Clips from a movie called "Speed and Angels" currently in production...

More info at: http://speedandangels.com/

Trailer: Click here!

Dogfight: Click here!

Effect of G's: Click here!

The last clip is classic!

"Hey brother... I gotta get you an alarm clock back there". That last one was way funny. Not saying that I could do any better though... Thanks LD. Good find.

Convertible

Very cool - I didn't realize I was perfect for handling Gs (Short, fat, red meat & beer)

Did I just see what I think I saw, an F-14 in a strafing pass? Awesome! This must have been done during Enduring Freedom or Iraqi Freedom because the last active F-14 squad is due back in a few weeks, and then, no more Tomcats

"Goodnight, sweetheart, goodnight..."
-Priceless

Happy Flying-
SuperBugz

yup yup. it was an F-14. and god bless it . Such a tragedy that their scraping the whole fleet, thats just like scraping a whole ship cause it dont have a GPS. The only thing to solve the problem with the tomcat, is to upgrade it, give it better armaments, and better electronics like the super bugz. To me, the tomcat is the plane with the heavy artillery, u see them dropping Mk84's through GBU-10-16's+. And look at the hornets, they only got a few small bombs but one, that nice metallic Red GBU which is really pretty if ya look at it

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2690945

Only in the Navy....

Wazzup!

Another big reason for the retirement is of course maintenance and man-hour per plane and flight hour. The Tomacat requires 4 times as many hours in the shop for every single flight hour compared to the Hornet. Last I heard the Tomcat averaged 18 mx hours per flight hour, compared to the Hornet with less than 5 hours! That's significant!

It's an aging platform, that's all... Besides, before getting the Hornets the Navy expressed wanting a Fighter with Air-To-Ground capability to add to their forward projection of force, which is why the F/A-18 fit the role well (the first Fighter to have an F/A designation). The Tomcat was built for air superiority and long range intercept, the Hornet is a multi-role fighter (compromise, but more effective in cost savings as well). Not to mention the space savings on the carrier deck and hangar or the easier maintaining of its modular engine parts, avionics etc.

Just like so many others that grew up with the "Top Gun" (Hollywood) generation and "Maverick", the airplane has a special feel around it, but it's time to let it go. Can't become a legend before your time is up, if you know what I mean...

Lawndart wrote:Wazzup!
It's an aging platform, that's all... Besides, before getting the Hornets the Navy expressed wanting a Fighter with Air-To-Ground capability to add to their forward projection of force, which is why the F/A-18 fit the role well (the first Fighter to have an F/A designation). The Tomcat was built for air superiority and long range intercept, the Hornet is a multi-role fighter (compromise, but more effective in cost savings as well).

Thats where Northrop Grumman needs to come up with an F-14E

Lawndart wrote:The Tomcat was built for air superiority and long range intercept, the Hornet is a multi-role fighter (compromise, but more effective in cost savings as well).

LD we know what ya mean, and how expensive the beast of the sky is...but the long range capability is "STILL" the most important part needed for the navy.
Tomcat=Combat Radius ( to and back ) 2,000 miles / 3,200 km. Add another 250 miles cause of the AIM-54C
Super Hornet=Combat Radius ( to and back ) 1,290.8 miles / 2,074 km (no external fuel, BUT with externals it only matches the tomcat having 1 external)

Overall:
Being 25 years younger then the Tomcat, the Super Hornet has an advantage in both stealth and modern day technology. Design to carry out both "air to air" and "air to ground" missions, the new generation of the F-18 Super Hornet offers more longer range, greater endurance, more payload-carrying ability, more powerful engines, increased carrier bring back capability, enhanced survivability and a renewed potential for future growth compared to its F-18 predecessor. The crew station also features a touch-sensitive, upfront control display, a larger, liquid crystal multipurpose color display and a new engine fuel display, making the Super Hornet one of the most sophisticated and ATF in the world

SO ??????
With more technological advanced weapon available to more unstable countries (such as the new generation of Migs and the new Russian Anti-ship missile), fleet defense has ever become more important. While the Super Hornet might be the next generation of the navy super fighter, there has been doubt whether if it can carry out air to air combat in long range distance. The Phoenix missile is designed especially for the F-14 Tomcat, it is able to destroy any given target within the range of 60 miles.
With the end of the cold war, governments in the western world are looking into more flexible and money saving equipment, such as the F-18 Hornet series which is known for little m (maintenance) and big R (reliability). The F-18 Super Hornet is definitely the more advanced technological fighter with superb air and ground capability at a cost of 35 million dollars (3 million dollar cheaper then the Tomcat), but the F-14 Tomcat is still the superior fighter because it is able to reach a longer distance and engage multiple targets and destroy them simultaneously (which is needed for the first line of defense in naval warfare), in a time of war and the protection of the fleet.

Only time will tell if it is a mistake to replace the F-14 Tomcat with F-18 Super Hornet as the carriers first line of defense.

Which source did you quote? Just out of curiosity...

Agreed on all points, except that regardless of why, it was time to let the Tomcat go. New technology has to take its place. Whether the Hornet is the answer is a moot point. Maybe it's not, but the aging Tomcat is certainly past its prime, regardless how much we all love that airplane (myself included). Once the Navy gets their version of the JSF things will once again be turned. In the mean time the Super Hornet is truly an amazing weapons platform that offsets any cost vs. performance questions perfectly and it's arguably one of the most versatile fighters in the armed forces today.

One good point about the F/A-18 that was brought up though, is its fuel capacity. Without externals, its range is its biggest limitation. With externals, it offsets the cost per range and stations available for ordinance to be very effective in the fleets forward projection of force.

thank you . And why would i tell you where my good info comes from

Cause this is a FORUM Tailhook.....you know, where people SHARE information that they know or have from what they know and OTHER PEOPLES resources.

Viper101 wrote:thank you . And why would i tell you where my good info comes from

You don't have to, but it's common courtesy when quoting a source to name it in a footnote or at least mention that you "Googled it" for instance.

If you don't want to tell that's fine. It's not as if I cannot find the information myself, but what's your point of holding on to it? To make more friends around the internet?

Listen. I don't care where you got the information. I was simply asking since you quoted a source, but never gave the source out. The information is still as valid regardless (but it begs to differ whenever inconsistencies occur and no mention of a source is pointed out)...

haha. well with my l33t skills i just simply googled "tomcat vs super hornet" and hit "Im feeling lucky" and there ya go

Big thumbs up on doing the research...

Not citing the source still equals plagiarism...

I was just hoping the meds were kicking in...

As far as the l33t skills...umm...you didnt get the name "TAILHOOK" for nothin...

Thumper

Thank you.

That is what I was talking about. Now, I could easily find the source myself and see who the author was etc: http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/ ... owdown.htm