Here's Why We Didn't Get the Super Tomcat-21 and Why That Was a Mistake

Ward reviews the origins of the Navy's Fleet Air Defense mission requirement that led to the acquisition of the F-14 Tomcat and how the F/A-18 emerged from the Air Force's Lightweight Fighter program. He also goes into the factors that ultimately saw to the Tomcat's sunsetting and imagines what the modern carrier air wing would look like if SecDef Cheney had wanted the Super Tomcat over the Super Hornet.

[kipcampbell]

In the early 1990's I was working as a stability and control aero engineer for McDonnell Aircraft. Even though Grumman was a competitor, I/we thought it was a complete travesty to not strengthen the F-14 line. The F-14 swing wing was well implemented after Grumman's lessons learned with the Jaguar and F-111. And a swing wing aircraft is the only really practical way to realize both the loiter and dash capability required for the long range fleet air defense mission.

[ldjb]

Mr. Ward, the Tomcat is the sexiest and most versitile fighter in history without a doubt. But as a retired infantryman, the A10 is my Angel and will forever hold that place in my heart!

[blueduster]

When I was a SH-60 AWS in the 90s my buddies that worked on the Tomcat always told me the maintenance issues were WAY over blown.

[Tar-Numendil]

The F-14 Tomcat is one of the sexiest planes ever. Others for me include the F-22 Raptor, the F4U Corsair, the P-51 Mustang, and the SR-71 Blackbird. It's a shame that we never got the Super Tomcat 21, and that the Tomcat is no longer in service in the United States Navy.

[mister-LA]

I was an engine mechanic in VF-142 in the mid-'70s and transitioned from the F-4 to the F-14 (around 1974). Our squadron was attached to the USS America. I found this video by accident, but it was really interesting.

[bobbidonde]

For 27 years in Grumman Engineering, I worked on F-14 Programs. I was the 9K TCR Task Team Leader when the F-14 Program came to an end in 2001.

[olentangy]

Great history presentation, Ward. I work for Navair, and spent several years doing depot level work on the Tomcat in Norfolk. My specialty was the environmental control systems, which provided cooling for the weapons systems, and the cockpit ECS.
(I spent hundreds of hours in the nose wheel well, where all the lines intersected) In addition to the A models, some of the B and D conversions were done. The wing gloves were riveted closed, and the plumbing for the cooling system for the Phoenix was omitted.
The early 90’s was a glum time for naval aviation. Scores of squadrons across the spectrum were being decommissioned. Intruders were rolling fresh off the overhaul line and straight to the scrappers. Dozens of Tomcats were being stripped of useful parts so as to scrap the airframes. It was a sad time. But the pilots who were still flying the Tomcats loved them. Pilots who would arrive at the depot to fly Tomcats back to Oceana told stories of how the hornet pilots on the boat were constantly calling for a tanker while the F-14 guys could stay aloft for hours. With the hornet’s short legs, the joke was that the hornet would make a fine attack plane as long as you were bombing Argentina.
I was at the FRC at Jacksonville for the ceremony commemorating rollout of the last Tomcat in 2005. The following year they were retired completely.
I have been with the Super Hornet for 16 years now, and it has matured into a very capable platform, but there will never be another combat aircraft like the mighty Grumman F-14 Tomcat.

[geoffcampbell]

I'm still watching old episodes on this channel, just catching up on my education, and what jumps straight out at me is a saying we have of "Penny wise, pound foolish." But politicians rarely admit their mistakes, and the rest is history. A fascinating video, thanks. 👋

[johnnelson]

I was working for Northrop Grumman in the 1990’s when the program was canceled. A lot of scuttle but at the time corroborated your sentiments. In final analysis, the Armed Services Committee had more constituents in St Louis than in Bethpage. What a shame, the F-14D was an incredible warplane.

[chriskenney]

So energizing, and then the reality of military aviation acquisition and related politics. You can't fix stupid. Thanks Ward, it's a privilege to hear your stories, and analysis.

[josephclark]

As a Prowler maintainer, I hated that the Navy turned its back on Grumman. If they could figure out how to put a dish on a lawn dart, the E2 would be gone too. 😥

[UrbaneHobbit]

I have only recently discovered this channel, and have watched maybe half a dozen videos going back several years. I have to say that the writing for this channel is a cut above. Certainly it is personally informed by actual experience, but not everyone who has done the thing can describe the thing so well. I can only assume that communication plays a large part in US naval aviation. Thank you for sharing your observations and analysis so clearly, in a way that enhances their value, both in terms of history and entertainment. A rare feat, and one which you can apparently execute on a weekly basis.

[jamescraft]

39 years Air Force and was a F-111 crew chief in the early 80's, started on O2-A's n the late 70's and ended on F-16 C/D's in 2019 and I still believe the Tomcat is the best looking aircraft of the modern era.

[stevis]

I'm a former member of the USAF RF-4C community. I'm impressed with your knowledge of aircraft and your ability to present the information. This video answered a lot of questions that I had about the reasons the F-14 was retired so soon.

[wlodell]

As a retired Army guy, I understood the value and appreciated the design of Grumman aircraft and admired the thinking behind it all! But, how to forgive those terrible politicians who imposed their 'better judgment' on the Troops, Sailors, Marines, and Airmen?

