RAF F-14A Tomcat?

[chopper2004]

Since today is Tomcat birthday

How close were we to getting them....

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-raf-f-14-tomcat-fighter-jets-that-never-were/


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x537/raf_f_14_7c8ffd6959c7722f6b348270d2c21fb5e7f52d62.png
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x770/raf_f_14s_543d9d2d0ffeae5c5c1cc959b8a37e3c8716b0c9.jpg

Cheers

[tartare]

Very interesting jet.
Automatic wing sweep.
Centre fuselage barrel that was deliberately designed act like a lifting body.
All of which made it a great close in dogfighter, but with long range - perfect fleet defence asset.
But by all accounts - a maintenance nightmare...

[1771 DELETE]

I dont think we had any real aircraft carriers left when the F14 was available. I remember walking under one without having to bend down, far bigger than i had realized .

[Navaleye]

Was the Tornado F3 not better?

[tartare]

This is worth a watch.
Long video, but really intriguing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsUCixAeZ0A

[Ascend Charlie]

I was intrigued by the comment from a Mirage pilot, when asked how it performs against an F-14.

He replied that with the 14's auto wing sweep, he could tell at a glance what the 14's speed was, and could fight accordingly.

[SpazSinbad]

VFC-12 Adversary TA-4J Gun Sight ACM REAR Tomcat F-14 [gunsight is fixed & 'depressing' from WWII era]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER6eUCLqkGA

[B2N2]

Was the Tornado F3 not better?

Go wash your mouth.

[BEagle]

When 101 Sqn did the first Tiger Trail to bring some jets back from the USA, the Americans were astonished to learn that these were ex-boneyard F-4Js rather than F-14As.....

But 74 were very fond of their 'Js!!

[Asturias56]

I seem to remember someone who was involved with the evaluations said it was too big for anything we planned and the maintenance costs were unbelievable

[LOMCEVAK]

I was intrigued by the comment from a Mirage pilot, when asked how it performs against an F-14.

He replied that with the 14's auto wing sweep, he could tell at a glance what the 14's speed was, and could fight accordingly.
But you could sweep the wings further aft than the computed position so if an F-14 pilot knew that an adversary pilot was doing this he could always make it look as though he was faster than he was. And you could look cool on the break!

Great aeroplane, especially the big-engined ones (B and D models). No twin-stickers (like the Buccaneer) and some significant handling characteristics with asymmetric power due to the lateral spacing between the engines. A very low approach speed for such a large aircraft (around 125 KIAS from memory) with direct lift control also. One of the all-time great iconic fighters.

[BusterHot]

Was the Tornado F3 not better?
Er, no! End.

[LOMCEVAK]

A friend of mine who flew the F3 and later became a test pilot at Warton once said "The Tornado F3 is to fighter aircraft what the Austin Allegro was to Formula 1 motor racing". I don't think anyone around at the time disagreed with him ....

[Lima Juliet]

Was the Tornado F3 not better?

Actually, the F14A which we are talking about here had the troublesome TF30 engines (apart from the last few delivered). The thrust to weight ratio on these was about the same, if not marginally worse, than the F3. They were prone to compressor stalls, blade failures and the famous flat spin of Top Gun fame (some 1/3rd of accidents were attributed to that engine). It was only after they became F14A+ and then the F14B, with the GE F110 engines did the airframe become really dogfight capable able to hold its own with more agile aircraft. By the time it became the F14D Super Tomcat or “Bombcat” it was way superior to the F3, but I would say that the F3 was superior to the F14A on paper when it was selected in the last 1970s.

Further, the AWG 9 RADAR was really just a “blue water” RADAR with a very wide doppler notch compared to more modern affairs - the F3’s AI24 FOXHUNTER by the early/mid 90s had far superior overland performance and integration of JTIDS L16 on the RADAR and Plan displays. I flew with many F14 pilots and worked with a similar number of RIOs who explained this (sadly I just missed the final F14 exchange as the buggers were promoting me (no place for second!)).

There were features that both aircraft had that the other didn’t, but that is not for here.

