Is there any possibility of us getting the F14D-Super Tomcat?

[Greekbull]

Hello guys this is my first reply on these forums ever. First things first....I am a Navy veteran. I served in Operation Iraqi Freedom with VF-2 Bounty Hunters on board the USS Constellation. I was an AT2(Aviation Electronics Technician,2nd class petty officer.) There are a few things I would like to clear up regarding the F-14D here just to make sure information is as accurate as it can be.

 

1) All F-14D's had datalink capability which enabled them to send and receive still pictures, and even video. ROVER 3 was only available to Deltas that were originally built as Deltas, none of the Deltas that were Alphas before, and then upgraded to a Delta had the capability. ROVER 3 did in fact send real time video, and I've seen it done :).

 

2) I would imagine the LANTIRN pod functions pretty similarly to the A+/B, since the LANTIRN I believe was designed for F-15 Strike Eagle. So in essence it's the same exact thing. The only difference is the F-15 had two control sticks in the NFO's seat(one on each side of the console areas), while the Tomcat had only one(on the left side).

 

3) Right before the war, we were heavily modifying the Deltas to be JDAM capable. We updated the software from D03B to D04. Along with adding in the hardware to do it. It was a very hectic time for us, because we knew that we were going to war.

 

4) The Delta's RADAR was very different from the earlier models. It replaced most of the AWG 9 system in favor to the APG-71. The only commonality that it shared was the AWG 9 transmitter, which was left unchanged. The range was 150+ miles....at high altitude. It is capable of tracking 36 targets simultaneously, not 24. One Tomcat, of a squadron of 10 could track over half of their phoenix complement, and guide them to their targets. There has never been a more powerful RADAR system in a fighter jet to this day.

 

5) The AIM 54 had an active RADAR that allowed the missile to become independent from the Tomcat. So theoretically the Tomcat never had to achieve RADAR lock, however it is better to get the RADAR lock since the missile's RADAR range was significantly shorter. The missile could also interrogate mode 4, friend or foe to prevent friendly fire mishaps. Also a Tomcat could launch the phoenix and have an E-2 Hawkeye guide the missile to it's target. I don't care what people say, the Phoenix missile is still a ****ing missile, you don't want one shot at you....Period.

 

6) During the first Gulf War, the Air Force favored their F-15's over the F-14's not because of lack of IFF capability, but because the F-15 was their jet. I have talked to Pilot's who flew during that war, that were still pissed off about that.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Welcome! Great info!

[Wizard_03]

Awesome post bulletweak, nice info

 

I have a question regarding your number 4 point.

 

If I understand your post correctly with the APG71 a single tomcat would be able to guide aim-54s launched from another separate tomcat.. (please anyone correct me if I'm wrong)

 

Now my question: was that an actual capability of the radar at the RIOs disposal? or are you just stating that the radar is simply powerful enough that it could have done something like that but didn't actually have the software/datalink capability built in?

[amalahama]

Hello guys this is my first reply on these forums ever. First things first....I am a Navy veteran. I served in Operation Iraqi Freedom with VF-2 Bounty Hunters on board the USS Constellation. I was an AT2(Aviation Electronics Technician,2nd class petty officer.) There are a few things I would like to clear up regarding the F-14D here just to make sure information is as accurate as it can be.

 

1) All F-14D's had datalink capability which enabled them to send and receive still pictures, and even video. ROVER 3 was only available to Deltas that were originally built as Deltas, none of the Deltas that were Alphas before, and then upgraded to a Delta had the capability. ROVER 3 did in fact send real time video, and I've seen it done :).

 

2) I would imagine the LANTIRN pod functions pretty similarly to the A+/B, since the LANTIRN I believe was designed for F-15 Strike Eagle. So in essence it's the same exact thing. The only difference is the F-15 had two control sticks in the NFO's seat(one on each side of the console areas), while the Tomcat had only one(on the left side).

 

3) Right before the war, we were heavily modifying the Deltas to be JDAM capable. We updated the software from D03B to D04. Along with adding in the hardware to do it. It was a very hectic time for us, because we knew that we were going to war.

 

4) The Delta's RADAR was very different from the earlier models. It replaced most of the AWG 9 system in favor to the APG-71. The only commonality that it shared was the AWG 9 transmitter, which was left unchanged. The range was 150+ miles....at high altitude. It is capable of tracking 36 targets simultaneously, not 24. One Tomcat, of a squadron of 10 could track over half of their phoenix complement, and guide them to their targets. There has never been a more powerful RADAR system in a fighter jet to this day.

