--- title: "Trump Tells Boeing To Price A Comparable F/A-18 To The F-35—There Isn’t One" description: "The problem is about total force capabilities and it far more complex than swapping out one fighter jet for another." date: "2016-12-23" modified: "2016-12-23" authors: - name: "Tyler Rogoway" job_title: "Editor-in-Chief" link: "https://www.twz.com/authors/tyler-rogoway.md" url: "https://www.twz.com/6663/trump-tells-boeing-to-price-a-comparable-f-a-18-to-the-f-35-there-isnt-one" categories: - "Air" - "F-35" - "F/A-18" - "Fighters" - "News & Features" - "POTUS" - "Procurement" tags: - "Boeing" - "F-35 Saga" - "F/A-18" - "Hornets" - "Lockheed" - "Procurement" - "Super Hornets" - "trump" --- # Trump Tells Boeing To Price A Comparable F/A-18 To The F-35—There Isn’t One ![]() *www.twz.com* [Commander-in-Chief to be Trump]() is back at it again. He has taken [plunge into the Pentagon procurement wars]() and the heads of Boeing and Lockheed—along with generals and admirals in tow—have visited his Florida estate [to kiss the ring and pitch their wares](). Now he's tweeted that he is having Boeing price out a “comparable” F/A-18 Super Hornet to the F-35 because of the latter’s [cost and developmental overruns.]() https://twitter.com/_/status/812061677160202240 The only problem is that there is [no Super Hornet comparable]() to the F-35, and there never will be. First off, there is a short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the F-35, something the Super Hornet family cannot offer. Additionally, Boeing has quietly played with [the idea of a very stealthy Hornet]() adaptation, most likely an unmanned one, but it didn’t seem to go anywhere. Even if the F-35 program were cancelled—which has become nearly unthinkable—major force structure investments in other platforms would be necessary to have the proper capabilities mix. Otherwise there will be a massive capabilities gap left behind [by the already 20+ year old]() Joint Strike Fighter program For instance, if the F-35 were no more, the USAF would have [to put the F-22 back into production](), purchase more F-16s and possibly F-15s. Heavier investments in [advanced Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs) ]()and [long-range strike, namely the B-21 Raider](), would also need to go along with it. This is precisely the force structure I have pushed for many years. Likewise for the Navy (which is the service that Trump might be talking about exclusively here) more Super Hornets and Growlers would be a relevant choice, but they would need to be paired with substantial investment into fast-tracking navalized UCAVs into the inventory and larger purchases of standoff munitions—something I have proposed for many years. The Marine Corps is a different animal altogether. Their [rapidly aging legacy Hornet fleet ]()could be, and should have been, replaced with Super Hornets. Instead they opted to hold out for an all F-35 force made up mainly of B models and a smaller number of C models. Cancel the F-35 and the aged AV-8B Harrier would continue to serve indefinitely as the only short-takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) tactical jet alternative to the F-35B. ![hornet\_hero\_lrg\_02\_1280x720.jpg]() *Super Hornet Advanced. , *Boeing** The Marines AV-8Bs can continue to fly for a couple more decades with the help of the UK’s GR7/9 Harrier fleet, [bought for parts by the USMC for pennies on the dollar](). Still, axing the F-35B and keeping the A and C model would be foolish. The A and C models pay for the [F-35B’s STOVL capabilities]() in a compromised design ([you can read all about this odd situation here]()). By eliminating the type and keeping the others, the US armed forces will never benefit from this design sacrifice. In fact, the [F-35B is the most relevant ]()of all F-35 variants, at least to the US. It is tough to tell from a tweet what exactly Trump is talking about here, and maybe it's just a bargaining ploy. But if the President-elect has been informed that the Super Hornet alone, even [in its most advanced conceptual configuration](), is capable of replacing the F-35, he is sorely and alarmingly wrong. The situation is far more complex than that, but with the right overall high-low capability mix strategy, a more flexible, [affordable]() and capable air combat capability can be had without the F-35, or at least with far fewer of them than the 2500 or so that the US currently plans on buying. ![f13-09625pr-2\_main.jpg]() *F-35B hovering. , *Lockheed** *Contact the author Tyler@thedrive.com* ## Author Tyler’s passion is the study of military technology, strategy, as well as foreign policy, and he has fostered a dominant voice on those topics in the defense and national security space. Tyler was the creator of the hugely popular defense site *Foxtrot Alpha* before developing *TWZ*, which he continues to lead as the Editor-In-Chief to this day. ### Author social links [Twitter]()