F14 vs F18

Modeling Subjects Aircraft
1

I just finished an Italera 1:72 F18. I did a 1:72 F14 last. Can someone explain to me in english what the difference is in these planes? I assume starting at the F14 through F18, what does it all mean? Where do the stealth planes fit in?

Just lookin for some education. I thought I was in love with the WWII birds, especially the navy planes. However, these new sleek birds are finding a place in my heart. They are cool. But, then again, nothing beats that dired up beat up blue on a navy avenger or corsair or Dauntless. They are priceless.

2

Well, the F-14 Tomcat was technically a superiority fighter to protect the fleet, and the F-15 Eagle has a similar kind of role for the USAF. Both the F-16 anf F-17 were competitors into a programme looking at ways to produce a much smaller and highly agile fighter aircraft (a dogfighter) that would cost WAY less than the F-15. As you know, the F-16 Falcon won, and the F-17 got ditched but not fast enough to make some impression upon the Navy who eventually got a development of the YF-17 into the F/A-18 Hornet. The Hornet is not exactly a figther but was developped to replace existing Navy attack aircraft. The Hornet ended up being nearly as complex and expensive as the Eagle…

The F-19 designation was I believe not allocated to any know aicraft but gave rise to a number of plastic kits depicting a first generation Stealth aircraft. The F-20 was the Tigershark, a souped-up development of the F-5 Tiger, but it never was developed beyond the prototype phase. The F-21 Lion was the US designation for the Israeli Kfir C7, used as aggressor aircraft.

3

Just to get another perspective —

Would you say that the F-18E/F are totally differnt planes than it predecessors? It’s my understanding that E/F is a larger plane bigger engines better avionics, improved range and load capabilities.

Then with the E/F’s new capabilities is the F-14 still technically a better plane?

4

Hey, no fun. I thought this was going to be the definitive debate between F-14 and FA-18E/F fans. Here’s one vote for the 14.[:p]

5

The F/A-18E/F is a larger aircraft and almost completely new. for good info n these aircraft go to www.fas.org/man

6

The Tomcat and the Hornet were designed for rather different mission profiles, so to compare them is not really fair.

The Tomcat was designed to fit a requsition to replace the F-4 Phantom IIs as fleet air interceptors, with emphasis on the beyond visual range interception role, hence the Tomcat could carry the ultra long range Phoenix missile and its related operating systems. While the Tomcat can dogfight, it was not initialy intended that it would let threat aircraft get close enough to it to make the dogfight situation likely.

The Hornet, by contrast, fits into a category of combat aircraft usually refered to as multi role combat aircraft. The idea of the the MRCA came about in the 1970s when the economics of specialist mission aircraft (such as the Tomcat) were being questioned. The question was, why build two different airframes, one for air to air combat and one for surface attack missions, when you could build one airframe that could addapt to both? In other words, why shoot money at two aircraft when you can get one aircraft to do it all?

The Tomcat is a mission specific aircraft, specific to the interceptor role. The Hornet is an MRCA, beyond calling it a fighter, its not terribly specific about what mission profiles it takes on in the air combat arena.

To compare them is like comparing a meat cleaver to Swiss Army Knife: One is designed to do one job very well to the exclusion of others, the other is designed to addapt to almost anything you can throw at it without losing a beat.

As for my favorite between them: I like the design of the Hornet in the A through D versions, but I dont like the E and F much.

The Tomcat is a beauty no matter what version you’re looking at.

If you’re in battle and aren’t sure what you’re up against, load up a Hornet and hope for the best.

I you see something nasty coming in by air from a long way out and need to knock it down, get in your Tomcat and ride!

7

I’m a big fan of the F-18 myself, so seeing the E model Super Hornets on the Navy’s carriers is wonderful. The ‘18 is a good strike aircraft and with the E, I believe most of the earlier models’ shortcomings have been corrected giving the Navy a top-notch plane. BUT- I do have to say that I feel that getting rid of the Tomcat from air wings is a mistake. As far as long range fighters and fleet defense goes the '14 is unsurpassed. Not only that, but in the Bombcat mode she can carry a great deal of weapons. I will always maintain that the F-14 can do some things that the Hornet simply can’t…

8

I’m sorry, but Claymore has blown me away. Check out the website he provided. Absolutely incredible resource. You guys are nuts!!! This is amazing!!!

9

That is the most intelligent comparison anyone has made to date on the Subject! Good Job.

My vote is for the ol’ F-14- it’s the equivalent of a Cadillac!

10

The F14 looks better than the F18.

