Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page / 5
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:11:30 AM EDT
[#1]
From a post I made a year ago about pops' Martin-Baker experience over the Baltic:

We came across this page: http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1969.html and noticed something a little concerning.

Between 69-0371 and 69-0381: Five Crashed; One was shot down (by that retard in a Tomcat over the Med); three are now drones; one is on a popsicle stick and the other is at AMARC.

Out of eleven consecutive aircraft, six met rather untimely demises!
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:13:09 AM EDT
[#2]
Since the last QF-4s were retired fairly recently, does anybody know what was done with them?  If ever there was a plane that's a last best option for putting in museums, that'd have to be the one so I hope they are all preserved and homed out to museums.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:14:11 AM EDT
[#3]
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:21:08 AM EDT
[#4]
One other cute Phantom story.

Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:25:29 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

What use is off boresight missiles and IRST to the Nork when an AWACS has told the ROK or JASDF Phantom when the MiG has taken off and exactly where he needs to be to salvo his AIM-7s?  If they miss, the Phantom is just going to run for home and the 29 will run out of fuel if it tries to follow.
View Quote
Like I said, I thought we were comparing fighters, not doctrine and supporting forces.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:37:58 AM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Like I said, I thought we were comparing fighters, not doctrine and supporting forces.
View Quote
I’m trying to think of a conflict where each side sat back and threw spec sheets at each other and am drawing a blank.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 1:16:44 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It was my favorite. It had the hard wing (no slats) of the J, and I think the same radar as the S, with this wonderful thing for the time called "Digital Auto-Acquisition". You just pushed a button and it would sweep your lift vector and lock onto anything within five miles.

The slats on the S added a thousand pounds of weight. They would give you one (and only one) good turn. I think they encouraged pilots to ignore the strengths of the F-4 (speed, and the thrust-to-weight for a vertical fight) and try to turn with airplanes that had a better turn rate/radius.

Disclaimer: As with Dr. Blasey-Ford, this was a long time ago and my memory may be imperfect.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
@Rodent

F-4 Super J? Heard of the J and S.
It was my favorite. It had the hard wing (no slats) of the J, and I think the same radar as the S, with this wonderful thing for the time called "Digital Auto-Acquisition". You just pushed a button and it would sweep your lift vector and lock onto anything within five miles.

The slats on the S added a thousand pounds of weight. They would give you one (and only one) good turn. I think they encouraged pilots to ignore the strengths of the F-4 (speed, and the thrust-to-weight for a vertical fight) and try to turn with airplanes that had a better turn rate/radius.

Disclaimer: As with Dr. Blasey-Ford, this was a long time ago and my memory may be imperfect.
Auto-Acq and 3-bar scan...  On the AWG-10A and B, Auto-Acq scanned the B-sweep from the max range selected on the RSC (Radar Set Control, LRU 12) down to zero, however, the acq strobe was only displayed in the B-sweep from the 50 NM mark and in.

VI (Visual Identification) Mode had a max range 5 NM could be manually selected on the RSC by the RIO or engaged by the pilot (by pressing a button on the stick... left side, adjacent to the right thumb, IIRC).  When VI mode was engaged by the pilot, it overrode the settings on the RSC and engaged Auto-Acq by default.  It could also be used in combination with SEAM (Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode) and VTAS (Visual Target Acquisition System).  VTAS was pretty cool in its theory of operation.  Once calibrated by the pilot, the radar antenna could be slaved to the VTAS helmet so it would point to wherever the pilot was looking (within the mechanical limits of the main radar antenna, 60 deg from boresight).  When coupled with SEAM, the Sidewinder seeker head was also slaved to the VTAS helmet (looks that kill).  The system worked, but was rarely used.  I was told the VTAS helmets were a touch too heavy under G.

D(6354)Peacher
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 1:27:39 AM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

The prototype design originally was a multi-role plane, but the Navy changed the requirements to it being an interceptor. As they had the A-4 and the F-8, but no long range interceptors at the time.
Since it had the foundation for a multi-role capability, it was easy for all branches later to adapt it to multi-role duties.
But the F-4 as the Navy received it in 1960 was an interceptor much like the F-14.
View Quote
Little known fact.  The USMC initially planned to operate the F-14 out of 1st MAB, K-Bay, MAG-24, VMFA-212, VMFA-232, and VMFA-235.  However the plans were cancelled once the Navy decided to remove the Tomcat's ability to drop bombs.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 1:35:24 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The last US ones flying (not counting QF-4s) were Boise Idaho F-4Gs, retired in 1996.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the last ones flying were recon birds in the National guard out of Birmingham Al. Someone I know had a family member shot down in the build up to GW1. They flew very fast and very low. Not a lot of room for error.
The last US ones flying (not counting QF-4s) were Boise Idaho F-4Gs, retired in 1996.
In the mid-2000s, a QF-4 crashed in New Mexico.