[schweinhund]

I commend your candid assessment! Being a retired “Army dogfaced grunt” I can assure you that much Department of Defense procurement is suspicious to us too! Anchors aweigh!

[bryanbeers]

Mr. Carroll - A bunch of years ago, two MiG-29's (a single seater and a tandem seater) and an IL-76 support aircraft participated in the local airshow in Kalamazoo. There was an F-14 Tomcat flight demonstration during the show (I believe it may have been flown by the late, great "Snort Snodgrass - RIP) which included an amazingly tight 360 degree circle in knife-edge flight!!!! I was standing near one of the Russian pilots and his backseater, and you could tell they were absolutely gobsmacked at the flight characteristics of the Tomcat!!!! Their reaction was priceless!!!! Thanks for all the great information! Bryan

[stanharley]

Ward:

Very interesting discussion on “Why We Didn't Get the Super Tomcat-21.” There is one more very important program development that weighed heavily in the evolution that was not mentioned.
From 1979 through 1983 I served as a Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) in the same squadron in which you later served: VF-102 Diamondbacks at NAS Oceana. Following VF-102, from 1983 to 1986 I was at VX-4, NAS Pt. Mugu, CA. After the Navy went to work for Northrop (now Northrop/Grumman) in 1987. At the time, Northrop was teamed with McDonnell Douglas in development
of the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) and the Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF). The two of us – Northrop and McDonnell Douglas – were in competition against Lockheed, Boeing, and General Dynamics to design and build two replacement fighters for both the Air Force’s F-15 and the Navy’s F-14. Both teams built two flyable vehicles – the Lockheed team built and flew the YF-22 and we built and flew the YF-23. What is not widely known are the details involving the Navy variants the public never saw. I was the senior RIO on the program for the Northrop/McDonnell team. While the public saw our YF-23 we built for the Air Force, the details for our Navy ATF were never publicly released and I assume remain classified. I can tell you, though, our aircraft looked similar to the YF-23 the public saw. The big design drivers at that time were low observability, interoperability with the AAAM missile – the Phoenix replacement, the ability to super cruise, sensor fusion both internal and external, and a significant reduction in maintainability costs. Our Navy ATF resembled the Air Force YF-23 we flight demonstrated but was designed with both a pilot and an RIO. It had an electrically scanned array (ESA) radar, larger internal weapons bay to accommodate the AAAM, had a much larger thrust to weight ratio than the F-14D, and incorporated a very low radar and infrared signature. I personally flew thousands of hours in flight simulation. It was an exciting time to be sure. But at source selection in late April 1991, the Air Force – the lead service on the program – chose the Lockheed team’s YF-22 for the Air Force. DoD had billed the program as “two aircraft with one contractor for both services” (like the F-4 Phantom and the TFX) but what occurred was what many had feared: the Air Force and Navy split on their selections.

The Navy pulled out of the program – which infuriated the Air Force because it dramatically drove up their costs. The day it was announced the Navy was out of the program, McDonnell Douglas issued pink slips to all of the design engineers I had worked with for several years. So sad. In the debates that followed, the Navy planners decided that low observability was not so-much the design driver as it was in the Air Force community. Although not expressly “low observable, ” what eventually transpired was the development of the F/A-18 Super Hornet as you have described by the same two contractors that lost the NATF program: Northrop (now Northrop/Grumman) and McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing).

I still have a couple of coffee mugs in my china hutch depicting our NATF on the side that “disappears” when hot coffee is poured into it. I gave away boxes and boxes of these at our Northrop booth at Tailhook 1990.


Stan Harley “Hawg”

[joelgraffman]

A great recap of the F-14 story. I was closely involved with the beginning, and until your video didn't know the end. I was a LCDR RIO instructor in VF=121 in the late 60's and was asked to visit Hughes aircraft for fleet inputs on how the modify the F-111 B weapons system for the newly planned F-14. This soon involved more and more time, and I ended up getting orders to the F-14 program office at NAVAIR. It's hard to believe today, but the program manager was only a Navy Captain (Mike Ames). The only other blue suit was the weapon system manager an EDO CDR. Engine procurement was managed by the USAF at Wright-Pat. This might help to explain the TF-30 thump-bang problem that we experienced during the first deployment on Enterprise, which was a big surprise to those of us in the Fleet. In hindsight, someone knew of this problem. I used to get F-4 flight time at Pax River and the Pax service test pilots were leery of this engine even before the F-14 first flight. After the first F-14 crash, the Washington Post seemed to make it a personal vendetta to cancel the program and a flag officer (Swoose Snead) took over the program before fleet introduction. I was lucky to be assigned to the VF1/VF2 fleet introduction team at Miramar which was loaded with future Astronauts and Flag officers. Later on, I was again fortunate and was honored to command VF-24. Alas that was my last flying tour and involvement with the F-14. Joel Graffman (Capt USN RET)

[darrinparrent]

My friend, Bill Judd, worked for Grummond since late 1970. This was right after he got out of the US Navy. He was in Iran training the Shaw's mechanics on F-14 maintenance. Bill claimed (and I believe) that he had worked on every Tomcat ever made except the first one (model 001) which crashed. Bill and I were at the Reagan Library in 2018. We went to see the F-14 they had gotten. The name on the side was a man that Bill knew; the last aviator to be assigned to that plane. Bill loved the Tomcat. He retired from Pt. Mugu as a civilian contractor (Northrup-Grummond) in 2008.