Want to help support this channel? Become a channel member: ruclips.net/channel/UCz_aGg3uEnfE4hU6Pu6Wj3gjoin Subscribe on Patreon: patreon.com/PilotPhotog
I remember watching Grumman test flying the F-14's at their Calverton, Long Island, facility from the road by the fence. I can't understand why they abandoned the Tomcat, which had super-maneuverability, for the slower & less maneuverable F18 Hornet. Somebody must've gotten paid off.
Its perfect. Except for nothing. Even with the added weight to keep the swing wings, i think this aircraft will merge eventually. She would have to be much larger than what im looking at. Like Isosceles Triangle wings over what the animation. Very much the blend of the Aardvark.
You acould still possibly get a new tomcat if the navy gets what it wants. The stealthcat is a 6th gen design and a direct evolution of the tomcat. The navy has been begging for clearance to get the program rolling for several years now, but they keep getting denied due to the cost of the project.
@@appa609 F-15EX is barely any bigger than F-15E though. Most of it are internal changes like adding on EPAWSS & two new weapon stations. F-15C to E might be more apt, but that also changes its mission. So yeah, Legacy Hornet to Super Hornet. Same mission, more capabilities.
@chillwill5080 I think the RIOs task management of AI drones would be to ensure Correct target acquisitioning and input initial way-points, both egress and ingress and further more could At-The-Least assist ea drone in the section in mid-air refueling in the event of system disablement due to typical malfunction or weapons dmg. Beyond that the RIO could assist in guiding to TACAN approaches where a drone (tasked to trap) may try to land A. Broadside or worse B. Reverse of the correct landing pattern as drone ai is blind. Look up Elons ai decapitated ai piloted driver for that synopsis...long story short ai didn't "see" the trucks trailer due to the low profile of the ai vehicle and never activated the brakes...ppl give ai too much and yet not enough respect. Humans control the blend if ai is smart or subpar. Cheers!!
I was an Avionics Tech. On the F106 Delta Dart during the 60's and 70's - quite an aircraft. I do feel compelled to point out that your film of the "F106" is in fact an F102 Delta Dagger. The intake location and the pointed wing tips and vertical stabilizer are a dead giveaway.
The level of thought and research that went into this presentation is easily one of the best I have ever seen, it is superb. I remember back in the day waiting each month for the new magazines to come out, just to catch the news on the decision about the Tomcat's probable upgrade. Aviation Week and Space Technology, Popular Science and Popular Mechanics were the easy ones to find. Info traveled so much slower before the net. Excellent, high quality work! Cheers.
@@PilotPhotog So I bet you watched Wings of the Red Star and Wings of the Luftwaffe also? How was your trip to the USAF Museum in Dayton? Favorite two planes, if you went. I couldn't pick just one.
I was disappointed when the USN retired the F-14 Tomcat’s. They were such a sleek and elegant aircraft. I recall standing on the flight deck of my ship watching F-14’s take off from Cubi Point NAS in the Philippines. One came towards my ship before vectoring nearly straight up and disappearing in sky above. It was impressive to watch!
I got to play with F-8 Crusaders Ejection seats, & cockpit operations for oxygen, pressurization, conditioning, canopy, & windscreens. When the F-14 showed up at NAS MIRAMAR, I put in for a transfer to the new squadron, thinking ultimately, I'm on my way for a possible ride! The chance was denied, they were already set up. Imagine... Working on the F-14's seats, & pilots safety operations. Don't get me wrong, the F-8 was by no means an aircraft not to proudly represent... Just a single seater, no chance for a ride ..... Even if your seat worked and saved their arse ! God Bless the Men & Women that SUPPORT & FLY... the BEASTS!
We didn't even leave any flyable F-14s in a museum. We just scrapped em so Iran couldn't get parts, only for them to reverse engineer most of the plane.
And in my opinion it was complete bullshit decommissioning this aircraft I’m pretty sure it got hit with the same thing the SR-71 did, budget cuts… (Idiot Senators and Congressmen at the time: Oh well since we don’t have a big enemy like the Soviet Union anymore we don’t need any of these even though it seems China is getting more powerful and Russia could possibly revert back to a dictatorship but whatever leets decommission it anyway!) (That’s my opinion and mine alone but I’m somewhat right am I not?) P.S. if you’d like to criticize, feel free too! Fire away! Constructive criticism is always helpful!
7:23 perhaps it's a viable option for project wingman. Your fantasy version of a further development on the ST-21 is litterly PERFECT for Project Wingman
@@effisjens1776 OK, just making sure. I absolutely loved that game. Everything about it was great. I still have some of the music on my playlists. Presidia is probably my favorite.
Only change to ST22 would need to add a more prominent LERX that spanned the full distance from wing root to air intake. Like a mini-E/F F18. Superb place to store fuel. Would also angle the vertical stabs out another 5 degrees and make them all-moving. That way they could also be used to assist the tailerons as control surfaces with large active area (like in F22 and F18E/F). Lastly, I would add fluidic thrust vectoring. I'm sure with full fly by wire, this could be a crazy good high-AOA platform.... maybe better than the SuperHornet.
Maybe even add some subtle anhedral to the tailerons for more clearance during maneuvering. Not as far as F16, but would encourage relaxed stability and prevent them from being blanked by the wings at high AOA
@Jack Sujovolsky Possibly. But I'm sure it's gotten smaller and lighter in the nearly 60 years between the original design and now. Especially if we're talking Carbon Composite construction of those surfaces. Seems like a solvable problem.
I would recommend against TV as it's largely demonstrated to be overrated cost wise when you apply advanced aerodynamic design to the airframe. Using structures like the LERX appropriately will allow vortex generation to be guided directly to the need control surfaces. The F-35 basically demonstrated why Thrust Vectoring is rather pointless for 'enhanced maneuverability'. The real reason to seek out TV is for 6th generation considerations where speed and stealth, which are diametrically opposed requirements; are in consideration. This is because full range TV can be made to provide full yaw control as well as pitch, thus remove the need for stabilizers altogether to reduce drag and reduce RCS. The Tomcat show surprisingly lacks chines being added to the nose. The cylinder shape of the nose will cause significant returns if chines are not added. The chines are also for lift generation, a need if you intend to add far more fuel load and increase the MTOW. The 'side arm' weapon bays are not possible due to the MLG configuration on the OG Tomcat, at least not without some severe redesigning of the engine nacelles. You're looking st making a whole new fighter that honors the tomcat, rather than Upgrading. There was a Tomcat styled F-22 offered to the Navy by LM. This is essentially what the video shows. See the NATF, the A-X and A/F-X variants of the F-22B design proposals.
@@Nurhaal fully aware and good points. There are indeed very good arguments against TV, as you noted. The F-35 isa good example but it isn't the first aircraft to show TV being unnecessary. The YF-23 did that. With all moving tail surfaces that were nearly the size of a legacy hornet's wing. Lol.
@@DBravo29er @ScH75 the YF-23 wasn't as maneuverable as the YF-22 at low altitudes due to it's lack of TV and the TV for the F-22 is what makes it's fat ass maneuver as good as an F-15 above 20,000 ft. The Widow was likely faster and for sure was stealthier (I caution the max speed because both had classified speeds that are restricted due to friction destroying the RAM. That's the issue with asking for both speed and stealth and why they're diametrically opposed) but the '23 did not have the maneuverability the '22 did. The placement of it's lift generators were not as effective as they are on the F-35. The F-35 is capable of post stall maneuverability without TV, even with such poor 'wing loading' metrics (much to the chagrin of Pierre Sprey). Having large surface areas for deflection is pointless if you cannot direct airmass to that area to deflect at high AoA. Furthermore, directing that airmass in a controlled form increases the potential mass to deflect, hence why it's important to have those vortex generators in the right places in coordination with your control surfaces. However you have that... constant... struggle of aerodynamicist vs materials engineer that makes it so hard. The more aero-structures you add to increase the kinematics, the materials engineer who's responsible for the RAM gets mad at you lol
Beauty is great, but it's not what makes a plane a good. Nostalgia and beauty shouldn't be permitted to interfere with relevant considerations when designing tomorrow's killing machines. My personal opinion is that beauty, being in the eye of the beholder, is something that is *earned*. An aircraft for war shouldn't be designed to be beautiful; rather, it earns beauty in the eye of the beholder as it proves its utility.
The modern Avionics and aerodynamics have made the swing-wing obsolete The weight required for the wing pivot can be better used for more fuel and weapons
ignoring some slight airframe issues from the ST21 to the "22" you made, it's a great idea in my rocket science opinion. The idea of a backseat co-pilot being able to control a dedicated drone wingman is actually exceptionally interesting...
Having a free pair of hands up there in such a plane also might have AWACS potential. Consider a pair of them as part of a specialised aerial recce team which can fight and/or run.
but if the two were to be involved in a dogfight, the co-pilot would have to fly the drone while undergoing the G-force of the jet he is in... that would be a bit of a problem situation, or maybe I just misunderstood.
@@justamantiswithgoodtaste8166 I mean, any pilot is going to be screwed as far as trying to pilot a drone while engaging in BFM. A RIO would certainly perform worse under G load, but no way is a pilot going to dogfight while even _thinking_ about controlling a drone.
@@mage3690 Exactly mate, that's what I was saying, that's why I thought I misunderstood, it seems quite counterproductive, there's also the fact that I don't speak English as a first language, and maybe that doesn't help.
It is really cool :) I don't know anything about designing airframes, what would you change Chris Kamen? I heard that having the vertical stabs slightly forward of the horizontal stabs improves stealth because of right angles or something, is this true? I'm probably just spouting nonsense though 😅
One thing that has to be included into the discussion about advanced Tomcat variants is the (cancelled) successor to the F-14's signature weapon (AIM-54 Phoenix), the AAAM (Advanced Air-to-Air Missile) or the AIM-152. This topic alone would make an interesting video. Back in late 80's two teams, Hughes & Raytheon and General Dynamics & Westinhouse were selected to produce rival designs for a missile that would surpass the AIM-54C's capabilities. Hughes proposed a hybrid ramjet/rocket powered missile that was like the MBDA Meteor on steroids, but also featured a pair of small wings instead of a cruciform configuration so the missile would "fly" through turns with minimal drag. Some of the technology had already been evaluated during the Advanced Common Intercept Missile Demonstration. Given that the Meteor is considered the best AAM in the world today makes one wonder how impressive this missile would have become. (Keep in mind that the Meteors size was more constrained as it had to fit in AMRAAM stations) GD/W came up with an equally radical design, a smaller tube-launched missile with a jettisonable rocket booster. Both the booster and the main stage had thrust vectoring and the missile would use SARH with a back-up EO seeker. This necessitated an external targeting pod that had radar antennas both forward and aft, making it possible for the F-14 to guide the semi-active missiles even when not facing targets. Although inferior in maximum range to the H/R proposal, it was much more maneuverable during powered flight and an F-14 could carry 12 (!) of these launch tubes between its engine pods and addtional 3 on a wing station, as opposed to 6 - 8. A dual-thrust rocket engine / jettisonable booster is probably used in the upcoming AIM-260 that once again faces strict size constrains due to the fact that it has to fit inside F-35's weapons bays. After the F-14 was destined for early retirement, the AAAM project was cancelled; the Tomcat was the only (Navy) platform that could utilize this weapon to its fullest extent. Flight International had a great article on the AIM-152 that I found online (After the Phoenix falls, 22 April 1989 issue), not sure if it can be still found in their archive.
It’s an interesting conversation, I enjoyed reading it, I believe it’s all going in the wrong direction. Unmanned is the future, and that means zero combat pilots on board aircraft. Once you select that option, the whole thing becomes cost-effective and deadly. It is silly to relive World War II In the year 2022.
Saw your comment pertaining to the Pheonix missle. In the later half of the 90s I had bought a PC flight simulator. Janes F14 and started flying thru all the missions. Well anyways, there was an expansion pack(CD) and I bought it. Well this expansion included the use of the Phoenix missle, and an expanded flying territory, and all sorts of stuff. Something that stood out was the operating range I could fire it. It said 80 nautical miles I believe. I don't know if that's true but the sim was from Jane's. 80 miles is pretty far to target from a jet.
I am amazed with this video. I love the models you have and the people that made them. I've never seen the Sea Raptor in such a beautiful rendition. The fact that the F-14 could have been pushed into the modern day fold makes me want it back in the skies that much more. Thank you for making this video and bringing the Sea Raptor into the spotlight.
Ultimate is just that freaking ultimate tomcat 21 coulda, woulda, should of been. It's a crying shame that your version of the F-14 was never made. Not only does it look awesome but I'm sure tye performance would of been awesome as well. Now I want a model of the Tomcat 21 or a diecast tomcat 21. Something I could hold in my hand and flying around the living room going " PEW PEW PEW" !!! 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
Great job on that! Tomcats were hanging on my walls when I was a teen. Grew up on Long Island NY and got to see them in action. Great memories. Watched the last one take off from calverton. A stealth F-14 is cool to imagine
Thank you and while I did see Tomcats at airshows in the 80s and 90s I can imagine what it must have been like seeing them fly out of Claverton. Glad you enjoyed the video and cheers!
The Stealth/TVC Tomcat should have been built. It should have. The jet was conceived as having a 2 person crew, and the forward thinking concept of a drone controlling RIO is awesome. If they 'd built this Tomcat, the USN would've had a supersonic, supercruising, stealthy, supermaneuverable, AESA sporting, loyal wingman drone equipped jet fighter _already in service._ Let that one sink in.
@@Optimaloptimus I don't think the '5gen Tomcat' would have been anywhere near the Hangar Queen that the F-14 A & B were. The technology exists now to make the swing wing much less susceptible to mechanical failure, plus engine technology is waaaay better now.
From the little bit that I know of stealth I conclude that swing wing and stealth do not mix. This utopian F14 design is a solution in search of a problem. Thankfully military procurement is generally based on a set of requirements and not on how well a defense contractor can hot rod an old design.
@@skyhorseprice6591 You mean to tell me somewhere in that design they actually bothered to design a new mechanism for the wing and cause it’s price to skyrocket even more? Genius! Also it’s not 5th Gen. it’s a 3rd Gen and a half cosplaying as 5th Gen.
Wow... growing up the iconic Tomcat was most definitely one of my favorite aircraft. But to see that final iteration... that was VERY impressive to me. Thanks for the great vid!
You have got to come up with hypothetical combat scenarios for the ST 22 in a war against Iran or China. Kinda like the stuff you would find in the History Channel Show “Dogfights” but with Tog as the narrator. It can be called “Togfights”.
As a child my dad was station at NAS Miramar. We had a picture of us by the hangar that had “Fightertown USA” and F14s parked around it. Definitely a icon amongst jet fighters.
7:24 an optional Fulcrum style hunchback CFT would extend the operational time even further at the cost of RCS. Of course, this is also inspired by the Super Hornet Block III that's doing similar stuff for a decent increase in operational time.
One of the best videos you've ever done. The F14 is my favorite aircraft of all time. And seeing someone give it the TLC it deserves makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. wish this could've been real. With the thrust vectoring and variable swept wings this would've given the F22 a real run for its money.
@@PilotPhotog Your content is awesome. It's informative and entertaining, and everything is factual or, like this video, is grounded in factual data. Love the content man and it's great to be subscribed. Also, the only thing that I think could make the Super Tomcat even better than what's in your presentation.. Is a reworked and fully upgraded AIM54.
@@John_Redcorn_ if an F14 was fully upgraded and modernized like this video suggests it would absolutely give the F22 a problem. And then if you give it the 5th gen treatment I'd be willing to bet it would be the F14 vs F15 fight all over again. We'd have another 'Anytime Baby'.
While the AIM-120 is a solid missile, the AIM-54 has a role to fill as well, and the US interception capability suffers from the lack of a replacement.
@@bdh985 they had one planned, which would have included adding a sustainer engine to increase its range to nearly 450 km. That's why the tomcat's last radar update gave it such an extreme range, in anticipation of the upgrade
@@downix Replacing the AIM-120 with the AIM-54 was correct as the tactics changed from intercepting the missiles, to stopping the bombers from getting in range However the USN should have go back to AIM-97 missile and used it as base for longer range missile
Pretty cool. The only thing I think you missed is a redesign of the nozzles. As you have them they light up the ir sensors, and a lot of the opposition like long range ir weapons and detection. Fix that and you have a winner. Consequently, the heat put out by the Russian stealth fighter is a big part of why pilots aren't so worried about it. It's like being in a dark room invisible to everyone except they know where you are because you're holding a torch.
You hit nail on the head with this future of a navy legend. Bringing the F-14 to a 5th Gen fighter would be lot than forcing f-35c one engine wonder on the USN.
Your videos have never ceased to amaze me. What great details! Love the ST22 - you should share that with Northrop Grumman - maybe they'll build it for the Navy. They really need it. The only change I would most likely make is to use the F-22 Raptor's P&W F135 engines that put out 35,000 lbs of thrust or a General Electric that's equivalent to it: I believe the closest being the GE F110-132 which puts out 32,000 lbs of thrust used in late model export F-16's, . From your concept, it's safe to say that the ST22 houses an internal gun on the right side. Other than that, your concept is absolutely beautiful. Thanks again.
The P&W F135 engines are actually the F-35's engines and are 42k pounds of thrust class engines. The F-22's engines are the P&W F119. And yes, P&W F135 engines on an F-14, any variant really, is not only possible (they are slightly smaller than the GE-F110 in the B/D model F-14's), but would be absolutely RIDICULOUS. The P&W F135 engines produce as much thrust in military power as the GE F110 does in AFTERBURNER, and in Afterburner would give a 75k pound (fully loaded A2G loadout, by the way) Tomcat a thrust to weight ratio in excess of 1:1. That'd be a super cruising (as in, like Mach 1.6-1.8 range) F-14 with an engine in common with the F-35C already on the carrier. Pretty crazy engine, to be honest.
Man, if only. I’ve been fascinated with the F-14 for almost 40 years. I live near Barksdale Air Force Base. Home of the B-52s and the Strategic Air Command. When planes started flying into buildings, President Bush was taken to Barksdale, so it’s a major base. I’m sure there’s multiple Nukes, from at least 2 countries, but on the upside we get Airshows every year. I’ve seen the Blue Angels, and the Thunder Birds. They’re the featured performances, but they had f-14s out there from time to time, despite being a navy plane. It’s the kinda bleep, that will really get you fired up. Being able to check them out in the first person was mind blowing as a young fella. Seeing the SR-71 up close and personal was also an amazing experience, but through it all the F-14 remains my favorite jet fighter of all time. The F4 Corsair is my favorite prop fighter/cas attack plane, and deserves to be distinguished separately from the jet fighters. This was an excellent video, and I’m sorry I’m nearly a year late to the party, but thank you for making the vid. The SU-57 in TopGun2 wouldn’t have stood a chance (well maybe a little bit of a chance) against the SuperCat you’ve concocted here. Bravo sir!
The final design looks sick, a thing to mention is that probably the engines would be way closer, or even maybe just one single engine, as the separation the engines had in the tomcat where part of the reason it usually flatspined, nowadays every twin engined plane has both engines together!
@@ivorbrae Oh, i absolutely forgot about the weapons bay (ironic being one of the most powerful stealth technics), but i have to ask, wouldn't it be similar to the raptor that has both engines super close to one another?
@@ShinZoraYT I'm definitely no expert, but I do believe the Raptor has a reasonably limited stealth config payload. The old Tomcat used to house 4 massive AIM-54 tucked between the engines. There might have been the opportunity to house a lot of modern AMRAAMs or MK80s internally.
That is an awesome concept design. Honestly, I always thought the 5th gen upgrade concepts like this and the F-15SE Stealth Eagle were a better solution than the adoption of 5th gen fighters. Could you make a futurized version of the A-10 Thunderbolt II?
The concepts for the Stealth Eagle were amazing. Almost F22 performance for 65% the price per airframe.(projected) A far betting option in my opinion. The navy had a love hate relationship with the F14. The pilots might have loved it but the admirals didn't. They were physically heavy and were maintenance hogs. They wanted something smaller and cheaper that could fill more than the air superiority role convincingly. Also, I heard a few of them ended up working for Boeing as consultants, I'm sure the fact the killed any F14 development had nothing to do with it at all.
The Tomcat is one of my favorite planes and I have known two pilots who flew them. Just magnificent aircraft, however, their fatal flaw, the one thing which doomed this fantastic plane was maintenance. The F-14 required more hours of maintenance vs. flight hours than any other aircraft in the navy and they were expensive to repair. On top of that the F-14 was like a modern P-47 Thunderbolt, a seriously massive plane for a fighter.
I have been reading up on the Super Tomcat 21 since seeing articles in magazines since 1992. Grumman did address the maintenance and reliability as part of the Super Tomcat 21 design. It would not have lowered it to the same level as the F/A-18, but it would have been a huge improvement.
This is interesting as I have heard from a few pilots that as long as you flew them routinely they never broke down, in the same way a diesel truck requires routine use.
actually, the EA-6 required more. Also, a lot of people use the A in comparisons as opposed to the D. During the years when it was getting full support, it required 17 mmh/fh and that was trending down.
@@tararaboomdiay7442 Sorry, but that is nonsense and confirmed nonsense by two pilots, one of which is on RUclips. The F-14D had serious maintenance hours on average, the engines could explode if you were unskilled on the aircraft, and they were almost impossible to pull out of a flat spin. The F-18 is a better aircraft because per pilots who flew both aircraft, the 18 you can get right in and fly, very little prep, very little maint. vs. flight time compared to the Tomcat. Also, the Tomcat was never designed to be an attack platform so when the 14 was running anything but clean, it's performance was seriously hampered. As a fighter / interceptor the 14 was the best plane the Navy ever fielded, but it was a middling strike aircraft which was very expensive to maintain and required the very best pilots to fly them successfully. IMO though every carrier should have a single CAP squadron of 14's for interceptor role exclusively running clean.
@@chrisweber3379 No it wouldn't have because they wouldn't have changed the airframe. The primary reason why it was such a hangar queen was because of the complex airframe, and adding more technologies on top of that would've arguably made maintenance a lot worse.
The ST22 would've been the ultimate Tomcat, and a gorgeous fighter at that! However, some folks in the navy had gotten a bug (or a hornet) up their butt, and wanted a single airframe to do everything. They would also never come up with the funding for a Tomcat replacement.
Wasn't the Navy, the Navy loved the Tomcat and wanted to build off of its airframe like what has been done with the superhornet. Dick Chaney had some sort of stock or money in having the Hornet in production instead of the Tomcat. Politics and money always win
f-14 was expensive as hell, was basically like the f-22 of the time ($38 million in the 70s, which is over $200 million nowadays). Imagine if the main naval aircraft was the f-22 and you'll get an idea of why they wanted to go for a cheaper option
@@jrolla1858 Boeing lobbying, to this day, continues to make the decisions too. Even in the trials for example, the Grumman YF-23 solidly beat the YF-22, but still wasn’t awarded a contract. The Super Hornet still can’t accomplish anywhere near the job of air supremacy the old Tomcat’s could. It’s all about whose hand gets greased the most.
@@jrolla1858 They could have upgraded the F-14 Tomcat if they really wanted to! I know it was high maintenance, but they could have redesigned it to where it's not high maintenance like they did the F-18 Super Hornet! I know the military could afford it if they could build the F-22 and F-35 from scratch and send billions of dollars to Ukraine! I'm surprised a foreign country did not reverse-engineer the F-14 and created a more advanced version!
Navy fought tooth and nail for the Tomcat. They had representatives making rounds of the Pentagon with Grumman to show presentations. It was Bush administration (Dick Cheney in particular) who was in the pocket of the Hornet mafia. From someone who was involved in the Navy group going to Pentagon, Cheney would not even listen to what Grumman was proposing and how much superior Tomcat was to the concept Super Hornet at the time. Dick Cheney drove Grumman into bankruptcy by preventing new contracts for Grumman drying up all of their business. They ended up spending $5 billion in the Super Hornet development and ended up with something that ended up being a master of none where the F-14D proved to be superior in many ways to the Super Hornet (when F-14D development cost a fraction of that), let alone the ST-21.
This is still one of my favourite aircraft. Totally rebuilding a new aircraft is insanity. Building on a known and trusted platform is cost effective and less re-orientation for its users. I think the Navy would have saved billions if they have stuck with the Tomcats. Now they are doing this for the Hornets, which in all honesty is never a great replacement for the Tomcats
AN/AAQ-37 DAS (Distributed Aperture System) would complement the thrust vectoring and stealth features you already have included. Aircraft & ground target tracking, missile cueing, and incoming missile tracking, plus increased situational awareness and crew comfort (replaces worn NVG's with a HMD) all lead to increased survivability.
