Will the F-14B that Leatherneck is working on have a LANTIRN pod?

[Tirak]

Those crews did a whole lot without many electronic aids.

 

-Nick

 

This is still my favorite quote when talking about the Tomcat's strike capability, and why I'll be heartbroken if the F-14B doesn't have LANTIRN support.

 

With the Strike Eagle you can put the bomb on the building. With the Tomcat you're putting the bomb into the third window from the left, from miles away.

[BlackLion213]

This is still my favorite quote when talking about the Tomcat's strike capability, and why I'll be heartbroken if the F-14B doesn't have LANTIRN support.

 

I'm pretty confident that the Leatherneck F-14B will get LANTIRN at some point. The real question is will it have it within the first year after release IMHO.

 

I'm still hoping. :)

 

-Nick

[FWind]

Great finds FWind! And this does clarify it, a LANTIRN equipped F-14A or F-14B should have the PTID (MFD). The F-14D didn't need it, but many still had it installed in the late-90s.

 

I can see why LNS would hedge on this decision. If the differences prove tricky to model, require cockpit mods, development of LANTIRN, and might need some tweaks to Jester AI so that it uses the LANTIRN properly - it might be a bit much for the initial release.

 

Releasing the F-14A set in the mid-1980s and an F-14B in the mid-1990s (able to drop bombs, but needs buddy lasing for LGBs) would offer lots of excellent game play scenarios and mission possibilities.

 

I think that a future upgrade option for both the F-14A and F-14B would be a good idea, perhaps as part of a new Theater for late-90s or early 2000s operations. This package would update the 1980s F-14A to late 90s standard (update the gunvents to F-14B standard, RWR, etc) and add the PTID with LANTIRN and GPS (and possibly DFCS). The F-14B could be upgraded to "F-14B Upgrade" standards with the mentioned avionics upgrades (PTID/MFD, GPS, LANTIRN) and perhaps DFCS.

 

This would effectively create 4 different F-14 models in DCS spanning a 20 year operational period (without compromising the fidelity to operate across that wide time-frame). I think such an upgrade would be really cool and would keep the F-14 continuously upgraded in DCS. Such an upgrade would also pair very well with a new Combat theater or campaign. These 4 models would contrast very well with each other. I think this is what TurkeyDriver recommended in a past post. :)

 

Also, I really don't think that this qualifies as the "nickel and dime-ing" that Tirak complained about since it would create new models that operate during a different era with a bunch of changes. It wouldn't simply be a matter of adding LANTIRN alone.

 

My 2 cents,

 

Nick

 

Naval Aviation News

[Dudikoff]

The document stated that F-14s using LANTIRN needed the PTID. Like you, I'm not totally sure that is correct for all timeframes. But it seems likely from this report, that all F-14 squadrons that actively used the LANTIRN had the PTID upgrade. Also, the first squadron that deployed with LANTIRN was VF-103 in 1996. Their jets were modified prior to deployment for LANTIRN and one of the upgrades mentioned was NVG compatibility of the cockpit. I'm pretty sure that one of the critical NVG compatibility changes was the replacement of the RIO TID with a PTID (again, stitched together from multiple reports - wish someone would publish the complete "LANTIRN recipe").

 

Yes, but this is a later maintenance document where all the LANTIRN capable aircraft were already upgraded so it doesn't need to go into any potential early configurations. For instance, it mentions PTID only in the context of the F-14B Upgrade and that program was done in 1997 and included the digital bus integration and some other systems. Regarding the NVG's, they say only 6 of the 9 LANTIRN capable jets had their cockpits modified for NVG use so I'm not sure that the TID screen was the limiting factor for NVG's if all the other old screens weren't.

 

On the other hand, the pilot's quote on the 1995 VF-103 tests from the 'Bombcat' magazine differs from the earlier test integration quote which mentioned LANTIRN picture being interleaved with the radar on a TID:

 

"Ballistics for the GBU-16 1,000lb LGB and the LGTR were also added, as were display signal paths between the pod and the RIO’s new 8in x 8in Programmable Tactical Information Display (PTID), which had to be used instead of the then standard fishbowl TID – the PTID displayed both radar and LANTIRN data. Paths were also established to the pilot’s vertical display indicator, in place of the television camera set. F-14 aircraft modifications included dedicated ‘hard wiring’ from the LANTIRN pod to a GPS antenna on the jet’s turtleback and from the LANTIRN station to the cockpit displays." "Then we had to de-configure the aeroplane, since the mods were not cleared for use when the jet was embarked on a carrier, and the only LANTIRN pod modified for Tomcat use had to go back to Martin Marietta."

