Editing Grumman F-14 Tomcat (section)

==Development==
===Background===
[[File:F-111B NAN7-65.jpg|thumb|The [[F-111B]] was designed to fulfill the carrier-based interceptor role, but had weight and performance problems, and was not suited to the types of aerial combat that were predominant over Vietnam.]]

Beginning in the late 1950s, the U.S. Navy sought a long-range, high-endurance interceptor to defend its [[carrier battle group]]s against long-range [[anti-ship missile]]s launched from the jet bombers and submarines of the [[Soviet Union]]. They outlined the idea of a Fleet Air Defense (FAD) aircraft with a more powerful radar and longer range missiles than the [[F-4 Phantom II]] to intercept both enemy bombers and missiles at very long range.<ref>Thomason 1998, pp. 3–5.</ref> Studies into this concept led to the [[Douglas F6D Missileer]] project of 1959, but this large subsonic aircraft would have limited ability to evade supersonic fighters or defend itself once it fired its missiles, and the project was canceled in December 1961.<ref>{{cite book|last=Simonsen|first=Erik|title=A Complete History of U.S. Combat Aircraft Fly-Off Competitions: Winners, Losers, and What Might Have Been|year=2016|publisher=Specialty Press|location=Forest Lake, MN|isbn=978-1-58007-227-4 |page=108}}</ref>

The Navy still sought long-range defensive aircraft, but with higher performance than the Missileer. The Navy was directed to participate in the [[F-111 Aardvark#Tactical Fighter Experimental (TFX)|Tactical Fighter Experimental]] (TFX) program with the [[U.S. Air Force]] (USAF) by [[United States Secretary of Defense|Secretary of Defense]] [[Robert McNamara]], who favored versatile aircraft that could be shared by both services, reducing procurement and development costs. To this end, he had already directed the USAF to buy the F-4 Phantom II—which was developed for the Navy and could serve both as a [[fighter-bomber]] and an [[interceptor aircraft]]—instead of buying more [[F-105 Thunderchief]] and [[F-106 Delta Dart]] aircraft to fill each respective role.<ref>Dwyer, Larry. [http://www.aviation-history.com/mcdonnell/f4.html "The McDonnell F-4 Phantom II."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111127154136/http://www.aviation-history.com/mcdonnell/f4.html |date=27 November 2011}} aviation-history.com, 31 March 2010. Retrieved: 24 March 2012.</ref>

The TFX had adequate speed, range and payload for the FAD role, but was designed primarily as a fighter-bomber and [[interdictor]] that lacked the maneuverability and overall performance that the Navy expected. The Navy strenuously opposed the TFX as it feared compromises necessary for the Air Force's need for a low-level attack aircraft would adversely impact the aircraft's performance as a fighter. Their concerns were overridden, and the project went ahead as the [[F-111B]]. Lacking recent experience in naval fighters, the F-111's main contractor, [[General Dynamics]], partnered with [[Grumman]] to provide the experience needed to develop a naval version. Weight and performance issues plagued the program, and with the F-111B in distress, Grumman began studying improvements and alternatives. In 1966, the Navy awarded Grumman a contract to begin studying advanced fighter designs. Grumman narrowed down these designs to its Model 303 design.<ref name=Spick_p71-2>Spick 2000, pp. 71–72.</ref>

Through this same period, experience in Vietnam against the more agile [[MiG]] fighters demonstrated that the Phantom lacked the maneuverability needed to win in any engagement. This led to the [[VFAX]] program to study new fighter aircraft that would either replace or supplant the Phantom in the fighter and ground-attack roles while the TFX worked the long-range interception role.<ref>Spangenberg, George. {{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20120204215346/http://www.georgespangenberg.com/vf15.htm "Spangenberg Fighter Study Dilemma."]}} georgespangenberg.com. Retrieved: 24 March 2012.</ref> Grumman continued work on its 303 design and offered it to the Navy in 1967, which led to fighter studies by the Navy. The company continued to refine the design into 1968.<ref name=Spick_p71-2/>

