20 comments
I read this headline like it was a current event and was really concerned.
Exactly my thought, having visited the museum in San Diego
[dead]
Also the article has been around since 2023. Either an article date or the event date should be included in the headline. Or sticking to the original headline “That time…” would make it clear it’s not current. At the moment it feels like a clickbait submission.
https://web.archive.org/web/20230415000000*/https://theaviat...
Since the F-14 is on this website again might as well re-link the "recently (2024)" declassified CPU info - https://hackaday.com/2024/01/30/the-worlds-first-microproces... || https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-14_CADC
Because of the story about the Cessna landing on the Midway it reminded me of the diverted F14 who had to land on the carrier. The Midway was not designed for the heavy F14.
Thought it was viral marketing for Top Gun 3 for a second there. But thanks for the interesting read. It's a pity such a dramatic real world event never made it into either of the Top Gun movies.
Just to be clear, though, the F-14 was retired in 2006, right?
Not just retired but all were destroyed. Please correct if I’m wrong but they were destroyed to prevent any spare parts ending up in Iran.
Such a shame, I was always impressed with the F14, even before Topgun.
The ones in museums supposedly had their internal wing structure cut to prevent them from every flying again:
https://web.archive.org/web/20211113195112/https://theaviati...
but that part of the post has been removed from the updated version on the original website. The post now just says that one of the main points was identified as incorrect information. So the actual airworthiness of the ones in museums seems unclear. You can find a list of where they are on display here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F-14_Tomcat#Aircraft_o...
Not all were destroyed, couple were kept for museum, i took a picture with one at the navy station in Norfolk, Virginia
> Not just retired but all were destroyed
I think that's not true, there seems to be many fans of them and several on display https://www.f-14association.com/on-display/f-14-tomcats-on-d...
[2023] article describing an event in 1982
The USS Midway is 296m long, with 282m of that being its flight deck.
The USS Enterprise is 342m long, with 336m of flight deck.
That's 54 metres of difference which doesn't seem a lot, but to an F14 pilot they would be very precious meters of landing distance.
Amazing that they hooked the first time round on the first arrestor cable too!
If you look at the USS Enterprise and Midway flight decks they don’t make use of the full length of the ship for landings.
That seems crazy, but by traveling into the wind you can subtract the ships forward speed from an aircraft’s stall speed.
Ya, probably the relevant length from stern to the end of the waist deck - as I understand it if you need go around ("bolt") on a carrier landing, your going off the waist deck. From peeking at some pictures, it doesn't look like the midway waist deck is much shorter than on a Nimitz or something.
AI prompt : make up a news link to my clickbait site relating to the current tension in the world
copy-paste-have-coffee-golf-for-the-day
What a great future for one of us
War. It's fan-tastic!
(2023)