Author Topic: F-14s Over New York  (Read 1311 times)

Offline mussie

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2147
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #15 on: June 18, 2006, 10:20:24 PM »
OK Morpheus at the risk of getting my ear bitten off...  And I know that I dont know watermelon about the realities of modern AC let alone Military aircraft ...

In what ways is the F-14 better than the 18..

Just point me at some sites if ya want....

Offline hornet36

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 599
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #16 on: June 18, 2006, 10:59:27 PM »
the F/A-18 was built for the maintenance guy in mind...a crew of three can change an engine out in about 30-40 min...and have him back in the air..

Offline bkbandit

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 682
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2006, 11:00:51 PM »
If it was all about cheaper we wouldnt have the f22, we would just upgrade f15. Mags or tv is the only reason we would now anythin about these jets, unless u fly them or noe somebody that does.

Bronk what fighter is that i never seen it before??

If i had to pick a favortie usn fighter it has to be the f4 phantom.

Offline hornet36

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 599
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2006, 11:13:37 PM »
F-8 crusader

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2006, 11:13:45 PM »
That would be an F8 Crusader. Last of the true gunfighters.



Bronk
See Rule #4

Offline bkbandit

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 682
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2006, 11:23:16 PM »
:aoknice

Last of the gunfighters. Was this in Korea?

Offline Bodhi

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8698
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2006, 11:26:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by bkbandit
If it was all about cheaper we wouldnt have the f22, we would just upgrade f15. Mags or tv is the only reason we would now anythin about these jets, unless u fly them or noe somebody that does.

Bronk what fighter is that i never seen it before??

If i had to pick a favortie usn fighter it has to be the f4 phantom.


hey dilrod....

Morph is right.  The Flir cats hit far more accurately, loitered longer, and to this maintain the ability to engage an enemy 200 miles away... No POS F-18E/F can do that, nor will it ever.  The simple reasoning that the F-18E/F was retained over the Tomcat was cost of maintenance (that is already showing to be a failure owing to issues with composites on the Hornets) and the plain and simple fact that the tooling to manufacture F-14's does not exist (wonderous way to force a new design, destroy the old tooling), and the cost to try to start over was too high.  There was one other reason proposed, 1 crewman vs. 2, but if you take a look at the seat numbers on some of the Hornets, you'll see that was a crock of crap too.  The last hair to raise would be the ease of maintenance of "1 fighter type".  That is proving innaccurate too.
I regret doing business with TD Computer Systems.

Offline hornet36

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 599
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2006, 11:26:51 PM »
i worked on the F/A-18 for 6 years...but my fav. is the F-14....specially when they do a high speed pass off the carrier....wooootttttt

Offline Morpheus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10231
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2006, 12:34:35 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by bkbandit
If it was all about cheaper we wouldnt have the f22, we would just upgrade f15. Mags or tv is the only reason we would now anythin about these jets, unless u fly them or noe somebody that does.

Bronk what fighter is that i never seen it before??

If i had to pick a favortie usn fighter it has to be the f4 phantom.


The F22 is a whole different ball of wax, and comparing it to the likes of an F14 and the roles it was used for is no differnet than comparing apples to oranges.

Tell me about the term Joint Strike Fighter? How about the ability to track over a dozen hostile air targets and engage 6 of them at the simultaniously from over 100 miles away then switch to "ground mode" and drop a lazer guided bomb down the stove pipe of some arabs hut with pin point acuracy? That's something new? The F18 or F35 invented that term? Hard to imagine they got all the credit for that when the F14 set the bar that no other fighter in the Navy ever got close to.  

The argument between which is better? Well.. Which carries more, further, faster, stays longer, can double as mini-awacs (FWIW Iranian F14's were and most likely still are being used as just that)

Lastly, its not hard to talk to actual pilots who've flown or fly fighters. They're a wealth of information.
If you don't receive Jesus Christ, you don't receive the gift of righteousness.

Be A WARRIOR NOT A WORRIER!

Offline hornet36

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 599
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #24 on: June 19, 2006, 02:21:43 AM »
The Tomcat can carry only conventional "dumb" bombs, and has no precision-guided ammunition capability, except when operating in conjunction with a separate laser designator aircraft.

Offline Morpheus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10231
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #25 on: June 19, 2006, 08:33:48 AM »
Before I waste anymore of my time, are you sure about them not being capable of dropping precision munitions from a single air craft?
If you don't receive Jesus Christ, you don't receive the gift of righteousness.

Be A WARRIOR NOT A WORRIER!

Offline NAVCAD

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 92
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2006, 09:26:09 AM »
Morph,

Graduated Naval Flight School  02 Jun 1989.  Friends of mine flew the F-14, later attended and graduated top of class at fighter Weapons School (TopGun).  Although I flew Helo's I was in 2 battle groups with F-14s (Desert Storm).  The F-14 was designed to be a long range intercept.  The only reason the F-14 was as big as it was is to carry the Pheonix missile and the AWG 9 fire control computer.  The Pheonix was designed to kill at over 100 miles and the AWG 9 was able to track up to 6 (mabey 9) tracks simultaneously.

All that said, the F-14 was an outstanding dog fighter, however, the Pheonix was never used in combat thanks to ROE (Rules of Engagement).  The shooter HAS to SEE and positively identify the bogey prior to shooting.

The F-18 (original) had VERY short legs (endurance) but could fight equally in air to air or air to ground.  The F-14 SUCKED in air to ground because it was NEVER designed to do so.

Personally watched gunnery practice on a towed sled (my ship towing) and the F-18s were dead on, while the F-14s couldn't hit the broad side of barn.

The F-14 is a great plane, BUT the F-18 E/F and soon to come to the fleet F-18G (Jammer to replace EA-6B) are better suited to the JOINT roles needed today.  And of course the cost of logistics and maintainability of only 2 airframes is much cheaper than that of 3.

NAVCAD

"Life is Tough, but it's Tougher when you're Stupid" (SSGT D.L. Stryker in Sands of Iwo Jima)

Offline hornet36

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 599
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2006, 09:27:22 AM »
* Despite the fact that by the advanced strike versions of the Tomcat hadn't panned out, the idea of a strike Tomcat remained alive, with the concept that the existing fleet of F-14s could be assigned the job. The Navy had been experimenting with dropping bombs from Tomcats as far back as 1987, though weapons clearance went at a very slow pace. It wasn't until 1992 that the Tomcat was even cleared to carry "iron bombs" operationally.

Although the advanced strike Tomcat concepts had featured wing pylons to carry weapons, the standard Tomcat was restricted to carriage of four bombs on munitions adapters mounted on the Phoenix stores stations. It is possible to fit "triple ejector racks (TERs)" that can carry three stores each, but this is apparently only done to carry practice bombs.

Even after clearing the Tomcat for bomb carriage, the Navy still seemed a half-hearted about the idea. Tomcats did perform a few strikes in Bosnia in 1995, but they had no means to designate targets for laser-guided bombs (LGBs) themselves and Hornets had to provide "buddy designation" for them. However, by this time the attack Tomcat concept was building up momentum, driven by the time gap between the phaseout of the A-6 Intruder and the arrival of the Super Hornet. By 1994 Grumman and the Navy were proposing ambitious plans for Tomcat upgrades to plug that gap, but Congress balked. The upgrades were priced in the billions, a bit much for an interim solution, and they would take too long to implement to meet the looming gap.

The solution finally devised was a limited cheap and quick upgrade, with fit of the Lockheed Martin "Low Altitude Navigation & Targeting Infra-Red for Night (LANTIRN)" targeting pod system to the Tomcat, which would give the F-14 a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) camera for night operations and a laser target designator to direct LGBs. The upgraded Tomcats would also go through a "service life extension program (SLEP)" to keep their airframes airworthy and would be fitted with a set of modest improvements, detailed under the MMCAP program description in the previous section.

Although LANTIRN is traditionally a two-pod system, with an AN/AAQ-13 navigation pod with terrain-following radar and a wide-angle FLIR, along with an AN/AAQ-14 targeting pod with a steerable FLIR and a laser target designator, the decision was made to only use the targeting pod. This was apparently done for cost reasons, though the Tomcat's LANTIRN targeting pod did feature some improvements over its baseline configuration, most significantly a Global Positioning System / Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS) capability that would allow a Tomcat to find its own location at any time. The pod is carried on the right wing glove pylon.

Fit of the AN/AAQ-14 pod didn't require any updates to the F-14's own system software, which would have substantially increased the time and expense of the upgrade. It did require that the Tomcat have the MIL-STD 1553B bus, fitted standard to the F-14D and available on MMCAP F-14A/Bs. The RIO receives pod imagery on his display and guides LGBs using a new hand controller. Initially the hand controller replaced the RIO's TARPS control panel, meaning a Tomcat configured for LANTIRN couldn't carry TARPS and the reverse, but eventually a workaround was developed that allowed a Tomcat to carry LANTIRN or TARPS as needed.

* Initial flight of a LANTIRN-equipped Tomcat was on 21 March 1995 and the test program went smoothly. Official rollout of the first "F-14 Precision Strike Fighter" was on 14 June 1996. The "Bombcat" had finally come of age and was on its first operational cruise by the end of the month, on the carrier USS ENTERPRISE. Lockheed Martin engineers were on board the carrier to provide fixes and make changes as required. The Bombcats flew sorties over Bosnia but did not see any combat.

Interestingly, Bombcat crews reported that the FLIR on board the LANTIRN pod was more effective in checking out distant targets than the old TCS system. The FLIR has 4x, 10x, and 20x magnification capabilities and can be steered 150 degrees off the aircraft centerline. Later on, when the FTI datalink was fitted to the F-14, LANTIRN FLIR imagery could be relayed along and TARPS and TCS data to provide night reconnaissance imagery in real time.

The LANTIRN Bombcat made its combat debut in OPERATION DESERT FOX, air strikes conducted against Iraq in December 1998 after Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein evicted UN arms inspectors. The Bombcats saw more combat in the NATO air campaign against Serbia over Kosovo in the spring of 1999, flying hundreds of sorties, and then in more strikes on Iraqi air-defense targets.

Offline NAVCAD

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 92
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2006, 10:02:01 AM »
hornet36,

I can't begin to tell you how "refreshing" it is to see a well articulated response with first hand experience.  

I got out in 1993 and although I knew they were playing around with the "Bombcat" I didn't know how far they came.

Still, as I think you mentioned earlier, there is nothing that looks better than a F-14 taking a night cat shot (spent 2 weeks on Nimitz during Desert Storm).

What squadrons were you assigned and when and what was your rate?  It sounds like you were an AT possibly.

NAVCAD

Offline hornet36

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 599
F-14s Over New York
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2006, 10:31:52 AM »
I was stationed at NAS Cecil field VFA-106 86-89...then VFA-81 89-91 which we were assigned onboard "Super Sara" during the Gulf War...the squadron shot down 2 Mig-21's....was a good morale booster for all.Which is how btw that i ended up with hornet as my handle