It's a while since I read it, but I seem to remember that this book gives a very good, "warts and all" perspective on operating the F-4 (albeit without any combat experience):

Hardback:



Paperback:



It's also not written by an American, so there's no danger of being accused of having national bias.

I tried to keep out if the argument, but with the above statement you have my attention.

You judge the F4 on your expierience from just one passenger flight, and that holds no value at all. I've flown the T-38 and had one ride in the Netherlands NF-5, and felt not much difference in handling. A beauty to fly, but not much excess thrust with two tanks and two Winders. They told us the MIG 21 of that time would perform in a similar way, i have no proof though. I had one ride in the F15 about 30 years ago, and the fuel consumption in low level was awful. My planning of the routing with 420 kts groundspeed to visit some Bavarian Castles enroute went down the drain within 30 minutes after takeoff.

But i would neither aircraft judge by these single flights. I could judge them by having flown against a variety of fighter aircraft ( most more advanced than our F-4) in dissimilar air combat training, but due to the adherence of established ROE's my point of view might not be the correct one. But I never went in one of those engagements with the knowledge to have no chance to win the fight. Speed is life, and we could generate a lot of it with those engines.

I spent all my flying life in F-4 aircraft, and it looked like a flying brick, but in the hands of an expierienced crew (yes, i used my tailgunners to the max extent possible) this aircraft could do more than it looked like from the outside. We instructors were not able to make a crew combat ready in a few flights, but at the end of the training program the handling of the jet in all sorts of situations to its most advantage was no problem at all.

Your POV after one flight in it is pointless.

RetiredF4:

I can't find myself disagreeing with a word you've written, though I have tried.

Regretfully, it would be unwise for me to say more than I've already offered. But my opinion is based on considerable personal experience, and that experience has relevance to the subject under discussion.

As I noted elsewhere, you may believe whatever you wish. I could be an outstandingly competent troll, or I could be an outstandingly fortunate pilot. You could be a tubby ex-airframe fitter with a vivid imagination, or you could be a many-thousand-hour F 4 pilot who can make it dance like Alessandra Ferri. We'll never know for sure, will we?

On the assumption that you actually were an F 4 instructor in the GAF, did you have the opportunity to fly in / against the ex-East German Mig 29's? If you did, penny for your thoughts?

Since I have first-hand knowledge of flying both the MiG-21 and F-7M, as well as lot of time in the various models of the F-4, I would like to add a couple of comments. The MiG-21/F-7M was relatively simple aircraft that were easy to fly. The biggest issue with the MiG-21 is its lack of on-board fuel. If an F-4 and MiG-21 were equally distant from their respective basses, the F-4 could simply hold off the MiG until it ran out of fuel. The other issue of course was the lack of a real radar in the MiG-21.

Fighter pilots never, ever want to allow themselves to get low and slow...that is a death sentence. As one gains experience one learns to stay as fast and use the vertical. I would also like to note that the MiG-21 had a very high induced drag with its delta wing and so it slowed down in a hard turning fight. The MiG was then slow to accelerate out of that condition. In an F-4 you could in fact turn with a MiG-21 below 250 kts by using approach flaps (1/2 flaps). In that condition you could actually turn in front of the MiG-21 if you were above him since he could not bring his nose up to track you. This was not on the approved list of F-4 maneuvers but was effective. And here I am talking about the MiG-21Fishbed C/E and the really nice and light F-7M.

Another item to consider, since crew training has been raised, is that during my combat tour in 1971-72 at least on quarter of the F-4 pilots in my squadron had come from non-fighter aircraft just prior to their tour. This was because of the USAF policy of a single one year tour and then rotation. In addition, the USAF at that time said that any pilot having gone through pilot training could fly any aircraft. That of course is true; they could fly the aircraft but not necessarily proficiently perform the mission. It took more than a three month “conversion course” for pilot to become functioning fighter pilot rather than the pilot of a fighter.