The problem i see is The US has played with Thrust vectoring for a LONG time and yet only one official American aircraft uses it the question of why that is the case should be asked. Just adding it to Tick a checkbox may not be as useful as you may expect and may in fact harm some other aspect of an aircraft's performance.
@@silverphinex The US found out through various projects and observing foreign designs that thrust vectoring is expensive both in terms of design and manufacturing and of limited usefulness in most engagements. The fact that it is also difficult to do while retaining low observable characteristics pretty much precludes any US 5th gen from having anything more than the F-22's 2d thrust vectoring. A 4++ design like PilotPhotog's Super Tomcat 22 here might find it beneficial.
@@Orphican i find your answer funny in two ways one the Vectoring thrust is both Expensive and mechanically complex. And everyone's whine about the original 14 is that the swing wing made the aircraft Mechanically complex and expensive to maintain. I mean i still like the concept dont get me wrong. If you want a wonder do it all plane i think its better for it to be larger so that later you have more physical space for upgrades. That in my opinion was the largest drawback of the F/A-18 was its relatively small size until they went to the 18E. Tho from my understanding the lions share of issues the 14 had where Electrical not mechanical in nature from what i understood the 14 was pretty reliable mechanically.
@@militavia-air-defense-aircraft you can do things to reduce the Radar signature of any airframe it just massively lowers the tolerances you have to build to the B1 lancer while not a Stealth bomber like the B2 does have a Reduced RCS due to the geometry of the aircraft
Sounds like it still would have been developed from a clean sheet of paper, which is actually good. Legacy Cats were getting to be maintenance nightmares for ground crews. I lived in San Diego, and Cats would occasionally fall out of the air, much to the surprise of the pilots.
Possibilities equal stunning. The alignment of sweepable wing with empennage horizontal plane appears amazing in your presentation along with much info re mission and armament. Thank You.
From what I have heard the fate of the Tomcat was already sealed when TOP GUN (1) was released and the F18 was implemented. The Navy wanted a promotional movie for new recruits without giving any vital information about their current weapon's systems. So basiclly "Top Gun" was already obsolescent when it came out.
Like most young boys of the late 70s/ early 80s, i was extremely fascinated by fighter jets. I didn't have the attention span to attend college so i enlisted as aviation Machinist's mate (jet mech) in 1992. In 1994, I was transferred mid westpac to a carrier from a frigate. My first day on board, i went to the hangar to perform rust control on our sh60s. There were rows and rows of f18s packed in and at the front of the hangar were the most beautiful birds i have ever seen, the tomcats. A thing i noticed was that they were HUGE. Just 2 took up the area of 6 folded 18s. Not much rust prevention done that day :)
The stealthy version has aerodynamic compromises which I would loathe to adopt. Specifically the channel between the engine ducts on the F-14 created a lifting body which eased stress on the wings. Sukhoi made use of the feature with the Su-27 family right up to the Su-57. Even the MiG-29 family of aircraft does this. I agree it's a logical place for a weapons bay in a stealth platform, but what does it do to low speed performance and landing speeds? There's a push in American design to sacrifice aerodynamic gains to stealth. There's also a push to place artificial bandaids (FBW, thrust vectoring, and rather optimistic weapons suits) dating back to the F-4. The idea being technology will make a bad airframe work well enough. Trouble is the first things any plane needs to do is fly, and fly well. When compromised aerodynamics loses the advantage of technology crutches, it is a dirt-dart in short order.
I would add diverter less intake to your list. Good for stealth, but very performance limiting for an interceptor role. Could do better with f22/Su54 type intakes.
Yeah. Maybe adoption of a few features to slightly reduce observability but aerodynamic compromise maybe too great with internal weapon bay. My question is what is the proposed role of the super Tomcat here? Is a variable geometry winged plane compatible with stealthy designs? My understanding of F14 is that it offer high top speed, long loitering time or range, large payload and geared towards a BVR fight. So why not focus on improving its core. Give it improved engines without the thrust vectoring, updates its radars and avionics, add more fuel storage and couple it with a newer even longer range missile. Being loud, brash, flying at top speed chucking long range missiles is hell of a distraction.
@@akhtarahtesham i think the design here is using a YF23 styled S duct design and its boundary layer control system. You are right that a DSI wouldve limited it to below mach 2 performance.
@@syjiang yet what does Mach 2 performance gain a fighter? How many pilots have exceeded Mach 2 as a regular practice? Supercruise is another issue, but Mach 2 appears to be a practical ceiling for manned fighters. the YF-23 was faster than the YF-22, yet it didn't exceed Mach 2. At least the test pilots aren't willing to admit it. Every Mach 3 interceptor the West has tried to adopt (F-103, F-108, F-12A) has been rejected on operational and unit costs. And is there anyone who thinks a Mach 3 interceptor could operate effectively from an aircraft carrier? The Tomcat is the only thing that could come close, and that's because we know they can land on a carrier, even if no Tomcat ever reported moving above Mach 2.4 or so. The specification that would attract my attention is: heavy payload, nimble, can exceed Mach 2, supercruise, stressed airframe for +9g, ability to intercept hypersonic weapons, carrier rated, and all-weather capable. Stealth would be nice, but it would probably do to be "hard-to-see" instead of "can-not-see". Having a few of these quietly roving around a fleet swatting down threats, reliably launching and landing on the carrier would be a good investment.
@@Kabayoth Its useful for lobbing long range missile. At higher altitude and higher speed at launch, the missile retain more kinetic energy to maneuver. Im just highlighting that the original design spec the navy put out called for a Mach 2+. I imagine it imposed too much penalty on the design so now speed is less emphasized.
The F14 Tomcat was a great aircraft!! I followed it from its mock-up all the way to its Navy retirement. Iran is even still flying it!! The Navy is missing a fighter now with a long flight time. The advanced Tomcat could have filled the need.
Iran is even still flying it!!! And VERY recently Iranian officials said that they have a new program to develop a new heavy air fighter based on the F-14 architecture... SO... This video may give to the Iranians a good starting point for they next endeavor... SADLY....
The Iranian export version is pale version of the Tomcat the avionics and flight argumentation systems where downgraded and sub-standard to Navy specifications I worked on the undelivered aircraft at Point Mugu pilots hated flying it and Grumman could not get up to Navy Specs with spending millions to do it.
What could’ve been. The navy will always need a long range fighter and attack craft, especially in an era of renewed peer competitors. And it would’ve been great for us Long Islanders
Yeah they lost allot of capability when they got rid of the Tomcat, Prowlers and especially the vikings. They need a longer range loitering plane that can push out their protection/early warning bubble that you just don't get in the Super hornet. Also I don't think using the Super hornet as a tanker is not something ANYONE would call efficient. Perhaps the Navy should expand their operating budget to allow for more types on the carriers so they can get back those capabilities they lost and their not getting back with F-35s. I know they are working on a refueling drone but something like a new version of the Viking is what they really need IMO. A new version of the viking could be a long range antiship/sub, ECW and refuling platform plus a drone controller with a 4 man crew. Somehow using F-35 pilots as drone controllers seems like its going to over burden pilots who should be concerned with flying their planes.
@@loganholmberg2295 You’re definitely on point. These new platforms can carry multiple capabilities with the miniaturization of electronics along with the networking
I loved working on all three variants of the Tomcat with due respect for how much of a pain in the butt it was at times. I wish the art concept design you had on here would have come to fruition. The Tomcat is and always will be tge best machine the Navy ever had.
Adding Celestial Navigation, Fluidic thrust vectoring, fly-by-light systems, and a cranked arrow wing design would further enhance the ST22's abilities & lower maintenance cost.
Im way late to watching this video, but i love the modelling you used for the beloved Tomcat, especially the final evolution.. as to your question, my main input to upgrading the Tomcat would at least be FBW controls so even we never got the Advanced Super Tomcat, at least it would be more controllable. Also, maybe increase its structural strength to make it 9G-tolerant rather than just 7.5.. lovely video my man!
Thank you and thanks for commenting...I forgot to mention the FBW and the 20mm gun, both of which would be part of the ST22...and this won't be the last you see of the ST22 on this channel. Cheers!
In sept 74 I was onboard Enterprise making the first wartime cruise with the F-14. It's first time at bat was mediocre at best. It spent a significant portion of that cruise grounded. I was there, I know. It was a great plane once it shook off it's "Infant Mortality" issues. It certainly is the best fighter the Navy ever had. The AWG-9 weapons system in combo with the Phoenix Missile was incredible.
I keep hearing that the Phoenix saw very little use and that over 77% of the few that have been fired never hit or tracked on to their intended targets... is this true?
I always thought the VF-1 Valkyrie would have been the ultimate Tomcat upgrade, but man your concept would still have given any adversary such as the Zentradi major trouble on any battlefield
Was waiting for someone to make a Macross/Robotech reference! I have to say though, the ST-22 concept as shown here bears more of a resemblance to an Alpha/Shadow fighter than a VF-1 IMO
That was an interesting back thought to its potential. It would have been cheaper if we needed a stop gap in viable planes by extending the program with upgrades while producing the new 4th gen. I like the option of the copilot role with drones, bringing a larger, inexpensive role of air support and nearly pushing into 5th gen market.
The F14D was already the equivalent of the F15E, and word is that grunts on the ground during OEF much preferredthe the bomb cat over anything else that they had on air.
The B and D models gained the use of the Lantirn targeting pod, they didn't need the optical pod as the F-14 was already equipped with an onboard camera system.
Id add Canard wings for better lift off and climb control. Also build a modular ram jet for higher altitude flight and short boost when encountering missile lock ons. A short EMP burst for anti missiles. Cloak rear engine outlets. For better heat signature. Dissipation. All this on the new F-14 22.
Just wanted to say that you have a hell of a skill to build and design these, to program even for these short videos is no small task. Congratulations for this alone. Next, that lady herself, is one fine Cat! Sexy, sleek, looks like it would RIP the guts out of any other plane in the sky, what a heartbreaker!
I would add, Conformal fuel tanks, and maybe stealth pods that house even more missiles/bombs, since carring capacity was one of the greatest assets the tomcat had. (Honesty dont know why it hasnt already been made but ok). The major drawback i can see with the tomcat maintaining stealth tho, is the swing wing. You would have to ensure stealth would be maintained throughout the swing process. Unless it wasnt a true stealth aircraft like the F-22 or F-35, maybe like a semi-stealth 5- instead of 5 or 5+. Just things to consider. The F-14 should have never been replaced by the hornet. Complemented, but not replaced. Imo. Because look at the sacrifices the hornet airframe is having to make to stay in the fight, and the roles its now having to field. Maybe im just biased cuz im old school. But i stand by my opinion. Just like the F-16XL should have been produced, as well as the F-16 carrier variant. But what do i know.
What opponents has the F-18 hornet and super hornet had to fight though? It seems the USN made the correct call for time, that they didn't expect to fight a near peer adversary for another decade plus. This meant they could get away with not having to field a bleeding edge fighter. Can't defend how they spent any of the money saved though. The LCS travesty should have gotten people fired. The billions wasted on going cutting edge on the Seawolf, Zumwalt, and Ford could have paid for a new fighter.
@@militavia-air-defense-aircraft you can add a internal weapons bay to the F-14 airframe, it has tons of room for modifications like that, and by stealth weapons pods, was in reference to having a 3/4 missile pod that has a shell around it that is stealth shape and coated, with a side release door for deployment.
@@EliteF22 the F-14 still has more hardpoints than the F-18 ever could. Even with fighting non-peer enemies, the loitering time, range, and payload the F-14 offers way more benefits than the F-18 ever could. The F-14 is just a superior aircraft all the way around when compared to the F-18. The new block III F-18s still cant offer the USN the right aircraft that it needs. Idk, i just think there were better options available without retiring the F-14. Congress and the DoD saw something new and flashy and made yet another poor decision. Its a common trend since the 60s.
