• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Remembering the early days of Tomcat maintenance....

Navy Chief

Navy Chief

Senior Member
When I was at Patuxent River in the early 70s, the Tomcat had just been introduced to the fleet. Maintenance on the F-14As (two of them, I believe) at North Site Maintenance on base was done by civilian contractors. They were doing some work one day, when the aircraft's flaps went to full downward position, killing the civilian who was operating an NC-8A mobile electric power unit, parked under the aircraft. If I recall correctly, the mech in the cockpit had not selected any controls. It was because of that incident, and other cases where the NC-8A operators had forgotten to store the power cord before driving away from the aircraft - that an extension of the cable became required in all NC-8s.

NC
 
Chief, maybe you can clear this up for me. It's my understanding that the early F-14s were fitted with engines orginally designed for an abandoned naval variant of the F-111 strike aircraft, and were extremely vulnerable to turbulent and otherwise "dirty" air, as well as being somewhat underpowered. Is this true? False?

JAMES
 
Eoraptor, you are correct. The F-14A's original TF-30 engines were planned for the ill-fated F-111B Navy version. They were a terrible match for the F-111, and performed only slightly better with the F-14. Not enough thrust, and prone to compressor stalls. The GE F110 engines used in the F-14A+ and F-14D were a big improvement and gave the planes the performance they should've had all along.
The F-111B was a pet program of Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. After the carrier trials proved that the aircraft was a dog, Vice Adm. Tom Connolly said so before the Senate Armed Services Committee. That PO'ed McNamara and pretty much ended Connolly's career but it paved the way for development of the F-14. :)
 
TARPSBird said:
....., Vice Adm. Tom Connolly said so before the Senate Armed Services Committee. That PO'ed McNamara and pretty much ended Connolly's career but it paved the way for development of the F-14. :)
Click to expand...


And this is why the jet is named the 'Tom'cat, according to Grumman.
 
Thanks for answering, gentlemen. It's unfortunate that someone pointing out the fact that frequent compressor stalls might be a disadvantage in a fighter aircraft had to sacrifice his career for doing so. I can't post my thoughts about Mr. McNamara and obey forum rules...

I've been fascinated by the Tomcat since I was a little boy. My old mailman, on the other hand, insists that the F-8 Crusader was the last fighter the Navy put into service. He was in Naval aviation and always had lots of stories.

JAMES
 
Eoraptor1 said:
I can't post my thoughts about Mr. McNamara and obey forum rules...
Click to expand...
Eoraptor,
Hehe, most of us Vietnam vets here probably have the same problem. :mad:
Your mailman was right about the F-8 Crusader, at least until the F-14 came on the scene. The old saying was, "When you're out of F-8's, you're out of fighters". I'm still a loyal Crusader guy, even though I spent four years in the F-14 community at the end of my Navy career. Both aircraft were outstanding designs and the Navy/USMC got their money's worth from them.
 
TARPSBird said:
Eoraptor,
Hehe, most of us Vietnam vets here probably have the same problem. :mad:
Your mailman was right about the F-8 Crusader, at least until the F-14 came on the scene. The old saying was, "When you're out of F-8's, you're out of fighters". I'm still a loyal Crusader guy, even though I spent four years in the F-14 community at the end of my Navy career. Both aircraft were outstanding designs and the Navy/USMC got their money's worth from them.
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to cause you any upset, TARPSBird. I was just a little boy when we left Indochina ("we" - meaning the United States); but my family who were there talk like you, and we also have the Freedom of Information Act here, and I have I library card. It's a real eye opener to read even partially declassified national security documents, even stuff as far back as WWII. Planners have an entirely different vocabulary when talking to each other than they do talking to the public. Better stop there. Forum rules...

JAMES
 
TARPSBird said:
Eoraptor, you are correct. The F-14A's original TF-30 engines were planned for the ill-fated F-111B Navy version. They were a terrible match for the F-111, and performed only slightly better with the F-14. Not enough thrust, and prone to compressor stalls. The GE F110 engines used in the F-14A+ and F-14D were a big improvement and gave the planes the performance they should've had all along.
The F-111B was a pet program of Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. After the carrier trials proved that the aircraft was a dog, Vice Adm. Tom Connolly said so before the Senate Armed Services Committee. That PO'ed McNamara and pretty much ended Connolly's career but it paved the way for development of the F-14. :)
Click to expand...

Paraphrasing the quote, "Senator, all the thrust in Christendom would not make this plane a fighter."
 
navychief said:
Maybe I am doing something wrong (usually the case), but it looks like that is only one chapter?

NC
Click to expand...

Chief,

My apologies; that was my mistake. I know there was at least one complete Tomcat manual online, but the link may be dead. A lot of the old Tomcat links are gone. If it isn't dead and I can find it, I'll post it here. Meanwhile, here's a link to another F-14 resource page. I'd be interested in knowing if their info is accurate. GO HERE: http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-detail.htm

JAMES
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top