Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 3 Posted (10 years 1 month 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4147 times:
I am currently reading Air Force Legends #203, the North American F-107A by William J. Simone. At 148 pages, this is likely the most extensive publication on this very interesting fighter. Those interested in US military aviation history may appreciate this series, as well as the well-established Naval Fighters series, both published in California by Steve Ginter. While the initial issues in the Naval Fighters series were somewhat below par Mr. Ginter steadily improved his products throughout the 1980s and by now has produced one of the most respected series of US Naval and Military aviation books seen to date.
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6203 posts, RR: 43 Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 month 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3975 times:
"Nice century series lineup, but no F-100 or F-104." What on earth do you mean?
What is it with all the "is there a possibilty airline X will.." threads? The answer it'll is possible.
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6203 posts, RR: 43 Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3964 times:
The F-100 and F-104 are in there, just not visible from the angle.
What is it with all the "is there a possibilty airline X will.." threads? The answer it'll is possible.
Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3976 times:
Finished the book yesterday. Very good publication by my estimate. The author was intimately involved in the salvage of 118 pictured above at Pima. I remember building the Aurora kit of this bird when I was in high school.
The F-107A had advanced automated stability systems and other features such as variable ramp intake that were not really operational with the first two of three airframes. The book mentions how much of the R&D was later successfully applied to the A3J-1 Vigilante. The F-107A made quite a contribution in spite of the fact that it did not see series production.
When I look at the info for Axel's photo above, it states, "One of the two surviving prototypes on display at Pima Air and Space Museum." I think the other survivor is actually at the Air Force Museum. Also, the third airframe was apparently destroyed during fire training at Oxnard, CA.
Off the top of my head: The F-103 was to be a Republic ramjet/rocket powered interceptor without a canopy. It was to be used against supersonic bombers, with little or no dogfighting capability. The pilot was to use a periscope of some sort. Drawings (or photos of the mockup, as no prototype was ever built) show a ventral swept-forward intake and tiny delta wings if I remember correctly. I think it may have been in competition with the North American F-108 Rapier, though the latter was a bit more conventional I don't think they ever cut metal on either of the two types.
Broke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3955 times:
The F-110A was the original Air Force designation for the F-4C. Once the military services standardized their designation system, the F-110A became the F-4C.
There is an F-107A at the Air Force Museum and it is in very good shape. It has been in the hangar adjacent to the Presidential Hangar, now known as the Research and Development Hangar and I believe that that is where you will find it, but the place is in transition and airplanes are being moved almost daily.
Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 3 Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3940 times:
Well, okay, I'll get into the Phantom thing with a bit of a quiz OTTOMH. Sharpen those keyboards! I mean pencils.
I think the first two USAF wings of F-4C Phantoms worked up around 1963. I believe the 12 TFW was one of them, and perhaps the 3 TFW was the other. The aircraft looked really good, with either light gray or white finish and buzz numbers. I have read that prior to getting production F4Cs, they had been loaned some USN F-4Bs for initial work up.
1. I have often wondered if the overall white/grey paint scheme I mentioned identical to that which was being applied to USN F-4Bs at the time, or was there a different paint FSN used. Can anyone help?
2. What letters were selected in the buzz number?
3. Would they have used the loaned Phantoms much for USAF air-air refuelling work?
4. Did the Navy get their F-4Bs back?
5. Did those USAF pilots attend Top gun school in their F-4s?
6. What air-air missile was broiught into USAF inventory for the first time with the introduction of the Phantom?
7. When was the first flight of the Phantom?
8. Where did the initial USAF workup take place?
9. The GIB in the USN was a RIO, while he was a ____ in USAF.
10.Which flew higher, the F-104 or the F-4?
11. If you downed an enemy aircraft in a Phantom, the kill marking usually was applied to the _______ plate.
12. The presence of a heavy tailhook on USAF F-4s was the cause of the "tailhook scandal" (_____) YES (_____) NO.
13. Like the Air Force, the Navy operated a sizable number of recon Phantoms
(____) YES (____) No.