@PilotPhotog Another great video on the legendary F-14 Tomcat! Love the 3d graphics of the stealthy F-14 and the ASF-14/Tomcat 21 as a way to show what could’ve been had the Navy kept it service. However, once again you failed to talk about (did not talk about this in the first Tomcat video months ago either) how the USMC almost became the second service to fly the Tomcat; farther than the Air Force ever got. The Marines went so far as to send prospective pilots and RIO's, as well as enlisted to train up on the Tomcat at Navy air bases (Miramar, CA and Oceana, VA I think), slated for delivery to fighter squadrons around 1975-76. Due to the post-Vietnam drawdown and other problems (wasn't cleared to drop bombs yet I think), the Marine Corps never got to fly the F-14. A second topic not talked about are two capabilities added to the Tomcat's toolbox that made it even more unique: TARPS (Tactical Airborne Reconnaissance Pod System) and LANTIRN (Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night). Both pods gave the Tomcat the ability to perform reconnaissance (with TARPS) and to finally drop bombs (with LANTIRN), giving it the nickname "Bombcat". Perhaps a third video with these honorable mentions in the future?
This is dope as hell. I really feel that they failed the Tomcat in a major way, the F-22 is WAAAAAY to expensive, and the F-35 is alright. The fact that you gave the RIO more to do, including piloting drones, that is awesome. I would make a single seat variant, but I like what you've done.
What would I change? Easy, replace the engines on the "AST-22" with the P&W F135 engines from the F-35. These engines, combined, would produce 84k pounds of thrust and are no bigger than the GE-F110 engines already in the aircraft. The additional thrust would allow for extremely high super cruise and fuel efficiencies while sharing parts commonality with the F-35A and F-35C. The F-14D weighed in at about 76k at max load... so, greater than 1:1 TWR while fully loaded could be achieved... it'd make an F-15 envious of the TWR. I'd take the sensor suite out of an F-35 as well down to the radar controller. Only change would be the larger AESA array. Again, for as much commonality as possible. The last major change I would make is move the rudders and vertical stabs forward to reduce the propensity for rudder stall during "flat" spins. Kind of like the Hornet's have. I think you could also fit way more than four AIM-120's in an internal bay of an F-14. They'll stack three wide in the current tunnel as is, never mind if you had the entire depth of the aircraft to work with.
@@JMiskovsky the F135 is effectively the same size as the TF30 and GE F110 already in the F14. It actually sits just between the two in diameter and length while being significantly lighter. Besides, the AST22 would never have been current F14 airframes. It'd been a new build from the ground up.
Just a note for those mentioning the Super Hornet. The Super Hornet was never meant to replace the Tomcat. The Navy purchased the Super Hornet as a "strike fighter" - a replacement for the A-6 and A-7. The replacement for the Tomcat in fleet defender role was supposed to be a navalized variant of the F-22. The "ultimate final version of the Tomcat" at 4:50 is really just that - a navalized F-22 (except with an additional seat). But that navalized F-22 was never purchased due to costs and the end of the Cold War. One problem I see with the "ultimate final version of the Tomcat" is weight. The F-22 for the USAF ended up being nearly the same weight as the Tomcat and now you want to navalize it, add swing-wings, and a second crewman...
Totally agree with the weight issue you mentioned. A second pilot takes away from gas, which you'll need additional airframe structure to get back. Stealth requirements dictate internal weapons stores, and those increase weight. At the end of the day, landing on a airstrip has minimal considerations for bring back weight. Not so with a naval aircraft.
I’m sorry that we didn’t get the TomCat upgraded, instead it was sent to Tucson for junk. The F-18 is a good plane but not a great plane like the F-14, was I knew the guys who flew them at Point MUGU , they loved it and it was so nice to see them in the air.
@@jameslittlefield3917 The F/A 18 is miles ahead of the F-14 in service life, maintenance cost, modularity, modern avionics. It's a better plane in just about every way.
@@j4min1 There most certainly was. It was called the Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter 22 (NATF-22) Sea Raptor program. Beginning in 1988. The plan was to create an F-14 style variable-sweep wing version of the F-22 (so that it could fly slowly enough to land on a carrier) for the US Navy. Along with a more robust fuselage and landing gear. So that it could withstand the greater forces of carrier take-offs and landings. However, the program was cancelled in 1991. As creating a variable-sweep wing version proved to be too complicated, problematic and costly. The US Navy also determined that a naval F-22 would be significantly too expensive for them to operate and maintain. And that beyond its stealth, supercruise and thrust vectoring capabilities. It offered little improvement upon their existing capability with the F-14. As the F-14s had a faster top speed (a crucial factor in carrier defence) and were massively cheaper to operate and maintain. It was ultimately proven that the US Navy made the right decision. Their assessment regarding the F-22s significantly high operating and maintenance costs was 100% correct. As the F-22 is the most expensive fighter in the world to operate and maintain. Hence why the USAF now only has less than 100 which are operational.
Don’t forget a multi barrel gun. Now’s days ever since man took to the air guns were a important part of either defense or offense weapons. Fighting will be visualized to see who the pilot is fighting.
Your videos are amazing! Awesome script, great narration, excellent visuals, and the research is on point! Well done sir! You'll be up to a million subs in no time I'm sure!
The story I was told was that the Tomcat 21 was up against, and lost out to the F/A-18E/F. One of the biggest factors in the decision was the reliability of the Tomcats versus the Hornets. During the Iraq war, since there was no air superiority required after the first few days, F-14's were relegated to using their high power radar to extend the radar bubble of the carrier battle group. By the end of the day, Hornets were filling the role because the Tomcats were down with issues (typically hydraulic system related). Another factor was that the Super Hornet would have a lot of system commonality with the smaller Hornets. Gone were the days of throwing money at programs to chase specific capabilities. Instead the overall logistics costs played a much larger role in decision making. I still miss seeing the F-14's flying and the great stories that came with them (like the F-14D whose afterburner set the woods on fire at NAS Lakehurst while testing compatibility with the JBD).
"Gone were the days of throwing money at programs to chase specific capabilities." LOL Yeah the F22 & F35 programs were bargain basement steals. According to my searches, here are the costs for each: Plane Program Cost Maintenance Plane Cost F-14 $1.4 Billion $40K/FlightHour $38M/ea F-22 $34 Billion $68K/FlightHour $120M/ea F-35 $1.4 Trillion $36K/FlightHour $91M/ea (average of the 3 variants) Admittedly, F-14 had its probs. But it also had its abilities that the Navy is now realizing it is woefully lacking. Specifically the F-14's range which the FA-18 and F-35 cannot match. China & Russia's long range anti-ship missiles have exposed a glaringly shortcoming of our current capabilities. It's just a shame that the F-14 didn't get to mature like the other teen fighters (F-15, F-16 & F-18).
Although the sweep wing is one of the most characteristic things of the tomcat, I think I'd replace it with a delta wing because it works at high and low speeds and make it a lot lighter. One of my favourite vids!
@@tankieflanker4119 and what parts of the aircraft are you suggesting to make out of these Bio Composites the primary structure or replacing the aluminum skins with it
@@tankieflanker4119 a better reply than I expected the stabilators where boron epoxy and where tested to four times the forces they expected them to encounter and where still unable to break them
Well done. This is an excellent video concerning the Super Tomxat. As for items to add, I am thinking about an infra red viewfinder. Not sure if this was already done. Perhaps there would be an improved Phoenix missile system . Thanks for a great video.
![Jack Harlow - Hello Miss Johnson [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q86_nlRoIGw/mqdefault.jpg)
Want to help support this channel?
Become a channel member: ruclips.net/channel/UCz_aGg3uEnfE4hU6Pu6Wj3gjoin
Subscribe on Patreon: patreon.com/PilotPhotog
I remember watching Grumman test flying the F-14's at their Calverton, Long Island, facility from the road by the fence. I can't understand why they abandoned the Tomcat, which had super-maneuverability, for the slower & less maneuverable F18 Hornet. Somebody must've gotten paid off.
How would a super hornet look as a stealth fighter?
Ya see this is why the tomcat. Is super bad ass super loved and supermissed
Its perfect. Except for nothing. Even with the added weight to keep the swing wings, i think this aircraft will merge eventually. She would have to be much larger than what im looking at. Like Isosceles Triangle wings over what the animation. Very much the blend of the Aardvark.
Why haven’t you submitted this to grumen or Lockheed
That 5th gen Tomcat is quite literally the stuff of my dreams. I want her so badly.
Add it to Arma 3!
5th Gen? Taking a 3.5 Gen and adding in salt doesn’t make it 5th Gen.
@@Optimaloptimus no, but adding several million dollars worth of tech does.
You acould still possibly get a new tomcat if the navy gets what it wants.
The stealthcat is a 6th gen design and a direct evolution of the tomcat.
The navy has been begging for clearance to get the program rolling for several years now, but they keep getting denied due to the cost of the project.
@@jakehildebrand1824 That doesn’t make it 5th Gen either as the airframe is not up to standard.
I’ll tell you right now, if these cats had made it into service, the navy would have a lot easier time finding new pilot recruits
Well, it's not like the USN are ever short for hotshot recruits.
That said, AST-21 would've definitely been what Super Hornet was to the Hornet.
@@TheRibbonRed Bigger and heavier?
Seems more like what the F15EX is to the F15E
@@appa609 F-15EX is barely any bigger than F-15E though. Most of it are internal changes like adding on EPAWSS & two new weapon stations.
F-15C to E might be more apt, but that also changes its mission. So yeah, Legacy Hornet to Super Hornet. Same mission, more capabilities.
Add lot harder for mechanics who maintain those planes 🤣
The RIO being able to control drones and their networking would be a game changer.
We'll probably see that with the F/A-XX.
:will be:
@chillwill5080 I think the RIOs task management of AI drones would be to ensure Correct target acquisitioning and input initial way-points, both egress and ingress and further more could At-The-Least assist ea drone in the section in mid-air refueling in the event of system disablement due to typical malfunction or weapons dmg. Beyond that the RIO could assist in guiding to TACAN approaches where a drone (tasked to trap) may try to land A. Broadside or worse B. Reverse of the correct landing pattern as drone ai is blind. Look up Elons ai decapitated ai piloted driver for that synopsis...long story short ai didn't "see" the trucks trailer due to the low profile of the ai vehicle and never activated the brakes...ppl give ai too much and yet not enough respect. Humans control the blend if ai is smart or subpar. Cheers!!
I wish we could of lived in this timeline. The F-14 is just a great plane.
Yes it was awsome bro
This timeline does exist. We just cant experience it. Kinda sucks but its kind of cool to know...
*could've
There's a timeline out there where this was the star plane in Top Gun: Maverick. Just goes to show you why we live in the worst timeline.
And with the xm8 and xm29 oicw
I was an Avionics Tech. On the F106 Delta Dart during the 60's and 70's - quite an aircraft. I do feel compelled to point out that your film of the "F106" is in fact an F102 Delta Dagger. The intake location and the pointed wing tips and vertical stabilizer are a dead giveaway.
Rest in peace F-14 TomCat. You will never be forgotten.
Add it to Arma 3
It will return
The mighty F-14👍 is still operational in Iran
Iran's still got around 40
@@kennyfox7055 it will not
The level of thought and research that went into this presentation is easily one of the best I have ever seen, it is superb. I remember back in the day waiting each month for the new magazines to come out, just to catch the news on the decision about the Tomcat's probable upgrade. Aviation Week and Space Technology, Popular Science and Popular Mechanics were the easy ones to find. Info traveled so much slower before the net. Excellent, high quality work! Cheers.
Thank you Ben! I grew up reading Popular Science and Popular Mechanics, my dad had a subscription in the 80s. Your comment is very much appreciated!
@@PilotPhotog So I bet you watched Wings of the Red Star and Wings of the Luftwaffe also? How was your trip to the USAF Museum in Dayton? Favorite two planes, if you went. I couldn't pick just one.
@@benwelch4076 I did watch both of those! I still haven't been to USAF museum in Dayton...its a trip I am very looking forward to!
Well said!
Also had Jane's Weekly and Scientific American which had frequent articles on aerospace. (Jane's All the World's Aircraft was practically my bible)
I was disappointed when the USN retired the F-14 Tomcat’s. They were such a sleek and elegant aircraft. I recall standing on the flight deck of my ship watching F-14’s take off from Cubi Point NAS in the Philippines. One came towards my ship before vectoring nearly straight up and disappearing in sky above. It was impressive to watch!
I got to play with F-8 Crusaders Ejection seats, & cockpit operations for oxygen, pressurization, conditioning, canopy, & windscreens.
When the F-14 showed up at NAS MIRAMAR, I put in for a transfer to the new squadron, thinking ultimately, I'm on my way for a possible ride! The chance was denied, they were already set up.
