British Tomcats - What If the RAF got F-14s? Would the Tomcat still be flying today?
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 08. 2024
- → Invest in blue-chip art for the very first time by signing up for Masterworks:masterworks.ar...
Purchase shares in great masterpieces from artists like Pablo Picasso, Banksy, Andy Warhol, and more. See important Masterworks disclosures: mw-art.co/37WwvbD
What if the UK had F-14s? It turns out that the British Ministry of Defense (MoD) looked into acquiring F-14 Tomcats. Today we will take a look at the circumstances that led to the consideration of the F-14 for the RAF and Royal Navy's FAA (Fleet Air Arm) along with other nations that might have followed the UK's example. Thanks for watching!
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @pilotphotog
Subscribe on Patreon: / pilotphotog
Join our growing community on Discord:
/ discord
Credits/Attributions:
"The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
Department of Defense
Lockheed Martin
Like some others have said, the Tomcat in the British camo scheme looks amazing. Although it must be said that the Tomcat looks great in every paint scheme!
It even looked good in Canadian colours! 😁
@D Just like the Moskva? Or was that just from the crew's incompetence and an accident; just like the latest destruction of the air base in Crimea was also just an accident?
A few Tomcats in desert camo for the Iranian Air Force were sent to the boneyard outside of Tucson. I got to see one during a tour in the late 80s.
It looks like a large, twin-tailed Tornado in RAF colours.
Where did he get that image though? Is it a Warthunder skin? I want it in my life xD
Tomcat looks fantastic in RAF and JSDF colours. What could have been.
Nah FAA colours
Actually looks better in the Soviet Mig 21, and Mig 23 colors imo.
Nah, the Iranian colour schemes are by far the best!
@@melissasmith5109 If the F14 had been bought for the RAF it would have flown in RAF colours, which after all is the subject of the film. Of course if they had been bought for the RN they would have had Navy colours.
True, but then again the Tomcats look great in any livery :)
Tomcat was definitely considered in the mid 1970's and as regards capability, it checked all of the boxes for the mission the RAF had for it. It was also rejected on cost in the mid 1970's. The main issue being that purchase of the aircraft required the UK Government to have the Dollar's (or Gold) in the piggy bank to pay for them, which they didn't. Those Dollar's were also required to pay for things like Oil, which the UK was a massive importer of (North Sea Oil didn't come on stream until the late 1970's). It was the Devaluation of the Pound against the Dollar in 1967 (plus the rise in Oil Prices caused by the closure of the Seuz Canal) which killed the F-111K and saw the last batch of Phantoms for both the RAF and FAA get Cancelled in 1968 (Plus the fact that the F-111 had a lot of issues that where going to push the in service date back way too far as far as the RAF were concerned. The 400% increase in Oil prices in 1973 due to Yom Kippur didn't do the UK's finances any good either. Tornado ADV was proposed and accepted in 1975 as it didn't required a load of Dollars in the piggy bank to design and build. The Tornado's radar issues were mainly caused by the project being given to the wrong compony (same as the Nimrod AEW 3), however the Compony that should have got both contracts (Ferranti) were massively overloaded with projects for the Royal Navy (Sea Spray for the Lynx, Sea Searcher for the Sea King and Blue Fox for the Sea Harrier). F-16 was rejected for single engine and pilot, plus lack of ECCM. F-15 was rejected for being signle seat and lack of ECCM in the radar (plus original APG-63 was a dog, it was only after the USAF spent the GDP of a small Country on it to fix the problems, that it became the radar it did).
In the 60s, 70s and 80s the uk military was downscaling massively. When they got rid of the f4 phantoms they lacked a capable interceptor until the eurofighter typhoon.
@@joelbilly1355 f4s did not leave RAF service until the Mid 90s. The fleet air arm handed them to the RAF after the big carriers went out of service in the late 70s
I remember my father complaining bitterly about the government at the time about the Nimrod he was a RADAR engineer at ferranti coming from lightnings working on Buccaneers and finally senior trials engineer on blue fox and vixen for the harrier another aircraft the the British government canned before it’s time the pride I feel for what he did will never go away but the British government at the time missing the chance of putting the RR engine in the tomcat as they did in phantom was a big mistake. The British aviation produce some of the best avionics and engine packages out there but haven’t always got the money to bankroll the airframe the harrier was more luck than judgement.
@@patdbean Phantom phased out of RAF service in autumn of 1992.
@@richardvernon317 didn't realise it was that early, didn't the Germans keep their f4s on until about 2013? But I guess not operating from carriers their airframes were a bit less stressed....
