Flight characteristics of the F-4 Phantom

[PR3D4TOR]

I think the F-4 would take the Mirage overall.   If I had to chose one or the other I would pick the F-4 any day.

The problem with that Vraciu is that in the 1960s you would have seriously deficient missiles and no gun, fighting against an opponent that's both faster and more agile and armed with twin 30 mm revolver cannons (and equally crappy missiles). After 1968 you get a very good gun in the F-4E and better missiles, but then you'd be up against the excellent Shafrir-2 missile, and still those excellent DEFA 30 mm revolver cannons. However, you would be more of an equal with an edge in BVR. As we progress into the 1970s both aircraft are getting obsolete, but in the Yom Kippur war of 1973 the Mirage III and the Nesher (Israeli ground attack variant) shot down 246 aircraft to 26 losses of their own, making the Mirage III the second most successful jet fighter of all time in terms of total kills (second only to the Me 262). In total all versions of the Mirage III have destroyed close to 400 enemy aircraft.

[PR3D4TOR]

Oh and today your F-4 would be facing the Kfir C.10 Block 60, with advanced AESA radar, helmet mounted sight, Python and Derby missiles. The Mirage III lives on in the Kfir and will be flying for at least 20 more years. Probably a lot longer.

[Vraciu]

I would still take the Phantom.  Better radar, more persistence, and can carry more weapons. 

The Mirage is a one trick pony. 

The biggest problem the Phantom had was ROE.    The Sparrow had its problems but a lot of that had to do with how our guys were forced to employ it.   Slammer is far better though and a Phantom can conceivably carry six of those. 

And if you're gonna switch the argument away from the Mirage to a Kfir..

The F-4 doesn't have all that new stuff because it's retired.   (Iran doesn't count.)  A modernized F-4 would be even more lethal.   F-4 2000 with equivalent electronics?   Boom.   

[PR3D4TOR]

The F-4 is not retired as far as I know. It still serves with several modern air forces in secondary roles. Japan, Turkey, Greece at least. Probably more. But you're right a modernized F-4 would be an awesome multi-role fighter-bomber! Imagine the power of the radar you could put in that big nose these days! Increased ord carriage and new engines. Would be a poor man's F-15E. Upgraded Kfir is like a poor man's F-16. I wouldn't call it a one trick pony though. Not even the old Mirage III from the 60s. It was a competent attacker as well (why it was later developed into a dedicated ground attack aircraft like the original Kfir).

Pakistani Mirage IIIE and Argentinian Dagger (Israeli made bootleg Mirage III/5) in ground attack configurations:

[Vraciu]

Yeah I guess the EJ sorta counts. 

F-4 never got the upgrades it could have had. 

Mirage one trick pony meaning one bat turn them it's out of energy.  Phantom would eat it alive. 

Even the Kfir with more thrust would be in trouble.  Deltas are notoriously bad for E retention. 

An interesting discussion.   

[PR3D4TOR]

The F-4 is also a delta. Clipped delta with a conventional tail. Same with the Mig-21 for that matter. Most jet fighters are deltas in one configuration or another. The Israelis test flew a captured Mig-21 against its Mirages and found the Mirage superior to the Mig-21 in high speed agility and equal at low speed. Given that the Mig-21 is generally considered more agile than the F-4 I cannot agree with you on the 'one trick pony' characterization. I'm still trying to find some info on how the three Kfir's the USN and USMC leased from Israel performed as aggressors. No luck so far. 

Found more Swiss Mirage IIIS pron though from when they were still in service back in the early 2000s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1PYiDIIZ1U

[Zimme83]

The J-35 would most likely been a tough opponent to the Phantom (and mig-21), Armed with the same missiles as the Phantom and 2x 30 mm cannons. J-35 was also both fast and a very good turner.

[Gman]

The South Koreans operate one of the largest existing F4 fleets, an entire wing of them still, 70+ are still flying in the ROG air force.

Puma - what kind of blast radius or effective range did those Genie nuclear warheads have?  How far would 1.5kilo tons of kaboom kill a target like a bomber or even a fighter?

Puma alluded to how important the gun was in those days, that due to the limitations of systems, ROE, the missiles of the time - even the "good" ones - that having a good gun was critical.  The Mirage/Kfir/Nesher/etc all had a great gun, the gun cam vids of the IAF blowing up Migs shows that it clearly was very effective.  30mms from an accurate reliable cannon = all kinds of bad news for the opposing Migs of the day.

The Kfir is a good little fighter, but every dog has its day - good and bad.  The Daggers that Argentina flew, which is pretty much an early Kfir, got smoked by Harrier fighters, to the tune of 9 to 0 (plus 2 more from AAA/SAMs).  The cannon there played zero role in how things worked out, the Aim9L was just too good of a weapon by then, plus the Brits were good pilots as well, as were the Argentines (The Dagger wing badly damaged 6 Royal Navy ships).

[bozon]

Yeah I guess the EJ sorta counts. 

F-4 never got the upgrades it could have had. 

Mirage one trick pony meaning one bat turn them it's out of energy.  Phantom would eat it alive. 

Even the Kfir with more thrust would be in trouble.  Deltas are notoriously bad for E retention. 

An interesting discussion.   

