A "Q" for the F-4 Community

[CoffmanStarter]

Guys ...

I've heard a few anecdotes and stories over time that the F-4J(UK) was very popular with crews compared with the F-4M (FGR.2). Stepping away from the politics surrounding the original decision to fit the Spey to our F-4K & M's ... and the later need to buy a few J79 engined ex USN F-4J's prior to the Tornado F.3 coming on stream ... was the F-4J(UK) superior in performance and role execution from a "Hands on Perspective" to that of the FGR.2 ?

I understand our F4 Nav community had to contend with a different backseat environment in the F-4J(UK) ... did that bring up any issues ?

I guess the above is a bit of an Anorak question really ... but a "crews eye" view would be greatly appreciated :ok:

Best regards ...

Coff.

[Geehovah]

I guess I've already said my bit, although I never flew the J. I had quite a few sorties in the F.

Fonthill Media - The Phantom in Focus Sampler (http://www.fonthillnews.com/phantomsample.html)

The F4K was really only good for the carrier as the lack of avionics was a serious limitation.

The F4M was good down low. The radar was always good but (eventually) reliable. The J79 was a jet so worked better at height. The M probably went quite a bit further in terms of range, certainly when I worked with the J79 jets.

Have to say that most of my mates that flew the J preferred it to the M.

[soddim]

If you Spey a dog it gets fat at the back end and slows down - the F4 was no different!

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks Geehovah ...

Great book BTW ... I have a copy :ok:

I'm sure a few M & J Guys are out there ...

Coff.

[maxburner]

Coffman; If I read your post correctly you seem to link the arrival of the Js with the F3. In fact the Js were procured to replace the F4Ms that went south to Stanley.

[CoffmanStarter]

Then that's my bad Maxburner ... sorry. My genuine interest is in a comparison between the M and J in terms of performance and capability as it would seem the almost "off the shelf" J was superior ... I was hopeful that a few who had the privilege to fly both could share a few observations and perspectives.

Cheers ...

Coff.

[kenparry]

and the later need to buy a few J79 engined ex USN F-4J's

Were they leased, rather than bought? ISTR they went back to the US eventually?

[RAFEngO74to09]

The F-4J(UK)s were bought - ISTR GBP 120 Million for qty 15 including spares and support. Originally they were only going to be used for about 5 years and not have a Major servicing - in the end they were kept much longer and Major servicings were carried out. Bargain !

[kenparry]

74to09

Thanks - I stand corrected!

[Dominator2]

The question actually asks many questions about the different F4s. Which was best, hard wing or soft wing? Which models had a slotted stabilator and what did it do for performance? Was the K the only model with drooped ailerons and could they be used in combat? Was the K also the only model with rapid reheat? I know that the J79 reheat lit quite quickly. The debate between J79 and RR Spey has been aired many times. Why do USAF models and their derivatives have less sturdy landing gear and smaller tyres.
Then of course there is the weapons system. Having operated Ds and Es as well as the M there is no doubt that, in the right hands, the PD radar was way ahead. I was appalled to hear when at Yuma that only 2 RIOs on MC Sqn could operate or understand PD, the rest just used Pulse.
The Digital Radar in the E model was an improvement but it still had all of the limitations of pulse. The weapons upgrade in the F made it credible to go on into the 90s, a shame the display wasn't better.
Any thoughts out there?

[HaveQuick2]

Am I correct in thinking that the J did not have INS, so could theoretically scramble faster as it didn't have to wait for an align, or was the align time rapid enough not have been a factor?

[sandozer]

The J model for the USN is the aircraft the F-4K was nearest to. No INS fit, it had the AN-ASN-39A dead reckoning navigation set instead.

[Rhino power]

Dominator2, its the USAF/land based derivatives that had the larger main wheels and tyres, 11.5 inches wide against the Navy's 7.7 inches. To accommodate the larger wheels/tyres the inner wing upper surface had a slight bulge as did the main undercarriage doors, only the F-4J/S and the last 12 RF-4Bs (post SLEP) also had the larger wheel/tyre combination. :ok:

-RP

[Three Miles Out]

There is some further information on this site:

Some F4E Phantom radar questions. - SimHQ Homepage (http://simhq.net/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1242390/all/Some_F4E_Phantom_radar_questio.html)

[RAFEngO74to09]

Have Quick 2,

The RAF Germany Battle Flight HASs for Phantom FGR2 / F-4M were equipped with INAS heaters. RS05 was held 24/7/365 with crewroom to airborne times in the region of 2.5 to 3 minutes regularly achieved, particularly during TACEVALs. During a forward deployment trial to use the ex-Lightning QRA facility at RAF Gutersloh in 1979, I once recorded a crewroom to airborne time of 1 min 40 sec when INAS alignment was dispensed with and the taxy distance to the runway was slightly less than that at RAF Wildenrath. So fast enough !

[A2QFI]

ISTR that an FGR2 INS could be aligned in 100 seconds, from a stored heading shut-down. The alignment was started as a first action by the nav, on reaching the cockpit, it was aligned before the crew were strapped in and the engines running.

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks chaps ...

Can I just pick up on something Dominator2 said regarding Hard v Soft Wings. I understand that we elected not to have leading-edge slats on the J. Was this on cost grounds or did the Hard Wing offer faster/more agile advantages at height ?

Best ...

Coff.

