F-14 Tomcat

[Taiidantomcat]

Dual Winders in Libya, 1989

[dy031101]

Makes me think of Super Tomcat 21 with those loadouts......

[rickshaw]

Out of a matter of interest, did the Tomcat ever achieve any operational kills with the Phoenix?

[sandiego89]

Out of a matter of interest, did the Tomcat ever achieve any operational kills with the Phoenix?

The Iranian F-14's did get some kills with the Phoenix against Iraqi Migs and Mirages, perhaps over 20, but the exact number will likely never be absolutely clear. No Phoenix kills by U.S. F-14's.   http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_210.shtml

[Maverick]

I, for one, am still dubious about the multiple engagement/kill claims by the USN & Grumman, especially when you read the exercises (and they were just that) as being flown against QT-33, QF-9J & BQM-34 drones.  They may have performed 'as advertised', but the targets in question weren't 'live' in a real-life environment using maneuver & ECM defences.

Regards,

Mav

[Taiidantomcat]

I, for one, am still dubious about the multiple engagement/kill claims by the USN & Grumman, especially when you read the exercises (and they were just that) as being flown against QT-33, QF-9J & BQM-34 drones.  They may have performed 'as advertised', but the targets in question weren't 'live' in a real-life environment using maneuver & ECM defences.

number one the Phoenix like all weapons evolved and improved throughout its life:

AIM-54A
   The original version to become operational in 1974, also exported to Iran.

AIM-54C
   Improved version utilizing digital electronics, better able to counter cruise missiles. Superseded the AIM-54A from 1986.

AIM-54 ECCM/Sealed
   Further improved electronic counter-countermeasure capabilities, does not require coolant conditioning during captive flight. Used from 1988 onwards.

Also, its not like the USN never live fire tested an Aim-54 after one set of exercises. It was constantly tested throughout its lifespan and of course the new variants listed above were tested extensively before entering service, with the US Navy the primary test force. I have no idea why the US Navy and its men would carry on a lie for decades when the very survival of their fleets depended on the F-14 and Aim-54. The Navy was even more suspicious of "wonder missiles" after the Vietnam experience, they kept it in service for 3 decades with good reason. The US military is actually very quirky about testing a weapon system once and then never again, while crossing their fingers.  Weapons are tested often to ensure they work, for obvious reasons.



Aim-54 test Circa 1983

[Maverick]

Ben, at no point did I suggest there isn't regular testing of these systems (I actually said 'exercises' rather than 'exercise'), but my comment still calls into question the genuine ability of the AIM-54/AWG-9 combo.  It's all well and good to take out drones regardless of whether they are being flown aggressively or are carrying ECM, it's an entirely different situation when it's 'real life'. 

In one test, the missile was used against a drone carrying ECM acting as a support aircraft for another drone acting as a fighter.  Both were destroyed, but then the comment was made that they 'would have destroyed multiple fighters if there were more around'.  That's a fairly broad statement to make, considering they didn't even destroy multiple drones in that particular test.

As has been said, I suspect the real capabilities of the system were somewhere between it being an uberweapon or a white elephant.

Regards,

Mav

[Burncycle]

Another issue is ROE generally won't let the Phoenix stretch its legs

[Maverick]

I don't think a given scenario's rules of engagement really have a bearing on the AIM-54's capabilities.  Whilst I believe it could knock a single aircraft down at an extreme range, I doubt it would be able to knock down four or six at the same time without fail as has been suggested in exercises.

Restrictive ROEs could preclude the use of AIM-54s, or any other BVR weapon for that matter.  That's a political issue rather than one of a given weapon's capabilities.

Regards,

Mav

[Taiidantomcat]

Remember the F-14 was supposed to be an "open ocean" fighter. In the first gulf war it was restricted because its IFF "didn't play well with others" since it wasn't fitted with the idea of operating with the USAF. also its RWR had a hard time picking up certain ground based SAMs. bad decision of course, and later rectified.

