Re-engine F-18Cs & Ds Hornets and Jas-39 Gripens

[Valiant1]

I love the Gripen, I think it's a wonderful fighter, as I have stated in one of my posts - a beautiful and graceful get powerful airplane.  I like the F-18 Hornet, but I think it could have been built better.  It's still fairly a new plane, considering nowadays. 
The problem with both these fighters, the Hornet and the Gripen, I believe, are the engines, the General Electric F404.  I don't know the Swedish company that was subsidized by GE to build the engine for the Gripen.  First of all, I think the F404's thrust factor stinks. Yes, it is a very reliable engine as I've watched and read from crew chiefs, and yes, the F404 will push the Gripen to Mach 2, but why not the Hornet, and it has 2 of them? 
I think this a good reason why the Hornet is not a GREAT dogfighter, just a good one - it has mediocre thrust-to-weight ratio.  Look at the current F-16s - they're pushing 29,000 lbs of thrust  from GE's F110 engines.  Every F-16 pilot will tell how powerful that engine is.  You don't hear that from Hornet pilots. 
I think the F-18C & D model would greatly benefit from engines that get at least 20,000 lbs of thrust.  It would make the fighter faster and more maneuverable especially in dogfights.  The jet already has exceptional low-speed agility; it needs an exceptional high-speed punch.  There's no need to retire these aircrafts so soon - look at the Eagle, it's still serving as a front line fighter for over 30 years.  The Hornet is only around 20 years old but has newer technology than the Eagle.
As for the Gripen, I think implementing  the F-16's GE F-110 engine would make the Gripen a phenomenal fighter, giving the fighter over 10, 000 lbs more thrust. Of course we all know this is with the afterburners on.  Supercruise would be a great addition.  Additionally, the Gripen's fuselage would have to be enlarged to accomodate the new engine.  Possibly one of the Eurofighter's engines would fit nicely?  And one more thing - it would be a shame if England, Germany and Italy retire the absolutely marvelous Tornado, both ground attack and interceptor.  That would truly be a waste.

[Viggen]

To answer one of your questions about the engine. Volvo Aero Corporation. The engine (GE F-404-400 ) has the designation "RM12" in Sweden. Approx 18,000lb of thrust is sufficiant for a light fighter as Gripen. Dont know the exact weight. I think they choose that engine because of operating costs, they want to keep it down to a minimum.

There where rumours of a "SuperGripen" last year (a larger model with a more powerful engine). But thats all it was, no truth behind those facts. Just wishfulhinking. 

[Valiant1]

The Gripen is a small fighter, probably no bigger than an F-5 Tiger II, which by the way, I think the US Air Force should have implemented their stock of F-16's with F-20 Tigershark II that WAS powered by the GE F404, but managed to outperform the F-16 in just about every category.  Unfortunately for Northrop, the design of the F-20 came from the F-5, which was a dated design, but I believe they could have remedied that with the addition of a delta wing configuration that would have given the F-20 double the range, the payload and better performance.  Too bad.

[Webmaster]

I think if an export customer would request the EJ200 (Eurofighter's engine) - Gripen combo, it will be possible. So for the Swedish it might be wishful thinking, but it's not impossible.

Because of the F404 engine I have not as much faith in the Gripen. Like you said, the F-16 outperforms the F/A-18 when it comes to power, and the F/A-18 has got two of these. I guess it is better and improved than those of the original F/A-18s, but I think it is the weakest point of the design of both jets, although the Gripen clearly has the light weight factor to make up for it.
But it's all about economics for most air forces, which makes the Gripen a success on the export market, for its price (including operating costs) it is the best choice, and you can count on it that Sweden will keep improving it over the years. But new engine, I don't think so, probably just upgraded versions of the F404.

I am not sure the F-110 will fit the Gripen. The F404 and EJ200 are more compact designs. But yeah, maybe some other GE engine!

Having said all this, I don't want to take anything away from the F404, I think it is a very good engine.

About the Tornado and wishful thinking, think about this, the Tornado powered by two EJ200s. That would be interesting! Don't worry by the way, those Tornado strike versions will stay in service for quite some years to come.

[Valiant1]

Webmaster, the F404 was chosen because of the only strength it has - reliability.  That's great because we definitely would like to see our Hornet drivers come home safely.  BUT in a dogfight against a Flanker driver, pilot and AA weapons being equal, the Hornet driver better buzz away, whatever nationality is flying it.  GE should build a more powerful version of the F404, in the 20,000-25,000 lb. thrust class, at least.  As I have said, the Gripen's fuselage would have to be redesigned to accomodate GE's F110 engine. 
You see, I'm a hotrodder at heart.  I don't necessarily believe in a bigger engine, but a more powerful engine.  You can have a car that's an excellent handling machine, but what good is it if you have a weak engine and the competition can just roll right over you?
You're right, it's also about economics.  You can't throw all your money into the military.  But a little collaboration between GE and Volvo in redesigning the F404 wouldn't cost as much as installing another engine.

[Viggen]

Im all up for a new engine in Gripen,  the EJ200 would be great. But how fuelsufficant are the F-404 vs EJ200 vs F-110?
A complete redesign of the fuselage is probably out of the question, the Gripen is built to be small and light. I dont think they want it to get any bigger then it is, otherwise they just have a new "Viggen".

[Valiant1]

That is a good question - fuel efficiency- we're gonna have to look that up and see what the range of each aircraft (Typhoon, Gripen, Hornet, Falcon) is empty and full combat weight.  Obviously, the Typhoon and Hornet would be the heavyweights in this category.  Anyone out there a physicist and figure the range of a EJ200 or F110 or a 25,000 lb thrust F404 in a Gripen?

[Raptor]

How many kNs on the F110?

[Valiant1]

The GE F-110 is quite powerful - it puts out amost 29,000 lbs. of thrust - almost 11,000 lbs. MORE than its little brother, the F404.  Imagine the F110 in an F-20 Tigershark, a Gripen or in the Hornet.  The enemy would then have a lot to worry about. 

[Raptor]

*choke*

That's one big problem. Aren't the 110s already being used on some F-15 models?

[Valiant1]

Yes, on the Eagles and Fighting Falcons, but why does that pose a problem?

[Raptor]

If you're going to worry the enemy, you might as well go all the way and threaten to kill them. Anyway, if you're just using it as part of your defensive infrastructure, the enemy might not want to be very worried.

Well, yeah. That means a multi-role fighter better than the Fighting Falcon, doesn't it?