VFA-203 Forever
So You Like To Put fishsticks in your mouth?
eddie said:
Anyone know when the movie is being released? It looks awesome.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
The Tomcat Legacy; 35+ years from Fleet Air Defender to Recce to Precision Strike
- Thread starter webmaster
- Start date
Anyone know when the movie is being released? It looks awesome.
Oh, boy ..... While I fully realize this will be unpopular with some herein:
GUYS .... really. For the love of God.
STOP !!! .... the seemingly endless post-mortem orgasm re: the F-14 and it's passing.
It's too bad it's going south. But it's just another Navy jet. Where are all the A-4's today??? The F-8's, F-4's, A-7's, RA-5's, A-3's, A-1's, A-6's , etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum; just to name a few ??? They "were great" , too, right ??? ... and they are gone. Gone. Buried. Dead. Toast. Check Davis-Monthan if you doubt me.
The F-14 was a really nice airplane. Troubled and a little confused early on, and never "really tested" in the heat of combat: you know .... launch after launch, day after day, week after week, line period after line period, year after year .... like some others -- in combat .... but it was really nice. High tech , powerful, capable, ... high maintenance.
I would have liked to have flown it. But was it GREAT ??? A great radar, great missile, good range. But a GREAT USN FIGHTER ??? Well, I wouldn't know about that.
I liked it. I beat it nearly EVERY time I fought it. As in .... nearly .... every .... time. Maybe every time --- I don't dwell on those things or get "hung up" on it. I just know I always went up against the "Turkey" with a LOT of confidence in the eventual outcome. Sure; easy to say, since we weren't REALLY killing each other. No harm, no foul, right ???
But when the "Turkey" would throw up a wing in a fight ... every Adversary in the Western Hemisphere could see it --- and if you could, you could beat it --- Tom Cruise and Hollywood and Miramar/Grumman propaganda notwithstanding. And since most of you are handicapped because you know relatively nothing about the realities of Navy fighters you are condemned to remain victim of the ... "propaganda" .... and are therefore clueless ....
The F-14 was a good/great (?) USN fighter ... it could have been better --- but can't we all ... ???
>>>>The F-4 Phantom in USA service killed > 100 Gomers ... and we'll not even talk about the Israeli contribution to the overall score ....
>>>>The F-14 in USA service bagged about .... what ??? Five ( 5 ) ???
Perspective .... always keep your perspective, or you will end up wanting.
[**edit** p.s. .... it's the Man ... not the airplane. Believe it ....**]
GUYS .... really. For the love of God.
STOP !!! .... the seemingly endless post-mortem orgasm re: the F-14 and it's passing.
It's too bad it's going south. But it's just another Navy jet. Where are all the A-4's today??? The F-8's, F-4's, A-7's, RA-5's, A-3's, A-1's, A-6's , etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum; just to name a few ??? They "were great" , too, right ??? ... and they are gone. Gone. Buried. Dead. Toast. Check Davis-Monthan if you doubt me.
The F-14 was a really nice airplane. Troubled and a little confused early on, and never "really tested" in the heat of combat: you know .... launch after launch, day after day, week after week, line period after line period, year after year .... like some others -- in combat .... but it was really nice. High tech , powerful, capable, ... high maintenance.
I would have liked to have flown it. But was it GREAT ??? A great radar, great missile, good range. But a GREAT USN FIGHTER ??? Well, I wouldn't know about that.
I liked it. I beat it nearly EVERY time I fought it. As in .... nearly .... every .... time. Maybe every time --- I don't dwell on those things or get "hung up" on it. I just know I always went up against the "Turkey" with a LOT of confidence in the eventual outcome. Sure; easy to say, since we weren't REALLY killing each other. No harm, no foul, right ???
But when the "Turkey" would throw up a wing in a fight ... every Adversary in the Western Hemisphere could see it --- and if you could, you could beat it --- Tom Cruise and Hollywood and Miramar/Grumman propaganda notwithstanding. And since most of you are handicapped because you know relatively nothing about the realities of Navy fighters you are condemned to remain victim of the ... "propaganda" .... and are therefore clueless ....
