F-14 Tomcat and F-15 Eagle Fighter Jet/Variants Discussion/Multimedia Thread

MIDKNIGHT FENERIR-00

VICTORIOUM AUT MORS
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
1,814
Likes
5,084
Country flag
F-14 Tomcat F-15 Eagle
F-14F-15
RoleInterceptor, air superiority and multirole combat aircraftAir superiority fighter
ManufacturerGrummanMcDonnell Douglas Boeing Defense, Space and Security
National originUnited StatesUnited States
Number built7121,198
Also known asGrumman F-14 TomcatMcDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle
Unit costUS $38 millionUS $28-30 million
StatusIn use by Iranian Air ForceUsed primarily by the US, Japan, Saudi Arabia and Israel
Number of engines22
Maximum speedMach 2.34Mach 2.5
Number still in service0 in US; 25 operational in Iran.222 in US; over 1000 worldwide.
Length62 ft 9 in63 ft 9 in
Number of seats21 or 2
IntroducedSeptember 1974January 1976
WingspanSpread:64 ft. Swept:38 feet42 ft 10 in
Armament20 mm M61 Vulcan Gatling-type cannon, missiles, bombs20mm M61 Vulcan 6-barreled Gatling cannon, bombs, missiles, drop tanks.
Loaded weight27,669 kg20,200 kg
Rate of climbMore than 45,000 ft/min50, 000+ ft/min
Combat radius575 miles1222 miles
Service ceiling50,000 ft65,000 ft

Source:
 
Last edited:

MIDKNIGHT FENERIR-00

VICTORIOUM AUT MORS
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
1,814
Likes
5,084
Country flag
Source: https://theaviationgeekclub.com/f-14-tomcat-vs-f-15-eagle-aircrews-perspective/amp/
Credits: Dario Leone

F-14 TOMCAT Vs F-15 EAGLE: THE AIRCREWS’ PERSPECTIVE
Dario Leone
Sep 22, 2017

F-14 Tomcat Vs F-15 Eagle: the pilots' perspective


Even if until today a real F-14 Tomcat Vs F-15 Eagle engagement with live weapons fired has never taken place, since the prototypes made their first flights comparisons have been made between these two iconic aircraft

The F-14 Tomcat and the F-15 Eagle are two of the best (and two of the most beautiful) fighters ever built.

Even if until today a real Tomcat Vs Eagle engagement with live weapons fired has never taken place, since the prototypes made their first flights (just two years apart) comparisons have been made between these two iconic aircraft. But, as you will read in the following article, trying to determine which was the better fighter is a pointless exercise.

Having spent his entire career flying USAF F-15Cs in Europe, Robert “Scout” Winebrenner never flew the Tomcat but during the 1980s he had the opportunity to fly Dissimilar Air Combat Training (DACT) with 6th Fleet F-14s in the Mediterranean.
As he explains in Issue 13 “Grumman F-14 Tomcat” of Aviation Classics magazine, innumerable discussions have been made about which was the better fighter, but although both the aircraft replaced the F-4 Phantom, the F-15 and the F-14 were built to satisfy totally different operational requirements, hence the two fighters could be more or less effective in the different missions they could have performed because of their respective strength and limitations.
F-15C Print
F-15C Eagle 144th Fighter Wing, 194th Fighter Squadron, CA/80-004 – California Air National Guard – Fresno ANG Base, CA – 2016

F-14 Tomcat Vs F-15 Eagle: the pilots' perspective

For instance the F-14 was the best aircraft to defend U.S. Navy aircraft carriers against a multiple target engagement. In fact thanks to its beyond visual range (BVR) capabilities and assisted by E-2C Hawkeyes, the Tomcat could inflict severe losses to an incoming enemy bombers formation. In fact in comparing BVR performance, the Tomcat’s AWG-9 had true multiple target track and multiple target engagement with the AIM-54 Phoenix, while the Eagle did not gain a multiple target engagement capability until the late 1980s with the introduction of the AIM-120 AMRAAM. Moreover, as told by Scout, the AIM-7 Sparrow didn’t possess the range of the Phoenix and the Eagle could only get one or two shots before the merge. So, due to the lack of the multiple target engagement capability, the Eagle was not effective in this role.

F-14 Tomcat Vs F-15 Eagle: the pilots' perspective

By contrast the constant mixing of friendly and enemy aircraft typical of a Central European Defensive Counter-Air (DCA) would have rendered the Phoenix unusable in most of the engagements because of the dynamic environment faced by the fighters. Moreover the agility deficit of the then TF-30 powered F-14 could have caused problems during the several dogfights that crews could have faced in such a complex scenario.

