2008 Election | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB


Go Back   World Affairs Board > Military Forums > Military Aviation
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-14-2008, 15:24 PM   #46 (permalink)
JA Boomer
Contributor
 
Join Date: 07-10-07
Location: Banff, Alberta
Posts: 362
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabpilot View Post
As promised, a little more about bombing from the F-14.
Thank You wabpilot...very interesting!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabpilot View Post
Amazing thing, the software on the old bird did just what the highly classifed document said it would, it did appear to give a bombing solution.
Was the bombing capability of the Tomcat simply built into the airframe and software because Grumman engineers could do it...and then hidden because this was not part of the aircraft requested by the Navy, or did it remain dormant for so long for another reason?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabpilot View Post
But, I can say the F-14 would have been a good low lever penetrator.
That is what I have always though...although for no other reason than the airframe's design.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wabpilot View Post
If we had had even a million dollars, I think the F-14 would have stayed in production and been the medium attack aircraft for the navy from about 1989 to the end of the century.
Might have made a difference in the F-14D and propsed QuickStrike and Super Tomcat variants as well I would guess, perhaps the Tomcat would still be around present day.

One other thing I have always wondered about...how far can the infra-red search and track system, and the onboard closed circuit television camera be used effectively. And how useful were these systems in operational deployments?
JA Boomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2008, 01:26 AM   #47 (permalink)
wabpilot
Military Professional
 
wabpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-05-03
Location: Commuting between Dresden and Ft. Worth
Posts: 558
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JA Boomer View Post
Thank You wabpilot...very interesting!!!

Was the bombing capability of the Tomcat simply built into the airframe and software because Grumman engineers could do it...and then hidden because this was not part of the aircraft requested by the Navy, or did it remain dormant for so long for another reason?
YVW.

The bombing capability was included in the software on the AWG-9. It was crippled at the factory because Grumman and the Navy didn't have time to complete the flight testing needed to clear it. We needed a fleet air defense fighter. While the F-4J addressed all the B model's problems it did not deal with the problem that the Sovs could launch a massive number of missiles at us. Only the AWG-9 and AIM-54 could solve that problem.

Quote:
One other thing I have always wondered about...how far can the infra-red search and track system, and the onboard closed circuit television camera be used effectively. And how useful were these systems in operational deployments?
Those numbers are still classified. But, performance depended on a lot of factors including weather, temperature and the skill of the operator. I personally found the IRST to be very useful even if it was not all that reliable. There is a story in Red Storm Rising about using the IRST at some distance to bag a Backfire or a Bear. The story was fiction of course. Well, sort of fiction.
wabpilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2008, 01:32 AM   #48 (permalink)
omon
Field mechanik
Senior Contributor
 
omon's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-01-06
Location: bk
Posts: 1,925
Country:
a question to pilots, do fighter jets have hvac?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin
omon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2008, 02:25 AM   #49 (permalink)
Blademaster
Military Enthusiast
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 08-15-03
Posts: 3,050
What was it about F/A-18s that created the deathknell of F-14s?
Blademaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2008, 11:39 AM   #50 (permalink)
wabpilot
Military Professional
 
wabpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-05-03
Location: Commuting between Dresden and Ft. Worth
Posts: 558
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by omon View Post
a question to pilots, do fighter jets have hvac?
Every manned aircraft since the Wright Flyer has had some form of HVAC.
wabpilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2008, 11:48 AM   #51 (permalink)
wabpilot
Military Professional
 
wabpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-05-03
Location: Commuting between Dresden and Ft. Worth
Posts: 558
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blademaster View Post
What was it about F/A-18s that created the deathknell of F-14s?
It is far easier to maintain. It takes less time to turn between sorties. It takes fewer person/hours of maintenance per flight hour. The F-18 has the best panel design I have ever seen in any fighter aircraft and frankly better than most transports. The F-18A-D are vastly more maneuverable than their contemporary opponents making WVR engagements usually a lopsided affair. The F-18E/F continues that superiority, yielding only to the F-22 and being comparable to the Rafale, Typhoon and Grippen. The E/F is finally a good medium attack aircraft as well. It's the all around package. Of course, that is what one expects from a twenty year newer design.
wabpilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 20:14 PM   #52 (permalink)
gunnut
Senior Contributor
 
gunnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-27-06
Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 9,365
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabpilot View Post
As promised, a little more about bombing from the F-14. Late in my career, I commanded the AIMD at Oceana. As such, I had a bunch of F-14s in my hangar and on my ramp. One fine day, an old friend of mine who by then was at the Pentagon doing something highly classified, showed up at my office asking interesting questions about some old Grumman software. He had some interesting documentation that I had long thought existed somewhere. What he had was the instructions for activating the bombing modes on the AWG-9. We had one of my hagar queens powered up so we could run some tests. Amazing thing, the software on the old bird did just what the highly classifed document said it would, it did appear to give a bombing solution. At least one aimed at the wall. The next step was to try and fly a bombing profile.

That was more difficult. It's one thing for the boss to hook up a GPU to a plane that is being scavenged for parts and aim the IRST at various spots on the wall. That just affirmed most of my crew's impression that I was crazy. It's quite another to order an ordy chief to roll over some inert Mk 76s for release testing. By then, most of the crew thought something was seriously wrong. I had my planning staff going over bomb profiles. I had my engineers checking and re-checking load stresses. I had my ordies loading and unloading bombs from the ejector racks. In a week, I had satisfied myself that the original data on bomb carriage was incomplete but suggested that we could safely depart with Mk 76s. By then, my XO had called the base chaplin, the base commander, the base psychologist and my wife. He was deeply concerned that I might be unhinged. A diagnosis the psychologists were reluctant to endorse since they didn't think of it first. Finally, the base commander called me into his office for a friendly chat.

I showed him the orders I had from my old buddy. He immediately ordered the entire air station to give me what I wanted and stop asking questions. He also orded the base fire department to stand by ready for a catastrophic explosion in or around the AIMD hangars. We picked a day when the USAF didn't have anything planned for the Dare County range so they wouldn't get upset about us dropping bombs. My ABE loaded two Mk. 76s for the test. Taxi and takeoff went just fine as did climb out. The trip to Dare County is minutes at most. I made three passes at the navy target. The first was just to confirm the AWG-9 worked in the air to ground modes. It did. The second was to make a drop. My planners and engineers agreed that a straight and level drop from 12000 feet was safest. So, I dropped from 12000 just as on the test card. The bomb hit the target dead on! The third pass was the same drill. The point was to verify the second had not been a fluke. It wasn't. Another drop and another hit on target!

The trip home was far too short but, I did have to flat hat the tower. It had been ten years since someone at Grumman locked away all their bombing data and now the cat had fangs again!

From there on, I had to pass the program on to VF-101 which was co-located at Oceana NAS. I would bring in a F-14, modify the programming and do a test flight to verify that the AWG-9 and the SER's worked. Then they got the plane and flew to Roosevelt Roads for more advanced testing and to work out the various bombing profiles. It was all done on the cheap, using time available at the AIMD and at VF-101. Fuel was "borrowed" from different accounts. Lots of engineering time was charged to squadrons that had no clue what we were really doing to their planes.

Because the program had no budget and no authorization from the congress, it moved slowly. My only flights were very early test flights. The later tactical flights were done by VF-101. But, I can say the F-14 would have been a good low lever penetrator. However, we did get much better accuracy and safety from the middle altitudes. By 1986, five years after that first fateful afternoon, the F-14 was cleared for limited bomb drops. I was already retired by then. But, it felt good to know somehting I had been in on at the beginning was paying off.

When the A-12 program folded all the work we had done so cheaply in the '80s really kept naval aviation alive. If we had had even a million dollars, I think the F-14 would have stayed in production and been the medium attack aircraft for the navy from about 1989 to the end of the century.
Wow! It's an honor to have someone so intimately involved with bringing about the "Bombcats" to tell the story in this forum.

And I totally missed this thread until today!

Thanks to ArmchairGeneral for referencing this thread.
__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
gunnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
IDF Stats ZFBoxcar Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 34 10-23-2007 06:41 AM
F-22, stuff you should know Rusky Military Aviation 275 09-21-2007 01:19 AM
Iran gets military gear in Pentagon surplus sale tim52 The Iranian Question 2 01-16-2007 23:33 PM
Pentagon under fire for waste of military supplies troung The Western Alliance 7 06-09-2005 12:40 PM
Missteps Delayed Armor for Troops troung The War in Iraq 11 03-09-2005 23:46 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:25 AM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8