Why British pilots loved the F-4 Phantom 

What a fantastic story, you must wear that pin with pride!

I'm jealous. My record is mach 0.83 :( Thats still "moving out" but not in the cool kids club :)

Great story, thank you

The English Electric Lighting never had that problem, Maybe Inferior paint.

We had that problem with the F-111s. They'd come back with all the paint burned off the leading edges. Pilots playing dumb. Oh no. They never went above MACH 2

Probably because it was such a new shape for the time fighter's before this where much rounder

The A10 is the most beautiful aircraft ever built. NOBODY can match flying tank. ;)

@@shupichii9647 i like the A-10 and all but nothing can match the Tomcat for looks.

Personally my favourite is the javelin just because it's got two massive engines either side of the pilot , it's also just big lol

I 100% agreed. Best looking fighter of all time.

Apparently the Phantom was in UK service until as late as 1992. That's not bad going.

I was going to like this , but I can’t ..coz it had the perfect number of likes “69”

F18

@@chrisblay I saw RAF Phantoms in the Montijo AFB Tiger Meet in Portugal, in 1987. They were all light grey and from Wattisham, if I remember well. I was told that they were former USN F-4Js. Plus F-111s, F-104S, Mirage F-1, Alpha Jets, F-16, F-15C, Tornadoes, F-4F and our own Fiat G-91 and A-7P, C-130 and P-3. Glorious times indeed...

Still flying with the Hellenic AF, that’s really good going!

@russellbateman3392, I was in USAF Officer Training School in late '81. I was on track to be a back seater and was going to try for F-4s, because few people wanted the posting anymore. What they didn't know is that, as the Phantoms were phased out, they were retraining F-4 aircrews (front and back seater staying together as a unit) directly over to the Strike Eagle. If I had done that, when my time came to be able to apply for pilot training (six years after commissioning), I would have an advantage in getting an F-15, since I already had "time in" the airframe. Unfortunately, a medical condition prevented me from realizing my dreams. "Woulda, coulda, shoulda," I guess.

What is stopping either of you from booking a flight in one, if they offer commercial flights? Edit: typo

@@sjonnieplayfull5859 i was about to ask that.

DCS World flight sim will have an F-4E soon, so if you have grandchildren with gaming PC's, you may have a chance :D

YES, and you've discovered YT in 2021. Now back to watching teletubbies and cockysucky your imaginary partner.

Dude that is insanely cool

@rebreaville9332, if they had gone along with the Israelis' plan to up-engine the Phantom, you would have walked all over the 15s and 16s. In 1987, the Israeli Phantom used as a testbed had a well over 1:1 power to weight ratio and could supercruise. The US said no to it because there were so many Phantoms still flying, the export market for 15s and 16s would have dried up and McD/D would have been selling nothing but conversion kits. 😄

@@odonovan Not only did the Israeli mod come with PW1120 (?) engines, it had a PD radar and other goodies. The USAF did not want more capable F-4s, they wanted them retired. The Phantom was great to fly and fight and I remain very fond of it. As a young guy, it was simply thrilling to walk up to and strap on. The F-15E was in very good way, the mighty son of Phantom and I had time in it as well. Before the F-22, it was the most lethal aircraft in the world. Unreal jet.

Seeing as you still had the speed, did you feel the F-4 could still compete using hit-n-run tactics?

@@DoBraveryFPS Yes. We had a lot of energy and could show up fast, leave fast. Two guys in the plane were worth a lot, Very survivable to the end. We got all aspect Aim 9Ms which gave us point/shoot kill and we were lethal with it.

@@odonovan The British Proposed F-4L? Would have had a better engine that the Israeli phantom (basically sustaining vertical flight like the electric lightening) would have had been armed with AiM54 missiles

And he would have been right. The Phantoms used by the UK were based on the F-4J used by the USN, which had more advanced radar and fire control than the USAF’s F-4E. If the UK could have used their Phantoms in the Falklands, Argentine pilots would have had to deal with Skyflash missiles fired from beyond visual range, long before the fleet even started seeing them appear over the horizon.

