Why so much negativity? A Phantard Speaks.

[Fromthedeep]

32 minutes ago, exhausted said:

You may not like it, but you aren't entitled to your own facts.

You stated your opinion and no one cares, you can move on. Heatblur already decided to deliver two E variants regardless of what you think about it. If you don't like it, post in some other subforum, no one here cares.

[Stackup]

I mean seriously...  Heatblur decides what Heatblur makes, not people on the internet.  The history that's important here, is that sometime in 202X, Heatblur decided to begin the journey of bringing the F-4 Phantom into DCS.  At some point, they made the decision to produce the E model first before a Navy model.  Nobody here had any say in that, nor should they have.

[SgtPappy]

6 hours ago, exhausted said:

I can only ask that you use history to back up your points. It's not trolling for the side using that information, despite your best efforts to frame it that way. Sorry not everyone agrees with you, but at least you can be happy you have some supporters if that makes things better. People don't express viewpoints to become popular, they express them because history tells an interesting story that largely should have an impact on how we interpret our today. I've incorporated history in every post with my viewpoint. You may not like it, but you aren't entitled to your own facts.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. And they say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again so I guess I'm insane because I'll try this one more time even though this has ALL been stated before in this thread and several others...

 

 

With the exception of that video you've actually not backed up one claim with any numbers or reference to text.

The Osprey series of books contain probably our best records of aircraft victories to date. They are not perfect and every researcher/author of each volume has disclaimed the possible errors in their books. Even if all but three or four of the ~115 claims these stock F-4E's got during the War of Attrition during their service from 1969-1973 and Yom Kippur War (Oct 1973) are unconfirmed, (stock means without modification because you ignored that twice already) it would still be more kills than the F-4J. Extensive modification (refuel probes, new weapons, etc.) of these F-4's happened after the Yom Kippur War. That said, the F-4J is not any less awesome than the F-4E just because it got fewer kills. This is a concept you do not understand, and one I'm sure you'll ignore for the fourth time.

The stock slatted F-4E then saw combat with Iran as well in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq War and was the back bone of their AF. We don't have reliable kill stats but we know they shot down at least a few MiG-21s and MiG-23s. We also know they undertook most of the bombing missions alongside F-5's and much later, modified F-14's. The tonnage dropped by just the F-4E when cross referenced with the other texts shows that it dropped more ordnance, and caused more collective damage than all other variants combined. Doesn't make it better, but it does make it far from non-negligible.

Both the F-4E and F-4J got a similar number of kills in US service in Vietnam (~20) with the F-4J shooting down more MiG-17s and the F-4E shooting down more MiG-21s. In fact, according to [1] and [2] (see bottom of post), the F-4E got 23 kills and according to [3], [4], and [5], the F-4J got 20. So your whole argument based on air to air victories crumbles. I suppose you'll find a new goal post to invalidate this.  

I've already mentioned that the 24 Rivet Haste birds flew over 200 sorties logging over 600 combat hours between Nov 1972 and Jan 1973, but you've ignored the service of all those who took part in the program and anyone who flew the F-4E before them. Most of their combat was air to ground but you've ignored that as well.

Even if you wanted to count that service as negligible, then your claims of the F-4S would hold no water because it saw no combat and was fewest in number between the F-4E or J. 

Then there's still that unaddressed claim you made that the slatted F-4E's maneuverability doesn't matter because it's not interesting or whatever you made up.

But I'm sure you'll ignore this too and not address a single one, or maybe you'll focus on one claim and say the rest is wrong or you'll just say the opposite again for some reason.

 

Quote

Frankly, a slow and sluggish Air Force version with a downgraded radar is the last thing people want out of a Phantom

Frankly, this is a delusional statement.