14. A drone Phantom is so named because of the steady noise produced by its engine(s). (____) YES (____) NO.
15. Early on engine Fan blade nicks were a common reason for grounding the Phantoms. (____) NO (____) YES.
16. Did the Phantom ever score a kill while in supersonic flight?
16.a. 5 pt. Bonus: If so, with what weapon?
17.Bonus non-Phantom question. The F-109 was a prototype effort that involved VTOL technology developed in what European country?
18. Giveaway: OTTOMH=Off the top of my head= 5 Pts.
19. In USAF service, the Phantom replaced the Super Sabre in many wings.
_______________ was to the former what Los Angeles was to the latter.
20. What alphabetic model variant (F4A-Z) letter was used for American services twice, in two unrelated roles?
LY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 11 Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3931 times:
3. No. Because I'm guessing they didn't have the boom style intake.
4. I'm going to say yes, who wouldn't want their Phantoms back?
5. I don't think Top Gun was established until the early 70's, or very late 60's, by which time I'd imagine the USAF would have their own Phantoms anyways.
6. Probably the AIM-7 Sparrow.
7. OTTOMH, 1957.
9. Hmm, I thought he was the GIB(S) in the USAF, trick question?
13. Yes, ("sizeable"?) I believe their version was the RF-4B, while the AF had the RF-4C, and other countries the RF-4E?
Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 3 Reply 15, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3930 times:
You guys are good. Between the three of you most were answered correctly. There were some flakey questions, or stupid questions, whatever....
1. I have often wondered if the overall white/grey paint scheme I mentioned identical to that which was being applied to USN F-4Bs at the time, or was there a different paint FSN used. Can anyone help?
Thanks for info on this Spacepope-I always thought it was not the same as the Navy's paint job. Those early USAF F-4s looked sweet!
2. What letters were selected in the buzz number?
Yes, Spacepope, it was "FJ"
3. Would they have used the loaned Phantoms much for USAF air-air refuelling work?
Agreed, they wouldn't have practiced AAR much because USAF was to use the flying boom method with their Phantoms. Oddly enough, if you had an ex-F-100 pilot in the USAF Phantoms then, he probably had plenty of experience with the hose-drogue method, as that was how the F-100C (and D?) did AAR.
4. Did the Navy get their F-4Bs back?
I think I read that they did get them back.
5. Did those USAF pilots attend Top gun school in their F-4s?
Yeah, I think this was too early for USN Top Gun. I wonder if the early F-4Cs had the 20mm gun pods then anyway. Most of their air-air ACM likely was simulated missile shoots.
6. What air-air missile was broiught into USAF inventory for the first time with the introduction of the Phantom? The Sidewinder was in the USAF inventory from around 1958 onward, while the Sparrow was the missile the Phantom brought to the USAF inventory, much to the disdain of the AIM-4 Falcon-loving brass. Eventually the Falcon would become operational on F-4Ds, at least for a while.
7. When was the first flight of the Phantom?
Shit Hot Popester, May '58.
8. Where did the initial USAF workup take place?
MacDill AFB, FL.
9. The GIB in the USN was a RIO, while he was a ____ in USAF.
Yes, WSO.
10.Which flew higher, the F-104 or the F-4?
I'm talking zoom climbs here.The F-104A exceeded 91,000 feet the same month the F-4 Phantom first flew. The Phantom exceeded 100,000 Ft. in April, 1962. The rocket-assisted NF-104A attained 120,000 ft.in Dec 1963, though I would not have been referring to a "one-off" special mod like this in my question.
11. If you downed an enemy aircraft in a Phantom, the kill marking usually was applied to the _______ plate.
Yes, splitter plate.
12. The presence of a heavy tailhook on USAF F-4s was the cause of the "tailhook scandal" (_____) YES (_____) NO.
NO!!! It had nothing to do with the scandal, and I was chuckling the whole time as this really was a pretty bogus question.
13. Like the Air Force, the Navy operated a sizable number of recon Phantoms
(____) YES (____) No.
NO, the RF4Bs were USMC aircraft as Spacepope pointed out. So why didn't the Navy opt for the RF-4 if it was so good?