 

5) The AIM 54 had an active RADAR that allowed the missile to become independent from the Tomcat. So theoretically the Tomcat never had to achieve RADAR lock, however it is better to get the RADAR lock since the missile's RADAR range was significantly shorter. The missile could also interrogate mode 4, friend or foe to prevent friendly fire mishaps. Also a Tomcat could launch the phoenix and have an E-2 Hawkeye guide the missile to it's target. I don't care what people say, the Phoenix missile is still a ****ing missile, you don't want one shot at you....Period.

 

6) During the first Gulf War, the Air Force favored their F-15's over the F-14's not because of lack of IFF capability, but because the F-15 was their jet. I have talked to Pilot's who flew during that war, that were still pissed off about that.

 

I hope this helps.

 

It might be your first post, but I really hope it's not the last one :D Awesome info, thank you very much!

 

Regards

[tekrc]

in all honesty I prefer the A/A+ even though the b is easier to manage.

 

realistically the things that make the A hard to handle: compressor stalls and so on, dont make much of a difference as long as you are smooth with throttle and mantain above 80% rpm (flight idle) really not that hard to get along with

 

I like the challenge of the early engines and dont understand all the complaints sure its less of a t/w ratio but the whole idea is to learn your strengths and play them. not just go for the better model to begin with. if you learn the early model, you will likely do even better with the newer one. the old engines are perfectly capable below 15k ft if you didnt want a challenge you are playing the wrong sim.

[BlackLion213]

in all honesty I prefer the A/A+ even though the b is easier to manage.

 

realistically the things that make the A hard to handle: compressor stalls and so on, dont make much of a difference as long as you are smooth with throttle and mantain above 80% rpm (flight idle) really not that hard to get along with

 

I like the challenge of the early engines and dont understand all the complaints sure its less of a t/w ratio but the whole idea is to learn your strengths and play them. not just go for the better model to begin with. if you learn the early model, you will likely do even better with the newer one. the old engines are perfectly capable below 15k ft if you didnt want a challenge you are playing the wrong sim.

 

I totally agree with you. The F-14A will probably be the more engaging and interesting to fly because it has more "gotcha's". I've felt that learning to deal with faults and quirks is the reason for having a high fidelity sim in the first place.

 

I think back to the early 90s when I got my first sim - Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. Like most (if not all) sims of the era, it had a really simple FM, instruments that were digital by necessity (resolution/readability), faultless engines, and weapons that never failed. Fun at first, but pretty flat learning curve and not that much insight into what it was like to fly a real airplane.

 

Fast forward to 2017 and we have DCS with ultra-realistic flight models, soon to be photo-realistic cockpits with meticulously recreated systems and instrumentation....and players want ultra-modern, faultless airplanes that use FBW computer wizardry to make the airplane fly just like the fighters in Chuck Yeager's Air combat. :doh:

 

I spent my entire flight sim years longing for a virtual aircraft that would (virtually) kill me in a flash and spit on my grave. :D Why else would I take all the time to learn the aircraft's secrets and gotchas?

 

Bring on the F-14A! :thumbup:

 

-Nick

 

PS - The F-14A+ and B are the same airplane - the F-14A+ designation was changed to the F-14B in late 1991, reportedly to simplify reading digital database info that was confusing with the "A+" moniker. So the F-14A is one version while the F-14A+ and F-14B are the same (excluding the fact that F-14A+ always refers to the aircraft in the 1987-1991 timeframe).

[Greekbull]

Lol and I'm a little more excited for the B Model;). But I'll be happy with either...just a bit happier we're getting the B first:D

 

Although we'll have to do some fun stuff with the skins since VF-2 only flew the A and the D...so a fictional VF-2 B will need to be made.

[OnlyforDCS]

I totally agree with you. The F-14A will probably be the more engaging and interesting to fly because it has more "gotcha's". I've felt that learning to deal with faults and quirks is the reason for having a high fidelity sim in the first place.

 

I think back to the early 90s when I got my first sim - Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. Like most (if not all) sims of the era, it had a really simple FM, instruments that were digital by necessity (resolution/readability), faultless engines, and weapons that never failed. Fun at first, but pretty flat learning curve and not that much insight into what it was like to fly a real airplane.

