F-14 Tomcat.... What should have been!

[Stitch]

Would that figure of 40% be mostly because of the GE F414 vs the GE F404 or is there that much difference in the airframes as well?

My understanding is that the F-18E/F/G was basically an entirely new aircraft; the basic shape remained the same as the legacy Hornet, and the new engine WAS an outgrowth of the F404, but I'm guessing that 70-75% of the Superbug is an all-new design. Part of the reason for calling it a "Super Hornet" was to make the whole program APPEAR less expensive than (supposedly) designing an entirely new (and different) aircraft; it's a lot easier to sell Congress/taxpayers/the US Navy on a weapons program if it's just "an upgrade", as opposed to an entirely new aircraft/weapons system, as it theoretically entails less risk and is, supposedly, less expensive.

If I had to guess, I'd say that only the ejection seat, the weapons themselves and, maybe, the radar are interchangeable between the two aircraft; everything else is different.

[bfng3569]

I probably misinterpreted (badly) your initial question, but regardless of which direction (SH vs ASF-14) the Navy went, there would still be those hundreds of legacy Hornets, generally much newer than the older legacy Tomcats.

(If that makes any sense )

makes sense, i just question whether it would really make a significant enough impact to sway the decision.

[desertswo]

What's really wrong with the "big picture" here, is that with the F-18 regardless of iteration, there is no "big picture" vis-a-vis fleet defense. That went away when the Tomcat went away. CVSGs are less well protected than they used to be, period.

[tbm3fan]

What's really wrong with the "big picture" here, is that with the F-18 regardless of iteration, there is no "big picture" vis-a-vis fleet defense. That went away when the Tomcat went away. CVSGs are less well protected than they used to be, period.

I always like hearing the bottom bottom line...

[Fastam]

What's really wrong with the "big picture" here, is that with the F-18 regardless of iteration, there is no "big picture" vis-a-vis fleet defense. That went away when the Tomcat went away. CVSGs are less well protected than they used to be, period.

Thats a giant load of bullshit. The APG79 is superior to the AWG9 in almost every way possible. The AWG9 might slightly out range the APG79. But thats what E2Ds are for. The AIM120D has the same effective range as the AIM54. The difference we know the AIM120 can hit targets reliably. Somthing the AIM54 could never do in american use. It was designed to shoot Bears and Backfires not SU27s .I doubt an AIM54 could ever hit a fighter than knew he was being targeted. Heck a lot of the time it didn't even fire, just dropped 500k worth of missile into the ocean.

The AWG9 itself was extremely easy to detect and later Jam.

CVSGs are infact far better protected. Now they have cooperative engagement capability. SM6s can be qued by superhornets or E2Ds over 100 miles from the carrier group. So whats left? Oh right speed. Yep the Tomcat was faster. But throw 4 AIM54s on it and it wasn't breaking Mach 1.5 either. The aerodynamicly superior F15 can't break mach 1.6 in a loaded combat mission either.

The supertomcat? Vapourware. The tomact was ditched, because it was a mantinence hog,too expensive. The hornet did the job pretty good. The superhornet does it better. Ask Hornet pilots who flew both, you'll never hear them save they were better off with the F14.

The only F14s pilots that complain about the Superhornets are the ones who didn't get selected to transition.

[desertswo]

Thats a giant load of bullshit. The APG79 is superior to the AWG9 in almost every way possible. The AWG9 might slightly out range the APG79. But thats what E2Ds are for. The AIM120D has the same effective range as the AIM54. The difference we know the AIM120 can hit targets reliably. Somthing the AIM54 could never do in american use. It was designed to shoot Bears and Backfires not SU27s .I doubt an AIM54 could ever hit a fighter than knew he was being targeted. Heck a lot of the time it didn't even fire, just dropped 500k worth of missile into the ocean.

The AWG9 itself was extremely easy to detect and later Jam.

CVSGs are infact far better protected. Now they have cooperative engagement capability. SM6s can be qued by superhornets or E2Ds over 100 miles from the carrier group. So whats left? Oh right speed. Yep the Tomcat was faster. But throw 4 AIM54s on it and it wasn't breaking Mach 1.5 either. The aerodynamicly superior F15 can't break mach 1.6 in a loaded combat mission either.

