One big correction to this video - top-end speed. Though the Spey provided greater thrust for takeoffs, the GE J79 Phantoms still had higher top-end speed.
Was on the USS Independence 1971/2, cross decked with the Ark Royal, and saw the difference in J79 F4Js and British Navy Spey engined FG1s. Extreme nose gear extension for launch was also very noticeable. Only looks made them family😊
Friend of mine was a Marine F4 pilot. He said they landed on a USAF base’s asphalt runway and when they took off, they also melted the runway. He said fleet F4’s engines were angled downward vs Air Force F4’s…
This came at a cost though The British F-4's had more drag resulting in lower top speed at altitude. And inferior engine performance as well. This resulted in an old joke from the Americans: "What happens when you Spey a bitch? She becomes fat and slow!"
@@adampolson6938does that negate the performance characteristics at altitude? “But muh video said🥴🥴” takeoff performance does not equal performance at altitude
@@adampolson6938 WhT was mentioned? The higher power, yes. The increased drag, no. Hence the fact that although more powerful, British Phantoms were slower than the standard J79 powered models and were less responsive at higher altitudes. Perhaps you should listen to RAF pilots who flew both types.
I think you UK is mow a fourth rate force almost as much of a joke as the Belgian military after all the cutbacks in defence spending these last ten years. I would sooner have Poland at my back if I went to war , their military especially army and airforce is soon going to be larger and more modern than the British
You mentioned the RAF Phantom being the FGR.2, but in reality that one came even later. The earlier ones were the FGR.1 (*correction: FG.1 (thanks Keith)) that my father flew. That trend carried onwards in the family and led me to the Typhoon FGR.4. For anyone wishing to fly fast jets, work hard for it and you won’t regret it. They are devilishly fun. When it comes to young kids today, I truly hope such an opportunity will still be available to them and that everything won’t have shifted to one fighter manned from a virtual cockpit on the ground with a bunch of AI flown loyal wingmen. It’s understandable that such things will happen since it’s lower risk and training costs, but it would be a shame if kids of today don’t get to grow up to fly whatever awesome fighter jets there may be by that time. For those of you on that path, I wish you the best of luck.
@ Sorry, my phone auto-incorrect likes to assume I’m going to write FGR the minute I put the first two letters. I guess it did that here too. Recently it’s been making really odd corrections to other parts of the sentences as well. I really. Need to get into the habit of checking what it is that comes out rather than just staring at the keyboard as I write. I’d love to fly the Phantom just for the experience of it. There’s not too many left now though.
@@thegreyarea-WPP I was in two minds to post anyway, you know your stuff. I worked on the simulators for F4K and F4M before moving on to Tornado IDS. Have a great day ;)
Why would the use of an American fighter be unthinkable? Britain has used aircraft from other countries from the beginning. The P-51 was originally developed for the RAF.
@@briancooper2112 wasn't Hortons, it just wasn't supercharged. On the deck it was a great performer, that's why the US used it for ground attack. But yes, at altitude it was gasping for breath.
I want to get with mcdonnell Douglas and design a third bent wing bird. This time with two stabilizers slanted away from each other front wings swept back but bent the same as the wings on the corsair and same color blue just like the corsair. It'll look like the child of the f4f phantom and sukoih su-57 and the corsair is the grandfather of it. Also just like the phantom the two smaller wings behind the front wings on the side will be pointing down diagonally but this time with two scram jet engines. I'll call it the f4c poltergeist.
When all was done, the SPEY powered F-4's had a lower combat radius, lower top speed and higher fuel usage rates at combat ratings than the turbojet powered F-4's. Installations effects (inlet and exhaust throttle dependent aerodynamic effects and higher fuel flow rates at combat power were significant contributors. Some of this led to more focus on aircraft-engine integration engineering in the late 60's and early 70's.
Just a suggestion, maybe one regular size carrier would be a win win, save on r&d, on plane and ship, endless mods and bonus a real carrier 😊 Justin case u need it?
During the trials, USN Phantom crews “zapped” the RN F-4’s that were on board the Saratoga. The Navy crews painted “Colonial Navy” on them and put WW2 style American roundels on them too.
The British took the F-4 and made it their own just like the U.S. took the Harrier and made it their own. The 2 countries who were once fierce enemies working together to better each other. Great tech comes from the U.S. and great tech comes from British however more often the best tech comes when we have worked together.
The Phantom was a bad MF to start with. I bet those rr engined planes were incredible. Not the prettiest plane but rugged and menacing looking for aure.
No, the new fighters are too expensive. I know, lets order off the shelf fighters. Oh no they don't work on our carriers. lets modify the planes we bought. While we are modifying the planes lets completely re-build them. Oh no the cheaper planes cost more than the ones we cancelled. The UK government at work.
