Schorsch:
Some reason from yours couldn’t stand
It is an aircraft for a very special mission and was never intended for use as fighter-to-fighter dogfighter.
How do you explain why F-14 win the competition with F-15 most times? As you said:
Some things are truly remarkable on the F-14, which actually set trends for following fighters:
- Large use of fuselage lift
- Reasonable control at higher angles of attack
- Turbofan engines
Yes, these does are character of advanced aerodynamic layout of new fighter at that time for dogfight
Many more things were remarkable but very mission specific, like the weapon system and the swing wings. The Tomcat was much too big for an effective fighter, but would have been an effective aircraft in the inventory.
Too big? How many “too big” carried aircrafts compare with the carrier US navy has used? Why you only pick up Tomcat?
I think that the F-18E is indeed better suited for today’s US Navy. It has however some drawabcks when compared to the Tomcat, because it wasn’t tailormade for the mission. But as the threat of Russian attack has vanished, single mission aircraft are superfluent. Something like a Tomcat II or life extension measures would surely be a waste of money and resources. When talking about the Tomcat it should always be noted, that its technology is basically end 1960s standard. It was introduced same time as late MiG-23M and very early MLs, which it outpasses in overall performance (and by a wide margin in price).
And I think the F-14 was the first fighter aircraft to exceed all expectations in price tag. F-14 Million!
Well, How good S.H. is, Time will prove.
Sign In
:confused: