A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

F-14 on the History Channel's "Modern Marvels"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old November 5th 03, 02:17 AM
Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 11/4/03 5:37 PM, in article
, "gizmo-goddard"
wrote:

"José Herculano" wrote in message
...
You have a very good point. Yes, the F35 is only a single seater
although LM does have a 2 seater "mockup".


Looking at what an F/A-22 (single seater) and a B-2 (twin-seater) can do,

I
find it harder and harder to justify a thing like an F/A-18F....


Well for one thing, the US Navy can actuallly afford the F/A-18F. While it
doesn't really add any more capability than the F-14D has, it is far easier
to maintain :-)

__!_!__
Gizmo



Gizmo,

Far be it from me to be a Kool Aid drinker (despite my current VFA
association), but I disagree with you based on what I see the F/A-18F doing
these days with HMCS, ATFLIR, AESA, and AIM-9X.

There's much more growth potential based on architecture.

And that maintainability counts for a lot.

--Woody

Ads
  #22  
Old November 5th 03, 03:12 AM
Mike Kanze
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

José,

Looking at what an F/A-22 (single seater) and a B-2 (twin-seater) can do, I

find it harder and harder to justify a thing like an F/A-18F....

I might agree with you if either were carrier-capable. g

--
Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"When you enter the voting booth, vote for the guy you think will go to jail
last!"

- Anonymous


"José Herculano" wrote in message
...
You have a very good point. Yes, the F35 is only a single seater
although LM does have a 2 seater "mockup".


Looking at what an F/A-22 (single seater) and a B-2 (twin-seater) can do,

I
find it harder and harder to justify a thing like an F/A-18F....
_____________
José Herculano




  #23  
Old November 5th 03, 04:19 AM
Thomas Schoene
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Pechs1 wrote:

-110 engines did make a HUGE difference...but rmember the RIO was
looking at perhaps the last tactical seat available in the F-14 for
NFOs, so I am sure a lot of them really talked up the A/C..Good thing
the F-18F came along or these guys would be SOL...and may be 'soon'
anyway, Isn't the USN JSF single seat??


Yes, but the JSF will replace F/A-18Cs, also single-seaters, not the Es and
Fs.

The NFOs may have worries because there will only be one two-seat Super
Hornet squadron per air wing. But hasn't that already ahppened with the
F-14 anyway?

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)




  #24  
Old November 5th 03, 04:26 AM
gizmo-goddard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message
...
On 11/4/03 5:37 PM, in article
,

"gizmo-goddard"
wrote:

"José Herculano" wrote in message
...
You have a very good point. Yes, the F35 is only a single seater
although LM does have a 2 seater "mockup".

Looking at what an F/A-22 (single seater) and a B-2 (twin-seater) can

do,
I
find it harder and harder to justify a thing like an F/A-18F....


Well for one thing, the US Navy can actuallly afford the F/A-18F. While

it
doesn't really add any more capability than the F-14D has, it is far

easier
to maintain :-)

__!_!__
Gizmo



Gizmo,

Far be it from me to be a Kool Aid drinker (despite my current VFA
association), but I disagree with you based on what I see the F/A-18F

doing
these days with HMCS, ATFLIR, AESA, and AIM-9X.


Oh I don't doubt it one bit. I was speaking of general flight performance,
stuff like top-endspeed, range, that stuff. Certainly late nineties
technology is going to be much better than early to mid 70s and 80s
technology. I can imagine what the Tomcat could have done if it were
retrofitted with that technology, but realistically, that'll never happen.
At least the Navy isn't having to spend 200 million a copy for the darn
things. :-)

__!_!__
Gizmo

There's much more growth potential based on architecture.

And that maintainability counts for a lot.

--Woody



  #25  
Old November 5th 03, 05:19 AM
Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 11/4/03 9:26 PM, in article
, "gizmo-goddard"
wrote:

"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message
...
On 11/4/03 5:37 PM, in article
,

"gizmo-goddard"
wrote:

"José Herculano" wrote in message
...
You have a very good point. Yes, the F35 is only a single seater
although LM does have a 2 seater "mockup".

Looking at what an F/A-22 (single seater) and a B-2 (twin-seater) can

do,
I
find it harder and harder to justify a thing like an F/A-18F....

Well for one thing, the US Navy can actuallly afford the F/A-18F. While

it
doesn't really add any more capability than the F-14D has, it is far

easier
to maintain :-)

__!_!__
Gizmo



Gizmo,

Far be it from me to be a Kool Aid drinker (despite my current VFA
association), but I disagree with you based on what I see the F/A-18F

doing
these days with HMCS, ATFLIR, AESA, and AIM-9X.


Oh I don't doubt it one bit. I was speaking of general flight performance,
stuff like top-endspeed, range, that stuff. Certainly late nineties
technology is going to be much better than early to mid 70s and 80s
technology. I can imagine what the Tomcat could have done if it were
retrofitted with that technology, but realistically, that'll never happen.
At least the Navy isn't having to spend 200 million a copy for the darn
things. :-)

__!_!__
Gizmo


And here's where I prove to you that I'm not a Kool Aid drinker when I agree
that the F-14D has much better performance numbers than the E/F--except in
turning fight performance.

--Woody

  #26  
Old November 5th 03, 05:24 AM
Jake Donovan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Lockmart F35 is a single seater. The motioned mock up is just that. A mock
up. There are no plans to build a 2 seater unless it is a limited training
version but that isn't in the works.

PAX isn't getting their 35's at STRIKE for 3 more years. 7 of them. 4 VSTOL
and 3 Carrier birds.

The Superbug F's NFO's are renamed back to WSO's. The only RIOs left are in
the F-14 community.

