F4 Takeoff technique was standard on most models. The aircraft sat on the ground with the wing at a low incidence. 3/4 to full aft stick was used to rotate the wing to the optimum angle. As the speed increased through 100kts it was required to ease the stick forward to capture about 12deg pitch angle. The aircraft would fly off between 145 and 205 kts dependant on configuration, temperature and altitude. It was possible to "pull" the aircraft airborne early, however, not recommended.
Three main components affected the takeoff speed and distance; technique, C of G and nose strut extension. Any one of those out could extend the takeoff by 20%!! A USAF article written in the Phantom Digest in about 1970 called "Late Rotators" explain it very well.
As for approach and landing the F4 was a beast apart from other aircraft. Due to it's unique handling characteristics the aircraft had to be flown using AOA as the main reference. Apart from the AOA gauge the pilot was provided with Head Up Indexers and on some models Audio AOA. Once mastered to was possible to fly a stable approach very accurately to a precision touchdown. All naval variants (B,J,K,M,N,S) had strengthened landing gear, smaller wheels and were designed to land with No Flare. The USAF originated models (C,D,E,F,G) had different landing gear and wheels and required a flare to reduce the descent rate prior to touchdown. The UFAF IPs did not appreciate my naval landing technique.
As LOMCEVAK stated, Kicking off drift was a NO-NO.
Landed using the wrong techniques it was possible to use over 10,000 ft of runway to stop. As Audax stated, on 64(R) Sqn we perfected the short landing technique prior the the Falklands deployment and managed to stop in 2500 ft without using a cable. The brakes,however, would be very hot. Chute deployment should occur so that full deployment occurred at touchdown and not before. A 200ft deployment would be a little early in my opinion.