Was it true

Member for

6 years 10 months

Posts: 162

Several years ago when I took a Tiger Cruise on The USS Lincoln, I was told that under certain conditions that the F-14D could super cruise. Can anyone confirm this?
Original post
Profile picture for user Boom

Member for

9 years 6 months

Posts: 889

most 4gen fighter with decent TWR (F-14 certainly was one) can supercruise in case a) it is flying clean and b) it has a light onboard fuel load. such supercruising is not a tactically useful capability.

Member for

11 years 9 months

Posts: 2,248

F14D and F14A+/B had good twr, F14A did not.
Profile picture for user HAWX ace

Member for

9 years 9 months

Posts: 694

most 4gen fighter with decent TWR (F-14 certainly was one) can supercruise in case a) it is flying clean and b) it has a light onboard fuel load.
Also it's important whether ascending or descending, obviously the latter makes it easier.
Profile picture for user swerve

Member for

14 years 4 months

Posts: 13,434

If you count descending, then Hawk, Harrier & M-346 can all supercruise.
Profile picture for user schurem

Member for

11 years 3 months

Posts: 295

lol if you count descending [i]I[/i] can supercruise and i dont even need no stinkin' airplane to do that either! Link to experimental evidence
Profile picture for user Dr.Snufflebug

Member for

7 years 2 months

Posts: 478

Also it's important whether ascending or descending, obviously the latter makes it easier.
Cruise is per definition level flight, so no, that's irrelevant. And on topic, there are numerous Cold War-era jets that could pull off supersonic cruise, but only a few could do it with any meaningful weapons/fuel load and even fewer could push through the transsonic without having to use reheating (AB) at least for a little while. That having been said though, it is obviously not a new phenomenon in any way. It's just that the modern day buzzword refers to a more practical side of it.
Profile picture for user HAWX ace

Member for

9 years 9 months

Posts: 694

Cruise is per definition level flight, so no, that's irrelevant.
You are right. But you can achieve supercruise descending and then go back to level flight. You will continue supercruising. Not lasting and not meaningful, surely, but possible nonetheless.
And on topic, there are numerous Cold War-era jets that could pull off supersonic cruise, but only a few could do it with any meaningful weapons/fuel load and even fewer could push through the transsonic without having to use reheating (AB) at least for a little while. That having been said though, it is obviously not a new phenomenon in any way. It's just that the modern day buzzword refers to a more practical side of it.
Gripen included, presumably. One of its test pilots when asked about demo's supercruing, he claimed "you can supercruise with the C/D too, but you have to be in Sweden {north climate} and it has to be cold."
Profile picture for user MSphere

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 8,850

Several years ago when I took a Tiger Cruise on The USS Lincoln, I was told that under certain conditions that the F-14D could super cruise. Can anyone confirm this?
Certainly possible even with F-14B.

Member for

6 years 10 months

Posts: 162

I noticed that on the Lincoln when they launched F-14Ds most of the time they had so much power that they didnt even use afterburner on take off. That and the statement by some on the ship that D model 14s could super cruise made sense. That of course would seem to depend on how much junk that had hanging from the wings. And yes super cruise means level flight for an entended period of time. Even an F-86 could dive and probably remain supersonic for several seconds after it leveled off. At Ofautt Air Force Base in Omaha at an air show one of the new at the time F-14Ds put on a flight demo. Much to the dismay of the Air Force types, it stole the show. Among other things it came down the runway in slow flight with everything it could hang out in the wind. It then pulled everything up and went into burner and went verticle from that slow flight. It stacked 3 immelmann turn on top of one another. It was the most impressive display of aircraft power I have ever seen.
Profile picture for user Freehand

Member for

7 years 5 months

Posts: 980

I'd have to say the most impressive demo of aircraft power I have ever seen was the SR-71. That thing took off so fast, I could barely turn my head fast enough to keep up with it.
Profile picture for user eagle

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 2,261

I noticed that on the Lincoln when they launched F-14Ds most of the time they had so much power that they didnt even use afterburner on take off. That and the statement by some on the ship that D model 14s could super cruise made sense. That of course would seem to depend on how much junk that had hanging from the wings.
It was more a safety issue the Tomcat B and D launched without afterburners. Should one engine quit during take-off, the Tomcat couldn't compensate for asymmetrical thrust. The increase in dry thrust was enough to launch without burners, so they did. If you think about it, the B/D had less dry thrust than the A had in burners, and the newer models were heavier meaning take-off performance dry B/D model versus wet A model is worse. Re supercruise, my guess is the B was the fastest. Compared to the D, its lighter and less draggy due to the added IRST sensor.

Member for

6 years 8 months

Posts: 253

Whole concept of swing wings is wings forward for low speed flight wings back for higher speed flight. So its very possible F14 with wings swept back could hit supercruise because wing is better optimized then a non swing winged aircraft that has to worry about things like landing speed that F14 deals with by sweeping its wings forward.

Member for

6 years 10 months

Posts: 162

eagle I have a little problem with your statement that Tomcats didnt launch with burners. There are a ton of pictures on the internet with older models of Tomcats in burner during launch. The D models with their GE engines had approx 30% more thrust, and were not prone to compressor stalls like the PW engines were. BTW the GE engines had a special moan to them that just plain made the hair on the back of your head stand up. Again at Offaut at the air show a D model made a high G turn is full burner with about an 80 degree bank. The sound and the turn like I say helped the Tomcat steal the show at an AF base.
Profile picture for user frankvw

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 4,445

The F-110 equipped Tomcats (so the B & Ds) didn't need afterburners for a cat shot. They had enough power in dry thrust. Short summary here: http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-detail-engine.htm

Member for

6 years 10 months

Posts: 162

Frank Thanks for the detail specs. Interesting tho that with all that extra thrust of the GE engines, they still list the top speed at 1544. Could that be a heat limiting speed, or are they still unwilling to list the true top speed of the D models. I know that when you get above approx 1500 mph heat really starts to become a problem with both the engine inlet and the airframe.

Member for

9 years 8 months

Posts: 2,163

I'd have to say the most impressive demo of aircraft power I have ever seen was the SR-71. That thing took off so fast, I could barely turn my head fast enough to keep up with it.
Really? That is surprising given the thrust:weight of an SR-71 is quite low. It had to take off so fast as it has limited high lift devices.

Member for

6 years 10 months

Posts: 162

If you want to talk impressive take offs, you should have see the Crusader III take off. Start to roll fire the burner. There was a huge boom and a huge flame. It then lifted off and the two ventral fins that were horizonal came down vertical as the gear went up. The Navy should have bought some of them too. They could fly rings around the Phantom. I saw the III fly several times at Moffett Field in 1960 give or take.