Winkle Brown knew more about aircraft than almost anyone alive during his career. No doubt he was absolutely correct.

yes,but there withdrawal was one of the reasons it did happen then.With the scrapping of Ark Royal RO9 it was pretty obvious it would be a good time to invade.

There is a price to be paid for giving up conventional aircraft carriers. The Royal Navy would've been better able to project power with a carrier loaded with Phantoms and Buccaneers, or maybe even Grumman Intruders. The Harrier was and still is a capable aircraft, the US Marines still use them for the time being, but it's limited in fleet defense and bombing capacity.

Bad luck that HMS Ark Royal was decomissioned shortly before the conflict. A mixture of F4 and Harriers would have given much bigger headache to the Argentinians.

The reason the Lightnings were being replaced was not because of thier performance, which was impressive, but because they had very short range.

Thumbs down I'm afraid, range is performance.@@Snake-ms7sj

Gave you a super thumbs up, I think it was 15 airframes if I recall correctly. And I'm not sure what the decision for their purchase was (beyond the natural Tory " . . they're cheap . . "). It was probably Lightning as you say plus Tornado delays plus over-commitment to Stanley/MPA by the overall Phantom force. Never really thought of them as being blue, just looked grey to me - but then Needham and Stow were grey a lot of the time too. But I was stuck in Commcen, so I didn't get to love them as much as I'd have liked to. In fairness, whilst at Coltishall, I never saw the hastily painted Op Granby Jags as pink . . . hope that helps.

@richardmarshall4322 The f-4J(UK)'s were procured because of the requirement to put Phantoms on the Falklands. The RAF had to have a set number of fighters to met NATO commitments. The only reason that the Lightning was in service past 1976 was there were not enough Phantom's in the British Inventory to met those commitments, plus hold a servicing and big enough attrition reserve until the Tornado ADV entered service. Had the RAF and Royal Navy not cancelled their final orders for the Phantom in 1968 (32 FGR2's and an option for 7 FG1's) there would have been more than enough Phantoms to replace all of the Lightnings in 1976 when the Jaguar replaced the Phantom in the ground attack role).

Similar to the automative adage of, "you can't beat cubes"

@@wreython No substitute for cubic inches! Absolutely my friend, Semper Fidelis.

makes warhammer space marine flyers look less stupid, but only less.

Was your first airline Suckling Airways formerly based out of Ipswich? I was based in ATC at RAF Wattisham at the time!

@@barryhumphries4514 yes it was, we used to report at the guard house then us and the passengers were escorted to the VAS. Wow that brings back memories, I left the airline in early 88 to join BMA at EMA, I probably spoke to you quite a bit as we used to call on the way up and back to MAN even before we became residents.

My dad worked there in the 1980s as aircraft crew man to T38 trainers. The Iron cross was what the German Air Force used for their Eid weasels trainings during that time.

@@jamessnyder1175 the Iron Cross is the regular symbol for German Air Force, like the white star in the blue circle with white bars is the USAF symbol. I just think it’s cool that former enemies are now allies, and have been for decades. Plus the Iron Cross just looks badass.😁🍻

The SUU-16A was not the solution for air to air combat. It had great weight, great drag, great load factor and was very innacurate. Coronel Robin Olds, for example, strictly forbade his pilots to seek combat against the Migs just because they had the SUU installed because he knew they would have no chances. It was effective for ground straffing only. The F-4E was a different matter, its built in M-61 was fully effective. Still, the F-4 always had a hard time dogfighting a Mig-17. It hadn't been conceived to do so.

The F-105F carried the Weasel load over Vietnam; Phantoms only came in at the very end.

@@petesheppard1709 That's what he said 🙄

@@Twirlyhead'Fine work' is accurate, but IMO understated what was accomplished by the F-105Fs, especially given their very heavy losses.

