Aviation Classics 25 McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II

The pilot’s cockpit of a McDonnell Douglas RF-4E Phantom II of the Greek Air Force. Six of these were delivered to the 348th ‘Eyes’ Squadron of the 110 Combat Wing at Larissa in 1979, followed by 29 more ex-Luftwaffe RF-4Es in 1993. Luigino Caliaro

F-4 Phantom 3

Contents

A pair of Turkish Air Force F-4Es approach the coast.These greatly upgraded aircraft may well become the last Phantoms in service as they are expected to continue until at least 2015, perhaps longer. Luigino Caliaro

6

Angular grace… or brute force and reliability?

8

McDonnell Naval Fighters

12

Unsolicited success

18

Founding a family

24

I told you we needed a gun

4

28

Joe Kittinger

40

Norman Gaddis

50

You fight like you train

52

Power & perfection

58

The world’s slowest Phantoms

BE RI 0 C 13 BS E SU PAG Editor: Publisher: Contributors:

Tim Callaway [email protected] Dan Savage

Dave ‘Bio’ Baranek, Luigino Caliaro, Randy ‘Duke’ Cunningham, Norm deWitt, Keith Draycott, Michael France, Brig Gen Norman Gaddis, Peter Greengrass, Lt Col Axel Grossmann, Col Joe Kittinger, Constance Redgrave, Emmanuel Rodriguez, Jon Schreiber, Dan Sharp, Joe Walsh, Robert I ‘Scout’ Winebrenner

Designer: Reprographics:

Libby Fincham Simon Duncan

Group production editor:

Tim Hartley

Divisional advertising manager: Sue Keily [email protected] Advertising sales executive: Stuart Yule [email protected] 01507 529455

64

RAF Phantoms

72

F4G Wild Weasel

74 76 94

Subscription manager: Circulation manager: Marketing manager: Production manager: Publishing director: Commercial director:

Paul Deacon Steve O’Hara Charlotte Park Craig Lamb Dan Savage Nigel Hole

Editorial address:

Aviation Classics Mortons Media Group Ltd PO Box 99 Horncastle Lincs LN9 6JR

Website:

www.aviationclassics.co.uk

Customer services, back issues and subscriptions: 01507 529529 (24 hour answerphone) [email protected] www.classicmagazines.co.uk Archive enquiries:

The last naval fighter

Jane Skayman [email protected] 01507 529423

Distribution:

Taking the Smoking Thunder Hog to the boat

COMAG Tavistock Road, West Drayton, Middlesex UB7 7QE 01895 433800

Printed:

William Gibbons and Sons, Wolverhampton

In the shadow of the Phantom

104 Optimising the G-less turn...

© 2014 Mortons Media Group Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage retrieval system without prior permission in writing from the publisher ISBN No 978-1-909128-31-6

110 The Phantom abroad 116 Inside the Phantom 124 Survivors

Independent publisher since 1885

Member of the Professional Publishers’ Association

Having trouble finding a copy of this magazine? Why not just ask your local newsagent to reserve you a copy

Angular grace…

The main thing about the Phantom is it looks like a combat aircraft, the design is uncompromising. Here a pair of Luftwaffe F-4Fs are high in their natural environment. Luigino Caliaro

...or brute force and reliability?

H

ow difficult has it been to condense the story of the mighty F-4 Phantom into just 132 pages? Well, I will tell the truth, I gave up... you can’t physically do it. This aircraft was simply too successful, did too much in too many places to be so easily confined. I have covered all of the major variants, but have left it to the gentlemen who operated the Phantom in the US Air Force, US Navy and Luftwaffe to explain why the aircraft was such an incredible icon, such a perennial favourite, even today. It is interesting how many of them use the same words in their descriptions of the Phantom: power, reliability, strength, acceleration, which gave me something of a clue as to what I was dealing with here. The strangest thing is that this is not a single story of success, but two. The design of the Phantom came from a company well versed in producing the kind of tough aircraft required for use on aircraft carriers. Unsolicited by the US Navy, McDonnell aircraft tried to produce the most flexible design it could to meet any or all of the most likely future requirements. In building this degree of adaptability into the airframe, the 6 aviationclassics.co.uk

team did far more than they knew at the time. Many modifications later, the aircraft that emerged went on to set a large number of world records before it had even properly entered service, attracting the attention of the Department of Defence among others. While many of the projects instigated by Secretary of Defence Robert Strange McNamara are open to debate, the decision to force the F-4 on the US Air Force is not one of them. This is an opinion borne out by the fact the last USAF Phantom was not to leave service until 1996, 33 years later. This decision was to result in an incredible 5195 Phantoms being produced, 5068 by McDonnell Douglas (as it had become), the last being an F-4E for Korea delivered in October 1979. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries also built 127 Phantoms under licence for the Japan Air Self Defence Force, delivering its last F-4EJ in May 1981. The 11 overseas F-4 customers included Greece, Japan, the Republic of Korea and Turkey, all of whom are still using upgraded F-4s today as they still remain a viable and effective combat aircraft. So that’s the first story. The second has to be the engine, without which the legend of the Phantom would not

have shone half so bright. While it is true the UK Phantoms first ordered in 1964 were powered by Rolls Royce Speys, the majority of Phantoms were powered by the General Electric J79. One of the most reliable and successful of the third generation of turbojets, the J79 was designed by Gerhard Neumann and Neil Burgess who won the prestigious Collier Trophy in 1958 for their work on it. Over 17,000 J79s were produced in the US and under licence in six other nations, matching the incredible production record of the aircraft it is forever associated with. Perhaps this story is best summed up in one simple fact. The F-4G and the original reconnaissance version, the RF-4C, were again in combat over Iraq during Operation Desert Storm in 1991, 30 years after the Phantom began operating from US Navy carriers for the first time. Now that’s a legend. Adaptable, flexible, fast, durable. Slab sided, brutal, angular, ugly. But always reliable and somehow really quite beautiful, I give you the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom. All best, Tim

NEW BOOKAZINE

reD arroWs 50 Celebrating

Display seasons

by tiM CallaWay

tHe teaM – year by year • insiDe tHe HaWK ManoeUVres anD ForMations • anCestors

The summer of 2014 is witnessing the 50th display season of what can only be described as a British national treasure – the Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team, the Red Arrows. In this special edition the entire story of the Red Arrows is told using rare images from the team’s own archives. The first Royal Air Force aerobatic

teams were formed by individual squadrons, and their stories are told to explain how the Red Arrows came to represent the service as a whole. From 1964 to 2014, a year by year diary charts the development of the Red Arrows into the national icon we know today. The aircraft of the Red Arrows, the

ON SALE

FOR ON

LY

£8.99 ISBN: 978-1-909128-22-4

£8.99

Folland Gnat and today’s BAE Hawk, are explored inside and out, detailing what a tremendous success the Hawk has been for Britain. 50 years of Eclat celebrates the 50th display season of the Red Arrows in a truly unique way, taking the reader inside half a century of precision flying in a way no other publication ever has.

ORdER YOuR cOpY tOdAY!

Call: 01507 529529 Visit: www.classicmagazines.co.uk /thebookshelf Support

ailer ret

r lo you cal

naval fighters mcdonnell

From Phantom I to Phantom II The complete histor y of James Smith McDonnell and the McDonnell Aircraft Company was recorded at the beginning of Aviation Classics Issue 23, the McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet. Here we will only cover the family of naval jet fighters the company produced that led up to the F-4 Phantom II.

8 mcdonnell navel fighters

On July, 1946, Lieutenant Commander James Davidson made the first take off and landing of a pure jet aircraft from a US carrier aboard the USS Franklin D Roosevelt in a McDonnell FH-1 Phantom. National Museum of Naval Aviation James Smith ‘M ac’ McDonnell, founder and dr iving force behin d the McDonnell Airc raft Corporation . National Air an d Space Museu m

McDonnell is forMeD

James McDonnell left the Martin Aircraft Company where he had been working as the chief designer towards the end of 1938. On July 6, 1939, he founded the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, setting up an office in the Park Plaza Hotel in St Louis, Missouri, before moving to a second floor room in the American Airlines building at Lambert Field, later St Louis Airport. Design work began on September 25 and for the next 12 months the company submitted 12 proposals to the USAAC and four more to the US Navy. Every one of the proposals met with rejection, but McDonnell began to receive sub contract work from other companies as the US aircraft industry began to rapidly expand in the opening months of the Second World War. The company also had a number of early successes with its own designs in this time too, responding to the USAAC’s March 1940 Request For Proposal (RFP) R-40C for a long range, high speed, high altitude fighter that eventually became the XP-67. The first flight took place on January 6, 1944, but was cut short by engine problems. The low power and overheating problems of the engines were never to be solved and on September 13, the USAAF cancelled the project. Work on the second prototype was stopped. However, this ambitious fighter was to lead to McDonnell’s first major success.

naval success

Outside the McDonnell factory in St Louis, the prototype F-3H-1 Demon shows off its narrow air intakes on the fuselage sides. McDonnell

One of the proposed powerplant upgrades in the development of the XP-67 was the addition of an I-20 turbojet in the rear of each engine nacelle. This ambitious aircraft attracted the attention of the US Navy’s Bureau of Aeronautics when it began to investigate the possibilities of jet propulsion in 1942. It was the beginning of a long and highly successful association between the manufacturer and the service that would produce some remarkable aircraft. In response to the Navy’s interest, the first of these designs began with a proposal in January 1943 for a twin engined carrier based jet fighter. On January 7, the US Navy ordered two prototypes and a static test airframe of the design, intended as a carrier defence fighter and designated XFD-1. The uncertain and experimental nature of the powerplant led to

eight, six, four and twin engined designs all being considered by the head of the design team, Kendall Perkins, before two large engines were selected for simplicity and ease of maintenance. The powerplant also affected the layout of the aircraft in significant ways. Early turbojets needed short tailpipes to avoid a loss of thrust, so the engines were mounted in the wing roots, each with an individual air intake. A tricycle undercarriage was fitted to avoid the jet exhaust striking the deck of the carrier, which in the US fleet were mostly of wooden construction at that time. The tailplane was mounted on the fin and given dihedral to keep it out of the jet exhausts, but other than this the fighter was a conventional straight wing design with the cockpit and armament of four .50 cal (12.7mm) machine guns mounted in the forward fuselage. Problems with the development of the Westinghouse WE-19XB2B turbojet meant that by October 1944, only one had been delivered, so early ground trials were conducted on the power of a single engine, a short hop being made on the runway on January 2, 1945, despite only 1165lb (528kg) of thrust being available. With the fitting of the second engine, test pilot Woodward Burke took the XFD-1 on its first full flight on January 26, the aircraft proving to be easy to fly. With further testing, the incidence of the tailplane was changed to correct a longitudinal instability and the aileron circuit redesigned. With these modifications, the fighter, now named Phantom, became the first US Navy aircraft to exceed 500mph (805kph) in level flight and a production contract for 100 aircraft was issued on March 7. Sadly, the first XFD-1, 48235, was lost on November 1 due to an aileron failure which killed Woodward Burke. The second aircraft was further modified, and on July 19, 1946, Lieutenant Commander James Davidson made the first take-off and landing of a pure jet aircraft from a US carrier, the trials taking place aboard the USS Franklin D Roosevelt off Norfolk, Virginia. The end of the Second World War had seen the production order cut to just 30 aircraft, but this was reinstated to 60, the last of which was built in May 1948. The aircraft was also redesignated as the FH-1, ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 9

The second McDonnell jet fighter design for the US Navy, the F2H-2 Banshee, here carrying wing tip tanks and under wing HVARs.This aircraft is on display at the Flying Leathernecks Museum of Marine Corps Aviation in Miramar, California. Constance Redgrave

the original use of D had been to refer to Douglas, which had not produced aircraft for the US Navy for some time. With Douglas’ return to the field, McDonnell was assigned the manufacturer letter H. The Phantom entered service with VF-17A in August 1947, but by the end of 1949 all the FH-1s had been relegated to reserve and training units, replaced by McDonnell’s development of the concept, the F2H Banshee. While short lived, the FH-1 Phantom was to convince the US Navy of the feasibility of jet operations, and secure McDonnell’s future as a supplier of naval aircraft.

THE BANSHEE

Before production of the FH-1 Phantom had even begun, McDonnell realised that the low power of the early turbojets would quickly be improved upon, so began work on a design to accommodate larger engines. Initially intended to use as many parts of the FH-1 as possible, it quickly became apparent to Herman D Barkey and his engineering team that the new engines, the required increase in internal fuel and a change in standard armament from four .50 cal machine guns to four 20mm cannons would preclude this, so although similar in appearance to the FH-1, the F2H was almost an entirely new airframe.

On March 22, 1945, the US Navy ordered three XF2D-1 prototypes, later redesignated XF2H-1s. Initially powered by the 3000lb (1361kg) thrust Westinghouse J34-WE-22 turbojet, nearly twice the thrust of the FH-1s engines, these would eventually develop 3600lb (1633kg) of thrust in the later -38 version of the engine. Development was slowed by the end of the Second World War, the prototype not flying until January 11, 1947, in the hands of test pilot Robert M Eldholm. Satisfactory trials meant the F2H-1 replaced the FH-1 on the production line at St Louis in August 1948 only three months after the last Phantom had been built. The Banshee was to be a major success for McDonnell, with 895 F2Hs being built in eight major variants for the US Navy and Marine Corps and the Royal Canadian Navy before production ended on September 24, 1953. Aside from the first day fighter version, the Banshee was to be produced as a fighterbomber, nuclear strike aircraft, radar equipped all weather and night fighter and photographic reconnaissance platform, the fuselage being stretched and the wing modified to better accommodate these roles. After the first deliveries to VX-3 in August 1948 for service evaluation, the Banshee was to see combat over Korea, initially in 1951 as an escort fighter, due to its excellent climb

rate and high altitude performance, before later versions were used as fighter bombers, night fighters and reconnaissance aircraft in this theatre. Twenty US Navy and seven US Marine Corps units were to operate the aircraft until the advent of swept naval wing aircraft meant the Banshee was relegated to training and reserve units in September 1959, the last being retired in 1961. In Royal Canadian Navy service, 39 F2H-3 Banshees were transferred from US Navy stocks between 1955 and 1958, the last 11 being retired in September 1962.

THE SWEPT WING DEMON

The US Navy recognised the need for a high performance carrier based interceptor to maintain air superiority as early as 1947. An RFP for an interceptor was issued on May 21, 1948, the McDonnell Model 58 being selected from 11 competing designs seven months later and designated F3H. Designed by a team led by Richard Deagen, the programme was accelerated when the MiG-15 was first encountered over Korea in 1950, the production aircraft being ordered before the prototype had even flown. Test pilot Robert M Edholm took the first of two prototype XF3H-1s, 125444, into the air at St Louis on August 1, 1951, but problems with the engine delayed testing and development.

Two later versions of the McDonnell Banshee, the F2H-4 and F2H-2P showing the difference between the fighter and much longer reconnaissance nose fitted to the aircraft. National Museum of Naval Aviation

This is a McDonnell F3H-2 (F3-B) Demon of VF-13 when it was part of the air wing aboard the USS Shangri La, now on display in the Pima Air Museum near Tucson, Arizona. Constance Redgrave

Like the Douglas F4D Skyray, the F3H was intended to be powered by the Westinghouse J40 turbojet, but this engine never developed the promised power or anything like the required reliability and every aircraft designed to use it was eventually either reengined or cancelled. Unlike the Skyray, the F3H, now named Demon, was designed around the J40, so any change of powerplant required significant modification. At the same time as the engine problems became evident; the US Navy also changed the mission requirement to that of all weather fighter, which necessitated further changes to be made. Consequently, the first of 58 production F3H-1N Demons did not fly until December 1953. This first batch of aircraft suffered a series of accidents largely due to the engine, three of which were fatal, so were grounded and relegated to ground training use. The engine problems had prompted project engineer R J Baldwin to convince the US Navy to allow the substitution of the Allison J71 afterburning turbojet in November 1952. Two F3H-1Ns were modified as prototypes of the J71 powered F3H-2N on the production line, the wing being increased in size at the same time to cope with the additional weight of the equipment for the all weather role. The

first J71 powered Demon flew on April 23, 1953, and 140 F3H-2Ns were built. They were armed with four Colt Mk.12 20mm cannons and four AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles on underwing pylons, alongside 80 F3H-2Ms, a development able to carry four AIM-7 Sparrow missiles. The last production version, the F3H-2, could carry the developed versions of the AIM-7 and -9, as well as bombs and rockets for ground attack missions on two fuselage and six wing pylons. A total of 239 F3H-2s were produced, 519 Demons in total, the final aircraft was delivered on April 8, 1960. Altogether 22 US Navy Squadrons were to use the type, first entering service in 1956 and proving reliable and popular with pilots, not least of which due to the excellent view from the cockpit and docile handling at high altitude and on approach. The lack of power from the 14,750lb (6690kg) thrust Allison J71 and the increase in weight for the all weather role limited the Demon to subsonic performance, but it successfully fulfilled the role of fleet defence fighter until they began to be replaced, initially by the Vought F-8 Crusader and finally by the next McDonnell fighter, the superb F-4B Phantom II, in September 1964. ■

An Allison J71 powered F3H-2 Demon of VF-31 lands on a carrier.This version could carry the AIM-7 and -9 air-to-air missiles as well as bombs and rockets for ground attack missions on two fuselage and six wing pylons. National Museum of Naval Aviation

Looking surprisingly modern in the later grey and white scheme, this F2H-4 Banshee is on display in the National Museum of Naval Aviation at Pensacola, Florida. Constance Redgrave

The F3H-2M Demon could carry four AIM-7 Sparrow missiles, this one is on display in the National Museum of Naval Aviation at Pensacola, Florida. Constance Redgrave The first US Navy jet fighter, a pair of McDonnell FH-1 Phantoms are seen over St Louis. St Louis Archive

Compare this view of a production F3H-2 (F3-B) Demon with that of the prototype.The air intakes changed shape, a flight refuelling probe was added and the forward fuselage bomb racks enabled a range of ground attack munitions to be carried. Constance Redgrave McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 11

UNSOLICITED

SUCCESS The beginnings of the Phabulous Phantom II

The iconic F-4 Phantom began as an entirely private venture by McDonnell Aircraft at St Louis, an attempt to improve on the F3H Demon. The lack of an official requirement meant the new fighter was offered in a wide range of versions, both single and two seat, this inbuilt flexibility being the reason for the tremendous adaptability of the resulting design.

The engineering mockup of the YAH-1 ground attack fighter, the aircraft that would later become the world famous F4 Phantom II. Note the single seat cockpit, anhedral wing and flat tailplane. National Museum of Naval Aviation

12 UNSOLICITED SUCCESS

The same mock-up after it had been rebuilt into the F4H-1 demonstrator.The second cockpit, new air intakes and anhedral tailplane have been added, but the wingtips have yet to be turned up.The Sparrows were intended to be launched from rails that extended from their semi-recessed bays. McDonnell

The sixth F4H-1,BuNo 143391, went aboard the USS Independence on February 15, 1960 for carrier trials. McDonnell

O

ne of the most famous and enduring jet fighters of all time, the F-4 Phantom actually began in August 1953 as a project to solve the problems of an earlier aircraft. The development of the McDonnell F3H Demon had been spurred by the first encounters with the MiG-15 over Korea, the limited performance of this otherwise excellent aircraft being due to the failure of the Westinghouse J40 engine programme. The Demon had been specifically designed around this engine at the request of the Navy, so a change of powerplant would have been difficult to achieve. It was only when a series of accidents grounded the Demons that McDonnell began a complete redesign around the Allison J71 turbojet, at which time the US Navy also changed the role of the Demon to that of all weather fighter. The new role required that the Demon be capable of carrying air to air missiles and consequently required the radar and other associated equipment necessary to fire and guide the weapons. As can be imagined, with this level of equipment and engine change, the Demon that emerged as the F3H-2N was a radically different aircraft to the original.

Three men who made the Phantom; (left to right) David S. Lewis, the McDonnell preliminary design manager, Robert C. Little, chief test pilot, and Herman D. Barkey, senior project engineer. McDonnell

FIRST CONCEPTS

The extent of the work required to modify the Demon to its new role and engines got McDonnell’s preliminary design manager David S Lewis thinking that a more advanced version, beyond even the modifications already made, would increase the capabilities of the Demon as well as extend its production life. Aside from the J71, he began to examine alternative propulsion for the fighter, which other than a lack of thrust had excellent handling. Beginning in August 1953, five main concepts were studied, the first being known as the Model 98A or F3H-3, powered by a Wright J67 intended to enable the fighter to reach Mach 1.69, a marked improvement over the existing Demon of over a third greater speed. Due to the nature of naval operations, twin engined concepts were also studied, the first being the Model 98B, which had two options for powerplants and two variants, a photo reconnaissance aircraft and a fighter. The photo reconnaissance version was known as the F3H-F, and could be based on either of the two twin engined studies. The first, known as the F3H-G had two Wright J65 turbojets, while the F3H-H had a pair of

The prototype YF4H-1, BuNo 142259, making its first flight over the St. Louis area on May 27, 1958 in the hands of Robert C. Little. Even in this early version with the flat canopy and small nose radome, the unusual lines of the Phantom are unmistakeable. McDonnell

General Electric J79s, all three studies having a redesigned wing of greater area to support the greater weight of two engines. Similar to the Model 98B was the Model 98C, which had the same choice of engines but a new delta wing, followed by the Model 98D which had a straight wing. Lastly, the Model 98E or F3H-J also featured a delta wing, but a much larger and more refined design of thinner cross section. Both of the delta winged studies were what are known as tailed deltas, inasmuch as they still retained a tailplane. There was no competition running or outstanding specified requirement from the US Navy at the time, but McDonnell did know of their interest in all weather fighters due to the work being carried out on the Demon. Given this, McDonnell presented the Model 98 concepts to the Navy’s Bureau of Aeronautics as an unsolicited proposal for an all weather fighter on September 19, 1953. McDonnell made the aircraft as adaptable as possible to whatever role the Navy might be focussing on with some novel design features, including single and two seat nose sections configured for air to air, air to ground or reconnaissance versions being part of the proposal. The aircraft was also to be armed with four 20mm cannon or retractable ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 13

The 11th F4H-1F, BuNo 145310 demonstrated the Phantom’s prodigious weight-carrying abilities by lifting and dropping 22 500lb bombs using all five weapons stations to do so. McDonnell

The fifth F4H-1 built, BuNo.143390, was used by VX-5, a US Navy test and evaluation squadron at El Centro, California. Note the early air intakes. McDonnell

The first units to receive Phantoms were training squadrons VF-121 and Detachment A of VF-101 in December 1960.These were F4H1Fs, later designated F-4As, sometimes referred to as TF-4As to denote their nonoperational status. McDonnell

The second YF4H-1, BuNo.142260, was later fitted with a water/alcohol inlet spray to cool the air and increase thrust and used to set a number of world records. McDonnell

President Dwight D. Eisenhower inspected an F4H-1 Phantom II aircraft on October 21, 1960, at NAS North Island in San Diego. McDonnell

rocket packs, as well as being able to carry a very wide range of weapons on nine hardpoints under the fuselage and wings. Of the proposals, the US Navy found the Model 98Bs F3H-G and H concepts most interesting, ordering a full scale mock up early in 1954. Initially both of these designs were single seat and twin engined, featuring a delta wing with a 45º sweep to the leading edge, the larger area being to take the increased weight.

GROUND ATTACK TO FIGHTER

At that time it was considered that the US Navy’s supersonic fighter requirements would be fulfilled by the recently ordered Grumman F-11 Tiger and Vought F-8 Crusader for the foreseeable future. Fortunately, the projected performance of the McDonnell proposal keenly interested the Bureau of Aeronautics, so the design was reworked with 11 hardpoints for weapons to become a fighter bomber. On October 18, 1954, after an inspection of the mock up, the US Navy ordered two prototypes of the design,

designated YAH-1s and intended as cannon armed, single seat attack aircraft. However, after a review of fleet requirements, the US Navy decided that the attack role would be taken by the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk. On May 26, 1955, taking advantage of the flexibility of the original proposal, the order for the two prototypes was altered to develop a two seat, missile armed, all weather, fleet defence fighter redesignated as the YF4H-1. Interestingly, this was the role the F3H Demon had mostly fulfilled during its career. On July 25, the order was increased to cover five pre-production aircraft with 16 more added to this the following year. The General Electric J79 became the engine of choice, not least for its lower fuel consumption over the J65, which

made the Navy’s requested three hour loiter endurance easier to achieve. The design team under Herman D Barkey placed the engines low in the rear fuselage, each fed by a fixed geometry cheek intake. The armament was set at four AIM-7 Sparrow III semi active radar homing missiles mounted in semi-recessed bays under the fuselage, with the option to carry AIM-9 Sidewinders on underwing pylons. The original cannon were deleted for the fleet defence role, making the YF4H-1 the first US missile only fighter, missile guidance being provided by the AN/APG-50 radar in the slim nose. The wing was an anhedral delta design with a level tailplane at the base of the fin at this stage, but wind tunnel testing revealed that this configuration limited the performance to below Mach 2 and exhibited marked instability. The changes made to the design to correct these problems were to later cause an RAF engineer responsible for receiving the first British Phantom to enquire if it had been delivered the right way up! The tests revealed the wing needed a 5º dihedral, which would mean completely redesigning the centre section, a major undertaking. Instead, 12º of dihedral were added to the outer wing panels, which could fold at this point reduce the space the new type required in carrier hangars. The outer panels also broadened in chord to give a distinctive dog tooth to the leading edge, while the single piece tailplanes were given ➤

McDonnell F4H-1, BuNo.146817 was used in weapons systems trials, seen here loaded with the maximum six AIM-7 Sparrows radar guided missiles. McDonnell 14 UNSOLICITED SUCCESS

PHANTOM PERFORMANCE RECORDS. Date

Aircraft

Crew

Location/Project Record

December 6, 1959

Second YF4H-1 BuNo.142260

Cdr L E Flint

Edwards AFB, Operation Top Flight Absolute altitude, 98,556ft (30,040m)

September 5, 1960

F4H-1F

Lt Col T H Miller

Not known Speed over a 500km closed course, 1216.74mph (1958.16kph)

September 25, 1960

F4H-1F

Cdr J F Davis

Not known Speed over a 100km course, 1390.26mph (2237.41kph)

May 24, 1961

Five F4H-1Fs

Lt R F Gordon, later a Project LANA, the 50th Anniversary Gemini and Apollo of Naval Aviation attempt on the astronaut and Lt B R Young Bendix Trophy, for the fastest speed across the US, from Ontario California to Floyd Bennett Field, New York. The fastest crew, as listed, covered the 2446 miles (3936km) at an average speed of 870mph (1400kph) in just 2 hrs 47 mins, refuelling form A3D-2 Skywarrior tankers three times en route.

August 28, 1961

F4H-1 BuNo.145307

Lt H Hardisty and Lt E H DeEsch

Project Sageburner from Holloman AFB, New Mexico Low altitude speed over a 3km course at 125ft, 902.769mph (1452.869kph)

November 22, 1961

Second YF4H-1 BuNo.142260 fitted with a water/alcohol inlet spray to cool the air and increase thrust

Lt Col R B Robinson

Operation Skyburner at Edwards AFB, California Speed over a 15/25km course, 1606.3mph (2585kph) at 45,000ft (13,715m), the first absolute speed record in excess of Mach 2.

December 5, 1961

Second YF4H-1 BuNo.142260 fitted with a water/alcohol inlet spray to cool the air and increase thrust

Cdr G W Ellis

Edwards AFB, California Sustained altitude, 66,443.8ft (20,252.1m)

February 21, 1962

F4H-1

Lt Cdr J W Young

Operation High Jump, NAS Brunswick, Maine Time to height, 9843ft (3000m) in 34.52 seconds

February 21, 1962

F4H-1

Cdr D M Longton

Operation High Jump, NAS Brunswick, Maine Time to height, 19,685ft (6000m) in 48.78 seconds

March 1, 1962

F4H-1

Lt Col W C McGraw

Operation High Jump, NAS Brunswick, Maine Time to height, 29,528ft (9000m) in 61.62 seconds

March 1, 1962

F4H-1

Lt Col W C McGraw

Operation High Jump, NAS Brunswick, Maine Time to height, 39,370ft (12,000m) in 77.15 seconds

March 1, 1962

F4H-1

Lt Cdr D W Nordberg

Operation High Jump, NAS Brunswick, Maine Time to height, 49,213ft (15,000m) in 114.54 seconds

March 31, 1962

F4H-1

Lt Cdr F T Brown

Operation High Jump, NAS Point Mugu, California Time to height, 65,617ft (20,000m) in 178.5 seconds

April 3, 1962

F4H-1

Lt Cdr J W Young

Operation High Jump, NAS Point Mugu, California Time to height, 82,021ft (25,000m) in 230.44 seconds

April 4, 1962

F4H-1

Lt Cdr D W Nordberg

Operation High Jump, NAS Point Mugu, California Time to height, 98,425ft (30,000m) in 371.43 seconds McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 15

23.25º of anhedral. The air intakes were also modified with adjustable ramps to maintain subsonic airflow to the engines, which in the first prototype were 14,800lb (6713 kg) thrust J79-GE-3A turbojets as the -8 version intended for the F4H-1 were not ready. In this form, the first Phantom II, 142259, took to the air at St Louis on May 27, 1958, this first flight performed by Robert C Little. Testing showed the air intakes required further modification, including the now familiar 12,500 small holes in the inner intake cheek door to extract the slow moving boundary layer air, preventing turbulent airflow in the intake ducts. Boundary layer control was also introduced on the leading edge slats and trailing edge flaps, to improve their performance, through the addition of ducts through which air from the compressors was blown across the lifting surfaces. In December 1958, the Phantom II was tested against the single engined Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III in the future fleet defence

role, the Phantom II being declared the winner on December 17 as the US Navy decided that the high workload of a missile armed interceptor required a crew of two. Also on that day, 24 more F4H-1s were ordered, bringing the total on order to 45. These first 45 pre- and production F4H-1s were powered by the J79-GE-2 or -2A version of the engine, producing 16,150lb (7326kg) of thrust, and were known as F4H-1Fs until the common designation scheme introduced in 1962, when they became F-4As.

TRIALS AND MODIFICATIONS

Testing revealed that more modifications were necessary, including a revised and raised canopy to improve the crew’s view, a larger radome which increased the diameter of the nose to accommodate the 32in (81cm) antenna of the powerful Westinghouse AN/APQ-72 radar and further changes to the intake design. The intake now featured two

On December 6, 1959, the second YF4H-1 prototype performed a zoom climb to a world record altitude of 98,557ft (30,040m) as part of Operation Top Flight. Note the early canopy and nose profile for the AN/APG-50 radar. US Navy

Left: Low over New Mexico, Project Sageburner sets a low altitude speed record of 902.769mph (1452.869kph) on August 28, 1961, flown by Lt H Hardisty and Lt E H DeEsch. McDonnell Right: Project LANA, a 50th Anniversary of Naval Aviation transcontinental race for the Bendix Trophy, was won by Lt R F Gordon, later a Gemini and Apollo astronaut and Lt B R Young, a crew from VF-121, on May 24, 1961. Note the early air intakes. US Navy 16 UNSOLICITED SUCCESS

ramps ahead of the duct, the first fixed at five degrees to the airflow, the second being variable up to 10º of incidence to control the intake airflow. Payload trials were carried out, including the carriage of an impressive 24 500lb (227kg) bombs on the fuselage and wing pylons. The range and endurance targets set by the US Navy were easily met as the centreline and inner wing stations could carry external fuel tanks that increased the total capacity from 1957 US gallons (7408 l) of internal fuel carried in the fuselage and wings to 3297 US gallons (12,480 l). As well as this prodigious capacity, the Phantom II was fitted with a retractable air refuelling probe on the starboard side of the fuselage just under the cockpit to extend its range still further. The Phantom also acquired one of its identifying features at this point, with the addition of a Texas Instruments AAA4 infra-red sensor in a small pod under the radome. All of these changes were retro-fitted

or introduced on the production line as the Phantoms began to roll out of St Louis. On February 15, 1960, the fourth pre-production aircraft, 143391, made the first launch and recovery aboard an aircraft carrier, CVA-62, the USS Independence, with US Navy service trials beginning in July that year. During their service life, the F-4As were used by the fleet replacement training Squadrons, VF-101 and VF-121, where they were often referred to as TF-4As to show they were not a fully combat capable version of the aircraft. However, the early Phantoms did set an impressive series of performance records as listed in the table here, some of which were to stand until 1975 and the introduction of the F-15. A number of F-4As were modified with the J79-GE-8 engines and brought up to the standard of the next, and first full production version, the F-4B.

FULL PRODUCTION

The McDonnell F-4B Phantom II was the first fully formed version of the type, with a number of improvements that were to remain features of the aircraft until production ended in 1979. The troublesome intakes were finalised, again with two ramps ahead of the intake, but now the first ramp was set at 10º to the airflow and the second could be altered in angle up to 14º. The intakes fed a pair of the

16,950lb (7688kg) thrust J79-GE-8 turbojets which were now rolling off the General Electric production lines in numbers. Initially known as the F4H-1, this variant also had a slightly increased internal fuel capacity of an additional 26 US gallons possible through space saving inside the airframe as the design was refined for series production. The armament of four AIM-7 Sparrows radar guided missiles was augmented by the ability to carry four AIM-9 infra red guided Sidewinders on rails on the inner wing pylons. In all, 649 F-4Bs were to be built for the US Navy and Marine Corps, a remarkable figure until it is realised that on its introduction to service, the Phantom had the greatest speed, range and firepower of any US fighter of the time. It was this performance that attracted the attention of the USAF, 29 F-4Bs being loaned to the Air Force for trials beginning in October 1961, the first two being marked as F110As, the original USAF designation. The F-4B equipped VF-74 and VF-114, these becoming the first operational Phantom Squadrons, VF-74 completing the unit’s carrier qualifications in October 1961, the first Phantom Squadron to do so. The F-4B was to be used widely and modified into a range of sub versions, which will be covered later in this magazine. The Phantom as we know it had arrived. ■ Words: Tim Callaway

The first US Navy Squadron to operate the Phantom II was VF-74 aboard the USS Forrestal, who took delivery of an initial batch of F4H-1s, later known as F-4Bs, in 1961. Note the enlarged canopy and radome for the Westinghouse AN/APQ-72 radar. National Museum of Naval Aviation

Project High Jump was carried out at Brunswick, Maine, and Point Mugu, California Naval Air Stations in 1962. No fewer than eight time-to-climb records were set by a number of F4H-1s. US Navy

The second YF4H-1, BuNo.142260, modified to F4H-1 standards and fitted with water/alcohol injection was used on Operation Skyburner on November 22, 1961 to capture the world absolute speed record of 1606.3mph (2585kph) at 45,000ft (13,715m), the first absolute speed record in excess of Mach 2. US Navy

Foundinga

family

The F-4B, C and D

The development and modification process that the YF4H-1 and F4H-1 had gone through in the 31 months between its first flight and its entr y into ser vice had changed the design in detail but not in many major respects. The first production version, the F-4B, was fast, powerful and well armed, and was to be the basis of a wide range of variants.

Although the Phantom is most remembered for its air to air exploits over Vietnam, in fact it was mostly used as a fighter bomber, as seen here with a US Navy F-4B Phantom of VF-111. US Navy

An F-4B of VF-41 launches from the waist catapult of USS Independence as A-4 Skyhawks of VA-86 launch from the bows. Eventually the F-4 would replace many of the A-4s in the attack role. US Navy

The front and rear cockpit schematics for the US Navy F-4B Phantom. US Navy

A

s already mentioned, the first operational unit to equip with the F-4B was VF-74, who got its first aircraft on July 8, 1961. The Phantom’s first deployments on US aircraft carriers were made by VF-102 aboard the USS Enterprise between August and October 1962 and by VF-74 aboard the USS Forrestal between August 1962 and March the following year. The US Marine Corps received its first Phantoms when VMFA-314 at MCAS El Toro in California transitioned to the type in June 1962. The Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 gave Phantom crews from units based on the USS Enterprise and Independence as well as those at NAS Key West in Florida their first taste of near combat conditions as they helped to enforce the blockade of the island.

INTO COMBAT

Less than two years after the sorties around Cuba, US Navy Phantom crews flew their first combat missions over Vietnam on August 5, 1964. These were F-4Bs from VF-142 and VF143 aboard the USS Constellation, flying escort missions during Operation Pierce Arrow against North Vietnamese gunboats and shore support facilities in the Gulf of Tonkin. The first air to air victory in an F-4 was achieved by an F-4B of VF96 flown by Lt T M Murphy and Ensign R Fegan, who shot down a Chinese MiG-17 on April 9, 1965. The fate of their Phantom is still

the cause of controversy, as it is undetermined whether Murphy and Fegan were shot down by the guns of another MiG or an AIM-7 Sparrow from one of their own wingmen. During the war, the F-4B received a number of upgrades, particularly to its defensive capabilities. AN/ALQ-51 and -100 radar jamming and track breaking systems, a Radar Homing and Warning System and chaff and flare dispensers were all added to the airframe to better defend the Phantom against the North Vietnamese air defence system. Altogether US Navy F-4B units made 51 war cruises into the Gulf of Tonkin between August 1964 and August 1973, with 33 more being made by other units operating different versions of the aircraft. During this time Phantoms accounted for 40 enemy aircraft destroyed, against 5 F-4s lost to enemy aircraft, 13 to surface to air missiles and 53 to anti-aircraft fire. When added to the 54 Phantoms lost in operational accidents, the long drawn out South East Asian war was a costly one for the US Navy’s F-4 units. The basic F-4B was to be modified into a number of roles, including small numbers as the DF-4B Drone Director and the NF-4B test and research platform. The Phantom also became an electronic warfare aircraft with the development of the EF-4B which carried additional jamming pods and other defence countermeasures systems under the wings. These were issued to VAW, later VAQ-33, in the

A rare EF-4B of VAQ-33 in formation with a Lockheed EC-121 Warning Star and Douglas A-4 Skyhawk.The unit operated such a diversity of types to provide electronic threats to the fleet on exercises, effectively being electronic aggressors. US Navy

early 1970s and were used as aggressor aircraft, simulating electronic warfare and other threats to the fleet during exercises worldwide. Beginning with the third F-4B built, BuNo.148365, converted in 1972, a great many F-4Bs ended their service lives as target drones or QF-4Bs, intended to provide supersonic targets for missile development programmes at the Naval Missile Centre at NAS Point Mugu among other units. Lastly, 46 F-4Bs were built as RF-4Bs reconnaissance aircraft for the US Marine Corps. The concept of using the Phantom as a reconnaissance aircraft had been part of the original proposal from McDonnell in 1953, known as the Model 98P and later the F4H-1P, but it was not taken up as other aircraft filled the supersonic reconnaissance role at that time. By 1962, the RF-110A was under development for the USAF and included night reconnaissance capabilities, something the US Marine Corps lacked at the time, so the first order for nine RF-4Bs was placed in February 1963. The radar was removed from the nose of the F-4, which was extended by 4ft 8.875in (1.44m) and could accommodate forward and side looking oblique and mapping cameras, a sideways looking radar and other sensors, including infra red detectors. For night McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 19

The US Marine Corps operated both the armed and unarmed Phantom, as an F-4B of VFMA-531 taxies past the nose of one of the Corps’ RF-4B reconnaissance aircraft. USMC

When the first F-4Ds were introduced, they had lost the ability to carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder in favour of the AIM-4D Falcon.This mistake was soon rectified as the AIM-9 was a far more successful missile. USAF

photography, the RF-4B was fitted with ejectors that launched photoflash cartridges upwards and outwards from the fuselage sides. Interestingly, film carried by the aircraft could be processed in flight and the magazines ejected by parachute to allow the rapid delivery of images to forces on the ground in the area of interest. All RF-4Bs were completely unarmed, the first sortie over Vietnam being flown by VCMJ-1 on November 3, 1966. The unit was based at Da Nang between 1966 and 1970, during which time only one of its RF-4Bs was damaged by ground fire and none were lost. The first 36 RF-4Bs were based on the F-4B airframe and engines, the last 10 retaining the engines, but using the F-4J airframe, which will be described later. Despite this, and the Sensor Update and Refurbishment Effort (Project SURE) that was applied to the aircraft in 1975, the US Marine reconnaissance variant retained the designation RF-4B throughout its service life. The SURE upgrade fitted a new navigation system, data links and electronic counter measures, as well as strengthening the airframe. These Photo-Phantoms were to remain in service until 1990 with the introduction of the Advanced Tactical Airborne Reconnaissance System (ATARS) for the F/A-18 Hornet.

USAF PHANTOMS

Given the excellent performance of the new fighter, US Secretary of Defence Robert Strange McNamara directed the USAF to evaluate the F4H-1F to meet their needs for a new interceptor, tactical fighter bomber and reconnaissance aircraft. McNamara was on a misguided economy drive to develop aircraft that could fulfil a number of roles for all three services, a plan which would meet with success and failure, the Phantom being one of the former. Starting in 1961, the Phantom II was tested against the Convair F-106A Delta Dart, the 20 FOUNDING A FAMILY

Republic F-105 Thunderchief and McDonnell’s own F-101 Voodoo in these three roles, proving to have advantages in range, payload, turning performance, equipment and maintenance requirements in all three comparisons. The USAF interest in the Phantom had been less than enthusiastic due to the nature of the way it was forced upon them, but following the outcome of the tests, all that changed and the USAF would become the Phantom’s largest customer. As a result, in January 1962, President John F Kennedy requested Congressional approval for the acquisition of F-110A tactical fighters and RF-110A reconnaissance aircraft for the USAF. Two F4H-1s were transferred to Langley Air Force Base in Virginia on January 24 for evaluation by Tactical Air Command (TAC), with the result that in March, type was selected as the fighter and tactical reconnaissance aircraft for TAC and the US Air Forces deployed in Europe and the Pacific. A further 27 F-4Bs were loaned from the US Navy to allow testing and development trials to take place to refine the Phantom for US Air Force use. The common designation scheme of September 1962 meant the F-110As were designated as the F-4C for the fighter bomber and RF-4C for the reconnaissance aircraft. Interestingly, the latter were to be among the longest serving Phantoms, still performing their original role during the Gulf War of 1991. The F-4C differed little externally from the Navy’s F-4B, but had a number of detail differences of note. The USAF had full dual controls in both cockpits and a refuelling receptacle in the upper fuselage behind the cockpit instead of the retractable probe of the naval version. The J79-GE-15 engines produced slightly more thrust at 17,000lb (7711kg) and featured a built in cartridge starting system to minimise the required ground equipment on deployments abroad.

The AN/APQ-100 radar as mounted in the nose of the USAF’s F-4C version of the Phantom. USAF

The use of thicker low pressure types for better rough field capabilities meant the upper wing skin and undercarriage doors had to be bulged slightly to accommodate them, and the undercarriage was fitted with a full anti-skid braking system. The electronics suite on the F-4C had changed markedly from that of the F-4B, with an AN/APQ-100 radar fitted in the nose and an AN/ASN-48 Inertial Navigation System reporting to an AN/ASN-46 Navigation Computer. The F-4B’s AN/AJB-3 bomb aiming system was replaced by the more sophisticated AN/AJB-7 which had all altitude capabilities more suited to the USAF’s intended fighter bomber role for the aircraft. The range of weapons the F-4C could carry was extended to include both guided and unguided bombs, air to surface missiles and rockets and the SUU16/A and -23/A gun pods, as well as the AIM-4 Falcon air to air missile in addition to the existing Sparrow and Sidewinder capabilities.

INTO SERVICE

The first USAF F-4C Phantoms were delivered to MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, equipping the 4453rd Combat Crew Training Wing in November 1963, the first combat unit to receive then being the 12 Tactical Fighter Wing (TFW) at the same base 11 months later. One of the units of the 12th, the 555th Tactical Fighter Squadron (TFS), was the first to take the F-4C abroad when they were detached on temporary duty to Naha Air Base on Okinawa in Japan in December 1964. The activities of this unit in the Vietnam War are more fully described in Joe Kittinger’s story on page 28 of this issue. The 555th became the first Phantom unit to use the

The USAF evaluated two F4H-1Fs loaned from the Navy in 1961.The designation of F-110A and the name Spectre did not last long. USAF

Two US Marine Corps RF-4B Phantom reconnaissance aircraft of VMFP-3.The USMC amalgamated all of its RF-4Bs into one unit in 1975 at MCAS El Toro,VMPF-3 operating the Phantom until it disbanded in 1990. US Navy The AIM-7 Sparrow was still the main armament of the F-4C. Here, ground crew prepared AIM-7 Sparrow III missiles for loading on US Air Force F-4C Phantoms at an air base in South Vietnam. USAF

AGM-62 Walleye TV-guided air to ground missile when they successfully attacked a bridge on August 24, 1967. Deployments to Europe followed, as did the first to Vietnam when the 45th TFS moved to Ubon Air Base in Thailand in April 1965. Further weapons advances were introduced into combat by the USAF F-4 units in Vietnam, including the GBU-10 laser guided bomb in 1968 and the EOGB (Electro-Optical Guided Bomb) in 1972. The F-4C was also effective in the air to air role over Vietnam, the first two MiG-17s being shot down by two 45th TFS aircraft crewed by Captains K E Holcombe and AC Clark and Captains T S Roberts and R C Anderson on July 10, 1965, these twin victories also being the first of the conflict for the USAF. By the end of the war, F-4Cs were to claim a total of 22 North Vietnamese MiGs shot down by AIM-9 Sidewinders, 14 with AIM-7 Sparrows, four by gun pods and two which crashed while manoeuvring in a dogfight.

