Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
F14 Tomcat Replacement  
User currently offlineMezza From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (14 years 11 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3992 times:

What are the plans for the replacment of the F14 Tomcats, when are they scheduled to be phased out of service and what will replace them.

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineWhistler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (14 years 11 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3929 times:

Where have you been man  Smile.

The F-14s are being replaced by the 2 seat F/A-18F Superhornet. The first VF squadron is planned to switch over in the next few months. The first operational Superhornet squadron (VFA-115, a Attack squadron) is converting as we speak.

Also, if you want to get pick, you could also say Aegis cruisers are replacing the F-14s as well, they are taking over the bulk of the carrier air defence role.

User currently offlineMezza From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 11 months 23 hours ago) and read 3909 times:

Thanks, Whistler

I've been in hibernation for a long time, old and losing my memory.

User currently offlineRedskin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (14 years 11 months 16 hours ago) and read 3897 times:

Well, i suppose that some REMF has decided that the Navy won't be getting Hit by Multiple regiments of Soviet Backfire Bombers etc. Launching ASM's.

Somebody hasn't worked out that ASM's are not exclusive to the soviets and that the countries that they are now worring about will have them soon if not already. What happens if somebody pops off a baby nuke.

I personally like the idea of keeping the bastards as far away as possible.
If the tomcats were out at 100 ks and the pheonix has 100ks thats a two hundred K bubble around the group. Additional is the Camers on the F14 for ID of targets at long range. I have not heard of this handy piece og kit being put on the Super Hornet.

The math if the 18 is at 100 ks is still forty short as i believe the amraam is a 60 k job. Is there something alse in the pipeline with a greater standoff rangefor AAW.

Also what will the max weapons fit out be on the new puppy..

User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4556 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (14 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 3887 times:

I sure hope that the Navy has a better plan than allowing the Aegis Cruiser to handle all of the fleet defence. This shows us once again how poor the Hornet and now Super Hornet are and how their selection over other aircraft has forced the Navy to be weaker and make stupid decisions around these ridiculous platforms.

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineZionstrat From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3857 times:

Sorry CX747, but I feel like we are rehashing the thread from a couple of weeks ago


You said:

"First off, I am not knocking the F/A-18 Hornet as it does what it was designed to due quite well. It was designed to replace the A-7E Corsair II as a medium attack aircraft. It was not designed to be a fleet defender which is the role the F/A 18 E/F will take over from the F-14 Tomcat. It is a jack-of-all-trades master of none. ..."

I still contend that the 18 is the only ac that currently meets the naval multi-role requirement, and although F14s are spectacular, they were designed for a different war where best of breed was possible- My point is that the 18 does what is necessary, and there is certain elegance in getting the job done-

I don't want to dis the 14, but if the 18 does the minimal job interception/CAP role (and a couple of others as well), isn't this a good thing?

User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4556 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3840 times:

My friend, a MINIMAL job is not a good thing. Naval Aviation and for that matter military aviation needs the BEST job from its machinery. Would you want to go into battle in an aircraft that does a minimal job? Do you think the guys on the carrier want an aircraft that does a minimal job at protecting them? Do the pilots want an aircraft that does a minimal job when their butt is on the line? The fact is, that the Hornet has been called upon to do to much and while the Navy has been able to hide that fact from the general public, it is plain to see by those who follow and are part of military aviation. Think of it this way, the F/A-18 E and F are replacing the F-14 while the F-22 is replacing the F-15. The Air Force has once again gone and done it right. Shame on the flat top commanders and Navy brass for letting this sham of an aircraft through. If they wanted to replace the F/A-18Cs and only the Cs with it that would be fine, but that is not the case.

P.S. Multirole=Jack of all trades master of none.

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineMezza From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3839 times:

Lets look at the possible future threat to a naval carrier group.

.Missile attack, either Submarine launch,SSM from warships, or aircraft
.Submarine convential torpedo attack
.Aircraft carrying conventinal weapons, smart bombs etc
.Sucicide Attack (Remember USS Cole)

Who are likely to be the Aggressor!

Will an air attack be massed or in two;s or threes, etc!

What will be the quality of the aircraft and the crew sent against an battle carrier group.

Once again will the US lead in technology prove the edge over an attack.

Interesting questions we will only really know if it ever happens.

User currently offlineRedskin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3836 times:

Some time ago a country used what can be described as minimal A/C for fleet defence, They were up against an adversary that had 2nd generation A/C not state of the art so in term os matched , ie USN V somebody else ie China etc this scenario is camparible with the exception of the AGEIS units. Small A/c with SSM's put a very large hole in the UK fleet and the fact that there carriers were not hit was more good luck than good management. Those ships that were hit and sunk were in the main with good old iron bombs , not SSM's of the current generation. What was the fleet defended with, A comprimise fighter, specfically a unit designed for operating in the Forward Battle area of a ground conflict.

