I try to get some insight in the envisioned career of the F-14 at the beginning of its service life. The TF-30 engines were due to be replaced and following variants (B and C) were due to follow in considerable numbers. Also did the Navy think that the USAF might adopt the aircraft. Does anybody have background infos about this and can possibly timeline it with other programs (like F-15, F-16, F-18 and F-4M).

This is a rather low quality impression of the LTV contender for the USAF LWF-competition. It was intented to serve as USN-aircraft, too.[ATTACH]150833[/ATTACH]

@moderators:
I like to have this topic in Modern Military Aviation as it fits the usual discussion and might be misplaced in historic forum.

Schorsh

The F-14A is not the best teen fighter in terms of performance and agility, the F-18 is more agile, its TF-30 restricted it a lot, as a whole the F-14 was superb before the 1990s but when even the F-16 started getting the AMRAAM AIM-120 the design showed active homing was available in smaller and better weapons, when it lost the AIM-54, in the last years of its carreer basicly all the short comings of the design became evident, unstealthy, expensive, obsolete weaponry, underpowered engines and so on, in the 1970s the F-14 was a complete different animal.

Compared to the MiG-25 and MiG-23 enjoyed better avionics weaponry avionics and up to a level some degree of better agility specially compared to the MiG-25.

From 1974 to 1985 it was really a very good fighter interceptor, but with the advent of fighters like the MiG-29K and Su-33, it started showing signs of obsolecence, the Su-33 and MiG-29K could take off without the aid of a catapult, as fighters would out turn and outmaneuver the F-14.

The AIM-54 despite it had a great range was not agile and it imposed some performance limitations to the already slow climbing F-14.

In the early 1970s there were too much limits in missile design, air breathing missiles like the Meteor or agile missiles like the AIM-9X were still years ahead, the threat of Tu-22Ms armed with primitive missiles was still a reason to carry the AIM-54, by the 1990s better Surface to Air missiles, longer range and lighter Air to Air missiles showed the AIM-54 was getting old and obsolecent.

As far as we can say the 1970s were the best years the F-14 had, the mid 1980s were also good years but new contenders proved that new wing designs dispensed of the complexity of variable geometry wings, this simply proved that at the end the F-18 took over where the F-14 once ruled.

Today we can say the best naval fighter is the Rafale and against it the F-14 would not had win, when the Rafale gets the Meteor will rule for several years as the F-14 did in the 1970s

I agree with u Mig-23, but not completely..

As far as ‘ur assessment of Su-30 MKI goes vis-a-vis other a/cs(barring F-22), i think u r missing a few things..

Lets talk about what makes an a/c an air superiority vehicle(human factors not withstanding):
(1)Its survivability against possible threats posed by the enemy..
(2)The punch it can deliver..

Taking the first criterion into account the major constituting factors are
Stealth, ECM/ECCM package,flight Kinematics,Situational Awareness..

Those for second criterion include RADAR capability.Weapons systems & armament and Flight Kinematics..

Hope, in ‘ur next post u explain ‘ur choices/ comparisons based on the above factors..

artzd

What i do not like of the Su-30MKI is it lacks a AIM-9X type weapon, i mean a well armed F-15 with a good radar will eat a Su-30MKI if it uses Python Vs or ASRAAMs, i mean you do not need to be so agile when you have a HMS and a good missile.

probably at BVR combat things get even, but the Su-30MKI is a Heavy aircraft that is the reason new AL-31s have more thrust.

Also we always have to think what model and upgrade of either the F-15 or the Su-30.

Now the Eurofighter is more powerful than the F-18E, F-15I or Gripen thanks to supercruise, this will make the Su-30MKI not as good as the Eurofighter in BVR, compared to the Modern Eurofighter it is a slow machine, add up to this the Meteor and the Su-30MKI will be also be surpassed in BVR combat.

Modern aircraft are basicly radars and missiles, gun combat is rare and speed is an important aspect, in general i feel the Israelis know a well upgraded F-15 still can beat the Su-30MKI, but the Eurofighter will beat it for sure

If someone needs to explain the difference that types of engines makes to you then you really have no business commenting on it do you? Both the Eagle and the Hornet have similar bypass afterburning turbofans so it’s an apples to apples comparison. The Foxbat and F-15 are not. The type the Foxbat has is more like those on the B-70 ie. lower pressure ratio turbojets designed for high speed.

The MiG-31 has turbofans 😉

Huh, so in your book if it’s a US aircraft they can’t touch their published speeds in service but if it’s a Russian one it can not only reach the published speed but exceed it. I can’t believe I’ve wasted time even replying to your posts in this thread.