Altogether 583 F-4Cs were built for the USAF, 40 of which were later transferred to the Spanish Air Force as will be related in the Phantom abroad section on page 110 of this issue. Aside from these, a number of other F4Cs were modified as different versions or built as such from the outset. The first of these were the 36 EF-4Cs, the forerunner of the later F-4G Wild Weasel aircraft that will be covered later as these constitute a separate version in their own right. A side shoot to the F-4C development and concurrent with it was the YRF-110A of May 1962, the first all weather reconnaissance version of the Phantom. Six F-4Bs were modified to become two YRF-110A prototypes and four RF110A development aircraft. These aircraft were redesignated as the YRF-4C and RF-4C and were used to test the reconnaissance cameras, other sensors and the control equipment that would go on to be fitted to the most produced reconnaissance variant of the Phantom. Interestingly, the first prototype YRF-4C, 6212200, was to have a remarkable career as a flying testbed. It was rebuilt as the aerodynamic prototype of the F-4E in 1965, then with the slatted tailplane, lighter rudder

and various components made of composite materials in 1970, then with a fly-by-wire control system in April 1972. Lastly, 12200 was fitted with canard foreplanes and a new control system as part of the Precision Aircraft Control Technology (PACT) study in 1974, before being rightly donated to the US Air Force Museum at Wright Patterson AFB in 1979. The more conventional production version of the RF-4C was first delivered in May 1964, entering service with the 33rd Tactical Reconnaissance Training Squadron at Shaw AFB, North Carolina, in September. Based alongside the training unit was the 16th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron, who became the first Squadron to take the RF-4C to war when nine of their aircraft deployed to Tan Son Nhut Air Base in South Vietnam on October 30, 1965. Like the RF-4B of the US Marine Corps, a variety of up to three KA-1, KA-55A, KA-91, KS-56 or KS-87 high and low altitude vertical or oblique cameras could be mounted in the elongated nose. These could also process and eject film magazines in flight to allow images to reach the commanders on the ground as quickly as possible and the aircraft was fitted with a photoflash ejector to

The front and rear cockpits of the F-4C, this being the aircraft in the USAF Museum at Wright Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio. USAF McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 21

The other air to air, although largely used air to ground, weapon on the F-4C and D was the SUU-23A 20mm cannon pod, seen here being loaded with ammunition. USAF The F-4C and D introduced a range of new weapons, not least of which was the Laser Guided Bomb (LGB), a pair of which are seen here on the inner pylons of an F-4C. USAF

allow photography at night and in poor weather. The nose also housed a Texas instruments AN/APQ-99 radar, later upgraded to a 162, which could be used to map the ground or provide navigation information in terrain following mode, as well as give warning for terrain avoidance. Two more sensors could be carried, a Goodyear AN/APQ-102 Sideways Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR) could provide terrain and vehicle information, or for night or poor weather missions, a AN/AAD-5 or AN/AAS-18 infra-red detection and recording sensor could be mounted just aft of the nosewheel bay. For self defence, the RF-4C was fitted with a variety of electronic counter measures (ECM) during its career including a radar warning receiver. It could also carry the Westinghouse AN/AQL-115 or Raytheon AN/AQL-184 ECM pod on the inboard wing pylons. During the Vietnam War 74 RF-4Cs were to be lost, none in air to air encounters, all to ground fire. In 1970, 20 RF-4Cs were fitted with AN/ARN-92 LORAN-D long range navigation equipment, the aircraft being identified by the long ‘towel rail’ antenna with its three supports running along the spine of the fuselage aft of the cockpit. Other upgrades during the long service life of the RF-4C were the addition of the AN/ALQ-125 Tactical Electronic Reconnaissance sensor (TEREC) with its attendant data link for transmitting images, the Electronic Wide Angle Camera System (EWACS) and the AN/AVQ-26 Pave Tack combined infra red sensor and laser target designator. In 1971, after two RF-4Cs had been loaned

to Israel for trials, experiments began to fit the General Dynamics HIAC-1 Long Range Oblique Photography (LOROP) camera with its 66in high resolution capabilities to the RF4C to allow Israel to photograph deep into its neighbour’s territories without overflying them. This was carried in a large G-139 centreline pod and limited the aircraft’s performance severely, so the idea was developed into the F-4E(S) which will be described later. The USAF did acquire and use a few of the LOROP pods itself along the borders of North Korea and the Warsaw Pact in Europe and 24 of its RF-4Cs were fitted with the CAI KS-127A or -127F 66 inch LOROP cameras in the nose. The last RF-4C of the 503 built was delivered to the USAF in 1973, the Nevada Air National Guard not retiring the last until September 1995, a remarkably long career. Before retirement, 12 RF-4Cs were transferred to Korea in 1989 and later 12 more went to Spain, the only air forces other than the USAF to use the type.

ENTER THE D

The F-4C had very much been a US Navy fighter ‘air force-ised’ by the replacement of naval avionics and systems by those more compatible with the USAF’s needs and missions. This was done rapidly to comply with Secretary of Defence McNamara’s policies of the time, but shortcomings soon became apparent, especially in air to ground and air to air gunnery accuracy. The USAF’s Tactical Air Command began drawing up a list of modifications for the Phantom to make it more of the aircraft they

The schematics for the front and rear cockpits of the F-4C taken from the aircrew manual. USAF 22 FOUNDING A FAMILY

An F-4C approaches a Boeing KC-135 tanker boom with its upper refuelling receptacle open. Images such as this made the Phantom one of the icons of the Vietnam War period. USAF

needed. Some of the more extreme changes, such as the use of the Pratt and Whitney TF-30 turbofan in place of the General Electric J79, were shelved as they would have broken the McNamara code of commonality with the US Navy, but in March 1964 the F-4D was ordered for the USAF. Again, the major changes were internal, only a slightly enlarged radome showing that it contained the AN/APQ-109A radar. This radar had a number of advantages, not least the saving of weight and space in the nose as many of the low voltage system components were now solid state as compared to the AN/APQ-100 radar it replaced. The larger antenna required a slightly larger radome, but this was not a sure fire way to identify the F-4D as a number of them were fitted with the F4C’s system, making them externally identical. Internally however, there was a great deal of difference, especially in the capabilities and accuracy of the new avionics. The AN/APQ109 radar display could show and identify ground beacons; could display the TV picture from such weapons as the AGM-62 Walleye

Right: A side view of a McDonnell F-4D Phantom of the 81st Tactical Fighter Wing. Keith Draycott

and could, using moveable cursors, be used in an air to ground ranging mode. The inertial navigation system was upgraded to the Litton ASN-63 and an AN/ASQ-91 weapon release computer was fitted, all of which, when combined with the new radar, took care of the air to ground accuracy concerns. The air to air gunnery problems were addressed with the addition of the AN/ASG22 lead computing sight which offered greater cueing and steering to the pilot. The infra red sensor in its small pod under the nose radome was deleted, only to be restored later in production to carry the forward sensor of the ALR-25/26 radar and SAM warning receiver. Still later this system was upgraded to the ALR-69(V)2 and the APS107A warning systems which were mounted on and in the pod. The F-4D first flew on December 7, 1965 with the first deliveries being made to the 36th TFW at Bitburg in Germany in March 1966. Altogether 825 F-4Ds were built, 793 for the USAF and 32 for the Imperial Iranian Air Force. A number of USAF aircraft were transferred to the Greek and Korean Air Forces, but this will be covered later. The improvement in the F-4Ds weapons aiming abilities was quickly noted in the many ground attack, particularly close support, missions being flown. The improvement in air to air capabilities was also evident, the USAF’s first ace of the conflict, Captain Steve Ritchie scoring his fifth victory in an F-4D on August 28, 1972.

SIDEWINDERS

One of the strangest changes in the F-4D was the deletion of the ability to carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder on the underwing pylons, replacing it with the bulkier Hughes AIM-4D Falcon infra red guided missile. This proved to be less than satisfactory as a dogfighting missile, having been designed as a bomber interceptor weapon. Long delays in weapons launch from the time the trigger was depressed, engine flameouts caused by the Falcon’s launch and the lack of a proximity fuse necessitating a direct hit were just a few of the problems posed by the missile, all of which caused loud complaints from the Phantom crews in Vietnam. Consequently, the AIM-9 Sidewinder wiring was restored to the inboard underwing pylons beginning in 1967. The F-4D was also the first Phantom to be equipped to use a number of specialist sensors and target designators. The AN/AVQ-10 Pave Knife and AN/ASQ-152(V)-2 Pave Spike laser target designators could be fitted, the former on an inboard underwing pylon, the latter in one of the semi-recessed housings for the AIM-7 Sparrow missile on the underside of the fuselage. A small number of F-4Ds were modified to use other sensors under the Pave Sword, Pave Fire, Pave Light and Pave Arrow designations, but one other change worthy of note was the Combat Tree

upgrade of 1968, which added an attachment point to the inner pylons for an ECM pod, allowing a full missile load to be carried along with the ECM equipment. Another 72 F-4Ds were fitted with AN/ARN92 LORAN-D long range navigation equipment and known as Pave Phantoms. This highly accurate navigation system was for one use only in Vietnam, to allow the extremely accurate dropping of sensors along the Ho Chi Minh trail that allowed other aircraft to detect then interdict Vietnamese supply convoys moving on the trail. There was one other development of the F-4D, the EF-4D, but like the EF-4C, this will be covered in the Wild Weasel article later. The F-4D was to serve the USAF extremely well in the ground attack and strike fighter roles, the last were not withdrawn from service until 1992 when they left the Air National Guard. The Phantom had arrived and rapidly developed as a weapons system due to the Vietnam War, improving in accuracy and survivability. That being said, the war was a bloody one for the F-4 units. The USAF lost 445 F-4Cs and D and Es, along with 83 RF-4Cs. The US Navy and Marine Corps lost 233 F-4Bs and RF-4Bs, meaning that 761 Phantoms of all types had been shot down or crashed, by far the greatest number being lost to Anti-Aircraft Artillery (AAA), ground fire. Conversely, Phantom crews claimed 150.5 enemy aircraft destroyed, mostly MiG-17s, –19s and 21s. Strangely, the air to air role of the Phantom is often over

emphasised in recording the story of the aircraft in the Vietnam War. The Phantom units were striking ground targets in both North and South Vietnam on a daily basis, often flying more than one air strike in a day, which explains the high proportion brought down by AAA. The Phantom steadily replaced many other types in the USAF and US Navy roster, proving the types adaptability to a wide range of roles not originally considered for it, so by the end of the Vietnam War it was the most numerous fighter bomber in service by far. The conflict had three other effects on the Phantom, it led to the rapid development of the ultimate navy and air force variants, the F4J and F-4E respectively, it proved the performance of the type under difficult circumstances and attracted overseas customers and finally, it turned the Phantom into an icon. You could not watch the news in the 1960s and early 1970s without seeing one somewhere, so like the Bell UH-1D Huey, it became a symbol for that war, forever associated with it. The last USAF F-4Ds were not to be retired until they left the Air National Guard in 1992, some 20 years later, but they were still seen as Vietnam era aircraft. As already mentioned, the development of the Phantom was far from over, the next article will deal with the ultimate USAF development of the type, the F-4E. ■ Words: Tim Callaway

Left: One of the 72 F-4Ds fitted with the AN/ARN-92 LORAN-D long range navigation equipment known as Pave Phantoms.This advanced navigation system allowed the extremely accurate dropping of sensors along the Ho Chi Minh trail. Note the aircraft is also carrying an ECM pod in the forward Sparrow bay under the fuselage. USAF

Twenty six years after its first conflict, an RF-4C taxies out at Shaikh Isa Air Base, Bahrain, for another mission during the build up to Operation Desert Storm in 1991.The six RF-4Cs operated every day at long range, only one was lost in a flying accident before the war began. USAF McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 23

I told you we needed

a gun...

The McDonnell F-4E and F Phantom The initial four models of the Phantom had been the first purely missile armed fighters in the inventory of the US Forces. The limitations of carrying a gun in an under fuselage pod quickly became apparent, so the USAF request that an internal gun be fitted to the airframe. The result would be the most produced Phantom variant, the F-4E and its derivatives.

The original YRF-4C prototype, 62-12200, had a new longer nose as an aerodynamic test bed for the F-4E.The aircraft is seen here after being further modified with canard foreplanes as part of the fly by wire Precision Aircraft Control Technology (PACT) programme of 1974.The aircraft is now in the USAF Museum at Wright Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio. USAF

B

y the time the F-4B, C and D models were in combat in Vietnam with the US Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, the aircraft had proved able to operate in extreme environments with a minimum of support, capable of carrying a very large weapons load over long distances. It was fast too, particularly in acceleration, due to the massive power of the General Electric J79 turbojets, and most importantly in that theatre, it was tough and reliable. The one complaint coming back from the USAF users about the aircraft was the lack of a cannon, the SUU-16A and -23A pods being the only way to carry one but at the expense of a stores pylon and additional drag. The original plans for the McDonnell Model 98 had included several gun armed versions but none of these had been taken up, so it was not until 1964 that the design team began reconsidering the available options in the light of the US Air Force’s Tactical Strike Fighter requirement.

FITTING IT ALL IN

Given the amount of equipment and fuel already inside the F-4 airframe, those options were quickly limited to the nose of the aircraft, with the proviso that a smaller radar system of similar power and capability could be fitted around the cannon. The first aircraft to be modified to examine how this would be best achieved was 6212200, the original YRF-4C prototype. This had a new longer nose built which included a pod on the underside to house the six barrels of a General Electric M61A1 20mm cannon, 639 rounds of ammunition being stored in a drum in the fuselage forward of the cockpits. The radar was moved further forward as a result, the first aircraft carrying a smaller Sperry AN/APG-30 X-band fire control system. The modified aircraft, now known as the YF-4E, first flew on August 7, 1965, and was quickly followed by 63-7445, an F-4C, and 65-0713, an F-4D, which were similarly modified but with differing gas vents and cooling intakes to test the optimum solution to mounting the gun and the radar.

The first trials with the gun installed featured cooling air intakes on the top of the nose with the gun muzzles exposed to the airflow. USAF

The classic form of the F-4E Phantom when it first entered service with the USAF, in this case the 34th TFS of the 388th TFW based at Korat in Thailand in 1972. USAF

The trials proved to be successful, the final form being a tapered and streamlined shape with the pod faired smoothly into the underside. As a result, the US Air Force ordered 96 production F-4Es in August 1966 by changing an existing contract for F-4Ds to the new type. The F-4E was to be produced in greater numbers than any other Phantom version, with 959 going to the USAF and an additional 428 to overseas air force customers over the next 12 years.

DEFINING THE E

There were a number of significant changes to the production F-4E over the prototypes, and yet more upgrades would follow as the aircraft matured in service. The production aircraft were fitted with the slotted leading edge tailplane from the F-4J which had been developed for the US Navy’s second fighter version to improve take off and approach control performance. The wing fold mechanism then common to all Phantoms was deleted saving a great deal of weight, and the engines were changed to the J79-GE-17 series, which produced 17,900lb (8119kg) of thrust and would later include new combustors that eliminated the smoke trail left by early versions of the aircraft. Aside from new engine mounts, this also required use of

additional titanium sheeting in the engine bays to cope with the higher temperatures. The radar was changed for the smaller, lighter, solid state Westinghouse AN/APQ-120 fire control system and the Radar Homing and Warning (RHAW) receiver was changed to the Itek AN/APR-36/37 system. Due to the radar’s close proximity to the gun, this had to be well insulated from vibration, which meant the design and installation of new damping mounts. Due to delays in the equipment production, the first 30 F-4Es were delivered without radar, over double this without the RHAW, which had to be retrofitted after the aircraft had been delivered. The initial batch of F-4Es suffered from engine flame outs when the gun was fired as the exhaust gases were ingested by the intakes. This led to an early modification to the fairing around the gun muzzle, longer blast diffusers on each barrel, an additional intake to flush gas from the gun compartment above the nose and redesigned exhaust gas vents being fitted to the pod under the nose. One other internal change was made to balance the longer nose and the weight of the gun and ammunition. A 95 gallon (360 litre) fuel tank was fitted in the rear fuselage, which

also helped to offset the loss of capacity caused by the replacement of the earlier simple fuel bladders with thicker, self sealing fuel tanks. Other than this, the ability of the F4E to carry external weapons and fuel tanks was unchanged, the addition of the gun increasing the abilities of the Phantom without detracting from them in any way.

IMPROVING IN SERVICE

While the development of the F-4E was going on, a major change occurred in the company behind the aircraft as it merged with another giant of US aviation. Given the close affiliation of the companies and their products, the first talks of the possibility of a merger between McDonnell and Douglas began as early as 1963. The enormous success of the Phantom and its ongoing development encouraged Douglas, in1966, to accept McDonnell’s bid, officially merging to create the McDonnell Douglas Corporation on April 28, 1967. The first F-4Es were delivered to Tactical Air Command in October that year, the first being sent to Vietnam when the 469th Tactical Fighter Squadron at Korat in Thailand converted from the Republic F-105D Thunderchief in November 1968. ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 25

Two F-4F Phantoms of Jagdgeschwader 73.The F-4F ICE upgrade kept the Phantom in service while the Tornado and Typhoon programmes were delayed, the last not being retired by the Luftwaffe until June 29, 2013. Luigino Caliaro

As production continued, a number of modifications were made to strengthen the centre section through the use of additional internal members in the case of existing aircraft and thicker wing skins in the case of aircraft on the production line. New equipment capabilities were added in the form of several different laser target ranging and designation systems and the AN/ASX-1 TISEO. The Target Identification System, Electro Optical was fitted in a small can-shaped pod on the leading edge of the port wing and was essentially a digital camera with a powerful zoom lens to allow the passive identification and tracking of targets at long range. During February 1972, a feature that had been in development since 1969 was finally introduced on to the production line. These

were leading edge slats that improved the manoeuvrability of the F-4E, but at a cost of maximum speed. McDonnell Douglas also built modification kits to retrofit the slats to existing aircraft, the USAF upgrading 304 F4Es in this way. Finally, in 1977, 180 F-4Es were fitted with the Lear Siegler An/ARN-101(V) digital navigation and attack system to increase the accuracy achievable by the Phantom. The last Phantom built by McDonnell Douglas was an F-4E for the Korean Air Force which left the St Louis production line on October 25, 1979. Production would continue for another two years in Japan, when the last of 127 F-4EJs built under licence by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries was delivered on May 20, 1981.

The 5000th Phantom built was this F-4E, 77-0290, with the elongated nose for the internally mounted M61 Vulcan 20mm cannon, pictured at St Louis on May 9, 1978. McDonnell

The most famous users of the F-4E Phantom were the US Air Force Air Demonstration Squadron, the Thunderbirds, who flew the type between June 1969 and 1974. USAF

The Westinghouse AN/APQ-120 fire control radar in its vibration damped nose mountings. USAF

Other versiOns

The only real difference between the F-4Es produced for the USAF and those for other air forces was the ability to carry, arm and release nuclear weapons and other special stores. This was restricted to the USAF aircraft. There were 11 other variants on the F-4E theme, mostly role specialisations for the basic airframe. The F-4EJ was ordered by Japan on November 1, 1968, with all the ground attack capability removed as a pure air defence aircraft. The AN/ABJ-7 bombing computer was removed, and a datalink to the Japanese air defence network was fitted, along with a Japanese built J/APR-3 RHAW. The first two were built at St Louis, flying in January 1971, followed by 11 more as kits for construction in Japan. As already mentioned, 127 more were built up to May 1981. These were upgraded in the early 1980s with a new avionics suite including the Westinghouse AN/APG-66J radar developed for the General Dynamics F-16, a new Litton inertial navigation system, a new J/APR-6 RHAW and finally a head up display replaced the earlier weapons aiming sight. The first of the 96 new aircraft, known as the F-4EJ(KAI), flew on July 17, 1984, and can carry the Mitsubishi ASM-1 and ASM-2 antiship missiles in addition to the later versions of AIM-7 and AIM-9 air-to-air missiles. Like the EF-4Bs and Js of VAQ-33 of the US Navy, four F-4EJs were modified to become Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) training aircraft for the Japan Air Self Defence Force. Like the F-4C before it, the F-4E was also developed into a reconnaissance variant, the RF-4E. The camera nose of the RF-4C was added to the F-4E airframe and 132 were built for five overseas customers. The largest customer was Germany, which ordered 88 in 1968, the first being delivered in January 1971. These, like the USAF’s RF-4Cs, were fitted with Texas Instruments AN/APQ-99 J-band radar for navigation and terrain following and carried an Infrared Recognition System (IRRS) and Sideways Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR) as well as flares to allow all weather and night reconnaissance. Production continued until 1978, with the last aircraft being delivered to Turkey. Initially unarmed, the Luftwaffe aircraft were upgraded by Messerschmitt Bölkow Blohm (MBB) in 1982 to give the RF-4Es a ground attack capability. One more of the Luftwaffe aircraft was fitted with an electronic intelligence gathering system in place of the

The reconnaissance version of the F-4E airframe, in this case an RF-4E of the Greek Air Force. Luigino Caliaro

cameras in the nose. Another version of the reconnaissance F-4E was built for Japan based on the electronics suite of the F-4EJ. Fourteen of these RF-4Es were built at St Louis, the last delivered in June 1975. Like the F-4EJs, these were also subject to a similar upgrade with the addition of the AN/APQ-172 radar and the J/APR-5 RHAW to become RF4E(KAI)s. These first 14 Japanese reconnaissance aircraft are often referred to as RF-4EJs, which is actually the designation of 17 F-4EJ air defence fighters modified during the early 1990s to carry external reconnaissance pods which can be fitted with various cameras and their data links or an infrared detection system. One last reconnaissance version of the F4E is worthy of note, the F-4E(S). Three of the Israeli Air Force’s F-4Es were modified by General Dynamics between 1976 and 1977 with the gun and radar being replaced in the nose by the 66in (1.68m) HIAC-1 Long Range Oblique Photography (LOROP) camera. These were to replace the planned RF-4X Mach 3.2 capable Phantom which had to be abandoned due to costs.

THE F-4F

The Luftwaffe was already operating the RF4E and was considering a simplified single seat Phantom as a replacement for its Lockheed F-104G fleet. The cost of this was

An underside view of an F-4F Phantom of the Luftwaffe, showing the leading edge manoeuvring slats on the main wing and the tailplane without the leading edge slot. Luigino Caliaro

prohibitive, so 175 of a modified version of the F-4E were ordered instead. Known as the F-4F, these had no in-flight refuelling system or the ability to carry the AIM-7 Sparrow initially. The tailplane with the leading edge slot was replaced with the earlier plain version, but the leading edge slats were fitted. The deletion of one of the fuselage tanks gave the F-4F a better power to weight ratio than the standard F-4E and the first aircraft flew on March 13, 1973. Deliveries began to George Air Force Base in California, where Luftwaffe crews trained on 12 aircraft known unofficially as TF-4Fs as they were fitted with dual controls. These 12 aircraft were later modified to full operational standards and delivered to Germany in 1976, being replaced by 10 F-4Es to enable the training programme to continue. The first F-4Fs were delivered to the Luftwaffe in May 1974 and were split between air defence and ground attack units. During 1980, a three year programme began which saw all the F-4Fs fitted with refuelling receptacles and the AIM-7 Sparrow capability returned. This was followed in 1983 by the Improved Combat Efficiency (ICE) upgrade to 110 F4Fs with the Raytheon AN/APG-65 radar and the ability to carry the AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile. A new ALR-68 RHAW receiver, a laser gyro inertial navigation

system, air data computer and digital data bus were all fitted at the same time, making the Luftwaffe F-4Fs potent and capable fighters. The first fully upgraded aircraft were delivered in 1992, the last one not being retired until June 29, 2013, when they were replaced by the Eurofighter Typhoon. These were not the last F-4E derivatives in service however. The Egyptian Air Force still has 34 F-4Es in service, while the Korean Air Force has 82 F-4Es and RF-4Cs. Turkey still operates 69 F-4Es and RF-4Es,while Greece still flies 50 more of both types. The Japan Air Self Defence Force has 78 F-4EJ(KAI)s, EF4EJs and RF-4EJs still in service and improbably, but proving what a tough airframe it is, the Islamic Republic Iranian Air force (IRIAF) still has an estimated 28 F-4Ds, F-4Es and RF-4Es in service, which due to arms embargoes have had no spares or upgrade support since the 1980s. Many of these extensively upgraded F-4E Phantoms are due to remain in service well into the 2020s, a remarkable record by a remarkable aircraft. In the US, a large number of F-4Es have been converted to QF-4E target drones, a number of which were maintained in historic colour schemes and flew as part of the USAF Heritage Flight until 2012, flying at air displays and thrilling crowds wherever they appeared. ■ Words: Tim Callaway

Four of the QF-4Es maintained in historic colour schemes and flown as part of the US Air Force Heritage Flight at air displays until 2012. USAF

Joe Kittinger tinger

and the F-4 Phantom

Colonel Joe Kittinger is best known for his five record setting stratospheric balloon flights. On one occasion Kittinger jumped from an altitude of 102,800ft, which was only exceeded by the recent exploits of the Red Bull Stratos team, in which Kittinger also played a major part. What is less known was that in 1971-72 Kittinger was the commander of the 555th Tactical Fighter Squadron in Vietnam, the famous ‘Triple Nickel’, flying the F-4 Phantom.

H

aving started his fighter pilot career flying P-47s in Germany in 1950 with the 526th Fighter Squadron, Joe Kittinger soon moved on to new jet aircraft such as the F-84 and F-86. In March of 1952 he was involved in testing in Denmark, trying to determine a protocol to deal with the issues of leftover solvent in the fuel regulator and lines of newly delivered F84Gs, which would cause flame-out with full throttle at high altitudes. Kittinger developed the restart procedure, his first experience as a test pilot. Having liked it, he sought assignment in R&D, rather than fighter pilot duty as the Korean War was just ending. He said: “When I left Europe and the F-86, I went to Holloman AFB (in New Mexico), and was in the fighter test section, at one time flying 11 different types of airplanes from the L-19 to the F-104.” It was a phenomenal assignment, and when he volunteered for a zero gravity project pilot, he came under the influence of Colonel John Stapp and his Aerospace Medical Research Lab. He said: “One day when I first got there my boss, the fighter commander, brought us all into a room and said that they needed a volunteer for the Aero-med lab, ‘They have a project called zero gravity and they need a project pilot, I need a volunteer.’ I immediately put my hand up, then I looked around and nobody else was doing it… I was the only one, the only volunteer. I thought, something must be screwed up about this mission. “So I went in to see Dr Stapp who said, ‘You know when we go into space, the astronaut is obviously going to be in a weightless condition and we’ve never done any real research on how a man responds to zero gravity and that is one of the conditions we need to learn about, to anticipate. I’m going to start a program with an airplane with a pilot doing zero gravity parabolas. I understand you’ve volunteered’. 28 Joe Kittinger

VieTNAM PhANToM PiloTs PART 1

“We started off in the T-33, and the instrumentation was a golf ball on a string. We put a subject in the back seat, I’d dive down and pull up in a very steep climb and when the golf ball floated, that was zero gravity. I would just keep the golf ball floating, and that’s how we did the first zero gravity work. “From there we went to faster airplanes like the F-104, and eventually had data recorders that had x, y, z accelerometers and I did approximately 1000 zero gravity parabolas with different people in the back seat. Sometimes they’d have a cat, one time they had a monkey. As a result of the zero gravity flights, everybody at the Aero Med-lab got to know me. So, every time Dr Stapp needed to go anywhere, he would call me and I would fly him all over the United States, I was ‘his’ pilot. I would set up the airplane and fly it for him. I continued to be his pilot while later stationed at Wright Field.” Colonel John Stapp was also to develop the rocket sled programme to test deceleration from Mach 1 to zero in one second. The testing was to determine if supersonic bailout could be survivable. Dr Stapp himself was the test subject who rode the rocket sled. ➤ A Republic P-47, later changed to F-47, Thunderbolt of the 526th Fighter Squadron, the unit Joe Kittinger belonged to, at Neubiberg Air Base, near Munich, in 1948. USAF

Joe Kittinger flew fuel system tests in Republic F-84Gs in Denmark in 1952. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

Kittinger, flying the T-33 photo plane directly overhead needed to hit the start line at exactly 350mph the instant that the sled’s rockets fired. As it turned out, the experience was survivable and Stapp survived the negative 41 G. Kittinger said: “Dr Stapp – he was a visionary and an exceptional leader… he was the bravest man I ever met in my life. All the research that I did… Manhigh, Excelsior, StarGazer… it was because of him, that man gave me the tools and the opportunity to do that. “One day he told me about the Manhigh program. He knew that going into space, the pilot would be in a very small confined area, we had to develop the life support system, the communication, the training programs, the selection, all of the stuff that was going to happen going into space… Dr Stapp, being a visionary, knew that we needed to do some basic research to get ready for doing that. “There were three flights in that programme and the information obtained was used by NASA when they started the Mercury programme. He was looking at it from the human aspect, how does a human relate, because he knew we were going to put a man into space. This was when people thought putting a man into space was Buck Rogers stuff.” Many people in the armed forces saw Dr Stapp as a problem, and more trouble than he was worth. “Absolutely, and none of those people were visionaries. Stapp was a visionary, when most were bureaucrats, and those people never had an original thought in their life. People like that resent a guy like Stapp who is looking to set a new frontier. “The project officer for Operation Manhigh was a guy by the name of Major Simons. He was not a test pilot, he wasn’t a pilot, and he wanted to make the first flight. Dr Stapp wanted a test pilot, so if something went wrong, he wanted somebody who had been trained for test flying, so I volunteered for it. Simons was really resentful that I was assigned the first flight. It was evident that Simons was ticked off at me and Stapp, and it kind of ticked me off that this guy was acting the way he was. “So, when I got to altitude, I was running very low on oxygen and knew I had to get down, but I had a very small amount of ballast. If you valve off too much gas and come down too fast and you don’t have enough ballast, you are going to crash. So, I was in a very difficult situation at 97,000ft, and I had to valve off the gas very judiciously, as the sun was heating up the helium.” It was similar to being underwater and running out of air but you can’t go up too quickly as you will get the bends. “Simons accused me of going to jump out. I’m up there working my butt off to try and come down, and I was typing a message in Morse code, and I’m not that good at it and my radio transmitter wasn’t working. Simons gets on the radio and says ‘come down immediately’. “I’m working my butt off and here’s this jackass giving me an order to come down immediately, so I typed out ‘Come up and get me’ and laughed my butt off. Simons says ‘My God, he’s got ‘breakaway phenomenon’, 30 Joe Kittinger

Some of the early Zero G flight trials were conducted by Joe Kittinger in Northrop T-33 Talons. The test equipment included a golf ball on a string! Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

The 526th Fighter Squadron was reequipped with Republic F-84E Thunderjets, seen here in 1951. USAF

Joe Kittinger suiting up for the world altitude record jump. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

he doesn’t want to come down; he wants to stay there.’ He is thinking that I’m going to jeopardize the programme. Of course fighter pilots don’t have breakaway phenomenon anyway; flight surgeons might but not fighter pilots.” A popular concept within the psychology community was that these high altitude missions would make the pilots ‘space happy’ and they wouldn’t come down. Breakaway phenomenon was the clinical term used in the day. Kittinger said: “Finally, Dr Stapp got on the radio and asked ‘Joe, are you trying to come down?’ So I let him know ‘I’ve been trying to come down for 30 minutes.’ I made a perfect landing and the flight went great, but Simons was always ticked off that I made the first flight. “There was a poem… ‘Run if you can, hide if you must, you are the quarry, fate is the hunter.’ In all of our lives, fate is the hunter. In September of 1957, I was taking off in an F-100 for a test flight and the engine caught fire and I had to eject at 800ft, and I barely

Joe Kittinger, in the centre, and a group of fellow aircrew show their ripcords, celebrating their first parachute jump. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

survived. The chute took one swing and then I landed. “It was very close… I started thinking that if it hadn’t been for somebody who developed a damn good ejection seat and parachute, I would have been dead. A week later Dr Stapp, who was being reassigned to be the chief of the Aero Med Lab at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, called me in asking if I wanted to work on escape systems. Well, I’d just had my butt saved by a good escape system. So I said ‘Well, I would love to go with you colonel.’ He got me transferred to the Aero-Med lab at Wright Field, and I started working on escape systems, parachutes, pressure suits, and floatation equipment. “I started studying escape systems and I found one area that had been ignored, which was high-altitude escape. There were quite a few cases where people had gotten killed because they were spinning and tumbling. These were cases where there was obviously a problem. I went to Dr Stapp and told him I had this idea. Stapp said ‘When we go into

space, we are going to have to be worried about rescue from high altitude, and we also have U2 airplanes up at those altitudes.’ “So he gave me the go-ahead to go do the research. Now, I was a captain, and captains can’t do anything. But I had Dr Stapp behind me and he gave me the tools to do the research. When I hit a brick wall, I could call up Dr Stapp and he’d move the wall, but I’d only call him when I was really in a bind. About once every couple of months I’d give him the run down on what we’d done. He made no decisions, but I’d keep him up on what was going on. “When it came time to do the jumps, General Schriever and four or five of his generals wanted a briefing, so we went up there and I made the presentation as I was the project officer and told them what we had done, and why we wanted to do it. They excused us to discuss it and then called us back in after about 15 minutes and told us ‘reluctantly we will give you permission to do the first jump’. I almost got killed on that first jump.”

Somebody decided to make a Styrofoam seat for the mission and it ended up deploying the drogue chute immediately after Kittinger left the capsule, and lacking velocity, it wrapped around his neck and could not deploy. Having jumped at 76,400ft, without a functioning drogue chute, he ended up spinning at 120rpm and lost consciousness. It was a very close thing and Kittinger was very nearly killed. He said: “The reserve chute saved me. I ended up spinning like hell and what happened verified the need for the research. So, we had to go back to General Schriever after almost getting killed and give him the briefing. I told Schriever when we went back to him, ‘My jump the other day showed why we have to do this project. I showed you what we are working on is valid. There could be no better demonstration of the problems, if I’d gone up to 180rpm, I would be dead. We have a problem that we have to solve.’ “The general said ‘Kittinger, we are going to let you go again, but once again… reluctantly. We know you had a really close ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 31

Joe Kittinger with the Project Excelsior capsule. Note the logo under the door,‘This is the highest step in the world’. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

“EVERY EJECTION SEAT IN THE WORLD, EVERY AIR FORCE USES THAT PRINCIPLE, USING A DROGUE CHUTE FOR STABILIZATION AND IT IS STILL BEING USED TODAY 53 YEARS LATER.”

During Project Excelsior, Joe Kittinger makes the record jump on August 16, 1960 from 102,800ft. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt 32 JOE KITTINGER

call.’ My alternate was George Post, a great guy who was a great test jumper, and went through all the training that I did. On my second jump, from 75,000ft, everything went perfect.” For the third jump, on August 16, 1960, Kittinger was to jump from 102,800ft, but it nearly didn’t happen. “The pressure suit inflates at 40,000ft, and I checked my equipment and one glove, my right hand wasn’t pressurized. We had never taken anyone up in the pressure chamber without a hand or foot pressurized. I knew I was going to be in trouble with my right hand, and I knew it was going to swell up, but also I knew if I told the doctor that my right glove wasn’t pressurized, they had no choice but to abort. The whole program was on a shoestring. But I had a glove on over my hand so although my hand swelled up to double its normal size, it filled up the glove and that provided some pressure. I took a chance and obviously my decision was correct. “I was approached by the air force, who wanted to make this a FAI official World Record. We turned down the opportunity to set a new record. I said that I didn’t want to make an official record as I didn’t want people to think we are doing this to set records because we are not. We’re doing this for science. I didn’t want my name in the record book, as I was interested in accomplishing research that we need for the space programme. And in addition, our instrumentation was twice as accurate as the instrumentation of the FAI anyway. The Russians came in and set the FAI record by jumping at 80,000ft, which is fine as we didn’t want to be distracted from what we were doing. I didn’t think our taxpayers should be paying for some guy to set a record, it was for science.” If there is any one thing that Colonel Joe Kittinger wants to be remembered for, would this high altitude escape chute system be it?

“That’s it. It’s still being used. Every ejection seat in the world, every air force uses that principle, using a drogue chute for stabilization and it is still being used today 53 years later.” Kittinger was awarded his second Distinguished Flying Cross, his first having been previously awarded for Project Manhigh. As if these pursuits weren’t enough, at the same time Kittinger was also to find himself involved with one of the great scientific research missions of that time, Project StarGazer. StarGazer was the Hubble Space Telescope of its day. Kittinger said: “There had been a previous team at the Aero-Med lab who had been working on high altitude escape and used the wrong approach so their project had been cancelled (Project High Dive). But they had built this beautiful well-engineered capsule that was 8ft high and 8ft across. So, one day I get a call from George Nielson at the Smithsonian Observatory who had heard about this capsule. He asked if we could take a telescope up in that capsule. I said it was possible, and he should come down and we could talk about it. “So, he came down and we went to the project guy, J Allen Hynek, a UFO expert who later was the advisor for the movie Close Encounters of the Third Kind (also an uncredited extra who played himself, at the landing scene in the movie) and he was the director of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. Dr Hynek and I went to MIT to meet with Dr Draper, who was Mr Gyro… he had designed the guidance system on Apollo. We wanted to get MIT involved in the programme to develop a stabilization system and to help

Joe Kittinger in the capsule on June 2, 1957 when he reached 97,000ft during Project Manhigh, making him the first astronaut. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

us with a star tracker. Dr Draper said he wanted to be part of the programme, and he assigned us a professor from MIT, Dr Winston Markey, a brilliant 26-year-old engineer who designed the systems. The Smithsonian provided the telescope. We had a bright civilian astronomer who worked for China Lake Naval Air Station, and he worked for years on the programme, Bill White. “After I’d talked with MIT, I had to get permission to do it. So, I went to see Dr Stapp to get his permission and explained the program to it. He asked ‘Joe, what’s the benefit to the air force and the Aero Med Lab?’ I said: ‘Dr Stapp, the Aero Med Lab will get quite a bit on life support systems, and the capsule is pressurized. We had a helmet that

would automatically close in the event of loss of capsule pressurization, so during the flight you’d have your faceplate open.’ Dr Stapp said to go ahead and do it. The Aero Med Lab wasn’t getting much out of it, and it was going to cost a lot of money, but basic scientific research was getting a lot from it. That’s the kind of leader Dr Stapp was. “It was a long four year programme, running the capsule and the telescope up in the altitude chamber to make sure everything worked up to 100,000ft, –100ºF. We finally made a flight in December 1962. They had a 12.5in telescope, gyro stabilized, and they had another exactly like it on the ground. Bill White, the astronomer, would tell the people on the ground which areas he was aiming at to take the same shots of the same star. You could see the difference between the two and the efficiency of being above the earth’s atmosphere. It was phenomenal and was a great programme. “The first flight was very successful but after that Dr Stapp had been transferred. I had lost my support and the other flights and the programme were cancelled. It was a tremendous way to gather knowledge. The Hubble Telescope cost billions of dollars and we had done it on a shoestring. It was the last scientific flight made above the earth’s atmosphere at that time. I was very discouraged as it was such a great programme. “The war in Vietnam was starting, so I volunteered to join the Air Commandos who were flying the Douglas B-26 which was a great airplane, it was more like a heavy fighter… nothing like the Martin B-26 bomber which had a very bad reputation during the Second World War. ➤

Recovering the Project Manhigh capsule after landing. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

One of the purposes of Projects Manhigh and Excelsior was to build and test high altitude pressure suit. Joe Kittinger is seen here during one of the suit tests. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

“When I volunteered for the Air Commandos, the next day I got instructions to go see General Schriever, so I got a T-33 and I flew it to Baltimore to report to the general. He said, ‘Captain, you volunteered to leave my command, to join the Air Commandos.’ I told him that ‘I am a fighter pilot and I feel like I can do more good there.’ He kind of shielded me and said, ‘Well, Kittinger, when you get done with this fling, I will get you back into the Systems Command.’ So I went to Vietnam in September of 1963, flying B-26s.” In May of 1964, just returning from his first tour in Vietnam, Kittinger appeared before a Senate Subcommittee headed by Senator Stennis, about the state of affairs in Vietnam. He said: “That was a profound experience. Robert McNamara had the company line and what we were saying was that McNamara was not truthful in what he was telling the public. “We were in a difficult position as we were contradicting the lies McNamara had been telling Congress, and we were jeopardized for telling the truth. Afterwards I got a telephone call from Stennis’ lawyer, who said, ‘The Senator asked me to tell you that if there are any repercussions from your testimony, not to worry about it.’ I said, ‘if there was no worry, why did you call me?” Needless to say, under any definition, the Vietnam War ended up being a disaster. The CIA sponsored coup of President Diem, followed soon after by his assassination, set the course. Kittinger said: “That was the beginning of the end. When Diem was assassinated, he wasn’t a very good leader but he was better than what they ended up with. They had nothing after he was assassinated, and looking back on it, that was the beginning of the end. “We had no idea that the leadership vacuum was going to be so bad and corrupt. At the time we had no idea that things were going to go as far downhill like they did. McNamara lied in saying that we were training Vietnamese pilots, and he knew good 34 Joe Kittinger

Joe Kittinger with the Project Excelsior display at the National Museum of the US Air Force, Wright Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

and well what we were doing. They would be sitting in the back of the plane smoking pot.” To make it even worse, the Senator Stennis subcommittee report was prepared for President Johnson by the State Department under McNamara. It was signed, sealed, and delivered. Kittinger said: “Yes, absolutely… McNamara was a tragedy to our country and Johnson was too. They are the ones that bear the responsibility for the 47,000 men that we lost in Vietnam. When we testified at the Stennis committee, at that time we had only lost about 300 men in Vietnam. “We had two recommendations for the Stennis Committee, first, that the Congress declared war on North Vietnam, and we could kick their butts really quick. The second thing was getting the politicians out of the decision making, and turning it over to the military. If not, we should just walk away. President Johnson opted to escalate offensive action without the will of the American people, without the will of Congress. “Johnson was responsible and everything went downhill from then on. We were fighting for a good cause, when you think back on it we were trying to help a small country from being overrun by the communists, and that was a good objective and we failed. Not because of

the military, but because of the politicians.” Kittinger was back in Vietnam in 1966, only now with an improved variant of the B-26. He said: “They grounded the B-26s as the wings were coming off, and built a reproduction called the A-26, where they corrected all the problems they had with the B-26. They improved the engines and wing spars, it was just a great airplane which I later flew when I went back in 1966-67. “Since 1962 we knew that the North Vietnamese were infiltrating munitions and assets to supply the troops from Laos. We needed to go into Laos to cut that logistics train into South Vietnam, but nobody had the courage. We knew it, all the generals knew it, and McNamara knew that the enemy was constantly supporting the insurgency through Laos. The bottom line was the Joint Chiefs of Staff knew it, and if one of those leaders had quit over it, saying what we were doing was against the US Constitution, then possibly there would have been repercussions, but they didn’t do that. “Possibly we could have saved 47,000 lives. General Jack Lavelle was the only one that had the courage to change the rules of engagement to where if we were shot at we could retaliate. That was against the rules of

engagement, which is just insane. He was a four star general who was a hero to all of us, and he ended up being court-martialled over it, and was retired as a two star general. General Ryan, Chief of Staff for the Air Force, was responsible for charging General Lavelle. “I then went to Europe for a year with the Special Forces. In the air force you have to have a year in a Joint Command or at the Pentagon, so I went to get that square filled. So, I’m over in Germany in 1970 and the war is still going on in Vietnam, so I signed up again.” Kittinger went through flight training for the F-4 Phantom at Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, Arizona. He said: “I had a great instructor, but they were all great, all had been in Vietnam, flying the F-4. I had my training in the F-4C model, and I just loved flying the airplane. The F-4 was a phenomenal airplane and from all of us that had the pleasure of flying it, I’ve never seen anybody yet who said they didn’t like the airplane. Tremendous engines, the airplane was very forgiving, it was one hell of an airplane. “There were 5000 made, and went into service in 1961. I’ll tell you what, there are a lot of people who were in Vietnam, who are alive today because that airplane saved their butts. It was the most versatile plane in the Vietnam War. Chasing MiGs, protecting B52s, dropping bombs for really close air support for troops, bombing hard targets in North Vietnam, we did all of it and it was an extremely versatile airplane. “My squadron, the Triple Nickel (555th), shot down more MiGs than any squadron in Vietnam, including the navy. We were known as ‘The world’s largest distributor of MiG parts’. There will never be another squadron that will have as many enemy airplanes shot down by an airplane as the triple nickel, in my opinion. I think Vietnam was the last war where there was a predominance of aircraft shooting down enemy aircraft. Air-to-air combat is consigned to the history books. “The F-4 was very difficult to maintain, it was a maintenance nightmare. It was quite obvious whoever designed the airplane wasn’t a mechanic on the flight line, as it was just atrocious to keep going. To change the radio for example, you had to take the ejection seat out of the airplane. To install the engine you have to pretty much disassemble the entire rear end of the airplane. The pilots loved it, but for the maintenance people it was a nightmare. “The C and D did not have guns, but the E model had guns. I flew all three of them, but

the Triple Nickel had D models and then near the end we got the E models. The MiG I shot down was with a D model, and then I was shot down in a D model. If I’d had a gun, it would have been an advantage, as the gun was a great asset. The new F-22 has got a gun in it, but we didn’t miss it as we knew what we had.” Without guns, your future survivability as a pilot was in the hands of the missiles. “The missiles, 30% were reliable. That happened to Robin Olds, who had shot down four MiGs (to add to his 12 kills during the Second World War), and I think five times he fired missiles that didn’t function properly. “The AIM-9 was an infrared missile developed by the navy and that was a very dependable missile, but it could only be used shooting up the tailpipe, it had to have an infrared source. The AIM-7 was a radar guided missile that was tied to the radar in your aircraft, would lock onto the target and was the one that was so undependable. It was very frustrating, but I tell you we loved that airplane.” There were benefits of operating a navy plane. Kittinger said: “Of course it was developed by the navy and the air force bought it. But the air force kept the tailhook on it, and we used that tailhook if we had battle damage, to stop it on the runway. It was a very valuable thing and that tailhook saved many F-4s. “Chuck DeBellevue (a 555th weapons systems operator or ‘back-seater’) shot down six MiGs; he shot down the most MiGs of ➤

Douglas B-26C Invaders at Bien Hoa in 1963. USAF

The 1959 Harmon Trophy for the outstanding aeronaut and aviator of the year was awarded to Joe Kittinger for Project Excelsior and Joe Jordan for the F-104 altitude record. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

Project Stargazer – Captain Joseph Kittinger acted as pilot and project engineer and William White, a US Navy civilian astronomer as the scientific observer. USAF

Joe Kittinger in Vietnam with his Douglas A26 Invader. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 35

A B-26 of the 609th Air Commands Squadron of the 56th Air Commando Wing based at Nakhon Phanom in Thailand. USAF

anybody in Vietnam. Steve Ritchie was the weapons and tactical officer in my squadron, and he shot down five MiGs (four with DeBellevue as weapons system operator). Another Ace was Randy Cunningham of the navy who shot down five, and who just got out of jail. I was a friend of his and he let us all down.” One of the big problems was establishing surprise with the North Vietnamese monitoring all of the radio communications. “We knew that they were monitoring our radios, and I felt we needed to be smarter than they are. I recommended to headquarters and came up with the idea with a callsign code word so that you’d know what I was telling you was not correct. “We had a lot of airplanes up in Laos at night and the North Vietnamese would scramble their MiGs a couple of times a month and send them into Laos and scare the hell out of our airplanes, just to clear the area out and show air superiority. I was on alert one night, as we always had four guys on alert. If the whistle blew, you could get off the ground in five minutes. “I was the squadron commander, so I felt it was incumbent upon me to know what my flight crews were experiencing while standing alert duty. On March 1, 1972, I’m in the alert shack at about 9 o’clock at night and the MiGs showed up in Laos, so we scramble. Normally we’d go to the tanker and refuel, and now we were ready for bear. “I told my wingman to go up northern Laos and I’d go to the tanker and get fuelled up. As soon as I got fuel, I told my wingman to head for the tanker, and I dropped down to the deck and gave that bogus callsign that I was headed back up north, so everyone knew it was BS what I was saying. Then I said, ‘Oh crap, my fuel tanks are not feeding, I’ve got to go back to the tanker’ and this meant that the enemy thought there was no F-4s in northern Laos. “I hit the deck and had full power going as fast as I could go, but could not use the afterburner because they could see it at night. It was no moon, at night, right on top of the mountains going as fast as I could go. I told my back-seater not to lock up on the MiG, as the pilot would not know he was headed towards me. He was going 500 knots at 20,000ft and I was going 500 knots on the deck. At the last moment I told the back36 JOE KITTINGER

The B-26 proved more effective at counter insurgency missions over Laos than fast modern jets. USAF

seater to light him up and I pulled the trigger and missile fell off and did not ignite. “I had to wait three seconds and the next missile came off and made a hard right turn. I had one missile left, squeezed the trigger and got it off. When I shot it was just a little bit before he shot two missiles at me, I made a hard right turn to evade his missiles and my missile went straight into the MiG and blew him up. I got him by being smarter. And that F-4 that I shot down the MiG with ended up with six MiG kills and is on display at the Air Force Academy.” Soon, the NVA came across the border in force, with a full scale invasion on March 30, 1972. “We increased our missions over North Vietnam and Hanoi. On May 10 we had 150 plane missions attacking Haiphong and Hanoi with the air force, marines and navy. My Squadron lost four airplanes that day, including two crews. Major Bob Lodge was shot down that day and he would have been the first American ace in Vietnam. “He was the greatest fighter pilot there, he had shot down three MiGs before anybody else had shot down one. An airplane (MiG 17) snuck up his butt, and he got shot down the same way I got shot down the following day. There was a navy ship (Red Crown) in the Gulf of Tonkin and they had the ability to hear the tower talking to the MiG pilots. If they had

told me that the aircraft I was chasing was a MiG, I could have shot it down. “I thought that I was chasing a MiG, three or four miles behind him, but the navy flew A4s that was a small delta wing airplane that looked a lot like a MiG, but I wasn’t going to shoot at him because the last thing you want to do is shoot down a buddy. I called ‘Red Crown’ and told the guy we needed to know if it was a MiG that I was following and they said ‘stand by’. I called again, and they said ‘stand by’. The airplane in front of me was a token, the bait. “My wingman said, ‘Break right’ as the MiG fighter who was below and behind me had fired an Atol missile at me. I got hit and the airplane immediately started tumbling… the G force was so great that I could not reach my hand up. The best way to eject from an F-4 is to always go for the upper face curtain as it puts your body in the right position and keeps your helmet from being pulled off at high speed. “I was over Mach 1 at 18,000ft. when I ejected, and when the G forces backed off just for a second and I reached down and pulled the ejection seat actuator. My back-seater was unconscious. The way it goes, is that the ejection seat system ejects the back canopy, then my canopy, then the back-seater goes and then I go… all of this in about a quarter of a second. I was in freefall until 10,000ft when the parachute opened.

