Want to help support this channel? Become a channel member: ua-cam.com/channels/z_aGg3uEnfE4hU6Pu6Wj3g.htmljoin Subscribe on Patreon: patreon.com/PilotPhotog
I spend some time on a discord where everyone talks about military weapons, equipment, their performance, what makes one better than another and the thing about the tomcat is everyone agrees about 2 things. 1: The Tomcat was a beautiful plane and everyone loves it. 2: We'll never ever see another plane like it again, and we never should. We can go as fast as the tomcat, while being as maneuverable as the tomcat, while having a higher flight ceiling than the tomcat, while not having an expensive swing wing design. In the 1970s, it let jets go faster. Now it's just not necessary. There's no iteration of the tomcat that will outperform the hornet or the eagle. The other thing is as much as I love the tomcat, the hornet is also a beautiful plane. I certainly disagree with the statement that Maverick should have been using a tomcat. It's a disservice to the hornet. It's also impossible because there is 1 tomcat still in flying shape and the hornet sequences in the movie were flown in actual US Navy F/A-18 super hornets.
@@squashiejoshie200000 all excellent points and I made this video before I saw the movie. I’m actually working on a follow up video to give the Super Hornet some love. TGM was awesome! Thanks for commenting.
@@PilotPhotog hey would you ever consider releasing the 3d model for the new st-22 tomcat you made so people can add them as mods to games like ace combat and stuff?
I am a retired F-14 A/B/D Aviation Electrician and I retired from the Navy in 2007. I was in 5 Tomcat Squadron. I wish Grumman never retired my Tomcats. A great video brother. Tomcats forever.
@@bobojo37 "Dick" was certainly a good name for that Rino fool. The Super Hornet is inferior to the F-14D which could super cruise with a bomb load in the tunnel, and outran F-15s in training exercises.
I was an Avionics Tech in the Navy that worked with many Tomcat maintainers and they all said that the F-14 was a MUCH BETTER Fighter! The Clinton Administration is the One that KILLED the Tomcat when they Reneged on the Deal of Ordering the NEW Upgraded F14 that Grumman had refitted with Glass Cockpit, Internal Weapons Bay, a crude version of Vector Thrust for 1995/96, Super Cruise of Mach 1.3-1.4, More fuel tanks added to the frame on the side of the intakes, LANTERN/FLIR System and Upgraded avionics and control surfaces, Grumman also added Stealth Paint to the frame.
If you grew up in the 80's and 90's then the Tomcat is what you think about when someone says fighter plane. It's like the Lamborghini Countach. It's the poster that adorned your wall, and the model that hung from your ceiling on strings. It's so iconic. I still think it's the coolest looking aircraft ever designed.
And like the countach is it simultanously awesome and not actually as advanced as we thought it was when we were 10 :). Both of them are awesome for what their massive size allows them to carry. The Lambo V12 and the Aim-54 respectively. They are muscle cars that people didnt realize at the time were muscle cars.
@@thevictoryoverhimself7298 Yeah. Although the Tomcat seemed to get more sorted out towards the end of its career that the Countach did towards the end of its production run.
I must say.. The F-16 gained some fame also threw Hollywood like Iron Eagle.. Most people that would not be up to speed on military aviation still recognised the F-16 along with the F-14..
Top Gun: Maverick gave me the most thrilling cinematic experience I've had in years. The Super Hornets were great to see, but they just don't have the same screen presence as the Tomcat. There's just something majestic about the Turkey.
You are totally right- the F-18 doesn't have the cool factor the Tomcat does. I can't explain why, maybe it's the swing wing design (?), but the F-14 has always & will always stand out to me as an American symbol of power & freedom.
The Tomcat is beefy + the swept wing makes the plane looks like it has shoulders. The super hornet is basically the oversized legacy Hornet, which has a more rounded + more "conventional" layout
Your ST-22 is gorgeous. Just based on the Rule of Cool it’s a God Tier fighter. I can only imagine such a platform combined with a similarly upgraded AIM-54. Presuming upgrades to the avionics, motor and control surfaces of the Phoenix it might very well be equivalent to an air launched, late model, Patriot missile. With those types of upgrades an AIM-54X, unlike the original Phoenix, could still be effective against even the maneuverability of fighters.
It’s a shame st-22 never was conceived, if it had the maneuvering that the f22 has it would be scary for any foreign nation to see a carrier off its shores with the st22 on its deck. I just watched the movie myself and it’s going to be up there with my favs that’s for sure.
nah, the AIM-54 was on its way out, the US was working on the AIM-152 as a replacement, but it got cancelled as the cold war ended. After it got cancelled more effort was put into the AIM-120, and now the US is again working on a long range missiles, the AIM-260
That’s actually a really awesome imagining of what a modern, stealthy F-14 might look like. The F-14 is one off if not the best looking fighter jets ever made, and your stealthy, modern rendition looks fantastic. Very well done!
I was on the F14 program in the 80s/90s and helped generate data for some of the proposals. It wasn’t about what the F 14 could do or be modified to do. It was about replacing the the F14, A6, EA6B, KA6 with the F18 essentially removing Grumman off the carrier with the exception of the E2 and C2. We gave it the great college try but looking back with additional info I know now how much it wouldn’t
Carriers, also had S-3 Vikings, A-7 Corsair 2, and the H-3 Sea king too, during the 80's/90's. I'm a Navy veteran, that was assigned to H-3 Sea king helicopter squadron, that was assigned to a carrier airwing, during the 80's. You are half right about removing the (Grumman) Northrop/Grumman F-14 Tomcats from carriers with the (McDonald Douglas) Boeing F/A-18 Hornet. The F/A-18 Hornet is smaller, weighs less than and cost less than the F-14. It took the Navy/Marines 35 years to figure out all what the F/A-18 could do, before the Navy/Marines replaced the F-14, A-6, EA-6B and the KA-6. Now, Lockheed/Martin replaced Northrop/Grumman aboard carriers.
I just saw the sequel today, and man, does it live up to the original! The flight scenes are just incredible, and the story itself is at least as good as the original. It doesn't break new ground like the original did, but is a more than worthy successor.
As always, excellent video. I just watched Top Gun: Maverick. It’s 100% worth the wait. I couldn’t imagine watching it on anything other than the big screen. If you’re a fan of the original, you’ll really appreciate all the tastefully incorporated nostalgic elements of the movie.
To some degree, I personally think they went a little too hard on the nostalgia. I understand that this is a sequel to a 36 year old movie. There needs to be some call backs to help those who are younger and probably haven't seen the first one. However, in some places it seemed a little too on the nose for me.
@@VTdarkangel while I respectfully disagree with your assessment, I also respect your right to your opinion. Regardless, I think we can all agree that waiting until they could release it in theatres was the right call. Cheers!
@@dstavs I will definitely agree with that. The theater was the best place for this release. I will admit that my point of view on the nostalgia could be skewed pretty heavily since I was a HUGE fan of the original growing up. The first movie had affected me so much that, had I not developed a need for glasses as a teenager, I most certainly would tried to become an F14 pilot. So for me, much of the memberberries were very much "yes, I know. Can we move on with the story?" I will say one thing they handled well with the nostalgia was Penny. They never came out and said that she's the "Admiral's daughter" from the first movie, but if you were familiar with it, you picked up on it immediately. It would've been great if Kelly McGillis would've reprised her role instead, but life isn't perfect.
@@VTdarkangel we share a similar story on how the original affected us. Shortly after graduating high school I gave serious consideration to joining the Canadian Armed Forces in the hopes that I would fly the CF-188 (F/A-18 Hornet). However, I had a moral dilemma in that I realized that I may be required to drop bombs on people. Just wasn’t my thing… I picked up on Penny immediately. Put a smile on my face. I really enjoyed how they took what seemed like an irrelevant story from the first movie regarding Maverick’s misadventures and turned it into the love interest in Maverick. If you noticed, Meg Ryan’s character mentions Maverick’s fling with admiral’s daughter to Charlie (McGillis), suggesting they had more than one encounter. As for reprising her role, I think having her in some aspect of the movie could have been nice, but it wouldn’t have worked as the love interest. Besides, the surprising years-long love story with Penny was well played.
@@VTdarkangel I have to agree. The nostalgia was overdone. I stayed away from all the trailers so it wouldn't ruin anything for me. As soon as the intro started I knew there was going to be a lot of nostalgia in the movie. Don't get me wrong, I really liked the movie and there was a place or two where the nostalgia served the story but they just over did it. The sad part is I think the story was good enough on its own that it would've been better if they had laid off the nostalgia
If only, I remember when the Super Tomcat was proposed and reading the periodicals for news on its fate. Maintenance costs and hours on current airframes at the time were the reasons I saw cited as for its dismissal. Instead of telling us no, my boss always says, 'Negative Ghostrider.' Great video, as always superb work and cheers to you and your subs.
That was cited but reality was Grumman tainted thier reputation with a-12 program and dick Cheney had it in for Grumman and now the navy is stuck with an airframe less capable for the same if not higher price tag
I maintained Avionics and Fire Control systems on the Tomcat for 20 years. Your evolution of the Tomcat is spot on. Many people that have no actual experience with the Tomcat like to blame the swing wing for the high maintenance cost per flight hour but that was not the case, The primary cause of the cost was the outdated electronics. The D updated about 30% of the electronics and that did reduce the costs. The ST21 would have had all new electronics, including a digital fly-by-wire system and would have incorporated everything Grumman and the Navy had learned about the Tomcat after 20 years of service. This would have resulted in a much more reliable jet that was much less expensive to operate. It would have also made the Carrier Task Force much safer than the Super Hornet ever could.
Your Super Tomcat ST-22 is actually not that far off from Lockheed Martin's own F-22N, a navalized version of the Raptor with swing-wings that was on the drawing board in the 90's but was dropped because of budget cuts.
I don't sure F-22N was a real project, it's too weird to have swing-wing on a stealth design. And why they need swing wings if it's possible to just redesign flaps or even install blown flaps for STOL capability?
@@KF99 no, it was real, but it never made it off schematics. At the time the navy was looking to both upgrade the F-14 as well as a possible stealth fighter, so Lockheed Martin threw the F-22N together specifically to appear like a Tomcat so as to appeal to the Navy. Unfortunately the post Gulf War demilitarization ment that the navy had to downsize from the three or four fighter projects they were working on to only a single one, and they ultimately settled on going with the Super Hornet.
Of course, even if they would approve an F-22N Sea raptor, it may not have look like the promotional art in the end. A lot of stuff often happens since the start of project to the end of it. And sometimes the redesigns can be quite major.
Brings a tear to my eye as I remember watching these beautiful planes off the coast of Long Island NY. It's clear as day they were pushed aside for Boeing's benefit. They had more potential and exuded American air superiority more than any other plane in our aviation history. What a waste to let it go the way it did...
The f-14 will live in history like the sr-71 as a killer whale of an airplane that may never be surpassed in some ways. Top Gun Maverick did it justice at the end. What an insane and bonkers spaceship of a fighter jet.
