Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
    This article is dated, but I found it interesting: F-14D Tomcat vs. F/18 E/F Super Hornet
    You know, before Desert Shield/Desert Storm, carriers didn't even venture into the Gulf. They staid out in the NAS, where the aircraft could still whack Iran, because that was the enemy du jour before Hussein got stupid, and the ships avoid all of that Silkworm nonsense. They were real POSs BTW.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
      This article is dated, but I found it interesting: F-14D Tomcat vs. F/18 E/F Super Hornet
      found this stuff on FAS.org

      Performance (At Maximum Takeoff Weight)

      F/A-18C/D
      Max level speed More than Mach 1.8
      Max speed, intermediate power More than Mach 1.0
      Approach speed 134 knots
      Acceleration from 460 knots to 920 knots at 10,670 m under 2 min
      Combat ceiling approx 15,240 m
      T-O run Less than 427 m
      Minimum wind over deck:
      Launching 35 knots
      Recovery 19 knots
      Combat radius, interdiction, hi-lo-lo-hi 290 nm
      Combat endurance, CAP 150 nm from aircraft carrier 1 h 45 min
      Ferry range, unrefueled More than 1,800 nm

      F/A-18E/F
      Maximum level speed at altitude more than Mach 1.8
      Combat ceiling 13,865 m
      Minimum wind over deck:
      Launching 30 knots
      Recovery 15 knots

      Combat radius specification:
      Interdiction with four 1,000 lb bombs, two Sidewinders,
      and two 1,818 liter (480 U.S. gallon: 400 Imp gallon) external tanks,
      navigation FLIR and targeting FLIR: Forward Looking Infra-Red
      hi-lo-lo-hi 390 nm

      Fighter escort with two Sidewinders and two AMRAAMs 410 nm

      Combat endurance: maritime air superiority, six AAMs,
      three 1,818 liter external tanks, 150 nm from aircraft carrier. 2h 15 min

      the following was also from FAS for the F-14, but not sure which version of what the payloads:

      Mission Radius 500 nm Hi-Med-Hi strike profile
      380 nm Hi-Lo-Lo-Hi strike profile

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
        Minor nitpick, the Captain is a SWO - Surface Warfare Officer.
        Originally posted by desertswo View Post
        Yeah, what he said! :)
        Got it! Cheers, "nice handle" :)
        Ego Numquam

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
          You always hear that the F-14 bested the Super Hornet is range, the only figures I can find state that the Tomcat held around 16,000 lbs of internal fuel (F-14 Tomcat - Airforce Technology), the Super Hornet holds 14,700 lbs of internal fuel (F/A-18E/F Super Hornet vs. Sukhoi Flanker), and the F-35C will hold more than 20,000 lbs of internal fuel (Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)!



          It's been my understanding that Boeing has been creating these conformal tanks and weapons pods for the Super Hornet Block III in the hopes of attracting further foreign buyers and that the USN has not shown interest in acquiring these Block III add-ons to this point.
          Some of the block III boeing hopes to fund with forgein buyers. The CFTs the enhanced durability engine and th stealth pod the us navy is going to fund. The enhanced performance engine with 26 000lbs of thrust the navy is not interesting in funding. Boeing is playing this very smart though. The only difference between the EDE and EPE is a fan upgrade which can be added later. The EDE engine extends engine life and reduces fuel consumption futher increaseing range.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Fastam View Post
            Some of the block III boeing hopes to fund with forgein buyers. The CFTs the enhanced durability engine and th stealth pod the us navy is going to fund. The enhanced performance engine with 26 000lbs of thrust the navy is not interesting in funding. Boeing is playing this very smart though. The only difference between the EDE and EPE is a fan upgrade which can be added later. The EDE engine extends engine life and reduces fuel consumption futher increaseing range.
            I disagree. The articles I have read clearly indicate that the Block III upgrades have been funding by Boeing and their industry partners, and although the USN is monitoring the results of the program, they are not currently funding the development of, nor do they have any intention of buying the upgrades associated with the Block III Super Hornet.

