F-4E Air to Air Weapons/Capabilities Discussion

[KlarSnow]

USAF F-4's did not have SEAM for Sidewinders.

The AIM-9B/E/J/N/P until the AIM-9P-4/5 were not capable of being slewed to a radar lock. they were all boresight only.

there was an update for the F-4E/G that added full AIM-9L/M compatibility including the ability to slave them to a radar lock during their end of life updates. Before this those missiles also would have been boresight only as well on an F-4E/G.

So no, the F-4E should absolutely not have any SEAM, unless its replicating the isrealis addition of AIM-9G's in the 1970s. Which how it was integrated you would have to get some details on.

[LanceCriminal86]

7 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Hey, a question I can answer!

The F-4 used SEAM on most missiles throughout its career, and depending on which air force was using it, was available on anything from USN AIM-9G/H variants (Israel) to the AIM-9J/N/P USAF variants (USAF, Iran, South Korea, Sp... I'm not going to write the full list. Sod off.) and the AIM-9L/Ms that the F-4E saw in its sunset service.

 

SEAM worked like it did on the F-4J and other F-4s before it- you just locked a target with your radar and the missile would automatically slew around to it. Then you waited for missile tone and voila. It'd work just like missile locks work for any other gen 4 plane, except you're using solely the radar screen, and the shoot cue on the big "Meatball" on the reflector sight. The meatball doesn't actually move around, but it would give you a valid range cue.

 

VTAS on F-4Js would use it with a primitive HMD to use the CW Radar Beam to slew the IRM seeker around. In real life, due to complications with the helmet itself, it wasn't particularly popular due to being a heavy piece of kludge. Ingame, if the F-4J is added, there probably wouldn't be an issue.

The weight of the helmets was only part of the issue, the other being the reliability of the IR tracking boxes and their wiring harnesses which usually led to a *down* system. Keeping the system up and available required manhours and apparently modifications to the wiring harnesses of the system but it was progressively divested by the end of the 1970s.

[Aussie_Mantis]

12 hours ago, KlarSnow said:

USAF F-4's did not have SEAM for Sidewinders.

The AIM-9B/E/J/N/P until the AIM-9P-4/5 were not capable of being slewed to a radar lock. they were all boresight only.

there was an update for the F-4E/G that added full AIM-9L/M compatibility including the ability to slave them to a radar lock during their end of life updates. Before this those missiles also would have been boresight only as well on an F-4E/G.

So no, the F-4E should absolutely not have any SEAM, unless its replicating the isrealis addition of AIM-9G's in the 1970s. Which how it was integrated you would have to get some details on.

I was going to say that I've never heard of AIM-9J/N/P lacking SEAM. The manual 1F-4E-34-1-1 mentions radar slewing being available ("aircrew may use the radar as an aid in steering to an optimum firing point"). However, upon perusing 1F-4C-34-1-1 and 1F-4F-34-1-1, both direct to the -34-1-1A manuals, which I don't have on hand at the moment, so I cannot definitively say whether they had SEAM or not.

 

However, I have not heard of AIM-9Js lacking a radar slaving feature.

[KlarSnow]

You can always use a radar lock to steer to an optimum firing position. That applies to all weapons since it tells you the range and where the target is. What that line is saying is you can get optimum steering if you put the dot in the center of the ASE circle. Just like any other missile.

The best reference for this would probly be looking at something that definitely had the ability to slave a sidewinder to a radar lock, and also has AIM-9J/N/P capability.

If you have it recommend you look at the AIM-9 employment section of the F-15C-34-1-1. It has a whole section on the AIM-9J as well as the differences between it and the AIM-9L. You will note if you read through it that there is no way to cue the AIM-9J to the radar lock. You only can employ it via boresight and uncage. This applies to all members of the AIM-9J family (9J/N/P) until the AIM-9P-4 and 5.

If you google fighter weapons review 1982 and look for an article titled AIM-9P to uncage or not, it talks about AIM-9P employment on F-4E's. They only talk about boresighting and uncaging, no reference to SEAM or any of that other stuff in there.

There are lots of other sources out there that talk about this and their employment.

SEAM and slaving a sidewinder to a radar lock was exclusive to navy sidewinders and aircraft until the AIM-9L arrived.