As much as I love the Tomcat, that dogfight at the end wasn't supposed to show how good the plane was. It was supposed to show just how ridiculously good a pilot Maverick is, to be able to take out two fifth-generation fighters in a technologically inferior aircraft. It's completely unrealistic but it is damn good fun.
@@Randoman590 absolutely. it’s just one of those times where you just gotta turn your brain off and enjoy the cinematic masterpiece that is top gun maverick
@crooney82 Your use of "spaceship" serves to remind me of a different part of the F-14's pop-culture legacy. It inspired the space-capable fighter craft of the Japanese sci-fi franchise "Macross".
It really wasn’t. It adapted that role because that’s what the navy needed it to do. Even the A model had a bomb mode but it was sealed off from the crew. It wasn’t built to be an interceptor
Exactamundo. More than that it was feared and respected by America's enemy. Let's face it, as good as the F22 and 35 is supposed to be, the Russians and the Chinese ain't losing sleep over it.
As a retired Navy Mechanic who worked both 14's and 18's, nobody factors in beyond the cool factor, what a MASSIVE maintenance pig the 14 was. 14's returned to base every-time broke (in my Squadron). 18's turned around and went for more. Just my humble experience. As a dude that liked being off of work, more that being there 19 hours, 18's worked for me.
Yep but at the same time, if things aren't right, you fix them to make them better. I have confidence that if someone really deep down inside wanted to revamp the F14 bringing it up to current 5th technologies that not only would they have made it world class, they would of first tackled said "maintenance issues". Like you pointed out, a plane that has a history of breaking down is pointless.
@@xtremevette2 They did fix them, they replaced them. The F-14 is faster but times have changed, intercepting strategic bombers isn't about max speed anymore it's about armaments, there are no advantages to the F-14, even combat range which people gloss over in favour of "range".
I worked on both A/C the Tomcat was a maintenance beast.... I was in VF -124 In Miramar aka the rag , When -124 decommissioned I went to the F-18 Rag VFA-125 LOVED HORNETS
@@Spaced92 except the Hornets would be at a huge disadvantage against potential adversaries who are just as agile and advanced but definitely way more faster.
Grumman build a proof of concept Super Tomcat that had many of the characteristics that you described in the mid-90s which included Vector Trust Engine Nozzles, Internal Weapon Bay, Additional Fuel Tanks attached to the fuselage reminiscent to the F-15E Strike Eagle, Glass Cockpit and New GE engines that allowed a Mach 1.1 Super Cruise but ONLY One Tomcat was build at a cost of about 100 million dollars in 1995-96 dollars. The Deal was if Grumman build the Aircraft and it had all the characteristics that the NAVY wanted in the Next Fleet Defender which this Tomcat did the Navy would sign a contract for the NEW Tomcat. During this period the Naval Aviation Brass did not have faith in the Super Hornet being able to fill the Tomcat shoes since it did not have the Airframe to be able to handle the Fuel or Weapons load required to conduct a Combat Air Patrol at the same distances away from the Carrier as the Tomcat. Everything was SET for the NAVY to get their NEXT Generation Tomcat until the Politicians got involved and the Contract went to McDonald Douglas/Boeing the builder of the Super Hornet and the NAVY got SCREWED by people that would never be out in the middle of the Pacific or Atlantic patrolling the Seas. The Super Hornets were never supposed to be in service this long and that is why they have had so many Airframe issues and the Navy and Marine Corps is going to get SCREWED YET again with the F-35 which is also supposed to be a short term solution for Naval Aviation Problem but till the F/A-XX 6th Generation Stealth Fighter which was supposed to have been started with a 5th Generation and taken into the 6th but with Budget Cuts and Program Delays the Navy will probably be STUCK Flying Super Hornets and F-35 till at least the 2035 if not beyond that. I have talked to a few friends that are still in the Aerospace Industry and we have discussed the current trends and one person that is in the know told me that Grumman has the plans and could have an aircraft flying within 6 months after getting the go ahead from a signed contract because they do not want to get screwed again and the bird would look very close to what your 3d model looks like. I hope that we get people in the Chain of Command that will be willing to SPEND the MONEY to make sure that the Sky over a Carrier Task Force is Properly Protected from any sort of threats.
Here's the thing. The F-14 was great for its time. . capable and beautiful. BUT in the end it lost to the F/A-18 because for many reasons one being the F-18 was more capable of striking ground targets, in addition to being able to hold its own in an air to air fight with the F-14. The F-35 out classes both the F-14 and F/A-18 in its ability to kill. No it cant out dog fight either acft but most of the time that doesnt matter since air to air battles are typically decided 20-30 miles away. Its not sexy, but shes a killer. Which is why the brass went with the F-35.
@@arkadious9320 I was served in the US NAVY 2003-09 as a Avionics Tech but I had family friends that were Naval Aviators including a Naval Academy graduate that retired as a two star admiral that flew the Tomcat. When the Tomcat had the Lantern Pods System added to them they were able to be a Great Close Air Support that carried more Ordinance than the F/A-18 Super Hornet that replace it. When a Tomcat took off from the carrier on station in the Indian Ocean the F14 only needed two mid-air refueling but a Super Hornet needed a MINIMUM of 6 Refuels and sometimes as many as 10 for the same mission profile. The MAIN Reason that KILLED the Tomcat was the Number of Maintenance hours required for Each hour of Flight which was around 18 hours and the Super Hornet is somewhere in the 8-10 depending which Mission Profile model. With all the Delay Issues the F35 has had including that the Block 3 Software is NOT Compatible with Block 1 is a MAJOR ISSUE. The F35 again does not have the range a Carrier Task Force Protector should have which is even a BIGGER ISSUE! I know many pilots that transition from Tomcats to Super Hornets and all of them BITCHED about it but they are professionals and will fly the hell out of what ever they are given. I believe that the Navy needs to invest resources into an Aircraft that takes the best attributes of the F14D, F15E, F22 and F35 so the Fleet has a Stealthy Air Superiority Fighter that can also take on bombing missions when the airspace is safe enough to be able to carry bomb rack outside the internal weapon's bay.
@@af22raptor23503 The Block 3 software not being compatible is a major issue. . that will be phased out over the next decade or so. You are correct that the Mx cost of the F-14 was its major downfall. . making the F-18 a huge upgrade based on that alone.. you cant fly if its broke. The F18 has its limitations for sure but in the end comes out above the F14. . Mx costs and capabilities. BUT what you are asking for simply doesn't exist a super fighter bomber that has all of the advantages and little to no downsides. Did you notice the pattern so far? F-14. . great fighter in its time but breaks too easily and costs too much . Replaced by F-18 . . good fighter that costs less to maintain. F-35 . . A jet that can't dog fight as well as either of them but with its tech will kill them before they ever knew it was there. Warfare changed over the decades from having a dog fighter, to a less expensive dogfighter, to a not designed to dog fight but in actuality more deadly jet.
@@arkadious9320 The Super Hornet was NOT money saving Fighter that it was Advertised to be either and it actually it has had more issues that have caused more birds to be on a DOWN Status than the Tomcat ever did. The Tomcat did not break all the time but with all the Hydraulic and Mechanical systems that are need for the wings to more back and forth that takes maintenance hours. Technology changes and so do mission objectives but when the people making the decision do not have a CLUE of what it is NEEDED and keep kicking the ball down so the next admiration gets stuck dealing with it NOTHING gets done. Right now McDonnell Douglas/Boeing is Upgrading the F-15E platform creating a Generation 4.5/4.75 with the internal weapon bay, new data links, Stealth paint and additional fuel tanks that mounted to airframe that allows the Eagle to increase range and loiter time on station or the tanks can be removed to have additional weapon stations. The Air Force is looking at not only upgrading the F15E Fleet that we have but also buy additional aircrafts. Northrop/Grumman had a similar upgrade program for the Tomcat but it is ok for the Eagle but not for the Tomcat. This is the same sad story of the Air Force getting better planes than the Navy, but the Carriers get stuck with TURD because the Air Force has better Lobbing Power in the Congress. Grumman originally also had a F14 model that they tried to sell to the Air Force and McDonnell Douglas had plans for a F15N but they never build it, would be having this conversation if the Navy had purchased F15N Sea Eagles instead of Tomcats and would they still be flying off carriers RIGHT NOW? Interesting thought.
@@af22raptor23503 the f-35 is actually better than the f-18 and f-16 in dogfighting once the block 4 software unlocks the full potential of the jet. Even now with the block 3 software the f-35 is doing very well in exercises as a force multiplier against more numerous 4.5 gen jets adversaries. What I think you are forgetting thou is the F35 was only meant to be a 15-30 yr acft. The USN and USAF are already testing their 6th gen acft respectively (NGAD). The navy version is said to have a greater range for fleet defense. So they are prob going back to a F14 like size 6th gen fighter sometime early 2030's.
I definitely miss the awesome badass coolness of the F-14 and you did a great job rendering a futuristic stealthy version of a classic. I don't know that I would say that Maverick "should" be flying it, as it's a plane that's not in service and/or doesn't exist. It was cool seeing him test pilot a fictional super-jet, but having him fly a fictional plane throughout the film would have detracted from the realism. That said, I WISH the Navy was flying the "22" - what a beautiful rendering. Great job!
The sweep would probably be most stealthy at full sweep where the wing angle matches the elevators, I suspect that the Hinge points and fairings would need the old Jagged treatment to minimise surfaces for radar return, Naturally at least amount of sweep it wouldn't be stealthy but I suspect that probably isn't so much of a disadvantage compared to the advantage of having lower approach speeds on recovery, and in a visual turn fight the advantage in turn.
@@GolddenWaffles the sweeping action would rub the paint off or you would have to give the wing enough clearance from the mechanism but then you would have to coat the underside. The variable geometry wing sweep is just to expensive and too out dated
@@glassfullofmilk its main problem is not stealth but weight. Modern day aerodynamics and engines have no need for a variable geometry wing anymore. It was meant to combine high maximum speed (for intercept) with low landing speeds (for carrier landings). In the 1960's, this wing was a reasonable answer to this problem. But these days there are equal or even better wing designs that have the advange of having much less weight.
I think a next-gen Tomcat would've been especially fitting, since the "pancake" between the engines would've allowed for a YUUUGE internal weapons bay and that the original vertical stabilizers were already canted out, a bit like the 5th-gen stealth fighters. BTW, I'm super salty that the military didn't keep any airworthy examples around just because Iran maintains a dozen-or-so -rusty- airframes.
Two improvements. One: The addition of a modified version of the AWACS Radar embedded into the top central fuselage to allow this aircraft to achieve command and control of an attack wing. With an advanced computer ,this aircraft could assume AWACS target acquisition, coordinate force multipliers, and have a full offensive/defensive suite to assist in combat. Now for clarification, I don't mean the "rotating dish" housed atop a modified Boeing 707, I mean radar transceivers mounted in panels atop the Super Tomcat 22. The second modification is a more "minor" upgrade. A rear mounted, low range (5-25 miles) radar assembly in the rear area between the engine housing. The RIO (Radar Intercept Officer) can monitor along with the IRST and other sensor packages a nearly 360° coverage around the Tomcat and can warn of aircraft with more precision and even coordinate a possible "rear strike" capability with missiles capable of making extremely steep turns, or using the drones in an offensive/defensive capacity. So much potential. But your aircraft does basically resemble a "swing wing" and 2 crew version of the F-22 Raptor and that IS a possible and practical idea. So basically a heavily modified F-22 to perform what boils down to a "arsenal craft" containing bombs, missiles, possibly a laser (future upgrade) the Vulcan cannon and even EF-18 Growler electronic capabilities including jamming and other duties. One hell of an aircraft, and with it's already prodigious speed (Mach 2.5 1500mph) and Mach 1.3 supercruise ability, this would have been the plane to level the playing field.