@ronkennedy213 Yep,your government came up with the ultimate shortsighted approach when they cancelled the magnificent,decades ahead of it's time, Avro Arrow.
I was not a fan of the F-4 Phantom, trying to save money it was a Jack-of-all-trades while not being superior in any category except time to altitude. those variety of twist, bending & various funny looking notches in the Aircraft are all there to solve some kind of Problem, one of the F-4's more famous issues was during a battle it would occasionally swap ends, the Drogue chute was employed to help correct the wildly oscillating Jet
the Royal Navy should never have switched from CATOBAR aircraft carriers to STOVL carriers . . . inspite of knowing fully well that a STOVL carrier by design, has limited capabilities & unable to project power . . . guess the switch to STOVL was dictated by the type of carrier borne fighter the navy was planning to operate & low cost . . . and that new fighter jet was none other than the navalized carrier borne Hawker Sea Harrier VTOL FA.2 multi role all weather interceptor . . .
If Range Rover and Jaguar are any indication of the finest of British engineering, then I wonder how much better the British F4 was over the American..
Immagine the Carnage the British Phantom would have done to American thinner decks, All British Carriers ahve armoured decks. Nimitz Decks are only 2.5 Inches thick, whilst the deck of the Ark Royal was 3.5 inches thick. Apparently it did happen in exercise Ocean safari in 1975, and melted the US carrier's deck as well. Thus there was only one instance ever of a British Phantom F4-K usng an American carrier. Too much damage was done!
No. By that time the carriers which could field them had been scrapped. The aircraft carrier that went to the Falklands was HMS Hermes which carried Harriers. They did most of the aerial work. There was also one famous long-distance bombing run by Avro Vulcans from Ascension Island.
You are talking about problems with the phantoms in RAF service where as a lot of visions are in fact buccaneers.If you wish to give us interested persons an insight to history at least get the visual footage correct please.
As always Dark Skies makes a mountain out of a molehill and misrepresents what actually happened. It was HMS Eagle that had the problem with the Phantom FG1 overheating the deck. This was alleviated by bolting a plate over the location on the deck where the exhaust hit. The steel plates were kept abord Eagle just incase she needed to operate Phantoms in an emergency. HMS Ark Royal was fitted with water cooled Jet Blast Defectors as part of a planned refit to make her suitable to operate Phantoms. They were not rushed into service. This channel is full of shit.
One big correction to this video - top-end speed. Though the Spey provided greater thrust for takeoffs, the GE J79 Phantoms still had higher top-end speed.
I am grateful for channels like these ! I love this stuff ! Happy Thanksgiving to all !!!
!!!!!!🦃🦃🦃🦃💙💙💙
Was on the USS Independence 1971/2, cross decked with the Ark Royal, and saw the difference in J79 F4Js and British Navy Spey engined FG1s. Extreme nose gear extension for launch was also very noticeable. Only looks made them family😊
Phantastic plane... legend 👍✈️
Friend of mine was a Marine F4 pilot. He said they landed on a USAF base’s asphalt runway and when they took off, they also melted the runway. He said fleet F4’s engines were angled downward vs Air Force F4’s…
F3D Skynights were not very popular as their jet flow melted asphalt.
It always seems as if any time a government or business tries to save Money, they just wind up $pending more....
I was lucky enough to be a plane captain on a F4 aboard the USS Ranger CVA 61 69/70 in the Tonkin Gulf.
This came at a cost though The British F-4's had more drag resulting in lower top speed at altitude. And inferior engine performance as well. This resulted in an old joke from the Americans: "What happens when you Spey a bitch? She becomes fat and slow!"
It was mentioned in the first minute that the Spey had 30% more power. Were you not paying attention?
@@adampolson6938does that negate the performance characteristics at altitude? “But muh video said🥴🥴” takeoff performance does not equal performance at altitude
@@adampolson6938 WhT was mentioned? The higher power, yes. The increased drag, no. Hence the fact that although more powerful, British Phantoms were slower than the standard J79 powered models and were less responsive at higher altitudes. Perhaps you should listen to RAF pilots who flew both types.
It wasn't all plain sailing, though. One of the test pilots said that when they first installed the Spey, it was pushing flames out of both ends!
That must have been an eye-opener! Have a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year
Back when the US and UK were an unstoppable force.
I think you UK is mow a fourth rate force almost as much of a joke as the Belgian military after all the cutbacks in defence spending these last ten years. I would sooner have Poland at my back if I went to war , their military especially army and airforce is soon going to be larger and more modern than the British
Not the woke mess they be now in my humble opinion.
