Give your own opinion on Tomcat to Super Bug *Very long reading*

[GGTharos]

PLenty of drivel, in particular people who love mixing up F-14D advantages and F-18A/C disadvantages and sticking the F-18E with the latter :D

 

Grow up. The Tomcat's gone. If the two got in a fight, the F-18E WOULD WIN, phoenix or no phoenix, because *avionics* would bring the F-14 into a range where the Hornet enjoys *BVR SUPERIORITY*.

 

Man, what is it with people thinking that you can stick a long range missile on a plane and claim it can do everything?

 

The SH is a LO aircraft, that means capabilities of the F-14's radar AND the AIM-54's seeker against it are DEGRADED. Further it features a VERY sophisticated countermeasures suite that'll make your wizzo pull his hair out.

 

Get off your pedestal, you can't win this battle with a retired plane. Choose an F-22 or something ;)

[Corsair7662]

Ok you point out any missile thats going to be good if its been in storage for 20 some odd years.

 

Get off of it. The hornet is a hell of a lot better than the tomcat. You just see that F-22 get owned up close by a superbug and then watch that video of the F-14 doing a flyby and catching fire.

 

Wow! somebody REALLY needs to get out the books and research or something, I recommend this www.wikipedia.com!!!! The AIM-54C was retired less than a year ago and has NEVER been put into storage until Tomcat Sunset 'September 20th".

 

And also about that, dont ever say the F/A-18 is better than the tomcat because anybody will straight out tell you no its not. That video of the F-22 and F/A-18, ever figured the pilot in the hornet was just a fighter "ace"? ALSO on the flyby of the F-14 until it explodes, that was from the wing flying off because it had poor maintainence and the guy didn't screw in loose screws from the last flight considering it was doing over 700 knots into a high 'G pull, so ofcourse the wing would probably rip off causing the fuel to catch fire and which then exploded, I can tell you more about the story some other time.

 

Here is a reply from one of the F-14 NATOP's who knows what he is talking about with the Tomcat.......

OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here. The following is my personal opinion:

 

When folks compare the Tomcat to the Hornet, they are comparing the 1960's technology that went into the F-14, to 1980's and 1990's technology that spawned the Hornet and Super Hornet.

 

I'll be the first to admit the age of the jet, the long maintenance hours, etc. dictate that a new fighter is necessary.

 

But,

 

I can guarantee you if Grumman were still in business today we'd be producing the F-14F (or Tomcat 21 or whatever of the many names you want to use) with totally new manufacturing processes, 21st Century materials, state of the art avionics, and multi-mission capabilities that would exceed the current Super Hornet. And all this with growth in mind. Just like the original F-14 was designed. It did more than anyone ever imagined in 36 years.

 

Or, we'd be producing a totally new fighter platform. We've replaced our own aircraft in the past (Wildcat to Hellcat, Bearcat to Panther/Cougar, and Tiger to Tomcat. Quite an evolution). Grumman would have done it again.

 

In other words, there'd be no Super Hornet, just Hornets replacing the A-7 as originally intended.

[GGTharos]

So then, you want us to compare an EXISTING SH to a NON EXISTANT F-14 variant that WOULD have existed if this had happened and yadda yadda. :D

[Pilotasso]

One thing Pilot, what is the kill ratio of the Super Hornet to the Tomcat? And also the distance irrelavent to that. Not very sure with the hornet but I think it is 6 or 8:12 at a range of 50 miles and the tomcat is 5:6 with the Aim-54 with over a distance of 150 miles and 3:4 with the Aim-7, the hornet has a capability of being able to carry 12 -120's but that is a whole crap load to be able to spam :P

 

 

Not sure if I understood your post and your rates. But the AIM-54 range of 150 miles reffers to maximum TWS range against target head to head. Maximum range by the time the F-14 is ready to launch is closer to 110 miles and impact occurs 70 miles from launcher. 150 miles range is a myth. Even more against fighters.

I have always read that against a manuevering target the range of 50 ish miles is much more realistic. Also bear in mind that AIM-7's require swiching to STT mode and lose the information on all other targets, hence my coment "1 on 1" with the Tomcat. TomCats would never use AIM-54's as their primary AA weapon against fighters. The Sparrow would be, and then their multi target capability woudnt serve them much.

 

On many situations it would be more economic for the war effort to use other missiles than a million dollar Phoenix on a target that on scope could be a full blown reccon Mig-25, or a cammel rider on a battered old fishbed thats not worth one of the precious 54's wasted on it. The other alternative is to swich to Sparrow and the fabulous 6 on 6 capability goes out of the window.

