F-14 tactics

[joe bob]

I debuted Tom's VF-31 repaint on Gonzo station last night and true to it's appearance this one works for a living and got the job done. I thought it might be of interest to compare tactics with others.
My previous CAP missions were not pretty. ugly in fact. My last one I had gotten a visual ID via the TVSU while relighting the right engine after a double compressor stall.

Not this time though, I had a plan. Awacs has two bogeys so it was AB till 30 miles out and then slow to subsonic. 10 miles out I made a check turn to the right then reversed back while switching to bore sight mode. got a visual for my first TU-95 intercept followed by locking up what I assume was an SU-27. this one beat feet as soon as I got a lock on.

I tried this profile to try and counter the SU-27 tactic I had been encountering where they come in low and accelerate at the merge causing a tail chase that often ended over the carrier group.
That wasn't the tactic this time so it remains to be seen if it works for that situation but at least I looked good for the TU-85 guys. The SU-27 tactic is frustrating since you have to have to approach a contact as if it is one even if it turns out to be an Airbus. Trying to hit the merge with a lot of energy but still get it turned around seems to be prime compressor stall territory for the A models.

Edit to add, I thought I got a couple of screen shots to show off Tom's repaint but for some reason they didn't get saved.

[Odie]

I debuted Tom's VF-31 repaint on Gonzo station last night and true to it's appearance this one works for a living and got the job done. I thought it might be of interest to compare tactics with others.
My previous CAP missions were not pretty. ugly in fact. My last one I had gotten a visual ID via the TVSU while relighting the right engine after a double compressor stall.

Not this time though, I had a plan. Awacs has two bogeys so it was AB till 30 miles out and then slow to subsonic. 10 miles out I made a check turn to the right then reversed back while switching to bore sight mode. got a visual for my first TU-95 intercept followed by locking up what I assume was an SU-27. this one beat feet as soon as I got a lock on.

I tried this profile to try and counter the SU-27 tactic I had been encountering where they come in low and accelerate at the merge causing a tail chase that often ended over the carrier group.
That wasn't the tactic this time so it remains to be seen if it works for that situation but at least I looked good for the TU-85 guys. The SU-27 tactic is frustrating since you have to have to approach a contact as if it is one even if it turns out to be an Airbus. Trying to hit the merge with a lot of energy but still get it turned around seems to be prime compressor stall territory for the A models.

Edit to add, I thought I got a couple of screen shots to show off Tom's repaint but for some reason they didn't get saved.


JB on the compressor stalls, in conversations I've add with real-life aviators that flew the A-model their line of thinking was that you flew the engine first, plane second. In fact when Microprose was developing FLEET DEFENDER F-14 sim, they initially were going to use the A-model in the sim but after a few flights with their model, decided to use the B-model to make it a more pleasant experience and cut out some of the frustration due to the modeling of the A's engines.

I still miss that sim. It had some neat features that allowed you and your squadron to progress thru the missions. Reading your report of the intercepts took me back to those FD days!

[Bjoern]

I was always amazed at how they could do their whole TOPGUN/FWS stuff with those beeches for engines.

The TF-30 did fare better in the Aardvark right?

[joe bob]

I remember Fleet Defender well. I miss Microprose and that era in general. Some of the things those companies attempted haven't been done since.

Regarding the engines, I have learned to live with them for the most part, the only part I still have trouble with is the high speed run. it usually happens when I am at higher Mach and fiddling with the radar so it may be that the aircraft
pitched up some. With the Mach tuck trim shifts a lot about then.
It has certainly cured me of the habit of rapidly pulling off power in close for a hail marry stab at the deck.

I know the early F-111s had trouble with compressor stalls at high speeds but it was not quite the big deal as the F-14 probably because they were not flown to the extremes as an air to air platform was.
Top gun flying seemed rather tame since they really wanted an airborne car chase for the cameras. In air to air, the vertical maneuvers seem to be the biggest gotcha in the F-14 and F-4 to a lesser degree.
The slow speed turns while flying with the "Zeros" in The Final Countdown seemed more adventurous to my uninformed view.

[Bjoern]

I know the early F-111s had trouble with compressor stalls at high speeds but it was not quite the big deal as the F-14 probably because they were not flown to the extremes as an air to air platform was.
Top gun flying seemed rather tame since they really wanted an airborne car chase for the cameras. In air to air, the vertical maneuvers seem to be the biggest gotcha in the F-14 and F-4 to a lesser degree.
The slow speed turns while flying with the "Zeros" in The Final Countdown seemed more adventurous to my uninformed view.