[Scruffy Fanny]

So many mistakes ! - THe FGR2 needed INAS for the pilots ADI so we never got airborne from Battle flight with the INAS not aligned -
The F4 J was a short term stop gap only 3 aircraft were put through the major programme at St Athan - then resprayed in RAF colours
The RAF wanted the F4S over the F4 J but not were available - the S is a upgraded J - at the time they were still upgrading the last Js at NAF North Island but no wing slat sets were available in the time period so the RAF took the hard wing J
The J was a much better F4 than the F4M for many reasons - the radar was the AWG12 but upgraded so better than the RAF AWG1/12

[Courtney Mil]

THe FGR2 needed INAS for the pilots ADI

Or the AJB7 by selecting STBY.

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks Scruffy F ... Belated Happy New Year :ok:

Any joy in scanning your G90 film ?

Best regards ...

Coff.

[Scruffy Fanny]

I'm working on it - got a scanner
Anyone know where I could get an 8mm Vinten black and white film developed ? I've got an exposed radar cassette but I think Vinten have gone out of business
thanks Courtney for the reminder about the AJB7
You need to get out more!

[fantom]

Or the AJB7 by selecting STBY.

Abba Jabba 7 it was on my course.

[Courtney Mil]

You need to get out more!

I take your point!

[typerated]

As a slight thread drift...

In the war fit - 4 sparrows/skyflash and 4 winders how common was it to fit the gunpod.

Did crews like having the gun fitted or would they prefer the jet to be cleaner or carry a centre line tank instead?

[Courtney Mil]

Scruffy,

As your Vinten film is pretty old, it may be past its sell-by date. See if an on-line company can handle 8mm b&w and get it processed as soon as you can. If you need help converting it to vid, let me know. I've got some kit and may be able to help.

Of course, that's only if it's not classified. :cool:

[Courtney Mil]

Typerated,

The "combat fit" was three tanks and 8 missiles. We flew two tanks, 8 missiles and gun in the Falklands and very occasional other places, but in the main (including QRA) it was centerline tank rahter than gun.

[Dominator2]

Courtney, remember that in RAFG our War Fit was 44+. The gun was deemed essential to counter all threats. Could print the details but I would have to shoot you. I could only guess Steve N...... didn't do a Germany tour or he would not have made such a stupid decision with Typhoon and the gun!
Yes it took 100 secs to align the INS. The Nav had to get the INS into Nav prior to the pilot starting to taxi. Both engines were started while strapping in, 7 second between starts I believe. The Nav could strap-in on the way to the T/O point if required. On an Alpha Scramble we WERE TO get airborne in 5 min, no matter. Battle Flight was seem to be of high interest by the *** Officers and politicians.

RP you are quite right on the tyre size, one red wine too many.

[Scruffy Fanny]

Of course the RAFG FGR2 were the elite force hence the 5 minute readiness - actually the job was easier than UKADR FGR2s which had a much bigger airspace to engage targets - The RAFG F4s on Battle Flight adopted the following procedure- THe aircraft was winched back into the HAS and the backseater re aligned the INAS and made a note of the heading which was then written in china graph on the instrument panel - this fast align method took the stored heading as its reference hence the 100 second align as opposed to the 10 minutes. The aircraft was connected to ground power 24/7 which kept the INAS heaters on and hence the oil warm to aid erection !
Thanks for the tips Courtney - the film is about 1988 vintage so probably fogged

[Milo Minderbinder]

Scruffy

firdt hit on google looks possible

I DON'T know them

Stanley Productions : 8mm, 16mm, 35mm Film Processing London UK (http://www.stanleysonline.co.uk/scategory-87.htm)

[Scruffy Fanny]

Thanks Milo
Not far from where I live so will give them a go
RGds SF

[Courtney Mil]

Courtney, remember that in RAFG our War Fit was 44+

Of course. Stupid me! Quite forgot about that.

[pubsman]

Scruffy,


The J was a much better F4 than the F4M for many reasons - the radar was the AWG12 but upgraded so better than the RAF AWG1/12

Surely the Radar in the J was an AWG 10?

[tucumseh]

The first FJ I worked on as a fitter was a Phantom. And many years later I was the last radar project manager (AWG 10/11/12). God, I feel old.

[Scruffy Fanny]

Apologies you could be right- It probably was the AWG10- I'll check my notes, Ferranti were given the contract to maintain them and i know when they did the upgrade on the AWG11/12 it was a big improvement but i recall the F4J was the best of the J,K, M

[Courtney Mil]

F-4J(UK) carried the AWG10B, an upgrade of the older AWG10. Some of the analogue stuff replaced by digital, which helped with reliability.

[Geehovah]

But the digital update to the AWG 11/12 in the 80s was a quantum improvement over the original hi power analogue version.

[Courtney Mil]

Of course. For the same reason. The 12 was probably the best set, all mods and other things being equal.

[CoffmanStarter]

Done a bit of digging today Gents ... it seems that 7 of our 15 F-4(UK)'s had Vietnam War Service behind them ... being ZE's 353, 354, 355, 356, 359, 362 and 365.

Best ...

Coff

[CoffmanStarter]

Cortney, Geehovah ...

From the same reference material ...

The J was initially equipped with the AWG-10B with a Doppler Spectrum Processor with all connections gold lined which gave a much cleaner picture than the FGR.2's AWG-12. But some Nav's felt that the 10 was not so useful at close range, lacking the fine-scale tuning for short-range returns.

Best ...

Coff.

[Courtney Mil]

That's how I understood it too, Coff.