F-14 Tomcat

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I am not clear on exactly where you were say to hang the tanks.  I just tried it with F-15's tanks (same size I think) and they fit  between the engine, where they would mounted to the rear two locations for the phoenix. Sparrows are mounted centerline on the F-14, for reasons not clear to me.  I don't think that the intakes would be able to take phoenix because of the cooling equipment the phoenix need from the launching plane.

Thank you for performing the check-fit on the parts.  Appreciate the feedback and it is always good to bounce an idea off of someone else to make sure it is not too crazy.  I did forget about the cooling requirement for the Phoenix but I beleive that was not an issue with later versions of the AIM-54, just the original AIM-54A version.  The later models had some kind of improvement to the missile electronics that did not require the cooling system.  The F-15 tank is smaller in diameter than the Sargent-Fletcher tank by a milimeter or three.  It would take up residence on the center of the underside over the troughs for the Sparrows.  Nice thing about the Hasegawa kits are that a piece is provided to fill in that depression when you opt for the Phoenix pallets.  The underside of the engines is restricted by the distance from the ground to the bottom of the engines so I would have to say that my original idea for mounting an AIM-54 at that location is a no go but it might work for something smaller like a Sidewinder and just maybe a Sparrow if you really wanted to pimp out your Kitty Kat.

[tinlail]

Ah! I see what you are thinking, yes one centerline tank fits easily, you can even fit two side by side, if you wish, though dropping the tanks might be problematic.

I doubt that any of those stations are plumbed, and the center line probably isn't designed to carry that much weight.

That is small stuff however.

[Burncycle]

Why not just fill the tunnel with a large conformal fuel tank like the proposed USAF version

[tinlail]

Sounds like a great idea to me!

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Why not just fill the tunnel with a large conformal fuel tank like the proposed USAF version?

Then you will still have a surplus of fuel tanks in the spare parts pile.  The objective of this exercise was to determine how to best apply a spare 600 gallon Sargent-Fletcher drop tank to something other than an F-4.  If you use two F-15 tanks you can place them side by side which also increases the coolness factor by several thousand percent.  Not quite to the level of coolness that Brian da Basher has achieved with his unique interpretations of spat technology but close. 

Besides the conformal tank looks ugly on the proposed USAF ADC F-14, kind of like jowls on a hog which really detracts from the attractiveness of the F-14.  The drop tank approach is an attempt to think outside the box. 

[KJ_Lesnick]

I thought the conformal tanks on the USAF version were wrapped around the sides of the intakes, with redesigned pylons to carry the AIM-54's in a set-up that was still area ruled (longer, blended pylons)?


Kendra Lesnick

[tinlail]

If you are talking about my belly tank. I will say that I was not attempting to recreate the IMI belly tank configuration. The pictures and drawing I have of the IMI plane do not give me clear picture of how it was shaped. I would love to know however.

My goals were.
1) Be less ugly than the IMI belly tank.
2) Maximize the store carrying ability, by flatten the belly profile and simplify the geometry of the plane.
3) Preserve the existing mounting location of the plane on the new belly tank.

It has failing that I will honestly admit.
1) It is not area rule, and might take away supersonic performance.
2) It might shift the CG of the plane too far aft, a lot of the tank volume is at the tail end of the plane.
3) It's not clear to me how much payload is available for weapons, if the plane is carrying that tank full of fuel, particularly when flying from a carrier.

[KJ_Lesnick]

No offense tinlail, but I actually liked the F-14 IMI design.  It kind of looked like a slick cleaned-up F-14 design.  The pylon-set up was a bit weird though, but I like it (I hope this won't lower your opinion of me)

[Shasper]

Dont think yer getting too far off the cat with a full fuel load + weapons w/that conformal, but it does change the F-14s look quite a bit.

Shas

[tinlail]

Well the back will probably have a chaff dispenser, or such to suggest to that the tank stops short. Other possibilities launch with the tanks not full and refuel in the air, and adding a drogue reel to refuel those other planes launching with empty tanks.

I may make different belly tank after I've had a chance to play around with possible load outs.

[KJ_Lesnick]

Is it true that the F-14 with the glove vane fully out (with the wings swept all the way back) could pull 7.5 G's at Mach 2.0!?  I would almost swear I read that somewhere, but I can't find the source...

Does anybody have any further information to prove, disprove, etc?


Kendra

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Another WHIF idea that needs to be shared:

F-14 ASAT launcher.  Plain vanilla F-14 with the ASM-135A ASAT missile and launcher adapter unit (from the F-15) mounted under the fuselage in-line with the Sparrow missile troughs.  I know the Hasegawa kits provide a blanking piece for this section in the shape of a half-round shape that has the profile of a Sparrow missile to fill in the void when you are opting for the AIM-54 Phoenix pallets and missiles.  So with the blanking pieces in place, the ASAT LAU would fit over these and there is more than enough room underneath the aircraft to accomodate this weapon.  The mission would be deck launched intercept of Russian ocean radar surveillance satellites and other hostile reconnaissance assets as required during hostilities.  Load out would be one X ASM-135 ASAT missile, two X AIM-9 sidewinder, and (optional) two X AIM-7 Sparrow. 

This WHIF idea could also be built in the following scales:

1/144th Scale.  An ASAT missile shape is included in one of the F-15 kits I don't know which manufacturer but I have had one and just recently gave it back to the donor (Brian da Basher) so if you want on, you might want to contact him to obtain it. 

1/72nd Scale.  An ASAT missile shape in the Esci F-15Akit with 318th FIS markings.  I have a pair of these and they look pretty good considering how small they are. 

1/48th Scale.  Hasegawa special edition of the F-15A included the ASAT missile shape.  By hook and crook, I managed to pick up a pair of these, one by purchasing the kit and the other by trading some parts for it.

1/48th Scale.  Several of the Academy F-15 kits have a very bad representation of the ASAT missile shape included in the majority of these kits.  It is too short in overall length to qualify as a good representation of the ASM-135 but might make a really good rocket propelled cluster bomb shape.  Every Academy F-15 kit that I have purchased so far has included this shape in the kit. 

1/32nd Scale. There was an ASAT missile shape included in the Revell 1/32nd scale F-15E kit.  Quite by accident after a Revell F-15E Strike Eagle kit was given to me for free, that was the surprise in the bottom of the box, and it is impressive in that scale, very intimidating. 

[KJ_Lesnick]

An F-14 ASAT launcher does sound pretty cool

[GTX]

Jeffrey,

That's actually not a bad idea - I would probably try to keep the load out to a single (or at most 2) ASM-135 ASATs though.

Regards,

Greg

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Load out would be one X ASM-135 ASAT missile, two X AIM-9 sidewinder, and (optional) two X AIM-7 Sparrow.

The area between the engines allows for carriage of one ASAT.  The other weapons would have been carried for self-defense on the way to the launch point and on return to base (carrier).  The AIM-7 had the caveat of "optional" added to it, I guess you missed that part