Brit aircrew on exchange, and indeed personnel on ground appointments, were allowed to deploy and many did. It was always subject to approval from BDS Washington.

I was on exchange with the USN 78/81. I used to visit McDonnell Douglas in St Louis every 6-8 weeks to work on AV-8B/F-18 cockpit systems integration.

The F-4 production line was reaching it's end and the McD engineers used to take great delight in showing us Greek and Turkish F-4's, next to each other on the production line. In fact, they used to say that every morning they had to adjust the aircraft back into line, as overnight they had started to point towards each other!

Either way, McD would win, no matter who won!!

Great business position.

Great aircraft - great company!

Sadly no longer an independent company, and a terrific warfighting aircraft is now assigned to history. Along with many others.

Never flew it myself, but would have loved to.

It looked aggressive and right!

Bevo
 

No - VX-5 at China Lake

Pontius Navigator

It's performance compared pretty well to the F-106 actually. The F-106A was undoubtedly more elegant and beautiful in appearance (and slightly faster at top-end speed), but the F-4B had a greater intercept radius (750 nm vs 650 nm), a faster climb-rate (AFAIK).

The F-4B's radar boasted 25% greater range than the F-106A and was more reliable; it's two man crew reduced workload and didn't require a lot of the automation the F-102A and F-106A did.

I don't know how the F-4E's radar compared to the F-4B's, whether it was inferior, the same, superior, etc, but they were still used as interceptors by NORAD and ANG units, and I think it had an even greater intercept radius than the F-4B/C (786 nm vs ~ 750 nm).

Well, technically the plane was physically capable of carrying up to 22,500 pounds of payload; operationally, it was restricted to around 16,700. I don't know if an F-4 ever carried 16,000 pounds of bombs, but if the RAF was carrying 9,000 pounds of bombs, 2 x 450 gallon tanks and an SUU, you would probably be right up on the limit.


brickhistory

Yeah, the F-4 had a number of ugly characteristics. Substantial adverse yaw due to it's ailerons (which for some reason only deflected down) combined with reduced rudder effectiveness under high g-loads was one problem, I think it had bad stall characteristics too (I'm not sure, but I remember something mentioned about a post-stall gyration).

Actually, that might have been the reason the USN never developed an F-4 variant with a gun. Over the nose visibility is particularly important for carrier operations.


gibbo568

You sure you're not mixing the F-4 up with the F-15? They had a "blow-up" feature whereby the flaps would retract as the plane accelerated.

Did an F-4 ever do this?


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...ingsfolded.jpg

the story about that picture is here Night Infamy and Folded Wings



this thread has an image of a Phantom flying with folded wings, but no idea if its genuine
Warbird Information Exchange • View topic - F-4 flying with wings folded???

Jane-DoH

Quote:

---

I don't know how the F-4E's radar compared to the F-4B's, whether it was inferior, the same, superior, etc, but they were still used as interceptors by NORAD and ANG units, and I think it had an even greater intercept radius than the F-4B/C (786 nm vs ~ 750 nm).

---

On F-4E/G models, the digital ARN-101 navigation system replaced the LN-12 inertial navigation system. The F-4E was equipped with the APQ-120 which offered considerable improvements in weight (290 kg), volume, performance and reliability through the use of solid-state circuitry. It is also designed to operate reliably in close proximity to the nose-gun installation of the F-4E. The F-4E also was equipped with the AIM-7F missile. The Northrop "Target Identification System Electro-Optical (TISEO)" camera system was also introduced in late F-4E production, being retrofitted to older aircraft as well. TISEO involved a steerable, stabilized telescopic camera mounted on the left wing, and was used primarily to inspect targets before engaging them. TISEO imagery was displayed on the WSO's radarscope. The camera could be slaved to the AN/APQ-120 radar, and linked to the navigation system to target flight checkpoints as well.

Navy F-4J/S were equipped with The AWG-10 and AWG10B using the AN/APG-59 radar. This was the first multi-mode radar set that included pulse-Doppler look-down capability as well as a comprehensive built-in-test (BIT) system.


Both aircraft had an auto-retract flap system. On the F-15C flaps automatically retracted at 250 kts. On the F-4D the flaps automatically retracted at 220 kts. +/- 10 kts. Some of us actually used this feature on the F-4 during air-to-air as using ½ flaps provided some additional slow speed capability. I always had the guy in back call out airspeeds with the flaps down, and I would start them up before 220 kts. as going downhill you could still over speed the flaps as they may not retract fast enough.

Bevo

So it actually despite being smaller and lighter actually did have superior range and tracking ability?