Around this time, [[Thomas F. Connolly|Vice Admiral Thomas F. Connolly]], Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Air Warfare, flew the developmental [[F-111A]] variant on a flight and discovered that it had difficulty going supersonic and had poor carrier landing characteristics. He later testified before Congress about his concerns against the official Navy position and, in May 1968, Congress stopped funding for the F-111B, allowing the Navy to pursue an answer tailored to its requirements.<ref>{{cite news |author=Thomas. Robert McG. Jr. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/09/us/thomas-connolly-86-top-gun-admiral-dies.html |title=Thomas Connolly, 86, Top-Gun Admiral, Dies |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=9 June 1996 |access-date=29 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171111095405/http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/09/us/thomas-connolly-86-top-gun-admiral-dies.html |archive-date=11 November 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===VFX===
Free to choose their solution to the FAD requirement, VFAX ended in favor of a new design that would combine the two roles. In July 1968, the [[Naval Air Systems Command]] (NAVAIR) issued a [[request for proposal]]s (RFP) for the Naval Fighter Experimental (VFX) program. VFX called for a tandem two-seat, twin-engine air-to-air fighter with a maximum speed of Mach 2.2.<ref>A Dictionary of Aviation, David W. Wragg. {{ISBN|0850451639}}, 1st Edition Published by Osprey, 1973 / Published by Frederick Fell, Inc., NY, 1974 (1st American Edition.), Page 123.</ref> It would also have a built-in 20&nbsp;mm [[M61 Vulcan]] cannon and a secondary close air support role.<ref name="Woolridge"/> The VFX's air-to-air missiles would be either six [[AIM-54 Phoenix]] or a combination of six [[AIM-7 Sparrow]] and four [[AIM-9 Sidewinder]] missiles. Bids were received from General Dynamics, Grumman, [[Ling-Temco-Vought]], [[McDonnell Douglas]], and [[Rockwell International|North American Rockwell]];<ref name=Spick_p9-10>Spick 1985, pp. 9–10.</ref> four bids incorporated [[Variable-sweep wing|variable-geometry wings]].<ref name="Woolridge">Woolridge, Capt. E.T., ed. ''Into the Jet Age: Conflict and Change in Naval Aviation 1945–1975, an Oral History''. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1995. {{ISBN|1-55750-932-8}}.</ref>{{refn|Admiral Thomas F. Connolly wrote the chapter, "The TFX – One Fighter For All".<ref name="Woolridge"/>|group=N}}

The name "Tomcat" was partially chosen to pay tribute to Connolly, as the nickname "Tom's Cat" had already been widely used within the program during development to reflect Connolly's involvement, and now the moniker was adapted into an official name in line with the Grumman tradition of giving its fighter aircraft feline names. Changing it to ''Tomcat'' associated the aircraft with the previous Grumman aircraft [[Grumman F4F Wildcat|Wildcat]], [[Grumman F6F Hellcat|Hellcat]], [[Grumman F7F Tigercat|Tigercat]], and [[Grumman F8F Bearcat|Bearcat]] propeller fighters along with the [[Grumman F9F Panther|Panther]], [[Grumman F-9 Cougar|Cougar]], and [[Grumman F-11 Tiger|Tiger]] jet fighters. Other names considered were ''[[Feral cat|Alley Cat]]'' (considered inappropriate due to sexual connotations) and ''Seacat''.<ref>Spick, 2000, p.74</ref><ref>Marrett 2006, p. 18.</ref>

===Full-scale development===
[[File:F-14 Tomcat prototypes in flight c1972.jpg|thumb|Grumman's VFX entry was designed around the TF30 engine, AWG-9 radar and AIM-54 missile intended for the F-111B; this eventually became the F-14A.]]

