T-28 vs 'Phantom'
Thread Starter
T-28 vs 'Phantom'
At the end of the video linked below, the fellow speaking says that, from a standing start, his T-28 Trojan will beat a 'Phantom' to 10,000 feet.
At first I thought he meant an F-4 Phantom, but maybe he means the earlier FH Phantom? Either way it's an interesting claim from this layperson's point of view. Maybe it depends on how you define a standing start -- perhaps he means from the commencement of pre-flight checks? I imagine it would take longer to start up an F-4 (one that's not sitting ready to scramble) than a T-28?
Thoughts?
At first I thought he meant an F-4 Phantom, but maybe he means the earlier FH Phantom? Either way it's an interesting claim from this layperson's point of view. Maybe it depends on how you define a standing start -- perhaps he means from the commencement of pre-flight checks? I imagine it would take longer to start up an F-4 (one that's not sitting ready to scramble) than a T-28?
Thoughts?
Last edited by AnotherFSO; 29th Oct 2023 at 11:27.
My dad used to wisely say, "Believe nothing you hear and half that you see". For some reason we live in an age where Wiki and YouTube are fact. Plainly this is BS and deserves no further discussion.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 299 Likes
on
167 Posts
That was John Young who joined NASA later that year. To be fair, the aircraft was somewhat lightened, but I still don't believe a T-28 would outclimb an F-4 to 10000'!
The C model that I have been fortunate to be able to fly is certainly sprightly, but I’ve never seen much more than 3000’/min climb (I also don’t make a habit of flogging it). I don’t think I’d be much above pattern altitude by 35 seconds from a standing start.
My NATOPS manual isn’t handy, but there’s no way it’s gonna do anything like the previously mentioned F-4 time to climb record.
It does take some rudder on takeoff , but never feels like it’s going to “flip over from P factor”
It has castering nose gear, and the manual says you’ve got it use differential braking until 40 kt or so, but in reality, as soon as you’re rolling and the engine is above idle, there’s so much airflow over the rudder that you can keep your heels on the floor.
Compared to a T-6, from a pilot skills standpoint, it’s an utter pussycat, and an absolute joy to fly.
My NATOPS manual isn’t handy, but there’s no way it’s gonna do anything like the previously mentioned F-4 time to climb record.
It does take some rudder on takeoff , but never feels like it’s going to “flip over from P factor”
It has castering nose gear, and the manual says you’ve got it use differential braking until 40 kt or so, but in reality, as soon as you’re rolling and the engine is above idle, there’s so much airflow over the rudder that you can keep your heels on the floor.
Compared to a T-6, from a pilot skills standpoint, it’s an utter pussycat, and an absolute joy to fly.
Last edited by 421dog; 29th Oct 2023 at 17:26.
I think there was a record set by a Bearcat for fastest piston time to `x` altitude....
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 299 Likes
on
167 Posts
If it's the same record the Bearcat set, some 20 years ago Steve Hinton was planning to go for a brakes off to height record in the Spitfire 19 he fitted with a Griffon 56 and contra props (now in France with a standard Griffon 65 and prop. Then somebody beat the record very convincingly in a homebuilt light single!
The F4 is actually the 'Phantom II'; the earlier Phantom was the FH-1 designed in 1943 and the first jet powered carrier borne aircraft in the USN.
ROC for the FH-1 was given as 4230 ft/min
ROC for the FH-1 was given as 4230 ft/min
From the book using military rated power rate of climb,
7,000AUW 4,350f/m
7,500AUW 4,070f/m
8,000AUW 3,700f/m
Training on the T-28 at Pensacola 1967 gossip was the T-28 could beat the F-4 from brakes off to 10,000, apparently it was a bet made with visiting USAF F-4 student crews, never saw it myself but can imagine the long ground roll of the F-4 and accelerating to best climb would put the T-28 ahead, zero wind ground roll for a 8,000lb (our training weight from memory) T-28 was 550 feet.
Our instructors had a broad range of experience, ex F-4, F-8, A-4 etc and combat time, so I'm sure they wouldn't have been making idle bets.
7,000AUW 4,350f/m
7,500AUW 4,070f/m
8,000AUW 3,700f/m
Training on the T-28 at Pensacola 1967 gossip was the T-28 could beat the F-4 from brakes off to 10,000, apparently it was a bet made with visiting USAF F-4 student crews, never saw it myself but can imagine the long ground roll of the F-4 and accelerating to best climb would put the T-28 ahead, zero wind ground roll for a 8,000lb (our training weight from memory) T-28 was 550 feet.
Our instructors had a broad range of experience, ex F-4, F-8, A-4 etc and combat time, so I'm sure they wouldn't have been making idle bets.
Last edited by megan; 30th Oct 2023 at 01:57.
Well, the closest I get to a phantom is in the local air museum, (but I still fly the T-28)
I will allow you to accede to the disputed assertion without non-accredited dispute…
I love the plane 😎
I will allow you to accede to the disputed assertion without non-accredited dispute…
I love the plane 😎
Last edited by 421dog; 30th Oct 2023 at 02:39.
I'll never forget the day two F-15s from nearby Tyndall AFB landed at our airport (KPFN) bingo fuel due to thunderstorm on the field at Tyndall. I was a CFI at the time and timed my last student of the day to coincide with the F-15s departure. We sat in the run-up area for RWY 14 as they taxied by/launched outta there in formation with afterburners. They were cleared to 12000' and cleared to land Tyndall AFB - distance, 11 nautical miles. Pretty awesome to see up close, asphalt went everywhere when they rotated!
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 299 Likes
on
167 Posts
Collings Foundation have an airworthy F-4 - I wonder if they could be persuaded to put the theory to the test alongside a suitable T-28... 
With the improvement in computer graphics and the blind acceptance of AI I suspect those numbers need to be adjusted considerably downwards.
having flown and displayed both, i am sure that the F4 wqould win, although I have no data to back this up