# Nice article about the last flight of the F-14



## Devildoc (Sep 23, 2016)

Who _didn't_ like the F-14??  It was an awesome aircraft.

10 Years Gone, the F-14 Tomcat’s Last Flight | RealClearDefense


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 23, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> Who _didn't_ like the F-14??  It was an awesome aircraft.
> 
> 10 Years Gone, the F-14 Tomcat’s Last Flight | RealClearDefense



What a beautiful, loud, and ruling force in the air. The Tomcat defined air supremacy every where the fleet went; and then some.


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 23, 2016)

Red Flag 1 said:


> What a beautiful, loud, and ruling force in the air. The Tomcat defined air supremacy every where the fleet went; and then some.



It had a very distinctive sound, that perfect whine/whistle in the engine.  It always reminded me of a shark, the perfect killing machine.

Years ago I had read an article in which a former Soviet pilot said they thought the Phoenix and stand-off range was all misinformation, and when they found out it was all true, became very, very concerned for their lives if they had to attack an American carrier fleet.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 23, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> It had a very distinctive sound, that perfect whine/whistle in the engine.  It always reminded me of a shark, the perfect killing machine.
> 
> Years ago I had read an article in which a former Soviet pilot said they thought the Phoenix and stand-off range was all misinformation, and when they found out it was all true, became very, very concerned for their lives if they had to attack an American carrier fleet.



The Phoenix was a mighty and an frightful weapon. The perfect standoff weapon.

As for sound. The winners for me have been the Tomcat precursor, the F-4. Second, the FB-111, and third was the howling scream of the F-104. At Hahn AFB in Germany, when the F-4 launched, talking on the phones had to halt, base wide. If a squadron launched, you just sipped coffee until the last one launched. While at Hahn, the Germans were flying F-104's. European weather being what is was, we had  plenty of F-104's RON.


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 23, 2016)

Red Flag 1 said:


> The Phoenix was a mighty and an frightful weapon. The perfect standoff weapon.
> 
> As for sound. The winners for me have been the Tomcat precursor, the F-4. Second, the FB-111, and third was the howling scream of the F-104. At Hahn AFB in Germany, when the F-4 launched, talking on the phones had to halt, base wide. If a squadron launched, you just sipped coffee until the last one launched. While at Hahn, the Germans were flying F-104's. European weather being what is was, we had  plenty of F-104's RON.



I have a ton of family in Goldsboro, NC, home of Seymour-Johnson AFB.  Back in the 80s they had Phantoms.  Those, too, were awesome.  yes, a distinctive roar, and a black exhaust you could see for miles.  SJAFB also had B-52, impressive in their own right.

I have never seen a F-104 in the air.  I love the Century-series fighters.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 23, 2016)

The F-104 was pretty close to a rocket with a pilot strapped on. If you look at the flight control surfaces, they were just enough. In a way, the F-104's are like the T-38, F-5' versions are still in use by nations as fighter aircraft. When I was at Plattsburgh AFB, NY, a Guard unit in Burlington, Vt. were still flying the delta winged F-106. One winter day, a F-106 went down in the Adarondack Mtns, SW of PAFB. We launched and found the aircraft, but we did not find the pilot until the next summer. 

The  pre-century aircraft were the big step into the world of real speed in the air. The swept back wings of the F-86 made for something that just looked fast, setting there on the tarmac.

All those aircraft were purpose built. The USAF  leadership took the USA into the world where we could fly faster than sound. Now we have the one aircraft that the USAF management says will fit any and all needs our military will need pretty well, the F-35. Thank God the F-22 Raptor got spit out the door when it did.


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 23, 2016)

I believe the hey-day of military aviation has come and gone.  Just the sheer number of aircraft from the end of WWII until the late 60s....in just 20 years there were two or three dozen new types.  A carrier air wing had a couple different fighters, a couple different types of attack, a medium bomber....now, just the F/A-18.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 23, 2016)

I really think you are right. It really does seem we have reached the end of the particular airframe limits. The burst of growth now are stealth technology, avionics, weapon systems, VTOL, etc. Computers are now making fighter aircraft capable of turns and auto modes, allowing pilots to concentrate targeting, and weapon selections. One question that will always plague us, is where we stand against other nations. Putin is on the move, and building his military. Can we stay ahead of Putin with what we have? 

I like the F/A-18 for the versatility it brings to the fight. I wonder how well the F-35 stacks up against the F/A-18? I read the USAF side of things, but I am not as well read on the USMC/Naval Aviation side of things.


----------



## BloodStripe (Sep 23, 2016)

Some year I would love to sit in on a source selection board for a new type of aircraft.


----------



## AWP (Sep 23, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> I believe the hey-day of military aviation has come and gone.  Just the sheer number of aircraft from the end of WWII until the late 60s....in just 20 years there were two or three dozen new types.  A carrier air wing had a couple different fighters, a couple different types of attack, a medium bomber....now, just the F/A-18.