The F-14 was a good/great (?) USN fighter ... it could have been better --- but can't we all ... ???
>>>>The F-4 Phantom in USA service killed > 100 Gomers ... and we'll not even talk about the Israeli contribution to the overall score ....
>>>>The F-14 in USA service bagged about .... what ??? Five ( 5 ) ???
Perspective .... always keep your perspective, or you will end up wanting.
[**edit** p.s. .... it's the Man ... not the airplane. Believe it ....**
]
Perspective? Check six!
Even though I come from the community, this isn't a defensive response but an attempt to put Tomcat into perspective:
1) the Tomcat was introduced into role of Fleet Air Defense after two other programs failed to deliver capability to haul around a big radar and some really big missiles. That it did well and is the reason the airframe is so large. It's contribution to the outer air battle was needed in height of Cold War (as was your tanking services to maintain the "grid"). When the Backfire and Badger threat went away after the Cold War ended, the Tomcat was in risk of being an anachronism virtually overnight.
So, comparing the total score of the F-4 in the skies over Vietnam isn't the right "perspective" to the Navy's Tomcat box score. The skies over Vietnam were sometimes bogey rich, sometimes not. Many superb pilots never saw a MiG. Some very junior folks had MiGs literally fall in their laps ("Wizzard" McCabe was a deployed stash ensign awaiting orders to the RAG with he got a MiG kill with Pete Pettigrew). The Tomcat has handily downed all comers when circumstances have permitted (yielding 5 kills in USN service and over 100 claimed in Iranian service). Although it has fighter qualities, it doesn't have the pure performance numbers of the F-16. F/A-18 or F-15, but in the hands of a capable pilot, it can be very intimidating and successful (you make that point yourself), but it is really a supreme interceptor that absolutely rules in the BVR arena.
2) If you want to talk about perspective, then forget about the fighter mission. The first sustained combat deployment of the Tomcat was a Reconnaissance platform over Lebanon in 1983 and the Tomcat took over the RECCE mission from the RA-5C and the RF-8G totally in the early 80s. Tomcats went daily where no other platforms went and where shot at continuously with no losses (when the strike group went in, they lost an A-6 and an A-7). The big fighter with no meaningful DECM/ECM and Vietnam RHAW gear (ALR-45/50) cut its teeth in the Bekaa. Same thing over Somalia in 83 when two VF-102 jets encountered a SA-2. Tomcats came back intact with the photos. TARPS Tomcats had many other unheralded successes throughout the Cold War and then again in Desert Strom where they were the only deep penetrating self escorted RECCE assets operating up to 200 nm inside Iraq several times a day.
When Desert Storm ended, the Tomcat again faced becoming an anachronism when it was realized that the Hornet could take care of itself and a dedicated fighter wasn't needed nor with improved RECCE capability being developed for the Hornet (ATARS and SHARP), that capability would not be needed either. Soon after the war, it was decided to reduce the Tomcat assets to half of Cold War complement of 2 squadrons per air wing and go to a single squadron. Although the Tomcat had been designed with a stores management system that included provisions for air-to-ground weapons, it had been abandoned after early tests in the late seventies. When the Pentagon started looking at reduction in type/model/series, it became A-6 vs F-14 and although the Tomcat ultimately won, it was a close run thing. The (Naval) Air Warfare priority was strike and precision strike at that. The Tomcat was initially programmed for a $1.8B upgrade called Block 1 Strike to give it capability comparable to the A-6 and F-15E, but it lost the majority of its funding in 1994 Peace Dividend cuts. So what to do?
In spring of 1994, plans were being made to say farewell to the Tomcat as soon as feasible and a pall fell over the community. Nobody saw a future in flying Tomcats any longer. Even worse for morale, the top 30% of the Intruder community was being transitioned into Tomcats at the same time half the squadrons were being stood down so Dept head screens came into play. However, unbeknownst to most of the community, a small cadre began working to get the LANTRIN pod onto the Tomcat and fielded in unprecedented time (and low cost). By fall of 94, VADM “Sweet Pea” Allen, AIRLANT at the time and a legacy A-6 B/N, was asked for a fleet Tomcat to demonstrate the radical integration scheme after NAVAIR turned down the opportunity. He said yes and by March of 95, a VF-103 Tomcat was dropping LGBs using a borrowed F-15E LANTIRN pod. Thus began the transformation of the community virtually overnight.