 

The earlier chapter quote by the same pilot I pasted on the last page mentioned interleaving done on a TID set, hence the confusion: "A USAF LANTIRN pod was shipped to the Fairchild Germantown facility, where ‘Rat’ and I checked out the displays on a tactical information display (TID). Symbology from the pod and an AWG-9 simulation were interleaved on the TID to avoid any overlap between the two systems."

 

These guys are talking from their memories so it's easy to misplace some details. I admit it makes more sense to use the PTID's from the start for the LTS tests, just not really integrated into the plane's systems (which was later done with the F-14B Upgrade program and never done on the F-14A). The only thing is they don't make any mention of the screens or where they came from like they do for the LANTIRN panel and other parts they needed for the demonstration.

Edited March 2, 2016 by Dudikoff

[FWind]

Yes, but this is a later maintenance document where all the LANTIRN capable aircraft were already upgraded so it doesn't need to go into any potential early configurations. For instance, it mentions PTID only in the context of the F-14B Upgrade and that program was done in 1997 and included the digital bus integration and some other systems. Regarding the NVG's, they say only 6 of the 9 LANTIRN capable jets had their cockpits modified for NVG use so I'm not sure that the TID screen was the limiting factor for NVG's if all the other old screens weren't.

 

On the other hand, the pilot's quote on the 1995 VF-103 tests from the 'Bombcat' magazine differs from the earlier test integration quote which mentioned LANTIRN picture being interleaved with the radar on a TID:

 

"Ballistics for the GBU-16 1,000lb LGB and the LGTR were also added, as were display signal paths between the pod and the RIO’s new 8in x 8in Programmable Tactical Information Display (PTID), which had to be used instead of the then standard fishbowl TID – the PTID displayed both radar and LANTIRN data. Paths were also established to the pilot’s vertical display indicator, in place of the television camera set. F-14 aircraft modifications included dedicated ‘hard wiring’ from the LANTIRN pod to a GPS antenna on the jet’s turtleback and from the LANTIRN station to the cockpit displays." "Then we had to de-configure the aeroplane, since the mods were not cleared for use when the jet was embarked on a carrier, and the only LANTIRN pod modified for Tomcat use had to go back to Martin Marietta."

 

The earlier chapter quote by the same pilot I pasted on the last page mentioned interleaving done on a TID set, hence the confusion: "A USAF LANTIRN pod was shipped to the Fairchild Germantown facility, where ‘Rat’ and I checked out the displays on a tactical information display (TID). Symbology from the pod and an AWG-9 simulation were interleaved on the TID to avoid any overlap between the two systems."

 

These guys are talking from their memories so it's easy to misplace some details. I admit it makes more sense to use the PTID's from the start for the LTS tests, just not really integrated into the plane's systems (which was later done with the F-14B Upgrade program and never done on the F-14A). The only thing is they don't make any mention of the screens or where they came from like they do for the LANTIRN panel and other parts they needed for the demonstration.

Fighter Fling 1995 at 00:06:43

PTID

[ame]

[/ame]

[BlackLion213]

Fighter Fling 1995 at 00:06:43

[ATTACH]135881[/ATTACH] PTID

 

FWind,

 

I'm impressed and grateful for your thoroughness. Thank you for posting all of these interesting facts and finds, it's answering a lot of questions that I have wondered about for quite a while. :thumbup:

 

-Nick

[Dudikoff]

Fighter Fling 1995 at 00:06:43 [ATTACH]135881[/ATTACH] PTID

 

