@@shawnomack45 Still can. Hell, I told myself if ever win the lottery, I would fly to Iran purchase one, bring it back to the US, refit it with better engines and updated avionics and find a giddy navy pilot to fly it in airshows all over the US, as long as my ass gets to ride in the back and learn to fly it. I seriously would love an F14 on the airshow circuit that goes around America.
Used to go to the airshow at Andrews AFB every year. Always, ALWAYS made sure I was on the flight line for the Tomcat demo. When he hit the burners, you could feel it in your chest!
Sometimes you could feel it on your skin. When I went to shows in FL as a kid, when the F14 would bank away from the crowd on burner, you could absolutely feel a heat wave LOL. Surreal.
My uncle was a trainer for us navy on the f14-f18 for many years while stationed at Cecil field. I'm one of the few as a teenager who got to try out a simulator and go up in the live f18. An awesome experience to say the least
The F-18 was a must have addition to the Naval airwing, but it was a collosal mistake retiring the F-14 completely. They should have followed the upgrade path for it. The F-14 Super Tomcat 21. There were even plans for a low observable F-22 like version of the Super Tomcat. www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29653/this-is-what-grummans-proposed-f-14-super-tomcat-21-would-have-actually-looked-like
The 18 was a design with many compromises. The 14 was an overkill platform to make anyone think twice about hostile intentions. It was the perfect deterrent and definitely had the teeth and claws to back it up.
There was a lot of risk moving forward with ST-21, since the Navy already had 3 decades of maintenance records on the F-14. Maintenance Man Hours Per Flight Hour were in the 40-72 region, depending on year. Baby Hornet was 11-20 for most of its career, now climbing the end of the bathtub graph late in life before retirement. Even with all the proposed improvements to the airframe and addition of DFLCS, the ST-21 was still going to have a complicated mechanical flight control system with augmentation, 2 crew cockpits with lots of displays, a huge mechanically-steered Radar, and the requirement to re-do weapons separation and design work for the wing glove and tunnel stations. During AIM-120 testing at Point Mugu and Pax River on the F-14D, they found aerodynamic problems with the glove stations during separation, which is why AIM-120 never got fielded on the F-14B/D in the fleet. There's a very solid argument to be made that they could still expect at least 40 MMH/FH to remain a relative constant with ST-21, with a risk of even worse numbers like the F-14A/B/D had. With Legacy Hornet, they knew they had a fairly predictable 11-20hr MMH/FH fleet expectation, which allowed 2-3x the sortie generation compared with the F-14. The same promises of reduced MMH/FH were made for the Super Hornets, but with a known mixed fleet of mostly single seat F/A-18E models, with a balance of 2-seat Fs. This would reduce manning requirements in the budget as well. The biggest thing they sacrificed was the opportunity to get an 800-1100nm radius multirole fighter, though the Super Hornet definitely brought more legs than the Baby Hornet. I think the Navy was tired of maintaining the Tomcat, and didn't want to continue with a bird that would most likely duplicate its legacy model hangar queen reputation. Super Hornets still are tough to maintain. F-35C is the first multimission fighter in USN inventory to maintain a consistent 6-9 MMH/FH, (which is phenomenal), while also bringing back an 800nm+ radius fighter back to the deck since the retirement of the A-6E and A-7E.
@@LRRPFco52 yeah it's certainly something that needed to happen. Sweep wings are awesome but if it can't be cost effective in today's rapidly advancing world then it doesn't have a place. I say that as a huge fan of the F-14. I'm pretty excited to see what becomes of NGAD and Japan reportedly resurrecting the YF23 concept.. I say excited, purely in the sense that I love aviation and appreciate aero design a lot... And Not because that I wanna see it ushered into service because of the looming threat of war.. even if that's objectively the reason for it.
