** Anytime, Baby! - NEW TRAILER & TRACK PREMIERE **

The soundtrack reminds of a '90s arcade video game... I LOVE IT!!!

I absolutely love F-14 and now that it's finally coming is like dream come true. But does anyone else find those afterburner textures and effects kind of cheap? I mean, they look simple and kinda boring flames just shooting from the back pulsating, compared to videos and pictures that there are.

Light conditions have a lot of impact on what you see of the exhaust flames. I think they look pretty good relative to the little I've seen in real life.

Great work! Very grateful to you guys for bringing this project to life!

No Nut November failed.

Great job! Cant wait for the system and FM videos!

F14 was designed as a 4x4 dogfighter. It is both. The myth that its just an interceptor needs to be killed.

Oh I don't know...Pete Bonanni doesn't think much of the Turkey as a BFMer.

Oh I don't know...Pete Bonanni doesn't think much of the Turkey as a BFMer.

I suspect the turkeys roll rate would be a weak point in BFM.. Wouldn't want to be caught in scissors with an F-16.

F14 was designed as a 4x4 dogfighter. It is both. The myth that its just an interceptor needs to be killed.

Indeed!

"Despite the emphasis on the fleet air defense mission, one should remember that the F-14A was designed primarily as an air superiority weapon. Its basic flight design gross weight corresponds to the escort mission with Sparrows and accommodates the Phoenix missiles and ground attack weapons as alternate loads. The pilots now flying the airplane are convinced that it is capable of engaging successfully with any known threat in either close-in or long-range engagements."

Statement of MR. G. A. Spangenberg before the senate armed services subcommittee on tactical air power. June 1973

Link

Air Superiority!

Holy crap! That was fantastic! *throws money at monitor*

I suspect the turkeys roll rate would be a weak point in BFM.. Wouldn't want to be caught in scissors with an F-16.

Yes you would!

Indeed!

 

"Despite the emphasis on the fleet air defense mission, one should remember that the F-14A was designed primarily as an air superiority weapon. Its basic flight design gross weight corresponds to the escort mission with Sparrows and accommodates the Phoenix missiles and ground attack weapons as alternate loads. The pilots now flying the airplane are convinced that it is capable of engaging successfully with any known threat in either close-in or long-range engagements."

 

Statement of MR. G. A. Spangenberg before the senate armed services subcommittee on tactical air power. June 1973

 

Link

 

Air Superiority!

Yeah, it could deal with "any threat" in the early 70s. That means MiG-21s effectively. *-Correction, MiG-23 was out, albeit the early clunky versions, future versions were significantly more manueverable*. Compared to a MiG-29 or Su-27, the F-14 is outclassed in WVR dogfighting both in TWR and core maneuverability. The Tomcats primary advantage against such aircraft is superior radar and engagement range. The swing wings give it better low speed handling than a pure delta would have, but across the board it is inferior in both stability and overall maneuverability.

And before somebody cites the poorly piloted examples of aircraft in the Middle East getting wasted by Tomcats, yeah, those half-trained and questionably maintained units are probably not a valid comparison.

So, whether it's a "pure interceptor" is entirely circumstantial. When it was brand new and outclassed the 60s era designs then common, yeah, it was likely a beast. Against future 80s/90s+ designs? No. That's just common sense, each gen of aircraft is generally superior across the board to the ones that come before it (assuming they're of equal "high end fighter status" and you're not looking at trainers or budget projects)

So your stipulation is that aircraft roles should be judged against the most modern threats and not those of the timeframe in which they were designed?

Also, go ahead and look up the ITR/STR numbers, since I suspect you are trying to imply the F14 lumbers around as just a missile truck.

 

And before somebody cites the poorly piloted examples of aircraft in the Middle East getting wasted by Tomcats, yeah, those half-trained and questionably maintained units are probably not a valid comparison.

 

The classic catch-all disqualification for any counter argument.

Don't bother engaging further with this guy folks, it'll get you nowhere.

Just an FYI, the max instantaneous turn rate for the F-14 at 5000' is ~22 degrees per second at a gross weight of 56,000 lbs....that's really high!

 

The airplane is a remarkably good turner, despite the mis-information is out there. :)

 

-Nick

Check out this turn. I was at this airshow :)

Lt. Rice of the VF-124 Gunfighters performed the hottest minimum radius turn ever recorded at an airshow. The Abbotsford International Airshow was host to many foreign teams and dignitaries in 1986 as part of Expo '86 in Vancouver, BC. If there was one show to pull out all the stops to show the world how great the F-14 Tomcat was, this was it. Lt. Rice performed all the standard airshow demo maneuvers, but the minimum radius turn set the record for an elapsed time of 20 seconds. Many factors contribute to the high G maneuver such as entry airspeed, density altitude, pilot proficiency, but mostly the ability of the pilot to withstand the sustained blood draining G's for that 20 seconds. Lt. Rice and the VF-124 team showed the world how awesome the Tomcat really was

@dino

No, I'm saying it's not a match to more modern aircraft in a dogfight, indicating it should avoid that situation unless necessary.

