Key Points and Summary: Decades after its retirement, the F-14 Tomcat remains an aviation icon due to its extensive and versatile combat record, which surpassed that of the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18 combined.
-While its onboard computers were primitive—compared by one pilot to a “Commodore 64″—its powerful AWG-9 radar was revolutionary.
-The F-14 adapted from a pure interceptor to a formidable strike aircraft.
-A former U.S. Navy pilot quoted in the article stated that while the succeeding F/A-18 Hornet was more nimble, he would always choose the F-14 for actual combat, citing its superior range and invaluable second crew member.
F-14: The Fighter the Navy Misses?
Over 50 years after it first flew and almost two decades after it was retired from service with the United States Navy, the military aviation enthusiast community’s love affair with the F-14 still carries on. Is it because of Tom Cruise and the 1986 feature film Top Gun?
As one could see in the second Top Gun film, it isn’t because the aircraft was not—by today’s standards, that is—a technological marvel. It was. The exception is the Tomcat’s Hughes AWG-9 radar, one of the most powerful radars ever until the F-22’s APG-77 appeared decades later.
The AWG-9 radar was one of the strongest points of the aircraft’s combat performance. As a long article about the F-14 details, when this AWG-9 was working in the Track-While-Scan (TWS) mode, its “emissions were difficult to identify for contemporary radar warning receivers, and thus warning of an attack was minimal—if there was any.”
However, the onboard systems of the original F-14A version, in contrast to the robust mission computer systems of an F-16, were like comparing a VW Beetle to a Lamborghini. One colleague who was a US Naval Reserve F-14 pilot in the 1980s described the level of the disparity at the time.
“The F-14 runs on system that is about like a Commodore 64,” he said – for those of you who remember that early, first-generation personal computer system. “The onboard kit can do the job that the aircraft is assigned very well, but do not ask it to be some ‘anything and everything’ multirole fighter.”
F-14 Tomcat: More Combat Experience Than All The Others
But, despite those rather definitively expressed limitations about what the F-14 could and could not do, it ended up seeing more combat than—as one profile of the aircraft states—“than the other ‘teen fighters’—including the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18—combined” and performing numerous missions it was never designed to be utilized for.
Some of the prominent examples:
-During the 1980s, the F-14 saw eight years of intensive combat operations during the Iran-Iraq War, where it scored its first kill ever (a gun kill against an Iraqi Mi-25 attack helicopter).
-In service with the US Navy off Iran (Iran hostage crisis), Libya (two air combats and dozens of ‘close calls’)
-Lebanon, Syria (reconnaissance ‘only’), Somalia (reconnaissance), etc.
-In 1991, the F-14 saw its last conflict, during which it finally served in the role it was originally designed for—as a “pure” interceptor—during the Second Persian Gulf War—Operation Desert Storm.
Later, it was deployed during the Iran-Azerbaijan cross-border tensions in the 1990s, and then—adding in the role as a strike aircraft as well—by the US Navy in Bosnia (1992-1995), over Kosovo (1999), in Afghanistan (2001-2006), and Iraq (2003-2006).
It is an impressive history and a tribute to how a well-designed aircraft combined with the extended reach that advancements in avionics create allowed the F-14 to demonstrate the full range of its combat capabilities.
Enter The F/A-18 Hornet
Once it entered service, the F/A-18—even the earlier versions—showed several advantages that the F-14 pilots gradually learned to appreciate. One was its ability to function as a multirole aircraft that could be dispatched for both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. The F/A-18’s smaller and lighter size made it more maneuverable. Its even smaller maintenance footprint also made it more cost-effective.
One F-14 pilot who later ended up flying both aircraft has given his assessment of which aircraft he felt would have been better for him in a combat situation:
“The Hornet was newer, and newer is often better. I could only pull 6.5g in the Tomcat, but in the Hornet, when I burnt my fuel down a bit, I could go to 7.5g. The F404 engine in the Hornet was far better than the TF-30 that we had in the Tomcat, and I never had to worry about a compressor stall with the F404. I should know as I did a lot of the initial out-of-control flight test on the two-seat Hornet where I would intentionally depart the airplane from controlled flight.
“The engines never even hiccupped at all. The Hornet was far more nimble than the Tomcat, but the Hornet did not have the range, endurance, or speed of a Tomcat. Each was designed for a different mission. I would often say to colleagues that in peacetime, I loved the agile Hornet.
“But were I to go into combat, I would much rather be in the Tomcat. My RIO and I were a great team. Having that extra set of eyes was invaluable. One afternoon, my wingman and I engaged a pair of Libyan MIG23s. During the engagement, I lost sight of one of the MIGs. While I kept my eyes on the Libyan in front of me, I knew my RIO could help me to get my eyes on the other MIG. That extra set of eyes is invaluable when all hell breaks loose.”
About the Author: Reuben F. Johnson
Reuben F. Johnson has thirty-six years of experience analyzing and reporting on foreign weapons systems, defense technologies, and international arms export policy. Johnson is the Director of Research at the Casimir Pulaski Foundation. He is also a survivor of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. He worked for years in the American defense industry as a foreign technology analyst and later as a consultant for the U.S. Department of Defense, the Departments of the Navy and Air Force, and the governments of the United Kingdom and Australia. In 2022-2023, he won two awards in a row for his defense reporting. He holds a bachelor’s degree from DePauw University and a master’s degree from Miami University in Ohio, specializing in Soviet and Russian studies. He lives in Warsaw.
More Military
We Almost Touched the F-117 Stealth Fighter
doyle-1
August 4, 2025 at 6:18 am
Good article, but….
The ‘original’ f-18 was powered by the GE f404-400 which was said to output less thrust than yor living room ceiling fan at full blast.
Anyway, in mock combat with A-4 Skyhawks, f-14s usually employed full afterburner to leave those dumb part-time jocks behind.
F-14 was no match for su-27. Thus the appearance of the su-33.
The bit about the clash with the Libyan mig-23s only underlines the need even for stealth jets to have two pilots.
Hence the j-20S will kick the ass of f-22 & f-35.
Thus sam paparo better note that before he decides to kickstart ww3 in the western Pacific.