Forum: Military Aircraft of the Cold War

madrat wrote:

No, an F.3! No sarcasm detector?

I suspected sarcasm, but I didn't recognize any of the other systems you mentioned, so I have no idea how serious you were being.
And I still don't know what you mean by "F.3".
I'm not the professional that many of the other people on this sight are.

F-16.net Sponsor

Last edited by madrat on Jun 23, 2012 - 02:42 PM; edited 1 time in total

The UK version of the Tornado, an interceptor. It was smaller than the F-4, used Sky Flash AAMs (aim-7 sparrow derivative), had a BK27 cannon, long range radar, and swingwings. Basically I was tongue in cheek saying take the guts of the Tornado interceptor and put it into the theoretical Phantom. The Tornado was planned to use EJ200 (Eurofighter Typhoon engine) in a future upgrade, but budgets never allowed it. Since the Spey-powered F-4 was using as much UK built kit as possible I was extrapolating the appropriateness of EJ200.

A best of post on the F-4
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost ... ostcount=3

I think all the avionics and cockpit upgrades are a no brainer. That's probably the easiest part to take care of. Israel, Germany, Greece, Turkey and Japan have all undergone their own upgrade programs, successfully. Still can't figure out why Egypt and South Korea kept their birds stock. The one thing users haven't really improved on is raw performance. I'd say at this point any engine that fits and offers significantly more thrust is an improvement over the J79. An off the shelf solution would probably be better than the PW1120. Additionally, I was thinking that upgrading the flight control system would be WAY too costly.

Interesting article.

http://aviationtrivia.blogspot.de/2012/ ... antom.html

Wow... that J79 is quite the peice of work.

Forum: Military Aircraft of the Cold War

Theoretical F-4 Phantom Upgrades