 

I've also tried to show empathy to your arguments on why the F-4J would best represent the Phantom first (my second favourite version) on three occassions and you have not reciprocated once... People are agreeing not because of popularity, but because most Phantom records are publicly verified and the replies to you contain logic that can only be dismissed by ignorance or denial (that, and you're not addressing rebuttals to your made-up claims, you're being unfriendly and unempathetic, to put it kindly). This is why I'm convinced you either have some unaddressed, unhealthy coping mechanism resulting in absolute denial of fact or you're doing this on purpose. Unless there are legitimate reasons to continue, I will stop talking to a wall.

 

 

References: 

[1] Futrell, Frank (1976). United States Air Force in Southeast Asia 1965-1973: Aces and Aerial Victories. Air University, Headquarters USAF

[2] Davies, Peter(2012). USAF F-4 Phantom II MiG Killers 1972–73

[3] Naval History and Heritage Command

[4] Elward, Brad. US Navy F-4 Phantom II MiG Killers 1972-73. Osprey Publishing.

[5] Stoffey, Robert (2008). Fighting to Leave: The Final Years of America's War in Vietnam, 1972-1973

 

Edited January 1, 2023 by SgtPappy

[SgtPappy]

8 hours ago, Ramstein said:

we had the F-4 B, E, and F models, at my base in Germany. the only thing I didn't see was Napalm or a nuke loaded on them. Probably the most thirstiest fighter, if not one of them. Carries huge loads of weapons, wings are tiny. They had brake problems more than most issues. They also lost wing tanks once in a while. 1.5 hour a sortie before fuel was an issue.

I guess getting back to the F-4... 

I heard that the F-4 always came home with something broken. Do you think that's true? Would that be a testament to how much damage it could take, or does it mean the Phantom was fragile? 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

4 hours ago, exhausted said:

Production numbers aren't everything. Being prolific also includes productivity. There are other versions that have far more missions under their belt, and thus more contributions.

 

 

[Lieuie]

7 hours ago, exhausted said:

Those comparisons never included the -S with slats - they only compared USAF slat-wing Phantoms with earlier hard wing variants. Doesn't even matter though, since tactics schools like Top Gun still produced a more substantial kill count with Js than the USAF did with Es.

 

I am confused. Which version are you saying we should be getting as the most prolific, the S or the J? Also I fail to see what TOPGUN has to do in a discussion about the capabilities of these aircraft.

[BIGNEWY]

folks, stick to the topic and treat each other with respect and tolerance. 

thank you

[Elf1606688794]

13 hours ago, SgtPappy said:

I guess getting back to the F-4... 

I heard that the F-4 always came home with something broken. Do you think that's true? Would that be a testament to how much damage it could take, or does it mean the Phantom was fragile? 

It's not far from the truth.

While prepping for an exercise we would get 12 primary aircraft loaded/gassed and every other air worthy airframe would be a spare. On Monday morning we'd have 12 primaries and sometimes 12 or 13 spares. We'd fly 12 x 5 sorties each day and by Friday we were struggling to keep 12 primaries and 1 or 2 spares ready.

[exhausted]

17 hours ago, Fromthedeep said:

You stated your opinion and no one cares, you can move on. Heatblur already decided to deliver two E variants regardless of what you think about it. If you don't like it, post in some other subforum, no one here cares.

This is still the forum to speak about the Heatblur F-4E, right? You don't have to like opinions you disagree with, but you can't cross certain lines either. You only need to look back to see my opinion is not unique or without support.

This subforum is the exact proper place to discuss the upcoming Phantom modules, and that's what we are trying to do. I will continue to focus attention on the Naval variants since the Phantom was designed to be a shipborne aircraft. I really am sorry if that upsets you, but things be how they do.

[JayTSX]

I think no one really got a problem with you stating your opinion as long as you stay within topic of the thread. Every single thread you appeared in was transformed into something like "only -profanity- people like land based phantoms" which is your opinion but don't try forcing it upon us. That said there was a thread about why a naval phantom is objectively better, so maybe stay there? You wouldn't face so many opinions against yours and could freely discuss any shortcomings of landbased phantoms. I don't think you're necessarily wrong but like with most things people have subjective feelings about certain things and don't like it when you call them dumb. I think most of us get that most navy variants where objectively better than any landbased ones. But we still love the E or atleast we are fine with getting the E as long as we get any phantom. Maybe try understanding others? But that one goes in both directions.