@Racefuel

No, I'm just not a fanboy who thinks that half-trained pilots are in any way indicative of the aircraft they were flying. "I took out these guys that fly like 1-2 times a month... man their *downgraded export* aircraft were really crap!"

Clarification : I'm not saying it can't dogfight. I'm saying half these people have visions of being Tom Cruise and they will not have the benefit of plot armor when they engage aircraft that outclass them... because 90% of people don't notice quotes like the above are from decades ago.

@dino

Clarification : I'm not saying it can't dogfight. I'm saying half these people have visions of being Tom Cruise and they will not have the benefit of plot armor when they engage aircraft that outclass them... because 90% of people don't notice quotes like the above are from decades ago.

I am pretty sure 90% of people are well aware that someone wouldn't be addressing the senate armed services subcommittee on tactical air power regarding the F-14A last week as well...

The classic catch-all disqualification for any counter argument.

 

Don't bother engaging further with this guy folks, it'll get you nowhere.

Yeah, pretty sure this guy is just here in the F-14 section to troll people excited about the F-14 release. Don't worry a new aircraft will be announced soon and he can go troll them :thumbup:

They used f-16s and f-18s as adversary aircraft from the late 80s on. I would imagine that if they were that advantageous, the f-14 pilots wouldnt have graduated topgun. I dont think they said “thanks for coming to top gun but your 70s tech tomcat is no match for mig 29s and su27s so we will only train against older aircraft.”

They used f-16s and f-18s as adversary aircraft from the late 80s on. I would imagine that if they were that advantageous, the f-14 pilots wouldnt have graduated topgun. I dont think they said “thanks for coming to top gun but your 70s tech tomcat is no match for mig 29s and su27s so we will only train against older aircraft.”

That is some flawed logic there and false. Top Gun instructors were and are some of the best pilots the Navy has to offer; yet attendees still get "kills" on their instructors.

Fact of the matter is that the instructors would use the tactics of foreign AF, primarily Russian tactics. It would be up to the attendee to use, better, American BFM tactics. Every aircraft in existence has some strength and some weakness against other aircraft. Pilots are taught to exploit their enemies weaknesses while maximizing their own.

So, no, you are wrong on all accounts. When the Tomcat comes out, you can jump in a Fulcrum or a Flanker and I will fly the Tomcat and I will show you how wrong you are.

Every aircraft in existence has some strength and some weakness against other aircraft. Pilots are taught to exploit their enemies weaknesses while maximizing their own.

This!

It's not like a Rhino will be better in all situations in a BVR and WVR fight - or as it was stated "across the board" - than any aircraft developed in the 70's that's just wrong. Even more so, when we talk about dogfighting. The F-16A is e.g. regarded as a better pure dogfighter than the later C. There is a huge discussion going on for years, if the F-35 will be able to perform as good as the F-22 in WVR fights.

The Tomcat will be able to dogfight everything we have in DCS if the pilot knows what he is doing and is playing the bird to it's strength. What should be rembered is, that a WVR-fight and dogfighting in particular hugely depends on the pilot abilities. If you get a Hornet to bleed all it's energy in the initial turn while the Turkey goes vertical, the Hornet will have a hard time regaining that energy and the Turkey Driver will have an distinct advantage. The other way around you would want to drag an F- 15 in a slow speed turning fight. IIRC the Eagle has an inferior turn rate at slow Speeds and your F-14 will have superior nose authority. If the Eagle Driver keeps his energy and speed up, you've got a Problem.

In conclusion there is no this plane is better than this plane in WVR. What is to be considered on the other Hand are off-boresight launching capabilites of some planes e.g. the Mig-29/Su-27/33 and the Hornet

Oh I don't know...Pete Bonanni doesn't think much of the Turkey as a BFMer.

Its a shame that he is not well-informed. :) But I can see how that would happen, he was bomber pilot.

Under 450 KIAS the Tomcat can comfortably out pitch the F-16 and it only gets worse as airspeed declines. The F-16C and F-14B in fact have the same STR at 10K-15K'.

Yes you would!

And our former F-14A pilot does not seem to be worried about F-16s. :thumbup:

-Nick

That is some flawed logic there and false. Top Gun instructors were and are some of the best pilots the Navy has to offer; yet attendees still get "kills" on their instructors.

 

Fact of the matter is that the instructors would use the tactics of foreign AF, primarily Russian tactics. It would be up to the attendee to use, better, American BFM tactics. Every aircraft in existence has some strength and some weakness against other aircraft. Pilots are taught to exploit their enemies weaknesses while maximizing their own.

