SgtPappy

Yes I honestly count myself so lucky that the first Phantom coming out is precisely my favourite version, and I feel for our Navy fans. I know for a fact there will be times I'm going to be hurting to use that pulse Doppler goodness that the F-4J or S would bring. Let's hope that the F-4E and early F-14A RWR rework cuts down the amount of work needed to get the USN Phantoms out as soon as possible. That said, you bet your butt I'm going to try a takeoff in the F-4E from the very stern of the boat...

Don't worry, one day we'll have a Navy F-4 (I hope for the J!) and then pretty much everyone will be happy. And again, someone made a mod for the F-15 to use its tailhook for carrier landings, so I feel like eventually someone will make a mod of a carrier-launched F-4E though I feel that may hurt my brain to look at

I empathize with how you feel. It doesn't feel great when you just want to put something out there and it feels like someone steps on it. I think we've all been there at some point. That said, I would urge you to look again at the responses, as I can only see maybe 1 that could be conceived as aggressive - and that's a stretch. The rest appeared to be personal preferences. Meanwhile your tone in the replying posts was passive aggressive and also blanketly labeled the other responses as "typical naysays" who prioritized "purism over playability" followed by sarcasm which, let's be honest, could also be construed as overly-aggressively defensive. Maybe it isn't but then neither are the original responses which prompted your rebuttals. Can't be both ways. I can't say I'm innocent of this either. Fact of the matter is, we are one community that bickers form time to time but we might need to give each other a tad more benefit of the doubt to support our hobby.

That's a pretty good prank. I guess TAGM's only have working seekers and nothing else.

I think I should also be mentioned that a lot later in the US' involvement in Vietnam in 1972, the USAF was more able to maintain and repair the missiles. Steve Ritchie was able to pick some of the best taken care of AIM-7E's and managed to get a pretty high kill ratio with them.

What did you expect exactly from a flight simulation that strives for realism? It's one thing to ask and that's totally fair... it's another to come to literally one of two high-fidelty combat simulation communities and then be salty when hearing what you don't want to hear. Then on top of it, act like you're entitled for the developer to develop the uneducated guess of two lines of code it would take to make the feature. If it's that easy, make the mod yourself.

Agreed but it's such a mystery, I cant help but to wonder what's true! At least from a RWR perspective.

I'm quite excited to see what is in store with the APR-36/37 and its limitations. The Israelis were apparently unable to detect CW launch signals from the SARH SA-6, which is odd since I thought that X-band signal was right in the range of the stock APR-36/37. So I wonder if we'll have similar problems with the SA-6 and more modern systems in the game. Of course I might also be missing something or taking that historical tid bit out of context... not much info on what they did to solve the issue within the two days of the start of the Yom Kippur war.

One special thing that F-4D's used and then Rivet Haste F-4E's was Combat Tree, to IFF without the use of radar. I know the USN got them too but I wonder if they had them in time to use them while the US was in Vietnam.

You've already accused me of trying to act superior. You're not seeing that you have already crossed a line - the one where your posts aren't feedback anymore. This is feedback, polite and constructive: "I prefer the F-4J/S and would have liked it to be the first variant." Ok, now the devs know. They'll take note of those who share the sentiment - as well as those who do not. Now going into almost every thread and saying things like "the F-4E is not the right choice" or that it's a bad plane, ignoring its history, ignoring everyone else's proof of its legitimacy for some reason over and over is not constructive. It's long crossed that line. Finally, yes the F-4 started out as a Navy jet. It ended up as a mean, double ugly-looking bomb truck which ALSO performed well, dropped more bombs and shot down more planes than its Naval counterparts.. But if your argument is "lots of people see it as a Navy jet" there are more people all over the world who see their F-4E as their definitive Phantom - USAF personnel and their families, Israelis, Turkish, Japanese, Iranian and Greek. These are points you have never once addressed. Why do their opinions not matter in comparison to yours?

