The Super Hornet is ugly. Hard to put into words why
The Super hornet looks awesome to me. It is just a matter of opinion.
>>64477769oversized head
>>64477769maybe because it looks bloated? The nose is fat in relation to the canopy and the wings are long and straight
It's not ugly, it just looks ungainly.
f14 head on a trainer body
It's an enlarged Charlie Hornet, which was an enlarged YF-17. The original airframe was tight and lithe, but more shit keeps getting attached to it.
>>64477938>YF-17which itself was an enlarged F5
>>64477945LARGER, WE NEED TO MAKE IT LARGER, THE TIGER MUST FLY FOREVER
>>64477769I think it's alright lookingVery utilitarian
>>64477919The F looks better than the E. I think the cockpit looks too small for its body on the E, like a plane version of Hasan Piker. I also think the trapezoid intakes don't jive with the rest of its very curvy and pre-stealth design.
*fries your balls*
>>64478370How do those tiny propellers keep the plane flying?
>>64478592Jewish physics
>>64477769It is ugly in comparison to other fighters but not objectively unappealing.
>The Super Hornet is ugly.I agree. And you know what? I'll go one further:
West taiwan are masters of making ugly planes.
it's born from corruption
>>64478592>How do those tiny propellers keep the plane flying?I'll assume this isn't bait and is actually genuine retardation or ignorance.Those are RATs or ADGs, they rotate in the wind and generate electricity to run the pod because otherwise it would be too much of a power drain on the aircraft's electrical systems.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ram_air_turbineThere are cute pop-out ones like picrel also, so that the aircraft can still generate electricity after engine failure.
>>64477950That's one skinny Mig-29
>>64481011
>>64477769tail is all ugly n shitlerx are ugly tooit's just all ugly
>>64477769>make the super hornet>turns out the munitions like to slam into the fuselage thanks to funny wind science reasons>notgreatnotterrible.jpeg>quick solution needed>we'll just angle the pylons out>problem solved!>only at the cost of losing 1/5 of your range and performance.Overall I love the Superbug, but that one detail drives me up the wall
>>64481186most if not all American combat aircraft can deliver nukes
>>64477817>>64477938>>64477945>bloatedThis, enlarged unrelated perversion of the original perfect design>>64477950>>64478931anons that get it
I like all the version of the YF-17, Hornet and Super Hornet
>>64477769the super hornet is beautiful, and as the last remaining descendant of the F-5 it is automatically based
>>64477769>Super Hornet >ugly
The Super Hornet, is fully the equal of the F-15EX
>>64484189>as the last remaining descendant of the F-5 it is automatically basedthisbut also this>>64481169:(
>>64477769I, too, dislike the super hornet. Regular hornet is fine. I just don't like the big one. Don't know why.
>>64485311>I just don't like the big one. Don't know whysimple as
>>64485311might be the big wing strakes. I think the thinner ones on the legacy hornet are more shapely.
>>64485679For me it's the LEX. I don't think they look cute.
>>64481135I think the F model looks really good with CFTs
>>64477769It looks like a copied homework version of the Tomcat
>>64485985the only post-C/D Hornet derivative I can give a pass to is EA-18G, and that's due to its specialized role and burly outfit
All Hornets are ugly, even the old ones. I wish they'd be replaced faster.
>>64477769The Hornet is workmanly. You look at it and you know it's a dependable and rugged plane that will get its job done with little fuss. Being a naval aircraft means it's bones are tough and its skin very thick. Two engines means it will get the pilot home.
>>64477769Flat fucking arms that go look at me hurrrr durrr
>>64477769F-18s and F-15s are the platonic ideal of what a fighter jet should be.
