Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military From: mjt@super.org (Michael J. Tighe) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: F-4, etc. Message-ID: <7885@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 30 Jun 89 03:19:58 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Lines: 40 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Michael J. Tighe >> The F-4 a fighter? I respectfully disagree. The F-4 was an air defense > ^^^ fleet? I guess it depends on who the owner of the plane is. If it was the USAF, then the plane was air defense; if it was the USN, then it was fleet defense. > I contest the claim that MiGs were much better... I did not mean the MIGS were better, but more maneuverable. There is no doubt (in my mind) that the F-4 was a better plane, but the MIGs had better turning capability. > The F-4 did become a fighter, and a damn good one, even though it > started life as an interceptor/bomber. And this is testament to the skill of our pilots and ACM tacticians to be able to take a plane that is not designed for the fighter role, and make it work. > I'd like to point out an interesting difference between Navy two- > seaters and Air Force two-seaters. Another interesting (albeit stupid) is that the refueling receptacles were not the same. The USN F-4 used a male probe, while the USAF F-4 used a female receptacle. I assume this was fixed eventually, but it could have been a problem. > BTW did you know that you can successfully launch an F-8 _with_ the > wings folded? I don't know if you can do this with the F-4, but maybe > nobody ever tried. Can't say I have, but while we are on this subject of weird takeoff & landing configurations, did you know that the U-2 could be (and was) configured to takeoff from a carrier? And that an F-15 can land with only one wing? (assuming you can find some one to shoot one off). Believe it or Not.