The Boeing Super Phantom; Making a Legend Even Greater 

I seem to recall that the Phantoms used by the RAF were equipped with Rolls Royce engines that had multiple advantages : no revealing smoke trail, lower consumption and more thrust. Not the first time an American plane was greatly upgraded by the fitting of a british power plant (#P51 Mustang)!

@@TheIndianalain indeed Rolls Royce Speys.

Do you still have those?

You were unfortunate that you couldn't do that for the F-15.

@@vaultsuit Alas, no, lost in the intervening 55 years 😂😂

Retired (for 34 years) Navy Aviator, I still, still have dreams flying.

Amazing!! Pilots are the top skill man operators, my respect to you. 🇬🇷🤟

Definitely not the greatest jetfighter of all time. Much more affordable and simpler Russian Mig fighters or shooting them down in Vietnam add about a one to one ratio, if the truth be told. It’s easy to fall in love with the airplane that you flew, I’m just a private pilot, but one of my trainer pilot was a Navy fighter pilot and he told me this about the Phantom, “ it’s a piece of shit.”

Maybe, however it was the first real "weapons platform" and so pointed the way for how all modern jet fighters are now.....the migs you mention from the Vietnam era had lots of restrictions, range, payloads etc plus the phantom could operate from a carrier which they couldn't. I suppose the easiest test is - which would you rather have in a fight!

@@steveperreira5850 What? Affordability is not the making of 'best'.

Lucky you!

My high school teacher for computer science and physics was an A4 Skyhawk pilot in Vietnam, was shot down and taken prisoner (even shot in the leg having tried to escape). Great teacher and like yours, if you put in the effort he was right there to help. Excellent man, Mr Higdon.

My HS art teacher in 1982 Mr Weatherbee was a tail-gunner on a B-24 during WWII. Told me some interesting stories because I had joined the Army.

Were those the ones that had the TISEO pod on one of the wings?

UK had loads , we loved them ! A great aircraft even today ....

What happened to the original 463? scrap?

@@crushingvanessa3277 it is at the AF academy

Close to 300 F-4s were converted to QF-4s over the years and used as drone and aerial targets. I was at WSMR in 2004/2005ish and got to see one in action for a missile test. They were saying then the F-16 was going to take over as they were running out of QF-4s and especially guys that knew how to fly them remotely. Did a little research and it seems they carried on for at least another decade before the switch.

That's way cool. Did the noise not bother you?

Same here - Soesterberg Air Force Base - aka Camp New Amsterdam, in the Netherlands. In the 70’s. Love the F-4 Phantom.

@@madmaximus2836 There were times that it did, especially at night, but no matter. It used to really irritate my parents.. Cool is cool. BTW, there were F105s at the base too. Those bad boys were really fast, loud and screechy.

@@nonamesplease6288 Nice, nice! I bet you "feel" the power! I grew up close to an air force base in South Africa in the 80s. They had Mirage F1 and F3s. Not nearly as cool as US fighter jets, but did see a F3 doing a very low level inverted pass over the runway during an airshow. Had posters of US fighter jets plastered all over my bedroom walls as child. I immigrated to the US and now go to US air museums and shows. My one son is in the Army and the other Navy and so we visit military places when possible. Looking forward to see Top Gun: Maverick on May 25th. So much nostalgia from the first Top Gun...

we were rebuilding a runway and during the day in slow times F4s would do touch and goes (on the other runway) and by golly (god if ur from W.Virginia) and those rascals were louder than the big commercial birds (we're talkin 4 engine jobs on take off mind you) like riding in a cab or bus and seeing a Ferrari zip by effortlessly but strong loud.

It’s just wings attached to 2 huge engines, and a fuselage to carry the fuel it will guzzle 😂🤣

When I was a kid I built tons of WWI & WWII models. A friend of my brother's who had served in Viet Nam gave me a Phantom kit and I was stunned at how huge it was in comparison. Numbers just didn't do it for me.

@@mbryson2899 : Yes, my model 1/72nd scale F-4 dwarfed the little MiG 21 sitting beside it on the shelf.

It was a really big aircraft around 63 feet long especially with all the comparisons to the mig 21 at around 48 feet

@@barbaratodd1288 Where the comparison was most noticeable was head on. The Mig had a fraction of the frontal area. Also the smoke trail wasn't a help.