Agree. Look at the construction, advances in overall knowledge, and necessity be it WWII or the Cold War, and it is no shock. The Navy once had something like 3 or 4 different fighters in front-line squadrons, though we're approaching that in the AF (-15, 16, -22, -35). Stealth, software, and our broken acquisition system guarantee us long and costly lead times.

Going from memory though, the USAAF had at least 3 models of the B-24 in service, 2 models of the B-17 at any given time, 3 or 4 models of the B-25, 3 of the P-47, at least the same for the P-51. Times have changed. Post-war we had something like 4 medium/ heavy bomber models at one time whereas today we have 3.

In the 60's a CVW was 2 fighter squadrons (F-8's or F-4's), two light attack (A-1's, A-4's, or A-7's), 1 medium attack (A-6), plus supporting a/c like the Vigilante, helos, AEW, EW, subhunters, etc. 

In the 80's it was two fighter (F-14's), two light attack (A-7's that gave way to single seat F/A-18's, 1 medium (A-6), plus supporting a/c. One squadron was usually, or always, USMC. Now it's...two twin-seat Hornets, 3 single-seat, a Growler detachment, and 4 E-2's? I think the Navy's planning to keep the Hornet around until 2035, so I don't think it is sold on the -35 just yet.

Times have really changed, but in some respects they haven't and I think that is more acquisitions and funding related than technology.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 23, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> I believe the hey-day of military aviation has come and gone.  Just the sheer number of aircraft from the end of WWII until the late 60s....in just 20 years there were two or three dozen new types.  A carrier air wing had a couple different fighters, a couple different types of attack, a medium bomber....now, just the F/A-18.



The FA/18 Super Hornet can do it all pretty damn well. Why have 4 aircraft when one can do it. Reduce the load for maintenance. The only real drawback if the hornet is the range...

The Tomcat was a very capable airframe, surprisingly maneuverable, fast as fuck, and it could pack a punch. But, they were old, limited in modern avionics, and ability to adapt.


----------



## Dame (Sep 23, 2016)

Red Flag 1 said:


> The Phoenix was a mighty and an frightful weapon. The perfect standoff weapon.
> 
> As for sound. The winners for me have been the Tomcat precursor, the F-4. Second, the FB-111, and third was the howling scream of the F-104. At Hahn AFB in Germany, when the F-4 launched, talking on the phones had to halt, base wide. If a squadron launched, you just sipped coffee until the last one launched. While at Hahn, the Germans were flying F-104's. European weather being what is was, we had  plenty of F-104's RON.


It was a great thing living in El Toro in the 1980s. LTA was just across the street from work and down the freeway from home. Ever been buzzed by a Tomcat? Had to change my panties. 

ETA: I wrote an article for their newspaper called "Confessions of a Jet Voyeur." First published piece.


----------



## BloodStripe (Sep 24, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> The FA/18 Super Hornet can do it all pretty damn well. Why have 4 aircraft when one can do it. Reduce the load for maintenance. The only real drawback if the hornet is the range...
> 
> The Tomcat was a very capable airframe, surprisingly maneuverable, fast as fuck, and it could pack a punch. But, they were old, limited in modern avionics, and ability to adapt.



It was only two years older than the 15.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 24, 2016)

The -15 has multiple variants. The Strike Eagle is a totally different platform. It also doesn't have to crash land into an aircraft carrier for 6-8 months at a time.

The -14 was mission specific. It was difficult to adapt to a changing environment. The-18 can do tanking, air to air, electronic warfare, fleet interception,  and attack.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 24, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> The -15 has multiple variants. The Strike Eagle is a totally different platform. It also doesn't have to crash land into an aircraft carrier for 6-8 months at a time.
> 
> The -14 was mission specific. It was difficult to adapt to a changing environment. The-18 can do tanking, air to air, electronic warfare, fleet interception,  and attack.


Fleet Defense, Interceptor, CAS,Interdiction seems like more than one mission to me.


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 24, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> The FA/18 Super Hornet can do it all pretty damn well. Why have 4 aircraft when one can do it. Reduce the load for maintenance. The only real drawback if the hornet is the range...
> 
> The Tomcat was a very capable airframe, surprisingly maneuverable, fast as fuck, and it could pack a punch. But, they were old, limited in modern avionics, and ability to adapt.



I am not saying it is necessarily a 'bad' thing, but it is what it is.  The sheer numbers of different operational aircraft produced in that 20-year span was incredible.  And the leap from prop-driven, altitude-challenged, sub-sonic to what they got in that time was just astonishing.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 24, 2016)

DA SWO said:


> Fleet Defense, Interceptor, CAS,Interdiction seems like more than one mission to me.