 

 

Grow up. The Tomcat's gone. If the two got in a fight, the F-18E WOULD WIN, phoenix or no phoenix, because *avionics* would bring the F-14 into a range where the Hornet enjoys *BVR SUPERIORITY*.

 

Man, what is it with people thinking that you can stick a long range missile on a plane and claim it can do everything?

 

The SH is a LO aircraft, that means capabilities of the F-14's radar AND the AIM-54's seeker against it are DEGRADED.

 

Putting a hornet VS a tomcat scenario is irrelevant, but putting both agains the same potential realistic threat is not.

[Corsair7662]

So then, you want us to compare an EXISTING SH to a NON EXISTANT F-14 variant that WOULD have existed if this had happened and yadda yadda. :D

 

Oh its existing alright, it just hasnt been put into production. My friend Ryan Pearce, an aeronautical engineer/designer has figured out what the payload rails, and armament decisions should be just by using the math of the designated size of the wings, and under belly to map out where each weapon should be and so on, it really amazed me once he displayed it to me for the first time of what Grumman should of done with the F-14A. The design/project of the hornet is what stopped the production of the Tomcat 21 (21st century F-14) because that technology was halted and ended up being put in the F/A-18's. From what Ryan told me, the whole aircraft would be able to store away up to 16 weapons. half bombs and half missles, and have enough space for 2 external's!

 

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/f14/st21-2.jpg

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/f14/st21-1.gif

http://www.f14tomcat.neostrada.pl/zdjecia/historia/evol-4l.jpg

[Guest IguanaKing]

 

Here is a reply from one of the F-14 NATOP's who knows what he is talking about with the Tomcat.......

 

Does he know that Grumman is still in business?

[Pilotasso]

Oh its existing alright, it just hasnt been put into production. My friend Ryan Pearce, an aeronautical engineer/designer has figured out what the payload rails, and armament decisions should be just by using the math of the designated size of the wings, and under belly to map out where each weapon should be and so on, it really amazed me once he displayed it to me for the first time of what Grumman should of done with the F-14A. The design/project of the hornet is what stopped the production of the Tomcat 21 (21st century F-14) because that technology was halted and ended up being put in the F/A-18's. From what Ryan told me, the whole aircraft would be able to store away up to 16 weapons. half bombs and half missles, and have enough space for 2 external's!

 

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/f14/st21-2.jpg

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/f14/st21-1.gif

http://www.f14tomcat.neostrada.pl/zdjecia/historia/evol-4l.jpg

 

Consider that the F-14 requires 50 man hours of maintenace for each hour it flies for an airframe that was designed for a different threat we have today. You can have a bunch of hornets flying for the price of one F-14. The fact that you would require brand new airframes to keep the type alive without the 7.3 G restrition only makes it worse. Theres just no justification for it anymore. The Tomcat was an Iconic plane but its time was overdue.

[Gripes]

LOL...

 

Hey Corsair, what`s a NATOP?

[Guest IguanaKing]

I was wondering the same thing. :D

[Corsair7662]

....look it up smart one.

[GGTharos]

Ahhh ... yeah. See, okay, sounds like a slightly lighter armored F-15E, without the power ;D

 

Funny too that there's a Tomcat 21 variant, yet it was never produced. Wonder why? ;)

 

And I wonder why it was replaced by the SH? Could it ah ... be that the F-14 could not deliver what it was supposed to any longer?

Or perhaps you could do the same with an SH, at an affordable price ...

 

Oh its existing alright, it just hasnt been put into production. My friend Ryan Pearce, an aeronautical engineer/designer has figured out what the payload rails, and armament decisions should be just by using the math of the designated size of the wings, and under belly to map out where each weapon should be and so on, it really amazed me once he displayed it to me for the first time of what Grumman should of done with the F-14A. The design/project of the hornet is what stopped the production of the Tomcat 21 (21st century F-14) because that technology was halted and ended up being put in the F/A-18's. From what Ryan told me, the whole aircraft would be able to store away up to 16 weapons. half bombs and half missles, and have enough space for 2 external's!

 

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/f14/st21-2.jpg

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/f14/st21-1.gif

http://www.f14tomcat.neostrada.pl/zdjecia/historia/evol-4l.jpg

[Guest IguanaKing]

....look it up smart one.

 

Don't need to, I already know what it is. I'm just curious as to how someone can have an on-line conversation with one. :D

[Corsair7662]

omfg, did you even read the sentence I put?????? I guess not

 

The design/project of the hornet is what stopped the production of the Tomcat 21 (21st century F-14) because that technology was halted and ended up being put in the F/A-18's.

