Author Topic: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II Ideas and Inspiration (Read 146173 times)

elmayerle · « **Reply #25 on:** February 05, 2012, 11:23:38 PM »

Quote from: dy031101 on February 05, 2012, 09:30:15 PM

A heavier version with three engines?

Only if you're enlarging the existing intakes to handle the needed increased airflow or are adding another intake or set of intakes (see, for example, the proposed 3-engined Vigilante).

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #26 on:** February 06, 2012, 02:22:13 AM »

Quote from: dy031101 on February 05, 2012, 09:30:15 PM

A heavier version with three engines?

Interesting concept!

Weaver · « **Reply #27 on:** February 06, 2012, 02:59:46 AM »

Quote from: GTX_Admin on February 05, 2012, 06:54:32 PM

Quote from: Weaver on February 05, 2012, 06:48:52 PM

4. USAF procurement of the F-8 Crusader, possibly with a J-79 and a Vulcan?

Mmmm....

Maybe also USAF A-6 Intruders in the strike role?

Distinct possibility...

However, another "no Phantom" scenario I've considered is "it's a Phantom Jim but not as we know it". In this version, the A-6 gets bogged down in unsolvable avionics difficulties and is cancelled before it enters service. This causes a huge scandal, ends the careers of those officers pushing for a sophisticated attack plane, and causes a change of USN policy towards a more general-purpose big, fast striker like the F-105. The Thud itself would never be carrier compatible, but MacDonnell just happened to be trying to find a niche for it's new big "fighter" by calling it the AH-1 at the time, so the Phantom WAS adopted, but in the form of a sort of "Super-Skyhawk", with a small radar, single seat, 4 x 20mm, flat 6-pylon wing, flat tailplanes and no missile bays.

The AH-1 Phantom effectively displaced the Skyhawks onto the smaller Essex class carriers, and meant that the A-7 Corsair never happened either. Big carriers now operated updated A-5 Vigilantes (in an expanded conventional role) for long-range attack/recce/tanker functions, AH-1s for heavy attack and F-8U-3 Super-Crusaders as fighters. Essexs operated orignal F-8s and Skyhawks.

elmayerle · « **Reply #28 on:** February 06, 2012, 04:02:39 AM »

I like that one, Weaver, though I think aerodynamics might push the bent wings and anhedral tailplanes anyway. Still, that would be a rather different looking McD product. As an alternative, the demise of the Intruder sees the USN buying the Blackburn Buccaneer and McDonnell getting the US rights to build it.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #29 on:** February 06, 2012, 05:54:11 PM »

Dedicated ground attack F-4 proposals:

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #30 on:** March 04, 2012, 01:50:57 PM »

Phantom updates anyone?

The Big Gimper · « **Reply #31 on:** March 04, 2012, 07:51:41 PM »

2nd from the top is my favourite.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #32 on:** May 18, 2012, 03:47:58 AM »

Random Idea: F-4 Phantom in Ukrainian markings

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #33 on:** May 18, 2012, 03:52:17 AM »

Another random idea: Indian Air Force or Indian Navy F-4s???

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #34 on:** May 19, 2012, 01:47:02 AM »

Yet another random idea: RAF F-4 FGR.2 serving in the 1991 Gulf War (by keeping the aircraft in service a tad longer or even slide the war forward a couple of years) and in the desert pink scheme worn by the RAF tornadoes and Buccs and also adorned with appropriate nose art...

gofy · « **Reply #35 on:** May 21, 2012, 01:03:13 AM »

"MiG Eater" F-4?
cool!

M.A.D · « **Reply #36 on:** July 23, 2012, 12:38:48 PM »

Quote from: GTX_Admin on March 04, 2012, 01:50:57 PM

Phantom updates anyone?

Nice work of faceting Greg!!
Also very impressed with the massive conformal tank/sensor arrangement!! Would this hold internally stored AIM-120 AMRAAM's??

M.A.D

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #37 on:** July 23, 2012, 08:24:58 PM »

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #38 on:** July 24, 2012, 02:24:47 AM »

Quote from: M.A.D on July 23, 2012, 12:38:48 PM

Also very impressed with the massive conformal tank/sensor arrangement!! Would this hold internally stored AIM-120 AMRAAM's??

M.A.D

I believe it was for fuel only...specifically 1,100 US gal (4,230 L).

tsrjoe · « **Reply #39 on:** July 24, 2012, 03:06:07 AM »

some manufacturers display models of F.4C exports ...

cheers, Joe

tc2324 · « **Reply #40 on:** July 26, 2012, 11:28:10 PM »

Russki F-4

Maverick · « **Reply #41 on:** July 27, 2012, 07:41:48 AM »

Don't forget the 'swinger' F-4's:

Regards,

John

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #42 on:** July 28, 2012, 01:49:36 AM »

Extra engined Soviet Phantom

ChernayaAkula · « **Reply #43 on:** July 28, 2012, 03:15:08 AM »

^

Mad as a box of frogs! I love it!

The one-piece canopy is just inspired! Would look the dog's danglies for a modernized F-4, especially when coupled with the one-piece windscreen. :)

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #44 on:** August 04, 2012, 02:37:50 AM »

TerryCampion · « **Reply #45 on:** August 05, 2012, 05:57:02 AM »

Argentine F-4S

Jeffry Fontaine · « **Reply #46 on:** August 05, 2012, 05:58:56 AM »

Very nice camouflage scheme. Is that the Italeri or Hasegawa F-4 kit?

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #47 on:** August 05, 2012, 06:30:56 AM »

Nice indeed.

TerryCampion · « **Reply #48 on:** August 05, 2012, 09:56:10 PM »

Italeri 1/72nd.
I also built alongside it an Italeri 1/72nd F-4(E)S for the RDAF....basically an F-4S but I added some length tp the noce with plasticard and filler.

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #49 on:** August 07, 2012, 12:09:16 AM »

Quote from: ysi_maniac on August 04, 2012, 02:37:50 AM

To fix the problem with F-111 cockpit width: longer fuselage ...

... or broader fuselage. But then ... add a 3rd J-79.

Two posibilities.


"From the Sea" Amphibious GB

News:

Author Topic: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II Ideas and Inspiration (Read 146173 times)

gofy