The only sidewinders that ever had any form of SEAM capability were the navy lineage sidewinders (AIM-9G/H which were the basis for the AIM-9L/M) and eventually retrofitted into an export only variant of the AIM-9P for customers that didn't want to/couldn't afford to/weren't permitted to acquire AIM-9L/M. The AIM-9P-4/5. Other than that, no SEAM for air force sidewinders.

Edited July 15, 2023 by KlarSnow

[Aussie_Mantis]

8 minutes ago, KlarSnow said:

You can always use a radar lock to steer to an optimum firing position. That applies to all weapons since it tells you the range and where the target is. What that line is saying is you can get optimum steering if you put the dot in the center of the ASE circle. Just like any other missile.

The best reference for this would probly be looking at something that definitely had the ability to slave a sidewinder to a radar lock, and also has AIM-9J/N/P capability.

If you have it recommend you look at the AIM-9 employment section of the F-15C-34-1-1. It has a whole section on the AIM-9J as well as the differences between it and the AIM-9L. You will note if you read through it that there is no way to cue the AIM-9J to the radar lock. You only can employ it via boresight and uncage. This applies to all members of the AIM-9J family (9J/N/P) until the AIM-9P-4 and 5.

If you google fighter weapons review 1982 and look for an article titled AIM-9P to uncage or not, it talks about AIM-9P employment on F-4E's. They only talk about boresighting and uncaging, no reference to SEAM or any of that other stuff in there.

There are lots of other sources out there that talk about this and their employment.

SEAM and slaving a sidewinder to a radar lock was exclusive to navy sidewinders and aircraft until the AIM-9L arrived.

The only sidewinders that ever had any form of SEAM capability were the navy lineage sidewinders (AIM-9G/H which were the basis for the AIM-9L/M) and eventually retrofitted into an export only variant of the AIM-9P for customers that didn't want to/couldn't afford to/weren't permitted to acquire AIM-9L/M. The AIM-9P-4/5. Other than that, no SEAM for air force sidewinders.

 

As I said, I've had another look and just can't find anything. I looked through PROJECT CHECO reports to find a similar result. There were no mentions of any radar slaving ability, which you'd figure might be included in a breakdown of missile performance. All it mentioned were caged/uncaged shots. No SEAM.

Edited July 15, 2023 by Aussie_Mantis

[Aussie_Mantis]

13 hours ago, KlarSnow said:

You can always use a radar lock to steer to an optimum firing position. That applies to all weapons since it tells you the range and where the target is. What that line is saying is you can get optimum steering if you put the dot in the center of the ASE circle. Just like any other missile.

The best reference for this would probly be looking at something that definitely had the ability to slave a sidewinder to a radar lock, and also has AIM-9J/N/P capability.

If you have it recommend you look at the AIM-9 employment section of the F-15C-34-1-1. It has a whole section on the AIM-9J as well as the differences between it and the AIM-9L. You will note if you read through it that there is no way to cue the AIM-9J to the radar lock. You only can employ it via boresight and uncage. This applies to all members of the AIM-9J family (9J/N/P) until the AIM-9P-4 and 5.

If you google fighter weapons review 1982 and look for an article titled AIM-9P to uncage or not, it talks about AIM-9P employment on F-4E's. They only talk about boresighting and uncaging, no reference to SEAM or any of that other stuff in there.

There are lots of other sources out there that talk about this and their employment.

SEAM and slaving a sidewinder to a radar lock was exclusive to navy sidewinders and aircraft until the AIM-9L arrived.

The only sidewinders that ever had any form of SEAM capability were the navy lineage sidewinders (AIM-9G/H which were the basis for the AIM-9L/M) and eventually retrofitted into an export only variant of the AIM-9P for customers that didn't want to/couldn't afford to/weren't permitted to acquire AIM-9L/M. The AIM-9P-4/5. Other than that, no SEAM for air force sidewinders.

 

Did some quick searching this morning- didn't the USAF have an inventory of AIM-9P-4/P-5s during the late 90s?

Also, what variant of AIM-9P do we have in game at the moment?

[KlarSnow]

USAF never had AIm-9P-4/5's those were upgrade kits for foreign operators taht had lots of AIM-9N/P's lieing around. AIM-9P-4 replaces the seeker head with an all aspect seeker somewhat equivalent to an AIM-9L, and gives it the ability to slave to a radar lock. AIM-9P5 adds IRCCM of some sort to the 9P4.

