The last public appearance of the F-14 Tomcat

Navy news ^

[mcgiver38]

End of an Era, the F-14 tomcat makes its final public appearance.

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. (NNS) -- The venerable F-14 Tomcat took a final bow with a boom at its last air show Sept. 16-18 at Naval Air Station Oceana, Va.

The classic Northrup Grumman fighter jet that rose to prominence in the 1986 hit film "Top Gun" and has worn U.S. Navy colors since its first test flight in 1970 attracted a legion of fans from around the world at its public goodbye.

“It’s basically a bittersweet day for us,” said Lt. Cortney Kinna, an F-14 naval flight officer from Amarillo, Texas. "It was our favorite airplane. I just think it's the sexiest looking airplane out there. It's unique, big, powerful and loud."

Geert Meuris, who lives near Antwerp, Belgium, said he crossed the Atlantic Ocean to see the swing-wing, twin-engine jet fighter shake the skies in a four-ship formation and during a solo tactical demonstration.

“We don't see them very often in Europe,” he said as he stood near the flight line at the fighter's home base. “This is the last chance for us. It’s beautiful.”

Aviators who flew in the Tomcat said it stands alone.

“It had a little bit of a heritage feeling to it," said Lt. Mario Duarte, an F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot who previously flew the F-14 off carrier decks. “It is a cool thing to say that you've done. Everybody associates it with the movie Top Gun, and it's big and it looks great sitting on the ground.”

“The biggest thing about it is the F-14 has such a great identity,” said Lt. Joe Ruzicka, a naval flight officer from Crandall, Texas, who flew in the Tomcat's last public solo demonstration. "People have such a love and affection for it.”

Air crew with Fighter Squadron (VF) 32, the Swordsmen, and VF-101, the Grim Reapers, showed off the jet's capabilities before hundreds of thousands in attendance at the three-day show.

Lt. Jack Tangredi, a naval aviator with the Grim Reapers, put the plane through its paces during one of its solo displays.

“It was awesome,” said Tangredi, a native of Wallingford, Conn. “For me personally, it doesn’t get any better than that. The pinnacle of my aviation carrier.”

Radar intercept officers (RIO) said they will particularly miss the concentrated teamwork needed between the pilot and “backseater” to let the F-14 do its job. Unlike the F/A-18 Super Hornet, one said, pilots do not have the same cockpit controls in the front seat to operate the radar and fire all weapon systems.

“The Tomcat is a RIO's airplane,” said Lt. Tim Henry, a Gettysburg, Pa., native who took his last F-14 flight during the airshow. “It’s sad. I caught myself looking around the cockpit.”

Retired Capt. Phil Grandfield, of Virginia Beach, said he favored the Tomcat over the F-4 Phantom and the F/A-18 Hornet in his 26 years of flying Navy jets.

“I’m most proud of having flown the F-14,” said Grandfield, who has more than 2,000 flight hours in the aircraft and made his 1,000th carrier arrested landing in the jet. “It’s a unique airplane. It’s respected around the world.”

Even so, every F-14 air crew member without hesitation said they are ready to transition to the more modern and nimble Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet, the Tomcat's replacement.

Now in the midst of its last cruise with VF-31, the Tomcatters, and VF-213, the Black Lions, aboard USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71), the Navy will retire the aging Tomcat from service next year.

[F14 Pilot]

Do you have any photos or materials left from those days?

[NY Attitude]

Yes, I have pictures especially of those last days. I just have to retrieve them from New York

[F14 Pilot]

http://usna.com/News_Pubs/Publications/Shipmate/2000/2000_09/swoose.htm

[lentulusgracchus]

Then explain the look-down, shoot-down radar carried in the Su-27 and followons, and the long lance they use with it. I think it's the AA-9 "Amos"/R-33/R-37 program. I only see attestation in an article about the missile that it's used with the MiG-31, but there is definitely a long-range, 160-km-plus missile used with the Sukhoi types.

I think that one, whichever it is, is the copy of the AIM-54 Phoenix. How they compromised the Phoenix, I don't know, but I remember reading that the Sov weaponeers had the benefit.

