Will the modernized F-4E have the AIM-120?

[Bremspropeller]

21 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The F-4 had a following for a different reason, which is just how widespread it was in Vietnam, and its influence on modern fighter tactics and design. You already have to know a few things about combat aviation to know just how important it was.

Given the fact that it was the most-produced western jet-fighter of it's generation (just shy of 5200 built) and flown in 12 countries over a span of more than 60 years, I'd beg to differ.

[Dragon1-1]

It's also been out of service in most of them for years. Why would it be more important than, say, the F-104 (smaller numbers, but also widely exported)? The F-4 just doesn't have the cultural footprint of the Tomcat and (as of recently) Hornet. Yes, it's there, but so are many others. The Viper is famously a great dogfighter, and the Eaglejet, while less common, had for a long time been touted as the fastest, meanest thing the USAF had, at least in term of sheer number of missiles carried. The Phantom? It's just there, mostly known as a product of an era when US fighter design went in the wrong direction. The first thing most people learn about the Phantom is that it had no gun and they had to put a gunpod on it just to stop it from being MiG food, because its missiles didn't work. 

You need to know a little bit about post-WWII air combat to know that it was the F-4 that created dogfighting as we know it, precisely to compensate for its problems and capitalize on its strengths. Alternatively, people who are into Vietnam war will know just how much the F-4 contributed, despite the difficulties it had against the MiGs.

[Bremspropeller]

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

It's also been out of service in most of them for years. Why would it be more important than, say, the F-104 (smaller numbers, but also widely exported)? The F-4 just doesn't have the cultural footprint of the Tomcat and (as of recently) Hornet.

And it's still in service with a couple of countries and others had phased them out fairly recently. Among them the US, using QF-4Es shown at airshows across the country. Don't underestimate the impact of that service-history.

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

and the Eaglejet, while less common, had for a long time been touted as the fastest, meanest thing the USAF had, at least in term of sheer number of missiles carried.

Which is precisely the number of missiles the F-4 could carry (eight). Unless you'll use a Sparrow-recess for an ECM-pod or stick two/ three bombs onto one of the inboard/ shoulder pylons.

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The Phantom? It's just there, mostly known as a product of an era when US fighter design went in the wrong direction. The first thing most people learn about the Phantom is that it had no gun and they had to put a gunpod on it just to stop it from being MiG food, because its missiles didn't work. 

Didit? It provided a shipbourne interceptor with an airspeed-range between 120KIAS* to Mach2+, providing serious head-on capability with it's large-a$$ radar and four Sparrows. It was the fastest, best performing operational fighter of it's time and when flown properly, it could more than hold it's own against any MiG on the planet. And it could out-bomb a B-17.

Did it have imperfections? Sure, but which airplane didn't back at the time?

If you're from Israel, the narrative on defective missiles or the absent gun isn't. They also never bothered forgetting about realistic training. Your view on the aircraft is highly biased and one-sided. Fans of the F-4 around the world most probably don't even know a bit about it's service in Vietnam at all, as all they care(d) about is "their" Phantoms.

Ask the Egyptians about how they feel about the Phantom. I'm sure you'll get a couple of interesting answers.

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

You need to know a little bit about post-WWII air combat to know that it was the F-4 that created dogfighting as we know it, precisely to compensate for its problems and capitalize on its strengths. Alternatively, people who are into Vietnam war will know just how much the F-4 contributed, despite the difficulties it had against the MiGs.

The F-4 didn't "create dogfighting". It was defective training that put the F-4 crews in peril at first. When given into the right hands, the F-4 would beat the crap out of most opponents. The F-4 never had difficulties, it was the people flying them, relying on bad training and political decisions made at some desk thousands of miles away.

The F-8 community had never forgotten about dogfighting at all** and when they transitioned over to the F-4, the results were immediate. The "Last Gunfighter" also shined by the lack of using it's gun all that much.

