Why did America have to retire them so early, lads?

pigfat useless old and busted old cold war whore

They were extremely maintenance intensive. Also, the navy tried to play silly games by buying them with placeholder engines and got called out on it when they tried to replace them with what they were supposed to have.

They were unfortunately pointless. What's there to been to intercept since it's retirement? Nothing. The F/A-18E might not be as good at being a high speed missile truck, but it does everything a naval fighter has been needed since the Tomcat's retirement. Even the

File: 1404993368813.jpg (20KB, 301x289px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 301x289px

>>34252105
Watch your mouth

because swing wings are a maintence liability

>>34252115
This is the sad truth. We all love to dream about things like the Super Tomcat and A-12, but all the advanced Naval aircraft that were cancelled really weren't needed. Vice President Cheney was right.

>>34252094
Tom Cruise turned down TG2.

File: 1446047122665.gif (2MB, 309x273px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 309x273px

>>34252094
>AC7 has laser weapon mounts for F-15's
>we may get lasers on fucking Tomcats

>>34252094
Just because there's a new starlet doesn't diminish Audrey Hepburn. There will always be a newer better plane, and there will also always be the danger zone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oct4huJkPg

>>34252159
>Just because there's a new starlet doesn't diminish Audrey Hepburn.
Which starlets have matched Audrey Hepburn?
Which naval planes have matched the Tomcat?
I don't know whether to call your metaphor good or bad. I am confused. It may be a simile, but still, if it were, would it be a good or bad simile?
Fuck.

File: 1497425509141.jpg (208KB, 1920x1024px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1920x1024px

>>34252154
How about stealth weapon pods full of AMRAAMs?

>>34252184
"Stealth pods" on a completely non-stealth airframe

go back to /v/

>>34252144
Everyone seems to be shitting on Top Gun lately with the announcement of TG2. Although the original came out like 4 years before I was born, it still made me want to become a fighter pilot as a kid.

>then...
>learn that the f14 was on its way out
>drop all interest flying as a career
>tfw you'll never be in a 4g inverted dive with a mig "28" flipping off Igor

I actually jotted down a few predictions for what'll happen in TG2 for fun.
Hopefully they go full hollywood and fit the f14 in somewhere.

>final battle sequence
>drone enemies keep "jamming/hacking" the friendly planes
>enemies starting to overwhelm the allies in their new age jets
>some wiz kid on the ground
>"sir, the older generations of our planes don't have (insert whatever the new ones have that's being hacked)"
>they open up some secret hangar
>stereotypical secret base commander
>"we kept a few, just in case"
>operational f14s loaded and fueled
>cleared for DANGER ZONE
>old birds take out new fangled enemy drones

TG2 could actually be interesting if it was - and this is actually totally plausible - Americans in Super Hornets or even F-35s vs. Iranians in Tomcats.

It's honestly about the only way they could make having F-14s in that movie work.

File: 1446069007599.png (175KB, 287x327px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 287x327px

>>34252184
This game keeps getting better and better.

>F-104's
>prototype COFFIN system planes
>space elevators
>fuckin lasers

File: AceCombat7-13.jpg (178KB, 1920x1040px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1920x1040px

>>34252228
Its gonna be sweet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4XpxMet3y4

>>34252094
Spent 75% of their time disassembled in the hangar and were basically impossible to upgrade any more.

>>34252144
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/06/02/top-gun-2-tom-cruise-reveals-sequels-title-val-kilmer-lobbies-to-return-as-iceman

>>34252094
Because it's an old design, shit came out in the 70s

>>34252144

I heard that the reason Top Gun 2 keeps getting delayed is because apparently the F-35C is integral to the plot and the Navy wants to have real F-35's in the movie, but the delays with the F-35 keep pushing it all back.

>>34255509
I wonder if they'll have the balls to make the antagonists be the chinks, or pull a Milius and cop out by making them the norks or russians (again).

>>34252094
Because they were useless shit.

>>34255101
F-15s and F-16s also came out in the 70s.

They were old, a nightmare to maintain, and didn't do anything that we needed that the Hornet couldn't do more cheaply.

>>34253859

>Val Kilmer

Doesn't he weigh like 270 lbs now? Dude probably can't even fit into a cockpit.

>>34255561

The antagonists are rogue AI-controlled fighter jets. :^)

>>34255912

Actors hitting the gym hard to prepare for a role isn't at all unprecedented.

File: fd55b9fd3a143ea4a4c60568c6b2de8e[1].jpg (111KB, 618x1024px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 618x1024px

>>34255912
He's slimmed down a lot recently.

Both he and Cruise look more like they'd be better off as an Air Boss or higher at this point than an active pilot, though.

>Top Gun 2

Let me guess...

A strong womyn of color and her transexual male to female RIO in their battle to fight the patriarchy have an encounter with a rogue white male flight squadron and come out victorious....

>>34256129
Fuck off /pol/.

File: 1494929132717.jpg (47KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x300px

>>34252094
>Why did America have to retire them so early, lads?
No worries, once the Civil War 2.0 starts, they'll come out of retirement.

File: 1339014567095.gif (681KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

681KB, 800x800px

>>34252228
Post YFW we get BRRRRT with lasers

File: Force Maxi Pads.jpg (202KB, 856x928px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 856x928px

>>34256163

What?

That sounds exactly what could come out of a Hollywood Top Gun sequel.

