The Tomcat was also quite unreliable and very expensive to maintain. It bled a shed load of energy in tight turns and as many of you have pointed out, really did only a few things well which are not relevant today. The Super Hornet is a much better aircraft. Us Aussies fee the same way about the recent retirement of the F-111. A legendary arcraft that did one job REALLY well. But also became very expensive to maintain. F-111 & F-14 were the only Phoenix carriers and had same engines as well.
@smeary10 I disagree on the hornet being a much better aircraft, but I agree on the rest. The 14 like you said though was built for a reason, a long range interceptor figther during the cold war, not a bomber or dog fighter really just a specific reason! I think you are sleeping on the Tomcat though, I don't now if the Hornet is that great just alot more cost effective and more relevant for todays missions.
@smeary10 I disagree on the hornet being a much better aircraft, but I agree on the rest. The 14 like you said though was built for a reason, a long range interceptor figther during the cold war, not a bomber or dog fighter really just a specific reason! I think you are sleeping on the Tomcat though, I don't now if the Hornet is that great just alot more cost effective and more relevant for todays missions.
@smeary10 F-14A was the only model that had the F-111's TF-30 engines. The A+, B, and D models had the GE F-110, which were much more reliable than the TF-30. The F-14B and D have less maintenance time, and the D model has better avionics and a HUD. The F-14 can out-dogfight an F/A-18 just by staying in the vertical. The F-14 can actually do multiple jobs as well, because it is an ALL ASPECT air-superiority fighter. Also, the B and D models had precision strike capabilities better than the FA-18
@FutureMarine1775USA - Understood mate. But I still think you're reaching a little. As I mentioned, the F-14 & F1-111 were both state of the art and arguably ahead of their time in their day. But modern warfare has rendered these old girls redundant now. 1960's engineering and maintenance is too expensive to upkeep. 1960's handling and performance is a problem today as well.
@smeary10 Well, my idea is to moderenize the F-14. Pratt and Whiteny F-100 Turbofans, simplified wing system, improved avionics, extra hardpoints, thrust-vectoring, updated HUD and more. All of this would make the F-14 even more amazing.
@FutureMarine1775USA - I agree, however, why modernize an old airframe when you can design and build a completely new one for less money? What you want to do to the Tomcat will basically give you a SuperBug. If you look at the Super, from the air intakes forward, it looks a lot like a Tomcat front end. I reckon they should navalize the Raptor. That would be cheaper to do again. Strengthen undercarriage, arresor hook etc.. Your thoughts, mate?
@smeary10 They actually came up with a naval-raptor concept i the 90s, with swing wings and everything. Also, the Tomcat's airframe has several advantages over others:One of the last aerodynamicly stable airframes, can be flown without computers,Extremly aerodynamic, Good payload capacity, Space for GIANT Radar.Also, the upgrades I mentioned are just a sliver of what would be on the F-14E. I want do redesign the Cockpit controls from the ground up (HOTAS would be great). Also, maybe an AIM54D?
I think it was much better than 60's handling and performace. Try 80's.
But the 14E would have been much better (decades better) than the originals. Just take a look at the F-15E and the newer SE modle. Or even the F-16 Block 52 and 60's.
What killed the F-14 was the Phoenix being retired. When it went the one job the F-14 was special for disappeared. biped may not care "what anyone says" but luckily no who knows what's up cares what he says. The Super Hornet can do everything the F-14 can do with the exception of long range bomber interception, a threat which has disappeared.
@ewthmatth It's used to catch the aircraft in case something were to go wrong and the F-14 had to make an emergency landing,cause if it's that bad there isn't gonna be a chance to go around and try again if you miss the capture cable so it's sort of a back up to save the plane from running off the carrier.
@Aryanpars you need to remember that they did not have any thrust vectoring in 1971. Thrust vectoring did not come around until the f22 prototype in 1994. but i will agree they could have modified the f14d to have thrust vectoring and that therefore wouldve made the f14 much more lethal.
They should have added Thrust Vectoring, front wings, upgraded jet engine and new avionics/radar system and this would have killed everything in the air...
In my mind, the F-14 Tomcat was the best Air Superiority Fighter for it's time and will never see the likes of again. The Phoenix Missile System was so unique in that it could track six targets at once and had standoff capability of 100 miles. Libya found that out the hard way in the 1980's.
The US Navy got smart when the F-14 was given Air-to-Ground Attack with Laser Targeting and became known as the F-14 Bobmcat. In Combat Missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, the F-14 did perform nicely in At
@69Cabeast the tomcat's price on plane was cheap but it's maintenance price was the heaviest out of all the 4th generation fighters. It's maintenance and upkeep (around 24-36 hours for just 2 hours of flight) was such a hassle to the goverment that they had to cancel it. I really like this jet a lot and wish it didn't retire.
