F-4 (F4H-1)(F-110) Phantom

[Weaver]

One of the scenarios I was considering was a range of new F-105 variants: updated strikers with the original wing and new, more fighter-like ones with reduced weight and an enlarged wing. On reflection though, I still think it would be better to "Phantomise" the F-106 than the F-105 if there were no Phantoms.

Everybody always insists that the F-105 was a good strike aircraft but a lousy fighter. Interestingly, it actually scored 27.5 victories in air-to-air combat compared to 22 losses, and most of those were with the gun, since the lack of pylons meant that they rarely carried Sidewinders. Wonder what a pair of Sidewinders on tip pylons would have done for that figure?

Anyway, we're getting off the point here: redesigning the F-8U, F-105 and F-106 in detail is a job for their own threads: I only raised them as likely gap-fillers if the multi-role Phantom never happened. Now what about the consequences for other F-4 users: what would the Brits, Japanese, Germans, Israelis et al have bought if the Phantom was just a single-seat attack jet?

[Geoff]

One of the scenarios I was considering was a range of new F-105 variants: updated strikers with the original wing and new, more fighter-like ones with reduced weight and an enlarged wing. On reflection though, I still think it would be better to "Phantomise" the F-106 than the F-105 if there were no Phantoms.

Everybody always insists that the F-105 was a good strike aircraft but a lousy fighter. Interestingly, it actually scored 27.5 victories in air-to-air combat compared to 22 losses, and most of those were with the gun, since the lack of pylons meant that they rarely carried Sidewinders. Wonder what a pair of Sidewinders on tip pylons would have done for that figure?

Anyway, we're getting off the point here: redesigning the F-8U, F-105 and F-106 in detail is a job for their own threads: I only raised them as likely gap-fillers if the multi-role Phantom never happened. Now what about the consequences for other F-4 users: what would the Brits, Japanese, Germans, Israelis et al have bought if the Phantom was just a single-seat attack jet?

Hi, IIRC the Thuds carried one Sidewinder under one wing and an ECM pod under the other for self defence when operating over North Vietnam,at least at one point in time.

[PR19_Kit]

Now what about the consequences for other F-4 users: what would the Brits, Japanese, Germans, Israelis et al have bought if the Phantom was just a single-seat attack jet?

TSR2s of course..........

[KJ_Lesnick]

Just out of curiousity, why did the F-4's Ailerons only deflect downwards (with a spoileron popping on the "up" side) rather than the normal set-up which has one aileron going up and one going down?

I do remember hearing some explanation awhile back but I forgot honestly.

[Daryl J.]

This caught my eye today and wouldn't mind making a photo-recon variant of it:

http://hsfeatures.com/features04/f3hgtm_1.htm

[Edit] Hasegawa 1/72 RF-4E purchased just for this.




Daryl J.

[Daryl J.]

What I'd like to do to Hasegawa's F-4J is to create a machine similar to the link above but have it serve the Navy alongside the F-3H-x Demon and the Phantom in a photo recon role.    It would have a 50+ year service life.

Shorten the nose further than it is on the J, revise the intakes backwards in time to rememble the F3H-G mockup,  redo the leading edge of the wing to match the increased sweep of the dog tooth, de-kink the main wing, lengthen the fuselage aft of the engines, reprofile the vertical stab, reduce and reshape the horizontal stabs and reduce the anhedral, short nozzels for the J-79 if modeling budget allows, and have unique fuel/photo/electonic pods underslung on Phantom hard points.    Paint in a blend of old and new ideas:   Pattern:  Gull Grey over White but use a lightened Tamiya X-59 Desert Yellow substituted for the grey, Hi Viz markings, red tail and trim.   

As an aside, the XF-88 is planned to get a similar treatment but for the USAF.


Daryl J., getting ready to put a #15 blade and scribing needle to styrene

[DarrenP]

What if some Commonwealth Nations had gone down the route of the Phantom in the Late 60's early 70's

RAAF actually used the F4E till they got their F111's and the RAF/RN used the FG1/FGR2.

The Australian Govt decide to follow the UK lead and Equip the larger carriers with the F4K and the RAAF to get F4M instead of Mirage III and the Buccaneer for the FAA & instead of the F111.

The Canadians get the F4K for their large carrier and the F4M instead of the F101 Voodoo CANUSADZ and F104 Star Fighter for RCAF Germany

New Zealand gets F4M instead of the A4K

[Weaver]

Couple of things strike me:

1. The Spey conversion was expensive and not particularly successful, so given a straight choice, the Aus/Can forces might well have gone for J-79 versions instead. However, since the Spey conversion was motivated by politics rather than technicalities, the same forces might be brought to bear on a Commonwealth buy. As it was, all the Brit Phantoms were built in St.Louis: with a suitably big combined order, a licence production deal might have been possible, with politically desirable workshare for Aus and Canada.

2. NZ would probably have struggled with the running costs of an F4 fleet. How about giving them the RAAF's cast-off Mirages with a big upgrade in the mid 1980s when such things became widely available?

[DarrenP]

Alot of NZ's financial woes of the 70's were caused by the UK's realignment as alot of NZ exports went to the UK and with the EEC rules thease had to be cut back.

[Weaver]

Alot of NZ's financial woes of the 70's were caused by the UK's realignment as alot of NZ exports went to the UK and with the EEC rules thease had to be cut back.

So we stay out of the EEC so the NZers can buy American aircraft? 

Actually, we could well have stayed out: the referendum was close-run and I'm not the only one by a LONG way who'd like to see a re-count.....

This probably feeds more into your other thread in Alt. History.

[DarrenP]

If you think about the Commonwealth Negiotating with MCDD over the Phantom and the Production run of the Spey Engined aircraft being lengthened the development cost would have been spread out and Maybe MCDD would have liscenced production to Commonwealth countries.

[jcf]

Adding to Weaver's comments, another factor in favour of purchasing J79 variants is that Canadian and Australian forces would most likely
be working with US forces far more often than they would UK forces and using the same engines would simplify logistics.  Just a reality of the post-WWII world.

Here's an option, ditch the Spey Phantom altogether and the everybody, UK included, uses J79 powered machines, not an unlikely scenario as there
were many who questioned the re-engining project.


Jon

[DarrenP]

The J79 would always have been the better option but the British wanted to agnlicize the phantom as much as possible. With the change if Foreign policy stance I have outlined the British, Australians and New Zealanders would be working together east of Suez 28th Commonwealth Brigade would have continued in Singapore.

[Sauragnmon]

See, I could quite imagine the RCAF liking the Spey Phantoms, as they were originally looking to get the Phantom not for Voodoo/104 replacement, but for Supplementation in Tactical Air Support.  A lot of the modifications, in addition to the longer cruise range, better low-altitude accelleration, would probably have been appealing to the RCAF brass.  The Extending Nosegear would amusingly also be added to the CF-5 when we built them, because we didn't like the takeoff rolls for the F-5 as well, so I could imagine that would have continued in service.

[Weaver]

Adding to Weaver's comments, another factor in favour of purchasing J79 variants is that Canadian and Australian forces would most likely
be working with US forces far more often than they would UK forces and using the same engines would simplify logistics.  Just a reality of the post-WWII world.

Here's an option, ditch the Spey Phantom altogether and the everybody, UK included, uses J79 powered machines, not an unlikely scenario as there
were many who questioned the re-engining project.


Jon

Or alternately, with a big order in prospect, sit down with a clean sheet of paper and design a twin-Spey powered Phantom-sized aircraft from scratch. There was nothing wrong with the Spey in itself: the problems came from the mis-match with the Phantom airframe. The result, assuming conservative use of 1960s technology might have looked rather like a JH-7.