            Boeing aims to keep building F/A-18 jets through 2020 | Fox Business
            Boeing shows off advanced Super Hornet demonstrator - 8/28/2013 - Flight Global
            http://defensetech.org/2013/11/04/na...-super-hornet/

            Do you have sources that indicate otherwise?

            Comment


            • #96
              Online flight stats for aircraft are generally unreliable, but these are from the USN fact file pages:

              General Characteristics: F-14 Tomcat
              Propulsion: F-14A: (2) TF30-414A Afterburning Turbofans with over 40,000 lb Total Thrust
              F-14B/D: (2) F110-GE400 Afterburning Turbofans with over 54,000 lb Total Thrust.
              Length: 62 feet 9 inches (18.9 meters).
              Wingspan: 64 feet (19 meters) unswept; 38 feet (11.4 meters) swept.
              Weight: 43,600 lb (19,777 kg) (F-14B).
              Airspeed: Mach 2+.
              Range: 1600 nautical miles.

              General Characteristics: F/A-18, E and F models
              Unit Cost: $57 million
              Propulsion: Two F414-GE-400 turbofan engines. 22,000 pounds (9,977 kg) static thrust per engine.
              Length: 60.3 feet (18.5 meters).
              Wingspan: 44.9 feet (13.68 meters).
              Weight: Maximum Take Off Gross Weight is 66,000 pounds (29,932 kg).
              Airspeed: Mach 1.8+.
              Range: Combat: 1,275 nautical miles (2,346 kilometers), clean plus two AIM-9s
              Ferry: 1,660 nautical miles (3,054 kilometers), two AIM-9s, three 480 gallon tanks retained.


              General Characteristics: F/A-18, C and D models
              Unit Cost: $29 million.
              Propulsion: Two F404-GE-402 enhanced performance turbofan engines. 17,700 pounds static thrust per engine.
              Length: 56 feet (16.8 meters).
              Wingspan: 40 feet 5 inches (13.5 meters).
              Weight: Maximum Take Off Gross Weight is 51,900 pounds (23,537 kg).
              Airspeed: Mach 1.7+.
              Range: Combat: 1,089 nautical miles (1252.4 miles/2,003 km), clean plus two AIM-9s
              Ferry: 1,546 nautical miles (1777.9 miles/2,844 km), two AIM-9s plus three 330 gallon tanks.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
                I disagree. The articles I have read clearly indicate that the Block III upgrades have been funding by Boeing and their industry partners, and although the USN is monitoring the results of the program, they are not currently funding the development of, nor do they have any intention of buying the upgrades associated with the Block III Super Hornet.

                Boeing aims to keep building F/A-18 jets through 2020 | Fox Business
                Boeing shows off advanced Super Hornet demonstrator - 8/28/2013 - Flight Global
                http://defensetech.org/2013/11/04/na...-super-hornet/

                Do you have sources that indicate otherwise?
                http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/new...reply&p=983282
                Navy Tests Stealth-Like Features for Super Hornet | Military.com

                I would surprised if boeing is self funding working prototypes that the navy is testing. The navy wants these upgrades, they have to talk congress into funding it further.

                I may be incorrect on who is paying for the funding. But the navy deffinately wants the upgrades.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
                  Online flight stats for aircraft are generally unreliable, but these are from the USN fact file pages:

                  General Characteristics: F-14 Tomcat
                  Propulsion: F-14A: (2) TF30-414A Afterburning Turbofans with over 40,000 lb Total Thrust
                  F-14B/D: (2) F110-GE400 Afterburning Turbofans with over 54,000 lb Total Thrust.
                  Length: 62 feet 9 inches (18.9 meters).
                  Wingspan: 64 feet (19 meters) unswept; 38 feet (11.4 meters) swept.
                  Weight: 43,600 lb (19,777 kg) (F-14B).
                  Airspeed: Mach 2+.
                  Range: 1600 nautical miles.