USAF transitioned entirely to AIM-9L for the frontline fighters (F-15/16) in the mid 80s, and then late 80's-early 90's switched to the AIM-9M. Only J/N/P's left around were either in WRM stocks, for platforms that couldn't use AIM-9L/M or were considered second line air to air platforms (F-4E's for example). Or were sold off to other nations that were upgrading or updating their arsenals as part of aircraft sales.

Eventually the F-4G in USAF service had the update that gave full compatibility with AIM-9L/M, but the F-4E was divested as far as I can tell before that update hit (in USAF service, foreign operators may very well have added it).

In DCS we have what is labelled an AIM-9P, but is actually an AIM-9P3, however it should be a reduced smoke or smokeless motor, and it is not. the AIM-9P and P1 had the same motor as the AIM-9B/E/J which had less thrust than the motor we have in the DCS AIM-9P, and were not reduced smoke. Additionally the AM-9P and P5 have reduced G limits in DCS (16G max) than they should have. They should match the AIM-9J for maximum G (22G) So for actual dogfight performance its a big tossup for motor performance (9P and P5 have the more powerful motor, 9P5 has smokeless) vs turning capability (9J turns better). Overall its a bunch of inconsistencies in DCS that will hopefully get cleaned up at some point.

The DCS AIM-9P5 has the smokeless motor and is all aspect.

Edited July 16, 2023 by KlarSnow

[Top Jockey]

Thank you all guys for the insights regarding the AIM-9 and SEAM in the Phantom.

Also as far as I know (if I'm not mistaken) :

- besides the capability of slaving the AIM-9 seeker head to a radar track;

- SEAM also had the capability to make the AIM-9 seeker head perform a scan pattern by itself around the boresight / ADL (widening the target acquisition area)

There's more related to this subject, CAGE / UNCAGE function, scan pattern types, etc.

 

Anyone feel free to share your insight.

[Aussie_Mantis]

On 7/16/2023 at 12:22 AM, KlarSnow said:

You can always use a radar lock to steer to an optimum firing position. That applies to all weapons since it tells you the range and where the target is. What that line is saying is you can get optimum steering if you put the dot in the center of the ASE circle. Just like any other missile.

The best reference for this would probly be looking at something that definitely had the ability to slave a sidewinder to a radar lock, and also has AIM-9J/N/P capability.

If you have it recommend you look at the AIM-9 employment section of the F-15C-34-1-1. It has a whole section on the AIM-9J as well as the differences between it and the AIM-9L. You will note if you read through it that there is no way to cue the AIM-9J to the radar lock. You only can employ it via boresight and uncage. This applies to all members of the AIM-9J family (9J/N/P) until the AIM-9P-4 and 5.

If you google fighter weapons review 1982 and look for an article titled AIM-9P to uncage or not, it talks about AIM-9P employment on F-4E's. They only talk about boresighting and uncaging, no reference to SEAM or any of that other stuff in there.

There are lots of other sources out there that talk about this and their employment.

SEAM and slaving a sidewinder to a radar lock was exclusive to navy sidewinders and aircraft until the AIM-9L arrived.

The only sidewinders that ever had any form of SEAM capability were the navy lineage sidewinders (AIM-9G/H which were the basis for the AIM-9L/M) and eventually retrofitted into an export only variant of the AIM-9P for customers that didn't want to/couldn't afford to/weren't permitted to acquire AIM-9L/M. The AIM-9P-4/5. Other than that, no SEAM for air force sidewinders.

 

Had a look for your little article. I can't find it on google because it's too old. Do you happen to have a link or a PDF or something?

[Aussie_Mantis]

On 7/9/2023 at 8:47 PM, Northstar98 said:

Well, I'm not sure what the advantage would be, both the 7F and 7M have the same rocket motor according to this, in the files the M has better countermeasure resistance and a few other parameters that show differences (namely height_error_k/max_h/max_vel), they're both defined with the same warhead too (here's the .lua for the 7F and here's the one for the 7M).

True, but then we need to find evidence that it was carried and/or employed on F-4Es. There's nothing stopping them from being employed/carried on the face of it (after all the AIM-7M has a HOJ mode that doesn't require monopulse encoding from the jammer), but that's not to say it actually happened. Though in any case, even if we only get up to the F, we aren't really losing much.

Not sure if AIM-7 has HOJ, but the radar definitely has one that's stated in the -34-1-1

[Northstar98]

14 minutes ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Not sure if AIM-7 has HOJ, but the radar definitely has one that's stated in the -34-1-1

I'm not sure about RL, but the 7F, 7M, 7M(H) and P all have a line in their .luas which states "hoj = 1", whereas the one for the E-2 doesn't have that line. However, I can't find anything in a -34-1-1 referencing the 7Fs HOJ mode, though yes, the radar's HOJ mode is mentioned.

