F14B Upgrade Programm

An F-14 strike aircraft would undoubtedly have been retired long ago for the same reasons the actual Tomcat was retired.

You mean because the defense secretary owned stock in McDonald Douglas? Yes, a challenging barrier to overcome.

Given that the F/A-18C had the exact same service life as the F-14 it is clear that USN aircraft need ongoing production. USAF can keep aircraft much longer with their long runways and kinder conditions.

-Nick

TFR and A2G radar aren't really used anymore IRL during deep strike/interdiction missions. Turns out pointing high powered radars at the ground in hostile territory is a great way to let everyone know your coming.

 

The F-14 would be just as good today if not better in the strike role then the F-15E had it got the same sort of upgrades other aircraft get. Cost alone killed the F-14 not Capability. It didn't get the SLEPs it needed like other jets because of costs, it never got enough updates because of costs and they never built new ones because of costs.

 

Not spending enough money leads to more cost and then in turn, more not spending enough money. Without getting too political that was the death of the tomcat. But it was a fantastic platform and highly effective as a strike fighter. Very fast, long range, and decent payload capacity made it very capable

Perfectly said Wizard! :)

-Nick

It wasn’t that the F14 was retired, it had to go at some point, but it was the lack of a replacement at the time, including fleet organic tankers. The threat had changed dramatically as well.

It isn’t much use in discussing it really. The Hornet was more versatile for the mission at the time, right out of the box. Costs matter.

Yes, a challenging barrier to overcome.

Yep, saving money and having a decisive edge over your adversaries are regrettably not compatible. ;)

TFR and A2G radar aren't really used anymore IRL during deep strike/interdiction missions.

They were a fundamental tool of the mission at the time, which is what we're talking about. All the strike fighters had them and it's a huge part of what distinguished them from other fighters.

They were a fundamental tool of the mission at the time, which is what we're talking about. All the strike fighters had them and it's a huge part of what distinguished them from other fighters.

Your right and that's true for 1995, But my point is that had the F-14 not be cancelled, Slapping a TGP and some precision guided weapons on it might have actually been all you would have needed to make it a very effective strike platform today. Apart from a good modern EW suite, which the F-14D got.

And that the F-15E is only the best because it got all the funding it needed and the F-14 just didn't, because politics. The Tomcats only got super expensive because they stopped taking care of them.

It'd be like buying a very fast expensive car and never doing the routine maintenance work on it. (work that you knew it needed from the start) Then having it break down all the time (as expected) and then complaining its too expensive to fix because now it costs way more then the routine work. Work that should have gone into your initial cost of ownership calculations from the day you brought it home, and then junking it. :)

The problem has nothing to do with the cars performance or reliability and everything to do with the owner.

TFR and A2G radar aren't really used anymore IRL during deep strike/interdiction missions. Turns out pointing high powered radars at the ground in hostile territory is a great way to let everyone know your coming.

In case of the TFR the reason for this is mostly, that in todays operations there is usally total air superiority, so the strikers don't have to go low. If total air superiority is not available, they would have to go back to Cold War tactics and fly low (or rely solely on stand off weapons).

In case of the TFR the reason for this is mostly, that in todays operations there is usally total air superiority, so the strikers don't have to go low. If total air superiority is not available, they would have to go back to Cold War tactics and fly low (or rely solely on stand off weapons).

That and passive terrian following systems now exist that are safe for emcon situations.

I think there is some apples and oranges comparing an F-15E to a proposed QuickStrike F-14 in the same way there is comparing an F-15C to an F-14A/B/D. Regardless of whether the F-15E is the same, better or worse the F-14 does one thing it can't - land on a carrier deck.

In that case we are really asking whether having a strike capability analogous to the land based F-15E on an aircraft carrier, (F-14 or not) is necessary or required - which so far is beyond the scope of this argument.

For my own position I think the QuickStrike F-14 was a huge wasted opportunity, but as others have noted already - it was an opportunity that was wasted long before the retirement of the aircraft.

Having allowed the jet to develop a reputation for being unreliable and/or expensive to maintain going back to congress and saying we would rather more of these instead of the Super Hornet would require a lot of backtracking to unwind that reputation.

And incase it wasn't clear from the above - to answer my own question - with the right aircraft I would argue the aircraft carrier still offers immediate response worldwide capabilities that aircraft from the airforce simply can't. I would say this was proven in almost every conflict since 1991 where negotiations for basing and the buildup of forces from the AF eventually exceeded the Navy commitment, but critically took longer, the Navy and their Carrier Air Wings are still unbeatable in terms of getting hundreds of aircraft into an area of operations in very very short order.