Wow, I’m in my mid 50’s and I join the navy in 91, do have to say, I have yet to see the second movie and enjoyed your video of explaining what could have happened with the f-14d, I was one of the lucky ones to see it in action at Miramar before top gun got relocated and of course, on the carrier! But saw one go down during deployment after take off, at least no one got hurt! Thanks again brother!
My late wife and knew a couple who were engineers for Grumman. She and He both looked like they stepped out of an Agatha Christy novel. She would've made a perfect Miss Marple. One day they were rearranging their Den/Office. there was multiple Tomcat pictures, memorabilia on the wall. I looke at him and said: "I knew you and your wife worked for Grumman." He said -we were on the weapons system team." "So in other words, you and your dear wife,any time a Tomcat splashed a MiG you two had something to do with it.?" "He said;"Uh Huh." and that was it.
Great job on the S22 Tomcat. It looks amazing. The F18 is not the air superiority fighter the legendary Tomcat was. I imagine we could buy one S22 or a small country. It looks like money to produce and to fly, but what a beauty.
Your 22 tomcat looks absolutely badass. But thrust vectoring really needs fixed wings. That’s a LOT of stress on pivot points. Still, an amazing attempt. The super cruise function and stealth would have made it viable.
The F-14 Tomcat actually had some composite and plastic parts to it, and they had planned to make even more of it composite and polymer-based, which would have had the side-effect of making it harder to detect by radar. If the F-14 had been allowed to progress (like they did for the F-15, F-16, & F-18), the F-14 would have outperformed the F-18 in almost every regard. Additionally, the F-14 could fire the Phoenix (air-to-air) missile, which allowed for an accurate BVR (beyond visual range) fire and forget targeting system, utilizing a top-down attack (like the Javelin missile, but for aerial targets), making it almost impossible to detect and evade.
The Phoenix missile was amazing for its time, but it was really designed to shoot down bombers, not fighters. The AIM-120D today has 90% of the Phoenix’s range and much better maneuverability. The AIM-260 will double that.
@@bluemarlin8138 I agree, but I mentioned the Phoenix missile, as it was ahead of its time, which was why it was so expensive, and why the F-14 was ultimately canceled. It wasn't due to the F-14's performance, but due to budget costs, mostly resulting from the Phoenix missile program, in which the F-14 was the exclusive user.
The Super Hornet is really amazing in its ability to replace almost all of the aircraft on an aircraft carrier, but I've also read a lot over the years about the limited range putting a strain on the OpTempo of the carrier flight ops. The Super Tomcat 21 seems like it would have been perfect as the long loiter command and control interceptor, directing the F18s in their various roles like the Navy's version of the F22, especially if the Phoenix had decades of development to pace the AMRAAM D.
Tomcat is legendary... awe inspiring in fact. But is main feature is also its weakpoint. Present day aerodynamics and engines simply have no need for a variable geometry wing. We can combine the low landing speed with high maximum speed perfectly well with other wing designs... That would have the advantage of being much lighter due to the absence of a pivoting mechanism. The ST-22 would have been great, but its never to be... If it were to be built, it would however have a wing with much higher surface area (for maneuverability). I am unsure how to combine this with a variable geometry wing though...
Honestly when I was younger I was in love with the F-14. I guess there's just something so "cool" about the sweeping wings. But now that I'm older, to me the sweeping wings has the same "cool" factor as the flip up lights on sports cars of the 80s. Basically they were "nifty" for their time but now just seem like unnecessary moving parts. I'm happy they went with the Super Hornets. They are amazing machines...
Back during my childhood of the late 70s and 80s, I witnessed a lot of US Aircraft activities almost on a daily basis in the Philippines. Our hometown in Pangasinan Province was situated distant to Clark Air Force Base in Pampanga and Subic Bay Naval Base/Cubi Point Naval Air Station in Zambales. There were frequent flybys and low passes even along populated centers whereby sparking disgusts, irritation to Pinoys but definitely made children smile, wave, cheer and shout in exitement hearing those jet engine roars and occasional sonic booms. Among the jets that featured in my childhood days were Skyhawks, Corsairs, Intruders, Vikings, Harriers, Thunderbolts, Phantoms, Tomcats, Eagles, Fighting Falcons, Hornets. There were also flights of Sabres, Freedom Fighters and Crusaders flown by the Philippine Air Force paralleling these jets flown by the US Air Force, US Navy and US Marines. But what really impressed and amazed me with a differing adrenalin are the F-14 Tomcats that flew by performing all those mock ACMs while swinging their wings in various maneuvering patterns including the barrel roll and the so called cobra evasive tactic, which I had known thru my adult research later on. Back then, we had a bamboo ladder permanently-tied beside our house and leading to the roof, basically utilized to sundry our washed clothes, and as a hangout for children like me (there is a barrier on two corners that is why it is safe for children to climb on to). It was on this house roof that I watched these jets fly and scream out, and it was a highly-memorable entertainment for a child like me (with some playmates of mine most of the time). Unfortunately by 1992, these US bases were completely-closed as the renewal for another term of government to government long-term lease failed on the side of the Philippine Government negotiation. That was an end to an immense jet flying era and all those sonic booms heard all around. Had the US Government been able to secure a lease renewal to these overseas bases, these present era would have allowed Pinoys to constantly-witness flybys of Super Hornets, Vipers, Strike Eagles, F22s and F35s etc.
The finest military aircraft the United States has ever designed........ end of. I've just watched a lecture with the former VP of Grumman and he confirmed that they did indeed have this project in development which incorporated stealth as well as a plethora of new technologies. She was and would be a massive improvement of the bog..... sorry, the F-18.
that would be pretty cool if they were to actually build the ST 22 for the navy it truly is an icon and one of the coolest planes ever built and with the upgrades to the plane it could have been unstoppable. maybe one day they will decide to bring it back.
It could have been nice airplane. But swing wing is a thing of the past, it is heavy and complicated. I don't think we ever get that back. Thanks for a great video
@@billhanna2148 Variable geometry with a huge mechanical hinge is an obsolete design now that digital flight control and improved aerodynamic device can deliver much better performance. In the future, smart materials might allow “non swing-wing” variable geometry and I would expect smaller drone to embrace the concept first.
I used to work for Boeing... in 2001 I was with other Lean Manufacturing Experts and went to St Louis to help reduce waste and cycle time on F/A 18 Super Hornet. Boeing had purchased McDonnell Douglas, along with all military orders. At that time, they were finishing the last 4 F-15's and the production line would shut down. Today, they are building the F-15X advanced aircraft. Boeing and Navy were finalizing 2nd order of F/A 18's. Costs had to be reduced, or Navy wouldn't buy anymore. Our teams slashed cycle times, increased production, reduced wastes, made a safer and better F/A 18. I'm pretty sure Tom Cruise loves the new F/A 18's just fine. But, it was a sad ending for F-14's. Did you know if you accidentally stray into 'highly restricted' parts of St Louis plant, you will be 'greeted' by military guys in full body armor and automatic weapons pointed at you. I did, and I had very high security clearance. They were there to prevent people going into the paint booths were F/A 18's RAM coatings were applied. Not only is process top secret, the fumes can kill you if not wearing proper PPE.
The down time required to keep the F-14 flying was considered too expensive. Which is why the US Navy considered the F-18as a replacement. I haven’t seen the new movie yet.
The only reason the Tomcat spent allot of time in the hangar was because they never upgraded it like they did ALL the other Gen 4 fighters, Hell they didn't even give the Tomcat the engines it was supposed to come with in the beginning for roughly ten years!!!, to put that in perspective the Hornet which entered service in 1983 received its first major upgrade ONLY four years after it entered service, Oh and getting the engines it was supposed to come with should not be considered and upgrade so in reality the Tomcat didn't receive a similar style upgrade as the Hornet until its 16th year of service.
@@josephkugel5099 Your argument to me will not bring the F-14 back. It was more about Corporate positioning (pirating) and creating the monopolies we have today. As well as what the Navy wanted. The F-14 was just another casualty.
The author of the video is correct about what the F-14 21/22 would have offered, except he's overly optimistic about stealth. The Navy was skeptical that a new F-14 would have been less expensive, or at least equally expensive, to maintain, compared with a Super Hornet, and the Navy wanted to eliminate the extra crew members to reduce personnel costs on the ship. While the redesigned air intakes to the engines would have successfully obscured the engines from radar, it is very difficult to make a swing-wing stealthy. The new Super Hornet, with AESA radar and extended range AMRAAM missiles, equaled the Tomcat's long range air to air strike capability as of 2016 - a testament to the Tomcat. The Hornet still lacks the Tomcat's range and it bleeds more energy in a turn (though its instantaneous turn rate is higher than the Tomcat's), but in the hands of a well trained, aggressive pilot, it will hold its own against anything the Russians or Chinese can put up in squadron strength.
The Tomcat is one of the best plane designs out there. Russia and couple other nations stole many of its great features if you look at them side-by-side. The sweep wing helps but its overall design, power plant, speed, strike capabilities, front line attack capabilities, carrier success and many others, made the F-14 a remarkable plane. I don't particularly like the F-18, both 1/2 seaters, it doesn't inspire that wow factor like the Tomcat does. The T22 would've been a great successor to the T14 and would look much cooler than the F22 and F35 (the best part is the vtol variant-US Marines).
they made the Su-27 from spys on the F-15..and we built the F-15 because of the MiG-25 foxbat... also so the MiG-23 uses the exact same intake design as the F-4 Phantom....been going back and fourth for for years
@@aandc2005 The Foxbat is an absolute giant of an airframe. People don’t realize how big that thing was. The 15 would eat it’s lunch in every scenario except a long top speed chase. And nothing in our (known) inventory today can touch the Foxbat in that regard.
In the 1980s I had a friend who was an Navy F-4 pilot in Vietnam. I asked him what he though of the then-new F-18 that was just entering service. His reply, "Well, the Navy is letting the Marines get them first. That should tell you all you need to know".
I'm a big fan of the Hornet/Super Hornet, so I loved to see that plane in the new Top Gun 😍 But your F-14/2022 Stealth Fighter would also be an awesome fighter jet 👍🏻 Let's hope for Top Gun 3 😆
I was with you until the last version :) I can not remember any successful implementation of major Stealth features on a legacy platform. I know it has been planned (Stealth Eagle etc) but not been implemented which considering countries like Japan really wanting a stealthed air superiority fighter makes me think it is not viable.
@@billhanna2148 So not a valid counter argument. If you want a viable LO platform the required features NEED to be designed in from the start, retrofitting isn't an option. The first guy was right, if it could be be done it would have been.
