# F-14



## cheddar cheese (Jul 9, 2005)

Bit low dont ya think?


----------



## lesofprimus (Jul 9, 2005)

Man that ones been around for a long long time... The pilot lost his wings for months after that stunt...

Heres some more F-14 shots...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 9, 2005)

I never seen it before, thought itd be good to post though. Crazy though...


Nice shots.


----------



## lesofprimus (Jul 9, 2005)

TY, and I love that pic btw... My son had a copy of it on his mirror for awhile lol...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 9, 2005)

It's ashamed, they're all retired!


----------



## evangilder (Jul 9, 2005)

THAT is a shame, FBJ! Are there none left flying, even in Reserve units?


----------



## BlackWolf3945 (Jul 9, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> The pilot lost his wings for months after that stunt...


That's one of the most perpetuated myths in the aviation community these days. Look HERE...



FLYBOYJ said:


> It's ashamed, they're all retired!


Not quite, but it's good as done, unfortunately. I hate to see my beloved Turkey leave the scene for good, but it's inevitable. VF-31 and VF-213 will make the Tom's last deployment onboard the Roosevelt this fall...


Fade to Black...


----------



## evangilder (Jul 9, 2005)

Good clarification on that one, BW. I know it has been circulating around for years.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 10, 2005)

evangilder said:


> THAT is a shame, FBJ! Are there none left flying, even in Reserve units?



What, no F-14's flying? But F-14's kick ass!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 10, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> evangilder said:
> 
> 
> > THAT is a shame, FBJ! Are there none left flying, even in Reserve units?
> ...



I thought they were all gone but according to BlackWolf 2 squadrons are taking them on a deployment abord the Rosie. 

I knew guys who worked on the -14, they said they were a real pain, the -18 is a much more maintainer friendly aircraft.  

Seeing them go makes me feel old. I remember when the -14 first flew.


----------



## Glider (Jul 10, 2005)

Old. In Duxford there is a Seahawk. Back in the mid 70's I was one of the maintanence team that looked after that plane. Trust me. When you see an actual plane that you worked on in a museaum, then you feel old.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 10, 2005)

Glider said:


> Old. In Duxford there is a Seahawk. Back in the mid 70's I was one of the maintanence team that looked after that plane. Trust me. When you see an actual plane that you worked on in a museaum, then you feel old.



I know how you feel Glider. In 1980-82 I worked as an inspector on the P-3 production flightline. I was straight out of school and landed this great job. Fast Foward - 1996 I'm in the Naval Reserve, I look at the aircraft in my squadron and they're the same ones! 16 years and 8000 hours later!


I'm waiting for them to wind up in a museum!


----------



## evangilder (Jul 10, 2005)

I didn't work on F-111s, but they were on the base where I was stationed. After seeing them at the AMARC facility at Davis Monthan and the pic that plan_d posted of one at Duxford, I know what you mean.

I guess it's a bit different if you work on a plane that's already in a museum though!  I have worked on a Zero, a C-131 and a C-46. Nothing major, just a helping hand when needed.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 11, 2005)

Yes it is a shame that they are being retired. The Tomcat is my fav modern plane.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 12, 2005)

thing is, they can't really be put ni civilian hands in flying condition now can they, too pawerful, expensive and just suicidal, so you'll never really see them fly again much.......


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 12, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> thing is, they can't really be put ni civilian hands in flying condition now can they, too pawerful, expensive and just suicidal, so you'll never really see them fly again much.......



Unless a flight test company (like the one I used to work for) could show that they have a civilian use for them, I doubt any civilian will get any of them. It's like the A-6. My company was trying to acquire one for a chase plane but the DoD was real leery because of their load carrying capability.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 12, 2005)

What would you really want to use a F-14 for civilian use anyhow?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 12, 2005)

Making lots of noise and going very fast!

Actually flight test work (testing radars, antennas, munitions, etc.)


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 12, 2005)

Two seats...give rides!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 19, 2005)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Actually flight test work (testing radars, antennas, munitions, etc.)



I was meaning other than that.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 19, 2005)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> FLYBOYJ said:
> 
> 
> > Actually flight test work (testing radars, antennas, munitions, etc.)
> ...



Making lots of noise and going very fast!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 19, 2005)

LOL


----------



## HealzDevo (Jul 31, 2005)

I thought that there was one showing an F-14 Tomcat being escorted by two Mig-17 Frescos (I might have the wrong aircraft and they might be fishbeds). Interesting picture all the same that one.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 31, 2005)

HealzDevo said:


> I thought that there was one showing an F-14 Tomcat being escorted by two Mig-17 Frescos (I might have the wrong aircraft and they might be fishbeds). Interesting picture all the same that one.



They are actually late-model Mig-21s of the Croation AF.


----------



## Glider (Jul 31, 2005)

Now here's an answer to the Australian problem mentioned in the SU27 thread. Second hand F14's. 
Expensive to maintain probably but cheap to buy. If the Iranian's could keep a few flying I am sure the RAAF should be able to.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 31, 2005)

I dont think the Iranians have been able to keep theres flying. The US has not sold them any spare parts to them to keep them up.


----------



## marconi (Jul 31, 2005)

What plane will be the replacement for F-14?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 31, 2005)

i believe it will be the F/A-18 until the F35 enters service............


----------



## Glider (Jul 31, 2005)

Derald. I certainly could be wrong but my understanding was that by cannabalising others they were able to keep some in the air and they mainly used them for their radar, not for air to air combat. 
The Phoenix missiles would be well past their sell by date.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 31, 2005)

You could be right, but did the US sell Pheonix's to the Iranians also. That I doubt.


