F-14A has become my primary ride

[Dragon1-1]

Also, the F-4 was the very first multirole jet. It truly did everything. AA? World's leading distributor of MiG parts. Interception? Goes to M2.0, for all your bomber-killing needs. Bombing? Carries more bombs than WWII-era heavy bombers. Precision bombing? Walleye, Mavs, LGBs, take your pick. FAC? Also did that, with great success. Nuclear strike? The F-4 could do it. Wild Weasel? Bread and butter, and not just for the G. It wouldn't be until the time of Hornet and later Viper models that there was a fighter as flexible as the F-4.

 

It stayed relevant long after the F-14's introduction, though not in air to air role (albeit it still made a competent interceptor). The F-14A took over air to air, but the Phantom was still needed for air to ground until the Hornet was introduced. F-14B could do some of the things it did, but not all (most notably, it wasn't equipped for Wild Weasel).

[unlikely_spider]

I would be much, much more likely to buy an F-4 than an F-22. Fly by wire craft in sims seem so sterile to me. I wanted to like the F-18, and tried it during two free trial periods, but it just didn't catch. Conversely, I didn't expect to like the Tomcat, but ended up buying it at the end of the trial period because it was just so damn fun to fly.

It's too bad most F-4s don't have guns, but that era of craft is so much more interesting to me than modern server racks.

 

I also stay away from the G1000-equipped planes in the civ flight sim in favor of steam gauge planes, so that illustrates what is interesting to me I guess.

Edited March 3, 2021 by unlikely_spider

[Harlikwin]

Yeah, I far prefer it to the B. And actually can't wait for the earlier versions. I often fly it on the CW servers where its limited to sparrows. Albeit everyone takes the fancy ones for "balance" reasons. Frankly I never saw it as F4 replacement, more like a F15A really with the Janky radar. It just pisses me off that jester can't ever seem to hold a lock for a longer range sparrow shot. I basically use PAL for everything. 

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Harlikwin

[jcdata]

"Janky" what does that mean?

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[Harlikwin]

4 minutes ago, jcdata said:

"Janky" what does that mean?

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

 

It means the F15A radar had unique problems, and was rapidly updated. 

 

TBH overall I like the radar modeling that HB has done with the AWG-9, But jester needs some tweaking in terms of both sorting logic/interface (i.e. he will lock the most useless random shit, and not the impending bandit of doom coming right at you), and then he will invariably loose the lock, for either phoenix shots or aim7's.

 

[Skysurfer]

2 hours ago, garyscott said:

December 1990, 2x F-14 (Diamondbacks I seem to remember), USS America transiting the med heading for Red Sea via Suez Canal, US Navy asked for “interaction” from Cyprus based RAF aircraft, one early morning singleton FGR2, following direction from ground radar heads out to “interact” (wingman went U/S, no spare). Radar off, winders selected, F-14s seen in semi loose form crossing nose left to right at around 18000 from circa 9 miles. So a good viz pickup.
Stay radar silent, come in on the beam, then convert to a low rear quarter simulated winder shot.

F-14s didn’t see it coming. No reaction to the F-4 towing a cloud and hell bent on their heat sig.

We’re it real, at least one would be sans crew and falling.

Blow through before the other can react, and escape stage left grinning. Recommendation sent to ship - keep head on a swivel.

 

1v2 is achievable, if you think about how to do it - even something supposedly archaic can give a nasty wake up call to something assumed to be better.

Silhouette applied to Phantom couple days later, a rough sketch of the Tomcat ‘cat’ flying forward with a British boot kicking its ar5e.

Head shed didn’t like it though, and artwork only lasted about a week.

 But I remember the sight picture . . . .

 

 

Well, with all due respect, jumping someone in a non-combat environment who is just cruising and isn't fenced in is just cheap. No difference to intercepting an airliner at this point. Would not have happened with an AWACS and other aircraft around. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Skysurfer

[G.J.S]

9 minutes ago, Skysurfer said:

 

Well, with all due respect, jumping someone in a non-combat environment who is just cruising and isn't fenced in is just cheap. No difference to intercepting an airliner at this point. Would not have happened with an AWACS and other aircraft around. 

 

Carrier had requested harassment so as to train the embarked crews and keep them sharp. They were supposed to be on a war footing. Hawkeye was around (due to proximity of Libya, a necessity) as were a few other flights, fighters, and attack aircraft, all doing their thing - training in preparation for the first Gulf conflict.

