Why aren't they still in service? What went wrong?
>>64365687Women.
60s technology, as the earliest 4th gen it's really a 3rd gen technology airframe with 4th gen avionics and sensors.
heavygigantic airframe meant you could have less planes on your carrier - small carriers like midway could not field tomcatstoo many moving parts to maintainair launched ballistic anti ship missiles no longer as big of a threat because of SM-2 and datalinkradar relies on a giant computer from the 70'sharder to fly than an f/a-18f/a-18 easier to upgrade and maintain
Too based for this clown world
>>64365687Greed. Cheney's political bullshit. Fucking the navy for wanting their own heavy fighter and fucking over Gruman, I guess.None of the "reasons" you see people put before or after me are or will be in any way accurate.The F-15 had a horrendous maintenance record at the start of it's life, with massive engine problems, weaker radar, just as weak SAS system, much weaker missiles etc.Look at it now - fly by wire, best radar, better missiles, engine troubles fixed, mission readiness up to 80 %.They just abandoned the F-14 is all.It was the F-22 of it's time and looking at things - ironically they are doing the same to the F-22 now as well. Fags.
>>64365687Just a total pain in the ass to keep flying because they had variable geometry (in a saltwater environment so imagine the corrosion) and their onboard electronics were this weird shit that was super advanced when it came out but also damned hard to actually upgrade or replace when it inevitable went out of date.Also it was a fat fuck.
>>64365687iwrong
>>64365750this is basically it. Basically a scaled up version of 'we can't have shit in detroit' because god hates us and we can only have clown nonsense here.
They put the future in a museum like with the Concorde.
>>64365687Didn't want to face Flankers at sea
>>64366011>He doesn't knowTalking a lot of shit for someone about to be locked by an AIM-54 once more!
>>64365859I mean the F14 wasn't really as conducive to upgrades as the F15 was, it was first 4th gen aircraft with a lot of 3rd gen tech, It didn't have as much space to add new things, the swing wings were expensive to maintain and really proved to be unnecessary in modern aircraft, and the phoenix was obsolete and was very maintenance heavy. The cockpit was straight out of an F4 phantom too
>>64365687A combination of the wing actuators being a maintenance hog and a lack of enemies that need an AIM-54. High G turns and supersonic flight slowly wore down the airframes as it got harder and harder to integrate newer tech.
>>64365687Enormously expensive to operate. AIM-120 obviated the need for Phoenix.A navalized Vark would have been a better Phoenix truck, and proved to be the better electronic warfare and strike platform.
>>64365687>variable geometryfuck that shit
>>64365687Too cool-looking, not gay enough for the Air Force.
>>64367798It was the best solution in the late 60s.
>>64367847it hasn't been the best solution in the following 60 years
>>64366869>F-111 missile truckMaybe. The Tomcat was designed as like a no-compromise interceptor, aside from TWS and AIM-54, it had that mid cold war emphasis on speed and range, and despite being fucking obese was an extremely nasty dogfighter if you somehow survived to merge with it, much more dangerous than an F-15 WVR due to the sheer about of wallhaxx bullshit an experienced cat driver could pull out in one or two circle fighting. Like manual wing sweep, differential thrust on the widely spaced engine, differential wing sweep, intentional OCF, just infuriating shit like that. My IPs were old enough that most of them had done dissimilar ACM against the big cat and said it was just like teleport behind you and say "nothing personal kid" levels of kinematic bullshittery. Now, putting that capability into a naval interceptor also means the unit cost was about a quarter of a billion dollars each, and outside of the IRAF those capabilities were only used a few times IRL so you can ask if it was really a smart decision to make like the ultimate Fuck you with BVR and fuck all your gay friends with WVR airplane
>>64366869Of course, who wouldn't want to fly a gluttonously overweight "fighter" from a carrier? One that can't perform BFM or ACM, the weight caused issues with approach speeds for recovery, plus the F-111B lacked a central air data computer used to automatically maneuver the wings. Additionally, the TF30 wasn't going to do the F-111B any favors for operations. While I will say the TF30 did soldier on with the F-14, it led to numerous issues, including 28.2 percent of all F-14 crashes. I couldn't fathom the increasing number of issues this would cause with the F-111B.
>>64367847Yes but F-16 was put into service in the early 70's. The only reason it wasn't used on carriers is because the gay navy wanted two engines.
>>64365746aye these things are xbox heug
Requires 3 times the amount of maintenance of a Hornet and was way too expensive
>>64365687too expensivetoo many hours of maintenance for every hour of flight
>>64366011That unarmed, barely fueled Flanker?
