I listened to a podcast, I can’t for the life of me remember which it was, but it was an navy pilot shot down in an F-4 over Vietnam, and he said that they did two week rotation, two weeks of air to air, and two weeks of air to ground before two weeks of air to air, so they did both missions in Vietnam.
I would love to hear more on this topic. Most other content creators seem to be focusing on the air to air use of the Phantom with technical switchology videos on air to ground, but not much on theory or strategy of how it would be employed. I love that you do do this.
Amazing video again, nice to see someone digging a bit deeper in the realistic side of things. I wonder if there is any chance for a video sometime discussing the real loadouts used, and the process of deciding what ordnance to load for which misson. On the F-4 as well as most other modules a wide wariety of weapons can be loaded. But there is little discussion about what and why was commonly used. I know a Pilot who flew in navy F-4s in Vietnam, and he tells that they almost allwas used MK82s, and it was a rarity if the got MK20s or Mk83s which they enjoyed using much more. It seems like most of the available weapons were almost never used in actual combat.
Your F-4E videos are really amazing stuff. Your entire channel is an absolutely wonderful source of great information and great content to watch, but your passion for the F-4 really shines. I appreciate all the work you are putting into it! Thank you again for all you do!
One thing no mentioned about the role of the F-4 was it's use as recon, and as it aged, it was used more and more as recon besides the Wild Weasel role. I know DCS doesn't have RF-4's so that is a moot subject.
But you could use the recording feature to make pictures. A human rio would help, but is not even neccecary. Pictures are then in your saved games folder and can be analyzed. Recon missions are entirely possible with the F-4!
@@Lorian667 That sound good! I will have to play with that. What I was referring to is what might be the F-4j version that was probably (not sure) the wild weasel version and most closely associated with the econ version.
The F-4 Phantom was first a Navy fighter jet designed to perform fleet defence with AA missiles. But since it was big enough , powerful with a good payload, it was adapted to perform many more missions. 😅
@@Sidekick65 Operation Priha (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Priha) during the War of Attrition "...118 sorties with F-4E against targets in theEgyptian heartland."
This has ended up being a very important video for me. You see, I'm a big fan of the F-15E. But that module is dead, the radar being broken by a date bug was too much. Anyway, I bought the F-4 because it is a Heatblur product, even though I'm not an air to air guy. But this video has showed me that the F-4 has the potential to replace the F-15E in terms of gameplay. I've never had thought of the Phantom as a low level, deep strike mission. But I was tinkering around with it and I realized it can fill that role perfectly. Of course, not with all the technological advantages that the Mudhen has, but it can be done. You showed it with laydown mode: a runway attack deep within enemy territory can be done with that mode. So, in summary, I'll use the F-4 as a replacement for the F-15E in my missions. All those Cold War and Desert Storm missions can be done with the F-4, by day and by night, and Jester can really help with them. Not reallistic, but hey, that's what DCS allows us to do: play with concepts. And the F-4 offers a lot of possibilities.
So interesting, thank you for helping inspire some mission ideas. I've been trying to figure out how best to play it and I think this describes it well
In Europe, even as late at 1989 the F-15 wasn't being fielded in numbers sufficient to fully replace the F-4, and one imagines that in 1980 there would have been substantial numbers of F-4's tasked with CAP, or even more likely, escort for AWACS, tankers, ECM platforms etc.
Excellent video, as always. Would love to get your take on Israeli and others use of the F-4 (particularly E-like variants, since that's what we've got). Keep up the great work!
Yes. You need to keep this up. My head is bubbling over with ideas for the Phantom and Kola map, but like you I’m trying to get the timeframe correct for maximum DCS aircraft integration. Also loving your history of bombing series On a side note. I do believe that the Navy hung bombs off their Phantoms. IIRC Cunningham and Driscoll had just dropped on a target in N Vietnam when their famous run in with “Col Tomb” happened
Another very good video and history lesson Ian. Our 104's had the similar nuclear strike roll as the F-4 in the early to mid 60's. When we changed rolls, the 104 wasn't suited to the close air support and conventional strike missions very well (trust me, I know that very well from trying to hit targets on the Primrose range).....unlike the phantom which was adaptable to rolls that it was never designed for...and did them relatively well in the right hands. It's adaptability was it's strength, although not really envisioned when it was designed. One area where we do have a number of aircraft and assets in DS for realistic scenario's is the Iran-Iraq conflict of the 80's with F-14A's, F-4E's and F-5's on the Iranian side and Mig-21's, Mig-19's and F-1's on the Iraq side. AI Mig-23's could also be used.
