F-14 from the top gun film

[Reddog]

Not trying to turn this into a "my planes better then yours" thread but to clarify a few points made.

1. The F-14 was designed at the start to carry bomb, the Navy decided not to pursue that capability since they already had the A-7 and A-6. If the DOD had decided to pursue the bombing capability then they would have cleared Zuni, Mk 77 and other weapons but again, there was no need.

2. The F-4 didn’t have a CCIP, moving map display, laser designator, ground-radar-mode, and self-start capability in 1975 either.

3. Another plus for the A-7 was load carrying capacity, it could carry three times more than an A-4, carry just as much as an A-6 and was just as accurate if not more accurate then an A-6, the A-7 was a bomb truck and CAS aircraft.

Comparing different aircraft from different eras (such as the F-14 to the F-4) is like comparing apples to oranges. Both were designed to combat different threats and designed at different times. Both were at the top during their time in service for the mission they were designed for but both were designed at different times and one must take into account the technology gap between there design. It’s like comparing a cell phone to an old rotary phone, both are cutting edge technology when they came out but comparing them to each other is not a very fair comparison.

The intent of my post was to point out why the Marines didn’t buy the F-14, not to discuss which aircraft is better so I would like to recommend that we just drop this discussion and get back to the original topic of this thread. If we start discussing which aircraft is better the end result will be the thread getting lock down and deleted and we don’t want that. There is too much good information in this thread to let it get deleted due to one’s passion for their favorite aircraft.

Respectfully,

Reddog

[Tank]

Marine F-14's....

Ugh... Back in the day the Marines and Navy tried the F-18 concept that we have today (both services operating the same systems). Except it was the F-14 and Harrier. The harrier replacing the A-7 and soon be F-18A becoming the light attack aircraft and the F-14 becoming the fighter. Being what things were in the day, that didn't work out. First the Marines asked the SecNav for some F-14's. Than after some thought and bean counters working with some numbers, we wanted out. Reasons - too much money, to hard to forward field maintain, too many personal needed for maintance overall (over the F-4 numbers, remember the force is capped so more wingers mean less grunts or other MOS's), wait till the F-18 came along. SecNav/brass/other Marine Air had other ideas because of per-unit cost of F-14 running away to move $600 mil from Marine F-4 funds to Marine F-14 funds, 70 in all. VMFA-122 was to the first and a three more planned (IIRC VMFA-235, VMFA-531 and one other). SecDef ended all fighting. 2 Jul 75 CMC said that the Marines would use the F-4 till the F-18 came along. IIRC not soon afterwards Iran bought a large number of F-14's.

Source, Mersky's Marine Air book, emails with the Marine Tomcat Det CO and soon to be VMFA-122 CO and other websites.

[jenshb]

I don't see this as a "my plane's better than your plane" contest - Reddog and John make some valid points, but from different perspectives. I think we can all agree that the Phantom and Tomcat both are among the greatest aircraft ever built. What I read from this is that the USMC didn't buy the F-14 because it wasn't "good enough". The USMC already had an aircraft (F-4) that could carry a heavy bombload in support of the Marines on the ground, and from this point of view and point in time, the F-14 was not offering much in the way of improvement to what they already had, but it did come at a high cost. If you're looking at buying a car and have a budget, then there is little point in changing or buying a more expensive car that will do the things you want and need as well as or no better than your current car.

Now, the F-14 had ground attack potential that the designers realised (like the F-15). However, the main customer wasn't interested in developing that potential (initially, just like the F-15). The customer already had several airplanes that could drop bombs - what the customer wanted was an air superiority fighter, and Grumman could hardly be expected to fund this development on their own when they were already struggling making a profit on the Tomcat. If we go to the car analogy again - you already have a "people carrier" and an SUV, and you're at the Corvette dealer. The dealer says he can make your Corvette drive off road or carry passengers - but why would you want more of the same? You want something better than what you have in a particular area (in this case "sportiness")...

Jens

Edited July 24, 2008 by jenshb

[John B]

Not trying to turn this into a "my planes better then yours" thread but to clarify a few points made.