>>64365687Old. You forget it's a design that saw service in Vietnam and planes age way faster than rifles or tanks, especially if there's not a whole lot of space to improve. Also she was a fat bitch, no wonder the navy loved her
>>64365859Correct, Grumman overall and the F-14 in particular was deliberately kaboshed.also correct, the F-15 and F-14 were contemporaries in engineering technologies and design. Tomcat 21 ought still be aroundthe F/A-18 was a much later program that took lessons from the A-4/A-6/A-7/F-14 as far as maintanability, began its flight test program a decade later. It's a later-gen airframe. A-7 could have been kept in service with unafterburning Tomcat 21 engines, and the A-6F would have had unafterburning F/A-18 engines.>>64368907>"saw service in Vietnam"Wrong the war ended in January 1973.This thread is filled with uneducated plebbitard responses
>>64366869>>64367888>>64367926the fleet defense interceptor project decade-predated the F-111B, the TF30 engine AWG-9 and long range missile Bendix AAM-N-10 its original incarnation was the Douglas F6D Missileer look in desuarchive for this picrel (not going to re-type it all)
>>64365687One trick pony whose trick became obsolete with the collapse of the USSR and was x5 as expensive as the F18 Hornet.
>>64369043>January 1973.The US signed the Paris peace accords in January, The bulk of US troops didn't leave until March and the F14 did fly CAP sorties in 1975 covering Civilian evacuations in the final days of the War. You should at least get your facts right before calling someone an uneducated plebbitard
Because reality is shit and disappointing and doesn't allow for anything cool and based.
>>64369069The U.S. military role in Vietnam permanently ceased after December 1972.(everything after that was skirmishes)**********FUCK (You)************ gamerstreamerlarpertard 11-year-old plebbit boomerbook faggot.
>>64369086Why you mad tho
>>64369191? I'm correct, not "mad"
>>64369204*cough* if you were correct you wouldn't have coped calling anything after 1972 a skirmish *cough*
>>64369253f-14s entered service 9 months before the war ended
>>64369253>>64369270>'entered service'the F-14A didn't enter squadron service until September 1974, almost two years after the end of the Vietnam warthe 1972-73 carrier deployments of F-14s were pre-production trials(You) are 11-year-old gamerstreamerlarptards awake past bedtime, have a hot pocket
>>64369284>America withdrawing from vietnam means the war ended
>>64369294The war ended in January 1973 with signing of the Paris peace accords.
>>64369294This.
>>64369062This looks like a savage and intruder got blackout and had a baby. But I'm here for it
>>64369294lmfao bodied that freak
>>64369294yes
>>64365687No meme answer? Denying spare parts to Iran.
>>64369294>>64369305>>64369356>>64369359The war in Vietnam ended in January Nineteen-Seventy-Three.anyone claiming "uhm a vietnaaahhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm vet" after that is stolen valor.
>>64369043It fought against the Vietnamese. Call it part of the war, call it a separate conflict, call it a high intensity training exercise, whatever the case F14s flew over Vietnam against the NVA. Regardless its a plane that got into service in 74, which is a long fucking time ago. I don't need to portmanteau a bunch of childish insults to make my point, nigger
>>64369367Someone gets it. But in fairness she was showing her age hard even in the 90s, even without the Iranians she would've likely left service around the same time she did IRL
>>64369383>muh part of muh warsee post immediately above (You)rsU.S. combat military involvement *ended* in January 1973 as did mandatory conscription aka The Draft <---for all time until today Oct 7th 2025>'over Vietnam against the NVA'the war and U.S. military involvement *ended* in January 1973 period, END.
>>64365687Well, what were they good at? Sure, they were too XYZ, but they must've done something well, aside from being kino and making everyone jackoff to "Top Gun".
>>64369284VF-1 (wolfpack!) literally flew tomcats during the fall of SV, operationally. Maybe they don't have books or cave paintings where you come from. But you guys should work on that
>>64367880well yeah because stealth is now a mass produced feature now. you dont need a plane that has to fly at different altitudes to avoid detection anymore.