The pilot ejected safely.

That's still one of the weirdest news stories ever.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 5:56:40 AM EDT
[#11]
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 11:22:31 AM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
In the mid-2000s, a QF-4 crashed in New Mexico.

The pilot ejected safely.

That's still one of the weirdest news stories ever.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the last ones flying were recon birds in the National guard out of Birmingham Al. Someone I know had a family member shot down in the build up to GW1. They flew very fast and very low. Not a lot of room for error.
The last US ones flying (not counting QF-4s) were Boise Idaho F-4Gs, retired in 1996.
In the mid-2000s, a QF-4 crashed in New Mexico.

The pilot ejected safely.

That's still one of the weirdest news stories ever.
Why was it weird?

Is it because you don't know that QF-4s flew lots of sorties with a pilot in the cockpit?
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 11:44:09 AM EDT
[#14]
Attachment Attached File


IAI Super Phantom

A separate Israel Aircraft Industries project was proposed for a PW1120-powered Phantom, and one prototype built. IAI's F-4 "Super Phantom" or F-4-2000, which could exceed Mach 1 without afterburners, was displayed at the 1987 Paris Air Show. (Allegedly) McDonnell Douglas scuttled the F-4-2000's development because it equaled the F/A-18C/D in performance and could endanger future F/A-18 sales.

The Kurnas was powered by two Pratt & Whitney PW1120 turbofans developed for the IAI Lavi. The powerplant endowing the Kurnas with a 17% better combat thrust-to-weight ratio, 36% improved climb rate, and a 15% improved sustained turn rate than the F-4E.

I think Japan came up with an improved version that was shot down as well by M-D.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 11:49:20 AM EDT
[#15]
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about?
Attachment Attached File

They look like a complete afterthought to the design.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 11:57:04 AM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about?
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG
They look like a complete afterthought to the design.
View Quote
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitter_plate_(aeronautics)

Sorry, linking from an iPad.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 11:58:45 AM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about?
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG
They look like a complete afterthought to the design.
View Quote
Intake air dirverters.  They've been on since day one.  They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines.  Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that.

Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 11:59:32 AM EDT
[#18]
my thought is to control airflow at certain angles of attack......eta.  slow on the draw
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:07:36 PM EDT
[#19]
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 12:14:47 PM EDT
[#20]
Vought F-8 Crusader
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 3:53:28 PM EDT
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Intake air dirverters.  They've been on since day one.  They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines.  Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that.

Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about?
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG
They look like a complete afterthought to the design.
Intake air dirverters.  They've been on since day one.  They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines.  Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that.

Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps.
The F-4 splitter plate was fixed but directly behind it were vari-ramps. They work just like the F-14 and F-15s, just horizontally restricting flow instead of vertically. They also had a movable bellmouth behind the vari-ramps that allowed increased bypass air at high air speeds to cool the motors.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 4:51:42 PM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
So was it a fucked up design or was it sexy or are you ignoring how successful of a plane it still is because it isn’t sexy? I’m confused.

Phantoms were such outstanding planes that they’re still in service. Yes,quite a few were lost in Vietnam and by the Israelis and Iranians but the majority to air defense,not other fighters.

The only 3rd generation fighter that turned more MiGs and Sukhois into smoking holes for fewer losses in the air is the Mirage III and to that you can attribute Israeli pilots over Arabs. However,Israeli Phantom drivers shot down Pakistanis,North Koreans and even Russians during Operation Rimon 20.

I’d put my money on Japanese and ROK F-4s over Nork MiG-29s today.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, it had all that weird retarded flight surface geometry to over-come its poor design.

How can the same generation of engineers create the beautiful, perfect SR-71 but come up with the fucked up F-4 design?

Oh...the F-4 was good, but by sheer american might, it go there eventually.

It was like the ME-104 of WW2 or the spitfire, it got all the attention because it looked sexy but the other planes had far better kill ratios
So was it a fucked up design or was it sexy or are you ignoring how successful of a plane it still is because it isn’t sexy? I’m confused.

