F-14s heading to aircraft graveyard

[Otis Willie]

F-14s heading to aircraft graveyard

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=24037

{EXCERPT}, by Greg Tyler, Stars and Stripes Pacific edition, Friday,
August 27, 2004

ONBOARD USS JOHN C. STENNIS, Sasebo, Japan — The U.S. Navy’s meanest,
fastest and most agile fighter jet, nearing retirement, is deployed in
the western Pacific Ocean for the last time.

The Grumman F-14, which entered military service in 1972, also is a
movie star. At least for aviation aficionados, it upstaged actors
including T...

U.S. and friendly nation laws prohibit fully
reproducing copyrighted material. In abidance
with our laws this report cannot be provided in
its entirety. However, you can read it in full
today at the supplied URL. The subject/content of
this report is not necessarily the viewpoint of
the distributing Library. This report is provided
for your information and discussion.

---------------------------
Otis Willie
Associate Librarian
The American War Library
http://www.americanwarlibrary.com
(310) 532-0634

[Pooh Bear]

Otis Willie wrote:

> F-14s heading to aircraft graveyard
>
> http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=24037
>
> {EXCERPT},

" they built these jets without cutting edges … "

A *non cutting edge* jet ? I think maybe the word intended was corners.

Worthy of Quayle or Bush jr. ;-)

Graham

[Bob Urz]

Otis Willie wrote:

> F-14s heading to aircraft graveyard
>

So, does this mean we will soon be seeing QF-14 drones?
Maverick, Goose and jester would be crying.....

Bob


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Pooh Bear]

Bob Urz wrote:

> Otis Willie wrote:
>
> > F-14s heading to aircraft graveyard
> >
>
> So, does this mean we will soon be seeing QF-14 drones?
> Maverick, Goose and jester would be crying.....
>

Hi, Bob !

Graham

[Krztalizer]

>
>So, does this mean we will soon be seeing QF-14 drones?
>Maverick, Goose and jester would be crying.....

Not Goose -- he's dead. Jester took a job with AA and Mav lost everything in
the Tailhook scandal. Iceman is still around, but he got pidgeonholed into
some hellish Pentagon staff job and is due to retire...

[Prowlus]

Otis Willie > wrote in message >...
> F-14s heading to aircraft graveyard
>
> http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=24037
>
> {EXCERPT}, by Greg Tyler, Stars and Stripes Pacific edition, Friday,
> August 27, 2004
>
> ONBOARD USS JOHN C. STENNIS, Sasebo, Japan ? The U.S. Navy?s meanest,
> fastest and most agile fighter jet, nearing retirement, is deployed in
> the western Pacific Ocean for the last time.
>
> The Grumman F-14, which entered military service in 1972, also is a
> movie star. At least for aviation aficionados, it upstaged actors
> including T...
>
> U.S. and friendly nation laws prohibit fully
> reproducing copyrighted material. In abidance
> with our laws this report cannot be provided in
> its entirety. However, you can read it in full
> today at the supplied URL. The subject/content of
> this report is not necessarily the viewpoint of
> the distributing Library. This report is provided
> for your information and discussion.
>
> ---------------------------
> Otis Willie
> Associate Librarian
> The American War Library
> http://www.americanwarlibrary.com
> (310) 532-0634



Wonder what stopping any of those tomcats from being bought up and
flown by private owners? Surely someone has gotta keep at least 1 or 2
jets airworthy just to remind future generations what the f-14 stood
for.
As for VF-31 I wonder if they'll rename themselves the "Rhinos"?

[John Carrier]

> Wonder what stopping any of those tomcats from being bought up and
> flown by private owners? Surely someone has gotta keep at least 1 or 2
> jets airworthy just to remind future generations what the f-14 stood
> for.

How about dollars? Not only would the fuel costs be high (roughly 2000 gal
of JP per sortie), but the maintenance man hours would eat you alive (don't
know the latest figures, but well over 20 hrs/flt hr). Parts cost would be
up there as well. I'd venture that Travolta's personal 707 is a bargain by
comparison. Even millionaires have their limits. How about a nice F-5
instead?