___

*give or take

** and it seems some people on the F-106 over in ADC were doing verboten stuff with their airplanes as well

[Dragon1-1]

You're overestimating the impact of its service in other countries, most of which was spent in the shadow of more capable aircraft. Sure, it's got fans, but not quite as many as other aircraft. You're one yourself, which colors your view quite a bit. Israel is small and has a unique way of doing thing, and in Germany it was reduced to Wild Weasel role after newer designs showed up. For most part, the US view dominates, and the Phantom was long eclipsed by newer designs. 

50 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

The F-4 didn't "create dogfighting". It was defective training that put the F-4 crews in peril at first. When given into the right hands, the F-4 would beat the crap out of most opponents. The F-4 never had difficulties, it was the people flying them, relying on bad training and political decisions made at some desk thousands of miles away.

You need to get quite deep into these things to find that out. And yes, F-4 drivers did, in fact, create the modern energy-maneuverability theory and most of the modern energy tactics repertoire, which was particularly important in the Phantom, as just trying to pull your nose after the MiGs didn't quite work. In the USAF, continuity of dogfight training was lost, and this resulted in having to effectively reinvent air combat training.

The "popular knowledge", however, is that the F-4 was a troubled design that later got patched up. It isn't that famous as a naval bird, either. The first thing about it that most people think of is the USAF F-4D in Vietnam-era camo. The other exploits of the Phantom are significantly more obscure.

[JayTSX]

Oh really we used them as wild weasels? Afaik they were used as reconnaissance, patrol and intercept once those "newer designs came up" since f4's were deemed more reasonable than the new stuff. That may partially be because of the 2-seat concept and that we already had plenty crews manning those jets. Also from what I heard: even though the Eurofighter may be a better fighter it apparently isn't as multirole as f-4s especially after all the upgrades. Also maintainability may have been better since analog (or at least mostly analog) system are easier to maintain and expand, since you usually don't have that much oversight and bloat as in fully digital systems (please don't argue to much about this as this is something a lot of computer scientist are bussy with), therefore making it a better "daily driver".

Also comming from the "oh what's that in the sky?" perspective and only learning about aviation history in the last 3 years, in which I started with DCS, the Phantom always was a plane I loved (along the mig29) even more after learning about her troubles. So that may only be me but maybe more blue-eyed rookies share this mindset.

Anyway I respect all opinions here and love to learn new stuff about the F-4 so thanks to everyone sharing his knowledge =).

[Bremspropeller]

47 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

and in Germany it was reduced to Wild Weasel role after newer designs showed up. For most part, the US view dominates, and the Phantom was long eclipsed by newer designs.

It never had any kind of "Wild Weasel" role in Germany.

As for the rest - grab a couple of books and let me know when you're ready for a discussion on even terms.

[Dragon1-1]

16 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

As for the rest - grab a couple of books and let me know when you're ready for a discussion on even terms.

In other words, stuff read by people already heavily enough into combat airplanes to invest in literature on the subject?

Thanks for proving my point. Which, I shall remind you, was that people below that level wouldn't know what makes the Phantom so notable, unlike the Viper or the F-14.

[Bremspropeller]

5 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

In other words, stuff read by people already heavily enough into combat airplanes to invest in literature on the subject?

Seems about like the demographic that spends heavy dough on a "study level" DCS module.

6 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Thanks for proving my point. Which, I shall remind you, was that people below that level wouldn't know what makes the Phantom so notable, unlike the Viper or the F-14.

So people need to have an Ivy League School sized library to properly appreciate a module.

I don't know about you, but aircraft like the MiG-21, Sabre or Viggen seem to disprove your point.

[Dragon1-1]

4 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

I don't know about you, but aircraft like the MiG-21, Sabre or Viggen seem to disprove your point.

