Editing Grumman F-14 Tomcat (section)

===Engines===
The F-14A was initially equipped with two [[Pratt & Whitney]] TF30-P-412A (or JTF10A) augmented [[turbofan]] engines, each rated at 20,900&nbsp;lb (93&nbsp;kN) of static uninstalled thrust, which enabled the aircraft to attain a maximum speed of Mach 2.34.<ref name="Spick_p81"/> The F-14 would normally fly at a cruising speed for reduced [[fuel consumption]], which was important for conducting lengthy patrol missions.<ref>Laurence K. Loftin Jr. [http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-468/ch10-3.htm "Part II: The Jet Age, Chapter 10: Technology of the Jet Airplane, Turbojet and Turbofan Systems."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100914184628/http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-468/ch10-3.htm |date=14 September 2010}} ''Quest for Performance: The Evolution of Modern Aircraft'', 29 February 2009. Retrieved: 29 January 2009.</ref> The rectangular air inlets for the engines were equipped with movable ramps and bleed doors to meet the different airflow requirements of the engine from take-off to maximum supersonic speed. Variable nozzles were also fitted to the engine's exhaust. Late production F-14A had the improved TF30-P-414A engines. The Navy had originally planned to replace the TF30 with the Pratt & Whitney F401, the naval variant of the F-15's F100 engine, but this plan was ultimately canceled due to costs and reliability problems.<ref name="wapj19p1301">Lake 1994, pp. 130–131</ref>

[[File:F-14 Tomcat preparing to refuel.jpg|thumb|left|An F-14D prepares to refuel with probe extended.]]
The performance of the TF30 engine became an object of criticism. [[John Lehman]], [[United States Secretary of the Navy|Secretary of the Navy]] in the 1980s, told the U.S. Congress that the TF30/F-14 combination was "probably the worst engine/airframe mismatch we have had in years" and that the TF30 was "a terrible engine";<ref name="Dorr p.50."/><ref name="Sgarlato_p40-46"/> 28% of all F-14 accidents were attributed to the engine. The TF30 was originally designed for the flight envelope of bomber applications, so in air combat they proved extremely susceptible to [[compressor stall]]s especially at a high angle of attack and during rapid throttle transients or above {{convert|30000|ft|m|abbr=on}}, which could easily result in loss of control, severe yaw oscillations, and could lead to an unrecoverable [[Flat spin (aviation)|flat spin]].<ref>{{cite news |last=Holding |first=Alex |date=8 December 2024 |title=The U.S. Navy's Great Mistake: Retiring the F-14 Tomcat Fighter Too Early? |url=https://www.19fortyfive.com/2024/12/the-u-s-navys-great-mistake-retiring-the-f-14-tomcat-fighter-too-early/|work=www.19fortyfive.com |location= |access-date=17 December 2024}}</ref> A high frequency of turbine [[Turbine engine failure|blade failures]] led to the reinforcement of the entire engine bay to limit damage from such failures. At specific altitudes, exhaust produced by missile launches could cause an engine compressor [[stall (engine)|stall]].  This led to the development of a bleed system that temporarily blocks the frontal intake ramp and reduces engine power during missile launch.{{citation needed|date=July 2022}}

The upgraded F-14A+, later redesignated F-14B, and F-14D were equipped with the General Electric F110-GE-400. The F110 provided a significant increase in thrust, with a static uninstalled thrust of {{convert|26950|lbf|kN|0}}; installed thrust is {{convert|23400|lbf|kN}} with afterburner at sea level, which rose to {{convert|30200|lbf|kN|abbr=on}} at Mach 0.9.<ref name=SAC_F-14D>{{cite report |title=Standard Aircraft Characteristics (SAC) F-14D |url=https://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-14D_Tomcat_SAC_-_July_1985_(Partially_Declas).pdf |date=July 1985 |access-date=16 January 2023 |archive-date=1 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230101005424/http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-14D_Tomcat_SAC_-_July_1985_(Partially_Declas).pdf |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="NAVAIR">[https://info.publicintelligence.net/F14AAD-1.pdf NAVAIR 01-F-14AAD-1A F-14D NATOPS FLIGHT MANUAL] January 2004 PART 1 CH-2 Section 2.2 "Engine" pg "2–9".</ref> The increased thrust gave the Tomcat a better than 1:1 thrust-to-weight ratio at low fuel quantities, and the rate of climb was increased by 61%. The basic engine thrust without afterburner was powerful enough for carrier launches. While this did result in fuel savings, the main reason not to use afterburner during carrier launches was that if an engine failed the F110's thrust in full afterburner would produce a yawing moment too abruptly for the pilot to correct. Thus the launch of an F-14B or F-14D with afterburner was rare, while the F-14A required full afterburner unless very lightly loaded. The F110 was also more efficient, allowing the Tomcat to cruise comfortably above {{convert|30000|ft|m|abbr=on}}, which increased its range and survivability as well as endurance for time on station. In the overland attack role, this gave the F-14B and F-14D 60% more striking range or one-third more time on station.<ref>{{cite web|title=F-14D History and Specifications|url=http://www.topedge.com/alley/text/f14d/f14d.htm|website=TopEdge.com|publisher=Top Edge Engineering|access-date=6 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161223113220/http://www.topedge.com/alley/text/f14d/f14d.htm|archive-date=23 December 2016|url-status=live}}</ref> The F-14B arrived in time to participate in Desert Storm.{{citation needed|date=July 2022}}

With the TF30, the F-14's overall [[thrust-to-weight ratio]] at [[maximum takeoff weight]] is around 0.56, considerably less than the F-15A's ratio of 0.85; when fitted with the F110 engine, an improved thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.73 at maximum weight and 0.88 at normal takeoff weight was achieved.<ref name="Spick_p81">Spick 2000, p. 81.</ref> Despite having large differences in static thrust, the TF30-equipped F-14A and the F110-equipped F-14B and F-14D were rated at the same top speed.{{refn|The F-14's maximum speed is limited by the scheduling of the inlet ramps, and the inlet ramp programming for the F110 was optimized more for transonic performance; at higher speeds, the installed dynamic thrust of the TF30 actually exceeds the F110's.|group=N}}<ref>{{bulleted list|{{Cite book |url=http://server.3rd-wing.net/public/Ked/natops%20F14B.pdf |title=NATOPS Flight Manual Navy Model F-14B Aircraft |year=2001 |id=[[NAVAIR]] 01-F14AAP-1 |access-date=10 August 2023 |archive-date=9 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201109031419/http://server.3rd-wing.net/public/Ked/natops%20F14B.pdf |url-status=live}}|{{Cite book |url=https://info.publicintelligence.net/F14AAD-1.pdf |title=NATOPS Flight Manual Navy Model F-14D Aircraft |publisher= |year=2004 |id=[[NAVAIR]] 01−F14AAD−1}}}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=TOMCAT! The Grumman F-14 Story |last=Gillcrist |first=Paul |publisher=Schiffer Publishing |year=1994 |isbn=0-88740-664-5 |pages=193}}</ref>

In 1996, two F110-equipped Tomcat crashed after an afterburner failure. In the second crash, lighting the afterburner damaged the afterburner can's lining and led to an explosion. The Navy prohibited the use of afterburner on the F-14A+/B/D below 10,000 feet until GE could redesign the afterburners, a process that took over a year to complete.<ref>{{cite news|title=NAVY WIDENS BAN ON USE OF F-14'S AFTERBURNERS|author=Graham, Bradley|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1996/04/02/navy-widens-ban-on-use-of-f-14s-afterburners/f6311fc4-14b4-49c3-9aa5-b89f09d1993f/}}</ref>