The 555th Tactical Fighter Squadron (TFS) was known as ‘Triple Nickel’ and was equipped with the McDonnell Douglas F-4D Phantom II, as shown on the badge on their headquarters building at Udorn,Thailand. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

Joe Kittinger strapping in to his F-4D at Udorn. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

“I was over a rice paddy field with no cover, no trees. I heard all these bells and when I looked down I could see people running to where I was going to land. I tried to steer my parachute towards my unconscious back seater, but I couldn’t get that close to where he was. As soon as I landed about 30 people jumped on top of me, ripped my gun out, ripped my knife out. A woman who was about 70 years old with one tooth took a swipe at my neck with a machete and missed it by about an inch. “Then a kid about 12 years old picked up the machete and took a swipe at me. A lot of the guys who survived ejection over North Vietnam were killed as soon as they landed. I was lucky as hell and a few minutes later a soldier showed up, pulled my pants down to check my butt, tied my hands and feet so I could walk and took me to a Jeep for the start of my trip to the Hoa Lo, we called it ‘the Hilton’. “I was in solitary for about 30 days, with a very bad leg wound that was badly infected. They wouldn’t give me any water, tortured me, and denied me everything. I told them they had signed the Geneva Convention and they are supposed to give medical attention. They said the Geneva Convention was meant for soldiers and they said we weren’t soldiers but were criminals. I think the leg was so bad, that was how I got out of solitary confinement; they thought I was going to lose my leg. Their medicine was back in the 1800s – there wasn’t a single amputee POW, none had survived the surgery if they even got it. It took about three months before my wound was healed.” At the Hanoi Hilton, Kittinger was the leader, the senior ranking officer of the new prisoners, known as the FNGs (the f***ing new guys) as opposed to the older guys (the FOGs). “They went to extremes to keep us separate from the older guys, they didn’t want

Joe Kittinger with an F-4D of the 555th TFS. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

us to provide updates and comfort to the old guys, and they went to extremes to keep us separated. If you were shot down before December 1971, you were a FOG. “Those guys had been tortured so bad and had killed so many of those aviators, the North Vietnamese didn’t want us to know how badly those guys had been treated. Senator John McCain was a FOG.” Rank was important to maintain discipline. “They went out of their way to ignore that I

A McDonnell Douglas F-4D Phantom II of the 555th TFS on take off. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

was the top ranking guy of the FNGs. By December 1972 I had given them so much grief that they put me in solitary confinement again. As soon as they put me in, the number two guy, Ron Polfer who was a navy commander, became the SRO and started giving them more trouble than I’d been giving them. It was part of the training we had, we had a command structure. “We were told that as POWs, the SRO (senior ranking officer) is the man who sets military policy. In the Korean War, a lot of Americans died in POW camps and might not have died if they’d been trained better. After Korea they started training all of us pilots and aircrews, they gave us very intricate training as to how to live as a POW. We knew what to expect and did a hell of a good job in Vietnam as a result of what happened in the Korean War. We returned with honour.” There was a showcase camp, one camp where they had all what we called ‘the weak ➤

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 37

sisters’ that were in this special camp so when people like Jane Fonda came to town, that’s where they’d take them. They were a special group where they didn’t get tortured, but they were intimidated. They would collaborate; write statements about how they were being treated well, go on the TV, meet foreign correspondents. “The people who were getting tortured, she wouldn’t see them. One rule we had that really hurt was that we all go home together and some of those guys took an early release, which was against our rules of engagement. “There was one guy who was a hero, Doug Hegdahl. He was a one stripe navy sailor who fell off a destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin at night and got picked up the next morning paddling around in the Gulf. They picked him up as a CIA agent, until they finally figured out that he was just some dumb sailor that fell off a boat. This guy’s mother got involved with a peace group that got permission to go to Hanoi. So they brought Hegdahl downtown to see his mom. “The North Vietnamese told him they would release him to go home with his mother but he knew the rules of engagement and didn’t answer. He came back to the camp and told his SRO that he’d been offered an opportunity to go home and had said no. At that time, the American public had not been told who was a POW in prison as they were all listed as MIAs. Hegdahl was then ordered to go back to America and tell them what was really happening with the POWs and how they were being treated, and tell the real story of what is happening to us. “He also had 24 hours to memorize all 340 names of POWs being held, so that he could tell who was being held. When he landed in Bangkok the American Ambassador came up to him and said ‘welcome to freedom’. Hegdahl said, ‘I don’t want to talk to you, get me a tape recorder’. Families had no idea

A McDonnell Douglas F-4D Phantom II, 65-0683, of the 555th TFS on January 20, 1972. USAF

who was being held, or how they’d been tortured. He was the only POW who was ordered to go back. “I was involved with that war since 1963, had testified before Congress, I’d had a long association with that war. I’d gone back in 1971, got shot down in 1972, and got home in 1973. I was involved with it for 10 years.” Kittinger was released as a POW in March 1973 and in July 1974 was assigned as the Vice Wing Commander of an F-4 Fighter Group in England, where he served until 1977. On his last flight he led 24 F-4s from Lakenheath, England, to Hill AFB, Utah, a flight of over 4000 miles with nine refuelings en route during the more than 11 hours of flight time. Kittinger has accumulated over 1400 hours in the F-4 and considers it as the most versatile fighter that he had ever flown. Today, Kittinger has 16,800 hours of flight time in 93 different aircraft, and still flies aircraft and balloons. Sitting in the hell hole of solitary confinement in a North Vietnamese prison, probably as much to keep sane as anything else, Kittinger had mapped out his plans for an around the world solo balloon flight attempt. He said: “That was the first step. I tried like hell to get a sponsor, but couldn’t so I thought the solo flight across the Atlantic had never been done and I thought it would be

Joe Kittinger with a group of 555th air and ground crew on the occasion of shooting down his first MiG. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt 38 JOE KITTINGER

fun. The second reason was that I thought if I made that flight across the Atlantic solo, I could get a sponsor to fly around the world. Nobody had ever done it solo, so I wanted to be the first. I went 500 miles beyond the existing (non-solo) record, and did that on purpose because I wanted to set the distance record. All that began in solitary confinement.” So, Kittinger had broken a world ballooning distance record, in the hope of finding a sponsor for his original goal, flying around the world. “I never could find a sponsor to fly around the world, and Steve Fossett finally did it,” he said. “He was a neat guy, and a real competitor. When he got killed, he had three projects in the mill. He had bought Craig Breedlove’s Sprit of America and was going to set the World Land Speed Record. Hell of a guy.” It wasn’t long before Kittinger was involved with perhaps the highest profile record attempt of his life. The Red Bull Stratos team efforts to exceed Kittinger’s 102,800ft freefall seemed somewhat unusual to attract Kittinger as Red Bull is normally more involved with circus type stunts. He said: “Let me tell you, for the last 52 years I’ve been getting emails and calls from all over the world about people who wanted to beat my record. I always turned them down as I did not want to get involved as none of them were prepared properly and didn’t want to get involved in somebody getting killed. “In August of 2008, I was called by the president of the David Clark Company who builds pressure suits as he had been approached by Red Bull and was very concerned over them being legitimate. He asked me to be present for the meeting with their people. “It turned out that there was a scientific aspect, as they were coming up with a next generation of pressure suit with more flexibility, which was of great interest to me. That’s an advance. Another thing was that nobody had ever gone supersonic, and they could measure his medical condition throughout, which was a second real objective. In addition to that, he would set a world record. “So, since there was a scientific reason for it, then I was interested in it. I told them ‘I have four conditions. First, there have to be three jumps, not one. You don’t go to max altitude the first time, you test the crew to make sure you are doing it properly. They said okay, which surprised the hell out of me. Secondly, I told them that we needed two

Having survived the horrors of the Hanoi Hilton, Joe Kittinger was welcomed home with a personal message! Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

balloons for every flight, which would double the cost of the balloons. The third thing was that Felix Baumgartner could not do any base jumps until after the project was over. He said okay, he would accept that. Then they asked ‘what was the fourth condition? ‘Number four is that I never have to drink a Red Bull’. “It was a four year programme. We got over a million points of data, and on October 14, 2012, Felix went 1.25 Mach, at 847mph. We accomplished all the objectives, got him down safely, and developed a next generation pressure suit. I designed the life support system, selected the balloons, and developed the check lists. “I was in communication with Felix through all the chamber tests, training and all the flights. He had confidence in me and I knew the total system. It worked out really well, and I really enjoyed it. Felix did a very good job on his jump.” Felix Baumgartner had set a new record for freefall from 127,851ft, the next generation pressure suit performing as expected. Colonel Joe Kittinger is still pushing the envelope. Today, Colonel Kittinger is leading a project to install an F-4 Phantom in a park named after him at the downtown airport in Orlando, Florida, dedicated to the Vietnam Veterans from Central Florida that served there during that war. ■ Words: Norm deWitt

The F-4D Joe Kittinger flew to shoot down a MiG still exists today on display at the US Air Force Academy. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

While in the prisoner of war camp, Joe Kittinger planned a series of world breaking balloon flights, making the first solo transatlantic balloon flight in the 106,000cu ft (3000sq m) ‘Balloon of Peace’ from September 14 to September 18, 1984. Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt

RED BULL STRATOS TEAM

1

2

3

4

1. Felix Baumgartner makes the record jump from the Red Bull Stratos at 127,851ft, reaching Mach 1.25 during his fall. 2. Felix Baumgartner safely on the ground at the conclusion of the Red Bull Stratos project. 3. Two great high altitude pioneers, Felix Baumgartner with Joe Kittinger. 4. Joe Kittinger with Art Thompson of the Red Bull Stratos team. All Joe Kittinger via Norm deWitt McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 39

Norman Gaddis Norman Gaddis followed a somewhat parallel life with Joe Kittinger (see the previous article), both starting out flying P-47s with the same fighter wing in Germany postwar, then both being shot down in their F-4 Phantoms and ending up in the Hanoi Hilton as prisoners of war. Gaddis returned to the military after his release in 1973, retiring from the Pentagon in 1977 as a brigadier general.

General Norman Gaddis. Gen. Gaddis via Norm deWitt

A

fter completing flying school in November 1944, Norman Gaddis got some initial experience in P-40Ms and P-51s before the war ended. He was released from active duty in 1945 and then recalled in 1949, being assigned to Germany flying the P-47. Joe Kittinger takes up the story: “It was a heck of a fighter wing, the wing commander was Colonel John Chennault, his father was

Claire Chennault of Flying Tigers fame. There were three fighter squadrons, the 525th, the 526th, and 527th. Norm Gaddis was in the 525th, Bob Gilliland and myself were in the 526th, and Chennault had a brother in the 527th named (Claire) Pat Chennault.” Pat Chennault had won the Distinguished Flying Cross, shooting down two enemy aircraft in the Second World War. “We all knew everybody in the fighter wing of course, and every Friday evening we’d all go there and I’m sure that’s where I met Norm.” It was there in Germany that Gaddis was first exposed to a jet aircraft, the F-84E. Gen Gaddis continues: “First they let us have three T-33 flights, and everyone got to check out in the T-33. You didn’t get a lot of flying time because of the number of pilots involved, but at least you got a feel for flying a jet aeroplane. Particularly with respect to advancing the throttle, how much power would be available

The Republic P-47N Thunderbolt was still the front line equipment of many US Air Force units when Norman Gaddis was recalled to duty in 1949. USAF

40 NormaN Gaddis

to you, and how little effect it would have at first. The jet aeroplane engine was slow in coming up to speed so there was quite a difference and you had to anticipate that, otherwise you would land short.” After three years, Gaddis returned to the United States. Gaddis again: “When I left Germany I went to Turner AFB in Albany, Georgia. We had F-84Es at first, and then we converted into the G model. The 31st Wing was selected for nuclear weapons missions and the G was a much better aeroplane than the E. I was there with the 31st Wing for two years and had the chance to fly across the Pacific Ocean on a project called ‘Fox Peter One’, in July of 1952. The whole wing deployed from Turner AFB to California. After landing there we spent a couple of nights getting everything all

Above: The patch of the 525th Fighter Squadron.The unit also trained many pilots from European and Middle Eastern countries to fly the F-84 Thunderjet. USAF

VIETNAM PHANTOM PILOTS PART 2

A Republic F-84E Thunderjet of the 525th Fighter Squadron. USAF

On his return to the US, Norman Gaddis began flying the Republic F-84G version of the Thunderjet. USAF

The cockpit of a Republic F-84G Thunderjet. USAF

squared away. Because of headwinds we could only send one squadron each day from California to Hawaii. We were rendezvousing with tanker aircraft out over the weather ship, which was 750 miles off the coast of California. After refuelling we would proceed to Hickam AFB. We carried four tanks on the aeroplane, two wingtip tanks and two belly tanks. The flight took about 63⁄4 hours.” ‘Fox Peter One’ was the first jet fighter crossing of the Pacific Ocean. Its leader, Col Schilling, had been the first to achieve a nonstop Atlantic crossing in 1950, refuelling over Scotland and Iceland, after departing RAF Manston along with Col William Richie in F84E Thunderjets. Richie’s plane had a damaged fuel probe and he had to eject over Newfoundland when he ran out of fuel, unable to refuel at the final air tanker. Schilling won the Harmon Trophy for his achievement. Gaddis again: “Colonel David Schilling was the leader of the ‘Fox Peter One’ flight. We flew from Hawaii to Midway, spent the night and then flew to Wake Island and refuelled. Then we landed at Eniwetok, the Atomic energy base, and there we spent the night. The next day we flew to Guam. The runway at Eniwetok was made of coral and was only 6000ft long, so we made jet assisted take offs. Several aeroplanes had engines damaged by the coral runway. We spent two days at Guam for engine changes and then flew to Iwo Jima. “One pilot and aircraft was lost at Iwo Jima; one of the most experienced pilots with over 6000 flying hours had to bail out over Iwo and the parachute and the seat did not separate properly and he was killed. It was a flight of 59 aeroplanes, and 58 pilots and planes flew on to Tokyo that day. Lt Col Elmer DaRosa was a highly respected pilot and a gentleman. “We spent a couple of nights in Tokyo as they had a storm with terrific rain and wind passing through the area. My squadron, the 309th, went north to Chitose Air Base for three months while the other two squadrons stayed at Misawa AFB. After that we came back to Turner AFB and another Tactical Air Command wing went over to replace us. We left our planes in Japan and they took over the mission. After we came back we got newer models of the F-84G, the nuclear carrier. I had spent two years with the 31st Wing. I think I had close to 600 hours in F-84s. “Afterwards I was assigned to the 81st Fighter Wing in England, and there they had the F-86A aeroplanes, and it was a ‘Sunday afternoon’ aeroplane. It was a great aeroplane ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 41

The ‘Fox Peter One’ crossing of the Pacific Ocean by the F-84Gs of the 31st Wing was supported by the Boeing KB-29P tankers of Strategic Air Command. USAF

Two 31st Fighter Wing F-84Gs approach the boom of a KB-29P tanker.The F-84Gs were modified with a refuelling receptacle on the leading edge of the inner port wing. USAF

to fly, golly it was great. It was an exceptional air-to-air machine, a relatively good air-to-ground machine, but it had really short legs and you could only fly it for an hour and 20 minutes and then you had to land. That suited a lot of people as then you could take off the G-suit and cool down a little bit. “The decision was made that we would switch to the F-84F model, and the Wing’s mission would also change to nuclear strike. I came back to the States and checked out in the F-84F and helped to write the pilot’s handbook on it. I went back to the 81st Wing in England and we set up a training programme. I became the standardisation officer for the wing. “We had one squadron at Bentwaters RAF Station, one squadron at Shepherds Grove, and one squadron at Manston RAF Station. All of these bases were at one time occupied by RAF fighter units.”

promoted to major and director of operations and training for the Fighter Weapons School, in the F-100Ds. “Of course they had the F100F models as well, both very good planes to fly. Steady and reliable, and I really did enjoy flying the F-100,” commented Gaddis. Not so much with the A model… “After about two years and three months there, I was nominated to go to Command and Staff College at Maxwell AFB. I finished up the course and was assigned to Air Force Headquarters, in the Tactical Operations branch… a staff officer for Fighter Operations. I went in as a major and came out as a lieutenant colonel four years later. “Mr Robert McNamara came in, and he installed a new accounting system within the air force… at first it was just hard to swallow all of these things. I was the program element monitor for the F-100 aeroplane. This meant that I had to make sure that we programmed

Was the F-86A your favourite plane? “It was great, said Gaddis. If I could fly today and had the choice, I think I would take an F-86A, fill up those little 120 gallon tanks, and go up to do aerobatics and air-to-air with somebody else. The F-86A would be my favourite of the aeroplanes that I’ve flown. “When I came back to the States, I was sent to Foster AFB, Texas in June of 1957, and lo and behold they were flying F-100A models, and they did not have landing flaps on them! When landing, you came in at about 160-165mph, tried to put it on the runway and use the drag chute to stop you. Sometimes the drag chute didn’t work and you ended up with very hot brakes. Or you ‘took the barrier.’ It needed more than a drag chute to stop it.” After less than a year in Texas the base closed and Gaddis received a new assignment as a flight instructor at Nellis AFB, Las Vegas, where it wasn’t long before Gaddis had been

The role of the 81st Wing was changed to that of nuclear strike so the North American F-86A Sabres were replaced with the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak.This is an aircraft of the 91st Tactical Fighter Squadron of the 81st Wing based at RAF Bentwaters in Suffolk. USAF

42 NormaN Gaddis

“Afterwards I was assigned to the 81st Fighter Wing in England, and there they had the F-86A … It was a great aeroplane to fly, golly it was great.” USAF

enough flying hours, based upon 20 hours per pilot per month. I had to make sure all of the pilots were programmed that amount of time, and then I would have to set aside fuel for all of them, and I also had to compute all of the ordnance requirements for all of the tactical fighters… all 1200 of them. I also had the responsibility as the F-104 program element monitor, which wasn’t too difficult as we only had one wing of 104s. The air force had decided that the aeroplane was not a suitable ground attack aeroplane and Tactical Air Command did not especially want the aeroplane. That’s when the debate went on to a higher level about ‘do we really want to buy more F-104s of lesser capabilities and greater speed, or do we want to buy the F-100F models? The decision was made at the two or three star level to buy the F-100. “I flew in the 104 three different times, and one time I flew in the F-104 with Bob Gilliland (SR-71 pilot). I liked the aeroplane, if all you had to do was air-to-air, but it did not have the capability as a tactical fighter to do ground support work with napalm, bombs, rockets and all of the stuff they were developing to hang on the aeroplanes. The Germans lost a tremendous number of those aeroplanes. I had

a chance to fly with a company representative and he showed me a radar mapping system they had, to be used primarily for nuclear missions. It was fantastic, you could look down and see automobiles on the bridges, but the range of the F-104 would not permit you to get to the targets deep inside of Europe and then return to your base.” Eventually the 81st Wing in England was re-equipped with F-101 aircraft and the tactical fighters on the European continent were equipped with F-100 aeroplanes. “It was an interesting four-year tour that I had at the Pentagon. On a couple of occasions I actually had to go in and brief the chief of staff, General LeMay on F-100 problems. He was not fond of fighter pilots, let me just say that. He was Mr. Bomber, strictly a bomber man. My F-100s were getting old and the wiring in the aft section where it was so hot, the insulation was coming off and we had to re-wire the aeroplanes. At that point in time, the project was estimated to cost $1 million and in 1962-63 that was a lot of money. “I thought the maintenance people should be required to go and brief him, but no… they said ‘you are the program element monitor, you go brief him.’ When I told one of my friends that I had to brief General LeMay, he

On his return to the US, Norman Gaddis began flying the North American F-100A Super Sabre, an aircraft which often needed the use of its brake chute to stop it on the runway. USAF

The badge of the 31st Wing that undertook ‘Fox Peter One’, the first jet fighter crossing of the Pacific Ocean. USAF

told me ‘I feel sorry for you sir, he eats fighter pilots for breakfast.’ I said: ‘Oh my God…’ “I went in to brief him and half way through he said, ‘Norm, did you fly the P-47?’ I said: ‘Yes sir, I did.’ ‘How many miles of wiring is there in the P-47?’ I told him: ‘Sir, I don’t know, but I will get the information and I will bring it to you tomorrow.’ He said: ‘That’s okay’… I finished the briefing and he pushed back in his chair and had the cigar in his mouth… he just chewed it, he didn’t smoke it… he turned to me and said: ‘Good briefing Norm, thanks a lot.’ I walked out, I was on Cloud 9 to think that I didn’t get eaten to death by the chief of staff.” Gaddis was selected to attend the National War College in Washington. “That was a year of real dedication and study, an opportunity to be with and converse with all the departments within the US Government. The programme was directed, more or less, at International Relations. That was an eye-opener. About a third of the class went to Hawaii, then down to Australia to bend elbows with the fighter pilots down there for a couple of nights. “We got good briefings on their position in respect to the war that was going on in Vietnam at that time. After graduation, ➤

The short range and limited air to ground capabilities of the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter meant the F-100 and F-101 Voodoo were preferred for the tactical fighter roles in Europe.This is a two seat F-104B, the type Norman Gaddis flew. USAF

I waited to see what my job would be, and I was selected to go to Cam Ranh Bay to be the assistant director of operations there. Cam Ranh Bay was probably one of the busiest airports as most of the transport aeroplanes came in and out of there. “I was director of operations from six in the evening until six the next morning, then get some sleep and fly a mission in the afternoon with an F-4C. I arrived there two days before Thanksgiving 1966 and my first duty was to write to the families of four young people… two F-4C crews who were lost, both of their planes shot down while engaged in a fight over the DMZ. That was my introduction to Vietnam. I tried to fly as much as I possibly could. Between November 1966 and May 1967, I’d flown 73 combat missions in North and South Vietnam, mostly in South Vietnam with maybe 12 missions up North. “The F-4 was a good tactical aircraft with the capability to carry a tremendous amount of ordnance and fuel. There were missions that I flew out of Cam Ranh Bay where the aeroplane grossed out at 60,000lb; we would

have the four Sparrows, two – 375 gallon wing tanks, a 650 gallon centreline tank, and a total of six 750lb bombs. That would put us right at 60,000lb and of course we had two engines with 30,000lb of thrust with afterburner. “It was a different type of mission. We were dropping CBUs, which is a anti-personnel bomb in a shell almost like a fuel tank and as it drops they open up and these little bombs come out… a very lethal type of weapon, almost inhumane. “I also dropped napalm, not that I wanted to but that was the order of the day. I made sure that the pilots I was flying with, all of them, recognised what we were doing and unless we had a Forward Air Control aircraft to actually mark the target for us, we would not drop napalm or bomblets. “What we were doing was to work along the Ho Chi Minh Trail from North Vietnam down through Laos. Most of our missions were flown in the daytime. We bombed some at night as we’d keep four planes on alert at night so if they called us, we would come in and give them support.”

The F-4 Phantoms were heavily engaged in close support missions in South Vietnam as well as strikes against the North. Here an F-4C from the 12th Tactical Fighter Wing delivers close air support to armoured vehicles in South Vietnam during April 1969. USAF

It all went wrong for Gaddis on May 12, 1967 on an attack into North Vietnam. “We could see these things coming up and we were dodging them, we were a flight of four fighters. The strike force was bombing the target, there was supposed to be a boat factory in the southwest quadrant of Hanoi. “These missiles were coming up all around, and we had a detector in the cockpit that showed us when a missile was coming and also showed us when we were being tracked by radar. There was a surface-to-air missile that exploded out to the left of the aeroplane, portions of it were sucked into the left intake and then the engine blew up. The fuel tanks of course were wrapped around the engine, the fire was just inevitable so I told him (WSO – Lt James Jefferson) to get out. “The aeroplane was actually tumbling less than 2000ft above the ground. While I was going down I took the emergency radio out of my flight suit pocket, called and said ‘this is Dagger 4, I’m okay.’ I didn’t tell them which Dagger, as I should have told them I was Dagger 4-1, which would be me and he was

In 1958, Norman Gaddis was promoted to major and became the director of operations and Training for the Fighter Weapons School, flying the North American F-100D. USAF

44 NORMAN GADDIS

The Fighter Weapons School also flew the North American F-100F Super Sabre. USAF

Dagger 4-2. My backseat pilot went out first. I heard two blasts, one was the canopy going, and then shortly after that the backseater went out. After the second blast, I was upside down when I went out.” Did you ever find out what happened to Lt Jefferson while a POW? “No, not what happened to him, but I kept pressing the Vietnamese troops for information. After they handcuffed me and put me in the truck bed, we drove to an area where I could smell the burning aircraft and we waited there for about 30 minutes. When they came back, they had my hands tied behind my back and had me backed up against the cab of the truck. “I started to get up and the guard took his pistol and put it on my forehead and I began to understand Vietnamese right away. That meant, ‘sit down or I’ll blow your head off.’ I did ask them ‘where is my pilot’. They got into the truck where they had his helmet, his name tag was cut out of his flight suit, his clipboard with all the navigation information, communication information, and info on the weapons we were carrying. “We had only two 275 gallon fuel tanks, the 600 gallon centreline tank was jettisoned over the Black River. There were no burns or smell of jet fuel on the flight suit, so James Jefferson definitely was out of the aeroplane. What happened to him after that, only God knows.” Gaddis was taken to interrogation and the special hell of the North Vietnamese prison camps. “It was like a continual change because it was like the Vietnamese stirred us up in a big pot, moving people out to different camps. They kept the senior officers isolated; when I was captured I was a full colonel at that point in time. During my interrogation, the

“THE AEROPLANE WAS ACTUALLY TUMBLING LESS THAN 2000FT ABOVE THE GROUND.WHILE I WAS GOING DOWN I TOOK THE EMERGENCY RADIO OUT OF MY FLIGHT SUIT POCKET, CALLED AND SAID ‘THIS IS DAGGER 4, I’M OKAY.’ I DIDN’T TELL THEM WHICH DAGGER,AS I SHOULD HAVE TOLD THEM I WAS DAGGER 4-1,WHICH WOULD BE ME AND HE WAS DAGGER 4-2. MY BACKSEAT PILOT WENT OUT FIRST. I HEARD TWO BLASTS, ONE WAS THE CANOPY GOING, AND THEN SHORTLY AFTER THAT THE BACKSEATER WENT OUT.AFTER THE SECOND BLAST, I WAS UPSIDE DOWN WHEN I WENT OUT.” interrogator asked me ‘Do you know Risner?’ I said ‘yes’. They asked ‘You know he promoted to colonel?’ After they tortured me three times and interrogated me, they put me in a part of the prison called Heartbreak Hotel; I was in cell #5. It was 7ft long by 7ft wide with two concrete bunks in it. The ceiling was at about 12-14ft high with a window way up near the top so I could never see outside. I was there in solitary confinement for 1004 days.” How does one keep their sanity in a situation like that? Gaddis recalls: “A lot of praying, thinking good thoughts about my family and hoping that some way the information would come out to my wife that I was alive. It was almost three years before she knew that I was alive. “They allowed me to write before Christmas 1969 and she got the message in February or March of the next year. After she read the message, she contacted Air Force Intelligence and they asked her ‘do you recognise his writing, and is that what he would be saying in a message like this?’ She said: ‘Yes that is his writing’ and so they took

me off missing in action, and changed my status to prisoner of war.” There were turf battles between the services, even within the POW chain of command. “Robbie Risner, the ace from Korea (eight MiG-15 kills over Korea), of course was the senior officer there. The Navy people were the first to be shot down over there, so they made policies with respect to who was the ranking officer. “Their policy was that the rank you had when you were shot down established your place in the chain of command. Then, in September 1965, I was at Fort Bragg with the National War College class when the promotion list came out, and lo and behold Robbie Risner was on the promotion list to a full colonel. He had been shot down twice over there (Vietnam) and the last time he was captured. I knew that he was as full colonel, but the Navy people didn’t know it and the senior Navy guy was considered senior to Robbie, which caused some friction up until the time the Navy people eventually ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 45

After attending the National War College in Washington, Norman Gaddis was selected to go to Cam Ranh Bay to be the assistant director of operations flying the F-4C.The first F-4Cs to arrive in theatre were still in the grey scheme before being repainted in the more familiar camouflage. USAF

recognised that Robbie was the senior officer of everyone there. When Colonel John Flynn was shot down, he was senior to Robbie. John was in a body cast for several months before he could assume the senior officer role. Meanwhile Robbie was the senior ranking officer,” states Gaddis. Robbie Risner passed away on October 22, 2013. During the war he had spent seven long years as a POW. They kept the long-time prisoners separate from the new arrivals of the 1970s, but they did start to change near the end of their long ordeal. “We did start to get contact with them near the end of the war. I knew Joe Kittinger from the 86th Fighter Wing over in Germany, he was in the 526 squadron and I was in the 525th. I got to see Joe again on Christmas Day 1972 when the outer cell doors to our compound opened up and in walked this redheaded guy. I said: ‘Joe, you devil you!’” It must have been one of those ‘small world’ moments when the long-time fighter pilots were reunited at the Hanoi Hilton. “It was,” said Gaddis. He told me about being shot down. He was not a prisoner for a long period of time, although it was longer than anyone would want to be. They pulled him right back out again, but he entertained us with stories there.” Joe Kittinger continues: “I was one of the first of the new guys that they put in with the old guys. They did that because I was such a horse’s ass, they thought they could get rid of me as I was such a big pain in the butt. I was in there for days, and as a matter of fact they 46 NORMAN GADDIS

never let me sleep, keeping me up all night long telling them what had been going on. I was constantly asked questions, as it was like Rip Van Winkle, those guys had been in there five, six, seven years and knew nothing of anything that had been going on in the world. I was constantly asked questions about politics, fashion, what had transpired. “I loved it because, hell… these guys were my heroes and if I could give them support by telling them what had been going on, I was thrilled to death to have the opportunity to be with those guys. Norm was there during the horrible time, it was horrible how those guys were treated. He was one of my heroes as in the long time he was there; he never lost faith in what was going to happen. “There were four of us from the 86th Fighter Wing in Germany that were POWs… Norm, Konrad Trautman, Dave Winn, and myself. What was really interesting was these guys I got put in with were all the senior guys… 12 guys in the room… Stockdale, Denton, Jack Flynn… the colonels and ranking people were who they put me with. We discussed what we would do if we ever got out of there, how we would handle ourselves if they said ‘okay, you are going home.’ The new guys got transferred from the hotel to what we called ‘the plantation’. We had discussed how they did not treat us in accordance with the Geneva Convention and when they called me in for interrogation, they refused to recognise me as the senior ranking officer. This guy called me in February of 1973 when

they were already starting to ship the old guys home. They said they would bring native dancers in so we could see their culture, and gain an appreciation for their society. I told them ‘we didn’t want to see them’, and the guy was shocked. I told him ‘you didn’t treat us properly for the past seven years, you abused us, you killed us, and now you want to be friends with us… we don’t want to see them.’ “We had discussed all these possibilities between the new guys and the old guys during those 40 days, so we had continuity between what we (each group) were going to do and how we were going to do it.” Norm Gaddis again: “I saw Joe just before I left and he asked me to call his wife. When I landed in the States, I called his wife and told her I had been with Joe for several days in late 1972. The policy that was adopted in Paris by the US and Vietnamese was that they (Vietnam) would release the sick and wounded first. The Vietnamese would not let us decide who was sick and wounded and needed medical attention. So, they made the decision as to who was ‘sick or wounded’ after the first group of POWs departed on Feb 12, 1973. On February 18, the Vietnamese selected 18 Americans, who had not caused them much trouble, for an early release. “As the senior officer of the second group to be released, I ordered the group not to put on their release clothing and not to leave the camp. Early releases by the Vietnamese was in the protocol which I had been given. I advised them that I would release those 18

people only if ordered by a responsible American official. After a four hour standoff, a US Air Force lieutenant colonel entered the prison and assured me that Secretary of State Kissinger was at the Hanoi Airport waiting for that group of US prisoners. Then I released and ordered them to march out in accordance with a release plan approved by our senior officer, Brigadier General John Flynn. “You were to be released according to the date you were captured. We could find that out without any difficulty, but they would not allow us to choose the ones who needed to go home, as we had some pilots who had wounds that had not healed. One pilot in particular was Fred Cherry, an African-American and a prince of a guy. He had open wounds that would not heal. The medical attention was non-existent. We had people who should have been released first, but the Vietnamese would not allow that, they wanted to select people who had not caused them a lot of problems. With the first group that went out, it went fairly smoothly.” Colonel Fred Cherry had been a POW since his F-105 was shot down in October

1965, the first black American aviator to be captured by the North Vietnamese, retiring from active service in 1981 with a list of honours that include two DFCs, Colonel Cherry later being CEO of Cherry Engineering and director of Silver Star Consulting. Gen Gaddis continues: “I was released March 4, 1973. After I arrived in the States, I was taken to a military hospital at Andrews AFB, Maryland, to meet my family. I went through a very detailed debriefing to give them all the information that we could think of. I was in the hospital there for two weeks for medical tests and treatment; we all had so many parasites, a lot of it from the food we ate over there. “After that, they let me come back to North Carolina and visit with my family but then they called me back a second time for more questioning and discussion followed by 90 days of convalescent leave. During that time they informed us that the Air University down at Maxwell AFB in Alabama would have a twoweek briefing covering the important events ➤

Norman Gaddis was photographed the night he arrived in the Hanoi Hilton on May 12, 1967. Gen Gaddis via Norm deWitt

A KC-135 refuels an F-4 Phantom over Southeast Asia in 1967. USAF

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 47

The ability of the F-4 to carry a heavy load of fuel and ground attack weapons made it particularly effective in the Vietnam theatre. Here, a pair of 375 gallon wing tanks and three bomb racks adorn an F-4C. USAF

The American Embassy Compound in Saigon viewed from one of the evacuation helicopters. USMC

A US Marine Corps CH-46 helicopter is loaded with staff at the American Embassy Compound in Saigon. USMC

US Marine Corps Sikorsky CH-53 helicopters land at the Defense Attaché Office compound in Saigon on April 29, 1975. USMC

of the time from August 1964 until 1973 when all of us were released, and it was a general briefing so we could bring our wives. After that was over, those who felt they were medically qualified could qualify for refresher training in T-38s if they wanted to fly again. “Some of us elected to fly and I wanted to fly again. I went to Randolf AFB, stayed there about 60 days and got about 60 hours of flying time in the T-38, many of the flights with instructor pilots, and other flights had POWs in the back. In the process of this requalification, General William McBride, the commander of the Air Education Training Command asked me to come to his office. He wanted to know what I thought of the requalification and I told him that it was absolutely perfect, they would let you progress at your own pace. It was a good programme that they set up for us, and it seemed there were quite a few who requalified, and if they planned to fly or not at least they could say they re-qualified and the Air Force gave them preferential treatment as to where they wanted to go. General McBride asked me what I wanted to do, and I told him I had graduated from Williams AFB in Chandler, Arizona 30 years ago, and I would love to go and command Williams, if it does not push anyone out of their position. “After a couple of weeks he called me to come up again and he said ‘Norm, this is going

to work out okay, Warren Moore has had experience commanding the wing and it’s time for their commander to be reassigned. I want you to go out there and be his vicecommander.’ It was a position that wasn’t really authorised, and the commander gave me a real good overview of how the base operated, and let me get comfortable with flying. “The general called me one morning at 5am and it scared me to have a three-star general calling at 5 o’clock in the morning. He said, ‘normally if I was to call you at 5 in the morning, you’d be in a lot of trouble, but that’s not the case this morning. It’s 8am in Washington right now and they’ve just released the promotion list and you have been promoted to brigadier general, now you can go back to bed.’ Four hours later he called me again and said ‘Norm, things have changed, we are going to move Warren Moore out of there and at noon time today, you will become the commander of the 82nd Flying Training Wing. You talk to Warren Moore and make the arrangements for him to move out of his quarters, and we will take care of the rest.’” One of the more disagreeable chapters of Aviation Medicine was soon to follow, that they subjected the returning POWs to. “Two months after I had taken command of Williams AFB, the School of Aviation Medicine at Randolph sent a message that said: ‘We are concerned that you lost

consciousness while being tortured and we would like you to return here for more examinations.’ I was a little bit disgusted, I got an aeroplane and an instructor pilot and we flew down to San Antonio. They put me through this awful examination, sideways, upside down, went in through my arm, and up through my groin. The next day they said they had found damage to my heart and I hated to hear the next words… ‘and you are no longer qualified to fly.’ Of course I was disappointed.” It is worth noting at this point that Norman Gaddis is still with us at age 90. “I went back out and told the instructor pilot ‘My arms are so sore from all those tubes they had inserted in me… how’s about you fly back’, so he took the front position on the way back.” That was the turning point. General McBride called me and said ‘I’m sorry, it’s been such a short time, but the medical people have said that you aren’t qualified to fly, so we will turn it in to the personnel folks at the Pentagon and see what they say. In about two weeks, a two-star general friend of mine, John Roberts, whom I had known from Neubiberg, Germany, had a position for me in Tactical Operations at the Pentagon. So back I came to spend two more years in the Pentagon, far more extensive than my previous position. I had responsibility for all tactical aircraft and missiles for anything that went wrong as to missiles or bombs falling off

48 NORMAN GADDIS

Almost six years later, on March 4, 1973, Norman Gaddis was released from prison in Hanoi. Gen. Gaddis via Norm deWitt

of tactical airplanes; I was the go-to guy. In April 1975 we were very busy, accidents had happened with missiles dropped off aeroplanes and several such things, but one afternoon my boss, who was a three-star, said he wanted me at the National Control Center. He said: ‘We are in the process of picking up 4000 South Vietnamese who helped us, and the only way we can get them out is by helicopter from the platform at the American Embassy to our Navy ships in the South China Sea. The Secretary of Defense, Dr Schlesinger, and all the four-star generals… army, navy, air force, and Marine Corps were there. We had secure speakers that were describing what was going on in Saigon. At about 7pm that night I had a call from the duty officer at the White House and he said: ‘The president (Ford) would like to know if the Ambassador has left Saigon yet.’ I said: ‘Well, we do have secure lines, so I will talk to them and find out.’ So I called over there and they said: ‘No, Ambassador Martin is up here trying to get all the people into these helicopters so we can get them out to the ships in the South China Sea.’ So, I passed that information back to the White House. At about 11 o’clock I got another call from the White House, and it was the duty officer again, saying the president wanted to know if Ambassador Martin had left yet. I passed the word back that ‘No, the Ambassador has gone down to burn the Embassy.’ At about 5 o’clock in the morning another call came through from the same duty officer there who said: ‘I have a message from the president for Ambassador Martin, would you pass it to him please?’ I said: ‘I will do my very best.’ He said ‘Tell Ambassador Martin that the president said to get his butt on the next helicopter leaving Saigon.’ So, I passed that word to them. There were no high-fives there that night, I can tell you that. It was a sombre crowd and everybody left shaking their heads. “After I retired in 1976 I moved to WinstonSalem, North Carolina and also Ambassador Martin was from there. One evening I was at a Presbyterian church uptown for a service and near to me was Ambassador Martin. So, I scooted over to him and introduced myself and told him ‘I’m Norm Gaddis. I was the one who passed the word from the president to

get your butt on the next helicopter.’ He had a big laugh out of that. It is a small world. “It was within just days after that that one of our commercial ships, the Mayaguez, was seized in the South China Sea. We went through that, and I was again in the National Command post. After that I was tired… I sat down with my wife and told her that I thought it’s time to retire. I’ve had enough pressure for almost six years as a POW (2124 days) over there in Vietnam and now two years of this over here. I told the chief of staff who told me come up and talk to him. He said I was on the next promotion list, but I said ‘Thank you sir, I really owe it to my family. My wife has gone through a tremendous amount of stress and had some serious operations since I’ve been gone, and I owe it to her and to my family.’ It had been 30 years and three months, and I decided this was the time to hang it up.” What happened to James Jefferson, Norman Gaddis’ crew member? Gaddis recalls: “In 1999 a crew from the DOD/POW/MIA Task Force was still searching for POWs and MIAs. They went to the rice paddy where our aircraft crashed. They dug there 10 different times. They finally found a tooth and sent it to the dental lab in

A Bell UH-1D is pushed over the side of the USS Okinawa during Operation Frequent Wind in April 1975 to make room for helicopters still arriving from Saigon. USMC

Hawaii. The dentist thought it could have been James’ tooth. The team went back again and found some human remains and did DNA tests. Military and Commercial labs determined that those were his remains. The only thing that we know was that he did get out of the aeroplane. His name tag had been cut out of his flying suit, it had not been scorched, it was not bloody or covered with jet fuel. His helmet and clip board were clean, and I saw those items as we travelled to Hanoi. “The DOD team could not find any evidence as to the cause of his death, they listed it as: Cause of Death: Undetermined. The date of his death was listed as May 12, 1967. His father was an army colonel; the family took James to Florida and buried his remains beside his father and mother. I still maintain contact with his brother, who was a major general in the air force. James also had three sisters, they were wonderful people.” Hazel Gaddis was active in POW/MIA issues throughout the war, selling bracelets with names of POWs among other activities. She passed away in 2007. Today, Norman Gaddis is retired, living in North Carolina. “I left with my head high, but certainly have thought many times about the 58,000 people who lost their lives there and 300,000 injured. McNamara… no respect. And to be honest with you, I did not believe President Nixon was an honest man. I told my senior officer John Flynn, ‘If he is elected in 1968, nothing will happen… only after he has spent the first four years in office will anything happen… and that’s exactly the way it went. After he was reelected, that’s when they unleashed all of the bombers and all hell broke loose. For 11 nights we POWs saw the most fantastic fireworks you’ve ever seen, but unfortunately a lot of it was the B-52s that had been hit and were on fire spinning down. We paid one heck of a price for all of that. Even today I ask myself ‘Why were we there? Why did we do that?’ We can’t afford to continue that kind of activity. We’re not the policeman of the world, we don’t have the resources to do all the things we would like to do. And let’s face it; we owe it to our people here to give them better opportunity to succeed.” ■ Words: Norm deWitt

Norman Gaddis at a press conference in April 1973. Gen Gaddis via Norm deWitt McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 49

You VIETNAM PHANTOM PILOTS PART 3

fight like

you train

Taking the Phantom into aerial combat

Phantom pilot Randall H ‘Duke’ Cunningham and his RIO William P ‘Irish’ Driscoll became the only US Navy aces of the Vietnam War, shooting down five MiG aircraft while part of VF-96 operating from the USS Constellation. Between them they were awarded two Navy Crosses, four Silver Stars and two Purple Hearts, testament to a remarkable team of brave men. Here, in his own words, Randy Cunningham relates what it was like to fly the Phantom at the edges of the envelope.

A

fighter is like your wife. She has her good points and her bad ones. You love the good things and learn to live with the bad ones. The F-4 smoked like an old locomotive, she was big and ugly, and easy to see – but would take care of you if you treated her right. Her attributes included good outside visibility, switchology that was easy to use if trained, radar and missiles that were better than the enemy, and the extra back seat was a plus with the best RIO in the Navy, Willy ‘Irish’ Driscoll. (The single seat vs. two seat fighter is another debate). The F-4 was easy to trap, and launch was a piece of cake – except for your first 56,000lb

June 1972 — Lieutenant Randall H. Cunningham (second from left) in a ceremony honouring him and Lieutenant (JG) William P. Driscoll (third from left), the Navy’s only Vietnam War air ‘Aces’. On the left is John Warner, then Secretary of the Navy, and on the right is Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, then Chief of Naval Operations. US Navy 50 YOU FIGHT LIKE YOU TRAIN

cat shot. You could find yourself nose high ready to eject if you did it wrong. Yes, that’s from personal experience. At the field, landing and taking off were a piece of cake. But with a wet runway on landing, she could hydroplane on you. At NAS Cubi Point (in the Philippines), I landed in a thunderstorm and my bird turned 180º, with me going down the runway backwards at a high rate of speed. The brakes would not work so I went full afterburner and stopped. Then called for taxi with a higher pitched voice. She was steady and spoke to you if you listened to her. She told you if you were abusing her, “I’m going to stall, depart and even spin,” she said through buffet and stick feel. If you didn’t listen she would bite you, but also she would forgive you and recover every time. On a Mach 2 flight test out of North Island, a ramp stuck and scared the Bajesus out of me! But again, she was forgiving and brought me home. She could bleed hydraulic fluid and still get you back with her back-up heart. This lady even liked a rat (the ram air turbine,

which we deployed after electrical failures). I had several flame outs, but she relit every time. Formation flight was a snap in the F-4. Speed brakes and throttle response were great. She was a good dogfighter above 420 knots and below 20,000ft, but only if trained... and I had the benefit of having some of the best instructors in the world. Dan Pederson, ‘Yank’, was my first instructor. He rode in the back seat and said: “Okay, take her pure vertical to zero CAS (calibrated air speed). You heard me, now do it! Keep the stick and rudders neutral and she will recover by herself.” Ten out of 10 times she forgave us. Then he said: “Go back pure vertical and at 200 knots go to idle, kick in rudder and feel her do a rudder reversal.” He taught me to hold her roll with opposite but neutral stick and we came directly down our slip stream. Yank gave me confidence in the F-4 on my first flight. In each manoeuvre flown, I knew she would get me through it. Thanks, Dan. I had other great instructors like Jim Ruliffson, J. C. Smith, Monroe Smith, Jim

Left: Lieutenant Randall H. Cunningham (centre) and Lieutenant (Junior Grade) William P. Driscoll (right) in the VF-96 ready room aboard USS Constellation (CVA-64), describing how they downed three MiG-17 fighters in aerial combat over North Vietnam on May 10, 1972. Combat damage forced them to eject from their F-4J, but they were quickly rescued by a helicopter from USS Okinawa (LPH-3), from where, after a hot meal and dry clothing, they were flown back to Constellation. US Navy

McDonnell Douglas F-4J Phantom II, BuNo.155800, NG-100, of VF-96,‘The Fighting Falcons’.The fighter Squadron was part of Carrier Air Wing 9 (CVW-9) aboard the aircraft carrier USS Constellation (CVA-64) in February 1972. Having the call sign ‘Showtime 100’ it was used by Lieutenant Randy Cunningham and Lieutenant Willie Driscoll for their 3rd, 4th, and 5th MiG-kills on May 10, 1972. However, it was hit by a surface-toair-missile and the crew had to eject over the Gulf of Tonkin. US Navy

Laing, Darrell Gary, Dave Frost, Mel Holmes, Jerry Sawatzky, and many others. Peter Jago and Jerry Kinch, two British exchange pilots, had me fly low level routes hitting points within 10 seconds. We flew at 100ft, 500 to 750 knots, and when I was chasing a MiG-21 at tree-top level a few years later their training paid off. Low level she was solid as a rock — 750 knots, 100ft above the ground. You could outrace the wind! She was stout as well. On May 8, 1972, with MiG-17s at 5 and 7 o’clock, tracers inches above our canopy, I rolled nose low and placed 12 g’s on her, ducking into a cloud. Even though she was hard down when we got back to Connie (USS Constellation), it was only a short time before you could take her to a dance again. Without a radar the bird was degraded by 50%. Going into combat blind is like cooking for your ex-wife: not fun. The F-4 had a blind area aft so when I came back from Vietnam I was asked to meet with Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, who asked what we needed. I said: “An Israeli-style scope on the front of the rear cockpit so we can see our six o’clock.” The next day he ordered all USN, USMC, and USAF F-4s to be fitted with the periscope. I was summoned to see Admiral Mickey Weisner and the first thing he said was: “What the hell did you tell SecDef yesterday?!” But we got them installed. Other equipment I would have added during that time included: a gun and lead computing sight, better UHF radios and KY-28 secure voice system, the USAF ‘Combat Tree’ system, AWG-10 parts supply, and more AIM9 and AIM-7 missiles.

