Nice article about the last flight of the F-14

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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. :ROFLMAO:

ETA: I wrote an article for their newspaper called "Confessions of a Jet Voyeur." First published piece.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
600px-F4d_skyray.jpg

F101A Voodoo
600px-F-101A_Voodoo.jpg

F11F Tiger
600px-F11f_grumman_tiger.jpg


F3H Demon
600px-McDonnell_F3H-2N_Demon_in_flight_in_1956.jpg


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.
 
Back
Top