McDonnell Douglas and Grumman were selected as finalists in December 1968. Grumman's 303E design was selected for the contract award in January 1969.<ref>Spick 2000, p. 74.</ref> The design reused the [[Pratt & Whitney TF30|TF30]] engines from the F-111B, though the Navy planned on replacing them with the [[Pratt & Whitney F401|Pratt & Whitney F401-400]] engines under development for the Navy, along with the related [[Pratt & Whitney F100]] for the USAF.<ref>Spick 2000, p. 112.</ref> Though lighter than the F-111B, it was still the largest and heaviest U.S. fighter to fly from an aircraft carrier, a consequence of the requirement to carry the large [[AN/AWG-9|AWG-9 radar]] and AIM-54 Phoenix missiles (from the F-111B) and an internal fuel load of {{convert|16000|lb|kg|abbr=on}}. The design service life was 6,000 flight hours, although this was later extended to 7,200 hours.<ref>Gunston and Spick 1983, p. 112.</ref>

Upon winning the contract for the F-14, Grumman greatly expanded its [[Calverton, New York|Calverton]], Long Island, New York facility for evaluating the aircraft. Much of the testing, including the first of many compressor stalls and multiple ejections, took place over Long Island Sound. To save time and avoid cancellation by the new presidential administration, the Navy skipped the prototype phase and jumped directly to full-scale development; the Air Force took a similar approach with its [[McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle]].<ref name="Jenkins">Jenkins, Dennis R. ''F/A-18 Hornet: A Navy Success Story''. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000. {{ISBN|0-07-134696-1}}.</ref> The F-14 first flew on 21 December 1970, just 22 months after Grumman was awarded the contract. The fighter reached initial operational capability (IOC) in 1973. The [[United States Marine Corps]] was initially interested in the F-14 as an F-4 Phantom II replacement, going so far as to send officers to [[VF-124|Fighter Squadron One Twenty-Four (VF-124)]] to train as instructors. The Marine Corps pulled out of any procurement when the development of the stores' management system for ground attack munitions was not pursued and decided the upcoming [[McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet|F-18]] fit their role better.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2005/august/late-great-lou-wilson | title=The Late Great Lou Wilson | date=August 2005 }}</ref> An air-to-ground capability was not developed until the 1990s.<ref name="Jenkins"/>

Firing trials involved launches against simulated targets of various types, from cruise missiles to high-flying bombers. AIM-54 Phoenix missile testing from the F-14 began in April 1972. The longest single Phoenix launch was successful against a target at a range of {{convert|110|nmi|km|abbr=on}} in April 1973. Another unusual test was made on 22 November 1973, when six missiles were fired within 38 seconds at Mach 0.78 and {{convert|24800|ft|m|abbr=on}}; four scored direct hits, one broke the lock and missed, and one was declared "no test" after the radar signature augmentation in the target drone (which increased the apparent radar signature of the tiny drone to the size of a [[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21|MiG-21]]) failed, causing the missile to break track. This gave a tested success rate of 80% since effectively only 5 missiles were tested. This was the most expensive single test of air-to-air missiles ever performed at that time.<ref>Spick 2000, pp. 110–111.</ref>

===Improvements and changes===
Throughout production, the F-14 underwent significant upgrades in missile armament, especially with the move to full solid-state electronics, primarily allowing for better [[Electronic counter-countermeasure|Electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM)]] and more space for the rocket motor. The AIM-54A Phoenix [[Active radar homing|active-radar]] air-to-air missile was upgraded with the AIM-54B (1983, limited use) and AIM-54C (1986) versions.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Raytheon AIM-54 Phoenix|url=http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html|access-date=24 January 2022|website=designation-systems.net|archive-date=1 April 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120401085041/http://designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html|url-status=live}}</ref> The initial AIM-7E-4<ref name="wapj7p545">Dorr 1991, pp. 54–55</ref> Sparrow [[semi-active radar homing]] was upgraded to the AIM-7F in 1976, and the M variant in 1982.<ref>{{Cite web|title=AIM-7 Sparrow|url=https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104575/aim-7-sparrow/|access-date=24 January 2022|website=Air Force|language=en-US|archive-date=24 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220124164231/https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104575/aim-7-sparrow/|url-status=live}}</ref> The [[Infrared homing|heat-seeking]] missile armament was upgraded from the AIM-9J/H to the joint Air Force/Navy missile, the AIM-9L in 1979, and then the AIM-9M in 1982.<ref name="wapj7p556">Dorr 1991, pp. 55–56</ref>

