F-14D with glass cockpit?

On the subject of the IRST I saw earlier in the chat, I'd say just keep it to the basics of what those things do, which is to say: They help locate and track targets which can then be slaved to them to help lock on. The exact nature of how they work can remain classified, but ultimately, the purpose of them is the same, and they can just keep it there (with an option to upgrade it later on should the information become available).

As for the rest... that's the tough part really. And frankly, given all the work they have to do to make the F-14A, which is an engine change and some cockpit changes, the F-14D is going to rely a lot on 'under the hood' changes that we won't see, such as the handling characteristics and radar. There's also the MFDs to program correctly, which won't be an easy task.

Basically, if they go to make the D, they will need a minimum of 18 months worth of work to get it right, and there isn't a whole lot that can be reused from the B. So strap in kids, it's gonna be a long road ahead.

That the F-14D documentation is still classified is a bit silly tbh when you consider the capabilities of the systems in the aircraft that are now being deployed (F-35, F-22, EF2000 etc.), all of which are equipped with much higher tech sensors.

In other words whilst the F-14D's IRST & radar were certainly impressive for their time (early 2000's), they couldn't hold a candle to todays sensors in both categories.

Hence that the documentation isn't available is most likely all down to silly beaucracy, with people having no clue on how the tech works (politicians) being the ones with the authority to decide when it will be available.

DFCS is not fly-by-wire system.

 

The DFCS will replace the analog stability augmentation system and autopilot in the F-14A/B/D, while utilizing the hydromechanical flight copntrol systems already in place.

 

Source from HOME OF MATS.

Right. Specifically, it was the fruits of the NASA Dryden results to stop the spins and loss of control notorious in the F-14A (even after the P414 upgrade to the TF-30s).

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/quick-look-nasa-f-14-tomcat-testbeds/

That the F-14D documentation is still classified is a bit silly tbh when you consider the capabilities of the systems in the aircraft that are now being deployed (F-35, F-22, EF2000 etc.), all of which are equipped with much higher tech sensors.

 

In other words whilst the F-14D's IRST & radar were certainly impressive for their time (early 2000's), they couldn't hold a candle to todays sensors in both categories.

 

Hence that the documentation isn't available is most likely all down to silly beaucracy, with people having no clue on how the tech works (politicians) being the ones with the authority to decide when it will be available.

This is the same thing that killed the ASF14E/F14E "Super Tomcat 21" Program. Not anything wrong with the aircraft in particular, just the politicians being completely ignorant of how the military works, and it's still in effect now.

Not to go on a long political rant, but many politicians in the US don't understand why things were the way they were. Case in point, why having a long-range, mult-irole, but slightly more complex aircraft on the carrier was a good thing. The further a carrier is from the action, the harder it is to target for retaliation. Sure, the Super Hornet can do a lot of things, but compared to the other planes that it ultimately replaced, like the Tomcat, A-6 Intruder, and even somehow the S-3 Viking, it just doesn't have the range to do everything the carrier needs it to do, while keeping the carrier safe.

But, they see it as "Hey, we can save billions by making the F-18 Super Hornet a one plane fits all aircraft, so let's do that!", I can understand making certain things common across air frames, that makes sense in the long run. But a single air frame to fit every role? They didn't bother to read the history books to see how well that worked the last time it was tried.

We aren't getting the D, ever. The radar alone is highly classified, let alone the digital subsystems. HB hasn't even delivered a proper A more than a year in or fixed up the B to represent an actual B, so eh.

 

Already done, but they went even better own missile as AIM-54 is very old and unreliable compared to new ones.

Right. Specifically, it was the fruits of the NASA Dryden results to stop the spins and loss of control notorious in the F-14A (even after the P414 upgrade to the TF-30s).

 

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/quick-look-nasa-f-14-tomcat-testbeds/

What's a good article.

Already done, but they went even better own missile as AIM-54 is very old and unreliable compared to new ones.

What?

One of the things that attracts me to the F-14 is the fact that it DOESN"T have a glass cockpit.

Agreed :thumbup:

You'll always have the F-14A and the current B while those of us high speed, low drag types can hope to equally enjoy the F-14B(U) and F-14D.