Absolutely, the navy has always been a little short sighted, incredibly so with the retirement of the Tomcat series. But there was also a LOT of politics that killed the cat. If they developed the F-14 further like the F-15E then it would totally lethal.
I don't care what anyone says. The super bug is a cobbled together redesign that was more expensive than building new advanced F-14s.
I would not go that far, especially with the F-22. The F-35 is still an unknown quantity, although the cockpit and avionics are top notch. Still, it is a stealthy dump truck compared to the "Super Tomcats" that should be rolling off the assembly line as we speak. A great high / low mix: Advanced Tomcats and F-35s on the deck. Now we will have two planes doing the exact same thing F-35 & the F-18E/F/G/H/I/J/K/L/M/N/O/P/Q/R/S/T/U/V/W/X/Y/Z.
@khanbernardphoenix You're missing the point. It wasn't just cost, the Navy wants to cutback on superfluous aircraft taking up space on carrier decks and the F-14 was one of them. At it's heart the F-14 was an interceptor and no amount of JDAMs was going to change that. Their is no Soviet Union anymore, the Navy's duties increasingly call it against poor third world nations where close air support and ground attack are the name of the game. Not bomber interception.
@biped19 It wasn't more expensive. I am like you though.Loved the F14, however its time had come. The F18 Super Hornet has something like a 75 percent commomality in parts to the Classic model. With the money saved they were able to build a very effective defence fighter, electonically. Our airforce here in Australia have bought it for this same reason
Yeah, did you ever notice that; then sec. of defense Dick (just the right name) Cheney viewed the F-14 as just a jobs program, matter of fact because he wanted it to end in favor of something newer.
Well congress funded just 55 newly built 14 D's. the rest was upgraded A or B models to D status.
@Spadadiforza They were, back in the 1980s anyway. The AIM-54's useful range against a maneuvering target like a fighter was basically the same as the AMRAAM. The Phoenix's main advantage was its overall range which was great for killing bombers from far away. But the usefulness of that falls off when you're facing lighter aircraft.
Well, nothing wrong with the GE 110. as matter of fact these powerplants have been known to put more than 20,000 pounds dry thrust. 32500 Max with A/B.
I think they must do experimental prototypes of the F-14 half and 3/4. Smaller, faster and more agile with a one man cockpit.Same sweepback wing that responds twice as fast on the throttle. With a flattened thin stremline body for stealth. The F14 is a beautiful jet and it should have been improved upon and carried on. It was a great concept but it became too heavy to keep up with the sleek modern F-22 Raptor stealth....
F14 still one of the bests!
ahriman46 5 months ago
The Tomcat was also quite unreliable and very expensive to maintain. It bled a shed load of energy in tight turns and as many of you have pointed out, really did only a few things well which are not relevant today. The Super Hornet is a much better aircraft. Us Aussies fee the same way about the recent retirement of the F-111. A legendary arcraft that did one job REALLY well. But also became very expensive to maintain. F-111 & F-14 were the only Phoenix carriers and had same engines as well.
smeary10 7 months ago
@smeary10 I disagree on the hornet being a much better aircraft, but I agree on the rest. The 14 like you said though was built for a reason, a long range interceptor figther during the cold war, not a bomber or dog fighter really just a specific reason! I think you are sleeping on the Tomcat though, I don't now if the Hornet is that great just alot more cost effective and more relevant for todays missions.
onblock7 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@smeary10 I disagree on the hornet being a much better aircraft, but I agree on the rest. The 14 like you said though was built for a reason, a long range interceptor figther during the cold war, not a bomber or dog fighter really just a specific reason! I think you are sleeping on the Tomcat though, I don't now if the Hornet is that great just alot more cost effective and more relevant for todays missions.
onblock7 5 months ago
@smeary10 F-14A was the only model that had the F-111's TF-30 engines. The A+, B, and D models had the GE F-110, which were much more reliable than the TF-30. The F-14B and D have less maintenance time, and the D model has better avionics and a HUD. The F-14 can out-dogfight an F/A-18 just by staying in the vertical. The F-14 can actually do multiple jobs as well, because it is an ALL ASPECT air-superiority fighter. Also, the B and D models had precision strike capabilities better than the FA-18
FutureMarine1775USA 4 months ago
@FutureMarine1775USA - Understood mate. But I still think you're reaching a little. As I mentioned, the F-14 & F1-111 were both state of the art and arguably ahead of their time in their day. But modern warfare has rendered these old girls redundant now. 1960's engineering and maintenance is too expensive to upkeep. 1960's handling and performance is a problem today as well.
smeary10 4 months ago
@smeary10 Well, my idea is to moderenize the F-14. Pratt and Whiteny F-100 Turbofans, simplified wing system, improved avionics, extra hardpoints, thrust-vectoring, updated HUD and more. All of this would make the F-14 even more amazing.
