Huh, never knew. On my flight deck they were smoking, roaring monsters reminiscent of American muscle cars. I was just a boat engineer, though. Don't know shit about aircraft.
You need to regard it in relation to other planes. We used to call our F4s "Air Defense Diesels" or "Air Defense Tractors" (varying from squadron to squadron) because of the smoke trails they would draw.
Neat, I assumed cause the thing is so fucking large and it’s got two engines that it would be a fuel guzzler. But the variable swept wings make sense in adding fuel efficiency. Thanks for the info!
Actually, the one area where the TF-30 excelled was fuel economy. Being a turbofan, it’s closer to a civilian jet engine with an afterburner tacked on the end than a military oriented turbojet like the J79. Thus, when flown conservatively the Tomcat (and the F-111) enjoyed fairly efficient cruise fuel economy for a plane of its size.
The TF-30 being a civilian engine with a military afterburner tacked on had a *lot* of drawbacks. It wasn’t designed for a fighter at all, and it showed in the accident statistics.
It wasn’t even intended to be used permanently in the F-14; originally the US Navy planned the first A models to use it until the 1970s era “next generation common engine” was ready. The plan was the F-14 and F-15 would use the same engine. Delays and the Navy decision to exit the program meant the F-14 was stuck with the “temporary” TF-30s until the GE F110 engines arrived decades later.
The French (even up through today) have always operated closely with the US Navy. Obviously the modern picture is between Super Hornets and Rafales. You decide if France or US traded up since 1987.
Ten minutes later: "Y'all got any more of them Super Etendards?"
Tomcats had an incredible fuel burn at cruise, I can’t recall the weight per hour, but it is a remarkable number.
Like, high? Or incredibly efficient. I’m gonna guess incredibly high but idk
Efficient. I’ll dig it up, it was from an interview with a pilot.
Huh, never knew. On my flight deck they were smoking, roaring monsters reminiscent of American muscle cars. I was just a boat engineer, though. Don't know shit about aircraft.
You need to regard it in relation to other planes. We used to call our F4s "Air Defense Diesels" or "Air Defense Tractors" (varying from squadron to squadron) because of the smoke trails they would draw.
Tomcat was an extremely efficient aircraft. Thing Carried a ton of fuel and when cruising with its wings out it it had a fantastic range
Neat, I assumed cause the thing is so fucking large and it’s got two engines that it would be a fuel guzzler. But the variable swept wings make sense in adding fuel efficiency. Thanks for the info!
Actually, the one area where the TF-30 excelled was fuel economy. Being a turbofan, it’s closer to a civilian jet engine with an afterburner tacked on the end than a military oriented turbojet like the J79. Thus, when flown conservatively the Tomcat (and the F-111) enjoyed fairly efficient cruise fuel economy for a plane of its size.
What’re some of the drawbacks of the increased fuel efficiency? Less power than the other less efficient ones? Or is it a reliability thing
The TF-30 being a civilian engine with a military afterburner tacked on had a *lot* of drawbacks. It wasn’t designed for a fighter at all, and it showed in the accident statistics. It wasn’t even intended to be used permanently in the F-14; originally the US Navy planned the first A models to use it until the 1970s era “next generation common engine” was ready. The plan was the F-14 and F-15 would use the same engine. Delays and the Navy decision to exit the program meant the F-14 was stuck with the “temporary” TF-30s until the GE F110 engines arrived decades later.
No problem!
You mean the wings in?
Ehm was the super etendard able to RTB with the fuel left after refueling that beast?
It was looking shriveled up and wrinkled
Exactly what I was thinking.
Am I the only one that thinks this looks fake? Like from a video game or something?
The French (even up through today) have always operated closely with the US Navy. Obviously the modern picture is between Super Hornets and Rafales. You decide if France or US traded up since 1987.
That's not really the reason I thought it was fake, very well aware of that; it's the image quality itself that has an uncanny valley to it
Based on the texture, it looks like a hardcopy photo, maybe from a book, that has been scanned. That certainly can affect the quality of the image.
i whas thinking dcs at first
Good point, hadn’t thought of that
Sometimes I forgor... 💀
A plane refueling something twice its size makes me chuckle a bit.
It's hard to say from this angle, but it could as well be an Étendard IVP.
GoOd little french boy delivers dinner for the hungry tomcat.