That the F-14D documentation is still classified is a bit silly tbh when you consider the capabilities of the systems in the aircraft that are now being deployed (F-35, F-22, EF2000 etc.), all of which are equipped with much higher tech sensors.

Since F-15E project is underway,considering the commonality between APG-70/71,it ought to share some similarity between this two as if public info was right.

Maybe we could have a F14-AM. The Iranian ones. Sure, not much hard data on those, but what Ive found:

- The radar has received new digital / CPU, which would make it comparable to the APG-71 of the F14D and very similar to the one in the F15. I have no problems believing this claim, its not like processors that are many orders of magnitude more capable than what was available in 70s is difficult to acquire even for Iran.

- MFDs. I havent seen any pics though. Could be duct taped ipads or anything else. This would be guess work unless someone knows more than me. But even if you leave out fantasy MFDs, im going to assume they also updated the HUD and didnt reinvent the wheel. And a fantasy HUD is something I would welcome very much.

- Fakour and maghsoud missiles. Nothing credible is known about them afaik, except for some claimed ranges (200 and 300+Km). Probably best to leave them out.

- APUs. Hey, why not.

Already done, but they went even better own missile as AIM-54 is very old and unreliable compared to new ones.

The Fakour-90's capabilities are still pretty unknown and I'm skeptical of any claims coming out of Tehran. Looking at it, it appears pretty draggy to me with those robust fins.

The Fakour-90's capabilities are still pretty unknown and I'm skeptical of any claims coming out of Tehran. Looking at it, it appears pretty draggy to me with those robust fins.

That program actually pretty much failed as they werent able to hook it up properly to the WCS and have proper guidence

Since F-15E project is underway,considering the commonality between APG-70/71,it ought to share some similarity between this two as if public info was right.

That's what I'm thinking. Sounds like security angle is as silly as the idea Iran would be able to use any of it on 50 year old A models.

Might have to make an educated guess on a few items but how many MFD pages are still placeholders on other planes? Know from Hornet what most of those pages have to be by deduction and what should be the options for JDAM, etc

Then duplicate the functions from VDI and HSD...

Any chance at all in getting a F-14D with glass cockpit. I would gladly pay an up-charge for the development. With the coming addition of the EuroFighter and with already having the Hornet, Viper, and Thunder. With having the later version of the TomCat/BombCat would allow for the F-14 to be utilized in both cold war scenarios as well as modern without feeling left behind technologically.

Not sure what you're talking about with the all glass canopy. See attached link:

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/439373-f-14-abd-tomcat-true-topgun/page/2/

The F-14D had the same structural framework around the canopy as all the other models. The only difference in the 14D cockpit was the addition of MFDs and the updated HUD. And I'm sure some others I don't know about.

I agree with being OK with only having the F-14B. The purpose of these planes is they are all time period based.

The F-14A/B still has all the analog controls left over from the 60s but the better performance maneuverability from the newer fighters. It was built as a better class of fighter/interceptor to replace the aging F-4 Phantom.

The Air Force already had its F-15C Eagle and the F-16 Viper.

What I like about the F-14 is when you're in the cockpit it looks like an F-14 should from the era.

All analog controls. Large metal frame around the front of the cockpit. Although when I first started flying it I have to admit that was one of the most annoying parts about it. It's hard to go from cockpits like the F-86, the F-15 and the F-16 to having all that metal blocking your view.

But you start to fall into what the F-14 was.

What I can do without is the F-14A with the under powered TF=30 engines.

 

What I can do without is the F-14A with the under powered TF=30 engines.

Ditto.

I suspect a lot of guys who've gotten used to the B model and are doing good at carrier landings are going to have whole litters of brick kittens when they start ramp-striking that A-mod. ;)

On the flip side, while the -A engines are under-powered at SL, when fast (and I think up high too, might be wrong on that), they'll actually take the -A to a higher top speed than the -B.

It's just a different thrust profile, ignoring the other issues.

The engine gods giveth and the engine god taketh.

I would pay for the D with a HUD similar to Hornet and with more XXI century avionics.

F-14D with glass cockpit?

I would pay for the D with a HUD similar to Hornet and with more XXI century avionics.

I would pay also for a B with sparrowhawk hud and jdams.

I have also read about F-14A that were upgraded before the Kosovo conflict in 1999 to have better flight controls.

The book is “black aces over Kossovo” one of the first chapters were is described a DACT between a so upgraded F-14A and a German Mig-29.

I would pay also for a B with sparrowhawk hud and jdams.

 

The book is “black aces over Kossovo” one of the first chapters were is described a DACT between a so upgraded F-14A and a German Mig-29.

Actually the book is "Black Aces High".

So you enjoy the DCS F-14B's qualitative traits of feeling like an old piece of equipment despite its objective inferiority in some aspects to other airframes modeled in DCS, but don't want the most-produced version, most legendary of the F-14 for the same reason? Interesting.

Actually the F-14D saw the least amount of service compared to the older A&B models that were the epitome of the Top Gun era. And I don't mean the Tom Cruise movie I mean the school itself.

Let me ask you this. How would it feel it they stuck MFDs and Modern Day HUDs in the F-86.

We already have A slew of planes in here with all the fancy HUDs and Electronic MFDs. F-16, F-15C, F-18, AV-8, JF-17.

It's kind of nice to dive into the beginning of the modern jet age when they where still using the analog instruments. The F-5 was actually developed after the F-14A. The F-5E II came into service in 1972, 2 years after the F-14A first hit the skies and it had analog controls. It wasn't until the F-20 variant of the F-5 that they put the MFDs in the same plane.

While I have always loved the F-16 and F-15 I like being able to go back to simple where I can fly and have all the information I need right there.

I am having a blast dogfighting in the F-5E where all I have to do is glance down at my analog controls without having to worry about hitting buttons on multiple MFDs.

I would rather have a few models that have more attention paid to them instead of all the different models with to many issues to fix.

The F-14B in my opinion was very well done.

Ditto.

 

 

 

I suspect a lot of guys who've gotten used to the B model and are doing good at carrier landings are going to have whole litters of brick kittens when they start ramp-striking that A-mod. ;)

The closer we get to the "go live" date for the F-14A, the more eager I become to try it out. I've read and heard so much about the notorious temperament of the TF30 that I can hardly wait to experience it for myself.

I'll always prefer the 'B', I think. But, who knows? Maybe the 'A' model will endear itself to me somehow.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I felt that way for a long time. "I already have the best engine/airframe combination, so why would I ever want to downgrade my performance envelope?" But, you know...

 

The closer we get to the "go live" date for the F-14A, the more eager I become to try it out. I've read and heard so much about the notorious temperament of the TF30 that I can hardly wait to experience it for myself.

 

I'll always prefer the 'B', I think. But, who knows? Maybe the 'A' model will endear itself to me somehow.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Some people just can't understand the allure of trying what used to be.

Anybody can have the fastest, sleekest, most modern that has computer to correct for your mistakes but the real allure is mastering the older fly by the seat of your pants rigs such as the A-4E, The F-86s, the older MIGs and yes the older versions of the F-14.

Some of the older MIGs weren't even hydraulically controlled. I remember watching a documentary where a pilot was testing out a captured MIG 17 I believe it was. He said he was pulling so hard on the stick trying to get it to turn tight that the control column started bending and he had to ease off of it...lol.

I like when the F-14 starts to depart controlled flight. Makes you feel you're in a real plane instead of just some run of the mill video arcade game.

First felt it flying in here with the P-51 trainer. Try to turn to hard and flips back the other way.

Just like the F-14.

Some people just can't understand the allure of trying what used to be.

 

Anybody can have the fastest, sleekest, most modern that has computer to correct for your mistakes but the real allure is mastering the older fly by the seat of your pants rigs such as the A-4E, The F-86s, the older MIGs and yes the older versions of the F-14.

 

Some of the older MIGs weren't even hydraulically controlled. I remember watching a documentary where a pilot was testing out a captured MIG 17 I believe it was. He said he was pulling so hard on the stick trying to get it to turn tight that the control column started bending and he had to ease off of it...lol.

 

I like when the F-14 starts to depart controlled flight. Makes you feel you're in a real plane instead of just some run of the mill video arcade game.

 

First felt it flying in here with the P-51 trainer. Try to turn to hard and flips back the other way.

 

Just like the F-14.

Each to their own, of course, but I much prefer machines with little to no computer augmentation.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk