Cold War Intercept

[plan_D]

... that's a great statement. You have a good point. Wait, no you don't, what are you going on about?

[pbfoot]

the numbers the lightning had were impressive but the tomcat was years ahead in every other facet including weapons, fire control,ecm and in particular the radar also the rio would be a major advantage

[102first_hussars]

Finally I get to do this

[plan_D]

The fire-control and weapons system were enough because the performance of the Lightning as an aircraft allowed them to stay in existence. The radar on the Lightning was also good, with a one-hundred and twenty degree vision it was capable of detecting targets many miles apart.

The systems on the Lightning were basic in most cases, and that is what made it the ultimate point defence interceptor. It was up there, among the enemy before anything else out there. And it may have only had two missiles but it also had two 30mm Aden, which allowed it to shoot down much more since it'd already be near the enemy aircraft at the time.

The F-14s systems were superior, no other number excluding combat radius were superior. The actual airframe capability of the F-14 in performance terms was inferior.

[pbfoot]

i sure they were good but to switch over to digital systems or new technologies as they came out cuz the lightning was a product of its era and it must of been very labour intensive to switch all systems over to new technologies and very expensive . i'm not up on the various mks and when they went with digital being how the original airframe (i'm guessing) wasn't designed for the new technologies

[evangilder]

Thanks for that info on the TR-1 Joe. I figured if anyone would know, it would be you.

d, 88,000 feet?! Man, I have been a fan of the lightning, but that seems really high for a normal jet engine. But from what I have seen on the web, that does look like it happened (yep, I searched). That's f'ing amazing!

One thing that I am not sure of, did he intercept at 88,000, or just climb to it?

It was also in 1984, during a major NATO exercise that he intercepted an American U-2 at 66,000 ft, a height which they had previously considered safe from interception. Shortly before this intercept, he flew a zoom climb to 88,000 ft and, later that year, he was able to sustain FL550 while flying subsonic.

http://www.lightning.org.uk/archive/0410.php

I guess it doesn't matter at what altitude he actually intercepted it, the fact that teh Lightning reached that altitude is an interesting testament to the airplane.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

pD you completely confirmed my posting. I said the Lightning never had a combat intercept where it shot down an enemy aircraft. Tomcats did the same thing they intecepted Soviet Bombers all the time. The Tomcat however has shot down enemy aircraft. Ever heard of Libya?

Second what are you talking about taking 4 minutes to climb to 44000ft? The F-14D had a rate of climb of 50,000+, only the F-14A was 30,000+. The F-14 also had a service cieling of 50,000+

List of F-14 "Combat" Intercepts:

Aug. 19, 1981 - F-14As from VF-41 Black Aces shot down two Libyan (Soviet-built) Sukhoi Su-22 "Fitters" using AIM-9 "Sidewinders" after the lead Fitter pilot fired a Vympel AA-2 "Atoll" at one of the F-14s, which missed. One of the Su-22 pilots was seen to have ejected.

Jan 4, 1989 - F-14As from VF-32 Swordsmen assigned to John F. Kennedy shot down two Libyan (Soviet-built) Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 "Floggers" with two AIM-7 "Sparrows" (one failed) and one AIM-9 "Sidewinder." The MiG-23s were pursuing the F-14s in an attempt to get into a missile firing position for several minutes before the F-14s concluded that they were under attack and outmaneuvered the Floggers. Both of the Flogger pilots were seen to have ejected.

Feb 6, 1991 - during Operation Desert Storm, an F-14A from VF-1 Wolfpack shot down a Mil Mi-8 "Hip" helicopter with an AIM-9 "Sidewinder."

2-1 for the Tomcat!

Oh and the F-14 had the most advanced weapons systems and avionix systems of any interceptor including the F-15.

[FLYBOYJ]

Although I have great "sympathies" for the Lightning and understand it's role as an interceptor, after that zoom climb to 88,000, I wonder how much fuel was left?!?

[plan_D]

Enough for him to bring it home and land, at least. And so what, Adler? So the Lightning hasn't dropped anything in real combat. It still could and would quicker than the F-14 on a point intercept. Notice how none of those combat actions used Phoenix missiles!? You lose out on the Phoenix argument so you bring in combat action? Well, with a normal combat load-out the F-14 would be left behind by the Lightning because the only thing keeping the F-14 anywhere near the Lightning in quickest strike is the Phoenix, and the Lightning is still faster.

Either way, Eric, 88,000 feet is very impressive. See, the real ability of the Lightning is yet to be released. The top speed is the next I hope someone decides to reveal because it's obvious it was faster than Mach 2.3.

[Glider]

I suspect folks that were trying to compare apples and pears.
The Lightning had the fastest climb rate of any plane that I have ever heard of. It is a point defence intercepter par excellance. It had to and could, get off the deck quickly, gain height at a prodigious rate and tackle all comers when he got there. So the Lightning correctly had climb and speed.
The F14 had three things that the Lightning didn't have, Range, payload and very long range radar / missiles.
The F14 was designed to operate from Carriers and had to nail incoming bombers before they could launch cruise missiles, probably the greatest threat to any carrier. It also had to dogfight because carriers only hold so many planes and fighters have to fight.
Had the Lightning been able to operate from a carrier then it would have been a modern Seafire, nice performance, poor range.
They were designed to do two different jobs and they both did their assigned tasks almost perfectly.
The F14 must be considered the more flexible of the two and is what the RAF should have bought instead of building the Tornado F3 which was designed to fill a similar role. Carry a good radar, lots of weapons and have a decent range. Unfortunately we got what you get when you try to do something on the cheap, something that doesn't do anything really well.

As for the actual combat record of the F14, I have no doubt the Lightning (or even dare I say the Tornado) could have handled a couple of Mig 23's, two SU22 and a Mil 8 with much better trained pilots.

[Gnomey]

pD have you read this? http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/lightning1.html

"The McDonnell Douglas F.4 Phantom arrived in RAF service in 1969, initially as a ground attack aircraft, but the intention was to replace the Lightning as soon as possible. However, it was not until the SEPECAT Jaguar entered service in late 1973 that the Phantom was released to replace the Lightning in the Air Defence role."

"Although the Lightning fleet still had plenty of hours left in the airframes, the type was considered too labour intensive to both operate and fly by the late 1980's. With the arrival of the Panavia Tornado F2 and F3, the writing was on the wall for the Lightning. Although it still had an excellent rate of climb and could dogfight with the best, it was always short of duration, even the F.6 only had a duration of around two hours without refuelling. The Tornado could stay airborne for twice that, so in 1988 both remaining Lightning squadrons disbanded, along with the Lightning Training Flight (the renamed Lightning Conversion Flight)"

Specs: http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/lightning10.html

[evangilder]

Yes, the Lightning was quite impressive. The first time I saw one was in 1986 at the RAF Mildenhall Air Fete. What a pleasant surprise. I was impressed! But glider is correct, comparing the Lightning and the Tomcat is an apples to oranges comparison as their roles, while both interceptor, carried them in different ways.

How about we say this: The Lightning was the best land based interceptor, and the Tomcat the best carrier based interceptor.

[Glider]

Good for me

[Gnomey]

Originally Posted by evanvanglider

How about we say this: The Lightning was the best land based interceptor, and the Tomcat the best carrier based interceptor.

That I would agree with.

[syscom3]

Sounds good to me.