Their sales numbers actually prove it. The original argument was that F-4 isn't gonna be a big earner like modern jets such as the F-16. MiG-21 was even quoted earlier in the thread in having, over its much longer lifetime, fewer sales than the Viper. Granted, there are quality issues with it (and with Sabrejet, too), but Viggen doesn't have that excuse, and yet it isn't exactly the most bought module, despite being made by HB and of top quality. 

Again, it wasn't about "properly appreciating a module". It was about buying it. It's not immediately obvious that modern US fighter design, and the air combat doctrine, basically started with the F-4. Those who know a thing or two about air combat, and its history, will be lining up to buy it, but it'll be a much harder sell to anyone else.

[JayTSX]

Maybe we can get back on topic?

So what I get is that the main advantage of a Fox 3 equipped F-4 would be some sort of fire and forget capability which in DCS is primarily used to either kill people unaware of their rwr in bvr or if we are wvr to force them defensive and maybe kill them right so far?

I primarily use the F-14 which is iirc primarily Fox 1 and in case of the pheonix either forced to seek for itself (but this is only usefull up to about 40 miles(?) at least from my experience) or it goes active when tti is >=30 seconds. Meanwhile Amraams are quite annoying on both ends. For the receiver because you have to hit the notch a couple seconds and then reaquire your target. And for the sender since it's not really feeling all that good getting someone since you basically hope, that the bandit cannot hit the notch.

So for me the F-4 is perfectly fine with "just" sparrows and hopefully enough sidewinder to get those close range high aspect shots. (I prefer either rate fights or chasing (probably not the correct term) in the F-14) but I really think that having something Fox 3 would greatly improve her perception among new players (my start with DCS were the huey and mig 21, in which I learned to love heatseeker so I'm just guessing here using what my friends say). 

In conclusion the F-4 has already great potential regarding what she can carry and which missions she can do, but Fox 3s may give it just enough to be a must have for basically everyone.

Edited June 26, 2022 by JayTSX

[Bremspropeller]

8 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The original argument was that F-4 isn't gonna be a big earner like modern jets such as the F-16. MiG-21 was even quoted earlier in the thread in having, over its much longer lifetime, fewer sales than the Viper. Granted, there are quality issues with it (and with Sabrejet, too), but Viggen doesn't have that excuse, and yet it isn't exactly the most bought module, despite being made by HB and of top quality.

The Viggen was flown by a single country, population-size similar to North Carolina. Yet still, non-Swedes (amongst them yours truly) bought it readily. The Sabre and MiG-21 are older modules and both of them suffer from the lack of context (maps and adversaries) in game. Modern aircraft are benefiting from the recent (20yr) commitments in the Middle East and they are working just fine on the maps we have with the assets that came along.

The "kewl" modules are about to be finished with the appearance of the F-15E. I guess people are going to stop buying new modules, right?

5 minutes ago, JayTSX said:

So what I get is that the main advantage of a Fox 3 equipped F-4 would be some sort of fire and forget capability which in DCS is primarily used to either kill people unawre of their rwr in bvr or if we are wvr to force them defensive and maybe kill them right so far?

Why buy that when you already can do exacty that in any other "modern" module. The beauty of the F-4 is precisely that you can't do that anymore and that you need to adapt to different tactics in different periods of times. Especially since other modules are up the pipe, that are going to flesh out the cold war era a little more.

Keep in mind that the USAF F-4E is going to have a lot of "sh!ttier" (but awesome in the day) AG capabilities that will be challenging for both seats to employ to the utmost. No more death-dots and tell the JDAM which point in particular you want to go boom.

It's the reason why I and many other people are looking forward to flying modules like the A-6, A-7, F1, F-8 etc.

[Dragon1-1]

4 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

The "kewl" modules are about to be finished with the appearance of the F-15E. I guess people are going to stop buying new modules, right?