On a note of the Tomcat - We took a VERY clean A+ (now a B model) to mach
on mil thrust only in the re-engine flight test program. Pretty impressive
given it was in the 1980s.

For all you Hornet fans, and I have plenty of Hornet time, maintenance is a
big plus but you have to temper that with the fact that ALL of the F-14's
tooling was ordered destroyed by the DoD years ago. Thus, serious lack of
spare parts and a nightmare upkeep. Makes you wonder what a program like
the Superbug would have looked like if it had been the F14. Range, Load
out......

And if memory serves me right, (this should get a few rises) VF31 took home
the trophy for the Best ATTACK squadron in the Navy a couple of years ago.

The F22 has also been mention in this thread. The F22 is getting ready to
hit the reserves and Air Guard as soon as the AF's F35's go on line. The AF
is finding it hard to justify its existence with the 35 program in place.
Guys at the 325th Fighter Wing at Tyndall who have both F22s and F15s report
the F15's are a 3 to 1 favorite in a 1V1, 2V2 over the F22. Might be
experience, might not be.

The B-2 is a bomber and wouldn't stand a chance in any arena with any
fighter, F16, F14, F15, F18.....

Pete is right about that second pair of eyes. You hear a lot of talk about
it but in real life( mine) the 2nd pair of eyes were much better spent on
the scope and systems as it lessened my load.

Jake

"Pechs1" wrote in message
...
jdata- I have read a statement by an F14 RIO that in the 90's that the

F14
was known as the "world's fastest or quickest aircraft" this may have
changed since some of the aircraft had their engines changed. Mind
you, he was saying this when he was in the Bravo version. BRBR

-110 engines did make a HUGE difference...but rmember the RIO was looking

at
perhaps the last tactical seat available in the F-14 for NFOs, so I am

sure a
lot of them really talked up the A/C..Good thing the F-18F came along or

these
guys would be SOL...and may be 'soon' anyway, Isn't the USN JSF single

seat??


P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye

Phlyer


  #27  
Old November 5th 03, 09:19 AM
José Herculano
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Looking at what an F/A-22 (single seater) and a B-2 (twin-seater) can do,
I
find it harder and harder to justify a thing like an F/A-18F....

I might agree with you if either were carrier-capable. g


Guess I was not literate enough on my point... what I meant is that I do not
believe on the advantages of the F/A-18F vs the F/A-18E. If such advanced
weapons systems as the two Air Force birds allow for a revolucionary fighter
to be flown by one, and a huge bomber just by two, there is no call for a
twin-seat Super-Bug.

And remember that the current squadrons deploying at sea with the F/A-18F
have rear cockpits that are barely different from the front ones... the
advanced rear cockpit is yet to fly operationaly. I don't believe the F can
turn a real advantage over the E.
_____________
José Herculano


  #28  
Old November 5th 03, 11:50 AM
Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 11/5/03 2:19 AM, in article ,
"José Herculano" wrote:

Looking at what an F/A-22 (single seater) and a B-2 (twin-seater) can do,

I
find it harder and harder to justify a thing like an F/A-18F....

I might agree with you if either were carrier-capable. g


Guess I was not literate enough on my point... what I meant is that I do not
believe on the advantages of the F/A-18F vs the F/A-18E. If such advanced
weapons systems as the two Air Force birds allow for a revolucionary fighter
to be flown by one, and a huge bomber just by two, there is no call for a
twin-seat Super-Bug.


Jose',

I'd agree with you all the way up to the air-to-air mission. Most of the
Tomcat converts I know claim that the RIO sucked SA away from the pilot...
BUT when AESA comes on line, and the folks at Boeing split up the cockpit,
the WSO in will have plenty to do that the pilot would never be able to
handle by himself.

--Woody

And remember that the current squadrons deploying at sea with the F/A-18F
have rear cockpits that are barely different from the front ones... the
advanced rear cockpit is yet to fly operationaly. I don't believe the F can
turn a real advantage over the E.
_____________
José Herculano



  #29  
Old November 5th 03, 02:24 PM
nafod40
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal wrote:

Don't take that as NFO bashing. I've got a lot of respect for B/N's, WSO's,
and RIO's in the systems weapons and sensor supported weapons roles. It's
great to have one guy totally focused on target acq and weapons support
leaving the pilot to flying form and avoiding the threat.

I just think that their additional utility (given current technology) in the
air-to-air arena is limited.

I'm sure I'm going to get many responses from this one. Seriously, folks,
not a troll.


I think the real battle of the decade is going to be how many pilots
will remain in the cockpit. There's going to be some paradimg shifts
going on soon.

  #30  
Old November 5th 03, 03:28 PM
John Penta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 10:50:10 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
wrote:


I'd agree with you all the way up to the air-to-air mission. Most of the
Tomcat converts I know claim that the RIO sucked SA away from the pilot...
BUT when AESA comes on line, and the folks at Boeing split up the cockpit,
the WSO in will have plenty to do that the pilot would never be able to
handle by himself.

--Woody


AESA?

Someone needs to write a FAQ for this group, if there isn't one
already...:-(

John
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New aviation history interview: Fokker/Curtiss/Messerschmitt ace Mauno Fräntilä Jukka O. Kauppinen Military Aviation 0 September 22nd 04 11:18 PM
MILITARY HISTORY BOOKS Robert Hansen Military Aviation 0 February 19th 04 03:10 AM
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements me Military Aviation 146 January 15th 04 11:13 PM
F-14 on the History Channel's "Modern Marvels" Brian J. McCann Military Aviation 15 October 12th 03 02:12 PM
FS: Aviation History Books Neil Cournoyer Military Aviation 0 August 26th 03 08:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2017 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.