@@FallenPhoenix86 It had NOTHING to do with Grumman's ability and all to do with the politics of military spending and corporate welfare and you should know that 😉
Would have been a whole new airframe, they kept the Tomcat name to sell it as a new version of the old airframe. Which is what they did with the he Super Hornet.
I'd ditch most of the stealth elements from the design. Those are expensive and greatly increase both upkeep cost and reduce aircraft availability with increased maintenance time. We already have F-22, F-35, B-2 and the B-21 Raider is also on the way, as is a 6th gen stealth fighter eventually. We have enough stealth aircraft in inventory now or in the future. The big advantage of having an advanced multi-role version of the F-14 would be having a fighter that can operate from aircraft carriers with extremely long range, high speed, high weapons payload and the largest radome on a fighter. This would mean that even if you used the same radar as found in, say the F-15EX Eagle II, it would be even more powerful as the radar surface would be larger and would have more modules. Such an advanced F-14 would have incredible BVR fighting capability. It would also have a RIO who could control drones as mentioned and those drones would likely be stealthy, giving this advanced F-14 a stealth capability as a whole system even if the aircraft itself was not stealthy.
Dude, this concept is f#@king gorgeous!! I would love to see this model in a wind tunnel! The reason I say that is cause I wonder that kind of effect the main wings being perfectly aligned with the horizontal stabilizers would have on the aerodynamics. I imagine there would a bit of turbulence that could affect the stability. I’m no expert though and would actually LOVE someone to explain what kind of interaction there would be with the airflow! All that being said I still freaking LOVE this concept buddy, great work!
Love your speculative Gen 5 F-14 design. I think it could be awesome but when you couple the complexity of a swing wing design with the maintenance of the low observable coatings, it seems like a maintenance nightmare. Maybe a compromise with fixed a wing somewhere in between the extremes? BTW the F-23 should have won. Maybe some kind of F-14/F-23 mashup? That would be one sexy-ass bird!
When I think American top y think Eagle, Tomcat ,f16 and the YF 23 the aircraft that that should have been but never was.A Super Tomcat should have been developed alongside the F18 allowing the f18 to be developed more for the attack role allowing the Tomcat to be a master of the fleet defence role it could have been the true multi role fighter
The ventral fins on the improved stealth version would likely be angled slight to improve on stealth. Just like you angled the vertical stabilizer. It not a huge area, but every little bit helps. And angling just a little does a lot for the stealth capability. (But that is just my uninformed opinion based on general stealth design guidelines and one really need to do a proper simulated modelling of course. And materials plays a huge role to.)
Tog, could you do a review of the aircraft found in Arma 3 like the A-164 Wipeout and F/A-181? I got to see an early showing yesterday and it was amazing! It does live up to its predecessor
I just think it would be cool to see you review them and see if they are feasible to how you would make future versions of the aircraft they are meant to represent if you know what I mean?
This was an amazing recreation and future creation of the Tomcat. My best friend would have loved it if he were still alive. I so wish I could have watched this with him. Thanks for reminding me of my best friend who loved all things military but especially the Airforce and the Tomcat.
The back seater should be AI based and providing situational awareness and precision weapons control but not have complete autonomy but support pilot directives and commands.
@UCii8uaLXQUHbQFDVvf1ycMA - AI could do that if given authorization. A simple command like establish A firing solution. Again, you could replicate the communication between pilot in backseater.
Genuine question : was the F-14 actually a good dogfighting aircraft ? I always had the impression it was mostly designed foremost as a long-range, high-speed, heavily-armed interceptor to protect carrier battlegroups rather than intended to dogfight within gun ranges.
@@johnhermann7498 I love the Tomcat. But it had its limits. And it was not a great dogfighter. The TF-30 engines required high amounts of airflow to maintain power. Low speed high G turns were a problem. The airframe could handle it. The engines couldn’t.
@@bigbore4498 those problems were rectified in the B and D models with the F110-GE-100 engines, same as they used in the Bug and the Falcon. Got a hefty thrust increase too. As far as I'm concerned, no fighter jets should EVER use Pratt and Whiney engines... their radial piston engines were great, their jet engines are JUNK.
@@nathanhansen4334 - No offense dude... But I'll take the word of the men that actually flew and maintained the aircraft over the word of a bunch of people that read stats out of a technical manual... Max G, etc, etc isn't the be all and end all of DACM/BFM.... Anyone that has ever listened to people like Ward Carroll and his guests would know that... Not hatin'... Just sayin'.
One thing I consider everytime I think of the AST-21, is what kind of improvements could have been done to the AIM54 at the same time. Because if you're keeping the Tomcat, you HAVE to keep it's most iconic weapon system.
Superb design of a future F-14 Tomcat. My only wish is that you should have shown the internal weapons bay with, at least, a future version of the Phoenix missile. In the end, that’s what the F-14 was built for.
In another universe the US Navy would have gone for this aircraft instead of the F 35. The F 35 is a flying computer built to be flown as weapons delivery platforms, not real fighters. The F 14 was a proper fighter.
@@bop3752 I say the funniest thing is, if the navy wanted to keep the F-14 and keep it modernized, it becoming a flying computer itself would be a must
*Sniff, I actually had a tear watching this video. Thanks for sharing what could have been an awesome idea for the new Top Gun Movie. I know Tom Cruise wanted authenticity of showcasing flying Jet planes, but I wonder how the audience would feel if there was a plot where Maverick's F-18 gets damaged somehow and then gets the prototype ST-22 to pilot to complete the mission! I humbly believe they would be cheering so much when they see a Modern F-14 Tomcat ready to strike and kick ass! :D TYVM Have Fun ^_^
The song, “You’ve lost that loving feeling,” is by the Righteousness Brothers IN THE 60’s!!! If you thought the maintenance was bad with the F-14; image the price for an would be gen 5; let alone the $$$ to buy one
The main reason why the F35 and F22 weren’t used was because neither feature a rear seat which was crucial to the way this movie was produced. Had a super tomcat ever been produced it would’ve been the perfect choice. The super hornet is still a beast though and it’s great to see it getting some recognition
Am going to see TGM tomorrow, can't wait. I still remember seeing the original back in 86. Sadly couldn't join the AF due to crappy eyesight :( I still weep every time I watch TG and no doubt will tmrw as well 😢
You are are right, the F-14 will always be remembered as a cool aircraft. Problem is, cool will show up on the other guys radar screen. Times are changing, but that was a great commercial for the ST-21, and AST-21.
I gotta admit, as much as I'm a huge fanboy of the F-22 Raptor and it would be very difficult for anything to top that in my mind, your mockup of this hypothetical Super Tomcat does look pretty damn sexy.
Want to help support this channel?
Become a channel member: ua-cam.com/channels/z_aGg3uEnfE4hU6Pu6Wj3g.htmljoin
Subscribe on Patreon: patreon.com/PilotPhotog
I spend some time on a discord where everyone talks about military weapons, equipment, their performance, what makes one better than another and the thing about the tomcat is everyone agrees about 2 things.
1: The Tomcat was a beautiful plane and everyone loves it.
2: We'll never ever see another plane like it again, and we never should.
We can go as fast as the tomcat, while being as maneuverable as the tomcat, while having a higher flight ceiling than the tomcat, while not having an expensive swing wing design. In the 1970s, it let jets go faster. Now it's just not necessary. There's no iteration of the tomcat that will outperform the hornet or the eagle. The other thing is as much as I love the tomcat, the hornet is also a beautiful plane. I certainly disagree with the statement that Maverick should have been using a tomcat. It's a disservice to the hornet. It's also impossible because there is 1 tomcat still in flying shape and the hornet sequences in the movie were flown in actual US Navy F/A-18 super hornets.
@@squashiejoshie200000 all excellent points and I made this video before I saw the movie. I’m actually working on a follow up video to give the Super Hornet some love. TGM was awesome! Thanks for commenting.
@@PilotPhotog hey would you ever consider releasing the 3d model for the new st-22 tomcat you made so people can add them as mods to games like ace combat and stuff?
Hornet's canted vertical tail improves yaw during high AOA, not just RCS.
C-section
I am a retired F-14 A/B/D Aviation Electrician and I retired from the Navy in 2007. I was in 5 Tomcat Squadron. I wish Grumman never retired my Tomcats. A great video brother. Tomcats forever.
Grumman didn't make that call, Dick Cheney decided the F-14 was a "jobs program" and made sure its upgrade plan was scuttled.
@@bobojo37 "Dick" was certainly a good name for that Rino fool. The Super Hornet is inferior to the F-14D which could super cruise with a bomb load in the tunnel, and outran F-15s in training exercises.
I was an Avionics Tech in the Navy that worked with many Tomcat maintainers and they all said that the F-14 was a MUCH BETTER Fighter! The Clinton Administration is the One that KILLED the Tomcat when they Reneged on the Deal of Ordering the NEW Upgraded F14 that Grumman had refitted with Glass Cockpit, Internal Weapons Bay, a crude version of Vector Thrust for 1995/96, Super Cruise of Mach 1.3-1.4, More fuel tanks added to the frame on the side of the intakes, LANTERN/FLIR System and Upgraded avionics and control surfaces, Grumman also added Stealth Paint to the frame.
@@af22raptor23503 And I bet all of that would still have been cheaper than the F-35
@@kdrapertrucker Never forget what the Neocons took from us.
If you grew up in the 80's and 90's then the Tomcat is what you think about when someone says fighter plane. It's like the Lamborghini Countach. It's the poster that adorned your wall, and the model that hung from your ceiling on strings. It's so iconic. I still think it's the coolest looking aircraft ever designed.
And like the countach is it simultanously awesome and not actually as advanced as we thought it was when we were 10 :). Both of them are awesome for what their massive size allows them to carry. The Lambo V12 and the Aim-54 respectively. They are muscle cars that people didnt realize at the time were muscle cars.
@@thevictoryoverhimself7298 Yeah. Although the Tomcat seemed to get more sorted out towards the end of its career that the Countach did towards the end of its production run.
F4 phantom is a menacing competitor when it comes to intimidation factor
I must say.. The F-16 gained some fame also threw Hollywood like Iron Eagle.. Most people that would not be up to speed on military aviation still recognised the F-16 along with the F-14..
F-16….recall that the F-18 lost the Pentagon fly off to the Electric Jet. The Navy went away in tears…
Top Gun: Maverick gave me the most thrilling cinematic experience I've had in years. The Super Hornets were great to see, but they just don't have the same screen presence as the Tomcat. There's just something majestic about the Turkey.
Eagles and Tomcats will always be The Big Brothers👍
I was raised in the 80s. I saw Top Gun 2 today and it was great. Definitely had a nostalgic moment for sure.
It was nice to see the tomcat make an appearance in the movie.
The story is crap. Stolen straight from Star Wars.
@@douglasbooth6836 Mav: "I am your father (now)" Goose Jr: "No you're not."
You are totally right- the F-18 doesn't have the cool factor the Tomcat does. I can't explain why, maybe it's the swing wing design (?), but the F-14 has always & will always stand out to me as an American symbol of power & freedom.