Nice find, thanks. So, at the very least LN would have to add the LANTIRN panel, the pod and the non-fully-integrated PTID screen. Now for tests, they mention the PTID would show the radar picture interleaved with the LANTIRN picture if I understood correctly? I'm not sure what they mean by this exactly - both pictures would be shown at the same time or you could at least switch between the sources by using the PTID buttons? I would expect that the deployment configuration was similar to how the PTID was installed on the F-14A which were not upgraded with a digital bus, etc. so the PTID was not fully integrated.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Dudikoff

[jcdata]

The AWG-9 had air to ground modes but was NEVER followed through because the main design criteria for the air to air roles and TARPS. There is a HUD mode on the right console denoting "AG"

 

 

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[jcdata]

Glove vane areas were not reshaped but either welded shut, removed for more warning gear, or not manufactured in the later blocks.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[jcdata]

In air to air, the the Alphas would turn faster due to a faster bleed rate versus the bravo and Delta. The later would easily over G. The B/D would out accelerate anything to M1.6 with the exception of the F16 b52 back in those days. The A would develop more thrust than the B/D when going past M 1.6 or M 1.8. I forgot.

 

During BFM, out of plane and controlled departures were the tomcat's advantages. The F110 engines negated the F15 climb advantage.

 

Sorry for thread hijack

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[zantron]

So... it's possible to have LANTRIN on F-14B with its original cockpit (no MFD's)? Is the target picture shown in the TID? If that's the case, then there is no problem having the LANTRIN pod. But if LNS have to totally redesign the RIO pit... and in the future comes along a theater ... let say First Gulf War... and you are cruising in you're flashy MFD pit ... well its just not authentic

this is off topic comrades but i thought there were some differences between a F14A pit and a mid 90s F14b? i know different engines, but i thought in addition i thought the b type had a mfd or two (im talking b not d) in there along with slightly different panels, or am i totally wrong ?

[probad]

there are some nice discussions and pictures relevant to your question in this thread:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=161954&page=2

[zantron]

there are some nice discussions and pictures relevant to your question in this thread:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=161954&page=2

thank you, much appreciated!!

[BlackLion213]

this is off topic comrades but i thought there were some differences between a F14A pit and a mid 90s F14b? i know different engines, but i thought in addition i thought the b type had a mfd or two (im talking b not d) in there along with slightly different panels, or am i totally wrong ?

 

The mid-90s F-14A and mid-90s F-14B have the same cockpit. There is an F-14B Upgrade (official designation) that added a large RIO MFD in place of the fishbowl as well as data bus upgrades, RIO side-stick for the LANTIRN, and the ability to carry LANTIRN. These upgraded F-14Bs were operational by late-96 and most (if not all) were upgraded by the end of 1997. Many of these upgrades were later applied to the remaining F-14As.

 

If you compare the F-14A cockpit circa 1994 to an F-14B cockpit circa 1994 - they look the same.

 

If you compare the 1980s F-14A to 1990s (or late 80s) F-14B they look slightly different. The F-14B added the ALR-67 RWR with a separate display in the pilot's cockpit, along with improved ALQ-126 ECM. The ALR-67 RWR was added to F-14As in the early 90s (92-93). The ALQ-126 entered the F-14A production line in the mid-80s (around Block 130?) and remaining F-14As were upgraded from 92-93 along with adding the new NACA-type gunvents on the exterior.

 

Overall, the cockpits really look the same save for the RWR display and any differences also depends on the time frame for comparison.

 

-Nick

[captain_dalan]

In air to air, the the Alphas would turn faster due to a faster bleed rate versus the bravo and Delta. The later would easily over G. The B/D would out accelerate anything to M1.6 with the exception of the F16 b52 back in those days. The A would develop more thrust than the B/D when going past M 1.6 or M 1.8. I forgot.

 

During BFM, out of plane and controlled departures were the tomcat's advantages. The F110 engines negated the F15 climb advantage.

 

Sorry for thread hijack

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

I'm not sure i follow. Why would the A's bleed faster then the B/D's? It's almost the same platform as far as aerodynamics go (glove vanes and chin pods being minor exceptions). Are you referring to the differences in thrust? But thrust can be regulated via throttle inputs, so there would be nothing stopping you from reducing throttle and matching the A's bleed rate in a B/D, you just have to play the throttle more which isn't an issue in the new engines anyway.