The vanishing of F-14 Tomcat and its replacement

Very simply the F-14 was an analog computer with bits all over the place not standardised and a bit of a nightmare to maintain and upgrade.

Having said that it had speed and range advantages over the Hornet.

the hornet was an IBM PC aircraft with a standard design and clear upgrade paths and modular plug and play sort of thing.

Much easier to upgrade and to maintain.

Performance could be improved with software updates.

the thing is that the hornet was the replacement for the tomcat so the tomcat stopped getting love which led to a difference in performance.

The F-14D had enormous upgrade potential which was sacrificed to the Hornet and F-35 fan clubs.

Having a mix of fighters... big and powerful and long ranged and smaller and lighter made sense, because it gives the best of both worlds.

Having a big heavier fighter means even if you are surprised you can launch a plane that can run at high speeds and meet the threat at the greatest distance to the carrier as possible.

Having only that type on board would limit the number of aircraft you can carry because of their size but most of your fighters don't need to be long range heavy fighters.

Shorter range lighter more nimble types are cheaper and can be carried in greater numbers, so you can use the bigger heavier types for outer perimeter defence, but as the enemy threats approach the carrier group you can send more and more smaller fighters to intercept.

The big fighters are handy, but their flight range and endurance means they might be off doing something when you ships need protection from another threat.

Shorter ranged fighters hang around your ships and don't end up separated from your carrier group simply because of their range performance.

An Air Force with only Su-27s or Su-35s is going to offer patchy defence because operational costs and size constraints are going to limit how many you can have.

One Su-35 is not worth two MiG-35s, because two MiG-35s can fly in different directions, or offer the other mutual protection...

Radar range advantages of the larger aircraft are not unimportant but much of the time ship based radar and AWACS based radar will be used instead to operate more passively for the fighter aircraft... and of course they have IRSTs for tracking targets too.

Given the choice of having 12 Su-33s only or 6 Su-33s and 12 MiG-35s, it is pretty obvious which air compliment is more useful... especially as the 12 Su-33s are single seat aircraft only so you would also need the Su-28 two seat trainer which has no combat capability other than carrier landing training.

With 6 Su-33s and 12 MiG-35s you no longer need Su-28 trainer aircraft as the MiG-35s can include a mix of single seat and two seat versions.

The Su-30 was actually a PVO aircraft that was intended as an interceptor and a fighter, but not so much a strike aircraft as the India military wanted in the Su-30MKI.

The Su-30 is essentially the Su-27UB combat capable two seat training aircraft, and the intention was to use the aircraft as an airborne radar system for places where ground based radar is not practical... it would operate with radar silent aircraft to provide target information.

There was a proposed Tomcat 2000 but the Navy had already decided on the Hornet path and then the JSF.

The Hornet lacks the range to operate properly in the Pacific. The F-14D had like 50% more range than even the Super Hornet. But cutting the F-14D was never about capabilities, it was all about money.

It was exactly about the money because when they pitched the Hornet it was modern and digital and easy to upgrade and fix so maintenance costs were going to be cheap and they were not... if the Tomcat was viable the Navy would refuse to pay the ridiculous costs asked for the Super Hornet which was shockingly expensive... until the F-35 came along of course and made it look affordable.

Anything they could have put into a Hornet or Super Hornet they could have put on a Tomcat that was bigger and better.

Iran had the f-14. It was just a matter of time before soviet and chinese got a full access to it.

The Chinese got the full plans for the F-35 so that is a fake reason... also on the face of it it sounds reasonable except that Iran bases its entire air defence around the F-14... why would they share such information with Russia or China who are not really their buddies at all... well not until recently.

It is more about explaining why the Soviets managed the MiG-31 when they are so backwards... I mean obviously they must have copied because there is no talent in that country for anything except copying...

That's why they just started a new jet IMO.

They started new jets because there is more money to be made in brand new from scratch designs.

And BTW if keeping such technology secret is so damn critical then they needed a replacement for the Abrams before it entered service.

The armour the Abrams and the British equivalent Challanger had were designed and paid for by the Shah of Iran for a new Iranian tank... are you sure that has not be compromised?

they thought the F-14 was an overkill & bet on F-18E/F growth, supported by tankers.

They thought it was an overkill because the cold war is over and there is no way any other country could make Tu-22M3 like aircraft or Kh-22M type missiles in the next 20 years.

Unfortunately Russia recovered and now not only has Tu-22M3Ms and Kh-32s but also MiG-31Ks with Kinzhal missiles and also Zircon missiles on the way as well as PAK DAs too.

A new F-14 type is needed now more than ever... ironically you could argue that even F-14s are not enough so by getting rid of them they saved themselves a lot of money keeping such expensive aircraft in service... but the Super Hornet and F-35 are not cheaper... they cost more.

Iranians had no other choice but to keep & upgrade their F-14s, which played the MiG-25/31 role in their service.

That is true but now they could be purchasing Su-35s with R-37 export model missiles... if they want.