You mention imagining a Tomcat equipped with the AIM-120 Amraam. Such Tomcats did exist. Much of the development and flight testing of the AIM-120 was conducted by F-14s from the PMTC. The first firings and guided launches of the AIM-120 were from the Tomcats at the Pacific Missile Test Center. Flight clearance tests were conducted on the F-14, and the software was written to give those F-14A, B, and D aircraft involved in testing full AIM-120 capabilities. There may have been fleet squadron aircraft involved in supporting this work, too. In the end, the money to integrate Amraam into the F-14 fleet went to the LANTIRN pods.
Yeah the F-14D was so close to getting the AIM-120 that it only needed a software update in order to use them.
While I think Japan made the correct choice in going for the F-15, the JASDF F-14 looks great. They'd also probably still have them flying today, since the JASDF tends to keep their planes around for quite some time (only recently retiring the F-4).
Wish they bought both back then
And Macross would have had even more gravitas.
@@DocWolph exactly, literally the closest we will ever get to a variable fighter. Sadly
If they did get it it would be a sick color scheme!.
A correction in the timeline: The TSR2 was undermined by a hollow promise to supply the F111K. The US Government lobbied hard and exerted leverage to persuade the UK government to cancel the TSR2. Part of that was a cut-price deal on the F111K. However, once the TSR2 was cancelled, the US reneged on the F111K deal and the price soared. The resentment and scars from the debacle lasted decades. It caused a political crisis but was hushed-up so the "special relationship" would look strong in the eyes of the USSR.
Wasn't that when we bought the F4 after the cancellation if the F111
Many a time the US screwed us on projects which I think they used our war debt a leverage.
Stealing the Miles M-52's all flying tailplane for the Bell X-1 and then not letting our guys over as promised to see what they had as well as project cancelled.
TRS2
Nimrod, almost ready for paint, 4 billion pounds spent, scrapped and replaced by 737's FSS, what use are those low level over the sea?
@@cornishcactus US Airforce test pilots who came over to test fly the TSR2 reported back it was decades ahead of the F111 in all areas. Their was then skulduggery by a UK government minister to get the Australia's to not buy the TSR2 and buy the F111, which they did. All leading up to the TSR2 being cancelled. Just after the TSR2 jigs were broken up the government contacted the makers to say they had changed their mind and they wanted them after all, but with the jigs destroyed it was too late.
@@petergibbs Only one TSR2 (XR219) ever took to the air, so I'd be very interested to know the names of any USAF pilots who got to fly it. I think you've just made that up.
As an aside, the Phantom F-4K was the FG.1 of the Royal Navy, and latterly RAF. The F-4M was the FGR.2 for the RAF. Both where based on the USN F-4J.
The F-4J(UK) was ordered because a flight of Phantoms operated in the Falklands leaving a gap in UK air defence.
Considered the upgrades that Grumman had, it would have been a monster for the RAF
The Super Tomcat would've been an excellent weapons platforms for the US Navy. The F-14 A, B, C and D models were true "powerhouses" in our Country's Naval inventory, if You add the proposed power plants, trust vectoring and the other changes and actualization it'd definitely would've been an excellent 4.5 fighter bomber. The F-14 has always been an excellent asset against the Soviet air combat weapons platforms. Great Britain and specially Canada would've adquired one of the best fighters and there's a high probability that it would be in use today. Just like You said, it would've been a "sight to behold" and a force to be reckoned with.
Excellent video and analysis.
Keep up the good work!
We definitely missed out. What an aircraft 😔
The C was a proposed variant and was never built. The Tomcat only ever existed in A, B, and D models. (Also A+ if you count that, although the A+ became the B).
Imagine Super Tomcats with Meteors
The Tomcat was exactly what the RAF needed, not as a naval fighter but as an interceptor. They had a huge gap in its air defenses when they got rid of the F4 phantom up until they bought the eurofighter Typhoon. The Tomcat was probably too expensive for their budget through the 70s, 80s & 90s.
Again, you're putting money into an interceptor program; when the bomber threat was already dying.
@@WALTERBROADDUS but at the time they needed a fighter interceptor. The English electric lightening was quick enough but lacked range. The F4 Phantom was good enough but was from the 60s and a multirole platform. The interceptor version which was the RAF's only fighter in the 90s was not capable of the interceptor role.
@@joelbilly1355 the mission of fighter interception was already dying in 1970. The main Soviet threat was the submarine Force. Spending money on an f-14 to chase the occasional tu-95 would have been a waste of money.
@@WALTERBROADDUS was still a required mission. A tu95 or tu 160 still needed to be intercepted along with any potential escort. The RAF didn't just need an interceptor, it needed a capable fighter plane. The Tornado was not that.