Interesting having heard pilots refer to the Tornadoes as a politicians aircraft. I clearly remember a Tornado pilot describing with absolutely no shame felt or doubt how he would immediately depart the area rapidly if a Mig 29 appeared anywhere in the vicinity.

@@michaeld5888Smart. The Tornado was in no way a dogfighter. It was designed as a low level light bomber, with the mission of intercepting heavy strategic bombers kluged on as an afterthought.

Oh yeah, the noise, I can easily imagine, I experienced ANG Phantoms roaring blasting out of the Reno airport on very cold spring day in the early eighties

I grew up near Volkel airforce base here in the Netherlands. As a teen in the 80's we would often go to watch the aircraft take off and land. That was the time when the RNLAF transitioned from the F-104 to the F-16. And the F-104 has the same glorious engine as the Phantom. Great sound. And occasionally, if we were lucky we got to see some Phantoms from other NATO countries too. I remember hearing that there were Phantoms on the base got us going there.

And believe it or not, swing and mid shift maintenance personnel learned to sleep through that. :)

Hi Ya Bud. I was a Crew Chief on F4 C and the D model. When I hear someone say that will be the day when Pigs Fly I always laugh say that day has already passed, my Pig flew great !! My last two years was at Hill on the first F16 combat wing the 388th. Fault codes to tell you whats wrong made my job fairly easy. You had to be a real Jet Mechanic to work the Pigs.

I think you meant the Aim 7 Sparrow for the Air Force the Phoenix is actually the AIM 54 and it was only used by the later F14 Tomcat The Aim 4 Falcon was used by the Phantom but that missile was retired in 1963. Not trying to be mean here but just wanted to clear it up, Im a Retired USAF Jet Mechanic worked on A10's and F15C/D and the Aim 7 did failed a lot in Vietnam for the F4 in fact a lot of the time the Pilots would fire off a pair of Aim 7's at a target to get a hit on it. I was just watching a video on it, look up Operation Bolo and Col Robin Olds.

@@bikecommuter24 Thanks for the info. I think I got my information from one of the Osprey books. I think the one about Crusader units in the Vietnam war. As they carried the Aim-9D. It did reference Operation Bolo and Colonel Olds.

But you need guns for closed air combat, missles needed distance

@@RacerX1971 That was what the fighter mafia argued. But in the case of the USN all F-4 MiG kills in the Vietnam war were with missiles. Even after Top Gun was introduced. The Crusader, the socalled last gunfighter which had 4 guns, scored all its kills with sidewinders, if only because its guns had a nasty habit of jamming after intense turns. Even the one kill that a Skyhawk pilot made, and they had guns too, was with an unguided zuni rocket. I think the only gun kills that USN pilots made were from Skyraider pilots. But they probably had the best guns in aircraft at the time and the element of surprise on their hand. The problems with dogfighting in Vietnam were not so much lack of guns but lack of air to air training, very restrictive rules of engagement and inadequate missiles for the job. The AIM-7 Sparrow was of little value and scored very poorly, as did the AIM-4 Phoenix. AIM-9 was the best missile to have, IF you knew how to use them well. Most of the aircraft that did have guns rarely got to use them in a dogfight because they often jammed in a dogfight. There's a reason why the Israeli's opted to have 30mm cannons in their Skyhawks instead of the 20mm that were standard in US versions. As did Singapore. In that sense installing the vulcan gattling style guns in the F4 and A7 were game changers.