 

Fast forward to 2017 and we have DCS with ultra-realistic flight models, soon to be photo-realistic cockpits with meticulously recreated systems and instrumentation....and players want ultra-modern, faultless airplanes that use FBW computer wizardry to make the airplane fly just like the fighters in Chuck Yeager's Air combat. :doh:

 

I spent my entire flight sim years longing for a virtual aircraft that would (virtually) kill me in a flash and spit on my grave. :D Why else would I take all the time to learn the aircraft's secrets and gotchas?

 

Bring on the F-14A! :thumbup:

 

-Nick

 

PS - The F-14A+ and B are the same airplane - the F-14A+ designation was changed to the F-14B in late 1991, reportedly to simplify reading digital database info that was confusing with the "A+" moniker. So the F-14A is one version while the F-14A+ and F-14B are the same (excluding the fact that F-14A+ always refers to the aircraft in the 1987-1991 timeframe).

 

Im in the same boat. Erm, plane.... Err, you get my point.

 

I could never get as excited for the F16, the Hornet, or any of the other myriad of 4th gen+ aircraft as I could for the Tomcat. From what I've read it's a very hands on jet, no digital FBW systems to get between the pilot and the plane.

 

With that said I slightly prefer the B over the A for one simple reason. The TF30s were never meant to be the powerplants that would power the Tomcat fleet, they were basically used as an interim solution until a better engine design matured.

[Slims]

So F14 A/B does not have IFF capabilities for radar ? This is going to be problematic in current dcs environment. :) Nonetheless can`t w8 for this to be released.

[RaceFuel85]

So F14 A/B does not have IFF capabilities for radar ? This is going to be problematic in current dcs environment. :) Nonetheless can`t w8 for this to be released.

 

It does, but it wasn't updated significantly between it's initial deployment and thus was a bit lacking by Desert Storm in 1991.

 

The lower capabilities of the F-14A/B IFF system in 1991 meant it was considerably restricted in BVR engagement compared to the F-15 which had a much better, by that time, IFF interrogator system

[RaceFuel85]

Im in the same boat. Erm, plane.... Err, you get my point.

 

I could never get as excited for the F16, the Hornet, or any of the other myriad of 4th gen+ aircraft as I could for the Tomcat. From what I've read it's a very hands on jet, no digital FBW systems to get between the pilot and the plane.

 

With that said I slightly prefer the B over the A for one simple reason. The TF30s were never meant to be the powerplants that would power the Tomcat fleet, they were basically used as an interim solution until a better engine design matured.

 

Yep..the TF30 was supposed to be replaced by 1975 with the P&W F401 in the F-14B, the first 100 or so F-14A's were supposed to be reworked into B's with the new motors.

 

Obviously the F401 fell flat, so the TF30 kept on keeping on.

[Slims]

Thanks for the clarification m8.

[BlackLion213]

So F14 A/B does not have IFF capabilities for radar ? This is going to be problematic in current dcs environment.

 

Actually the Tomcat has a fine IFF system. The implementation in DCS should be completely comparable to other 4th gen fighters currently in DCS (Mirage and F-15C - things may be different with the Hornet). IFF as a system is not extensively modeled in DCS currently, but the Tomcat has doesn't lack any functionality for DCS.

 

It does, but it wasn't updated significantly between it's initial deployment and thus was a bit lacking by Desert Storm in 1991.

 

The lower capabilities of the F-14A/B IFF system in 1991 meant it was considerably restricted in BVR engagement compared to the F-15 which had a much better, by that time, IFF interrogator system

 

Actually, it wasn't a lack of IFF. It was the lack of NonCooperative Target Recognition (NCTR) that the F-15C had recently received. The USAF was given overall control of the air war and used this as their justification for tasking F-15Cs for CAP missions in the region. The Tomcats would provide USN escort, but not cover Coalition CAP stations like the F-15s.

 

Now the F-14A and A+ (to become F-14B by the end of the year) did have its own analog NCTR system - the TCS. However, the USAF still "preferred" the radar-based NCTR system and continued with their policy.

 

NCTR would be a function of the new APG-71 radar on the F-14D, but you need a digital signal processor to perform the complex algorithms, so the F-14A/B could not implement this system into the AWG-9.