That is not the question, the MiG-23 figures are given by several sources one is the MiG-23ML manual, the other is military parade a Russian publisher that claims the M-23 can reach Mach 2.5, if you can get official numbers from official sources you can put the argument to rest but without it, it is only an argument of faith, you believing your F-15 figures and schorsch his books;)
See the chart they claim the F-15 only gets up to mach 1.78 fully loaded see this is a Western source

source
http://www.ausairpower.net/Profile-F-15A-D.html

They might have some figures that might be wrong or are incomplete but see how they claim a max speed in combat of 1.78 for the F-15.

Well,going by the usefulness meant to their operators, the following are my pickings (Fighters only):

(1) F-15 (The Fighter that upheld US air dominance for almost 30 years vis.a.vis its competitors)
(2)Mig-21(The fighter that exceeded everything ever expected of it)
(3)F-4(The American Mig21)
(4)MirageIII(The 3rd player in the era of the Mig-21 & F-4)
(5)F-16(A very good fighting machine coming at a very good price)

In terms of modern capabilities:
(1)F-22A(Generation ahead of its competitors )
(2)EF-2000 & Su-30 MKI(U may argue endlessly over which one is better)
(3)F-15 E(with AESA/avionics suite & latest Missiles)
(4)Rafale & F-18E/F
(5)Gripen & F-16(with AESA/avionics suite & latest Missiles)
(6)Su-30 MKK(Actual threat,as perceived by all the above)

I kind of agree with you a lot, your pickings are quit similar to mine

any way these are not so difficult to guess but i rate the MiG-31 as one of the best modern fighters.

F-22. The best modern fighter, i guess its only weakness is the limited number they will build and the possibility they might detect it in the future or present as some Russian statements claim, however there is few aircraft that can fight with it in even terms, perhaps only the Eurofighter armed with ASRAAM and with a good IRST system detector might beat it or the S-400 system with MiG-31s firing R-37s and R-77s

however i think it will beat them most of the time.

The Eurofighter packs supercruise, ASRAAM, AIM-120 and in the future Meteors, this aircraft must be at least as good as the F-22 in some terms.

The MiG-31 also must be another impressive aircraft flying at Mach 2.35 for half an hour and armed with R-37s this fighter must be a real challenge.

the rest are almost in the same class, the Gripen, Rafale, F-18E, F-15I and F-16 all can fire similar weapons, AIM-120s, ASRAAM. IRIS-T, Mica, AIM-9X and Python V, perhaps only the Rafale is a little better than the rest in performance.

It is probable the japanese F-2 is close to the F-18E if it is armed with the latest AAM-5s and AAM-4s

The rest the Su-30MKI, MiG-29SMT, Su-30MKK, J-10 do not posses a good WVR weapon in the class of the AIM-9X at this moment and still rely in older R-73s and Python IIIs and the Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen will soon deploy the Meteor leaving these aircraft obsolete in BVR combat.

The JF-17 is in a generation behind this aircraft and still belongs to the class of the MiG-29A, F-16A, ChingKuo IDF. Su-27B, Mirage 2000 and other obsolecent aircraft.

Russian analysis

I think I’m going to go crazy if I read that again. This is a rhetorical question, but I wonder where you actually get your “Russian analysis” from?

Phantom II

Several Russian writers quoted in several webpages give that figure, how did they get it i do not know, but i guess in 2007 the F-15 is not the most guarded secret and probably the Russians had a rough idea of the F-15 when they designed the Su-27 and MiG-29, they have flown mock combats against the F-15 in 1992 over American soil, they have visited the US and probably also exchanged some information about the F-15 and Su-27, and i think also they knew some information from the nations that have fought the F-15 Eagle.

Also remember the Mach 2.5 is not with supercruise, the F-15 is not a F-22 that can supercruise, and very likely fly at Mach 2.5 fully loaded would mean a short dash gulping lots of fuel, so it is not something to disbelieve the Russians, i guess also computer models can give them a rough idea and i am sure the Russians did some computer models before giving the specifications for even their Su-27 and MiG-29.

i guess the F-15 can achieve Mach 2.5 with less than 40% fuel and for a small period of time, it is probable it can carry a few missiles with it, but fullly loaded i guess is something most likely can not do .

I think that ColonelMarksman needs to define the word Modern

I think everything dependes of the decade because in reality aircraft are modified and also dependes in the type of aircraft involved, if we talk about fighters i would say tht basicly the list would be like this

During the 1960s i guess the best fighter was the F-4E and the MiG-21 this would be very difficult to organized.