There's the F-15C, which a lot of people want really badly, the MiG-29 and Su-27, which are famous for their maneuverability and are interesting in that they're Russian. There's the Su-25, which FC3 owners already know. There's the Super Hornet, which had been recently boosted to cult status similar to the F-14. But yeah, big fixed wing sellers of the modern era are running out. I've been wondering myself what ED's next move will be, because don't seem to like to touch more obscure airframes.

Yes, people had, obviously, bought the Viggen. It's not a big seller, though. A quick glance at SteamDB shows it at position 2798 in top sellers, despite being out for a while. Viper is 859 and Tomcat is 946. I love the Viggen, but most never heard of it. Even the F-5 sells a little better. 

[JayTSX]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

Why buy that when you already can do exacty that in any other "modern" module. The beauty of the F-4 is precisely that you can't do that anymore and that you need to adapt to different tactics in different periods of times. Especially since other modules are up the pipe, that are going to flesh out the cold war era a little more.

Keep in mind that the USAF F-4E is going to have a lot of "sh!ttier" (but awesome in the day) AG capabilities that will be challenging for both seats to employ to the utmost. No more death-dots and tell the JDAM which point in particular you want to go boom.

It's the reason why I and many other people are looking forward to flying modules like the A-6, A-7, F1, F-8 etc.

As I stated I don't really use any Fox 3, especially since the Phoenix got updated and now thinks it belongs to the Apollo programm (different topic though). My point is, that some new players may wan't the option to have Fox 3s and decide, which module to buy upon it. That beeing said even those will, with some time, appreciate Fox 1 and 2 for their simple use (Sidewinder) or forgiveness regarding false lock or reaquirred targets (Sparrow and Pheonix on long range). 

So you might misunderstood me: I'm totally on your side regarding that I'm hyped for an F-4. I just wanted to point out, that some may be deterred by it having (on a glance) less capability than the other options available.

Salewise I don't feel comfortable to make a comment since I only know, how it was durring the pandemic.

[upyr1]

15 hours ago, JayTSX said:

So for me the F-4 is perfectly fine with "just" sparrows and hopefully enough sidewinder to get those close range high aspect shots. (I prefer either rate fights or chasing (probably not the correct term) in the F-14) but I really think that having something Fox 3 would greatly improve her perception among new players (my start with DCS were the huey and mig 21, in which I learned to love heatseeker so I'm just guessing here using what my friends say). 

In conclusion the F-4 has already great potential regarding what she can carry and which missions she can do, but Fox 3s may give it just enough to be a must have for basically everyone.

I simply don't see any reason to add AMRAAMs to the Phantom for now. There are two reasons for this, first is the fact the primary appeal to the F-4 Phantom II is the fact the F-4 is a cold war bird. So the folks who are the most excited will want to go fly cold war missions and down F-5s, MiG-19s and 21s. Next the F-4s with AMRAAMs went through massive updates so it will take some work . I think Heatblur would be best focusing on cold war variants first. 

22 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Given the fact that it was the most-produced western jet-fighter of it's generation (just shy of 5200 built) and flown in 12 countries over a span of more than 60 years, I'd beg to differ.

The fact they are still in service in some nations is the reason I'm not totally against the AMRAAM modernized versions they are just low on my list. 

[Lieuie]

13 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

I simply don't see any reason to add AMRAAMs to the Phantom for now. There are two reasons for this, first is the fact the primary appeal to the F-4 Phantom II is the fact the F-4 is a cold war bird. So the folks who are the most excited will want to go fly cold war missions and down F-5s, MiG-19s and 21s. Next the F-4s with AMRAAMs went through massive updates so it will take some work . I think Heatblur would be best focusing on cold war variants first. 

The fact they are still in service in some nations is the reason I'm not totally against the AMRAAM modernized versions they are just low on my list. 

Agreed

[Bremspropeller]

1 hour ago, upyr1 said:

The fact they are still in service in some nations is the reason I'm not totally against the AMRAAM modernized versions they are just low on my list. 