FutureMarine1775USA 4 months ago
@FutureMarine1775USA - I agree, however, why modernize an old airframe when you can design and build a completely new one for less money? What you want to do to the Tomcat will basically give you a SuperBug. If you look at the Super, from the air intakes forward, it looks a lot like a Tomcat front end. I reckon they should navalize the Raptor. That would be cheaper to do again. Strengthen undercarriage, arresor hook etc.. Your thoughts, mate?
smeary10 4 months ago
@smeary10 They actually came up with a naval-raptor concept i the 90s, with swing wings and everything. Also, the Tomcat's airframe has several advantages over others:One of the last aerodynamicly stable airframes, can be flown without computers,Extremly aerodynamic, Good payload capacity, Space for GIANT Radar.Also, the upgrades I mentioned are just a sliver of what would be on the F-14E. I want do redesign the Cockpit controls from the ground up (HOTAS would be great). Also, maybe an AIM54D?
FutureMarine1775USA 4 months ago
@smeary10
I think it was much better than 60's handling and performace. Try 80's.
But the 14E would have been much better (decades better) than the originals. Just take a look at the F-15E and the newer SE modle. Or even the F-16 Block 52 and 60's.
mojame100 2 months ago
What killed the F-14 was the Phoenix being retired. When it went the one job the F-14 was special for disappeared. biped may not care "what anyone says" but luckily no who knows what's up cares what he says. The Super Hornet can do everything the F-14 can do with the exception of long range bomber interception, a threat which has disappeared.
CaptHawkeye 7 months ago
7:50 what the hell is that?
ewthmatth 9 months ago
@ewthmatth That's a plane
iceskull11 8 months ago
@ewthmatth It's used to catch the aircraft in case something were to go wrong and the F-14 had to make an emergency landing,cause if it's that bad there isn't gonna be a chance to go around and try again if you miss the capture cable so it's sort of a back up to save the plane from running off the carrier.
FlyingBoxHead 8 months ago
@Aryanpars you need to remember that they did not have any thrust vectoring in 1971. Thrust vectoring did not come around until the f22 prototype in 1994. but i will agree they could have modified the f14d to have thrust vectoring and that therefore wouldve made the f14 much more lethal.
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
They should have added Thrust Vectoring, front wings, upgraded jet engine and new avionics/radar system and this would have killed everything in the air...
Aryanpars 9 months ago
In my mind, the F-14 Tomcat was the best Air Superiority Fighter for it's time and will never see the likes of again. The Phoenix Missile System was so unique in that it could track six targets at once and had standoff capability of 100 miles. Libya found that out the hard way in the 1980's.
The US Navy got smart when the F-14 was given Air-to-Ground Attack with Laser Targeting and became known as the F-14 Bobmcat. In Combat Missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, the F-14 did perform nicely in At
Bigu47 1 year ago
What a beaut!
dervit 1 year ago
pffft what about a F-14E? New AESA radar, P&W F119 engines and glove vanes that acted like cannards for subsonic flight.
bf2lover42 1 year ago
@ 6:00
that is an F-14A+ or F-14B engine nozzle
nakazatoGTR 1 year ago
i still dont understand way they replaced the tomcat with slower and cant carry as much plane. this plane was beast in the air
1BULLDOGBLITZ 1 year ago
@1BULLDOGBLITZ
It is because the slower plane can do the Tomcat's job while still being made almost half the Tomcat's price
deckire 1 year ago
@deckire bullshit .....the tomcat was cheap in comparrasion its this simple if it makes sence its doesn't happen
69Cabeast 1 year ago
@69Cabeast the tomcat's price on plane was cheap but it's maintenance price was the heaviest out of all the 4th generation fighters. It's maintenance and upkeep (around 24-36 hours for just 2 hours of flight) was such a hassle to the goverment that they had to cancel it. I really like this jet a lot and wish it didn't retire.
deckire 1 year ago
the best plane in the world
elpapaxo 1 year ago
If it were not for Iran, we would stil be using them. I love the F14, but the F18 is a worthy replacement.
tenoki 1 year ago
the f-14 had no weakpoint its egiens where strong and loud enough to blow your ears of it was on purpose its not a spy plane
tristancooper97 1 year ago
The weakpoint of the tomcat was the engines. Using the low bypass turbo fans of the F22 plus OVT would make these F14s lethal.