During the Vietnam war had the Vietnamese had the F-4 and the US had MiG-21 I believe the result would have been interesting. The Vietnamese would not have been able to get many aircraft in the air and the US would not have been able to get many aircraft to the combat area because of range issues. Plus the number of booms dropped by the US would have been drastically reduced.


During Desert Storm the RoE required two separate forms of on-board indetification, or a confirmation from AWACS. At that time the F-15 was the only aircraft that had two on-board systems capable of performing ID and were allowed to use those systems for BVR shots.

And so this thread creeps ever nearer to current tactics, ROE and capabilities. :=

Mr. Noritake must be rubbing his hands with glee ... "What next will they reveal if I goad them enough?"

'since he could not bring his nose up to track you.'

Utter, compete, almost criminal, nonsense.

No, I have not, as my time in the GAF was already ending when the MIG 29 was doing more than just a few demo flights with the GAF. But I would have loved to fly it, and I talked to pilots who flew it for some years. The turning performance was described as awfull, the time on station due to fuel consumption as not adequate. The GAF sold their MIG 29 to Poland and other states and kept their F-4F until last year, when JG71 Richthofen retired them with a "Phantom Farewell" display. I was honoured to take part in this ceremony as a guest of my former fighter wing. Bevo describes a lot of valid points, all of them hold value and there would be others to be considered. I could add to those, and others could too.

In the first days after the Berlin wall came down our wing got an unanounced visit of MIG 21 pilots from the former NVA. They stood at our door and asked for some insight in our daily flying training and told us about heir way of training and flying. We had nothing to hide. To make the story short, it was obvious that their standardized training differed big time from our daily flying ops. They were only allowed to do what they were trained for, what they had practiced on the ground. They were dependent on good weather and were not trained to make own judgement calls. They could not believe that our air task orders arrived in the squadron and two hours later the jets were on its way. On this day we ordered two jets to fly out and back to Aviano in Italy to pick up the things in need for the welcome party in the evening (steaks, shrimps, lobster, you name it). When we landed and unloaded our shopping items, they still did not believe that we had been away. They lived and trained in a different world.

Their training might habe been good for standard situations, but normally there are none in combat.

It is not the machine which decides a fight or a battle, its the combination of machine, men, their training and command.

RetiredF4:

Your first post made complete sense. Your second... well... less so.

Enjoy your retirement.

Jane

If you can't substantiate then its best to remain quiet, maybe time to return to lurker status before you run yourself off from pprune again like you did under the jane handle.

West Coast:

And you were being so nice. :-(

I didn't 'run myself off PPRuNe'. Some contributors didn't appreciate being told they were wrong. I upset some people of influence, that's all. **** happens.

Would you like me to offer my name plus a whole load of spurious data relating to my service in (insert your air force of choice) flying (insert your aircraft of choice) which you couldn't possibly verify without having access to facilities that I seriously doubt any of you currently have access to?

What would be the point? I can't verify that a single one of you are who you claim to be. That's the nature of the internet.

Can't cope? Then may I politely suggest that you occupy your time going through the reading list recommended in this thread.

I agree with West Coast entirely. N, you persistently insist that we all take your credentials as given. You have made a lot of claims about various comparisons and deride folk if you think they may not beleive you. Now that a couple of people (that are well known here) have been able to offer experiences that rather deflate your claims, all you can do is to make derisory comments.

To Bevo describing when the MiG was slow:

To RetiredF4:

Not only have you now fallen from what appeared to be a partly reasonable discussion, albeit without much backup, you are now engaging in being rather disrespectful to people that have simply made well explained and valid points.

Please don't go back to your old ways. It's not needed.

EDIT TO ADD: you are wrong about verification of identities. Remember that many of us know each other and understand exactly who we're conversing with here.

Courtney:

You will have (had) access to data relating to the low speed AoA performance of most models of the Mig 21, ditto most versions of the F 4. Read it, then tell me I'm wrong.

For his own (probably very sound) reasons, Bevo chooses to profess otherwise.

As for RetiredF4; his second post made reference to a number of observations with which I take variance but which I don't care to dispute here, hence the comment that his second post did not, to me, make complete sense. I wished him a happy retirement. I see nothing disrespectful in my response.

YOU may be able to identify your chums. I can't. And my chums don't post here, ergo my comments regarding verification.

And therein lies the problem.

Yes I have studied the data and they pretty well support the points raised by many here.

Bevo's point was about low speed nose authority was well made and you would need to ask him for the exact conditions he was describing before you could rightfully dismiss it as "almost criminal nonsense."

RetiredF4's statement made good sense. Just because you didn't like it...

...does not mean it didn't make sense.

Apart from two links to a bunch of slides, you haven't really done anything in this thread other than argue and attempt to discredit others' statements. You have offered no facts and when challenged to do so, you hide behind some fictitious threat to your life, or whatever it is. If you came here to discuss the F4C vs MiG21, please start doing so. Don't just stir things up for whatever reason.

By the way. Your words

could equally apply to you. Especially as most of the data you offered us in Post#3 refer to F4E.

Low speed AOA data are not relevant, a trained F4 crew would not plan to fight in that AOA region, and if they would end up in that speed regime would use all means to regain energy and thus maneuvering options as quick as possible. Extend, leave the fight, come back when speed is in the green again. I know people who went slow in engagements (training engagements), and I know some who died in doing so. The reason for their death is not written on their grave, but it helped others avoiding the same mistakes. Well, not all learned, to be fair, but I did the hard way.

I expected your comment on my second post, as grasping its content needs an understanding of the whole system, machine, crew, training and command, not only some numbers out of the tech manual. Fights are not won by those numbers , but by the people who are able to use those numbers to their advantage.

RetiredF4:

It was this:

In an F-4 you could in fact turn with a MiG-21 below 250 kts by using approach flaps (1/2 flaps). In that condition you could actually turn in front of the MiG-21 if you were above him since he could not bring his nose up to track you.

comment of Bevo's which led me to make the observation regarding the nose pointing ability of the Mig 21 at low speed.

I 'grasped your contents' of your second post just fine. I took variance with your assertion regarding Mig 29 turning performance and am somewhat surprised by your assertion that there were 'former NVA' pilots swanning around in Europe at the time you mention.

But, as I said, I'm happy to let your comments pass as I have no wish to engage in discussion on them.

Noritake, given that we all understand the MiG21's ability to bleed energy in a turning fight, perhaps you would enlighten us concerning the airspeed at which the 21 would not have the nose authority to pitch up to engage an aircraft above it.

Courtney:

If you consider my comments fraudulent, unbelievable, incorrect, unverifiable, unpalatable or just downright wrong, please disengage.

I clearly have nothing to teach you, therefore continuing to discuss my posts will only drag you down the road of increasingly personal attacks. I have no need to justify myself or my opinions to you, nor you to me.

I'm happy that you hold your opinions to be true. I have no desire to dissuade you from your beliefs. This is the internet. It's a resource only if you wish it to be so.

Merry Christmas, Courtney. You live in a beautiful part of France. I'm almost jealous :-)

Actually, while we're asking questions, could you tell us which model of F4 you had a pax ride in? Did you get to see the weapon system? Did you recognise the big technological difference between that and the 21?

And one last one. Who on earth was going to give you a front seat F-15 ride?

M2:

No, I would not. If you need to know that information it will already be in your domain. If you don't, I'm not about to provide it.