@@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623 well written, but the AIM-4 is the _Falcon,_ by far the worse missile of that generation. The _Phoenix_ is an outstanding missile and is designated AIM-54.

when i was a Boy/teen there wasnt a need to go to airshows we had our "airshows" every autumn during the big manouvres between Weservalley and Solling regiion near the east german Border, they came in alone, in pairs sometimes up to four Planes often at treetop level, sometimes the flew dogfights between the 60s and late 70s with all sorts of Planes F-104G, Hunters (not sure if Belgium or British) , Buccaneers, F-4/RF-4/FGR (RAF, Luftwaffe and USAF), Jaguars, Mirages, and all sorts of Helos, Transportplanes, on the Roads, Fields and forrests all the Tanks, APCs and Trucks, it was like a warzone . It wasnt impressive especialy at treetop level it was breathtaking! btw, Two F-4 crashed during the manouvres near my Hometown one F-4D (USAF) went down at a hill of the Solling Forrest and a RAF FGR Phantom only few kilometer away in Höxter region

@@Sturminfantrist I experienced that crash of the FGR2 live on the radio.... Never in my 38 years of service I heard again a flight lead freaking out like that about loosing his wingman.....was cruel...... If I remember right it must have been around 1977.....

@@HCH944 yes was in mid or late 70s , if i remember right in both cases the Crews couldnt eject, heard the FGR was to slow in a Curve and stalled but iam not 100% sure. terrible story RIP both Crews ! Served at a Naval airbase/Base defense early 80s luckly we had no crashes

@@Sturminfantrist I don`t know the reason of that crash and I never tried to investigate..... The FGR2`s had been on a low level-sweep.....searching for air targets...... Was in a designated low flying area- forgot he number- so they were allowed to go down to 250ft !!!!!!!! At that height you do not survive the slightest mistake...... Got some hours on an A-jet and believe me...at that height the trees are f*cking tall and close to your ass!!!!!!!!

@@HCH944 Thank you very much for the info.

He didn't hitch on to a troubled F4, he got behind it, the troubled F4 lowered their arrester hook, and he approached until he made contact between the hook and the canopy bow. Then he *pushed* his wingman across the border.

​@@peatbogg3688 And he got his ass chewed out for damaging his aircraft in the process of saving the other guys from having to bail out over enemy territory. That's the military.

There's a pair of pretty similar stories I've read about 2 different KC-135 tanker aircraft saving pilots. The shorter of the two that I don't have a reference for off-hand was when a tanker received a call that an F-4 had taken a missile strike and was rapidly losing fuel. The tanker pilots broke protocol to fly into North Vietnam to meet up with the damaged aircraft and his wingman. Normally when closing the fighters will perform a 180 to drop in behind the tanker while it maintains level flight. In this instance with the tanker flying north and with the damaged F-4 rapidly losing fuel and lacking the control to even perform the maneuver, the tanker performed a loop to form up with the F-4s. While in the midst of this loop the final engine on the F-4 flamed out and it started to lose altitude. The tanker started to dive attempting to mate with the stricken F-4 and eventually managed to mate up while in a 30 degree dive. With the damaged F-4 now attached to the tanker they started transferring fuel in the hopes the F-4 could reignite its engine, but the boom operate quickly canceled the transfer since he could just see the fuel gushing out of the plane. Instead, the tanker decided to lock the fuel probe into the boom and essentially towed the stricken plane out of hostile airspace so the crew could eject over friendly airspace. The second story was told by Walter J. Boyne about a KC-135 which was scheduled to refuel a pair of F-104s. After refueling their assigned targets the tanker received an emergency request from a pair of Navy KA-3 Skywarrior tanker aircraft. One of them had a malfunction which prevented them from utilizing their refuel tanks for their own use and was critically low on fuel. The KC-135 diverted and managed to meet up with the KA-3 when it had less than 3 minutes of fuel remaining. It refueled the first KA-3 and then proceeded to start refueling the wingman. While this was going on a pair of F-8s showed up with one of them having less than 300 pounds of fuel remaining. This critically low F-8 attached to the currently refueling KA-3 which initiated the first tri-level refueling in history. While this was happening the first malfunctioning KA-3 shared its otherwise unusable tank with the F-8's wingman before linking up to refuel from the KC-135 for a second time. Their day not quite over, a pair of Navy F-4s arrived on scene with insufficient fuel to return to their carrier. Now low on fuel themselves the KC-135 crew turned south towards their base in Da Nang and refueled the F-4s while en route. They landed back at base with less than 10,000 pounds of fuel remaining, less than 5% of what they took off with on what was supposed to have been a trip to refuel only a pair of aircraft.