2. The F-4 didn’t have a CCIP, moving map display, laser designator, ground-radar-mode, and self-start capability in 1975 either.

Respectfully,

Reddog

My statement was not about "whats-my-favorite-aircraft". It was about "Why didn't the Marine Corps buy the F-14?".

As you pointed out, the F-4 didn't have a CCIP, moving map display, self-starter, ground-radar-mode. That's correct, but neither did the F-14. The idea was "Why buy a jet without the things you want when it is more expensive?"

That's like buying an expensive pair of designer jeans that are too tight when a good-fitting pair of Levi's will do just fine.

As for the CCIP, moving map display, laser designator, and the ground-radar-mode - the A-7 did have that.

As for the CCIP, moving map display, laser designator, ground-radar-mode, and self-start capability - the A-4M had that was (arguably) cheaper than the A-7. Depending on how you do the math (whether you are pro- or con-F-14), an A-4M was 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of an F-14.

In the end, the Marine Corps benefited from the Navy opting for the F-14. It freed up more F-4s that were transferred to the Marine Corps until the jet that had CCIP, movin... (blah blah) was available for them to buy. Factor in operating costs (which would've been dramatically less different if the F-14 was ever produced in enough quantities) and the Hornet was a good choice for the Marine Corps.

What people are forgetting is that when the Marine Corps was courting the F-14, it was post-Vietnam and pre-Reagan. The money was so tight that F-4 squadrons were disappearing the way F/A-18 squadrons are disappearing now.

What no one seems to be understanding in the Marine Corps F-4 vs F-14 choice (and I'm poorly conveying) is that - IT ALWAYS BOILS DOWN TO COST! The Commandant felt that losing 2 more F-4 squadrons for a jet that didn't meet its needs and would require more money to develop into what it really wanted wasn't worth the price. Two more squadrons meant more units were available for deployment, which meant all the squadrons could spend more time not deployed or available to deploy somewhere else. Staying with the F-4 meant that maintenance folks didn't need to learn to fix different jets and aircrews be transitioned as well. Staying with the F-4 meant the Corps didn't have to set up a another logistics pipeline for parts. It also meant that The Corps didn't have to go through the growing pains that the Navy did. The F-4 was ready to go and was a proven factor. F-14 (for the Marines) wouldn't be ready until it's ground attack capabilty was fully matured even then it would still COST MORE.

I don't see this as a "my plane's better than your plane" contest - Reddog and John make some valid points, but from different perspectives.... ....If you're looking at buying a car and have a budget, then there is little point in changing or buying a more expensive car that will do the things you want and need as well as or no better than your current car.

Jens

YES! That's exactly what the mind-set was in 1975.

[VFA-103guy]

I bought a Toyota Corolla to save on gas.

It's the best car my wife owns..

[David Walker]

But does it have CCIP?

[illithid00]

But does it have CCIP?

My Hyundai Elantra has CCIP, the ability to fire HARM missiles, and afterburning F110 jet engines.

EDIT: Oh, and it has AIM-9X, AIM-120D, and the ability to use Russian counterpart missiles.

Edited July 25, 2008 by illithid00

[trut]

uh, last time I've checked, this thread was called "f-14 from the top gun something..."

any chance of reuploading those files?

thanx

[VFA-103guy]

But does it have CCIP?

No..but it does have a Tomcat sticker on it...

And it came with a tires for life/engine for life warranty....the only stipulation being, I have to have any and all maintenance done at a Toyota dealership. Which I might add is pretty pricey.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program......please..

Edited July 25, 2008 by VFA-103guy

[David Walker]

any chance of reuploading those files?

Has anyone tried to get in touch with Jared? I'd think he still has those files lying around.

[Brian P: Fightertown Decals]

Might as well add hype to a sheet that will go to print shortly from us. Since it matches this thread. And it's got Tomcats on it Now if the Marine Phantoms were as cool as Navy Tomcats....

