Author Topic: Last F-14 takes off (Read 1160 times)

Golfer · « **Reply #15 on:** September 08, 2006, 02:13:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
It was time for the F-14 to go. It was an obsolete design by the 90s in regards to air to air combat.

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiight.

Hajo · « **Reply #16 on:** September 08, 2006, 02:41:39 PM »

I discussed the demise of the F-14 with a former F-14 Pilot Bill Johnson.
He is now retired Navy and in business. The F14 is better then the F18 for their designed roles.

Bill told me that the F14 is still the best standoff fighter for the fleet. F18 is cheaper in all areas...but doesn't do the job with the same effectiveness as the F14.

Can you say Politics? The parts for the F-18 are made in different states. So.....yes the F-14 is expensive but it still is the best stand off fighter for CV Task Forces. It still is the only fighter that can track and down 6 enemy at the same time from a range of up to 125 miles. Upgrades have been available. The Govt. or should I say Senators and Reps from the various states that are involved with making the F-18 want to keep the F-18 flying for their constituents sake. Has nothing to do with the F14 being better qualified for the job of CV defense.

Another wise decision by politicians who know little about defending anything but their public reputation.

Debonair · « **Reply #17 on:** September 08, 2006, 02:51:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bodhi
There are a fair number of 14's still in storage at Davis Mothan...

who can find them 1st on google earth?!?!?
on your marks,
get set,
go!!!!!!11

Debonair · « **Reply #18 on:** September 08, 2006, 02:52:14 PM »

OMFG too many F-11!1!!!111 i give up

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 08, 2006, 05:00:42 PM »

So the F-14 isnt even going to be used by the reserves?

LePaul · « **Reply #20 on:** September 08, 2006, 06:50:39 PM »

The F-14 is a sharp looking airplane. No doubt there

One of the guys I know flew em, he was backing up the F-14s that shot down the Libyans. He's got mixed feelings about the plane. He mentions the long sordid engine issues it had and how it wasnt anywhere as nimble as the newer planes (F-16, F-15, F-18, etc)

Effectively, you had a platform that had a really complex radar that fired a really really expensive long range missile (Phoenix) for fleet defense.

And the 18 hours maint per hour was a lot.

In that role, it served admirably. It was time for it to go.

Debonair · « **Reply #21 on:** September 08, 2006, 06:51:18 PM »

my local air national guard d00ds fly F-18s

LePaul · « **Reply #22 on:** September 08, 2006, 06:51:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hajo

Another wise decision by politicians who know little about defending anything but their public reputation.

That reminds me of the politicans who represent states that manufacture C-130s. the Air Force doesnt want em, yet they are forced to have em

AquaShrimp · « **Reply #23 on:** September 08, 2006, 07:20:28 PM »

How was the F-14 the best stand-off fighter in the inventory? It was equipped with sparrow, sidewinder, and phoenix missles. Thats 2 short range fighter missles, and one long range bomber missle.

Certainly if a phoenix missle only had a 83% chance of hitting a non-maneuvering drone, it would have next to 0% chance of hitting a maneuvering fighter. And who knows how effective the phoenix was at anti-jamming? The AMRAAM, if jammed, will actually home in on the source that is jamming it. I doubt the ancient phoenix could do that.

At its prime, the F-14 only had a .91/1 thrust ratio. The F-16, F-15, and I believe F-18 all have that beat.

Air Force F-16s used to have mock engagements with F-14s. The F-14s were referred to as 'turkeys' because of their poor maneuverability. Also, the energy state the F-14 was broadcast by its wings.

Really, the only thing the F-18 lacks is range. Its proven itself in combat by performing air-to-air and air-to-ground in the same sortie. The biggest threat to Naval fighters now is shoulder-launched missles, which the -18 is more capable than the -14 at handling.

SMIDSY · « **Reply #24 on:** September 08, 2006, 07:24:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mietla
Why would they do that? Is this a standard procedure?

no, just politics. you piss off a guy in power and he tries to ruin your company.