I really hope that it's possible to set our differences aside for atleast one thing. (Yeah I know wishful thinking but given the state of society in general hope is most we have I guess)

[Fromthedeep]

44 minutes ago, exhausted said:

This subforum is the exact proper place to discuss the upcoming Phantom modules, and that's what we are trying to do. I will continue to focus attention on the Naval variants since the Phantom was designed to be a shipborne aircraft. I really am sorry if that upsets you, but things be how they do.

All of this sounds nice in theory but what you're doing is destructive flame baiting and when you show up to 'discuss the naval Phantoms' it will inevitable end up being a pointless mud slinging contest. 

[_BringTheReign_]

I firmly believe that the only way to settle online combat sim disagreements is to challenge each other to a gentlemanly duel/tourney. 

I hereby propose a Phantom v Phantom tournament on the date of (TBD) pending the release of both the Air Force and Navy Phantoms from Heatblur. 

To include the following:

1. 1v1 BFM Heaters/Guns only
2. 1v1 BVR
3. Section v Section ACM 
4. Section v Section BVR
5. Bombing Bullseye 

Best 2 out of 3 for each segment, winners get bragging rights to the "most bestest Phantom" and highest kills/bombing score gets a custom F-4 Phantom joystick grip (compatible with Virpil/Thrustmaster) courtesy of me:

null

null

[F-2]

You might have a little trouble with a naval phantom in a guns only fight

[_BringTheReign_]

4 minutes ago, F-2 said:

You might have a little trouble with a naval phantom in a guns only fight

That's why I did not put guns only:

 

6 minutes ago, _BringTheReign_ said:

1v1 BFM Heaters/Guns only

 

Heaters meaning Sidewinders

[Stackup]

1 hour ago, exhausted said:

This subforum is the exact proper place to discuss the upcoming Phantom modules, and that's what we are trying to do. I will continue to focus attention on the Naval variants since the Phantom was designed to be a shipborne aircraft. I really am sorry if that upsets you, but things be how they do.

The subforum is indeed the best place for it.  This however, is a thread/topic on that subforum made in response to negative comments about the F-4E, not a place for you to provide more of those negative comments.  The thread was created with the clear intention of bringing some positivity back to the release of the F-4E so saying negative things about that is in fact off topic.  There is another thread on this subforum dedicated specifically to the Naval Phantom variants and I suggest that if you have nothing positive to say, that you discuss the Naval variants(of which I am a huge fan of) there.

20 minutes ago, _BringTheReign_ said:

I firmly believe that the only way to settle online combat sim disagreements is to challenge each other to a gentlemanly duel/tourney. 

I hereby propose a Phantom v Phantom tournament on the date of (TBD) pending the release of both the Air Force and Navy Phantoms from Heatblur. 

To include the following:

1. 1v1 BFM Heaters/Guns only
2. 1v1 BVR
3. Section v Section ACM 
4. Section v Section BVR
5. Bombing Bullseye 

Best 2 out of 3 for each segment, winners get bragging rights to the "most bestest Phantom" and highest kills/bombing score gets a custom F-4 Phantom joystick grip (compatible with Virpil/Thrustmaster) courtesy of me:

null

null

I think that sounds like an excellent idea.  Pit pilot and plane against one another to decide once and for all.  On the other hand, other than bragging rights and I must say an awesome F-4 grip, I don't think anybody's minds will be changed as to which they favor.  I'm just happy we're getting any F-4 at all.  And both the USAF and USN versions at that.

[SgtPappy]

2 hours ago, Elf1606688794 said:

It's not far from the truth.

While prepping for an exercise we would get 12 primary aircraft loaded/gassed and every other air worthy airframe would be a spare. On Monday morning we'd have 12 primaries and sometimes 12 or 13 spares. We'd fly 12 x 5 sorties each day and by Friday we were struggling to keep 12 primaries and 1 or 2 spares ready.