Having allowed the jet to develop a reputation for being unreliable and/or expensive to maintain going back to congress and saying we would rather more of these instead of the Super Hornet would require a lot of backtracking to unwind that reputation.

It was the Defense Secretary's call to cut down F-14D numbers, IIRC (which still makes it a political decision, but I wouldn't bet it was primarily based on its reputation) and the Congress actually fought him on that initially by refusing to end the production.

If they purchased at least 200 F-14D's as was planned, perhaps the proposed Tomcat variants would have stood more chance (with a different SecDef, I guess).

So I got my question answered according to the CVW-11 interview with HB they don't have enough data on the Upgraded systems to do a later model F-14B. Which is sad but understandable.

So I got my question answered according to the CVW-11 interview with HB they don't have enough data on the Upgraded systems to do a later model F-14B. Which is sad but understandable.

That *is* disappointing. I would really love to see a study-level F-14D (or B equivalent) someday, but not at the expense of accuracy. I can't say I'm surprised. Nearly every combat feature on Dino Cattaneo's F-14D for FSX/P3D was inop with a placeholder page on the MFDs. If he couldn't find any data to implement those features in the 3-4 years that's been out (considering he's managed to create an F-35 module), then I'm not holding my breath for anyone else to do so.

They kind of left it open ended, like maybe one day they can gather enough materials. But for the sake of getting it released sooner they went with what they had.

I'm sure they want too, just a question of research.

So I got my question answered according to the CVW-11 interview with HB they don't have enough data on the Upgraded systems to do a later model F-14B. Which is sad but understandable.

More specifically, they said they don't have a reference document showing PTID pages and modes.

They kind of left it open ended, like maybe one day they can gather enough materials. But for the sake of getting it released sooner they went with what they had.

 

I'm sure they want too, just a question of research.

We can make it happen. The Sparrow hawk HUD is also installed on the T-6 correct? The HUD modes are in NATOPS, just need to get some PTID images and more info on it. We have a working DDD, that alone amazes me with what they are capable of.

We can make it happen. The Sparrow hawk HUD is also installed on the T-6 correct? The HUD modes are in NATOPS, just need to get some PTID images and more info on it. We have a working DDD, that alone amazes me with what they are capable of.

The T-6 Texan II does have a Sparrowhawk HUD, yes. That would probably be the easiest add-on towards making an F-14B(U) or F-14D.

I recall there being a set of F-14 maintenance manuals including weapon systems and armament NAVAIR's (dated around 1997 - 1999) that were up for sale on eBay a few years back. eBay has since tightened its policies however.

Curious, Did they ever Upgraded the SAS to a digital one on the B cat?

Curious, Did they ever Upgraded the SAS to a digital one on the B cat?

The F-14B indeed received DFCS in later years. I can’t post it per the new site rules, but the NATOPS manual references it.

+1

Yea if it turns out not enough information is possible for the F14D, then the F14B(U) would be the next best thing.

Cobra, do u have any plans to research improved F-14B (U) features after F-14A and F-14B Full release and implement them to the module even like payed expansion pack? :)

F-14D is still closed topic with advanced radar and another avionics, but here is maybe u can find something. :)

P.S: I believe u see here same questions every day, but I wanna to try, sorry. :)

They've already made it pretty clear that the B(U) PTID can't be modelled partially because they don't have access to all the menus. I doubt we are going to see a more advanced version of the B than what we have now, and that's fine.

They've already made it pretty clear that the B(U) PTID can't be modelled partially because they don't have access to all the menus. I doubt we are going to see a more advanced version of the B than what we have now, and that's fine.

Yea, I agreed and it's not critical, I just surprised that this exists, and read only about F-14D status xD

Tbh ptid is not even exclusive to the f14b(u) variation

An f14b manual from 2001 shows a f14b with many modenrizations via to upgrade list thatwould be on the f14b(u), minus sparrowhawk hud, and jdam capability, but otherwise include ptid , dfcs, and egi. Although as other have pointed out since t6 Texan has sparrowhawk that manual could potentially be used to fill in the blanks

I would like to know what information would still would be missing because the f14b manual has ptid operation documented. it really is not used for anything more beyond awg9 display, lantirn display, or perhaps as repeater for the egis cdu screen.

In any case I would still love to see a f14b DlC