As ANY good aggressor would do, you pick on a weakness. In this case, it was two Tomcats - not bad for a single Phantom.

It proved that their lookout was not really up to par at that time, and we acted on it.

Good training for them.

And it shows the Phantom still had teeth.

 

Also, this sort of harassment happens every day, it’s good training. 
Airliners used to be on the cards too, the USAF used to use Concorde as a Backfire simulator!

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by garyscott

[AH_Solid_Snake]

2 hours ago, Skysurfer said:

 

Well, with all due respect, jumping someone in a non-combat environment who is just cruising and isn't fenced in is just cheap. No difference to intercepting an airliner at this point. Would not have happened with an AWACS and other aircraft around. 

 

You’ll probably be disappointed with most air combat stories from the real world then - even with radars and AWACS and every electronic gizmo imaginable most kills are on guys that never knew what happened to them. 
 

It’s only half joking that the best targets are blind and deaf, I mean it’s really a shame they’re awake...

[Uxi]

Good story to stay alert, but do we know the Tomcats didn't see,  identify and diregard an old lone friendly cruising along? 

[G.J.S]

44 minutes ago, Uxi said:

Good story to stay alert, but do we know the Tomcats didn't see,  identify and diregard an old lone friendly cruising along? 

They certainly didn’t see (that’s how I and others wanted it to play out), so identification was moot.

They were NOT to disregard anything inbound to the carriers area of ops. That is what they wanted - we were to actively try to penetrate the carriers defences, so as to exercise the air units prior to them taking up station for the Gulf conflict.
The only thing off limits was any airborne AWAC, and helicopters. Fighters and attack aircraft were fair game. 
Over the period of the carriers transit through the med we were to make as many simulated attacks as we wished. The carrier would be given advance warning that, for instance, “during the 24HRS of Tuesday, carrier assets airborne will be subject to a maximum of 4 separate incursions, timings and directions will vary. The 4 separate incursions for this day is a maximum, there may be no activity, or any number up to this days agreed”. So the carrier, and by extension the air units, were aware that they will be tested.
The onus on them was to sharpen up - because once in the AO, the incursions will likely be real, with real consequences.
When the carrier came within 50NM of the canal then it was off limits and our duty as a method of training was over.

 

[Lurker]

15 hours ago, Mr. Big.Biggs said:

Gotta be honest. Never understood what you see in your wife....

everyone has there idea of whats cool. . Kind of a generational thing. 

 

Wow dude, no need to throw insults around. As for that generational thing, again you're off the mark. I happen to really like airplanes of all generations, with a few exceptions and some of the newer FBW flying computers. The F14 happens to be my all time favorite fighter jet. The Mig21 I consider to be THE iconic 3rd generation fighter jet of all time. The F111 is probably my all time favorite bomber (with the Su24 coming in at a close second). I really dislike the F18, for the aforementioned (and some other) reasons, and this goes for most of the later F series except for the F15C the F16 (because of it's revolutionary design) and on the Russian side the Su27 and the Mig29 which are some of the most beautifully designed fighter aircraft ever flown. I could go on with further examples but I think you get the point, don't make assumptions based on what someone wrote about one particular airplane, and maybe next time don't be so quick to throw around insults just because someone has a differing view from your own. 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Lurker

[bies]

19 hours ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

Errr, it was an engineering marvel for its day? It claimed a great many world records for performance in one big clean sweep.

 

the fact that it’s not as good as an F22 only matters if you take everything outside it’s context. Ignoring dates the F22 is better, in 1958 it wasn’t.

 

Exactly. In some 40 years F-22 will be absolutely a piece of outdated junk compared to modern fighters of this new time (or maybe drones squeezing 20G without a drop of sweat and sprinting Mach 3 firing 200nm ramjet hypersonic missiles or lasers).

 

Context is everything.

 

When Phantom was setting time to climb records and operating all weather/night early Sparrow, hauing B-17 worth bomb load at the same time and all of that operating from aircraft carrier - it was engineering marvel.

[Skysurfer]

15 hours ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

You’ll probably be disappointed with most air combat stories from the real world then - even with radars and AWACS and every electronic gizmo imaginable most kills are on guys that never knew what happened to them. 
 

It’s only half joking that the best targets are blind and deaf, I mean it’s really a shame they’re awake...