Phantoms were such outstanding planes that they’re still in service. Yes,quite a few were lost in Vietnam and by the Israelis and Iranians but the majority to air defense,not other fighters.

The only 3rd generation fighter that turned more MiGs and Sukhois into smoking holes for fewer losses in the air is the Mirage III and to that you can attribute Israeli pilots over Arabs. However,Israeli Phantom drivers shot down Pakistanis,North Koreans and even Russians during Operation Rimon 20.

I’d put my money on Japanese and ROK F-4s over Nork MiG-29s today.
Stuff from that era is a good read.

Leaving nothing to chance, Motti Hod decided to assemble the best possible squad for the mission. Airmen selection rested with the Squadron commanders and each subsequently selected himself. Amos Amir, commanding 119 Squadron and a 5-kills ace at the time, selected Asher Snir (11 kills), Avraham Salmon (6) and Avi Gilad (2) to accompany him. Uri Even-Nir, commanding 117 Squadron and already credited with 3 kills, was to be accompanied by Itamar Neuner (4), Yehuda Koren (7) and Kobi Richter (7). Iftach Spector, an 8-kills ace leading 101 Squadron, was accompanied by Michael Tzuk (2), Israel Baharav (5) and Giora Ram-Furman. The 69 Squadron Phantoms was led by Avihu Bin-Nun, who had shot down 2 aircraft as a Mirage pilot, with navigator Shaul Levi. Also present were Aviem Sella (1) with Reuven Reshef, Ehud Hankin (3, navigator unknown) and Uri Gil (1) with Israel Parnas. To face the Soviets, who had little combat experience and no kills to their name, the IAF was preparing to send up some of its most experienced pilots, with a combined score of 67 aerial kills.[16]

Dam Son lol.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 5:58:47 PM EDT
[#23]
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 6:19:50 PM EDT
[#24]
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 6:26:47 PM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

A mig 29 with a semi capable pilot will piss all over an f4 in a turning fight.
View Quote
If Japanese or South Korean pilots are ever up firing warshots, they’re gonna be in a no-shit exsistential conflict and nit hamstrung by POHR rules of engagement.

Odds of a turning fight happening are pretty slim.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 6:32:17 PM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

MiG 25 would be used for defense of Mother Russia, you are not likely to find yourself flying that over someplace like Vietnam or Korea with some American pilot on your tail.
View Quote
Foxbat was basically a reusable SAM with a human-aided guidance system and submunitions.

Take off, climb balls-out fast toward where the ground radar operator told you the bombers were, launch missiles, land if you still have a runway.
Link Posted: 10/2/2018 7:57:15 PM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Auto-Acq and 3-bar scan...  On the AWG-10A and B, Auto-Acq scanned the B-sweep from the max range selected on the RSC (Radar Set Control, LRU 12) down to zero, however, the acq strobe was only displayed in the B-sweep from the 50 NM mark and in.

VI (Visual Identification) Mode had a max range 5 NM could be manually selected on the RSC by the RIO or engaged by the pilot (by pressing a button on the stick... left side, adjacent to the right thumb, IIRC).  When VI mode was engaged by the pilot, it overrode the settings on the RSC and engaged Auto-Acq by default.  It could also be used in combination with SEAM (Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode) and VTAS (Visual Target Acquisition System).  VTAS was pretty cool in its theory of operation.  Once calibrated by the pilot, the radar antenna could be slaved to the VTAS helmet so it would point to wherever the pilot was looking (within the mechanical limits of the main radar antenna, 60 deg from boresight).  When coupled with SEAM, the Sidewinder seeker head was also slaved to the VTAS helmet (looks that kill).  The system worked, but was rarely used.  I was told the VTAS helmets were a touch too heavy under G.

D(6354)Peacher
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
@Rodent

F-4 Super J? Heard of the J and S.
It was my favorite. It had the hard wing (no slats) of the J, and I think the same radar as the S, with this wonderful thing for the time called "Digital Auto-Acquisition". You just pushed a button and it would sweep your lift vector and lock onto anything within five miles.

The slats on the S added a thousand pounds of weight. They would give you one (and only one) good turn. I think they encouraged pilots to ignore the strengths of the F-4 (speed, and the thrust-to-weight for a vertical fight) and try to turn with airplanes that had a better turn rate/radius.

Disclaimer: As with Dr. Blasey-Ford, this was a long time ago and my memory may be imperfect.
Auto-Acq and 3-bar scan...  On the AWG-10A and B, Auto-Acq scanned the B-sweep from the max range selected on the RSC (Radar Set Control, LRU 12) down to zero, however, the acq strobe was only displayed in the B-sweep from the 50 NM mark and in.