 

The TCS was capable of long-range ID against fighter sized targets, but in order to focus on a target at range, you generally needed STT mode to direct the TCS. In the opening strikes of Desert Storm, 2 sections of F-14A+'s from VF-103 were escorting a USN strike package and detected a group of 4 MiG-21s heading south from an Iraqi airbase. The Tomcats had a good track in TWS mode and planned to launch AIM-54Cs at 25 nm. However, they couldn't obtain clearance from the E-2C, which had radio difficulties and had switched to a different frequency. After several attempts to obtain clearance, the range was falling below 20 nm and the Tomcat lead decided to use his TCS for a proper VID that would allow him to fire. The moment they locked-up the MiGs, they turn and ran at the speed of heat. The F-14s gave a brief chase, but it was pulling them away from the strike package. But the TCS did give them a solid VID even against a MiG-21 at range, but politics and practicality are often not aligned...

 

Yep..the TF30 was supposed to be replaced by 1975 with the P&W F401 in the F-14B, the first 100 or so F-14A's were supposed to be reworked into B's with the new motors.

 

Obviously the F401 fell flat, so the TF30 kept on keeping on.

 

Yes, but it was cost more than performance that spelled the end of the F401. It wasn't as good of an engine as the F110 (later generation engine) and it had it's own stability problems and issues with the afterburner (hard starts and blow outs). The real issue is that the Tomcat problem was over budget and the new engine was the easiest way to cut millions from the cost without sacrificing key program features. Such is life with politicians.

 

-Nick

[turkeydriver]

Actually the Tomcat has a fine IFF system. The implementation in DCS should be completely comparable to other 4th gen fighters currently in DCS (Mirage and F-15C - things may be different with the Hornet). IFF as a system is not extensively modeled in DCS currently, but the Tomcat has doesn't lack any functionality for DCS.

 

 

 

Actually, it wasn't a lack of IFF. It was the lack of NonCooperative Target Recognition (NCTR) that the F-15C had recently received. The USAF was given overall control of the air war and used this as their justification for tasking F-15Cs for CAP missions in the region. The Tomcats would provide USN escort, but not cover Coalition CAP stations like the F-15s.

 

Now the F-14A and A+ (to become F-14B by the end of the year) did have its own analog NCTR system - the TCS. However, the USAF still "preferred" the radar-based NCTR system and continued with their policy.

 

NCTR would be a function of the new APG-71 radar on the F-14D, but you need a digital signal processor to perform the complex algorithms, so the F-14A/B could not implement this system into the AWG-9.

 

The TCS was capable of long-range ID against fighter sized targets, but in order to focus on a target at range, you generally needed STT mode to direct the TCS. In the opening strikes of Desert Storm, 2 sections of F-14A+'s from VF-103 were escorting a USN strike package and detected a group of 4 MiG-21s heading south from an Iraqi airbase. The Tomcats had a good track in TWS mode and planned to launch AIM-54Cs at 25 nm. However, they couldn't obtain clearance from the E-2C, which had radio difficulties and had switched to a different frequency. After several attempts to obtain clearance, the range was falling below 20 nm and the Tomcat lead decided to use his TCS for a proper VID that would allow him to fire. The moment they locked-up the MiGs, they turn and ran at the speed of heat. The F-14s gave a brief chase, but it was pulling them away from the strike package. But the TCS did give them a solid VID even against a MiG-21 at range, but politics and practicality are often not aligned...

 

 

 

Yes, but it was cost more than performance that spelled the end of the F401. It wasn't as good of an engine as the F110 (later generation engine) and it had it's own stability problems and issues with the afterburner (hard starts and blow outs). The real issue is that the Tomcat problem was over budget and the new engine was the easiest way to cut millions from the cost without sacrificing key program features. Such is life with politicians.

 

-Nick

As I understand it- a small number of AWG-9 sets were modified with NCTR in the early eighties but the funding was removed, how this happens with an AWG-9 I don't know. I do not have information if these sets were specifically tracked and used or the system disabled. Regardless, F-14 crews didn't train or deploy with the system for the 1991 Gulf War. The F-14D had NCTR from the start with the APG-71 as well as Link-16 and the way F-14Ds datalinked to control airspace was like the way MiG-31s do now. You can control humongous amounts of airspace with a small amount of F-14s.