Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6409 times:
There was enormous interservice rivalry at the time.
The F-14 was also an older design, which was overweight for what the airforce wanted.
The Airforce spec also stated a single seat fighter, and longer time between maintenance than what the Navy had got with the F-14 (which was more than they bargained for).
The cost of the F-14 was also higher than what the AF wanted to pay.
F-111 had failed as a fighter, it had been originally intended to be a bomber for the airforce AND a fighter for the Navy (who in the end bought the F-14 instead).
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6403 times:
Plus at the time, the US thought that the Soviet Mig-25 was just as superior, with composite materials, a high Vmax, and such...until it turned out to be a dragster only designed to catch up with a SR-71/XB-70 type aircraft, and attempt to shoot it down.
I think for attack/fighter/interceptor aircraft the Mig-25 "Foxbat" still holds the altitude and speed records. Either that of that special F-104 fitted with a rocket beat the altitude, I dono.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
TheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3787 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6372 times:
German Wikipedia states the following:
Parallel dazu beteiligte sich die US-Luftwaffe anfangs an der Entwicklung der Grumman F-14 Tomcat der US-Marine, die genau die Aufgaben Ã¼bernehmen sollte, fÃ¼r die die Luftwaffe das TFX entwickelte. Man zog sich aus dem Tomcat-Projekt zurÃ¼ck, als sich langsam abzeichnete, wie die endgÃ¼ltige Tomcat aussehen wÃ¼rde (sehr stabil, um die hohen Belastungen bei TrÃ¤gerlandungen auszuhalten, und unflexibel in der Avionik - die US-Luftwaffe bewies damals enorme Weitsicht).
Parallel to this the USAF also was involved in the development of the F-14, which was meant to do exactly what the TFX project intended to do. The Airforce went out of the Tomcat project when it became obvious how the final tomcat was meant to look like (very stable to cope with carrier landings, very unflexible in terms of avionics - the US Air Force showed a lot of far sight that time)
Of course, Wikipedia always should be regarded with caution, but I guess this article isn't wrong...
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6316 times:
Two different airplanes.
The F-14 was designed with the USN specifically in mind, and their desire was for a long range interceptor.
The USAF wanted a dogfighter with high speed capability and extreme (for the day) maneuverability. The Eagle was exactly what the Air Farce wanted...and it certainly proved itself out both with us and others.
The F-14 was the greatest interceptor ever built, and it's still flying for another little while albeit as a bomber and recon aircraft, however it had limited exposure to combat. It would probably have done it's designed job (to shoot down Soviet bombers and cruise missiles at long distances from the fleet) very well.
HaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2124 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6295 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 2): I think for attack/fighter/interceptor aircraft the Mig-25 "Foxbat" still holds the altitude and speed records. Either that of that special F-104 fitted with a rocket beat the altitude, I dono.
The MiG-25 and F-104N (rocket assisted) fighters both achieved altitudes of over 100,000'... but only in zoom climbs. That is why the SR-71 holds the altitude record, because of its 85,000'+ ceiling in level flight. Much as the MiG-25 was capable of Mach 3+, but not continous and the engines then had to be replaced.
MigFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 5442 times:
In the post-McNamara defense administration there was an effort to shy away from cross-service standardization. The F-4 served well during it's career. The USAF wanted their own design, and so did the USN. For a brief period of time, the F-14A was considered by the USAF, and underwent operational evaluation. I did get to see a picture of an F-14 in USAF markings! The F-15 was contemplated by the USN as the "Seagle". The most I ever seen of that was a concept drawing. I would image that complications in modifying the wing for carrier duty would sacrifice the Eagle's great range.
I think both aircraft would have performed exceptionally in whatever role they were found.