The IAF considered the Mirage III the better fighter of the two. The F4 was clearly the better attack plane.
Yiftah Spector was a very colorful and controvertial pilot that flew both and got plenty of kills in both. He was a squadron commander of both. Eventually he also flew F16s and participated in the attack on the Iraqi nuclear plant (a total blunder on his side, but that is just another crazy story of his many).

Some of his exploits are described in this thread, which is in Hebrew and WAY too long for me to translate for you. Scroll down for images from his gun cam of many kills of mig21s in both mirages ans phantoms. The yellow certificates are the official kills confirmations.

https://www.fresh.co.il/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=584112#post4468571

Vraciu, the IAF did operate a modernized Phantoms called "Kurnas 2000" (Hebrew for Sledghamer). It got completely new avionics and a special radar capable of creating images of the ground from very large distances in order to recognize components of the target before attacking. It was still considered an inferior fighter to the other F's, but an excellent attack plane with abilities that F16s and F15s still lacked (no F15E at that time). Kfir was already out of the service by that time. The last two squadrons operated these and closed down around the year 2000.

[Vraciu]

The F-4 is also a delta. Clipped delta with a conventional tail. Same with the Mig-21 for that matter. Most jet fighters are deltas in one configuration or another. The Israelis test flew a captured Mig-21 against its Mirages and found the Mirage superior to the Mig-21 in high speed agility and equal at low speed. Given that the Mig-21 is generally considered more agile than the F-4 I cannot agree with you on the 'one trick pony' characterization. I'm still trying to find some info on how the three Kfir's the USN and USMC leased from Israel performed as aggressors. No luck so far. 

Found more Swiss Mirage IIIS pron though from when they were still in service back in the early 2000s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1PYiDIIZ1U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1PYiDIIZ1U

Simply untrue.

A true delta has entirely different lift and drag characteristics than what the F-4 has.   Deltas get one turn and they're done.  That's been their nemesis from the day they were invented.   The Eurocanards have tried to mitigate this with varying success via thrust to weight, something neither the Mirage III nor the Kfir C2 have.

The Mig-21 wing is a fraction of the size and has far lower drag than it would if it were a pure/true delta.

Agility does not equate to sustained turn performance.   The F-4 is not a turn fighter, but then again, neither is/are the MiG-21/Mirage III.   That they are able to turn marginally better than a Phantom isn't saying much.   The F-16/F-15/F-18 would tear them up BVR and WVR, IMHO.  (Boy that's a lot of acronyms!)

[Vraciu]

The J-35 would most likely been a tough opponent to the Phantom (and mig-21), Armed with the same missiles as the Phantom and 2x 30 mm cannons. J-35 was also both fast and a very good turner.

If you keep it going downhill.

[Vraciu]

The IAF considered the Mirage III the better fighter of the two. The F4 was clearly the better attack plane.
Yiftah Spector was a very colorful and controvertial pilot that flew both and got plenty of kills in both. He was a squadron commander of both. Eventually he also flew F16s and participated in the attack on the Iraqi nuclear plant (a total blunder on his side, but that is just another crazy story of his many).

Some of his exploits are described in this thread, which is in Hebrew and WAY too long for me to translate for you. Scroll down for images from his gun cam of many kills of mig21s in both mirages ans phantoms. The yellow certificates are the official kills confirmations.

https://www.fresh.co.il/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=584112#post4468571

Vraciu, the IAF did operate a modernized Phantoms called "Kurnas 2000" (Hebrew for Sledghamer). It got completely new avionics and a special radar capable of creating images of the ground from very large distances in order to recognize components of the target before attacking. It was still considered an inferior fighter to the other F's, but an excellent attack plane with abilities that F16s and F15s still lacked (no F15E at that time). Kfir was already out of the service by that time. The last two squadrons operated these and closed down around the year 2000.

Depends on the mission.   As a short range interceptor with a small radius and lots of radar help the Mirage is okay.

The "true" F-4 2000 (with the big motors) never went beyond a demonstrator.  It would have been a beast.

Another part of the Kurnass 2000 program was to have been a change of engines. In 1986/87, Bedek fitted first one and then two Pratt & Whitney PW1120 turbofans into an IDF/AF F-4E. The aircraft was initially flown on July 30, 1986 with a single PW1120 in the starboard nacelle only, but was flown with two turbofans from April 24, 1987. This re-engined aircraft was initially intended as a test bed for the IAI Lavi project. A similar sort of conversion had been planned for the abortive Boeing-originated "Super Phantom"--in fact Boeing is rumored to have played a cooperative role in this project, although the true extent of IAI-Boeing collaboration is unknown.

The re-engined Phantom was able to exceed Mach 1 without using afterburner, and had a combat thrust-to-weight 17 percent greater than that of the standard F-4E. The sustained turning rate was 15 percent greater, the climb rate was 36 percent faster, and medium-level acceleration was 27 percent greater. The re-engined Phantom was displayed at the 1987 Paris Air Show wearing the civilian registration 4X-JPA. However, plans to re-engine the entire IDF/AF Phantom fleet with PW1120 turbofans were abandoned due to budgetary constraints. In any case, since most IDF/AF Phantoms were already high-time aircraft, such an ambitious conversion program would not have been very cost effective.

[PR3D4TOR]

Simply untrue.

Completely true. The F-4 is a tailed delta with cropped delta wings.

[Vraciu]

Completely true. The F-4 is a tailed delta with cropped delta wings.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

It's NOT a delta.  It's not a cranked arrow.

[PR3D4TOR]

Yes it is a delta.