Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Morpheus on June 16, 2006, 07:43:00 PM
-
Put up some pics from the trip to Long Island Mars and I took where two F-14Ds from the Vf-31 Tomcatters returned home for their final farewell.
Truely an awsome plane.
Gallery (http://www.furballunderground.com/gallery2/categories.php?cat_id=39)
Morph
-
:aok
-
used to love watching them launch at night from the carrier in zone 5 afterburner...awesome sight...
thanks for sharing
-
:aok
-
Thanks for posting those Jeff...
-
was out fishing with boy friday. had a warthog buzzing out bass boat for bout 30 mins we were at chippewa lake Michigan have no idea where this lone a10 came drom. stupid me left camcorder in truck. P.S my boy still catching big ones while i catch weeds. I hate 8 year olds :)
-
Morph....Woke up at 7 and it was terrible out...called flight service, and looked at radar and all indications pointed towards a chitty morning/early afternoon....went back to sleep and woke up at 11 and it was beautiful out! Im so pissed I miss it!
Do all F-14D's have partial glass?
-
those arent f-14`s looks like ht`s spit16:rofl
-
are they still in service?? i though they were retired already. IN a year or 2 the navy should be getting f35. So then it will be the super hornets and the f35s.
-
My dad would take me out to Calverton, when Grumman was Grumman and we would see them get test flighted. I'll never forget seeing the Tomcat standing on it's tials at what seemed to be 90 or 100 mph. Then the afterburners would light and it would climb away like a homesick angel. Damned sexy aircraft!
-
whats sick about the D's is they dont need to light the burners for carrier take off's. They have that much snot.
US Gvt really dropped the ball when they cut funding to the F14D.
-
Homesick angel.....Animal...I think you just found the most perfect words to describe it!!!! I really like that!
-
us goverment didnt drop the ball, the f/a18e is better. The f14 spends more then double the time in maintence then the f/a 18e. The f14 is great but she is gettin old, just like the f15 she needs to be replaced. The f14 has been out there for about 30 years.
-
Better how? You really insist on Hijacking this thread with your misunderstood magazine BS?
The F18 loiters longer? Carrys more? More what? Flys futher? Further how? Oh yeah, that's right... You read all that in a magazine.
The F18 isnt better. Its cheaper. And dont forget it.
EDIT: And, please, don't tell me that the F/A-18 is a "newer" design. Its origins can be tracked back to Northrop's P.530 design, drawn in the mid-1960s...
-
While the F14 is a great AC. My fav USN jet fighter is this
(http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/rf-8g-DNSC8806700_JPG.jpg)
Just something about it.
Bronk
-
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....
-
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..
-
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.
-
F-8 crusader
-
That would be an F8 Crusader. Last of the true gunfighters.
Bronk
-
:aoknice
Last of the gunfighters. Was this in Korea?
-
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 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
-
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.
-
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.
-
Before I waste anymore of my time, are you sure about them not being capable of dropping precision munitions from a single air craft?
-
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)
-
* 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.
-
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
-
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
-
Good friend of mine was on the "Sinking Sara" during that time. He was an S-3 NFO call sign "Mollie".
Oh by the way, Nice shooting on the Greek ship with the Sea Sparrow..LMFAO (and a head shot at that). You'll be happy to know that there is an existing ESSM (Enhanced Sea Sparrow Missile) program that came out of that little debacle. It seems that no one knew that the Sea Sparrow could be used in a surface mode..:)
I was West Coast HSL-47 (SH-60Bs) from 89-93. 1st cruise Nimitz BG for Desert Storm, 2nd with Ranger on her last deployment and Somalia.
-
Originally posted by hornet36
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.
Did you not say here that it didnt have the capability of carrying precision guided munitions?
That gigantic cut and paste (no offence) says it had exactly that. Not to mention its a well known fact that the F14 is known now for its ability to deliver "LGB's" with pin point accuracy. Basicly, everything I've been saying.
Is it an old design? Yep, but so is the F18. The only difference between the two today is the F14 had the funding cut from under it and it fell apart.