I was blessed to have seen one at the Chicago Air & Water Show as a teen. It was the most beautiful, impressive, maneuverable, and loudest aircraft of the show! God I wish she were still in service today. Nothing could match it. Nothing. 🇺🇸💯
The Tomcat is the greatest combat aircraft ever built. The sound is so distinctive and glorious. Its power and maneuverability is unmatched. She deserves to still be flying for the U.S. Navy today. Thank you for sharing this with us. 🇺🇸👍💯
Progress as it is. The F-14 is probably the best at weapons loads for a fighter. The B-1 as a bomber holds that distinction, not the B-52. The B-1 will more than likely will become a multi role fighter/bomber. Can you imagine a B-1 with 72,000 pounds of AMRAMM 120? That's like 75 missiles.
It truly was and would still be the baddest bird in the sky when you consider the whole pkg. Mach 2.3, variable geometry configuration, high & low speed capabilities, 30 TONS of thrust, powerful AWG-9 radar could track 24 bogies simultaneously, from 50 to 80,000 ft. and fire on 6 bandits, also simultaneously, with a choice of AIM-7 Sparrows, AIM-9 Sidewinders, or the yet-to-be-matched 100 mi. fire-n-forget range of the AIM-54C Phoenix. As impressive as the Tomcat's performance was, though, it was too labor-intensive. It required 4 maintenance hours for every single hour of flight time, far less efficient than the near hour-per-hour ease of the Hornet. Too bad. So sad.
@@stephenobrien1505 F-14 MMHPFH was 40-72, not 4. 4 hours would have been a dream for Tomcats. There have been some years where F-35A has demonstrated 4.1 MMHPFH average. F-14 couldn't even get down to 35hrs. F-16 was the lowest at 10-14 until F-35A came along. Even the STOVL F-35B is lower than the F-16, which is a testament to how well JSF took maintainability into account.
@@LRRPFco52 Im sorry. I'm not sure I understand your reply. When you say "40-72" does that mean 40 MMH for every 72 FH? That seems like a pretty respectable record, so I think I need a little more detail. Do you mind?...
@@LRRPFco52 Do you mean 40-72 MMH for every single FH?!! That's a pitiful record!! So the F-16 needs 10-16 MMH for every FH? Have I got that right? And the F-35 JSF is 4 to 1? Does that include the Navy version? One would think the reinforced landing gear and the rigors of cyclic ops would jack that figure up some.
Because it was a badass warbird that most things in the sky could not touch. It's power, speed, utility and radar array made it an apex predator in the sky.
If only I had been born in an earlier age. I remember loving the tomcat after seeing it on topgun. Then I became obsessed after buying a game called Jet fighter 4 and the tom cat was on it. I even wrote about it for school. 😔 then I learned it was retired in 2006 and was extremely upset about it. F18s are better at turning sure. But as far as speed, range, and beauty the tomcat stands alone! Playing with it on DCS world really makes me obsessed all over again and Im 28 now lol.
I feel you on all that. The f16 was always my fav as a kid. When I was in 3rd grade a pilot did a “big brother” thing and picked me. He’d take me to see his jet the f16 and I’d get to sit in it. Then after that stage in life I seen the f14. And as a adult that jet is amazing. The swept wings. The presents of it was just all around bad ass.
Can confirm, it is absolutely beautiful on DCS, I even use the same paint job as the tomcat in this video ^ the flight model is damn near 1:1, as is pretty much everything else- I’ve got about 200 hours altogether in the tomcat (on dcs of course lol) and air shows are some of my favorite things of all time!
I was probably there. I remember watching Dale "Snort" Snodgrass (RIP) coming in from the right, doing his trademark loooow high speed pass in the Tomcat during that era. The Harrier jump jet Demo. Fat Albert JATO takeoff. AH-64 demo rising up out of the trees show center. The night show with the jumpers with glow sticks on their bodies descending on the field. A FF Eagle doing an early morning sneak pass through the cool September air.
@@Apemopar , umm..no. just give her updated avionics, helmet linked weapon systems and some stealth ability and she'll once again be the most feared aircraft in the world.