14. A drone Phantom is so named because of the steady noise produced by its engine(s). (____) YES (____) NO.
NO, it was an unmanned target drone.
15. Early on engine Fan blade nicks were a common reason for grounding the Phantoms. (____) NO (____) YES.
NO, the J-79 was a turbojet engine, not turbofan.
16. Did the Phantom ever score a kill while in supersonic flight?
I didn't know the answer, but I believe the Popester on this
16.a. 5 pt. Bonus: If so, with what weapon?
And this.
17.Bonus non-Phantom question. The F-109 was a prototype effort that involved VTOL technology developed in what European country?
I recall the 109 was a Bell Aircraft project that involved a three-letter consortium (like VKW or something) in Germany. The straight winged aircraft had rotating twin jets at each and of its stubby-remember? Or maybe I'm all screwed up and thinking of something else.
18. Giveaway: OTTOMH=Off the top of my head= 5 Pts.
19. In USAF service, the Phantom replaced the Super Sabre in many wings.
_______________ was to the former what Los Angeles was to the latter.
Yes, St.Louis, where it was built. B'Jeezus, they call the place Boeing now, don't they? Pope, you musta' been thinking about submarines by the sound of it.
20. What alphabetic model variant (F4A-Z) letter was used for American services twice, in two unrelated roles?
I ain't giving you guys this one. The USN F-4G Phantom first flew in 1963, and the USAF F-4G Phantom, (Wild-Weasel variant) first flew in 1975. This repeat use of the G designation was a DOD screw-up far as I can see.
Spacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2738 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3889 times:
To get technical, the plane that hot 100,000 feet in the zoom was an F4H-1.
the F-4G (original) program consisted of 12 F-4B's that were used in digital data link trials. Temporary designation only. Just filling in the blanks.
Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 3 Reply 19, posted (10 years 1 month 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3897 times:
Regarding your question about original designations for the F-4A and F-4B. Frankly, I don't think there is an easy answer. I think that the F-4A is the post-1962 designation for the F4H-1. If there was a F4H-2, it likely became the F-4B.
But it's not that simple. The F4H-1 was originally designated AH-1, though this may have been before any flying airframes were produced. Like most programs, there is still an earlier designation you can dust off. The designation I am referring to is F3H-H. This reveals an interesting aspect to the origin of the Phantom. For years I thought it was derived from the F-101 Voodoo, but historically it rather seems to be a close descendant of the F3H Demon.
Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (10 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3883 times:
Moon shot? Uh, oh, this could be fun. Ahh, do you mean the verb moon as in, "The WSO mooned the entire flightline following his last combat mission?" Or do you mean a photograph of the familiar lunar subject as taken by the cameras in an RF-4? I think I saw the former when it happened, but nothing comes to my (already blank) mind when I ponder the latter.
Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 3 Reply 24, posted (10 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3827 times:
Well, one of the first things they do when you enter the military is have you drop your drawers for inspection. Obviously the pilot here was multi-tasking part of his flight physical. Quite efficient, don't you think?
A present-day equivalent image would have me stating "his/her flight physical." Then we would all be clamoring for more image resolution!!
25 Broke: The F-4A was the F4H-1, which could be identified by its low profile canopies. It was an F-4A that set the world speed record. In addition to the low
26 Tomh: Very interesting Broke. I recall seeing photos of the low-profile canopy. Was this type canopy found only on the speed record aircraft, or all F-4As?
27 Broke: Tomh, all F-4A's had the low profile canopies (for some reason 27 airplanes rings a bell). The information I have (an article in Air International) is
28 Spacepope: Close! my sources say 26 F-4A's were used for development, with the production standard being reached on airframe #19. BUT... there were 2 XF4H-1's ma
29 Spacepope: L-188: Now you see why the USAF model had controls in the back seat! T.J.
30 Tomh: Broke, Yeah, I noticed the drift away from the F-107A subject. This forum seems slow most of the time, so its okay with me that we get into a differen
31 Tomh: I embellished by ommision, but hey, it reads better. In reality he hit a bulkhead with the axe. I believe that following this they located the appropr
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2738 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