You know why you don't see me popping into forums regularly (regularly being the key word here) of planes I dont like and complaining in every thread? Same reason I wouldn't go to every dog show complaining to everyone that cats are superior. There are people who prefer the USN phantom and have managed to state as much respectfully with a few posts. Note that I've mentioned in all our interactions that I never believed the E to be superior. Just different as valid a choice; better at some things and worse at others. I absolutely adore the F-4J. You're the one touting the E is the wrong choice, in several threads. You've made your point. Everyone knows you loath the E. You've never once acknowledged a single good thing about it, you've exaggerated its deficiencies. You've shown no empathy. While you're welcome to express this opinion as many times you like (and even that's being generous), I'm just as allowed to point it out when your argument becomes illogical, an unnecessary burden, the proverbial party pooping, etc. It's painfully obvious that the frequency and nature of your posts go beyond expressing your preference and making that clear to the devs. It's not so different than that other guy who complains about the F-14 in every thread on the F-14 forum... If you're making it known to everyone that you really don't like the party, someone will eventually ask you why you're even in attendance.

No there are only two, the USAF F-4E with upgrades up to 1974, and the USAF DMAS F-4E. Both will have slats. The F-4 as it entered service with the USN was marketed as being able to carry lots of bombs. If being a bomb truck is so bad, the F-4J/S would never have been upgraded to bomb through clouds because that would be an unholy endeavor by your definition. Just treat the F-4E and the USN F-4's as totally different planes. Like an F-15 and an F-16. Straight up just different planes. Try taking this pill 3 times a day (with food, of course). Disclaimer: side effects may include in you leaving this forum alone instead of coming in primarily to poop on this module while advertising your favourite version as superior. Call your doctor if you're feeling nauseous, or if you're still salty once a USN F-4 releases that doesn't match the ranges of BuNo's you prefer.

Awesome work, that you and your team do! Hopefully one day I'll get a chance to visit.

I'll have to check my tracks for this one but for me it seems to happen if I fly a mission (ML or SP, doesn't matter) in one plane and then switch to the F-14. Then at some point, it freezes.. sometimes at spawn but sometimes in the air. I've been shy about posting it because it doesn't always happen and I can't reproduce the conditions reliably.

Yikes that's some next level mental gymnastics needed for this amount of cope

The idea that the AIM-7M needs monopulse guidance is quoted a lot in books so maybe its sort of just a pervasive fallacy now. Juts like how some books still quote the equal transit bull crap to explain lift... Although I think that's far worse.

The distinction is that (and correct me if I'm wrong) the MiG-21bis was marketed as not being the original version that entered service in 1972, since so many of its weapons are from after that time period. The F-4E we are getting has as mentioned by Cobra will be from the 1974 time period incorporating modifications from that time and earlier. I'm betting the DMAS F-4E from the late 70s/early 80s will have the AIM-7F available but I suppose we'll have to just wait (hopefully not long) and see. Unrelated tangent: How fun would it be to release the Phantom on Halloween??

With the AIM-7F reaching IOC in 1975 or so and the first F-4E that we are getting is from 1974, I don't think we would get the AIM-7F. It's probably going to show up with the later F-4E with DMAS which may also get AIM-9L's. Just a guess.

As mentioned by Quid, the -1 performance manual indicates that the slatted F-4E with 4x AIM-7Es can technically pass Mach 2 - if just barely around 36,000'. But technicalities this subtle aren't seen in practice especially since this was never really a configuration that was flown with. With all 8 missiles, or similar loadouts, the slatted F-4E would not pass Mach 2. It was obvious the previous version was faster, could fly higher and climbed better but that's the trade off for much better handling and turning capabilities. This explains why the quoted excerpt by Kermit states the less than Mach 2 performance. It would be interesting to see a version without slats like an F-4J so we get two very different kinds of F-4 which we would fly very differently for BFM.

