I have seen dozens and agree! The dirty roll was unique to Navy demos. Never see Air Force guys do it. Just like The Dirty loop with gear extended is only done by Blue Angels pilots who don't wear G suits. Best of the best.
onblock7 I would have loved to see a B or Dick model fly with the glove vanes still intact. I was sad to see them not used in the later models. I would be interested in seeing the performance data.
@@dannyboyemt interestingly enough, it DID perform better, but it was such a small amount that the extra maintenance simply didn't justify their use. They were disconnected or welded shut on the early B models and completely removed on late B and D models.
With Captain Dale Snort Snodgrass at the control ‘ he’s capable of doing the impossible with a under powered F-14A Tomcat ‘ that’s Mr Tomcat the best of the best 👍
i find quite interesting the fact that this A model cat has the glove vanes fully operational in 1987 .. i read that they were deactivated/welded due to them deemed unnecesary below high mach speeds.. personally i love the aesthetic of the tomcat with those things..looks really aggressive and badass
This and all other "Snort" flown F-14 demos should be required viewing for all those who state that the Tomcat wasn't very maneuverable or couldn't mix it up with the best in a dogfight. Underpowered in the A variant ,sure, not very maneuverable, I think not.
Even the A variant was not underpowered unless it had a full weapons load with 6 phoenix missiles and was 60,000 lbs+ configuration. Only had a sluggish low end and midgrange and not great throttle response. In zone 5 afterburn, it was a beast. The GE-110 engines fixed that midrange and low end response where the throttle slamming was no longer a big no-non. In Zone 5 afterburn, F-14A could rocket upwards into the vertical while adding energy into the climb. That was the most favorite counter to lightweight fighters at "Top Gun" taught to F-14 pilots to simply climb into the vertical and run the opponent out of energy. It was in part due to the lifting fuselage and extremely low wing loading. An empty F-14 weighed 39,600 lbs and in dog fighting configuration and drop tanks, it weighed just over 50,000 lbs or so. The TF-030 generated 44,000 lbsf of thrust in full Zone 5 afterburn.
@@KLRGT500KR Not entirely accurate... The F14 with TF30's was underpowered compared to the F15 in all flight regimes and payloads ! F14A empty 43735 lbs 41800 lbs of thrust - 1935 F14B empty 43735 lbs 46800 lbs of thrust +3065 F15C empty 28000 lbs 47860 lbs of thrust + 19860 The F14 was just a lot heavier then the F15.. Carrier landing requirements, swing wing, bigger radar, rio in the back, it all had it's cost in weight... Not only was it seriously underpowered , they had compressor fan disk failures and compressor stall problems.. It's a great plane, but , the A was most definitely underpowered for what it was designed and intended to do. There's no chance of it adding energy in the climb with any kind of payload. It would run out. Those counter tactics may have worked against the early days light weight fighters at Topgun when they still flew old A4's and the F5, they did not work later on with the F16N aggressors, or when dealing with F15's or slick Hornets. When the Shah of Iran requested a Fly off demo, the F15 went first, the Tomcat went second, the reason they won the fly off, is because the Tomcat pilot been up in the air, burning the fuel down to as little as 2500 pounds..., just enough fuel for the demo, and was practical on fumes by the time he landed. But it had worked, they did the demo impressed the Shah and that's it, but it was a bit of a cheat... Google "tomcat fly off shah fuel" for the full story.