Its simple really. when John Boyd and cheney had the pull, and were pushing for smaller cheaper a/c's, it was clear to see that the Tomcat's days were numbered and were to be oversteped by politics. Grummans arrogance in that "They had the cat in the bag" also was said to anger cheney. Which in turn he forced grumman to destroy the tooling for the tomcat.
I'm not trying to fan these flames of another "Tomcat Vs Super Hornet" debate. Its' obvious how great the Tomcat could have been, but its also obvious how great it has been and continued to be up until its recent final deployment.
Throwing out flase facts about how it was not capable of dropping laser guided bombs so it was pulled off the decks in place of somethign that could do it on its own, and do it better... That's kinda silly.
-
A quote from Dale Snodgrass on the upgraded avioncs and LANTIRN.
The GE engines certainly gave the airplane a lot of new life in the dogfight arena, and it brought it up to a level of thrust that the airframe was really designed for. The older engines were a result of politics and other factors, so the new engines made you feel like you were flying a rocketship!
The avionics upgrade was in the F-14D and that was a significant enhancement in air to air capability. However, the production was very limited. Over half the Tomcat community is still flying F-14 A models.
The biggest capability upgrade was the LANTIRN pod and putting the aircraft into a world class precision strike role, and this all occurred at Naval Air Station Oceana while I was there. We deliberately kept the project away from Washington so they couldn't get control of it. Martin Marietta, now Lockheed Martin, sent some reps up by invitation, gave us a LANTIRN pod to work with, and contributed some very smart people resources. I gathered some of my best people to work on the project, and in six months we went from an informal handshake to actually dropping laser-guided bombs from the F-14. I dropped a bomb from 18,000 ft and 22 miles away that blew the top off a tank at the Vieques range off of Puerto Rico. We made a short promotional video of those first bombs and then I went around to all the Navy Warfighting CINC’s in Europe and the Pacific and told them to let Washington know that they could have this capability on deploying carriers around the world in as little as six months, for no additional cost. It was a major jump in capability and in some ways we even exceeded the F-15E, which was designed for that role. One year after that concept discussion in my office, the LANTIRN capability deployed with VF-103 to the Med and Gulf.
-
the Pheonix was never used in combat thanks to ROE (Rules of Engagement).
NAV, this is incorrect. It was in fact fired twice (that I know of), but can not go into details as I am not 100% sure about the classification of the information.
The shooter HAS to SEE and positively identify the bogey prior to shooting.
Again, not true. If that was the case, then why even produce BVR weaponry?
AWG 9 was able to track up to 6 (mabey 9) tracks simultaneously
It could track up to 24 targets, and prosecute 6. When it was working:aok
Few other tidbits:
Both the B and the D had the GE motors that could allow it to launch without AB.....a real nice kick in the bellybutton :):aok
As has been stated, the D recieved a nice avionics upgrade, but never reached potential due to stop in production.
Tomcat's mission legs WAAAYYYY longer than a hornet's. Hell, Hornets had to hit a tanker immediately after launching just in order to proceed on a mission!
As Morph has pointed out, the Tomcat became one of the best (if not THE best) Naval platform for dropping laser-guided ordnance. Guess *who* did the majority of the buddy lasing for the Hornets??:aok
If Cheney hadn't killed the Tom by ordering the destruction of all the tooling dies, I don't believe the maintenance problem would be as bad as it is today.
It's sad....the sexiest, baddesst ***** on the block just got kicked to the curb. She will be missed.
Tom
-
Originally posted by bkbandit
Last of the gunfighters. Was this in Korea?
F8 flew in Vietnam
"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."
They both seem to be designed for Air Superiority. The F-14 carried the pheonix missile to shoot down targets beyond visual range. The F-22 boasts the same capability (though the phoenix missile has longer range). The main difference in the two designs is the F-14 was a naval platform. As well as a good decade difference in when they were designed, F-14 in the 70's, F-22 in the 80's. F-14 truely is a great plane.
This thread makes me think of the P38 vs P51 thread. Where the F-14 (P38) was a great aircraft, the F-18 (P51) was simply cheaper and easier to maintain.