There is no better aircraft in an air show than the F-4. When the Blue Angels or Thunderbirds made a pass in front of the crowd, those two J79-10 engines, each belching 17,900lb of thrust, made the hair on the back of your neck stand up and your heart pound from the noise and vibration. On the other hand, those engines were prone to FOD (foreign object damage), and I have seen two sailors being sucked into the intakes. One lived the other did not make it. When I joined my first fighter squadron, VF-96, it was suffering from losses caused by the devastating Enterprise fire (January 1969) and a difficult combat tour. My new commanding officer, ‘Early’ Wynn said: “Go out and fly the aircraft every day as much as you can.” Yay! This was after being stashed at

Topgun while waiting for the squadron. I took the ladies out and saw how much altitude it took to complete a split-s at 250, 350, and 500 knots. I saw how many g’s I could sustain at various altitudes at different airspeeds and felt her stick tell me when she would stall or spin. I was able to meet an old F-9 from China Lake over the Date Farm, and I’d challenge any knight that wanted to play. The fighter pilots most cherished words are, “fight’s on,” and I said them many, many times. I’ll leave you with one more thought. The difference between a fairy tale and a fighter pilot’s story: a fairy tale starts, “Once upon a time,” and a fighter pilot’s story starts off, “No shit, this really happened.” Going for knots, into the sun, and check six! ■ Words: Randy ‘Duke’ Cunningham

McDonnell Douglas F-4J Phantom II, BuNo.157267, NG-112, of VF-96,‘The Fighting Falcons’ and the aircraft in which Lieutenant Randy Cunningham and Lieutenant Willie Driscoll achieved one of their victories, a MiG-21 as it appears on the fin.This aircraft is now in the superb San Diego Air and Space Museum in Balboa Park in San Diego. Constance Redgrave McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 51

&

Power & perfection The US Navy Blue Angels and the F-4 Phantom II

The US Navy’s Flight Demonstration Squadron, the Blue Angels, was formed in 1946. Through the years, the Blue Angels used several aircraft from the Fleet, starting with piston-engined aircraft such as the F-6F Hellcat, F-8F Bearcat, followed by the first jets such as the F-9F-2 Panther, F-9F-8 Cougar, and the F-11F Tiger.

T

he Blue Angels transitioned to the F-4 Phantom II on December 23, 1968. The squadron collected six aircraft from Lambert Field, the home ground of the McDonnell Douglas Aircraft Company on December 23, 1968. Six McDonnell Douglas F-4J Phantom IIs were flown from St Louis, Missouri, to the squadron’s home base at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida. A seventh aircraft was added later.

BLUE ANGELS PHANTOM MODIFICATIONS

The six flight demonstration aircraft were previously used for carrier qualification missions for the fleet replacement squadron. The AWG-10 weapons control system was removed from the nose of each aircraft and replaced with weights to maintain the aircraft’s centre of gravity. Hence, they were dubbed lead-nosed F4Js. Opening the radome also revealed a nose compartment capable of holding 150lb of crew luggage. The standard variable engine inlet ramps which normally moved during transonic and supersonic flight were disabled, since the

team’s aircraft flew the demonstration at subsonic speeds and this also prevented the ramps from cycling while the aircraft taxied in single file. Underneath the fuselage, four dummy Sparrow missiles were attached. The forward Sparrows, containing red and blue dye, were connected to each of the wing fuel dump masts located at the trailing edge, just inboard of the wing fold. The aft Sparrow missiles contained oil, and both smoke and dye control switches were located on the throttle. Steve Shoemaker, who flew as one of the two Solo pilots from 1969 to 1970, explained the smoke system: “Engine oil was stored in the aft two dummy Sparrow missiles. A line routed the oil to a probe that was mounted just above and aft of one of the engine’s exhaust. When the pilot activated a switch in the cockpit, oil was sprayed into the exhaust causing it to partially burn, producing white smoke. However, it didn’t work in afterburner, since the extra heat caused total burning of the oil and no smoke was produced.” The oil tank system was also modified to allow these Phantoms to operate while inverted for more than 30 seconds, thereby

allowing inverted manoeuvres such as the Diamond Farvel and the Solos’ Opposing Inverted Pass. Steve Shoemaker said: “The limitation in Fleet F-4s was due to the oil system, not the fuel system. For inverted flight, baffles in the fuel tank capture about 900lb of fuel around the boost pumps. Conversely, the oil tank reservoir is a gravity feed, therefore inverted flight is limited to 30 seconds, after which pressure to operate the engine nozzles begins to fail.” The Blue Angel modification provided for an inverted pick-up system for the oil tank reservoir, therefore, no inverted limitation. Unlike fleet F-4Js, fitted with J79-GE-10 engines, these Phantoms were fitted with earlier J79-GE-8s, as fitted to the F-4B. The J-79-8s still packed a punch, providing over 10,900lb of dry thrust and 17,000lb in full afterburner. The demonstration aircraft had the basic cockpit layout of their fleet counterparts but with several modifications, such as the weapons selector being removed. The throttle quadrant on the left panel was specially modified so that minimum afterburner was selected by moving the throttles outboard at

A transition in progress.The F-4s in US Navy Blue Angels colours of blue and gold, next to their predecessor, the F-11F Tiger. Ron Rentfrow

Blue Angels F-4 Phantoms fly in formation with Bill and Corky Fornof, flying F-8F Bearcats, the first type the Blue Angels flew. Ron Rentfrow

Nellis Air Force Base, Las Vegas, Nevada.The US Navy Blue Angels Diamond Formation flies over the US Air Force Thunderbirds, who had the F-4E Phantom at the time. Ron Rentfrow

about 89 to 91% power, which moved a microswitch installed in the quadrant. By moving the throttles forward from here, the pilot modulated power from 89% in minimum afterburner all the way to 100% afterburner. On the front of the inner throttle were switches activating the smoke and dye system. These were used in response to the flight leader’s radio commands of “Smoke on” or “Water on”. Also positioned on the throttle was a communication control switch, toggling between the UHF radio and the internal intercom to communicate with the backseater. The stick was also modified with the trigger removed to allow a tighter control. On top of the stick was the trim toggle, used for elevator and aileron trim. In full nose-down trim position, a constant 25lb of pull on the flight stick was implemented. This had a dampening effect on any pilot-induced oscillations and facilitated the fine corrections necessary to maintain close formation. Ernie Christensen, who flew Right Wing in 1969 and the Slot position in 1970, explained the adjustments needed in learning to fly with this system: “Because the team flew at full nose down trim and that allowed for a ‘pullrelease’ application of stick in minute amounts, a trim downspring replaced the standard F-4J’s bellows and allowed for a constant pull. At a nominal 325 knots (or so)

The Delta Vertical Break, showing the trailing smoke and dye systems. Ron Rentfrow

Afterburner takeoff of the Blue Angels Diamond formation. After take-off, Number 4 slides into the Slot position. Ron Rentfrow

with full nose down trim there was about 20lb of pull and about 5lb per G at that airspeed. At 500 knots, there was only about 5lb of pull, so that on slightly unloaded run-ins for overheads during the 1969 season, we were all really at the edge of control.” The automatic flaps system found in the fleet versions of the F-4J Phantom II was removed in the demonstration aircraft. Ernie Christensen said: “The flap blowup/blowdown system (based upon airspeeds that tended to vary between aircraft) was around 220 knots blowdown and 230 knots blowup. Obviously, with varying blowup and blowdown switches, the aircraft would be very unstable in formation during aircraft configuration

changes and accelerations. Therefore, that feature was removed and flaps were raised and lowered directly, bypassing the Central Air Data Converter (CADC).” Standard Martin Baker Mark H7 ejection seats were installed in the flight demonstration aircraft. A small valve located on the front console controlled the ejection sequence. Normally, an ejection sequence in a fleet F-4 involved a delay of 1.92 seconds, allowing the radar intercept officer (RIO) in the back seat to eject first, before the pilot. During demonstration flights, the pilot adjusted the valve to allow the immediate ejection of the front seat, within 0.44 seconds of sequence initiation. ➤

After the flight demonstration, the aircraft taxi back to the flight line in single file.The hard work of the maintenance crews was crucial in ensuring the success of the team. Ron Rentfrow McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 53

The Diamond Landing, showing the characteristic smoke trails of the J-79 engines.This landing required runways 10,000ft long since drag chutes could not be deployed. Ron Rentfrow

FLYING THE FLIGHT DEMONSTRATION

The F-4 Phantom had major advantages over its predecessor, the F-11F Tiger, especially in terms of thrust. The thrust increase gave a wide margin of sufficient power for vertical manoeuvres such as loops. While the additional thrust was an advantage, its aerodynamic flow posed several unique challenges in maintaining close formation. Pressure from the Boundary Layer Control (BLC) system, where bleed air from the engines was directed over the upper surface of each wing to provide additional lift, coupled with the vortices of the dihedral wings, resulted in forces which pushed aircraft flying in very close formation. These forces were even more pronounced when the aircraft were in the so-called ‘dirty’ configuration, with flaps and gear down. To maintain a close Diamond formation with a 36in wingtip to canopy separation, the wingmen often had to apply full deflections of the stick with full trim to counteract the

opposing forces pushing them away from the formation. Ernie Christensen summarized the whole experience: “On the other hand, with all of the vortex generated by all the anhedrals and dihedrals and with the engine bleed air blowing over the wings when flaps were down, handling the F-4 in formation was sheer brute force. It was like trying to run an Indy 500 with a tractor trailer. As any demo pilot who flew the F-4 would tell you, you worked so physically hard in the cockpit that you were exhausted and soaking wet after a show. “I can remember when flying the No. 3 plane during the 1969 winter training having to take my left hand off the throttle coming down the backside of a loop and helping my right hand hold the stick, until my right forearm really strengthened, yelling out loud to hold on to the stick.” The six-ship Blue Angels F-4 Phantom demonstration sequence retained the elements of the previous sequences from earlier aircraft types, but added additional manoeuvres designed to show the sheer power and thrust The Blue Angels Delta formation over Mount Fiji, Japan, during the Far East tour in 1971. Ron Rentfrow

Commander Harley Hall, Flight Leader of the Blue Angels in 1970 and 1971. On January 27, 1973, Commander Hall was listed as Missing in Action after his F-4J Phantom was shot down on a Close Air Support interdiction mission in Vietnam. US Navy

of the Phantom. It retained the basic elements of the precise 4-ship Diamond formation, with the rapid dynamic motion of the two Opposing Solos. Towards the latter part of the sequence, the Diamond and the two Solos joined to form the Delta formation. The sight of six F-4 Phantom II, with 12 screaming J-79 jet engines was indeed impressive. The Blue Angels F-4 flight demonstration evolved between 1969 and 1973, as new manoeuvres were added and old ones modified. It was during this period that the Blue Angels developed manoeuvres such as the Solo Dirty Roll, Line Abreast Loop, the Left Echelon Roll, Tuck Under Break, and Tuckaway Break. Many manoeuvres were developed and perfected during the winter training period at Naval Air Station El Centro, California, from January to March. To illustrate this, Steve Shoemaker explained how he executed the Solo Dirty Loop manoeuvre successfully: “The manoeuvre began from crowd right with gear down and half flaps, with an airspeed of 250 knots (the flap limit speed) at around 100ft. “You hit maximum afterburner on pull-up, producing a nice loud noise effect right in front of the crowd. The initial pull-up was just enough to keep the speed under 250 knots. The F-4’s power was enough to get over the top of the loop at probably around normal approach speeds of 120-140 knots, and I guess around 8500ft. “There also might have been some attempt to drive it or float over the top to make the loop more of a circle, but there wouldn’t have been much excess airspeed to drive it here on the top. As the nose started through the horizon, the power was pulled to idle, which was very impressive: from max noise in full burner to no noise at idle. As the nose fell through and started down, the rest of the manoeuvre consisted of keeping the airspeed below 250 knots and working the altitude back down to the deck. Speed brakes were required.”

The 1970 US Navy Blue Angels Team, from left to right: Lt Dick Schram, Lt Skip Umstead, Lt Ernie Christensen, Capt Kevin O’Mara, Flight Leader Lt Cdr Harley Hall, Lt Jim Maslowski, Lt Steve Shoemaker and Lt J D Davis. US Navy

The 1969 US Navy Blue Angels Team, from left to right: Lt Bud Jourden, Lt Steve Shoemaker, Lt Rick Millson, Capt Vince Donile, Flight Leader Lt Cdr Bill Wheat, Lt Ernie Christensen, Lt John Allen, Lt Rick Adams and Lt Dick Schram. US Navy

The Blue Angels Delta Formation. Ron Rentfrow

The 1971 US Navy Blue Angels Team, from left to right: Lt Dick Schram, Lt Bill Switzer, Lt Jim Maslowski, Capt Kevin O’Mara, Flight Leader Cdr Harley Hall, Lt Bill Beardsley, Lt Skip Umstead and Lt Cdr J D Davis. US Navy

BLUE ANGELS 1969-1973

The F-4s of the US Navy Blue Angels, led by Flight Leader Lieutenant Commander Bill Wheat, performed their first public flight demonstration at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona, on March 15, 1969. This began a memorable period in the history of the team. During each year, they flew more than 70 flight demonstrations across the United States showcasing the skill and dedication of the officers and enlisted staff of the US Navy. On October 10, 1970, Lieutenant Commander Harley Hall led the squadron on a memorable flight demonstration at Quito in Ecuador, one of the highest elevation airfields in the world. The unique geography, weather and fortuitous timing led to a most memorable six-plane cross. Kevin O’Mara remembers the event: “Quito has a 10,000ft runway, but it is at an elevation of 9300ft with surrounding mountains going as high as 18,000ft. This was the highest elevation airfield the Phantom had ever operated out of. “Due to the high altitude, we flew a rolling show with no overhead manoeuvres. The day of the airshow it was raining and the surrounding mountains were shrouded in clouds. We did a low opener, a 4-ship trail approach, head-on to the crowd, with a call of: ‘Ready, break’, No. 1 and 2 turn 90º to the

right, 3 and 4 90º to the left on opposite runway headings. “Another break and a timed turn for a cloverleaf back to the runway for a cross manoeuvre. As I got the call to break from the Boss I realized that I had drawn the short straw and was headed for the high mountainous area adjacent to the airport. I lit the burners and started to pull but I was still approaching the cloud covered mountains. I saw a ravine and thought if I just keep pulling I’ll end up in that ravine. I did end up going into the clouds, but also ended up breaking out in the ravine. By this time all thoughts of a timed turn had long since vanished. I saw two Blue jets approaching the field and I thought to myself, I’m late for the cross and relit the burners. “As I was just about to centre point the two F-4s started rolling and I realized that it was the solos and that I was just a tad early. At that moment the other three diamond aircraft arrived and we had a four-plane cross right after the two-plane horizontal rolls. A very interesting manoeuvre for certain.” In 1971, Commander Harley Hall led the team on a memorable Far East tour, in addition to more than 60 flight demonstrations in the United States. The tour included flight demonstrations in the Philippines, Vietnam, and across the Far East. ➤

The 1972 US Navy Blue Angels Team, from left to right: Lt Steve Lambert, Lt Bill Switzer, Capt Mike Murphy, Flight Leader Lt Cdr Don Bently, Lt Bill Beardsley, Lt Skip Umstead and Lt Gary Smith. US Navy

The Transpo Air Show, Dulles Airport, Washington DC, saw a meeting between the 1972 Blue Angels and Red Arrows Teams. Ron Rentfrow McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 55

The Two Opposing Solos highlight the dynamic and powerful performance of the F-4 Phantom. Ron Rentfrow

Lt Skip Umstead flew as a Solo Pilot with the Blue Angels from 1970 to 1972. In March 1973, while training with the new F-14 Fleet Replacement Squadron, Lt Umstead was called back to lead the Blue Angels. His loss during a mid-air collision on July 26, 1973 was deeply felt across the entire Squadron. Ron Rentfrow

In 1972, Lieutenant Commander Don Bently took over the squadron. Highlights of the 1972 tour included the May 1972 Transpo Aviation Expo at Dulles Airport, Washington DC, where the US Air Force Thunderbirds and Royal Air Force Red Arrows also performed. Sadly, during winter training in 1973, a mid-air collision involved three F-4 Phantoms while practicing the Trail Loop manoeuvre. The three pilots, including Lieutenant Commander Don Bently ejected safely. Due to his injuries, Lieutenant Commander Bently was replaced by Lieutenant Skip Umstead, who had previously flown as a Solo pilot from 1970 to 1972. Lieutenant Skip Umstead led the team during the 1973 air show season, which included a historic tour of Europe and the

Middle East, with displays in Spain and Iran, along with memorable flight demonstrations in the UK, including at Upper Heyford and Bentwaters. The team also performed at the 1973 Paris Air Show. This brilliant beginning was to end in tragedy.

July 26, 1973 – end of an era

On July 26, 1973, the Blue Angels took off from NAS Oceana for a flight demonstration at Lakehurst, New Jersey. Skip Umstead led the formation, flying with Crew Chief Gerald Harvey as his backseater. Skip Umstead’s two wingmen were Captain Mike Murphy, flying Right Wing, and Captain John Fogg, flying the Left Wing. Mike Murphy’s backseater was Crew Chief Ronald Thomas.

Phantoms and angels Emmanuel Rodriguez is the author of the excellent Phantoms and Angels, published by EditionOne Books of Berkeley, California. Copies for US addresses can be ordered directly via the author’s website at www.phantomsandangels.com Copies for non-US addresses can be ordered directly by emailing the author at [email protected]

Air to air refuelling from a KC-135 Tanker during the 1971 tour to the Far East. Ron Rentfrow

56 ...

THRESHOLD – THE BLUE ANGELS EXPERIENCE This is an absolute must for any fan of the Phantom or any aviation enthusiast, shot as it is from the cockpit as well as the ground to produce one of the most dynamic and exciting aviation films ever made. Threshold is a 93 minute documentary produced by Paul Marlow and Dave Gardner, detailing the experiences of the 1970 and 1971 Blue Angels F-4 Phantom Teams.The DVD can be ordered via Amazon or directly through the producers’ website at: www.thresholdtheblueangels experience.com

The 1973 US Navy Blue Angels Team, from left to right: Lt Chuck Newcomb, Lt Jerry Tucker, Capt Mike Murphy, Lt Marlin Wiita, Flight Leader Lt Cdr Skip Umstead, Capt John Fogg, Lt Steve Lambert and Lt John Chehansky. US Navy

At low altitude, the V-shaped formation of three Phantoms was just finishing its Diamond Roll manoeuvre. The entire formation was at 270º of roll, when a collision occurred between the aircraft of Skip Umstead and Mike Murphy. Umstead, Murphy, and Murphy’s backseater Ronald Thomas were all killed in the collision. In the brief moments immediately after the collision, Umstead was able to activate the ejection sequence, resulting in the ejection of his backseater, Gerald Harvey, who was later recovered several feet away from the crash site, escaping major injuries. Only three modified F-4s remained after the tragic collision so the rest of the air show season was cancelled. On September 25, 1973,

The US Navy Blue Angels support aircraft, the C-121J Constellation, affectionately named “Connie” seen at the high airfield of Quito in Ecuador, October, 1970. Ron Rentfrow

the squadron flew the remaining F-4s from Naval Air Station Pensacola to MCAS Cherry Point, North Carolina. Severe weather forced the pilots to fly by instrument flight rules for at least one hour. Once at Cherry Point, the three F-4J Phantoms taxied to the flight line, the pilots shut down the engines and left their aircraft quietly. It was a quiet, sad end to an historic period which began with the first Blue Angel F-4J Phantoms taking off from Lambert Field, St Louis, Missouri, only four years before. In 1974, the Blue Angels transitioned to a new flight demonstration aircraft, the Douglas A4F Skyhawk. From 1969 to 1973, the F-4 Phantom II flew in the blue and gold of the US Navy Blue Angels. Millions of spectators, attending hundreds of flight demonstrations were inspired by the sight of six Phantoms conquering the skies with grace and power. Behind the scenes were even more hours of dedicated maintenance by the US Navy Blue Angels maintenance crews. In just four years, the history of the US Navy Blue Angels had become forever entwined with the legend of the Phantom. ■ Words: Emmanuel Rodriguez

Capt Mike Murphy flew as the #2 Pilot in 1972 and 1973. Prior to joining the Blue Angels, Murphy flew the F-4 Phantom on 300 combat missions in Vietnam. His loss in the mid-air collision in July 26, 1973, marked the end of a distinguished life, full of dedication and service. Ron Rentfrow

The first prototype British Phantom, XT595, takes flight. Editor’s collection

The world’s slowest Phantoms Royal Navy F-4K-27/FG.1 Phantom II The Royal Navy became McDonnell’s first overseas customer for the Phantom following the disastrous collapse of plans to create a supersonic version of the Harrier. Political wrangling meant the American fighter could only be accepted if it had a British engine fitted – yet this made it the most expensive, and slowest, Phantom ever built.

W

ith Phantom production under way in 1958, McDonnell realised its new aircraft had the potential to be a big seller overseas – a market the company had not previously attempted to exploit. Since it was designed as a carrier-borne aircraft, McDonnell set its sights on nations that operated carriers large enough to accommodate the Phantom – Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the Netherlands and Britain. Contact was made with the British government and on December 9, 1959, a report was sent across the Atlantic entitled The Carrier Suitability of the F4H-1 Airplane on British Carriers. This met with some interest and a meeting was arranged for April 1960 between a McDonnell delegation and the Ministry of Defence, the Royal Navy, the RAF and Rolls-Royce. Three months later, the Admiralty’s Commander Patrick Charles Stuart Chilton made a reciprocal visit to McDonnell and became the first British pilot to fly the Phantom, and only the 73rd to fly it overall. He was impressed but stressed that the Phantom in its then current form would not be suitable for British needs. A higher launch attitude, a slower approach speed and more power were required. 58 THE WORLD’S SLOWEST PHANTOMS

In December 1961, with both the RAF’s Hawker Hunters and the Royal Navy’s de Havilland Sea Vixens reaching the end of their service careers, the British government decided that both would be replaced by a single new aircraft – appropriately adapted to the needs of each service. This multirole machine would most likely, it was foreseen, be the Hawker P.1154 – a supersonic version of the promising VTOL Hawker P.1127, the aircraft that would ultimately be developed into the successful Harrier. In January 1962, it was decided that both services would have to take whichever aircraft was chosen to meet NATO Basic Military Requirement 3 (NBMR-3) – which was for a single-seat VTOL strike fighter capable of Mach 0.92. In April, Operational Requirement 356 was issued for an RAF/Royal Navy aircraft based on the winner of NMBR-3 – which in July of that year was announced as the P.1154. This lengthened version of the P.1127 achieved supersonic flight through the use of plenum chamber burning in the low-pressure fan air duct to produce more thrust. When the Navy examined the competition winning design, it was unhappy with the undercarriage arrangement, a bicycle type it claimed was unsuitable for the conventional aircraft carriers from which the P.1154 would have to operate. Hawker therefore began work

on a tricycle undercarriage instead, fitting the rear legs into large wing-mounted nacelles. At the end of the year, Roll-Royce offered its Spey engine for the project, competing against the Bristol Siddeley BS.100. A month later, however, in January 1963, it was agreed that the Spey – an engine originally designed for use aboard small airliners – was inferior and the Pegasus-derived Bristol Siddeley BS.100 was chosen instead. The Navy then raised concerns about the P.1154’s single-seat design, arguing that a twoseater was needed to meet its requirements. The Navy and the RAF also disagreed about which radar to fit but the RAF reluctantly agreed that the design could have a folding nose and wings. Hawker itself then raised concerns that the design was evolving way beyond its original specification. Meanwhile, McDonnell was watching events closely. It had already been working, since 1962, on adapting the F-4 to meet the British requirements previously outlined. A nose oleo double extension of 40in, compared with the US standard 20in, was designed to raise the aircraft’s attitude for launch. Tests of this configuration took place aboard the USS Forrestal using a US Navy F-4B on April 11, 1963. Five months later, after the successful completion of this work, McDonnell sent the British government another report cum ➤

XV588 lights up in readiness to launch from HMS Ark Royal. National Museum of Naval Aviation

Another of 892 Squadron’s Phantoms on deck. Note the deck crew sheltering on an aircraft tug next to a Blackburn Buccaneer S Mk 2 of 809 Squadron. National Museum of Naval Aviation

One of several 892 Squadron Phantoms to be coded 014R, XT860 is pictured on board HMS Ark Royal in 1972 with HMS Berwick, a Rothesay or Type 12I class anti-submarine frigate in the background. National Museum of Naval Aviation

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 59

sales brochure, this time entitled F-4B for Great Britain. By October 1963, it was finally recognised that a single aircraft that could serve both the RAF and the Navy in both fighter and strike roles was unlikely to be achievable in time to replace the Hunter and Sea Vixen. An interim solution was needed, and in November the Royal Navy expressed renewed interest in McDonnell’s Phantom, now the F-4C, as a short-term stopgap while the P.1154’s protracted development continued. In February 1964, the Navy was given permission to begin negotiations for the purchase of Phantoms and the following month representatives of the Navy travelled to McDonnell’s St Louis headquarters to discuss the specifications of a British version. At this stage the Royal Navy already considered that a pair of Rolls-Royce Spey engines, replacing the American General Electric J79s, might provide the greater power required for Royal Navy carrier operations. Speys were viewed favourably having proved to be a success, without reheat, on the Blackburn Buccaneer S.2. The two-shaft Spey had a gas turbine starter and reheat with 17 compressor stages. It exhausted through a variable area primary nozzle and a fixed-area secondary nozzle – and these would have to be redesigned and increased in size from those used for the J79 if the Phantom was to accommodate the Spey. None of this came as a surprise to McDonnell, however, which had already considered how the Spey might work in the Phantom as part of British adaptation efforts of 1962. It had even thought about putting forward a Spey-powered Phantom for the USAF’s TFX requirement, which was eventually met by the F-111.

An 892 Squadron Phantom on Ark Royal’s catapult. Note the three small ‘traffic’ lights to the bottom right of the open nosewheel hatch door.The best way to tell a Royal Navy Phantom in RAF service was to look for these lights, which were absent from the FG.2. Editor’s collection

60 THE WORLD’S SLOWEST PHANTOMS

XT869 was lost on October 15, 1973, after suffering a double engine failure and crashing into Tentsmuir Forest while on approach to RAF Leuchars. It is pictured here as VL154 with 767 Squadron.The crew, Lt J Hooton and Lt D J Lortscher, ejected safely at 400ft. Editor’s collection

A VERY BRITISH PHANTOM

Finally, on July 1, 1964, the government gave the go-ahead for the Navy to place an order with McDonnell. The aircraft to be bought, referred to at this stage as the F-4B (RN) or F-4RN, would be based primarily on the F-4J, rather than the F-4B as originally envisioned. It was required to have a landing weight of 36,000lb so that unused ordnance would not have to be jettisoned before landing as per US Navy practice. In addition, it was to allow a steeper approach, have a sink rate of 24ft per second and an 8% slower approach speed than the American equivalent. It needed a strengthened undercarriage and arrester hook, 16.5% droop ailerons, bigger leading edge flaps, stabiliser slots and reduced stabiliser anhedral. Part of the deal was that 40-45% of components had to be manufactured in Britain. This was intended to ensure that the British aviation industry would benefit, so Short Brothers, BAC and Rolls-Royce were all to be involved in making parts and sub-assemblies which would be shipped over to St Louis to be used in the assembly of the aircraft.

In addition to the change of engine, the Ferranti AN/AWG-11 fire control system was to be installed in place of the F-4J’s AN/AWG10. The British-manufactured AN/AWG-11 was actually a licence-built version of the AN/AWG-10, but differed from the American version primarily in having a radar dish which could be swung sideways in order to reduce the aircraft’s length to 54ft. This was essential if the Phantom was to fit on British carrier deck lifts – which were significantly smaller than those of their American counterparts. Another novel, albeit minor, addition to the Royal Navy’s version was the Stick Positioning Device (SPD). This involved a wire wrapped around a small clutched reel fitted beneath the cockpit instrument panel. Before takeoff, the pilot clipped the wire to the control column and pulled it back to a pre-determined setting. This setting depended on the weight and balance of the aircraft based on its load and configuration, which in turn decided the tail plane angle needed. Once the correct control column position had been visually checked by the crew chief, the stick could be released and the wire would go slack. When the aircraft was positioned

A US Navy Douglas A3D-2 Skywarrior refuels a Royal Navy Phantom. National Museum of Naval Aviation

on the catapult, the stick would be pulled back to the position where the wire was taut and the Phantom would then launch into the air with its tail in the correct position and unmoving. The inclusion of the Rolls-Royce RB.16876R Spey Mk.202/203 turbofan powerplant had now been agreed but was by far the most controversial of the various modifications required. All the development costs of making this larger engine fit the F-4J, including a complete redesign of the rear fuselage engine bay and engine intakes, were to be borne by the British government. This served to raise the unit cost of each British Phantom, now designated the F-4K, dramatically. The initial order placed with McDonnell was for two YF-4K-26 prototypes and two F-4K-27 production aircraft with a longer term plan of purchasing 143 Spey Phantoms to serve aboard HMS Victorious, HMS Eagle and a pair of proposed new carriers known as CVA-01s which would have accommodated 36 Phantoms each. While work on the F-4K was ongoing, in February 1965, the P.1154 programme was cancelled in its entirety, bringing to an end any hope of it providing a long-term replacement for the ‘short-term’ Phantom. In February of the following year, the CVA-01 programme too was cancelled and it was decided that HMS Ark Royal would be updated to take the Phantom instead. Thereafter, fixed-wing aircraft would begin to be phased out of the Royal Navy entirely. The proposed number of Phantoms to be bought was reduced to 137. YF-4K Phantom XT595, the 1449th Phantom built, first flew on June 27, 1966, followed by XT596 on August 31. The Royal Navy subsequently decided to redesignate the type FG.1 to indicate its dual fighter/ground attack role. The YF-4Ks differed from the final production model in several ways – mounted on the end of the nose was a test instrumentation probe with yaw indicator, on the underside of the fuselage beneath the cockpit an inert AIM-7 round was carried for ballast and the Spey fitted was the earlier Mk.201. Both prototypes went to Edwards Air Force Base, California, for engine trials, while the first production machine XT597, first flown on November 1, 1966, was used for weapons trials, which included operations flown from USS Coral Sea.

This trio was later used for experiments and tests conducted in Britain at the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Bedford, the Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment at Boscombe Down, Rolls-Royce at Hucknall and Hawker Siddeley at Brough. While the first FG.1s were being tested, HMS Victorious was brought back to Britain for a refit in readiness to accommodate them. This was carried out from 1966 to 1967 but on November 11, 1967, a fire broke out in the Chief Petty Officers’ mess causing significant damage. With budget cuts biting, it was decided not to recommission HMS Victorious after all and the number of Phantoms to be bought was correspondingly cut to 110. The first three Phantoms destined for front-line service with the Royal Navy were flown by US civilian crews to Royal Naval Air Station Yeovilton via the Azores on April 29, 1968. They were painted with dark sea grey upper surfaces and white undersides, with large Type D national roundels. In mid-1968 three FG.1s were used for deck trials on board HMS Eagle. The vessel had just been refitted with powerful BS5 catapults capable of launching fully laden FG.1s but its jet blast deflectors had not been updated to incorporate the water-cooling feature required by the Spey’s powerful reheat. During the trials therefore, Eagle’s longer waist catapult was used and a plate made from thick steel was chained to the deck to absorb the heat of the aircraft’s engines. It was cooled with water from fire hoses after each launch. Upgrading Eagle’s deflectors would have cost £5 million and it was decided that this would not be money well spent so plans to use it for Phantom operations were cancelled, though it was still used for further tests in March and June of 1969. ➤

PHANTOM F-4K/FG.1 HISTORIES A&AEE = Aircraft and Armament Experimental Establishment McDD = McDonnell/ McDonnell Douglas PTF = Phantom Training Flight RAE = Royal Aircraft Establishment RR = Rolls-Royce 43 = 43 Squadron, RAF 111 = 111 Squadron, RAF 700P = 700P Intensive Flying Trials Unit 767 = 767 Squadron (training and type conversion), Royal Navy 892 = 892 Squadron, Royal Navy XV565 001R/892, crashed June 29, 1971 XV566 010R/892, crashed May 3, 1970 XV567 A&AEE, 011R/892, 001R/892, RAE, 003R/892, I/43, AI/43, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XV568 012R/892, 002R/892,T/43, AT/43, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XV569 767, 013R/892 Squadron, X/PTF, S/43, Q/111, BQ/111, 9063M (maintenance), Wattisham, Wildenrath, Bruggen XV570 014R/892,Y/PTF, N/111, BN/111, 9069M, Wattisham, scrapped September 1992 XV571 Delivered straight to RAF. A/43, AA/43, A/111, Leuchars, scrapped March 1992 XV572 156VL/767, then to RAF as C/43, N/43, AN/43, BG/111, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XV573 Delivered straight to RAF L/43, C/43, L/43, D/111, BD/111, Leuchars, scrapped 1992 XV574 Delivered straight to RAF B/43, Z/111, Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XV575 Delivered straight to RAF C/43, G/111, S/43, BO/111, Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XV576 Delivered straight to RAF D/43,AD/43, BK/111,Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XV577 Delivered straight to RAF M/43, AM/43, 9065M, Leuchars,‘AM’ scrapped at Leuchars April 2001 XV578 Delivered straight to RAF O/43, F/111, crashed February 28, 1979 XV579 157 VL/767, then to RAF as R/43, AR/43, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XV580 Delivered straight to RAF Q/43, crashed September 18, 1975 XV581 Delivered straight to RAF E/43, AE/43, 9070M, Wattisham, preserved Buchan, ATC Sqn Bridge of Don February 2000. Aberdeen Wing ATC January 5, 2002 (cockpit section)

XV591 as 012R with 892 Squadron. Editor’s collection

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 61

XV582 Delivered straight to RAF F/43, AF/43, M/111, M/228OCU(64), 9066M, preserved Leuchars XV583 Delivered straight to RAF G/43, B/111, BB/111,Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XV584 Delivered straight to RAF I/43, F/111, BF/111,Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XV585 Delivered straight to RAF F/43, H/43, P/43, AP/43, Leuchars, scrapped 1995 XV586 003R/892, 011R/892, 010R/892, J/43, AJ/43, A&AEE, AJ/43, 9067M, preserved Leuchars, on display RAF Leuchars November 1999. Moved to RNAS Yeovilton May 2012 XV587 013R/892, 010R/892, 009R/892, G/43, AG/43, BR/111, 9088M, Wattisham, scrapped April 1993 XV588 010R/892, 004R/892, damaged May 18, 1977, LoS, fuselage Leuchars FS, nose Predannack, Culdrose FS, perished July 1996 XV589 154VL/767, 006R/892, 011/892, P/111, crashed June 3, 1980, wreck Coningsby FS, scrapped 1982 XV590 001R/892, X/43, AX/43, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XV591 006R/892, 012R/892, M/111, BM/111, Category 5 December 1987, Leuchars, St Athan FS, scrapped October 1991, nose preserved Cosford, (892 markings) April 28, 2007 XV592 004/892, 005/892, 008/892, X/111, L/111, BL/111, Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XT595 YF-4K McDD, MoD(PE), Brough, Coningsby, St Athan, scrapped September 1981, nose RAFEF, 8550M, fuselage St Athan, Wattisham, 8851M, fuselage scrapped June 1993 XT596 YF-4K McDD, RR, RAE, BAe, preserved Yeovilton XT597 McDD, MoD(PE), A&AEE, Boscombe Down Museum September 2000 XT598 McDD, MoD(PE), E/111, crashed November 23, 1978 XT857 McDD, RAE, A&AEE, 767, U/PTF, C/111, damaged July 1985, 8913M, MP/Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XT858 RR, 724VL/700P, 001R/892, RAE, RR, RAE, BAe, Hucknall, Aldergrove, Leuchars, HoSM, Brough, Aston Down, scrapped at Aston Down 1994 XT859 725VL/700P, 001R/892, 155VL/767, 006R/892, HS, 006R/892, K/111, BK/111, 8999M, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992

Royal Navy Phantom XT863 flying with 767 Squadron as 150VL. Editor’s collection

62 THE WORLD’S SLOWEST PHANTOMS

Although displayed here in Royal Navy colours, XT598 ended up flying with the RAF’s 111 Squadron. It was destroyed in a crash on November 23, 1978. It came down on approach to RAF Leuchars and the crew, Flt Lt Christopher John Jones and Flt Lt Michael Hardy Stephenson, who did not eject, were killed. Editor’s collection

This left HMS Ark Royal as the only carrier suitable for the Phantom and upgrading it cost £32 million even though it was considered, overall, to be in a poorer material state than Eagle. The order for Phantoms was now reduced still further to 50 with an option for seven more. By now the unit cost had soared to £1.25 million – three times the price of the standard F-4J – although 46% of the money went to the British companies involved in manufacturing it. In service, the Spey gave a 10% increase in operational radius, a 15% increase in ferry range, and better takeoff, initial climb and lowlevel acceleration figures. Unfortunately, it also had a top speed of just Mach 1.9 compared with the production F-4J’s Mach 2.1 and ceiling, performance at altitude and afterburner light-up time were all inferior. Delivery of the last Phantom FG.1 (XV592, F-4 number 3394) was made on November 21, 1969. With a surplus of aircraft available, however, XV571 to XV585, with the initial exception of XV572 and XV579, had been delivered straight to the RAF, leaving the Royal Navy with just 33 Phantoms not counting the two YF-4K prototypes, XT597 or XT598 which never entered naval service. In fact, owing to accidents and further transfers, only 27 of the 50 Phantoms ordered for the Royal Navy would ever see service with its only front line FG.1 unit, 892 Squadron.

THE FG.1 IN SERVICE

The first unit to operate the FG.1 Phantom was 700P IFTU (Intensive Flying Trials Unit) Squadron, an evaluation and testing unit formed at RNAS Yeovilton on April 30, 1968, the day after the first three examples had been delivered. Three more Phantoms came on strength soon afterwards and the six were given side numbers 722 to 727 plus the deck letters VL, indicating Yeovilton. The aircraft also had McDonnell’s ‘Phantom’ character painted on their fins – but wearing a union flag waistcoat. When its work was completed the squadron’s aircraft were redistributed to 767 and 892 Squadrons and it was formally disbanded on March 31, 1969. The first of these two units, 767, had been re-established at Yeovilton on January 14, 1969, and became the operational conversion unit for Royal Navy Phantom crews. The unit’s aircraft were coded 150VL to 157VL and received an adaptation of 767 Squadron’s hawk badge as a graphic on their fins. After just over three and a half years, on August 1, 1972, 767 Squadron was disbanded again and its staff were moved to the new Phantom Post Operational Conversion Unit at RAF Leuchars. This was officially part of the RAF’s 11 Group but provided Fleet Air Arm pilots and navigators with a naval version of the RAF Phantom course provided at RAF Coningsby. Taking place over four months, this included 70 flying hours plus 25 hours in a simulator and 25 hours of intercept training. The unit’s four aircraft, officially operated by the RAF, were briefly given the deck letters LU before being painted instead with singleletter identity codes on the fin together with the badge of an omega beneath a sword with its blade pointing upwards. The PPOCU’s last aircraft was withdrawn on March 15, 1978, and it disbanded on May 31. The main Royal Navy Phantom unit, 892 Squadron, was also the only Fleet Air Arm unit to actually fly the Phantom from carriers as a replacement for de Havilland Sea Vixens, as per the original plan of the early 1960s. It disbanded on October 4, 1968, at Yeovilton and then re-formed at the same location on March 31, 1969 with the aircraft and personnel of the 700P IFTU.

During a practice display at Leuchars ahead of the last naval flight of the Phantom, XT868 flew low downwind along the runway axis and then entered a tight right-hand turn through 180 degrees to fly back along the runway. Sinking fast, it just missed the QRA sheds and the pilot, Commander C C N Davies, ejected horizontally as the right wing hit the ground. He was seriously injured but the observer, Lt J Gavin, who tried to eject seconds later, was killed. Editor’s collection

The refit of HMS Ark Royal was not due to be completed until February 1970 but nevertheless 892 Squadron’s aircraft carried the Ark Royal deck letter ‘R’ on their fins, plus deck code numbers 010-018, later 001-008, on the nose. A rather melancholy decision was made to paint a new symbol on the fin – a red chevron and a white diamond containing a black omega, the last letter of the Greek alphabet. This was intended to signify that 892 Squadron would be the last Royal Navy unit to operate conventional fixed-wing aircraft. The primary role of 892 Squadron during its eight years with the Phantom was air defence, with ground attack and close support as secondary duties. The weapons options available for the unit’s aircraft reflected this – four AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles, four AIM-7 Sparrow or Skyflash AAMs, SNEB rocket pods with 12 rounds each, BL755 cluster bombs and/or parachute retarded bombs. The SUU23/A gun pod was not available on the Royal Navy’s Phantoms, although those transferred to the RAF were later upgraded to accept it. When the squadron was waiting for Ark Royal to be recommissioned, on May 11, 1969, one of its aircraft was involved in an unusual mission – a London to New York race sponsored by the Daily Mail newspaper. Lt Cdr Brian Davies and senior observer Lt Cdr Peter Goddard set a new FAI record of four hours, 46 minutes and 57 seconds in XT858, with the help of Handley Page Victor tankers for in-flight refuelling. Five months later, on October 12, 1969, 892 Squadron made its first embarkation aboard USS Saratoga in the Mediterranean and trials were conducted where four Royal Navy Phantoms made 61 launches.

Finally, on April 30, 1970, the first familiarisation sorties were flown from the deck of HMS Ark Royal in Lyme Bay. These continued until May 15 and full embarkation took place on June 12. During their later career, the Royal Navy’s Phantoms were fitted with Marconi ARI 18228 radar warning receivers which were housed in a boxy structure on top of the tailfin. Also, many received a three-stage radar upgrade, including a Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode. Eight years and seven months after they had first embarked, on November 27, 1978, Ark Royal catapulted its final 10 Phantoms – the last one being XT870. They were flown directly to the RAF maintenance unit based at St Athan and 892 Squadron was disbanded on December 15. Its remaining Phantoms were transferred to the RAF. ■ Words: Dan Sharp

XT860 726VL/700P, 002R/892, 006R/892, 014R/892, PTF, L/43, AL/43, crashed April 20, 1988 XT861 700P, 003R/892, 767,V/PTF, C/43, crashed September 7, 1987 XT862 722VL/700P, 004R/892, 015R/892, 156VL/767, crashed May 19, 1971 XT863 700P, 150VL/767, 014R/892, G/111, BG/111, AS/43, Abingdon, scrapped 1992, nose Cowes XT864 724VL/700P, 151VL/767, 007R/892, J/111, BJ/111, 8998M, preserved Leuchars XT865 A&AEE, 156VL/767, 892, RAE, 892, U/111, BU/111, Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XT866 158VL/767, HS, 158VL/767, 158LU/767, W/PTF, O/43, crashed July 9, 1981, wreck Leuchars FS, hulk Faygate XT867 152VL/767, 892, H/111, BH/111, 9064M, Leuchars,‘BH’ scrapped at Leuchars April 2001 XT868 153VL/767, 151VL/767, 892, crashed May 12, 1978, wreck Leuchars FS XT869 700P, 154VL/767, 002R/892, crashed October 15, 1973 XT870 001R/892, RAE, 012R/892, S/111, BS/111, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XT871 007R/892, crashed July 1973 XT872 A&AEE, RAE, 007R/892, 001R/892, 004R/892,T/111, BT/111, Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XT873 767, A&AEE, then to RAF as S/43, A/111, BA/111, Leuchars, scrapped April 1992 XT874 Delivered straight to RAF. J/43, E/111, BE/111, 9068M (maintenance), Wattisham, Wattisham FS, Bruntingthorpe, scrapped February 1994

A Royal Navy Phantom of 700P Squadron, coded 725, at sea.The squadron was disbanded on March 31, 1969. Editor’s collection

XT875 157VL/767 then to RAF as K/43, AK/43, BP/111, Wattisham, scrapped September 1991 XT876 160VL/767, crashed January 10, 1972 McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 63

RAF Phantoms 24 years of Fighter, Ground Attack and Reconnaissance

The last unit to receive the Phantom in the UK was 41 Squadron, who used the aircraft as a reconnaissance platform from April 1 1972. Aside from the drop tanks and BL755 cluster bombs under the wings, this aircraft, XV407, is also carrying an EMI reconnaissance pod under the fuselage. Editor’s collection

The origins of the RAF’s Phantoms lie in the same place as those of the Royal Navy – the Hawker P1154 supersonic VTOL strike/interceptor of 1962. The failure to keep costs down while attempting to marr y two ver y different roles into the same airframe saw the British government cancel the Navy’s requirement in lieu of the F-4K Phantom in early 1964. The RAF however, was to wait in the hope that something suitable for its needs for a Hunter replacement might yet be developed.

O

n February 2, 1965, the recently-elected Labour Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, speaking during a parliamentary debate on its military plans made the following statement on the planned Hunter replacement: “I have to the tell House that this is not a practicable proposition… The P1154 will not be in service in time to serve as a Hunter replacement.” He continued, “In these circumstances, on defence grounds alone – quite apart from the cost argument – it will be necessary to extend the (previous Conservative) government’s purchasing programme for the Phantoms and to use this aircraft as a partial Hunter replacement.” This announcement and the subsequent cancellation of the TSR.2 (which had survived this debate but in reduced

numbers due to spiralling costs) dealt the British aircraft industry a fatal body blow. As with the Fleet Air Arm’s Phantoms, the government was keen to have as much British designed and built equipment fitted to the RAF aircraft on the production line. Subcomponents and avionics would be built by BAC, Short Bros, Martin Baker, Dowty and Ferranti (among others), the latter of which would provide an inertial navigation and attack system not included in the F-4K. The F4Ms also had the standard nose undercarriage leg, a different fire control system (Ferranti-built AN/AWG-12), anti-skid brakes and HF radio. No internal gun was fitted but the F-4Ms were wired to carry a 20mm SUU-23 gun pod under the fuselage centrepoint. One sticking point for the RAF however, was the engines.

