F-14

[Pucara70]

The mighty Tomcat is a good plane, but now it is getting old. The airframes are very tired with extensive use and with very fatigue problems. A solution for that could be to re-construct the cells, and moderniza some avionics, but it is a political decision. I would like to see my Navy operating some of them, but it just a dream.
F-14 is faster, with better range, weapons load, can fire Phoenix missiles (no other aircraft could do that)and is strong, but, on the other side, it is supercedeed in term of speed, maneoverability, and technology by other planes, such as SU-27/35/37, F-16/15/18, Rafale, Gripen, Thypoon, MiG-29, even the A-4AR in use in the Argentine Air Force (I am argentine) are more agile and with more maneouverability, put the Python5 missiles and the F-14 will be blown out of the sky. Of course, it has the Phoenix missiles, but first it has to detect, and thats difficult, if you fly in ULL mode and with sophisticated ECM pods.

[avon1944]

(Sorry, this kinda long. -Adrian)

> Pucara70 <
> The mighty Tomcat is a good plane, but now it is getting old <
> it is supercedeed in term of speed, maneoverability, and technology by other <
> planes <
Actually, the Tomcat-21 should have had a flyoff with the F/A-18E/F! The F/A-18C/D was supposed to have 90% commonality with the E/F. In reality it has only about 30%. This means it is not a remodel but, a new design!
Now, back to the Tomcat, yes it has aged but the Navy never took care of it the way the USAF did the F-15! The F-14A was competitive with the aircraft you mentioned and has a lot more capability than the F/A-18E/F! (Sorry, I am a E/F basher!) What you normally saw was aggressor pilots against operational pilots at the beginning of the program!
The Tomcat can carry an ordnance load faster and farther than a E/F. The F-14's TARPS pod does a better job in the "recon" mode than the new recon pod for the E/F! The hits against the Tomcat are reliability, maintainance cost, diffuclty getting aboard ship!
The Tomcat "21" would have addressed the maintainance/cost issues, so the only advantage the E/F would have is ease comming aboard ship. The Tomcat is a large aircraft and with aircraft parked on both sides of the landing area, the Tomcat can have as little as ten feet between its wingtips and the parked aircraft! Comming in at 170 mph due to wind, weather and, at night makes a bad situation "nightmarish!"
The Tomcat was forced to wait too long for its engine replacements. The P&W TF-30 engines were designed for the F-111B, the carrier version of the TFX and not a dogfighter. They had real problems when the Tomcat was at higher angles of attack, an air flow problem. This what inhibited the Tomcat's performance. When the Navy decided not to buy the F-111 the USAF made a "B" version for itself. So the original plan was to develope the engines for the B-1 bomber and use its engine core to make fighter engines.

President Jimmy Carter cancelled the B-1A program and that killed the engine of which the F-14 was depending on. President Ronald Regan re-instated the B-1 program as the B-1B with significant changes. The engine developement was going again but, it was late in the Tomcat's career.

Now, with the GE-100-229 engines that the new F-16C Block 50 aircraft will recieve these new engines with 32,000 pounds of thrust! This would have served the F-14 well along with a possible "limited" supercruise ability!! The Tomcat is not facing a major structural problem like the B-52's!

The real reason the F-14 is being retired is because of a group sometimes referred to as "The Lightweight Fighter Mafia," in the Navy, USAF and Pentagon.
When the cost of the Tomcat and Eagle proved to be more than originally thought, there was no talk about speeding up the production or second sourcing sections of the plane to reduce cost. Congress did just the opposit, they slowed production and dragged out the program. Between a slow production rate and inflation, the cost zoomed. At peak production, the F-14 Tomcat was being built at a rate of 2½ aircraft per month! (The limitation was welding the wingbox) At a rate like that, how many people are working a peak rates or, are they standing around a lot! The USAF is still delievering the F-15 and the production has been slowed to five aircraft per month! It will remain that way until at least 2008! It was the "Lightweight Fighter Mafia" pushed for the F-16 and F/A-18.

• As a dogfighter, the F/A-18C is better than the F/A-18E! Better acceleration and turn rates. F-15E Strike Eagle can do everything the F/A-18E/F can do much better and at a lower cost, except land on a carrier! This is according to a McDD internal report.

• An F/A-18E/F in maximum afterburner thrust cannot exceed Mach 1.0 in level flight below 10,000 feet even when it is in the clean configuration (no external stores). At 10,000 feet, the F-14D can exceed Mach 1.6.

• The most devastating comment came from a Hornet pilot who flew numerous side-by-side comparison flights with F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and says: “We outran them, we out-flew them and we ran them out of gas. I was embarrassed for them.”

• The F/A-18E/F is supposed to have greater range than the C/D well, most of that additional range comes from carrying larger drop tanks!

• The E/F is supposed to stealthier but, once you hang weapons and fuel tanks on the wing, that is all shot to hell.

• The Navy will no longer be able to defend the outer defense zone, once the Tomcat is retired, The E/F does not have the range to challenge the opposition out there. The middle and inner air combat zones is where the Navy will contest control of the air. This will be bad against anti-ship missiles with a 300 mile range! You can shoot at the missile when it comes in but not at the bomber that launched it.

