I mean the f14 iraf makes the f14b kinda pointless despite the far worse avionics.
I have both I like both but I find myself using the f14B more do to the bol pods and better fm the only thing the f14 iraf has on the f14B is f-90 and r-27
Which to be fair are massive. I think the f14b is better in sim than the iraf overall but in rb where you’re less reliant on your avionics, it just falls behind imo. I like them both as well tho.
NAVAIR manuals says they could carry AIM-9M-10 but, I don’t they will model it because We still don’t have one even through We gets Rhinos in this update.
Those would be cool
Hard No, Why?
The common argument relying on photos of BuNo.158625 ignores the critical fact that this was an NF-14 permanent test vehicle based on an early production F-14A-65-GR airframe that never saw combat service. Unlike fleet Tomcats, this flying laboratory likely retained RWR systems potentially older than even the standard ALR-45/50.
From a technical standpoint, claiming the missile works simply because “it fits on the rail” is comparable to plugging a modern USB-C device into an old RS-232 serial port via a physical adapter.
Here is why the architecture fundamentally fails. The first major hurdle is the MIL-STD-1553B network layer where the AMRAAM operates as a Remote Terminal on a digital network and waits for commands from a Bus Controller.
This relies on a time-division multiplexing protocol which means the plane must send digital packets addressed to the missile’s specific ID. The standard F-14A used point-to-point analog wiring and lacked the Bus Controller hardware entirely, so it physically cannot generate the digital addressing or timing signals required to talk to the missile.
Furthermore, the MIL-STD-1760 physical interface standard defines the umbilical connections for power and high-bandwidth data transfer for smart weapons. The F-14A’s pylons were hard-wired for the AIM-7’s analog CW illumination and specific tuning commands. The connector physically cannot supply the required INS initialization data or the mid-course update datalink.
The NF-14 was a Frankenstein that hacked these modern standards into an analog airframe. Regarding the F-14D, while the APG-71 hardware was maybe and theoretically capable, the Navy explicitly cancelled the Operational Flight Program firmware integration to divert funding to the Super Hornet and “Bombcat” program.
Technically, an F-14D with AMRAAMs is like a high-end GPU with no drivers installed, making it a useless brick. Finally, citing the F-16AJ is flawed because those were desperate exceptions to fill massive gaps for nations lacking alternatives whereas the US tree is already saturated with decent 4th-gen fighters. There is no justification for turning the Tomcat into a “what-if” fantasy plane.
If you want to use AIM-120s, go play Hornets, just like irl Tomcat pilot/RIOs.
9 Likes
They could limit it to 6 like the Fakours on the IRIAF F-14.
literally no we dont need the F14D to be overtiered and facing top tier jets like rafale
13.0 with AIM-7P and AIM-9M with new radar it will be a good counter to the SU33 and Su27
no other techtree plane can receive aim-7P at the current moment so why do you wanna have it be overtiered garbage
yeah that would work great for 13.3.
but still you know how us main will react, same as they with the double pylon f15c GE.
U.S. mains will probably be happy that the F-14 is playable. The reason they’re unhappy abt the F-15C GE is because it sucks do to ahistorical nerfs.
It would barely be a counter to them lol they still have better radar capabilities like the 10+ miles hmd even against the f14D those r27er are still better than aim7p and r73 are better than aim9m (in game) its going to be 13.3 not 13.0 goofy the f14B is already at 13.0 and ain’t going down not to mention the new jets like su30mk2,mig29n, and a lot of other 13.3 jets with better fox 3
I mean it carry’s 6 fox 3 and 4 r73 equals 10 missiles while if the dual pylons do come witch is a huge if it would be 8 fox 3 2 aim9m equals 10 missiles so I think it balances out but honestly I would be fine with it coming with 6 aim120A and aim9m
How about no.
Not only is the Hornet not a Tomcat, but it’s also not that great of a fighter in general. Besides the 1 piece of the puzzle that is the 1553 Bus for the APG-71 including the Aim-120, there are tons of more primary sources explicitly stating the F-14D could fully employ AMRAAMs. If there’s any Tomcat that should get them it should be the F-14D, purely for the sake of balance.
Random examples:
If you want a Tomcat with 100% realistic armament, well you’re SoL. Every Tomcat in Warthunder doesn’t have the armament it should. Hell if you want a toptier jet fighter with those qualities you’re going to have to search a decent amount. I would say DCS solves this but they’re not doing so great either…
Thanks for the detailed overview though. Just know Gaijin won’t go through 5% of this effort when adding the F-22 in 6 months.
7 Likes
at that br, irrcm missile dont matter, its how much fox 3
They prove “Design Intent,” not “Operational Reality.”
First, the 1981 Fact Sheet explicitly identifies the missiles as “full-scale mock-ups”. It was published in April 1981, nearly a decade before the F-14D entered service. We often joke about “marketing lies,” but this is the literal definition of one. It was a sales pitch, not an engineering manual.
Second, the 2014 SAR lists the F-14 solely for historical reasons (“legacy compatibility”). The Tomcat had been retired for 8 years by the time that report was published. It confirms the missile was physically sized for the plane, not that the software was active.
Think of it this way: These documents prove the F-14 had the “Motherboard” (Hardware), but the “Drivers” (Software) were cancelled. You are pointing to a GPU box and claiming it works without drivers installed. The Navy explicitly spent that money on the Super Hornet and “bombcat” upgrades instead.
HB says F-14D never comes because there are not enough legal documents for modeling it with DCS standards and that’s why We stuck at F-14A/F-14B(and F-14A IR, F-14BU in soon™).
Also, some aircraft/missile modelings are really awful, just like FC3 Flankers DL and overperforming SD-10, etc.
Reply doesn’t work for me
wtf
Yet their 4.5 gens aircraft and supposedly are gonna add 5 gen aircraft this up coming year
Actually it says demonstrated performance and list the f14
You mean EFT and F-35A?
We don’t know when they comes because it is quite often modules are delayed or canceled, just like AI A-6E(Heatblur: delayed), MiG-23ML(Razbam: canceled) etc.
Not sure it is even comes within 10 years.
