F-14 vs F-15 vs F-16

[Soren]

BTW the published wing loading for the F-14 is approximately 50% higher than either the A-4 or F-15C.

True, but the F-14's wings are more lift efficient, creating more lift pr. area when folded out. The span-loading, which is a good indicator of turn performance according to some as an a/c rides on a cylindrical tube of air, suggests that the F-14 is the best.

[FLYBOYJ]

Again I'll state - I was on a RIMPAC excersize and was told the AF F-15 knocked down F-14s at the rate of 3 to 1. This is with the Navy attempting to overwhelm the F-15 with superior numbers.

[FLYBOYJ]

True, but the F-14's wings are more lift efficient, creating more lift pr. area when folded out. The span-loading, which is a good indicator of turn performance according to some as an a/c rides on a cylindrical tube of air, suggests that the F-14 is the best.

Not compared to an F-15 when its putting out almost 5000 pounds more thrust. Again an F-14 can not out turn an F-15, especially the earlier F-14As. And I'd like you to show HOW the F-14 carries a more efficient wing?

[SoD Stitch]

Don't know who your buddy is or what squadron he was in, I could tell you the F-15 is a 9G airplane, read "F-15 Eagle engaged" By Steve Davies Page 82. Additionally the -1s show configurations where the F-15 could sustain 9gs. The F-14 has a higher wing loading and lower thrust to weight ratio than the F-15, go to any web site (Wiki) and it will show that. It was an "excellent" machine with "excellent" maneuverability - the F-15 is just more maneuverable.


The F-14 "was" a great aircraft and is still worthy of front line operation but as stated the F-15 is at least a half a generation a ahead of the F-14, especially comparing it to the later block "C" models.

That is also the reason the -15 is still being produced, 35 years after it's first flight, and the F-14 is not; the F-15 was designed FROM THE OUTSET to be more maneuverable than any other a/c on the planet and, to this day, it is STILL more maneuverable than 90% of the fighters out there (including some 5th-gen fighters, especially with the 29,000+ lbs. PW-100-229 engines).

And, as drgondog pointed out, the maximum g-loading for either a/c is rather academic anyway, as the pilot can only tolerate a few seconds of 9G+ maneuvering; the a/c definitely is more "capable" than the pilot in this case.

[Soren]

Again an F-14 can not out turn an F-15, especially the earlier F-14As.

Well how can you state that as fact, do you really know it to be true ?

And I'd like you to show HOW the F-14 carries a more efficient wing?

Easy, the F-14's wing can change sweep and is of a much higher Aspect ratio, and a higher aspect ratio means a higher CLmax & lower Cdi, making it a more efficient wing FLYBOYJ.

[Soren]

Like I said earlier span-loading is a good indicator of turn performance according to some as an a/c basically rides on a cylindrical tube of air, so lets look at the span loading of the a/c.

Span loading of the a/c:

F-14: 27,700 kg / 19.55 m = 1,416.87 kg/m
F-15: 20,200 kg / 13.05 m = 1,547.89 kg/m
F-16: 12,000 kg / 9.8 m = 1,224.48 kg/m
F-18: 21,320 kg / 13.62 m = 1,565.34 kg/m

Seems the F-16 beats the pack but the F-14 comes in as second.

[Marcel]

Hmmm, I rather have 2 F16's for the price of one F15 or 1 F14......

[FLYBOYJ]

Like I said earlier span-loading is a good indicator of turn performance according to some as an a/c basically rides on a cylindrical tube of air, so lets look at the span loading of the a/c.

Span loading of the a/c:

F-14: 27,700 kg / 19.55 m = 1,416.87 kg/m
F-15: 20,200 kg / 13.05 m = 1,547.89 kg/m
F-16: 12,000 kg / 9.8 m = 1,224.48 kg/m
F-18: 21,320 kg / 13.62 m = 1,565.34 kg/m

Seems the F-16 beats the pack but the F-14 comes in as second.

Why don't you look in the POH of each aircraft and it will tell you the exact data you are looking for.

Hmmm, I rather have 2 F16's for the price of one F15 or 1 F14......

And for some operators that was the reason why the F-16 was chosen over the F-15.



"Even today, the F-14A Tomcat is still a potent fighter. Against aircraft such as the F-4 or the MiG-23 "Flogger" the F-14A would have few problems in maintaining air-to-air superiority, but its rate and radius of turn, thrust-to-weight ratio, and high-angle of attack capabilities would leave it at a serious disadvantage against later aircraft such as the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, MiG-29 Fulcrum, or Su-27 Flanker. Nevertheless, its BVR kill capacity is still unmatched.

Service of F-14 Tomcat with US Navy

As stated, the F-14 is best viewed as a bomber killer with some "good" air-to-air capabilities but against the F-15 it is at a disadvantage.

[Soren]

Why do you quote facts about the F-14A FLYBOYJ ? The F-14B is vastly better in the horizontal than the F-14A, and also better than the F-15 according to most I've read and the people I've talked to.

[Soren]

Why don't you look in the POH of each aircraft and it will tell you the exact data you are looking for.

Don't have it FLYBOYJ, and I doubt most people do

[FLYBOYJ]

Why do you quote facts about the F-14A FLYBOYJ ? The F-14B is vastly better in the horizontal than the F-14A, and also better than the F-15 according to most I've read and the people I've talked to.

Vastly better? Come on Soren, what's vastly better? If the F-14 was so much better why did the navy stop sending the aircraft to William Tell, RIMPAC and other exercises even AFTER they were re-gngined? I was at a RIMPAC exercise as a participant and was told the -14s got its @ss kicked by Navy people!!!!! and fighting in the horizontal is something done 60 years ago. If you're fighting on the horizontal in a modern jet either you're a 3rd world fighter pilot with minimum training or you really screwed up - and who have you really spoken to? One Tomcat driver who flew in the 80s and probably never got to fly an F-14B? Look at the stats on the airplanes, the F-15 still puts out more thrust, has a lower wing loading and a higher thrust to weight ratio. It was designed as a fighter from the ground up and was on the drawing board when the first F-14s was being delivered.

As far as the manuals? Look on E bay, they're on there - I have access to an F-15 manual but I can't scan or copy it.

"The overall thrust-to-weight ratio at maximum load is around 0.56 to 1, which does not compare favorably with the F-15A's ratio of 0.85 to 1."

F-14 Tomcat: Definition from Answers.com

[FLYBOYJ]

Here's more with the F-14B and D included!

Specifications (F-15C Eagle)

Data from USAF fact sheet,[64] Jane's All the World's Aircraft,[65] Davies 2002,[66] GlobalSecurity[67]

General characteristics

Crew: 1
Length: 63 ft 9 in (19.43 m)
Wingspan: 42 ft 10 in (13.05 m)
Height: 18 ft 6 in (5.63 m)
Wing area: 608 ft² (56.5 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 64A006.6 root, NACA 64A203 tip
Empty weight: 28,000 lb (12,700 kg)
Loaded weight: 44,500 lb (20,200 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 68,000 lb (30,845 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney F100-100, -220 or -229 afterburning turbofans
Dry thrust: 17,450 lbf (77.62 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 25,000 lbf for -220; 29,000 lbf for -229 (111.2 kN for -220; 129.0 kN for -229) each
Performance

Maximum speed:

High altitude: Mach 2.5+ (1,650 mph, 2,660 km/h) Low altitude: Mach 1.2 (900 mph, 1,450 km/h)
Combat radius: 1,061 nmi (1,222 mi, 1,967 km) for interdiction mission
Ferry range: 3,450 mi (3,000 nmi, 5,550 km) with conformal fuel tanks and three external fuel tanks
Service ceiling 65,000 ft (20,000 m)
Rate of climb: >50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
Wing loading: 73.1 lb/ft² (358 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 1.12 (-220), 1.30 (-229)


Type F-14A F-14B (F-14A+) F-14D
First Fligth 21 Dec 1970 Sept 1986 Mar 1990
Wingspan (unswept) 64 ft 1.5 in 64 ft 1.5 in 64 ft 1.5 in
Wingspan (swept) 38 ft 2.5 in 38 ft 2.5 in 38 ft 2.5 in
Lenght 62 ft 8 in 62 ft 8 in 62 ft 8 in
Height 16 ft 16 ft 16 ft
Wing Area 565 sqft 565 sqft 565 sqft
Empty Weight 40,104 pounds 41,780 pounds 43,735 pounds
Max. Weight 72,000 pounds 74,349 pounds 74,349 pounds
Powerplants 2 P&W TF-30-P-414A 2 GE F-110-GE-400 2 GE F-110-GE-400
Max. Thrust 34,154 lbs 56,400 lbs 56,400 lbs
Wing Loading 92 psf 94 psf 96 psf
Max. Speed 1,544 mph 1,544 mph 1,544 mph
Mach 2.38 Mach 2.38 Mach 2.38
Ceiling 50,000+ ft 53,000+ ft 53,000+ ft
Range 1,730 nm 2,050 nm 2,050 nm

From Wiki - Thrust/weight: 0.91 THIS IS FOR THE F-14 "D"

[SoD Stitch]

It was designed as a fighter from the ground up and was on the drawing board when the first F-14s was being delivered.

It all comes down to what each a/c was designed for: the F-14 was designed FROM THE OUTSET with Fleet Defense in mind, which means shooting down bombers, and other less maneuverable attack a/c, attempting to destroy US Naval assets. I believe the primary adversary the F-14 was originally designed to counter were Tu-16's & Tu-22/M/26 missle bombers, which were medium-sized tactical bombers for use primarily against the US Navy, especially large surface targets, like aircraft carriers. There was no need to make the F-14 very maneuverable, as they would be flying against much less maneuverable Soviet bombers.

The F-15, on the other hand, was designed from the get-go to acheive & maintain air superiority against any current and future Soviet fighter. Therefore, it was designed with exceptionally low wing-loading, and exceptionally high excess thrust (especially for the '70's).

[FLYBOYJ]

It all comes down to what each a/c was designed for: the F-14 was designed FROM THE OUTSET with Fleet Defense in mind, which means shooting down bombers, and other less maneuverable attack a/c, attempting to destroy US Naval assets. I believe the primary adversary the F-14 was originally designed to counter were Tu-16's & Tu-22/M/26's missle bombers, which were medium-sized tactical bombers for use primarily against the US Navy, especially large surface targets, like aircraft carriers. There was no need to make the F-14 very maneuverable, as they would be flying against much less maneuverable Soviet bombers.

The F-15, on the other hand, was designed from the get-go to acheive & maintain air superiority against any current and future Soviet fighter. Therefore, it was designed with exceptionally low wing-loading, and exceptionally high excess thrust (especially for the '70's).

BINGO!

[Matt308]

Ugh... here comes another meltdown.