1960s
fighter ————-Fighter-bomber/Bomber
1.F-4E ————-1.F-111
2.MiG-21———— 2.B-52
3.Mirage III ———3.Tu-16
4.F-5 —————4.Tu-22
5.Harrier ———– 5.Tu-95
6.Su-15————–6.A-4 Skyhawk
7.Su-11————–7.HandleyPage Victor
8.F-106—————8. Douglas B-66
9.F-104—————9.Avro Vulcan
10. BAC Lighting——-BAC Camberra

1970s

Fighter ———– Fighte-bomber/Bomber

1.F-15A ———— 1.Tu-22M2
2.F-14A ———— 2.F-111
3.MiG-25PD ——– 3.B-52G
4.F-16A ———– 4.Su-24
5.MiG-23ML ——— 5.Sepecat Jaguar
6.AJ-37 Viggen——–6.MiG-27
7.Mirage F1———–7.Su-22
8.F-4E —————8.Mirage V
9.IAI Kfir————–9.Tu-22
10. Harrier————-10. A-10

1980s

Fighter —————Fighter-bomber/bomber

1.Su-27B ———-1.F-117
2.F-15C ———- 2.Tu-160
3.MiG-31 ———-3.B-1B
4.F-14D ———— 4.Tu-22M3
5.MiG-29C ———–5.Panavia Tornado
6.F-16A/C —————-F-111
7.MiG-25PD ———-Su-24M
8.F-18A/C—————-MiG-27
9.Mirage 2000 —————-Sepecat Jaguar
10.MiG-23MLD —————Mirage V

1990s

Fighter ————————————–Fighter-bomber/bomber
1.F-15C (armed with Python IV)———————-1.B-2
2.Su-27B ——————————————2.F-117
3.F-16C (Armed with Python IV and AIM-120)——–3.Tu-160
4.MiG-31 ——————————————4.B-1B
5.F-14D —————————————–5.Tu-22M3
6.MiG-29C —————————————-6.Panavia Tornado
7 MiG-25PD—————————————-7.F-111
8.F-18A/C —————————————-8.Su-24
9.Mirage 2000————————————–9.MiG-27
10. IAI Kfir (armed with Python IV)——————10.Sepecat Jaguar

2000s

Fighter ————————————–Fighter-fighter/bomber

1.F-22 —————————————-1.B-2
2.Eurofighter ————— ——————-2.F-117
3.MiG-31BM (Armed with R-37)——————–3.Su-34
4.Rafale —————————————-4.Tu-160
5.F-18E ——————- ——————5.B-1B
6.Gripen —————————————–6.Tu-22M3
7.F-15I (armed with Python V and AIM-120)——–7.Panavia Tornado
8.F-16 (armed with AIM-9X and AIM-120)———-8.Su-24M
9.Su-30MKI ————————————–9.FBC-1
10 Su-27 (upgraded)—————————10. Sepecat Jaguar (armed with ASRAAM )

Note only operational aircraft, future fighters such as the LCA, Su-35BM, MiG-35, F-35 and new missiles might change the 2000s ranking but as far as 2007 i guess that is the most likely list

I used BVR and WVR weaponry and general radar and performance of the aircraft listed, fighters with more BVR weaposn ranked better, long range weapons are important parameters.

The J-10 might be a better close combat fighter but lacks a credible WVR weapon and does not carry as many BVR weapons as the Su-27B despite chinese reports that claimed it is better than the Su-27B.
I ranked the F-15 better than the F-14 because it used AIM-120s, and was more agile than the F-14

German scientists learned pretty fast that forward swept is not useful with available material. Other scientists learned that again later.

The basic concepts of aircraft are known since centuries, you may lead something to anything. But from the elements that make the B777 a well-selling aircraft, nothing was introduced or in any basic manner known on the Me-262, and if the Me-262 had it was somehow available before and in other countries at the same time (jet engines for example).

The usefulness of the military studies is very doubtful, at best we can contribute part of the engine development to military inputs.

However there are two important aspects you forget, the german WWII aircraft had two main feautures shared by modern aircraft, one was jet engines and the other was swept wings either forward or backward, the german aircraft of that era already did experiment with guided missiles and ejection seats, some used radars, so basicly Germany by the end of may 1945 had all the basic features we associate with modern jet aircraft.

Contrary to the british Meteor, Vampire or the american P-59, the German aircraft had all the complete features we associate with modern jet aircraft