Oh that's cute
Do you not remember Vietnam?
You mentioned the RAF Phantom being the FGR.2, but in reality that one came even later. The earlier ones were the FGR.1 (*correction: FG.1 (thanks Keith)) that my father flew. That trend carried onwards in the family and led me to the Typhoon FGR.4.
For anyone wishing to fly fast jets, work hard for it and you won’t regret it. They are devilishly fun. When it comes to young kids today, I truly hope such an opportunity will still be available to them and that everything won’t have shifted to one fighter manned from a virtual cockpit on the ground with a bunch of AI flown loyal wingmen. It’s understandable that such things will happen since it’s lower risk and training costs, but it would be a shame if kids of today don’t get to grow up to fly whatever awesome fighter jets there may be by that time. For those of you on that path, I wish you the best of luck.
F4K, FG1
@ Sorry, my phone auto-incorrect likes to assume I’m going to write FGR the minute I put the first two letters. I guess it did that here too. Recently it’s been making really odd corrections to other parts of the sentences as well. I really. Need to get into the habit of checking what it is that comes out rather than just staring at the keyboard as I write. I’d love to fly the Phantom just for the experience of it. There’s not too many left now though.
@@thegreyarea-WPP I was in two minds to post anyway, you know your stuff. I worked on the simulators for F4K and F4M before moving on to Tornado IDS. Have a great day ;)
Why would the use of an American fighter be unthinkable? Britain has used aircraft from other countries from the beginning. The P-51 was originally developed for the RAF.
Yes. But the original engine was horrible.
The original P51 was designed as a medium altitude aircraft. It was developed into a high altitude fighter with the RR Merlin.@@briancooper2112
@@briancooper2112 wasn't Hortons, it just wasn't supercharged. On the deck it was a great performer, that's why the US used it for ground attack. But yes, at altitude it was gasping for breath.
Meant horrible, damn phone
The same attitude that hindered development of the Merlin/P51
"Stop burning holes in my ship!"
It's like a race car: "It needs to be fast". How fast do you want to go? "How much will it cost"? Depends. "On what"? How fast you want to go.
id never heard this story. way to go brits.
I want to get with mcdonnell Douglas and design a third bent wing bird. This time with two stabilizers slanted away from each other front wings swept back but bent the same as the wings on the corsair and same color blue just like the corsair. It'll look like the child of the f4f phantom and sukoih su-57 and the corsair is the grandfather of it. Also just like the phantom the two smaller wings behind the front wings on the side will be pointing down diagonally but this time with two scram jet engines. I'll call it the f4c poltergeist.
When all was done, the SPEY powered F-4's had a lower combat radius, lower top speed and higher fuel usage rates at combat ratings than the turbojet powered F-4's. Installations effects (inlet and exhaust throttle dependent aerodynamic effects and higher fuel flow rates at combat power were significant contributors. Some of this led to more focus on aircraft-engine integration engineering in the late 60's and early 70's.
Just a suggestion, maybe one regular size carrier would be a win win, save on r&d, on plane and ship, endless mods and bonus a real carrier 😊 Justin case u need it?
2:59 Damn I wonder if the RAF had any plans to replace the TF30’s on the F-111’s with Speys
What a fantastic aircraft!!
During the trials, USN Phantom crews “zapped” the RN F-4’s that were on board the Saratoga. The Navy crews painted “Colonial Navy” on them and put WW2 style American roundels on them too.
A beast to hot for its own nest .....luv it.
There you go, full size in the Falklands probably would have made a HUGE difference so far from home 😔
As Ella Fitzgerald would say about the British Phantom - Too Darn Hot!
It's about about the Phantom, yet you show a Buccaneer taking off...
1:11 ?
@@Bakaat777 Yupp. That's a Buccaneer. And if you watch closely, you'll see that it's not the only occasion they appear...
@@CaptainQuark9 Ah! Spoiler Alert! LOL I haven't finished watching yet.
@@Bakaat777 Oooops! Sorry 😁
Any excuse to show a Bucc is fine by me 🙃
A marvel of engineering. Then there's the Harrier
very interesting video, i assumed the british pantom was a lightly modified variant of the US aircraft but it's clearly not. thanks!
The F4 was a flying Brick 🧱!
Looks like a drag car. Wow
Sure does!!
Didn't a F4K also blow away one of the older US carriers wooden decks when on trials?
The British took the F-4 and made it their own just like the U.S. took the Harrier and made it their own. The 2 countries who were once fierce enemies working together to better each other. Great tech comes from the U.S. and great tech comes from British however more often the best tech comes when we have worked together.