Fleet Defense and interceptor are the same mission, both of which the -18 can do. Cas and interdiction were late additions, like in the last 5 years of service, and are both better performed by the -18.


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 24, 2016)

But the F-14 DID change (it had to).  The F/A-18 just added additional roles, which was part of its expected evolution.  True enough that with the proliferation of the F/A-18 roles and the age and expense of the F-14 it was natural to push the F/A-18 and retire the Tomcat.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 24, 2016)

Overlap is not a bad thing.


----------



## Gunz (Sep 24, 2016)

Red Flag 1 said:


> The Phoenix was a mighty and an frightful weapon. The perfect standoff weapon.
> 
> As for sound. The winners for me have been the Tomcat precursor, the F-4. Second, the FB-111, and third was the howling scream of the F-104. At Hahn AFB in Germany, when the F-4 launched, talking on the phones had to halt, base wide. If a squadron launched, you just sipped coffee until the last one launched. While at Hahn, the Germans were flying F-104's. European weather being what is was, we had  plenty of F-104's RON.




They were churning out warplanes like crazy during the '50s, and shitcanning the ones that didn't measure up almost as fast after just a few years in service. The money was flowing like water for contracts, R&D, etc., spurred by the competition of the Cold War. My Dad worked for Pratt & Whitney, then Sikorsky, then Norden, all part of the same corporation back then, United Aircraft...and I learned to love planes at an early age.

@Red Flag 1 , you may remember some of these gems: 

F4D Skyray


F101A Voodoo


F11F Tiger



F3H Demon



As for sheer sound and terror from above, I'll take the F4. It flew so low during CAS you could clearly see the flight helmets of pilot and RIO. The first nape strike I ever saw was by two Marine F4s that came down out of the low gray monsoon cloud, screamed past us at just above treetop level, roared downrange toward the target, dropped the cans and kicked in the afterburners to arc straight up back into the clouds....and then we began to see the brilliant roiling orange and black ball of fucking hell inflating from the dull green of the jungle like a balloon...and then the sound and concussion hit us a second later, right up through the soles of our boots like somebody whacking the bottom of your feet with a bat.

AO got awful quiet after that.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 24, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> But the F-14 DID change (it had to).  The F/A-18 just added additional roles, which was part of its expected evolution.  True enough that with the proliferation of the F/A-18 roles and the age and expense of the F-14 it was natural to push the F/A-18 and retire the Tomcat.



How did it change? Adding JDAMS in 2002, and retiring in 2006? 

It's most feared weapon was fired 2-3 times and never hit anything.


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 24, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> How did it change? Adding JDAMS in 2002, and retiring in 2006?
> 
> It's most feared weapon was fired 2-3 times and never hit anything.



Well, yes.  It wasn't built for CAS, but it did.  That it did so for a couple years is irrelevant.  RE: the Phoenix missile, the deterrence factor alone made the Soviets change doctrine.  That ot never fired a weapon actually proved its worth.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 24, 2016)

I


----------



## BloodStripe (Sep 24, 2016)

Fact: Iran's Air Force Flies American-Made F-14 Tomcats

I guess we should all just go backpacking through Iran to look for some Tomcats.


----------



## AWP (Sep 24, 2016)

The -14 changed towards the end of its life cycle and a number of changes were driven by retiring airframes. RA-5's and later F-8's handled reconnaissance, but with their departure the TARPS pod was specifically developed for the -14. Bombs weren't dropped until '01 or '02, but some of that was to give the -14 an additional capability (plus the range on the -18's sucks). The loss of the A-6  in the late 90's transferred the deep strike role to the F-14. When it the -14 left the fleet in '06 it could do just about everything, minus SEAD and EW.

The -14's biggest drawback was maintenance. It was a beast to maintain and costly compared to the F-18. The -18 came from the YF-17 developed to compete for the USAF's lightweight fighter contract; that went to the F-16. The -18 was reworked a bit to give it longer legs and "navalize" the airframe, but it remained (and still does to a certain extent) a short range strike aircraft. IN killing the -14 and A-6, the Navy standardized a lot of its maintenance and logistics requirements, but at the cost of range and organic tanker support. The KA-6D performed that role until it was retired and while the -18 carries buddy stores, but still suffers from short range. Everything has a tradeoff and to be honest, minus the tanker and range issue I think the Navy did the right thing.

The Growler EW variant is a beast, but development, like just about everything Mil-related, took longer than expected. It gives the fleet a common airframe which means a strike package is built around a common airspeed and fuel radius. With the AF carrying a probe and drogue on its tankers, some of the range issues would be negated in a full-on war. Launch, tank from the AF, and then use buddy stores to tank enroute or upon the Alpha Strike's return.

The -18's a good call and I'll be real surprised if the Navy goes to an all F-35 air wing.

I think the USAF is missing the boat by not replacing the F-15E fleet with the Silent Eagle variant.


----------