----------



## Glider (Aug 1, 2005)

I am pretty sure they did. At the time Iran was a major arms buyer and the number of F14's was quite significant in the 70's if I remember.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 1, 2005)

Yes they did!


----------



## plan_D (Aug 2, 2005)

The U.S sold Iran anything and everything during the 70's. They have 200 AH-1 Cobras sat on the pan even to this day.


----------



## BlackWolf3945 (Aug 2, 2005)

marconi said:


> What plane will be the replacement for F-14?


When all is said and done, the VF squadrons will have converted to the F/A-18E/F... mostly the Foxtrot. As of right now only one VF unit has converted to the F/A-18E... VF-14, now VFA-14. But the SuperBugs will not be able to match the F-14 pound for pound. They have shorter range than the F-14 and they certainly aren't as fast. The F-14 was obviously designed for air to air and was made to have a long reach and to hit hard so as to help counter the Russkie bomber threat. 

The Super Bugs can hit hard but their reach isn't even close to that of the F-14. Although in this day of reduced far-reaching threats and advanced technology in air to air weapons systems, you don't really need to shoot at something that's a couple hundred miles away anymore. The days of bear hunting are long gone and over the course of the last decade the F-14 has been used for moving mud more than anything else.

On that note, check this out...

*Special Forces And Tomcats Teamed Up For Classified Missions In Iraq*


An interesting fact that many folks don't know is that all F-14s were built with the capability to carry and employ air to ground weapons, albeit nothing more sophisticated than 'dumb' iron bombs. 'Twas only with the reduced threat from the Soviet bomber fleet that the 'Bombcat' came into being.

Nevertheless, there really is no 'proper' replacement for the F-14.



the lancaster kicks ass said:


> i believe it will be the F/A-18 until the F35 enters service............


The JSF doesn't come into the picture at all so far as the F-14 is concerned. The JSF is meant to replace the original F/A-18s, called 'Legacy Hornets' by some folks.



DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> but did the US sell Pheonix's to the Iranians also. That I doubt.



This should answer that question... 

















From what I understand they ran out of AIM-54s in the mid 80s. There have been stories about the Iranians adopting the HAWK surface to air missile for use in an air to air role on the F-14. Dunno how true it is and how effective it may have been, but here's a shot of an Ali-Cat with a HAWK mounted on station 8B...







There are also photos of Ali-Cats with another 'big missile' mounted on the shoulder pylons, but I dunno what they are.




DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I dont think the Iranians have been able to keep theres flying. The US has not sold them any spare parts to them to keep them up.


For the most part this is a fairly accurate statement. The Iranians have typically had problems keeping more than 10 airframes 'operational'. From what I understand, the situation has improved some with the advancements made in Iran's aerospace industry and around 20 are said to have been 'operational' in recent years. Still, I don't think that too many of the original 79 jets are consistently airworthy and some sources state that these days they can't get more than six or seven jets in the air at once.


Fade to Black...


----------



## Glider (Aug 2, 2005)

Whilst I don't agree with the politics or aims of the Iranian goverment, you have to take your hats off to the engineers who can keep such a complex aircraft in the air over such a period without any support. It isn't as if they had much of an aerospace industry to start with.

It also isn't fair to blame the USA for selling them anything. We were happy enough to let them buy hundreds of our Cheiftains and Light tanks.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 2, 2005)

I've always liked the F-14, but she is getting old - I have Navy friends that tell me she's a b*tch to maintain, spares are getting scarce and operating costs are outrageous when compared to the FA-18.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 3, 2005)

Thanks for the info BlackWolf3945. I really did not think they would have sold them the Pheonix but oh well shit happens.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 15, 2005)

Just saw this article this morning on AVweb:


> The F-14 Tomcat is going down fighting. The last operational deployment of the big swing-wing fighter began earlier this week with the last remaining squadrons VF-31 Tomcatters and VF-213 (Blacklions) flying aboard the carrier Theodore Roosevelt for a tour to the Persian Gulf. "Epic, historic, I'm looking for words," said Cmdr. Rick "Twig" LaBranche as he led the pilots and crew aboard the Roosevelt. "They understand that being the last Tomcat squadron is a historic event." The F-14 first saw service in the early 1970s and has seen action in all major conflicts since. Described by LaBranche as the Harley Davidson of fighter aircraft, it is giving way to the leaner and more efficient FA/18 Super Hornet. For every flight hour, an F-14 needed up to 60 hours of maintenance. The Super Hornet gets by on 10 to 15 hours and takes up a lot less room, with wingspan a full 20 feet shorter than the Tomcat's.


http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/464-full.html#190589


----------



## plan_D (Sep 15, 2005)

Bloody hell, I did not know the F-14 was that unreliable. It's almost as bad as the EE Lightning.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 15, 2005)

Well it is 35 years old! For an air superiority fighter, that's ancient.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Sep 15, 2005)

unless you're in canada 

well, someone was gonna say it........


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 15, 2005)

If you hadn't of, I would have.


----------



## plan_D (Sep 15, 2005)

The Lightning was knocking on 30 years old when it left service (1960 - 1989).


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 16, 2005)

The F-14 I believe is at 32 years right now.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 16, 2005)

33 I think.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 16, 2005)

Its something like that. I am sure I put in an earlier post when it was first flown and first entered service. That would tell us, I am just to lazy to look.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 16, 2005)

1970 was the first operational service.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 16, 2005)

35 it is then. Wow.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 16, 2005)

I remember when Grumman was testing the prototype and the test flight crew had to eject short of the runway - happened at their facility in eastern Long Island, Les' stomping ground....


----------



## evangilder (Sep 16, 2005)

I watched a documentary on the F-14 about a year ago and they showed that crash. Good thing the guys got out.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 17, 2005)

Wow I did not know the prototype crashed.


----------

