All flaps. It had no ailerons at all. It used stabilators, aka tailerons, which were assisted by the wing spoilers at slower speeds for roll.
Umm, no, they were much more capable at the mission they were developed for than hornets and I believe more versatile overall than most gave them credit for. But yes, they were expensive and like many things Congress screws with, had issues.
I will always miss seeing them in the air.
They cost 50 man hours of maintenance for every hour in the air. The F18SH costs 5 to 10. What good is a platform if it isnt flight ready? The SH has an RCS of 6 to 7x less then the 14, depending. Of course there are things the TC can do better. More Load, greater range, more speed.
But the threat environment has changed. No modern navy can reproduce the threat the Soviet Navy could at the height of the Cold War with their maritime strike bombers, ASM's, and ASM boats. Modern defense systems like the SM aboard Aegis platforms have proven effective against not only Ballistic missiles but also over the Horizon super sonic cruise missiles in testing. Coming down the pipe are rail guns, Lasers, stealth, and unheard of computing power and power generation.
The lack of range of the SH has been mitigated by its reduced RCS, long range extremely accurate stand off missiles, and before long.. The F35.
Naw, she was a great bird and will forever be a symbol of the Free World making a stand. A marvel for its time. But the decision to bench the TomCat was the right one. I'll never forget the Libyans getting their lesson that the free world wasnt playing anymore. I think the Soviet Maritime strike Bomber force would have had a very bad time with the F14s. Apparently they believed it too.