The service was happy to accept its aircraft fitted with the J79-10 engines as they were cheaper to buy, cheaper to run and its lower thrust would not adversely affect the FGR.2’s combat ability. In the end, the RAF succumbed to political pressure and accepted the Spey for its aircraft. The version fitted to RAF Phantoms, the Mark 202, had a slower light-up time for the afterburner than the Spey 203s in the F-4K, a requirement for rapid thrust increase in the case of a missed approach (‘a bolter’) on the smaller British carriers. The F-4M also retained the folding outer wings and arrester hook of sea-going Phantoms. On July 1, 1965, an order for two prototype YF-4Ms plus 38 production-standard F-4Ms (to be known as the Phantom FGR.2) was placed from a planned total of 200 aircraft. ➤

Before delivery to the front line units, the Phantom FGR.2s underwent rigorous engineering examinations at 23 Maintenance Unit at Aldergrove in Northern Ireland, the first arriving in mid 1968. Editor’s collection

The cockpit of an RAF Phantom simulator, part of the sadly closed RAF Millom Museum, showing few differences from its US counterpart. Peter Clarke

The number was soon to decrease as the British government sought to purchase three US manufactured at the same time – the C-130 Hercules, F-111 and F-4 – under fixed-price contracts. The Phantom was the meat in the sandwich and as the cost of the F-111 rose, the funds available for the F-4s fell correspondingly. The total soon fell to 150, but the final 32 airframes were cancelled before delivery leaving a total of 116 production-standard aircraft. It was expected that the Phantoms would start to replace the Hunter in squadron service in 1968 and serve in the ground attack and reconnaissance roles until they themselves were replaced by the Anglo-French Jaguar fighter/bomber expected in 1971. The Phantoms would then be cascaded to Lightning units and take up air defence duties. Four months after the RAF order for the Phantoms was placed, there were still doubts about the cost of the programme and whether the Spey would be the eventual powerplant. In October 1965 it was estimated that the cost of operating the then proposed fleet of 290 F-4Ks

The first YF-4M for the RAF, XT852, underwent extensive testing in the US prior to delivery including refuelling trials from a Handley Page Victor BK.1, XA930. Editor’s collection 66 RAF PHANTOMS

and Ms (reduced by 10 from the previous month) for 10 years would be £710m compared with £550m for standard US Phantoms. At that time £20m had been spent on developing the Spey alone and it was estimated that an additional £110m would be needed over the same period if the Rolls Royce engine was fitted. It was also noted that the unit price of a Spey had risen from £110,000 to £155,000 over an 18 month period. The price of a J79 was just £65,000. The Admiralty was also hinting that – if pressed – it could just about operate American-spec F-4s from its carriers. These higher engine costs resulted in a substantial increase in the overall cost of each aircraft. The September 1965 list price for a British Phantom was £1.17m ($3.2m), almost 50% more than a US Navy F4B (£725,000/$2.022m) and USAF F-4C (£693,000/$1.931m). Finally, on November 17, 1965, the Minster of Aviation, Roy Jenkins, confirmed that the Spey had been selected to power both the F-4K and F-4M having received “guarantees on cost, performance and timescale” from Rolls Royce. McDonnell also attempted to exploit the cancellation of the TSR.2 programme (in April 1965) by offering a stretched Phantom – known as the Phantom FV – which the company was working on as an alternative to the US Navy’s troublesome F-111B. The aircraft, complete with variable geometry wings mounted on the shoulder, was offered with offsets totalling about 60% to British companies and was to be powered by a development of the Spey, the RB168-27R, which could have been fitted with a new rear end and an additional compressor stage. A planned in-service date of 1971 was even proposed. The British government (and

The Phantom was quickly replaced in some units, this formation in October 1976 was to mark Laarbruch based 2 Squadron’s transition from the Phantom FGR.2 to the Sepecat Jaguar GR.1. Editor’s collection

One of the main duties of the Phantom fighter Squadrons was to provide the Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) fighter to intercept unidentified aircraft entering the UK Air Defence Region. This 43 Squadron aircraft from RAF Leuchars has intercepted a Tupolev Tu-95 Bear on February 8, 1973. Editor’s collection

The first Phantom crew to fly non-stop from the UK to Singapore, Squadron Leader GH ArkellHardwick and Squadron Leader D C Read of 54 Squadron. Greeting them at RAF Tengah are Air Vice Marshall K H Hennock RAAF and Group Captain PA Latham. Editor’s collection

the Air Staff) pressed on with procuring their preferred choice, the F-111K, despite McDonnell’s estimate of a 50% saving per airframe (about £1.5m) and the proposal was dropped. On February 17, 1967, the first YF-4M, XT852, took to the air for its maiden flight at the McDonnell facility in St Louis before moving to Holloman AFB in New Mexico for trials. The second aircraft flew east to Patuxent River, Maryland. The first of the RAF’s production-standard FGR.2s, XT891, was delivered to Yeovilton on July 18, 1968 before being flown to RAF Aldergrove near Belfast two days later to undergo pre-service checks and modifications with 23 Maintenance Unit. When the checks were completed, the aircraft was part of the initial batch issued to 228 Operational Conversion Unit at Coningsby in Lincolnshire where all RAF Phantom training was to take place. Many of this first batch were ‘twin stick’ aircraft and, although the process to convert the second cockpit to a standard fit was fairly simple, many of these Phantoms remained in their original configuration. The first RAF Squadron to reform on the Phantom was No 6, a strike/attack unit which, until January 1969 had been flying Canberra B.16s from Cyprus as part of the Near East Air Force. Under the command of Wing Commander David Harcourt-Smith, the squadron continued its work-up and was finally declared operational in May 1969. Two months later, a diamond-nine formation of the squadron’s aircraft performed a flypast as part of the investiture of the Prince of Wales at Caernarvon Castle. Next to receive the FGR.2 was 54 Squadron, which replaced its Hunters in September 1969, while, 43 Squadron at

Leuchars was standing up on the first FG.1s deemed surplus to Fleet Air Arm requirements. It should be noted that the two FGR.2equipped squadrons at Coningsby were not, as might be expected, part of Strike Command (which was created in April 1968 with the merger of the former Bomber and Fighter Commands), but formed part of 38 Group’s rapid deployment force within Air Support Command and primarily employed in the ground attack role in support of ground forces. For this, the Phantom could carry the SNEB 4in rocket pod, up to 11 1000lb bombs (retarded or free-fall), BL755 cluster munitions and the externally-carried SUU-23 rotary cannon. RAF Germany squadrons could also carry tactical nuclear weapons when used in the strike role. The RAF was keen to show off its improved capability and, in May 1970, 10 aircraft from 54 Squadron deployed from Coningsby to Tengah, Singapore, three of which would make the 7500-mile flight nonstop in a little over 14 hours. As part of the build-up to such a mammoth task, endurance flights lasting up to 15 hours and covering 7500 miles had been flown around the UK to test both crew and aircraft stresses were bearable for the longest leg of the outbound flight – eight hours to Masirah, Oman. A two aircraft test-run was made in December 1969, setting an unofficial UKSingapore record time of 15hrs 26mins and routing UK-France-Mediterranean-CyprusTurkey-Iran-Oman-Gan-Tengah. Shortly before midnight on May 18, two Phantoms took off for the nonstop (and, hopefully, record-breaking) flight, tanking for the first time 10 minutes after wheels-up. To set a record time, they had to route over

Hornchurch in Essex before settling in formation which their accompanying Victor for two further top ups before Cyprus was reached and another Victor took over. With Tehran visible on the horizon, the flight’s fifth refuel was completed, emptying the second Victor which headed home, leaving a third to join the Phantoms north of Masirah. As the formation flew over the Arabian Sea, the next refuel was completed and a course for Gan set where the next Victors in the relay should have been waiting. However, an aircraft unserviceability meant that only one could take off and provide fuel for one of its two receivers, forcing one Phantom crew to end their flight prematurely. The final transfer took place 1000 miles from Tengah, the crew celebrating with a drink of squash and a sandwich. After flying past the tower at Tengah to officially record the end of the flight, the Phantom touched down and the crew, Squadron Leaders GH Arkell-Hardwick and DC Read gingerly climbed out of the cockpit to be handed a cold beer. Their record time of 14hrs 14mins stood for just a day – the second pair beating it by five minutes. By the end of the year the FG.1s of 43 Squadron had also made their first overseas deployment when, in November, the squadron deployed en-masse to take part in ‘Lime Jug’ a major RAF/Royal Navy exercise in Malta where the Phantom crews honed their maritime defence skills For the next wave of Phantom squadrons, the focus changed to Germany and the RAF squadrons contributing to NATO’s 2nd Allied Tactical Air Force. In July and September 1970 respectively, two Canberra squadrons, Nos 14 (B(I).8) and 17 (PR.7) reformed at Bruggen on the Phantom. They were ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 67

A Phantom of 54 Squadron, XV500, demonstrates the power of the aircraft, carrying four 1000lb bombs and three drop tanks with ease. Editor’s collection

followed in December by the first reconnaissance squadron, No 2, which had been flying Hunter FR.10s at Gutersloh. Then, with the formation of 31 Squadron in July 1971, the Bruggen Wing reached its full complement of Phantoms. The introduction of the Phantom in Germany did not go smoothly as ongoing engine problems kept serviceability rates barely above a level at which the reinforcement FGR.2s of 38 Group would have been called in to alleviate the problems. Thankfully, careful husbanding of the fleet coupled with a reduction in flying rates enabled the Phantom fleet to recover and become a valued asset within RAF Germany. It wasn’t only the engines which were causing problems, however. The introduction of the externally-mounted reconnaissance pod to be used by the aircraft of 2 Squadron was some 18-months later than planned. It carried vertical and oblique-mounted optical cameras as well as infra-red linescan and sidelooking radar. When fitted, it precluded the use of the two forward Sparrow or Skyflash missiles due its size. With one reconnaissance squadron in Germany, it fell upon 41 Squadron to become the first UK-based recce unit, when it reformed at Coningsby on April 1, 1972. Unusually, despite a long history as a fighter squadron, it had previously operated the Bloodhound surface-to-air missile at West Raynham before returning to the air. This gave the RAF Phantom fleet its high watermark of eight frontline squadrons plus 228OCU for training. Throughout the Phantom’s 20-odd years of service with the RAF, when it came to operational service, the old saying, ‘ever the bridesmaid, never the bride’, could easily be applied. A first chance to the aircraft to see active service came in 1974 when, following the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, the leader of

Like the US Navy and Marine Corps Phantoms, RAF aircraft did not have an internal cannon. They could however carry the 20mm SUU-23 cannon in a centreline pod, as demonstrated by XV436 at a firing range in 1979. Editor’s collection 68 RAF PHANTOMS

the United Nations peacekeeping forces on the island, Major General Pram Chand, requested air support for the 200 troops attempting to enforce a 500-yard neutral zone around Nicosia airport against the threat of an armoured attack. Late on July 24, 12 rocket-carrying Phantoms from Nos 6 and 41 Squadrons departed Coningsby at just two hours’ notice for an overnight flight supported by Victor tankers. By first light on the 25th, the aircraft were on 10 minutes standby at Akrotiri and one pilot had been positioned on the roof of a hangar at Nicosia to act as forward air controller should air strikes have been needed. By this time, however, the arrival of the first Jaguars into squadron service – No 54 being the first to receive the new aircraft in April 1974 – signalled the start of a major change for RAF ground attack and fighter squadrons. The Phantoms were passed to 111 Squadron which handed in its Lightning F.6s to reform at Coningsby. Six months later, 6 Squadron followed suit, passing its aircraft to another Lightning squadron, No 29. These became the first FGR.2s in 11 Group for air defence. At the end of 1975, the four squadrons of the Bruggen Wing in Germany started their programme of re-equipment. In November, No 14 Squadron’s Phantoms were transferred to replace the Lightnings of 23 Squadron which reformed at Coningsby. No 17 Squadron re-equipped in January 1976, 31 followed in June and 2 completed the process in September. From the disbandment of these final three Germany-based units, rose one more home-based Squadron – No 56. Reformed in June 1976, it, and 23 Squadron were to make the move south from Lincolnshire to Wattisham in Suffolk, becoming the third Phantom operating base in 11 Group. This now meant that the process of covering the

Sixty years after the first fixed wing aircraft crossed the Atlantic, a Rolls Royce Eagle powered Vickers Vimy flown by John Alcock and Arthur Whitten Brown, a Rolls Royce Spey powered Phantom commemorated the achievement in 1979, flown by Sqn Ldr Tony Alcock and Flt Lt Norman Browne. Editor’s collection

Loading the SUU-23 20mm cannon pod on a 92 Squadron Phantom.The aircraft is at RAF Akrotiri on Cyprus in July 1984 on what was known as an Armament Practice Camp or APC.The cannon rounds carry non-drying paint on the tips, each aircraft having a different colour, so the holes in the towed banner target would tell a pilot how accurate, or otherwise, his shooting was. Editor’s collection

By early March 1982, the RAF Phantom fleet had begun to be repainted into the ‘Air Defence Grey’ scheme, as seen here on a 56 Squadron aircraft on QRA duty in what was known as the ‘Q-shed’ at RAF Wattisham. Editor’s collection

vital Quick Reaction Alert (QRA, or ‘Q’) could be shared by locations along most of the east coast. Coningsby and Wattisham formed QRA South and Leuchars QRA North. QRA was the most vital part of Britain’s air defence network. Mounted 24/7, 365 days a year, each station was to nominate a squadron on a rota basis with two aircraft parked in a ‘Q Shed’ (usually located somewhere near the end of the runway) at ‘cockpit readiness’. This meant that both air and groundcrew had carried out their pre-flight checks up to the point of engine start. A second aircraft was kept at 10-minutes’ standby. Each aircraft carried the full air defence weapon load – four Sparrow or Skyflash medium range, infra-red missiles under the belly, four AIM-9 Sidewinders under the wings along with two 370-gallon fuel tanks plus a 650-gallon on the centreline hardpoint. The duty crew lived in accommodation adjacent to the aircraft, attempting to fight off the boredom while waiting for the call to launch, wearing as much of their flying

clothing as was comfortable. The call when it came would be made by fighter controllers acting on information from both the groundbased network of radar stations across the country, or ageing Shackleton AEW.2s (replaced by the Sentry AEW.1 in 1991) on airborne patrols. All of these assets formed UKADR – the United Kingdom Air Defence Region – which was designed to monitor airspace ranging out to 1000 miles around the British coast. Information could also be passed from Norwegian or American controllers (based in Iceland) as they monitored their own airspace. With authority given for a QRA launch, a klaxon would sound across the site and the engines started and brought up to speed. As they raced to their aircraft, the crew would don any kit required climb the ladder, strap in, carry out any last minute checks as they taxied and hit the afterburner for a maximum performance take-off. Once airborne, the details of the first tanker meeting would be passed (Victor tankers supported all QRA

launches) and a course to intercept the ‘bogey’ set. Usually waiting for the Phantom’s arrival would be a Soviet Tu.95 ‘Bear’. If the crew got lucky it could be one of the other Russian bombers – Tu.22 ‘Blinder’, Tu.160 ’Blackjack’, or M.4 ‘Bison’. All would test the RAF’s reactions by flying a course to enter British airspace but then turn to skirt the outer reaches of UKADR to avoid any diplomatic incidents. Once alongside, Phantom’s shadowed the unwanted visitor – usually heading to a sympathetic location somewhere much warmer than home – with the two crews exchanging photos of each other’s aircraft for intelligence staff to analyse later. Once the threat had receded the Phantom crew would head for home, refuelling as required, to be interviewed on arrival about their latest encounter. There now followed a short gap in the formation of new squadrons at home as the Phantoms started a programme to extend the fatigue life of the airframe to counter the rigours of extended operations at low level. ➤

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 69

McDonnell Douglas Phantom FGR.2, XT900, of 228 OCU, in the markings of its ‘shadow’ designation, 64 Squadron. Keith Draycott

A side view of a McDonnell Douglas Phantom FGR.2, XV420, of 23 Squadron. Keith Draycott

As the Phantom neared the end of its operational life with RAF Squadrons, a number of aircraft received special paint schemes, such as XV408 of 92 Squadron. Editor’s collection

This included reworking the wings, rewiring to accommodate the Skyflash missile (which replaced the Sparrow from 1978 onwards) and a radar warning receiver was also fitted in a fin tip fairing. In 1977, Lightning operations came to an end in Germany when Nos 19 and 92 Squadrons became the first Wildenrathbased Phantom units in January and April respectively. Sandwiched between these changes was the re-formation of 41 Squadron at Coltishall on Jaguars, losing its FGR.2s in March. This turbulent period had resulted in the nett loss of one squadron (to seven on the frontline), and just 228OCU (now with the ‘shadow’ designation of 64 Squadron) employed in the ground attack role with 38 Group. (It would finally join the rest of Phantom fleet in 11 Group in 1983). In April 1982, Argentinian forces invaded a little-known (at that time) dependency in the

South Atlantic known as the Falklands Islands. In order to maintain the 8000 mile supply line, Phantoms from 29 Squadron took over QRA duties on Ascension Island (some 4100 miles from the UK) from a detachment of Harriers on May 25, allowing them to embark on one of the carriers for the forthcoming action. Although the Argentinians didn’t attempt an attack on Ascension, the Phantoms were launched to meet inquisitive Russian reconnaissance aircraft monitoring the situation in the South Atlantic. This was as close as the Phantoms would get to joining the battle proper. The Falklands were liberated by the end of June but the Ascension QRA was maintained until mid-July when 29 Squadron was stood down, returning home to Coningsby on the 20th. In the meantime, a decision was taken by the British government to increase the permanent military presence in the Falklands. Work was begun at the largest

Imitating a famous 74 Squadron team photograph of the Tigers when they had Lightnings, the Phantom FGR.2s make an impressive sight with their all black fins. Editor’s collection

70 RAF PHANTOMS

To replace the Phantoms that were required in the Falkland Islands, the RAF acquired 15 ex-US Navy F-4J Phantoms, oddly known as the F-4J(UK).This is ZE355, an F-4J(UK) Phantom of 74 Squadron. Editor’s collection

airfield on the islands, Port Stanley, to accommodate eight Phantoms, extending the runway from 4000ft by the use of steel planking and a total of five arrester wires installed. It fell to 29 Squadron again to make the epic flight of 8000 miles via a stopover at Ascension to take up their new role with the second half of the flight taking nine hours and incorporating 11 refuels with over 1000 miles unaccompanied. The first FGR.2 arrived at the newly-renamed RAF Stanley on October 17, 1982 in the hands of the squadron’s CO, Wing Commander Ian Macfadyen, who, despite the fatigue of the mammoth flight, completed an impromptu display for the waiting press and TV crews. The detachment was brought up to strength over the following days and ‘Phandet’ as it became known, set about its task of guarding the 200-mile exclusion zone around the islands, mounting a permanent QRA just in case of any further Argentinian aggression.

A side view of a McDonnell Douglas Phantom FGR.2, XV436, of 29 Squadron. Keith Draycott

A side view of a McDonnell Douglas Phantom FGR.2, XV408, of 92 Squadron in their spectacular all blue scheme. Keith Draycott

74 Squadron swapped its F-4J(UK)s for the FGR.2s of 56 Squadron when the Firebirds transitioned onto the Tornado F.3.74 were the last RAF unit to operate the Phantom,based at RAF Wattisham until October 1992.Editor’s collection

To aid them in this task, the crews were required to train for refuelling from a new tanker aircraft – hastily modified Hercules’ which had been fitted for single-point tanking. In March 1983, 23 Squadron took over the detachment and officially disbanded at Wattisham base, with ‘Phandet’ receiving the squadron’s number plate. 23 Squadron remained at Stanley until a new purpose-built facility, Mount Pleasant, was constructed and the squadron moved in at the end of April 1986. The transfer of 23 Squadron ‘down south’ in 1983 had, however, left a gap in the RAF’s NATO commitments. The answer lay in the formation of another Phantom squadron, but one equipped with second-hand US Navy aircraft. As the F-4K and F-4M were based on the then current model entering service with the US Navy, the F-4J, the British government negotiated the purchase of 15 of the type at a unit price of approximately £800,000. In complete contrast to the original purchase, these were purchased with US equipment and modified smokeless J79 engines. The ‘new’ aircraft were given depot-level checks in the US before receiving an updated AWG-10 radar – equivalent to that fitted to the F-14 Tomcat. They were not, however, wired to carry the Skyflash missile. The unit chosen to operate the F-4J(UK) – not the Phantom F.3 as might have been expected – was 74 Squadron which had last seen service in the Far East flying Lightnings. The crews undertook a three-week course at Yuma, Arizona, in the groundschool and simulator before completing 10 hours’ instruction in the air. The Squadron reformed in October 1984, taking the place of 23 Squadron at Wattisham. Phantom squadrons had been kept busy with two little-known operational deployments in the meantime. The first, Operation Pulsator, saw six FGR.2s of 56 Squadron deployed to

One of the main RAF bases for the UK Phantoms was RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire. Here aircraft of 111 and 41 Squadrons can be seen in 1975, along with those of the Phantom training unit, 228 OCU, which also had the ‘shadow squadron’ number plate of 64 Squadron. Editor’s collection

Akrotiri on Cyprus between September and December 1983 to provide cover for Buccaneers flying ‘show of force’ missions over Beirut. Then in April 1984, following US raids on bases in Libya (Operation Eldorado Canyon), it fell to 29 Squadron again to cover the threat of reprisal attacks against Gibraltar by deploying four aircraft to the island. The attacks never materialised and the squadron returned home at the end of May. RAF Phantom operations began to wind down after 20 years of service. A new interceptor, an air defence version of the Tornado ground attack aircraft, initially called Tornado ADV, was finally ready for service in its F.3 variant and in April 1987 29 Squadron disbanded to become the first operator of the new aircraft. The second unit to re-equip was 23 Squadron. On October 31, 1988, the Falkland Islands Phantom detachment was reduced to four based aircraft and renumbered 1435 Flight, with 23 Squadron officially reforming on the very next day on its new mount at Leeming in North Yorkshire. Next in line were the two FG.1 Squadrons at Leuchars, Nos 43 and 111, in July 1989 and January 1990 respectively. Operational duties had not yet come to an end for the Phantom. With the creation of a huge Allied coalition air force gathering in the

Gulf following Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, 92 Squadron was ordered to Akrotiri to protect the Sovereign Base against possible attack. Again, the feared attacks failed to materialise and the aircraft returned to Germany without seeing action and in July 1991 the squadron number plate was transferred to a Hawk training unit at Chivenor. No frontline squadrons disbanded in 1991 but January 31 saw the end of 228OCU with its training role passing to a Phantom Training Flight down at Wattisham (which was itself disbanded on the last day of the year). By the end of the first week of 1992, 19 Squadron’s number plate transferred to another Hawk training unit at Valley, leaving just the two Wattisham squadrons to continue at home and 1435 Flight in the South Atlantic. No 56 ended its FGR.2 days on July 1, 1992 to become the Tornado F.3 OCU at Coningsby, with its aircraft replacing the unique F-4J(UK)s with 74 Squadron and days later the first Tornado F.3s arrived at Mount Pleasant in the South Atlantic to re-equip 1435 Flight. Having been the last to receive the Phantom, 74 Squadron then became the last to disband when, on October 1, its number plate was passed to a third Hawk training Squadron at Valley. ■ Words: Joe Walsh McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 71

The ultimate Wild Weasel Phantom, the F-4G was a truly advanced SEAD aircraft with a comprehensive detection and countermeasures suite. Note the ECM pod in the port forward Sparrow bay under the air intake. USAF

F-4G Wild Weasel The Phantom turns SAM hunter

One of the most dangerous and difficult missions for any modern air force is suppression of enemy defences or SEAD. Essentially, these can be free ranging aircraft or elements of a strike package tasked with destroying or jamming opposing surface to air missile (SAM) sites and anti-aircraft artiller y (AAA) weapons to allow the other members of the force to do their work unhindered. The SEAD aircraft hunts the hunters.

I

nterestingly, there were two separate aircraft known as the F-4G, the first being 12 US Navy F-4Bs that had been fitted with the AN/ASW-21 two way datalink communications system and an approach power compensation system that was intended as an operational trial of an automatic carrier landing system (ACLS). The first F-4G flew on March 20, 1963, all 12 aircraft being deployed with VF-213 on board the USS Kitty Hawk from November 1965 until June 1966, operating in the Gulf of Tonkin and carrying out missions over Vietnam. One was lost to ground fire in these operations, the remaining 11 being converted back to standard F-4Bs.

First Wild Weasels

Wild Weasel has to be one of the most appropriate names for any military system. The attributes required of an aircraft that can take on ground based defences are speed of movement, reaction and fearless aggression... rather a good description of a weasel in fact. The story of the Phantom as a SEAD aircraft goes back to 1965, when the extensive use of SAMs and AAA in an integrated air defence network prompted the USAF to develop aircraft capable of countering these defences. The Republic F-105F Thunderchief 72 F-4G Wild Weasel

and McDonnell Douglas F-4C were the aircraft of choice, developed as the EF-105F and EF-4C respectively. The EF-105F was ready first, deploying to South East Asia in May 1966, whereas work on the EF-4C stalled due to a lack of space inside the Phantom to store all the additional sensors, coupled with electronic interference problems between the close mounted equipment. McDonnell engineers practically redesigned the system from scratch, achieving success in trials during the middle of 1969. Known as the Wild Weasel IV configuration, 36 F-4Cs were converted to EF-4Cs with the addition of the AN/APR-25 radar homing and warning system (RHAWS) and AN/APR-26 SAM launch warning system, the panoramic receiver sensor for which was mounted in the starboard rear Sparrow missile recess under the fuselage. An AN/ALQ-119 electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod was also frequently carried, and the ability of the EF-4C to detect and locate threats was enhanced in 1973 with the addition of an AN/ALR-46 ECM receiver and an AN/ALR-53 long range homing receiver. Once these multiple sensors had detected and isolated a threat, it could be attacked with the AGM-45 Shrike antiradiation missile (ARM) or CBU-52 cluster bombs. The EF-4Cs were first deployed to

South East Asia in 1972 with the 67th Tactical Fighter Squadron (TFS) operating from Korat in Thailand, while others went to Spangdahlem in Germany with the 81st TFS. All of the EF-4Cs were supplied to the Indiana Air National Guard in 1979 as they were being replaced in front line units with the next version of the Wild Weasel Phantom. As well as the original 36 EF-4Cs, four EF-4Ds were also modified, intended as prototypes for an advanced Wild Weasel Phantom. Two were fitted with the improved AN/APS-107 RHAWS and the avionics to support the AGM-78 Standard ARM anti radiation missiles, while two more were fitted with the IBM/Loral AN/APR-38 warning and attack system jointly developed with McDonnell Douglas. If I may digress a moment, it is interesting to note that on the bottom of the patch worn by Wild Weasel pilots are the letters YGBSM. This is an abbreviation of the standard new aircrew reaction on being told what the Wild Weasel mission is and how it is achieved. “You gotta be sh**tin’ me.”

Next geNeratioN

The F-4E, with its outer wing leading edge slats and enhanced manoeuvrability was an obvious choice for the second generation of Wild Weasel Phantoms, the Wild Weasel V.

One of the 36 EF-4Cs produced to the Wild Weasel IV standard, carrying a pair of AGM-45 Shrike anti radiation missiles. USAF

The front cockpit of the F-4G had a warning and control panel to the left of the radar scope repeater under the HUD, and a repeater scope of the rear cockpit’s threat display to the right, here with a cover over it. USAF

The rear cockpit of the F-4G was a busy place, with the three large displays showing threat information from the comprehensive warning and attack system along with the usual equipment and controls. USAF

The F-4Gs were operated in the US as well as the Pacific and European theatres, this is a PUP upgraded 52nd Tactical Fighter Wing F-4G based at Spangdahlem in Germany. USAF

Two F-4Gs from the 35th Tactical Fighter Wing from George AFB in California over Saudi Arabia in 1991.They were based at Shaikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain during Operation Desert Storm. USAF

The last unit to operate the F-4G – in fact, the last US unit to operate the F-4 Phantom – was the Idaho Air National Guard, the last flight being made in April 1996 by Maj Mike Webb and Maj Gary Leeder. Lugino Caliaro

The first of 116 F-4Es was modified by McDonnell Douglas for tests beginning in December 1975, the remaining 115 being upgraded at the USAF’s Ogden Logistics Centre at Hill Air Force Base in Utah. The new aircraft was given the designation F-4G, and it was a very different machine to the previous SEAD Phantoms. The cannon in the nose and its ammunition drum were both removed, but the F-4G retained a streamlined fairing under the nose. In this fairing were fitted forward and sideways looking antenna and the electronics of the AN/APR-38 warning and attack system tested on two of the EF-4Ds. The rearward facing antennas for this system were mounted in a bulged fairing at the top of the fin. The electronics were mounted in 25 easily replaceable line replacement units (LRUs) or black boxes that could be swapped out rapidly in the event of a failure. There were relatively few changes to the pilot’s cockpit of the F-4G, just the addition of a warning and

control panel, a repeater scope from the rear cockpit’s threat range and azimuth display and a modified head up display that can display target and radar information. The rear cockpit however, now home to the electronic warfare officer (EWO), was fitted with three screens that displayed the various sensors output, as well as the low mounted radar screen, hand controller, the usual flight instruments and a full set of dual controls. Once the ground radar or other threats had been detected by this comprehensive system, they could be attacked with a greater range of weapons; cluster bombs and the AGM-45 and AGM-78 were both still carried, but now the AGM-88 HARM and TV or Imaging Infra Red versions of the AGM-75 Maverick could also be employed. For self defence, the F-4G could also still carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-7 Sparrow as well as AN/ALQ-119 or 131 ECM pods in the port forward Sparrow bay under the fuselage and ALE-40 chaff and flare

dispenser pods on the inner pylons. The F-4Gs began to enter service in 1978, being supplied to units based in the US, the Philippines and Europe. In October 1982 a performance update programme (PUP) saw the F-4G fleet fitted with the upgraded AN/APR-47 warning and attack system that could detect a wider range of threats as well as an improved signal processor and a MILSTD-1705A Electronic Warfare computer, all of which enhanced the F-4G’s effectiveness. In 1988, 18 more F-4Es were converted to F-4Gs to replace losses. During Operation Desert Storm between January and February 1991, F-4Gs from the 35th Tactical Fighter Wing from George AFB in California were used extensively to suppress and destroy the Iraqi air defences. The last F-4Gs were retired from the Idaho Air National Guard in April 1996, many of them being converted into QF-4G target drones. ■ Words: Tim Callaway McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 73

The last

naval fighter The F-4J, N and S

The F-4B had proved itself to be an excellent carrier based fighter and ground attack aircraft for the US Navy and Marine Corps. While it and the US Air Force versions were in production, a number of improvements in aerodynamics and avionics had been developed, all of which were to be applied to the last naval fighter version of the Phantom, the F-4J.

T

here were very few criticisms of the F-4B in US Navy service, most of the few there were relating to the takeoff distance and approach speed. The experiences of the Vietnam conflict also caused the US Navy to reassess the Phantom’s abilities in air to air combat, beginning discussions with McDonnell as to how best to improve these. At the same time, experiments with the Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) had borne fruit and other advances in avionics were now available to upgrade the Phantom’s systems, all resulting in the last fighter version for the US Navy and Marine Corps, the F-4J.

NEW TECHNOLOGY

As already mentioned in the F-4G section, 12 F4Bs had been converted to the first F-4Gs to test the AN/ASW-25 Approach Power Compensator System and AN/ASW-25 datalink as part of an experimental ACLS system. This was fitted to the new fighter, along with an improved AN/AJB-7 bombing computer which offered an enhanced ground attack capability. It was in the air to air capabilities that the greatest changes were made in the electronics. The radome, already quite bulbous, was enlarged again to accommodate the Westinghouse AN/APG-59 pulse-Doppler radar which had a look-down, shoot-down capability. It was able to

The front cockpit schematic of the McDonnell F-4J from the aircrew manual. US Navy 74 THE LAST NAVAL FIGHTER

pick out and track low flying targets hidden in the returns from the surface. The radar and weapons were integrated through the AN/AWG-10 fire control system which greatly improved the offensive capabilities of the F-4J. The Radar Homing and Warning (RHAW) equipment was upgraded, and later an integrated AN/ALQ-126 Electronic Countermeasures (ECM) system was retrofitted, its antennae mounted on the air intakes to equally enhance the F-4Js defensive capability. All of this required a great deal of power, so the engine-driven generators were upgraded from 20kVA to 30kVA, enough electricity to run a small town. All of the data generated by the powerful fire control system was more efficiently fed to the pilot through the Visual Target Acquisition System (VTAS), a helmet-mounted sight. These improvements also led to the removal of the infrared sensor pod under the nose as it was now unnecessary. The engines were a pair of J79-GE-10s of 17,900lb (8119kg) thrust, General Electric’s masterpiece of reliability and efficiency in one of its most powerful forms. These were later upgraded to the J79-GE-10B version with the smoke-free combustors to reduce the Phantom’s characteristic smoke trail to almost nothing, making visual acquisition of the F-4J in air to air combat that much harder. Many of the changes to the airframe were also developments from the land-based versions of the Phantom. The extra fuel tank in the rear

The beginning of the F-4J programme, the F-4G Phantom with the ACLS system.This one was allocated to VF 213 on the USS Kitty Hawk and was lost in combat operations over North Vietnam on April 28, 1966. US Navy

fuselage of the F-4E was included, not only to increase the internal fuel capacity but also to offset the weight of the new equipment in the nose. The larger main undercarriage wheels of the land-based Phantoms were also included, necessitating the use of the thicker wing with its distinctive bulges over the wheel wells. New developments included a new tailplane with a slotted leading edge and a system that drooped the ailerons to 16.5º when the flaps were selected down, both of which changes shortened the takeoff distance and lowered the approach speed and therefore the landing distance. Finally, the ejection seats were now the excellent Martin Baker Mk H.7 zero-zero models, capable of safely extracting the crew on the ground with zero forward airspeed. Three F-4Bs were converted to YF-4Js, the first flying on June 4, 1965. The success of the flight tests led to the approval of the new design and its adoption by the US Navy, the first production F4J flying on May 27, 1966. A total of 522 F-4Js were built, the last being delivered in January 1972. One US Navy F-4J crew achieved the status of aces during the Vietnam War, Lt R H Cunningham and Lt W P Driscoll of VF-96, who shot down the last of the five North Vietnamese MiGs on May 10, 1972.

228 F-4Bs were upgraded to the F-4N standard.This is an F-4N of VF301, unusually loaded with low drag bombs and no external tanks. US Navy

to go through the Service Life Extension Programme (SLEP) at the Naval Air Rework Facility (NARF) at NAS North Island in San Diego. The avionics upgrade included the AN/ASW-25 datalink from the ACLS, ECM equipment and VTAS helmet-mounted sight from the F-4J, but also added the Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode (SEAM), Automatic Altitude Reporting System, air to air Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) and a dogfight computer, all supported by a complete rewiring of the airframe. The engines were upgraded to the J79-GE-10 with the smoke reduction system. The airframe was structurally strengthened to extend its fatigue life and the same aerodynamic improvements from the F-4J, the slotted tailplanes and drooping ailerons, were fitted to create the F4N. The first modified aircraft flew at San Diego on June 4, 1972, steadily replacing the in service F-4Bs as more aircraft were upgraded, the last F-4N not being retired until 1984. The success of the F-4N programme led to a similar NARF run SLEP being applied to the F-4J beginning in June 1975. The airframe was

completely rewired and it and the undercarriage were strengthened to extend their fatigue life. After the 43rd aircraft went through the SLEP, the wing was also modified with leading edge slats to improve manoeuvring capability. The avionics were upgraded with the new digital version of the fire control system, the AN/AWG-10B. The radios were upgraded and the Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) system was added. The cooling vents to the nose avionics bays were improved and moved so they were staggered on either side of the nosewheel bay and finally the engines were changed for the smokeless J79-GE-10Bs. The 265 upgraded Phantoms were designated F-4S, and were to be the last Phantoms in US Navy and Marine Corps service. The US Navy retired the last from the Naval Reserve in 1987, the Marine Corps retiring the last from its Reserve in January 1992. A number of F-4N and S airframes were converted into target drones as the QF-4N and QF-4S, the last of which flew at the Naval Air Warfare Centre at NAS Point Mugu in 2004. ■ Words: Tim Callaway

VARIATIONS

Like the earlier F-4B, two F-4Js were converted into EF-4J electronic aggressor aircraft for VAQ33, able to carry additional ECM and jamming pods beneath the wings. In 1984, the UK Phantom fleet was stretched by the necessity to base 23 Squadron and its FGR.2s at RAF Stanley for defence of the Falkland Islands. To make up the shortfall in the UK defences, 15 stored F-4Js were modified with the ACLS and AN/ALQ-126 ECM systems removed and British secure communications and ability to carry the Skyflash missile added, then supplied to the RAF as the F-4J(UK) for use by 74 Squadron. Lastly, one F-4J was converted into a drone control aircraft as the DF-4J.

UPGRADES

With the F-4J in service with the US Navy and Marine Corps Squadrons, Project Bee Line was initiated, a programme to extend the useful lives of the F-4B fleet. A total of 228 F-4Bs were

The last upgraded version of the Phantom was the F-4S, which was also the last version to fly with the US Navy and Marine Corps.These are F-4Ss of VF302 over Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego, the location of the NARF that undertook the upgrades. US Navy McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 75

Taking the

SMOKING THUNDER to the boat HOG

F-4 Phantom II and A-7 Corsair IIs on board the carrier John F. Kennedy. The size of a Carrier Air Wing and the mix of types led to some interesting encounters, not to mention a lot of useful experience of operating with different types. NMNA

76 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

Or, Phlying the Phantom – Navy style What follows are a few recollections of my experiences while flying the McDonnell Douglas Phantom II, the F-4, the Lead Sled, the Smoking Thunder Hog… from 1979 to 1983.

F

lying the Phantom, or more appropriately ‘Phlying’ the Phantom is something I never thought I might do but I was entirely transphormed by so doing. It was a ‘muscle jet’: part ballet dancer, part mixed martial artist, 100% badass cool. It was one of the last of the third generation fighters. It featured boatloads of power and all the aerodynamics you could squeeze out of slide rules and short sleeved white dress shirts; anhedral, dihedral, boundary layer control, staged afterburners, area rule, auxiliary air (part of the whistle the F-4Ns were known for in the pattern), stability augmentation, moving ramps, etc… two steely-eyed fighter dudes, and a missiles-only

armament to deal death at a distance; gunfighters be damned! Fox 1 in the face… you’ll be dead before the merge, comrade. I got my opportunity to fly the Phantom after I completed advanced jet flight training in Beeville, Texas on July 20, 1979. That date happened to be the 10th anniversary of the Apollo 11 lunar landing, which is a key reason I joined the navy in the first place (side note: one of my first memories of flying was seeing Lieutenant Commander Alan Shepard launching into space, but I digress). Once I completed flight training I thought I would be rushed off to fleet training. The orders were delayed for a couple of weeks leaving me in a state of uncertainty as to where I was going to join the fleet. I had

requested a fleet assignment to A-6 Intruders. I had made that decision early in my navy career after seeing a Grumman marketing film (still available on YouTube) while an impressionable officer candidate in Pensacola. I was finally told I was going to Miramar to fly Phantoms. I was going to be one of the last of the west coast pilots trained in the F-4 Phantom II via the legendary VF-121. At the time I did not know what that meant. I was completely clueless of the heritage I was cockily walking into. I was not a student of naval aviation or the air war over Vietnam. I was acquainted with dogfighting from some old Second World War movies and the syllabus in advanced jet training. ➤

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 77

An F-4N Phantom aircraft of VF 154 demonstrates ‘boat loads of power and all the aerodynamics you could squeeze out of slide rules’. NMNA

The bible of the student Phantom pilot, the NATOPS Flight Manual. Author

The likes of Mezzadri, Hall, Cunningham, Driscoll, Dose, Frost, Ryon, Cash, Pettigrew, Dewald, Nichols, Lamoreaux, Southgate, Nickeral, Canepa, etc., were mysteries to me. These are names that should have made me genuflect in deference or at least buy a round at happy hour, but they were entirely unknown to me. I would wise up over time. I left Beeville, Texas, early on a typically scorching and humid August morning. My goal for driving that day: New Mexico, about 1000 miles to the west as the turkey buzzard flies. That was going to be a long day of driving. Once I made it past the ‘Welcome to the Land of Enchantment’ sign I knew I had accomplished my mission. With only a few hours of sleep after the previous day’s long haul, I began to fade late in the day near Marine Corps Air Station Yuma in Arizona so I pulled in to a rest stop just west of Roll, Arizona. I was awakened by the roar of four J79s in afterburner as a couple of Marine Phantoms took off from Runway 03 and were climbing into the range just to the south of Interstate 8. That spectacle got me all fired up and I pushed the rest of the way west to Miramar, NKX, Fightertown USA. I checked into the ‘Q’ (bachelor officers’ quarters) and unloaded all my worldly possessions from my Audi Fox, which took about 20 minutes. I found a couple of buddies who had gotten to NKX a few weeks earlier and spent the rest of the night wandering around La Jolla and being introduced to the Southern California lifestyle. The next morning I started Phantom Ground School. Even today I am amazed by the F-4 fuel system, it was the most complex arrangement of pumps, dumps, tanks, pipes, vents, gravity feeds and bleed air that could have possibly been designed by humans. Damn those short sleeved white shirts and slide rules. Once ground school was completed and the seemingly endless hours of ‘flying’ the 2F88 simulator had drilled procedures, limitations and crew coordination into my psyche, I finally got to fly the real thing on the morning of October 25, 1979. 78 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

The J79s of an F-4B of VF 111 producing full power during a catapult launch.The Phantom really was a ‘muscle jet’. NMNA

The objectives of the first familiarisation flight in the Phantom read something like the following: Preflight planning and aircraft inspection Start, taxi, takeoff Climbout, level off and cruise Fuel management (of course) High G manoeuvring Supersonic manoeuvring Return to base Touch and go landings Full stop landing and roll out. I was a 24-year-old ‘butter bar’, had been in the navy just south of two years and was sporting the Wings of Gold a mere three months. I was entering a syllabus that included “supersonic manoeuvring” as a first lesson: this was going to be cool! A couple of side notes on the conduct of the many hours of 2F88 simulator operations: nearly every flight had a total electrical failure, where upon the RIO would yell: “GET THE RAT OUT”. That phrase will forever echo in my brain. Additionally many, if not all ‘flights’ in the 2F88, would end on short final with some ungodly combination of emergencies, (single engine, runaway trim, total electrical failure, hydraulic failure, low fuel, etc…) all being compounded by a hurricane force crosswind and a 2000lb bomb ‘magically’ shifting from station 1 to station 9 and back again until the airplane was uncontrollable, forcing an ejection.

The Phantom was not known for agility. As you can see from the V-N Diagram below, corner speed was 450 knots at 20,000ft and the energy deficit you could get into was pretty deep if you tried to work at a slower speed. Your G available actually went down if you went faster.

The F-4 Phantom VN diagram. Author

I need to add a little context here. The Phantom was built as an interceptor so a large part of our syllabus was learning how to intercept lumbering Soviet bombers via a perfectly executed stern conversion. Learning how to do radar intercepts left me with the permanent memory of the acronym ‘RBA’ which was how I learned to calculate aspect angle.

An F-4 Phantom II of Fighter Squadron VF 121 fires an AIM-7 Sparrow semi-active radar homing missile. NMNA

The ‘R’ stands for the Reciprocal of the bogey’s heading. The ‘B’ stood for the Bearing that the bogey was from me. If you took those two numbers you could calculate the ‘A’ or the aspect angle, which was where the bogey pilot would have to look to see you coming. The aspect angle was important because it affected when we were in the envelope to launch missiles. For example, if the bogey’s heading was 180, his recip was 360, and if the bogey’s bearing from me was 330, then I had 30 of left aspect angle on him. That sounds simple until you realise that the bogey could turn left 40º then you had a heading of 140 a recip of 320 and if the bearing was still 330 then now you had 10º of right aspect angle. Now do this at a closure rate of 16-20 miles per minute at night in sketchy weather. The geometry that we wanted was 10º of aspect at 40 miles, 20º at 20 miles, 40º at 10 miles and then turn into the bogey to arrive at their six within 1.5 to three miles with some amount of closure. You could fire a radar missile then close to an infrared (IR) missile if need be. If you were slow to put the nose on the bogey or the bogey turned away from you then you would be ‘cold’ and roll out too far aft to take a good shot. If you were too early on the turn or the bogey turned into you, then you were ‘hot’ and ran the risk of being too close for an aft quarter missile shot and being inside the envelope for the aft facing guns that some Russian bombers carried. ➤

The RAT, or Ram Air Turbine, was the emergency power supply in the case of engine driven generator failure. USAF McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 79

Working with an E-2A Hawkeye could ease the workload of interceptions for the Phantom crews. NMNA

The Phantom was built as an interceptor so a large part of our syllabus was learning how to intercept lumbering Soviet bombers via a perfectly executed stern conversion. NMNA

Sometimes you had assistance with solving the geometr y from an AWACS or E-2C or, even better, you had an Aegis Cruiser watching the sky… that could give you a LOT of situational awareness. It was nice to fly with that boat as a wingman. Traditionally though we trained ‘organically’, which meant we, the aircrew, were on our own. The pilot and the RIO had to obtain and analyse a valid radar contact. This was indicated by a ¼in wide green bar that would drift right or left, develop a range rate (‘r-dot’), and dim and brighten as the bogey moved above, below or into the radar beam that the RIO would control with joystick in the back seat. The pilot of the F-4 had the same raw video that the RIO had, which was a really good idea. The best compliment I ever heard was in the debrief of a fight in W-291 with Phantoms, Tomcats, T-38s and A-4s: one of the A-4 adversaries said he was always amazed that an F-14 crew needed a full up system to get to the merge with an advantage, but if a good Phantom crew had a couple of sweeps they had the intercept suitcased. The point of all the above was to note that the F-4 was designed to intercept fairly stable contacts with about 40,000ft of lateral separation, turn to their rear

quarter and shoot them down before they could launch their anti-ship weapons or release their nukes – ho hum! This was in sharp contrast with the reality the Phantom found itself in the late 60s and early 70s. Just 10 years earlier the navy’s only aces in the Phantom (Duke and Irish) went head to head with 23mm high explosive rounds skimming past the canopy during the merge in a 6G pas de deux with a MiG-17… whuuut, we did not train for this! War, I have heard, follows its own rules. When flying off the USS Coral Sea (CV43) the Phantom was a little bit of a challenge in light winds and it was common to taxi up to the catapult and give a thumbs up to a sign stating something to the effect of ‘–6’. What this sign indicated was that at the end of the catapult on this particular day and weight the airplane would be six knots short of ideal flying speed. When the sign was down near –10 the launch would get a little ‘squishy’ and forced the frontseater to have his hand on the gear handle so the gear could be coming up immediately after launch. The pilot had to really pay attention to the AOA and be ready to punch off external stores if something went awry.