LePaul · « **Reply #25 on:** September 08, 2006, 08:11:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
How was the F-14 the best stand-off fighter in the inventory? It was equipped with sparrow, sidewinder, and phoenix missles. Thats 2 short range fighter missles, and one long range bomber missle.

Certainly if a phoenix missle only had a 83% chance of hitting a non-maneuvering drone, it would have next to 0% chance of hitting a maneuvering fighter. And who knows how effective the phoenix was at anti-jamming? The AMRAAM, if jammed, will actually home in on the source that is jamming it. I doubt the ancient phoenix could do that.

I thought its intended targets would be advancing USSR bombers.

You have to remember the time this thing was developed. Its rival was the F-111. Compared to that, its a markedly better fighter...and the FB-111 excelled at its low level strike role

Wolfala · « **Reply #26 on:** September 08, 2006, 09:36:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
How was the F-14 the best stand-off fighter in the inventory? It was equipped with sparrow, sidewinder, and phoenix missles. Thats 2 short range fighter missles, and one long range bomber missle.

Certainly if a phoenix missle only had a 83% chance of hitting a non-maneuvering drone, it would have next to 0% chance of hitting a maneuvering fighter. And who knows how effective the phoenix was at anti-jamming? The AMRAAM, if jammed, will actually home in on the source that is jamming it. I doubt the ancient phoenix could do that.

At its prime, the F-14 only had a .91/1 thrust ratio. The F-16, F-15, and I believe F-18 all have that beat.

Air Force F-16s used to have mock engagements with F-14s. The F-14s were referred to as 'turkeys' because of their poor maneuverability. Also, the energy state the F-14 was broadcast by its wings.

Really, the only thing the F-18 lacks is range. Its proven itself in combat by performing air-to-air and air-to-ground in the same sortie. The biggest threat to Naval fighters now is shoulder-launched missles, which the -18 is more capable than the -14 at handling.

Two different trains of thought at work. Keeping in mind that the Bombcat didn't come to fruition until after Gulf War 1 b/c of the A-6 retirement - the F-14's main job was Fleet Defense against Soviet bombers - running picket with AEGIS equipped cruisers.

Just because it had the AIM-9 and AIM-7 doesn't mean it couldn't fire the AIM-120 - it could, they just didn't see the need to do the software upgrade because it was decided the F/A-18E would be the primary focus.

Speaking from a ordinance delivery standpoint - losing the A-7 and A-6, left a HUGE gap in power projection against shore targets. The F-14 only carried bombs b/c the F/A-18 didn't have the legs, and they borrowed a couple of LANTRN pods from the USAF to add an ad-hoc bombing / FAC capability - to which it excelled with loiter times and ordinance carryback capability far exceeding the Hornet's.

If you are in the MA, log into Vox 169. Cyclic is a former F-14 driver, and was Commanding officer of VF-84 up to its decomissioning in the mid 90s. A highschool friend of mine is currently in VF-31 with the last of the Tomcats. LTJg Halligan.

S!

Wolf

LePaul · « **Reply #27 on:** September 08, 2006, 09:38:38 PM »

Ha, didnt know Cyclic flew those.

Kinda explains that monster F-14 handbook in PDF format he gave us a few months ago

Wolfala · « **Reply #28 on:** September 08, 2006, 10:27:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by LePaul
Ha, didnt know Cyclic flew those.

Kinda explains that monster F-14 handbook in PDF format he gave us a few months ago

Actually...was me who gave ya that PDF.

Squire · « **Reply #29 on:** September 08, 2006, 10:46:30 PM »

It was important to have a fighter with a long range missile like the AIM-54 for fleet defense, coupled with a very powerfull radar, and having a dedicated WSO also made it a more effective long/medium range bomber killer, being able to engage multiple radar targets at the same time. This was importrant to fend off large attacks against CV Battle Groups.

The F-18 does not have the same radar as the F-14, nor does it have the AIM-54, or the range, or the WSO. It can't do fleet defense as well. It can do some things better (fighter vs fighter).

As for being obsolete by the 1990s, no. The F-14s were upgraded several times, getting more powerful engines and better avionics, as well as better missiles.

Of course, no a/c can last forever, thats just reality, and it would have had to be replaced eventually.