Phantom jets overcame their flaws
by SEBASTIEN ROBLIN
The McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II is a legendary aircraft — an icon of the Vietnam War and the archetype of the third-generation jet fighter designs that entered service in the 1960s. More than 5,000 of these heavy supersonic fighters were built, and hundreds continue to serve and even see combat in several air forces today.
But the Phantom’s record in air-to-air combat over Vietnam — especially when compared to its successor, the F-15 Eagle, which has never been shot down in air-to-air combat — has left it with a reputation of being a clumsy bruiser reliant on brute engine power and obsolete weapons technology.
This is unfair.
The Phantom’s fundamental flaws were corrected by 1970 — while more recently, Phantoms have had their avionics and ordnance upgraded to modern standards. These modernized Phantoms flown by the Turkish and Greek air forces can do pretty much what an F-15 can do … at a much lower price.
Baptism of fire
When the F-4 came out it in 1958 it was a revolutionary design — one that went on to set several aviation records.
Weighing in at 30,000 pounds unloaded, its enormous J79 twin engines gave (and still gives) the aircraft excellent thrust, propelling the heavy airframe over twice the speed of sound at a maximum speed of 1,473 miles per hour.
The early Phantoms could carry 18,000 pounds of munitions — three times what the huge B-17 bombers of World War II typically carried. The weapons officer in the rear-seat could operate the plane’s advanced radar, communication and weapons systems while the pilot focused on flying.
Furthermore, the F-4 came in both ground- and carrier-based models and served in the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marines. The only other frontline fighter to serve in all three services before or since is the F-35.
But when the F-4 confronted the lighter-weight MiG-17 and MiG-21 fighters of the North Vietnamese air force in 1965, the Phantom suffered.
In the Korean War, the U.S. Air Force had shot down between six and 10 enemy fighters for every one of its aircraft lost in air-to-air combat. In Vietnam, the ratio was closer to two to one (including other aircraft types besides the Phantom).
The F-4’s primary problem was that it had no built-in cannon. Instead, it relied entirely on newly-introduced air-to-air missiles — the radar-guided AIM-7 Sparrow, the heat-seeking AIM-9 Sidewinder and the older AIM-4 Falcon.
The Air Force didn’t realize those early missiles were terrible.
Studies showed that 45 percent of Vietnam-era AIM-7s and 37 percent of AIM-9s failed to either launch or lock on, and after evasive maneuvers, the probability of achieving a kill fell to eight percent and 15 percent for the two types, respectively. The Falcon missiles were even worse, and the Pentagon later withdrew them from service.
The North Vietnamese MiGs, equipped with both cannons and missiles (on the MiG-21), would outmaneuver the heavier F-4, which for all its speed, was not especially agile. Worse, American pilots weren’t trained for close range dogfights, as the Air Force assumed air-to-air engagements would occur at long range with missiles.
Furthermore, the Phantom’s J79 engines produced thick black smoke, which combined with the aircraft’s larger size, made it easier to spot and target from a distance. On the other hand, the rules-of-engagement over Vietnam prohibited U.S. pilots from shooting at unidentified targets beyond visual range, further crippling the advantages of the missiles.
However, the F-4’s problems began to recede. Air-to-air missile technology dramatically improved with later versions of the Sparrow and Sidewinder. The F-4E model finally came with an internal M161 Vulcan cannon.
Before, some Phantom units made do with external gun pods that vibrated excessively.
In 1972, an F-4 piloted by Maj. Phil Handley shot down a MiG-19 with his plane’s gun — the only recorded aerial gun kill performed at supersonic speed.
Eventually, the Air Force upgraded all of its F-4Es with wing-slats that significantly improved maneuverability at a slight cost in speed. New J79 engines even dealt with the problem of the F-4’s visible black smoke.
The Navy, in contrast, perceived the problem as being a lack of Air Combat Maneuvering training, and instituted the Top Gun training program in 1968. Navy pilots went on to score a superior kill ratio over Vietnam of 40 victories for seven planes lost in air-to-air combat.
The Air Force’s Phantoms claimed 107 air-to-air kills for 33 lost to MiGs, and the Marine Corps claimed three. Ground fire shot down 474 Phantoms in all services, as the heavy-lifting Phantom fighters did double duty as ground-attack aircraft.
Two sub-variants of the Phantom also distinguished themselves — the RF-4 photo reconnaissance plane, optimized for speed, and the Wild Weasel, specialized in attacking enemy surface-to-air missiles defenses.
The last American F-4s would see action during Operation Desert Storm, before being retired in 1996. The Pentagon later converted some into QF-4 target practice drones.
Phantoms in the Middle East
However, the Phantoms proliferated around the world. The F-4 saw extensive use in Israeli service, scoring 116 air-to-air kills against the Egyptian and Syrian air forces, starting in 1969 during the War of Attrition.
In one engagement on the first day of the Yom Kippur War in 1973, 28 Egyptian MiGs attacked Ofir Air Base. Just two Phantoms managed to scramble in defense, but they shot down seven of the attackers.
The Israeli Phantoms’ primary target — and most deadly foe — during these campaigns were Arab surface-to-air missile batteries. SAMs accounted for most of the 36 Israeli Phantoms lost in action.