Mav, Speaking of RWRs according to Tom Bishop in the Iranian Tomcat book, Iraq Migs werent fitted with RWRs that could pick up the F-14 Radar, so in many case the targets did not evade or launch countermeasures  This was later rectified, but the Aim-54 possesses a "home on Jam" capability and made the enemy aircraft an even better target. The book also claims somewhere in the 70-90 kills over the eight year war (not all from Aim-54s, but many) YMMV those numbers vary depending on who you ask and what they are trying to promote. 

[Diamondback]

So, I'm getting ready to WhIf up a Tomcat variant, and thought I'd see what everybody thought--it builds on a few ideas above, plus some of my own--the concept is a present-day "One Plane, Spare No Expense Demonstrator" built and operated by a private contractor as an R&D ship under joint USN/USAF aegis with administrative support coming from both Navy VX-9 and AFSOC.

It'd start with an F135'ed AST21, kinda like TaiidanTomcat PM'ed me a profile of over at ARC that I'm guessing came from here, but would add:
1. Integrate LANTIRN pods (or current/next-generation replacements; this is a Spare No Expense concept, and the WhIf's builder in the fiction I'm building this for uses any prototypre gear he can lay hands on) with Phoenix fairings, freeing precious HP's for payload.
2. Rebuild nacelles to contain two F135s, straight-across rip out of two JSFs complete with 3d Thrust Vectoring.
3. Reposition undernacelle hardpoints to take BRU-61 strongbacks for GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs.
4. Uprate wing racks to take AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER, AGM-154 JSOW or European SCALP/Storm Shadow. (Ideal would be AGM-86 ALCM or AGM-129 ACM.) Concept load is four "AIM-54E" (Phoenix with added terminal-guidance), four HP's (one under each wing and engine) ATG payload, two Sidewinders or IRIS-T.
5. Added UARRSI somewhere on the spine or dorsal area so it can refuel from any US or NATO tanker. (Do ComBloc use the same probe as USN and NATO?)
6--tentative: relocate Sidewinder rails to overwing like SEPECAT Jaguar, add second overwing pair (maybe replace the strakes near wing TE?) and redesign underwing pylon to hold two hardpoints spaced for Phoenix or Harpoon/SLAM/Mk 84, possibly 2x AGM-130.

Considering but need more data: Israeli-style CFT's. Would love refinements or ideas on pulling all this off, and appreciate any ideas considering that this is only about the second kitbash I've ever planned and haven't even finished the first yet. Mods, please move my post to Idea Repository if that's more appropriate--I only stuck this here 'cause I didn't know  where else to file it.

[Diamondback]

And a recent refinement... Back in the '70s, the F-106 was being concepted and got to carry-trials for an ASAT version of AGM-78 STARM--basically an air-launched version of today's Tier 3 Aegis right down to the same missile-body--so why not add that as an option?

[Chris707]

Regardless of whether Phoenix was as effective as the PR made it out to be, the USN was essentially stuck with making the best out of it. A long-range AAM was needed for  battle group defense, and with the post-Vietnam budget cuts and the enormous problems the service experienced with getting the F-14, there was essentially 0% chance that they could have cancelled the thing early on. AIM-54 was the "main battery" of the very expensive fighter they were desperate to get, and if Phoenix was cancelled, there would have been a lot of political pressure to cut the Tomcat as well. Phoenix at least gave some measure of capability, and probably as important, a deterrent to the Soviets thinking that they could easily deal with a carrier's defenses. It certainly gave them more to consider than F-4s and FA-18s armed with Sparrows.

[Spey_Phantom]

has anyone noticed the Iranian F-14AM Upgrade?
according to airliners.net, it claims that Iran has integrated the R-73E on the Tomcat's 
i like the new color scheme to, much like the SU-35's splinter camo 

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran---Air/Grumman-F-14AM-Tomcat/2239264/L/&sid=2e9091c87f78bea54c902910d95ece41

[rickshaw]

has anyone noticed the Iranian F-14AM Upgrade?
according to airliners.net, it claims that Iran has integrated the R-73E on the Tomcat's 
i like the new color scheme to, much like the SU-35's splinter camo 

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran---Air/Grumman-F-14AM-Tomcat/2239264/L/&sid=2e9091c87f78bea54c902910d95ece41

Interesting claim about the R-73s.  Any pictorial evidence?