(Why) Are we phasing out F-14s?

[chuckster]

I read an article on the net today saying the US is shreading its surplus F-14 Tomcats so the spare parts don't fall into unfriendly (i.e. Iranian) hands. This leads me to ask: Are we getting rid of our F-14s?

When I first read about the Tomcat, I thought 'What a marvelous aircraft!'. I was particularly amazed by the claim it can fire six phoenix missiles at six different targets simultaneously with an 80% kill probabliity. In other words, become an ace in one engagement. And of course, it was the star of the movie 'Top Gun'. (Which lends the question, what would be the most fun, flying a Tomcat or screwing Kelly McGillis!). I know the F-18 is an excellent aircraft also, and perhaps more versatile, but can it replace the F-14? So, why are we scrapping such a marvelous aircraft, and if so what are we replacing it with?

[Ordie]

F-14 were great in flight, but a maintenance nightmare.

For every hour of flight, there's at least 20 man hours of maintenence.
I knew guys working through the night while the rest of us went on Liberty.

The aircraft is being shredded because the only other user of the type is Iran. F-14 spare parts have been somehow been finding thier way to Iran through front companies and various middlemen.

I find this a moot point because of the Iranians capability of reverse engineering parts, and obtaining spare parts for other aircraft such as F-5E, F-4 Phantoms, Mirage F-1, and others t keep the fleet up.

[Hispeed1]

Great jet, but now obsolete...

[orionhawk]

they are already retired, actually. the last squadron made its last flight last year. obsolete, unfortunately. The 14's were designed and built in the 60's/70's, and carrier life is extremely hard on airframes. to add to that, we bought the last one back then, and the manufacturer stopped building new parts, other than consumable spares like seals and electronics modules and such. so when we started getting landing gear failures and airframe cracks, we would have had to pay huge extra cash to cover the manufacturer retooling to start over. it would be basically the same price to pay them to retool to build a new, modern design.

to add to that, Tomcats were designed to fill a role we never actually needed, specifically, intercepting intercontinental supersonic nuclear bombers. more specifically, they were designed in a time where American fighter design theory was entirely about "bigger, higher, and, above all, FASTER". modern aircraft are designed to be able to perform their design mission, as effectively as possible, and where that mission is based on real-world need. part of why we are switching to Hornets is because a chunk of the cost of Tomcats was giving them the ability to fly Mach2.8+, which is totally unnecessary. Tomcat have very poor maneuverability, are inefficient, and thus expensive to operate, and have a poor payload-to-weight ratio. the 18, and especially the 18E/F Super Hornets, are much more versatile airframes, designed based on real dogfighting capability, with modern design techniques, and to be useful as strikefighters, which the Navy spends much more time doing.

they're "cool" airplanes, more than really "good" airplanes. still, they are cool enough it's sad to see them go.

[Robbee]

obsolete, unfortunately. The 14's were designed and built in the 80's, and carrier life is extremely hard on airframes.

It was designed in the late 1960's.

Maiden flight 21 December 1970
Introduction September 1974


a chunk of the cost of Tomcats was giving them the ability to fly Mach2.8+, which is totally unnecessary.

I've never heard of a Tomcat flying that fast. Where did you get that stat?

[orionhawk]

oh, and Phoenix was extremely unreliable past about 50-60 miles, not to mention costing ~$1MILLION PER SHOT!

and I have never heard of a Tomcat launching missiles simultaneously, at all. The Phoenix was not a fire-and-forget weapon; the pilot had to keep his radar locked basically the whole way to the target. it was also unnecessarily powerful, its warhead was designed to hard-kill a large bomber, or a big russian interceptor with a near-miss.

I initially heard Super Hornet was supposed to be capable of firing Phoenix missiles, but that appears to have been scrapped. quite probably, they have the capability, but we never load them, because they never get used.

[orionhawk]

It was designed in the late 1960's.

Maiden flight 21 December 1970
Introduction September 1974

my bad. that was what I had thought, but I didn't want to sound like an idiot exaggerating the age of the aircraft.:oops:

[budgie]

part of why we are switching to Hornets is because a chunk of the cost of Tomcats was giving them the ability to fly Mach2.8+, which is totally unnecessary.

I thought the max was around 2.34?

