It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

3 seater f-14

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
The SR-71 shot is not photoshoped and the Fire Fox is from a movie.l

I stand corrected. I'm starting to get pretty sketpic of the three-seater F-14. I'll see if I can get a hold of my friend in the Navy and see if he knows about it.




posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 06:32 PM
link   
The guy that I know thatt flew F-14's in the Jolly Rogers took one look at this and laughed his reare end off. Its a fake, there is no 3 seat F-14 and there really would not be anyreason for one. Some one was just really bored and wanted to cook up a great joke.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by engineer


Remember what happened when the Brits tried to buy some Typhoons without the gun, it was a fiasco.

yeah we figured out it was easier with the gun?
what was the fiasco?



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Hmm, I had been studying the picture closely, and looks as if the third seat was taken from the front cockpit of another F-14. The First seat.

And yea, I was studying it a along time, I kept seeing that something wasn't alligned right, but I did not notice it, kept passing the reflection bit.

And there was no Fiasco with the EF-2000 Typhoon. The British RAF wanted the EF without a cannon, they didn't get it.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
img72.exs.cx...


Ahaha, yes, that kinda proves it. The reflection would be constant.
Thanksfor clearing that up.

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: Image Hotlinking – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 19/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Here's a fake 3 seater f-16. Link


This is what happens when you run out of ammo and the target must be destroyed. Link



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 07:10 PM
link   
great
some people have to mush time on their hands



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 07:34 PM
link   
It is a fake. look at the reflections and the first 2 seats,

good one though and would make a heck of a wallpaper!



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by engineer


Remember what happened when the Brits tried to buy some Typhoons without the gun, it was a fiasco.

yeah we figured out it was easier with the gun?
what was the fiasco?
My point was not to criticize the RAF, it was to point out the critical nature of weight and balance in a fighter AC.

The fiasco was that in an attempt to safe money, the MOD ordered the Typhoons without the gun. To quote the news article,


It was too late to stop the first tranche of 55 British aircraft being fitted with the Mauser BK27 gun, but the rest would have a lead or concrete weight in its place.

But engineers found the only way to preserve the aircraft's aerodynamics was to have something that not only weighed the same as the gun but was also shaped exactly the same.

To make matters worse, each individual part of the makeweight's shape also had to weigh exactly the same as the real thing. In short, the cheapest option was to fit the cannon. So all 232 of the RAF's Eurofighter/Typhoon aircraft will be fitted with the gun at a cost of 90 million - but in order to save what is now a mere 2.5 million they will have no rounds to fire.


This has already been discussed here, so no need to drag the discussion back up. But that is what I was referring to, you don't make any changes to a fighter AC without consequences. And adding a 3rd seat to an F-14 is a HUGE change.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   
I was an F-14 Tech In the Navy. AQ was my designator. All I can tell you is there IS NO WAY this could or Would work with out MAJOR changes in the avionic, and there is NO room for changes in the air frame with out extending it.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Fake....very fake...

This was even debunked here on ATS a LONG time ago when I was still a lurker.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Yes, I think we all know it was an April Fool's joke.

It is indeed an April Fool's joke, if you look at the date on the article that came with the pic, it was dated April 1st. So many tricks.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 01:20 PM
link   
First off the pictures are not fakes, nor was it a trainer. It was the prototype of the EF-14.

There was exactly one three-seat EF-14 produced. To give the Navy an electronic warfare capable aircraft that would have be able to go in with a strike mission instead of have to stand off.

A friend of mine (former Captain and F-14 pilot) mentioned it to me and claimed there were no pictures of it (that was fairly early in the internet era). When I showed the picture to him, he was very surprised but confirmed one was built and was tested once only. This was classified even after the Navy decided not to go ahead with production models. I do not know why.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Interesting. I've never heard of the EF-14. Has anyone else?

There is the well known, three crewed, electronic warfare aircraft, the EA-6B Prowler. I know there not much common ground bar them both being navy electronic warfare planes but could your source be confused?

Maybe your friend could give some more info on it. Particularly why the reflection on the cockpits dont match up!



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Actually the EA-6B was a four person crew. Two electronics officers a pilot and a nav. I've seen a LOT of information about just about every tomcat varient ever even proposed and have NEVER seen anything about an "EF-14". Not to mention what someone else posted about there not being ROOM in the Tomcat for another person. Especially if you're going to mount electronics for jamming on it.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Especially if you're going to mount electronics for jamming on it.


Yep - the equipment on this "EF-14" is apparently so advanced that it doesn't need any additional external antennas, like the EF-111 or EA-6B or EF-18G.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by crusader97
Yep - the equipment on this "EF-14" is apparently so advanced that it doesn't need any additional external antennas, like the EF-111 or EA-6B or EF-18G.


Personally, I don't find it too difficult to believe that there might have been a one-off model of an F-14 with three seats.

As to the EF-14, it had quite a prominent antenna:



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
I find it interesting that there is exactly NO information ANYWHERE about an F-14 carrying an AWACS radar like that, but there is information about every OTHER variant of the F-14 that was even proposed. You'd think that SOMEONE would have information about it.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 09:12 PM
link   
After working on F-14 A/B/Ds in the Navy I can tell you that I haven't heard of any 3 seat versions. The original picture used to make this picture is a B or D model because of the "turkey feathers" of the engines, good catch on an earlier post.

Anyone who worked on these knows what is located in the area that the pictured 3rd seat resides in. No way can you move that stuff to make room for a bigger cockpit.

I also like how the glare on the canopy changes for the 3rd seat, what a poor photoshop job. I know someone talked about that earlier, but someone said that could be from the design. One word, fake.

I can go on and on about this. All were 2 seat versions, period.

Funny picture. I will have to send this to my friends and get a few good laughs.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I find it interesting that there is exactly NO information ANYWHERE about an F-14 carrying an AWACS radar like that, but there is information about every OTHER variant of the F-14 that was even proposed. You'd think that SOMEONE would have information about it.


Yeah you'd think so... If it were real!


After considering the practicality of a big-ass radome like that on a supersonic fighter, I did some further searching and found this: (which is most likely the source image used for the "EF-14" image)

Sorry about that folks!




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join