That's insane! But sounds typical. Thanks for the insight. Sounds like you guys and girls must have been overworked.

I wonder if newer aircraft like the Typhoon are much better in this regard or if it was more of a staffing or logistics issue regardless of airplane type.

[exhausted]

43 minutes ago, Stackup said:

The subforum is indeed the best place for it.  This however, is a thread/topic on that subforum made in response to negative comments about the F-4E, not a place for you to provide more of those negative comments.  The thread was created with the clear intention of bringing some positivity back to the release of the F-4E so saying negative things about that is in fact off topic.  There is another thread on this subforum dedicated specifically to the Naval Phantom variants and I suggest that if you have nothing positive to say, that you discuss the Naval variants(of which I am a huge fan of) there.

I'm amazed at the ability for people to take things personally - they are already getting what they want with the specific model they want, and they don't want to hear anyone say anything different. I'm not doing any flaming; my opinions are just opinions - they aren't inherently negative. I'm for the F-4J, and I've included a lot of information why. Those facts and that information do not become negative just because you disagree with them.

There is plenty of room for disagreement where comparisons can be fairly made and there is room for discussion where probative information can be given. What isn't discussion is people making personal attacks and wanting to silence anybody who disagrees with them. We have to untangle those concepts, since there is plenty of disagreement on which Phantom should be released.

[Stackup]

29 minutes ago, exhausted said:

I'm amazed at the ability for people to take things personally - they are already getting what they want with the specific model they want, and they don't want to hear anyone say anything different. I'm not doing any flaming; my opinions are just opinions - they aren't inherently negative. I'm for the F-4J, and I've included a lot of information why. Those facts and that information do not become negative just because you disagree with them.

There is plenty of room for disagreement where comparisons can be fairly made and there is room for discussion where probative information can be given. What isn't discussion is people making personal attacks and wanting to silence anybody who disagrees with them. We have to untangle those concepts, since there is plenty of disagreement on which Phantom should be released.

People taking things personally in 2023 surprises you?  Where exactly have you been the last couple of years? 

While your comments may not be inherently negative, they are worded or phrased in a way that can be seen as negative.  From what I have seen, this discussion has led both sides to become very combative, which in itself, makes this a net negative.  Also, I may have missed the part where you said the F-4E had good qualities that the F-4J did not and the F-4J had good qualities that the F-4E did not.  You merely say that the F-4J is clearly superior in every conceivable way without providing any sources as evidence besides that one video.  This implies that you have at minimum a sense of superiority(if not outright disdain) in regards to the F-4E and this causes you to be rather condescending in your responses and as others have pointed out, you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge the evidence and rebuttals presented to you.  Please provide the evidence of your claims as @SgtPappy has done since you claim historical evidence without citing your sources.  

You also say there is plenty of disagreement in regards to which version of the F-4 to release.  Clearly, this is true, but I'll say this once more...  Which version gets released is not up to you and neither is up to me or anyone besides Heatblur and Eagle Dynamics.  Discussing(or in this case arguing) about it will not change the fact that Heatblur is the developer and they have already decided to release the F-4E first.  You also never address the fact the Heatblur have clearly stated that we will be receiving a naval Phantom at a later date.

In regards to personal attacks, I have not made any personal attacks against you, nor will I be goaded into name calling or other such nonsense as it will add nothing to the conversation.  I have merely stated that they way in which you come off in most instances is rather rude and condescending to those with whom you disagree.  Discussion is important but simply stating things without presenting the evidence for the statements will win you no arguments and acting in a condescending manner will win you no friends.

Edited January 1, 2023 by Stackup

[exhausted]

27 minutes ago, Stackup said:

While your comments may not be inherently negative, they are worded or phrased in a way that can be seen as negative.  From what I have seen, this discussion has led both sides to become very combative, which in itself, makes this a net negative.  Also, I may have missed the part where you said the F-4E had good qualities that the F-4J did not and the F-4J had good qualities that the F-4E did not.  You merely say that the F-4J is clearly superior in every conceivable way without providing any sources as evidence besides that one video. 