My former air base with VF-41 along side VF-84 and training squadron VF-101... didn't have airshows at that time.... bummer. Would have been out at see anyway...oh well....I miss that bird. Good to see it finally received an upgrade on the old TF-30 engine...🤳😎
Would be nice if they would bring a tomcat back but they're not going to do that that is one badass fighter jets ever it's still in service with Iran I believe they have 79 of them they've been flying them since the 70s
Most of the Tomcats the Iranians have are just sitting on the deck. No parts and they were never given the AWG-9 Weapon System either. Completely different bird compared to the F-14D in this. video.
We lost one of the most lethal war birds of the country. A truck just out ran a f18. Imo whetevere the f14 went the enemy had to worry about to Tomcats abilitys. The globe knew the TOMCATS power! 🐯 ANY WHERE, ANYTIME! That was TRUE!
Beautiful plane these were my favourites as a kid f14 Tomcat , f4 Phantom , f104 Starfighter , English electric Lightning, Vulcan and the Harrier all had unique sounds .
The way the flames look shooting out the engines on Shockwave reminds me of the mach cones in the exhaust of the engines on the now long since retired space shuttles.
The F-14D top speed is just over mach 2. or 1544 mph depending on the inlet ramps. The Tomcat has reached 2.4 but the Navy doesn't want their aircraft going faster than mach 1.6 for longer periods of time. But it's nice to know if you have to leave the bad guys in a hurry. The F-18 super hornet top speed is mach 1.8 or 1190 mph
Many Tomcat pilots did Mach 2.3+ at 70,000 feet (Watch 'Okie' interview). That was with payload on it. F-18 clean could hit Mach 1.6, but with the external mounting points for air-to-ground, it has very high drag. With bombs and missiles, it can barely do Mach 1.3.
Charlie Brown, a Vietnam-era combat pilot who flew Bearcats and two years in Phantom IIs, was part of the F-14 design team as well as an experimental test pilot with Grumman. “The [Navy] specs called for Mach 2.34. We actually tested the airplane for Mach 2.5. I flew it 2.5 a couple times. When you fly a Phantom, it’s built for 2.0, but when you fly that fast you know it. It’s like sitting on a beach ball; you don’t know which way it’ll go, it’s so sensitive. In a F-14 it’s like sitting in a Cadillac. It’s solid. You don’t realize you’re going that fast." This from a 2004 article in Global Security: (retired Air Force Col. Everest Riccioni, who helped develop the Air Force strategy for the Eagle and the Raptor) "The Air Force boasted that the F-15 tested for Mach 2.5 - 21/2 times the speed of sound." To make the speed, Riccioni said, the Air Force stripped the plane down of just about anything it would need for real combat. "It was a stunt," he said.
And ? This is irrelevant for 95 to 100% of combat missions. Except pure flight testing for aerodynamics design and engine test, those mach 2+ top speed means absolutely nothing.
Such a truly wonderful aircraft. Such a truly fucked over aircraft that had to fight for its life before it even flew. A huge example how little most politicians actually care about or safety and lethality. It didn't deserve its final fate. A testament to how truly badass it was is the fact the A model shouldn't have even existed. It was basically the EMD version the B is about what the A should have really been. The updates and upgrades denied to it. Imagine if it didn't have a ton of politicians gunning for it, and it was built as intended as well as modded and upgraded. I was an HT on the Kitty Hawk and we had VF-154 aboard flying ancient A models but man did they make it look good. I'm the only HT, an engineer mind you who spends most of our working hours below the waterline. The only business I would even have to lay hands on an F-14 in a work capacity would be if one was on fire. One of 154's Cats had it's cannon go out. The large electrical cable that connected it, sent power and signals had broken. It was an original part and the only way to get another one was to salvage one. They had a gunex in a few days and would be DQ'd if they didn't have all birds up. The squadron skipper was desperate yet creative. He knew our quality of work and had seen my work numerous times. He asked me if I really wanted to test myself and do something never done before and being it was 2002 most likely never done again. Super long story short I made a cage out of several braze rods bent it around the cable attached a rose bud tip and melted the cage around the cable. Damn thing actually worked and I didn't catch the plane on fire. Also 154 won the exercise. Just for fun imagine that it was decided the Grumman 303F would be selected over Mcdonnells design and became the F-15..... One final edit, if you don't have a good solid reason to not hate the F-18 get a copy of the book The Pentagon Paradox.
