F-14 Tomcat: History, Performance & Discussion

Realistically, I think the best bet for that in-game would be the F-14D Super Tomcat.

Yes I know iirc the F-14D didn’t test them, and only the F-14A did, but adding AMRAAM to an F-14A woul;d be a little odd in the first place.

The F-14D with AIM-9M, AIM-120A/B, and AIM-54C+ on the other hand would be a truly interesting and very capable fighter, which otherwise would have little to no reason to be added over the current F-14B due to gaijins outright refusal to fix the AIM-54C.

At the point when we can expect an F-14D to be added, there will be little to no reason for it to be added in-game anyways, since it would only bring a better radar and 9M’s over the current F-14B, and will have to compete with aircrafts with better weapons and more missiles in the case of the Su-27, Rafale, and EF2000, that also have better flight performance.

For it to be competitive, the AIM-54C(and by extension C+) will have to be fixed so that they aren’t the absolute joke they currently are at the very least, and the AIM-120A/B would also go a long way in bridging the midrange gap between the F-14D and other gen 4 and gen 4+ aircrafts that will be added.

2 Likes

F-14D would already be better due to radar, systems, IRST, AIM-7P block 2, etc. No need for AMRAAM but it is welcome.

2 Likes

Considering that the AIM-54 / -7 already struggles at combat distances vs the -27ER, the AMRAAM / R-77 are going to put them in the dirt due to the TTK disparity on top of the fact they can break cold and have even higher maneuvering limits.

2 Likes

If I had F-14D with AMRAAMs I wouldn’t need any other aircraft because that is all I would play.

4 Likes

I wonder until when Gaijin will suspend wrong fuselage model of F-14s in game. Everytime i see backplate of F-14 makes gross.

Been reported about clueless F-14 model in game from last year (Yes right after F-14A has been released, back in Danger Zone update), still no answer from gj yet.

Am i the only one who Not-satisfied about current F-14 model in game?

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/uaYooe3Ellll

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/n0BF566gVJ8y

PLEASE DO SOME WORK

1 Like

Every nation has modeling inaccuracies that aren’t fixed. I myself reported the J-7E model some time ago. Be patient, these fixes are slow.

image
image

image

Just interesting concepts of the F-14 Grumman and Lockheed played with.

The E/F-14G Hawkcat (no official designation)

It was said to be able to manually eject the radome or automatically when ACM was in engaged by pilot (foreword cockpit) Then automatic transfer to the AWG9 upon separation.

Rumor updated versions would have a 3rd seat with ICAP III (Increased Capability III) antennas in the tail.

They have a whole exhibit at one of the air museums down the street with really cool photos and literature. I may swing by this week to snap pictures.

Id much rather they fix the stupid TCS and AIM-54C than the visual model, ill be completely honest, I care very little for the visual model when its got much bigger problems with sensors and weapons

TCS function has been bug reported since literally day 1 of the dev server. It was the first approved bug report of the “La Royale” dev server and the devs have done literally nothing about it.

2 Likes

Speaking of, @Gunjob sorry to bug u m8, but is the TCS bug report still alive somewhere? it was an old forum dev server bug report so I cant see its status

So it would work at mach 3 the awacs sr71 and why is it called super duper AWACS

1 Like

Still open if there is an update I’ll post it here.

1 Like

It’s probably based of the F-12A, so would have access to the AIM-47 / -54.

1 Like

Alright, thanks. We do also have documents regarding the scan pattern it used, not sure if thatd help:

2 Likes

Yeah we have that on the report!

4 Likes

Sorry for the late reply Mytho.

I am not sure perhap just because of the speed and for the article title.

I can only imagine how much lift the radome produced. Then again, maybe minimal at the Blackbirds operational altitudes 85,000 feet etc.

I am not sure if it could operate at Mach 3 with the radome. However even Mach 2 or even 1 would still offer capability and range traditional airborne early warning radars are not able to. Slower speed would surely reduce its operational altitude, however.

Maybe it was susceptible to attack at that point and deemed unfeasible.

1 Like

Bumping this thread since the AIM-9M thread for F-14B has received a little traction. Personally, I’m for inclusion of AIM-9M on the F-14B with a BR increase to 12.3.

1 Like

I dont think it should go to 12.3 until the AIM-54C’s get some more fixing personally, but i do think it could get 9M’s

Id much rather they just fix the AIM-54C’s though. Giving it 9M’s just makes it a side/downgrade from the F-15A and F-16C instead of the unique BVR vehicle it should be

2 Likes

with proper AIM-54Cs and 9Ms it would be pretty nice, proper AIM-54s would keep it competitive even against modern fox3s in BVR since they have a sorta R-27ER effect with their long range potential. I hope thats the angle gaijan sees too (I got a free talisman on my F-14B a while back so I really hope it is xD)

1 Like

Completely agree. 9Ms would be nice to have to round out the historical load out but the 54 should take priority.

2 Likes

@k_stepanovich any good reason why the AWG-9’s HPRF mode got nerfed and now has a deadzone in it like the MiG-29 radar or did you guys just nerf an already powercrept plane(because of refusal to fix its weapons and sensors) for fun?


Increasing the min range of the PD radar on the F-14 from 500m to 5000m out of nowhere is in pretty bad taste

Is this another one of those patented gaijin “well the russian radars had this issue so the American radars MUSTVE had it as well!” moments?

5 Likes