It was originally designed as a carrier fighter

The other F4 - the Corsair F4U?

the majority of non US hornets are land based, and theyve done pretty good (admitting that the og design has weaknesses due to its carrier based origins), but your right its incredible how well the phantom did in its history given all the design decisions and trade offs due to it (how many other naval fleet defense fighters became the backbone of large nnumbers of entire air forces)... i still think it and the F8 crusader have the best silhouette of the mid cold war... but then again im also partial to the buccaneer and scimitar's shape and i have to admit theyre kinda fugly... like fictional jets made by people that dont know how they work, but get the whole "rule of cool" thing right, kinda like halo's ridiculous M808 scorpion...

It's actually quite easy to operate carrier-type a/c from land. They in fact spend much of lives operating from land bases during training. Not so for the reverse.

Oh look, an aircraft designed to operate from carriers can also operate from land airbases. Impressif. Who could have thought that? /sarcasm

So you were on the back side of the runway

In '70 and '71 I spent way too much time on a big boat named the U.S.S. Independence. My favorite activity (BY FAR!) was standing beside my squadron's F4's at the cats when they were shot at night!! Becomes part of your blood! Watch ed the Blue Angels last November fly 3 days straight!

@@steveowens913 I was a flight deck troubleshooter for VMFA-531 on the Forrestal in '72-3. In the cats at launch is indeed awesome. Hard to describe.

@@michaelleitner1245 I was on USS Forrestal in 1981 w/ VMFA-115 [ Med Cruise] I was lucky and had the Hoor of BINGO Det Sigonella Sicily the 1st 30 Days

@@edwardgoering1237 We had guys at Suda Bay, Crete. They allegedly just lounged all day and drank beer all night.😄

BOOM! Nailed it...

There's a substantial difference between "having to" and "choosing to". Lobbyists from the military industrial complex would much rather newer airframes be produced than upgrade older ones, something you might have gleaned if you had like...watched the video you're commenting on.

@@sgthop I think what KP was saying was that, because the F4 was so good, it took four aircraft to fully replace it.

@@markymarknj Possibly, but it can be read either way.

​@@sgthop There a difference between lobbyist fantasy where everything is on time and on budget with no prod faults whatsoever and reality

McAir (McDonnell Douglas Aircraft) learned a lot and applied those lessons to the F-18. An F-18 engine change is a 15 minute job.

I was a weapons mechanic and worked on F-4C’s and D models at Cam Ranh Bay, I extended in order to save up enough money to buy a new car when I got back to the States, I spent 10 months at Cam Ranh, then I was sent to DaNang for 8 months, where I worked on D and E model F-4’s. The E model was the most beautiful of them all. Some maintenance was difficult for us though! When I got home I bought a 1971 Plymouth 340 Duster for $3,100. They sure were expensive!

Witness that the B-52 is slated to fly in frontline service another 20 years, and its first flight was ten years before the Phantom's.

​@@johngregory4801 20? It's actually supposed to be 50+ years. Those planes are going to outlive a whole bunch of people.

​@@mill2712 When the Mars colonies eventually insurrect, we're gonna be launching ships full of B-52s and M2s modified for low gravity use, I just know it.

... its* head (it's = it is)

@@einundsiebenziger5488 🙄 another control freak ? Phuleease .

When I was in Abu Dhabi in 2015, I got to visit the Solar Impulse 2, the airplane that flew around the world on solar power. When no one was looking, I touched the fuselage. If you think the F4's skin was delicate, you haven't touched a carbon fiber solar electric airplane that has been mercilessly optimised for weight 😉 The skin gave so much under even a light tap that for a moment I was *sure* I had punched through it, and I nearly fainted.

"Hallo, BMJ? Ja, bitte guck das an."

@@SolarWebsite No touchy means no touchy.

If you had tapped Muhammed Ali’s skin it would have felt soft too. I just don’t recommend it.

@@theothertonydutch Well technically, no one had told me I couldn't touch it, and there were no signs 😉

It did !

This three versions, including the RF-4C, we had long ago in Germany in the USAFE. But these days are long gone... ☹️

did u happen to know bill/william holcombe..aslo a weasel driver? man he had stories. and his helmet was all painted dark and green and with crack marks on top where it had hit the canopy from i guess explosions going off around or under him

Bob, at time stamp 2:36 in this video. Is this the Wild Weasel variant??

I was an SP at George AFB in 88. Were you still there?