@@Sidekick65 thx Iain , i think the Viggen is the closest to the F4 in terms of A2G. The F4 hasard a gréât and better panel of weapons so a greater spectrum of mission but , imho the Viggen is better in the délivery modes of weapons , and how effective it is :)
Another great video. I have dreaming up new missions to fly in the Phantom. Using the Caucasus Map as an impromptu Korea map and have second Korean War Scenarios(something very posisble after the Pueblo Incident). Kola map having a sort of scenario where prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union a conflict breaks out between non Nato Sweden and Finland and the USSR. NATO begins to supply Sweden and Finland with F4s as these aircraft are being replaced in their inventory by Typhoons and Eagles(mainly because it allows Viggens and Phantoms to fly alongside each other).
One more thing I would add as your video has made abundantly clear is that the Phantom has always been forced to fill roles that is what not designed for and managed some amount of success at it. I think where the Phantom shines is when it is not the best platform for the job but the only platform available, I am not sure there is one aircraft in its era that can perform as varied a mission set as effectively as the F-4, even into the 1980s
Interesting ideas - don't forget that the Marines had deploying to Norway on their task list in the case of Soviet invasion in the 80's. Assuming Sweden came in on the NATO side, there might be a way to put F-4's and Viggens together...
I think an early 1980s scenario USSR vs NATO would be interesting. I think it would not bode well for the Soviets who would lose a lot of Mig23s and 25s to F-15s and F-16s, however in doing so you would find the Viggens and Phantoms now able to perform more offense operations striking deep into the USSR to take out runways,bridges, etc..
So you did mention the different bombing modes, but I still feel in between what bombing mode to use when. For the most part I’ve done dive toss, but I want to vary it up. Do you know how pilots determined when to use what mode?
from what i've heard, they mostly used Dive Toss, sometimes Laydown. The other modes were mostly for Tactical Weapons (nukes) and they had to train on them but didn't use them much outside of that.
I flew F-4Es at Hahn AB Germany in 1977-1980. I was assigned to the 496thTFS and arrived about a month after their DOC changed from Zulu alert (Air to Air intercept missions using 2 minute response times from Klaxon to Takeoff) to Air to Ground. It was a challenging time as the A/G DOC was sneered at by the old heads who were A/A studs. Anyway, we trained for A/G munitions deliveries at the Aviano AB, Italy range and at the Zaragosa AB, Spain range. At these ranges we practiced strafing with the internal 20mm cannon and dropping BDU 33 practice bombs that mimicked MK 82 bombs, both normal and Snake Eye variants. Our normal delivery method was the Pop Up profile where we approached at low level on a course offset to the target (usually putting the target 60 degrees to the left of the nose since all fighter pilots only turned left LOL!) then popped up into a steep climb for a couple of thousand feet then rolled over into a dive and put the pipper on the target and released on the pre-determined altitude and airspeed. The reticle deflection, airspeed, and altitude were determined based on tables provided in the -34 manual. We also certified a Strike line. This entailed being assigned a real life deep target, planning an ingress route to avoid known A/G threats, and delivering a special munition using the Dive Toss system. We used it a bit differently than how one video I recently saw as a demo of Dive Toss in DCS. The way we practiced the delivery was to have the WSO lock up the shack in the middle of the bombing range scoring circle, go in fast a low, then follow the ILS steering bars when the computer determined the proper time to start a 17* climb and pickle when the computer blared a tone in the helmet. Once the bomb was off, you turned and rolled over to get back down to low level and sped out of there. On one of my deployments to the range at Zaragosa my WSO worked the system expertly and our MK106 (beer can with fins) bomb dropped right through the top of the shack. We won all the quarters on that mission. I haven't started flying DCS, but now that there is an F-4E module, I'm going to give it a try once I get the HOTAS equipment.