As for a comparison of the F14A engine to the F14A+, F14B and F14D engine. The same improvement could have been achieved by replacing RB199 with EJ200 for the Tornado F3 (which was planned under Tornado 2000 but was shelved through fear of Eurofighter being cancelled).

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1487x1907/674f386c_61ac_4f50_9484_5968586e2cf3_590089b50d08872342b1807 9fbb14ee03726fdd2.jpeg

[Lima Juliet]

PS. I should add that Tornado F3 was the product of RAF Air Staff Requirement 395 (ASR 395) that dates back to the early 1970s to look for an interceptor to replace English Electric Lightning and Phantom FGR2. ASR 395 was for a Mach 2 interceptor capable of chasing down and shooting down long range bombers in the Iceland-Faroes Gap. The contract was awarded in 1976 for BAe to build 3x Air Defence Variant (ADV) Tornados. The F14A first flew in 1970 and was with the USN from 1974.

At the time for ASR 395 there were 4 options on the table:

1. F14A with a questionable set of engines and massive expense - which offered not much better performance than the Phantoms in service but was certainly a favourite at the time.
2. F15A with a really poor RADAR but seemed to have great performance - first flight 1972 - it broke eight time-to-climb world records between 16 January and 1 February 1975. But without the RADAR it was seen more as a long range Lightning than what ASR 395 was aiming for.
3. F16A was designed as a single-engine IR-missile equipped day fighter initially. First flight 1974. Deemed unsuitable for ASR 395.
4. Tornado ADV - the winner, which BAe made fit the entirety of ASR 395 and would keep the British aircraft industry in business.

I understand that F14A and Tornado ADV was a really close run thing too.

[Davef68]

At the time for ASR 395 there were 4 options on the table:

1. F14A with a questionable set of engines and massive expense - which offered not much better performance than the Phantoms in service but was certainly a favourite at the time.
2. F15A with a really poor RADAR but seemed to have great performance - first flight 1972 - it broke eight time-to-climb world records between 16 January and 1 February 1975. But without the RADAR it was seen more as a long range Lightning than what ASR 395 was aiming for.
3. F16A was designed as a single-engine IR-missile equipped day fighter initially. First flight 1974. Deemed unsuitable for ASR 395.
4. Tornado ADV - the winner, which BAe made fit the entirety of ASR 395 and would keep the British aircraft industry in business.

I understand that F14A and Tornado ADV was a really close run thing too.

From what I recall, the other reason the F-15 was eliminated was for being a single seater, the preference in 11 Group at the time for an aircraft with a back seater to operate the navigation and weapons systems over the Northern Seas.

I think the fly away price of the F-14 was about twice the price of the F3, which also had the British industrial benefit as well, so although technically they were close, financially it was only ever going to go one way. So the answer to the OP's question would be 'not very'

[sandiego89]

"I feel then need, the need for tea..."

"Lad, your ego is cashing cheques you body can't cash"

Tea gets spilled on controller: "Bums, I want bums!!"

-- Ill show myself out

[tdracer]

Actually, the F14A which we are talking about here had the troublesome TF30 engines (apart from the last few delivered). The thrust to weight ratio on these was about the same, if not marginally worse, than the F3. They were prone to compressor stalls, blade failures and the famous flat spin of Top Gun fame (some 1/3rd of accidents were attributed to that engine). It was only after they became F14A+ and then the F14B, with the GE F110 engines did the airframe become really dogfight capable able to hold its own with more agile aircraft. By the time it became the F14D Super Tomcat or “Bombcat” it was way superior to the F3, but I would say that the F3 was superior to the F14A on paper when it was selected in the last 1970s.


It's really hard to understate how much better the F110 engine was than the TF30. Granted, the F110 was a much newer, higher tech engine than the 1960's vintage TF30 (with a lot of the TF30 tech tracing it's roots back to the '50's) but the F110 totally transformed the F14.

