Added: 4 years ago
From: TJDOZIER1
Views: 32,603
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (33)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • If some F-14's were on the flight deck this video would be even more awesome!!

  • I was on here, worked the flight deck for four years as a yellow shirt, I was up there when we had a place crash down the L.A. and off the angle!

  • @phoenixson3

    Was that the Hornet ramp strike?

  • @phoenixson3 do u get good pay? are u Navy soldiers or just a regular workers?

  • i was there

  • Omg I was on this tiger cruise!

  • Im so proud....My Taxes pay for that little blinking light's filament!

  • Ya good little airshow ! Love the AW cutting loose with that 240 !

  • Im calling the exterminators guys! There are Hornets buzzing around all over the place here.

  • That was awesome bro! great camera work too! The E-2 pass was Epic! Great job!

  • I love the tomcat, but the Hornet can take 'em on the turns. I always love it when they race...tomcat will take the hornet, but the hornet will sneak on the inside of the curve and land before the tomcat. haha badass

  • Nice video, the hawkeye fly-by was cool. when the seahawk takes off I was waiting for the ship to sail away from underneath it... I saw a video of a wire breaking, have they changed things so people aren't in the way if one goes?

  • The ship and the Seahawk are both traveling forward at the same speed during take-off, so it appears they are just floating above the deck, but they are traveling about 20-30 knots. The wires can still break and injure or kill people on the flight deck. New materials and a very regimented number of traps per cable results in a minimalized chance of a cable snapping and taking out people on deck. My dad told me when he was in the Navy, a cable snapped and cut a guy in half on the flight deck.

  • yeah! nice video !

  • Nice video !

  • F/A18s ROCK THE HOUSE!

    so do knight hawks

    (kind of like a black hawk except an american version!)

  • I was there!

  • Nice video... the hornet you're describing is not a K/A-18, there's no such thing. It's an F/A-18 Super Hornet configured as a "tanker," which you described correctly. The "K" you see on the vert stab is just a form of Airwing/Ship identification.

  • Oops, When your right your right, the designation "K" is a throw back to the old days. I didn't notice the K on the tail until now, my bad.

  • What plane is that at 0.58 seconds?

  • That is a mission variant of the F/A-18 Hornet. In this configuration it is called a K/A-18, with "K" designating refueling aircraft. It is among the first launched, after the SAR helo's and Hawkeyes. Its purpose is to be an airborn refueling station for use by the other aircraft in the strike package if necessary. So its a flying gas station, with a 20 MM cannon in it. In a real combat situation it may also have AA missiles on the wing tip rails.

  • The Flight Deck is "AB Country". By the way, that is an SH-60, not a UH-60. So the correct name is Seahawk, not Blackhawk. Oh, you forgot to mention that in addition to the winds, the danger, the long hours, there's also the lung burning stench of sulfur steamed out of the catapult grease airdales get to breathe all day and night. Thanks for posting.

  • You have obviously been there, so thanks for the correction...

    and thanks for your service.

  • What is that plane at 0.58 seconds?

  • F-18. You can tell by the single-seat and the angled tails. The F-14 has two seats and its tails are straight up and down. Plus, the Tomcat is a hell of a lot bigger than the Hornet.

  • the Superhornet is 2 seater tho. Plus, the Tomcat is decommissioned now , so u wont be seeing those in US anymore.

  • The twin tails are still angled on the Hornet (not vertical like the Tomcat) and the engines are next to each other, not separated like on the Tomcat. The only reason the Tomcat is decommissioned is because some moron ordered the stamps destroyed in the 90s. The new engines they put in the Tomcats, plus its avionics and 100-mile Phoenix fire-and-forget missile made it the best interceptor in naval history. Stupid politics.

  • Still though, the tomcat just isnt as good a fighter as the superhornet. it might not matter at all being that it sounds like most of our air fleet is gona be replaced by F-35s and F-22s.

  • The Tomcat was faster, had twice the legs, better radar, and carried 6 fire-and-forget 100 mile-range Phoenix missiles. The F-14 wasn't a fighter, it was an interceptor, designed to take out squadrons of enemy aircraft from up to 100 miles away.

    The F-18 isn't an interceptor or a fighter. It's a multi-role attack jet that isn't a very good fighter or interceptor -- truth be told its not that good in ground attack either.

    The idiot that order the F-14 stamps destroyed should be shot.

  • @BloodofPatriots The Tomcat was the best in it's day- and I would have loved to see the Navy field new production Tomcats as well as the Super Hornet. Truth be told, the Super Hornet is a very good aircraft and the Navy is very happy with it. Is it a true "replacement" for the F-14? No, but it is much more cost effective and still does about 80-90% of what the Tomcat could do minus the top speed. And the SH sdtill has plenty of room for growth. Just my two cents.

  • @67tomcat Without an equivalent to the Phoenix Missile, the Super Hornet can't even hope to match the Fleet Defense role of the Tomcat. The F-14 could target and fire that missile from 100 miles away, keeping Exocet-carrying ship-killers out of range. Unfortunately, the longest-range air-to-air missile carried by the Super Hornet is the AIM-120 with a range of only 43 miles -- well within the range of an Exocet.

  • @BloodofPatriots Agree with your assement on the F-14/Phoenix combo; can't fault a missle with a 100 mile range. The Phoenix was an awesome missle- when it worked properly. The F-14 should have been wired for the AMRAAM as a replacement for the AIM-7 Sparrow. Again, I would like to have seen new production F-14D's with Super Hornets sharing carrier decks- no need for the costly and single engine F-35.

  • @67tomcat The F-35C is an expensive, underwhelming POS. It's nothing but a jobs program for Lockheed Martin. If the idiots just upsized the carrying capacity of the two-seater F/A-18F to carry even one or two Phoenix missiles, then we'd have the 100 mile stand-off capability again given the Phoenix's capability to be guided into a target by the E-2D's APY-9 radar, we wouldn't even have to upgrade the F/A-18F's avionics much.

  • amen

  • Outstanding video, nicely done :)

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more