>>34256188
Seamen still have to shave.

>>34256064
Cancer does a lot to a man.

>>34255944
>they're gonna do a STEALTH 2 but with Tom Cruise and the Top Gun name
reeee

>>34252105
DELET

>>34256278
>Getting this salty about movies finally having more than token representation

File: 1497358345844.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>34252184
ALL OF THE AMRAAMS

>>34252094
Because the only two aircraft in the entire fleet required more maintenance man hours - the B-2 and Harrier, and both of those had abilities that weren't easily replaced.

File: autist outburst.png (575KB, 834x445px) Image search: [Google]

575KB, 834x445px

>>34256443
>getting this butthurt over shitposting

If I was a betting man I'd put my money in your prediction, sadly.

>>34256665
>Getting this autistic because we aren't letting you turboshitpost

>>34256795
>still butthurt and crying

>>34256129
Out of all the branches of the military you choose to get upset about with having females, you choose Navy Aviation?
Ruh roh, retard detected.

File: REEEE!!!!!!!.jpg (51KB, 834x445px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 834x445px

>>34257029

>>34257050
I'd be careful about posting selfies on 4chan.

>>34252094
America's air force died when we retired the last gunfighter and refused to take the tigershark

File: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE......inhales....REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.jpg (51KB, 834x445px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 834x445px

>>34257083

>>34252094

I wonder if that means the F-16/15 are on death's door as well. I mean, the stated number of F-35s is in the thousands range, and the only way to maintain that number is to axe superfluous classes.

What I don't understand is why they chose to scrap virtually every F-14 after they were retired. What did they have that warranted smashing them to pieces!?

>>34257144
Prevents spare parts from being stolen and shipped to Iran

The F-16 should be a fairly cost effective bird to maintain for state guard air arms, I'd imagine. Single engine, single seat, good performance.

I can see them staying around for a long time.

>>34257004
>>34257050
>>34257136
And here we see the lonely /pol/tard getting stuck on repeat as he "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"s about people catching him out for a stupid statement about a movie.

Doubly so because we already know Tom Cruise is the lead character.

>>34257113
Fuck off Sprey.

>>34257198
Sprey hated the tigershark, anon

>>34257208
You what? He tried to help Riccioni sell the POS.

File: 1465777395486.jpg (91KB, 1211x790px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1211x790px

>>34257224
>We wanted hot, light airplanes that were just as stripped-down as possible... They took an austere, stripped-down F-5 and ruined it by loading crap on it. Adding Sparrow missiles required huge complexity on the airplane. Adding air-to-ground capability ruined the F-20A.
Sprey is a fucking retard and didn't want the Tigershark. He's the embodiment of a luddite, and people listen to him

File: REEEEEEEEEEEEEE.......gag.....REEEEEEEEEEEEEE.jpg (51KB, 834x445px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 834x445px

>>34257195

>>34252094
Early? 30 years is a pretty long time for a naval plane. The airframes would be corroding from the salt water. They get beat up hard landing on carriers. Fighters pull hard G's further wearing the structures. Swing wings are a maintenance nightmare.

>>34252115
Sadly true. Super Hornets are far from the best, but good enough for the job they do.

>>34252210
This sounds terrible and you should feel terrible. Make it a period piece. Mid 90s over Bosnia maybe? Tomcats vs Fulcrums.

>>34256064
This. Both of them should have advanced past pilot by now. I could see Iceman as a senior instructor, and Maverick as a commander.

>>34257144
To a lesser extent, yes. Naval aviation is very hard on planes. Land based aircraft last longer. Still, USAF Falcons and Eagles are getting worn out. Thats the bigger reason for the F-35 push, we need planes, whether they are the right plane or not.

>>34257113
Tigershark was an amazing aircraft, but I can totally see why USAF didn't go for it. F-16 was already invested in. The common engine with the F-15 was a great advantage for maintenance and logistics. The slightly increased range and payload was more fitting to USAF doctrine.

F-20 would have been a Gripen 20 years earlier.

>>34257144
>>34257173
Iran still flies them and is a potential adversary. Rather than let Iran keep theirs flying longer, ours were destroyed.

>>34257190
It should and likely will. Its already in ANG inventories, and will likely stay there until F-35s start wearing out.

>>34252094
I never realized how big the plane really is.

>>34252094
Even though they retired it, I wish they would have kept the AIM-54 Phoenix Missiles. There must not be a real need for that type of weaponry I guess, but you would think they would be a good option for cruise missile countering. Especially with it's range and speed.

File: 1482363755637.jpg (40KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x480px

>>34252105

>>34258342
>Tigershark was an amazing aircraft
The F-20 sat stupid low to the ground with little weapons clearance, which severely restricted payload. An air to air focused dogfighter when we already had the F-15 was not going to fly when F-16s were already aplenty and doing excellent as multi-roles.

From what I've read, the f14 was expensive and difficult to maintain.
On top of that, it wasn't a very good jet to begin with.

>>34259744
It could have been, but in an attempt to game the McNamara-era acquisitions system they tried to stage up the Tomcat so it would look initially cheap.

Original plan:
F-14A: Minimal avionics and the TF-30 from the F-111.
F-14B: Once the F100 engines were in full production they upgrade the fleet with them.
F-14C: Total avionics overhaul.

The SecDef's successor caught onto that and it was stuck in the A variant for 18 years.