I was talking about the real deal and not the brilliant lessons in editing and air-to-air photography. ;)

F-4s didn't seem to have much of a problem in the vertical.

[joe bob]

Ah, comprendo. The F-4s didn't have the same trouble but when they did it seemed to be more dramatic.
The ones I am familiar with involved a zoom climb, looking back over the shoulder for a visual and then BOOM, double engine out and no getting them back.

[evvatc]

I remember Fleet Defender well. I miss Microprose and that era in general. Some of the things those companies attempted haven't been done since.

Regarding the engines, I have learned to live with them for the most part, the only part I still have trouble with is the high speed run. it usually happens when I am at higher Mach and fiddling with the radar so it may be that the aircraft
pitched up some. With the Mach tuck trim shifts a lot about then.
It has certainly cured me of the habit of rapidly pulling off power in close for a hail marry stab at the deck.

I know the early F-111s had trouble with compressor stalls at high speeds but it was not quite the big deal as the F-14 probably because they were not flown to the extremes as an air to air platform was.
Top gun flying seemed rather tame since they really wanted an airborne car chase for the cameras. In air to air, the vertical maneuvers seem to be the biggest gotcha in the F-14 and F-4 to a lesser degree.
The slow speed turns while flying with the "Zeros" in The Final Countdown seemed more adventurous to my uninformed view.

I was a huge fan of Fleet Defender. Easily my favorite simulation from the time. There were some other great sims from that time. Aces of the Pacific, B-17 Flying Fortress were among my other favs.

When describing vertical maneuvers being a "gotcha" in the Tomcat, what did you mean? Were you talking about being a problem area for the Tomcat or a strength?

<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/w3VKND7HrB8" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

[henrystreet]

great video, thanks for finding and sharing.

[evvatc]

great video, thanks for finding and sharing.

Thank you for your great scenery!!! Awesome work. Any chance of a NAS Miramar circa late 70s mid 80s or so? I'm sure you have plenty of request and other things on the burner, just trying to plant the bug.

[ejoiner]

JB on the compressor stalls, in conversations I've add with real-life aviators that flew the A-model their line of thinking was that you flew the engine first, plane second. In fact when Microprose was developing FLEET DEFENDER F-14 sim, they initially were going to use the A-model in the sim but after a few flights with their model, decided to use the B-model to make it a more pleasant experience and cut out some of the frustration due to the modeling of the A's engines.

I still miss that sim. It had some neat features that allowed you and your squadron to progress thru the missions. Reading your report of the intercepts took me back to those FD days!

Ah those were the days. I got to beta test Fleet Defender and got to know the Microprose guys pretty well and even visited their offices in Hunt Valley MD once when I was on business in the area. I miss the days when we had multiple houses building combat sims for the PC platform. However, the idea of having ONE platform and multiple contributors is a better idea.

E

[ejoiner]

I was a huge fan of Fleet Defender. Easily my favorite simulation from the time. There were some other great sims from that time. Aces of the Pacific, B-17 Flying Fortress were among my other favs.

When describing vertical maneuvers being a "gotcha" in the Tomcat, what did you mean? Were you talking about being a problem area for the Tomcat or a strength?




Anybody remember "Art of the Kill" by Pete Bonani?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzdyJdOUYRQ

[joe bob]

@ Evvact
I don't think problem is the right word more like an area of increased vulnerability for compressor stalls. When tracking an adversary in particular when you spend less time "flying the engines" rather than the plane.
It is an enjoyable video but keep in mind it is essentially an extended Grumman commercial.

[ejoiner]

@ Evvact
It is an enjoyable video but keep in mind it is essentially an extended Grumman commercial.

Disagree! There is some good instruction in this. Especially the use of the vertical flight regime, which a lot of sim pilots forget. Use of energy in dogfighting through vertical maneuvering is critical. If you ever see the video of discussion of Randy Cunningham's (F-4) kill of Col. Toon (MiG-17) in the Vietnam war, that fight was vertical almost the whole time. in fact mostly a rolling scissors fight.

[joe bob]

No doubt but you are seeing chery picked comments without including any other comments made about the tf-30 in that regime.
I am not saying it was bad in the vertical I am saying it was more vulnerable to engine issues.

[Bjoern]

Anybody remember "Art of the Kill" by Pete Bonani?