I was a F-4G crew chief at Spangdahlem Germany from Fall of 85 to fall of 87 (480th AGS) that extra bump under radar dome at 2:36 does not look like the G bump in this pic, it’s too small and not as round and the tail markings are not from the 3 bases that I remember having F-4Gs. Tail markings would be SP, WW, and I am brain farting on the base in Philippines that had Gs. If I recall most of the Gs that were converted were all from the year 69- xxxx edit after google search the Philippines base was Clark AB with tail letters of PN

The Blue Angels were using the Phantoms at that time too. They were going to fly at my base at Oceana, Va, and darn if it didn't just rain hard for the entire weekend!! After the Phantoms, the Blue Angels flew the A4 Skyhawks, and I think the top speed of the aircraft was only about 685 mph!!

Worked in the F 4E engine shop at Homestead AFB in 69 - 70

Ultra cool

What are they like to work on?

Is there any substance to the rumor that the phantom had issues catching on fire?

Thank you for your service, Dan!

I was the hydraulic mechanic on these from 1981 to 84 in Yuma

Nice one buddy!

Was not the Wild Weasel during that period the F4G (developed from the F4E)?

@@thekinginyellow1744 We had "D's and "E"s 1n 1978 at Kunsan. I was a missile trooper, Most of the F4s got loaded with LGBs, early Mavericks, Sparrows and Sidewinders with a 20mm Gatling in an underslung pod. The Weasels got Shrikes.

I bet even that many years later,everyone in the 8th knew about Robin Olds.

@@bellakaldera3305 Ds had the gun pod,Es had the gun under the nose where the RHAW (radar homing and warning) gear was on the Ds.

I think that's also the mascot of Boeing's Phantom Works.

Long live Spook.

That's a really extreme sequel to Driving Miss Daisy

@@CaptainSlug Flying Miss CIAsy?

That is a brutal commute. The intel she had must have been very, very important. But do you mean she wasn't able to deliver the info? No one to deliver it to, properly?

@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 Well, yes. She was in the AF but, she was a fully qualified Field Operative.

@@donjones4719 She accompanied an AF Major, he was in another F-4. Both of them had brief cases handcuffed to their wrists. When they got there a Special Forces Team took them into the jungle in Laos. There was something there they had to do/see/touch. They had to "come home" to report. There was nobody cleared high enough in SE Asia. She never told me any of this until after we were married! This "flight", all-in-all, is a long story but, when she first started to tell me I was "WHAT! You were a clerk typist!?!" "Well, yes and no. When the call came in, I was the only available person who was Cleared for the mission". She was a Field Operative! The first time she went to Langley, she/they knew that something Big had happened, or was going to happen. She said it was Very Upsetting so, she asked "the General" what the President was going to do about it. He told her to sit down, and that he was only going to tell her once and he Never wanted to hear another word about it. "The President is a civilian. He has not been cleared".

...and then in a repeat of history there were the proposed 'Super Tomcat' versions. That would have been some aircraft. And finally it looks like a 'Super' version has made it through with the F15EX

@@FinsburyPhil - There was even a Semi-Stealth Variant proposed of the F-15 Eagle. I believe it was designated F-15SE Silent Eagle. Was more a Partial Stealth Variant than a full on Semi-Stealth Variant. Only about 15% of the plane was stealthy, the result of Congress and as a result, Boeing couldn't get it sold despite interest.

I flew F-4Ds and Es. We performed Red Air DACT against Tomcats. The best kept secret of military aviation was that the F-14 never lived up to the hype. It came and went without actually having to prove itself. It was not a “superior” aircraft. That was just the cover story.

Well the inferior Phantom is still flying

A variant was in service as a RF veriant.

I fairly like 'Rex' hanger'. But given the choice of watching 3 of Eds or 5 or Rex's It ain't going to be Rex's.

Obscure and lesser known doesn’t really apply to the F-4 does it?

That was the Super Phantom 2000. I saw it at Paris Airshow in 1987.

Israel only installed one PW1120 and everything was great till they checked the bulkheads and found they were cracked. That is why all Israel upgrades of the Phantom II didn't replace the J79 including the "Kurnas 2000" that lasted till past 2000. Love this plane but it was a nightmare to maintain.

