F-14 A-g
SteveG75 said:
Actually, the reason the Tomcat did not go A-G initially is that the VF community did not want continue doing that after their experience bomb-dropping in Vietnam. Grumman had already developed racks and everything (even an A-G mode of the AWG-9). The VF bubbas were more than happy to go MiG hunting while leaving the bomb dropping to the Intruders and Corsairs.
Of course, with the demise of the Intruder, the VF guys saw the writing on the wall and went A-G with the addition of the Lantirn pod. Ironically, the least capable Tomcats (F-14A's) were the first to get the pod due to avionics issues.
Your comment about the VF bubbas wanting to avoid A-G is so ironic. I worked with a VF bubba (later became a Super CAG) who definitely saw the writing on the wall years before the rest and was a strong advocate (a lone wolf at the time) for an F-14 A-G capability.
That old VF bias against A-G flowed in parallel with a burning desire to constrain the costs of building new fighters, which at the time were the F-14 and F-15. There were forests of trees converted to newsprint arguing about the outrageous costs of building these two fighters. Of course no one wanted to blame the fiscal and monetary policies of the Carter Administration for driving inflation through the roof and thus blowing the costs of these two fine specimens through the same roof. So skipping any cost associated with getting A-G into the F-14 would have been welcome by Navy bean counters, willing to let the VF bubbas have their way. And don't forget the A-7 Mafia. They weren't going to object either. The A-6 Community wasn't going to object.
And the direct response to the rising costs of the F-15/14 was the F-16/18. And the most recent response to the costs of maintaining multiple air forces (Navy, USAF, USMC) is to modify a Hornet A-D into a SH E/F (a new airplane by any measure but it seems to have fooled the bean counters sufficiently) plus put a JSF next to it on the flight deck. Also, to shave even more money, let's "merge" USMC tac air with USN; and "mothball" the Kennedy. The CNO is quoted recently in Congressional hearings as asserting that precison strike weapons make the need for that 12th carrier to diminish. This is pure budget-speak not the lexicon of mission capabilities or requirements.
Let's face it. All seapower is shore-based, specifically in Washington DC and inside the Beltway- where the OSD Comptroller has considerable sway over all Service budgets. And to quote an old cliche, "No Bucks, No Buck Rogers".
BTW, the SH E/F is a real improvement over the Fruit Fly (A-7, set the bar low) but it can't do what the F-14 and A-6/KA-6 could do.