 

If the other guy has no clue it really doesn't matter if he's in a F-22 or F-35 at this point - the other guy could be in a Mig-21. Don't know how much credibility I'd give these tell-tales of "awacs was totally up" and "it was all a set-up". Regardless, having no SA usually gets you killed and I think this is the point the guy is making. 

[Top Jockey]

On 3/3/2021 at 12:45 PM, Lurker said:

Never understood the fascination with the F4. Apart from being a very capable weapons platform (AIM7, RIO, and probably the best fighter radar in service at the time) and being carrier capable, it's not like it was some kind of aeronautical engineering marvel of it's time. Maybe it's a historical thing. I guess different strokes for different folks. 

 

I imagine it can be just the same as other people are fascinated with anyother jet.

 

Although not one of my 'favorites', I do admire what it represented and achieved:

 

- looked much better (to me), and I believe it also performed good in BFM comparing with the "Century Series" jets;

- technological 'showcase' when it appeared, superior to Soviet MiG-21's, 23's, and the such;

- Cold War era charisma;

- versatile airframe (fighter, interceptor, multi-role, recce, etc)

 

Heck, for those who like avionics: there were even early experiments of Visual Target Acquisition System (Helmet Mounted Sight) in the venerable F-4 Phantom II...

Edited March 4, 2021 by Top Jockey

[Slant]

On 3/2/2021 at 7:30 PM, Victory205 said:

 

 

Tomcat also had far more endurance at lower speeds. One of the issues we had with the F4 guys was getting them to change their mindset about speed. They'd haul around a 400 KIAS wasting gas all of the time, bitching that their wingman was taking too long to join up. I had a helluvatime getting one of my CO's to slow down while holding overhead IKE when we were out doing a couple of weeks of active duty. He was "holding" at 350KIAS, lapping everyone else in overhead holding. We normally did 225-235 waiting for a ready deck.

 

 

Ha! In my endless search of real life things carrying over into a sim, this is one of them. I can't count the times I told people to calm down and not use their afterburners. I have gone entire missions without a/b or going beyond 350 (Phoenix is good at doing all the running for me against inferior enemies). There have been cases of Hornet/Harrier people telling me how jealous they are of the Tomcat's long legs. I had to agree, but when I pointed out that they are hopelessly overloading their airframes and needn't complain about having short legs, they had nothing to say against that... later they changed their mentality about their loadout and behold, the hornet can actually stay in the air quite a long time! And they can even loiter, who'da thunk!

 

It's a bit of a learning experience, I think. I've been the same. Got into DCS, look a jet fighter with afterburner! Let's see how fast I can go. I remember running out of fuel in the F-15 after 5 minutes. I'm not even joking. These days I take a perverse pleasure telling people that my loiter time is approaching 2h. No, no refueling needed, thank you for asking.

 

Of course, all of that is thrown out the window if I actually get into a serious dogfight, yes, I am indeed Joker. Yes, I promised 2h, but what can you do, once I start dumping gas into the exhaust, I burn fuel as fast as anyone... haha.

Edited March 5, 2021 by Slant

[streakeagle]

The F-4 in the 1970s and 80s was the P-40 in WW2. Newer, better planes were available from the start of the war, yet the P-40 remained in production for most of the war and served to the very end. "teen" fighters could fly rings around it. The MiG-21MF and MiG-21bis had edged it out in ACM performance with much better power-to-weight and low-altitude performance than earlier MiG-21s. It was never the best at anything, but flown to its strengths, it was pretty good at everything.

 

My preference for older aircraft is simple: 1980s+ combat with AIM-9L/Ms and AIM-7Ms/AIM-120s is boring and tedious compared to 1960s heavy, gunless fighter with unreliable missiles that have limited to no dogfight capability vs small, agile, gun armed MiGs. Thrown into that environment with little or no air-to-air training and given fixed routes and formations, a lot of F-4s were shot down that should not have been. But a handful of veterans, like Robin Olds, and a handful of new pilots/rios with decent air-to-air training, like Ritchie/DeBellevue and Cunningham/Driscoll, could win big in the F-4. I love the challenge of trying to win a gun range dogfight with an aircraft that didn't have a gun.

 

The F-14A is a big step up from the F-4J/S in air-to-air, but in principle, it is similar, just improved across the board. It was also limited by being so underpowered compared to its contemporaries, the other teen fighters and by the early 80s, the MiG-29 and Su-27. In WVR combat, the F-14A would have to work just as hard to beat the MiG-29 as the gunless F-4 had in trying to fight MiG-17s, MiG-19s, and MiG-21s. Whereas the upengined F-14B and F-14D are arguably the best ACM fighters of their generation while also retaining the high speed performance and long range radar/missiles. 