@@stijnvandamme76 F-14A empty weight was 39,600 lbs. I know about the fly off. F-14 was never chosen because of that "fly off". I can show you source of Iranian pilots who was lead that went to the US to evaluate both the F-14 and F-15 for several months prior to the "fly off". He said, it was absurd to believe billions of dollars were chosen to spend based on just a "fly off". They had evaluated both F-14A and F-15A for several months and decided to go with the F-14A because they were getting better performance and maneuverability out of the F-14A. F-14A had its own advantages and I am only stating the facts. The airframe generated far more lift than that of the F-15 because of the wider "pancake" and variable geometry wings. Also, the F-14 had higher angle of attack capabilities. Did you ever see video turn-rate comparison? Even with the A variant, only the T-bird prep'ed demo specific F-16 had a slightly better turn rate than a slick/clean F-14A. The higher lift/drag ratio especially below 15,000 feet in dense and thick air, allowed F-14 to perform way above what the thrust to weight would suggest. Also, F-14 B/D made 56,400 lbsf of thrust, which rose to 60,400 lbsf of thrust at Mach 0.8. F-14 B/D had a similar thrust to weight as the F-15 Eagle and had better maneuverability at slow speeds. In a vertical scissor fight, the B/D version according to pilots went toe-to-toe with the Eagle. The F-14 in all variants would do double immelmans all day while the Hornet could not do double immelmans as per NATOPS due to energy bleed/drag/lack of thrust. Hornet was grossly underpowered because the TW only is static on the dyno. Drag and airflow change the game as the speed increases. Those engines were tiny on the Hornet with those tiny inlets. They did not benefit from 'ram effect' like the Tomcat did. Even the A version in a vertical scissor fight had a field day with Hornets.
At 7:07, for a plane that's underpowered and "not really a fighter" in the words of a former navy admiral, the Tomcat performed that 360 in twenty seconds! And how many other jet fighters do you see performing touch and goes like the one at 9:45? In my opinion it is the best designed jet fighter that ever flew, with apologies to no one.
Less than 20 seconds. More like 17 - 18 seconds. About 400 - 450 knots speed and the distance is only 1300 feet officially for an F-14 do a full 360 degree turn. Also, notice how it is pulling almost 9g in turns. It could easily go sustained over the 7.5g limit. The F-14 was extremely maneuverable due to a lifting body and variable geometry wing.
@@xfiazc07 True. I heard an F-14D pilot say, only the Viper had the capability to potentially out-rate the F-14. He could out-rate both the F-15 and Hornet.
Nice clean video! Love the extended glove vanes and vortices coming off the wings in that wing back min radius turn ! The bow and spoiler wave took me back to 1989 at NAS Moffett Field seeing the Tomcat do it's bow in person.
I remember watching his demo at the 1985 Pratt & Whitney airshow (Rentschler Field in East East Hartford, CT). Was a cloudy/misty day - the ceiling lifted just enough to permit his demonstration. I had never seen an F-14 before. The low ceiling magnified the noise. What a show! I'll never forget. Note the field is long closed and has been repurposed to accommodate the UCONN Football stadium.
I was there in 1987 as an 7 year kid. My dad was stationed there and we went every year. I stared at the f14 as if it was a naked woman. My favorite plane. I used to ride my bike to the runways edge and watch these birds take off and land.
That turn he did with the wings swept back. That Tomcat with the wings swept back stalls at 195-200 knots according to a pilot who had to land with the wings swept back. So 180 deg in about 6 second, adjust for the accelerated stall, means he entered the turn above 500 knots, Snort just put the big fighter into a 9+g turn
'Snort' unofficially would pull 7.5 - 9 g in shows especially while doing turn-and-burn in the 80s when the rules were more relaxed for these low altitude demos (no vertical separation for correction). Tomcat airframe was built like a tank and could eat up Gs easily. Only issue was, the turnbuckles for the engine mounts used to get elongated from circular due to excessive G loads in air demos. But, they were easily replaced.
I’d say that looked like a “get out of jail” move cos his roll rate looked like it definitely increased as he bottomed out of the roll and got probably closer to the ground than he would have liked.
@@KLRGT500KR I read the theoretical breaking point of the Tomcat was 13g+. But it's not the wings that would break or the aircraft it was the engines ripping out of their nacelles. It was a crazy strong aircraft.
@@dannyboyemtdepends on the load-out, fuel load, where the mass is distributed. Etc. Most USAF and USN aircraft of that era had a "limit load" of 7-1/3g and an "ultimate load" of 11g But this was with a defined amount of fuel, whether that be full internal, no drop tanks, two missiles. Or in the case of the F-16, 9g with only half tank of internal fuel and two wingtip mounted missiles. Like I said, if you remove the fuel it can pull more G without breaking. But the F-16 digital fly by wire system limits you for pilot safety and structural fatigue. Its why the F-16 suffered so many ground impacts because the pilot was unable to He-man to 11g+ to save his own acc.
Наука
This was thee best Demo I have ever seen done by a Navy pilot in an F-14 TOMCAT.
And in the A variant as well
I have seen dozens and agree! The dirty roll was unique to Navy demos.
Never see Air Force guys do it. Just like The Dirty loop with gear extended is only done by Blue Angels pilots who don't wear G suits. Best of the best.
Dale was in love with F-14. He understood how to fly well and extract everything for that airframe.
Right on. He was an exceptionally good pilot and at the end he had over 4800 h with the F-14.
Rest in peace Dale Snodgrass . 🙏
R.I.P Dale 'Snort' Snodgrass. Forever best of the best!
Absolutely amazing display,the ultimate F-14 flown by a legend R.I.P Dale Snodgrass
Loved seeing the old wing glove vanes out as well on the older cats, made it look cooler if that was even possible.....
onblock7 I would have loved to see a B or Dick model fly with the glove vanes still intact. I was sad to see them not used in the later models. I would be interested in seeing the performance data.
dannyboyemt Dick model XD
@@dannyboyemt interestingly enough, it DID perform better, but it was such a small amount that the extra maintenance simply didn't justify their use. They were disconnected or welded shut on the early B models and completely removed on late B and D models.
@@reapertalon They made possible to fly 7.5 g turns at mach 2, so they affected significantly. But it was seen that it was not necessary.
With Captain Dale Snort Snodgrass at the control ‘ he’s capable of doing the impossible with a under powered F-14A Tomcat ‘ that’s Mr Tomcat the best of the best 👍
Snort loved the Tomcat, and was a great leader! RIP
I love the tomcat! I wish the Navy will have an updated version of the F-14 without alternating the airframe much.
i find quite interesting the fact that this A model cat has the glove vanes fully operational in 1987 .. i read that they were deactivated/welded due to them deemed unnecesary below high mach speeds..
personally i love the aesthetic of the tomcat with those things..looks really aggressive and badass
I think they were deployed with the swing wing mechanism but I'm not an expert
This and all other "Snort" flown F-14 demos should be required viewing for all those who state that the Tomcat wasn't very maneuverable or couldn't mix it up with the best in a dogfight. Underpowered in the A variant ,sure, not very maneuverable, I think not.
Agreed. A truly amazing aircraft.
Frank S Snort really did know how to push the Tomcat to her limits. No finer fighter ever flew!
Even the A variant was not underpowered unless it had a full weapons load with 6 phoenix missiles and was 60,000 lbs+ configuration. Only had a sluggish low end and midgrange and not great throttle response. In zone 5 afterburn, it was a beast. The GE-110 engines fixed that midrange and low end response where the throttle slamming was no longer a big no-non. In Zone 5 afterburn, F-14A could rocket upwards into the vertical while adding energy into the climb. That was the most favorite counter to lightweight fighters at "Top Gun" taught to F-14 pilots to simply climb into the vertical and run the opponent out of energy. It was in part due to the lifting fuselage and extremely low wing loading. An empty F-14 weighed 39,600 lbs and in dog fighting configuration and drop tanks, it weighed just over 50,000 lbs or so. The TF-030 generated 44,000 lbsf of thrust in full Zone 5 afterburn.
@@KLRGT500KR Not entirely accurate...
The F14 with TF30's was underpowered compared to the F15 in all flight regimes and payloads !
F14A empty 43735 lbs 41800 lbs of thrust - 1935
F14B empty 43735 lbs 46800 lbs of thrust +3065
F15C empty 28000 lbs 47860 lbs of thrust + 19860
The F14 was just a lot heavier then the F15.. Carrier landing requirements, swing wing, bigger radar, rio in the back, it all had it's cost in weight... Not only was it seriously underpowered , they had compressor fan disk failures and compressor stall problems..
It's a great plane, but , the A was most definitely underpowered for what it was designed and intended to do.
There's no chance of it adding energy in the climb with any kind of payload. It would run out.