Found this after reading your comment. Thanks. 😉ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aePzMZbImNU.html

@@yaronk1069 הייתי בט' תחזוקה בשנות ה-90 המוקדמות, במוסך קורנס ( הפטישים ). נהנתי לעבוד עליהם חוץ ממיכלי הדלק

@@yaronk1069 I can believe they had problems with the PW1120! The F-4 was designed around the J79. That's what the inlets were constructed for and the plane was stressed for it. It would have taken many months and a lot of money to resolve the integration issues. There probably would have been rebuilding of the inlets and engine mount areas. As a design that was nearly 30 years old by the time the upgraded F-4 Super Phantom flew, it must have seemed questionable to spend the money on a new powerplant that late in the plane's life. I think in the end it was better to spend that money on the avionics upgrades. The J79 was perfect for the F-4 Phantom and had a very good service record overall. It's very difficult to incorporate new engines into an established design AND be successful without major redesigns of the existing airframe. A famous example of this is the Lockheed P-38 which used an Allison-original engine. They looked at incorporating the Rolls Royce Merlin engine (which was built under license by Allison in the US) but it was realized quickly that incorporating the Merlin into the P-38 would have required radical redesign of the engine to fit into the existing engine booms OR major redesign of the airframe for the Merlin. The way the inlet/turbosupercharger(?) system was laid out in the P-38 made installing the Merlin engine in that airframe impractical. With World War II raging on, it made less sense to make radical changes that might delay production for months and more sense to improve the engines the P-38 was already using! Both the F-15 and F-16 had their engine compartments redesigned in the early 1980s to allow them to use alternative engines (the F110 family) from General Electric. The planes were selling well enough and were still early in their production runs when the change was made so it made sense. The F-15 and F-16 were both designed around the Pratt&Whitney F100 which was intended to be the definitive powerplant but it ran into all sorts of technical issues and was not as reliable as the US Air Force wanted. The F-16 redesign in particular forced General Dynamic to redesign the Viper's inlet to suit the increased airflow of the F110 turbofan. That had adverse effects on the plane's handling at high angle of attack and probably affected supersonic handling at the high end of its flight envelope. The change in the inlet design probably increased drag, possibly slightly slower than the Pratt&Whitney-powered F-16s which kept the original inlet designs and boosted thrust in later production Blocks 42/52 by boosting internal engine temperatures. The competition with General Electric forced Pratt&Whitney to "up its game" and the majority of the F100's problems were resolved with refit F100-PW-220 engines (compatible with both the F-15 and F-16) by the mid/late-1980s and the highly redesigned F100-PW-229 which debuted in service in the early 1990s. ** The F-14 was one of the few military planes that benefitted from a complete engine replacement. The thing is that the existing airframe itself had few alterations to install the new engine and it was the GE F110 that was altered to fit the airframe! The F110-GE-400 (-400 means it's a US Navy engine) integrated fine into the Tomcat airframe but was heavier than the equivalent Air Force model (the F110-GE-100 installed in the F-16C Block 30 and Block 40). The main cause of the engine weight increase (+600 lbs) was a steel pipe extension/band that stretched the length of the engine by over 4 ft to fit the existing F-14 engine nacelle. It essentially shifted the compressor section forward and the afterburner unit aft to integrate with the inlet and exhaust end properly. They DID have to attach a new afterburner unit and nozzle section; these were basically versions of the designs used for the F-18's F404 turbofan which was also a General Electric product. They had some vibration issues (resolved quickly) and some fanblade cracking early in the F-14's F110 service (this was normal; all the Teen Fighters had fatigue issues with their turbofans which were resolved with improved manufacturing and hardware refits) but even with those hiccups it was a much more reliable engine for the F-14 than the P&W TF30 ever was...

I was young during the Gulf War, 7th grade at the time. I might be mistaken, but didn't the Air Force at the time still have some F4's operating as Wild Weasels?

@@trostorff1 yes they were in the first Gulf war, I think he was talking about the second one or Iraq however you want to call it

@@dougc190 Yeah, as I just now reread what he had posted, I see that. Eh, yesterday was a long day. At any rate, thanks for confirming something that I was obviously far too lazy to look up for myself, ha.

@@trostorff1 Yes, but only a handful.

Except instead of three new airframes, we have one (the F-35) proving problematic in certain versions. We need aircraft added to the fleet to maintain numbers. If my understanding is correct, the F-15x is oriented towards new air frames.

@@Caseytify In fact, the F-35 is one aircraft with three different air-frames. The USN isn't in love with their "C" air-frame. The USMC is reducing their "B" air-frame acquisitions. Only the USAF "A" will likely see full production, unless the USAF NGAD produces its first series sooner than expected.