The F-18 doesn't even have half the cool factor of its own predecessor/siblings, the F-5 and F-20
Intimidating stance, mean stare, broad body builder shoulders, perfect photogenic symmetry, rare conventional to delta wing configuration, size matters appearance, under belly load capacity, craftsmanship, gawk factor, Robotech, badassery, true fleet defender capability, can layeth the law, walks the walk, list goes on.....
Because Tomcat presents power
The stance of the Tomcat, thing looks like it's got shoulder pads. Also Macross and Swat Cats when I was growing up.
The Tomcat is beefy + the swept wing makes the plane looks like it has shoulders. The super hornet is basically the oversized legacy Hornet, which has a more rounded + more "conventional" layout
Your ST-22 is gorgeous. Just based on the Rule of Cool it’s a God Tier fighter.
I can only imagine such a platform combined with a similarly upgraded AIM-54. Presuming upgrades to the avionics, motor and control surfaces of the Phoenix it might very well be equivalent to an air launched, late model, Patriot missile. With those types of upgrades an AIM-54X, unlike the original Phoenix, could still be effective against even the maneuverability of fighters.
I seem to recall a video that there is a new long range AAM on the way.
The same thought crossed my mind, what would happen to the aim-54, well, we’ll never know
It’s a shame st-22 never was conceived, if it had the maneuvering that the f22 has it would be scary for any foreign nation to see a carrier off its shores with the st22 on its deck. I just watched the movie myself and it’s going to be up there with my favs that’s for sure.
nah, the AIM-54 was on its way out, the US was working on the AIM-152 as a replacement, but it got cancelled as the cold war ended. After it got cancelled more effort was put into the AIM-120, and now the US is again working on a long range missiles, the AIM-260
The Phoenix still hasn't been surpassed in terms of range. The AMRAAM might be better overall, but it still has a slightly shorter range.
That’s actually a really awesome imagining of what a modern, stealthy F-14 might look like. The F-14 is one off if not the best looking fighter jets ever made, and your stealthy, modern rendition looks fantastic. Very well done!
I was on the F14 program in the 80s/90s and helped generate data for some of the proposals. It wasn’t about what the F 14 could do or be modified to do. It was about replacing the the F14, A6, EA6B, KA6 with the F18 essentially removing Grumman off the carrier with the exception of the E2 and C2. We gave it the great college try but looking back with additional info I know now how much it wouldn’t
Carriers, also had S-3 Vikings, A-7 Corsair 2, and the H-3 Sea king too, during the 80's/90's. I'm a Navy veteran, that was assigned to H-3 Sea king helicopter squadron, that was assigned to a carrier airwing, during the 80's. You are half right about removing the (Grumman) Northrop/Grumman F-14 Tomcats from carriers with the (McDonald Douglas) Boeing F/A-18 Hornet. The F/A-18 Hornet is smaller, weighs less than and cost less than the F-14. It took the Navy/Marines 35 years to figure out all what the F/A-18 could do, before the Navy/Marines replaced the F-14, A-6, EA-6B and the KA-6. Now, Lockheed/Martin replaced Northrop/Grumman aboard carriers.
HS-1 83-87
I hope this makes it into Ace Combat
My first thought as well lol. Or this needs to be a DCS mod!
Same, only thinking on War Thunder
I just saw the sequel today, and man, does it live up to the original! The flight scenes are just incredible, and the story itself is at least as good as the original. It doesn't break new ground like the original did, but is a more than worthy successor.
They could have at least played Volleyball lol
I saw it today to. It was awsome. Definitely a nostalgic moment for sure. Alexander I agree.
Rule of cool. Yep, i using that phrase.
And he never took out his nasty habit of buzzing the tower!!😆
And the way he made the F-14 dance in that movie was incredible... and surprisingly realistic too.
As always, excellent video. I just watched Top Gun: Maverick. It’s 100% worth the wait. I couldn’t imagine watching it on anything other than the big screen. If you’re a fan of the original, you’ll really appreciate all the tastefully incorporated nostalgic elements of the movie.
To some degree, I personally think they went a little too hard on the nostalgia. I understand that this is a sequel to a 36 year old movie. There needs to be some call backs to help those who are younger and probably haven't seen the first one. However, in some places it seemed a little too on the nose for me.
@@VTdarkangel while I respectfully disagree with your assessment, I also respect your right to your opinion. Regardless, I think we can all agree that waiting until they could release it in theatres was the right call. Cheers!
@@dstavs I will definitely agree with that. The theater was the best place for this release. I will admit that my point of view on the nostalgia could be skewed pretty heavily since I was a HUGE fan of the original growing up. The first movie had affected me so much that, had I not developed a need for glasses as a teenager, I most certainly would tried to become an F14 pilot. So for me, much of the memberberries were very much "yes, I know. Can we move on with the story?" I will say one thing they handled well with the nostalgia was Penny. They never came out and said that she's the "Admiral's daughter" from the first movie, but if you were familiar with it, you picked up on it immediately. It would've been great if Kelly McGillis would've reprised her role instead, but life isn't perfect.
@@VTdarkangel we share a similar story on how the original affected us. Shortly after graduating high school I gave serious consideration to joining the Canadian Armed Forces in the hopes that I would fly the CF-188 (F/A-18 Hornet). However, I had a moral dilemma in that I realized that I may be required to drop bombs on people. Just wasn’t my thing… I picked up on Penny immediately. Put a smile on my face. I really enjoyed how they took what seemed like an irrelevant story from the first movie regarding Maverick’s misadventures and turned it into the love interest in Maverick. If you noticed, Meg Ryan’s character mentions Maverick’s fling with admiral’s daughter to Charlie (McGillis), suggesting they had more than one encounter. As for reprising her role, I think having her in some aspect of the movie could have been nice, but it wouldn’t have worked as the love interest. Besides, the surprising years-long love story with Penny was well played.
@@VTdarkangel I have to agree. The nostalgia was overdone. I stayed away from all the trailers so it wouldn't ruin anything for me. As soon as the intro started I knew there was going to be a lot of nostalgia in the movie. Don't get me wrong, I really liked the movie and there was a place or two where the nostalgia served the story but they just over did it. The sad part is I think the story was good enough on its own that it would've been better if they had laid off the nostalgia
When I was young I watched Robotech, the Skull 1 resembled the F-14. Ever since then I have loved the F-14, and Top Gun only made it that much better.
If the live action movie ever gets into production i wouldn't mind them using this instead of the classic F14 as the base frame.
Yep one of the reason why f14 is so close to the 80s kids
If only, I remember when the Super Tomcat was proposed and reading the periodicals for news on its fate. Maintenance costs and hours on current airframes at the time were the reasons I saw cited as for its dismissal. Instead of telling us no, my boss always says, 'Negative Ghostrider.' Great video, as always superb work and cheers to you and your subs.
That was cited but reality was Grumman tainted thier reputation with a-12 program and dick Cheney had it in for Grumman and now the navy is stuck with an airframe less capable for the same if not higher price tag
@@strykerk992 Ty, politics. It's always politics.
The Tomcat was the most beautiful airplane in the past 50 years. Its the inspiration for the Robotech anima robot series.
I maintained Avionics and Fire Control systems on the Tomcat for 20 years. Your evolution of the Tomcat is spot on. Many people that have no actual experience with the Tomcat like to blame the swing wing for the high maintenance cost per flight hour but that was not the case, The primary cause of the cost was the outdated electronics. The D updated about 30% of the electronics and that did reduce the costs. The ST21 would have had all new electronics, including a digital fly-by-wire system and would have incorporated everything Grumman and the Navy had learned about the Tomcat after 20 years of service. This would have resulted in a much more reliable jet that was much less expensive to operate. It would have also made the Carrier Task Force much safer than the Super Hornet ever could.
Your Super Tomcat ST-22 is actually not that far off from Lockheed Martin's own F-22N, a navalized version of the Raptor with swing-wings that was on the drawing board in the 90's but was dropped because of budget cuts.
I was thinking the same thing. Looking at it, I got flashbacks to old promotional F-22 art I had seen.
U mean F22N Sea Raptor?
I don't sure F-22N was a real project, it's too weird to have swing-wing on a stealth design. And why they need swing wings if it's possible to just redesign flaps or even install blown flaps for STOL capability?
@@KF99 no, it was real, but it never made it off schematics. At the time the navy was looking to both upgrade the F-14 as well as a possible stealth fighter, so Lockheed Martin threw the F-22N together specifically to appear like a Tomcat so as to appeal to the Navy. Unfortunately the post Gulf War demilitarization ment that the navy had to downsize from the three or four fighter projects they were working on to only a single one, and they ultimately settled on going with the Super Hornet.
Of course, even if they would approve an F-22N Sea raptor, it may not have look like the promotional art in the end.
A lot of stuff often happens since the start of project to the end of it. And sometimes the redesigns can be quite major.
Brings a tear to my eye as I remember watching these beautiful planes off the coast of Long Island NY. It's clear as day they were pushed aside for Boeing's benefit. They had more potential and exuded American air superiority more than any other plane in our aviation history. What a waste to let it go the way it did...
The f-14 will live in history like the sr-71 as a killer whale of an airplane that may never be surpassed in some ways. Top Gun Maverick did it justice at the end. What an insane and bonkers spaceship of a fighter jet.
As much as I love the Tomcat, that dogfight at the end wasn't supposed to show how good the plane was. It was supposed to show just how ridiculously good a pilot Maverick is, to be able to take out two fifth-generation fighters in a technologically inferior aircraft. It's completely unrealistic but it is damn good fun.
@@Randoman590 absolutely. it’s just one of those times where you just gotta turn your brain off and enjoy the cinematic masterpiece that is top gun maverick
My favorite jet in ace combat fir a reason
@crooney82 Your use of "spaceship" serves to remind me of a different part of the F-14's pop-culture legacy. It inspired the space-capable fighter craft of the Japanese sci-fi franchise "Macross".
Man, this Tomcat would have been a game changer for carrier air strikes.
You know that the F-14 was not designed as a strike fighter? It was the fleet defender -.-
@@friendlyreptile9931 later versions of the f-14 did have strike capability. They called it the bombcat.
@@scalywing1 Yeh but it was not broduced with that in mind. I don't know if u knew that but iran used it as bombcat like 10 years before the us :D
It really wasn’t. It adapted that role because that’s what the navy needed it to do. Even the A model had a bomb mode but it was sealed off from the crew. It wasn’t built to be an interceptor
Exactamundo. More than that it was feared and respected by America's enemy. Let's face it, as good as the F22 and 35 is supposed to be, the Russians and the Chinese ain't losing sleep over it.
The movie lives up to its name and them some. It was that rare sequel that manages to out do the original.
6:37
"Who's up there?"
"Phoenix & Bob and Maverick & Rooster."
"Great... Maverick and Rooster."
As a retired Navy Mechanic who worked both 14's and 18's, nobody factors in beyond the cool factor, what a MASSIVE maintenance pig the 14 was. 14's returned to base every-time broke (in my Squadron). 18's turned around and went for more. Just my humble experience. As a dude that liked being off of work, more that being there 19 hours, 18's worked for me.