The [[Tactical Airborne Reconnaissance Pod System]] (TARPS) was developed in the late 1970s for the F-14. Approximately 65 F-14As and all F-14Ds were modified to carry the pod.<ref name="Warplanes"/> TARPS was primarily controlled by the Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) via an extra display for observing reconnaissance data. The "TARPS Digital (TARPS-DI)" was a 1996 upgrade featuring a digital camera. The digital camera was further updated beginning in 1998 with the "TARPS Completely Digital (TARPS-CD)" configuration that also provided real-time transmission of imagery.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sdl.usu.edu/programs/tarps-cd |title=Space Dynamics Laboratory: Tactical Air-borne Reconnaissance Pod System – Completely Digital |publisher=sdl.usu.edu |access-date=22 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100621131545/http://www.sdl.usu.edu/programs/tarps-cd |archive-date=21 June 2010 |url-status=live}}</ref>

In 1984, plans were announced to replace the existing TF30 engines of the Tomcat with [[General Electric]] [[General Electric F110|F110-GE-400]] turbofans.<ref name="Dorr p.70">Dorr 1991, p. 70</ref> An initial, interim, version just replaced the TF30 with the new engine, retaining the original avionics. These aircraft were designated F-14A+, which was changed to F-14B in May 1991. 38 F-14Bs were newly built, with a further 43 converted from F-14As.<ref name="wapj19p1324">Lake 1994, pp. 132–134</ref><ref name="iapr3p52"/> The F-14D variant was developed at the same time; it included the F110 engines with newer digital avionics systems such as a [[glass cockpit]] and compatibility with the [[Link 16]] secure datalink. 37 F-14Ds were new builds while another 18 were converted from F-14As.<ref>Friedman, Norman. "F-14". ''The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapon Systems'', Fifth edition. Annapolis MD: [[United States Naval Institute#Publications and products|Naval Institute Press]], 2006. {{ISBN|1-55750-262-5}}.</ref> The Digital Flight Control System (DFCS) notably improved the F-14's handling qualities when flying at a high [[angle of attack]] or in [[Air combat manoeuvring|air combat maneuvering]].<ref>{{cite report |url= https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA294267 |title=F-14 Flight Control Law Design, Verification, and Validation Using Computer Aided Engineering Tools |date=3 February 1995 |publisher=NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AIRCRAFT DIV PATUXENT RIVER MD}}</ref>

[[File:VF-143 F-14 F-18 2005.jpg|thumb|VFA-143 "Pukin Dogs" F-14B (in the foreground) and F/A-18E Super Hornet in 2005]]
While the F-14 had been developed as a lightweight alternative to the {{convert|80000|lb|abbr=on}} F-111B, the F-14 was still the heaviest and most expensive fighter of its time. VFAX was revived in the 1970s as a lower cost solution to replacing the Navy and Marine Corps' fleets of F-4s, and A-7s. VFAX was directed to review the fighters in the USAF [[Light Weight Fighter]] competition, which led to the development of the [[McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet]] as roughly a midsize fighter and attack aircraft.<ref name="Donald">Donald 2004, pp. 13, 15.</ref>

===Ground attack upgrades===
[[File:F14Missile.jpg|thumb|An F-14D launching an [[AIM-7 Sparrow]]; a [[GBU-10 Paveway II]] is also carried.]]

In the 1990s, with the pending retirement of the [[Grumman A-6 Intruder]] and the cancellation of the [[McDonnell Douglas A-12 Avenger II]] Advanced Tactical Aircraft (ATA), the F-14 [[Ground attack aircraft|air-to-ground]] program was resurrected. Trials with live bombs had been carried out in the 1980s; the F-14 was cleared to use basic [[Unguided bomb|iron bombs]] in 1992. During Operation Desert Storm of the [[Gulf War]], most air-to-ground missions were left to [[LTV A-7 Corsair II]], A-6 Intruder and F/A-18 Hornet squadrons, while the F-14s focused on air defense operations. Following Desert Storm, F-14As and F-14Bs underwent upgrades to avionics and cockpit displays to enable the use of precision munitions, enhance defensive systems, and apply structural improvements. The new avionics were comparable with the F-14D; these upgraded aircraft were designated F-14A (Upgrade) and F-14B (Upgrade) respectively.<ref name="Warplanes">Donald, David. "Northrop Grumman F-14 Tomcat, U.S. Navy today". ''Warplanes of the Fleet''. London: AIRtime Publishing Inc, 2004. {{ISBN|1-880588-81-1}}.</ref>

