Jump to content

Phantom vs XXX


divinee

Recommended Posts

I created this topic to compare different F-4 versions to different aircrafts. The main point is to learn how to fly phantom against various enemy aircrafts. 

This topic will be a continuation from the page 8 and 9 discussion of the "Announcing the F-4 Phantom for DCS World!" @BIGNEWY @NineLine maybe you can move those posts here if possible?

 

Edit: We don't want to start to argue which aircraft is better and please keep the discussion civil.


Edited by divinee

http://dcsfinland.fi/

Dcs: F/A-18C, F-16C, F-14, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, MiG-21bis, M2000C, C-101, AJS-37, F-5, MF1, Bf-109K4, AH-64, UH-1, Ka-50, Mi-24, FC3, SC

System: i5-13600k@P58,58,57,57,56,56/E45 Asus TUF 3080Ti OC 12gb, 64gb DDR5 5600cl32, HP Reverb G2, Virpil WarBrD, Warthog throttle with deltasim slew, MFG Crosswind, DIY ”UFC”, 3x TM MFD’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Continuing from the other thread, the F-4J should certainly turn worse than the slatted F-4E. Unfortunately I don't think there are performance charts readily available for it nor the F-4D but I have found a couple of things (hopefully reputable) that should illustrate how much the slats improved things subsonically.

The information below comes from a Have Drill summary pdf I found and the F-4D charts below are pretty close to the hard-wing F-4E turn charts in TO 1F-4C-1. The D is a bit better because it's a lot lighter than the F-4E in the TO charts. Because they seem to be pretty close, I'd wager the F-4J (which is aerodynamically similar to the D and weighs similarly to the E) is not far off. See below.

F-4D vs MiG-17 at 20,000 ft from Have Drill Summary

MiG-17 vs F-4 turn rates.png

 

Hard wing F-4E turn performance

hard wing F-4E turn performance.png

 

Below are turn rate plots (in addition to info from their Vn diagrams for instantaneous turn rates) for the hard wing and slatted F-4E which have been directly taken from the TO manuals and overlaid. The difference in subsonic maneuverability is quite impressive. Note: Based on the weight charts at the top of the TO's, I realized that both hard and slatted wing F-4E charts (with AIM-7's only) have ~60% fuel.

Hard vs Slatted wing F-4E overlay

F-4E hard vs slatted wing EM diagram.png


Edited by SgtPappy
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, SgtPappy said:

Continuing from the other thread, the F-4J should certainly turn worse than the slatted F-4E. Unfortunately I don't think there are performance charts readily available for it nor the F-4D but I have found a couple of things (hopefully reputable) that should illustrate how much the slats improved things subsonically.

The information below comes from a Have Drill summary pdf I found and the F-4D charts below are pretty close to the hard-wing F-4E turn charts in TO 1F-4C-1. The D is a bit better because it's a lot lighter than the F-4E in the TO charts. Because they seem to be pretty close, I'd wager the F-4J (which is aerodynamically similar to the D and weighs similarly to the E) is not far off. See below.

F-4D vs MiG-17 at 20,000 ft from Have Drill Summary

MiG-17 vs F-4 turn rates.png

 

Hard wing F-4E turn performance

hard wing F-4E turn performance.png

 

Below are turn rate plots (in addition to info from their Vn diagrams for instantaneous turn rates) for the hard wing and slatted F-4E which have been directly taken from the TO manuals and overlaid. The difference in subsonic maneuverability is quite impressive. Note: Based on the weight charts at the top of the TO's, I realized that both hard and slatted wing F-4E charts (with AIM-7's only) have ~60% fuel.

Hard vs Slatted wing F-4E overlay

F-4E hard vs slatted wing EM diagram.png

 

Looks like that my charts are from the slatted version 🤔

F4E-sustained.JPG

http://dcsfinland.fi/

Dcs: F/A-18C, F-16C, F-14, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, MiG-21bis, M2000C, C-101, AJS-37, F-5, MF1, Bf-109K4, AH-64, UH-1, Ka-50, Mi-24, FC3, SC

System: i5-13600k@P58,58,57,57,56,56/E45 Asus TUF 3080Ti OC 12gb, 64gb DDR5 5600cl32, HP Reverb G2, Virpil WarBrD, Warthog throttle with deltasim slew, MFG Crosswind, DIY ”UFC”, 3x TM MFD’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F-4J sustained turns at 37.5k pounds, lighter but also draggier loadout with sidewinders. With sidewinders mounted you have to pay attention to the G limit as for example at sea level you can sustain a regime that will overstress the pylons / airframe (and the limit decreases significantly at higher fuel loads/gross weight). This also applies to the F-4E if you mount sidewinders.


F-4J sustained turn.png


Edited by SuperEtendard
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting charts. The hard wing jets really were not agile, these numbers are not too far off those of a relatively lightweight F-104 (with the caveat that charts for that aircraft aren't straight EM diagrams so you need to interpret and/or extrapolate a lot). The improvement with the slats is really impressive too.

It actually makes me hope we will get a hard wing variant of some type, at some point, because it looks like the experience of flying that vs a slatted jet would be very very different.


Edited by TLTeo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, SuperEtendard said:

F-4J sustained turns at 37.5k pounds, lighter but also draggier loadout with sidewinders. With sidewinders mounted you have to pay attention to the G limit as for example at sea level you can sustain a regime that will overstress the pylons / airframe (and the limit decreases significantly at higher fuel loads/gross weight). This also applies to the F-4E if you mount sidewinders.


F-4J sustained turn.png

 

I have noticed that the effect of drag of the sidewinders or falcons in the USAF manuals tends to not be a huge driver for the peak STR more so than weight. 

That said, I did not expect for a light, hard wing F-4J to even compete with a loaded, slatted F-4E but here we see the F-4J has a tiny advantage. Chances are with the 4500 lbs more weight to match the fuel load %, the advantage would go back to the slatted E but by not as much as I had once thought. 

Do you have a link to these plots? Or do you have more plots to share at a different weight for the F-4J? I've been looking everywhere for the F-4J's performance info.

EDIT: Upon further inspection, it appears the F-4J manual shows a higher max. G structural limit (ignoring the AIM-9's) at 8.5 G until Mach = 0.7, linearly decreasing to 6.5 G at Mach = 1.05. The F-4E plot at 42,777 lbs with four sparrows has a 7.5 G limit until Mach 0.7, linearly decreasing to 5.8 G at Mach =1.05. However the relative subsonic performance between the two planes' graphs is nearly identical at SL. Taking some points on the mostly linear sustained acceleration plots, both the slatted F-4E and this F-4J sustain 7 G at a minimum Mach ~=0.77 and 4.2 G at Mach ~=0.5. At higher altitudes and Mach number, the light F-4J starts to come out ahead especially supersonic where the slats are dead weight/drag. It will sustain 6.2 G max at 10 kft at Mach ~=0.94 where the F-4E with more fuel load will sustain 5.8 G at the same altitude at a slightly lower Mach resulting in a very, very small turn rate advantage for the light J here.

Said another way, the slats do have quite the effect since the F-4J with 4x4 full missiles needs to be very light with next to no fuel (~25%) to match a slatted F-4E at 60% fuel with four sparrows in sustained turn performance.  


Edited by SgtPappy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also would be interesting to see how S compares to these with slats and more powerfull engines.

  • Like 1

http://dcsfinland.fi/

Dcs: F/A-18C, F-16C, F-14, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, MiG-21bis, M2000C, C-101, AJS-37, F-5, MF1, Bf-109K4, AH-64, UH-1, Ka-50, Mi-24, FC3, SC

System: i5-13600k@P58,58,57,57,56,56/E45 Asus TUF 3080Ti OC 12gb, 64gb DDR5 5600cl32, HP Reverb G2, Virpil WarBrD, Warthog throttle with deltasim slew, MFG Crosswind, DIY ”UFC”, 3x TM MFD’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The E, J and S motors had virtually the same thrust. The main difference between early and late models was smokeless combustion on the later models after a mod to the burner-cans. That might have raised EGT a little, but I don't think you'll see significant thrust changes from that. Tactically, that's a lot more decisive, as the smoke on the unmodded J79s was pretty bad and allowed for V-ID at comparatively long range (for a contemporary foe that was usually much smaller in size and didn't smoke) and you could spot power-changes (especially into and out of A/B)

For a comparison check about 02:00 and following.
 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

The E, J and S motors had virtually the same thrust. The main difference between early and late models was smokeless combustion on the later models after a mod to the burner-cans. That might have raised EGT a little, but I don't think you'll see significant thrust changes from that. Tactically, that's a lot more decisive, as the smoke on the unmodded J79s was pretty bad and allowed for V-ID at comparatively long range (for a contemporary foe that was usually much smaller in size and didn't smoke) and you could spot power-changes (especially into and out of A/B)

For a comparison check about 02:00 and following.
 