 

I'm not in charge of anyone else, period. And it's not my job to advocate for the F-4E, for which I clearly don't wish to. I want to see the F-4J, and I'm not sure we will. I do not plan to purchase the -E model. I think the F-4E is a radical departure from the Phantom, with added weight and gimmicky features. When hardwing F-4Es are compared with hardwing F-4Js, that F-4J seemed to outperform the F-4E. When slat wing F-4Es are compared with slat wing F-4Ss, the F-4Ss seems to outperform the F-4E. In terms of historical use in the air to ground role, the F-4J has a very good record I won't shy away from. In the air to air role, the F-4J has a better record in US service than the F-4E. I am not afraid of those facts. If you disagree, then you can advocate for your position. I will keep mine.

[Silver_Dragon]

10 minutes ago, exhausted said:

I'm not in charge of anyone else, period. And it's not my job to advocate for the F-4E, for which I clearly don't wish to. I want to see the F-4J, and I'm not sure we will. I do not plan to purchase the -E model. I think the F-4E is a radical departure from the Phantom, with added weight and gimmicky features. When hardwing F-4Es are compared with hardwing F-4Js, that F-4J seemed to outperform the F-4E. When slat wing F-4Es are compared with slat wing F-4Ss, the F-4Ss seems to outperform the F-4E. In terms of historical use in the air to ground role, the F-4J has a very good record I won't shy away from. In the air to air role, the F-4J has a better record in US service than the F-4E. I am not afraid of those facts. If you disagree, then you can advocate for your position. I will keep mine.

HB surely make as the F-14, we dont go to have two modules with diferente version... only a F-4 Phantom module with initially a F-4E version and after a naval F-4B/J with help of ED to integrate them on carriers, as the F-14 module build firsts a F-14A late, a F-14B and later, a aerly F-14A, and the canceled F-14A Iranian version.

Edited January 1, 2023 by Silver_Dragon

[exhausted]

2 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

HB surely make as the F-14, we dont go to have two modules with diferente version... only a F-4 Phantom module with initially a F-4E version and after a naval F-4B/J with help of ED to integrate them on carriers, as the F-14 module build firsts a F-14A late, a F-14B and later, a aerly F-14A, and the canceled F-14A Iranian version.

Ah, I wasn't sure about the Iranian F-14A being canceled. That's a bit of a let down, and sort of why I expect the Phantom module to begin and end with a couple F-4E variants. Given the record of follow ups, I would not expect a naval version realistically ever. Good on them for the late F-14A though - I do believe it's the only addition ever made on a DCS module out of quite a few (MiG-19S, Harrier II+, to name some).

[Stackup]

17 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

canceled F-14A Iranian version.

Cancelled?  They never planned it in the first place and added it later as a bonus.  They never stated they would be making a -95GR, but they HAVE stated that they will be releasing a modified version of the early-135GR with limited weapons and the disabling and possible removal of the TCS pod among other things.

[exhausted]

23 minutes ago, Stackup said:

Cancelled?  They never planned it in the first place and added it later as a bonus.  They never stated they would be making a -95GR, but they HAVE stated that they will be releasing a modified version of the early-135GR with limited weapons and the disabling and possible removal of the TCS pod among other things.