Great point of view
Yep but at the same time, if things aren't right, you fix them to make them better. I have confidence that if someone really deep down inside wanted to revamp the F14 bringing it up to current 5th technologies that not only would they have made it world class, they would of first tackled said "maintenance issues". Like you pointed out, a plane that has a history of breaking down is pointless.
@@xtremevette2 They did fix them, they replaced them. The F-14 is faster but times have changed, intercepting strategic bombers isn't about max speed anymore it's about armaments, there are no advantages to the F-14, even combat range which people gloss over in favour of "range".
I worked on both A/C the Tomcat was a maintenance beast.... I was in VF -124 In Miramar aka the rag , When -124 decommissioned I went to the F-18 Rag VFA-125 LOVED HORNETS
@@Spaced92 except the Hornets would be at a huge disadvantage against potential adversaries who are just as agile and advanced but definitely way more faster.
Almost makes me cry seeing what should have been. 😥 Excellent video!
Grumman build a proof of concept Super Tomcat that had many of the characteristics that you described in the mid-90s which included Vector Trust Engine Nozzles, Internal Weapon Bay, Additional Fuel Tanks attached to the fuselage reminiscent to the F-15E Strike Eagle, Glass Cockpit and New GE engines that allowed a Mach 1.1 Super Cruise but ONLY One Tomcat was build at a cost of about 100 million dollars in 1995-96 dollars. The Deal was if Grumman build the Aircraft and it had all the characteristics that the NAVY wanted in the Next Fleet Defender which this Tomcat did the Navy would sign a contract for the NEW Tomcat. During this period the Naval Aviation Brass did not have faith in the Super Hornet being able to fill the Tomcat shoes since it did not have the Airframe to be able to handle the Fuel or Weapons load required to conduct a Combat Air Patrol at the same distances away from the Carrier as the Tomcat. Everything was SET for the NAVY to get their NEXT Generation Tomcat until the Politicians got involved and the Contract went to McDonald Douglas/Boeing the builder of the Super Hornet and the NAVY got SCREWED by people that would never be out in the middle of the Pacific or Atlantic patrolling the Seas.
The Super Hornets were never supposed to be in service this long and that is why they have had so many Airframe issues and the Navy and Marine Corps is going to get SCREWED YET again with the F-35 which is also supposed to be a short term solution for Naval Aviation Problem but till the F/A-XX 6th Generation Stealth Fighter which was supposed to have been started with a 5th Generation and taken into the 6th but with Budget Cuts and Program Delays the Navy will probably be STUCK Flying Super Hornets and F-35 till at least the 2035 if not beyond that. I have talked to a few friends that are still in the Aerospace Industry and we have discussed the current trends and one person that is in the know told me that Grumman has the plans and could have an aircraft flying within 6 months after getting the go ahead from a signed contract because they do not want to get screwed again and the bird would look very close to what your 3d model looks like. I hope that we get people in the Chain of Command that will be willing to SPEND the MONEY to make sure that the Sky over a Carrier Task Force is Properly Protected from any sort of threats.
Here's the thing. The F-14 was great for its time. . capable and beautiful. BUT in the end it lost to the F/A-18 because for many reasons one being the F-18 was more capable of striking ground targets, in addition to being able to hold its own in an air to air fight with the F-14. The F-35 out classes both the F-14 and F/A-18 in its ability to kill. No it cant out dog fight either acft but most of the time that doesnt matter since air to air battles are typically decided 20-30 miles away. Its not sexy, but shes a killer. Which is why the brass went with the F-35.
@@arkadious9320 I was served in the US NAVY 2003-09 as a Avionics Tech but I had family friends that were Naval Aviators including a Naval Academy graduate that retired as a two star admiral that flew the Tomcat. When the Tomcat had the Lantern Pods System added to them they were able to be a Great Close Air Support that carried more Ordinance than the F/A-18 Super Hornet that replace it. When a Tomcat took off from the carrier on station in the Indian Ocean the F14 only needed two mid-air refueling but a Super Hornet needed a MINIMUM of 6 Refuels and sometimes as many as 10 for the same mission profile. The MAIN Reason that KILLED the Tomcat was the Number of Maintenance hours required for Each hour of Flight which was around 18 hours and the Super Hornet is somewhere in the 8-10 depending which Mission Profile model.
With all the Delay Issues the F35 has had including that the Block 3 Software is NOT Compatible with Block 1 is a MAJOR ISSUE. The F35 again does not have the range a Carrier Task Force Protector should have which is even a BIGGER ISSUE! I know many pilots that transition from Tomcats to Super Hornets and all of them BITCHED about it but they are professionals and will fly the hell out of what ever they are given.
I believe that the Navy needs to invest resources into an Aircraft that takes the best attributes of the F14D, F15E, F22 and F35 so the Fleet has a Stealthy Air Superiority Fighter that can also take on bombing missions when the airspace is safe enough to be able to carry bomb rack outside the internal weapon's bay.
@@af22raptor23503 The Block 3 software not being compatible is a major issue. . that will be phased out over the next decade or so. You are correct that the Mx cost of the F-14 was its major downfall. . making the F-18 a huge upgrade based on that alone.. you cant fly if its broke. The F18 has its limitations for sure but in the end comes out above the F14. . Mx costs and capabilities. BUT what you are asking for simply doesn't exist a super fighter bomber that has all of the advantages and little to no downsides. Did you notice the pattern so far? F-14. . great fighter in its time but breaks too easily and costs too much . Replaced by F-18 . . good fighter that costs less to maintain. F-35 . . A jet that can't dog fight as well as either of them but with its tech will kill them before they ever knew it was there. Warfare changed over the decades from having a dog fighter, to a less expensive dogfighter, to a not designed to dog fight but in actuality more deadly jet.
@@arkadious9320 The Super Hornet was NOT money saving Fighter that it was Advertised to be either and it actually it has had more issues that have caused more birds to be on a DOWN Status than the Tomcat ever did. The Tomcat did not break all the time but with all the Hydraulic and Mechanical systems that are need for the wings to more back and forth that takes maintenance hours. Technology changes and so do mission objectives but when the people making the decision do not have a CLUE of what it is NEEDED and keep kicking the ball down so the next admiration gets stuck dealing with it NOTHING gets done.
Right now McDonnell Douglas/Boeing is Upgrading the F-15E platform creating a Generation 4.5/4.75 with the internal weapon bay, new data links, Stealth paint and additional fuel tanks that mounted to airframe that allows the Eagle to increase range and loiter time on station or the tanks can be removed to have additional weapon stations. The Air Force is looking at not only upgrading the F15E Fleet that we have but also buy additional aircrafts. Northrop/Grumman had a similar upgrade program for the Tomcat but it is ok for the Eagle but not for the Tomcat. This is the same sad story of the Air Force getting better planes than the Navy, but the Carriers get stuck with TURD because the Air Force has better Lobbing Power in the Congress.
Grumman originally also had a F14 model that they tried to sell to the Air Force and McDonnell Douglas had plans for a F15N but they never build it, would be having this conversation if the Navy had purchased F15N Sea Eagles instead of Tomcats and would they still be flying off carriers RIGHT NOW? Interesting thought.
@@af22raptor23503 the f-35 is actually better than the f-18 and f-16 in dogfighting once the block 4 software unlocks the full potential of the jet. Even now with the block 3 software the f-35 is doing very well in exercises as a force multiplier against more numerous 4.5 gen jets adversaries. What I think you are forgetting thou is the F35 was only meant to be a 15-30 yr acft. The USN and USAF are already testing their 6th gen acft respectively (NGAD). The navy version is said to have a greater range for fleet defense. So they are prob going back to a F14 like size 6th gen fighter sometime early 2030's.
The final form is so beautiful I wish it could be built just to see what it could do ageast current aircraft
There already is the F-22 and F-35 and 6th Gen fighter currently in development. No need for more stealth aircraft.
@@SHVRWK as much as it pains me to admit it I think you are right but can you really blame me it's a beautiful aircraft
@@stevelenox152 I feel you, it is indeed a beautiful machine.
I guess there's a chance that it might turn up on DCS or something?
I definitely miss the awesome badass coolness of the F-14 and you did a great job rendering a futuristic stealthy version of a classic. I don't know that I would say that Maverick "should" be flying it, as it's a plane that's not in service and/or doesn't exist. It was cool seeing him test pilot a fictional super-jet, but having him fly a fictional plane throughout the film would have detracted from the realism. That said, I WISH the Navy was flying the "22" - what a beautiful rendering. Great job!
Realistically the swing wing function would have to be removed and replaced with a delta -canard configuration or some other solution
or the mechanism would be coated the duck out with that stealth rcs reduction paint
The sweep would probably be most stealthy at full sweep where the wing angle matches the elevators, I suspect that the Hinge points and fairings would need the old Jagged treatment to minimise surfaces for radar return, Naturally at least amount of sweep it wouldn't be stealthy but I suspect that probably isn't so much of a disadvantage compared to the advantage of having lower approach speeds on recovery, and in a visual turn fight the advantage in turn.
@@GolddenWaffles the sweeping action would rub the paint off or you would have to give the wing enough clearance from the mechanism but then you would have to coat the underside.
The variable geometry wing sweep is just to expensive and too out dated
@@glassfullofmilk its main problem is not stealth but weight. Modern day aerodynamics and engines have no need for a variable geometry wing anymore.
It was meant to combine high maximum speed (for intercept) with low landing speeds (for carrier landings). In the 1960's, this wing was a reasonable answer to this problem. But these days there are equal or even better wing designs that have the advange of having much less weight.
Grumman did had that design, the 303F. For modern iteration, give it a YF-22 makeover.
I think a next-gen Tomcat would've been especially fitting, since the "pancake" between the engines would've allowed for a YUUUGE internal weapons bay and that the original vertical stabilizers were already canted out, a bit like the 5th-gen stealth fighters.
BTW, I'm super salty that the military didn't keep any airworthy examples around just because Iran maintains a dozen-or-so -rusty- airframes.
Same I wish I could have bought one under the condition that I would get killed if I gave parts to Iran.
Chill
Lol
Two improvements. One: The addition of a modified version of the AWACS Radar embedded into the top central fuselage to allow this aircraft to achieve command and control of an attack wing. With an advanced computer ,this aircraft could assume AWACS target acquisition, coordinate force multipliers, and have a full offensive/defensive suite to assist in combat. Now for clarification, I don't mean the "rotating dish" housed atop a modified Boeing 707, I mean radar transceivers mounted in panels atop the Super Tomcat 22.
The second modification is a more "minor" upgrade. A rear mounted, low range (5-25 miles) radar assembly in the rear area between the engine housing. The RIO (Radar Intercept Officer) can monitor along with the IRST and other sensor packages a nearly 360° coverage around the Tomcat and can warn of aircraft with more precision and even coordinate a possible "rear strike" capability with missiles capable of making extremely steep turns, or using the drones in an offensive/defensive capacity.