 

Some pilots have mentioned that they would put one engine to idle and the other to min burner to minimize the smoke. I would assume if one of the F-4's we're getting smokes, it will be the earlier block Phantom and we'll have to remember to do the same thing if we really want to avoid being detected. 

Because I'm insane, a part of me hopes they both smoke but it would make sense to have the later one smokeless since that modification came around ~1975 or so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

The E, J and S motors had virtually the same thrust. The main difference between early and late models was smokeless combustion on the later models after a mod to the burner-cans. That might have raised EGT a little, but I don't think you'll see significant thrust changes from that. Tactically, that's a lot more decisive, as the smoke on the unmodded J79s was pretty bad and allowed for V-ID at comparatively long range (for a contemporary foe that was usually much smaller in size and didn't smoke) and you could spot power-changes (especially into and out of A/B)

For a comparison check about 02:00 and following.
 

 

John Kerr states in the fighter pilot podcast that S had the most powerfull engines with over 18000lb of thrust. I’m not sure about the actual number what he says. Of course it’s from his memory and should be treated like as it is but usually there is some point in those statements. I’ve been trying to find material from the late years of S but seems like the documentation is quite limited.


Edited by divinee
Few typos
  • Like 1

http://dcsfinland.fi/

Dcs: F/A-18C, F-16C, F-14, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, MiG-21bis, M2000C, C-101, AJS-37, F-5, MF1, Bf-109K4, AH-64, UH-1, Ka-50, Mi-24, FC3, SC

System: i5-13600k@P58,58,57,57,56,56/E45 Asus TUF 3080Ti OC 12gb, 64gb DDR5 5600cl32, HP Reverb G2, Virpil WarBrD, Warthog throttle with deltasim slew, MFG Crosswind, DIY ”UFC”, 3x TM MFD’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SgtPappy said:

Some pilots have mentioned that they would put one engine to idle and the other to min burner to minimize the smoke. I would assume if one of the F-4's we're getting smokes, it will be the earlier block Phantom and we'll have to remember to do the same thing if we really want to avoid being detected. 

Because I'm insane, a part of me hopes they both smoke but it would make sense to have the later one smokeless since that modification came around ~1975 or so. 

On FGR2 we would just go to min burner to clean up, stops a visual pick up. Not much point splitting throttles. Spey was A LOT cleaner than J-79’s, but would still give a trail, min burner under about 10 - 15 miles of a foe would deny the foe that telltale sign.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So on the topic, what would ne the recommended tactics with E-phantom against the roughly comparable jets like F1, Mig-19, Mig-21Bis, Mig-23?


Edited by divinee

http://dcsfinland.fi/

Dcs: F/A-18C, F-16C, F-14, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, MiG-21bis, M2000C, C-101, AJS-37, F-5, MF1, Bf-109K4, AH-64, UH-1, Ka-50, Mi-24, FC3, SC

System: i5-13600k@P58,58,57,57,56,56/E45 Asus TUF 3080Ti OC 12gb, 64gb DDR5 5600cl32, HP Reverb G2, Virpil WarBrD, Warthog throttle with deltasim slew, MFG Crosswind, DIY ”UFC”, 3x TM MFD’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, divinee said:

So on the topic, what would ne the recommended tactics with E-phantom against the roughly comparable jets like F1, Mig-19, Mig-21Bis, Mig-23?

 

Personally, having never jousted with the MiG-19, nor the MiG-21, I can’t speak for those. The Mig-23ML with the Czech Air Force I have had ‘playtime’ with whilst in the FGR2.
The MiG-23 was at its best with the wings at 45*, and the speeds not below 450kts. Level accel rates were blistering. Looping manoeuvres were large, with high speed entry making for a large height change.

When the speed dropped and the wings came forward - the MiG was an ace maker. Just not for the MiG pilot.

It tended to suffer instability at lower airspeeds, and mixed with the horrendous view from the cockpit, was limited in options. Climbing scissors could easily flush the MiG, and if he lost sight it was easy to go out of phase and take him. Descending scissors were essentially the same, as the MiG would struggle to limit speed gain, and would sail ahead - altitude allowing anyway. In the flat was just as easy.
However, any mistakes by the F-4 would be capitalised upon quickly, the MiG can pile on the knots rapidly and extend if the F-4 is gun only, any missile still onboard makes this risky for the MiG.