I think we are saying they posted that they would be adding it and it has not been added to the game. It seems that it may be canceled now? Relates back to the F-4J because the record of post-release adds is quite thin. Maybe they are thinking that people will be too excited to fly the F-4E as Iranians to care about the -95GR?

null

Edited January 1, 2023 by exhausted

[Stackup]

53 minutes ago, exhausted said:

I'm not in charge of anyone else, period. And it's not my job to advocate for the F-4E, for which I clearly don't wish to. I want to see the F-4J, and I'm not sure we will. I do not plan to purchase the -E model. I think the F-4E is a radical departure from the Phantom, with added weight and gimmicky features. When hardwing F-4Es are compared with hardwing F-4Js, that F-4J seemed to outperform the F-4E. When slat wing F-4Es are compared with slat wing F-4Ss, the F-4Ss seems to outperform the F-4E. In terms of historical use in the air to ground role, the F-4J has a very good record I won't shy away from. In the air to air role, the F-4J has a better record in US service than the F-4E. I am not afraid of those facts. If you disagree, then you can advocate for your position. I will keep mine.

Again you did not include any sources.  In my opinion, since the F-4S never saw combat(unless I'm mistaken) as stated previously and the F-14 had come onto the scene by that time I don't think that it should be added unless it's in addition to the J model as Heatblur is doing with the DSCG and DMAS version of the E model. 

I am not asking for you to advocate for the F-4E I am simply requesting that since Heatblur has chosen the F-4E to release first that you stop advocating against it.  I am not asking you to like that nor do I think you should buy a module you don't want.  By all means support the modules you want to, it's none of my business what you spend your money on. 

I make this request not because I am convinced the E version is the best thing ever, but because Heatblur has made their decision and you will never convince them they are wrong and seem to think your posts here will in some way change that.  They will not.

In fact, truth be told, as a fan of US naval aviation, like you, I would rather have seen the F-4J come first.  I also firmly believe we will most likely see the J version in Navy and Marine Corps colors make it to DCS as I have seen exactly zero evidence to the contrary.  Whether you believe that or not is irrelevant because no one can prove Heatblur is going to go back on their word and forget about the Naval Phantom. 

Unlike you, however I can see why so many people are excited for the F-4E as especially non US fans of the Phantom grew up seeing the shape of the E model, not the USN versions.  The US, Australia, South Korea, Israel, Iran, Australia, etc. all fielded versions of the E model  Phantom so when they think of the Phantom, that's what the think of.  Not the Navy versions used only by the US and the UK, but the land based E version.  This does not in any way detract from the Naval variant or its successes, but does show why it is so popular as not all DCS fans are American...

7 minutes ago, exhausted said:

I think we are saying they posted that they would be adding it and it has not been added to the game. It seems that it may be canceled now? Relates back to the F-4J because the record of post-release adds is quite thin.

You forget that the Naval Phantom was stated to be a completely separate module due to the amount of differences from the E model. 

Q: Why won’t all variants be part of one module?
A: The investment of time and effort to do the Navy and Marine Corps versions of the F-4 justice makes it unrealistic for us to include everything in one package. We want to make sure to tell the story of each Phantom variant chosen in the most content rich and appropriate way possible, while making sure that we stay a thriving and viable team. We’ll share more details on our plans with regards to variant additions to the F-4 later, but we remain steadfastly committed to ensuring that we are fair to our beloved community and supporters.

As for the Tomcat, it has not yet exited early access development so you can't say that we are "post release" because quite frankly the Tomcat is not fully released yet.  I have faith that Heatblur is trying their hardest to get these things to us as customers.

Edited January 1, 2023 by Stackup

[exhausted]

7 minutes ago, Stackup said:

 

I make this request not because I am convinced the E version is the best thing ever, but because Heatblur has made their decision and you will never convince them they are wrong and seem to think your posts here will in some way change that.  They will not.

 

The market has a voice. I'm in the market, so I have a voice. Sorry if that makes you uncomfortable but that's how the marketplace of goods and ideas works. Obviously, bullying and trying to overwhelm ideas and opinions hasn't had the effect people wanted. You don't need to list sources for everything - in fact sources have only come up 1-2 times in this thread, and they really haven't been persuasive: the reason is most of the sources are such common knowledge that the utility of listing them is quite low. For the most part, I've read the listed secondary sources and have even seen the primary sources used in them have been seriously questioned in the historical community. Anyway, it's just an idea.

Edited January 1, 2023 by exhausted