Another role where the Tomcat could be very effective was a sweep mission were BVR missiles could be freely shot: this would be the case of a sweep ahead of a carrier-based attack package, a kind of mission where the F-14 would have been able to launch its AIM-54s without limitations due to the absence in the area of any friendly aircraft. Actually the mission would have been also accomplished also in the case the enemy aircraft had leaved the area refusing to engage the Tomcats.
VF-84 F-14A PrintThis .F-14A Tomcat VF-84 Jolly Rogers, AJ200 / 160393 / 1977

F-14 Tomcat Vs F-15 Eagle: the pilots' perspective

On the contrary, Winebrenner says that in a Force Protection / Escort mission, where the fighters cannot commit on hostile until they were within 20 miles, many Phoenix advantages are negated and the F-15 good maneuverability was needed to better face enemy aircraft. But despite the fact the Eagle’s sensors were better to sort out friendlies from enemies, if the BVR Rules of Engagements (ROE) were so restrictive that visual identification (VID) was required for weapons delivery, the Tomcat armed with Sparrows and Sidewinders was better suited since it owned the Television Camera Set (TCS), a chin-mounted optical sensor that could be slaved to radar line of sight. So if needed, the F-14 crew could lock on to a target and (if VID was required for the engagement) zooming in with TCS to get a very early look at the potential target. As explained by Scout, the F-15 had nothing like this “It pains me to admit it, but we were flying around with rifle scopes strapped on to the Head-Up Display frame, allegedly boresighted” and achieving an early VID “was not that easy. Maybe other pilots thought it was great, but I didn’t. It was not user-friendly by any stretch of the imagination.”

F-14 Tomcat Vs F-15 Eagle: the pilots' perspective

So to the question to which was the better fighter, Winebrenner answers that depends on the mission, on the ROE, on the threat. And if the F-14 didn’t possess the close range dogfighting agility of the F-15, the Tomcat ability to launch 1000 lb air to air missiles with 135 lb warheads was impressive. And as Scout explains, claiming that a missile is easy to evade is much easier than actually evading it, especially if it is coming at you from above at Mach 5 and you cannot see it.



From the late 1980s both aircraft have received several improvements: so if the F-15C could finally engage multiple target thanks to the introduction of the AIM-120 AMRAAM, the thrust of the General Electric F110-GE-400 turbofans boosted the performance of the F-14B and D models. Nevertheless as explained by LCDR Joe “Smokin” Ruzicka, who was the Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) to fly the last F-14 Demonstration before the Tomcat was retired by the U.S. Navy in 2006, to Tyler Rogoway for foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com, the worst adversary for the F-14 in a mock dogfight remained the F-15C, since the Eagle was “more capable in that area than the Tomcat. You have to remember, the F-15C has a 9G turning capability versus 6.5 to 7.0 G for the Tomcat. But the F-15C is strictly air-to-air, so there are trade-offs in capabilities between the two jets. They don’t drop bombs, we do. Another thing: a lot of success in BFM has to do with the pilot’s ability to maximize the jet’s capability. Fortunately, the best trained guys who fly the F-15C are on our side!”
 

MIDKNIGHT FENERIR-00

VICTORIOUM AUT MORS
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
1,814
Likes
5,084
Country flag
F-15 Eagle
Specifications
VariantC/D modelsE/F models
Primary FunctionTactical fighter.Tactical Bomber
ContractorBoeing (McDonnell Aircraft and Missiles Systems)Boeing (McDonnell Aircraft and Missiles Systems)
Power PlantTwo Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-100 turbofan engines with afterburners, each rated at 25,000 pounds engine ( 11,250 kilograms)two Pratt and Whitney FIOO-P-220 turbofans each rated at 14,670 lb st (65.26 kN) dry and 23,830 lb st (106.0 kN) with afterburning or,
after August 1991, two FlOO-PW-229 each rated at 17,800 lb st (79.18 kN) dry and 29,100 lb st (129.45 kN) with afterburning;
Length63 feet, 9 inches (19.43 meters).63 ft 9 in (19.43 m)
Height18 feet, 8 inches (5.69 meters).18 ft 5.5 in (5.63 m)
Wingspan42 feet, 10 inches (13.06 meters)42ft 9.75 in (13.05 m)
Wing aspect ratio3.01
Wing area608.00 sq ft (56.48 m2)
Speed1,875 mph (Mach 2.5-plus).1,433 kt (1,650 mph; 2655 km/h) maximum level speed 'clean' at high altitude
495 kt (570 mph; 917 km/h) cruising speed at optimum altitude
Ceiling65,000 feet (19,697 meters).60,000 ft (18290 m);
Operating Empty Weight31,700 lb (14379 kg)
Maximum Takeoff Weight68,000 pounds (30,600 kilograms).81,000 lb (36741 kg)
fuel13,123 lb (5952 kg) internal
21,645 lb (9818 kg) in two CFTs
up to three 610-US gal (2309-liter~ drop tanks;
Range3,450 miles (3,000 nautical miles) ferry range with conformal fuel tanks and three external fuel tanks.3,100 nm (3,570 miles; 5745 km) ferry range with CFTs and drop tanks
2,400 nm (2,765 miles; 4445 km) with drop tanks
1,000 nm (1,150 mi; 1,853 km) Max Combat Radius
685 nm (790 miles; 1270 km) combat radius
Systems
CrewF-15A/C: one. F-15B/D: two.two
Unit cost $FY98
[Total Program]
$43 million.probably around $55 million for USAF
close to $100 million (including spares and support) for export customers.
Date DeployedJuly 1972April 1988
Fuselage Lifetime8,000 hours16,000 hours
Key Maintenance IndicatorsUnited States Air Forces standard
  • 81 % - Mission Capapble - Percentage of aircraft readily available to do the mission.
  • 15 % - Not Mission Capable for Maintenance - Percentage not mission capable for maintenance reasons.
  • 9 % - Not Mission Capable for Supply - Percentage not mission capable for supply reasons.
  • 6 % - Abort Rate - Rate of aircraft that cannot fly sorties due to ground or air abort.
  • 19 % - Break Rate - Number of Code 3s divided by total number of sorties flown. Different aircraft codes indicate mission capability upon completion of a sortie: Code One is mission capable. Code 2 is an aircraft with a problem but is still mission capable. Code 3 is an aircraft not mission capable until problem is fixed.
  • 75 % - Fix Rate - Percentage of Code 3 aircraft fixed in eight-hour period.
  • 18 % - Cannibilization Rate - Percentage of cannibalizations (parts taken from one aircraft to fix another) divided by number of sorties.
  • 9 % - Repeat/Recur Rate - Percentage of repeats or recurs divided by total of pilot-reported discrepancies.
  • 95 % - Maintenance Scheduling Effectiveness Rate - Percentage of maintenance scheduling actions done on time.
  • 88 % - Flying Scheduling Effectiveness Rate - Ability to fly selected aircraft without deviation

Source:
 
Last edited:

MIDKNIGHT FENERIR-00

VICTORIOUM AUT MORS
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
1,814
Likes
5,084
Country flag
F-14 Tomcat

Specifications
FunctionCarrier-based multi-role strike fighter
ContractorGrumman Aerospace Corporation
Unit Cost$38 million
PropulsionF-14: two Pratt & Whitney TF-30P-414A
turbofan engines with afterburners;
F-14B and F-14D: two General Electric F-110-GE-400
augmented turbofan engines with afterburners
ThrustF-14A: 20,900 pounds (9,405 kg) static thrust per engine;
F-14B and F-14D: 27,000 pounds (12,150 kg) per engine
Length61 feet 9 inches (18.6 meters)
Height16 feet (4.8 meters)
Basic Weightapprox 43,600 pounds
Maximum Takeoff Weight72,900 pounds (32,805 kg)
Wingspan64 feet (19 meters) unswept,
38 feet (11.4 meters) swept
Reference wing area565 sq ft.
Wing aspect ratio7.28
CeilingAbove 53,000 feet
Max G6.5
Speed1,584 mph (2,548km/h) Max. speed at 40,000 ft (12,200 m)
Max Mach Number = 1.88
Cruise Mach Number = .72
Carrier Approach Speed = 125 kts
Fuel16, 200 lbs. Internal fuel
3, 800 lbs. External fuel
Maximum range1,600 nm (2,573km)
Mission Radius500 nm (930 km) Hi-Med-Hi strike profile
380 nm (700 km) Hi-Lo-Lo-Hi strike profile
Airfield2,500 ft. Field takeoff distance
2,400 ft. Field landing distance
CrewTwo: pilot and radar intercept officer
ArmamentUp to 13,000 pounds of
Air-to-Air Missiles (up to)
6 AIM-7 Sparrows
4 AIM-9 Sidewinder
6 AIM-54 Phoenix
air-to-ground ordnance
MK-82 (500 lbs.)
4 MK-83 (1,000 lbs.)
4 MK-84(2,000 lbs.)
MK-20cluster bomb
4 GBU-10LGB
GBU-12 MK-82 LGB
4 GBU-16 MK-83 LGB
4 GBU-24 MK-84 LGB
4 GBU-31JDAM (2,000 lbs)
one MK-61A1 Vulcan 20mm cannon
Selected F-14A and B are wired to carry TARPS
All F-14D's are wired to carry the TARPS
Countermeasures
  • AN/ALR-45 radar warning receiver [Itek]
  • AN/ALR-67 radar warning receiver [F-14D]
  • AN/ALQ-167 ECM Pod [F-14D]
  • AN/ALE-50 towed decoy [F-14D]
Date DeployedFirst flight: December 21st 1970
Inventory157 F-14A/B
53 F-14D
Phasing out one squadron / year
All to be withdrawn by 2010
F-14 orginally designed for 6,000 flight hours
Currently certified for 7,350 flight hours
Potential for extension to 8,000 or 9,000 flight hours