The relatively slim profile of the MiG can be used to its advantage, as compared to the bulk of the F-4, the MiG can be difficult to acquire visually from 10 down to about 5NM. 

If (IF!) the MiG survives a sparrow shot, then sidewinders from the rear should be easy to attain, and if all AAM’s are expended, scissoring can flush the MiG and provide a relatively easily attainable gun solution.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 2

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, G.J.S said:

Personally, having never jousted with the MiG-19, nor the MiG-21, I can’t speak for those. The Mig-23ML with the Czech Air Force I have had ‘playtime’ with whilst in the FGR2.
The MiG-23 was at its best with the wings at 45*, and the speeds not below 450kts. Level accel rates were blistering. Looping manoeuvres were large, with high speed entry making for a large height change.

When the speed dropped and the wings came forward - the MiG was an ace maker. Just not for the MiG pilot.

It tended to suffer instability at lower airspeeds, and mixed with the horrendous view from the cockpit, was limited in options. Climbing scissors could easily flush the MiG, and if he lost sight it was easy to go out of phase and take him. Descending scissors were essentially the same, as the MiG would struggle to limit speed gain, and would sail ahead - altitude allowing anyway. In the flat was just as easy.
However, any mistakes by the F-4 would be capitalised upon quickly, the MiG can pile on the knots rapidly and extend if the F-4 is gun only, any missile still onboard makes this risky for the MiG.

The relatively slim profile of the MiG can be used to its advantage, as compared to the bulk of the F-4, the MiG can be difficult to acquire visually from 10 down to about 5NM. 

If (IF!) the MiG survives a sparrow shot, then sidewinders from the rear should be easy to attain, and if all AAM’s are expended, scissoring can flush the MiG and provide a relatively easily attainable gun solution.

Thanks for the post! It’s always interesting to read real life experiences. I hope you have lots of more interesenting stories about flying phantom 👍

http://dcsfinland.fi/

Dcs: F/A-18C, F-16C, F-14, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, MiG-21bis, M2000C, C-101, AJS-37, F-5, MF1, Bf-109K4, AH-64, UH-1, Ka-50, Mi-24, FC3, SC

System: i5-13600k@P58,58,57,57,56,56/E45 Asus TUF 3080Ti OC 12gb, 64gb DDR5 5600cl32, HP Reverb G2, Virpil WarBrD, Warthog throttle with deltasim slew, MFG Crosswind, DIY ”UFC”, 3x TM MFD’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, G.J.S said:

On FGR2 we would just go to min burner to clean up, stops a visual pick up. Not much point splitting throttles. Spey was A LOT cleaner than J-79’s, but would still give a trail, min burner under about 10 - 15 miles of a foe would deny the foe that telltale sign.

This is great to hear. In a pinch it's what I'll do since I only have a single throttle. Did you ever deploy the speed brake in these instances to keep from overspeeding or maybe that wasn't really a problem?

4 hours ago, G.J.S said:

Personally, having never jousted with the MiG-19, nor the MiG-21, I can’t speak for those. The Mig-23ML with the Czech Air Force I have had ‘playtime’ with whilst in the FGR2.
The MiG-23 was at its best with the wings at 45*, and the speeds not below 450kts. Level accel rates were blistering. Looping manoeuvres were large, with high speed entry making for a large height change.

When the speed dropped and the wings came forward - the MiG was an ace maker. Just not for the MiG pilot.

It tended to suffer instability at lower airspeeds, and mixed with the horrendous view from the cockpit, was limited in options. Climbing scissors could easily flush the MiG, and if he lost sight it was easy to go out of phase and take him. Descending scissors were essentially the same, as the MiG would struggle to limit speed gain, and would sail ahead - altitude allowing anyway. In the flat was just as easy.
However, any mistakes by the F-4 would be capitalised upon quickly, the MiG can pile on the knots rapidly and extend if the F-4 is gun only, any missile still onboard makes this risky for the MiG.

The relatively slim profile of the MiG can be used to its advantage, as compared to the bulk of the F-4, the MiG can be difficult to acquire visually from 10 down to about 5NM. 

If (IF!) the MiG survives a sparrow shot, then sidewinders from the rear should be easy to attain, and if all AAM’s are expended, scissoring can flush the MiG and provide a relatively easily attainable gun solution.

Thank you for this great info, makes me feel a lot better about facing the more advanced MiGs in the future. Which aircraft/pilot combinations give you the toughest time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SgtPappy said:

This is great to hear. In a pinch it's what I'll do since I only have a single throttle. Did you ever deploy the speed brake in these instances to keep from overspeeding or maybe that wasn't really a problem?

Air brakes only as-and-when, typically if I misjudged the oppo’s speed and I came in a little “too hot”! 

1 hour ago, SgtPappy said:

Thank you for this great info, makes me feel a lot better about facing the more advanced MiGs in the future. Which aircraft/pilot combinations give you the toughest time?

Biggest (WVR) headaches came from Buccaneer - V fast/V low and seemingly (gun) camera shy. Could never get a solution on them if they were piling on the coals, F-111 for similar reasons.
F-15A and F-16 were just painful - if you lost tally on them for 1 second in a furball,  they inevitably were directly behind! Never went against an F-18, so cannot comment on those.

Mirage when at altitude seemed to defy all physics - absolute P.I.T.A!

F-14 seemed to be dependent on the “meat behind the stick”. Have danced with one that made my eyes water, and caught another that must have been quite a wake up call to that particular crew, as in “don’t discount the old machine, ‘cause it’ll spank you”. They were royally spanked. :thumbup:

Have never tangled with a MiG-21, so cannot state anything there, but they were reportedly more of a threat than the MiG-23 (23 was supposedly the successor for the 21).

MiG-29s etc, ive only seen at air shows, but they certainly appear quite spicy!


Edited by G.J.S
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, G.J.S said:

Personally, having never jousted with the MiG-19, nor the MiG-21, I can’t speak for those.

When the speed dropped and the wings came forward - the MiG was an ace maker. Just not for the MiG pilot.

LOL, that’s funny (and true)!

A5D12B34-61AC-4E7E-AD1B-0D91E5B9C777.jpeg

CAF37CB3-2813-47E3-B175-38C603F41BFD.jpeg

  • Like 6

Viewpoints are my own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Victory205 said:

LOL, that’s funny (and true)!

A5D12B34-61AC-4E7E-AD1B-0D91E5B9C777.jpeg

CAF37CB3-2813-47E3-B175-38C603F41BFD.jpeg

Egyptian film stars? Nice :thumbup:


Edited by G.J.S

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of Bright Star. We were supposed to fight a pair of 21’s, and 19’s showed up, the only one’s we saw. The video is kind of funny when I realized that they were 19’s, but too large to upload.

It turned into a fun conversation point at Red Flag later, when my section got into trouble and had to see the Red Flag Commander (Col John Madden) after the mass debrief. The Col had two Mig 19 kills in Viet Nam.

Col Madden had a painting of his kills on the wall behind him when we reported for our discipline. I saw the Mig 19, and I used our engagement (same pilots as over Egypt) to change the subject. He was very, very cool to us, and understood that the Navy operated a bit differently than the USAF. His calling us out in the mass debrief was to send a message, he wasn’t actually mad. Our “chewing out” turned into a long fighter pilot bull session about Mig 19’s, the F4, and his experiences in Viet Nam while the next crew awaiting a tongue lashing waited outside his office. What those guys went through is worthy of our respect.

I’ve also fought 21’s, 23’s and 27’s both 1v1 and as part of mass exercises (21’s). The Egyptian Mig 21’s didn’t maneuver hard, just arced around at about 4 G’s for some reason, but that burner, it seemed to be as long as the fuselage! 


Edited by Victory205
  • Like 8

Viewpoints are my own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Victory205 said:

It turned into a fun conversation point at Red Flag later, when my section got into trouble and had to see the Red Flag Commander (Col John Madden) after the mass debrief. The Col had two Mig 19 kills in Viet Nam.

Col Madden had a painting of his kills on the wall behind him when we reported for our discipline. 

 

He had DeBellevue as WSO didn't he? Certainly some illustrious names.

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Victory205 said:

Yes, September of ‘72 I believe, two 19’s using AIM9’s.

While flying F4’s, did you get a chance to turn with any Tornados, perchance?

Yes. Slippery little f*£%er!

The GR1 can run hard, but cant really turn worth a damn - far too small a wing, plus the pilot has to contend with manual wing sweep - just to make life more awkward!

But low down and with a head of steam, extremely quick. The F.3, the ADV (semi-fighter) had better engines, but kept the same wing, so it was no 'turner' at all, interceptor only.

  • Like 3

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...