                  General Characteristics: F/A-18, E and F models
                  Unit Cost: $57 million
                  Propulsion: Two F414-GE-400 turbofan engines. 22,000 pounds (9,977 kg) static thrust per engine.
                  Length: 60.3 feet (18.5 meters).
                  Wingspan: 44.9 feet (13.68 meters).
                  Weight: Maximum Take Off Gross Weight is 66,000 pounds (29,932 kg).
                  Airspeed: Mach 1.8+.
                  Range: Combat: 1,275 nautical miles (2,346 kilometers), clean plus two AIM-9s
                  Ferry: 1,660 nautical miles (3,054 kilometers), two AIM-9s, three 480 gallon tanks retained.


                  General Characteristics: F/A-18, C and D models
                  Unit Cost: $29 million.
                  Propulsion: Two F404-GE-402 enhanced performance turbofan engines. 17,700 pounds static thrust per engine.
                  Length: 56 feet (16.8 meters).
                  Wingspan: 40 feet 5 inches (13.5 meters).
                  Weight: Maximum Take Off Gross Weight is 51,900 pounds (23,537 kg).
                  Airspeed: Mach 1.7+.
                  Range: Combat: 1,089 nautical miles (1252.4 miles/2,003 km), clean plus two AIM-9s
                  Ferry: 1,546 nautical miles (1777.9 miles/2,844 km), two AIM-9s plus three 330 gallon tanks.

                  Here is a better chart.
                  http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/f...ffd8&mode=view

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Fastam View Post
                    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/new...reply&p=983282
                    Navy Tests Stealth-Like Features for Super Hornet | Military.com

                    I would surprised if boeing is self funding working prototypes that the navy is testing. The navy wants these upgrades, they have to talk congress into funding it further.

                    I may be incorrect on who is paying for the funding. But the navy deffinately wants the upgrades.
                    Ya, that falls into he category of the USN monitoring the results in my eye. It doesn't indicate they are funding the development, or planning on buying the upgrades. Only that they are interested in Boeing's new toys. I would not be surprised that Boeing is letting the USN test their new toys, as they are trying to generate sales by getting the primary customer interested.

                    You're overstating the Navy's position in my eyes.

                    Comment


                    • I've been hearing the navy might cut it's F35 buys in order to get more super hornets. If that were to happen, these upgrades will likely get tacked on.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Fastam View Post
                        I've been hearing the navy might cut it's F35 buys in order to get more super hornets. If that were to happen, these upgrades will likely get tacked on.
                        You've been hearing .. like from the grapevine or what?

                        Again, it helps if you post a credible source for these assertions.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
                          You've been hearing .. like from the grapevine or what?

                          Again, it helps if you post a credible source for these assertions.

                          2015 budget preview ? Army-Guard fight gets ugly ? OSD turns down Navy request to take a ?break? from F-35 - POLITICO Morning Defense - POLITICO.com

                          Comment


                          • So basically a Politico reporter's own sniffing of the winds backed by a rumor from an unnamed congressional source....

                            I suppose anything is possible, but make a wish foundation would probably need to be working overtime on Boeing's behalf. :)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Fastam View Post
                              I've been hearing the navy might cut it's F35 buys in order to get more super hornets. If that were to happen, these upgrades will likely get tacked on.
                              TBH, I don't see that happening; the Navy is as committed to the F-35 program as the Air Force is, and if the Air Force is prepared to axe half of their programs in order to keep the F-35 alive, then I suspect the Navy is in the same position. If the Navy has any EXTRA money then, yes, I could see them spending it on SH upgrades; but with the Navy AND the Marines purchasing the F-35 B/C as fast as they can, I don't see them going out of their way to spend any more money on the legacy Hornets, even the newer SH's.
                              "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Stitch View Post
                                TBH, I don't see that happening; the Navy is as committed to the F-35 program as the Air Force is, and if the Air Force is prepared to axe half of their programs in order to keep the F-35 alive, then I suspect the Navy is in the same position. If the Navy has any EXTRA money then, yes, I could see them spending it on SH upgrades; but with the Navy AND the Marines purchasing the F-35 B/C as fast as they can, I don't see them going out of their way to spend any more money on the legacy Hornets, even the newer SH's.
                                The Navy also needs to save some $s for gen after next platforms. If there is any thing in the 2020s and 2030s that the F-35 can't handle, then the SH certainly can't handle it either. Mortgaging the fleet's future on SHs would not be wise if they are already unhappy with the F-35.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X