McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II Ideas and Inspiration

[GTX_Admin]

ISTR that Rafael Popeye/AGM-142 Have Nap (HN's a license-built and USN/USAF-ized Popeye) was primarily intended as a ship-killer to replace Harpoon, with a secondary stand-off capability against land targets.

I seem to recall it was the other way around.  I may be wrong though.

[Diamondback]

Doesn't really matter with modern seekers... whether Surf or Turf, if you can see it you can hit it, and if you can hit it you can hurt it. LOL

Re Harpoon, IF the Hasegawa Eggplane Phantom's to be believed, and I might've seen photos of it done, the Japanese may have tried the Phantom/Harpoon combo.

[Daryl J.]

Operators I had in mind were Canada, Norway, Finand, Greece, Turkey, Israel, Japan, Great Britain, and in a Coast Guard-like role Argentina to counter all the Squid stealing that is going on. 

Hmmm...Popeyes.   Hadn't thought of modifying those.   Can wing tanks be used?  The thought being a SUU-23 midline, wing tanks, and (altered) AGM-142s on a F-4J since one exists in the stash.   A gun nose variant would be outfitted on my shelf with the big centerline tank.   

[Diamondback]

Daryl, you'll probably need Popeye inboard, small droptanks outboard--it's a BIG missile, which is a LOT of weight dropping off at once, and you want to watch the roll moments induced by a lot of weight moving off one wingtip unless you have it set to launch both at once. (That weight change inducing roll is why on a Prowler I was planning, an NFO on ARC advised I limit the A-6F outer pylons to about 500# of payload each.)

[Daryl J.]

Understood.   Sometime back an online purveyor had the Revell/Monogram F-4C/D offered for very cheap so 4 were ordered in with the thought of doing a major airframe modification to the fuselage and wing using two kits.   See the Aurora VF-84 F-3G-H Spectre on Hyperscale for a basic planform btw.   Part of the idea is to move the inboard pylons a bit towards the centerline in order to reduce the effects of unilateral weight changes.

Sea Eagles?   Hmm....might have to go clip those out of my Airfix Sea Harrier kit and put them in the FGR.2 box. 

Harpoons?   Extended length/extended range versions perchance?   

[Diamondback]

ISTR  standard models... but you could WHIF something based on a SLAM-ER with the smaller Harpoon seeker and warhead, using the space for expanded fuel tank.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Sea Eagles?   Hmm....might have to go clip those out of my Airfix Sea Harrier kit and put them in the FGR.2 box.

Daryl.  The missile shapes you are referring to in the Airfix Harrier kit are I am sorry to say are are rather poor representations of the MARTEL ARM and quite soft on the details.  The missing air intake feature on the missile underside is one of the obvious differences between  the MARTEL ARM and Sea Eagle AShM missiles.  A decent 1:48th scale Sea Eagle can be found in one version of the Airfix Buccaneer kit. 

Harpoon shapes in 1:48th scale can be found in the Skunk Models weapons kit.  All other AGM-84 Harpoon shapes (with the exception of Verlinden and SOL resin) are missing the air intake on the underside of the missile body.  A very obvious feature even in a side view of the missile and most of the plastic model manufacturers have ignored this feature for reasons unknown.  Hasegawa got it right in their 1:72nd scale weapons set but failed in their 1:48th scale weapons set that offers the SLAM version of the Harpoon.  The Verlinden Harpoon was available in the old F-18 Hornet update set.  SOL is out of production and very rare. 

[Daryl J.]

Good to know.   Thanks! :).  There also just happens to be that Buccaneer kit in a storage box somewhere.

[Daryl J.]

ELINT Phantom: start with an F-4E and shave off the gun.   Requisite pod-based monitoring gubbins, some defense capability remains.   

[elmayerle]

ELINT Phantom: start with an F-4E and shave off the gun.   Requisite pod-based monitoring gubbins, some defense capability remains.

Leave the fairing and fair the front end forward for a faired in ELINT pod.  Add a second, larger, pod on the centerline (perhaps a variant of the one flown on RAF/FAA Phantoms, but for ELINT only) and two outboard wing drop tanks.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

ELINT Phantom: start with an F-4E and shave off the gun.   Requisite pod-based monitoring gubbins, some defense capability remains.

 

In real life the RF-4C was also tasked to perform the ELINT mission when the cameras were replaced with the electronics equipment to perform that function.   The only visible difference between a camera equipped RF-4C and the RF-4C ELIINT mission aircraft was the placement of a small truncated disc antenna (about the size of a pie plate) mounted under the nose ahead of the nose gear covering one of the vertical camera ports. 

The RF-4C was also equipped with side looking radar (SLAR) antennas below the cockpit where the missile wells were located on the fighter versions. 

[Daryl J.]

Since Academy include the long nozzles in their new F-4B kit, perhaps some alternative country could be involved in developing the updated J-79s.  Volvo perhaps and one airframe sent over for fitment/testing in full national markings.

[Diamondback]

21st Century Phantom: replace the shoulder rails with LAU-128's just like F-15, maybe fitted with ALE-58 countermeasure dispensers too. I fired off a note to Shawn Hull, and he tells me he's got plans to do '58s after he puts a few more projects to market.

[Daryl J.]

Getting back to the Mach 3 Phantom:  long nose or short nose?   Why?

[Daryl J.]

About what was the top speed the intakes of the Phantom could tolerate before there were problems?

[GTX_Admin]

About what was the top speed the intakes of the Phantom could tolerate before there were problems?

Are you talking about the standard F-4s or the RF-4X?

[Daryl J.]

The standard intakes please.

[Daryl J.]

Have I remembered correctly or is my mind beginning to play tricks on me?   It seems as though there is a photograph taken from above an early Phantom prototype showing ogival wingtips.
Yes?  No?  Photoshop?
If yes, was there a reason for the change besides possible efficiency in manufacturing? 
Thanks for any help in the matter.

[The Big Gimper]

Daryl:

You are you thinking of the F3H-G?

UP-SHIP.com:


Tailspin:

http://tailspintopics.blogspot.ca/2009/11/f3h-gh.html

[Daryl J.]

The photo was labeled F4H-1.   I found it curious because the F3H-G was quite squared off.

[GTX_Admin]

Have I remembered correctly or is my mind beginning to play tricks on me?   It seems as though there is a photograph taken from above an early Phantom prototype showing ogival wingtips.

Would this be the photo you were thinking of?



Edit:  From what I have been able to discover in my research is that this is a photo from the first flight of the XF4H-1.  Maybe the rounded wing tips were only on that aircraft?

[GTX_Admin]

I must admit that I have always liked the look of the original F4H-1 canopy.

[Daryl J.]

That's the one.  Thank-you!
But in looking at it more closely, the wingtip appears to be squared off and painted.   
 

[GTX_Admin]

You may be right.

[GTX_Admin]

From by Tommy H. Thomason:

"The wingtips on the first Phantom were painted red, with the inside edge curved between the leading edge and the aft outboard corner of the wing tip. Red appears dark in a gray-scale photo and in this instance gives the impression that the wing tip is curved when it is really not."