 

It stopped the production of the 21 because Grumman wanted to see how the hornet would turn out. Unfortunately the darn thing SUCKED so bad that they put the tomcats advanced technology in the hornet so it would help make it actually classify as a Naval fighter! Not to mention the plans originated in the early 80's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, the super hornet project was never even started till late 80's because they wanted to upgrade that technology to something more advanced which they were able to succeed at, boy is that a miracle. But now it turns out the old tech of the F-14A is still better than any hornet out there today...

[Guest Hell Sqn Protos]

 

Grow up. The Tomcat's gone. If the two got in a fight, the F-18E WOULD WIN, phoenix or no phoenix, because *avionics* would bring the F-14 into a range where the Hornet enjoys *BVR SUPERIORITY*.

 

+1

 

Time to let the cat go - trolling isn't going to bring it back.

[GGTharos]

Sorry, what technology?

 

There was no such things as 'putting the tomcat's advanced technology into the F-18'. :disgust:

 

Perhaps you're ... no, you're definitely unaware ... solutions are engineered for fighters, and are typically not interchengeable.

 

And if you REALLY want to go this way, it was the HORNET's advanced technology that was bringing upgrades to the F-14, not the other way around. It was the Hornet and F-16 onboard which things such as multifunctional and glass pits started coming to be, as well as advanced radar technologies (especially in the case of the Hornet), NOT the F-14.

 

 

omfg, did you even read the sentence I put?????? I guess not

 

 

 

It stopped the production of the 21 because Grumman wanted to see how the hornet would turn out. Unfortunately the darn thing SUCKED so bad that they put the tomcats advanced technology in the hornet so it would help make it actually classify as a Naval fighter! Not to mention the plans originated in the early 80's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, the super hornet project was never even started till late 80's because they wanted to upgrade that technology to something more advanced which they were able to succeed at, boy is that a miracle. But now it turns out the old tech of the F-14A is still better than any hornet out there today...

[ViperEagle]

Oi...

 

Ok...firstly, I do love the F model Super Hornet, I do.

 

But there are some very plain facts attached to it.

 

As of it's current block and engines, it is:

 

# Not as fast as the Tomcat, both in dry power and AB. It also doesnt have as prime of a T/W ratio as the Tomcat and doesnt have as sharp throttle responce.

 

# It doesnt have as long legs, so it cannot go as far or loiter as long, which is important in a CAS/ FAC-A role.

 

 

The Super Hornet has a very fine A2A suite, and it's a very capable multi-mission capable fighter. The much masturbated HUD footage of a F-22 is the result of a WAAAAAAAAY out of ROE merge. Also, due to ONE frame of footage, we dont know if it's a good gun track, which is 15-20 frames, or roughly 2-3 seconds.

I mean, if one HUD shot is a sign of clear superiority, then the Eagle and Viper are clearly superior to the SU-30MK and MKI's, since there exists HUD footage of them in F-16 and F-15 WEZ's and gun funnels.

 

And as for the Tomcat and the AMRAAM? Back in the mid 90's, there was simply a budget crunch. There existed the funds for the LANTIRN upgrade, to give the Tomcat the best A2G suite in the Navy and AF inventory on a fighter (Much better than the Viper and the Mudhen aka F-15E). OR, the Tomcat could get the AMRAAM to replace the phoenix. Dale Snodgrass argued for the LANTIRN, and ultimately, that was the wisest choice. The LANTIRN Tomcat kicked ass until April of 2006, an AMRAAM Tomcat maybe would have made it to 2000.

 

The Tomcat WAS a 9G aircraft, during the engagement with the SU-22's off of Libya, one of the VF-41 Tomcats executed a 10-11G manuver, with no problems at all. Basically the Tomcat driver had to whomp on the stick to clear the flaming wreckage of a -22 as it went down. However, with age, certain things cant be done anymore. At the end of their lives, after thousands of carrier landings, which alone is more stress than ANY AF jet will ever go thru, the Tomcat was limited to 7.5G's, and it STILL got kills on Hornets, Vipers and Eagles.

 

However, the YOUNGEST Airframe in the fleet is still 14 years old, and after that much stress, you'd be worn out too. And for the record, on their final cruises, VF-31 and VF-213 were averaging 25-30 maitenence hours per flight hour, the Super Hornet was averaging 20. They also had a higer mission capable rate and ordinance on target rate than the Hornet squads.

 

The Tomcat is GONE, and the SUPER HORNET is here, and best wishes to the Rhino, go kick some ass.

[Dudikoff]

You wanna qualify that ijozic? ... the AIM-120 can handle the job better than Phoenix, and its legs are long enough ... more than likely it doesn't even matter that there's a range difference when the target only gets detected relatively close.