@@joelbilly1355 the pre Thatcher United Kingdom was never going to afford the F-14.
As cool as the f14 looks in RAF camo, it would have been grey if it was in an interceptor role.
Imagine the F-14 with Rolls Royce powered engines. Sheeesh..
Canada could have been using them to this day, and upgraded to a modern standard. Such a shame.
I think one of the reasons for the early retirement of the F-14 was their use in Iran. I think the US wanted to close down all the supply chains so that the Iranians could not keep theirs flying and as they were the only other operators, this was quite a focused sanction action
This just breaks my heart
The Royal Australian Air Force looked at the F-14 as well when we were looking for our Mirage III replacement. We looked at the F-14A, F-15A, F-16A, F/A-18A/B, Panavia Tornado and Saab Viggen. The Hornet won in 1979 and the first two airframes were flown from the US to Australia in 1982, which broke the record for the longest flight to date, and the remaining 73 airframes were made in Melbourne.
The Tomcat looks amazing in that livery
The Tomcat would have been perfect for the RAF's role in defending the GIUK gap against Soviet bombers attacking Reforger convoys. A beautiful aircraft too.
Despite what is said here, the RAF Tomcat F.1 did exist.
I had a 111 Squadron example on my shelf courtesy of Airfix and after market decals in 1/72 scale.
It looked spectacular.
I think that, if the USMC had gotten Tomcats, there may still be some flying In the US. Would have been cool to have seen it exported to the UK, as well as other allies.
The F-14 at the time had no air to ground capability so it was deemed unsuitable for Marine corps service
@@michaelwayne2995 yeah the Tomcats strike capabilities were left out for quite a while. The USMC even sent some crews to train on them before the service decided on Hornets...
@@michaelwayne2995
Not quite, it had the capability from the start, it just wasn't utilised as there were plenty of A-6's an A-7's available at the time to handle the strike role. If the Navy, or Marines, had wanted Bombcats in the 70's or 80's they could have had them, the capability was simply surplus to requirements.
@@michaelwayne2995 Incorrect. The Tomcat had air to ground capability from the beginning but NAVAIR chose not to implement it operationally. The Marine Corps was strong armed by the Navy into agreeing to buy 4 squadrons worth of F-14s but did not want the type due to the number of personnel and the infrastructure required to maintain it. Had they gone ahead then the air to ground capability would have been implemented much sooner than it was by the Navy. I think that SecDef Schlesinger finally cancelled the buy. Mersky has all of the details in his book. The Shah ended up making the buy of aircraft that had originally been slated for the Marine Corps saving the program, for the time being.
The Marines were happy with the British Harrier at the time.
Loved it an excellent video
Pitty it was another missed opponent just like the TSR-2
but now I'm going to have to buy an F-14 kit and do it in RAF colours
The very idea of British Tomcats caused me to press pause and go off on a mind bending "what if", tangent. I also subscribed. So many things would be different today. The RAF and RN would have seriously benefitted.
For the Royal Navy to operate F-14’s would have required the building of new large carriers in the 1970’s, even the older F-4K had to be modified so it could be launched from the British carriers of the time, and since the use of carriers by the R.N. wasn’t looked upon favourably by the government at the time there was no way that was going to happen.
Great video. Answering to your question. It still flies in Irán, so it would be possible that the F-14 will be in RAF service today. It was a great plane, but those TF-30 were a real pain in the.....neck. It has a very costly maintainance compared with, for example, the F-15/F-18, and I think that was the main reason why other countries didn' t buy it and opted for the Eagle.
Imagine a Falklands war where the Royal navy rolls up with F-14’s...
Top gun for real 👍🏼👍🏼
Damn you, you beat me to that question. The RN would have had to have real deck carriers and not those helicopter types they flew the Harriers out of. But the Falklands would have been a completely different fight and would have saved many British lives.
Yes, but you need to remember the whole reason for adopting the sea harrier was that by the time of the Falklands war the UK no longer had large carriers with cats and traps. To Tomcats may well have work for the RAF in place of the ADV tornado. C
But full sized CATOBAR carriers were beyond the MoD's budget by the 1980s. Had we still had them even with F4s the Falklands invasion would probably never have happened and there would have been no Falklands war.
@@patdbean ever see the article on the reasoning behind why the new carriers don’t have catapults and traps now? Quite an interesting story.
@@anecdotal_mattybs5435 I haven't , I know there was talk of them being catapult equity and operating F35Cs rather than the B version.
In my experience Rolls Royce has always built the "Rolls Royces" of aircraft engines. Recip, turboprop, and jets of all kinds.