I was an F-14 pilot in Oceana in the 80s, this video brings back memories. But there's no reason to bring the airplane back, it is old technology. We don't need a variable sweep wing anymore, too complicated with the new computerized living wing of the cat 5 fighters.
When I was little, I mainly saw props when looking up at the sky but rarely any jets. The most common jets that I saw was actually the F-14 and F/A-18 rather any civilian jet! How about that now!😃
Iranian air force first contry after Americans can overhaul and upgraded F14. and we capability new radar ( bina )and long range air to air missiles( Fakor 90 )for Iranian tom cats
Well technically the Air Farce has the coolest pilots. Uncle Sam's Navy has the coolest aviators. Aviators are a few rungs above pilots, at the very top of the stick-n-rudder evolutionary ladder.
to tell the truth I don"t know where or if the F-18 has speed brakes,but I did see the landing gear lowered. He must have did a touch and go. Will say he was going pretty slow after takng off again.
Sorry, I was referring to the Tomcat's speed brakes. They're supposed to be absolutely flush when not in use, including taxiing. That would have been a down gripe back in the day for either a mechanical or hydraulic failure.
0:37 I see what you mean.... but I think its not a mechanical or hydraulic failure, just don't think it was fully retracted when last shut down, I'm not sure, but it looks like its fully retracted when they pass after landing and wave the flag 22:56
Where the commentator says the engines are going through 300 gals a minute in full reheat most of the tomcats display is in reheat (afterburner) how much fuel does it take off with if that's true it must be heavy
Travis Pastrana and his cronies should be on either side of the runway holding an arresting cable and on their bikes. Of course a jet tail hook grabs the cable, which then propels them up and over a couple of ramps and perform back flips. That's how you end a show!
There's no jet that has more stage presence than the F14. Capabilities wise the F14 is still unmatched in the navy. F22 would own it, but that owns everything!
F/A-18A++ exceeds most of the Tomcat's capabilities, but still lacks the range. Super Hornet Block II is a different animal with comparable range and a higher A2A weapon payload, with a vastly-superior Radar and sensor suite. F-35C exceeds the F-14 across the board in all of the important metrics: Combat radius/CAP Payload Sensors Maintainability Safety Bring-back Trap rate on the boat
@@LRRPFco52 when the comment was made F35s hadnt fully hit the fleet, yes F35 OWNS everything. Time of retirement and switch to super hornets the tomcat was superior and the sensor sweet comparable. Tomcat still has better out right speed, weapons payload capacity, and range. Navy needs a fleet defense aircraft, super hornet isn’t it. If it was still active the Tomcat would’ve received most of the upgrades the Rhino received. The people who okd the super hornet project against the Tomcat ASSumed it was legacy based and thought they’d save costs. Dumb. At the time of retirement the real F14Ds still smelled new. Huge waste.
@@TheUsmc0802 F-35C has been flying since 2010. Fleet IOC was 2019 after years of carrier quals, air wing integration, Fighter Weapons School course curriculum built for it, and squadrons populated. F-14Ds had been built from March of 1990 to July 1992, so upon retirement in 2006, they had plenty of cockpit stank accumulated in them. They certainly were retired early though, but A/B models had a lot of hours on airframes and were ready for retirement. Many A models had already been mothballed by that time. I miss them like anyone else, but can also see the big picture from mx perspective. Tomcat gave us 32 years of operational service, which was pretty typical compared with the F-4, A-6, A-7, and A-4. Change is hard and painful.
What a sex aircraft that f14 they should of destroyed the aircraft that got into enemies hands instead of destroying the ones they had so they could not get parts. The f14 Tomcat still could be great and have a role today if they would of kept producing them.