F-14 Tomcat Projects

[danwild6]

Huh? the missile is on the INBOARD side of the nacelle, the landing gear is on the outboard side. Zero chance of the gear touching a missile.

I was referring to this post by asval

If that Sparrow mount intrudes on neither the tunnel carriage clearance nor the fuel tank pylon then you can probably go with another outboard mount on either nacelles. So it becomes 4x Phoenix, 4x Sparrows, 4x Sidewinders and 2x fuel tanks. Nasty loadout. Phoenix shot from high and close in hunting with the Fox 1s.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I was referring to this post by asval

Ah, gotcha!

I'd need to look at a real plane to confirm, but the only missile fin that might interfere would be the aft fin and even then it may be far enough away to clear.

 

[danwild6]

Though you could probably do two tandem on each nacelle inboard might interfere with the aft Phoenix's as the tunnel does narrow I believe.

 

[aim9xray]

Though you could probably do two tandem on each nacelle inboard might interfere with the aft Phoenix's as the tunnel does narrow I believe.

Too far aft and you are interfering with the the "daily" and "weekly" engine access doors which swing down and inboard.

 

[Firefinder]

Too far aft and you are interfering with the the "daily" and "weekly" engine access doors which swing down and inboard.

Which is not that big of an issue due to the fact the plane should be unarmed if you are doing maintenance least you cause another Forestall Fire. Sof if you are doing maintaince in those doors, the missile be gone. Pretty sure the F15Cs have similar blockage, and the F15E fastpacks do block the outer engine maintenance doors.

The bigger issue with those is if they can or cannot take any turbulence from the weapons in flight or if the Missile attachment parts and reinforcements get in the way of the door.

 

[aim9xray]

Well the "daily" door is called that because it is (well, was) opened daily for hydraulic fluid and other checks/servicing. Are you suggesting that the ordies download the aft missiles so you can do your daily maintenance checks on the engines?

 

[Firefinder]

Well the "daily" door is called that because it is (well, was) opened daily for hydraulic fluid and other checks/servicing. Are you suggesting that the ordies download the aft missiles so you can do your daily maintenance checks on the engines?

Are you suggesting that the planes be armed 24/7 and not 30-60 minutes til launch?

Cause everything I have read the navy does not have the planes sitting around armed in the last 60 years. Or even ten years after the F14 started design work...

So why will the ordies need to download the missiles when said missiles should be in the Magazine? Sounds like a great way to have the Ships Captain himself appear like a wraith to Murder them cause they are endangering his boat.

And why would you be doing the daily inspections after the plane is getting ready to be hooked up onto the catapult? That should have been down hours ago.


Eyeah no. Unless the plane is schedule to launch inside the next few hours its freaking empty of anything.

That is when Maintenace is done. That is when you be doing you daily servicing. And thing that results in you need to pop open the service hatches is a deadlining fault and the plane be getting unloaded to be strike down to the hanger even if the hatches are not covered by the weapons.

 

[aim9xray]

You're the expert. I've not been aboard an active carrier, not even so far as a Tiger Cruise. KMAGYOYO.

 

[SSgtC]

Are you suggesting that the planes be armed 24/7 and not 30-60 minutes til launch?

Cause everything I have read the navy does not have the planes sitting around armed in the last 60 years. Or even ten years after the F14 started design work...

So why will the ordies need to download the missiles when said missiles should be in the Magazine? Sounds like a great way to have the Ships Captain himself appear like a wraith to Murder them cause they are endangering his boat.

And why would you be doing the daily inspections after the plane is getting ready to be hooked up onto the catapult? That should have been down hours ago.


Eyeah no. Unless the plane is schedule to launch inside the next few hours its freaking empty of anything.

That is when Maintenace is done. That is when you be doing you daily servicing. And thing that results in you need to pop open the service hatches is a deadlining fault and the plane be getting unloaded to be strike down to the hanger even if the hatches are not covered by the weapons.

Soooo, may I offer a piece of friendly advice? This isn't an argument you're going to win. There are two members on this site who's knowledge of Naval Aviation operations and of the F-14 in particular, dwarfs the rest of the forum combined. Aim9 is one of those two.

 

[danwild6]

Well the "daily" door is called that because it is (well, was) opened daily for hydraulic fluid and other checks/servicing. Are you suggesting that the ordies download the aft missiles so you can do your daily maintenance checks on the engines?

Do you think there would have been room outboard either forward or possibly aft of the landing gear?

 

[apparition13]

Now I do understand this model is the product of a joke but reflecting upon the fact that Grumman borrowed alot from the A-6 wing for the F-14's, could a "pylon-ed, plumbed and wired" wing be installed on the Tomcat in place of the original wing. I'm trying to brainstorm how a Beagle Tomcat would've looked like and a wing switch seemed more easy to do than, let's say, installing hardpoints and CFTs on the nacelles.

I'd put a big CFT in the tunnel. Something like the conformal weapons carriage tank that was tested on the F-4. That had around 1000 gallons, and mounts for weapons. Assuming it didn't wreck the aerodynamics something like that could work.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Do you think there would have been room outboard either forward or possibly aft of the landing gear?

That's going to be a very hot area, next to the engines. Not sure I'd want to let missiles bake there.

I'd put a big CFT in the tunnel. Something like the conformal weapons carriage tank that was tested on the F-4. That had around 1000 gallons, and mounts for weapons. Assuming it didn't wreck the aerodynamics something like that could work.

You mean like the one proposed for the F-14 AIM Improved Manned Interceptor for the USAF?

(edit: wrong acronym!)