The Phantom was a bad MF to start with. I bet those rr engined planes were incredible. Not the prettiest plane but rugged and menacing looking for aure.
No, the new fighters are too expensive.
I know, lets order off the shelf fighters.
Oh no they don't work on our carriers.
lets modify the planes we bought.
While we are modifying the planes lets completely re-build them.
Oh no the cheaper planes cost more than the ones we cancelled.
The UK government at work.
Canadian government. “Hold my beer, I can beat that”
@ronkennedy213 Yep,your government came up with the ultimate shortsighted approach when they cancelled the magnificent,decades ahead of it's time, Avro Arrow.
I was not a fan of the F-4 Phantom, trying to save money it was a Jack-of-all-trades while not being superior in any category except time to altitude. those variety of twist, bending & various funny looking notches in the Aircraft are all there to solve some kind of Problem, one of the F-4's more famous issues was during a battle it would occasionally swap ends, the Drogue chute was employed to help correct the wildly oscillating Jet
the Royal Navy should never have switched from CATOBAR aircraft carriers to STOVL carriers . . . inspite of knowing fully well that a STOVL carrier by design, has limited capabilities & unable to project power . . . guess the switch to STOVL was dictated by the type of carrier borne fighter the navy was planning to operate & low cost . . . and that new fighter jet was none other than the navalized carrier borne Hawker Sea Harrier VTOL FA.2 multi role all weather interceptor . . .
If Range Rover and Jaguar are any indication of the finest of British engineering, then I wonder how much better the British F4 was over the American..
TU95 German Bomber and Engine did in USSR by German engineer - speed less then 900KMH
Immagine the Carnage the British Phantom would have done to American thinner decks, All British Carriers ahve armoured decks. Nimitz Decks are only 2.5 Inches thick, whilst the deck of the Ark Royal was 3.5 inches thick. Apparently it did happen in exercise Ocean safari in 1975, and melted the US carrier's deck as well. Thus there was only one instance ever of a British Phantom F4-K usng an American carrier. Too much damage was done!
Why not just build bigger aircraft carriers?
They were going to, but they were also cancelled.
2:03 F4-afterburner (original audio)
Hey dark, you edited it out! Nobody knows but I do! Never forget!
Any Phantoms @ Faulklands war?
No. By that time the carriers which could field them had been scrapped. The aircraft carrier that went to the Falklands was HMS Hermes which carried Harriers. They did most of the aerial work. There was also one famous long-distance bombing run by Avro Vulcans from Ascension Island.
@@zh84 - Not forgetting HMS Invincible, the other albeit smaller aircraft carrier deployed by the RN to the South Atlantic.
Just the Argentinian ones that sunk a ship?. (Something like that).
@@TobyLawnjockey
They got the makeshift 'carrier' the Atlantic Conveyor after it had flown all its Harriers off
They had been scrapped in the late 70s defence review as they were astronomically expensive to run.
Only 2 bot accounts in the comments before I made my comment.
😂 social media has more bots than it does actual humans im convinced
Complimentary algorithm enhancement type of a comment!😊
What happened to the British Tornado 🌪?!
It's been replaced by
Typhoon's and F-35's
They’ll regret that
@@budwhite9591 Why? Both are far more capable than the Tornado.
You are talking about problems with the phantoms in RAF service where as a lot of visions are in fact buccaneers.If you wish to give us interested persons an insight to history at least get the visual footage correct please.
The British F4 phantom had much less range than the US phantom you consume way more fuel with their engine you gotta feed the ponies
❤❤❤
What car @3:00
1967 Chevrolet Chevelles SS396 a real beaut
@@pwilson-bs1ec Thank You. Miss those cars of the 60's
Dislike for clickbait titles.
As always Dark Skies makes a mountain out of a molehill and misrepresents what actually happened. It was HMS Eagle that had the problem with the Phantom FG1 overheating the deck. This was alleviated by bolting a plate over the location on the deck where the exhaust hit. The steel plates were kept abord Eagle just incase she needed to operate Phantoms in an emergency. HMS Ark Royal was fitted with water cooled Jet Blast Defectors as part of a planned refit to make her suitable to operate Phantoms. They were not rushed into service.
This channel is full of shit.
Please please stop saying Can-Berra, it just sounds odd and jarring. Can-Bruh is how it's pronounced.
Fartoosh?
NnnnNNnnoo no no iz PHANTOM now
why did you give your f4 to your stupid friend?
Greatest ride I ever took!
Because I made a lot of money ~ government
👀👍🇮🇪⚓
its not unthinkable tho , has always been same ,- uk idea us manufacture uk improvement , harrier ,hovercraft ,atom bombs ,apache etcetcetc