By 1994, Grumman and the Navy were proposing ambitious plans for Tomcat upgrades beyond the D model to plug the gap between the retirement of the A-6 and the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet entering service (such as the Super Tomcat 21, the cheaper QuickStrike version, and the more advanced Attack Super Tomcat 21).<ref name="Donald"/> However, the upgrades would have taken too long to implement to meet the gap, and were priced in the billions. The [[United States Congress|U.S. Congress]] considered this too expensive for an interim solution.<ref name="Warplanes"/> A quick, inexpensive upgrade using the [[LANTIRN|Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night]] (LANTIRN) targeting pod was devised. The LANTIRN pod provided the F-14 with a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) camera for night operations and a laser target designator to direct laser-guided bombs (LGB).<ref name="iapr3p535">Lake 2002, pp. 53–55</ref> Although LANTIRN is traditionally a two-pod system, an AN/AAQ-13 navigation pod with terrain-following radar and a wide-angle FLIR, along with an AN/AAQ-14 targeting pod with a steerable FLIR and a laser target designator, the decision was made to only use the targeting pod. The Tomcat's LANTIRN pod was altered and improved over the baseline configuration, such as a [[GPS/INS|Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation System]] (GPS/INS) capability to allow an F-14 to accurately locate itself. The pod was carried on the right wing glove pylon.<ref name="iapr3p535"/>

[[File:US Navy 051010-N-5088T-001 A specially painted F-14D Tomcat, assigned to the Blacklions of Fighter Squadron Two One Three (VF-213), conducts a mission over the Persian Gulf.jpg|thumb|An F-14D(R) from [[VF-213]] flying over [[Ba'athist Iraq|Iraq]] on the last Tomcat deployment with a LANTIRN pod on the starboard wing glove station and a [[GBU-12 Paveway II|laser-guided bomb]] underneath the fuselage.|alt=Pale gray jet aircraft flying over water towards right, perpendicular to the camera. Horizon located two-thirds down the photo. Sky made up of two shades, dark blue covers the top, blending with a lighter shade until it is almost white above horizon]]
The LANTIRN pod did not require changes to the F-14's own system software, but the pod was designed to operate on a MIL-STD-1553B bus not present on the F-14A or B.  Consequently, [[Martin Marietta]] specially developed an interface card for LANTIRN. The Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) would receive pod imagery on a 10-inch Programmable Tactical Information Display (PTID) or another Multi-Function Display in the F-14{{citation needed|date=February 2023}} rear cockpit and guided LGBs using a new hand controller installed on the right side console. Initially, the hand controller replaced the RIO's TARPS control panel, meaning a Tomcat configured for LANTIRN could not carry TARPS and the reverse, but eventually a workaround was later developed to allow a Tomcat to carry LANTIRN or TARPS as needed.<ref name="iapr3p535"/>

An upgraded LANTIRN named "LANTIRN 40K" for operations up to {{convert|40000|ft|m|abbr=on}} was introduced in 2001, followed by Tomcat Tactical Targeting (T3) and Fast Tactical Imagery (FTI), to provide precise target coordinate determination and ability to transmit images in-flight.<ref name="USN_FF" /> Tomcats also added the ability to carry the [[GBU-38]] Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) in 2003, giving it the option of a variety of LGB and [[GPS]]-guided weapons.<ref name="F-14Ds_JDAM"/> Some F-14Ds were upgraded in 2005 with a [[ROVER|ROVER III]] Full Motion Video (FMV) downlink, a system that transmits real-time images from the aircraft's sensors to the laptop of a [[forward air control]]ler (FAC) on the ground.<ref name="F-14_ROVER"/>

===Production termination===
In the early 1980s, the Navy anticipated that an Advanced Carrier-Borne Multirole Fighter (VFMX) would eventually be the long term high-end replacement for the F-14 and A-6, although this program was short-lived and was succeeded by separate efforts for fleet air defense and deep strike/attack; the latter would become the ATA program under which the A-12 Avenger II was being developed.<ref>{{cite report |last1=Parker Jr. |first1=James F |last2=Christensen |first2=Diane G. |last3=Mutimer |first3=George R. |url=https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA177469.pdf |title=Life Support and Protection Requirements for the Head/Neck Region of Navy Aircrewmen |date=December 1986 |publisher=Office of Naval Research |page=7}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Larrimer |first=Bruce I. |title=Think Obliquely: Robert T. Jones, the Oblique Wing, NASA's AD-1 Demonstrator, and Its Legacy |url=https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ThinkingObliquely-ebook.pdf |publisher=National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) |location= |year=2013 |isbn=978-1-62683-005-9 |page=144}}</ref> In 1988, the service announced that it would procure a derivative of the Air Force's [[Advanced Tactical Fighter]] (ATF), named the Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF) that would eventually have been a [[Lockheed YF-22#NATF-22|navalized variant]] of the [[Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor|F-22]], as the long term F-14 replacement.<ref>{{cite report |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-90-54.pdf |title=Report to the Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives: Navy's Participation in Air Force's Advanced Tactical Fighter Program |publisher=United States Government Accounting Office |date=March 1990}}</ref> However, the collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in declining defense budgets and also in a steep increase in the unit cost of the ATF and NATF due to reduced production rates. With tightening budgets, the Navy chose to focus on its top aviation priority, the A-12, and canceled the NATF in 1991, believing that the F-14D with upgrades would be viable for fleet air defense until 2015. However, the A-12 was cancelled shortly afterwards due to cost overruns and technical problems. As a result, the Navy launched a new attack aircraft program, the Advanced-Attack (A-X), while the F-14 with LANTIRN and ground attack upgrades would provide some interim capabilities, with Grumman proposing even more F-14 upgrades in the 1990s.<ref name="NATF to JSF">{{cite book |last1=Aronstein |first1=David |last2=Hirschberg |first2=Michael |title=Advanced Tactical Fighter to F-22 Raptor: Origins of the 21st Century Air Dominance Fighter |publisher=American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics |location=Arlington, Virginia |year=1998 |page=240 |isbn=978-1-56347-282-4}}</ref>

Although the F-14D was to be the definitive version of the Tomcat, not all fleet units received the D variant. In 1989, Secretary of Defense [[Dick Cheney]] refused to approve the purchase of any more F-14D model aircraft, stopping production after 37 F-14Ds had been built, although 18 more were produced by conversion of F-14As, giving a total of 55 F-14Ds.<ref name="wapj19p138">Lake 1994, p. 138</ref> An upgrade to the F-14D's computer software to allow AIM-120 AMRAAM missile capability was planned but was later terminated to free up funding for LANTIRN integration.<ref name="Warplanes"/> While upgrades kept the F-14 competitive with other teen series fighters, Cheney stated that the F-14 was 1960s technology. Despite an appeal from the Secretary of the Navy for at least 132 F-14Ds and some aggressive proposals from Grumman for a replacement,<ref name=Jenkins_p48>Jenkins 1997, p. 30.</ref> Cheney planned to replace the F-14 with a fighter that was not manufactured by Grumman. According to Cheney, the F-14 was a "jobs program", and when the F-14 was canceled, an estimated 80,000 jobs of Grumman employees, subcontractors, or support personnel were affected.<ref>Saul, Stephanie. "Cheney Aims Barrage at F-14D Calls keeping jet a jobs program." ''Newsday'' Washington Bureau, 24 August 1989, p. 6.</ref> The Navy would end up procuring the [[Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet|F/A-18E/F Super Hornet]] as the interim strike fighter for the A-X, which had become A/F-X (Advanced Attack/Fighter) due to added fighter capabilities although A/F-X itself would be canceled in the 1993 Bottom-Up Review. Cheney's cancellation of the F-14D was controversial and contributed heavily to Grumman's decline and resulting acquisition by [[Northrop Corporation]] to form [[Northrop Grumman]].<ref name="NATF to JSF"/><ref>{{cite web |url=https://libn.com/2000/07/28/maybe-vp-cheney-can-explain-grumman/ |title=Maybe VP Cheney can explain Grumman |work=Long Island Business News |date=28 July 2000}}</ref>