Its engine turned the P-51 from a turkey to the best fighter of WWII. No offense to the Spitfire or BF-109.
@@kickback-rq6nd You're right. I'm a well versed WWII historian. But I just mixed up first part of ME-262 with BF-109. Good eye. Thanks.
@@kickback-rq6nd I'm not one of those people that gets mad when someone points something out to me. It was just an innocent mistake by me.
@@kickback-rq6nd I corrected my original post.
@@kickback-rq6nd It's probably because the BF-109 was manufactured by Messerschmitt also.
I really want to see what would happen if Germany got F-14 tomcats! 🤩
Your depicting the proposed RAF F14 Tomcat in the 2 tone camo scheme is incorrect. Only the RAF IDS Tornado were painted in this color scheme whereas the Tornado ADV wore the air superiority grey scheme & continued till the end of their operational service.
I wished the RAF would have aquired the F14 Tomcat, then.
The Phantoms had Green / Grey / Light Grey Camo because they were procured as bomb trucks. when they were re-rolled to the Air Defence mission in the mid to late 1970's they were painted light grey.
Hollywood made the F14 an urban legend, I worked on F14s 1990-1996. Believe me they were expensive to buy and a maintenance nightmare. They are in the boneyard for a reason.
Joe Biden has spent more money in a year and a half, then we ever did on maintenance on the f-14.
@@WALTERBROADDUS what a dumb comment
The problem is if the Tomcat was going to step in for the air defence variant, it wouldn't have had that camouflage, camouflage have not been used on fighters for probably a decade before this... But it does look unique in the disperse pattern
Good point! It would have have the bland overall grey that the Tornado ADV had.
As great as the CF-18 Hornet performed for Canada these past 40 years, a "CF-14" Tomcat would've been the better solution for Canada's long range patrol and interception duties. Hell, it still would be a better platform for those duties than the F-35 that Canada is only now procuring. One step forward two steps back.
The F-14 was an expensive interceptor, while the F-18 was a cheaper multi-role fighter. As much as I like the F-14, with the fall of the USSR it wasn't needed.
Canada and Australia lucked out with the choice in the perfect time period. However, both are probably wishing they had a reach out and touch you platform like an upgraded Tomcat now. Well, freeloader Canada maybe not, but certainly the RAAF.
Talked with a Strike Eagle pilot in the mid-90s saying I wish we got the F-15E instead of the hornet. He disagreed, saying we got a lot of the capability in a cheaper package. Kind of put a pin in my ballon, but he was right economically, Canada made an excellent choice given how history unfolded. Remains to be seen if we will be saying the same thing about the F-35.
F-35's can kill from much further away though. It's not a dogfighter. Everyone would love the F-22 but export controls prevent this.
@@JakubKas The F-14 was much more than an interceptor. It was a true multi role platform with tremendous growth potential from day 1. Grumman recognized the need for versatility and growth in a carrier borne fighter of the future, before the first F-14 was built. The F-14 was capable of all air to air missions, photo recon, deep precision strike, forward air control, close air support, and it could probably do any other mission you can think up. It wouldn't be stretch to have it do sea control, SEAD, tactical nuke, and even tanking and electronic warfare. The F-14 could do many of the missions before the F-18 existed. Calling it an interceptor is only a small part of the picture.
There was also a proposal to fit redundant Vulcan bombers with the AWG-9 and AIM-54 fit for long range patrol over the North Atlantic. Came to nothing, but would have looked fab. The two tone green grey was the warpaint for FGR.2 Phantoms assigned to close air support of the British Army of the Rhine in Germany in the 70s. In UKADA role they wore low-vis grey and toned down pink/blue roundels from the early 80s when this F-14 programme was suggested.
I question the non-selection of the F-15 because of the lack of a RIO. F-15E came along much later this is true, but the second prototype F-15B was a two seater in 1972, while primarily a training aircraft it trialed bombing and second crewman roles and formed the basis of the F-15E so the option was there from the start.
You also got the wrong Phantoms in your clip - Royal Navy and RAF F-4's never had the nose mounted 20mm cannon. They were all based on USN, short nose, non-cannon versions.
raf tomcat camo is the definition of badass
7:20 That has Macross vibes.
This is a brilliant video bud thank you, and this would of have been amazing for us in the UK to have the F-14, wish we had it, 😀, take care 🇬🇧 🇺🇲.
That Tomcat looks sick with RAF colours
We still need something with the capabilities of the Tomcat in the US inventory. We have nothing that can fulfill its Fleet Defense Interceptor role. The F-14A having such prevalent compressor stall issues hurt its progression tremendously.
