Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
35 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

 

 

F-4E_GivatOlga_081014_03%20(1)_1.jpg

The Israeli F-4Es had refueling probes I don't know if the Israelis ever used the E's we have planned 

Back in the 60s and 70s, the Israeli Air Force tankers used probe/drogue setups similar to the US Navy. Obviously this posed a problem with the F-4E as it’s a boom/socket configuration. What you see is the workaround. Not all IDF/AF Kurnass Phantoms were fitted with the adaptor , and in any event Israel did acquire boom/socket tankers. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

Back in the 60s and 70s, the Israeli Air Force tankers used probe/drogue setups similar to the US Navy. Obviously this posed a problem with the F-4E as it’s a boom/socket configuration. What you see is the workaround. Not all IDF/AF Kurnass Phantoms were fitted with the adaptor , and in any event Israel did acquire boom/socket tankers. 

 

 

It would be cool to have that as an option 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

The upgrade used was purely an adaptation done by the Israelis. It will never be an option for US Phantoms. The refuelling probes are quite literally ripped off the A-4, and at any rate, they'd ruin the Phantom's aerodynamics. Have fun refuelling from a boom.

Edited by Aussie_Mantis
Posted

What aerodynamics? Those that the engines already ruthlessly beat into submission? 🙂 

It'd be fun for Israeli Phantoms, but I doubt we'd get it. This was essentially a jury-rigged solution by the Israelis.

  • Like 2
Posted
On 1/30/2023 at 2:10 AM, Aussie_Mantis said:

The upgrade used was purely an adaptation done by the Israelis. It will never be an option for US Phantoms. The refuelling probes are quite literally ripped off the A-4, and at any rate, they'd ruin the Phantom's aerodynamics. Have fun refuelling from a boom.

 

True they weren't used on US Phantoms it would be cool to add some time down the road so we could fly as the Israelis 

  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

True they weren't used on US Phantoms it would be cool to add some time down the road so we could fly as the Israelis 

If HB confirm a Non US Phantom model after, and not sure if has available info to simulate them.

For Work/Gaming: 28" Philips 246E Monitor - Ryzen 7 1800X - 32 GB DDR4 - nVidia RTX1080 - SSD 860 EVO 1 TB / 860 QVO 1 TB / 860 QVO 2 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Warthog / TPR / MDF

Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

If HB confirm a Non US Phantom model after, and not sure if has available info to simulate them.

I expect they will be British. I don't think the Israeli E is would be worth a module I could be wrong. 

Edited by upyr1
Posted
2 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I expect they will be British. I don't think the Israeli E is would be worth a module I could be wrong. 

 

The Kurnass was a worthwhile airplane. And it be interesting to have some non-NATO aircraft. Plus, the AGM-142

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, NotBonk said:

The Kurnass was a worthwhile airplane. And it be interesting to have some non-NATO aircraft. Plus, the AGM-142

Other than the STARM AGM=142 and refueling probe I wasn't sure how much the Israeli E differed from ours. 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 1/30/2023 at 6:14 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

What aerodynamics? Those that the engines already ruthlessly beat into submission? 🙂 

It'd be fun for Israeli Phantoms, but I doubt we'd get it. This was essentially a jury-rigged solution by the Israelis.

no idea but aerodynamics weren't an issue. by that point in F-4E's career in Israel they were strike only and had more insane ordnance options e.g. sidewinders in the forward sparrow cells, extra countermeasure dispensures in the rear sparrow cells, that came about because the F-4s weren't using Sparrows anymore and were ground attack only.

On 2/8/2023 at 9:29 AM, upyr1 said:

Other than the STARM AGM=142 and refueling probe I wasn't sure how much the Israeli E differed from ours. 

on Kurnass 2000s, the radar was different and they had those differences I mentioned earlier. 

 

other than that, not much. Certainly not enough to warrant a module; it'd be like adding an F-16C-40 as well as the C-50

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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