As it turns out, according to one of my backseaters who had done a tour as a launch officer, the Coral Sea catapults were so well used (old), that they had stretched by nearly a foot. There was an indicator in the flight deck that showed how much a catapult had stretched since it had been installed. According to these indicators Catapult 1 was the longest of the four catapults installed on the Coral Mar u. Therefore, when winds were light we normally got shot off from Cat 1, the presumption being that the extra length would provide an extra knot or two. Either that or the ship’s Captain figured it would be easier to steer around a Phantom that went ‘salt water seeking’ off of Cat 1. I decided I did not need to know any more details and just trusted the physics and hoped I did not have to go swimming with a Phantom strapped to my back. Walking out to a Phantom is impressive. It is a massive jet with landing gear and tailhook that look more suited for railway trestles than aircraft parts. Plus the aircrew had to strap on leg restraints to keep our legs from departing our torso during an ejection at high speed. These leg restraints or ‘spurs’ were a couple of metal rings that were attached to 2in wide nylon webbing that went around your lower and upper leg, through which a lanyard would be threaded. Upon ejection this lanyard would be pulled tight and keep your legs from wildly straying from the protective cocoon of the Martin Baker ejection seat and, on occasion, they did ‘jingle jangle jingle’ as we strolled merrily to our jet (my apologies to Frank Loesser and Kay Kyser). An Aegis Cruiser with its powerful radars, in this case the USS Shiloh, could give Phantom crews a huge advantage in situational awareness. US Navy

80 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

The F-4 provided a rock solid ride on the ground but had a bit of a quirk in that it could pretty easily fly itself into a stall at takeoff. A normal take off required a bit of a pull to get the nose to rotate, once the nose started coming up you had to meet it with a little bit of forward stick. Editor’s Collection

Since the Phantom was pretty much an analogue jet the start and taxi sequence was pretty simple compared to the modern systems checks that digital jets have to go through now. The only software in the Phantom was the two sweaty bodies sitting in front of a pair of firebreathing J79s. That is not entirely true; there were some built-in-tests (BIT) that had to be run but nothing like the software checks required in the F-14 and later fighters. The F-4 allowed the aircrew to taxi with the canopy open which I enjoyed. The F-4 did not bounce as it taxied like the F-14. It provided a rock solid ride to the hold short. Once in the run-up area near the hold short line the aircrew would run through the pre-takeoff checks which were pretty simple. You had to make sure the engines and flight controls were working, a handful of switches were in the right positions, and in the case of a few aircrew ash tray, lighter and Benson and Hedges were at the ready so you could light up after the flaps were raised. Once on the runway the pilot would push the throttles to mil-power, check that everything was working, wipe out the cockpit one last time, release the brakes, make any necessary line-up corrections, note that airspeed was increasing then push the throttles outboard and forward to light the afterburners, check to make sure the engine nozzles opened and enjoy that nice ‘push you back in the seat’ acceleration that let you know you were in a powerful machine. The airspeed

An A-4 Skyhawk aggressor aircraft pictured engaging an F-4 Phantom II during air combat manoeuvring. NMNA

built up pretty quickly but it still took about 5000ft to get airborne at about 180 knots. The Phantom had a bit of a quirk in that it could pretty easily fly itself into a stall at takeoff. A normal take off required a bit of a pull to get the nose to rotate, but you did not want to exceed 22 units angle of attack (AOA). Once the nose started coming up you had to meet it with a little bit of forward stick. If you were doing a low transition, the forward motion was a little more aggressive but the airplane looked good doing it when done properly. The nose gear would fold aft and the main mounts would collapse towards the centreline of the airplane and the Phantom just looked mean gaining speed close to the ground. There were a couple of fuel loads and external tank configurations that would tend to make over-rotation more likely, but an over-rotation could occur at any time if a pilot ham-fisted the aft pull on the stick. There is a Caution and a Warning in the NATOPS manual explaining exactly why you should not be too shy about stopping the rotation. This feature was accentuated when on the ship. In order to go flying the pilot had to have the stick full aft before the final checker would give a thumbs up for a catapult launch. That meant the pilot needed to get the stick moving forward rather quickly. I can recall seeing a marine colonel taking off from the Coral Sea and not quite getting the stick forward fast enough. All on deck were given the opportunity to inspect the entire top of his F-4 as he rotated

An F-4J Phantom II of VF 121 pictured landing at Naval Air Station Miramar, California.The author arrived at Miramar ‘completely clueless of the heritage I was cockily walking into’. NMNA

to about 45º nose high, then we all got the see the entire belly of his F-4 as he over-corrected to a very nose down attitude which, you guessed it, resulted in all of us seeing the top of his plane again. He eventually got things under control and asked the Air Boss if he could try that again. The bit of finesse it took to coax a Phantom into the air was an identifiable trademark of a Phantom pilot (note: once, while flying off the USS Lexington in a TA-4J Skyhawk, I had the wing commander in the back seat for the ride back to Beeville. As I took the cat shot he noted how resolutely I moved the stick forward and met the rotation of the Skyhawk. He commented over the Inter-cockpit Communications System (ICS): “You must have been a Phantom pilot.” Of course he could have probably figured that out by watching my cool demeanor). Once the Phantom ‘slipped the surly bonds of Earth’ (a nod to John Gillespie Magee Jr), was cleaned up and had accelerated past 300 knots the plane was a hoot to fly. The Phantom enjoyed a waiver from the FAA so that we could remain at 325 knots below 10,000ft. When you were down to landing weight and dirtied up the Phantom was pretty stable on final, with an approach speed of about 150 knots provided you did not mess with the nose. The engines were very responsive to control the glide slope and lateral control was not too badly hampered by adverse yaw due to the Aileron-Rudder Interconnect. Another quirk of the Phantom was transonic pitch up. This occurred when decelerating from supersonic to sub-sonic airspeeds (again, damn those men with their slide rules and short sleeved white dress shirts). In short, if you were at maximum G loading and were above Mach 1, then decelerated to a speed below Mach 1, the aerodynamic centre would shift forward. If you maintained the same stick forces, the G loading would increase above maximum and overstress the airframe. Probably every young F-4 pilot has spent a few hours taking panels off the fuselage and wings so the maintenance troops could inspect for internal damage. With experience you became acutely aware you were approaching the transition from supersonic to subsonic and you would relax the G loading a bit to avoid breaking the plane. Tactically, you seldom entered a fight above Mach 1. ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 81

The old F-4Ns we were flying were also known as Smoking Thunder Hogs. We had the old school General Electric J79s that put out enough smoke that on some days would linger like a well worn path. Luigino Caliaro

NOW TO SOME SEA STORIES.

In 1982 I was a lieutenant in VF-154 flying F4Ns, yes the same airframe that Duke and Irish flew more than 10 years earlier. Where were our F-4Js and our F-4Ss? That is a whole other story that ended up with the Miramar Reserve squadrons getting our F-4Ss and we and VF-21 flying two cruises in really old former marine F-4Ns from El Toro. We launched as a flight of four Phantoms out of NFL (Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada). Hoss and Skuzz in the lead with Hunter and Crash as dash two. I was flying as lead of the second section with Rhino in my back seat and we had Sully and Doc on our wing. We were acting as adversary against the emerging F/A-18 Hornet. The Hornet was undergoing Operational Evaluation at VX-5 out of China Lake. VX-5 was tasked with evaluating how well the Hornet would execute in both air-to-air and air-to-ground roles on a single mission. This flight was just one of many flights VX5 would use to completely evaluate the performance of the Hornet. On that day we were asked to challenge the look down shoot down capability and cockpit loading of the Hornet and the Hornet pilots… so we did. I am not certain what the Hornet drivers thought we might do but, apparently, we went a little rogue on this flight… at least in the opinion of the F/A-18 drivers. The old F-4Ns we were flying were also known as Smoking Thunder Hogs. We had the old school General Electric J79s that put out enough smoke in military power that 50+

mile ‘tally-hos’ were common. On some days that smoke would linger like a well worn path. To mitigate that trait a pilot could select idle on one engine and minimum afterburner on the other, which would put the aircraft on a ‘path less travelled’ and that indeed made all the difference. We were coming down from the north into the Saline, Panamint and Owens Military Operating Area (MOA) complexes north of China Lake (follow along if you have the Las Vegas and Los Angeles Sectional maps handy). Our intercept began as we entered the Saline MOA west of the Panamint Range. The Hornets were about 50 miles south of us. We were flying simulated Soviet tactics with a lead section on the eastern side of the formation and a second section in tactical spread aft, below and to the west of the lead section. Our simulated loadout consisted of two radar guided AA-3 Archers and two infrared AA-2 Atolls, pretty tame stuff compared to today’s weapons, but you fight with what you are given. We cranked on 450 knots, at about 25,000ft with smoke-on for all to see. At about 20 miles we go smoke off, except for one Phantom, mine. I am the sacrificial lamb on this particular day, a role for which I volunteered so I could see a Hornet close up in a fight. With smoke off; the lead section, to the east, turned port about 45º, accelerated to just shy of Mach 1 and dropped to the hard deck of 5000ft AGL, being careful not to violate the Death Valley National Park restrictions.

Once the Phantom was cleaned up and had accelerated past 300 knots the plane was a hoot to fly. NMNA 82 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

Ostensibly, this was done to test the look down shoot down capability of the four Hornets racing to despatch our Phantoms to phenomenal doom. At the same time our lead section turned east, our wingman broke away to the west by making a climbing, 30º starboard turn to build some aspect angle and lateral separation. At that point we had about 10º of left aspect on the flight of four Hornets. That put our wingman almost into the Owens MOA and spread our formation out to about 10 miles wide at the widest. Maybe the Soviets did this sort of thing, maybe not. We lowered the nose and dropped down to match the lead Hornet’s altitude of about 15,000ft. Our Phantom was smoking like a freight train with too rich a mixture and too many cars behind. I had my speed brakes out to keep the speed down to give us a little more time to get set up for the ‘sting’ (that is meant to be an ironic reference to what the Hornets undoubtedly had planned for us). At about 12 miles we hear: “Fox 1 on the Bandit bearing 360 at 15,000ft, continue…”, that was the lead Hornet shooting me in the face… the trap was set! That announcement was notification that at least one of the Hornets had a radar lock and had tossed an AIM-7E radar guided missile at us but he allowed us to continue to the merge. That also told us that the other three Hornets did not have any idea what was going on, otherwise we would have heard a couple more shots called.

An F-18 Hornet pilot’s view of the south end of the Panamint Valley near China Lake, near where our engagement with four F-18s of VX-5 took place. US Navy

Part of going to the boat is practicing to go to the boat. At Miramar that meant a lot of time in the Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) pattern. Here, Landing Signal Officers with a portable ‘ball’ approach path indicator observe F-4s practicing at Miramar before going out to the boat for the first time. NMNA

Off to our left the lead section was scooting along the Panamint Range, giving the F-18s some real good clutter to look into. Off to our right, our wingman was in a left turn to parallel the F-18s’ course with 35-40º of left aspect on the western section of F-18s that are stepped up from the eastern section. We were about 10 miles from the merge at this point. Both the lead section and our wingman start to put their noses on the Hornets. When Rhino and I were a little less than two miles from the merge, I stood my Phantom on its tail and, as expected, two F-18s followed and shot the living daylights out of us. We were basically right over Panamint Springs in the north end of the Panamint MOA. Based upon our radar picture we knew this is the lead section of Hornets that were on the east side of their formation. Our lead section was climbing into the fight from the east over Pinto Peak, each fired one of their AA-3s about five miles from their merge with the Phantom-killing Hornets. Those shots were followed with a “… continue” to force the fight to the merge. This told the Hornets that more than one Phantom had a good radar lock and might well mean that we knew what was going on. Meanwhile, back at the ranch… the two remaining Hornets did not fully commit to our ruse, and were arcing (a bad thing for a fighter section to do) in a climbing starboard turn. They were essentially solving the geometry problem our wingman – remember our wingman,

who went out to the west – might have had getting to a rear quarter shot. We dutifully call ourselves out of the fight. We roll inverted at about 40,000ft and turn to the east. What we see is a wonder to behold. The sky is a flawless blue dome, approximately a Pantone 2171 C shade, in stark contrast to the high desert landscape below wearing a Burberry cloak of khaki, with black and grey highlights and a sprinkling of green and pink doing its best to help hide the Hornets and Phantoms from each other. Rhino and I are viewing the fight from about 40,000ft. There, from our penthouse suite, we are looking down on four Hornets that look like so many marbles rolling off a bed sheet that had just been pulled up from the centre of the bed. The Hornets that shot us were heading to the east and absorbing two more AA-3s from our lead section nearly at the merge, probably not valid shots given the geometry, but worth taking for effect. The other two Hornets were a little north of us, lazily flying eastward. Our wingman was entering the fray from the west with perfect rear quarter geometry on all of the Hornets, a smorgasbord of choices for them. Then the radio got real busy with Atoll calls from the remaining three Phantoms and several break calls from the Hornets obviously realising what had just happened. Then, all the Phantoms came out of burner generating trails of smoke that resembled black insect spray aggravating a nest of rather angry pests. Although the engagement never really got into a classic turning fight, I thought the objectives were met. ➤

“Our Phantom was smoking like a freight train with too rich a mixture and too many cars behind.” A view of an F-4N smoke trail from the air during air combat manoeuvring. NMNA McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 83

Four F-4N Phantoms from VF-154 in W-291 just trying to look good.The photo was taken from the back seat of another VF-154 Phantom, the author is in dash-2. Author

The catapults on the USS Coral Sea were so well used that they had stretched by nearly a foot. Catapult 1 was the longest, therefore, when winds were light we normally got shot off from Cat 1. NMNA

Look Down, Shoot Down, check! Situational Awareness check! The result; four Hornets were toast after killing one Phantom – that would not be a good real world trade-off. A “knock it off” was called and the Phantoms headed back to Fallon. The Hornets stayed in the operations area to complete some air-toground testing before flying up to Fallon for the debrief. Everyone landed safely. The Phantoms and the Hornets went to their respective detachment flight lines. The VX-5 pilots had previously agreed to come over to our hangar for the debrief. I suspect they thought it would be a nice gesture after having ruthlessly worked us over. All eight of the Phantom aircrew were in the debriefing room going over the engagement when the lead F-18 pilot literally burst into the room and announced, “What was that? I thought we were going to test our systems against a realistic scenario…” His colourful monologue was intriguing but when he took a breath our skipper, a

former test pilot, said in a buttery smooth Texas accent, “Well, we went low to test your look down shoot down and went high and wide to test your cockpit load and SA, seems we might…” When the skipper paused; the lead VX-5 pilot launched back into his tirade and loudly announced that, “If we had a radar lock and a tally-ho we would have kicked your asses!” The room went dead silent. Everyone in the room realised the Hornet lead had boiled the fight down to a single sentence. I remember all of the JOs (junior officers) looking up at a couple of commanders in a stare down. One was the commander from VX-5, his neck veins were pulsating and an increasingly dark crimson colour was coming up from the collar of his flight suit. The other commander, our skipper, was standing nonchalantly by the blackboard. After a brief pause our skipper, in an even more relaxed drawl that would make John Wayne proud stated, “Well, pardner, I think that’s the point.” The Phantom crews

After a set number of launches, the used bridle was ejected off the bow as seen here. NMNA

laughed. The Hornet drivers did not join in on the mirth. The debrief eventually covered all the lessons learned and our collective observations. Perhaps, in some small measure the events of that day made the Hornet a better weapon. In my personal opinion all the aircrew from the test and evaluation squadrons were and are the cream of the crop and still, today, I have the utmost respect for what they continue to do. But… on that day, during that engagement, the Phantoms Phlyers won the day and were able to rejoice in a last hurrah. The Phantom lived at sea, like all navy jets. So I have to include a couple of stories about the boat. Part of going to the boat is practicing to go to the boat. At Miramar that meant a lot of time in the Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) pattern at: Miramar (do not fly over the trailer park), El Centro (do not fly over Ruth’s house) or San Clemente Island (do not fly out of the Warning Area).

The F-4 nose strut would be extended about 2ft.This done by a yellow shirt by flipping a switch in the nose wheel well that would allow 3000 PSI of compressed air to extend the strut. These are F-4B Phantom IIs of VMFA 513 and 314 on the catapults of the carrier USS Constellation, CVA 64. NMNA

San Clemente was dark and almost always enveloped in a 500ft overcast that topped out at about 1900ft. But even in clear weather the darkness on final course was smotheringly complete, very boat-like except there was some cumulo-granite quite nearby. Other than having to occasionally deal with some cross winds, FCLP at San Clemente Island was perhaps the most realistic practice for landing on the ship at night. I am not certain it was less dangerous than actually landing on the ship at night; more than one Phantom crew flew their last flight at San Clemente Island. Standard operations included the following; launch out of Miramar (well after sunset) and fly the approximately 80 miles to San Clemente, check in with the tower/Landing Signal Officer (LSO) and enter the pattern call the ball at a quarter of a mile, fly the ball to touch down, power to mil, climb, turn crosswind, clean up level off at 1200ft and do it all again and again. Nominally we flew a rectangular, right hand pattern (which was odd for navy pilots)

at 1200ft with about a five mile final course to runway 23. If you were efficient, meaning your first landing was right at 5100lb of fuel and you raised the gear and flaps after each pass and you flew max conserve while on downwind and dirtied up as late as possible, you could get 5-6 laps around this pattern during 40-50 minutes of flight time. Ideally the low fuel light would be on during most of the last circuit of this merry go round and you would full stop, hot refuel next to the runway and launch back into the pattern for more fun. If you were having a good night of it and had accumulated a sufficient number of passes the previous few nights the LSO would send you back to Miramar after two or three passes. If you were struggling or just needed more passes you would again land at San Clemente, get some gas and fly back to Miramar. It was always fun to climb out from San Clemente and make the climbing turn to the east and see the artificial sunrise as the west coast of Southern California would come into view. ➤

Two views of F-4s hooked up to the catapult. Note the bridle attached to the J hooks under each wing root. Also just visible is the secondary attachment to the Van Zelm track that recovered the bridle after launch. NMNA

An interesting comparison in size as an F-4S of VF-302 is parked next to an F/A-18A Hornet of VX-5. NMNA

When you broke through the cloud layer or merely got high enough to see 80 miles your windscreen would present you with a brilliant band of brightness from Los Angeles to the US-Mexican border. The coastal cities and the cars driving on I-5 created a diamond and ruby tennis bracelet of conspicuous consumption framed by the ebony of the ocean to the west and the deserts and mountains to the east. After almost two hours of flying inside a sensory deprivation tank your brain welcomed the stimulation of civilisation. The whole experience was a masterpiece of discipline, concentration and on occasion abject terror. There are stories of trapping three Phantoms at San Clemente as the weather deteriorated. By ‘trapping three Phantoms at San Clemente’ I mean they were all on one runway at the same time, the first into the short field gear on runway 23, the second into the short field gear on runway 05, the third into the midfield gear on runway 23, over the top of the first and hoping they would miss the second if they hook skipped the midfield wire.

When I look at an airfield diagram of NUC today there is no depiction of mid-field gear, but like I said at the start these recollections are true to the best of my knowledge. One night, we (me and my RIO, Bisket) had just landed after our first set of passes and had taxied to the fuel pits for gas. The fuel pits at San Clemente were located about halfway between base ops at midfield and the approach end of runway 23. In the cockpit my RIO and I were talking about the work we had just done when I sensed that we were being watched. There are a lot of goats on San Clemente so I thought there might be a gaggle of critters nearby. I leaned forward in my seat and tried to spot something across the taxiway on the hillside in front of me. I could not make anything out. Like I said the darkness was smothering even on a clear night. So I turned on the taxi light… what I saw were two or three SEALS, the elite navy kind rather than the flipper equipped sea mammal kind, armed with god knows what, creeping down the barren rocky landscape, on a training mission to ‘take-over’ the airfield.

86 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

When I turned on the taxi light it illuminated one of the SEALS looking straight at us then he lowered his gaze, thinking he might be able to restore a little night vision after 1000W of glare pierced his Mk.1 Mod 0 eyeballs. I quickly turned off the taxi light. Shortly thereafter the LSO shack was attacked and the occupants sustained mortal injuries then the SEALS took over San Clemente base ops. The primary airfield for the Peoples Democratic Republic of San Clemente had fallen! The SEALS regularly ‘attacked’ the island as part of their training out of Naval Base Coronado. Once the hubbub had subsided and the LSO was resurrected, he cleared us for take-off and we continued with the seemingly simple task of FCLPs. It was quite a thrilling night for all concerned. Before I get into a couple of stories from the boat I want to give the reader a feel for what it meant to strap on a Phantom while deployed aboard an aircraft carrier. Manning up the Phantom on the flight deck was just as impressive as manning up ashore… except more so. Walking out to an F-4 loaded with

This is a photo taken from the author’s airplane while carrying a very old photo pod. It came out quite nicely I think, showing the crowding that can occur on a modern carrier deck that sometimes required an ‘airborne respot’. Author

two AIM-7s, and four AIM-9s and, on the occasional bombing mission, 12 Mk.82s was a bit humbling and made you realise the responsibility that had been entrusted in your capabilities. It was an impressive war machine capable of doing a lot of damage. There were certain things you had to be aware of when manning up an armed Phantom. First and foremost, when the Ordnance crew (Ordies) loaded the plane they had to raise the landing gear handle to conduct their continuity checks to make sure all the rails had requisite electrical power to release the weapons. Failure to ensure the landing gear handle was placed back in the ‘down’ position could result in the landing gearing using 3000psi of hydraulic power to bring the landing gear into the ‘up’ position while the plane is sitting on the flight deck, assuming a microswitch or two had also failed.

An F-4J of VF-74 catches the arrestor wire on board the USS America. NMNA

I was witness to exactly that event during an early morning launch from the Coral Sea. A sister squadron’s F-4 was starting in the ‘Gator Hole’ just aft of the island. When the right engine came to life the plane collapsed to the flight deck. The 600 gallon centreline fuel tank ruptured and the Phantom was ‘resting’ on the assorted weapons that had been loaded. There was no fire or any accidental firings of weapons and no one was hurt. No real damage was done to the airplane and the weapons needed to have some aero fins replaced. The centreline tank was destroyed of course. The real damage occurred when the flight deck crew tried to pick the Phantom up with ‘Tillie’ the on-board crane. The seas were huge and the carrier did what all boats do in waves, it rolled side to side, pitched fore and aft and yawed left and right. Once the plane started swinging, things began to look like the video of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, parts and pieces were scattered everywhere, Tillie appeared to be in danger of tilting over and eventually the plane was simply dropped back to the flight deck and the crew had to wait until the ship could find calmer seas. The plane was rendered unflyable for quite some time thereafter. The Phantom was an old school plane and was not connected to the catapult like the A6, A-7, F-14, E-2, and F-18 were. These airplanes are connected directly to the catapult via a launch bar that was integral to the airframe and extended down from the nose landing gear assembly to attach to the front of the catapult shuttle. The F-4 was connected to the catapult by a big cable also known as ‘The Bridle’. The F-4 would taxi over the shuttle and come to a stop. Then the nose strut would be extended about 2ft. This done by a yellow

shirt by flipping a switch in the nose wheel well that would allow 3000psi of compressed air to extend the strut. I will let you mull over the danger inherent in that particular task. Now the F-4 had about 3º of nose up attitude. This added some angle of attack to the end of the catapult shot so the plane would ‘naturally’ go flying instead of swimming. After the nose was extended two other yellow shirts would heft the looped ends of a 15ft long cable to a couple beefy ‘J-Hooks’ underneath the wing roots very close to the bottom of the intakes. The centre of the cable ran in front of the catapult shuttle and would be drawn tight when the shuttle was moved forward into the ‘tension’ position and the Phantom was brought to full power meaning the catapult shuttle and the airplane were ready to be shot forward as a single unit. Then the two yellow shirts would scurry from under the jet and seek the relative safety of a small area just outboard of the wing tips. Again, mull over the inherent danger of this particular task. The cable itself was attached to the flight deck with a smaller cable near each loop that was connected to a return system contained within what was known as the Van Zelm Track. The Van Zelm was used to retrieve the bridle after the catapult launch and was then hooked up to the next Phantom being readied for takeoff. Each bridle was good for some number of launches, and when that number was reached the bridle was not connected to the Van Zelm track and would fly off the front of the boat and drop into the ocean. The return mechanism was covered by large brass ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 87

plates that were bolted to the flight deck. Sometimes those plates would break… which brings me to my first sea story. Quite frequently operations off the boat were ‘ground hog day’ kind of events… brief, launch, trap, slider, repeat. Yet even in a world of checklists and ‘routine’ operations, exciting stuff can and does occur. On one particular day, shortly after the WHAM of the catapult shot and as I was bringing the gear up, I heard over the radio, “Phantom off the waist cat, you have a fire in your tailpipe.” No real sense of urgency other than saying there was some fire. My thought was, I am in afterburner so I suppose that is good news. I asked my RIO, Nick, what he thought that was about. When I came out of burner, the radio told me, “the fire’s out”. Which once again made me think; things are working as designed. Nick, who was a high time Phantom guy with a train kill in Vietnam, takes a look into the MiG mirror and said, I think we are streaming fuel, I bet we broke something on the Cat shot. So we joined up on an RF-8 from VFP-63 to have him take a look. Sure enough there is a large hole in our centreline tank and fuel was porting overboard. So we went through the checklist and punched the tank off the plane and watch it drop into the ocean and then came back to the ship. We trap, taxi out of the landing area, undergo a little inspection, taxi to park, shutdown and walk to maintenance control. On the way to maintenance control we heard from some shipmates that they thought we were on fire and they were happy we made it back okay. We were asked what it was like in the cockpit? Did we have any warning lights? Did we hear an explosion? All I could say was it seemed pretty normal. After a few minutes at maintenance control, I go to the ready room to see the tape of the launch, which was pretty impressive. There indeed was a ball of flame that appeared to be pretty much stuck to the aft portion of my F-4. The puncture was caused by a piece of the Van Zelm track breaking off

On one particular day, shortly after the WHAM of the catapult shot and as I was bringing the gear up, I heard over the radio,“Phantom off the waist cat, you have a fire in your tailpipe.”The author’s centreline tank is punctured resulting in a spectacular ball of flame. Author

and slicing through the centreline tank. The picture above was left in the VF-154 ready Room aboard the USS Coral Sea a few days later by a person only identified as an Australian journalist who happened to be aboard and taking photos that day. Unfortunately he did not leave his name or any contact info. After jawboning with a few squadron mates in the ready room, our skipper enters and with the full authority afforded those that hold command at sea informs me that I am grounded until I take and pass a closed book NATOPS test. His point being that the NATOPS emergency procedure for Fire After Catapult Launch is one simple, IMMEDIATE action step: See right: And that step is exactly what I did not do. Therefore by all rights and reason I failed to perform my duties. Within a couple of seconds of my grounding, the Air Wing Commander (CAG) walked into the ready room, sans a hail of attention on deck, and stated; “Hooter, good job not punching those missiles off the plane. We don’t have many onboard!” He gives the ready room a thumbs up and walked out.

A four ship of F/A-18s, these being of VFA-94 in 2003. At the time of our engagement the F/A18 was still under evaluation by VX-5. US Navy 88 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

One of the NATOPS F-4 manual emergency procedures pages. Note the first action to be taken in the event of a fire after catapult launch. Author

Regardless of the kudos and the thumbs up from CAG the skipper refused to rescind my grounding until a test was taken and passed, which I did shortly thereafter. I flew again later that day. To this day I suspect that the skipper and the CAG played “good cop bad cop” with me to make the point, to always execute your emergency procedures properly but also to enforce that I displayed good judgment given the circumstances. They were successful in making that point, Here is one last story from the boat. This story is about what is affectionately referred to as an ‘airborne re-spot’. A re-spot on an aircraft carrier is an event where a plane is normally hooked up to a tractor and moved to a different location on the flight deck. This is done for any number of reasons. An ‘airborne re-spot’ is a little more dynamic. You would launch at the end of the current launch cycle and be recovered at the end of the current recovery cycle. That meant from take-off to landing and airborne re-spot might last 30 minutes. The normal sequence during carrier cyclic operations was: 1. Launch, fly for about 1.5 2. Another set of planes would launch 3. Recover at the end of the second launch cycle and land after about 1.8 hours of flight time. On an airborne re-spot you would launch in step 2 above and recover with the planes that land in step 3 (which took off in step 1). The Phantom normally launched with about 17,000lb of fuel and would land with about 5000lb. That meant there was about 12,000lb of JP5 to dispose of in about 30 minutes. That was not much of a challenge to the Phantom considering fuel consumption at max conserve was about 6000lb per hour. So to get rid of six tons of JP5 in 30 minutes all you had to do was increase your fuel consumption to the less conservative rate of 24,000lb per hour, no sweat GI, that is what afterburners are for. Technically you could simply dump the fuel from your wings or you could dump the fuel from your wings while in afterburner, but if you were also transferring fuel from the centreline tank you would have a hard time figuring out how much fuel you had used/dumped. Recall I stated early on that the Phantom fuel system was “the most complex arrangement of pumps, dumps, tanks, pipes, vents, gravity feeds and bleed air that could have possibly been designed…” Therefore, dumping fuel while transferring and while raging around in afterburner, could easily result in an emergency low fuel condition sooner than expected. The logical and most fun option was to just plug it into burner, go find someone to fight for a few turns and come back into the break at 500 knots and land with an OK 3. We decided to do just that on this particular airborne re-spot in the middle of the Indian Ocean. We had pre-briefed with a couple of A-7 pilots, Mole and Duster, that we would meet them as they were returning from their Surface/Sub-Surface Surveillance Control (SSSC) mission. They were scanning an area about 300 miles from the ship and ➤

“I had waited all my life for this and it was indeed quite right.” NMNA

Display flying might call for a formation flypast at an event or ceremony. Here, the Black Knights of VF-154 are flying in diamond formation, the author is in the ‘slot’ position, if I recall properly.The photo was taken from the back seat of another Phantom from VF-154 somewhere over the Philippines. Author McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 89

Trapping back aboard the boat could be extremely satisfying. Here an F-4 is moments before touchdown on the USS Carl Vinson. NMNA

90 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

30º right of its course. Upon take-off we accelerated straight ahead for about seven miles then turned right. My RIO (Reefer) had a radar lock nearly as soon as the gear came up. When we reached our turn point we were just below supersonic then we started our climb to 18,000ft, the marshall altitude at which the A-7s would normally be coming back to the ship. We were supersonic shortly after levelling off at 18,000ft. Although the weather was clear there was enough humidity to create a vapour shroud just aft of the shock wave. That shroud was about 200ft in diameter and was moving at more than Mach 1. We thumped the low fuel A-7s with our shock wave then pulled into the vertical. The A-7s manoeuvred only enough to keep us in sight. We pulled over the top and came back down towards them thumped them again and pulled back up into the vertical. We checked our fuel on the way up, and saw were down to our fuel ladder target and I pulled the F-4 out of burner. We coasted uphill for a few more thousand feet, and put our lift vector on the A-7s and slid into a loose parade position and followed them into the Cat 1 traffic pattern. The A-7s were the last guys back to the ship

so we took interval off of them when they turned in to the break. We landed about 40 seconds after the second A-7 trapped. We had been airborne for about 22 minutes. This was cool stuff. In its day the Phantom was an excellent airshow performer. The Blues and the T-Birds both flew the Phantom for years thrilling crowds around the world. Ten J79s in burner was an impressive statement of freedom. There is the classic Blue Angels movie Threshold with Harley Hall as Boss: “Burnerrrs onnn, NOW” and “Stand by for Speedbrakes… BRRRRakes”. A great watch indeed. My personal airshow experience in the Phantom was a little less thrilling but in the Phantom’s defence the fault was with the ground support equipment. On May 17, 1980, I was still in the RAG (VF-121) and was scheduled to fly to Whidbey Island NAS with Nasty in my back seat. Our take-off time from Miramar was at 0800 on Saturday (a nice wake-up call for the folks in Mira Mesa and La Jolla) and fly to Moffett Field to get gas and to kick off the airshow with a high performance climb out, then proceed on to Whidbey Island. Everything went perfectly and we got to Moffett Field ahead of schedule.

We parked a few hundred yards south of Base Ops, got our fuel and went inside the Base Ops building to attend the pre-airshow briefing, which was beyond exciting for this 20-something FNG with less than 300 hours total time. Others in attendance included The Blue Angels, Patty Wagstaff (I am pretty sure she was flying at this show), Bob Hoover, The Holiday Inn Flying Team, some Confederate Air Force guys flying P-51s and B-25s, and many more. Our job was to simply sit in the jet and listen for the announcer to give his welcome to the airshow address. This would be our cue to start the engines and taxi for our high performance take-off and unrestricted climb, a normally uncomplicated task. Unfortunately everything that could go wrong went wrong when the ground support crew connected electrical power to the plane. We expected to see evidence that we had electrical power but that did not occur. No lights came on and we did not have use of our ICS. This happens on occasion, so Nasty and I just yelled back and forth while going through our checklists to start the engines. Upon attempting to start the right engine, the RPM was just not spinning up so I coaxed it a bit by slowly oscillating the stabilator, ➤

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 91

purportedly that relieved the J79 from having to work against the hydraulic pump and would help build the RPM to enable a light-off. Nothing worked and after about 15 minutes of trying to start the plane the air show just had to move on to the next event. We shut down everything and climbed out of the jet, buttoned it up and turned to walk through the mass of humanity that had gathered around to see the storied Phantom amaze everyone with it’s awesome-ness. Helmet bag in hand and our piss-cutters expertly ‘50 mission dipped’ we walked from the plane to base ops through the disappointed crowd. As we ducked under the ropes a young boy asked the obvious question, “Aren’t you going to fly???”. I stopped and knelt down to his level, looked up at his dad and mom and said, “Sorry, the plane just does not want to start right now, maybe we’ll try later after the others finish. Have a great day.” We shook hands all around and continued our trek to Base Ops to wait out the airshow. When the show was over we briefed a four plane flight back to Miramar. We were going to fly back to Miramar with a T2, and F-8 and, of all things, an F-104. The F-104 was the lead plane because it had good radios and the rest of us flew wing back to NKX. A day or two later after maintenance had a chance to work on the airplane we were told that the electrical power from the ground support equipment must have been bad. As a result all the radios and navigation equipment were damaged, therefore even if we had been able to get our Phantom started at the airshow we would not have been able to take off. On another occasion VF-154 was invited to provide a Phantom as a static display at the Dayton Airshow. P-Squared, my RIO on this flight, and I were able to achieve our mission of attending the airshow, signing a lot of autographs and getting a wicked bad sunburn. We did this in spite of several delays that were just short of comical but ended up providing us with a view we would never forget. Our route of flight from Miramar (NKX) included a stop at Tinker AFB then on to Dayton International (DAY) with a scheduled

Air show flying in the F-4 could lead to some unusual formations to say the least. Here an F-4 of VF-84 formates with a civilian owned T-6 trainer. US Navy

arrival of 1800 Eastern time. That put our take off time at 0900 Pacific Time. The forecast was for clear weather coast to coast and not much wind aloft. We expected a smooth ride for about 2500 miles. The plane thought otherwise. On our first takeoff (emphasis on FIRST takeoff) we had a low oil light come on as we were approaching Ramon on our Julian departure. We cancelled our IFR clearance and returned to Miramar. We made a quick trip to maintenance, added a little oil, tightened a few nuts, reapplied some safety wire and off we went. Our second takeoff resulted in a fire light on the other engine before we even crossed Interstate 15 on our Julian departure. Again we cancelled and went back to Miramar. This time we climbed into a different airplane. By this time it was getting late and to tell the truth a bit frustrating. At 1500 we requested a takeoff on runway 06. Usually we take off from runway 24 at Miramar, but taking off on 06 will save about 15 minutes and a little more than 2000lb of fuel. As we would now be landing after sunset we thought that was prudent. We take off, for the third time, and finally all things went well and we landed safely at Tinker AFB. After landing we are being refuelled while P-Squared was packing the chute. Fuel began to pour out of the aft vent and soaked P-Squared in JP5, requiring him to take a quick shower and change his clothes in base ops. Another delay. When P-Squared was no longer flammable we climbed into the jet and took off for DAY. We now found ourselves way behind

Flying the Phantom solo was cool but the most poignant part of the flight was the way in which we abandoned these beasts in the desert. NMNA 92 TAKING THE SMOKING THUNDER HOG TO THE BOAT

schedule, at the end of a long operational day, flying into an unfamiliar field and to boot there is no moon making the clear night sky nearly as dark as our collective mood. About half way to DAY we were graced by a view of the Aurora Borealis, the northern lights, a spectacular treat that could have only been served up after all our plans went south. By late 1983 the time had come for VF-154 to transition from the Lead Sled to the Tomcat. Our planes were to be flown to the ‘Boneyard’ at Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, AZ. This gave me, and a few others, the opportunity to fly the Phantom solo. I made two trips, one as part of a flight of four and one as a section. We took off from Miramar with the back seat filled with documentation and just enough fuel to make the distance to DavisMonthan Air Force Base in Tucson. I was definitely in a VFR airplane on both flights, flying wing with limited no radio or navigation gear installed. It didn’t really matter, the weather was severe clear the whole way and all I needed to do was fly wing. If I had an emergency I could break out my PRC-90 from my survival vest and let folks know where the smoking hole would be. Davis-Monthan is just a couple miles from Tucson International Airport and the runways are aligned exactly the same; parallel runways 26 and 08 and we did indeed line up on Tucson International the first time over even though we briefed not doing exactly that. The Air Force Tower controller saved our hides from an embarrassing event, he had seen it all before. Anyway, flying the Phantom solo was cool but the most poignant part of the flight was the way in which we abandoned these beasts in the desert. After we landed we taxied past the base operations area and headed down a taxiway that led us from the from the airfield into the Boneyard. The taxiway crossed Cherry Avenue. Cherry Avenue ran from the Boneyard at Davis-Monthan and terminated at the University of Arizona football stadium. When we received clearance to cross Cherry some warning lights came on for the cars and the gates dropped down across the road. A piece of the base’s perimeter security fence rolled back to allow us to taxi through and we taxied across the street headed into the Boneyard. Of course we waved to the people sitting in their cars watching this spectacle of Cold War and Vietnam era fighters roll past their

Row upon row of F-4 in the desert boneyard. More than 5000 Phantoms were built, and many still sit here in the Arizona sun. USAF

windshields. Once we are on the other side of the street (why did the Phantom cross the road?), we literally left the paved surface and pulled over to the side of a caliche road and shut down (…because that is where Phantoms go to rest after a long life of kicking ass). Literally as the engines are running down, one of the Boneyard technicians climbed up the side of the airplane and told us that we can not take the manufacturer’s plate or the compass out of the plane. We groan and dismount our F-4s. The next two hours were spent climbing around B-52s, Thuds and other historic planes. As we walked over to the follow-me truck that was available for us to drive back to base ops I remember looking at the forlorn jets sitting unevenly on parched earth already being prepared to enter some lofty level of

preservation to await some unknown fate. Perhaps to be sold to another country, possibly to be placed back into flying status as a drone only to be shot down by another airplane or some ground based weapon or become a monument on some godforsaken air base or court house lawn. I suspect the planes I flew to the Boneyard are probably still there. I do not recall how we got back to Miramar. That is it for my sea stories but I have one more item to share. “I waited for this moment all my life… but it’s not quite right,” is a lyric from Lazy Eye, a song by a Southern California indie band The Silversun Pickups. The first time I heard this lyric happened to coincide with my beginning to write this article. I was driving home from LAX late one night and it struck me that my time in Phantoms was something that I too

had waited for all my life, but I could not agree that it was not quite right. It was indeed right, right as rain as the saying goes. Frankly, more like… right as oh hell yeah! The 20-something angst wrapped up in Lazy Eye is certainly part of the emotional growth I experienced as I matured from young adult to a somewhat more senior adult. Mixing the joy of flying with the requisite necessities of everyday life was a difficult balancing act. Climbing up the side of a Phantom on a foggy morning at Miramar Naval Air Station was always a very fun part of that balancing act. I had waited all my life for this and it was indeed quite right. Today, the author can be found patrolling the skies of Southern California in a DA-40, sometimes reaching Mach 0.215. ■ Words: Jon Schreiber McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 93

in the shadow of the phantom Recalling the 1980s and 90s in Europe

My early years as a fighter pilot were the waning ones of the Phantom, but the high-water mark of the Phantom years was only just before my time, writes Robert I ‘Scout’ Winebrenner. In my pilot training class, most fighter assignments were still F-4s. There were only a handful of Eagles, ’Vaarks or Warthogs.

I

was never actually assigned to a Phantom unit, because coming out of basic pilot training, I was one of the fortunate few in those days to be assigned directly to what was then a new generation fighter. As a young F-15 pilot, I was nevertheless immersed in Phantom facts, anecdotes, legends and lore to the point that it almost seemed I had a tour in the aircraft under my belt. So much so that I don’t hesitate now to share a few of these stories. However, first an explanation as to how and why this developed.

94 in the shadow of the phantom

Learning from

I came to appreciate the influence that the Vietnam-era Phantom had on the USAF’s modern fighter force as a second lieutenant pilot with newly-earned wings; first going through Lead In Fighter Training (LIFT) in Holloman AFB, New Mexico, and later through the F-15 Replacement Training Unit (RTU). In both cases, the cadre of instructor pilots and squadron supervisors were invariably old F-4 pilots. Partly because that’s the way they learned it, and partly to emphasise their credentials as experienced

fighter pilots, they would introduce and explain many concepts to their young charges with, “Well, in the F-4 we used to...” While learning basic fighter manoeuvres in the T-38, the instructors’ comparisons to F-4 tactics or characteristics were abundant. Moreover, sometime during the two months at LIFT, the students were given several missions in an F-4D simulator. We normally paired up with another student, one would fly the sim as the other operated the radar controls, which were of course, in the back. Then we would switch. The objective of these missions was ostensibly to learn some fighter radar fundamentals, which we did – to a degree. We learned about B-scope displays, search techniques, the 60 to 1 rule, locking on and breaking lock, Vc (and the x3 switch), collision antenna train angles, dynamic missile envelope computations and getting ‘the dot in the hole’ and much more. The front seater could follow along on his fellow student’s work

while flying, watching the repeater scope in the front. I loved these simulator missions, and I believe my fellow students did as well. After flying the T-38, even sitting in the Phantom simulator was somehow awe inspiring. It was a real war machine. There were armament panels, weapons switches, a radar warning receiver, and gun sights. There were man-sized undercarriage, flap, hook, and drag chute switches. It simply radiated seriousness. Naturally, the instructor pilot had previously flown the Phantom, and after fulfilling the instructional requirements of the mission, and continuing on for much longer than it should have, he simply couldn’t resist torturing us with various anomalies and his knowledge of the aircraft. “Look at your armament panel, there, Hot Shot. You’re not going to kill anybody with that hung missile. You better try something else.” “What?!? You don’t know how to air restart an engine? Just plug it into afterburner, you hopeless nugget!” “Hey, aren’t you going to do anything about that engine fire?”

“What do you mean the radar’s stopped? You expect it to work with that hydraulic failure?” “What’s the matter? You don’t know where to find the circuit breaker to stop that?” “Ha! Admit it! You guys don’t even know what bleed air is, do you?” “Hey there, Ace – the runway’s coming up pretty fast. It looks like you better figure out how to blow down the gear!” The list is endless. But suffice it to say that we got an extra-large serving of Phantomphacts and lore before, during, and after any of those simulator missions, whether our end assignment was to an F-4 unit or not. The Phantom stories continued at the F-15 RTU, where new pilots were minted into F-15 pilots. Eagle instructors used their Phantom experience to understand, and then subsequently to explain certain aspects of Eagle systems, tactics or flight characteristics. The instruction very often included some comparison to the Phantom. It was like learning two aircraft simultaneously. For example, a typical systems story: The Eagle has no battery. The engines are ➤

Three McDonnell Douglas F-4D Phantom IIs.“In my pilot training class, the lion’s share of the fighter assignments were still F-4s.” USAF

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 95

started with a sort of auxiliary power unit called the Jet Fuel Starter, which is in turn started with stored hydraulic pressure. This meant, of course, that the Eagle pilot needed to start engines to even talk on the radio – a somewhat unusual characteristic in the world of fighter aviation. Well, I heard time and time again about how MacAir had such difficulties with the battery in the Phantom: apparently it needed replacement more frequently than anyone would have liked, or it needed to be disconnected for a number of different maintenance tasks on the aircraft. The rear ejection seat needed to be moved in order to gain access to the battery, which in turn necessitated a recertification of the ejection seat and associated egress systems for every task involving the battery. “And that,” they would explain, “is the reason the Eagle has no battery.” A few of these war stories were usually enough to convince the fledgling Eagle pilot that he should be quite happy that the aircraft didn’t have a battery. I suppose I was, too. But it still would have been very handy sometimes to be able to talk on the radio without starting engines – for example, in those odd cases when you are supposed to radio the tower for engine start clearance. But there is more. Much more. Let’s take, for example, the circuit breakers. The Phantom had bazillions. The back-seater’s checklist contained several pages of maps and lists covering the various circuit breaker panels. Indeed, many emergency procedures in the Phantom involved pulling or resetting this or the other circuit breaker, and first, the back-seater had to actually find the right one, as they were generally not labelled. There were a few occasions when I was the backseater in a Phantom and needed to find one of those circuit breakers, so I have a first-hand appreciation for the task. I suppose regular aircrew have the more popular ones

“While learning basic fighter manoeuvres in the T-38, the instructors’ comparisons to F-4 tactics or characteristics were abundant.”The Northrop T-38 Talon was then, and remains, the USAF’s advanced jet trainer. USAF

memorised, but for my part, I had the checklist circuit breaker map out, counting out rows and columns, trying to locate the right one. Incidentally, I use the term ‘backseater’ only because this crew position has so many different names depending on nation or service: They could be a WSO, RIO, EWO, navigator, or flugbeobacter to name just a few. In early USAF service, the back seat was even crewed by a second pilot. So in another alleged lesson learned at MacAir, the aim was to simplify all that for single pilot operation, and quit the habit of using circuit breakers as switches. As a result, the Eagle has lots of switches, but only eight circuit breakers that are accessible during flight. It’s a mystery to me how the engineers decided on those eight circuit breakers. In over 2000 hours in the type, I don’t recall ever having to do anything with those circuit breakers except push them back in when they were inadvertently left out after maintenance functions. Another frequently told story was of the 556 Mod, AIMVAL/ACEVAL, and how it all related to the auto-acquisition modes of the

The cockpit of the F-15A. Note the lack of circuit breakers and the simplified control systems. USAF 96 IN THE SHADOW OF THE PHANTOM

Eagle’s APG-63 radar. As a young Eagle pilot, I was spoiled by the ease of achieving a radar lock even in gut-wrenching dogfight situations. Through the use of switches that were already in your hands on the stick and throttles, the radar could be commanded to look in certain directions and automatically lock onto the first target detected. It was trained and expected to launch Sparrows or off-boresight slaved Sidewinders in these close-in dogfight situations. Then, during the debriefings, the Old Heads would wax poetic about how good we had it. In the early Phantoms, there were no autoacquisition modes. There was no provision for the pilot to take control of the radar in such a situation. This necessitated some rather amazing communication between the pilot, who saw the enemy aircraft out the front and who needed a radar lock to fire a Sparrow, and the back seater, who had control of the radar but couldn’t see out the front of the aircraft where the pilot was looking. So the pilot had to describe where to point the radar: “Stab out 20 left 5 high!” At which point, the back seater would switch off the space/horizon stabilisation, take manual control of the antenna, and move it 20º left from the water line of the aircraft and 5º high, wobble it around a bit, and try to find the target. Of course, by this time in a dynamic environment, the target position had already likely changed, so the pilot was already relaying new instructions before the old ones were even completed. Spoiled as I am from the Eagle, I view it as a minor miracle that crews were able to do this and get missiles off the jet. There are many stories like this from the Vietnam War, and even some successful ones! The -556 Mod changed that somewhat. The front seat was retrofitted with a few switches whereby the pilot could take control of the radar, bring the target briefly to boresight, and effect an automatic radar lock. Pre-production Eagles also didn’t have the auto-acquisition radar modes I described earlier. These were added after the AIMVAL/ACEVAL evaluation which clearly demonstrated increased dogfight effectiveness and survivability of aircraft equipped with the auto acquisition radar modes.