>>64369938>'literally'Back to plebbit, Brainlet. the war and U.S. military involvement *ENDED* January 1973 as did mandatory conscription
>>64365687ridiculously labour intensive to keep flying - 1+ maintenance hours per 1 flight hour
>>64369724Let's see:Had a radar with range and raw power that no other fighter could match. Talking up to 00sWas the most maneuverable 4th gen and later on one of the most maneuverable after the introduction of F-15, F-16s. Especially for a heavy fighter.Could carry a fuckton of ordinance putting an F-15E at it's paces.Had an advantage with the automatic swing wing mechanism.Massive range for it's class. Not Su-27, but no need for it either.Paved the way with radar techniques including better close combat and literally the first with Track While Scan.Could launch a radar guided missile without warning to the target until 15-10 seconds from impact - massive advantage, wasn't repeated until the aim-120 in the laate 80s! russians couldn't figure this out untill the 2010s.Could hit target at 100NMs at a time people were planning to fire at 20 !!!A little quirk of the TWS mode and the RWRs at the time: If in TWS most RWRs would have ignored the radar...Had Link-4 and could be used as a mini awacs handing off targets to other F-14sPossessed an advanced imaging system as a backup IFF at a time where IFF was finicky. Structural G limit at 13.5. Multiple confirmed instances of being flown at 11Gs without major issues.Could and actually did shoot down the MIG-25, the plane the F-15 was "created to fight" before the F-15. In fact was in service before the F-15All that and was carrier capable with none of the drawbacks of carrier aircraft at the time.
>>64365687Fuck Cheney! Fuck navy! And fuck Congress! Objectively the sexiest plane that ever existed and that alone should have been enough of a reason to keep it operational for the next century. US turned lame and gay the moment they retired this piece of art.t.somebody who was probably bombed by one of these
>>64365985Concorde was never the future. The Concorde was reliant on businessmen traveling from the US and Europe to be in time for both a noon meeting in one continent and then dinner in another. This all fell apart when the novelty wore off and businessmen decided it was cheaper to just plan out a three day trip on a regular airline.Was the Concorde super advanced? Yes. Was it economically viable? Absolutely not, it was a pointless luxury that saved you two days of travel; and a three day business trip itself is a luxury compared to a two week long trip to and from Europe a century ago.
>>64365687Their long range missile had no purpose because Russians barely use bombers(because their own bombers are trash).
>>64367926The closer spacing made the Vark easier to fly in the event of engine failure. Based on weight they were similarly g-limited with 6 Phoenixes.The F-111B also carried more fuel to attempt another landing. Both planes took up similar amounts of deck space. The USN was just looking for an excuse to kill the 111B and quibbled over things that proved to be problematic with the Tomcat.
>>64371399>>64367888>>64365859This is objectively correct. It was literally killed by Cheney because of internal politics , and because without the USSR naval threat it wasn't needed in the interim, while the f22 and the naval variant were being built. Chenys wife worked for one of grummans rivals and had a hand in it as well. Look at how they sold the super hornet, as if it was just a new "variant". In reality it's an entirely different airframe in the same shape. Even in it's latter days of being a red headed stepchild it was pretty much an exact match for an f15e. In the early gwot it could haul the most, the fastest, drop it the most accurately, bring the most back, and was the best fac-a.Face it, it was about money. In a better timeline we upgraded to super attack 21 tomcats while the naval f22 came out. New build d model tomcats had fantastic ready rates, quite comparing ancient bent up a and b models. Further modernisation would have only improved that. Same for the intruder. BTW, what exactly are they looking for for a future indo pac naval fighter? Oh yeah range and speed, if only we had a jet with those. Oh well enjoy the super bugs racing out at Mach 1.1 to take out those Chinese flankers and cruise missiles.
>>64367926the f-111 resolved their issues with the tf30 by over engineering the intake cones, a lesson grumman hadn't learned before they left the project to make the F-14 and paid for it.
>>64365687>What went wrong?masculinity is banned
>>64365859My biggest concern would be over the swing wing, though that is the coolest design feature. That design seems ahead of its time. Shame really
>>64371543Allegedly, BoomSupersonic was looking into setting up their production facilities at the airport where I work.It’s probably a good thing they didn’t, because I would probably have been fired for calling them fucking retards every time I drove past.
>>64371584As I already stated here >>64369043USN carrier fleet air wing today 2025 ought consist of (and the Superbug should never have existed)>Tomcat 21>A-6F>A-7F (non-afterburning Tomcat 21 engine)>F/A-18C/D Upgraded (with an "EA-18" growler evolution)>S-3 (along with KS-3 tanker and CS-3 cargo derivative)>F-35C
>>64367926>>64372019>TF30by the late 1970s the TF30 was outdated, an engine (as posted upthread # 64369062) that began with the late-50s F6D Missileer.F-14s past the A model rightly and properly had upgraded engines (which the airframe design was fully capable of incorporating)
>>64373313if the f-111B wasn't such a piece of shit the f-14 would have no reason to exist. Neither should have been made.