@Fraser Fir LMAO...all Lockheed talking points. For all the money LM is dropping in to the campaign coffers of Congressional representatives and Senators, the F-15EX still survives. Looking at the USAF operational and readiness requirements, it is conceivable the F-15EX will not only continue replacing old F-15C/D air-frames, but also aging F-15E air-frames. The F-35A (the most reliable and capable Lightning II model) continues to post disappointing readiness statistics and requires specialized maintenance. Ultimately, the USAF will be willing to reduce all existing platforms for NGAD. The USN has also made no secret that they are prioritizing NGAD (F/A-XX) .

​​@@deadmeat8754 lol the EX is already dead

@@gotanon9659 As usual, you're wrong.

Worked at McDonnell Aircraft in the sixties in a paint shop, Building 27 applying zinc chromate primer to thousands of F-4 parts. If you ever saw the miles of wiring and hydraulic plumbing inside the F-4, you’d wonder how they got off the ground! These fighters were an engineering masterpiece. ONE BADASS AIRPLANE!!

@@nashvillecop1 And the tunnel under Brown Road to Bldg 27. I wonder what they did with that tunnel after selling those buildings?

I’m leaning towards nuts, married 4 times.

@Bruce Goodwin Got to repair RF-4s in the IAF. They were immaculate with perfectly fitted panels, not loaded to the gills like the bomb-trucks, only the centerline tank. Tail Nr. 495 is now in the Israeli Airforce Museum.

@@trespire Salute, trespire. I remember maintaining 555…can't remember the other tails. The underrated RFs (my opinion) are a good example of the Phantom design: reconfigurable, reliable, and pretty darn fast!

@@brucegoodwin634 Talking about fast, roumour had it, some of the RFs, not all, could reach Mach 2.5 and a bit. With the right tactics, at high altitude zoom, they were practically untouchable. The above mentioned 495 was in all gray, no gun, no pilons, super slick. IMHO, looked better than any Eagle. Thinking back, that was probably the fastest jet the IAF ever flew.

@@trespire kerosene & compression baby!!!

And you know the Eagle rocks…

That and their social-experiment and political corruption. But maybe I oughtn't mention that here.

Gambling? In this establishment?

And yet the USAF has incredibly competent pilots equipped with superb aircraft and weapons.

That's procurement for you. The government rules makes it so easy for contractors to rip off the taxpayers because they are in collusion with our representatives in Congress.

The chair force is a profit-driven corporation first, and a military service a distant second.

Proof positive that with enough thrust you can make a brick fly!

True, although the RAF used the F-4 as an interceptor, so faster climbing rate was useful for them.

Climb rate is almost always more important than top speed.

@@thethirdman225 not if I'm holding a competition for top speed retard

Imagine what some poor Vietnamese bugger felt when it wasnt a training run.....man....

I grew up near Hanscom AFB, had the same wonderful experience. At least once a B52 paid a visit. Talk about smoke and noise, really impressive!

Turkey still uses the Phantom, was the F-4E Terminator 2020. I believe those use the same radar and electronics systems as the Kurnass 2000, made by Israel

Turkey and also Greece are still both using upgraded versions of F-4 Phantom to this day.

Additional note: The MiG-21 is older than the F-4, it's as old as the F-105.

Fun fact: Mig 21 is a piece of shit aircraft and you need to stop sucking commy dick

@@joobinmcgroobin5181 : For small, poor African countries like Mali and Guinea, the choice is between the cheap MiG-21, or no jet interceptor at all. Obviously, it’s no use in a dogfight with modern fighters, but the 9/11 attack on New York in 2001 showed that even hijacked civilian aircraft can pose a serious threat, and any jet interceptor is better than none.

Have you ever considered the advantages of complete sentences and rational thought patterns?

@@iatsd Just keep it to yourself next time

@Aqua Fyre I am. I don't put up with simpletons IRL. Why should I put up with the cretins here? I'm playing nicely with the other children and not being rude.

@Aqua Fyre to be honest , i agree with @iatsd , i had a super hard time understanding what the og commenter was saying, but to be fair , iam not a native speaker

@@retr0_fps I do have to say I agree. I found that whole post v difficult to understand. Perhaps the OP in this thread isn't a native English speaker/writer? NO disrespect intended.

What amazes me is that it was less than 10 years separated from the F-86 Sabre.

@@FallenPhoenix86 Exactly ! Yet the F4 is similar to any modern design. It blows my mind it's over 60yrs old !