But regardless, as beautiful a bird as it was it is past its time. For example, nobody doubts the Phantom - the first superfighter - was gorgeous but do we still need them?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

oh, and Phoenix was extremely unreliable past about 50-60 miles, not to mention costing ~$1MILLION PER SHOT!

and I have never heard of a Tomcat launching missiles simultaneously, at all. The Phoenix was not a fire-and-forget weapon; the pilot had to keep his radar locked basically the whole way to the target. it was also unnecessarily powerful, its warhead was designed to hard-kill a large bomber, or a big russian interceptor with a near-miss.


There's some good data (and some questionable data in the Iranian section) on the AIM-54 on Wiki. It was virtually never used. From the "American Combat Experience" section-



The Gulf of Sidra incident (1981), in which American F-14s shot down 2 Libyan Su-22s is sometimes thought to have involved AIM-54. However, the engagement was conducted at short ranges using the AIM-9 Sidewinder. The other US F-14 fighter to fighter engagement, the Gulf of Sidra incident (1989) used AIM-7 Sparrow and Sidewinder missiles, not the Phoenix.
In training, the Phoenix hit a target drone at a range of 212 km (in January 1979, in Iran).
Actual ranges at which the Phoenix has successfully hit targets in tests:
longest shot to kill: ~ 140 km [This was a one time shot during an exercise against a drone. The shot was considered a total blind fluke shot because, while the missile had the aerodynamic capability to reach that range, the lifetime of the battery that powered the missile certainly did not]
average engagement ranges: 20 to 70 km[citation needed]
the shortest shot to kill: 7.5 km[citation needed]
Other than the possible Iranian firings, the only confirmed combat use of the Phoenix was on January 5, 1999 by two F-14Ds engaging two Iraqi MiG-25s, and on September 9 the same year against an Iraqi MiG-23. The missiles missed on both occasions.[citation needed]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-54_Phoenix


Basically I think the AIM-54 was a "total war only" weapon, since if you're using it, the IFF is going to be very questionable at that kind of range. Nobody wants to shoot down a handful of airliners by accident - so current SOP normally involves a visual ID...at which range the AIM-54 is no longer the weapon of choice.

[Ordie]

We had one BB-Stacker rolling an AIM -54 in the messdecks, accidently pushed by a mess crank ran into the salad bar causing damage to the nose cone. Costing the taxpayers $50,000.

I hated them next to the Tomahawk.

Both awsome in flight, but a pain in the ass to handle them.

[knowitall]

"For every hour of flight, there's at least 20 man hours of maintenence."

at leat being the operative word, at one point it got as bad as 74!

as a comparison the Saab gripen is contracturally garanteed to required less than 9 man hours per hour of flight


the AIM-54 was also designed to be used against cruise missile carrying bombers, its value against fighters is debateable

[Dling]

they a chunk of the cost of Tomcats was giving them the ability to fly Mach2.8+, which is totally unnecessary.

Mach 2.34 not 2.8 and speed was important for them back then because they'd have to be able to get to the russian bombers before they could launch their anti ship missiles.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

Didn't an Iranian F-14 shoot down 3 Iraqi jets with one AIM-54?

[Dling]

Megaraptor;2610893']Didn't an Iranian F-14 shoot down 3 Iraqi jets with one AIM-54?

Iran says many things:)

[budgie]

Megaraptor;2610893']Didn't an Iranian F-14 shoot down 3 Iraqi jets with one AIM-54?


I've never heard this story but I think I know the answer...

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

Well I decided to google it.

link (http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_211.shtml)

There was one incident on July 21, 1982 where an Iranian F-14A shot down 2 Iraqi MiG-23MFs with a singe AIM-54A.

I can't find any non-Wiki sources for other multiple-aircraft, single missile kills.

More info on Iranian F-14's (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0077.shtml)

[duhblow7]

Megaraptor;2610893']Didn't an Iranian F-14 shoot down 3 Iraqi jets with one AIM-54?


Wrong axis of evil. North Korea shot down 7 F-14's and already shot down 3 F22/A's with the mighty thunderbolts from Kim Jong-Il puppy dog eyes. I get all my news from the Propaganda Post.

[Little J]

Have to say I always wanted to see what an F-14 with PW F119 engines would be like...



As good as the Super Hornet is it'll never be the 'cat.

[Ratamacue]

Have to say I always wanted to see what an F-14 with PW F119 engines would be like...

As good as the Super Hornet is it'll never be the 'cat.I only wish that the NATF program hadn't been canceled. Imagine an F-22 with swing-wings...

[number nine]

I only wish that the NATF program hadn't been canceled. Imagine an F-22 with swing-wings...