[Aussie_Mantis]

On 7/17/2023 at 7:04 PM, Northstar98 said:

I'm not sure about RL, but the 7F, 7M, 7M(H) and P all have a line in their .luas which states "hoj = 1", whereas the one for the E-2 doesn't have that line. However, I can't find anything in a -34-1-1 referencing the 7Fs HOJ mode, though yes, the radar's HOJ mode is mentioned.

Seeing as that -34-1-1 is a 1986 edition I'm fairly confident in saying that it's probably the AIM-7F/M (since that's also the only AIM-7 mentioned in the -1)

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Seeing as that -34-1-1 is a 1986 edition I'm fairly confident in saying that it's probably the AIM-7F/M (since that's also the only AIM-7 mentioned in the -1)

There's nothing in either referencing the 7Fs HOJ mode (and only the -7E (which isn't defined with a HOJ mode in the files) and the F are mentioned in the -34-1-1 (which yes, is a '79 revised '86 edition) and a -1 (which is a 1984 revised 1990 edition).

[Aussie_Mantis]

4 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

There's nothing in either referencing the 7Fs HOJ mode (and only the -7E (which isn't defined with a HOJ mode in the files) and the F are mentioned in the -34-1-1 (which yes, is a '79 revised '86 edition) and a -1 (which is a 1984 revised 1990 edition).

As I said, I'm fairly confident that it probably has more to do with the AIM-7F than the AIM-7E. AT that point in the dash-ones there are quite literally zero mentions of AIM-7Es in the manuals. In older ones there were mentions of how AIM-7Es and AIM-7Fs can't be carried together, but even that was omitted from the 1F-4E-1 '79 rev. '86 I think- either that or I'm thinking of the F-4E '91 (Reduced) edition.

Something I can't shake, however is that I have this really odd feeling that one of the manuals mentioned loading the Matra R.550 Magic onto an F-4, which makes absolutely no sense. I have a feeling that I read Matra Durandal somewhere and I'm conflating the two, but I get this really odd feeling that one of the dash-ones mentions the R.550. Probably not real unfortunately.

Would be cool if it was, though, like the Python 3s on the Israeli F-4Es.

 

print("shalom world")

Spoiler

 

Edited July 18, 2023 by Aussie_Mantis

[Smyth]

4 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Something I can't shake, however is that I have this really odd feeling that one of the manuals mentioned loading the Matra R.550 Magic onto an F-4, which makes absolutely no sense. I have a feeling that I read Matra Durandal somewhere and I'm conflating the two, but I get this really odd feeling that one of the dash-ones mentions the R.550. Probably not real unfortunately.

I recall seeing the Matra 250kg GP bomb on the approved stores list. With only one digit different, that's probably what you are remembering.

9 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

There's nothing in either referencing the 7Fs HOJ mode (and only the -7E (which isn't defined with a HOJ mode in the files) and the F are mentioned in the -34-1-1 (which yes, is a '79 revised '86 edition) and a -1 (which is a 1984 revised 1990 edition).

The US manuals don't discuss the Sparrow in detail (looks like a separate document that has never been released), but the British F4 weapon system manual (CD-101B-0901&2-15D) does, including HOJ for both the Sparrow (meaning Aim-7E specifically in the UK) and Skyflash. Per that document, the Sparrow will break its speedgate lock and switch to HOJ when the jamming signal is strong enough, then attempt to re-lock the target doppler if the jamming signal is lost.

If Aim-7E doesn't have HOJ in DCS currently, that ought to be fixed before it is added to a player-controlled aircraft. I think the Aim-7E in DCS right now is really only a placeholder intended for AI aircraft that aren't expected to pose a serious threat to anything (along with other weapons only carried by AI like the R24, AGM45, etc.).

[Northstar98]

10 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

AT that point in the dash-ones there are quite literally zero mentions of AIM-7Es in the manuals.

My revised 1990 -1 does mention the -7E.

10 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Something I can't shake, however is that I have this really odd feeling that one of the manuals mentioned loading the Matra R.550 Magic onto an F-4, which makes absolutely no sense. I have a feeling that I read Matra Durandal somewhere and I'm conflating the two, but I get this really odd feeling that one of the dash-ones mentions the R.550. Probably not real unfortunately.