VI (Visual Identification) Mode had a max range 5 NM could be manually selected on the RSC by the RIO or engaged by the pilot (by pressing a button on the stick... left side, adjacent to the right thumb, IIRC).  When VI mode was engaged by the pilot, it overrode the settings on the RSC and engaged Auto-Acq by default.  It could also be used in combination with SEAM (Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode) and VTAS (Visual Target Acquisition System).  VTAS was pretty cool in its theory of operation.  Once calibrated by the pilot, the radar antenna could be slaved to the VTAS helmet so it would point to wherever the pilot was looking (within the mechanical limits of the main radar antenna, 60 deg from boresight).  When coupled with SEAM, the Sidewinder seeker head was also slaved to the VTAS helmet (looks that kill).  The system worked, but was rarely used.  I was told the VTAS helmets were a touch too heavy under G.

D(6354)Peacher
Wish I had a memory like that.

Loved the Auto-Acq - just roll towards your opponent and push a button. The antennae would lock on so hard you could feel it.
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 9:44:27 AM EDT
[#28]

US Navy F-4J Phantom II aircraft takeoff and crash in St. Louis, Missouri; Fireme...HD Stock Footage
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 12:19:48 PM EDT
[#29]
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 5:51:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I partnered in an airplane with the pilot of that airplane.

I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I partnered in an airplane with the pilot of that airplane.

I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason.
What caused the crash?
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 5:55:06 PM EDT
[#31]
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 5:57:42 PM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

An errant wrench in the controls.
View Quote
Oops
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 6:46:40 PM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
An errant wrench in the controls.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I partnered in an airplane with the pilot of that airplane.

I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason.
What caused the crash?
An errant wrench in the controls.
I bet somebody's tool control process got loved tenderly.
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 8:04:31 PM EDT
[#34]
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 8:27:09 PM EDT
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Since the last QF-4s were retired fairly recently, does anybody know what was done with them?  If ever there was a plane that's a last best option for putting in museums, that'd have to be the one so I hope they are all preserved and homed out to museums.
View Quote
You know how QF-4s are retired, right?







They're fresh out of QF-4s, on to QF-16As and Cs, many with GE motors.



Here's a QF-16A in use as a target that RTB'd, no missile warhead.

Test Missile Fired at Boeing's QF-16
Link Posted: 10/3/2018 10:41:05 PM EDT
[#36]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
View Quote
This was the retirement ceremony for my ship.

Attachment Attached File
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 8:45:53 AM EDT
[#37]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Intake air dirverters.  They've been on since day one.  They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines.  Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that.

Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps.
View Quote
Thank you!
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 8:57:04 AM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It was so mediocre that over 5000 were built.  The most of any Western fighter as far as I know, but the Russians made a lot more of some models of MiGs.

It's possible that the F-16 may end up being built in greater numbers than the F-4 at 5195 copies.
View Quote
Here's an interesting list, its all production aircraft starting at the 5000 [produced] mark.  The f-16 didn't make it though.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-produced_aircraft
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 12:37:08 PM EDT
[#39]
What happened to the last US built F-4?  Museum, crashed, shot down, scrapped?  And yes, I googled, no joy.
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 6:13:40 PM EDT
[#40]
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 7:36:21 PM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
What happened to the last US built F-4?  Museum, crashed, shot down, scrapped?  And yes, I googled, no joy.  
View Quote
IIRC it was delivered to the South Korean AF and is still in service.  The last Phantom built was an F-4EJ built by Mitsubishi and AFAIK is still in service with the Japanese Air Self Defense Force.

ROKAF F-4E


JASDF F-4EJ
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 8:30:47 PM EDT
[#42]
Back in my days in VF-84, our hangar was next to the F-4 RAG squadron VF-171. The Ark Royal visited Norfolk on it's last cruise with F-4 Phantoms, the F-4 squadron came to NAS Oceana. My understanding is that the F-4 squadron put the Omega on the tails to symbolize "the end." The Rolls Royce engines in the British birds had a cool sound, much different than our J-79's. I wish I had taken better shots of the cans or as the Brits would say, "reheaters"
VF-171 did a nice job Zapping the the skipper's bird.





Link Posted: 10/4/2018 9:21:15 PM EDT
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

So was it a fucked up design or was it sexy or are you ignoring how successful of a plane it still is because it isn’t sexy? I’m confused.