The Ageis is not capable of stopping every missle every time and a concerted missle attck on the fleet that's gets closer than it can currently because the CAP units don't have the range, the ID power or the AAM's is A BAD THING. I said it earlier on almost the same topic it's called PROGRESSIVE REGRESSION, that my quote ( REDSKIN)

User currently offlineZionstrat From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3828 times:

Redskin and CX747, I hear what you are saying, but I'm under the impression that we have a whole new stage in a whole new play. The 14 was designed to go up against the best the soviets had. Don't get me wrong, the 27 and 29 and their derivatives are very impressive, but we aren't likely to encounter waves of them in today's environment. A mixture of current technology provides the long-range standoff necessary for today’s threats.

Sure, the Falkland’s proved that if you hang an exotet on practically anything that can get it off the ground, you have a viable threat- But comparing Hornets to Harriers is apples and oranges when you consider the differences:

1.Long-range detection is crucial but we have the AWACs support necessary to do it-

2. We also have the tankers to loiter 18s at long range for as long as you need them as far out from the group as necessary.

3. The hornet is a supersonic fighter with excellent handling that the Harrier never attempted. It’s medium and short-range combat abilities have never been questioned.

Please don’t get me wrong- I love the 14 and the idea of launching an intercept with fire and forget over 100 miles. But as exciting as it is, how often did we use it, even when there were large fleets of enemy ac (once with Libya if I remember correctly?).

I enjoy the debate, but I think it is clear that the F18 can do the job that is needed today. As long as JSF funding doesn’t get cut also we have a suitable solution for the future. I agree with Mezza's list and think we have more to worry about with an aging fleet of S3s for ASW.

User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4556 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3830 times:

And what type of aircraft are going to protect the tankers that we will just have "loitering" up there? This is combat, and alot of times, things don't work as nicely as some people back in D.C. think. Crews of the F-14 are looking forward to accepting the F/A-18 E and F only because it is going to require less maintenance. There was a large artcile on VF-14 and VF-41 in a pretty recent Wings of Gold. It was very simply to see that the F-14 is a much more capable aircraft and that the crews are only excited by its "newness". Also, the reason that over the past 25 years no one has launched an attack against the carrier group is because the "Turkey" was on patrol. As for a new play and new stage, the only people that truly believe that are again the boys back in D.C. FYI- Intercepts of Russian and China bombers and reconnaisance aircraft have jumped 10 fold over the last 2-3 years. My father happens to have a job that has him in the know about what the "enemy" is doing more than the normal civilan. I was discussing Russia and China the other day, all he had to say was that our old comrades have never gone "away" and that while the media wants to say the cold war is over, it just ain't. Nothing has changed. All the Soviet Union did was make a new flag and try on a new name. Did you happen to see their newest fighter? All black with a RED Communist star on the wing. Makes you wonder. Its to bad there aren't any great senators like Mr. John C. Stennis still around. He didn't let the Navy do this kind of monkey business with the F-111 "Missilier". He stopped that program and called it what it was, junk. Thanks to him we got the best aircraft availabe in the F-14.

Just food for thought. The "Green Machine" USMC who has been criticized by the Navy for years of having inferior equipment and letting brand new platforms be beat up, is passing on the F/A-18 E and F. They want the JSF (An aircraft that will be the next F-16). HEY NAVY, YOUR THE ONLY SERVICE DUMB ENOUGH TO BE DUPED INTO THE F/A-18 "SUPER WASTE".

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic F14 Tomcat Replacement
No username? Sign up now!

Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics:More similar topics...
CDN CT-114 Tutor Replacement posted Sun Nov 12 2006 04:38:51 by Kearney
CDN Forces C-130 Replacement posted Sat Nov 11 2006 07:47:25 by Kearney
Polaf Helo Replacement posted Sun Oct 22 2006 07:24:18 by Cancidas
Air Force One Replacement? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 08:06:42 by TUSaadvantage
Replacement For The Superhornet posted Fri Sep 29 2006 17:50:02 by 747400sp
Goodbye Tomcat posted Sat Jul 29 2006 13:53:13 by Yellekc
C-5 Galaxy Replacement posted Fri Jul 28 2006 22:59:13 by 747400sp
Typhoon Contends For Japan F-4 Replacement posted Tue May 23 2006 21:12:48 by Lumberton
Why The USAF Never Bought F-14 Tomcat? posted Thu May 11 2006 01:33:54 by 747400sp
Was There Replacement For The F-8u posted Sat Apr 22 2006 19:27:24 by 747400sp

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format