So it effectively allowed one to identify enemy aircraft further out making for more BVR engagements?

The AWG-10 was the fire-control system and the AN/APG-59 was the radar?

Assuming it's not classified: When you say multi-mode radar, do you mean it possessed both air-to-air and air-to-ground capability?

I assume it performed better than either the F-4C's radar, or the AN/APQ-120?

As for the BIT capability, it could do auto-diagnostics on itself then?

You learn something new every day...

The RAF's F4s had folding wing outer sections but with the hydraulics removed. The panels were thus raised and lowered, and the locking pins engaged, manually. One aircraft at Bruggen was prepared for flight and the wings lowered but NOT locked and on take-off the crew had to abandon it. There was a tell-tale indicator pin on the wing but it wasn't that obvious

Bruggen episode - nav was Tobin?

Re Nav with folding wings, I believe it was Kevin Toal.

snacks and water! - typical American - can't last an hour without eating something

Was the Bruggen Nav. not Inverarrity?
AQ I think the folding wing episode was at Wattisham.

MATKAT,

Sorry - you are mistaken. The Folding wings episode was at Bruggen (31 Sqn - XV 431 and the remains ended up in 431 MU) - this is well documented in various reports and books

Kev Toal was the Nav and Ray Pilley(Spell?) was the driver-airframe. The re-enactment (less the crash!) was done at Coningsby for the film crew (at the same time as the re-enactment filming of the F4 QRA incident at a very northen unit - RAF fire engines making the (very cold) rain was a sight to see!

As a pedantic point - some RAF F4,s in the 70's and 80's and pre F4J days still had hyd wing spread/fold - controlled by a switch in the left main wheel bay

AI was the unfortunate nav in the F4/Jag incident in RAFG, the driver being RL.

Thanks DPB I spoke to an ex F4 tech sitting over the desk from me and we both thought it was Wattisham to many years and beers, was certain it was AI in the Jag/Tomb incident though as had regular meetings with Him when he left RAFG and returned to Leuchars, anyone know if he is still around?

Google is your friend.

A 92 Squadron F-4M XV422 flown by Roy Lawrence with nav Alistair Inverarity shot down Jaguar XX963 of 14 Squadron, flown by Steve Griggs. Griggs ejected twice within a five-month period; the first after being shot down by the F-4 Phantom; the second after a catastrophic engine fire over Northeast Scotland. Last I heard he was OC 41 with an AFC for NVG work.

A2QFI,
If I remember correctly, the RAF's F4's were from three routes. The first were F4M's, direct to the RAF, the second were F4K's, originally intended for the RN's second carrier, but diverted to the RAF when that was cancelled.

The third route was from the RN when the Ark Royal was finally decommissioned.

As you say the F4M had a purely manual wing fold, the F4K's were a mix of pilot controlled folding, (the switch was under a large guard situated at the rear of the RH cockpit side panel. When the guard was raised to access the switch, a cable operated the lock), or ground crew controlled, via a switch in the wheel well. On these the lock pin was screwed in manually as on the F4M's. These are probably the ones DBP remembers.

Thankfully I never worked on the F4M, so never had to do a manual wingfold!

Another 'throwback' to the Navy days was the noseleg extension. Controlled from a switch in the MLG bay, the nose leg would extend about 24 inches for carrier take off. AFAIK, there was NO facility to reverse this, the 'shrinking' being part of the retraction sequence. I think this had been removed before I got to 43 in '81.

If I remember correctly, the folding wing switch was moved from the cockpit to the wheel well when the RWR mod was incorporated.

Indeed. There is that old saying about Mac Air: "Give me a fuselage of any shape or size; now give me engines that will let it go a thousand miles an hour !"

From a book published by Macair

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...wingfolded.jpg

gibbo,

You're forgetting about the F-4J(UK)

sw

You are quite correct Safeware, I did forget about the F4J(UK), I was probably thinking only of 'Anglisised' Phantoms.

gibbo,
As you say the F4M had a purely manual wing fold

I think you'll find some of the F4M had powered wing fold as well, I remember doing the runs for the riggers for the OOP code for the wing fold on 56(F) in the late 80s.

Wingfold
 

The 74 Js had the powered wingfold, with the switch under the lock handle in the cockpit, if that helps. Ditto the runs.
Cheers.

Lots of the 228OCU F4M's had powered wing folding too as they were part of the batch of aircraft ordered for the RN originally.
Used to be great fun going along the line to unfold/fold up to 25 jets wings on a Morning/Night. Got to do some cheeky little ground runs too all a Big Billy Bonus for a Sootie Liney :ok:

We also went around painting the Lock Indicator pin Dayglo Orange too after the Germany incident.