The supertomcat? Vapourware. The tomact was ditched, because it was a mantinence hog,too expensive. The hornet did the job pretty good. The superhornet does it better. Ask Hornet pilots who flew both, you'll never hear them save they were better off with the F14.

The only F14s pilots that complain about the Superhornets are the ones who didn't get selected to transition.

Well, I guess I'll just check in my TAO and Command at Sear quals and call it a day. Of course, I am 20 years removed from the scrum as it were. When I left the show, the Hornet wasn't what you describe, and we didn't yet have cooperative engagement. The AWG9, AIM54, E2C was the troika of fleet defense; along with my old SM-1ERs. Oh, what's the combat radius of the Super Hornet again?

[Officer of Engineers]

SM6s can be qued by superhornets or E2Ds over 100 miles from the carrier group. So whats left? Oh right speed.

100 miles is BEAR/BACKFIRE firing range.

[bfng3569]

Thats a giant load of bullshit. The APG79 is superior to the AWG9 in almost every way possible. The AWG9 might slightly out range the APG79. But thats what E2Ds are for. The AIM120D has the same effective range as the AIM54. The difference we know the AIM120 can hit targets reliably. Somthing the AIM54 could never do in american use. It was designed to shoot Bears and Backfires not SU27s .I doubt an AIM54 could ever hit a fighter than knew he was being targeted. Heck a lot of the time it didn't even fire, just dropped 500k worth of missile into the ocean.

The AWG9 itself was extremely easy to detect and later Jam.

CVSGs are infact far better protected. Now they have cooperative engagement capability. SM6s can be qued by superhornets or E2Ds over 100 miles from the carrier group. So whats left? Oh right speed. Yep the Tomcat was faster. But throw 4 AIM54s on it and it wasn't breaking Mach 1.5 either. The aerodynamicly superior F15 can't break mach 1.6 in a loaded combat mission either.

The supertomcat? Vapourware. The tomact was ditched, because it was a mantinence hog,too expensive. The hornet did the job pretty good. The superhornet does it better. Ask Hornet pilots who flew both, you'll never hear them save they were better off with the F14.

The only F14s pilots that complain about the Superhornets are the ones who didn't get selected to transition.

did you read the article?

the ASF-14 was to the tomcat what the superhornet was to the hornet. a total 'clean sheet' redesign.

upgraded everything, modern everything. gone would be a all of the legacy equipment (hydraulics etc) that caused it to be such a maintenance issue.

Possibly the best part of about the ASF-14 is that it would be an entirely new aircraft, much along the same lines as the Super Hornet. This means old 1960's era sub-systems that were heavy and complex would be replaced with modular components. All of the jet's hydraulic and electrical systems that gave legacy Tomcat maintainers such headaches over the years would have been replaced with greatly simplified systems

range speed and size. everything the suphornet doesn't have.

aim-54 vs aim-120D? give the phonix another 20 years of development, or a follow on replacement.

AWG-9? the whole point was to update, not recycle.

The most exciting part of the avionics suite would have made use of the Tomcat's massive radar aperture. A mammoth active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar would have been fitted and provided with immense amounts of power for interlaced air-to-air and air-to-ground operations or even standoff electronic attack. You can see how incredible the ASF-14s AESA capability would have matured into by looking at the current APG-63V3 AESA radar upgrade program for the F-15. The APG-63V3 is actually more capable in some respects than the F-22A's APG-77 AESA radar because it is larger in diameter, allowing for more transit/receive modules to be utilized, and it is newer in its design. The Tomcat was built originally for the massive Hughes AWG-9 fire control radar, the largest radar ever deployed on a US fighter, so there is a LOT of real estate up front for the mother of all fighter jet AESA radar arrays to have been fitted.