I've installed Falcon BMS a few days ago (the last time I've tried F4 was SuperPak3 days!), so this is still on my "to do" list.

[evvatc]

joebob,
The TF30s definitely had teething problems and there is not a lack of information to it's vulnerability to compressor stalls during throttle changes however, I have also seen publications quoting Tomcat drivers saying they never experienced a compressor stall in the TF-30 Tomcat during any maneuvering. Here's something to try which helped me in the A model. Smooth inputs with the controls. Don't combine roll and pull inputs. Roll then pull. When going into the vertical try to get as wings level as you can before you pull. For the throttles, burners or mil. Any movement outside of that during hard maneuvering is increasing the chances for compressor stalls.

[henrystreet]

Thank you for your great scenery!!! Awesome work. Any chance of a NAS Miramar circa late 70s mid 80s or so? I'm sure you have plenty of request and other things on the burner, just trying to plant the bug.

the near future is back to my naval aviator studies, then an update to flesh out community feedback for Lemoore....after that ???

[henrystreet]

Disagree! There is some good instruction in this. Especially the use of the vertical flight regime, which a lot of sim pilots forget. Use of energy in dogfighting through vertical maneuvering is critical. If you ever see the video of discussion of Randy Cunningham's (F-4) kill of Col. Toon (MiG-17) in the Vietnam war, that fight was vertical almost the whole time. in fact mostly a rolling scissors fight.

Despite the video's origins/intents, it is a great discussion of "energy vs. angles" and lessons learned from Vietnam. Note that they are going wings level BEFORE pull up... partially to minimize the risk of compressor stall.

[joe bob]

Exactly, flying the engines.

Anyway, as the old saying goes, you meet a better class of people in the vertical.
I remember talking with an ANG F-4 pilot when the F-16 came out and everyone was wowed by 9G bat turns.
He said I just go vertical and wait for them to get tired.

[Deacon211]

Sims often tend to induce bad habits. There are certainly planes in FSX that have highly euphemistic flight models where you can roll and pull...and climb...almost to your heart's content. Aerosoft really tried very hard to simulate the challenges of flying the early model Tomcat...there are no kid gloves here. Jam accelerating the throttle will lead to compressor stalls, particularly if you simultaneously load the aircraft up at the same time. They also simulated some wicked wing rock caused by the neutral stability at certain AOAs which requires careful handling.

In a real jet you studiously avoid rolling pulls anyway as it asymmetrically loads the wings. And while modern jets have more stall resistant engines, even the A model Eagles were sensitive to ramming the throttles forward (an old Viper driver buddy of mine used to intentionally fight the Eagles in the regimes where they tended to stall most...whether they were preoccupied being careful or whether they stalled out the engine, they weren't paying much attention to him).

Also, the initial vertical move should almost always be done wings level anyway...if your objective is to get the nose above the horizon, the quickest way is wings level.

Try it yourself. Do a wings level pull to thirty degrees nose high, then do a pull to thirty degrees nose high in a sixty degree angle of bank and see which one is quicker.


As for the intercept, one common tactic is impossible in a single ship formation. In a two ship, the first Tomcat can take the bogey down the snot locker for a VID, while the "shooter" in combat spread has the lateral separation to early turn the now bandit and can get a good bite on him at the merge (if he doesn't shoot him before that since he has weapons sep).

You can still try a similar tactic in the single ship by locking up the bogey and leaning away from him in an attempt to give yourself some lat sep for an early turn just prior to the merge. Plus, if you know the bandit is heading for the ship, then I don't think that a pitch back does you much good. It will take time to get your nose up wings level and you still need to make a 180 degree turn...probably at below corner. You are much better off in performing a nose down slice at corner speed which will generate the maximum turn rate possible which is what you need to stop going away from the bandit (and the ship) and start going towards him. If you are above corner at the merge, you will likely bleed most of that off in the turn anyway.

[Blood_Hawk23]

AHHH Fleet defender. I have MANY hour of flight time on it. I still have it actualy. I wonder if it will work through DOSBOX.

I also have "Art of the Kill". Both the book and video. I still have my F16 Falcon with the MIG 29 and F/A18 extra CDs.

Those were the days. Then CFS2 came out and there I've stayed.

Great stuff Guys.

[ViperPilot2]

It's my (limited) understanding that Robert Shaw's Fighter Combat is one of the best books ever written on ACM.

I have a copy, and found it very informative, full of relative anecdotes, and had well drawn illustrations of each maneuver.