 

So, if you fly the F-14A with early AIM-7s and less capable AIM-9s, it isn't too bad a representation of the slatted, gun-toting F-4E and is adequate for the F-4J/S. Name a better alternative available in DCS. Which brings me back to the original topic of my post: the F-14A has become my main DCS ride due to the fact that the F-4 is unavailable and none of the available DCS modules is closer the capabilities and performance of the F-4.

[LanceCriminal86]

From everything I've heard including folks that tested VTAS with VX-4 in the Phantom and Tomcat, there's a reason it went away for another 40 years before coming back in the JHMCS/AIM-9X pairing. VTAS helmets were heavy and cumbersome, and under Gs extremely straining to keep ones head up and tracking the target. And, the Sidewinder itself just wasn't ready for it.

 

Just saying if VTAS were suddenly presented don't expect it to be like the Hornet with 9Xs.

[Gunslinger22]

2 hours ago, LanceCriminal86 said:

From everything I've heard including folks that tested VTAS with VX-4 in the Phantom and Tomcat, there's a reason it went away for another 40 years before coming back in the JHMCS/AIM-9X pairing. VTAS helmets were heavy and cumbersome, and under Gs extremely straining to keep ones head up and tracking the target. And, the Sidewinder itself just wasn't ready for it.

 

Just saying if VTAS were suddenly presented don't expect it to be like the Hornet with 9Xs.

Haven spoken to many RAAF Hornet pilots, all have mentioned that JHMCS is not a wonder weapon/death dealer. It’s extremely straining on your neck, to the point where I was told that often under the strain of G’s you cannot actually get your head in a position to make full use of HOBS. I’ve also heard similar anecdotes about the Vipers seat being restrictive and the cause of serious neck issues at the end of a career. Things that will never be simulated, but change the reality of how these things operate in the real world.

[Skysurfer]

6 hours ago, Gunslinger22 said:

Haven spoken to many RAAF Hornet pilots, all have mentioned that JHMCS is not a wonder weapon/death dealer. It’s extremely straining on your neck, to the point where I was told that often under the strain of G’s you cannot actually get your head in a position to make full use of HOBS. I’ve also heard similar anecdotes about the Vipers seat being restrictive and the cause of serious neck issues at the end of a career. Things that will never be simulated, but change the reality of how these things operate in the real world.

 

Hence why the russians rarely fly with the "zyura" HMD and rather use the vertical mode to get a lock and HOBS Archer shot. One also has to consider that a HMD-cue isn't always done under high G. In the case of the Hornet you'd pull the inital 7.5G (or less) max instantaneous turn, have your nose roughly on the enemy and compensate the rest of the lead with the HMD. A Hornet is really at home at low speeds and fairly low load factors where you can point your nose around freely or perform a pedal turn/falling-leaf type of thing. Same goes for the Viper - in lag you might be doing around 9G, looking slightly up or sideways with the head rested on the headrest (technique), which is often enough to "pull" the reticle onto the target. It all comes down to technique in the end. But it sure isn't as easy and carefree as it is in DCS where you can basically freely move your head around under high G and any kind of onset rate. 

Edited March 5, 2021 by Skysurfer

[Dragon1-1]

3 hours ago, Gunslinger22 said:

I’ve also heard similar anecdotes about the Vipers seat being restrictive and the cause of serious neck issues at the end of a career. Things that will never be simulated, but change the reality of how these things operate in the real world.

Realistic simpit chair + out of shape armchair pilot + VR = realistic neck injuries.  It already is a bit of an exercise to keep tally in VR, especially when you don't have a comfort of swiveling office chair.  It doesn't simulate G forces, but even under 1G, with a heavy VR headset hanging in front of your face, you'll be getting some neck exercise.

 

Also, I noticed one more thing about extreme HOBS shots: they miss a lot. Seeker FOV is one thing, missile kinetics are another, and it's easy to get suckered into thinking that you have a good shot when in reality, the geometry will make it very easy for the bandit to trash. With the older missiles, when you managed to get a lock the shot was usually good unless you really were too close (and if you were, you could always try the gun), with HOBS, you really need to learn how to tell a good shot from a bad one.