Happy days !

H

I seem to remember in the early 80's on the line on 56(F), that all the F4M's up to XV 417 had hydraulic wing fold, a switch in the L/H undercarridge bay, and a speed brace was all that was required. XV407 definitely did, as I had to make use of it at greenham common 1981 for the airshow to get the aircraft into the static line up, a little tight to say the least.

Some of us might disagree......

By Matkat:

"A 92 Squadron F-4M XV422 flown by Roy Lawrence with nav Alistair Inverarity shot down Jaguar XX963 of 14 Squadron, flown by Steve Griggs. Griggs ejected twice within a five-month period; the first after being shot down by the F-4 Phantom; the second after a catastrophic engine fire over Northeast Scotland. Last I heard he was OC 41 with an AFC for NVG work".

Last heard Steve Griggs was flying for one of the low cost airlines & doing consultancy work for Babcock, but that is about 7 years ago.

Well you live and learn!
I never worked on F4M's, I was relying on the training given at Conningsby on the Airframe course.

I can't believe I've still got these - FLM Training notes! Claron is spot on.
http://i387.photobucket.com/albums/o...old_Page_1.jpg
http://i387.photobucket.com/albums/o...old_Page_2.jpg

I remember reading a report on the F4Js being readied for RAF service after some time in the desert 'boneyard'. It was recorded that when a panel was opened "a petrified lizard" fell out. The Senior Engineering Officer commented that "these aircraft had previously been operated by the US Navy on carrier-borne operations, it is therefore no surprise that the lizard was petrified"

Couple of piccies to bring back some memories...Phantom overhauls at a place in South Wales; bottom 2 pics are 1981; top ones @ 1989;
I got poster there twice... ho hum..

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1.../phantom_3.jpg

Think IIRC that 'Pontius Navigator' is in the back seat here; he will know whom is doing the driving... and unlike some other forums suggest it is not a certain Mr Hanna Jr.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...mouse/low5.jpg

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...4_shed_BIG.jpg

ttfn

'wiggy':
http://www.pprune.org/4747349-post14.html
Vietnam, May 10 1972:

" Nearly out of missiles and starting to run short of fuel, the Phantoms went supersonic and sped toward the coast.
"At that time we had strong intelligence that the MiG-21 could not do more than Mach 1.05 below five thousand feet. We were doing Mach 1.15 in combat spread, feeling cocksure as we headed towards the coast."
Dosé recalled:
"Then a MiG-21 came up behind, overtaking fast. He made it look effortless. When I saw the MiG it was about three-quaters of a mile behind Hawkins. I called for an in-place turn, and as we began turning the MiG fired an Atoll missile at Hawkins. Initially it guided, but it couldn't handle the Gs and it wasn't ever a real threat."
After attacking the MiG broke away to the right. Instintictively Dosé turned after it, until McDevitt demanded incredulously, "What are you doing!" The back-seater's tone reminded Dosé that they had neither the missiles nor the fuel for another engagement. Chastened, the pilot reversed his turn and headed for the coast.
Almost certainly the MiG-21 that had caught up with the Phantoms was the new MF sub-type. It was the first time American crews had encountered this version, and its much improved low-altitude performance came as an unpleasant surprise.

As the survivors of Oyster Flight sped out of North Vietnam at low altitude, a MiG-21MF arrived to cause consternation for the second time that day. Oyster 2 ran out alone, 3 and 4 stayed together. Chuck DeBellevue, in Oyster 3, watched with disbelief as the Soviet-made fighter closing from behind seemed to join formation on the pair. "We were running out at seven hundred to seven hundred fifty knots(Mach 1.06 to 1.13), the F-4 wouldn"t go any faster that low. And we had a MiG-21 chasing us and keeping up-that surprised the hell out of us!" To DeBellevue, the MiG's ability to keep up was disconcerting, to Captain Larry Pettit in Oyster 4 it was terrifying: "He was at our eight-thirty position(left quarter), one hundred feet above and about three hundred feet out to the side. He caught up with us and was staying with us! I don't know if he saw us, but he had a gun and he could have strafed the s.it out of us." Larry Pettit's next move did nothing to lessen the danger but was understandable in the circumstances: "I lowered my seat to the floor, to hide from him! He banked towards us and I thought, Oh no, he's going to let us have it with cannon....But he turned and went off in the opposite direction, Tommy Feezel and I thanked our lucky stars and got the hell out of there."

Do you remember for the old intell-reports(RAF) in the early '70s? The new performance-data(MiG-21SM,SMT,bis)? Any 'warnings' then?