Exactly. New production and updated F-14s would be a great addition for the US.
The Super Hornet is perfectly capable of doing the fleet defense role.
@@yonghominale8884 It can, just not as well as a Tomcat. There is no aircraft in the world that could do that mission like a Tomcat. If there will ever be an aircraft that can do it as well or better than the F-14, the US Navy will have to create it.
The only thing that ever hurt the F-14 more than compressor stalls was politics.
The Aegis system has made the f-14 less necessary.
If I'm not mistaken wasn't the standard F-14D itself called the Super Tomcat?
Yup.
Interesting Whif !
First time I’ve seen this, I have to say that the Tomcat looks amazing in cammo makeup
Had the RAF or RN adopted the F-14, it would've been upgraded sooner I think. It could definitely be viable today, rendering the Typhoon redundant.
Typhoon would piss all over a Tomcat!!!
I had no idea that the F-14 had ever been considered by the RAF. Not sure why it feels so strange to see it in this scheme..! But as stated below - it will always look amazing...
Maybe because it wouldn't have had that camo scheme if we had got them. That is a ground attack colour scheme not an interceptor scheme that would have been overall grey.
I just found your channel when searching informatiom about F-14's and F-5's. You have made great content! Greetings from Finland!
Instead the RAF ended up with the Tornado F.3 variant as it's fighter to tide us over until the Eurofighter came into service. I love the Tornado but there's a clear reason as to why the GR4 variant stayed in service until 2019 when the F.3 variant was already out of service by then.
The Tornado F.3 was just tasking the airframe to do something it really wasn't designed to do. Nonetheless with the changes they made to it, it managed to hold up well but against a Tomcat it would lose everytime unless the RAF pilots used some pretty creative tactics which even then tended to use one of them as bait.
If we'd gotten a Tomcat though then an interesting sort of mixed squadron of Tomcats and Tornado F3's might have become a thing, basically having the Tornados herd enemy fighters into the jaws of the Tomcat and overwhelm them that way. Alas we'll never know, and unless by some miracle we get a Tornado module for DCS that does both the GR4 variant and the F.3 variant then we wont get to truly experience what the European multi-role swing-wing fighter could do against the American monster cat.
The Tornado ADV was designed to do a job that disappeared not long after it entered service, the job was that of a stand-off bomber destroyer, the idea was that in time of war Tornado’s would fly a set pattern over the North Sea waiting for incoming Soviet bombers, once the bombers were within missile range the Tornado’s would launch their missiles to try and knock the Soviet bombers down before they launched their cruise missiles at the U.K., unfortunately within five years of the ADV entering service the Cold War effectively ended and with it the stand-off bomber destroyer requirement.
I love that paint scheme. I wish the USAF could go back to the European Theater paint scheme.
Bro, just seeing these planes with international liveries is a treat - thanks so much 🍻
British Tomcats? I had no idea I wanted those until now..
From what I recall the Tornado ADV was hopeless. Love the story of the concrete ballast in the nose, or 'Blue Circle' radar as it was referred to.
the word is YES
Interesting vid I never knew the RAF had the tomcat in its sight's, it was a formidable platform and I'm absolutely sure would have served with distinction, but history tells a different story, the tornado was a great interdicter, it's fighter role I was never happy with
It's a shame the F 14 tomcat didn't become the export success it deserved to be, also I reckon if the Invincible class of aircraft carriers had been designed to be a little bit bigger, the Royal Navy Fleet Air arm might have considered the F 14 along with the RAF.
You say that had the RAF adopted the F-14 it might still be flying. The F-14 IS still flying in active military service. Just not with the US or RAF. ;) Also love the RAF livery on the Tomcat. Might need to make a model of that with Rolls Royce engines.
@@kickback-rq6nd Iran is still flying them. They escorted Russian bombers over Syria in recent years. Also in June of this year one crashed following an engine failure so they’re definitely still in service though one has to wonder how effective they’d actually be in an actual fight.
There were rumors that the RCAF were going to buy the F14s that Iran bought, since Iran was cut off by the US for parts. But there was the whole thing of smuggling out US Embassy staff out through the Canadian embassy in Tehran, which nixed that deal.
Now Iran still flies their Tomcats.
The Rolls Royce Spey engines weren't all that great for the Phantoms. It took a lot of time to integrate them to the Phantom airframe, created more drag , lowered performance at high-altitude, and ended up being an expensive endeavour. The only advantages with the Spey was that it was a less smoky engine and gave slightly better performance at low altitude. IIRC, the RAF didn't even think the Spey conversion was needed and would later buy ex-USN F-4Js straight off the shelf. Re-engining F-14s with RR Speys would've likely added more cost to an already expensive aircraft.