Those counter tactics may have worked against the early days light weight fighters at Topgun when they still flew old A4's and the F5, they did not work later on with the F16N aggressors, or when dealing with F15's or slick Hornets.
When the Shah of Iran requested a Fly off demo, the F15 went first, the Tomcat went second, the reason they won the fly off, is because the Tomcat pilot been up in the air, burning the fuel down to as little as 2500 pounds..., just enough fuel for the demo, and was practical on fumes by the time he landed. But it had worked, they did the demo impressed the Shah and that's it, but it was a bit of a cheat...
Google "tomcat fly off shah fuel" for the full story.
@@stijnvandamme76 F-14A empty weight was 39,600 lbs. I know about the fly off. F-14 was never chosen because of that "fly off". I can show you source of Iranian pilots who was lead that went to the US to evaluate both the F-14 and F-15 for several months prior to the "fly off". He said, it was absurd to believe billions of dollars were chosen to spend based on just a "fly off". They had evaluated both F-14A and F-15A for several months and decided to go with the F-14A because they were getting better performance and maneuverability out of the F-14A. F-14A had its own advantages and I am only stating the facts. The airframe generated far more lift than that of the F-15 because of the wider "pancake" and variable geometry wings. Also, the F-14 had higher angle of attack capabilities. Did you ever see video turn-rate comparison? Even with the A variant, only the T-bird prep'ed demo specific F-16 had a slightly better turn rate than a slick/clean F-14A. The higher lift/drag ratio especially below 15,000 feet in dense and thick air, allowed F-14 to perform way above what the thrust to weight would suggest. Also, F-14 B/D made 56,400 lbsf of thrust, which rose to 60,400 lbsf of thrust at Mach 0.8. F-14 B/D had a similar thrust to weight as the F-15 Eagle and had better maneuverability at slow speeds. In a vertical scissor fight, the B/D version according to pilots went toe-to-toe with the Eagle. The F-14 in all variants would do double immelmans all day while the Hornet could not do double immelmans as per NATOPS due to energy bleed/drag/lack of thrust. Hornet was grossly underpowered because the TW only is static on the dyno. Drag and airflow change the game as the speed increases. Those engines were tiny on the Hornet with those tiny inlets. They did not benefit from 'ram effect' like the Tomcat did. Even the A version in a vertical scissor fight had a field day with Hornets.
At 7:07, for a plane that's underpowered and "not really a fighter" in the words of a former navy admiral, the Tomcat performed that 360 in twenty seconds! And how many other jet fighters do you see performing touch and goes like the one at 9:45? In my opinion it is the best designed jet fighter that ever flew, with apologies to no one.
Alec Hall Wasn't that awesome?
Less than 20 seconds. More like 17 - 18 seconds. About 400 - 450 knots speed and the distance is only 1300 feet officially for an F-14 do a full 360 degree turn. Also, notice how it is pulling almost 9g in turns. It could easily go sustained over the 7.5g limit. The F-14 was extremely maneuverable due to a lifting body and variable geometry wing.
@@KLRGT500KR 19 seconds and still coulda been tighter if it really had to. I timed it twice. Tighter than the Eagle or Hornet !
@@xfiazc07 True. I heard an F-14D pilot say, only the Viper had the capability to potentially out-rate the F-14. He could out-rate both the F-15 and Hornet.
@@KLRGT500KR isn't 17-18 LESS than 20? That's what the OP said. "Less than 20"
12:45 the bow and wings flapping were the cherry on the cake
Greatest fighter ever made
I agree with you
Nice clean video! Love the extended glove vanes and vortices coming off the wings in that wing back min radius turn ! The bow and spoiler wave took me back to 1989 at NAS Moffett Field seeing the Tomcat do it's bow in person.
This is beautiful! Thank you so much, OP!
I remember watching his demo at the 1985 Pratt & Whitney airshow (Rentschler Field in East East Hartford, CT). Was a cloudy/misty day - the ceiling lifted just enough to permit his demonstration. I had never seen an F-14 before. The low ceiling magnified the noise. What a show! I'll never forget. Note the field is long closed and has been repurposed to accommodate the UCONN Football stadium.
