The Hornet's problem is that the DOD wanted a jack of all trades, but got a master of none. It was done with economy in mind, but the Hornet's shortcomings were an inevitable result of asking the question "where can we save some money?" and applying the result liberally and systemically. The Super is an improvement, to be sure, but it really only got the Hornet program to where the A-models should've been when they were delivered way back in the day. Moral of the story: every penny saved in weapons development will cost us a dollar when crunch time comes.
That isn't to say it is a bad aircraft, but the Navy/Marine Corps could have done a lot better with dedicated air superiority/fleet defense and strike aircraft to replace the F-14 and A-6. Also, the Intruder never should have been retired when it was. It was a crying fucking shame that they weren't around to rain iron over Afghanistan during the early days of OEF before we got the in-country airfields secured for land-based CAS aircraft to operate from. The bombcat performed admirably for what it was - an Aston Martin with a bucket loader attachment - but it never should have been necessary to begin with.
That isn't to say it is a bad aircraft, but the Navy/Marine Corps could have done a lot better with dedicated air superiority/fleet defense and strike aircraft to replace the F-14 and A-6. Also, the Intruder never should have been retired when it was. It was a crying fucking shame that they weren't around to rain iron over Afghanistan during the early days of OEF before we got the in-country airfields secured for land-based CAS aircraft to operate from. The bombcat performed admirably for what it was - an Aston Martin with a bucket loader attachment - but it never should have been necessary to begin with.