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

On 3/4/2021 at 2:43 AM, Lurker said:

 

Wow dude, no need to throw insults around. As for that generational thing, again you're off the mark. I happen to really like airplanes of all generations, with a few exceptions and some of the newer FBW flying computers. The F14 happens to be my all time favorite fighter jet. The Mig21 I consider to be THE iconic 3rd generation fighter jet of all time. The F111 is probably my all time favorite bomber (with the Su24 coming in at a close second). I really dislike the F18, for the aforementioned (and some other) reasons, and this goes for most of the later F series except for the F15C the F16 (because of it's revolutionary design) and on the Russian side the Su27 and the Mig29 which are some of the most beautifully designed fighter aircraft ever flown. I could go on with further examples but I think you get the point, don't make assumptions based on what someone wrote about one particular airplane, and maybe next time don't be so quick to throw around insults just because someone has a differing view from your own. 

 

Cmon man. You completely missed the point. I don’t even know if you’re married. 
Point of the exercise is that everyone is entitled to like what and who they want.  
Simple as that. Feel free to give props to what you enjoy. Keep your criticisms of what others like to yourself. 
simple....
 

[Top Jockey]

On 3/5/2021 at 6:33 AM, LanceCriminal86 said:

From everything I've heard including folks that tested VTAS with VX-4 in the Phantom and Tomcat, there's a reason it went away for another 40 years before coming back in the JHMCS/AIM-9X pairing. VTAS helmets were heavy and cumbersome, and under Gs extremely straining to keep ones head up and tracking the target. And, the Sidewinder itself just wasn't ready for it.

 

Just saying if VTAS were suddenly presented don't expect it to be like the Hornet with 9Xs.

 

Sure, it was a relatively rudimentar system, afterall the concept itself was on its early days.

 

A the time, although the US Navy confirmed the system's purpose / usefulness, the cost / benefit ratio for wide implementation was deemed too high.

Edited March 7, 2021 by Top Jockey

[Lurker]

On 3/5/2021 at 8:10 PM, Mr. Big.Biggs said:

Cmon man. You completely missed the point. I don’t even know if you’re married. 
Point of the exercise is that everyone is entitled to like what and who they want.  
Simple as that. Feel free to give props to what you enjoy. Keep your criticisms of what others like to yourself. 
simple....
 

 

If everyone just gave props to what they enjoyed, and no one ever voiced a differing opinion then what exactly is the point of having a discussion about anything? Why am I not entitled to a differing opinion and why is it wrong for me to share that differing opinion? 

[Max Thunder]

The F14B was my first Module and is still my favourite. So much fun to fly.

Heatblur did a fantastic job and I still hope for the F4 Phantom.

 

I can completely understand that people like the A more than the B because of its limitations. It is very rewarding to handle the special characteristics of the A. 
But in a knife fight with a F18 or a F16 I would always choose the B.

[SgtPappy]

On 3/2/2021 at 1:30 PM, Victory205 said:

Pissed off my CO, and ex- F4 RIO, who was sitting there and often replaced "F's" in his correspondence with "Ph's", and constantly gushed over how manly the old Phantom was.

 

We combined with them out at Nellis working with USAF F15's who were doing AMRAAM development in the early days. A couple divisions of F4's out there doing pincers and post holes with AIM7's and terrain masking with Tomcats hurling AIM54's is a different kettle of fish. All of a sudden, an AIM7 is tracking at you and you had no idea where it came from.

 

The sky is a deadly place, it isn't a sterile environment where you know where all the threats are, no matter how sophisticated the jet you happen to be sitting in might be.

 

This is such a great story, I can't get enough!

 

It's so great to hear what aircraft transitions were like and how fiercely loyal people are with their favourite jets. 

 

Truth is the F-4s and the F-14 (especially the A) have so much history and endless combat accolades with both the US and other countries who used them in combat (i.e. Iran and Israel). They are ace makers. 

 

@Victory205 I am curious about something based on your post - maybe it's been asked before but how easy/hard was it to keep track of these low fighters in TWS? In DCS, I've understood that it's quite realistic for the AWG-9 to lose track fairly easily against a beaming target near the ground and that the RIO had to be good with Pulse to pick anything up (which I assume is very susceptible to chaff). Do you feel that meta is reflected well in DCS where AIM-54s are spoofed fairly regularly by a low closure targets? 

Edited March 11, 2021 by SgtPappy