turkeydriver

Ordnance- stuff carried by cool fighter planes Ordinance- those boring rules in your city Just thought I'd help everyone out......J/K

Great Find FWind!

Agree on most of your points but stress that Paul Gilcrest's book pointed to a poor supply system, a poor engine, and a poorly prepared maintenance standard training. When I talk to maintainers who used superglue to keep AWG-9 R/T CCAs in place it blows my mind that they don't understand how it caused so many more problems. The F-18s initial success is that it was designed simpler in many ways, to circumvent maintenance induced problems. It is a proven metric across worldwide aviation maintenance that the more maintenance an aircraft requires- the more faults will be induced and the system as a whole will suffer. After 20+ years as a Navy maintainer, I'm convinced at least half of the Tomcat's maintenance troubles were induced by the standard of the time period, and the other half by the complexity of the aircraft itself. To RADM Gilcrest's credit, an entire air wing of F-14's on a carrier with a supply chain and maintenance team dedicated to that one T/M/S would have a much higher readiness rate than a single F-14 squadron with 10 deployed jets on a carrier with 3 Hornet units, a Prowler/Growler unit, E-2C, H-60 etc. Once the Navy killed the F-14 in the early 1990s, the blue water side never wanted to pay another dime to support it when they had the opinion their Destroyers could perform the fleet air defense mission better and use 1.5 hour cycles with sortie generating Hornets (that wore out the launch and arresting gear, wasted overall fuel, and negated the effectiveness of a Nimitz class by half, but don't get me started)

As far as we know yes. I don't know if it worked with other aircraft but haven't seen this reported anywhere.

Though his opinions and experiences are true and valid. I wonder f he served during the Tomcat's heyday and the 1980s and 1990s when the manning and supply systems were stronger. Commenting on 30 year old jets whose sundown date has been established isn't really helpful-it would be like ED asking a LT who just delivered an F/A-18C to the boneyard what he thought of the aircraft. Completely different from what the aircraft was like ~1998.

No aircraft other than a few F-4Es with TISEO had a visual ID capability up to this point. The F-14s that VX-4 took to AIMVAL/ACEVAL were brand new off the line block 90 F-14s with TCS- No F-14s prior to this point had TCS (you can see early F-14 pics with an RWR blister only). TCS was amazing in the fact that it could be slaved to the radar to verify the target or used independently of the radar. If 2 crew were proficient and had fully capable systems, you couldn't really beat an F-14 in an intercept scenario.

Thanks a ton!

sure ill work on that- just take what you see on 2.0, the turn your brightness on your monitor down to 20% or so. 2.0 is normal- 1.5 is dark.

(FIXED***** by following BillyCrsuher's link below) Hi, I have both 2.0 and 1.5 installed. I reinstalled 1.5 after I realized they were separate games still. After the reinstall the entire 1.5 (menus, in-game) appears much dimmer than 2.0 or 1.5 did previously. Anyone else experience this?

Great Find! Some VF-24 F-14A+ shots in there!

thanks for the quick reply!

So I finally bit the bullet and purchased the NTTR map with the F-15C and A-10 campaigns. I also own FC3 and MiG-21. After activation of all modules it seems that the crimea map does not work at all in 2.0? I cannot access any campaigns except the 2 for Nellis. I deleted my 1.5 install because I didn't know you could have them both. Is there anyway to get full FC3 working in 2.0?

-side note- I agree 100% with the what The Final Countdown showed of the F-14. Both Top Gun and the Final Countdown show the glove vanes being used if you have a sharp eye.

Then Motley Crue would be more your style? The movie may have been full of Tom Cruise ego, but the reality is that F-14 crews, while professional and highly trained, did indeed embrace a sort of rock star lifestyle- to the chagrin of every other wing-wearing individual on the planet.

The first video that is the weird commentary is the 6 on 6 AIIm-54A test- your videos are flight tests of AIM-54C individual launches.

Correction- its the AIM-54A 6 on 6 test. I've read in a few places the test was repeated with the AIM-54C with 6 shots and I've also read that it was never attempted again. Rest assured, anything you've seen regarding a 1970s video with 6 AIM-54s being shot from one jet is the AIM-54A acid test.

I'll just leave it that the guys in the cockpit who get paid todo this stuff have a much better trained ability to ID stuff from a long way out. The opinion of the armchair commando is invalid. Back on topic gents.

No, it can't. They're easily identifiable as different aircraft by basic airframe differences. I'll give you an IL-38 and a P-3, but a C-130 never looks like a P-3.

Its not too odd- if you consider the aspect the target is- The F-111 from the side and head on is easy to recognize once you see the intake curve instead of a box. 'm sure there is a guide that takes the tailfin height at XX range and states it is XX aircraft. - a poor man's NCTR. Clearly this was not enough to satisfy a shot during Desert Storm - perhaps because was difficult to determine a MiG-29 from an F-15 at range, or a MirageF1 from an F-16 or Jaguar(from head on). RIO skill definitely comes into play. Maybe compare the raw radar data to the pic for a determination.

Yes read about AIMVAL/ACEVAL.

I'm away from home for a period of time but this link (internet I know)does a good job dscribing the tech and talks about target types ID at specific ranges for their general size about half way down the page. http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-EO-Systems.html

Go back and read then. Fighters like the F-15, SU-27, and F-14 can be VID from 8-10 miles using the mk1 eyeball. That TCS will ID an F-5 from 10 miles, which is saying something. IDing a big fighter like a MiG-25 at 30nm or beyond shouldn't be a problem for the TCS if the atmospherics are clear. The TCS was decisive in AIMVAL/ACEVAL to such an effect that the Air Force bought rifle scopes to bolt on in their cockpits.

I've read that the TCS can VID a 747 at 70 miles with good visual conditions. The TCS should ID a MiG-25 or 31 from far enough out to launch a BVR weapon. The F-14A had the APX-76 interrogator IIRC so we should be able to interrogate, but personally I think this capability is only useful in congested airspace. Your AWACs and ESM units should have any target positively ID'd as soon as they are wheels up by satisfying a number of conditions.

Apparentlya few AWG-9 sets were modified with NCTR but it was discontinued because it was very expensive and thought unnecessary for a blue water mission where you know the inbound guy is bad from a long way out just by him heading toward the carrier. All F-14Ds had NCTR (and Link 16)

Please no.......