[Buster15]

Actually, the F14A which we are talking about here had the troublesome TF30 engines (apart from the last few delivered). The thrust to weight ratio on these was about the same, if not marginally worse, than the F3. They were prone to compressor stalls, blade failures and the famous flat spin of Top Gun fame (some 1/3rd of accidents were attributed to that engine). It was only after they became F14A+ and then the F14B, with the GE F110 engines did the airframe become really dogfight capable able to hold its own with more agile aircraft. By the time it became the F14D Super Tomcat or “Bombcat” it was way superior to the F3, but I would say that the F3 was superior to the F14A on paper when it was selected in the last 1970s.

Further, the AWG 9 RADAR was really just a “blue water” RADAR with a very wide doppler notch compared to more modern affairs - the F3’s AI24 FOXHUNTER by the early/mid 90s had far superior overland performance and integration of JTIDS L16 on the RADAR and Plan displays. I flew with many F14 pilots and worked with a similar number of RIOs who explained this (sadly I just missed the final F14 exchange as the buggers were promoting me (no place for second!)).

There were features that both aircraft had that the other didn’t, but that is not for here.

As for a comparison of the F14A engine to the F14A+, F14B and F14D engine. The same improvement could have been achieved by replacing RB199 with EJ200 for the Tornado F3 (which was planned under Tornado 2000 but was shelved through fear of Eurofighter being cancelled).

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1487x1907/674f386c_61ac_4f50_9484_5968586e2cf3_590089b50d08872342b1807 9fbb14ee03726fdd2.jpeg

Aside from retro fitting the F3 with the EJ200 engine, there was also the option of upgrading the RB199 performance by 20% from the XG20/Demo20 programme +15% dry and 20% reheat.
This was an MoD funded project and not only did it demonstrate the thrust increase, it was also aimed at life cycle and reliability improvements.
Would the F3 have really been able to utilise the significant EJ200 thrust increase from a structural perspective ?

[typerated]

It came a bit late but the two seat F-15 with E model strengthening and conformal tanks and vastly improved radar would have fitted the bill nicely.

Was the Tornado F3 intended to fully replace the Phantom?
The last 4 Sqns at Wattisham and Wildenrath soldiered on until options for change – didn’t seem like they were on the card to get replaced by the F3?
The F3 was at its best over the North sea – harder to see it with RAFG – was there a plan to field a smaller fighter for Germany (or just keep the Phantoms going?)

[Davef68]

Was the Tornado F3 intended to fully replace the Phantom?
The last 4 Sqns at Wattisham and Wildenrath soldiered on until options for change – didn’t seem like they were on the card to get replaced by the F3?
The F3 was at its best over the North sea – harder to see it with RAFG – was there a plan to field a smaller fighter for Germany (or just keep the Phantoms going?)

Yes, the pre-Options for Change plan was for them to soldier on until what became the Typhoon entered service in the late 90s

[ATSA1]

I was intrigued by the comment that the F14 was a maintenance nighmare...the Iranians seem to manage OK with no assistance from the manufacturer....

Unless someone knows different!

[Asturias56]

They manage to keep a few going by superhuman effort but its not many active aircraft - most sources reckon they have about 20 available

[DogTailRed2]

If you watch the film Final Countdown and the scene where the F14's are dogfighting with Zekes one of the F14's looses control and nearly crashes into the sea.
I forget the reason but it was quite a close thing if I remember.

[Lone Kestrel]

Having flown both the Tomcat (A an A+ models) and the F3, I can state that the F3 was not a match for the F-14 even with the older engines.

As to the Final Countdown post, I think you need to research the scene before you post such a comment.

[Saintsman]

No doubt that if we had ordered the F14, it wouldn't have been an off the shelf model.

It would have had to have lots of UK input and you know how long that takes to do and how much it costs...

[Lima Juliet]

Buster15

Would the F3 have really been able to utilise the significant EJ200 thrust increase from a structural perspective ?

Yes, the fatigue index (FI) problems were induced by running RB199 at medium and high level. You had to constantly load/unload the aircraft to keep some smash on as the SEP was poor. With EJ200 then you should have been able to pull and keep pulling at 7g (depending on fuel weight) and that would only put one count on the fatigue meter - with RB199 then you would probably have more like 20 counts and an over banked turn at that!