Phantoms were such outstanding planes that they’re still in service. Yes,quite a few were lost in Vietnam and by the Israelis and Iranians but the majority to air defense,not other fighters.

The only 3rd generation fighter that turned more MiGs and Sukhois into smoking holes for fewer losses in the air is the Mirage III and to that you can attribute Israeli pilots over Arabs. However,Israeli Phantom drivers shot down Pakistanis,North Koreans and even Russians during Operation Rimon 20.

I’d put my money on Japanese and ROK F-4s over Nork MiG-29s today.
View Quote
The Vought Crusader had a winning record against Migs.......
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 9:24:41 PM EDT
[#44]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

IIRC it was delivered to the South Korean AF and is still in service.  The last Phantom built was an F-4EJ built by Mitsubishi and AFAIK is still in service with the Japanese Air Self Defense Force.

ROKAF F-4E
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/F-4E_ROKAF_takes_off_from_Kunsan_AB_2009.jpg

JASDF F-4EJ
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/18/71/0818715a734d511da1e832e733ad8e28.jpg
View Quote
My bad:  I meant the last US built for the US military F-4.  I knew the last one was for SK, but failed to clarify.

Thanks,
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 9:24:43 PM EDT
[#45]
Mirages of that era are pretty awesome in DCS. Israel used them in combat against MiGs, but against Arab pilots so I don't know if that's a good thing to measure.

Sorry, in DCS those are Mirage 2000 4th generation fighters.
Link Posted: 10/4/2018 9:40:46 PM EDT
[#46]
#oneless
Shady J Phantom ran a little long. Mid 80s at Fayette Nam.Attachment Attached File
Link Posted: 10/5/2018 2:55:54 PM EDT
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

My bad:  I meant the last US built for the US military F-4.  I knew the last one was for SK, but failed to clarify.

Thanks,
View Quote
From the link below, it looks like the USAF got the last one meant for the US military.

All the F-4s listed on that site after 1653 were built for other nations.

http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1974.html

1653 (MSN 4913) to AMARC as FP717 Jul 12, 1991.  Left AMARC for Mojave Apr 2002.  
Converted to QF-4E drone AF244


Attachment Attached File


This was the last US Navy/Marine F-4 -

158379 (MSN 4201) with VF-154 collided in midair with F-4J 158364 Jun 26, 1972 while training over the Coso Range, Nevada. Both crews ejected safely.

http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_serials/thirdseries20.html
Link Posted: 10/5/2018 3:14:28 PM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Intake air dirverters.  They've been on since day one.  They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines.  Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that.

Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about?
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG
They look like a complete afterthought to the design.
Intake air dirverters.  They've been on since day one.  They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines.  Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that.

Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps.
Yep, the faster you go, the less intake surface area you need to allow air into the engines.

Dad said once when he was flying, he and his driver were accelerating and one of the diverters didn't deploy properly... the engine backfired flames out past the nose of the plane and stalled out.
Link Posted: 10/5/2018 5:44:33 PM EDT
[#49]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

From the link below, it looks like the USAF got the last one meant for the US military.

All the F-4s listed on that site after 1653 were built for other nations.

http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1974.html

1653 (MSN 4913) to AMARC as FP717 Jul 12, 1991.  Left AMARC for Mojave Apr 2002.  
Converted to QF-4E drone AF244


https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/54089/1288153-large-694058.JPG

This was the last US Navy/Marine F-4 -

158379 (MSN 4201) with VF-154 collided in midair with F-4J 158364 Jun 26, 1972 while training over the Coso Range, Nevada. Both crews ejected safely.

http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_serials/thirdseries20.html
View Quote
Link Posted: 10/5/2018 6:26:35 PM EDT
[#50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I don't know much about jets but i do know the F14 carried the Phoenix missile that had a long ass range and could have killed an F4 long before the F14 could have been in range of the Phantom. I know the F14 has a gun too and is probably faster. IIRC the F14 was designed as a carrier borne interceptor designed to attack anti ship planes from long distance, the F4 was a multi role design.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I don't know much about jets but i do know the F14 carried the Phoenix missile that had a long ass range and could have killed an F4 long before the F14 could have been in range of the Phantom. I know the F14 has a gun too and is probably faster. IIRC the F14 was designed as a carrier borne interceptor designed to attack anti ship planes from long distance, the F4 was a multi role design.
Has the Phoenix ever actually worked in real life combat? They failed a lot iirc.
Page / 5
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top