Wow. Just wow! Thanks so much for that. It's not easy to find accounts if how real F-4E pilots trained to drop bombs in the cold war. This is very helpful.
During the '80s in Europe, didn't the F-4E's role shift to SEAD working in conjuction with the F-4G, then later that pairing changing to F-4G/F-16 hunter-killer teams?
Some probably did, but I don't think it was an exclusive thing. The F-16s were supposed to take over the attack role from the F-4 but I'm not sure in what order they took which roles.
Actually I think the Swedish government considered the Phantom before going on with the development of the Viggen. Can’t recall where I saw this but I think the Phantom didn’t fit the road based airstrips and servicing by conscripts etc.
We've been using a portion of teh Caucasus to stand in for the Fulda gap. It works OK. I suspect that's where we'll go first... well actually some of the footage in that video is actually from that "Area of Operations" - as any Balloon Chasers in the audience will have noted. ;-)
I always love these types of videos. Keep 'em coming.
I will do so!
I listened to a podcast, I can’t for the life of me remember which it was, but it was an navy pilot shot down in an F-4 over Vietnam, and he said that they did two week rotation, two weeks of air to air, and two weeks of air to ground before two weeks of air to air, so they did both missions in Vietnam.
Thanks. That's good info. I appreciate it.
This one?
ua-cam.com/video/HlOxcgOPkbw/v-deo.html
I would love to hear more on this topic. Most other content creators seem to be focusing on the air to air use of the Phantom with technical switchology videos on air to ground, but not much on theory or strategy of how it would be employed. I love that you do do this.
Thanks for letting me know. If you have not already done so you should check out the "Callsign Spectre" video.
It figures the release date was late and right in the middle of my busy season. Trying to find the time to learn it. Great video as always.
Thanks. I hope you find the time soon
Amazing video again, nice to see someone digging a bit deeper in the realistic side of things.
I wonder if there is any chance for a video sometime discussing the real loadouts used, and the process of deciding what ordnance to load for which misson. On the F-4 as well as most other modules a wide wariety of weapons can be loaded. But there is little discussion about what and why was commonly used. I know a Pilot who flew in navy F-4s in Vietnam, and he tells that they almost allwas used MK82s, and it was a rarity if the got MK20s or Mk83s which they enjoyed using much more. It seems like most of the available weapons were almost never used in actual combat.
Interesting. I will see what I can find out.
Your F-4E videos are really amazing stuff. Your entire channel is an absolutely wonderful source of great information and great content to watch, but your passion for the F-4 really shines. I appreciate all the work you are putting into it! Thank you again for all you do!
Thanks. I'm so glad you like them and that you took the time to let me know.
One thing no mentioned about the role of the F-4 was it's use as recon, and as it aged, it was used more and more as recon besides the Wild Weasel role. I know DCS doesn't have RF-4's so that is a moot subject.
But you could use the recording feature to make pictures. A human rio would help, but is not even neccecary. Pictures are then in your saved games folder and can be analyzed. Recon missions are entirely possible with the F-4!
@@Lorian667 That sound good! I will have to play with that. What I was referring to is what might be the F-4j version that was probably (not sure) the wild weasel version and most closely associated with the econ version.
Yes, more of this please. Thank you sir.
thanks for making the old school iron bombing missions. very helpful. excellent summary of the the phantom and how it fits into dcs. 👍
Thanks. Glad you enjoyed it.
The F-4 Phantom was first a Navy fighter jet designed to perform fleet defence with AA missiles.
But since it was big enough , powerful with a good payload, it was adapted to perform many more missions. 😅
The IAF use the F-4 really early for deep strike - first months of 1970 into egypt - but afaik they have only dump bomb like the Mk-80 series.
Good info. Thanks.
@@Sidekick65 Operation Priha (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Priha) during the War of Attrition
"...118 sorties with F-4E against targets in theEgyptian heartland."