Lone Kestrel
Agreed that the F14A had a better instantaneous turn rate due to the lifting-body fuselage of the Tomcat’s widely spaced engines. But when it comes to thrust to weight then the F14A, F4 and F3 are frighteningly close. Also, the F3 was quicker than Tomcat at low level which was what ASR 395 had as one of its goals - chasing down BLACKJACK and BACKFIRE at low level. I used to love chasing down B1 and F111 who thought they could run away! Something that none of the competition for ASR 395 could get close to compared to the F3. But that was part of the problem, BAe very carefully matched F3 to ASR 395 which meant it was rubbish against the likes of FULCRUM and FLANKER when they appeared in the ‘80s and also in dogfights against F14A+/B/D, F15, F16 and F18 on exercises like RED FLAG. However, it was the clever stuff that they did with the F3s avionics that kept it still potent - RADAR upgrades, a fully correlated JTIDS L16 picture, a very fine RHWR, good self protection (chaff, flare and TRD (the first on a fast jet to be operationally deployed) and then the ASRAAM/AMRAAM C. It used to annoy the crap out of our Colonial Cousins when our piece of crap dogfighter would return 4:1 to 7:1 kill ratios on COPE THUNDER, RED FLAG, MAPLE FLAG, etc…

One thing I didn’t mention about Tomcat was the F14D. The AWG 9 was replaced by APG71 - a revised version of F15’s APG70. Now that really was the ultimate Tomcat and with the new engines it could wipe the floor with almost all adversaries in BVR and dogfighting. It also had colossal range, which is not seen in many of today’s aircraft - it could go well past Mach 2 as well, which again many of today’s fighters are unable to do. So the F14D really was the ultimate and the F18F that replaced it sadly doesn’t come near for me for a number of reasons.

[Finningley Boy]

It came a bit late but the two seat F-15 with E model strengthening and conformal tanks and vastly improved radar would have fitted the bill nicely.

Was the Tornado F3 intended to fully replace the Phantom?
The last 4 Sqns at Wattisham and Wildenrath soldiered on until options for change – didn’t seem like they were on the card to get replaced by the F3?
The F3 was at its best over the North sea – harder to see it with RAFG – was there a plan to field a smaller fighter for Germany (or just keep the Phantoms going?)
I believe the out of service date for both the Buccaneer and Phantom circa 1989-90 was planned for 2003-4. Options for Change was an exercise in accommodating the expectations of those who thought we maintained a war footing level military force during the Cold War, but more obligingly, to meet the requirements of the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty. I'm sure the choice to loose the older airframes met the desired move toward standardization and it was a simple deduction to make and be seen to be making expected cuts. This was better than trying to work out just how many Tornados of either variant to axe. Further, to keep two older aircraft in service, whatever their superior performance, while axing some very new airframes (at the time) would not be easy to explain the next time the press, or whoever, had a pop at the Tonka!:}

FB:)

PS Merry Christmas everyone, and those who provided anecdotes and piccies etc for my two projects, both due out on 1 Feb '22, so I shall need to confirm I've got all your details etc for your free singed copy!:ok:

Oh, one more thing, as has been suggested, yes the residual Phantoms, at least, were originally to hang on until the arrival of the Typhoon for its agility and more suitable deployment in the Central Region.

[MightyGem]

As to the Final Countdown post, I think you need to research the scene before you post such a comment.
From the man in question:
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/how-low-did-he-go-f-14-pilots-who-helped-filming-the-final-countdown-on-how-low-the-tomcat-pulled-out-during-the-zero-dogfight-scene/

[typerated]

PS. I should add that Tornado F3 was the product of RAF Air Staff Requirement 395 (ASR 395) that dates back to the early 1970s to look for an interceptor to replace English Electric Lightning and Phantom FGR2. ASR 395 was for a Mach 2 interceptor capable of chasing down and shooting down long range bombers in the Iceland-Faroes Gap. The contract was awarded in 1976 for BAe to build 3x Air Defence Variant (ADV) Tornados. The F14A first flew in 1970 and was with the USN from 1974.

