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.

 

The end of the Top Gun Era

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 03:02 AM
link   


The U.S. Navys meanest, fastest and most agile fighter jet, nearing retirement, is deployed in the western Pacific Ocean for the last time.

The Grumman F-14, which entered military service in 1972, also is a movie star. At least for aviation aficionados, it upstaged actors including Tom Cruise in the film Top Gun.


The end of a might fine era. Kinda weird they are replacing it with an aircraft that in some aspects is less capable.

Using the excuse that its getting hard to find part for is ridiculus as well. When they can just call their contractors and get more parts made. And carriers should have the capability to make their own parts as well.

End of Top Gun Era




posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:28 AM
link   
The problem is maintaining these extremely complex aircraft like the F14. You just cannot find enough people trained to work on them,and who wants to make minimun wage and suffer at sea?
What happened to the "advanced" Tomcat. Got a few more years out of it did you? That is why the Air Force went to the simpler F16's. Single engine,fixed wing,and it seems to do just fine.The Euro Tornado is another monstrousity.
We have our own troubles with those F18's we bought from you.
"The Falcon was what we wanted." Pilot

"No ship ever made its own parts."2IC
You have a foundry on board or something?

[edit on 27-8-2004 by stgeorge]

[edit on 27-8-2004 by stgeorge]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 08:33 AM
link   
The Advanced Tomcat was found to be too redundant and expensive. They figured it was better to develop newer fighters to augment and eventually replace the Tomcat.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Until F-22s are in service the F-14 will be the worlds most capable interceptor. How many other aircraft can launch the AIM-54 Phoenix.... none! Even in close combat the F-14 shredded almost all the other USN/USAF aircraft. Really the F-14 was well worth the cost. Replacing it with the F-18 is one of the stupidest moves I've ever seen. The F-14 has been proven to be far superior to the F-18 in everyway. If we were going to go with the cost effective plan the USN should have gotten F-16s. I feel a few more upgrades and the F-14 would be usable for quite a few more years. Well ladies and gentlemen there goes the USNs best line of fleet defense.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by stgeorge

"No ship ever made its own parts."2IC
You have a foundry on board or something?


Ever heard of something called a machine shop? or someone who is a machinist?



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 02:45 PM
link   
It's a shame they're retiring it from service, other countries i'm sure will buy them of the US.

Is the F-18 truly inferior to the F-14? Why is the F-14 the only fighter to carry the Phoenix AA missile?



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 04:36 PM
link   
I think this thread belongs in Aircraft Projects.

The F-14 is an extremely capable aircraft, and if what you all say is true about it being to expensive to maintain, then why has it lasted 32 years?

The F-35c JSF will take its place as the Navy's advanced multi-role fighter, right up there with the F/A-18 SuperHornet.

The F-14 has proven its worth in battle and will forever be a valued aicraft in any modern navy's inventory(up until the next decade or so).

By the way, the "Top Gun" era you are basing on the movie "Top Gun". A Top Gun is a Navy Ace with many hours of flight time and is a competition to other Navy Aces, there are Top Gun competitions and so on, just because the F-14 is retiring, does not mean that the Top Guns will retire as well.

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 27-8-2004 by ShatteredSkies]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:33 PM
link   
there is a large lathe,on a large US ship. It just sits there,the old timers say as ballast.It was never used. This is the USS Enterprise I believe.
It is too big to remove.Some say the ship was built around it in the yard.
Why? Who knows. But a lathe even can concievably create a spark or flame and...what does the machinist or millwright do when there is nothing to make? Much too valuable in the ship yards.
They also said the hull interiour looks like a "patchwork quilt" as plates are welded on as it corrodes or it strikes something.
Indeed a breech was created when it ran into a walrus,and this was in the North Atlantic.Don't ask what it was doing there...

[edit on 27-8-2004 by stgeorge]



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 05:55 PM
link   
A couple of years ago I got to visit the USS Enterprise. It truly was an amazing experience but I'm sure nobody really cares but anyhow I got a personal tour of all but the nuclear reactors, the sleeping quarters, and the bridge. I don't remember any lathe thoughIf I'm correct Top Gun is nessesary to fly the F-14. Anyhow trust me the big E is no piece of junk. It would take a lot more than a walrus to cause a breach.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 06:17 PM
link   
You would be surprised how thin modern warships hulls are. When my brother was in the Royal Navy, we went aboard the Carrier HMS Illustrious and the Frigate HMS iron Duke (not a tour, more as guests so got to see everything), and their hulls are literally only a couple of cm thick at best.

