Posted on 07/19/2019 3:41:40 PM PDT by Enlightened1
China is building a potent air launched anti-ship cruise missiles along with aircraft to carry those weapons. Meanwhile, the once-dormant Russian bomber force is back—though not in the numbers of the Soviet era. Moreover, with the emergence of new adversary stealth aircraft—some of which have the capability to fly very high and very fast—which are also armed with cruise missiles, the Navy will need the range and speed that the Tomcat offered to fend off those threats. The F/A-18E/F can do the job—but only to an extent.
The United States Navy retired the venerable Grumman F-14 Tomcat in 2006 after more than three decades in service. However, the Tomcat’s demise has left gaps in the carrier air wing that are only now being felt.
With the end of the Cold War and declining budgets, the Navy simply could not afford to keep the incredibly maintenance intensive and unreliable Tomcat on the carrier flight deck. Moreover, with the demise of the Soviet threat, the Tomcat’s primary mission of fleet defense has fallen by the wayside and the venerable jet was increasingly used in the strike role. But while the F-14 proved to be a competent strike aircraft, the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet was superior in most respects to the aging Tomcat as a strike fighter in the post-Cold War era. Particularly, the Super Hornet was far more reliable and cost effective—and with its much more modern avionics, it was mostly a more capable aircraft. However, there are still some gaps that the Super Hornet could not fill.
While the Super Hornet with its exceptional Raytheon AN/APG-79 active electronically scanned array radar, Harris AN/ALQ-214 Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures (IDECM) Block IV system...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
Even at Eglin I’m betting they didn’t launch with a 20 kt crosswind.
Drones and supersonic missiles have existed for the past 40 years. Good luck finding one CVN in the ocean when they can move 850 NM in one day. Difficult to target what you can’t even locate.
The F-35B short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the aircraft which are good on amphibious ships.
F-35A is for the air force.
The USS Abraham Lincoln was the first to have a full complement of F-35C which was completed in February this year. Next will be the USS Carl Vinson starting next year.
Democrat's new slogan:
"We will bury you".
Better? With those swing wings extended, it increased the Tomcat's loiter time and maneuverability, and it reduced the landing speed for carrier landings. Swept back, it was ridiculously fast. It could break the speed of sound at sea level. Not even the F-15 can do that.
There were actually four proposals for upgraded F-14’s before the Super Hornet was selected. The proposals ranged from simple upgrades of existing air frames, to remanufacturing existing air frames to completely redesigned new build air frames:
TOMCAT QUICK STRIKE – (upgraded existing frames) upgrade F-14B/D with LANTIRN and ground attack modes, plus ability to carry SLAM and HARM missiles. Basically the F-14 version of the F-15E Strike Eagle
SUPER TOMCAT 21 – (remanufactured F-14s) F110-129 engine upgrade (super cruise to mach 1.3), enlarged leading edge root extensions (increased low speed maneuverability/more fuel capacity), thrust vectoring (super maneuverability), and a single piece windscreen (better visibility)
ATTACK SUPER TOMCAT 21 – (remanufactured F-14s) same upgrades as ST21 plus major avionics upgrades including new FLIR and TFR plus the TCS/IRST pod
ADVANCED STRIKE FIGHTER ASF-14 – (new build F-14s) This is basically a completely new plane, sort of like what the F/A-18E & F are to the F/A-18C & D. Updates included F-119 engines (same as F-22), even larger fuel capacity than the Super Tomcat 21, thrust vectoring, 1960’s sub-systems replaced by simplified modular components to reduce maintenance issues, upgraded hydraulic and electrical systems, aluminum and titanium replaced by carbon fiber, stealth upgrades including engine intake baffles and edge aligned doors/access points, glass cockpit w/ helmet mounted displays, AESA radar, wild weasel SEAD capability, super cruise capability, and sustained 77 deg AoA capability
I look at it like the difference between a fancy sports car and a sedan. Sports cars have stats that sedans won’t match with speed and handling, a sedan has a nice sized trunk and four seats and it gets you from point A to point B reliably. Fancy sports cars also require tighter tolerances for their parts to run effectively, and their big selling point is that effectiveness. My gripe isn’t that sports cars aren’t cool as much as the people making the car choices are always dazzled by the cool sports cars when a sedan would do just fine.
Carrier landings are more stressful on airframes than a static airstrip and metal fatigue due to stress happens faster and requires more servicing and inspection time on a variable geometry aircraft. You can’t get around that as long as the aircraft lands conventionally. The best aircraft for the mission is never the one out of service for repairs.
The weakest, costliest, and most service-intensive part of an aircraft though isn’t the wings though, it’s the pilot. The logistics trail you save by removing that from the airframe is a much bigger savings.
...the Tomcat's demise has left gaps in the carrier air wing that are only now being felt.
That's why the threats have emerged -- hit 'em where they ain't (the they being us).
Thank you for that detailed info about the Tomcat options that were cancelled. I had not known there were so many. Back in my active duty days, around 1987, I went TDY to Norfolk Naval Station, and out group was given a peak at the F-14 rebuild facility that was there. I recall being told that the rebuilt F-14s they did came out as essentially zero time aircraft. We also got a tour of an attack submarine and the USS Midway or Coral Sea. And, being an Army guy, a very good life fire demo by the Marines at the near by USMC base.
My mistake.
My active duty days were 1995-2000. For some strange reason, I volunteered for submarine duty.
The gun range was closed in basic training for asbestos abatement, so the first time I qualified on small arms was at an Army base in Connecticut, not far from Groton. We were probably the last sub to have M1911s. I still laugh at an exchange I had with the Army instructor.
“Do you see the sites on your weapon?”
“Yes, I do.”
“Then why don’t you try using them!?!”
He still passed me, but I guess it was a good thing I went USN instead of USA or USMC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.