At the time for ASR 395 there were 4 options on the table:

1. F14A with a questionable set of engines and massive expense - which offered not much better performance than the Phantoms in service but was certainly a favourite at the time.
2. F15A with a really poor RADAR but seemed to have great performance - first flight 1972 - it broke eight time-to-climb world records between 16 January and 1 February 1975. But without the RADAR it was seen more as a long range Lightning than what ASR 395 was aiming for.
3. F16A was designed as a single-engine IR-missile equipped day fighter initially. First flight 1974. Deemed unsuitable for ASR 395.
4. Tornado ADV - the winner, which BAe made fit the entirety of ASR 395 and would keep the British aircraft industry in business.

I understand that F14A and Tornado ADV was a really close run thing too.


Would Foxhunter not fit on a F-15?

Too late but the F-16XL would have a made the basis of a superb interceptor – apart from the toy Radar on the front of a F-16.
Otherwise lots of fuel and performance – only trading sustained turn rate.
Think it was a mistake the USAF put it against the F-15E . It should have replaced the production of the F-16C.

[Lima Juliet]

Would Foxhunter not fit on a F-15?

By the time the early FOXHUNTER had come on line, the USAF had ironed out the issues with APG-63. Even then it took the FOXHUNTER to get to Stage 1 to become an effective system by the early 90s - but vastly improved with Stage 2 and Stage 3 in the late 90s and at the turn of the 21st Century. By then the APG-63(V)1 had come into service on the F15C/D. Both RADAR systems had their advantages and disadvantages, and even shared some technology, but when ASR 395 was being considered the APG-63 was unreliable and had demonstrated poor performance. It took an upgrade in 1979 to iron out the initial issues with the programmable signal processor (PSP) - by then the competition had closed. One Brit exchange Pilot reported that it was not any better than the F4’s RADAR’s performance that he had just come from, but better than the Lightning that he had flown prior to that. It certainly wasn’t showing the performance, in those early days, that it finally proved to have later on the C and D models after the introduction of PSP and other modifications/upgrades.

[ElectroVlasic]

"I feel then need, the need for tea..."

"Lad, your ego is cashing cheques you body can't cash"

Tea gets spilled on controller: "Bums, I want bums!!"

-- Ill show myself out
And if you screw up just this much, you'll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog shyte out of Her Majesty's Hong Kong Crown Colony!

[Commando Cody]

Would Foxhunter not fit on a F-15?

Too late but the F-16XL would have a made the basis of a superb interceptor – apart from the toy Radar on the front of a F-16.
Otherwise lots of fuel and performance – only trading sustained turn rate.
Think it was a mistake the USAF put it against the F-15E . It should have replaced the production of the F-16C.

After the cancellation of the B-1A, USAF needed an eventual replacement for the F-111. Thus was born the Enhanced Tactical Fighter (ETF) program. A derivative of the F-15D (which eventually became the F-15E) was pitted against the F-16XL which would have been designated the F-16E had it gone into production. The Eagle-based aircraft was selected because it would cost far less to develop, was lower risk and could be put into production and be ready years sooner. With the ETF mission filled, the F-16XL did not offer enough advantages to justify the costs of moving forward with it.

[Shaft109]

Was the fact the F16XL was only single engine come into it?

[MightyGem]

This is worth a watch.
Long video, but really intriguing.
Fascinating video. An outstanding aircraft.

[Brewster Buffalo]

One party that was keen on F-14s was the Royal Navy who wanted a small purchase of them to satisfy maritime air defence.
A non-American substitute for the Tornado ADV that was put forward was the then under development French Avion de Combat Futur (ACF). The French proposed that the aircraft would meet the defence needs of both Air Forces with the French purchasing about 50 Tornado IDS to replace their Mirage IVs. However the ACF was cancelled shortly after the idea was put forward.