There is a report on the web (I forgot the URL) entittled, "Battle of the SuperFighters F-14D Tomcat vs. F/A18 E/F Super Hornet" Two experts say the Super Hornet isn't so super. By Bob Kress and Rear Adm. Paul Gillcrist, U.S. Navy (Ret.) If you want a copy send me an E-mail and I will send you a copy. My E-mail is;
avon1944@hotmail.com -Subject F-14 Vs F/A-18E/F

Politics has given us the E/F and I don't feel it is competitive against any fourth or fifth generation aircraft. The F-14A could beat the A-4, F-4 with slotted flaps, F-5, MiG.-21, etc. when pilots have equal ability. Now place an A-4 with an aggressor pilot against an operational pilot and the aggressor will win. With the pilots being equal the F-14D can handle itself O.K. against aircraft like the SU-27 or MiG.-29! As has happened in many encounters between the aircraft and F-14's around the world!

The F-14A with the TF-30 engines had problems with A-4, F-5, MiG.-21, etc.. It could beat them in a WVR dogfight. The F-14A was designed to be able to defeat the MiG.-21 which is a competitor to the F-5 and A-4!
The GE-110 engines give the Tomcat a whole new lease on life

Adrian

[djelfa]

Avon,

The advantage of the F-14 swing wing design was the lower carrier approach speeds when compared to the traditional fixed wing aircraft. I would have thought this would have made it easier to land. I'm sure Naval Aviator can confirm this.

[jerre]

I read the article to, about the Superhornet, and I have serious doubts about it capabilities too.

the F100 engines fitted on the F14D indeed solved the stall problems on earlier models, and the VG wings were the ideal solution for the desired low approach speed and the Mach 2+ dash speed it was designed for ( an interceptor can use some speed) this combined with it's powerfull radar and long range weaponry and large fuel tanks, the F14 is probably still better for long range protection than the Superhornet. And you even get a Wizzo to watch your back
Undoubtly, the E/F makes a better strike platform that the normal hornet.
by the way: on Carriers, the E and F are referred as Rhinos - i believe - I hope for them it doesn't say it all...

I'm not sure about this, but I don't believe the USN F14 shot down any MiG29 or Su27. And the Iraqi's only received their MiG29 after the Iran-Iraq war, so Iranian Tomcats haven't killed them either. Anyway, if you have number of any of these, please let me know.

[bradusa_2003]

I like everyone else in this post seems to be a F-14 Tomcat fan and wasnt a big fan of the Superhornet at first the more I read about it the aircraft is not that bad of a plane. It may not be a F-14 but its job really wasnt designed to be the same. The F-14 was originally designed to be an interceptor and then later changed into a ground attack aircraft. Where the F-18 superhornet was designed to do both, yes it does lack in range for ship protection in the carrier fleets, but the Aegis Destroyers along with the other ships have now taken on that role with greater success. Yes the tomcat21 program solved many problems with the original F-14 engines and such but it was a program that was running over cost like the A-10 while the F-18 superhornet stayed on schedule and acually under cost. As far as the F-14 being the only aircraft being able to shoot the pheonix missle, well the Navy didnt loose much its not very acurrate anyway and obscolete. AVON1944's comment about the navy not taking care of the F-14's like the airforce took care of the F-15 should keep in mind the F-15 didnt have to slam down on carrier decks and get jerk to a sudden stop for over 30 years they landed on nice paved runways and didnt have to set in saltwater air most of the time, that and some F-15c's are starting to come apart also when being flown becuase of age. The superhornet is better on fuel that the F-14 was and according to a couple of Navy aircraft mechanics alot easier to work on in the field. As far as the Superhornet not being able to compete with 4th and fith generation planes, well thats yet to be seen I think it could compete with the rafale and eurofighter which both planes I am very fond of also, as far as the russian planes, I think it could compete with the newer versions and I dont count the SU-35 since no one has them so for now it is able to handle the threats it faces. Anyway the chances of a Superhornet seeing much air to air action is slim anyway when The F-22 gets up and deployed all the air to air contacts will more than likely go to them anyway. Like I said at the top I am a F-14 tomact fan but realistic fact is the plane is old and has outlived its role in the navy, so like it or not the Superhornet is replacing it.

[Dougk]

Listen boyz...I was in the first east coast squadron to get the F14 in the Navy back in 1974 ,VF32 "SWORDSMEN".
The A model was what we got and it was and still IS a VERY HOT aircraft. The Russians were scared ****LESS when we deployed with this aircraft. The systems u talk about are and have been updated with lateless technology. The airframes were made with a titanium alloy and it can take a lot of hits and keep on going. If the Navy took the time and really looked at this ,these aircraft could fly for many years to come. Grumman knew how to build a tough aircraft.
The problem here is MONEY. The Navy doesn't want to lose any money out of its budget. We use to fix aircraft but now the Navy is acting like the Air Force....lets just buy a NEW one.

[Pucara70]

If you love and adsmire the F-14 just like me, check this page out:www.anft.net/f-14