 

[yeetmahboi]

I'd put a big CFT in the tunnel. Something like the conformal weapons carriage tank that was tested on the F-4. That had around 1000 gallons, and mounts for weapons. Assuming it didn't wreck the aerodynamics something like that could work.

Like the F-14 IMI? Absolutely, love me Tomcats and gas all days.

 

[BlackBat242]

Soooo, may I offer a piece of friendly advice? This isn't an argument you're going to win. There are two members on this site who's knowledge of Naval Aviation operations and of the F-14 in particular, dwarfs the rest of the forum combined. Aim9 is one of those two.

As a former USMC A-6E tech who was aboard a carrier (CV-61) for 2 2-month Norpac (Korea/Japan area) cruises (1986 & 1987) and one 6-month WestPac/Indian Ocean cruise (1987, Persian Gulf tanker convoy ops), what I saw on the flight deck were birds that were unarmed unless they were going flying on a "weapons required" flight within 2-4 hours (F-14 CAP flights, as well as "lets go blow up some oil platforms", and "cruise over the Gulf in case we need to blow up Iranian boats attacking tankers" flights) or were standing "alert aircraft" assignment (aircraft prepped for flight, fueled & armed, and crew either in the cockpit (5 minute & 15 minute) or in the ready room (30 minute & 1 hour) - anything longer and they would only load ordnance after the bird was tasked with a flight.

And when I spent 6 months of 1984 in MCAS Iwakuni, Japan & NAS Cubi Point, Philippines, aircraft were likewise only armed when getting ready for, or just back from, flights.

 

[apparition13]

That's going to be a very hot area, next to the engines. Not sure I'd want to let missiles bake there.


You mean like the one proposed for the F-14 AIM Improved Manned Interceptor for the USAF?

(edit: wrong acronym!)

Was that a single tank? I was under the impression it was four enlarged Phoenix pylons. If it were two tanks that could work. I wonder if they would have clearance for four Harpoons. That might allow an F-14C or Super-Tomcat to match the A-6 for range.

I was actually picturing something wider and shorter so weapons would still be somewhat within a now shallower tunnel. More like this, but between the nacelles.

 

[danwild6]

That's going to be a very hot area, next to the engines. Not sure I'd want to let missiles bake there.


You mean like the one proposed for the F-14 AIM Improved Manned Interceptor for the USAF?

(edit: wrong acronym!)

Ok so it would have to be forward not aft thanks for the reply.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Was that a single tank? I was under the impression it was four enlarged Phoenix pylons.

I believe it is a single tank, it just looks like enlarged Phoenix pylons up front.

 

[aim9xray]

As a former USMC A-6E tech who was aboard a carrier (CV-61) for 2 2-month Norpac (Korea/Japan area) cruises (1986 & 1987) and one 6-month WestPac/Indian Ocean cruise (1987, Persian Gulf tanker convoy ops), what I saw on the flight deck were birds that were unarmed unless they were going flying on a "weapons required" flight within 2-4 hours (F-14 CAP flights, as well as "lets go blow up some oil platforms", and "cruise over the Gulf in case we need to blow up Iranian boats attacking tankers" flights) or were standing "alert aircraft" assignment (aircraft prepped for flight, fueled & armed, and crew either in the cockpit (5 minute & 15 minute) or in the ready room (30 minute & 1 hour) - anything longer and they would only load ordnance after the bird was tasked with a flight.

And when I spent 6 months of 1984 in MCAS Iwakuni, Japan & NAS Cubi Point, Philippines, aircraft were likewise only armed when getting ready for, or just back from, flights.

Thank you all. I stand sit corrected. As I said, I have no USS Boat time. I was scheduled for some in October/November 2001, but that was OBE, to say the least.

Facts talk, bullshit walks.

 

[DesScorp]

As a former USMC A-6E tech who was aboard a carrier (CV-61) for 2 2-month Norpac (Korea/Japan area) cruises (1986 & 1987) and one 6-month WestPac/Indian Ocean cruise (1987, Persian Gulf tanker convoy ops), what I saw on the flight deck were birds that were unarmed unless they were going flying on a "weapons required" flight within 2-4 hours (F-14 CAP flights, as well as "lets go blow up some oil platforms", and "cruise over the Gulf in case we need to blow up Iranian boats attacking tankers" flights) or were standing "alert aircraft" assignment (aircraft prepped for flight, fueled & armed, and crew either in the cockpit (5 minute & 15 minute) or in the ready room (30 minute & 1 hour) - anything longer and they would only load ordnance after the bird was tasked with a flight.

And when I spent 6 months of 1984 in MCAS Iwakuni, Japan & NAS Cubi Point, Philippines, aircraft were likewise only armed when getting ready for, or just back from, flights.

This mirrors my experiences on CVN-65 in the late 80's: most aircraft on deck were not armed unless they were scheduled to launch. Perhaps this was a policy resulting from the Forrestal/Enterprise incidents, and lessons learned. Zunis were gone, but why tempt the Accident Gods when you didn't have to?

 

[PappyVF477]

This mirrors my experiences on CVN-65 in the late 80's: most aircraft on deck were not armed unless they were scheduled to launch. Perhaps this was a policy resulting from the Forrestal/Enterprise incidents, and lessons learned. Zunis were gone, but why tempt the Accident Gods when you didn't have to?

And lets be frank and honest here, Putting weapons on a bird, esp one at sea when not needed is wasteful due to most weapon systems having a "Time on rack" life measured in days and a time in bunker in years. I don't know what the actual military term for these times are but I do know that flying the weapons on aircraft when not needed is excessive wear for both the aircraft and the munitions.