Bevo, thanks for the Desert Storm recollection.
(On a personal note, I am glad to see that someone got to use the fancy kit that we paid so much for. :ok:)
The use of BVR versus mixing it up is germane to modern fighter ops because there is far more to the modern fighter's air to air capability than the dogfight ... this was also true in the 1960's (time frame for the discussion) even though the dog fight remained of interest/importance. (Okay, ACM).
Retired F4's observation about the criticality of the crew (or section) in a given air to air engagement has been born out since the aces of WW I vintage were wreaking havoc among the less skilled, and the less well trained. I am pretty sure that it is true today. (I suspect a few honest Syrian Air Force pilots from back in the 80's would agree with that general comment ... )
I seem to recall that an A-4 pilot knocked down a MiG by using a Zuni Rocket ...

M2:

Second set of q's.

a) No, yes, yes.

b) Someone who hadn't cleared it with the right people.

Pretty much as I expected, Noritake.

Pleased I didn't disappoint, M2.

I'm not sure what "data" you are looking at (Ps data would be a good start). You remind me of some folks I dealt with in the USAF who told my squadron "we don't need your flight test info we have our analysis". And as you told CM I can disengage anytime - and now is the time.

Sound call, Bevo. You were getting low and slow.

Mr N,

I have no interest in WTF you are doing in the UK. I really couldn't care less, at a guess you are selling fake teacups or 'knocked-off' trainers. Now, guess what I do?

O-P:

Evidence would suggest that, in part, you attempt to stereotype a culture on the internet and make vaguely racist remarks.

But I'm sure that's not the *real* you, merely the keyboard warrior you.

You're probably a very nice chap in person. Anyway, I choose to comfort myself by thinking this.

I'd imagine that'd be because Bevo knows that's generally been held to be the correct approach to deal with troublesome Vietnamese insurgents in the most effective and precise manner...

<Coat, hat>

Bevo, being smart, can probably get away with it.

Many of his compatriots wouldn't.

Mr N,

Ask my wife if I'm a racist, she was born in Viet Nam (68).

EDIT: Guess what she does?

Jane

Curious how you're using comments from posters to arrive at your conclusion. The others here are pulling from thier own memory, some from having flown both to arrive at theirs.

There's nothing wrong admitting you're a defense journo type and not a pilot.

Yes, I also would like to know who offered a front seat ride in a F-15. Microsoft?

Mr N,

As the F4C is no longer in service, how would you tackle it in your MiG 21? Your tactics must have changed for a 4/5th gen fighter?

PS. I need some 'pucker' Nike Air Jordan 7s if you have them. (Size 11, 9, 5 and 6 US)

Gawd, it's like watching a pre-pubescent pissing contest against a wall!

I don't think Mr N has been at all disrespectful, and he has been taking incoming fire in the form of aircraft type or nationalistic parochialism at least as good as he has given.

Didn't we all learn LONG AGO that there is NEVER a clear cut answer when comparing aircraft A versus aircraft B?

Didn't we also learn long ago that, unless you know them personally, there really is no way of validating anyone's ID on the interwebs. So much relies on taking someone's claimed credentials at face value, but if you don't believe them, then don't. But so far you've all spent six pages challenging each other and getting, effectively, nowhere!

Now, back to my popcorn, and here's hoping I actually learn something in the next few posts and pages.

So Mr Noritake has been banned.

Good to see this forum has no place for people expressing contrary points of view in a witty and tounge-in-cheek manner, responding to sometimes purile and often offensive put downs with good grace and humour.

Definitely no place on PPRuNe for that kind of behaviour.

TOTY Award?

Under which forum rule/protocol/procedure was he banned?

Jaj, he demonstrated concisely how he did not fit the room definition of military professionals.

I know we welcome others too such as declared journalists, broadcasters, enthusiastic civilians, and crusty has-beens like me. When you fit none of these categories you stand in danger of being ejected. He didn't and he w a s.

Well no, if you read what he said, he was taking issue with another posters comments, specifically regarding the low speed performance of the MIG 21.

Room definition? Some might say "Clique".

"Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here."

First they came for Typhoon93, and I said nothing.
Then they came for Mr Noritake....