@@alexsis1778Remarkable stories.

Yup, 2024 T4 if I recall. The only titanum were the hot pannels on the tail, inboard parts of the horizontal stabalizers and the arrestor hook.

@@trespire I have a feeling parts of the BLC ducting were titanium.

@@martinconnelly1473 That would make sense. As a structural technician, my focus and experience was with the airframe structure. Repairs to the hot pannels and horizontal stabalizer were very frequent.

Yes just the bit aft of the afterburners was titanium

My thoughts too - but, as weapons get more and more sophisticated and capable, they also get a lot more expensive. I somehow doubt that a few Phantoms (even fewer than The Few) would have been much good against hoards of German bombers during the Battle of Britain...

@@mikespencer4922 Sorry! I never knew that despite getting a Grade A in both my English Language and Literature O-Levels in 1977. I always thought it was "to wreck havoc"...which sounds more logical but is evidently wrong! Haha...even at 60 years old you learn something new every day! Thanks!

the jet race really started to go fast in late 44 and early 45. after getting their hand on the german research(ers) it started to go really quick. also because the nations was more than willing to splurge to get the upper hand with the new looming threat of the soviet in the late 40's. some already worked many plans up against them while they where allies. as turncoats cant be trusted when the common enemy is defeated. even Paton (I think it was( many got different opinions of the man but he was kinda right in his assesment in some ways)) said it would have been better to work with the germans against the russians than experience the cold war, as you could debate and actually relate better with the germans than the soviets. I may sound dumm to some but i did read a lot of history when i was a bit younger, and this note i found a bit peculiar. but as time progress, i see more and more what he meant. we where better suited to tackle the germans in a political and general way than how we could with soviet at any day. also to anyone pointing to the nazis and the holocaus. look up how many and how the societ killed in the name of the union. i rather be without either to be honest buuuuut history is history, and those who dare to correct it in a narratives interest instead of bringiing out the truth can go suck on the arse of the dead Lenin in Mosqau. I am open for debate but dont strawman me, i want to learn not be brainwashed or led astray. sorry OP but i went on a side rant. but i felt it intrinsic to the history of the jet race.

still blows my mind that centurion was the answer to the heavy tanks of Nazi Germany.

Strangely enough, as a sixth former, just prior to going to university in 1968, walking in the fens, near the Wash training ranges, in Eastern UK with some classmates , we were mock attacked by a US Phantom and all dived to earth! Just had a glimpse of a smiling pilot ! A local farmer told us the US air force used the Wash for training at the time.

In that case any air force pilot could say they're soldiers first and pilots second.

Was a structural technician on IAF Kurnass (Es) & RF. Still miss working on them on the B-Check. A true work horse. Long live Spook

According to Bob Hope "the biggest distributor of MiG parts in south east Asia".

Col. Olds did an engagement in one of my BAK-12 barriers in 1968 at Bien Hoa AB Vietnam. I was only 20 years old at the time and now I'm 75.

bucc, bucc, bucc

If you already don't know it, there's a youtube channel called super8 rescue. The guy digitizes old super8 cine films. But he served on Ark Royal, and he has TONS of footage of Phantoms and Buccs taking off and landing on Ark Royal. Filmed by the actual sailors themselves.

Two very good choices. For me, I’d place a couple of WWII planes at the top; the P-51 Mustang and B-17. As a Yank,and as the grandson of a B-17 radio man that flew over Germany, those two just speak to me.

At 2:23 it’s shows a Massachusetts Air National Guard F-86H Sabre. The H had two 20mm each side of the nose and the larger intake.