Speys on UK Phantom's were essentiall, the J79 didn't provide enough thrust to allow the Phantom to be flown from Audacious class carriers at combat weights. They weren't added at the request of the RAF but rather the Royal Navy, the RAF had them to simplify logistics.
The F-4J (Phantom F.3) was ordered to bulk up numbers at home to allow a permanent detatchment of FGR.2's in the Falklands after the war. These F-4J's were off the shelf because they weren't intended to be kept around for long so a fresh order of new FGR.2's was cost prohibitive.
The reason for the RR engine on the F-4 was because of the small UK carriers, it needed more power for launch, it's fuel consumption was also higher than the GE engines and required other airframe modifications. It wasn't as good an engine in the F-4 and UK pilots stated they preferred the GE engine over the RR.
@@rayjames6096 As far as I know the F-4 was never powered by GE engines in any variant. The Spey actually had lower fuel consumption over the J79 being a turbofan as opposed to a turbojet. But as Vifam7 said it suffered from increased drag from the airframe mods and reduced ceiling and engine performance at altitude.
@@SPQRTempus The F-4 used GE engines, UK pilots were trained on the F-4 in the US. The RR engine was for more thrust for takeoff from smaller UK carriers which also required modifications to the back of the airframe and also for domestic jobs. This increased fuel consumption.
The RAF's 5th Gen fighter is a mix of the F22 and F35. F-14's were used as spotter planes in their last upgrade. They were taken out of service dur to high costs
Great video, enjoyed watching. Also Iran was considering selling it's F-14s to Canada after revolution, because the new leader was not looking at airforce as a necessity. Thankfully Iranian Pilots and Officers changed their minds, and now in Iran we have Upgraded F-14AM Tomcats with New MFDs, AESA Radar, And capability for Eastern & domestic Armament. Also there are Domesticly made and Upgraded Engines are in tests.
Love this !
I think everyone in the comment section can agree that this jet should have been kept......like the hornet to super hornet upgrade....😍😌😌😌
The F-14 was an expensive interceptor the US didn't need anymore, while the F-18 was a cheaper multi-role fighter.
As much as I like the F-14, with the fall of the USSR it wasn't needed, same goes for the F-23
F-23 was a concept fighter that lost out to the F-22.
The jet has been kept. It still flies today. In Iran.
@@JakubKas B.S.
Always keep the big guns ready.
The Rhino was NOT a hornet upgrade. It was a 95% clean sheet design using the general layout of the original hornet. Everything from the cockpit back is larger on the SH. I would say the only reasons it was approved was that it was called a super hornet so it was easy to sell as an evolution of the design, which it was. But that evolution created a completely new airframe minus the cockpit. The fact that Cheney was in charge meant he could persuade other politicians to green light the deal for his buddies at Boeing. Cheney made it his mission to end Grumman because grumman did not agree to being his wallet fattener like boeing did.
Damn shame the TSR-2 was cancelled. It was ahead of its time.
I believe thats PANAVIA, as in PAN AVIA as in avian.
I think it probably would have been phased out for Typhoons by now (like the Tornado F3s were)
Very informative..tx u 👍🏻👍🏻
We’d never have had them, the TSR2 saw to that and even if we did get them, we wouldn’t have the capability to train on them now. I’d also suggest we’d have had issues around armament as it’s unlikely we’d have opted for phoenix. My opinion as a limey. I do love the Tomcat though and it would have been awesome to have had them in a couple of sqdns here.
What did the TSR2 have to do with the U.K. not purchasing F-14’s, TSR2 was cancelled a year before Grumman were even awarded a contract to start developing the U.S. Navy’s new interceptor.
@@mrjockt - Mostly politics, partly doctrinal and the move to a ‘EU’ shared platform etc. We had effectivley dropped cat & trap, our ‘role’ in NATO and cold war meant the TSR2 “as was” could be better served by Panavia MRCA(?) and the embarrassment of BOAC. The appeal of shared cost, shared responsibility but still having some design input and control was favourable to an ‘OTS’ product over-engineered and needing expensive US ordnance and tech. I think we’d have been better off with Tomcat, but both variants fo Tornado worked fairly well for on ConOps for the time.
This would have been the coolest thing ever!
🇮🇹 MAGNIFICO 🇮🇹
🇮🇹FROM ITALY🇮🇹
No pal we had the Phantom but the main Interceptor that we had mainly was the Electric Lightening so get it right fella
WHAT A WASTE,THE WHAT IF. AWESOME AWESOME VID BROTHER.👊👍👊
I heard they also considered Viggen. Perhaps you could consider making a video on that as well?