Imagine... Working on the F-14's seats, & pilots safety operations.
Don't get me wrong, the F-8 was by no means an aircraft not to proudly represent... Just a single seater, no chance for a ride ..... Even if your seat worked and saved their arse !
God Bless the Men & Women that SUPPORT & FLY... the BEASTS!
Logistics chains and maintenance are a bitch.
We didn't even leave any flyable F-14s in a museum. We just scrapped em so Iran couldn't get parts, only for them to reverse engineer most of the plane.
@@Krystalmyth don’t we still have schematics for it though? If so you could still manufacture them provided you had the right equipment and parts, no?
And in my opinion it was complete bullshit decommissioning this aircraft I’m pretty sure it got hit with the same thing the SR-71 did, budget cuts… (Idiot Senators and Congressmen at the time: Oh well since we don’t have a big enemy like the Soviet Union anymore we don’t need any of these even though it seems China is getting more powerful and Russia could possibly revert back to a dictatorship but whatever leets decommission it anyway!) (That’s my opinion and mine alone but I’m somewhat right am I not?) P.S. if you’d like to criticize, feel free too! Fire away! Constructive criticism is always helpful!
that final image is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen. i was absolutely giddy
Thank you, glad you enjoyed it! Given the interest in this video I will definitely make a follow up one. Cheers!
I've always love the F14 air frame. This upgrade version looks great.
7:23 perhaps it's a viable option for project wingman. Your fantasy version of a further development on the ST-21 is litterly PERFECT for Project Wingman
By Project Wingman do you mean the game or the Loyal Wingman drone project by the Air Force?
@@deadlybladesmith3093 the game of course.
@@effisjens1776 OK, just making sure. I absolutely loved that game. Everything about it was great. I still have some of the music on my playlists. Presidia is probably my favorite.
Hell, maybe even A DLC Jet in Ace Combat 7.
Hoping for planes DLC considering it just came out on Xbox
Only change to ST22 would need to add a more prominent LERX that spanned the full distance from wing root to air intake. Like a mini-E/F F18. Superb place to store fuel. Would also angle the vertical stabs out another 5 degrees and make them all-moving. That way they could also be used to assist the tailerons as control surfaces with large active area (like in F22 and F18E/F). Lastly, I would add fluidic thrust vectoring. I'm sure with full fly by wire, this could be a crazy good high-AOA platform.... maybe better than the SuperHornet.
Maybe even add some subtle anhedral to the tailerons for more clearance during maneuvering. Not as far as F16, but would encourage relaxed stability and prevent them from being blanked by the wings at high AOA
@Jack Sujovolsky Possibly. But I'm sure it's gotten smaller and lighter in the nearly 60 years between the original design and now. Especially if we're talking Carbon Composite construction of those surfaces. Seems like a solvable problem.
I would recommend against TV as it's largely demonstrated to be overrated cost wise when you apply advanced aerodynamic design to the airframe. Using structures like the LERX appropriately will allow vortex generation to be guided directly to the need control surfaces.
The F-35 basically demonstrated why Thrust Vectoring is rather pointless for 'enhanced maneuverability'.
The real reason to seek out TV is for 6th generation considerations where speed and stealth, which are diametrically opposed requirements; are in consideration. This is because full range TV can be made to provide full yaw control as well as pitch, thus remove the need for stabilizers altogether to reduce drag and reduce RCS.
The Tomcat show surprisingly lacks chines being added to the nose. The cylinder shape of the nose will cause significant returns if chines are not added. The chines are also for lift generation, a need if you intend to add far more fuel load and increase the MTOW.
The 'side arm' weapon bays are not possible due to the MLG configuration on the OG Tomcat, at least not without some severe redesigning of the engine nacelles.
You're looking st making a whole new fighter that honors the tomcat, rather than Upgrading.
There was a Tomcat styled F-22 offered to the Navy by LM. This is essentially what the video shows. See the NATF, the A-X and A/F-X variants of the F-22B design proposals.
@@Nurhaal fully aware and good points. There are indeed very good arguments against TV, as you noted. The F-35 isa good example but it isn't the first aircraft to show TV being unnecessary. The YF-23 did that. With all moving tail surfaces that were nearly the size of a legacy hornet's wing. Lol.
@@DBravo29er @ScH75 the YF-23 wasn't as maneuverable as the YF-22 at low altitudes due to it's lack of TV and the TV for the F-22 is what makes it's fat ass maneuver as good as an F-15 above 20,000 ft. The Widow was likely faster and for sure was stealthier (I caution the max speed because both had classified speeds that are restricted due to friction destroying the RAM. That's the issue with asking for both speed and stealth and why they're diametrically opposed) but the '23 did not have the maneuverability the '22 did. The placement of it's lift generators were not as effective as they are on the F-35. The F-35 is capable of post stall maneuverability without TV, even with such poor 'wing loading' metrics (much to the chagrin of Pierre Sprey). Having large surface areas for deflection is pointless if you cannot direct airmass to that area to deflect at high AoA. Furthermore, directing that airmass in a controlled form increases the potential mass to deflect, hence why it's important to have those vortex generators in the right places in coordination with your control surfaces.
However you have that... constant... struggle of aerodynamicist vs materials engineer that makes it so hard. The more aero-structures you add to increase the kinematics, the materials engineer who's responsible for the RAM gets mad at you lol
Build them all. The tomcat is still one of the best looking planes ever made.
You're right on. It's a beautiful, deadly plane
Beauty is great, but it's not what makes a plane a good. Nostalgia and beauty shouldn't be permitted to interfere with relevant considerations when designing tomorrow's killing machines.
My personal opinion is that beauty, being in the eye of the beholder, is something that is *earned*. An aircraft for war shouldn't be designed to be beautiful; rather, it earns beauty in the eye of the beholder as it proves its utility.
@@warpedweirdo the A-10 is a perfect example of what you just said.
@@Friendlygiant666 Exactly the example in my mind as I composed my post.
The modern Avionics and aerodynamics have made the swing-wing obsolete
The weight required for the wing pivot can be better used for more fuel and weapons
ignoring some slight airframe issues from the ST21 to the "22" you made, it's a great idea in my rocket science opinion. The idea of a backseat co-pilot being able to control a dedicated drone wingman is actually exceptionally interesting...
Having a free pair of hands up there in such a plane also might have AWACS potential. Consider a pair of them as part of a specialised aerial recce team which can fight and/or run.
but if the two were to be involved in a dogfight, the co-pilot would have to fly the drone while undergoing the G-force of the jet he is in... that would be a bit of a problem situation, or maybe I just misunderstood.
@@justamantiswithgoodtaste8166 I mean, any pilot is going to be screwed as far as trying to pilot a drone while engaging in BFM. A RIO would certainly perform worse under G load, but no way is a pilot going to dogfight while even _thinking_ about controlling a drone.
@@mage3690 Exactly mate, that's what I was saying, that's why I thought I misunderstood, it seems quite counterproductive, there's also the fact that I don't speak English as a first language, and maybe that doesn't help.
It is really cool :) I don't know anything about designing airframes, what would you change Chris Kamen? I heard that having the vertical stabs slightly forward of the horizontal stabs improves stealth because of right angles or something, is this true? I'm probably just spouting nonsense though 😅
One thing that has to be included into the discussion about advanced Tomcat variants is the (cancelled) successor to the F-14's signature weapon (AIM-54 Phoenix), the AAAM (Advanced Air-to-Air Missile) or the AIM-152. This topic alone would make an interesting video.
Back in late 80's two teams, Hughes & Raytheon and General Dynamics & Westinhouse were selected to produce rival designs for a missile that would surpass the AIM-54C's capabilities. Hughes proposed a hybrid ramjet/rocket powered missile that was like the MBDA Meteor on steroids, but also featured a pair of small wings instead of a cruciform configuration so the missile would "fly" through turns with minimal drag. Some of the technology had already been evaluated during the Advanced Common Intercept Missile Demonstration. Given that the Meteor is considered the best AAM in the world today makes one wonder how impressive this missile would have become. (Keep in mind that the Meteors size was more constrained as it had to fit in AMRAAM stations)
GD/W came up with an equally radical design, a smaller tube-launched missile with a jettisonable rocket booster. Both the booster and the main stage had thrust vectoring and the missile would use SARH with a back-up EO seeker. This necessitated an external targeting pod that had radar antennas both forward and aft, making it possible for the F-14 to guide the semi-active missiles even when not facing targets. Although inferior in maximum range to the H/R proposal, it was much more maneuverable during powered flight and an F-14 could carry 12 (!) of these launch tubes between its engine pods and addtional 3 on a wing station, as opposed to 6 - 8.
A dual-thrust rocket engine / jettisonable booster is probably used in the upcoming AIM-260 that once again faces strict size constrains due to the fact that it has to fit inside F-35's weapons bays.
After the F-14 was destined for early retirement, the AAAM project was cancelled; the Tomcat was the only (Navy) platform that could utilize this weapon to its fullest extent.
Flight International had a great article on the AIM-152 that I found online (After the Phoenix falls, 22 April 1989 issue), not sure if it can be still found in their archive.
It’s an interesting conversation, I enjoyed reading it, I believe it’s all going in the wrong direction. Unmanned is the future, and that means zero combat pilots on board aircraft. Once you select that option, the whole thing becomes cost-effective and deadly. It is silly to relive World War II In the year 2022.
Now this is an excellent addition. Especially when such a missile system could have been folded into AST-22 internal weapon bays.
Saw your comment pertaining to the Pheonix missle. In the later half of the 90s I had bought a PC flight simulator. Janes F14 and started flying thru all the missions. Well anyways, there was an expansion pack(CD) and I bought it. Well this expansion included the use of the Phoenix missle, and an expanded flying territory, and all sorts of stuff. Something that stood out was the operating range I could fire it. It said 80 nautical miles I believe. I don't know if that's true but the sim was from Jane's. 80 miles is pretty far to target from a jet.
The Phoenix was great on paper and looked menacing up close, but it's in-theater performance was just so-so.
I am amazed with this video. I love the models you have and the people that made them. I've never seen the Sea Raptor in such a beautiful rendition. The fact that the F-14 could have been pushed into the modern day fold makes me want it back in the skies that much more. Thank you for making this video and bringing the Sea Raptor into the spotlight.
Thank you very much! It was a lot of fun rendering these scenes and I will find a way to make more videos of the Sea Raptor on this channel.
@@PilotPhotog Thank you very much!
Amazing job creating that advanced super tomcat
Ultimate is just that freaking ultimate tomcat 21 coulda, woulda, should of been. It's a crying shame that your version of the F-14 was never made. Not only does it look awesome but I'm sure tye performance would of been awesome as well.
Now I want a model of the Tomcat 21 or a diecast tomcat 21. Something I could hold in my hand and flying around the living room going " PEW PEW PEW" !!!
🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
I really like the idea of the second seat RIO commanding it’s own separate drone fleet. I’ve heard that’s the immediate future for force multiplier.
Great job on that! Tomcats were hanging on my walls when I was a teen. Grew up on Long Island NY and got to see them in action. Great memories. Watched the last one take off from calverton. A stealth F-14 is cool to imagine
Thank you and while I did see Tomcats at airshows in the 80s and 90s I can imagine what it must have been like seeing them fly out of Claverton. Glad you enjoyed the video and cheers!
The Stealth/TVC Tomcat should have been built. It should have. The jet was conceived as having a 2 person crew, and the forward thinking concept of a drone controlling RIO is awesome. If they 'd built this Tomcat, the USN would've had a supersonic, supercruising, stealthy, supermaneuverable, AESA sporting, loyal wingman drone equipped jet fighter _already in service._
Let that one sink in.
You mean they‘ll have the same hangar Queen that cost them loads of money to maintain and field but more expensive. Good idea. No.
@@Optimaloptimus
I don't think the '5gen Tomcat' would have been anywhere near the Hangar Queen that the F-14 A & B were. The technology exists now to make the swing wing much less susceptible to mechanical failure, plus engine technology is waaaay better now.
From the little bit that I know of stealth I conclude that swing wing and stealth do not mix. This utopian F14 design is a solution in search of a problem. Thankfully military procurement is generally based on a set of requirements and not on how well a defense contractor can hot rod an old design.
@@ericb.4914 Right you are.
