Can we admit now that retiring the F-14 was a bad idea?
>Standoff capability and other advantages with AN/AWG-9-Phoenix combo still carries an advantage today
>Superior performance to F-18
>Upgrade to AN/APG-71 Radar would have improved use over land
>F-14D Quickstrike would of shat on the Super Hornet
>We are paying the price of it's retirement today with the South China Sea because now F-18s are being pitted against Su-30MMKs which are only a radar/missile upgrade away to rendering it inferior
>Possibility of a Silent Eagle style upgrade later
>Datalink could see it being used as missile truck
>counter to A2/AD
>>31593160
>retiring the F-14 was a bad idea?
no
>>31593229
>mfw a trip makes post with no evidence or logic to back it up
>>31593287
it was old and not worth upgrading.
my proof is, the folks who make those decision know more than you or I
>>31593160
>He thinks a fuck huge RCS and a missile with a poor NEZ is relevant today.
>>31593160
>maintenance costs
>maintenance costs
>oh god the maintenance costs
>>31593432
This.
Also, the airframes was starting to run out of FHs.
>>31593160
No, hangar queen with outdated and ineffective weapons like
>Phoenix
LOL, 3 fires, 2 engine failures and a miss in combat
It was real pretty though.
>>31593160
The Advanced Super Tomcat projects would have been so much better than the super hornet, should have made those and made the Super Hornet to replace the Hornet
>>31593160
>F-14D Quickstrike would of shat on the Super Hornet
>the entire reason the Quickstrike wasn't chosen was because it didn't meet the requirements of the program atf program
lel
>>31593160
No. The increased commonality and reduced maintenance needs of the Bug/Super Bug outweigh any losses in capability.
>>31593432
FYI - that is a picture of a Panavia Tornado, not a F-14 Tomcat.
>>31593160
>Can we admit now that retiring the F-14 was a bad idea?
The F-14 was retired to save money after the end of the cold war and the Hornet was introduced as a cheaper alternative. It was purely a matter of budget. If the Navy could have maintain a cold-war-era budget, they would have probably kept the Tomcat.
F14 wasn't anything special. The USA should have made a Phoenix replacement though. That was a bad ass missile.
>>31593764
The AIM-120D has similar specs.
>>31593764
>The USA should have made a Phoenix replacement though
For what purpose? The F-18 and F-35 are both too small to carry such a large missile. You'd have a new missile but nothing to deploy it with. The Phoenix and the Tomcat were made for each other. Literally.
>>31593794
Not even close. The Phoenix has a fuck huge range and it climbs like a monster to really hit at hypersonic speed. AIM-120D is gimped.
>>31593840
>The Phoenix has a fuck huge range
True
>to really hit
I've seen no evidence of that.
>>31593745
wingtip missiles are AIM-9s
>>31593877
yes, very good observation anon
>>31593877
And?
What made up most of its maintenance time, that it had two engines, or that it was a swing wing? I don't even know that much about the F14's engines, I'm guessing they changed them out for different models so lets just say the F14D
>>31593834
>For what purpose? The F-18 and F-35 are both too small to carry such a large missile.
Yet can carry the >2000 lb jassm.
>>31593160
When I was browsing the catalogue, I thought this thread said
>Can we admit now that retiring the F-4 was a bad idea?
Would have been a superior discussion, desu
>>31593976
Go to South Korea anon
>>31593943
The variable wing geometry was the main problem.
Enough about shitplanes, let's talk about shitplanes.
Where my Tiger boys at?
>>31594253
>shitplanes
Didn't the F-16/18 outcompete it?
>>31594253
>>31594314
I mean, good concept but when it came to the market it was kind of dissapointing