iran has 4 flyable f-14 tomcats??

[muddyboots]

Mute is fine too, because it means muted. That's exactly what it means to me, so I'll say it. I can use any adjective I want so long as it is in the dictionary, and it has a meaning. There you go.

Sorry, I'm the decider- the arbiter of adjectives. Next time anyone wants to use an adjective around here they better ask me first!

Dear Grammar Czar,

May I use the word "nitwit" in my next post?

[A2C]

bdk wrote:
A2C wrote:
Mute is fine too, because it means muted. That's exactly what it means to me, so I'll say it. I can use any adjective I want so long as it is in the dictionary, and it has a meaning. There you go.
Sorry, I'm the decider- the arbiter of adjectives. Next time anyone wants to use an adjective around here they better ask me first!


Dear Grammar Czar,

May I use the word "nitwit" in my next post?

Of course Muddyboots will notice this, but at least everybody around here is keeping eachother honest.

[Ztex]

Isn't Nitwit a noun?

[m50a1ontos]

Interesting thoughts:

As far as I know the glove vanes were used to slow the plane down from supersonic or high speed flight. No idea why Grumman would change it.

The engines wouldn't be a problem, because Russian engineers could probably custom fit a Russian substitute.

They didn't sound like TF-30's....or was it just my jet noise induced tinitus? The Russians and Chinese are very good at copying things, so small parts all the way up to whole engines can be reverse engineered.

[Randy Haskin]

In your opinion, how would something (you pick the airplanes) do against an F22 in combat?

Well, in combat anything can happen.

That being said, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like the Raptor. I have been part of exercises where Raptors have gone against HUGE odds (like 12 F-15s vs 2 Raptors), and the Raptors have won....quite easily. It is a phenomenally capable aircraft, and its stealthiness makes it very difficult to find as an adversary (if you can't find it, you can't kill it). It is hands down the best fighter aircraft in the world today based on everything I've seen and read about capabilities of other aircraft (Flanker, Typhoon, Rafale, you name it). It outclasses the F-15E in the aerial arena and survivability against ground threats by a country mile -- not even a contest.

That doesn't mean that a lucky MiG-17 couldn't pop up from behind a mountain in, say, North Korea, and get a lucky shot given the right circumstances.

[brucev]

.

Sometime in the 1980s the CIA arranged for a Tomcat and two Phantoms to defect to Iraq. The Tomcat and one Phantom flew on to Saudi Arabia to be inspected. One Phantom was so unsafe the American pilots wouldn't fly it and it remained there until it was destroyed in the American attacks in 2003. There were photos on the web.

So...the Phantom was in Saudi Arabia....and it was destroyed in "American attacks in 2003"? I was part of the opening salvo of Shock and Awe in 2003, and we didn't bomb Saudi Arabia. Am I missing something here?.

one phantom stayed in iraq?

[Randy Haskin]

.

Sometime in the 1980s the CIA arranged for a Tomcat and two Phantoms to defect to Iraq. The Tomcat and one Phantom flew on to Saudi Arabia to be inspected. One Phantom was so unsafe the American pilots wouldn't fly it and it remained there until it was destroyed in the American attacks in 2003. There were photos on the web.

So...the Phantom was in Saudi Arabia....and it was destroyed in "American attacks in 2003"? I was part of the opening salvo of Shock and Awe in 2003, and we didn't bomb Saudi Arabia. Am I missing something here?.

one phantom stayed in iraq?

Gotcha. Thanks. I never did do very well on those word math problems.

[kenlyco]

TF-30 is a very funny,but good engine ,but you got to know how to ride one, if you ever seen a F-111 do a LITTLE GOOSE A/B AT NIGHT IT WILL MAKE YOU SMILE ,ANYONE KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT?... IF PRATT DID NOT f THINGS UP WITH THE NAVY THEY WOULD HAVE HAD PW-F-100'S IN THE B MODEL F-14'S

[CH2Tdriver]

Don't know if you guys have seen this, but over on YouTube you can catch all the parts of this Grumman made film from the mid 70's about the Iranian F-14 program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfbz50gw ... re=related

I found it really interesting and it has some good Tomcat footage. What I found surprising was that the $$ for this program was not just for airplanes, but for an entire infrastructure. They built housing, schools recreation facilities for the American workers and their Iranian allies! In a few years it would all be gone.

What is also sad is that I've read accounts of what happened to alot of the pilots and officers from the Iran airforce, being put to death after the revolution, as they were suspected of being loyal to the Shah. Some of them are probably in this film?

Pete

[jtramo]

From what I have heard over the past two years, they have been putting more and more 14s back in the air. Iran just launched a satellite,you dont think they can re-engineer or repair some 1970's vintage F-14 parts? By the same token, I believe the F14 was subject to many many hours (10+?)of maintenance per flight hour on US carriers and they had parts and knowledge.

With regards to the F-18 vs F14 (besides always depending on pilots skills and the scenario) I have heard that the new Super Hornet dosent turn as well, cant carry as much and wont go as far as the old gen Hornets which didnt hold their own with the 14D in the first place. Oh yeah, and it wont break Mach 1 with ANY external stores. My main source here is the article in Aviation History back in 2002-3. It was a good article, but it makes you believe that navair was more capable in the 70s and 80s then right now.