:wavey:

[evvatc]

Deacon211
Great information there! Thanks for sharing.

[Motormouse]

While all good stuff, we would be wise to remember that most of the 3rd generation fighters
like the F14, were designed at the outset as interceptors of large hostile bombing formations,at beyond visual range.
Hence large, powerful radars and long range missiles fitted as standard.

Dogfighting was a secondary function.

Ttfn

Pete

[Bjoern]

Dogifghting wasn't secondary for either aircraft. The Turkey got its fangs because of the RoE over 'nam, the fixed-wing turkey got its claws because the intelligence services thought the MiG-25 was much, much, MUCH more than the mach 2.8+ brick that it really was and wanted something to counter it.

It's funny to consider what would have happened if the intel on the Foxbat had been realistic from the outset. No F-15, but F-14s in USAF markings?

[evvatc]

While all good stuff, we would be wise to remember that most of the 3rd generation fighters
like the F14,

Last I checked, the F-14 was/is a 4th gen fighter...

[Motormouse]

Last I checked, the F-14 was/is a 4th gen fighter...

Suppose it depends on your cutoff, I always thought it was the era of design. 1960-1970 for third gen.
According to Wikipedia F-14 first flight 1970.

Whatever, it's all academic as fsx won't run properly on my system anyhow.

Ttfn

Pete

[JohnC]

I'd fall back to the opinion of the lead engineer for the design purpose:

"We were totally preoccupied with producing a fighter, with a basic weapon fit of four AIM-7's and two AIM-9's. Then we sat back and figured out how to screw six AIM-54's onto it without messing up the fighter role."

- Robert Kress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Kress)


To corroborate that statement, there are a couple of features that really made the F-14 a 4th generation fighter and standard setter for aircraft to come. In no particular order:

- Wide set engines to allow a straight air path from the inlet to the compressor to improve engine reliability in the high alpha region. This was particularly important for the still new low bypass-afterburning turbofans and was a lesson learned from the F-111, which had really nasty problems during hard maneuvering (at least the early versions).

- The above enabled very high alpha maneuvering that was previously unheard of. Like all modern fighter airframe's, "stall" is a relative term that only signify's boundary layer separation and the dissociation of drag dependence on lift coefficient. In colloquial terms, the F-14 increases lift (both force and coefficient) after the onset of stall to a peak at 30 degrees while usable lift doesn't really drop off until after 45 degrees or so.

- Because of both of the above, stability was a major issue. The F-14 had the capacity to achieve 50 degrees AoA, but this was a perilous region and really only reached at the peak of a loop where the aircraft was inverted. Two vertical stabilizers had been used before (MiG-25 in particular) to increase stability in a different region. But the F-14 was one of if not the first aircraft to really need them in the high alpha maneuvering region, because it was the first to go there. Of the 6,000 models built for wind tunnel testing, the "optimum" design had three stabilizers in a triangular configuration, but it was decidedly un-sexy and cast aside in favor of design model 303E (which became the Tomcat we all know).

Design intent aside, this has been a great discussion on the F-14! For those interested in more, two relatively inexpensive books to consider are:

How to fight and fly in the F-14 (http://www.amazon.com/Janes-Fight-F-14-Tomcat-Controls/dp/000472254X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1419870073&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+fight+and+fly+in+the+F-14): More focused on the D model, but still a good read

The great book of modern warplanes (http://www.amazon.com/Great-Book-Modern-Warplanes/dp/B000RERZXY/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1419870139&sr=8-3&keywords=the+great+book+of+modern+war+planes): I picked this up at an estate sale and later bought the two sister books (Modern Warplanes II and World War II airplanes.) It's one of the most informative books around is hard to find anything more era informative that doesn't have a government stamp somewhere on it.

[joe bob]

Formation flying is coming along nicely, still waiting for the SU 27s to make another appearance.
I think I have a high speed yo yo maneuver that will work if timed right for a visual.

[Victory103]

Two books I got delivered right before the Aerosoft release, the 1st link JohnC mentioned and P. Gillcrist's "Tomcat!, The Grumman F-14 Story" listed on the "Customers also bought..." on the Amazon page. The Opsrey Combat Aircraft series of USN Tomcat units of OIF/OEF give more detail into the final role of the Tomcat in successful air2ground missions.

[Ian Warren]

When describing vertical maneuvers being a "gotcha" in the Tomcat, what did you mean? Were you talking about being a problem area for the Tomcat or a strength?



Now to apply this again in a multiplay .. great video find :cool: