F-4G Wild Weasel?

[Egri_komrade]

Hi devs and F-4 enthusiasts!
Recently I became more and more interested in the F-4 family, and to put it mildly the announcment trailer really got me juming in my chair in joy! So here's a question that popped into my head: How differend is the F-4G Wild Weasel from other Phantom variants that were used in air-to-ground missions? Does it have any specialized avionics or systems to use the AGM-45 Shrike? And if it is substantially different enough, can we expect to see it as a different module?

[Northstar98]

AGM-45 is on both the F-4E and F-4G, T.O. 1F-4E-34-1-1 details controls and employment for it.

The main difference is that the F-4G has an emmiter locator in place of the gun (AN/APR-37, later replaced by AN/APR-47) and equipment/controls/indicators/displays for it in the back (EWO) seat.

In addition to the Shrike, it can also fire the AGM-78 Standard ARM and later the AGM-88 HARM (I believe A/B variants).

As for other weapons, AFAIK it can equip Sparrow and Mavericks, as well as drop tanks. Unsure about other weapons.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Northstar98

[upyr1]

The only reason I want to hear there isn't going to be a G is if it is still too classified

[upyr1]

59 minutes ago, Egri_komrade said:

Hi devs and F-4 enthusiasts!
Recently I became more and more interested in the F-4 family, and to put it mildly the announcement trailer really got me jumping in my chair in joy! So here's a question that popped into my head: How different is the F-4G Wild Weasel from other Phantom variants that were used in air-to-ground missions? Does it have any specialized avionics or systems to use the AGM-45 Shrike? And if it is substantially different enough, can we expect to see it as a different module?

They had specialized avionics which is why the guy in back was called an EWO and not a WSO. A normal F-4E firing an ARM would bassically work like it does in the A-4 modules except you would have an RWR display.  You see a spike hear a tone then fire and hope it hits. In the G or any wild weasel for that matter you have an EWO operating specialized avionics which enables him to get the exact range of the radar then the pilot fires when the plane is in the right parameters. The G could carry the AGM-78 STRAM, AGM-45, and as soon as they were available the AGM-88 HARM

[Kev2go]

5 hours ago, upyr1 said:

The only reason I want to hear there isn't going to be a G is if it is still too classified

 

Really would it still be? i dont want to hear how the F4G is too classified when its now obsolete technology, when it been retired this long and when it was replaced by F16C block 50's, and when HTS became integrated. blk 50s became a proper SEAD platform, which of course we have as a module in DCS, and especially when today the F35's EW capability massively suprass those of the F16 , and its potential for SEAD is only limited by not having harms 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Kev2go

[Silver_Dragon]

The main problem has the lack of info about the EW / ECM suite. 

[Northstar98]

16 minutes ago, Kev2go said:

Really would it still be? i dont want to hear how the F4G is too classified when its now obsolete technology, when it been retired this long and when it was replaced by F16C block 50's, and when HTS became integrated. blk 50s became a proper SEAD platform, which of course we have as a module in DCS, and especially when today the F35's EW capability massively suprass those of the F16 , and its potential for SEAD is only limited by not having harms

AFAIK, if you're going into EW, then expect to find much of it classified, apart from maybe general principles (at the very least, documentation is going to be very hard to get hold of), even for platforms long out of service or superseded multiple times.

[Bremspropeller]

Well, this F-4G shouldn't be any hassle at all...

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/remembering-u-s-navy-f-4g-phantom-perform-automatic-carrier-landings/

 

No, really. There was an F-4G before the F-4G.

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Kev2go said:

 

Really would it still be? i dont want to hear how the F4G is too classified when its now obsolete technology, when it been retired this long and when it was replaced by F16C block 50's, and when HTS became integrated. blk 50s became a proper SEAD platform, which of course we have as a module in DCS, and especially when today the F35's EW capability massively suprass those of the F16 , and its potential for SEAD is only limited by not having harms 

 

 

 

 

 

I am not saying that it is too classified I am just saying if the documents are available then we should get it. It might be. An EWO often had to manually identify a radar to get the range. I believe you often had to literally listen to it. While that is done by a computer in the F-35 and f-16c. So the problem is whether or not we need useful information

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by upyr1

[upyr1]

39 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

Well, this F-4G shouldn't be any hassle at all...

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/remembering-u-s-navy-f-4g-phantom-perform-automatic-carrier-landings/

 

No, really. There was an F-4G before the F-4G.

If I were heatblur I would do that g as part of the Navy line and announce it April 1.

43 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

AFAIK, if you're going into EW, then expect to find much of it classified, apart from maybe general principles (at the very least, documentation is going to be very hard to get hold of), even for platforms long out of service or superseded multiple times.

At most I expect to see an ai weasel 

[mkellytx]

4 hours ago, Kev2go said:

 

Really would it still be? i dont want to hear how the F4G is too classified when its now obsolete technology, when it been retired this long and when it was replaced by F16C block 50's, and when HTS became integrated. blk 50s became a proper SEAD platform, which of course we have as a module in DCS, and especially when today the F35's EW capability massively suprass those of the F16 , and its potential for SEAD is only limited by not having harms 

Kev, it very well could be.  The computers are as you say obsolete, but the technique and execution for how they derived an emitter's position very well may/are still used in platforms today.  If they were to fully declassify the G, folks might be able to figure out how good those other currently used systems are.  The way the G and the HTS work are different, HTS is less sensitive (classification wise), hence we have it modeled.  Furthermore, early implementations of HTS were far less capable than the G, it took a while before the Blk 50 matched the airframe it replaced.  Back when I was in the business the EW types were pretty squirrely and liked to spend their days in the vault.

Now, if they could get the info I'd love to get a G as much as the next guy