I agree. Both still in service with the Iranian Air Force! 🇮🇷

Very cool! @@AtheistOrphan

I've often thought that would be a good :"what if", the RN Phnatoms and a full Size carrier group with buccaneers etc, plus also the gannet as AEW. AEW would likely have saved several ships and cost the enemy more aircraft, as all to often the enemy were intercepted after bomb runs rather than when inbound. The Duxford F4 seen is an F4S, an updated F4J. I seem to recall the UK acquiring some F4J for Phandet which were called F4J(UK)???

Perhaps Argentina would not have invaded the Falklands if the UK had retained that big carrier-phantom capability in the 1980s.

Ark Royal RO9 scrapped 79,Falklands 82, It seemed to work well for a while, then a perfect oppotunity for The Argentine forces presented itself. .@@woodrow60

The cat & trap ( catobar) carrier would have been a disaster during the Falklands war because of the weather

@@jonathanmimnagh8956 The Phantom in the US Air Museum is one of the 15 Ex USN aircraft operated by the RAF and is a F-4J(UK) repainted in USN markings.

or both since the F4 essentially fulfilled both roles. Still, I think the world would have been a better place had the TSR2 and the Avro Arrow - which was cancelled for similar reasons - be pursued to completion

I think the F111 was also part of that political order/cancel/order/cancel kerfuffle

The Cancelation of the superior TSR2 was Political a sellout by Wilson.

@@thekinginyellow1744 TSR-2 had many problems and limited range etc

@@newton18311 Complete Bullshite I'm afraid. TSR2 had eaten up all of the R&D Budget set aside to develop the aircraft and was burning through all of the funding allocated to build the production aircraft. The RAF Engineering boys at CSDE had an absolute fit when they got their hands on the prototype notes for the aircraft due to all of the design flaws in the aircraft and the RAF;s Operational Requirements Branch had also crunched all of the figures that BAC had given them and they had found that the aircraft was totally incapable of meeting the RAF's operational Requirement. It was badly overweight, couldn't met the Speed, Altitude, Range or short runway requirements. The Nav Attack system didn't work in trial aircraft as the Computers in it were nowhere near powerful enough in speed or memory. Plus the Forward looking Radar didn't have definition required to find the targets it was suppose to be able to find. Engines were also nowhere near having the major issues with them being fixed. The RAF told Wilson to kill it and buy the F-111.

The F-100 had internal 20mm guns, not a Vulcan. It was a notoriously dangerous plane to learn to fly.

Bons tempos. Também lá estive... 😀

Making them the slowest Phantoms in the world:) higher thrust at low level though!

And a waste of money. Pilots preferred the later purchased J-79 F-4S with the better radar as a bonus

The F4-K was the Navy version the RAF used the F4-M and took over the F4-Ks when Ark Royal was scrapped.

If he flew the EE Lightning anything else was passe!

@@n2uid01 I thought the EE flew you

Oi! he had a navigator in the back.

Na hallo von einem landsman, wie geht's dir,

Plus they forgot about the ground attack role in the video. 30 mm centreline Vulcan cannon plus cluster bombs.

@@DuncanInnes1956 and 4 sparrow, probably 4 winder plus an AI radar : quite a challenge for a defending fighter.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zQvObtxH2EY.html&si=Czdxbc3k3G1lCrS8 This video shows the 20mm cannon in US service. I still think the RAF one was 30mm…

@@jtidsskids Cold War German F-4F Phantoms only carried 4 sidewinders and the Cannon, they were not fitted with the AIM-7 Sparrow. They got MRAAM capability with the ICE upgrade in the early 1990s with the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

I've seen the Blues fly F-4s, A-4s and F/A-18s. The Phantom was by far the most awe-inspiring of the three.

One of my favorite game series. Yesterday I completed Ace Combat 5 again. I'll always remember Captain Barret flying the F-4 Phantom.

​@@GideonStahl - and Silber 1