View Full Version : And who said the F-4 Phantom is obsolete?
Russia would not like to mess with todays Turkish Phantoms!
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/russia-doesn-t-want-to-mess-with-turkey-s-f-4e-terminator-2020-punches-above-its-weight-211834.html
I think we gave our last 26 F-4's to Turkey for letting us use their airstrips, fuel and etc during the Desert Storm war. When the conflict was over, rather than fly them back to the U.S. we gifted them to Turkey and got out of the F-4 business. This out of memory from watching the nightly news at the time.
The only downside I've ever heard about on these planes was the fuel mileage being poor.
barretcreek
03-19-2023, 09:38
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a43315881/f-4-phantom-history/
More fan mail.
F-4 was doubtless useful in its day. Much better planes in the current inventory. Sincerely. bruce.
But an F4 loaded with bombs or napalm sure looked good from below when your buttons were keeping you too high off the ground.
I thought it was one of the coolest planes ever. That and the F-111. And the F-104 and the 105 and the 102... Worst(for looks) that I worked on? F-9 Cougar. Even though it had the F-4 look sort of, it wasn't streamlined and had that Guppy look.
Forgot to mention; Israel. Real doubtful that the Turks could figure that stuff out themselves. They can copy some things but not do stuff like that. How did they pay for all that tech? Well, they are part of NATO... the lower part.
Agree with you on the F-111.
Agree with you on the F-111.
I had the pleasure of crawling around in and on a F-111B (Navy model) in 1968 (there were only 2 made at that time, 7 total). I was a new Ltjg and my only experience on a carrier was on The Enterprise, but even then I could see why it would not be suitable for carrier operations. It was just too big. The main landing gear were attached to a block of medal that looked like it would weigh 3X more than the struts on the F-4. I was appointed by our CO to fly with a Rear Admiral. NOT a good thing, his guy probably had not flown a F-4 in months and we were going to fly to the Raytheon Plant in Massachusetts and then on into Andrews AFB. When we got to DC it was getting dark and there was sleet and fog barely within the vision and ceiling limits and he said "I'm not going to use the drag chute, because you would have repack it in all this wet weather." I replied, "I can manage it sir!"
Bottom line he did not use it, we landed fast and long, blew out a tire, and had to take the overrun gear. It took nearly a week until a crew could flew up from NAS Oceana to fix the tire and I was stuck with very little money and one change of underwear. If only he hadn't been trying to be such a nice guy...
barretcreek
03-20-2023, 06:38
It was just too big.
What about a Vigilante?
Dryheat. Ever notice the gutted F-104 sitting in the gas station in Naha?
I remember the Vigilante. Long and sleek. I never saw one up close.
I've tried but can't figure out Naha. Northern Arizona... Maybe I've been there but memory is failing some. Seems I remember pictures of gas stations that had jets on them.
"And who said the F-4 Phantom is obsolete?"
goo?
He also flew them. Out of memory he also flew the F-14's? He said in one thread that the hardest part about flying the F-4 was carrying enough coal and having to shovel the coal in the firebox to keep the plane flying.
We all miss him. RIP
i flew f-4's for half a tour and was a grunt for the other half.
...
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1107/5150130692_153a90cf62.jpg
...
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2533/3882071517_4b1ff56979.jpg
...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3359/3607891932_25f8fa2460.jpg
...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3301/3190863891_228ea25e8e.jpg
...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/3151181039_9ba4d0338e_z.jpg?zz=1
...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3092/2439129719_c51fe075e8.jpg
...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/2380540924_ea5a14cd28.jpg
...
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2290/2370539241_f1f3d591a8.jpg
...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29251424@N00/2376805149/sizes/m/in/photostream/
...
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2308/2119385348_1c164c755e.jpg
Naha...to me is on Okiwana
This thread inspired me to spend two hours reading about 1950-60's jets. It's raining today anyway. The F series of jets were designed to fly fast and very high. When Russia's missiles could fly as high as our jets we went the other direction and designed planes for low altitudes.
Probably my favorite jet was the B-58 Hustler. I had a model of it when I was a kid.
I wonder if the F-16 is the be-all-end all of jets.