So much potential. But your aircraft does basically resemble a "swing wing" and 2 crew version of the F-22 Raptor and that IS a possible and practical idea. So basically a heavily modified F-22 to perform what boils down to a "arsenal craft" containing bombs, missiles, possibly a laser (future upgrade) the Vulcan cannon and even EF-18 Growler electronic capabilities including jamming and other duties. One hell of an aircraft, and with it's already prodigious speed (Mach 2.5 1500mph) and Mach 1.3 supercruise ability, this would have been the plane to level the playing field.
Wow, I’m in my mid 50’s and I join the navy in 91, do have to say, I have yet to see the second movie and enjoyed your video of explaining what could have happened with the f-14d, I was one of the lucky ones to see it in action at Miramar before top gun got relocated and of course, on the carrier! But saw one go down during deployment after take off, at least no one got hurt! Thanks again brother!
There is also an important point why the F-14 is sorely missed: it´s the plane that carries 4 missiles in it´s fuselage embedded.
The F-14 Tomcat was my favorite plane growing up in the early 90s and still is.
Makes me wonder if DCS may add the ST-22 to their ever growing list of aircraft.. would be nice.
That would be awesome!
Having grown up playing the F-15 Strike Eagle games by Microprose, that plane will always take #1 for me, but the F-14 is pretty cool, too.
My late wife and knew a couple who were engineers for Grumman. She and He both looked like they stepped out of an Agatha Christy novel. She would've made a perfect Miss Marple.
One day they were rearranging their Den/Office. there was multiple Tomcat pictures, memorabilia on the wall. I looke at him and said: "I knew you and your wife worked for
Grumman." He said -we were on the weapons system team." "So in other words, you and your dear wife,any time a Tomcat splashed a MiG you two had something to do with it.?"
"He said;"Uh Huh." and that was it.
Great job on the S22 Tomcat. It looks amazing. The F18 is not the air superiority fighter the legendary Tomcat was. I imagine we could buy one S22 or a small country. It looks like money to produce and to fly, but what a beauty.
Yep! I saw Top Gun as a pre-teen. My true crush was the F-14!
I love the concept of your ST-22, now all we have to do is convince the Navy and congress. Great video.
Your 22 tomcat looks absolutely badass. But thrust vectoring really needs fixed wings. That’s a LOT of stress on pivot points. Still, an amazing attempt. The super cruise function and stealth would have made it viable.
Grumman must love your sense of admiration and devotion to effective defense systems.
The F-14 Tomcat actually had some composite and plastic parts to it, and they had planned to make even more of it composite and polymer-based, which would have had the side-effect of making it harder to detect by radar. If the F-14 had been allowed to progress (like they did for the F-15, F-16, & F-18), the F-14 would have outperformed the F-18 in almost every regard. Additionally, the F-14 could fire the Phoenix (air-to-air) missile, which allowed for an accurate BVR (beyond visual range) fire and forget targeting system, utilizing a top-down attack (like the Javelin missile, but for aerial targets), making it almost impossible to detect and evade.
What about a Vulcan cannon for accidental targets that get to close.
@@dioad1739 yes the F-14 had the Vulcan Gatling cannon
The Phoenix missile was amazing for its time, but it was really designed to shoot down bombers, not fighters. The AIM-120D today has 90% of the Phoenix’s range and much better maneuverability. The AIM-260 will double that.
@@bluemarlin8138 I agree, but I mentioned the Phoenix missile, as it was ahead of its time, which was why it was so expensive, and why the F-14 was ultimately canceled. It wasn't due to the F-14's performance, but due to budget costs, mostly resulting from the Phoenix missile program, in which the F-14 was the exclusive user.
The most badass multi role aircraft ever made Tomcat.. you'll never be forgotten
The Super Hornet is really amazing in its ability to replace almost all of the aircraft on an aircraft carrier, but I've also read a lot over the years about the limited range putting a strain on the OpTempo of the carrier flight ops. The Super Tomcat 21 seems like it would have been perfect as the long loiter command and control interceptor, directing the F18s in their various roles like the Navy's version of the F22, especially if the Phoenix had decades of development to pace the AMRAAM D.
Tomcat is legendary... awe inspiring in fact.
But is main feature is also its weakpoint. Present day aerodynamics and engines simply have no need for a variable geometry wing. We can combine the low landing speed with high maximum speed perfectly well with other wing designs... That would have the advantage of being much lighter due to the absence of a pivoting mechanism.
The ST-22 would have been great, but its never to be...
If it were to be built, it would however have a wing with much higher surface area (for maneuverability). I am unsure how to combine this with a variable geometry wing though...
Best comment here…Col. John Boyd, USAF would approve!
The only comment on here worth reading! Thanks!
Honestly when I was younger I was in love with the F-14. I guess there's just something so "cool" about the sweeping wings. But now that I'm older, to me the sweeping wings has the same "cool" factor as the flip up lights on sports cars of the 80s. Basically they were "nifty" for their time but now just seem like unnecessary moving parts. I'm happy they went with the Super Hornets. They are amazing machines...
You’ll like Monday’s video then. Thanks for commenting!
Now THAT would be a dream come true... What an aircraft!
Back during my childhood of the late 70s and 80s, I witnessed a lot of US Aircraft activities almost on a daily basis in the Philippines. Our hometown in Pangasinan Province was situated distant to Clark Air Force Base in Pampanga and Subic Bay Naval Base/Cubi Point Naval Air Station in Zambales. There were frequent flybys and low passes even along populated centers whereby sparking disgusts, irritation to Pinoys but definitely made children smile, wave, cheer and shout in exitement hearing those jet engine roars and occasional sonic booms. Among the jets that featured in my childhood days were Skyhawks, Corsairs, Intruders, Vikings, Harriers, Thunderbolts, Phantoms, Tomcats, Eagles, Fighting Falcons, Hornets. There were also flights of Sabres, Freedom Fighters and Crusaders flown by the Philippine Air Force paralleling these jets flown by the US Air Force, US Navy and US Marines. But what really impressed and amazed me with a differing adrenalin are the F-14 Tomcats that flew by performing all those mock ACMs while swinging their wings in various maneuvering patterns including the barrel roll and the so called cobra evasive tactic, which I had known thru my adult research later on. Back then, we had a bamboo ladder permanently-tied beside our house and leading to the roof, basically utilized to sundry our washed clothes, and as a hangout for children like me (there is a barrier on two corners that is why it is safe for children to climb on to). It was on this house roof that I watched these jets fly and scream out, and it was a highly-memorable entertainment for a child like me (with some playmates of mine most of the time). Unfortunately by 1992, these US bases were completely-closed as the renewal for another term of government to government long-term lease failed on the side of the Philippine Government negotiation. That was an end to an immense jet flying era and all those sonic booms heard all around. Had the US Government been able to secure a lease renewal to these overseas bases, these present era would have allowed Pinoys to constantly-witness flybys of Super Hornets, Vipers, Strike Eagles, F22s and F35s etc.
The finest military aircraft the United States has ever designed........ end of. I've just watched a lecture with the former VP of Grumman and he confirmed that they did indeed have this project in development which incorporated stealth as well as a plethora of new technologies. She was and would be a massive improvement of the bog..... sorry, the F-18.
that would be pretty cool if they were to actually build the ST 22 for the navy it truly is an icon and one of the coolest planes ever built and with the upgrades to the plane it could have been unstoppable. maybe one day they will decide to bring it back.
If ST22 debuts in the US.NAVY it will be the lastest fighter of Maverick in this time.
Your Stealth Tomcat design mixed with the tail end of a Y-23 would slap.
If he got his eyes fixed and back in the air, I think Lt. Jim "Wash Out" Pfaffenbach from Hot Shots would be the perfect RIO for Maverick
As long as we aint flying the those Gnats. Those things wouldn't stood toe to toe against the Felons.
While I was in USAF. My coworkers and I watched hotshots as much as top gun.
That's top Secret quote was around long before the Movie used the quote, but it was fun to heard it used by someone else outside of Australia!
It could have been nice airplane. But swing wing is a thing of the past, it is heavy and complicated. I don't think we ever get that back.
Thanks for a great video
Yeah they also said Electric cars won't work
@@billhanna2148 Variable geometry with a huge mechanical hinge is an obsolete design now that digital flight control and improved aerodynamic device can deliver much better performance.
In the future, smart materials might allow “non swing-wing” variable geometry and I would expect smaller drone to embrace the concept first.
I used to work for Boeing... in 2001 I was with other Lean Manufacturing Experts and went to St Louis to help reduce waste and cycle time on F/A 18 Super Hornet. Boeing had purchased McDonnell Douglas, along with all military orders. At that time, they were finishing the last 4 F-15's and the production line would shut down. Today, they are building the F-15X advanced aircraft.
Boeing and Navy were finalizing 2nd order of F/A 18's. Costs had to be reduced, or Navy wouldn't buy anymore. Our teams slashed cycle times, increased production, reduced wastes, made a safer and better F/A 18. I'm pretty sure Tom Cruise loves the new F/A 18's just fine. But, it was a sad ending for F-14's.
Did you know if you accidentally stray into 'highly restricted' parts of St Louis plant, you will be 'greeted' by military guys in full body armor and automatic weapons pointed at you. I did, and I had very high security clearance. They were there to prevent people going into the paint booths were F/A 18's RAM coatings were applied. Not only is process top secret, the fumes can kill you if not wearing proper PPE.
The down time required to keep the F-14 flying was considered too expensive. Which is why the US Navy considered the F-18as a replacement.
I haven’t seen the new movie yet.
The only reason the Tomcat spent allot of time in the hangar was because they never upgraded it like they did ALL the other Gen 4 fighters, Hell they didn't even give the Tomcat the engines it was supposed to come with in the beginning for roughly ten years!!!, to put that in perspective the Hornet which entered service in 1983 received its first major upgrade ONLY four years after it entered service, Oh and getting the engines it was supposed to come with should not be considered and upgrade so in reality the Tomcat didn't receive a similar style upgrade as the Hornet until its 16th year of service.
@@josephkugel5099 Your argument to me will not bring the F-14 back. It was more about Corporate positioning (pirating) and creating the monopolies we have today. As well as what the Navy wanted. The F-14 was just another casualty.
@@robmx2324 I agree 100% that it was a casualty of corporate politics and a mountain of neglect by the Pentagon.
The author of the video is correct about what the F-14 21/22 would have offered, except he's overly optimistic about stealth. The Navy was skeptical that a new F-14 would have been less expensive, or at least equally expensive, to maintain, compared with a Super Hornet, and the Navy wanted to eliminate the extra crew members to reduce personnel costs on the ship. While the redesigned air intakes to the engines would have successfully obscured the engines from radar, it is very difficult to make a swing-wing stealthy. The new Super Hornet, with AESA radar and extended range AMRAAM missiles, equaled the Tomcat's long range air to air strike capability as of 2016 - a testament to the Tomcat. The Hornet still lacks the Tomcat's range and it bleeds more energy in a turn (though its instantaneous turn rate is higher than the Tomcat's), but in the hands of a well trained, aggressive pilot, it will hold its own against anything the Russians or Chinese can put up in squadron strength.
The navy should revive this classic, it's such a phenomenal fighter🧡🇺🇸
This version of Tom Cat looks a lot like if F-14 and F-35 had a baby
The Tomcat is one of the best plane designs out there.