This has ended up being a very important video for me. You see, I'm a big fan of the F-15E. But that module is dead, the radar being broken by a date bug was too much. Anyway, I bought the F-4 because it is a Heatblur product, even though I'm not an air to air guy. But this video has showed me that the F-4 has the potential to replace the F-15E in terms of gameplay. I've never had thought of the Phantom as a low level, deep strike mission. But I was tinkering around with it and I realized it can fill that role perfectly. Of course, not with all the technological advantages that the Mudhen has, but it can be done. You showed it with laydown mode: a runway attack deep within enemy territory can be done with that mode. So, in summary, I'll use the F-4 as a replacement for the F-15E in my missions. All those Cold War and Desert Storm missions can be done with the F-4, by day and by night, and Jester can really help with them. Not reallistic, but hey, that's what DCS allows us to do: play with concepts. And the F-4 offers a lot of possibilities.
Glad it has been of some help to you.
So interesting, thank you for helping inspire some mission ideas. I've been trying to figure out how best to play it and I think this describes it well
Glad I could help!
In Europe, even as late at 1989 the F-15 wasn't being fielded in numbers sufficient to fully replace the F-4, and one imagines that in 1980 there would have been substantial numbers of F-4's tasked with CAP, or even more likely, escort for AWACS, tankers, ECM platforms etc.
Good to know. Thanks
Excellent video, as always. Would love to get your take on Israeli and others use of the F-4 (particularly E-like variants, since that's what we've got). Keep up the great work!
Yes. You need to keep this up. My head is bubbling over with ideas for the Phantom and Kola map, but like you I’m trying to get the timeframe correct for maximum DCS aircraft integration. Also loving your history of bombing series
On a side note. I do believe that the Navy hung bombs off their Phantoms. IIRC Cunningham and Driscoll had just dropped on a target in N Vietnam when their famous run in with “Col Tomb” happened
Thanks. I appreciate the support AND the info. BTW a new HIB podcast is on the way soon.
Another very good video and history lesson Ian. Our 104's had the similar nuclear strike roll as the F-4 in the early to mid 60's. When we changed rolls, the 104 wasn't suited to the close air support and conventional strike missions very well (trust me, I know that very well from trying to hit targets on the Primrose range).....unlike the phantom which was adaptable to rolls that it was never designed for...and did them relatively well in the right hands. It's adaptability was it's strength, although not really envisioned when it was designed. One area where we do have a number of aircraft and assets in DS for realistic scenario's is the Iran-Iraq conflict of the 80's with F-14A's, F-4E's and F-5's on the Iranian side and Mig-21's, Mig-19's and F-1's on the Iraq side. AI Mig-23's could also be used.
Interesting point. I had not thought about iran/Iraq. I have to do some research.
Thank you Iain.
Great video as usual!
Thanks!
Hi Iain, top video thx ! A pleasure to hear while watching this one :). One wish: could you compare the mighty Viggen to the F4E please?
Great idea - I will put it on the list!
@@Sidekick65 thx Iain , i think the Viggen is the closest to the F4 in terms of A2G. The F4 hasard a gréât and better panel of weapons so a greater spectrum of mission but , imho the Viggen is better in the délivery modes of weapons , and how effective it is :)
Another great video. I have dreaming up new missions to fly in the Phantom. Using the Caucasus Map as an impromptu Korea map and have second Korean War Scenarios(something very posisble after the Pueblo Incident). Kola map having a sort of scenario where prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union a conflict breaks out between non Nato Sweden and Finland and the USSR. NATO begins to supply Sweden and Finland with F4s as these aircraft are being replaced in their inventory by Typhoons and Eagles(mainly because it allows Viggens and Phantoms to fly alongside each other).
One more thing I would add as your video has made abundantly clear is that the Phantom has always been forced to fill roles that is what not designed for and managed some amount of success at it. I think where the Phantom shines is when it is not the best platform for the job but the only platform available, I am not sure there is one aircraft in its era that can perform as varied a mission set as effectively as the F-4, even into the 1980s
Totally agree - that's the Phantom's great strength. In, effect, it taught the USAF a lot about the planes it REALLY wanted - and now they have them.
Interesting ideas - don't forget that the Marines had deploying to Norway on their task list in the case of Soviet invasion in the 80's. Assuming Sweden came in on the NATO side, there might be a way to put F-4's and Viggens together...