But if you never watch them, how do you know they're inaccurate?? Jokes aside, I was excited to have seen a new video about our phabulous Phantom but then there was so much wrong with the video. It's one thing to miss some information but somehow he filled those missing gaps with just random, made up script. Where did he get this information from? I've seen his MiG-31 video and another plane and both others were filled with incorrect "facts". Adding to the giant list above, he also mentions that the Army called the F-4 the F-110 but it was the air force. And almost nothing was mentioned again about the USAF save for a 5 second line about Handley's supersonic gun kill. No shade on you though, OP. If you want a recent video about the F-4 of better quality, there's this one from the Wings over the Rockies museum in Colorado:

Thank you again for these improvements! I'm very excited to try using the AIM-54C again.

The good thing about the D model is that there were so many subvariants just like many other F-4's. Some versions had no chin pod, many did not have the ARN-101, etc. It might be possible to model a version that has all its information available.

Thank you diesel thunder! I watched this yesterday and I'm so incredibly jealous of the work you get to do. Excited to see more of this as we get closer to the module's release.

I somewhat agree, I only chose A2A kills because it's what I mostly remembered off the top of my head. However it's still a part of combat action so it can't be ignored. And if you take the sorties flown, tonnage dropped, weapons fired, A2G kills etc., the F-4D/E still take the cake so they have seen more combat than their navy counterparts by almost every definition. I'm sure the day will be sweet when the F-4B/J will fly along side the E and we can simulate Navy-AF rivalry in real time online As for the F-14A-GR-95, I was under the impression that HB explicitly said that the F-4E would not take resources away and that their development went hand in hand.

So much salt these days (I sort of get it because I'm about to let loose my own salt bags)... we get you prefer something else, that's fine and the USN birds are great. But you don't really have to poop on everyone else's parade just because you're not getting exactly what you want as if its an affront to civilized society. But screw it, this is annoying, I'm projecting and I don't care so I'll bite. Here are some facts: F-4B kills: 12 confirmed during the Vietnam War. Flown by the US. F-4J kills: 20 confirmed during the Vietnam War. Flown by the US and UK Awesome stuff, worthy aircraft. However: F-4D: 45 kills confirmed during the Vietnam War. Further unknown amount with Iran. Flown by the US, Spain, Iran, RoK (South Korea). F-4E: 23 kills confirmed during the Vietnam War. 116 or so confirmed kills during the War of Attrition, October/Yom Kippur War and 1982 Lebanon War.. Further unknown amount with Iran. Flown US, Israel, Iran, RoK (South Korea), Greece, Turkey. Most numerous version made. Counterarguments: 1) Keep in mind not everyone on DCS is from the US. The F-4E was the original/only model for a lot of these countries. If this isn't war-proven, I don't know what is. 2) Just because it can drop LGB's somehow makes it the same experience as an F-16CJ? Go fly Korea or WW2 if you want something completely different. The Vietnam jets are inherently going to be more like modern jets than those planes. An honest look at the F-4E's smart weapon capabilities shows that it is literally the in-between evolutionary step in weapons employment between the Korean-war era jets and the modern whizz-bang auto tracking targeting system-equipped modern fighters. That's an untouched sector in flight simulation. The F-4B delivery systems were almost the same from the end-user perspective as the F-86's, MiG-21bis or F-5's we have now... New experiences, you said? 3) If you want the original for immersion, I get it. I'd prefer a 1980s F-15A instead of the F-15E but it just makes sense that a version more countries have flown is being made. It appeals to more people and can always be restricted in many ways. You can't upgrade a variant in the game.. So take one second and see above why the F-4E makes sense. It's not the RIGHT choice, it's just a logical one. The F-4B, J and S are also cool choices and they're not wrong but you have to be fooling yourself if you don't see the merit as to why the E was chosen first. The saddest part is that the Navy versions are planned and people will STILL be unhappy. Rant over. Have at me.