[bfng3569]

http://defensetech.org/2014/02/18/te...range-aim-120/

Lockheed Test Pilot Calls For Longer Range AIM-120

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2014/02/18/te...#ixzz3L8wv1Exz
Defense.org

San Diego, Calif. — The U.S. military needs a longer range AIM-120 to fully utilize the advances made by America’s fifth generation fleet — the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the F-22 Raptor, said one of Lockheed Martin’s top test pilots.
The AIM-120 is an advanced medium-range air-to-air missile and America’s premiere air-to-air weapon in the fleet. The latest model, the D-model, can fly Mach 4 with a range of about 180 kilometers or about 97 nautical miles. William Gigliotti, Lockheed Martin’s lead test pilot at the Fort Worth site, said he wants to see that range extended to take advantage of the advanced radars inside the F-22 and F-35.
He highlighted the recent advances made by the Chinese and the range of their missile defenses and fighter aircraft.
“When we war game it out, that’s the Achilles heel of the U.S. fighter fleet,” Gigliotti said referring to the AIM-120 at a F-35 panel session at a Navy conference here. Two other Navy F-35 pilots and one Marine Corps F-35 aviator, who also sat on the panel, agreed with Gigliotti.
Gigliotti didn’t challenge the U.S. military to develop an improved variant. He instead challenged the defense industry to start developing one now.
Of course, the Air Force and Navy are in the last stages of operational testing for the AIM-120 D model. Most aircraft are equipped with the AIM-120C3-C7 variants.
Operational testing on the D-model was delayed when the Pentagon halted the program in 2009 to allow Raytheon, the lead contractor, to address four performance and reliability deficiencies. The program was restarted in 2012, but was then again delayed because of sequestration funding levels.
Besides the F-35 and the F-22, the AIM-120 is also carried by the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18 along with other fighters.


Read more: http://defensetech.org/2014/02/18/te...#ixzz3L8wyrmIT
Defense.org

[Jimmy]

The hornet did the job pretty good. The superhornet does it better. Ask Hornet pilots who flew both, you'll never hear them save they were better off with the F14.

I have. The ones who didn't say it were the ones who didn't want to answer the question. The SH doesn't do much than upgraded boss couldn't do better, besides balance the budget.

[desertswo]

I have. The ones who didn't say it were the ones who didn't want to answer the question. The SH doesn't do much than upgraded boss couldn't do better, besides balance the budget.

I don't know Fastam's background so his points on some issues may or may not be informed by experience. One thing that he was right about was the cost of the AIM54, if not the performance. As the Engineering Officer of the Watch (EOOW) in Constellation, I once had to get that puppy up to 27 knots in the Northern Arabian Sea when her engineering plant wasn't optimized for those sorts of turns. Why? Because there was a Tomcat in marshal stack with no hydraulics and two Phoenix hanging off of it and no one from the CVBG commander on down wanted them to jettison those birds in the drink. So she was coming in hot, and needed max wind across the deck. I cheated like hell and allowed somethings to occur that a good engineer wouldn't, and the guy snagged the freaking four wire just as I lost vacuum in Number One Main Engine and I had to take it off line. It was a very near, and very expensive, thing.

[Jimmy]

He's not entirely wrong, but the idea that the Tomcat was outclassed by any Hornet variant in BVR combat is just wrong. I'm not even referencing the AIM-54, because using that weapon against fighters in anything but an "attrit the red horde" scenario is absolutely a waste. An F-14 with comparable software support upgrades, current generation weapons, and the kind of tactic evolution Top Gun was known for would be superior in the BVR environment to a current F/A-18.

Edit: Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to control F-14s, but I've got quite a few hours working with legacy and Super Hornets so I'm pretty familiar with their BVR performance and tactics.

[Fastam]

Well, I guess I'll just check in my TAO and Command at Sear quals and call it a day. Of course, I am 20 years removed from the scrum as it were. When I left the show, the Hornet wasn't what you describe, and we didn't yet have cooperative engagement. The AWG9, AIM54, E2C was the troika of fleet defense; along with my old SM-1ERs. Oh, what's the combat radius of the Super Hornet again?

On an Air to air fleet defense. Around 600nm. With the new Conformal fuel tanks the navy is buying , it can be over 800nm with a center line tank too.

