How/why is that even a concern? Is it that difficult to keep planes in a secure enough area that hostile governments can't get their hands on them? Or do some or all end up being demilitarized and sold, thus making them available through various channels to our adversaries?
F-14 to fly again?
- Thread starter Tikka
- Start date
About 70 of them are in museums - not all museums are equally secure. Some critical parts are easily removed.
The Navy had to go back and remove those critical parts from the airplanes on display.
Since the aircraft type was retired, there was no need to keep spare aircraft in the desert, no need for spare parts, so, most of them that were in storage at AMARC were shredded, including my favorite, Victory 211, BuNo 161134, a block 110 TARPS airplane in which I flew several combat missions.
Here it is on Cat 3, about to launch on a combat mission, in 1991
It happened to have my name on the canopy rail at the time.
CleanSump
Site Donor 2026
A-6, EA-6B, and E-2C. E-2C was still flying, but being parked as I retired 2 years ago. It's a real pain in the behind for logistics people to scrounge for things. Even a simple flap screwjack can be unavailable.
That whole thing has made huge waves in social media and F-14 nutts are going crazy over it, especially after the clip by Ward Carrol. Some speculate that Jarod Isaacman is behind the act. If that was the case, funding wouldn't be much of an issue I suppose. ....However, I don't want to be the party pooper but Carrols video only talks about the Senate draft, i.e. S.4161.
If anybody cares, read up on H.R.8331 which is the House of Reps counter proposal. The explicit statement of the option of "making one flyable" has been deleted. One could still kind of implicitly read a potential airworthiness into the "...operation in a public static display, an airshow...." ref. clause e/2 (the comma makes all the difference!) but if the text would be kept like that, one would walk on very thin ice in regards to a permission to turn one flyable again. In any case the express statement of possibly making one example airworthy again has been erased. The whole thing is now "in conference", i.e. house and senate have to haggle the matter out between each other but so far it is all but as rosy as some enthusiasts paint it.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th...1-CB3lUwWFjYe0OTMSFE5M3Holkn1NCLS5Kc_rkaf5t1g
BTW: Just two weeks ago an Iranian regime sanctioned propaganda outlet published an at least apparently authentic clip of an Iranian Tomcat landing at an Iranian airfield indicating that indeed some examples might have survived the air raids, however nobody knows for sure as it is always the case with Iranian publications such as this. As much as the IRGC and the regime hate their regular airforce including their F-14s, they sure know how to instrumentalize them as a tool for propaganda.
If there indeed was anything halfway substantial to this, I wonder if that had any impact on teh decision making process regarding the "Maveric Act" bill?!
If anybody cares, read up on H.R.8331 which is the House of Reps counter proposal. The explicit statement of the option of "making one flyable" has been deleted. One could still kind of implicitly read a potential airworthiness into the "...operation in a public static display, an airshow...." ref. clause e/2 (the comma makes all the difference!) but if the text would be kept like that, one would walk on very thin ice in regards to a permission to turn one flyable again. In any case the express statement of possibly making one example airworthy again has been erased. The whole thing is now "in conference", i.e. house and senate have to haggle the matter out between each other but so far it is all but as rosy as some enthusiasts paint it.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th...1-CB3lUwWFjYe0OTMSFE5M3Holkn1NCLS5Kc_rkaf5t1g
BTW: Just two weeks ago an Iranian regime sanctioned propaganda outlet published an at least apparently authentic clip of an Iranian Tomcat landing at an Iranian airfield indicating that indeed some examples might have survived the air raids, however nobody knows for sure as it is always the case with Iranian publications such as this. As much as the IRGC and the regime hate their regular airforce including their F-14s, they sure know how to instrumentalize them as a tool for propaganda.
If there indeed was anything halfway substantial to this, I wonder if that had any impact on teh decision making process regarding the "Maveric Act" bill?!
Iran never received F14s as far as I know. Iran was in the process of buying them when the Shah was overthrown.
4wd
$50 site donor 2026
??
Iran bought 80. Took delivery of 79. Shipped one off to Russia when the Shah fell, prompting some mission system and weapon upgrades on our own, since the jet, and its missiles, were compromised.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F-14_Tomcat#Operators
Iran flew them with great success in the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.
Part of the reason that we shredded most of the retired Tomcats was to keep Iran from getting spare parts (there are some easily removed high wear items that could be stripped from museums by unscrupulous individuals).
Iranian F-14s were still considered as part of the air threat in the most recent conflict.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Air_Force#Current_inventory
The F-14 pilot with the most kills is Iranian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalil_Zandi
CleanSump
Site Donor 2026
Rumor was that the American contractors (Grumman?) supporting the Iranians supposedly sabotaged the missiles and tried to get a doctored OFP into the birds before they left. I have no documentation of that, just chatter I was told.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2024
- Messages
- 235
An F-16 looks like ordnance when parked next to a Tomcat. I had no idea how huge that thing is until I got up close to one.
You mean like they sabotaged the equipment that we sold Iran right before the muslims overthrew the shah?
CleanSump
Site Donor 2026
Exactly.
I just remembered that when a buddy of mine was in USAF in Big Spring, he trained Iranian pilots. When I visited, he let me fly the simulator. This was in 1975.
Just thought I'd add that irrelevant data point.
Fascinating. I love it. I love learning about this stuff. I used to work for a titanium castings plant (aircraft/spacecraft industry) and loved learning about everything aviation related I could get my hands on. If you have any good reading on the subject I'd be grateful for recommendations!
h\ow much\?