I remember seeing an F 14 go supersonic on a knife edge pass at NAS MIRAMAR in the 80s. Windows shattered.
Fightertown was great back in the day.
Gorgeous Tomcat. I used to have its model size back in the 90s. I miss it.
Glove vanes out - look at how he comes out of that knife edge wing sweep pass. So nice
Doing fantastic approaches with TF30 engine.
RIP Capt ‘Snort’ Snodgrass
Amen
The guy said "are you seeing this!!!" 😂😂😂😂. Snodgrass is the shit 😂😂😂
I was there in 1987 as an 7 year kid. My dad was stationed there and we went every year. I stared at the f14 as if it was a naked woman. My favorite plane. I used to ride my bike to the runways edge and watch these birds take off and land.
The dirty roll is AWESOME!
Never seen an Air Force pilot do one.
Oh my god..
They even had the canards out!!
@1:50 Gary...are u seeing this Hhahahahahahah
Snort is fucking legend!
To this very day, the cameraman is trying to figure out if Gary can see it.
3:13 , 7:06 *TURN THAT BTCH!!!!!!!!!!!!! YEAH!!! RIP SNODGRASS!!! BEST F-14 PILOT EVA!!!* 1:27 , 1:42 F-14 doing a *cobra* 😆😆😆😆😆😆
Beautiful demo!
Gorgeous plane.
The Grim Reapers VF 101
Thank you.
What a beauty! 👍✈️
F-14A the Best Tomcat !
ThE F14 CaN't tUrN
1:24 🤯😎
Beast! 20 sec 360 turn! Not bad...
That turn he did with the wings swept back.
That Tomcat with the wings swept back stalls at 195-200 knots according to a pilot who had to land with the wings swept back.
So 180 deg in about 6 second, adjust for the accelerated stall, means he entered the turn above 500 knots, Snort just put the big fighter into a 9+g turn
個人的な思いですが･･F-14(トムキャット)の姿は、他の気体では以前から活躍してた名機のSR-71(ブラックバード)と、進化を続けてるA
10の強固な機体への進化は例を見ない程の長寿にふさわしい機体ですが、長老の名機ではB-52長距離爆撃機も名を残す機体と思いですが、アメリカには見送るには捨てがたい機体が多いのも時日かも知るませんね❗ アメリカの軍事産業の発展は、国内の大きな内需とGDPを牽引してるのは･･残念ですが事実ですが、仕方ありませんねぇ～😓
No finer fighter ever flew.
how many g-forces is the pilot pulling at exactly 4:49 ?
'Snort' unofficially would pull 7.5 - 9 g in shows especially while doing turn-and-burn in the 80s when the rules were more relaxed for these low altitude demos (no vertical separation for correction). Tomcat airframe was built like a tank and could eat up Gs easily. Only issue was, the turnbuckles for the engine mounts used to get elongated from circular due to excessive G loads in air demos. But, they were easily replaced.
I’d say that looked like a “get out of jail” move cos his roll rate looked like it definitely increased as he bottomed out of the roll and got probably closer to the ground than he would have liked.
@@KLRGT500KR I read the theoretical breaking point of the Tomcat was 13g+. But it's not the wings that would break or the aircraft it was the engines ripping out of their nacelles.
It was a crazy strong aircraft.
@@dannyboyemtdepends on the load-out, fuel load, where the mass is distributed. Etc.
Most USAF and USN aircraft of that era had a "limit load" of 7-1/3g and an "ultimate load" of 11g
But this was with a defined amount of fuel, whether that be full internal, no drop tanks, two missiles. Or in the case of the F-16, 9g with only half tank of internal fuel and two wingtip mounted missiles. Like I said, if you remove the fuel it can pull more G without breaking. But the F-16 digital fly by wire system limits you for pilot safety and structural fatigue. Its why the F-16 suffered so many ground impacts because the pilot was unable to He-man to 11g+ to save his own acc.
Maverick your 3/4 of a mile Call the Ball. Roger Ball . 😊
The Boss