Apparently they are designed to let bullets pass through rather than explode on the hull (not sure of the logic, ask a Navy dude).

You can actually see, if you go up close, especially on the Iron Duke, the skeleton of the ship underneath this paper thin hull!!



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Yeah when I was on the Enterprise I was a guest. Anyhow the Enterprise was made in the late sixties/early seventies or something, first nuclear powered aircraft carrier. So its a little older than a lot of ships in service. The Enterprise does seem to have a heavy metal element to it (they use the anchor room as a church). I'm pretty sure its thick enough to take some hits. Even if it does compartmentization keeps it afloat. It takes a lot of water to sink an Enterprise or Nimitz class carrier.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
You would be surprised how thin modern warships hulls are. When my brother was in the Royal Navy, we went aboard the Carrier HMS Illustrious and the Frigate HMS iron Duke (not a tour, more as guests so got to see everything), and their hulls are literally only a couple of cm thick at best.

Apparently they are designed to let bullets pass through rather than explode on the hull (not sure of the logic, ask a Navy dude).

You can actually see, if you go up close, especially on the Iron Duke, the skeleton of the ship underneath this paper thin hull!!

really?
when i went on edinburgh it was at least an inch and a haf thick. also you gota rem they aint designed for up close battles so bullets arnt a problem and also bullets wont go through the hull. only shells will.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:12 PM
link   
How big is an inch Devilwasp? 2.5 cm.... nuff said, it aint that thick at all.

Anyway, I am not here to argue with you, but that is what i was told by the Officers on board the Iron Duke. When i said bullets, i meant shells, missiles, walruss's.....



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Ok judging by your locations the both of you Devil and Stumason you both use metric. Me being in America let me help clarify our measurment system. My ruler shows almost exactly 3 centimeters per inch. Also just for future estimation referecnce about one yard (three feet which is 12 inches) is about a meter in lengh.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:18 PM
link   
It is exactly 2.54 cm to an inch

Inch to cm convertor

Anyway, i feel we have strayed off topic.... hehe

My fault, it was the whole walrus thing just made me want to add my 2 cents so to speak.

Oh yeah, me and Devilwasp are both UK, so we don't actually know what we use, sort of a mish mash of everything. (Depends if Europe gets its way or not.......)

[edit on 1-9-2004 by stumason]



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Just a question for either one of you guys what do you learn in school first, metric or the English system. Anyhow back on topic it is pretty sad to see the F-14 being retired. I still can't stand how its being replaced by the F-18.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:26 PM
link   
We're supposed to learn metric According to Europe), but for some reason we still all learn Imperial too. No wonder we're so confused when they demand we buy our bananas in kilos......



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Yeah my school taught us the English version then all of a sudden in middle school math and science they demanded we use metric. We were so screwed up after that. The US was supposed to switch to metric I think but you know how our foerign policy can be.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Of course there are machine shops on US Navy ships. The entire ship is a city of metal that has to be as self-sufficient as possible.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by stgeorge
there is a large lathe,on a large US ship. It just sits there,the old timers say as ballast.It was never used. This is the USS Enterprise I believe.
It is too big to remove.Some say the ship was built around it in the yard.
Why? Who knows. But a lathe even can concievably create a spark or flame and...what does the machinist or millwright do when there is nothing to make? Much too valuable in the ship yards.
They also said the hull interiour looks like a "patchwork quilt" as plates are welded on as it corrodes or it strikes something.
Indeed a breech was created when it ran into a walrus,and this was in the North Atlantic.Don't ask what it was doing there...

[edit on 27-8-2004 by stgeorge]



you are full of @%&$. from your statement im sure you have not been on the USS Enterprise for any other Navy ship.
well maybe one thats in the dead fleet in the James River.

you dont know that the hull of a CVN has to take the impact of 5 torpedos
to protect the reactor's (thats 2) or in the Enterprise's case 8 reactors.
what was the Enterprise doing in the atlantic. its not do do for a overhull till 2008

[edit on 4-9-2004 by DRAGON27]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join