And yet the B-52 is still flying and the last one of those was built 60 years ago. Also hundreds of F-4s are still in use world wide. What I am trying to say is that in today's day and age, with modern maintenance techniques there is no such thing as an "old" air frame. Just one that wont cost you nearly as much as the between 80 and 140 MILLION dollars a unit new aircraft cost.

@@deterrumeversor8680 The B-52 is not expected to dogfight, or make low level attack runs under fire. Even so metal fatigue is an ongoing and serious problem for the B-52s, one managed to drop an entire engine nacelle mid-flight in 2017, luckily it also made an emergency landing. Running costs on the B-52 are higher than the B-1 because of it. . But even discounting fatigue life, the Super Phantom looks like a bad deal to me. Re-engine it, fit new electronics package etc. If it serves into the 90s and 00s it's likely to face Mig 29s, SU-27s. Under all the upgrades it's still an aircraft built from a 1950s understanding of aerodynamics, no pilot would choose that over the F-16C. To a prospective buyer in the 1980s, the F-16 and F-18 were already out and well proven, why spend 65% of the cost of F-16s to upgrade a fleet of aircraft, only to replace them with F-16s in a few years time.

An old, improved airplane is still indeed an old airplane. I could have seen this as a good option for air forces that didn't quite have the money to spend or mission requirements that the US Airforce has.

One reason the Buffs are still around is because of the amount of time they spend sitting on alert rather than wearing out in flight.

@@deterrumeversor8680 - The F-15A and B models were phased out by the '90s due to age. The -C and -D models are phased out now, with mainly the F-15E model flying. The frames can only stand so much stress and abuse before they just are not safe. The B-52 is not pulling several Gs each time it takes off from a high traffic airfield.

I was around the "Rhinos". That aircraft had issue, lots of issue. First, it was heavy. Second, it's wing loading was terrible and nearly as much as the gawd-awful F-104. In a "rate" fight the Rhino was as nimble as the beast it's nicknamed after. Even with the better canopy the F-4 pilot & WSO sat low in the fuselage, their visibility was compromised. The USAF was right, the upgrade of the F-4 would have been tossing good money after bad. The F-16C block 50+ is one of the deadliest jets in the sky. The F-4E+ would have been like taking a re-engined pickup truck into the Indy 500.

@@Easy-Eight so was the MiG-21 the better plane?

@@doch.8039 ... The F-4 was a better all around aircraft than the MiG-21. The F-4 was a fighter, all weather interceptor, and bomber. The MiG-21 was a point defense interceptor and fighter (both the MiG-21 and F-104 have the dubious honor of killing its pilots more in training than the opposition in combat). If a nation had a limited budget then the French Mirage III was best. The F-15/F-16/F-14/F-18 are 4th generation fighters. The USAF & USN were wise in FY '93 and '94. BTW, a company out of South Africa will remanufacture the Mirage III as the Cheetah, a poor nations cheap F-16. Time has passed the F-4, MiG-21, and most of the mid-cold war aircraft.

I was an engine troop on the RF-4C in the ANG, we had two of our Phantoms go through the big upgrade with the new single piece windscreens etc. right before the announcement the aircraft were headed to the boneyard. I really liked the F-4 it was a rock solid machine, but the sad thing is satellites and drones took over the recce role so no need for the RFs anymore. I don't care what anyone says about the J-79 it was a great engine for when it was designed and built. BUT it would have been neat to see those PW's in from the performance standpoint.

Rearward visibility was still terrible, frameless canopy or not.

And little tiny cheap Mig 🎉fighters shut them down over Vietnam at about a one to one ratio. That is the truth. The phantom is a flying pig. And is it ugly and thin.

I guess we are not that apart after all . There is the exact same saying in Greek .

@@dimitrispatsiaouras713 pretty sure they say it in every country lol

@@mustang5132 Shit . Blame it on globalization!!!

@@dimitrispatsiaouras713 We lived together almost 1000 Years. Same soil, same atmoshphere. Political shit took us apart.

My brother and his wife had their first child when I was 10. I thanked them for having a son and making me an uncle instead of having a girl and making me an aunt. It was funny at the time... some 50+ years ago...

There’s no real way of knowing with these “what if” scenarios.

Very likely.

Semper Fi Marine. Same years I was in the Corps. With VMGR-352 @ MCAS El Toro & VMGR-152 MCAS Futenma. We were the KC-130's . I have been to Osan many times and have watched many F-4's refuel in air. It is amazing! 🍻 Oo-Rah.