1

3

2

4

1. The front cockpit of the McDonnell Douglas F-4D Phantom II showing the radar repeater just below the gunsight. US Air Force Armament Museum, Eglin AFB 2. The rear cockpit of the McDonnell Douglas F-4D Phantom II, note the many circuit breakers on the panels alongside the RIO’s seat. US Air Force Armament Museum, Eglin AFB 3. The F-4D simulator in the Frontiers of Flight Museum, Love Field, Dallas,Texas.The trainee fighter pilots were given a number of missions in the simulator to learn the rudiments of radar interception. Frontiers of Flight Museum 4. The rear seat side stick control that could manually steer the radar was also mounted on the central pedestal on some versions of the aircraft. Constance Redgrave 5. The control column design for the F-4 Phantom has become a classic, although the difference between the button and trigger functions caused some confusion for F-15 pilots. Constance Redgrave

TRIGGER OR PICKLE BUTTON?

In the Phantom, air-to-air ordnance was fired with the trigger, and the ‘pickle button’ (more properly, the Weapon Release button, just left of the trim switch) dropped bombs. This probably seemed like a logical arrangement at the time, considering none of the early marques were equipped with guns. However, in the Eagle, the pickle button fires missiles, and the trigger only fires the gun. Only and always. The trigger will fire the gun with the Master Arm on, regardless of HUD display, radar mode selected, or the position of the weapon select switch. This was a typical ‘gotcha’ for the Phantom pilot converting to the Eagle. So typical, I think everyone must have done it, considering how often I heard the story. The first tactical simulator ride during which the student operates the radar, locks onto targets, and shoots missiles. The first two tasks occur without a snag. Then, once the target is within range, he reverts to a Phantom habit and squeezes the trigger to

shoot the AIM-7 Sparrow missile. Of course, no missile fires. Instead, Buuuuurrrrrp! – the simulator’s sound effect as the M61 20mm Gatling gun spews out a few hundred rounds. The wry comment from the instructor pilot sitting at the simulator console: “Hey there, Ace, 12 miles is a little out of range for a gun shot.” Of course, a few short years earlier, he had probably done the exact same thing... Instructor pilots also were keen to demonstrate how to use the rudder to roll at slower speeds and high angle of attack. This is an aerodynamic characteristic of swept-wing aircraft: At higher angles of attack, yaw to the left causes the right wing to ‘straighten’ more with respect to the relative wind. Separation is reduced, and the effective length of the wing is increased – all resulting in more lift on the right and the resultant roll to the left. Rolling with the rudder in the Phantom was a necessity under these conditions. The ailerons were for the most part washed out and ineffective, and the stabilator was not differentially actuated. At high angle of attack,

5

moving the Phantom stick from side to side caused – at best – only a slight wobbling motion, but no real roll that could be tactically useful. At worst, such an application of aileron at high AOA caused an adverse yaw reaction: the aircraft would yaw and whip back in a roll the opposite of the desired direction and possibly depart controlled flight! Therefore, Phantom pilots learned early on to just pull straight back and roll with their feet. This technique also applied to the Eagle, much to the delight of the former F-4 pilots. Pull straight back and roll with the feet. It worked. The difference being, in the Eagle it wasn’t necessary! The Control Augmentation System (CAS) in the Eagle is a fly-by-wire system that is in some respects smarter than the pilot. In the same high angle of attack, slow speed situation, if the pilot moves the stick to the side to roll... surprise! The aircraft rolls! But not because the ailerons are magically effective in the Eagle when they aren’t in the Phantom. It’s because the CAS rolls the aircraft with a combination of rudder and ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 97

differential stabilator, regardless of the pilot’s flight control command for aileron. That having been said, if you were flying with a former Phantom pilot in the back seat as your instructor, the more prudent choice was to just humour him and roll with rudder. Not because you had to, just to avoid any misunderstandings and hurt feelings.

FLYING AGAINST: DACT

My first experience flying against the Phantom as a DACT (Dissimilar Air Combat Training) opponent occurred while I was still a student in the F-15 RTU. We took off as a 2-ship section from Luke AFB, Arizona, and met up with two Marine Corps Phantoms out of MCAS Yuma, whereupon we split into two separate 1v1s beginning from beyond visual range. It was much the same almost every engagement. Unless I made bad mistakes, and several of them at that, I was destined to win the engagement. I would typically have two if not three missiles in the air even before the merge, and the opponent would be lucky to get off one. At the merge, the Phantom pilot would normally attempt to bring me close aboard to take away turning room, but the difference in the sustained turn performance between the two aircraft meant it usually wasn’t long before I was camped in the Phantom’s 6 o’clock. This from a new pilot probably making more mistakes than not, despite the urging from my instructor. In the debriefings, it was always the same story. The highly experienced Marine pilot explained, “I was giving you my best turn but I could easily see you were gaining on me with each passing second. So I depleted all my energy to try to get you in close and force a flight path if not a 3-9 line overshoot. But as you could see, it just wasn’t effective enough.” I once remarked with uncharacteristic humility to my instructor pilot, “Wow, this is somehow not fair, is it? Look at those guys. They have thousands of hours of fighter experience and I come in here and win engagement after engagement because of the performance of the aircraft, not because of any skill or knowledge on my part.” The instructor’s face turned even more sour and serious than usual. He answered: “Lieutenant, I’ve got a news flash for you. You don’t want it to be fair. Everybody getting some training in

53rd Tactical Fighter Squadron pilots on an exchange visit to Orange in November 1982. Officer Commanding was Lieutenant Colonel ‘Rowdy’ Lewis standing third from the left.The author, Robert ‘Scout’ Winebrenner, is standing in the front row immediately below the star of the national markings. Robert I Winebrenner

peacetime is one thing, but never, ever, go looking for a fair fight.” Upon arrival in Europe in 1981, there were Phantoms everywhere. I was stationed at Bitburg Air Base in the Eifel region, which before 1977 also had Phantoms, and USAFE (US Air Forces Europe) was still mostly an F-4 command: a wing next door in Spangdahlem, another in Hahn, two squadrons in Ramstein, another wing in Torrejon, and a Recce wing in Zweibrücken. RAF Bentwaters/Woodbridge had only a couple of years earlier converted to the A-10. And that was just the Americans. RAFG had Phantoms at Wildenrath (the other Clutch bases at Brüggen and Laarbruch had Phantoms until 1978), and the Germans had a very sizeable Phantom force at Wittmund, Hopsten, Pferdsfeld, Leck, Bremgarten, and Neuburg. Bottom line: it was almost impossible to spend any time in the air or on the ground in Germany in those days without seeing some variety of Phantom. The 526TFS in Ramstein was equipped with about the best air-to-air Phantoms in USAF service then. Their F-4Es had the APQ-120 solid state radars, APX gear (electronic identification equipment), TISEO (a zoomable optical device that could be slaved to radar line-of-sight), and leading-edge slats for better slow-speed manoeuvrability.

A McDonnell Douglas F-4E Phantom of the 526th Tactical Fighter Squadron at Ramstein in 1980. Their F-4Es had the APQ-120 solid state radars, APX electronic identification equipment,TISEO, a zoomable optical device that could be slaved to radar line-of-sight and leading-edge slats for better slow-speed manoeuvrability as well as the late-model J79 ‘smokeless’ engines. USAF 98 IN THE SHADOW OF THE PHANTOM

The late-model J79 ‘smokeless’ engines at least produced less smoke than usual. They also had an air defence alert (‘Zulu’) commitment in those years. We didn’t fly as much DACT from home station in Bitburg as anyone would have liked, but when we did, our opponents were quite often the 526. The TRA (Temporary Reserved Airspace) training airspace in Germany was very restricted, typically from FL 110 to FL 245, only about 40nm in length, and subsonic only. Typically the first engagement was a ‘tactical intercept’ only, as the Phantoms were restricted in manoeuvring until their wing tanks were empty. Even thereafter, under those conditions, it wasn’t much of a fight. There was really nowhere for anyone to hide, and hitting the merge at high subsonic meant the Phantoms couldn’t really get away, nor could they expect to keep up with the much better turning Eagle for very long. The AIM-7F Sparrow carried by the Eagles in those years also had a measurably longer range than the AIM-7E2 carried by the F-4E. That meant that the Phantoms were usually already playing defence in the BVR contest. Of course, mistakes were made – on both sides. The Phantoms would often try some tactic designed to thwart the Eagles’ ‘sort’ – a briefed contract or agreement to lock onto and shoot at separate targets while BVR. Being familiar with our standard tactics, and knowing the range when this sorting was typically done, they could sometimes use weaves or resolution cell tactics to get both Eagles locked onto a single Phantom, with the other then completely untargeted and pressing to the merge. If they could force one Eagle to suddenly break off the attack and defend, the outcome of the engagement could be altered significantly. Aerial gunnery highlighted an interesting difference between the two aircraft (in the case of the Phantom, I am referring to the F4E and F-4F with the internal M61 20mm cannon). The cannon was installed at a depressed angle, for a variety of engineering reasons. In aerial gunnery, it is necessary to

get sufficient lead on the target to compensate for the time of flight of the bullet. In the case of the F-4, it was necessary to get even more lead angle, because of the depressed angle of the gun. What that meant in actual application was this: a Phantom attempting to achieve a gun tracking solution often had to contend with the target aircraft being temporarily ‘buried’ under the nose at some point while pulling lead during the attack. From the other perspective, defending against a possible gun shot, if the F-4 was pointed at you, there was no danger. You needed to clearly see much of the underbelly of the aircraft before the Phantom had a gun solution. In the Eagle, MacAir alleviated this by installing the M61 tilted 2º up, so there was already 2º (about 35½ mils) of lead angle ‘built in’. This prompted some interesting discussions during debriefs after DACT missions with Eagles and Phantoms. I heard the complaint more than once, “You couldn’t possibly have had a gun shot... you were only pointed at me!” True, but under some circumstances, that was enough in an Eagle. The constant training in the subsonic TRAs was habit forming in a bad way. For example, it was too tempting for everyone to get lazy with radar search discipline. We deployed frequently to Decimomannu in Sardinia to temporarily purge ourselves of those bad TRA habits. While there, in addition to the 527AS F-5Es, our DACT opponents were typically German F-4Fs or RAF Phantoms. In the case of the former, overland DACT back in Germany with German F-4Fs was not permitted owing to German MoD regulations, so to fly DACT against the Luftwaffe we needed to be in the North Sea training areas, or down in Decimomannu. We did lock horns with them constantly in the Low Fly Areas as part of the AAFCE Target of Opportunity Training Programme. This permitted ‘tactical intercepts’ of other military aircraft operating in VFR airspace, restricted to 180º of turn, and no afterburner use. At ‘Deci’ we would normally fly 2v4s with the F-4Fs. At first they were equipped only with older generation rear aspect Sidewinders. This was a tough fight for the Phantoms, who would typically employ some type of lead-around, decoy tactics – or even

The McDonnell Douglas F-15A Eagle, the replacement for the F-4 Phantom in many units.The tremendous power, manoeuvrability and advanced weapons systems made the F-15 an unfair opponent for any earlier generation fighter. USAF

wide area pincer attacks in an effort to survive until the merge. Owing to the limitations of the simulation, they had to assume radar missiles were in flight if they were targeted within range of a Sparrow. If done too late, the defensive manoeuvre against a Sparrow only increased the risk and exposure to a Sidewinder shot. So a typical engagement would involve a pair of targeted Phantoms dragging out of the fight at maximum Sparrow range, the Eagles quickly breaking lock and retargeting the remaining two, who

would themselves then exit the fight while the first two turned back in – lather, rinse, and repeat... until closing to Sidewinder range or hitting the limits of the airspace. The F-4Fs also were handicapped by the smoke produced by the early J79 engines. They needed to employ some throttle management tricks to not immediately give away their position once they approached the merge. The worst smoke was produced at military (maximum non-afterburning) power. To reduce the smoke, minimum reheat was much better. However, continuously flying ➤

The F-4D was fitted with the AN/APQ-100, later upgraded, as here, to the AN/APG-109 during the type’s service life.This is an aircraft of the 170th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 183rd Tactical Fighter Group, Illinois Air National Guard in June 1982. USAF

R

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 99

An early Luftwaffe McDonnell Douglas RF-4E from Aufklärungsgeschwader 51 with two McDonnell Douglas F-15A Eagles of the 58th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 33rd Tactical Fighter Wing. USAF

around in reheat had a devastating effect on endurance, and under some conditions, it was simply too much power. Sometimes the compromise was to fly with one engine in reheat, and the other in flight idle. The close-in effectiveness of the F-4F improved dramatically after being equipped with the AIM-9L, but crews still needed to deal with the other limitations of the platform. The F-4F also had no radar missiles until the KWS refit and purchase of the AIM-120. KWS (Kampfwertsteigerung, known as ICE – Improved Combat Effectiveness – in English) Phantoms entered service in 1992. The DACT missions against RAF Phantoms in Deci were typically 2v2s. The AWG-11 and AWG-12 fire control systems of the RAF Phantoms had a doppler mode which allowed look-down, shoot-down employment of the Skyflash. The Skyflash was a semiactive radar-guided missile which resembled a

The M61 20mm cannon as fitted to the USAF F-4Es and Luftwaffe F-4Fs, the only Phantoms to carry an internal gun. Luigino Caliaro 100 IN THE SHADOW OF THE PHANTOM

Sparrow, was loaded on the same Sparrow ejector launchers, and had a range similar to the Eagle’s AIM-7F. However, range information at launch needed to be verified either through previous use of pulse mode or offboard sources such as ground radar. These were very good exercises in BVR targeting, BVR defence, and maximising f-pole (the distance between the shooting fighter and the target at missile impact)... and they could have been even better exercises if not for the limitations of the simulation. Ideally, both sides were attempting to: target different aircraft BVR while complicating the same task for the opponents, fire missiles at maximum useful range, increase f-pole after shooting (the distance between fighter and target at missile impact), evaluate the tactical situation and either press to the merge, or defend against the opponents’ missiles. With everyone attempting to do these things at approximately the same time, an error in sorting or a delay in achieving a single-target track radar lock could well determine the outcome of the BVR battle. Unfortunately, the RAF Phantoms had neither dynamic missile fly-out computations, nor any recording equipment that could capture the cockpit/radar presentations to validate Skyflash missile shots, so they normally depended entirely on the Air Combat Manoeuvring Instrumentation (ACMI) simulations. This was often a source of some frustration and disagreement. When manually inputting a Sparrow or Skyflash shot, the ACMI automatically assumed the targeted aircraft to be the one closest to the shooter’s boresight. This was as often in error as it was true. Moreover, although the ACMI would dump a missile if the shooting fighter exceeded gimbal limits of the radar (typically 60°), it had no way of determining whether the shooter actually maintained a good radar lock throughout the time of flight of the missile: This is certainly not

automatic. A defending fighter could perform a great evasive manoeuvre and break the radar lock of the shooter, and still be ‘killed’ by the ACMI. Or, a fighter could be ‘killed’ when pressing to the merge untargeted, because unbeknownst to him, the ACMI sent a missile his way because he was originally closest to a shooter’s boresight. This tempted participants to consider a lot of unsound ‘gamesmanship’ tactics, such as boresighting a target when shooting to ensure the ACMI targeted the correct aircraft. Indeed, there were many examples and stories of ACMI antics, idiosyncrasies, or even abuses involving attempts to ‘win’ the BVR battle which go far beyond the scope of this article. Suffice it to say that at some point, it was necessary to refocus everyone on good tactics and good execution, and less on the characteristics of the ACMI. These DACT missions with Phantoms and Eagles at Deci revolved mostly around the BVR battle as described above, despite the aforementioned difficulties with the simulation. To my memory, there were not a lot of slow-speed dogfights in those engagements. Everyone took advantage of the relatively unrestricted airspace of Area D40 off the west coast of Sardinia to keep, for the most part, a tactically sound speed and altitude. Even post-merge manoeuvring resulted more in quick point-and-shoot Sidewinder shots rather than prolonged gun battles. The Eagles did have a tendency to start the engagements from high altitude, because of the positive effect on missile range shooting down – and the corresponding negative effect on the opponents’ missiles shooting up.

IN THE REAR COCKPIT (RCP)

My first actual flight in the Phantom was while participating in a major NATO exercise in Aalborg, Denmark (these were F-4Es from the 52FW in Spangdahlem). The mission was a 2v2 DACT and the opponents were Danish F-104s, with me in the back of the number 2

The Luftwaffe F-4Fs were fitted with the AN/APG-65 radar as shown here and could carry the Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. Luigino Caliaro

“AIMPOINT AND AIRSPEED TAKE ON NEW MEANING IN THIS AIRCRAFT,” HE SAID.“ONCE THE RHINO IS COMING DOWN FINAL IT TAKES LOTS OF POWER AND A PROLONGED FLIGHT CONTROL INPUT TO CHANGE ANYTHING.” aircraft. My front seater gave me plenty of stick time so I could gain an appreciation for the handling characteristics of the Phantom. It’s good that I had the chance to do a lot of the flying, because I wasn’t much use on the radar. Try as I might, I wasn’t seeing anything with it. The front seater said the system was on the blink, and that’s why we were in that particular airframe, but he may have just said that to make me feel better. Flying against the F-104s was the strangest sort of déjà vu: We were turning circles inside them much the way I was turning circles inside the Phantoms while flying the Eagle. We were peppering them with missiles much the same way I dished them out in the Eagle. I flew some engagements from the back and was frustrated on a few occasions with the throttles, as reheat cannot be initiated from the back seat: The front seater must overcome the detent by a slight lateral movement of the throttles. However, once selected, reheat could be modulated and deselected from the back. Back at Aalborg, I flew the first approach and the front seater gave me some visual reference tips. Configured and about two miles on final, I remarked that it didn’t seem as though I had much control over the flight path of the aircraft: It was coming down final and that was that! The front seater said: “I have the aircraft,” took control, and seconds later, “Watch this!” He essentially stirred the stick around in all directions, with large movements. Completely unimpressed by the stick stirring, the aircraft wobbled a little, but continued down the glide path with its aimpoint at the end of the runway seemingly completely unaffected. “Aimpoint and airspeed take on a whole new meaning in this aircraft,” he said. “Once the Rhino is coming down final it takes lots of power and a prolonged flight control input to change anything.” “I’ll say!” I wouldn’t dare try that in an Eagle. That was the first of many. A glance into ➤

‘We deployed frequently to Decimomannu in Sardinia to temporarily purge ourselves of those bad TRA habits. While there, in addition to the 527AS F-5Es, our DACT opponents were typically German F-4Fs or RAF Phantoms.’ Here Luftwaffe F-4Fs of JG74 taxi out for another sortie at Decimomannu. Luigino Caliaro

The early versions of the J79 engine left easily seen smoke trails, as demonstrated by four Luftwaffe F-4Fs of JG71 at Decimomannu in Sardinia. Luigino Caliaro

my logbook reveals flights in the following variants: US F-4D and F-4E, RAF FGR.2, Luftwaffe F-4F, as well as the F-4F KWS. In my capacity as a NATO Tactical Evaluation pilot, I had several flights in KWS Phantoms as well as the upgraded simulator at Wittmundhaven. Having also flown in the CF-18 several times, I expected to have no difficulty with the Hughes APG-65 radar which was also fitted in the F-4F KWS. However, it was not as intuitive as I expected. The controls in the rear seat were, logically, more designed to be familiar to the Phantom back-seaters instead of single-seat pilots. Moreover, the same old display was used, instead of replacing it with an F-18 style MFD. Even after the KWS refit, F-4F crews still preferred the low altitude environment for a number of reasons. However, the APG-65 radar utilised some rather powerful side lobe clutter suppression techniques, which especially over land caused the detection range to be greatly reduced when operating at low altitude. Crews I talked to at first couldn’t believe that their ‘new’ radars were not giving them better detection range, even look up. Once this characteristic of the radar became better known, crews began embracing more medium-altitude tactics. As mentioned, I also had a lot of exposure to the RAF variants, and in my capacity as a Tac Eval pilot, I had some flights in the FGR.2. In the case of the RAF Phantom, it was very much a flight in the aircraft, as opposed to flying the aircraft. The RAF versions had more in common with US Navy Phantoms in radar equipment, and also that the back seat was not equipped with flight controls. In those days, the unit would send up a 4ship with the Tac Eval chase pilot in the back seat of the No. 4 aircraft. It was understood that the chase pilot was not a qualified crew member, and that the overall effectiveness of the section was negatively impacted by his

‘The DACT missions against RAF Phantoms in Deci were typically 2v2s.The AWG-11 and AWG-12 fire control systems of the RAF Phantoms had a doppler mode which allowed look-down, shoot-down employment of the Skyflash missile.’This is a Phantom FGR 2 of 19 Squadron. Editor’s Collection

potential lack of skill with the RCP equipment. This was just somehow taken into consideration. In later years, that changed, and other arrangements were made for observing the evaluated flights. There were some interesting differences in the British Phantoms when compared to the others I was familiar with. I mentioned the lack of flight controls in the back, which was probably just as well: The back seater had enough to do. In my opinion, finding targets and getting missiles in the air required a great deal of hands-on radar manipulation – very little was automatic. Rolls-Royce Spey turbofan engines replaced the standard General Electric J79 turbojets. This gave the British variants somewhat better low altitude performance, but the high altitude efficiency suffered; partly owing to the structural changes needed to accommodate the Spey engines, including larger intakes with more drag, but also less area ruling on the fuselage. The Marconi radar warning receiver was unique to the British marques but performed similarly to the others. The radio equipment was also different, but not an improvement in

During the period Mixed Force Fighter Operations were in vogue, F-4s and F-16s frequently flew as teams. Here, in a later formation of the same types as Wild Weasel aircraft, an F-16C and F4G 52nd Tactical Fighter Wing at Spangdahlem Air Base fly past Hohenzollern castle in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany. USAF 102 IN THE SHADOW OF THE PHANTOM

my book: The radio channels were not programmable by the crew in the cockpit, it was a ground maintenance function. The naval FG.1 even had some interesting differences when compared to US Navy Phantoms: stronger undercarriage and a highly extendable nose oleo, both in order to better master the launch and recovery conditions on the smaller Royal Navy carriers.

FLYING WITH: MFFO

AAFCE’s (later AIRCENT) Tactical Leadership Programme (TLP), where I had the pleasure of instructing for three years, became a laboratory of sorts for Mixed Force Fighter Operations (MFFO). During the courses, participants were put in situations that required them to work as teams with dissimilar aircraft, utilise the relative strengths of each, and keep the plan simple enough to be executed even in the face of communication difficulties. It was a natural development then that TLP was called upon by the headquarters staff to take the lead in codifying MFFO tactics and procedures for wider application around Allied Command Europe, which we did. The emphasis was on attacking the ‘gorilla’ or large formation of enemy attackers spread out over many miles. As a planning factor it was assumed the enemy formation would be at low altitude to shrink weapons envelopes, and relatively high speed commensurate with range and fuel. Early MFFO aimed to pair up less capable fighters with pulse-doppler radar equipped BVR shooters. Two Central Region aircraft types in particular were the focus of this effort to improve air defence effectiveness – the F-4F and Belgian F-16A. The latter was owing to the fact that the Belgian F-16s were not equipped with the ALR-69 Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) at manufacture, and ended up spending the first several years without any RWR at all, which was a severe handicap in a potential radar missile environment. In the case of the F-4F, they were dependent on either ground radars or pulse-doppler radar equipped fighters to bring them to an advantageous attack position. Lacking these, they would typically set up a low altitude visual patrol, perpendicular to the threat axis, allowing both crew members to search out the side of the canopy where

vision was less restricted. Pairing up Eagles and Phantoms helped both: Eagles were loath to turn in on such gorillas; this was fraught with danger. The idea was to shoot as many front-aspect missiles as possible in quick succession and not turn until it was absolutely certain the end of the formation had been reached. Everyone’s eyes seemed to focus on the Eagles in such an engagement; no one saw the Phantoms behind at low altitude, as unlikely as that may sound. Along the way, enemy aircraft could be expected to pull up and turn if they thought they had a chance to engage the Eagles. In so doing, they made themselves easy targets for the trailing Phantoms. The MFFO era was not that long lived. Shortly thereafter, Ramstein F-4s were replaced by AIM-120 equipped F-16s (and after that, with C-130s!), the RAFG Phantoms left the Central Region and were not replaced, the F-4Fs were upgraded to the KWS standard, the Belgian F-16s were fitted with RWR, and the pressing need for MFFO dissolved. However, the tactics developed were often used as a baseline for any dissimilar formations in an air defence setting. The Lockheed F-104 Starfighter was also a common sight in the European skies, being operated by many NATO air forces during the 1980s. Italian Air Force

DIMINISHING NUMBERS

On my arrival in 1981, the German skies were filled with Ginas (Fiat G-91), Zippers (Lockheed F-104), and Phantoms... especially Phantoms. The Eagle was a newcomer. By the time I left Europe in 2008, only a few of the F15 Eagles of my youth were still around, albeit with improved avionics. The Ginas and Zippers were long gone, and the Phantoms – which once dominated the skies – were rarely seen. After the early-90s, the Luftwaffe was the only Phantom operator remaining north of the Alps, and the KWS Phantoms, in everdecreasing numbers, were being pooled at Wittmundhaven on the German North Sea coast. Now, those are also all gone. I personally miss the sight and sound of them, and am grateful to have had the opportunity to fly against, in, and with them. ■ Words: Robert I ‘Scout’ Winebrenner

‘On my arrival in 1981, the German skies were filled with ‘Ginas’, Fiat G-91s,’ such as this one of the Italian Air Force. Alenia Aermacchi

The Phantoms were also common in central Europe in the early 1980s, in service with the RAF, Luftwaffe and USAF to name but a few. Within a decade only those of the Luftwaffe were left, the G.91s and F-104s having been retired completely. Luigino Caliaro

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 103

Looping the RF-4E, 15 NM east of Bremgarten AB in TRW 51’s gymnasium, better known as TRA 206b, over the Black Forest.The aircraft carries two inboard armament pylons and a single 600 US gal centreline tank.This one is the so-called HPC (High Performance Centreline) tank, developed for the F-15 and cleared for aircraft G-limits when empty, a vast improvement over the former tank that was limited to 3G with fuel in it and 5G empty. Author’s collection

Optimising the G-less turn...

...and other assorted recollections from 15 years of Photo Phantom Phlying in the Luftwaffe The RF-4E as flown since 1971 by the Luftwaffe was arguably the fastest version of all serial built F-4s. The combination of the long, slim Recce nose, the ‘hard wing’ without slats, the non slatted stabilator and the -17 variant of GE’s J-79 engine made for the lowest possible drag factor versus the most available power.

T

he aircraft was extremely fast, both in acceleration and in top speed. Mach 2.35 was a realistic top speed value on functional check flights before the GAF Air Materials Office issued a restriction to Mach 1.9 due to some intake ramp control computer issues. Well, we did not carry a flight data recorder.

Even with three tanks the RF-4E presents a slick appearance. Constance Redgrave

104 ...

Turn capability was a different story, but looking at what the aircraft had once been designed for, namely a Mach 2 fleet interceptor operating from carriers, it did what the customer had asked for. Flight controls were somewhat unusual. There were ailerons that would only go downwards (30°), spoilers ahead of the ailerons that would go upwards (45°), a huge

full flying anhedral stabilator that rested on the ground at –8º and a small rudder at the end of a fin that was not high enough to provide directional control over the full range of what the wing could do but it made the aircraft fit into the deck hangars of the US Navy’s Second World War vintage aircraft carriers without the expense and the weight of a folding fin. There were folding outer wing panels on all Luftwaffe Phantoms without hydraulic drive. And there was a three axis damper system. A well functioning pitch and yaw damper were absolutely essential to control the aircraft throughout its envelope. Even with the pitch damper engaged the aircraft was quite prone to pilot induced oscillations in the high subsonic speed regime (Mach 0.9 plus), especially at low altitude. This arrangement was responsible for the pronounced ‘adverse yaw due to dihedral’ effect of all hard wing F-4s. Without anything to stabilize the laminar airflow over those rather small spoilers, only the downwards deflecting aileron remained effective in the medium and high angle of attack (or ‘Alpha’ in British terms) range.

The notorious max performance level turn, the diameter was about 1000m.This photo was taken during the final display on September 17, 1992.‘Last Call Immelmann’ was held to mark the sad occasion of the impending disbandment of AG 51 ‘Immelmann’. Operational flying ceased on December 22, 1992, and Bremgarten AB was closed on March 31, 1993. Author’s collection

This being a rather large surface, its drag effect outweighed its rolling input, thus making the aircraft yaw, exposing more wing area of the opposite wing to the airflow. So, that wing developed more lift, making the aircraft roll, but opposite to the desired direction. The cure to this was to keep the stick centred from 15 units AoA on upwards and effect rolling through the dihedral effect by using rudder. When really max-performing, this was nothing for the uncoordinated or the hamfisted, so I tip my hat to people like Robin Olds, Steve Ritchie, Randy Cunningham and the many others who found themselves dog fighting this lead sled against much lighter aircraft and would still win! The flap system was special, too. It was not supposed to be a manoeuvring flap system, like the later slats, but strictly to provide maximum lift for take off and landing. ‘Flaps half’ meant take off, with the outer two thirds of the leading edge moving 55° down and the trailing edge flaps that made the inner third of the wing down to 30°. ‘Flaps full down’ (leading edge, no change, trailing edge, 60° down) was used for landing, reducing approach speed by 12 knots over the take off setting. There were no drooped ailerons like on the FG.1 or some US Navy versions. Hot air from the engines’ 17th compressor stage was taken and blown through slots in the flap gap to stabilize laminar airflow over the wing (and, at 60° down, the trailing edge flap). The system was called BLC (Boundary Layer Control). The side effect was that with flaps down lift was also to some extend affected by engine RPM. A very neat feature was the aural AoA indication to the crew. Level flight was somewhere around eight units. These units had been chosen arbitrarily and were not related to geometrical degrees. Starting at 15 units where the medium AoA range began, a pulsed low frequency tone was generated.

Increasing AoA further, that pulse would become faster and finally be steady at 19.2 units, where ‘on speed’ or optimum lift was reached. From 20.3 units onwards, the signal became more and more high pitched and at 22.3 units the left rudder pedal began to shake as the ultimate warning that breakdown of directional stability could occur soon. In the Luftwaffe RF-4Es, this system was always active, regardless of landing gear position or other parameters. The reconnaissance crew’s motto had to be ‘alone, unarmed and unafraid’, as most sorties were carried out by single aircraft which did not carry any armament. Only very late in the 1980s were RF-4Cs of the Idaho Air National Guard in Boise modified to carry AIM 9L Sidewinders for self defence. The discussion of the pros and cons of self defence armament on recce aircraft could fill an entire book. So, we were down to speed and range in our favour, and that was where the hard wing was best. Saving your fuel for a rainy day by ➤

The pilot’s cockpit of an RF-4E Phantom, note the lack of a gunsight or head up display. Luigino Caliaro

For comparison, the pilot’s cockpit of a Luftwaffe F-4F with the head up display above the main instrument panel. Luigino Caliaro

The sheer power of a pair of J79s captured in an unusual time lapse image of a Phantom night departure. Luigino Caliaro

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 105

avoiding unnecessary manoeuvring, while at the same time keeping your energy level high was essential. With three external tanks, she would easily make 620 knots at low level without afterburner and taking a three-tanker through the sound barrier at 40,000 feet was no problem either. This was especially important when flying high altitude SLAR (Side Looking Airborne Radar) missions. Some of these missions were carried out very close to the Inner German Border and they had a certain importance. Their nickname was ‘SESAM’ and they were carried out in pairs, partly for mutual support and partly for technical redundancy if an aircraft went tech. As the SLAR system’s technical parameters dictated a minimum ground speed of 480 knots, it was necessary to go supersonic at times when high altitude winds were adverse, which was not a problem. Contrarily, I was tasked in my late days to fly a slatted F-4F three-tanker at 40,000ft to provide a target for supersonic intercepts. I had to give in to the fact that 0.98 Mach, banging on the sonic wall while pushing a huge transonic bow wave, was the best that this machine would do without descending, which was prohibited over land. Low level fuel flow of the RF-4E was about 10% lower than on the F-4F. Low level flying was the doctrine of the day, as we were facing the most formidable array of surface-to-air weaponry that the world has ever seen. We spent about 80% of our training at low level or in related medium-low-medium flight profiles, and the aircraft sensors were fitted to suit.

ABOVE: The badge of Aufklärungsgeschwader 51 ‘Immelmann’. AG 51 Association

Low and very, very fast, an AG 51 RF-4E in its natural environment. Luftwaffe

The legal limit over Germany in those days was 500ft AGL, but we could get down to 250ft at Beja in Portugal and just 100ft at Goose Bay in Canada on the Wing’s annual training deployments. Usually, we would carry a KS-87 camera in the forward oblique station, another KS-87 left oblique, a KA-56 low altitude 180° panoramic camera in a vertical position and another KS-87 mounted vertically in the so-called high altitude station. Aft of the nose gear well was the infrared compartment, housing Honeywell’s formidable AAD-5V infrared linescanner. For SLAR missions, the rearmost KS-87 had to go and the station took the APD-11 SLAR imagery recorder. A right oblique KS-87 could be installed symmetrically to its left oblique companion, but that was more of an exception than a rule. As an alternative, a single side oblique KS-87 with a 12in or even 18in focal length objective could be installed at 5°, 10° or 15° depression angle for stand off work. This was done quite frequently in our sister wing TRW 52 in Leck when flying over the Baltic to look into our neighbour’s front

The Luftwaffe’s F-4F fighter version was fitted with the leading edge manoeuvring slats on the outer wings, making them slower but more agile than the RF-4Es. Luigino Caliaro

106 OPTIMISING THE G-LESS TURN...

garden. So range and speed were there, and manoeuvring potential was adequate for the role. What more could we ask for from the machine! This made the recce community the subject of everlasting jokes from the fighter community as being the inventors of ‘the Gless turn’. We could also do something very different, as I will explain in what follows. In 1987, Lieutenant General Eberhard Eimler, then GAF Chief of Staff (Inspekteur der Luftwaffe) and Lt Gen Joerg Kuebart (then Commander GAFTAC, Kommandierender General Luftflottenkommando) gave orders that all relevant Luftwaffe types were to be displayed; “to the highest international standards by carefully selected designated aircrew”. Minimum display altitude was to be 100ft AGL upright and 500ft AGL during inverted parts of manoeuvring. I was lucky enough to be chosen for the job, together with Captain Willy Stadthaus as the designated WSO. Other units chosen were Jagdbombergeschwader (Fighter Bomber Wing) 31 ‘Boelcke’ from Noervenich for the Tornado, Jagdgeschwader (Fighter Wing) 71 ‘Richthofen’ from Wittmund for the F-4F Phantom and Jagdbombergeschwader (Fighter Bomber Wing) 43 from Oldenburg for the Alphajet. It was left to the units to develop a display

The effectiveness of properly gathered tactical reconnaissance cannot be overstated. Here, four RF-4Es are captured with the distinctive heat blooms behind them. A UAV or a computer cannot recognise the importance of or interpret an image like this, it takes trained eyes. AG 51 Association

the home of aufklärungsgeschwader (tactical Reconnaissance wing) 51 ‘Immelmann’, Bremgarten air Base. AG 51 Association

routine that stood up to the generals’ desires. In our case, we came up with a programme that lasted just under 13 minutes if all manoeuvres were flown. It was left to the crew’s discretion to apply adjustments if shorter playtime was allocated or local circumstances would dictate a change. Quite a trusting approach, I must say. The aircraft were flown completely clean, i.e. no external tanks. During the 1987 season we would still carry the inboard armament pylons, but for 1988 these were removed as well. There was enough room in the camera nose and in the photoflash cartridge compartments for our luggage and spare drag chutes, so we did not need the pylons to carry travel pods. This was looked at with envy by our F-4F buddies. In their nose, they might have taken 639 tubes of toothpaste in lieu of

their ammo but not a single toothbrush! When displaying, we would normally partfuel the aircraft by taking advantage of the 5⁄6 lockout feature that all RF’s had, that means the two rear fuselage fuel cell were left empty. So we started engines with a total fuel load of 8500lb instead of 11,300lb. Take off fuel would be somewhere between 7000lb and 7500lb, which made the old lady quite lively! The routine until take off was fairly standard, all checks as normal were carried out until runway line-up. When ferrying to the display location, we did an inverted flight check, though, to find out whether anything loose was in the cockpit and remove it before the actual display. Eventually, we decided to do a no flap take off. There was a warning in the pilot’s handbook about possible tail strikes when doing this, but

the aircraft was so lightweight that it would virtually jump from the ground leaving no chance to the stabilator to even come close to that. The advantage was a bit more power as no BLC air was taken away, less drag and as there were no pitch transients with flaps retracting it was easier to establish a stable pitch attitude approaching the first manoeuvre. Take off speed was increased by 12 knots but that didn’t matter at all. So here we go: Pre take off checks complete, roll damper not engaged to improve roll response, set altimeters to 0 and compare the ‘aircraft QFE’ to be within reasonable tolerance. Landing light on. Engine run up, 85% RPM, all systems check good, select full afterburner and release brakes, go full aft stick for take off. ➤

Left and BeLow: two views of aG.51Rf-4e’s operating from their home base at Bremgarten.the use of the drag chute was almost mandatory for Phantoms particularly on shorter runways as the high approach speed and weight of the aircraft took a lot of stopping. note the position of the leading and trailing edge flaps as described by the author. Axel Grossmann

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 107

Three views of the ‘Last Call’ colour scheme applied to an AG 51 RF4E in 1992 prior to the unit being disbanded on March 17, 1993. AG 51 Association

Acceleration is brisk, take off speed of 162 KIAS is reached within 12-14 seconds, lift off occurs after about 1500ft of ground roll. Compare that the next time you find yourself on board with Mr O’Leary’s outfit or some other flying guest house! With the stabilator becoming effective, establish 13-14° nose up, retract the gear immediately when airborne and accelerate. Passing 220 KIAS, feel the light kick in the rudder pedals when the artificial feel force switches from low to high gradient and start a left-hand aileron roll. As the roll axis and the flight vector of the F-4 don’t have much in common, especially at slow speed, this makes a perfect manoeuvre to level off at 500ft above ground. Continue accelerating to 400 KIAS and terminate afterburner. Enter the first manoeuvre that we called the ‘Brille’ (‘glasses’) as its plan view resembled a pair of goggles by performing a level turn away from the crowd line, controlling airspeed by keeping the AoA between 14 to 16 units with the power stable in Military (max dry power in British terms). After a three quarter turn, perform a roll underneath and reverse turn direction for a level belly up turn for the spectators. After 180º, perform another roll underneath to perform a three quarter turn back to the runway.

This sounds rather boring, but those underneath rolls, or Derry turns in proper terms, could – and they have – end up in disaster. Said difference between the roll axis and the flight vector could send you to be a smoking hole in the ground if the manoeuvre was started with a downward vector, i.e. sink rate already established. Watching all these vital parameters was the WSO’s job, and Willy with his eternal Gtolerance was the perfect team mate. Gate altitude was 500ft AGL throughout the manoeuvre. Established on the display axis again, reduce power to approximately 90% to maintain 380 to 400 KIAS and roll inverted. Perform an inverted pass along the runway at 500ft AGL and 380 to 400 KIAS. Optical reference for me was to put the canopy bow to the horizon. Willy would watch the rest. Reaching the runway end roll upright, select full afterburner and pull swiftly to ‘on speed AoA’ meaning 5-6G to enter a half Cuban Eight. Airspeed on top would be around 170 KIAS, height approximately 5500 to 6000ft. Coming inverted, pick up your visual references, check alignment and pull towards the runway centre. That established, perform 1½ aileron rolls, reduce power to idle and open the speed brakes. Pull out at 500ft AGL and turn away from crowd line to establish a landing pattern.

An AG 52 RF-4E, 35+62, is preserved in the Luftwaffenmuseum at Gatow in Berlin. Constance Redgrave 108 OPTIMISING THE G-LESS TURN...

Prepare slow flight demo by extending everything the aircraft has, i.e. landing gear, flaps full down, hook down, Cartridge ejector doors open, Ram Air Turbine out. Perform a rather aggressive turn to final but make sure to control airspeed so that a real slow flight at on speed AoA can be demonstrated at 300ft. Halfway down the runway, select full afterburner and turn away from the crowd line while simultaneously cleaning the aircraft up again. Be easy on the controls to minimize drag while accelerating for the next manoeuvre. Perform a High Yoyo type repositioning manoeuvre to come back to the display axis established at 500 feet and 420 KIAS to start a level on speed AoA turn in front of the spectators. This was quite a demanding manoeuvre to look good. 420 KIAS was about the ‘corner’ of the aircraft, that means the lowest speed at which the structurally permissible load of 8.5G could be attained. So it was an almost simultaneous roll to 90° of bank, select full afterburner and load up to on speed AoA. If there was only a slight aileron deflection left from the roll-in, the usual aerodynamic buffet would be accompanied by some mild wing rock and altitude control became difficult. Energy wash-off was massive, we lost about 100 KIAS during the turn. Accelerate along the runway and perform another High Yoyo type repositioning

AXEL GROSSMANN’S FLYING CV:

The AG 51 ‘Last Call’ RF-4E on final approach. Note the positions of the leading and trailing edge flaps as described by the author. AG 51 Association

manoeuvre back to the display axis. Play bank angle, power and back pressure to be established at 400 KIAS and 500ft over the runway threshold. Perform a four-point roll in two second segments. This was surprisingly easy. It was essential to get the nose up by 10º, then roll left to 90° of bank, apply full right rudder, adjust back pressure to keep straight along the runway. Let Willy count: “Einundzwanzig, zweiundzwanzig,” and roll further left to inverted, put the canopy bow to the horizon, “Einundzwanzig, zweiundzwanzig”, a slight push forward to kill any possible descend vector before rolling the next 90°, this time full left rudder, “Einundzwanzig, zweiundzwanzig” and roll upright again. Easy, huh? Depending on circumstances, the next manoeuvre after another High Yoyo could be a barrel roll, but most times we omitted that one. Instead, we used the High Yoyo to accelerate for the penultimate manoeuvre. Play bank angle, back pressure and power established over the runway threshold at 100 feet and 600 KIAS. At runway centre perform a 7G pull up to 90° and climb vertically. The Phantom’s excellent attitude indicator was a great help and we always managed to disappear in the blue yonder right above the airfield. Airspace and weather permitting, we would top out at 25,000 feet and 150 KIAS. Finally, we perform a descending spiral back to initial. Establish 300 KIAS at 500ft, pull up abeam of the spectators, perform a Derry turn to downwind, gear down, full flaps. Pull the drag chute entering ground effect so it’s fully deployed upon touch down. Do all routine checks, don’t get carried away from what you have been through in the past 15 minutes and taxi back safely. Engine shut down as normal. Well, this was a rapid tour d’horizon through the German Photo Phantom Phlyer´s community. Was it great? You bet it was! I didn’t want to miss a second of it! Phantoms Phorever! ■ Words: Lt Col Axel Grossmann, Luftwaffe (Retd)

■ Joined the Luftwaffe in 1973 ■ Flight screening in early 1976 on Piaggio P-149D ■ Undergraduate pilot training with USAF in Sheppard AFB,Texas on T-37 and T-38 from Oct 1976 to Nov 1977 ■ RF-4C RTU Course at Shaw AFB, South Carolina from Dec 1977 to May 1978 ■ RF-4E pilot with Aufklärungsgeschwader (Tactical Reconnaissance Wing) 51 ‘Immelmann’ at Bremgarten AB, Germany from June 1978 to Dec 1992 ■ RF-4E flight instructor (QFI) from 1982 to 1992, 2705 hours on type ■ Designated RF-4E Solo Display Pilot for 1987, 1988 and 1992 ■ 1993 crosstrained on F-4F, 105 hours on that type until 1995 ■ Retired on September 30, 1995

The last display team of AG 51, on the right, Lieutenant Colonel Axel Grossmann and Major Axel Weber on the occassion of their last ever display in the RF-4E at the “Last Call Immelmann” event on September 17, 1992. AG 51 Association

AG 52 flew the RF-4E at Leck and had their “Last Call” on August 26, 1993 with this colour scheme. Manfred Kohrs

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 109

An Egyptian F-4E is engaged in refuelling from a KC-10 Extender aircraft during the joint exercise Bright Star 1983. USAF

The

Phantom abroad

The other Rhino customers

T

he high performance and reliability of the Phantom attracted the attention of many air forces around the world. The relatively high cost of the aircraft and its advanced weapons systems limited the market to a degree, as did the inevitable restrictions on exporting such high technology into the international market. That said, the Phantom did end up operating all over the world with some surprising countries, and still does so today.

AustrAliA

McDonnell proposed an entirely unique model of the Phantom for the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) in 1963, the Model 98X, based on the F-4C airframe. The RAAF was operating the Mirage IIIOs at the time, powered by the SNECMA Atar 9 turbojet, so an Atar powered Phantom was proposed to offer a commonality of spares and maintenance. Estimates for the performance of the Atar powered F-4 were disappointing especially in range. The Australian Government was already considering the General Dynamics F-111C to replace the ageing Canberra B Mk 20 fleet as the strike aircraft had more than sufficient range to meet its requirements. However, delays to the F-111 programme meant that the first deliveries would not occur until 1974, leaving a four year gap in the

The use of the Phantom by the armed forces of the United States and United Kingdom has been covered earlier in this issue, as has the reconnaissance version in ser vice with the Luftwaffe. However, there were seven other F-4 customers as detailed here.

RAAF’s strike capability. To fill this, an agreement was reached on June 22, 1970, to loan 24 F-4E Phantoms from the USAF to equip two RAAF units in the interim, these being 1 and 6 Squadrons at Amberley RAAF Base near Brisbane. The first five F-4Es were delivered in September 1970, and became so popular with the RAAF crews that at one point threatened the F-111C order. The economics of the situation, particularly the tanker and other support the Phantoms would need to fulfil the RAAF mission, prohibited the permanent use of the type. Eleven of the Phantoms were returned during 1972, with the remainder going back to the US the following year after the first six RAAF F-111Cs were delivered in June 1973. Australian use of the Phantom may have been limited, but the aircraft built a popularity that remains to this day and is now included in the RAAF Museum at Point Cook, an F-4E placed between a Canberra and an F-111C.

