G

F-4 (F4H-1)(F-110) Phantom

Started by Glenn Harper, July 11, 2002, 01:21:58 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zen

How about twin RB106 Thames and Red Hebe AAMs?

RB106 is roughly the size of a Spey, and in reheat produces slight more thrust, but its in dry thrust you'd notice the difference, 15,000lb per engine at dry, 21,000lb in reheat.
To win without fighting, that is the mastry of war.

Jeffry Fontaine

#31
Quote from: elmayerle on December 14, 2007, 12:21:38 AMAs a follow-up to my earlier comments on the TF30-powered Phantom, the TF30 was as much greater in envelope diameter than the Spey 20s series in the F-4K/M as that engine was over the J79 ('bout 5 inches more in each case.  Too, the shortest afterburning TF30 is still over two feet longer than the Spey 200.

Actually, I think Archibald's idea of a M53-powered derivative of the F-4K/M airframe makes sense, the dimensions are close to the Spey s0s as is the performance (M53-P2 is actually a bit better) and the M53 weights a bit less (on the order of 700lb., or more, less).
Evan, thank you for the clarification on the overall dimensions and available space in the F-4 airframe.  Granted in real life, it would not work but here in Wacky WHIF World, it appears that most anything will work.  So for what I have in mind, the incorporation of a pair of TF30 exhaust parts could provide the requisite cosmetic changes to portray an engine upgrade to the F-4, or any other airframe that has a cavity close enough in size to accomodate the parts.  Granted, the real world has the laws of physics to deal with, but in here, that got tossed out the window.  Now if there were only a cheap source for engine exhaust parts...
Unaffiliated Independent Subversive
----------------------------------
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Archibald

QuoteHow about twin RB106 Thames and Red Hebe AAMs?

RB106 is roughly the size of a Spey, and in reheat produces slight more thrust, but its in dry thrust you'd notice the difference, 15,000lb per engine at dry, 21,000lb in reheat.
Sounds very interesting to me. A flyoff between this Phantom, the Arrow, and Hawker P.1121 would be wonderfull  :wub:  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

dy031101

#33
Here is another one- what if Royal Navy kept their CVA-01 project (or any CATOBAR alternative) and F-4K?  What if F-4K lasted with Royal Navy as long as F-4F did with Luftwaffe?

Make me inclined to take a page out of the F-4F ICE chapter...... replace the F-4K's radar with a Blue Vixen?

BVRAAM include Skyflash and AMRAAM...... how would adding Meteor into the options (like the proposed Tornado F.3 test machines in real life) look hobby-wise?
To the individual soldiers, *everything* is a frontal assault!

====================

Current Hobby Priority...... Sigh......

To-do list here

jcf

From Air Enthusiast Thirty, pgs 34 - 37, "Swing-Wing Phantom" by Mike Spick with acknowledgment to Robert Shackleton Blake of McDonnell Douglas.

The article has more performance data for various mission profiles, if anyone is interested.

Jon
"Conspiracy theory's got to be simple.
Sense doesn't come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever's supposed to be behind the
conspiracy."
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

JoeP

I'll have to see if I have any F-4s and F-14s left in 1/700. One or more of the swing-wing version could go on my Euro-carrier.
In want of hobby space!  The kitchen table is never stable.  Still managing to get some building done.

GTX

Here's a couple of ideas:

What about a VTOL Phantom - whack a bunch of liftjets in that baby!!???

What about your ultimate Phantom - i.e. the Phantom still in frontline USAF/USN etc service today (say the various F-15s, F-14s etc never made it to service for what ever reason(s) and the F-4 was forced to soldier on with various upgrades.

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

dy031101

#37
Quote from: GTX on May 12, 2008, 09:32:27 PM
What about your ultimate Phantom - i.e. the Phantom still in frontline USAF/USN etc service today (say the various F-15s, F-14s etc never made it to service for what ever reason(s) and the F-4 was forced to soldier on with various upgrades.

I have one earlier in this thread:

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,18658.msg249179.html#msg249179

Say, instead of EA-6B and EF-111A, the USAF, USN, and USMC were instructed to standardize on a single ECM platform......
To the individual soldiers, *everything* is a frontal assault!

====================

Current Hobby Priority...... Sigh......

To-do list here

Daryl J.

A Sparkspook?    That's interesting.   :thumbsup:

Spey Phantom, big egg on tail, glass cockpit with system designed by people who defected from Apple Computer as to make operating the system intuitive and simple.   Hmmmm.....




Daryl J.

ysi_maniac

Will die without understanding this world.

Jeffry Fontaine

#40
Quote from: GTX on May 12, 2008, 09:32:27 PMHere's a couple of ideas:
What about a VTOL Phantom - whack a bunch of liftjets in that baby!!???
What about your ultimate Phantom - i.e. the Phantom still in frontline USAF/USN etc service today (say the various F-15s, F-14s etc never made it to service for what ever reason(s) and the F-4 was forced to soldier on with various upgrades.
Not too crazy about your VTOL Rhino, but an improved F-4 would be excellent.  Earlier comments in this thread provide some indication of what would be preferred such as a one-piece windscreen and even a complete canopy replacement with something that provides more all around visibility for the aircrew.  Other things to consider might be a new wing for the F-4 based on the wing from the F-15.  Granted the signature cranked wing would be gone but the benefits of a better wing design might have given the F-4 a real edge against contemporary adversaries at the time.  If someone wer to do a kit-bash, I think it would be a rather simple task since both wings are similar in shape the idea would be to mate up the upper wing surfaces of the F-15 wing with the lower wing surface of the F-4 to at least keep the main landing gear in the same location.  The original F-4 wing pylons would be used and there is a chance that the smaller outboard wing pylon from the F-15 (the one that was never used in real life) could be adapted to the new F-4 wing. 
Unaffiliated Independent Subversive
----------------------------------
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

GTX

QuoteWhat about your ultimate Phantom - i.e. the Phantom still in frontline USAF/USN etc service today (say the various F-15s, F-14s etc never made it to service for what ever reason(s) and the F-4 was forced to soldier on with various upgrades.

Here are my rough interpretations of the 'Ultimate Phantom' (i.e. one still in front line USAF/USN service today instead of F-15s etc) - quite appropriate for a fighter that hits the 50 yr mark later this month (taking it from the first flight - the Phantom made its maiden flight on 27 May 1958 - I guess we should have tried for a GB of some sort to commemorate):

2 Seat version - mote that I figure it would get some stealth mods a bit like the Super Hornet though wouldn't necessarily be a full LO mod:



Single seat version of above:



Slightly stealthier versions of above with new V tail:





And just for comparison - a standard F4E:



Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

tinlail

I really like these designs. I didn't think a F-4 could be made to look so sleek.
Some hopeful constructive thoughts.

1) A V tail is really good for saying I am stealthy, but I am not sure that the F-4 need to have it's tail, changed that way. The purpose is to not have any corner reflects, and to cover the exhausts, both of which seems to be happening.

2) The conformal belly tank, this could use some steathing, some facets on this to get rid of the 90 degree angles would good.

GTX

QuoteWhat about a VTOL Phantom - whack a bunch of liftjets in that baby!!???

Folks, any suggestions on a VTOL Phantom?  I have two possibilities:


  • Do a variant with a bunch of lift engines such as like the Su-15VD or Mirage IIIV (see below)
  • Take a high wing variant (either fixed or VG) and replace the J79s with a pair of RR  Pegasus engines (with only 2 nozzles each) + a lift engine if still required

Su-15VD:



Mirage IIIV:



Your thoughts, suggestions.

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

tinlail

How about this as something to chew on.
Put tiltable exhausts on the existing(replaced?) engines something like this.

but with a little more tilt.
And replace the second seat and behind with lift engines just behind the pilot?