Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!spool2.mu.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: arthur@Eng.Sun.COM (Arthur Leung)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: B-52, B-1, B-2, and F-14 in Des. Storm
Message-ID: <1991Jan24.035909.22361@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 24 Jan 91 03:59:09 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 30
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: arthur@Eng.Sun.COM (Arthur Leung)
dvlssd@cs.umu.se (Stefan Skoglund) writes:

>>From the beginning the F-14 was supposed to replace the F-4 Phantom.
>Including the bombing role.
>If you look at the wing-sweep lever you will find a BOMB-mark.
>The storage stations for bombs was supposed to be under the wings
>and maybee the nacelles.
>
>But then the NAVY got the F-18 and the A-6E so they dropped the whole idea.

reading in various issues of the Naval Institute Proceedings:

part of the problems with the F-14A carrying air to mud ordanance was
at weapons separation.  ordinance was intended to be carried in
the tunnel between the two engines (pancake) which provides
lift for the airframe.  when ordinance was released, bombs had
a tendancy to hang there and occasionally strike the aircraft.
this was considered unacceptable.

part of the F-14A+ and F-14D qualification is with air to surface
weapons.  in addition to HARM (which comes off of the pylons
under the non-swinging part of the wing), smart and dumb bombs
are included.  to solve the separation problem, the Navy intends
to use a higher energy release system to push the ordinance off
the tunnel racks.

-- arthur