@@skyhorseprice6591 You mean to tell me somewhere in that design they actually bothered to design a new mechanism for the wing and cause it’s price to skyrocket even more? Genius! Also it’s not 5th Gen. it’s a 3rd Gen and a half cosplaying as 5th Gen.
Wow... growing up the iconic Tomcat was most definitely one of my favorite aircraft. But to see that final iteration... that was VERY impressive to me. Thanks for the great vid!
Thank you glad you enjoyed it!
So the flying pig aka F 111 isn't so bad. The air force loved it.
You have got to come up with hypothetical combat scenarios for the ST 22 in a war against Iran or China. Kinda like the stuff you would find in the History Channel Show “Dogfights” but with Tog as the narrator. It can be called “Togfights”.
That'd be interesting. Wish we can get something like that
That could be interesting..
Scarlet Magnum thank you and I'm going to see what I can put together.
@@PilotPhotog yes! looking foward to that
The war with Iran means the end of a superpower called the United States
Thanks a lot for doing this..! It was a visual treat..I really can't express my joy as a tomcat fan....!
Glad you enjoyed it and thanks for commenting!
We all fell in love with the Tomcat!♥😻♥
She'll never be forgotten. 😼
She never will be🤗@@niko7903
As a child my dad was station at NAS Miramar. We had a picture of us by the hangar that had “Fightertown USA” and F14s parked around it. Definitely a icon amongst jet fighters.
7:24 an optional Fulcrum style hunchback CFT would extend the operational time even further at the cost of RCS.
Of course, this is also inspired by the Super Hornet Block III that's doing similar stuff for a decent increase in operational time.
Love the ST-21 renditions that I took a screenshot of it in every angle. It was a big pleasure to see it animated at last! 💕
One of the best videos you've ever done.
The F14 is my favorite aircraft of all time. And seeing someone give it the TLC it deserves makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
wish this could've been real.
With the thrust vectoring and variable swept wings this would've given the F22 a real run for its money.
Thank you very much! I am glad you enjoyed the video and thanks for being a subscriber!
@@PilotPhotog Your content is awesome.
It's informative and entertaining, and everything is factual or, like this video, is grounded in factual data.
Love the content man and it's great to be subscribed.
Also, the only thing that I think could make the Super Tomcat even better than what's in your presentation.. Is a reworked and fully upgraded AIM54.
Lets not get crazy now. If we’re talking flight abilities, it still wouldnt come close to an F22
@@John_Redcorn_ if an F14 was fully upgraded and modernized like this video suggests it would absolutely give the F22 a problem.
And then if you give it the 5th gen treatment I'd be willing to bet it would be the F14 vs F15 fight all over again. We'd have another 'Anytime Baby'.
@@W1ckedRcL nahh the f22 would still be better
Looks so promising....and super manuverble....and super all
All the best from Cr🌞atia
👍🍀
Thank you so much 😊 greetings from Texas, USA
@@PilotPhotog 👍😊
I cannot describe how much I want this plane to be a reality, the Tomcat deserves to live on!!
6:48 I am convinced that this will be the actual role of the F-15EX backseater - remember that 19M USD Kraken "disorientation" motion sim?
So epic. I think the ST-21 +HMD/AIM-9X and AIM-120's would have been in insanely good 4+ gen strike-fighter. Love the vid and the ST-22 concept!!!!
Thank you and glad you enjoyed the video!
While the AIM-120 is a solid missile, the AIM-54 has a role to fill as well, and the US interception capability suffers from the lack of a replacement.
@@downix I agree with that. I do think the Phoenix would need a massive avionics upgrade though to take it past the "C" model, though.
@@bdh985 they had one planned, which would have included adding a sustainer engine to increase its range to nearly 450 km. That's why the tomcat's last radar update gave it such an extreme range, in anticipation of the upgrade
@@downix
Replacing the AIM-120 with the AIM-54 was correct as the tactics changed from intercepting the missiles, to stopping the bombers from getting in range
However the USN should have go back to AIM-97 missile and used it as base for longer range missile
Pretty cool. The only thing I think you missed is a redesign of the nozzles. As you have them they light up the ir sensors, and a lot of the opposition like long range ir weapons and detection. Fix that and you have a winner.
Consequently, the heat put out by the Russian stealth fighter is a big part of why pilots aren't so worried about it. It's like being in a dark room invisible to everyone except they know where you are because you're holding a torch.
Great video. I get to spend time with a F-14D ST every day. She was aboard the Eisenhower, part of VF-31 the Tomcatters.
You hit nail on the head with this future of a navy legend. Bringing the F-14 to a 5th Gen fighter would be lot than forcing f-35c one engine wonder on the USN.
Your videos have never ceased to amaze me. What great details! Love the ST22 - you should share that with Northrop Grumman - maybe they'll build it for the Navy. They really need it.
The only change I would most likely make is to use the F-22 Raptor's P&W F135 engines that put out 35,000 lbs of thrust or a General Electric that's equivalent to it: I believe the closest being the GE F110-132 which puts out 32,000 lbs of thrust used in late model export F-16's, . From your concept, it's safe to say that the ST22 houses an internal gun on the right side.
Other than that, your concept is absolutely beautiful. Thanks again.
The P&W F135 engines are actually the F-35's engines and are 42k pounds of thrust class engines. The F-22's engines are the P&W F119.
And yes, P&W F135 engines on an F-14, any variant really, is not only possible (they are slightly smaller than the GE-F110 in the B/D model F-14's), but would be absolutely RIDICULOUS. The P&W F135 engines produce as much thrust in military power as the GE F110 does in AFTERBURNER, and in Afterburner would give a 75k pound (fully loaded A2G loadout, by the way) Tomcat a thrust to weight ratio in excess of 1:1.
That'd be a super cruising (as in, like Mach 1.6-1.8 range) F-14 with an engine in common with the F-35C already on the carrier. Pretty crazy engine, to be honest.
What a formidable platform this could’ve been ❤️👍
Man, if only. I’ve been fascinated with the F-14 for almost 40 years. I live near Barksdale Air Force Base. Home of the B-52s and the Strategic Air Command. When planes started flying into buildings, President Bush was taken to Barksdale, so it’s a major base. I’m sure there’s multiple Nukes, from at least 2 countries, but on the upside we get Airshows every year. I’ve seen the Blue Angels, and the Thunder Birds. They’re the featured performances, but they had f-14s out there from time to time, despite being a navy plane. It’s the kinda bleep, that will really get you fired up. Being able to check them out in the first person was mind blowing as a young fella. Seeing the SR-71 up close and personal was also an amazing experience, but through it all the F-14 remains my favorite jet fighter of all time. The F4 Corsair is my favorite prop fighter/cas attack plane, and deserves to be distinguished separately from the jet fighters. This was an excellent video, and I’m sorry I’m nearly a year late to the party, but thank you for making the vid. The SU-57 in TopGun2 wouldn’t have stood a chance (well maybe a little bit of a chance) against the SuperCat you’ve concocted here. Bravo sir!
The final design looks sick, a thing to mention is that probably the engines would be way closer, or even maybe just one single engine, as the separation the engines had in the tomcat where part of the reason it usually flatspined, nowadays every twin engined plane has both engines together!
Tell that to the Russians. They *love* their Sukhoi wide engine split shenanigans.
Having the engines separated would allow a larger weapons bay and allow offsetting of intakes inwards to mask fan fins.
@@ivorbrae Oh, i absolutely forgot about the weapons bay (ironic being one of the most powerful stealth technics), but i have to ask, wouldn't it be similar to the raptor that has both engines super close to one another?
@@ShinZoraYT I'm definitely no expert, but I do believe the Raptor has a reasonably limited stealth config payload. The old Tomcat used to house 4 massive AIM-54 tucked between the engines. There might have been the opportunity to house a lot of modern AMRAAMs or MK80s internally.
Your ST-21 is something out of like Ace Combat or Project Wingman. *I LOVE IT.* Also, I would love for you to do the ATD-X/X-2 Shinshin
That is an awesome concept design. Honestly, I always thought the 5th gen upgrade concepts like this and the F-15SE Stealth Eagle were a better solution than the adoption of 5th gen fighters. Could you make a futurized version of the A-10 Thunderbolt II?
Username checks out...thank you and let me see what I can put together!
@@PilotPhotog I'll up the ante to keep you busy. See what would happen if you folded in some 5th gen tech into the F-20 Tigershark!
@@GrizzAxxemann As an F-20 simp myself I would be delighted as well. Same goes for the A-10 and perhaps the F-16.
A-10 yeah baby 🤩🤩🤩🤩
The concepts for the Stealth Eagle were amazing.
Almost F22 performance for 65% the price per airframe.(projected)
A far betting option in my opinion.
The navy had a love hate relationship with the F14.
The pilots might have loved it but the admirals didn't.
They were physically heavy and were maintenance hogs.
They wanted something smaller and cheaper that could fill more than the air superiority role convincingly.
Also, I heard a few of them ended up working for Boeing as consultants, I'm sure the fact the killed any F14 development had nothing to do with it at all.
The Tomcat is one of my favorite planes and I have known two pilots who flew them. Just magnificent aircraft, however, their fatal flaw, the one thing which doomed this fantastic plane was maintenance. The F-14 required more hours of maintenance vs. flight hours than any other aircraft in the navy and they were expensive to repair. On top of that the F-14 was like a modern P-47 Thunderbolt, a seriously massive plane for a fighter.
I have been reading up on the Super Tomcat 21 since seeing articles in magazines since 1992. Grumman did address the maintenance and reliability as part of the Super Tomcat 21 design. It would not have lowered it to the same level as the F/A-18, but it would have been a huge improvement.
This is interesting as I have heard from a few pilots that as long as you flew them routinely they never broke down, in the same way a diesel truck requires routine use.
actually, the EA-6 required more. Also, a lot of people use the A in comparisons as opposed to the D. During the years when it was getting full support, it required 17 mmh/fh and that was trending down.
@@tararaboomdiay7442 Sorry, but that is nonsense and confirmed nonsense by two pilots, one of which is on RUclips. The F-14D had serious maintenance hours on average, the engines could explode if you were unskilled on the aircraft, and they were almost impossible to pull out of a flat spin. The F-18 is a better aircraft because per pilots who flew both aircraft, the 18 you can get right in and fly, very little prep, very little maint. vs. flight time compared to the Tomcat. Also, the Tomcat was never designed to be an attack platform so when the 14 was running anything but clean, it's performance was seriously hampered. As a fighter / interceptor the 14 was the best plane the Navy ever fielded, but it was a middling strike aircraft which was very expensive to maintain and required the very best pilots to fly them successfully. IMO though every carrier should have a single CAP squadron of 14's for interceptor role exclusively running clean.
@@chrisweber3379 No it wouldn't have because they wouldn't have changed the airframe. The primary reason why it was such a hangar queen was because of the complex airframe, and adding more technologies on top of that would've arguably made maintenance a lot worse.
The ST22 would've been the ultimate Tomcat, and a gorgeous fighter at that!
However, some folks in the navy had gotten a bug (or a hornet) up their butt, and wanted a single airframe to do everything. They would also never come up with the funding for a Tomcat replacement.
Wasn't the Navy, the Navy loved the Tomcat and wanted to build off of its airframe like what has been done with the superhornet. Dick Chaney had some sort of stock or money in having the Hornet in production instead of the Tomcat. Politics and money always win
f-14 was expensive as hell, was basically like the f-22 of the time ($38 million in the 70s, which is over $200 million nowadays). Imagine if the main naval aircraft was the f-22 and you'll get an idea of why they wanted to go for a cheaper option
@@jrolla1858 Boeing lobbying, to this day, continues to make the decisions too. Even in the trials for example, the Grumman YF-23 solidly beat the YF-22, but still wasn’t awarded a contract. The Super Hornet still can’t accomplish anywhere near the job of air supremacy the old Tomcat’s could. It’s all about whose hand gets greased the most.
@@jrolla1858 They could have upgraded the F-14 Tomcat if they really wanted to! I know it was high maintenance, but they could have redesigned it to where it's not high maintenance like they did the F-18 Super Hornet! I know the military could afford it if they could build the F-22 and F-35 from scratch and send billions of dollars to Ukraine! I'm surprised a foreign country did not reverse-engineer the F-14 and created a more advanced version!
