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
  #11  
Old November 3rd 03, 07:01 PM
JD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Pechs1,

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.

jd

(Pechs1) wrote in message ...
bjm- A couple of night ago the History Channel aired a program about the
F-14. During the promo it was stated that the Tomcat is the world's
fastest fighter. I dunno, every aviation book in my house puts it
clearly behind the F-15 and the MiG 25. BRBR

Must've been written by Grumman...
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Ads
  #12  
Old November 3rd 03, 08:11 PM
John Carrier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Actually, the wings were programmed for best cruise which targets least drag
for current speed. A level acceleration closely hits those airspeed check
points ... there's no advantage to sweeping the wings on a level accel
because induced drag and trim drag will initially (at the starting speed of
the accel) increase significantly with the wing sweep. Unloaded (and
following optimum flight path for max PsubS) there's an advantage to
sweeping the wings. There are times when an unload is practical. There are
others when it is not.

Pete's right. airsource off helps.

R / John


"Pechs1" wrote in message
...
JD- Actually if you were to compare the F14 with the F110 engines to the
F15, the acceleration at SL would be even from M0.5 to M0.9. This is
with the F14 wings set to "Auto". If the F14 wings were set to manual
and the wings set fully aft, the F14 would be a lot faster. BRBR

'A lot'??-manual aft, airsource off type acceleration?


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

Phlyer


  #13  
Old November 3rd 03, 08:53 PM
nafod40
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Carrier wrote:
Actually, the wings were programmed for best cruise which targets least drag
for current speed.


Was it keyed off of airspeed, or AOA?

  #14  
Old November 4th 03, 03:45 PM
Pechs1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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
  #16  
Old November 4th 03, 06:37 PM
James Woody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yep - RIO (running into obsolesce). 2 pair of eyes was always better
than one.

Woody

Pechs1 wrote:
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


  #17  
Old November 4th 03, 08:44 PM
José Herculano
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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


  #18  
Old November 4th 03, 09:56 PM
John Carrier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

IIRC mach # and altitude.

R / John

"nafod40" wrote in message
...
John Carrier wrote:
Actually, the wings were programmed for best cruise which targets least

drag
for current speed.


Was it keyed off of airspeed, or AOA?



  #19  
Old November 4th 03, 11:37 PM
gizmo-goddard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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


  #20  
Old November 5th 03, 01:15 AM
Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 11/4/03 12:37 PM, in article
, "James Woody"
wrote:

Yep - RIO (running into obsolesce). 2 pair of eyes was always better
than one.

Woody


Woody,

In the air-to-air arena, I've never found the two sets of eyes in the Tomcat
(or the Strike Eagle for that matter) to be an advantage against single-seat
fighters at the merge. Been there many times against Tomcats when the Toms
are tally 0 (red or blue) and the Hornets are tally all (blue or red). In
fact, I see "no joy's" out of Tomcats way more than out of Hornets.

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.

--Woody

 




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 02:10 AM
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements me Military Aviation 146 January 15th 04 10:13 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 11:52 AM.


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