In my opinion the larger single aircraft that performs 1.5 missions of a similar role smaller aircraft is worth the extra cost if it can be contained within a 30% surcharge. New build F-14’s were possible for less than the F-18E/F; developing the Super Hornet was nowhere as cheap as they originally promised. To modernize the program up to today’s standard – minus the overhead of stealth technology – would have left you with a cheaper but more capable program. You could of easily strung it out until F-35 which is essentially what Super Hornet was supposed to do and now will have to live on for years past its designed life. I just don’t think F-18E/F was worth the cost in the long run.
The F-14 just plain had more size, more carry capacity, and more range. A modernized F-14 would of finally fulfilled some shortcomings that were planned for so many previous renditions of the F-14 that never left the drawing board. Add in the modernized weaponry like AMRAAM that makes AIM-54C obsolete. Modern materials could of lightened up the airframe and increased its landing weight. And it had much more electrical potential for electronic warfare, making a Prowler version more lucrative than the stopgap EF-18. Hell, you could of squeezed in a third seat for electronic warfare in a Growler-Cat.
The fact is the USN covers 70% of the world’s surface yet gets smaller proportional funds for its air forces than the USAF. If the Navy had more glamor than it does today, perhaps if they did more Top Gun movies per se, then they’d of been the first to the F-22 program and the USAF would of been buying their design. Hell, the Navy didn’t even get but token roles over Afghanistan or Iraq. The writing is on the wall.
Sign In