I've got Matra 250 kg GP bombs in my revised 1990 -1s as well as the Durandal but nothing on the R.550.

5 hours ago, Smyth said:

If Aim-7E doesn't have HOJ in DCS currently, that ought to be fixed before it is added to a player-controlled aircraft. I think the Aim-7E in DCS right now is really only a placeholder intended for AI aircraft that aren't expected to pose a serious threat to anything (along with other weapons only carried by AI like the R24, AGM45, etc.).

You're probably right but yes, there is no "hoj = 1" line in the .lua for the AIM-7E-2, all other Sparrows in DCS do.

[Aussie_Mantis]

On 7/19/2023 at 7:46 PM, Northstar98 said:

My revised 1990 -1 does mention the -7E.

I've got Matra 250 kg GP bombs in my revised 1990 -1s as well as the Durandal but nothing on the R.550.

You're probably right but yes, there is no "hoj = 1" line in the .lua for the AIM-7E-2, all other Sparrows in DCS do.

Called it.

 

Would be cool if it was there, though. Just imagine the ridiculous things you could do. The Germans and Greeks mess around with IRIS-Ts and AMRAAMs on their Phantoms, which is interesting to say the least.

[Sealpup]

On 7/18/2023 at 7:13 PM, Aussie_Mantis said:

Something I can't shake, however is that I have this really odd feeling that one of the manuals mentioned loading the Matra R.550 Magic onto an F-4, which makes absolutely no sense

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

This one is fairly easy to explain: The Magic series was designed to be Sidewinder compatible for NATO interoperability reasons. If it can carry a Sidewinder, it can carry a Magic, and vice versa.

[Aussie_Mantis]

On 8/7/2023 at 10:38 PM, Sealpup said:

This one is fairly easy to explain: The Magic series was designed to be Sidewinder compatible for NATO interoperability reasons. If it can carry a Sidewinder, it can carry a Magic, and vice versa.

Yes, but no F-4 ever carried the R.550 Magic in service, and I have yet to see any pictures of the F-4 actually carrying the R.550 Magic in any way, shape, or form. for now, it remains a funny "what-if" scenario.

Also, I don't think the Magic uses the same cooling as USAF sidewinders.

Edited August 9, 2023 by Aussie_Mantis

[Northstar98]

Just an addendum to the AIM-7M discussion, JNelson has stated that a 1995 manual for the E (presumably) mentions the AIM-7M (and puzzlingly, is listed with the F as one update), so I guess that puts the M firmly on the table.

EDIT: JNelsons mentions that the change is listed as TO 1F-4-1167.

Edited August 14, 2023 by Northstar98

[Biggus]

11 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Just an addendum to the AIM-7M discussion, JNelson has stated that a 1995 manual for the E (presumably) mentions the AIM-7M (and puzzlingly, is listed with the F as one update), so I guess that puts the M firmly on the table.

 

Pretty much what I suspected when we discussed this a few weeks ago.
I'd like to know whether the E birds picked up the ability to slave -9L/M seekers the radar around the same time.

[Aussie_Mantis]

Does anyone know about whether the F-4E ever could use BOZ Countermeasure Rails like on the F-14B?

I mean, if they attach to a NATO Standard Hardpoint...

[SgtPappy]

17 minutes ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Does anyone know about whether the F-4E ever could use BOZ Countermeasure Rails like on the F-14B?

I mean, if they attach to a NATO Standard Hardpoint...

The USAF F-4E's only used either chaff pods or the more compact, self-protection ALE-40 system (~1974) that bolted onto the back of the inboard pylons. Similar in concept to the F-14's 90's pylons with the chaff in the rails but not quite the same.

[Aussie_Mantis]

On 8/17/2023 at 12:02 AM, SgtPappy said:

The USAF F-4E's only used either chaff pods or the more compact, self-protection ALE-40 system (~1974) that bolted onto the back of the inboard pylons. Similar in concept to the F-14's 90's pylons with the chaff in the rails but not quite the same.

I know they used the AN/ALE-40.

 

I just want to know if I can put BOZ countermeasure rails on it for The Lols.

[SgtPappy]

9 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

I know they used the AN/ALE-40.

 

I just want to know if I can put BOZ countermeasure rails on it for The Lols.

Right, my bad I forgot you are the loadout guy! But no I don't think you can sadly.