I was assigned to three aircraft carriers that were doing 6th Fleet duties in the early 1960s. They were the USS Enterprise, USS Saratoga and the USS Shangri La. Since my duties were not related to air ops, I was only a casual observer of the type of aircraft used on the carriers although I did get to fly off the Enterprise in a prop driven COD as a passenger. Straight deck run, no cat launch. They tied me down between two mail bags. They flew me to Naples where I transferred to the Saratoga.
All of the jets on board the carriers were loud, but the F4s were really big and really loud. I only remember them being on the Enterprise and possibly on the Saratoga. I think the Essex class Shang was probably too small to accommodate them.
There was never any doubt when one of the F4s was being launched or recovered. They were powered by 2 big GE J79 engines that probably damaged the ears of many sailors who had to be on the flight deck when the afterburners were lit. The power they had when launched and their rate of climb was impressive.
I was at the St. Louis airport in the early 1980s waiting for a flight. I heard that old familiar window rattling deep roar that had everyone looking out the window to see what was happening. Two F4s were taking off in formation on a runway that parallels the terminal building. The passenger jets that were taking off could barely be heard inside the terminal. The raw power was awesome. The pilots had to be smiling knowing they immediately had the attention of everyone within a several mile radius.
We went to the Air Force Museum in Dayton, OH a few years ago and spent a couple days walking around looking at the examples of every military aircraft that the US ever flew. We could have easily spent a couple more days there.
Ohio has a 2nd smaller aircraft Museum in Canton, OH called the Military Aircraft Preservation Society that has maybe 25 military planes, mostly Vietnam era and one C47. They have a Crusader from the Saratoga that may have been aboard when I was there.
Pensacola Navy Air Base has a very nice museum with an Imax theater, flight simulators for the public, elevator, planes inside and out with an F-14 mounted near the front door.
Battleship Park near Mobile, AL has a much smaller museum but does have a B-52, A-12, battleship, sub, numerous ground equipment-some of which was brought back from Iraq, and a F-4 mounted near the entrance.
https://www.navalaviationmuseum.org/news-events/
https://www.ussalabama.com/
Vern Humphrey
03-21-2023, 03:35
How many of you can guess what the third photo from the top is?:eusa_shhh:
High Plaines Doug r
03-21-2023, 03:41
Not Bar-b-que.
Vern Humphrey
03-21-2023, 03:52
Not Bar-b-que.
You got that right!!
This thread inspired me to spend two hours reading about 1950-60's jets. It's raining today anyway. The F series of jets were designed to fly fast and very high. When Russia's missiles could fly as high as our jets we went the other direction and designed planes for low altitudes.
Probably my favorite jet was the B-58 Hustler. I had a model of it when I was a kid.
I wonder if the F-16 is the be-all-end all of jets.
The F-35 probably will become the last manned fighter that is widely used. It is too bad they didn't give it two engines and add a GIB (Guy In Backseat). The F-8 Crusader was the most dangerous Navy fighter to fly. 1,216 were made and 1,106 made big splashes in the ocean or little holes in the ground.
The F-8 Crusader was the most dangerous Navy fighter to fly.
Kinda ugly too. I heard that the (more ugly) A-7 was bad about sucking up people on the carrier decks with the huge intake.
- - - Updated - - -
This thread inspired me to spend two hours reading about 1950-60's jets. It's raining today anyway.
This should keep you busy for a while.
https://aviastar.org/index2.html
https://aviastar.org/index2.html
Lockheed made lots of planes we know but it looks like everything Northrup made was an experiment.
We had an A-7 park at our hanger. While I was on night guard duty I climbed inside the intake and crawled all the way to the back just for fun.
There is a difference between "obsolete" and "obsolescent." Obsolescent (meaning more modern and efficient stuff is available) equipment can still be quite useful. For example MiG 17 and 19 aircraft, both clearly obsolescent in the 1960s gave us a good bit of trouble in the Viet Nam war. As late as the Gulf War Phantoms, while not used by us much in their original role did good service for us in the "Wild Weasel" electronic warfare mode.
The Phantom remained in US frontline service from 1961 to 1996, that's 35 years, an almost unequalled record for a fighter aircraft. The Japanese just retired their Phantoms in 2021!! A remarkable record and one of histories great aircraft.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.