Navy fought tooth and nail for the Tomcat. They had representatives making rounds of the Pentagon with Grumman to show presentations. It was Bush administration (Dick Cheney in particular) who was in the pocket of the Hornet mafia. From someone who was involved in the Navy group going to Pentagon, Cheney would not even listen to what Grumman was proposing and how much superior Tomcat was to the concept Super Hornet at the time. Dick Cheney drove Grumman into bankruptcy by preventing new contracts for Grumman drying up all of their business. They ended up spending $5 billion in the Super Hornet development and ended up with something that ended up being a master of none where the F-14D proved to be superior in many ways to the Super Hornet (when F-14D development cost a fraction of that), let alone the ST-21.
This is still one of my favourite aircraft. Totally rebuilding a new aircraft is insanity. Building on a known and trusted platform is cost effective and less re-orientation for its users. I think the Navy would have saved billions if they have stuck with the Tomcats. Now they are doing this for the Hornets, which in all honesty is never a great replacement for the Tomcats
AN/AAQ-37 DAS (Distributed Aperture System) would complement the thrust vectoring and stealth features you already have included. Aircraft & ground target tracking, missile cueing, and incoming missile tracking, plus increased situational awareness and crew comfort (replaces worn NVG's with a HMD) all lead to increased survivability.
The problem i see is The US has played with Thrust vectoring for a LONG time and yet only one official American aircraft uses it the question of why that is the case should be asked. Just adding it to Tick a checkbox may not be as useful as you may expect and may in fact harm some other aspect of an aircraft's performance.
@@silverphinex The US found out through various projects and observing foreign designs that thrust vectoring is expensive both in terms of design and manufacturing and of limited usefulness in most engagements. The fact that it is also difficult to do while retaining low observable characteristics pretty much precludes any US 5th gen from having anything more than the F-22's 2d thrust vectoring. A 4++ design like PilotPhotog's Super Tomcat 22 here might find it beneficial.
@@Orphican i find your answer funny in two ways one the Vectoring thrust is both Expensive and mechanically complex. And everyone's whine about the original 14 is that the swing wing made the aircraft Mechanically complex and expensive to maintain. I mean i still like the concept dont get me wrong.
If you want a wonder do it all plane i think its better for it to be larger so that later you have more physical space for upgrades. That in my opinion was the largest drawback of the F/A-18 was its relatively small size until they went to the 18E. Tho from my understanding the lions share of issues the 14 had where Electrical not mechanical in nature from what i understood the 14 was pretty reliable mechanically.
@@militavia-air-defense-aircraft you can do things to reduce the Radar signature of any airframe it just massively lowers the tolerances you have to build to the B1 lancer while not a Stealth bomber like the B2 does have a Reduced RCS due to the geometry of the aircraft
Sadly, this is just gonna stay in our dream forever, but what a beautiful yet formidable fighter if this would be exist... love the Tomcat
Sounds like it still would have been developed from a clean sheet of paper, which is actually good. Legacy Cats were getting to be maintenance nightmares for ground crews. I lived in San Diego, and Cats would occasionally fall out of the air, much to the surprise of the pilots.
Possibilities equal stunning. The alignment of sweepable wing with empennage horizontal plane appears amazing in your presentation along with much info re mission and armament.
Thank You.
5th gen tomcat would have been everything we needed for decades.
My favorite video of yours yet, love having the fantastic visuals to go along with the theoretical fighter!
Glad you enjoyed it, thank you!
love the 22 , looks like a very cleaned up Tomcat . Wales UK.
Thanks 👍
Only if they would've made the Super Cat, top gun three would already be out in theater's
From what I have heard the fate of the Tomcat was already sealed when TOP GUN (1) was released and the F18 was implemented. The Navy wanted a promotional movie for new recruits without giving any vital information about their current weapon's systems. So basiclly "Top Gun" was already obsolescent when it came out.
@@yesyesyesyes1600 Also the F-18 isn't exactly a panty dropper like the Tomcat is.
For years, your ST22 imagary is EXACTLY what I dreamed the Tomcat could and should have been. Thanks!
I would lose the conventional vertical tails and def have thrust vectoring. Awesome video
Amazing video. 👍
ST-21 could have been a amazing aircraft.
Very nice imagination and concept design skills...... That looks like something that could have been done.
Thank you very much!
It brings a tear to my eye knowing that the "22" concept will never be made.... :'( But what a capable aircraft it would be!!!
Indeed and thank you for commenting
What an expensive aircraft it would have been. You're talking something that would cost more than an F-35 to produce xD
@@dragonbutt and less aircraft per carrier due to how big it is. Hornets and 35s are better-more aircraft=more sorties=more flexibility
I love this video.👏👍
I would add anti missile laser pods. I also think we should call it the F-41 Tomcat II.
Like most young boys of the late 70s/ early 80s, i was extremely fascinated by fighter jets. I didn't have the attention span to attend college so i enlisted as aviation Machinist's mate (jet mech) in 1992. In 1994, I was transferred mid westpac to a carrier from a frigate. My first day on board, i went to the hangar to perform rust control on our sh60s. There were rows and rows of f18s packed in and at the front of the hangar were the most beautiful birds i have ever seen, the tomcats. A thing i noticed was that they were HUGE. Just 2 took up the area of 6 folded 18s. Not much rust prevention done that day :)
The stealthy version has aerodynamic compromises which I would loathe to adopt. Specifically the channel between the engine ducts on the F-14 created a lifting body which eased stress on the wings. Sukhoi made use of the feature with the Su-27 family right up to the Su-57. Even the MiG-29 family of aircraft does this.
I agree it's a logical place for a weapons bay in a stealth platform, but what does it do to low speed performance and landing speeds? There's a push in American design to sacrifice aerodynamic gains to stealth. There's also a push to place artificial bandaids (FBW, thrust vectoring, and rather optimistic weapons suits) dating back to the F-4. The idea being technology will make a bad airframe work well enough. Trouble is the first things any plane needs to do is fly, and fly well. When compromised aerodynamics loses the advantage of technology crutches, it is a dirt-dart in short order.
I would add diverter less intake to your list. Good for stealth, but very performance limiting for an interceptor role. Could do better with f22/Su54 type intakes.
Yeah. Maybe adoption of a few features to slightly reduce observability but aerodynamic compromise maybe too great with internal weapon bay. My question is what is the proposed role of the super Tomcat here? Is a variable geometry winged plane compatible with stealthy designs? My understanding of F14 is that it offer high top speed, long loitering time or range, large payload and geared towards a BVR fight. So why not focus on improving its core. Give it improved engines without the thrust vectoring, updates its radars and avionics, add more fuel storage and couple it with a newer even longer range missile. Being loud, brash, flying at top speed chucking long range missiles is hell of a distraction.
@@akhtarahtesham i think the design here is using a YF23 styled S duct design and its boundary layer control system. You are right that a DSI wouldve limited it to below mach 2 performance.
@@syjiang yet what does Mach 2 performance gain a fighter? How many pilots have exceeded Mach 2 as a regular practice? Supercruise is another issue, but Mach 2 appears to be a practical ceiling for manned fighters. the YF-23 was faster than the YF-22, yet it didn't exceed Mach 2. At least the test pilots aren't willing to admit it. Every Mach 3 interceptor the West has tried to adopt (F-103, F-108, F-12A) has been rejected on operational and unit costs. And is there anyone who thinks a Mach 3 interceptor could operate effectively from an aircraft carrier? The Tomcat is the only thing that could come close, and that's because we know they can land on a carrier, even if no Tomcat ever reported moving above Mach 2.4 or so. The specification that would attract my attention is: heavy payload, nimble, can exceed Mach 2, supercruise, stressed airframe for +9g, ability to intercept hypersonic weapons, carrier rated, and all-weather capable. Stealth would be nice, but it would probably do to be "hard-to-see" instead of "can-not-see". Having a few of these quietly roving around a fleet swatting down threats, reliably launching and landing on the carrier would be a good investment.
@@Kabayoth Its useful for lobbing long range missile. At higher altitude and higher speed at launch, the missile retain more kinetic energy to maneuver. Im just highlighting that the original design spec the navy put out called for a Mach 2+. I imagine it imposed too much penalty on the design so now speed is less emphasized.
The F14 Tomcat was a great aircraft!! I followed it from its mock-up all the way to its Navy retirement. Iran is even still flying it!! The Navy is missing a fighter now with a long flight time. The advanced Tomcat could have filled the need.
Iran is even still flying it!!!
And VERY recently Iranian officials said that they have a new program to develop a new heavy air fighter based on the F-14 architecture... SO...
This video may give to the Iranians a good starting point for they next endeavor...
SADLY....
Still could.
The Iranian export version is pale version of the Tomcat the avionics and flight argumentation systems where downgraded and sub-standard to Navy specifications I worked on the undelivered aircraft at Point Mugu pilots hated flying it and Grumman could not get up to Navy Specs with spending millions to do it.
What could’ve been. The navy will always need a long range fighter and attack craft, especially in an era of renewed peer competitors. And it would’ve been great for us Long Islanders
Indeed and thanks for commenting!
Yeah they lost allot of capability when they got rid of the Tomcat, Prowlers and especially the vikings. They need a longer range loitering plane that can push out their protection/early warning bubble that you just don't get in the Super hornet. Also I don't think using the Super hornet as a tanker is not something ANYONE would call efficient.
Perhaps the Navy should expand their operating budget to allow for more types on the carriers so they can get back those capabilities they lost and their not getting back with F-35s. I know they are working on a refueling drone but something like a new version of the Viking is what they really need IMO. A new version of the viking could be a long range antiship/sub, ECW and refuling platform plus a drone controller with a 4 man crew. Somehow using F-35 pilots as drone controllers seems like its going to over burden pilots who should be concerned with flying their planes.
@@loganholmberg2295 You’re definitely on point. These new platforms can carry multiple capabilities with the miniaturization of electronics along with the networking
That is literally the sickest jet ever. Miss the tomcat so much. Was me and my father's favorite at airshows
I loved working on all three variants of the Tomcat with due respect for how much of a pain in the butt it was at times. I wish the art concept design you had on here would have come to fruition. The Tomcat is and always will be tge best machine the Navy ever had.
Add a DAS system, engine nozzle and fluidic thrust vectoring, self-defense hard-kill countermeasures, side lobe radars, skin integrated l-band transmit/receivers, weapons bay laser pod/turret, towed decoy, anti-iR stealth coating. A 100k+ ft high-altitude capability (ala mig-31).
Adding Celestial Navigation, Fluidic thrust vectoring, fly-by-light systems, and a cranked arrow wing design would further enhance the ST22's abilities & lower maintenance cost.
The F-14 also inspired an entire series of anime/toys that persist in anime culture today - the venerable VF-1A/J/S
The f-14 is amazing.
That was a beautiful rendering of the Tomcat evolutions 😍
I said it once and I'll say it again, the tomcat and warthog are the animals of the sky!!! No questions asked.
Im way late to watching this video, but i love the modelling you used for the beloved Tomcat, especially the final evolution.. as to your question, my main input to upgrading the Tomcat would at least be FBW controls so even we never got the Advanced Super Tomcat, at least it would be more controllable. Also, maybe increase its structural strength to make it 9G-tolerant rather than just 7.5.. lovely video my man!
Thank you and thanks for commenting...I forgot to mention the FBW and the 20mm gun, both of which would be part of the ST22...and this won't be the last you see of the ST22 on this channel. Cheers!
In sept 74 I was onboard Enterprise making the first wartime cruise with the F-14. It's first time at bat was mediocre at best. It spent a significant portion of that cruise grounded. I was there, I know.
It was a great plane once it shook off it's "Infant Mortality" issues. It certainly is the best fighter the Navy ever had. The AWG-9 weapons system in combo with the Phoenix Missile was incredible.
I keep hearing that the Phoenix saw very little use and that over 77% of the few that have been fired never hit or tracked on to their intended targets... is this true?
The F14 Tomcat still has a special place in my heart. Lol😊
It will always be Tomcat Thursday on this channel - check the community page when you get a chance and thank you for commenting!
I never thought the tomcat could be more awesome! Great video. 👍
Thanks! 👍
That stealth Tomcat is badass. I want that white ST-21 for my personal plane.
GOD I wish this happened, would have been incredible to see the upgraded Cat flying....
I love it. The ST-22 would be a melding of two legendary airframes, and an upgrade to both….provided stealth isn’t compromised.