So, to put the Tomcat into perspective, you have to factor in its last ten years of service in which it did not become irrelevant, it became predominant in precision strike delivery and forced a rethink in the decision to employ the F/A-18F in every air wing. At the time, the F/A-18F was not planned to have a missionized rear cockpit or even deploy. OPNAV was focused on the F/A-18E as the primary strike platform variant (the influence of the single seat “mafia” could be its own thread). LANTIRN wasn’t the only reason the Tomcat became relevant again. The new Tomcat community was instantly infused with considerable strike expertise with the integration of the Intruder “refugees”. Enterprising JOs began figuring out how to use the Tomcat in a variety of strike roles and established a relationship with the USMC FAC(A) cadre at MAWTS-1. This wasn’t a top down OPNAV or AIRLANT initiative. It was hard core JOs trying to maximize their impact. They did. When the first FAC(A) Tomcats were used over Bosnia and Later Kosovo, they validated the contribution of a two seat aircrew working tough missions. When LANTIRN hit the fleet, the FAC(A) aircrews had a real asset to bring iron to bear.
So when you talk about fighters and Tomcats in ACM arena, you severely date yourself A4s. VF-41 over Kosovo elected to carry NO air-to-air weapons at all. That squadron was awarded the McClusky trophy for that year (first time for a F-14 squadron). The Fighter Fling videos in latter years featured multiple videos of things blowing up…on the ground. When you talk to Tomcat aircrews, they talk about LANTIRN and dropping bombs, not DACT. The Tomcats in OEF and OIF were used as Strike assets and if you read Tony Holmes excellent book on Tomcats units in OIF, you’ll see Tomcats were pulled off USS Kitty Hawk to operate ashore in support of Special Forces. Why? FAC(A) expertise that had been ignored by F-15E community. They operated alongside F-15E and F-16 squadrons, but were the “go-to” guys. So I invite you to adjust your perspective to the total contribution of the Tomcat’s 34 years of fleet service and let me know if another aircraft stayed on the first string that long or successfully transformed itself into a mission never envisioned for it. The Tomcat can go into its Sunset with head held high. It has set the bar for the Super Hornet for sure. Nobody is saying it’s the best fighter ever, but it’s earned a place in history for sure.
[**edit** p.s. .... it's the Man ... not the airplane. Believe it ....**]
[/B]
BTW, any reason you chose a RDT&E F-4 Target Drone for image? The legacy of F-4 deserves a more fitting photo from its heyday, like this early shot of the dramatic markings worn by the VF-74 Bedevilers
A4sForever said:
Even though I come from the community, this isn't a defensive response but an attempt to put Tomcat into perspective:
1) the Tomcat was introduced into role of Fleet Air Defense after two other programs failed to deliver capability to haul around a big radar and some really big missiles. That it did well and is the reason the airframe is so large. It's contribution to the outer air battle was needed in height of Cold War (as was your tanking services to maintain the "grid"). When the Backfire and Badger threat went away after the Cold War ended, the Tomcat was in risk of being an anachronism virtually overnight.
So, comparing the total score of the F-4 in the skies over Vietnam isn't the right "perspective" to the Navy's Tomcat box score. The skies over Vietnam were sometimes bogey rich, sometimes not. Many superb pilots never saw a MiG. Some very junior folks had MiGs literally fall in their laps ("Wizzard" McCabe was a deployed stash ensign awaiting orders to the RAG with he got a MiG kill with Pete Pettigrew). The Tomcat has handily downed all comers when circumstances have permitted (yielding 5 kills in USN service and over 100 claimed in Iranian service). Although it has fighter qualities, it doesn't have the pure performance numbers of the F-16. F/A-18 or F-15, but in the hands of a capable pilot, it can be very intimidating and successful (you make that point yourself), but it is really a supreme interceptor that absolutely rules in the BVR arena.
2) If you want to talk about perspective, then forget about the fighter mission. The first sustained combat deployment of the Tomcat was a Reconnaissance platform over Lebanon in 1983 and the Tomcat took over the RECCE mission from the RA-5C and the RF-8G totally in the early 80s. Tomcats went daily where no other platforms went and where shot at continuously with no losses (when the strike group went in, they lost an A-6 and an A-7). The big fighter with no meaningful DECM/ECM and Vietnam RHAW gear (ALR-45/50) cut its teeth in the Bekaa. Same thing over Somalia in 83 when two VF-102 jets encountered a SA-2. Tomcats came back intact with the photos. TARPS Tomcats had many other unheralded successes throughout the Cold War and then again in Desert Strom where they were the only deep penetrating self escorted RECCE assets operating up to 200 nm inside Iraq several times a day.
When Desert Storm ended, the Tomcat again faced becoming an anachronism when it was realized that the Hornet could take care of itself and a dedicated fighter wasn't needed nor with improved RECCE capability being developed for the Hornet (ATARS and SHARP), that capability would not be needed either. Soon after the war, it was decided to reduce the Tomcat assets to half of Cold War complement of 2 squadrons per air wing and go to a single squadron. Although the Tomcat had been designed with a stores management system that included provisions for air-to-ground weapons, it had been abandoned after early tests in the late seventies. When the Pentagon started looking at reduction in type/model/series, it became A-6 vs F-14 and although the Tomcat ultimately won, it was a close run thing. The (Naval) Air Warfare priority was strike and precision strike at that. The Tomcat was initially programmed for a $1.8B upgrade called Block 1 Strike to give it capability comparable to the A-6 and F-15E, but it lost the majority of its funding in 1994 Peace Dividend cuts. So what to do?
In spring of 1994, plans were being made to say farewell to the Tomcat as soon as feasible and a pall fell over the community. Nobody saw a future in flying Tomcats any longer. Even worse for morale, the top 30% of the Intruder community was being transitioned into Tomcats at the same time half the squadrons were being stood down so Dept head screens came into play. However, unbeknownst to most of the community, a small cadre began working to get the LANTRIN pod onto the Tomcat and fielded in unprecedented time (and low cost). By fall of 94, VADM “Sweet Pea” Allen, AIRLANT at the time and a legacy A-6 B/N, was asked for a fleet Tomcat to demonstrate the radical integration scheme after NAVAIR turned down the opportunity. He said yes and by March of 95, a VF-103 Tomcat was dropping LGBs using a borrowed F-15E LANTIRN pod. Thus began the transformation of the community virtually overnight.
So, to put the Tomcat into perspective, you have to factor in its last ten years of service in which it did not become irrelevant, it became predominant in precision strike delivery and forced a rethink in the decision to employ the F/A-18F in every air wing. At the time, the F/A-18F was not planned to have a missionized rear cockpit or even deploy. OPNAV was focused on the F/A-18E as the primary strike platform variant (the influence of the single seat “mafia” could be its own thread). LANTIRN wasn’t the only reason the Tomcat became relevant again. The new Tomcat community was instantly infused with considerable strike expertise with the integration of the Intruder “refugees”. Enterprising JOs began figuring out how to use the Tomcat in a variety of strike roles and established a relationship with the USMC FAC(A) cadre at MAWTS-1. This wasn’t a top down OPNAV or AIRLANT initiative. It was hard core JOs trying to maximize their impact. They did. When the first FAC(A) Tomcats were used over Bosnia and Later Kosovo, they validated the contribution of a two seat aircrew working tough missions. When LANTIRN hit the fleet, the FAC(A) aircrews had a real asset to bring iron to bear.
So when you talk about fighters and Tomcats in ACM arena, you severely date yourself A4s. VF-41 over Kosovo elected to carry NO air-to-air weapons at all. That squadron was awarded the McClusky trophy for that year (first time for a F-14 squadron). The Fighter Fling videos in latter years featured multiple videos of things blowing up…on the ground. When you talk to Tomcat aircrews, they talk about LANTIRN and dropping bombs, not DACT. The Tomcats in OEF and OIF were used as Strike assets and if you read Tony Holmes excellent book on Tomcats units in OIF, you’ll see Tomcats were pulled off USS Kitty Hawk to operate ashore in support of Special Forces. Why? FAC(A) expertise that had been ignored by F-15E community. They operated alongside F-15E and F-16 squadrons, but were the “go-to” guys. So I invite you to adjust your perspective to the total contribution of the Tomcat’s 34 years of fleet service and let me know if another aircraft stayed on the first string that long or successfully transformed itself into a mission never envisioned for it. The Tomcat can go into its Sunset with head held high. It has set the bar for the Super Hornet for sure. Nobody is saying it’s the best fighter ever, but it’s earned a place in history for sure.
[**edit** p.s. .... it's the Man ... not the airplane. Believe it ....**
][/B]
BTW, any reason you chose a RDT&E F-4 Target Drone for image? The legacy of F-4 deserves a more fitting photo from its heyday, like this early shot of the dramatic markings worn by the VF-74 Bedevilers
With some time in, and having great affinity for both the F-4 and F-14 (and A-4 too), I can sit back and thoroughly enjoy this fascinating and enlightening "discussion" to the fullest. Thank you both, gentlemen.
Ah, pass me some more popcorn, please.
Ah, pass me some more popcorn, please.
Uhhhhh ..... no ... that's just not possible .... ain't gonna happen ....heyjoe said:
Yeah, 'cause that's where the mission was in Kosovo ... air-to-mud, and recce, with little/no airborne threat when compared to say .... Vietnam ???heyjoe said:
And droppin' warheads on foreheads has ALWAYS been what it's all about --- fighter propaganda notwithstanding. How you say: "Fighter guys make movies; attack pukes win wars" .... blah, blah, blah??? It's just that a lot of the fighter guys didn't understand --- or didn't WANT to understand that concept until it was forced upon them. I worked with an almost exclusively fighter-background cadre when flying Adversary --- so I know a little of the "fighter pilot" psyche and mentality. Why ??? Because that's what we had ... the only fast-mover available that could do the job you described effectively. And why was nothing else readily available ???heyjoe said:
Well, here's one reason: Do you remember the A-6/F-14 "blue-suit" politics that played heavily in the decision(s) to park the A-6 without a suitable air-to-mud deep strike/interdiction replacement??? I should mention ....and close bases, too. NUW was ON the original "hit list" --- i.e., no A-6 = no NUW = Navy politics . Just to clarify: I was directly involved with it and know what I'm rattling on about. I'm not talkin' Cheney and Co. "civie street" politicians ... I'm talkin' Navy politicians. The ones with blue uniforms and gold buttons and lots of stripes on their cuffs. The ones with real estate investments in Southern and Central California; the ones with kids in the F-18 program @ Leeeeeemore. Tho$e kind of politic$. REAL politic$. Of course the F-14 HAD to step up to many of the roles you artfully describe -- there wasn't any choice as there weren't many other options when the A-6 community lost it's "political" sponsorship and faded away ... prematurely, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
You mean like the A-4 ???heyjoe said:
But see ... that was the thrust (no pun) of my post --- what with all these guys whining about the demise of the F-14 --- it seems like we've lost our last "fighter" ??? Oooops --- that's right --- the F-8 drivers already have a patent on that whine. And in any case --- fighters ??? ---- but you said F-14's don't much like to do that DACT stuff anymore, yes ??? (engage/disengage sarcasm button, please
). Many of the F-14 missions and profiles you described were only performed because they were "forced" on the Tomcat community. I think much is being made of the F-14 sunset because it's the here and now --- and not because it was the greatest thing to grace the unfriendly skies since sliced bread first appeared in the closed officers' mess.I'm in total agreement --- never disagreed for a moment --- like I said in my post. A good fighter ... but a "great" one .... hmmmmmm ???heyjoe said:
Yeah, I know ... it does deserve better --- but it was late --- I was tired --- been gone for a few days --- and I wanted one that said "Navy" ... and I like the pretty little puffy clouds against the water background. Reminded me of 'ol Smoky's finest days in SE Asia. But then again, since the F-4 IS gone --- I thought of the irony, too. A drone. Maybe we'll be putting up pix of F-14 drones some day not too far off .....heyjoe said:
So maybe we'll go with this one, instead:
And it's still the man, not the ride he takes into battle that makes it or breaks it at the end of the day. Cheers ...