I think an early 1980s scenario USSR vs NATO would be interesting. I think it would not bode well for the Soviets who would lose a lot of Mig23s and 25s to F-15s and F-16s, however in doing so you would find the Viggens and Phantoms now able to perform more offense operations striking deep into the USSR to take out runways,bridges, etc..
So you did mention the different bombing modes, but I still feel in between what bombing mode to use when. For the most part I’ve done dive toss, but I want to vary it up. Do you know how pilots determined when to use what mode?
from what i've heard, they mostly used Dive Toss, sometimes Laydown. The other modes were mostly for Tactical Weapons (nukes) and they had to train on them but didn't use them much outside of that.
I flew F-4Es at Hahn AB Germany in 1977-1980. I was assigned to the 496thTFS and arrived about a month after their DOC changed from Zulu alert (Air to Air intercept missions using 2 minute response times from Klaxon to Takeoff) to Air to Ground. It was a challenging time as the A/G DOC was sneered at by the old heads who were A/A studs. Anyway, we trained for A/G munitions deliveries at the Aviano AB, Italy range and at the Zaragosa AB, Spain range. At these ranges we practiced strafing with the internal 20mm cannon and dropping BDU 33 practice bombs that mimicked MK 82 bombs, both normal and Snake Eye variants. Our normal delivery method was the Pop Up profile where we approached at low level on a course offset to the target (usually putting the target 60 degrees to the left of the nose since all fighter pilots only turned left LOL!) then popped up into a steep climb for a couple of thousand feet then rolled over into a dive and put the pipper on the target and released on the pre-determined altitude and airspeed. The reticle deflection, airspeed, and altitude were determined based on tables provided in the -34 manual. We also certified a Strike line. This entailed being assigned a real life deep target, planning an ingress route to avoid known A/G threats, and delivering a special munition using the Dive Toss system. We used it a bit differently than how one video I recently saw as a demo of Dive Toss in DCS. The way we practiced the delivery was to have the WSO lock up the shack in the middle of the bombing range scoring circle, go in fast a low, then follow the ILS steering bars when the computer determined the proper time to start a 17* climb and pickle when the computer blared a tone in the helmet. Once the bomb was off, you turned and rolled over to get back down to low level and sped out of there. On one of my deployments to the range at Zaragosa my WSO worked the system expertly and our MK106 (beer can with fins) bomb dropped right through the top of the shack. We won all the quarters on that mission. I haven't started flying DCS, but now that there is an F-4E module, I'm going to give it a try once I get the HOTAS equipment.
Wow. Just wow! Thanks so much for that. It's not easy to find accounts if how real F-4E pilots trained to drop bombs in the cold war. This is very helpful.
During the '80s in Europe, didn't the F-4E's role shift to SEAD working in conjuction with the F-4G, then later that pairing changing to F-4G/F-16 hunter-killer teams?
Some probably did, but I don't think it was an exclusive thing. The F-16s were supposed to take over the attack role from the F-4 but I'm not sure in what order they took which roles.
Osan AB Korea 87-88 51st TFS last air to air Squadron in USAF Sky Blue Cammo with Sharks Mouth Switched to F16 afterwards
Read “Phantom Over Viet Nam” by John Trotti. Great first-person stories of how the US Marines used the F-4.
Thanks! I will take a look
Hi @Sidekick65, thanks for all great videos you are producing. Great Stuff! Did you miss to link the Book in the description or am I blind?
I did forget. Good catch. Should be fixed now.
This aircraft defiantly fits in this environment for NATO.
God I hope we get the F-111
Actually I think the Swedish government considered the Phantom before going on with the development of the Viggen. Can’t recall where I saw this but I think the Phantom didn’t fit the road based airstrips and servicing by conscripts etc.
That would make sense.
I like your idea of the A-10 & F-4E mission but on what map? Ahem, ED we need Vietnam. Another good dose of history here!
We've been using a portion of teh Caucasus to stand in for the Fulda gap. It works OK. I suspect that's where we'll go first...
well actually some of the footage in that video is actually from that "Area of Operations" - as any Balloon Chasers in the audience will have noted. ;-)
My dad used to say that the f4 was proof that with big enough engines, even a brick will fly.
A Triumph of afterburner over aerodynamics. ;-)