R / John

[John Mullen]

"John Carrier" > wrote in message
...
>> Wonder what stopping any of those tomcats from being bought up and
>> flown by private owners? Surely someone has gotta keep at least 1 or 2
>> jets airworthy just to remind future generations what the f-14 stood
>> for.
>
> How about dollars? Not only would the fuel costs be high (roughly 2000
> gal of JP per sortie), but the maintenance man hours would eat you alive
> (don't know the latest figures, but well over 20 hrs/flt hr). Parts cost
> would be up there as well. I'd venture that Travolta's personal 707 is a
> bargain by comparison. Even millionaires have their limits. How about a
> nice F-5 instead?

I wonder if Iran would be interested?

John

[B2431]

>From: "John Mullen"
>Date: 8/28/2004 10:09 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"John Carrier" > wrote in message
...
>>> Wonder what stopping any of those tomcats from being bought up and
>>> flown by private owners? Surely someone has gotta keep at least 1 or 2
>>> jets airworthy just to remind future generations what the f-14 stood
>>> for.
>>
>> How about dollars? Not only would the fuel costs be high (roughly 2000
>> gal of JP per sortie), but the maintenance man hours would eat you alive
>> (don't know the latest figures, but well over 20 hrs/flt hr). Parts cost
>> would be up there as well. I'd venture that Travolta's personal 707 is a
>> bargain by comparison. Even millionaires have their limits. How about a
>> nice F-5 instead?
>
>I wonder if Iran would be interested?
>
>John

Yep, sell them to Iran complete with built in bombs. That way they can all be
disposed of rather nicely. Good way to eliminate their better pilots too.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Krztalizer]

>Wonder what stopping any of those tomcats from being bought up and
>flown by private owners? Surely someone has gotta keep at least 1 or 2
>jets airworthy just to remind future generations what the f-14 stood
>for.


It won't happen for a variety of reasons - chief among them, the incredible
complexity of the system and the hard working career that these jets served in
for decades. Unlike earlier, less complex carrier aircraft, the Turkey
requires a veritable army of ground support and supplies. They've been
bouncing off steel decks for 30 years; they did it well, but they are now
getting quickly worn out. Even vast amounts of money can't keep one of these
flying much longer - it will end up like that CAF Marauder; spend $$$$$ to
revive an edgy, very tricky and state of the art warplane that should be
preserved in museums for all to see - instead, some small group of people at a
quickly forgotten airshow will get to watch it crash. They should be allowed
to retire in a manner that does not include troublesome crashes while being
flown by hobbyists, tickerers, and bored rich.

Unless *I* get one, then stand back, Mav.

v/r
Gordon
<====(A+C====>
USN SAR

Its always better to lose -an- engine, not -the- engine.

[FLYWITHJAY]

<<I wonder if Iran would be interested?>>

I'm sure they would love to get their hands on the parts to get the ones they
DO have flying again!

[John Mullen]

"FLYWITHJAY" > wrote in message
...
> <<I wonder if Iran would be interested?>>
>
> I'm sure they would love to get their hands on the parts to get the ones
> they
> DO have flying again!

They still have around 20-30 flying. All sorts of rumours about re-engining,
glass cockpits, new radar etc, which I would take with a pinch of salt.

Israel is supposed to have helped with spare parts, according to one source
I've seen. Then there was the Iran Contra business, which is supposed to
have involved F-14 parts among other things. Other than that, they have
cannibalised, and developed the ability to make some parts locally. They got
late model F14As with the TF30-P-414 engine. They bought 79 and 284 AIM 54s.
The missiles were exhausted some years ago, leaving them as mini-AWACS with
Sparrow and Sidewinder for self defence. Supposedly the plan is to use them
as bombers until they run out of airframe life.

HTH

John