Source:
 

MiG-29SMT

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
375
Likes
569
Country flag
1593663749698.png


As he explains in Issue 13 “Grumman F-14 Tomcat” of Aviation Classics magazine, innumerable discussions have been made about which was the better fighter

Although both the aircraft replaced the F-4 Phantom, the F-15 and the F-14 were built to satisfy totally different operational requirements, hence the two fighters could be more or less effective in the different missions they could have performed because of their respective strength and limitations.

For instance, the F-14 was the best aircraft to defend U.S. Navy aircraft carriers against a multiple target engagement. In fact thanks to its beyond visual range (BVR) capabilities and assisted by E-2C Hawkeyes, the Tomcat could inflict severe losses to an incoming enemy bombers formation.

In fact, in comparing BVR performance, the Tomcat’s AWG-9 had true multiple target track and multiple target engagement with the AIM-54 Phoenix, while the Eagle did not gain a multiple target engagement capability until the late 1980s with the introduction of the AIM-120 AMRAAM. Moreover, as told by Scout, the AIM-7 Sparrow didn’t possess the range of the Phoenix and the Eagle could only get one or two shots before the merge. So, due to the lack of multiple target engagement capability, the Eagle was not effective in this role.

By contrast, the constant mixing of friendly and enemy aircraft typical of a Central European Defensive Counter-Air (DCA) would have rendered the Phoenix unusable in most of the engagements because of the dynamic environment faced by the fighters. Moreover, the agility deficit of the then TF-30 powered F-14 could have caused problems during the several dogfights that crews could have faced in such a complex scenario.

Another role where the Tomcat could be very effective was a sweep mission was BVR missiles could be freely shot: this would be the case of a sweep ahead of a carrier-based attack package, a kind of mission where the F-14 would have been able to launch its AIM-54s without limitations due to the absence in the area of any friendly aircraft. Actually, the mission would have been also accomplished also in the case the enemy aircraft had left the area refusing to engage the Tomcats.

On the contrary, Winebrenner says that in a Force Protection / Escort mission, where the fighters cannot commit on hostile until they were within 20 miles, many Phoenix advantages are negated and the F-15 good manoeuvrability was needed to better face enemy aircraft. But despite the fact the Eagle’s sensors were better to sort out friendlies from enemies, if the BVR Rules of Engagements (ROE) were so restrictive that visual identification (VID) was required for weapons delivery, the Tomcat armed with Sparrows and Sidewinders was better suited since it owned the Television Camera Set (TCS), a chin-mounted optical sensor that could be slaved to radar line of sight. So if needed, the F-14 crew could lock on to a target and (if VID was required for the engagement) zooming in with TCS to get a very early look at the potential target. As explained by Scout, the F-15 had nothing like this “It pains me to admit it, but we were flying around with rifle scopes strapped on to the Head-Up Display frame, allegedly boresighted” and achieving an early VID “was not that easy. Maybe other pilots thought it was great, but I didn’t. It was not user-friendly by any stretch of the imagination.”

So to the question to which was the better fighter, Winebrenner answers that depend on the mission, on the ROE, on the threat. And if the F-14 didn’t possess the close range dogfighting agility of the F-15, the Tomcat ability to launch 1000 lb air to air missiles with 135 lb warheads was impressive. And as Scout explains, claiming that a missile is easy to evade is much easier than actually evading it, especially if it is coming at you from above at Mach 5 and you cannot see it.

From the late 1980s, both aircraft have received several improvements: so if the F-15C could finally engage multiple targets thanks to the introduction of the AIM-120 AMRAAM, the thrust of the General Electric F110-GE-400 turbofans boosted the performance of the F-14B and D models.

Nevertheless as explained by LCDR Joe “Smokin” Ruzicka, who was the Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) to fly the last F-14 Demonstration before the Tomcat was retired by the U.S. Navy in 2006, to Tyler Rogoway for foxtrot alpha, the worst adversary for the F-14 in a mock dogfight remained the F-15C, since the Eagle was “more capable in that area than the Tomcat.

You have to remember, the F-15C has a 9G turning capability versus 6.5 to 7.0 G for the Tomcat. But the F-15C is strictly air-to-air, so there are trade-offs in capabilities between the two jets. They don’t drop bombs, we do. Another thing: a lot of success in BFM has to do with the pilot’s ability to maximize the jet’s capability. Fortunately, the best-trained guys who fly the F-15C are on our side!”

 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top