Russia and couple other nations stole many of its great features if you look at them side-by-side.
The sweep wing helps but its overall design, power plant, speed, strike capabilities, front line attack capabilities, carrier success and many others, made the F-14 a remarkable plane.
I don't particularly like the F-18, both 1/2 seaters, it doesn't inspire that wow factor like the Tomcat does.
The T22 would've been a great successor to the T14 and would look much cooler than the F22 and F35 (the best part is the vtol variant-US Marines).
they made the Su-27 from spys on the F-15..and we built the F-15 because of the MiG-25 foxbat... also so the MiG-23 uses the exact same intake design as the F-4 Phantom....been going back and fourth for for years
@@aandc2005 The Foxbat is an absolute giant of an airframe. People don’t realize how big that thing was. The 15 would eat it’s lunch in every scenario except a long top speed chase. And nothing in our (known) inventory today can touch the Foxbat in that regard.
In the 1980s I had a friend who was an Navy F-4 pilot in Vietnam. I asked him what he though of the then-new F-18 that was just entering service. His reply, "Well, the Navy is letting the Marines get them first. That should tell you all you need to know".
I'm a big fan of the Hornet/Super Hornet, so I loved to see that plane in the new Top Gun 😍
But your F-14/2022 Stealth Fighter would also be an awesome fighter jet 👍🏻 Let's hope for Top Gun 3 😆
That was badass! Great video man, I love it.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I was with you until the last version :) I can not remember any successful implementation of major Stealth features on a legacy platform. I know it has been planned (Stealth Eagle etc) but not been implemented which considering countries like Japan really wanting a stealthed air superiority fighter makes me think it is not viable.
Yeah they also said Electric cars won't work
@@billhanna2148
So not a valid counter argument.
If you want a viable LO platform the required features NEED to be designed in from the start, retrofitting isn't an option.
The first guy was right, if it could be be done it would have been.
@@FallenPhoenix86 It had NOTHING to do with Grumman's ability and all to do with the politics of military spending and corporate welfare and you should know that 😉
@@billhanna2148
I'm well aware why Tomcat 21 was shelved and why F-14D production was curtailed.
Would have been a whole new airframe, they kept the Tomcat name to sell it as a new version of the old airframe. Which is what they did with the he Super Hornet.
I’m glad UA-cam recommended this video, enjoyed the video
Awesome! Thank you!
@@PilotPhotog anytime, keep up the good work 🤘🏻
@@Mistadittman copy!
I'd ditch most of the stealth elements from the design. Those are expensive and greatly increase both upkeep cost and reduce aircraft availability with increased maintenance time. We already have F-22, F-35, B-2 and the B-21 Raider is also on the way, as is a 6th gen stealth fighter eventually. We have enough stealth aircraft in inventory now or in the future. The big advantage of having an advanced multi-role version of the F-14 would be having a fighter that can operate from aircraft carriers with extremely long range, high speed, high weapons payload and the largest radome on a fighter. This would mean that even if you used the same radar as found in, say the F-15EX Eagle II, it would be even more powerful as the radar surface would be larger and would have more modules. Such an advanced F-14 would have incredible BVR fighting capability. It would also have a RIO who could control drones as mentioned and those drones would likely be stealthy, giving this advanced F-14 a stealth capability as a whole system even if the aircraft itself was not stealthy.
Dude, this concept is f#@king gorgeous!! I would love to see this model in a wind tunnel! The reason I say that is cause I wonder that kind of effect the main wings being perfectly aligned with the horizontal stabilizers would have on the aerodynamics. I imagine there would a bit of turbulence that could affect the stability. I’m no expert though and would actually LOVE someone to explain what kind of interaction there would be with the airflow! All that being said I still freaking LOVE this concept buddy, great work!
Love your speculative Gen 5 F-14 design. I think it could be awesome but when you couple the complexity of a swing wing design with the maintenance of the low observable coatings, it seems like a maintenance nightmare. Maybe a compromise with fixed a wing somewhere in between the extremes? BTW the F-23 should have won. Maybe some kind of F-14/F-23 mashup? That would be one sexy-ass bird!
Does the swing wing design increase weight? And if so, how does that affect range and loiter time.
When I think American top y think Eagle, Tomcat ,f16 and the YF 23 the aircraft that that should have been but never was.A Super Tomcat should have been developed alongside the F18 allowing the f18 to be developed more for the attack role allowing the Tomcat to be a master of the fleet defence role it could have been the true multi role fighter
The ventral fins on the improved stealth version would likely be angled slight to improve on stealth. Just like you angled the vertical stabilizer. It not a huge area, but every little bit helps. And angling just a little does a lot for the stealth capability.
(But that is just my uninformed opinion based on general stealth design guidelines and one really need to do a proper simulated modelling of course. And materials plays a huge role to.)
If you look at an F-14 head on, the Vertical Stabs are already angled outwards a bit....
@@johnhermann7498 Yes, but hes talking about the teenie tiny ones on the bottom.
This is funny, informative and intelligent. Great video!
Tog, could you do a review of the aircraft found in Arma 3 like the A-164 Wipeout and F/A-181? I got to see an early showing yesterday and it was amazing! It does live up to its predecessor
I like this idea, let me see what I can come up with - I actually play Arma 3, though not nearly as often as I want to. Thanks for the suggestion!
I just think it would be cool to see you review them and see if they are feasible to how you would make future versions of the aircraft they are meant to represent if you know what I mean?
@@bullpupgaming708 I do! Let’s see what I can put together
This was an amazing recreation and future creation of the Tomcat. My best friend would have loved it if he were still alive. I so wish I could have watched this with him. Thanks for reminding me of my best friend who loved all things military but especially the Airforce and the Tomcat.
Super cool, but I think the main sticking point would be the VSW design. It's too heavy and decidedly not steathly enough.
Really great creative work!
The back seater should be AI based and providing situational awareness and precision weapons control but not have complete autonomy but support pilot directives and commands.
Wouldn't that cause information overload to the pilot?
@@Joshua_N-A - no more so than working with a human backseater
@UCii8uaLXQUHbQFDVvf1ycMA - AI could do that if given authorization. A simple command like establish A firing solution. Again, you could replicate the communication between pilot in backseater.
@@motorgearhead an R2D2. Heard the Americans want to develop such system.
@@Joshua_N-A yeah, standard equipment in the next generation of XWing fighter.
Loved this!
Thank you ! Thank you grummanians!!!
This is what we’re WAITING FOR !!!!
HAIL! Hail! TOMCAT’ the new GENERATION!!
so awesome, great work
Genuine question : was the F-14 actually a good dogfighting aircraft ? I always had the impression it was mostly designed foremost as a long-range, high-speed, heavily-armed interceptor to protect carrier battlegroups rather than intended to dogfight within gun ranges.
Check out Ward Carroll's videos on UA-cam....Or Growling Sidewinder's videos....
The F-14 could go toe-to-toe with any fighter in it's era...
;)
@@johnhermann7498 I love the Tomcat. But it had its limits. And it was not a great dogfighter. The TF-30 engines required high amounts of airflow to maintain power. Low speed high G turns were a problem. The airframe could handle it. The engines couldn’t.
@@bigbore4498 those problems were rectified in the B and D models with the F110-GE-100 engines, same as they used in the Bug and the Falcon. Got a hefty thrust increase too. As far as I'm concerned, no fighter jets should EVER use Pratt and Whiney engines... their radial piston engines were great, their jet engines are JUNK.
The tomcat airframe was considered "overstressed" at 6g, f16 and f18 will pull 8.1g and the f22 pulls over 9, swing wings can't take the abuse
@@nathanhansen4334 - No offense dude... But I'll take the word of the men that actually flew and maintained the aircraft over the word of a bunch of people that read stats out of a technical manual...
Max G, etc, etc isn't the be all and end all of DACM/BFM.... Anyone that has ever listened to people like Ward Carroll and his guests would know that...
Not hatin'... Just sayin'.
One thing I consider everytime I think of the AST-21, is what kind of improvements could have been done to the AIM54 at the same time. Because if you're keeping the Tomcat, you HAVE to keep it's most iconic weapon system.
So going forward, "it" could've been called the Strike Cat. That would've been cool.
Didn't see either of the movies, but totally love the Tomcat! And the TC22 totally kick ass, great work!!
Superb design of a future F-14 Tomcat. My only wish is that you should have shown the internal weapons bay with, at least, a future version of the Phoenix missile. In the end, that’s what the F-14 was built for.
I love the new thumbnails!
The F-14 Tomcat was just as lethal a weapon as they come. Both respected and feared by our enemies. And that is saying a lot.
Maverick's RIO would've been Bob.
This should've been the test pilot plane.
U.S. taxpayers: Take my money!
Oh man. This would be awesome. Great video!!!!!
In another universe the US Navy would have gone for this aircraft instead of the F 35. The F 35 is a flying computer built to be flown as weapons delivery platforms, not real fighters. The F 14 was a proper fighter.
Practically every fighter built after the F-14 is a flying computer Thanks to fly by wire tech
Flying computer designed to deliver weapons essentially describes every modern 4th gen and 5th gen jet.
@@bop3752 I say the funniest thing is, if the navy wanted to keep the F-14 and keep it modernized, it becoming a flying computer itself would be a must
*Sniff, I actually had a tear watching this video. Thanks for sharing what could have been an awesome idea for the new Top Gun Movie. I know Tom Cruise wanted authenticity of showcasing flying Jet planes, but I wonder how the audience would feel if there was a plot where Maverick's F-18 gets damaged somehow and then gets the prototype ST-22 to pilot to complete the mission! I humbly believe they would be cheering so much when they see a Modern F-14 Tomcat ready to strike and kick ass! :D TYVM Have Fun ^_^
The song, “You’ve lost that loving feeling,” is by the Righteousness Brothers IN THE 60’s!!! If you thought the maintenance was bad with the F-14; image the price for an would be gen 5; let alone the $$$ to buy one
The main reason why the F35 and F22 weren’t used was because neither feature a rear seat which was crucial to the way this movie was produced. Had a super tomcat ever been produced it would’ve been the perfect choice. The super hornet is still a beast though and it’s great to see it getting some recognition
Now pair the ST-22 and ST-21 with the new GE XA-100. Lots of range and lots of speed.
Am going to see TGM tomorrow, can't wait. I still remember seeing the original back in 86. Sadly couldn't join the AF due to crappy eyesight :( I still weep every time I watch TG and no doubt will tmrw as well 😢
You are are right, the F-14 will always be remembered as a cool aircraft. Problem is, cool will show up on the other guys radar screen. Times are changing, but that was a great commercial for the ST-21, and AST-21.
Your 22 reminds me of the Planned ASF-14 which was the next step after the AST-21. I like it, very nice.
Well done. Great work.
Thank you! Cheers!
I gotta admit, as much as I'm a huge fanboy of the F-22 Raptor and it would be very difficult for anything to top that in my mind, your mockup of this hypothetical Super Tomcat does look pretty damn sexy.
omg outstanding well done sir
That… would’ve been so SICK! 👍🏼 😯 👏🏼 👏🏼