11

The F-15 still beats 'em both!!! Nothing like a zero combat loss record!

12

Yes the F-18E/F is pretty much a different beast, but there’s political games going on in the naming. The way I understand it, you open up a whole new can of procurement worms on the hill when you try to get cash for something with a whole separate designation. Forget where I read that. It makes sense in a “Through The Looking Glass” sort of way (ie, it doesn’t make all that much sense, but when you consider that not much on the Hill DOES make sense, then it’s not so surprising).

Now, as to a better plane? You’re talking round about 30 years since the Tomcat development started, 25 or so since they started their operational lives and 20 years since they really started elbowing out the Phantom. They’re from different generations, so a simple comparison along the lines of “which is the better aircraft” is really sort of a pointless exercise. The Super Hornet is a generation more advanced than the Tomcat, just like the Tomcat was a generation more advanced than the platforms IT replaced.

13

that phoenix would knock an F-15 out of the sky before he sees the F-14

14

From what I’ve read, the F/A-18’s major problem was it’s short range relative to the Tomcat, or even the Intruder. It’s also a slower plane than the Tomcat. From what I’ve read in the press, the Super Hornet has a longer range, more weapons stations, and more advanced avionics than the Hornet – but it’s still a much slower plane than the Tomcat.

A recent article in Flight Journal, written by a Navy pilot who’s flying F-16s, compared the F/A-18 and the F-16. It was an interesting article, but the side bar on the Super Hornet was very disquieting. The author seemed to state that the Super Hornet was even slower than the Hornet!

I don’t know if speed is really all that important in today’s battles, and I’m sure that a lot depends on the plane’s mission. Still, I wonder if we tax payers aren’t ending up with an expensive and high-tech, sub-sonic, updated Avenger.

Regards,

-Drew

15

I’ve always been a fan of the F-14 for as long as i’ve gotten interested in aviation. It is a remarkable plane even for its age. The f-15’s got most of their kills in the gulf war I from migs turning away from tomcat cap patrols. (as soon as the migs realized they were being painted by a tomcat, they scramed because they did not want to be the first ones to put the phoenix system to the test in a real war situation) That in itself is an outstanding feat, even though to my knowledge the phoenix has never been used (successfully) against a real live war time target. The tomcat has been able to adapt itself to the navy’s different needs during its operational time, from reconnaisance to CAP’s to strike missions. (i’ve read an account that in some instances the f-14 pilots achived equal and sometimes greater accuracy as the f-18 pilots in strike missions in the no fly zone)

however, the 14 is an aging plane, extremely expensive to operate, and it can be spotted head on very easily because of its engine compressor faces completely exposed. The problem worsens with the A models with the underpowered engines and pilots had to feather the throttle to avoid compressor stalls. (the first problem of the tomcat development, they decided to throw an underpowered engine and fix the problem later)

Hopefully the super hornet will fix those issues and be a little bit more reliable to operate while still having the same efficiency the 14 had and still continues to have.

It’s trully ironic that if it weren’t for a “large money advancement” from the shah of iran, the 14 might’ve never come to life!!!

16

I hear ya brother!

The Eagle is the King of Air Superiority Fighters!

-Ken

USAF “AMMO” 1981-86
“IYAAYAS”

17

The original Hornet also has a lot less payload than either of them. now, a convincing argument could be made that sheer payload matters less in era of PGMs. However a bigger problem for the original Hornet is bring back. It can’t trap with a full load of air to ground ordnance. In OEF, by about February 2002 our air wing’s Hornet squadrons started coming back without having dropped everything. Now a JDAM or LGB is an economical way to destroy a target, but when it comes to having to jettison them, well the economics start getting ugly! [:0]
So they started taking off light loaded.

Supposedly the Super Hornet is supposed to have more bring back ability.

18

Sorry, but the “Turkey” is the best…
Nothing compares to an F-14 in dog fighting!!!
An F-15 fully loaded would have to drop something, and maybe it would start by the pilots!!!
An F-18 equiped for dogfighting would be around it’s target before it gets a lock!!!
Between all these, and if was a pilot (wich unfortunately i’m not…), if someone tells me to choose between the three, well… I’d stick to the F-14, without even a blink!!!
1st - It’s an huge birds, and as manouvebrale at high and as low speeds.
2nd - Nothing can beat those radar and it’s Phoenix… and i really mean nothing wich is airborne!!!
3rd - It’s one hell of a beatufill bird!!!

19

that is until we go to war with a country that has su-37’s or mig-29’s. [:D]

20

…and trained pilots.