Stealth definitely wouldn't be amazing with his aircraft but it looks badass
Just imagine Maverick flying one of these in Top Gun Mavrick against the Su-57s
I always thought the VF-1 Valkyrie would have been the ultimate Tomcat upgrade, but man your concept would still have given any adversary such as the Zentradi major trouble on any battlefield
Was waiting for someone to make a Macross/Robotech reference! I have to say though, the ST-22 concept as shown here bears more of a resemblance to an Alpha/Shadow fighter than a VF-1 IMO
That was an interesting back thought to its potential. It would have been cheaper if we needed a stop gap in viable planes by extending the program with upgrades while producing the new 4th gen. I like the option of the copilot role with drones, bringing a larger, inexpensive role of air support and nearly pushing into 5th gen market.
The F14D was already the equivalent of the F15E, and word is that grunts on the ground during OEF much preferredthe the bomb cat over anything else that they had on air.
I remember the F-14 flying over us for air support in OEF. Loved that plane almost as much as the A-10.
Even the F-14A had the ground attack capability of the A-7 Corsair II. I learned that from the "TOMCAsT" podcast.
The B and D models gained the use of the Lantirn targeting pod, they didn't need the optical pod as the F-14 was already equipped with an onboard camera system.
Id add Canard wings for better lift off and climb control. Also build a modular ram jet for higher altitude flight and short boost when encountering missile lock ons. A short EMP burst for anti missiles. Cloak rear engine outlets. For better heat signature. Dissipation. All this on the new F-14 22.
Just wanted to say that you have a hell of a skill to build and design these, to program even for these short videos is no small task. Congratulations for this alone.
Next, that lady herself, is one fine Cat! Sexy, sleek, looks like it would RIP the guts out of any other plane in the sky, what a heartbreaker!
Very nice research. It's an iconic fighter.
Thank you much appreciated!
The back seater acting as awacs/drone wingman is genius
I would add, Conformal fuel tanks, and maybe stealth pods that house even more missiles/bombs, since carring capacity was one of the greatest assets the tomcat had. (Honesty dont know why it hasnt already been made but ok).
The major drawback i can see with the tomcat maintaining stealth tho, is the swing wing. You would have to ensure stealth would be maintained throughout the swing process. Unless it wasnt a true stealth aircraft like the F-22 or F-35, maybe like a semi-stealth 5- instead of 5 or 5+. Just things to consider. The F-14 should have never been replaced by the hornet. Complemented, but not replaced. Imo. Because look at the sacrifices the hornet airframe is having to make to stay in the fight, and the roles its now having to field. Maybe im just biased cuz im old school. But i stand by my opinion. Just like the F-16XL should have been produced, as well as the F-16 carrier variant. But what do i know.
But where would the conformal fuel tanks even go?
@@dragonbutt you can put them in the same place as the F-16V or under the speed brake between the vertical tail stabilizers.
What opponents has the F-18 hornet and super hornet had to fight though? It seems the USN made the correct call for time, that they didn't expect to fight a near peer adversary for another decade plus. This meant they could get away with not having to field a bleeding edge fighter. Can't defend how they spent any of the money saved though. The LCS travesty should have gotten people fired. The billions wasted on going cutting edge on the Seawolf, Zumwalt, and Ford could have paid for a new fighter.
@@militavia-air-defense-aircraft you can add a internal weapons bay to the F-14 airframe, it has tons of room for modifications like that, and by stealth weapons pods, was in reference to having a 3/4 missile pod that has a shell around it that is stealth shape and coated, with a side release door for deployment.
@@EliteF22 the F-14 still has more hardpoints than the F-18 ever could. Even with fighting non-peer enemies, the loitering time, range, and payload the F-14 offers way more benefits than the F-18 ever could. The F-14 is just a superior aircraft all the way around when compared to the F-18. The new block III F-18s still cant offer the USN the right aircraft that it needs. Idk, i just think there were better options available without retiring the F-14. Congress and the DoD saw something new and flashy and made yet another poor decision. Its a common trend since the 60s.
It's a damn shame Dick Chaney was hellbent on killing the Tomcat, if he didn't the F-14 would have been modernized and still kicking ass
The tomcat is by far the most beautiful plane ever built. Followed closely by the f3 tornado.
@PilotPhotog Another great video on the legendary F-14 Tomcat! Love the 3d graphics of the stealthy F-14 and the ASF-14/Tomcat 21 as a way to show what could’ve been had the Navy kept it service. However, once again you failed to talk about (did not talk about this in the first Tomcat video months ago either) how the USMC almost became the second service to fly the Tomcat; farther than the Air Force ever got. The Marines went so far as to send prospective pilots and RIO's, as well as enlisted to train up on the Tomcat at Navy air bases (Miramar, CA and Oceana, VA I think), slated for delivery to fighter squadrons around 1975-76. Due to the post-Vietnam drawdown and other problems (wasn't cleared to drop bombs yet I think), the Marine Corps never got to fly the F-14.
A second topic not talked about are two capabilities added to the Tomcat's toolbox that made it even more unique: TARPS (Tactical Airborne Reconnaissance Pod System) and LANTIRN (Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night). Both pods gave the Tomcat the ability to perform reconnaissance (with TARPS) and to finally drop bombs (with LANTIRN), giving it the nickname "Bombcat". Perhaps a third video with these honorable mentions in the future?
This is dope as hell. I really feel that they failed the Tomcat in a major way, the F-22 is WAAAAAY to expensive, and the F-35 is alright. The fact that you gave the RIO more to do, including piloting drones, that is awesome. I would make a single seat variant, but I like what you've done.
What would I change? Easy, replace the engines on the "AST-22" with the P&W F135 engines from the F-35. These engines, combined, would produce 84k pounds of thrust and are no bigger than the GE-F110 engines already in the aircraft. The additional thrust would allow for extremely high super cruise and fuel efficiencies while sharing parts commonality with the F-35A and F-35C. The F-14D weighed in at about 76k at max load... so, greater than 1:1 TWR while fully loaded could be achieved... it'd make an F-15 envious of the TWR. I'd take the sensor suite out of an F-35 as well down to the radar controller. Only change would be the larger AESA array. Again, for as much commonality as possible.
The last major change I would make is move the rudders and vertical stabs forward to reduce the propensity for rudder stall during "flat" spins. Kind of like the Hornet's have. I think you could also fit way more than four AIM-120's in an internal bay of an F-14. They'll stack three wide in the current tunnel as is, never mind if you had the entire depth of the aircraft to work with.
Excellent suggestions and thanks for commenting!
Well, the F-135 would require extensive modification of airframe. Originally the F-119 or 120 were purposed.
The AST 22 would more likely share parts bin with F-22 doe to time consideration.
@@JMiskovsky the F135 is effectively the same size as the TF30 and GE F110 already in the F14. It actually sits just between the two in diameter and length while being significantly lighter.
Besides, the AST22 would never have been current F14 airframes. It'd been a new build from the ground up.
@@Whiskey11Gaming OK. I tougjt that diameter was much larger. Beside new build the Issue is also with time.
Just a note for those mentioning the Super Hornet. The Super Hornet was never meant to replace the Tomcat. The Navy purchased the Super Hornet as a "strike fighter" - a replacement for the A-6 and A-7. The replacement for the Tomcat in fleet defender role was supposed to be a navalized variant of the F-22. The "ultimate final version of the Tomcat" at 4:50 is really just that - a navalized F-22 (except with an additional seat). But that navalized F-22 was never purchased due to costs and the end of the Cold War. One problem I see with the "ultimate final version of the Tomcat" is weight. The F-22 for the USAF ended up being nearly the same weight as the Tomcat and now you want to navalize it, add swing-wings, and a second crewman...
Totally agree with the weight issue you mentioned. A second pilot takes away from gas, which you'll need additional airframe structure to get back. Stealth requirements dictate internal weapons stores, and those increase weight. At the end of the day, landing on a airstrip has minimal considerations for bring back weight. Not so with a naval aircraft.
There was never a naval version of the F-22 planned
I’m sorry that we didn’t get the TomCat upgraded, instead it was sent to Tucson for junk. The F-18 is a good plane but not a great plane like the F-14, was I knew the guys who flew them at Point MUGU , they loved it and it was so nice to see them in the air.
@@jameslittlefield3917 The F/A 18 is miles ahead of the F-14 in service life, maintenance cost, modularity, modern avionics. It's a better plane in just about every way.
@@j4min1 There most certainly was. It was called the Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter 22 (NATF-22) Sea Raptor program. Beginning in 1988. The plan was to create an F-14 style variable-sweep wing version of the F-22 (so that it could fly slowly enough to land on a carrier) for the US Navy. Along with a more robust fuselage and landing gear. So that it could withstand the greater forces of carrier take-offs and landings.
However, the program was cancelled in 1991. As creating a variable-sweep wing version proved to be too complicated, problematic and costly. The US Navy also determined that a naval F-22 would be significantly too expensive for them to operate and maintain. And that beyond its stealth, supercruise and thrust vectoring capabilities. It offered little improvement upon their existing capability with the F-14. As the F-14s had a faster top speed (a crucial factor in carrier defence) and were massively cheaper to operate and maintain.
It was ultimately proven that the US Navy made the right decision. Their assessment regarding the F-22s significantly high operating and maintenance costs was 100% correct. As the F-22 is the most expensive fighter in the world to operate and maintain. Hence why the USAF now only has less than 100 which are operational.
Don’t forget a multi barrel gun. Now’s days ever since man took to the air guns were a important part of either defense or offense weapons. Fighting will be visualized to see who the pilot is fighting.
Your videos are amazing! Awesome script, great narration, excellent visuals, and the research is on point! Well done sir! You'll be up to a million subs in no time I'm sure!
Thank you very much and thanks for being a subscriber!
Awesome!!! Wish it can come back in this form.
It looks great. I think the stabilizer need to be more angled to be more stealth
Fair point and thanks for commenting!
The story I was told was that the Tomcat 21 was up against, and lost out to the F/A-18E/F. One of the biggest factors in the decision was the reliability of the Tomcats versus the Hornets. During the Iraq war, since there was no air superiority required after the first few days, F-14's were relegated to using their high power radar to extend the radar bubble of the carrier battle group. By the end of the day, Hornets were filling the role because the Tomcats were down with issues (typically hydraulic system related).
Another factor was that the Super Hornet would have a lot of system commonality with the smaller Hornets. Gone were the days of throwing money at programs to chase specific capabilities. Instead the overall logistics costs played a much larger role in decision making. I still miss seeing the F-14's flying and the great stories that came with them (like the F-14D whose afterburner set the woods on fire at NAS Lakehurst while testing compatibility with the JBD).
"Gone were the days of throwing money at programs to chase specific capabilities." LOL Yeah the F22 & F35 programs were bargain basement steals.
According to my searches, here are the costs for each:
Plane Program Cost Maintenance Plane Cost
F-14 $1.4 Billion $40K/FlightHour $38M/ea
F-22 $34 Billion $68K/FlightHour $120M/ea
F-35 $1.4 Trillion $36K/FlightHour $91M/ea (average of the 3 variants)
Admittedly, F-14 had its probs. But it also had its abilities that the Navy is now realizing it is woefully lacking. Specifically the F-14's range which the FA-18 and F-35 cannot match. China & Russia's long range anti-ship missiles have exposed a glaringly shortcoming of our current capabilities. It's just a shame that the F-14 didn't get to mature like the other teen fighters (F-15, F-16 & F-18).
Although the sweep wing is one of the most characteristic things of the tomcat, I think I'd replace it with a delta wing because it works at high and low speeds and make it a lot lighter. One of my favourite vids!
I'd use a cranked arrow wing, with active aeroelastic wing technologies & Hemp based bio composites for a stronger, lightweight construction.
@@tankieflanker4119 agree with u
@@tankieflanker4119 and what parts of the aircraft are you suggesting to make out of these Bio Composites the primary structure or replacing the aluminum skins with it
@@silverphinex The skeletal structure would be Titanium, while the skin of the aircraft would be bio-composites.
@@tankieflanker4119 a better reply than I expected the stabilators where boron epoxy and where tested to four times the forces they expected them to encounter and where still unable to break them
Well done. This is an excellent video concerning the Super Tomxat. As for items to add, I am thinking about an infra red viewfinder. Not sure if this was already done. Perhaps there would be an improved Phoenix missile system . Thanks for a great video.
The Super Pheonix but updated with new technologies. Or a custom air to ground version that could repalce the Maveick Missile.
This is interesting 5th generation super tomcat look like this, i would totally agreed. kind a cool honestly