>>64373328eh, agreed that the F-111B was suboptimal and shitty (entire TFX project was a compromise) but something was going to replace it.Navy had too much invested in its fleet defense interceptor since the late 1950s (it wasn't going to 'not exist' or "never exist"). We could and ought have a Tomcat 21 right now in 2025
>>64372778More like homosexuality was looked down on back in the day. No wonder it's made such a comeback in recent years
>>64365687A super tomcat upgrade would have cost way more money than what gruman and the dod were willing to launder. It was easier to just replace it with the bug and call it a day.
>>64371543>Concorde was never the futureIt was. Ass blasted americans repressed civilian supersonic flights because their prized Boeing faggots failed to produce a competitor to Concorde. Simple as.
>>64373216Pic related
>>64373925Wrongand that's not the chronology or what occurred at all>'gruman'<facepalm>
With the benefit of hindsight we can look back at the last 21 years and come to the conclusion the F-14 was really never needed. It was a badass plane, the Navy's most iconic without a doubt and it had a fuck ton going for it, but like >>64365741 said, it was the first of a new generation. When it was introduced in the 70s it was a fucking starship, there's no question it left everything dead in the sky, a true grim reaper. But by 2004 times had changed, the Russian air threat wasn't nearly as big of a problem as it was 30 years ago, and the Navy's capability of dealing with air launched anti ship missiles had drastically improved, this left the navy with a plane that existed for a purpose that was no longer needed. Sure, Dick Cheney killed the F-14 but if he hadn't, someone else would have. In the 21 years we have lived without the F-14 we've never needed an airframe like it. F-18's were just as good at killing hajis as any other aircraft and the Chinese threat at the time was miniscule.In 2025, however, the chinks have caught up a lot, and the doctrine of spamming anti ship missiles against CSGs makes one wonder if the F-14 could be revived to serve a purpose, but I would have to say no, especially given that the F-18 with the AIM-174 has clearly shown itself capable of fulfilling exactly the same role the F-14 did decades ago.In the end, the F-14 was a product of its time. It was a beautiful airframe, the pinnacle of the 70s, but that was 50 years ago... Times have changed a lot. We will see what the F/A-XX has in store for us, I suspect it may be a worthy successor to the F-14
>>64374712>gpt $*@m
>>64374724I'm drunk as shit and wrote this myself but whatever anon whatever makes you happy.
>>64374712>With the benefit of hindsight we can look back at the last 21 years and come to the conclusion the F-35 was really never needed>With the benefit of hindsight we can look back at the last 21 years and come to the conclusion the F-22 was really never needed>With the benefit of hindsight we can look back at the last 21 years and come to the conclusion the F-15 was really never neededIf you want to be accurateA fucking Cessna can and did outsmart the S-400 "tRiUmf"Ukies with fucking MiG-29s with it's F-4 like avionics shot down SU-35sYou could argue none of the fourth gens were needed then.
>>64374781I'll admit you're not wrong but you have to consider:>the F-22 was developed to be the USAF's top air superiority fighter.The F-22 was built for another universe. A universe where America actually had a reason to field a fighter that was that good. However, the F-22 should be looked at as a thought exercise. When the USA was at tech level 10 and everyone else was tech level 9, it was worth thinking about a real adversary. When that bitch was introduced in 2005 there was nothing in world to rival it. It was like introducing an F4 to World War 2. The F-22 is my personal favorite fighter but even I have to admit it was fucking useless. Hell, it's first combat kill was.. you guessed it, bombing hajis in Syria!But anyways anon you are correct. The 4th gens were all built to fight a war they never fought. In a way this is sad, but we should be thankful these toys were never used for their real purpose. However, this doesn't mean we should just say 'fuck it' and stop innovating. the F-22 didn't fight a real war, nor did the F-15, or the F-14, but they laid the groundwork for their successors. I personally believe that that we (the USA) should never stop striving to be the best, and even if our enemies aren't really as good as we are, we lose nothing by imagining they are, and developing equipment (aircraft in this case) to counter that.
>>64374728>drunk as shitthat's fine, but we should have Tomcat 21 as fleet defense interceptor rn
>>64374799>desert storm wasnt a real war
>>64376718No it wasn't. U.S. hasn't been in a real war since Vietnam <--that and mandatory conscription ended in January 1973
>>64376800>if you're so badass you completely btfo the enemy it wasn't reaaaaalKeep crying bitch nigger.
>>64376827How old are (You)?the United States hasn't been in a real war since Vietnam <--that and mandatory conscription ended in January 1973Even Korea and Vietnam weren't "real" wars from the United States point of view, although tens of thousands of Americans did sacrifice their lives over decades. The country at large didn't gaf about either Korea (<--most forgotten) or Vietnam.War is when the entire nation mobilizes to fight the conflict. That hasn't happened, in substance, for the United States since 1945