(good points in the above discussion btw)

-brian

[Tank]

Might as well add hype to a sheet that will go to print shortly from us. Since it matches this thread. And it's got Tomcats on it Now if the Marine Phantoms were as cool as Navy Tomcats....

(good points in the above discussion btw)

-brian

The fact it has MARINES painted on its side makes it cooler, no matter what airframe it is. Having MARINES on a F-4 gives it style and class unequal to any.

[TaiidanTomcat]

The fact it has MARINES painted on its side makes it cooler, no matter what airframe it is. Having MARINES on a F-4 gives it style and class unequal to any.

Too true. I had also heard the Harrier was a factor in the USMC not getting the Tomcat, we couldn't afford both and the Harrier is better for the Corps. I have been told by many that the AV-8A sucked pretty badly. Modern Harriers are incredible though, so in the end it was a good choice...besides a Tomcat with Marines written on it, with that awesome VMFA-531 skull on the tails would have destroyed the Jolly Rogers cool factor to an unrecoverable degree. people would write posts like "no more 531 F-14s" and "enough Grey Ghost decals!" They would be busy shooting down zeros, and escorting hijacked airliners while VF-84 played "background clutter" in the movies.

Edited July 26, 2008 by TaiidanTomcat

[stealthy1]

For whatever reason, I feel that a Marines F/A-18D is just the sickest thing I've ever seen. Their night attack hornets are just cool. They can use LITENING too...

Too bad the F-14 was never bought by the us Canucks, after the whole fiasco with Iran we could have bought the F-14A at much cheaper costs than was originally planned. Somehow, the deal went South...and I don't mean it went back to the US. We opted for the now-old F/A-18A/B, which I guess is enough to fulfill the RCAF's mission of NORAD patrol. I'd like to see at least C/D, or perhaps E/F, hornets though.

[PNW_Modeler]

Too true. I had also heard the Harrier was a factor in the USMC not getting the Tomcat, we couldn't afford both and the Harrier is better for the Corps. I have been told by many that the AV-8A sucked pretty badly. Modern Harriers are incredible though, so in the end it was a good choice...besides a Tomcat with Marines written on it, with that awesome VMFA-531 skull on the tails would have destroyed the Jolly Rogers cool factor to an unrecoverable degree. people would write posts like "no more 531 F-14s" and "enough Grey Ghost decals!" They would be busy shooting down zeros, and escorting hijacked airliners while VF-84 played "background clutter" in the movies.

Oorah!

[phantom]

We opted for the now-old F/A-18A/B, which I guess is enough to fulfill the RCAF's mission of NORAD patrol. I'd like to see at least C/D, or perhaps E/F, hornets though.

Our Hornets, while old on the calender are (as far as I understand) right up to date with the C level Hornet. Since the upgrades have been completed.

[Josh1971]

So "Top Gun", huh?

[Tank]

...besides a Tomcat with Marines written on it, with that awesome VMFA-531 skull on the tails would have destroyed the Jolly Rogers cool factor to an unrecoverable degree. people would write posts like "no more 531 F-14s" and "enough Grey Ghost decals!" They would be busy shooting down zeros, and escorting hijacked airliners while VF-84 played "background clutter" in the movies.

I couldn't agree more......

[stealthy1]

Shawn,

Yes, as far as I understand, most of the land based A/B variants are equivalent to the C/D standard, but I'd prefer to see some jet refreshing until at least the JSF. We've had quite a few crashes; I was thinking we should maybe switch to something different, but then again, our defence budget is now as big as the US's.

[eliott71]

Hi all,

I've Jared's Layouts (Instructions, Placement Guide, Pdf's in 1/72, 1/48 & 1/32 scale) on file.

If he doesn't mind and you want them, send me a PM with your E-Mail then i'll forward them to you!

Happy Modelling!

Michael

[Jared Bishop]

I've been a gone a long time but I still have the files. Is anyone would like them just shoot me an email. Other are free to give them out but I'd like to see images of the finished models.

jared@bishopart.com

Edited August 18, 2011 by Jared Bishop