AA-9 writeup here:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/aa-9.htm

[lentulusgracchus]

I can well understand the strong emotional attachment many have to the F-14 Tomcat, but I find it difficult to believe that the A/F-18 Superhornet is as inferior to it as is being made out here.

Don't go by us, go check the link someone put up in the first 40 posts or so, to the comments made by the F/A-18 Hornet drivers about the new E/F Superhornet. It really is an inferior aircraft -- a design stretch that didn't work, even after they turned it into 90% new aircraft.

The E/F Superhornet resembles the A/D models in the same way Ryan Newman's superstocker resembles a family sedan -- cosmetically only. And it isn't about to fill the hole made by withdrawal of the F-14's.

It is far more costly to have to field and maintain two different airframes and weapon systems.

The mission comes first, everything else later. If you can't protect the carriers from Moskit-carrying Su-30's and -33's, you can't project force -- and that's the Mission. Then there's nothing for the Hornet-driving flying Leathernecks to do. Your F/A-18's can't support a Marine expedition if the expedition can't happen because you can't risk the carriers.

[lentulusgracchus]

It is remotely possible that the Federales have decided that the future does not lie with manned aircraft and "next big thing" will be some UAVs that make all manned aircraft obsolete.

The UAV hasn't been invented yet that can outthink a human being. AI is still a distant pipe dream (thank God). And sever the datalink with the UAV and what have you got?

Isolate an Eagle driver from his base, and he'll still kick your ass.

[lentulusgracchus]

"In April 1989, the Secretary of Defense canceled the V-22 program in the FY 1990 Amended President's Budget, citing affordability reasons."

The acronym for that is Peace Dividend.

People forget that Poppy was the one who cancelled the Reagan buildup, sandbagged the 600-ship Navy, and ordered the BB's mothballed and the heavy divisions brought home and demobbed.

Saddam thought he had Poppy leaning over too far, is why he went after Kuwait.

If he'd waited 18 months to make his move, he'd still be in Baghdad, and the incumbent in Kuwait. He might even own Ras Tanura and Dharan.

Yeah, people forget that Yacht Club Poppy was a big Defense-cutter.

[lentulusgracchus]

SP artillery, attack helicopter, Osprey; the navy is being gutted. I'm probably missing several more systems.

Well, here's a news flash -- everything takes second place to tax cuts at Republican Command Central. And I mean it.

Dubya made a lot of promises about replenishing stocks and paying people when he campaigned for president. Don Rumsfeld added it all up and handed up a $60 billion bump stapled to the 2002 budget request for DoD, to redeem those pledges. Dubya sent his eggs back instantly, with word that the Pentagon would stand fast on budget levels. Just that cold. The echoes of his campaign promises and pledges were still echoing, when he went back on it all and slapped Rumsfeld and the service chiefs down.

Then he turned around and told Rumsfeld to do a $60 billion carve-out for SDI. He didn't want to fund SDI. He wanted existing programs to fund it. That's where the Crusader SP gun went. That and just a whole lot of other programs.

Of course, that was all before 9/11.

Even afterward, he was still doing it. Even after the Columbia disaster, Dubya got Sean O'Keefe -- whom Dubya had sent over from OMB for just this purpose, O'Keefe was a budget scrubber, not an administrator -- to do a 12% carve-out in NASA's budget for Homeland Security, earmarking money for some secret Air Force missions in the shuttle. (Which perforce won't count against our obligations to the space-station program.) He timed that one beautifully, releasing it just two months after the accident, while people were still looking for shuttle parts around Toledo Bend.

[SauronOfMordor]

"With the end of the Cold War there was a general recognition that the outer air battle -- the battle against Soviet naval aviation bombers -- was significantly reduced in importance. While AAAM was seen as the best defense against the Soviet naval air arm, the future threat would consist of Third World fighter-bomber or diesel-electric submarine. This changing security environment doomed this Phoenix missile successor [as well as the associated F-14D Super Tomcat upgrades], and the Advanced Air-to-Air Missile program was cancelled in 1992."

And nobody wanted to posit a scenario of US against China

[F14 Pilot]

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_452.shtml

http://misc.kitreview.com/bookreviews/iranianf14bookreviewkb_1.htm

http://www.internetmodeler.com/2004/november/new-releases/book_osprey-f14.php

[Little Ray]

They have already come up with test UAVs that can plan and execute attacks on their own. Mind you, I suspect the programmers "tweaked" the code to optimize it for the test. A UAV doesn't have to be sentient, just able to ID and select targets, and use the appropriate weapons. Think of it as reusable a missile bus. 'Course it probably can't do very well with secondary targets and targets of opportunity...

[Tommyjo]

The one and only Su-37 Flanker E crashed back in December 2001. The pilot ejected successfully. No further Su-37 was built.

[Tommyjo]

Iranian Tomcats are still very much operational. These guys are still noted flying intense CAPs in the region. The Iranians are paranoid about an airstrike on their facilities. Tomcats are still a very prominent part of the Iranian air force as are their Phantoms.

[xsrdx]

A sad day indeed.

The Tomcat was one of the coolest ever - the end of a magnificent era.

[evilC]

Maverick: Requesting permission for flyby.
Air Boss Johnson: That's a negative ghostrider, the pattern is full.

[HamiltonJay]

Just for the F-18 development money we could have continued building the F-14 for another twenty years.

And lost air superiority (and a lot of pilots lives) in combat. 35 years is a good run, no way this one was going to reach an operational age of 55 years) but this bird belongs to history now.

[Arthalion]

That's the subject of some debate. They claim that a couple dozen are flyable, but the stories that filter out indicate that perhaps a dozen are actually serviceable at this point. They apparently only fly a few regularly for practice, preferring instead to keep the wear down to preserve the jets for the day they're actually needed. Could they do a lot of damage? Potentially, but keep in mind that the weapon and radar systems are several decades out of date. While the airframes may be the same, the equipment they use to fly and target would be considered primitive by todays standards. In any combat with Iran the airfields housing these jets would be #1 on any target list. Even if the Iranians were able to disperse them to their more remote airfields to preserve them, they would be ineffective im combat. We would have them so badly outnumbered that it's unlikely that we'd lose more than one or two planes to each of their fighters before we'd take them out (I'm assuming a well executed suprise attack here...they probably wouldn't even get one in actual combat). With their small number of planes, that battle would be over in a week.

I've said it here before, and I'll say it again. If we ever go to war with Iran, it's going to be a lot nastier than the ones in Iraq or Afghanistan. They're more organized and more technologically advanced than the Taliban, they have been setting up remote airfields and bunkers for decades to prepare for a war, and their terrain is a lot more defensible than Iraq's. We'll no doubt win, but at a far higher cost. These Tomcats are just a small part of the reason for that.

[F14 Pilot]

Damned Dick Screwed This Nice Bird!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Just for the F-18 development money we could have continued building the F-14 for another twenty years.

And lost air superiority (and a lot of pilots lives) in combat.

That would make sense if you could specify which carrier-suitable plane is superior to the F-14 in performance. The F - 18 was designed to be lower in cost than the F-14, not to have superior performance. It doesn't offer a performance advantage at any altitude whatsoever, and it can't maneuver better either.

The F-14 has the performance edge everywhere, and it especially performs better when the F-18 is out of gas. Which happens remarkably quickly in high speed - for a slow plane like the F-18 - flight.

According to this thread, even the E/F "version of the F-18" - it's actually essentially an entirely new aircraft compared to prior versions of the F-18 - can't carry a weapon load to a target as distant as you almost inevitably want to engage. And with the retirement of the "obsolete" KA-6D, the Navy doesn't have a carrier - suitable airframe which has the speed and payload to refuel jet fighters.

The most you can do with the F-18 is defend the surface fleet from air attack. If you try to attack a land target, you need to get your carrier close enough to the target that it is hard to defend the carrier from counterattack. Lacking a fighter bomber with the range and payload of the F-14, the carrier as a weapon is in danger of obsolescence.