It feels like this is be coming an issue as we push in to some types that people have wanted for a while. The Cobra is another great example, I would love to see a Cobra but how do you pick between a F and a W model. With the assets in the game currently either would fit well. Same with the Phantom.
I think the choice has been made quite some time ago and we can argue till we’re blue in the face but those arguments are nothing compared to the vagaries of economics and availability.
I think if the do the C version of the F4 then a B version wouldn’t be out of the question or wouldn’t be to much more difficult.
If they do the E version though, I think we can rule out other versions as the E had some significant upgrades, most notably an internal 20mm gun
One thing is certain. Whichever they announce will trigger the pitchforks of an angry mob.
True.
But even if they announced all F-4 versions, the mob would fight over which one they got first…
My dad flew the C, D, and E in combat, and by far preferred the E. So I would naturally be thrilled to fly the E. The E also could carry LGBs and were by far the most numerous built, 1370. But I love flying carrier ops and wouldn’t be disappointed with an F-4J either. It was Cunningham and Driscoll’s mount. I believe that I heard Dan Pedersen (Top Gun founder) mention that the F-4S was probably the best Phantom, since it had smokeless engines, leading edge slats, and no gun. But it didn’t arrive until '77, so after Vietnam. He said that the gun just slowed the turn rate because it was way out under the nose.
I agree with you all, and I think the E is the most likely to be the one since it’s the one that they’ve already been working on. I was just making the point that with some skins and some suspension of disbelief, the B can stand in for quite a few users (USN, USAF, USMC, RN, South Korea, Iran). But then again, for foreign users the E is actually the most common base model and was the most produced variant… I’d be happy to get any model of the Phantom!
-E covers about 2 dozen operating coalitions,
However, when then detached BST started the -E, there wasn’t a big carrier ops platform.
Now that we have SC and the Forrestal, there might be a case to do both.
F-4E and a navy Version with similar specs, but that would also mean gun pods.
An E and a J would rock.
I think Naval Ops are too Big of a Deal in DCS Now where they just Can Not Skip a Phantom with a hook.
B and C wouldn’t be bad either to be honest.
DCS: F-4 Alphabet Soup
Slap a USMC Livery on it, and no one will be the wiser
I’ve always been confused by claims of certain Phantoms not being carrier capable. I thought all of them had hooks, bridle attachment points, and beefy landing gear regardless of variant? Even the Japanese ones that recently retired had those attachments.
I think its also a case of lower pressure tires for the land based Phantom, not sure if they’d survive many carrier touchdowns though much nicer on a runway…
Also the nose gear on an F-4E is very different to the carrier variants, I suspect the carrier variants sat higher at the nose to take the correct angle of attack over the end of the catapult (I know I’ve read that was the case for the UK Phantom)
different avionics
I kinda wish there was a purpose for Recon in DCS (USMC used the RF-4B which with a good skin an F-4E could pass as) … something like a recon plane spotting an enemy ground unit shows it on the map for everyone despite fog of war or something?
I suppose I could do that through scripting…
Avionics would only matter for CASE III (ICLS and Magic Carpet or equivalent). For CASE I and II all you need is a TACAN.
I did some digging and all USAF F-4s had the same hook, same nose strut extension for cat launches, but the USAF birds had lower tire pressure (which Torc mentioned) not rated for deck landings and no bridle attachment points. Inflate the tires more and they could land, but they wouldn’t be able to launch unless maintenance stole some bridle hooks off another jet.