 

So, no, you are wrong on all accounts. When the Tomcat comes out, you can jump in a Fulcrum or a Flanker and I will fly the Tomcat and I will show you how wrong you are.

i think you miss understood what i was saying. i was trying to make the point that claiming the tomcat is only a good dogfighter againts mig21s and 27s isnt correct

This!

 

It's not like a Rhino will be better in all situations in a BVR and WVR fight - or as it was stated "across the board" - than any aircraft developed in the 70's that's just wrong. Even more so, when we talk about dogfighting. The F-16A is e.g. regarded as a better pure dogfighter than the later C. There is a huge discussion going on for years, if the F-35 will be able to perform as good as the F-22 in WVR fights.

 

 

The Tomcat will be able to dogfight everything we have in DCS if the pilot knows what he is doing and is playing the bird to it's strength. What should be rembered is, that a WVR-fight and dogfighting in particular hugely depends on the pilot abilities. If you get a Hornet to bleed all it's energy in the initial turn while the Turkey goes vertical, the Hornet will have a hard time regaining that energy and the Turkey Driver will have an distinct advantage. The other way around you would want to drag an F- 15 in a slow speed turning fight. IIRC the Eagle has an inferior turn rate at slow Speeds and your F-14 will have superior nose authority. If the Eagle Driver keeps his energy and speed up, you've got a Problem.

 

 

In conclusion there is no this plane is better than this plane in WVR. What is to be considered on the other Hand are off-boresight launching capabilites of some planes e.g. the Mig-29/Su-27/33 and the Hornet

My 2 cents, bearing in mind I'm no pilot or anything, just a combat flight sim / jet fighter enthusiast from long ago.

Maybe I have miss read your post, but I don't quite agree with the bold.

It seems like an universally true observation.

But it isn't, because in reality some planes are in fact better than other in WVR.

Which means; some aircraft effectively can outmaneuver / get on the opponent's 6 o-clock position, much easier than the opponent can.

For example, regarding one of my very favorite jets - the F-14A.

(And leaving aside high off-boresight systems.)

In a pure "machine vs machine" comparison, in BFM, dogfighting, all other circumstances being "similar", including pilot skill, I don't believe it is a match to jets like:

- F-16, A, C

- F/A-18, A, C

- MiG-29, A, G, S

- etc...

 

In a pure "machine vs machine" comparison, in BFM, dogfighting, all other circumstances being "similar", including pilot skill, I don't believe it is a match to jets like:

- F-16, A, C

- F/A-18, A, C

- MiG-29, A, G, S

- etc...

This is not correct: the F-16 will have a very hard time if it enters a low speed turn fight the Tomcat and thats what i meant:

The Tomcat has certain flight regimes where it will be superior to the Jets you mentioned. As i said there if you are able to fly the jet to it’s strength and exploit weaknesses of the adversary you will have no issues beating any of those aircrafts mentioned by you constantly. If the Viper Driver stays in the vertical, keeps his energy high - his strength - and doesn’t join the turning fun - his weakness at low speed v. a F-14 - well…different story. But e.g. the tomcat - same goes for the hornet - has better nose authority than the F-16 and the F-15 iirc

This is not correct: the F-16 will have a very hard time if it enters a low speed turn fight the Tomcat and thats what i meant:

 

The Tomcat has certain flight regimes where it will be superior to the Jets you mentioned. As i said there if you are able to fly the jet to it’s strength and exploit weaknesses of the adversary you will have no issues beating any of those aircrafts mentioned by you constantly. If the Viper Driver stays in the vertical, keeps his energy high - his strength - and doesn’t join the turning fun - his weakness at low speed v. a F-14 - well…different story. But e.g. the tomcat - same goes for the hornet - has better nose authority than the F-16 and the F-15 iirc

Pasquale I do love the Tomcat, so I'm not here to "bash" it in any way.

Iconic movies like TOPGUN, and very few video games from the 90's featuring the venerable F-14, really was what make me search and appreciate more, the jet fighter aviation.

(The F-16 not so much, although I also admire it.)

Don't take me wrong; but trying to match F-14A with the F-16C (early versions at least) in dogfighting, seems to me wishful thinking.

It is outclassed by the other jets I mentioned, in almost every aspects below:

- thrust to weight ratio;

- wing loading;

- instantaneous / sustained turn performance;

- turn radius;

- aerodynamic refinement;

Pratically every pilot says that the aircraft was indeed underpowered with the TF-30 engines.

"Turning fun"... against the F-16 ? Really ?

You mention, the low speed fight against the F-16.

From what I've read, close to 200 kts, the F-16 starts to lose a big part of its turning / nose pointing authority... but how good will the F-14A turn at 200 kts ?

From what I've read, close to 200 kts, the F-16 starts to lose a big part of its turning / nose pointing authority... but how good will the F-14A turn at 200 kts ?

With those wings + Leading edge devices (slats)... pretty damned well.