Later on that can be changed for a better design if there is one for next generation fighter jet, in mean time development time could be reduced for NGF project.
Development time can already be reduced via 3rd printing of parts and running robust simulations and other digital engineering techniques. USA cut their development time for prototype of 6th Gen fighter to months from years by using 3D printing and digital engineering.
Your idea is archaic and obsolete.
Because components can be tested sooner rather than wait for complete prototype being made when some of it if not majority can be tested on F-14.
You don’t need to wait for a full prototype to be complete. Software simulation, scale prototypes (1/10), radar rooms, wind tunnel tests, 3D printing can all reduce development time without needing to convert your most potent fighter into a test dummy.
Composite materials can reduce RCS of F-14 considerably and can make aircraft lighter in the process that notable decisions can be made.
You can simulate this via software before proceeding. You can also simulate RCS with software then radar room tests using scale (RC size) models before proceeding further in R&D.
Such as having new wing that is fully swept back and mechanism for variable wing angles not needed thus removed. That reduces weight, but that can be used to expand internal fuel storage to considerable amount.
Then new wing could be made to not carry fuel thus be thinner and further reduce RCS.
This isn’t an F-14 anymore and will slowly start approaching the shape of an F-22/TFX/SU-57. Designers have already done all this but you want to reinvent the wheel? Why?
New technologies have to be tested and F-14 is ideal example since it is over Mach 2 capable fighter jet and its size for large components.
Advanced supercomputer simulations, 3D printing, scale models, etc etc can all do this without taking the less than ~30 flight worthy F-14’s Iran has left and sacrificing them as frankstein projects.
design a prototype in software, test parameters, run simulations, reach an applicable confidence interval that your data is statistically significant, build 1/10 prototype do necessary real world simulations (wind tunnel, Radar bombardment, etc) input updated data into software re-run simulation. Build full prototype etc etc.
Now if you want the F-14 or F-4 or Mig-29 or SU-22 to test the new engine to make sure it doesn’t fail in the air or to determine HTO (hours till overhaul) then by all means do that. But the rest of what your saying is unnecessary.
UK-Italy-Japan 6th Gen. Project
Team Tempest to leverage AM for up to 30% of 6th gen jet fighter, with composite materials and AM provided by at BAE's Factory of the Future
www.voxelmatters.com
US 6th gen prototype already flew in 2020
The US Air Force’s sixth generation fighter jet, part of its Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) programme, has entered the next phase of development.
www.aero-mag.com
“The program uses a non-traditional acquisition approach to avoid traditional monolithic program schedules and exorbitant life-cycle sustainment costs. This strategy, called the Digital Century Series approach, creates a realistic business case for industry to adopt commercial best practises for key design activities – before a part is even manufactured.”
Acquisition head Will Roper noted regarding the importance of digital technologies to the new fighter program: “Digital engineering is lowering overhead for production and assembly [so] you do not have to have huge facilities, huge workforces [and] expensive tooling.” Roper further stated in a video conference call with reporters after his presentation: “It is letting us take aircraft assembly back to where we were in the [19]70s and prior to it — back when we had 10 or more companies who could build airplanes for the United States Air Force, because you could do it in hangar-like facilities with small, but very good teams, of engineers and mechanics. We're going back to that. It's super exciting.”
militarywatchmagazine.com