Same for me - my personal list looks kind of like this:

USAF F-4E (covers most export E models, too)

USN models (hopefully all B/N/J/S)

Brit FG(R) 1/2

USAF F-4C or rather F-4D (the latter has more specialised missions)

F-4EJ / EJ Kai*

Recce models (RF-4C or E)

SPAMRAAM-versions

____

* mostly because it has no slats and might enable a merge into an early F-4E, together with the F-4E coming out in the near future - I like the EJ in general, though

 

 

[Bananabrai]

I want a USN Phantom that can carry and fire AGM-78 Standard ARM. 

Unfortunately it doesn't exist, so I take any other.

[Bremspropeller]

Then all your money's on the F-4G (the USAF one):

Edit:

The IDF also used the AGM-78 in the early 80s on the F-4E, so you might get a shot. Depending on HB's willingness to step out of common USAF-loadouts. There were lots of special loadouts deviating from USAF standard with the IDF.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Bremspropeller

[upyr1]

3 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Then all your money's on the F-4G (the USAF one):

Edit:

The IDF also used the AGM-78 in the early 80s on the F-4E, so you might get a shot. Depending on HB's willingness to step out of common USAF-loadouts. There were lots of special loadouts deviating from USAF standard with the IDF.

 

The STARM would be awesome to get

7 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Same for me - my personal list looks kind of like this:

USAF F-4E (covers most export E models, too)

USN models (hopefully all B/N/J/S)

Brit FG(R) 1/2

USAF F-4C or rather F-4D (the latter has more specialized missions)

F-4EJ / EJ Kai*

Recce models (RF-4C or E)

SPAMRAAM-versions

____

* mostly because it has no slats and might enable a merge into an early F-4E, together with the F-4E coming out in the near future - I like the EJ in general, though

 

 

Our lists are basically the same, except if the G is possible then that is the number two slot 

[IronMike]

Wouldn't it be a pitty if our answer had shut down this mighty interesting discussion you guys had?

But, no, the F-4E ofc will not have AIM-120s.

Would we do a variant further down the road that would naturally have aim120s? Maybe, possible, who knows, can't tell you, we'll see. I know, I am mean.
 

[near_blind]

aighaightaightaight, but what about Agile?



* ducks *

Edited July 12, 2022 by near_blind

[Dragon1-1]

Well, if you guys are phanatical enough to make a Turkish and/or Greek variant, go right ahead.  Not exactly my first choice of module to purchase, but then, I originally planned to skip the Viggen before finding out your SP content for it was very good, and I didn't regret the purchase.

[_BringTheReign_]

1 hour ago, IronMike said:

But, no, the F-4E ofc will not have AIM-120s.

Would we do a variant further down the road that would naturally have aim120s? Maybe, possible, who knows, can't tell you, we'll see. I know, I am mean.

Thank you for the clarification - it's not mean at all hahaha

Super excited for the E module, potential J/S module, and any other future modules of any kind you have in store, F-4 or otherwise! 

[Heinlein]

hace 16 horas, IronMike dijo:

Wouldn't it be a pitty if our answer had shut down this mighty interesting discussion you guys had?

But, no, the F-4E ofc will not have AIM-120s.

Would we do a variant further down the road that would naturally have aim120s? Maybe, possible, who knows, can't tell you, we'll see. I know, I am mean.
 

You are not being mean. I think you guys chose the perfect version of the F-4 to start the phantom family with. The model E phantom is the phantom that is the MOST phantom after all. It saw the most combat, was the most exported version. Just perfect. I for one can't wait to take it to the skies with the J-79 engines leaving a smoketrail that would make  Swedish environmentalists scream just as loud as the engine itself 

[Bozon]

7 hours ago, Heinlein said:

I for one can't wait to take it to the skies with the J-79 engines leaving a smoketrail that would make  Swedish environmentalists scream just as loud as the engine itself 

Lol 

Try to make the smoke spell “Greta” in the sky…