F-14 performance with Phoenix air to air missiles

[gunsandrockets]

The great F-14 Tomcat fighter has been retired from U.S. Navy service, but questions linger. For one thing there is considerable controversy whether the F-18E/F Super Hornet is an adequate substitute for the F-14D.<br /><br />http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/595147/posts<br /><br />My immediate question has to do with the performance of the F-14 while carrying a CAP load of Phoenix air to air missiles for defense of a carrier task force. How fast could an F-14A Tomcat fly with a full load of six Phoenix? Carrying 8,000 pounds worth of extra drag I wouldn't be surprised if the F-14A was limited to subsonic speed in level flight.

 

[gioveante]

I hope you're not trying to give the Iranians any ideas here. Just kidding <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />I'm sure there were a lot of reasons why the old Tomcat had to go but even the Superhornet is no comparison in terms of pure performance and ability. The Superhornet has a better climbrate at max load but other than that the Tomcat outperforms it on just about every mark. It had to be cost that ultimately decided the switch.<br /><br />You might be right wrt F-14A but why compare apples and oranges like that? The Superhornet F-18E/F should be compared to the Supertomcat F-14D. Remember that the more you load a lighter aircraft the bigger the penalty. Adding 3,7 tons of armament to both planes means a percentage increase of F-14:10.8% & F-18:12.7%. <br /><br />Original thrust2weight is F-14:0.91 & F-18:0.95 which means any overloading penalty would be F-140.108 x 0.91 = 0.09828) & F-180.127 x 0.95 = 0.12065) which translated into speed means the F-18 would lose (4/3)^2 or a factor 0.78 more than the F-14. I think the F-14D topspeed would drop dramatically but not below Mach 1, that would be a Mach 1.34 drop and seems a bit high IMO. At high altitude I'm guessing it could reach M1.4-1.6 with that kind of load but it wouldn't make much sense.

 

[gunsandrockets]

<I hope you're not trying to give the Iranians any ideas here. Just kidding><br /><br />Since the Tomcat has been retired from service and the individual aircraft are being chopped into bits to prevent the Iranians from ever getting access to any used parts, there could be no harm in finding out hard data on the aircraft's performance. My interest is for historical purposes, one can trace the origins of the F-14 back to the old Douglas F6D Missileer air-defense concept which was cancelled back in 1960.<br /><br />Hence my curiousity over the top speed of the F-14A with a full load of 6 Phoenix missiles. The older F6D concept was straight-winged subsonic-only aircraft using 2 x TF-30 non-afterburning turbofan engines. With a three man crew, the F6D was supposed to loiter for up to six hours at a distance up to 150 miles from the carrier task force while carrying 6 Eagle missiles. The five foot diameter radome housed the powerful radar and fire-control system to guide the 1,300lb Eagle long range missile and engage up to six targets simultaneously beyond a range of 100 miles (this was the origin of the AWG-9/Phoenix). So I wonder how the newer F-14A compared to the specifications for the older F6D, could the F-14A have a higher practical speed or match the endurance of F6D?<br /><br /><I'm sure there were a lot of reasons why the old Tomcat had to go but even the Superhornet is no comparison in terms of pure performance and ability. /><br /><br />Most of the controversy over the Super Hornet has to do with long range strike missions and whether it is an adequate replacement for the A-6E intruder or the F-14D in that role. Improvements from GPS guided precision strike munitions and newer standoff weapons probably make the Super Hornet an adequate substitute for the long range strike mission. My main interest though is in the carrier task force defense mission. My preliminary analysis is m

 

[gunsandrockets]

Moderators -- please move this thread to Aviation.

 

[jschaef5]

Well now that the F-14 is retired, NASA's got a good use for all those old F-14 Phoenix Missiles that are just sitting in storage...<br /><br />http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/research/Phoenix/phoenixmissile.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

Interesting link, thanx!

 

[vulture2]

Until the F-22 no fighter aircraft was capable of supersonic cruise, and supersonic dash would not have served any purpose when you launch 100 miles from the target. Moreover, none of the F-14 pilots I spoke to over the years were enthusiastic about the Phoenix; it required mounting special launch rails that were seldom actually carried and were believed at least by some to degraded maneuverability in a dogfight. But the biggest reason seemed to be that a fighter pilot should see his/her target, at least indirectly. <br /><br />The Phoenix itself was considered unnecessary and abandoned, but the F-14D itself could well have been justified on objective grounds; it was abandoned for a simpler reason; the Navy wanted something new.<br /><br />

 

[gunsandrockets]

<supersonic dash would not have served any purpose when you launch 100 miles from the target.><br /><br />Unless the F-14 was more than 100 miles away from the target, especially if that target was an attacking bomber approaching within range of launching an anti-ship cruise missile.<br /><br /><Moreover, none of the F-14 pilots I spoke to over the years were enthusiastic about the Phoenix; it required mounting special launch rails that were seldom actually carried and were believed at least by some to degraded maneuverability in a dogfight. But the biggest reason seemed to be that a fighter pilot should see his/her target, at least indirectly. /><br /><br />Dogfighting is irrelevant to the all weather fleet defense mission of the Phoenix.<br /><br /><The Phoenix itself was considered unnecessary and abandoned, but the F-14D itself could well have been justified on objective grounds; it was abandoned for a simpler reason; the Navy wanted something new. /><br /><br />The F-14 and every other carrier jet such as the A-6 Intruder was abandoned in favor of the F-18 Hornet; and for reasons of cost not novelty. As I pointed out in my first post that decision was very controversial too.<br /><br /> <br /><br />