Spadadiforza 2 years ago 11
Absolutely, the navy has always been a little short sighted, incredibly so with the retirement of the Tomcat series. But there was also a LOT of politics that killed the cat. If they developed the F-14 further like the F-15E then it would totally lethal.
I don't care what anyone says. The super bug is a cobbled together redesign that was more expensive than building new advanced F-14s.
biped19 2 years ago 9
Now the Navy has no air superiority/fleet defense fighter. Instead we have two planes, The F-18E/F and F-35, that perform the SAME MISSION!
It should be Advanced Tomcats and F-35 on the flight deck today. Ridiculous, embarrassingly ridiculous.
biped19 2 years ago 3
@biped19 your right all the money for the f-22 and the f-35 should have been dumped into the tomcat even the f-15,16
reddead255 1 year ago
@reddead255
I would not go that far, especially with the F-22. The F-35 is still an unknown quantity, although the cockpit and avionics are top notch. Still, it is a stealthy dump truck compared to the "Super Tomcats" that should be rolling off the assembly line as we speak. A great high / low mix: Advanced Tomcats and F-35s on the deck. Now we will have two planes doing the exact same thing F-35 & the F-18E/F/G/H/I/J/K/L/M/N/O/P/Q/R/S/T/U/V/W/X/Y/Z.
biped19 1 year ago
@biped19 look, even they rolled out F-15SE. i mean WTF.
does the gov't have a special relationship with boeng/Mcdonnel Douglas?
nakazatoGTR 1 year ago 2
@biped19 i agree with you....even though i like the hornet, they would have gotten a better deal upgrading the cat
khanbernardphoenix 9 months ago
@khanbernardphoenix You're missing the point. It wasn't just cost, the Navy wants to cutback on superfluous aircraft taking up space on carrier decks and the F-14 was one of them. At it's heart the F-14 was an interceptor and no amount of JDAMs was going to change that. Their is no Soviet Union anymore, the Navy's duties increasingly call it against poor third world nations where close air support and ground attack are the name of the game. Not bomber interception.
CaptHawkeye 7 months ago
@CaptHawkeye THIS POST RIGHT HERE IS MONEY! Great post.
onblock7 5 months ago
@biped19 It wasn't more expensive. I am like you though.Loved the F14, however its time had come. The F18 Super Hornet has something like a 75 percent commomality in parts to the Classic model. With the money saved they were able to build a very effective defence fighter, electonically. Our airforce here in Australia have bought it for this same reason
Glenforbes60 3 months ago
@biped19
Yeah, did you ever notice that; then sec. of defense Dick (just the right name) Cheney viewed the F-14 as just a jobs program, matter of fact because he wanted it to end in favor of something newer.
Well congress funded just 55 newly built 14 D's. the rest was upgraded A or B models to D status.
mojame100 2 months ago
@Spadadiforza then lets do it then, and bring an old friend out of retirement!
CefiroGuy3 9 months ago
@CefiroGuy3 Not my call unfortunately. But that radar and those AIM 54s are a scary package.
Spadadiforza 9 months ago
@Spadadiforza They were, back in the 1980s anyway. The AIM-54's useful range against a maneuvering target like a fighter was basically the same as the AMRAAM. The Phoenix's main advantage was its overall range which was great for killing bombers from far away. But the usefulness of that falls off when you're facing lighter aircraft.
CaptHawkeye 7 months ago
@Spadadiforza The F-14A+, F-14B, and F-14D had improved GE F-110 engines.
FutureMarine1775USA 4 months ago
@Spadadiforza
Well, nothing wrong with the GE 110. as matter of fact these powerplants have been known to put more than 20,000 pounds dry thrust. 32500 Max with A/B.
mojame100 2 months ago
Amazing stuff thanks!
calimar28 2 years ago 3
I think they must do experimental prototypes of the F-14 half and 3/4. Smaller, faster and more agile with a one man cockpit.Same sweepback wing that responds twice as fast on the throttle. With a flattened thin stremline body for stealth. The F14 is a beautiful jet and it should have been improved upon and carried on. It was a great concept but it became too heavy to keep up with the sleek modern F-22 Raptor stealth....
Dima200022 2 years ago 3
@Dima200022 a concept very, varitech " valkyrie"
MIGUEL2005LIMA 1 year ago