Agreed.....Galland said it best for all of us:
"Only the spirit of attack born in a brave heart will bring success to any fighter aircraft no matter highly develop it might be"
Conversely, there have been more than one occasion where the "spirit of attack" (better SA) has prevailed over a relatively surperior adversary. To my mind, the successful employment of the AVG P-40 over China and Navy F4F Wildcats in early months of WWII against Japanese fighters with much superior performance is the best example of being able to use tactics based on solid knowledge of dissimilar perfromance characteristics and the "spirit of attack".
"Only the spirit of attack born in a brave heart will bring success to any fighter aircraft no matter highly develop it might be"
Conversely, there have been more than one occasion where the "spirit of attack" (better SA) has prevailed over a relatively surperior adversary. To my mind, the successful employment of the AVG P-40 over China and Navy F4F Wildcats in early months of WWII against Japanese fighters with much superior performance is the best example of being able to use tactics based on solid knowledge of dissimilar perfromance characteristics and the "spirit of attack".
If a lowly SNA can put his $.02 worth in here...
The "whining," as A-4's describes it, over the Tomcat's going away is because it is an icon. It represents all those 80's-something kids it influenced. It represents things like pride, power, and yes, a certain amount of cockiness. It is a symbol. The big-screen gave it a platform to catapult (couldn't resist) into the hearts and minds of all those dreaming kids. There have been other movies made about all sorts of things, but the machine featured in the film which I reference just struck a chord with people.
It has a following OUTSIDE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT FLIES IT that, I would argue, no other military platform has ever had. Regular people, non-military, civies know what an F-14 Tomcat is... Sure it's due to the propaganda surrounding it, but why not?! It LOOKS the part. It looks like a fighter jet.
These are a couple of the reasons, IMO, why the Tomcat's last days are being so well-documented.
-jai5w4
The "whining," as A-4's describes it, over the Tomcat's going away is because it is an icon. It represents all those 80's-something kids it influenced. It represents things like pride, power, and yes, a certain amount of cockiness. It is a symbol. The big-screen gave it a platform to catapult (couldn't resist) into the hearts and minds of all those dreaming kids. There have been other movies made about all sorts of things, but the machine featured in the film which I reference just struck a chord with people.
It has a following OUTSIDE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT FLIES IT that, I would argue, no other military platform has ever had. Regular people, non-military, civies know what an F-14 Tomcat is... Sure it's due to the propaganda surrounding it, but why not?! It LOOKS the part. It looks like a fighter jet.
These are a couple of the reasons, IMO, why the Tomcat's last days are being so well-documented.
-jai5w4
Ok, way too many Phantoms...
take that A4s!!!!!!!!:icon_smil
...And for the record I dont love the plane because I saw TopGun... I love it because my whole family worked for Grumman and put a lot of long nights into its success (or relative lack there of, however u wanna look at it, im proud.)
take that A4s!!!!!!!!:icon_smil
...And for the record I dont love the plane because I saw TopGun... I love it because my whole family worked for Grumman and put a lot of long nights into its success (or relative lack there of, however u wanna look at it, im proud.)
Uhhhhhh ... 'squeeze me ... it's Phantoms .... (big P) and I'm always impressed with the quality of your family's products ... i.e., the Grumman Iron Works ...zuggerat said:
Here's a pix of a Phantom for you ... enjoy:
A4sForever said:Uhhhhhh ... 'squeeze me ... it's Phantoms .... (big P) and I'm always impressed with the quality of your family's products ... i.e., the Grumman Iron Works ...
Here's a pix of a Phantom for you ... enjoy:
uh i dont wanna be a dickhead or anything but isnt that a Skyhawk? lol
Nope ... it's a Phantom ....zuggerat said:
A4sForever said:So maybe we'll go with this one, instead:
[/B]
And it's still the man, not the ride he takes into battle that makes it or breaks it at the end of the day. Cheers ...
Front end view (even though a painting) is much more dramatic. Shark nose looked great on F-4.