The swan song of the Israeli Phantom force came during Israel’s 1982 intervention in the War in Lebanon, when Phantoms — escorted by new F-15s and F-16s — wiped out all 30 of Syria’s SAM batteries in the Bekaa Valley in one day without losing a single plane in Operation Mole Cricket 19.
Iran received 225 F-4s from the United States prior to the Iranian Revolution. These formed the backbone of the Iranian fighter force during the nine-year-long war with Iraq. The Phantom reportedly acquitted itself well versus Iraqi MiGs, and carried out several long-range raids on the Iraqi airfields. The actual number of air-to-air kills remains disputed.
21st century Phantoms
The Phantom still sees service. But it’s somewhat of an anomaly. Just compare it to F-15 Eagle.
The F-15, which entered service in 1975, is emblematic of fourth-generation fighter aircraft that remain the mainstay of modern air forces today. The F-15 is also deliberately unlike the F-4. It’s a heavy, twin-engine, two-seat fighter and an agile dogfighter.
When the F-15 and the lighter F-16 saw their first major air action over Lebanon in 1982, they shot down more than 80 Syrian third-generation MiGs at no loss.
The supremacy of the fourth-generation was confirmed again in the Gulf War, in which Iraqi fighters shot down only one fourth-generation fighter (an F/A-18 Hornet) for the loss of 33 of their third-generation aircraft. How could the F-4 possibly keep up in this new environment?
Easy — by integrating the same modern hardware used in the fourth generation.
The Phantoms flown by the Turkish and Greek air forces both have modern pulse-doppler radars, which give the F-4 “look down-shoot down” capabilities. In the past, high-flying radars had trouble detecting low-flying aircraft because the radar waves bouncing off the ground created a cluttering effect. Active Doppler radars cut through the ground clutter.
Modern F-4s can also fire the full range of modern ordnance such as the advanced AIM-120C AMRAAM air-to-air missile with a range of 65 miles, precision-guided munitions such as the AGM-65 Maverick, and late model Sparrow and Sidewinder missiles.
As combat aircraft are essentially weapons platforms, these capabilities mean that the F-4s can handle most of the same offensive tasks a fourth-generation F-15 or Su-27 fighter can do.
But surely the electronics and instruments are out of date? Not really. For instance, modernized F-4s have improved Heads Up Displays (HUDs) so that pilots don’t have to look down from the canopy to check on their instruments.
Germany flew upgraded F-4Fs until 2013, and maintains them in stock in case of future need. South Korea still has 71 F-4Es (only modestly upgraded) in its 17th Fighter Wing. Japan maintains the same number of F-4EJ Kais upgraded with pulse-Doppler radars and anti-ship missiles.
The Israelis pioneered the art of Phantom upgrades in the 1980s with the Phantom 2000 Kurnass, or “Sledgehammer.” Though retired from Israeli service in 2004, Israeli firms went on to upgrade Greece’s 41 Peace Icarus Phantoms, equipping them with ANPG-65 pulse-Doppler radars and the ability to fire AMRAAM missiles.
Israeli upgrades contributed to the Turkish air force’s Terminator 2020, which has additional wing strakes for improved maneuverability.
The 2020s have had 20 kilometers of wiring replaced for a net loss of 1,600 pounds in weight. The Turkish versions also feature a diverse array of modern sensors and electronics. Like other modern F-4s, they can deploy advanced ordnance such as Paveway bombs, HARM anti-radar missiles and 3,000-pound Popeye missiles with a range of 48 miles.
The Terminators are primarily ground-attack planes … with some notoriety. They’ve bombed Kurdish PKK fighters in Turkey and Iraq in 2015 and 2016. An RF-4 reconnaissance plane was shot down over Syria in 2012, and three F-4s crashed in 2015 — earning them the appellation “Flying Coffins” in the Turkish media.
The Iranian air force in 2009 claimed to operate 76 F-4Ds and Es, and six RF-4s. Tehran has reportedly modified the planes to fire Russian or Chinese air-to-ground and anti-shipping missiles. They still rely on AIM-7 Sparrows acquired second hand.
Likewise, Iran relies on smuggled and improvised spare parts for its F-4s, just like its F-14 Tomcats.
But are souped-up F-4s really equal to fourth-generation fighters? None of these 21st century Phantoms have flown in air-to-air combat — but F-4s Phantoms have engaged in non-lethal dogfights with Greek F-16s on several occasions.
They also tangled with Chinese Su-27s in a 2010 exercise — and won zero to eight.
And if you compare videos of F-4s with wing slats making a tight, 180 degree turn (see 4:25 above) compared to F-15s doing the same maneuver, you will note that they both average seven to eight seconds to complete the turn, even though the latter is purportedly more maneuverable.
This doesn’t prove upgraded F-4s are superior to later designs, of course — but it does show they capable of pulling their considerable weight when compared with fourth-generation fighters.
The Phantom has proven both versatile and adaptable over time. Few of those present for its first flight in 1958 could have imagined that it would remain in frontline service nearly 60 years later.
Rudolph Emilio Torrini contributed to this article.