 

I don't see how it can handle the ASM defense better unless you have the ideal situation where the attack is coming through them.

 

To react to a surprise attack in an open sea scenario (e.g. coming from a sub) it lacks in speed and acceleration to a Tomcat and most importantly, it has to come real close (30 kms?) to engage a speeding ASM missile. The Phoenix has not only three times the effective range but higher speed and acceleration as well.

 

It depends on the type of the ASM missile and a lot of other factors so this is hipothetically speaking only since (as has already been stated) the carrier's support group handles the ASM defence now.

[JonTex]

In the AA role the Tomcat could use AIM-54 Phoenix only at cruise missiles and bombers. The Tomcat was not exactly cut and made for fighter VS fighter

combat (though it can Also do that)

but rather provide a defensive screen arround the carrier, hence the speed of deployment and range the Tomcat posessed.

But now the doomsday scenario is gone, the threats that are left for carriers are from certain and very known countries who do not own supersonic

intercontinental bombers. Carriers now are more often tasked for sending its fighters for bombin strategical targets and close support. Direct threats

to the carrier nowdays consist of anti ship missiles carried by fighters, Mig-29's Su-30's and the likes contrary to the bombers in the old days.

The tomcat in its last days would then be forced to go 1 on 1 with enemy fighters, while the Superhornet can engage 8 targets silmultaneously

figthers or incoming missiles and it does so with a much greater onboard radar coverage

And as for dogfighting - as far as turning and burning goes, the SH is one of the best in the business.

Remember that pipper on a certain F-22? ...

Grow up. The Tomcat's gone. If the two got in a fight, the F-18E WOULD WIN, phoenix or no phoenix, because *avionics* would bring the F-14 into a range

where the Hornet enjoys *BVR SUPERIORITY*.

Man, what is it with people thinking that you can stick a long range missile on a plane and claim it can do everything?

And if you REALLY want to go this way, it was the HORNET's advanced technology that was bringing upgrades to the F-14, not the other way around. It

was the Hornet and F-16 onboard which things such as multifunctional and glass pits started coming to be, as well as advanced radar

technologies (especially in the case of the Hornet), NOT the F-14.

 

Reading all that makes my head hurt and if any of it is true its a wonder that the Tomcat ever saw the light of day even in the day in age in which it was

conceived. So stinking what the Tomcat is gone and the Super Bug took its place. It had to happen some day why not now? Look I love the Tomcat hell I worked

on them for 5 years but dont let the emotion, and dreams of grandure cloud your logic. You cant compare an old tomcat with the new Super Hornet Grumman wasnt

prepared to do it and anyone who loves the tomcat shouldnt either. Now corsair you have to be a bit more tactful because GG is clever and he chooses his

battles wisely. (only the ones he knows he will win) As it should be I suppose but he is right the tomcat is old and outdated. Thats about all he is right

about though. I know you mean well but, much of the comparisons of a Superhornet vs. the old Tomcat is very heart felt and touching but totally unfair.

If we are to compare anything it should be the Tomcat 21 and the Super Hornet. This is a fair comparison considering this is what Grumman brought to the

table. Perhaps you should do the same its the only thing GG cannot accurately pick you apart on with some tech data he read in a book in somebodies library.

Pilotasso I know he asked for oppinions but do you really believe all that?

Even if the Navy believed what you just stated when they utilized the F14 and all its talents why, after the doomsday scenario is over, did they continue

to place phoenix missles on Tomcats. I understand some of your logic but the part about the phoenix escapes

logic. Whether your right or not I wouldnt want to be your backseater with a phoenix missle airborne at us and your logic of the threat at hand. A phoenix

is a lethal threat to anything that it can be fired upon, bank on it pal. There aint a pilot out there willing to ignore it trust me you dont even need to

look that up.

In closing Id have to say both aircraft are well suited for the ever changing threat in the world today its just a simple game of politics that has to be

played which is like playing russian roulet with a pilots life i say. This time the gamble worked , but for how long? The pilots job is to have the skill,

heart and courage to win in battle. The politician or DOD's job is to give that pilot equipment that is more than capable of winning. If DOD

wants to gamble those odds of winning with the lowest bidder that meets the standard so be it. But in the end we get what we pay for.

[Corsair7662]

However' date=' the YOUNGEST Airframe in the fleet is still 14 years old, and after that much stress, you'd be worn out too. And for the record, on their final cruises, VF-31 and VF-213 were averaging 25-30 maitenence hours per flight hour, the Super Hornet was averaging 20. They also had a higer mission capable rate and ordinance on target rate than the Hornet squads.[/quote']

 

Not true, they averaged 5 to 10 hours on their last cruise. I can try and find that article later but right now I know that is for sure.

[Pilotasso]

LOL how much time and money are you gonna waste on a fighter thats condemned anyway?

 

You should take in account the times the Tomcat was being maintained to keep the airframe going, not when no one gives a damn if its systems goes to hell after their retirement, because by then...they will be retired? :)

 

Crying over what the TOMCAT 21 would be makes as much sense as crying over the Su-37, both never came out of the prototype phase. IF we keep dreaming on variants each type could be given then I would be the F-16XL would kick the tomcats 21 a$$. :D

[Pilotasso]

Reading all that makes my head hurt and if any of it is true its a wonder that the Tomcat ever saw the light of day even in the day in age in which it was

conceived. So stinking what the Tomcat is gone and the Super Bug took its place. It had to happen some day why not now? Look I love the Tomcat hell I worked

on them for 5 years but dont let the emotion, and dreams of grandure cloud your logic. You cant compare an old tomcat with the new Super Hornet Grumman wasnt

prepared to do it and anyone who loves the tomcat shouldnt either. Now corsair you have to be a bit more tactful because GG is clever and he chooses his

battles wisely. (only the ones he knows he will win) As it should be I suppose but he is right the tomcat is old and outdated. Thats about all he is right

about though. I know you mean well but, much of the comparisons of a Superhornet vs. the old Tomcat is very heart felt and touching but totally unfair.

If we are to compare anything it should be the Tomcat 21 and the Super Hornet. This is a fair comparison considering this is what Grumman brought to the

table. Perhaps you should do the same its the only thing GG cannot accurately pick you apart on with some tech data he read in a book in somebodies library.

Pilotasso I know he asked for oppinions but do you really believe all that?

Even if the Navy believed what you just stated when they utilized the F14 and all its talents why, after the doomsday scenario is over, did they continue

to place phoenix missles on Tomcats. I understand some of your logic but the part about the phoenix escapes

logic. Whether your right or not I wouldnt want to be your backseater with a phoenix missle airborne at us and your logic of the threat at hand. A phoenix

is a lethal threat to anything that it can be fired upon, bank on it pal. There aint a pilot out there willing to ignore it trust me you dont even need to

look that up.

In closing Id have to say both aircraft are well suited for the ever changing threat in the world today its just a simple game of politics that has to be

played which is like playing russian roulet with a pilots life i say. This time the gamble worked , but for how long? The pilots job is to have the skill,

heart and courage to win in battle. The politician or DOD's job is to give that pilot equipment that is more than capable of winning. If DOD

wants to gamble those odds of winning with the lowest bidder that meets the standard so be it. But in the end we get what we pay for.

 

If you worked on the TOMCAT for 5 years, then you wasted alot of opportunities to ask the pilots about their clearence to fire AIM-54's on fighters as their main BVR weapon. Sad truth was that in the last decade, the F-18 was more on the fighter role than the F-14. The Tomcat was there to get to places far away, but any carrier commander would want to use The hornets AMRAAM capability to fight off a fighter force rather than the Tomcat with AIM-54's,(Not to mention that the Phoenix a specialized weapon, unlike the AMRAAM) or AIM-7's because the supply of Phoenixes are more limited and alot more expensive and the Sparrow is old and imposes limitations on the engagements.

[Groove]

This discussion will last for 10 more pages and then it will be closed by a mod...

 

Seeing Corsairs SIG - do anyone in here really thinks he will not defend the F-14 until this thread get closed ?

 

Its a very similar thread scheme to this threads which a rising from time to time. Like the starforce-omg-it-ate-my-cdrom, su-27-can-carry-(place a missile in here), Su-33-can-carry-the-big-czar-bomb, the-air-brake-istn-modelled-right threads...

 

Im slightly OT but i couldnt resist :D

 

PS: Maverick would OWN every F/A-18 - EVERY MODELL.

[Cosmonaut]

PS: Maverick would OWN every F/A-18 - EVERY MODELL.

 

Seriously F14s are crap and as for the chubby Phoenix.. well why do you think they never used them in Top Gun, which we all know is the most realistic combat movie ever made? .... That's right they suck! :(

 

Here's the source of my info (warning BAD language):

 

 

:huh:

[Groove]

They didnt used them in Top Gun because the Mig-28 were not worth spending so much money on them. Besides this Maverik always make kills with his gun, its more stylish than some lamer-bvr-missile engagement.

[Force_Feedback]

They didnt used them in Top Gun because the Mig-28 were not worth spending so much money on them. Besides this Maverik always make kills with his gun, its more stylish than some lamer-bvr-missile engagement.

 

:megalol: so true...