Was it a mistake to retire the F-14 Tomcat??...

[SYDCBRWOD]

If money were no object then retaining the tomcat and later bombcats would have been the gold plated solution. The alternative 'Gen 1' hornets were a far more cost effective, not combat effective solution. Then again, if money were no object the USN would be flying A-12's too.

The main reason was as has been stated cost (something like 3 or 5 times times as many maintenance hours per flight hour than the F/A 1, and fatigue life.

Peter, the reason for the Phoenix has already been stated - to attack large soviet bomber formations before they got within range to launch their AS-4's (a cruise missile about the size of a Mig-15 - designed as a carrier or capital ship killer. In it's day the AWG-9/Phoenix combo was an astonishing achievement, these days even better capabilities are available in the AESA radar in the latest Super Hornets.

[Peter Kesternich]

Honestly, why would the USN need any AIM-54-capable aircraft at all?

[seahawk]

It was a mistake to stop the F-14D production so early and not to go ahead with the F-14 2000 program which would have given the USN a striker comparable to the F-15E with longer range and AIM-54C.

Retiring the left fleet was unavoidable as the F-14A were really getting old and tired.

[justLOT787]

I think F-14 was to expensive to maintain and was big. That's why they came out with much better solution F-18. Another reason I think they got rid of it is because there was no interest for export except Iran. I think simple fighters like F-16 and F-18 is the way to go but like all planes the technology gets old and you have to come up with some thing new like F-35 which will be a kick a.s fighter.

[Peter Kesternich]

OK, forgetting all of the Top Gun movie nostalgia for this fighter, given it's excellent performance in combat, was it not a mistake to retire this fighter?? I realize that stealth is important, but the F-14 could lock on to multiple targets at close to 100 miles. So, despite the expenses, would it not have been worth it to keep the F-14 in service??

The F-14 could lock on to multiple targets at 100 miles away, because the US thought they would have to fight against armadas of Soviet nuclear bombers. These days, there is hardly any need for an air superiority fighter. Even the F-22, Rafale and Typhoon are pretty expensive toys with no real combat scenario anymore... They do lokk good, though - at least the Rafale and the Typhoon, but that's MY taste... *lol...

[UALdave]

OK, forgetting all of the Top Gun movie nostalgia for this fighter, given it's excellent performance in combat, was it not a mistake to retire this fighter?? I realize that stealth is important, but the F-14 could lock on to multiple targets at close to 100 miles. So, despite the expenses, would it not have been worth it to keep the F-14 in service??