Egypt

The Egyptian use of the Phantom came about after the breakdown in relations between Egypt and the former Soviet Union in the latter half of the 1970s. The interest of the Al Quwwat al Jawwiya il Misriya (Egyptian Air Force or EAF) in the Phantom had been established by its encounters with Israeli operated aircraft during the War of Attrition and the Yom Kippur War, where the performance of the Phantom as a fighter and a bomber had come as something of a shock to the nations opposing Israel. After the signing of the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty on March 29, 1979, Egypt found itself isolated, with neither the Soviet Union nor the other Arab nations willing to supply aircraft or weapons to the country. The last batch of MiG-21MFs and PFMs and the 36 MiG-23Bs that had been delivered in 1976 were beginning to suffer from a lack of spares and support, while Saudi Arabia cancelled the supply of 50 Northrop F-5Es that had been intended to bolster the Egyptian Air Force after its wartime losses. The US ➤

Two of the F-4Es used by the Royal Australian Air Force at RAAF Base Edinburgh in 1971. Chris Finney

Even though it was only in the RAAF for a short time, the F-4E made a lasting impression and is now featured in the RAAF Museum at Point Cook, appropriately between an F-111C and a Canberra B. Mk 20. RAAF McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 111

An Egyptian Air Force F-4E in formation with a 347th Tactical Fighter Wing F-4E during exercise Proud Phantom in 1980. USAF

was interested in acquiring the latest versions of the MiG-21 and 23 so brokered the ‘Peace Pharaoh’ agreement of September 1979, where 35 ex-USAF F-4E Phantoms would be supplied, partly in exchange for a number of Egyptian MiGs which they wanted for test and evaluation purposes. The F-4 E in Egyptian service was initially not a success, the aircraft being more complex than those previously operated so maintenance problems kept the majority on the ground. By 1982, the Government was considering selling some of its F-4Es to Turkey in order to purchase more F-16Cs and Ds. The Turkish Air Force was still operating the F-4E and 46 as the Egyptian acquisition of 220 F-16s had actually been built in Turkey under licence by TAI, so the deal made a great deal of financial sense. However, engineering training assistance from the US solved many of the EAF’s problems with the aircraft, a further seven F4Es being delivered to Egypt in 1988. Three F-4Es lost in training flights were replaced during the 1990s, and today 34 F-4Es remain in service with the units that have operated them from the beginning, the 76th and 88th Squadrons of the 222nd Fighter Wing based at Cairo West.

Germany

The German use of the RF-4E reconnaissance version of the Phantom after its initial order for 88 of the type in January 1969 has been covered elsewhere in this issue, as has the development of the F-4F to meet the Luftwaffe’s fighter and fighter bomber requirements. The 88 RF-4Es were used by AG.51 ‘Immelmann’ at Bremgarten and AG.52 at Leck between 1971 and 1993 and were subject to a number of upgrades to the

An ex-Luftwaffe RF-4E now in service with the 348th ‘Eyes’ Squadron of the Hellenic Air Force. Luigino Caliaro

reconnaissance equipment during their service lives, as well as having the ability to carry ground attack weapons restored to the airframes. With the withdrawal from service of the Luftwaffe’s RF-4Es, the fleet was disposed of to two other NATO nations, 32 going to Turkey and 29 to Greece. A total of 175 F-4Fs were ordered in 1971, being delivered between June 1973 and April 1976. Twelve dual control aircraft that were to form a training cadre at Sheppard AFB in the US were later converted to combat standard and flown to Germany, being replaced in the training role by 10 ex-USAF F-4Es. The F-4Fs were to equip two fighter wings, JG.71 ‘Richtofen’ at Wittmundhafen and JG.74 ‘Mölders’ at Neuburg, and two fighter bomber wings, JaboG.35 at Pferdsfeld and JaboG.36 at Rheine-Hopsten. JaboG.35 was later renamed JG.73 ‘Steinhoff’ and moved to Rostock Laage, where it flew the F-4F alongside the MiG-29, surely a unique unit in NATO’s aviation

A McDonnell Douglas F-4E Phantom II of the 338th ‘Ares’ Squadron of the 117th Wing of the Hellenic Air Force based at Andravida. Keith Draycott

112 the phantom abroad

history, until it began to re-equip as the Eurofighter Typhoon training wing in 2000. Likewise, JaboG.36 was renamed JG.72 ‘Westfalen’ in January 1991 and remained at Hopsten with the F-4F until it was disbanded in 2002. As already discussed, 110 of the F-4Fs were upgraded through the Improved Combat Efficiency (ICE) programme which began in 1983 with equipment trials, the first Phase 1 aircraft with improved avionics being delivered early in 1989 and the first Phase 2 aircraft with the AN/APG-65 radar and AIM-120 AMRAAM missile capability following in July of that year. These highly capable Phantoms were to remain in service until the last few were retired at Wittmundhafen on June 29, 2013, after 30 years of reliable and effective service.

Greece

The first Phantoms delivered to the Hellenic Air Force (HAF) were 38 F-4Es supplied under a US Military Assistance initiative called Peace Icarus in March 1974. The first unit to receive them was the 339th ‘Ajax’ Squadron (Mira) of the 117th Wing (Pterix) at Andravida, an air defence fighter and operational training unit, but were too late for use against the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in July that year. The following year, the 338th ‘Ares’ Squadron of the same Wing began to re-equip with F-4Es in the ground attack role. A further 18 F-4Es and six RF-4E reconnaissance

A pair of Luftwaffe F-4Fs from JG.74 ‘Mölders’ based at Neuburg. Luigino Caliaro

An F-4F of JG.71 ‘Richtofen’ usually based at Wittmundhafen gets airborne from Decimomannu in Sardinia during a joint exercise. Luigino Caliaro

Altogether 177 F-4Es were delivered to Iran, several are still in service today, this one being photographed in 2009. Shahram Sharifi

Phantoms were ordered, the fighters going to the 337th ‘Ghost’ Squadron in 1978 and the RF4Es to the 348th ‘Eyes’ Squadron in 1979, both units belonging to the 110 Wing at Larissa. An additional batch of 40 Phantoms was cancelled by the new socialist government of 1981. More Phantoms were supplied to the HAF in the early 1990s from two sources. After Greek support for the Allied forces during the first Gulf War, a total of 28 ex-Air National Guard F-4Es were supplied by the US beginning in 1991. Two years later, Germany supplied 29 of its RF-4Es as they were retired from the Luftwaffe, these aircraft going to bolster the reconnaissance capabilities of the 348th Squadron. Also in 1993, the HAF issued a requirement to upgrade its Phantoms, the contract being won by the German company DASA, now part of Airbus, in August 1997. The programme was similar to the ICE upgrade applied to Luftwaffe F-4Fs, the AN/APG-65 radar and AIM-120 AMRAAM capabilities being included, as well as new navigation systems, both GPS and Inertial, and a new Head Up Display. The upgrade was applied to 38 of the Greek Phantoms, which could also carry the Rafael LITENING target designation and navigation pod for use with laser guided bombs and air to ground missiles. Recently, the GBU-27 Paveway III was cleared for use with the upgraded F-4Es. These aircraft, known as the F-4E Peace

Icarus 2000 or Avionics Upgrade Programme (AUP) Phantoms are still in service today with the 338th and 339th Squadrons of the 117th Wing at Andravida, while 12 RF-4Es continue to fly with the 348th Squadron of the 110th Wing at Larissa.

Iran

The first Phantom order for the Imperial Iranian Air Force (IIAF) was placed in 1967 for 16 F-4Ds as part of the Shah of Iran’s drive to upgrade his armed forces. This was quickly followed by orders for 16 more F-4Ds, 208 F4Es and 32 RF-4Es. The first F-4Ds arrived in 1968, the RF-4Es in 1970 and the F-4Es in 1971, with deliveries continuing into the late 1970s. The IIAF equipped two squadrons with F-4Ds, eight with F-4Es and one with RF-4Es. Iranian F-4Ds deployed to Oman in 1975 to assist the Sultan in fighting the Dhofari rebels, during which ground attack sorties one aircraft was lost to ground fire. In 1976, the F-4Es were involved in a border dispute with Iraq, the AGM-65 Maverick armed aircraft defeating Iraqi ground forces. The Iranian Revolution of 1979 deposed the Shah, the last deliveries of 31 F4Es and 16 RF-4Es being embargoed by the US, as was the supply of spares and support. The new Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) was further weakened by nonsensical purges of personnel on political and religious grounds that left the huge fleet of 180

remaining Phantoms with very few qualified air or ground crew. In September 1980, being aware of the weakened state of his neighbour’s armed forces, Saddam Hussein launched the Iran-Iraq War. The tenacity and capabilities of the IRIAF were a surprise, but well-prepared air bases, hardened against attack, and a plentiful stockpile of spares meant that a large number of the IRIAF’s aircraft were still serviceable, particularly the Phantom fleet. The F-4Ds and Es not only intercepted Iraqi raids, but began a series of strategic and tactical air strikes too, culminating in battlefield strikes against armoured columns, halting the Iraqi advance within a few weeks of the war starting. However, by the end of the war, which ground on until 1988, the attrition of the conflict had reduced the Iranian F-4 fleet to fewer than 50 aircraft. In order to keep the F-4s flying, spares and indeed complete airframes were clandestinely acquired from around the world. The Iran-Contra Affair of 1985 saw the covert supply of spares and weapons from the US using Israel as an intermediary, but it is believed that surplus spares from European nations were also acquired. As well as these sources, Iranian engineers have proved to be extremely effective and inventive in adapting Russian and Chinese weapons technology into the F-4 fleet, as well as reverse engineering and producing supplies of spares to keep the aircraft flying. Several F-4Ds were updated with a look-down shoot-down radar system and other avionics upgrades and it is estimated that there are still 28 F-4Ds, Es and RF-4Es flying with the IRIAF today.

Israel

The first interest in the Phantom by Israel was expressed in 1965, but it was not until the ‘Peace Echo’ accord of January 1968 that the first 44 F-4Es and six RF-4Es were supplied to the Israeli Air Force (IAF). These were the first of 240 F-4E Phantoms, known appropriately as the Kurnass or Sledgehammer in the IAF, supplied between 1969 and 1976. Within six weeks of entering service on September 5, 1969, Israeli F-4Es were attacking SAM sites in Egypt in the continuing War of Attrition and were quickly to become the most numerous type in Israeli service. ➤ McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 113

One of the F-4Ds supplied to the Imperial Iranian Air Force seen here before delivery. Luigino Caliaro

A pair of F-4Es of the Israeli Air Force, note the fixed refuelling probe added by IAI that led directly into the US refuelling receptacle. IAF

Israeli Air Force 201 Squadron F-4E Phantom seen at Tel Nof on Independence Day 2013. Oren Rozen

They were used extensively in the Yom Kippur War of 1973 and escorted the raid on Entebbe airport in 1976 to free the hostages held in Uganda. Beginning in 1974, the F-4Es were steadily upgraded with both US and Israeli made systems, including an Elbit bombing computer and the ability to carry the Israeli Shafrir and Python air to air and Gabriel air to ground missiles. The TISEO passive identification system, Litton LW-33 inertial navigation system and combat slats on the outer wings were also fitted to the IAF’s F4Es. By the time of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and strikes against the Syrian SAM sites in the Bekaa Valley in 1982, the F-4E had begun to be replaced by the Kfir, F-15 and F16 in the fighter roles, but were still the most important ground attack aircraft in the IAF inventory, destroying many of the SAM sites with bombs and anti-radiation missiles. The F-4E fleet was also responsible for the IAF’s tactical nuclear capability throughout much of its career. The Kurnass 2000 upgrade of 1987 saw the aircraft skins replaced and several structural improvements made, as well as a new hydraulic system, wiring loom and additional fuel tanks added to the airframe. Avionics upgrades included a wide angle head up display, the Norden AN/APG-76 pulseDoppler radar, the Elbit ACE-3 mission computer, the ASX-1 TISEO, Rafael Popeye air

to surface missile capability and an improved hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) cockpit environment all added to the F-4Es. Interestingly, this upgrade programme was also to be used as the basis of the F-4E 2020 upgrade to aircraft of the Turkish Air Force. The 12 RF-4Es, known as Orev or Ravens in the IAF, were supplemented by three specially modified F-4Es, fitted with the 66in (1.68m) HIAC-1 Long Range Oblique Photography (LOROP) camera in place of the gun and radar in the nose. General Dynamics delivered the three aircraft between 1976 and 1977 to allow long range reconnaissance of neighbouring states without crossing their borders. These three aircraft were known as the F-4E(S). After 35 years of continuous front line service, the last F-4Es were retired by the IAF in 2004.

licence built examples. The first of six Hikotai (Squadrons), the 301st, began to re-equip with the F-4EJ in August 1972. As well as the fighter variant, Japan also purchased 14 RF-4EJs which began to equip the 501st Hikotai in November 1974. The F4EJs were upgraded in the early 1980s with a new avionics suite including the Westinghouse AN/APG-66J radar developed for the General Dynamics F-16, a new Litton inertial navigation system, a new J/APR-6 RHAW and finally a head up display replaced the earlier weapons’ aiming sight. The first of the 96 new aircraft, known as the F-4EJ(KAI), flew on July 17, 1984 and can carry the Mitsubishi ASM-1 and ASM2 anti-ship missiles in addition to the later versions of AIM-7 and AIM-9 air to air missiles. Four F-4EJs were also modified to become Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) training aircraft for the JASDF. As of the end of 2013, 78 F-4EJ, EF-4EJ and RF-4EJ Phantoms remain in service with the JASDF, but are steadily being replaced by the Mitsubishi F-2.

Japan

Japan was to build the majority of its F-4 fleet, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries signing a licence agreement with McDonnell Douglas in 1969, after the choice of the Phantom as the new fighter of the Japan Air Self Defence Force (JASDF) had been announced on November 1, 1968. The first F-4EJ, a variant of the F-4E with no refuelling or ground attack capabilities, first flew on January 14, 1971, the first two being delivered to Japan in July. Eleven more were assembled from kits in Japan, followed by 127

Republic of KoRea

The Republic of Korea Air Force (RoKAF) was first supplied with 18 ex-USAF F-4Ds in 1969 which was followed by a further 18 in 1972 and six more as attrition replacements over the next few years. The last batch of 24 F4Ds were received in 1988 and included the

Two Japanese Air Self Defence Force F4EJ(KAI)s from 8 Kokutai in the air defence scheme in 2002. US Navy

A CR.12 or RF-4C of the Ejército del Aire. Note the fixed refuelling probe leading back into the US refuelling receptacle, showing this is one of the upgraded aircraft. Luigino Caliaro 114 the phantom abroad

A Japanese Air Self Defence Force RF-4EJ of the 501st Hikotai. Toshiro Aoki

A pair of RF-4Cs, known as CR.12s in Spanish service, from 123 Squadron at Torrejόn. Note the lack of a probe on the leading aircraft. Luigino Caliaro

The Republic of Korea Air Force retired its last F-4Ds in June 2010. USAF

Pave Tack laser designation system to allow the use of laser guided bombs. Meanwhile, in 1977, the first of 37 new build F-4Es were delivered, followed in 1989 by the last of a batch of 76 ex-USAF aircraft. The same year 12 ex-USAF RF-4Cs were transferred to the RoKAF, meaning that Korea had three F-4D, five F-4E and an RF-4C reconnaissance squadron operational by the end of the year, a considerable force. The reconnaissance force was further supplemented by an additional 11 RF-4Cs delivered in the early 1990s, all of the RFs equipping the 131st Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron at Suwon Air Base. Like all the other F-4 operators, Korea’s Phantoms have undergone a series of avionics and systems upgrades, including improved electronic countermeasures capabilities and the ability to carry the Rafael Popeye air to surface missile. By the end of 2013, 82 F-4Es and RF4Cs were still listed as active with the RoKAF.

Spain

The Ejército del Aire (Spanish Air Force) was to be the only export customer for the F-4C Phantom when it received two batches of exUSAF aircraft in October 1971 and September 1972. These initial 36 aircraft were supplemented by four more in 1978 along with four RF-4C reconnaissance aircraft. Known as the C.12 in Spanish service, the F-4Cs were to be replaced by the EF-18 in April 1989, only seven of the 40 being lost in accidents in that time. The RF-4Cs, known as CR.12s, were flown by 123 Squadron at Torrejon, the initial four being bolstered by the arrival of eight more aircraft in 1989, all ex-Kentucky Air National Guard. The four original RF-4Cs were replaced in 1995 by six newer aircraft, again from ex-USAF stocks. The Spanish firm CASA was already overhauling European based

A starkly beautiful shot of a pair of Turkish Air Force F-4Es. Luigino Caliaro

USAF Phantoms at its Getafe factory, so was well placed to upgrade the CR.12s with new avionics and the Texas Instruments AN/APQ172 radar. These upgrades kept the CR.12 in service until the last was retired in 2002.

Turkey

One of the most prolific customers for the Phantom after Israel, Turkey was to acquire over 200 F-4s, beginning in August 1974 with an order for 72 F-4Es and eight RF-4Es. However, after 40 aircraft had been delivered, the order was suspended in response to the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. The first unit to equip with the F-4E was 161 Filo (Squadron) based at Konya, followed by 32 F-4Es being delivered to the 111 and 112 Filos based at Eskişehir. 113 Filo at the same base replaced its ageing RF-84Fs with the eight RF-4Es. In 1981, 15 more F-4Es were received, but unlike the initial order which were all new build aircraft, these were ex-USAF machines, going to equip 173 Filo at Erhaç-Malatya. To replace attrition losses, 15 more ex-USAF F-4Es were delivered in 1984, followed by 40 more aircraft in 1987, going to 131 and 132 Filo at Konya. After their assistance to NATO forces during the 1991 Gulf War, Turkey received an additional 40 F-4Es, these being delivered to 112 and 172 Filo. The US was not the only country to supply F-4s to Turkey. When Germany retired its RF-4E fleet, 32 of the aircraft were delivered to Turkey between 1992 and 1994, all going to 113 Filo at Eskişehir until 173 Filo passed the F-4Es on to 172 Filo, 173 becoming the second Turkish

reconnaissance unit with RF-4Es at this point. One of the 113 Filo RF-4Es was lost in an unfortunate incident on the Syrian border on June 22, 2012, when a Syrian anti-aircraft battery opened fire in error. The crew were killed in the incident which occurred during the internal fighting in Syria between the Bashar al-Assad regime and Syrian rebels. In 1995, Israeli Aircraft Industries won a contract to extensively upgrade 54 of the Turkish F-4E fleet along the lines of the Kurnass 2000 programme it had completed for the IAF. The first 26 aircraft were completed in Israel, the remainder in Turkey by TAI. Aside from structural strengthening, the airframes have their wiring, hydraulic and fuel lines replaced along with stronger fuel tanks. The avionics upgrade is extensive, and includes a wide angle head up display, advanced Elta EL/M-2032 multi-mode fire control radar and new navigation, computers and electronic warning and countermeasures equipment, all linked through a MIL-STD553D data bus. The range of weapons the F-4E can carry has been extended to include laser guided bombs, the AGM-88 HARM antiradiation missile and the Rafael Popeye air to surface missile. The modifications also include the ability to carry the Pave Spike and LITENING II laser designator and targeting pods. In this form the Turkish Phantoms are known as F-4E 2020 Terminators and are intended to remain in service until at least 2015. The first upgraded aircraft were delivered in January 2000 to 111 and 171 Filo. ■ Words: Tim Callaway

The F-4E has been upgraded to the F-4E 2020 Terminator standard by IAI for the Turkish Air Force and will remain in service beyond 2015. Luigino Caliaro

Inside the

Phantom C

onstance Redgrave had the opportunity to get up close and personal with two upgraded F-4Es of the Turkish Air Force at the ILA Berlin Air Show in May 2014. These were upgraded by Israeli Aircraft Industries to F-4E 2020 standard and are commonly known as the Terminator. In January 2013, on a visit to the Palm Springs Air Museum in California, she also had the opportunity to photograph its F-4S in detail, allowing us to show the major differences between the two variants. Aviation Classics would like to thank the air and ground crew from Turkey for their very kind assistance and patience in Berlin, and the Palm Springs Air Museum for access to its aircraft. ■ Words: Tim Callaway

Up close with a legend

The Phantom is a huge aircraft for a fighter, crammed with detail and unusual features. If we were to include all the various models and the differences between them it would comfortably fill the entire issue. Here we concentrate on two, the ultimate variants of the ground based and naval Phantoms, the upgraded F-4E and the F-4S. Arriving in fine style at the Berlin Air Show in 2014, the pair of Turkish Air Force F-4E 2020s are seen with their braking parachutes deployed.

REAR FUSELAGE,WINGS AND PYLONS

The tip of the arrestor hook with its latch gear in-beween two cooling exhaust vents in the rear fuselage.

Both sides of the special unit markings of the 111 ‘Panther’ Squadron of the 1st Tactical Air Force based at Eskisehir, along with the standard unit badge on the rudder of the second aircraft.

A side view of the arrestor hook and tailpipe of the port J79 engine.

Looking straight up the starboard tailpipe at the back of the engine and afterburner details.

The starboard and port outer pylons with their external fuel tank. Note the inner pylon with the twin missile rails in the starboard view and the inner leading edge slat and its actuators in the port.

The starboard and port outer wing sections showing the leading edge slats and outer pylons with their external fuel tanks.

The inner and centreline pylons with the additional missile rails on the port inner pylon and external tank on the centreline. Note the countermeasures containers on the rear of the inner pylons.

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 117

Looking up into the starboard and port semi-recessed missile bays on the forward fuselage. Note the short pylon for a reconnaissance or targeting pod in the port bay.

Views of the underside, front and down both engine air intakes. Note the gap between the splitter plate and the fuselage to remove boundary layer air, the myriad holes in the plate for the same reason and the adjustable ramp door inside the inlet to maintain a subsonic airflow to the engines regardless of aircraft speed.

THE UNDERCARRIAGE

Views around the nosewheel leg showing the hydraulics and steering mechanisms as well as details of the ancillary nose air intakes to cool the electronics bays and the nose mounted canon.

118 INSIDE THE PHANTOM

The main undercarriage leg with wheel, brake and hydraulic system details along with views up into the bay showing the doors and door retraction systems as well as the hydraulic and electrical lines running through the bay. Like the nosewheel leg, the red safety locks are in place on the retraction arm.

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 119

THE FRONT COCKPIT

The port side showing the undercarriage retraction lever and the throttles.

The multifunction display on the upper port side of the main instrument panel is part of the IAI 2020 upgrade and can display a wide range of sensor information.

The head up display.

The design of the F-4 control column was to become a classic, one of the first attempts and ‘hands on throttle and stick’ or HOTAS control systems.

An overview of the front cockpit. 120 INSIDE THE PHANTOM

The top of the front ejector seat and the canopy actuator jack. Note the rollers and locks on the inside edge of the canopy.

The lower port side of the main instrument panel with the weapons selection and arming panel.

The starboard side of the main instrument panel with the flight and engine instruments and the radar warning receiver display. The throttles on the port side of the cockpit also contain many control switches and selectors for the weapons, radar and other sensors.

The starboard side with the communications, lighting and emergency warning caption panel. Below the main panel and partly hidden by the control stick are the hydraulic and pneumatic system pressure gauges, rudder pedal adjustment crank and navigation system mode selector.

The transponder and avionics selector panel on the starboard side of the cockpit. McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 121

THE REAR COCKPIT

An overview of the rear cockpit showing the results of the IAI 2020 upgrade in the shape of the three multifunction displays and side selector panels.

The top of the rear ejection seat showing the rear canopy actuator.

The upper instrument panel to allow the aircraft to be flown from the rear seat as a full set of controls are supplied.

One of the two 111 Squadron F-4E 2020 Phantoms in Berlin with some of the crew who were extremely kind and helpful in acquiring these images. Constance says thank you!

The hand controller for the radar is on the starboard side panel, as is the back seat data input panel which replicates the front cockpit panel mounted under the HUD.

122 INSIDE THE PHANTOM

THE F-4S

A close-up of the forward fuselage showing the kill markings on the port splitter plate. The Palm Springs Air Museum’s immaculate F-4S Phantom. Note the shorter nose and lack of an internally mounted cannon.

A side view of the rear fuselage showing the arrestor hook, tailplane and tailpipes.

The nosewheel leg, extensible to increase the angle of attack for catapult takeoffs.

The inside face of the port airbrake in the extended position. The port main undercarriage leg, note the airbrake extended behind it.

The arrestor hook is a considerable piece of metal. Note the cooling air exhaust ducts on either side of the rear hook latch.

The inner and outer main wing leading edge slats in their extended positions.

Looking along the leading edge of the starboard tailplane showing the leading edge slat that was peculiar to the later versions of the Phantom.

The rear fuselage at the base of the fin showing the fuel dump nozzle and brake parachute housing.

The head of the arrestor hook, showing signs of repeated use, and the rear latch.

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 123

Survivors

Phantoms on display That the Phantom is an icon, and a popular one at that, can be gleaned from the following list. There are many aircraft still on display and lovingly preser ved all over the world, not just in countries that operated the F-4.

McDonnell F-4C, 63-7699, is preserved and on display at the Midland Air Museum, Coventry Airport, Warwickshire. Constance Redgrave

I

t seems no aviation museum is complete without a Phantom, or at least part of one, as the nose and cockpit sections make for popular exhibits at many locations, especially ones where the visitor can experience just what it was like to fly the beast. Some of the earliest Phantoms built are still with us, a testament to the solid engineering that went into creating the aircraft, a toughness and resilience that is the cornerstone of the Phantom legend. One of the joys of attending air displays is that it is still possible to see a Phantom fly, not just in Egypt, Greece, Japan, Korea and Turkey where they still operate, but across Europe where they are welcome visitors. Of course there are still those flying in the 124 SURVIVORS

US, the home of the Phantom. A number of the F-4Es converted to target drones have been painted in period colour schemes to allow them to attend displays as part of the USAF Heritage Flight and the Collings Foundation has an immaculate F-4D as part of its flying history collection, the aircraft based at Houston in Texas. I for one am glad the ‘Rhino’, the ‘Lead Sled’, the ‘Toom’, the ‘Smoking Thunder Hog’ has not gone from our skies, as there is something awe inspiring about the roar of a pair of General Electric J79s as they propel the ungainly elegant Phantom into the air. I have spent a long time looking at Phantoms, and I still cannot really describe one. It is an amazing combination of angular eccentricities and smooth streamlined grace

that just looks right. That’s the closest I can get to why this aircraft was and remains so emotive. I was standing on the tower balcony in Berlin when the two Turkish Air Force F-4E 2020s arrived, and had a grandstand view of every single person on that airfield stopping what they were doing, just to watch. Even among the latest technology gathered from around the world, the Phantom stopped everyone in their tracks. Now that’s an icon. As usual in compiling this list, we are aware that the aircraft do move to new homes or new owners, and sometimes it takes a while for the information to disseminate. If you know of any that have moved, or even better, new aircraft that do not yet appear here, then please let us know and we will publish the information in the updates section of our website. ➤

AUSTRALIA

69-7208 F-4E 67-0237 F-4E RAAF Museum, Melbourne

BELGIUM

68-0590/SW RF-4C Koninklijk Leger Museum / Musée Royal de l’Armée XV402 FGR.2 Didier Lafaut (nose section, stored), Izegem

CHILE

63-7683 F-4C Museo Aeronautico y del Espacio, Santiago

CZECH REPUBLIC

XT899 FGR.2 Aviation Museum, Kbely

CYPRUS

XV470 RAF Akrotiri

FGR.2

GERMANY

35+62 RF-4E 38+04 F-4F 38+34 F-4F Luftwaffe Museum, Gatow, Berlin 38+74 F-4F Neuburg Air Base Museum 67-0260/SP F-4E Deutsches Museum Flugwerft, Schleissheim 63-7423/1 F-4C 63-7446 F-4C Technik Museum, Speyer 63-7421/SA F-4C 63-7583 F-4C 68-0587/SW RF-4C Flugausstellung L.+ P. Junior, Hermeskeil XV489 FGR.2 Cockpit only, privately owned

GREECE

68-0481 F-4E Phantom Larisa Base Museum Unknown RF-4E Larisa Base Museum

One of three Phantoms at the Flying Leatherneck Aviation Museum at Miramar, California is this F-4S, 157246. Constance Redgrave

GUAM

1392 Andersen Air Force Base

F-4E

ITALY

64-0757/HF F-4C Parco Tematico & Museo dell’Aviazione, Rimini

ISRAEL

001 F-4E 2000 Kurnas Haifa Airport Museum 134, 189, F-4E Kurnas 171, 127, F-4E Kurnas 327, 333, F-4E Kurnas 122, 148, F-4E Kurnas 170, 208, F-4E Kurnas 297, 323, F-4E Kurnas 210, 223, F-4E Kurnas 225, 277 F-4E Kurnas 321, 156, F-4E Kurnas 317, 111, F-4E Kurnas 108, 124, F-4E Kurnas 261, 266, F-4E Kurnas 159, 295, F-4E Kurnas 328, 187 F-4E Kurnas 488, 485 RF-4E Kurnas 334 F-4E Super Kurnas 498 F-4E (S) Kurnas 614 F-4E 2000 Kurnas Israeli Air Force Museum, Hatzerim

JAPAN

57-8375/375 F-4EJ KAI Misawa Aviation & Science Museum, Aomori

REPUBLIC OF KOREA

40-934 F-4D Daejeon National Cemetery 80-355 F-4E KAI Aerospace Museum, Sacheon 50-786 F-4D 80-310 F-4E Republic of Korea Air Force Museum, Seongmu 40-948 F-4D Boramae Park 40-766 F-4C War Memorial Museum, Seoul

NETHERLANDS

1914 F-4C PS Aero, Baarlo 67-0275/CR F-4E Militaire Luchtvaart Museum, Soesterberg

NORWAY

67-0333/GA F-4E Norsk Luftfartsmuseum, Bodo XV399 FGR.2 Privately owned, Aust-Agder

SLOVAKIA

37+36 F-4F Muzeum Letectva, Kosice-Barca

SPAIN

CR12-42/12-51(65-0937) RF-4C C12-37/12-29(64-0820) F-4C Museo del Aire, Madrid C12-26/12-13(64-086165) F-4C Fundacion Parc Aeronautic de Catalunya, Sabadell

TURKEY

69-7503/1-503 RF-4E ODTU Bilim ve Teknoloji Muzesi 66-0361 F-4E (Cockpit only) 67-0230 F-4E 1/7503 RF-4E 69-7490 RF-4E Turkish Air Force Museum Etimesgut / Ankara 69-7465/1-7465 RF-4E Eskisehir Havacilik Parki ve Tayyare Muzesi 77/TC-KAH F-4E Turkish Air Force Museum Yesilkoy

UNITED KINGDOM

63-7414 F-4C Midland Air Museum (dismantled), Coventry Airport, Warwickshire 63-7699 F-4C Midland Air Museum, Coventry Airport, Warwickshire ‘65-777’ (actually 63-7419)F4C RAF Lakenheath , Suffolk 155848 F-4S National Museum of Flight, East Fortune, Scotland XT595 FG.1 Location and status unknown possibly scrapped XT596 FG.1 Fleet Air Arm Museum, RNAS Yeovilton, Somerset XT597 FG.1 Everett Aero, MoD Boscombe Down, Wiltshire XT852 FGR2 West Freugh, Dumfries and Galloway XT863 FG.1 Cliftongrade Ltd. (gate guard), Cowes, Isle of Wight XT864 FG.1 RAF Leuchars (gate guard), Fife, Scotland XT891 FGR.2 RAF Coningsby (gate guard), Lincolnshire XT903 FGR.2 RAF Museum Cosford (stored), Shropshire XT905 FGR.2 Bentwaters Cold War Museum, Suffolk

XT907 FGR.2 Defence Explosives Ordnance Disposal School, Chattenden, Kent XT914 FGR.2 Wattisham Heritage Museum, Wattisham Camp, Suffolk XV401 FGR.2 Everett Aero, MoD Boscombe Down, Wiltshire XV406 FGR.2 Solway Aviation Museum, Carlisle Airport, Cumbria XV408 FGR.2 Tangmere Military Aviation Museum,Tangmere, West Sussex XV409 FGR.2 RAF Mount Pleasant (nose, remainder scrapped Jan 2012), Falkland Islands XV411 FGR.2 Defence Fire Training and Development Centre (DFTDC), Manston, Kent XV415 FGR.2 RAF Boulmer (gate guard), Northumberland XV419 FGR.2 Terrington Aviation Collection, Terrington St. Clement, Norfolk XV424 FGR.2 RAF Museum, Hendon, Greater London XV426 FGR.2 Cockpit only, City of Norwich Aviation Museum, Horsham St. Faith, Norfolk XV460 FGR.2 Bentwaters Cold War Museum, Suffolk

AN URGENT APPEAL – SAVE ‘BLACK MIKE’ Two groups have joined forces to put together a bid to acquire and preserve for the nation Ex-Royal Navy & Royal Air Force McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom FGR.1 XV582 ‘Black Mike’. Please take a look at the following website: http://www.gofundme.com/saveblack-mike This is the official fundraising page of the British Phantom Aviation Group and the Save Black Mike Group.This is an urgent appeal and represents what in all probability is the last chance to preserve a live Phantom aircraft in the UK.They are a team of current and former

XV582 as she appears today at Leuchars in Fife.You can help preserve this superb example of a Rolls Royce powered UK Phantom. British Phantom Aviation Group

126 SURVIVORS

forces personnel with a huge amount of Phantom experience.Their aim is to acquire XV582 and to move the airframe from its current home at RAF Leuchars to Bruntingthorpe Airfield in Leicestershire.The ultimate aim of the group is to bring the airframe up to ground running condition. If you can help them keep a Rolls Royce powered Phantom running in the UK, please do.

XV467 FGR.2 ATC, Oban, Western Isles, Scotland XV474 FGR.2 Imperial War Museum, Duxford, Cambridgeshire XV490 FGR.2 Newark Air Museum, Winthorpe, Nottinghamshire XV497 FGR.2 Bentwaters Cold War Museum, Suffolk XV499 FGR.2 Air & Ground, Hixon Airfield Industrial Estate, Stafford, Staffordshire XV582 FG.1 Leuchars, Fife XV586 FG.1 RNAS Yeovilton (stored), Somerset XV581 FG.1 ATC Aberdeen Wing, Bridge of Don Barracks, Aberdeen, Grampian, Scotland XV582 FG.1 Leuchars, Fife XV586 FG.1 Leuchars, Fife XV591 FG.1 Cockpit only, RAF Museum Cosford, Shropshire ZE350 (ex-153768) F-4J(UK) Cockpit only, privately owned, Royal Tunbridge Wells ZE352 (ex-153783) F-4J(UK) Cockpit only, privately owned, Hooton Park, Merseyside 155529 (ex-ZE359) F-4J(UK) American Air Museum, IWM Duxford, Cambrideshire

The Phantom appeal badge. British Phantom Aviation Group

The beautifully restored nose and cockpit of Phantom FGR.2, XV426, is on display at the excellent City of Norwich Aviation Museum, Horsham St. Faith, Norfolk. Constance Redgrave

McDonnell F-4C, 63-7421, is on display at the Flugausstellung L.+ P. Junior, Hermeskeil, Germany. Joe Walsh

McDonnell F-4C 63-7446, is on display at the Technik Museum, Speyer, Germany. Joe Walsh

McDonnell RF-4E, 35+62, is on display with several other Phantoms at the Luftwaffen Museum, Gatow, Berlin. Joe Walsh

The Commemorative Air Force has a number of Phantoms, this is 680366,LC, an F-4E on display at its facility at the American Airpower Heritage Museum at Midland,Texas. Constance Redgrave

A rare prototype YF-4J, 151497, is resplendent in the desert sun at the Pima Air and Space Museum, near Tucson, Arizona.

Constance Redgrave

McDonnell QF-4S, 153851, is in immaculate condition inside and out at the Palm Springs Air Museum in California. Constance Redgrave

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 127

ZE360 (ex-155574) F-4J(UK) DFTDC, Manston Airport, Kent DB001 FGR.2 Newark Air Museum (simulator), Winthorpe, Nottinghamshire Unknown F-4J(UK) Yorkshire Flight Centre (simulator), Arkendale, Knaresborough,Yorkshire

USA

64-1049/BH F-4N Southern Museum of Flight Alabama 64-0838 F-4C N704NA BAe YAV-8B United States Space and Rocket Center Alabama 65-0660 F-4D Maxwell AFB Air ParkAlabama 63-7487 F-4C USS Alabama Battleship Memorial Park Alabama 153016/NE-211 F-4N Arizona Wing of the Commemorative Air Force Arizona 66-0384/ED NF-4E 65-0941/ED RF-4C Veterans Memorial Freedom Garden Arizona 68-0337 F-4E 68-0531 F-4E 68-0551 RF-4C Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) Arizona 64-0673 F-4C Pima Air and Space Museum Arizona 66-0329 NF-4E 151497 YF-4J Pima Air and Space Museum Arizona 148423 F-4B Nose only, Pacific Coast Air

Museum California 153879/210 F-4S USS Hornet Museum California 66-0289/6 F-4E Castle Air Museum California 66-7716/ED NF-4D Colonel Vernon P. Saxon Jr. Aerospace Museum,California Unknown F-4J Planes of Fame Air Museum Chino California 63-7646 F-4C Yanks Air Museum California 63-7407/ED NF-4C Air Force Flight Test Center Museum California 142260 F-4A San Diego Air and Space Museum Restoration Facility California 63-7693/FP F-4C 68-0382 F-4E 63-7746 RF-4C March Field Museum California 64-0706 F-4C Aerospace Museum of California 64-0741 F-4C Mojave Spaceport Legacy Park California 145310/AD-180 F-4A Wings and Rotors Air Museum California 65-0696 F-4D Joe Davies Heritage Airpark at Palmdale Plant 42 California 153851 QF-4S Palm Springs Air Museum California 156739 F-4J (Cockpit only) 155861 F-4S Nose only, Estrella Warbirds Museum California 157246 F-4S 151981/RF-06 RF-4B Flying Leatherneck Aviation Museum California

The March Field Museum in California boasts three Phantoms, this is F-4C 63-7693. Constance Redgrave

128 SURVIVORS

157267/NG-112 F-4S San Diego Air and Space Museum California 153030/NE-101 QF-4N 153880/NK-201 F-4S USS Midway Museum California 64-0827 F-4C California Army National Guard Museum California 153868/NF-203 F-4S Santa Maria Museum of Flight California 64-0823/FG F-4C Pacific Coast Air Museum California 63-7567/FJ-567 F-4C Jimmy Doolittle Air & Space Museum California 64-0912 F-4C American Veterans Memorial California 66-7463/OY F-4D United States Air Force Academy Colorado 66-0271 F-4E Wings Over the Rockies Aviation and Space Museum Colorado 63-0287 F-4C Peterson Air and Space Museum Colorado 66-0269/HS F-4D New England Air Museum Connecticut 65-0747 F-4D Kittinger Park, Orlando, Florida 64-0817/XC F-4C 67-0452 RF-4C USAF Armament Museum Florida 157349/RF-34 RF-4B 153915/NK-101 F-4N National Naval Aviation Museum Florida 155563/92 F-4J Valiant Air Command Warbirds

Museum Florida 63-7408/ED NF-4C Tyndall Air Park Florida 64-0815/GA F-4C Mighty Eighth Air Force Heritage Museum Georgia 63-7485/FG F-4D 66-7554/DO F-4D Museum of Aviation Georgia 152291/DB F-4N Hawaii Museum of Flight 69-0350 RF-4C (Cockpit only) Idaho Military History Museum Idaho 150444/NF-100 F-4N Prairie Aviation Museum Illinois 148412/IL F-4B Heritage in Flight Museum Illinois 62-12201/OO RF-4C Chanute Air Museum Illinois 65-0839 RF-4C Russell Military Museum Illinois 148407/EC-25 F-4B Classics Museum of Aviation Illinois 64-0844 F-4C Atterbury-Bakalar Museum Indiana 64-0783 F-4C Grissom Air Museum Indiana 66-7626/DO F-4D Indiana Military Museum Indiana 66-7746 F-4D Mid-America Air Museum Kanasa 66-0268/OY F-4D Combat Air Museum Kanasa 65-0801/OY F-4D Museum of the Kansas National Guard Kanasa 153904 F-4S Aviation Museum of Kentucky Kentucky 63-7556 F-4C Jackson Barracks Military Museum Louisiana

152986/NL-104 F-4N Wedell-Williams Memorial Aviation & Cypress Sawmill Museum Louisiana 148275 F-4A U.S. Naval Academy Museum Maryland 153071/SD-100 F-4J Patuxent River Naval Air Museum Maryland 64-0919 F-4C Glenn L. Martin Maryland Aviation Museum Maryland N749CF (65-0749) F-4D The Collings Foundation Massachusetts 63-7555 F-4C Yankee Air Museum Michigan 74-0658 F-4E Air Zoo Michigan 63-7534 F-4C Selfridge Military Air Museum Michigan 63-7482 F-4C 64-1061 RF-4C Minnesota Air Guard Museum Minnesota 64-0677 F-4C Cockpit only, Miracle of America Museum Montana 65-0903 RF-4C Strategic Air & Space Museum Nebraska 64-0806/WA F-4C Nellis AFB Freedom Park Nevada 151510/NF-100 F-4N Naval Air Station Fallon Air Park Nevada 148273/AB-200 F-4A Air Victory Museum New Jersey 66-0259/NJ F-4D National Guard Militia Museum of New Jersey New Jersey 72-1135/HO F-4F White Sands Missile Range Museum New Mexico

65-0626/HC F-4D Empire State Aeroscience Museum New York 152256/NE-101 F-4B 111768/BC-5 FH-1 Wings of Eagles Discovery Center New York 150628/NK-101 F-4N Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum New York 155872/DB-05 F-4S 158353/DB-06 F-4S (Cockpit only) Carolinas Aviation Museum North Carolina 157342/CY-00 RF-4B Havelock Tourist and Event Center North Carolina 148400/AD-110 F-4B Hickory Aviation Museum North Carolina 67478 F-4D Fargo Air Museum North Dakota 64-0972 F-4D North Dakota Air National Guard Collection North Dakota 40949 F-4C Bonanzaville - Eagles Air Museum North Dakota 155764/DB-02 F-4S MAPS Air Museum Ohio 61-0817/HM F-4D Charles B Hall AirparkOklahoma 63-7426 F-4 Stafford Air and Space Museum Oklahoma 63-7647 F-4C Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum Oregon 148252 F-4A 148371 F-4B Quonset Air Museum Rhode Island

153077/AC-101 F-4J Patriots Point Naval and Maritime Museum South Carolina 65-0796 F-4D Dyess Museum and Linear Air Park Texas NX109GU/ 235 F-4C Cavanaugh Flight Museum Texas 64-0712 F-4C Texas Military Forces Museum Texas 145315/WH F-4A 158366 F-4S USS Lexington Museum on the Bay Texas 64-0825/TH F-4C 153821/AJ-201 QF-4S Fort Worth Aviation Museum Texas 66-8812 F-4D Pate Museum of Transportation Texas 49-421 F-4B USAF Airman Heritage Museum Texas 64-1000/LV-01 RF-4C Lago Vista Airpower Museum Texas 68-0366/LC F-4E CAF - American Airpower Heritage Museum Texas 67-0384/HO F-4E Freedom Museum Texas 63-7431/SA F-4C Edward H. White II Memorial Museum Texas 63-7415 F-4C Texas Air Museum (Stinson Chapter) Texas 157293/AC-101 F-4S Texas Air Museum (Caprock Chapter) Texas 72-1490 F-4D Flying condition, Collings

Foundation, Houston Texas 63-7424/MO F-4C 64-0664 F-4C 66-8711 F-4D 68-0304 F-4E Hill Aerospace Museum Utah 65-0793/VT F-4D Vermont ANG Heritage Park Vermont 65-0712/VT F-4D Vermont Veterans Militia Museum Vermont 69-0372/ZZ RF-4C Air Power Park and Museum Virginia 67-0392/JJ F-4E Virginia Air & Space Center Virginia 148261 F-4A NAS Oceana Aviation Historical Park Virginia 157307/WT-03 F-4S National Air and Space Museum - Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center Virginia 63-7584 F-4C McChord Air Museum Washington 64-0776/AK F-4C The Museum of Flight Washington 63-7594 F-4C Wisconsin National Guard Museum Wisconsin

VIETNAM

153001 F-4B Wreckage on display, Air Force Museum, Hanoi Unknown F-4 Wreckage on display, Ho Chi Minh Museum, Hanoi List compiled and corrected by Tim Callaway, Michael France, Peter Greengrass and Constance Redgrave.

McDonnell F-4S 157307,WT-03, is beautifully displayed at the National Air and Space Museum’s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia. Joe Walsh

NEXT ISSUE

www.aviationclassics.co.uk

The Bell UH-1 Iroquois – the immortal Huey

ABOVE: A Bell UH-1 Iroquois of the Luftwaffe, seen at Ahlhorn in 1984. USAF

Issue

26

will be on sale from November 28

RIGHT: US Army Bell UH-1D helicopters airlift members of the 2nd Battalion, 14th Infantry Regiment from the Filhol Rubber Plantation area to a new staging area, during Operation Wahiawa, a search and destroy mission conducted by the 25th Infantry Division, north-east of Cu Chi, South Vietnam, 1966. US Army

For pre-ordering and subscription details call 01507 529529 or go online at www.aviationclassics.co.uk

“They heard the hum of our motors, They counted the rotors, And waited for us to arrive”

S

o wrote one of the great songwriters of the 20th century, Billy Joel, about the Vietnam War in his song Goodnight Saigon. The rotors in question were the thudding two bladed ones attached to an icon of that war, indeed of the 1960s, the Bell UH-1 Iroquois transport helicopter... known universally as the Huey. The chop-chop-chop sound of that huge, slow moving rotor became synonymous with helicopters in general, but especially with the operations of the US Army’s airborne cavalry in the Vietnam era. The design began with a US Army requirement for a medical evacuation and utility transport helicopter in 1952, but was to serve in roles far beyond these. From its first flight on October 20, 1956, the Huey was to become a troop transport, assault aircraft and armed attack helicopter as well as serving its originally intended roles... but this was just the start for the adaptable and flexible aircraft. It was the first turbine-powered helicopter to be produced in the US and was an unqualified success in both domestic and overseas sales, with more than 15,000 UH-1s being built, 7013 of which were used in the Vietnam War. The design was to change radically over its production life, being stretched to accommodate more troops or stretchers in the cabin as well as being fitted with a second engine to increase its load lifting capability and survivability in the case of an engine ‘out’. All four US services used the Huey. Other than the US Army, the USAF employed it to support missile sites and in special operations 130 aviationclassics.co.uk

missions, the US Navy used it as an attack gunship and the US Marine Corps in this role plus as an assault support helicopter. Altogether, the ubiquitous, single-engined Huey was to be used by 50 military operators worldwide, 35 of whom still use the aircraft today. The twin-engined version was almost as successful and long lived, with the US armed forces and 27 military customers around the globe, 24 of which still use the type. The military use of the helicopter was matched by the civilian success of the Model 204, 205, 212 and 412, many of which still fly regularly in a bewildering variety of roles around the world. Many companies offer significant upgrades to the helicopter in all its versions which will keep the Huey flying well into the 2020s and possibly as far as the 2030s. In creating the first US turbine helicopter, Bell also created a legend, an aircraft which, like the DC-3 or C-130, there is simply no replacement for. The change from two bladed to four bladed rotors may have given the Huey a very different sound, but the readily identifiable shape has changed surprisingly little over the five decades the Huey has been flying. This issue of Aviation Classics tells the whole story of this remarkable and ground breaking helicopter, and reveals much of the lesser known history of the type as well as introducing the latest variants on this much loved theme. ■ Words: Tim Callaway

save £12 subscribe

Today £5 That’s just

per issue

A McDonnell Douglas F-4F Phantom II of Jagdgeschwader 74 of the Luftwaffe based at Neuberg.This was one of two German fighter wings to operate the type, JG 71 being the other, along with two fighter bomber wings JaboG 35 and 36. Luigino Caliaro

Missed an issue?

As a subscriber you can purchase single issues for only £5. Call 01507 529529 and quote your subscriber number or visit

www.aviationclassics.co.uk for more details

Get four issues of Aviation Classics when you subscribe for just £20 a year (UK)

 01507 529529  www.classicmagazines.co.uk