Eric Palmer blog: Super Hornet beats overweight F-35C JORD combat radius requirements

Yes the SH doesn't have all of these now. But if you check the F14s combat radius its about the same in the same config. The 390nm number for the super hornet is loaded up with bombs.

the CEC the super E2D and the AAW CGs and brukes have , give the fleet one picture everyone sees the same. The super hornets cam be 400nm out orbiting non stop and since they buddy tank themselves, they aren't reliant on the old slow S3. The E2D and Aegis can cue the Super hornets AIM120s , without the SH ever even turning the APG79 on.

Could all of this tech being put into a Tomact airframe? Sure. But no way would it have been cheaper than the SH. Nor could the signature reduction techniques used on the SH be applied to the F14s airframe.

[desertswo]

On an Air to air fleet defense. Around 600nm. With the new Conformal fuel tanks the navy is buying , it can be over 800nm with a center line tank too.

Eric Palmer blog: Super Hornet beats overweight F-35C JORD combat radius requirements

Yes the SH doesn't have all of these now. But if you check the F14s combat radius its about the same in the same config. The 390nm number for the super hornet is loaded up with bombs.

the CEC the super E2D and the AAW CGs and brukes have , give the fleet one picture everyone sees the same. The super hornets cam be 400nm out orbiting non stop and since they buddy tank themselves, they aren't reliant on the old slow S3. The E2D and Aegis can cue the Super hornets AIM120s , without the SH ever even turning the APG79 on.

Could all of this tech being put into a Tomact airframe? Sure. But no way would it have been cheaper than the SH. Nor could the signature reduction techniques used on the SH be applied to the F14s airframe.

You do realize you are talking to the former voice of Golf Whiskey during Earnest Will and Praying Mantis, right? I ran everything from E-3As to those Tomcats you are so contemptuous of. I only say that because you have this sort of annoying way of telling me my business. I knew my business as it was, and one of the things I knew was the internal fuel capacity of those F-14s, and without tanking beyond initial launch top off, they were good to go way the hell out to hell and gone, something no Hornet ever was. I am well aware of what Link 16 et al. can do. I only retired in 2003, so I'm not entirely without knowledge of what was, and what was coming down the road.

[Fastam]

He's not entirely wrong, but the idea that the Tomcat was outclassed by any Hornet variant in BVR combat is just wrong. I'm not even referencing the AIM-54, because using that weapon against fighters in anything but an "attrit the red horde" scenario is absolutely a waste. An F-14 with comparable software support upgrades, current generation weapons, and the kind of tactic evolution Top Gun was known for would be superior in the BVR environment to a current F/A-18.

Edit: Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to control F-14s, but I've got quite a few hours working with legacy and Super Hornets so I'm pretty familiar with their BVR performance and tactics.

The F14 never got those upgrades for several reasons, some of the political. However mainly because the Hornet was cheaper to operate, far more reliable . With AESA radars and current data links the Hornets are better than what the F14s had. Comparing what might have been is largely irrelevant. Even then the only real BVR advantage an upgraded F14 would have, is that it could fit a larger aperture. However E2Ds have more than enough range as is.

We've really made a huge leap in technology over the past 10 years. AESA radars along with the AIM-9X, MIDS, and JHMCS have completely revolutionized fighter aircraft. The Air Force will balk and throw "stealth" in there as a quality, but they don't land on carriers. My Maintenance Master Chiefs would/will love that corrosion control program (on the F-35C).

If you have a Super with AESA, you've reached the pinnacle of the jet's capabilities. The air-to-air mode is superior to anything I ever saw in the Tomcat, particularly in terms of user friendliness. The air to ground mode has superb resolution. The radar can in theory, run air-to-air and air-to-ground simultaneously. I like to think of the AESA as a snow plow that catches snow in the air while also moving it off the ground. Pretty awesome if you ask me. If we were not making revolutionary improvements to our inventory you would have to be worried.

Probably even more revolutionary is the AIM-9X with a JHMCS used in the WVR (dogfight) arena. Imagine flying in spread formation at a mile apart, looking over your right shoulder and designating the guy you are about to fight. After "FIGHTS ON" is called, the next words out of your mouth could be "FOX-2" (launching of a short ranged missile). Yikes! That thing can make one hell of a bat turn.

Elite F-14 Flight Officer Explains Why The Tomcat Was So Influential