I'd rather not, it's good as it is. Jeez, combat aircraft are not designed to look cool!
:roll:

[nullterm]

I'd rather not, it's good as it is. Jeez, combat aircraft are not designed to look cool!
:roll:

No, but they often come out looking cool. Well, most of the time...

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/Fotos/boeingmi/X-32AFF.JPG

[JJHH]

What will they be doing with the phoenix missiles?

[Robbee]

What will they be doing with the phoenix missiles?

They were retired a few years back.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/navyweapons/a/pheonixretire.htm

[Vandervahn]

What will they be doing with the phoenix missiles?

They have been retired even earlier than the Tomcat. in ´04 I think.

[JJHH]

They have been retired even earlier than the Tomcat. in ´04 I think.

How do you retire ordnance? By disassembling it or using it in combat? Any phoenix's used in Iraq or Stan?

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

How do you retire ordnance? By disassembling it or using it in combat? Any phoenix's used in Iraq or Stan?

May have been used against chicken hawks

[JesperAFCA]

Can the Phoenix used as a CAS missile?

[Robbee]

'Pukin' Dogs' conduct successful Phoenix missile shot

by Lt. j.g. Matt Tallyn

The skies off the coast of Oman were filled with some of this nation’s last remaining AIM-54 Phoenix missiles three weeks ago as USS George Washington (CVN-73) and Carrier Air Wing Seven conducted a air-to-air missile exercise off the coast of Oman. The “World Famous Pukin’ Dogs” of VF-143 successfully launched and guided eight AIM-54 Phoenix air-to-air missiles in an exercise conducted with their sister squadron, the “Red Rippers” of VF-11.

“To see eight missiles track down range simultaneously was quite a sight,” said Lt. Tom Nagelin, who personally launched two of the missiles.
Introduced in the early 1970s and designed to be employed from long range, the AIM-54 Phoenix missile has been one of the most feared air-to-air weapons in modern history. The Phoenix missile, an integral part of the F-14 air-to-air suite, is scheduled to be removed from the U.S. inventory later this year. This exercise was designed to give F-14 air crew one last chance to fire the legendary missile.

“VF-143 – from the youngest ordnancemen to the most senior radar intercept officer – received some excellent training today. It is testimony to the high quality of the Tomcat-Phoenix combination as every missile and radar worked perfectly today,” said Cmdr. C.J. Murray, commanding officer of VF-143.

The Pukin’ Dogs are currently on deployment with Carrier Air Wing Seven and are scheduled to return in mid-July.

Lt. j.g. Matt Tallyn is the Public Affairs Officer for VF-143.

SOURCE (http://www.militarynews.com/jet/pages/stories4.html)

[JJHH]

SOURCE (http://www.militarynews.com/jet/pages/stories4.html)

Thx, very interesting!;)

[Thorgen]

Everything has an age and are measured by it to a degree. Your car is not at its prime when it has run 200k miles, similar to jets and their weaponry being used or sheltered for 30-40 years. Again, think about a car that was made 30 years ago and needs a spare part. You're not getting a new spare, that's for sure. The very same thing goes to F-14's main armament th Phoenix. You can't stock them for decades and expect them work when you really, really need them. The missile is obsolete and has been out of production for a long time. Every fighter aircraft, or better to say, every military weapon system itself is an individual task that you rely on. It's not just the aircraft/tank/whatever, it's the whole thing it's used.

F-14's swansong was it's Phoenix missile. It was meant to intersept Soviet bombers carrying nuclear bombs. Phoenix is way too expensive to be used and more or less inaccurate against fast moving fighters. Now add things up. The missiles wont be operational for decades, so you would need to reproduce new ones to fill the cap. You don't need the missiles because you don't have Soviet bombers against you. Basically this removes the need for the F-14 because cheaper and more modern jets can use the arsenal needed to fight the enemy.

Simplified this means that F/A-18 is much, much more capable in modern air-to-air combat using AMRAAM than F-14. Adding the F/A-18's capability to attack air-to-ground and much more, you should see why the F-14 was released from its duties. It was a capable fighter with its high power radar, unmatched even today for most of the fighter aircraft radars. Phoenix missiles haven't been matched by aniything. It's just that no-one needs a weapon system like that, and so it was relieved.

In short, F-14 is incapable for doing the job navy wants a fighter jet to do, but it still is unmatched for intercepting nuclear bombers.

[JJHH]

In short, F-14 is incapable for doing the job navy wants a fighter jet to do, but it still is unmatched for intercepting nuclear bombers.

So it's the right time for Iran to buy some old russian bears.. ;)