Had the RAF used the F-14 Tomcat, it would have served with considerable distinction and set a very high standard for other fighters to follow.
I have to admit I have only gotten 4 minutes into the video and only skimmed the comments before the idea in my my head forces me to write it down… in my head I’m picturing NATO squadrons of F-14s operating off of US carriers when said carriers were in the European Theater , since the only British carrier that could have in theory carried the tomcat was the ark Royal was decommissioned in 79. Having allied Squadrons of f-14s based in Europe capable of both land and carrier based operations AND having NATO support personnel qualified to service US naval aviation assents during the 70s-90s and the have a significant impact on the Cold War era
love 14 RAF skins, I fly the 14 exclusively in DCS ( although i also have the 15, 16, 18, apache, gazelle, hog 1 & 2 + spitfire- gonna grab them when I get on later.
I love that you have 41(F) squadron markings!!
As an interceptor in RAF service, it would have been painted all over grey with low viz roundels
Just a small point on an overall interesting video. The Phantoms you show in RAF colours are F4E models. Totally different from the F4M & F4K models and laterally F4J variants that served with that force. Other than that the Tomcat looks wonderful. Keep up the good work.
I think any spurious reasoning to do a video on the tomcat is justified! 😛😂👍👍👍👍
THIS CHANNEL IS GREAT!!!!!
Would have loved it if the R.A.F got the F 14 desert strom colours would of been epic 💯
MRCA. Stood not for Multi Role Combat Aircraft but
Must Refurbish Canberra Again ( Canberra was built under licence as B57)
A shame.. I mean, how good does it look in the classic dark earth/grey camo! To have had it alongside the Tonka would have been great.. 2 swing wing aircraft! Also a shame the ST21 didn’t come about.. but how often do excellent aircraft get canned by politicians, TSR2, the Avro Arrow etc..
Tomcat was an amazing machine I think there is still a space in our modern military it could perform well in there worth keeping around and keeping battle ready
I wonder if this happened, this would actually delay the retirement of the F 14 or allow for the greenlight of the Gen 2 F 14. One of the primary issues with the F 14 (besides Iran) is that it was way too expensive to procure, upgrade and maintain, especially when the US Navy was the sole operator of the aircraft. Having more than 1 active client (besides Britain, maybe Japan, Korea, and Australia as well) may actually reduce the price in this case
U know back in the day we only used to make one version of each model because it was the best of everything already from day one of going on sale. Northop Grumman acting like EA trying to cash in on all them expansion packs and DLC.
There has recently been talk of Poland possibly acquiring the F-15. Can you please do a video on that.
let me see what I can find out - my next video is actually on the F-15. Thanks for commenting!
Well it is still flying in Iran. Since the Tornado was already on the way, would have been an interesting conundrum. So are we assuming the Tornado was a failure, or was cancelled ala the TSR 2? Would it also have been adapted for the Olympus engine do you think?
Iran does have more advanced Migs though. Iran also still flies the F-4 Phantom.
@@anthonyfuqua6988 And their F5's, home grown versions of the F5, that stealth fighter that looks as if the canopy won't close if a pilot were in the cockpit.
@@300guy Yes I've seen but didnt think it was a stealth fighter considering how old the F-5 design is. Unless you're saying that another country had a different design they also called the F-5.
@@300guy First flight was 1959 and second version was developed about 10 years later.
@@anthonyfuqua6988 just search Iranian stealth fighter and you will see to what I am referring, absolutely hilarious.
Man with the Super Tomcat it sounds like Grumman heard the complaints about the 14 being expensive and just said "screw it make it so badass they'll look at the price and think *they're* ripping *us* off."
@PilotPhotog please do a video on the BAC TSR-2
The F-14 Tomcat is the most beautiful fighter ever conceived and flown.✌🏻🇺🇸
The in cockpit view of the F15E at time index 3:19 makes it look like the seats are rising upwards due to the canopy closing.
Its funny to think that both Canada and Japan were on the fence about purchasing the Tomcat and looking to the UK for the answer.
It just goes to show how respected the RAF is and the British Armed Forces in general that two nations waited to see what we did before making a decision.
You can imagine the board room meetings at Grumman talking none stop about trying to get the sale with the RAF to go through so they could then sell to Canada and Japan.
I'm surprised with three lucrative Military contracts on the table worth millions that Grumman didn't think about lowering the cost to the RAF to sweeten the deal considering they would have made their money back in the long term, especially when you consider that the RAF now operate the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II which is a American product.
Lastly seeing the F-14 decked out in RAF Camo Livery is a sight to behold and one I wish we had gotten.
First look i thought it was a flight simulator.
The problem for the Tomcat for the RAF and other nations, was not so much the unit cost but the cost of operating such a maintenance hungry aircraft, this was where the Tornado won out, because as the threat to the UK was at the time nothing better than a Backfire and mostly Bear and Bison, so they did not need the super performance capability of the Tomcat, so the much easier to maintain and most importantly greater service up time of the Tornado won through. The F111 and TSR2, woukd have similar issues for the RAF, like the Tomcat these aircraft pushed the performance envelope of what was possible with the technology at the time and so were packed full of troublesome systems. In a service such as the RAF short of both cash and skilled technicians, these aircraft had they entered service with the RAF, they woukd almost certainly have been dropped with urgency once the Soviets gave up.
In this alternative universe the Tomcat could have also served off the non-cancelled CVA-01 with the Fleet Air Arm
Would the Falklands War have even happened?
The chances that CVA-01 would ever have entered service were very slim, they tried to squeeze far too many new ideas into the design and the government were constantly trying to get the price lower and lower, even the head of the ships design team admitted he breathed a sigh of relief the day they were told it had been cancelled.
Cool vid. I don't think RAF would still have them. Tornado is scrapped. Typhoon and F-35 is current and way more advanced.
Darn, this should be in the royal army
Man, shame they didn't at least take a few for trials. They look sect in that British camo, then add some upgraded engines and it's a dream come true.
Biggest problem was that our carriers were just too small for the modern age and all the planned carrier replacements kept getting scrapped
The RAF don't fly from carriers, the Fleet Air Arm does. They, like the USN, paint their fighters grey.
@@white-dragon4424 And Irans F14 were (are?) land based.
@@atilllathehun1212 The video's about the UK Tomcat that could have happened, and the OP was talking about tiny carriers, so my guess is he's talking about the small RN carriers that we'd been stuck with since the late 70's until recently. Even so, ALL previous UK carriers have been too small to carry the Tomcat, just as the USN Midway-class could only carry Phantoms.
@@white-dragon4424 The role the RAF would have used the Tomcat for was the same as the Tornado F3. Bomber killer!!!! Loiter over the North Sea for hours and engage Soviet Bombers before they could launch stand off or Cruise Missiles at the UK. Fighter combat was not in the specs as the only fighters they would have had to deal with were Mig 23's if the RAF fighters were operating in range of Norway and the soviets were operating aircraft out of captured bases. Low level speed was required to chase SU-24's (if they had the range to get to the UK). High Speed at altitude was required to deal with Mig 25 recce aircraft and Tu-22's (Blinder / Backfire).
Why didnt the U.S. give the U.K. the catupult technology to launch planes instead of relying on the ski jump. China only this year unveiled it's first carrier equipped with the ability to launch planes by catapult.
Unlike us, the British carriers use a Ski Ramp. It would’ve made launching less stressful on takeoffs. (Correct me if I’m wrong). And despite the maintenance issues that plagued the Turkey, it’s such an iconic Cold War era warbird. And I still want one!
An f-14 would just fall off into the sea if it took off from a British ski ramp carrier. The F-14 required a catapult to accelerate it to take off speed, and arrestor wires to land. British aircraft carriers have neither.
The Tomcat, would have required the FAA to keep big carriers, or the RAF to have more bases to participate in the Falklands.
British F-14s would have DESTROYED the Argentine Air Force in no time.
It is sad that Canada and Japan did not select the F-14.
uk was thinking f14 in 1983, a year after
As a retired RAF aircraft refinisher NCO, I would have loved to have applied DTD 5580A polyurethane grey and green finish via the `wet on wet` wrap around paint scheme. I doubt any strike aircraft will ever wear this scheme anymore due to the low level ground attack and recon` in the European theatre being pretty much redundant today.
Given what's happening in Ukraine I think low level attack is back in vogue.
@@SVSky It depends on the defence systems that are in place. They too have no doubt moved on. It's just a real bloody shame that NATO (who are not an entirely innocent party here regarding this event) have decided we need a new Cold War, an enemy to justify huge 'defence' spending. Human nature sucks!
Your phantom model has the J79 not the Spey
Well it certainly would of been interesting to see there is one version I'd love to see and that would of been a stealth version
They should have updated the Tomcat with new engines, new aesa radar, avionics, computers, and electronic warfare suite, just like they've done for the F-16V, the F-18 Super Hornet, and the F-15 EX Eagle.
What a waste of a great airframe.
They had over 700 Tomcats and they shredded them all.
The US Navy still doesn't have a long range interceptor to this very day.
This was very interesting!