If Convair had been given a chance to develop the F-106 into a multirole fighter I’m not so sure they needed so many Phantoms. I heard the F-106 pilots in the ADC were able to hold their own against F-4 pilots in what amounted to a crude dac program. Not bad for something that was supposed to get replaced by the likes of the F-4 but never was because it offered no real improvement in capability.

They used to pack Rapiers on the lawn and one on the building itself. Have no idea what today’s shield consists of, but they most probably involve a little more stopping power than a Stinger.

F-4B USN version with 20mm cannon

At the risk of sounding rude, your arguments just lost a lot of credibility with this statement….

*pow! right in the kisser* 😉

Yeah, I flubbed that one.

Never was a true Phantom fan just as I didn’t much care for the F-101B Voodoo before it. I like the F3H’s shape but never warmed up to its successors. I’m just more hip to single-seaters; fighters like the F1 and Crusader, interceptors like the Delta Dart and Foxbat, and fighter-bombers like the Corsair and Thud. My idea of a nice looking single-seat twin engine fighter during the F-4’s reign is the F.6 Lightning, which was only an interceptor and falls short in the overall comparison. The F-14 and F-111 were already flying by the time I remotely found interest in the two-seaters.

For some compelling reason the F-15 won my heart over the F-14 in the air-to-air role just because it was a single-seater. I’ve always been more a fan of chivalry, just one man and his machine pitted against his adversary. The F-4 needed to be a single seater to win room in my heart.

Mirage III in that era were not an all around system comparable to F1 and the ones that shared the F1’s engine were largely neutered for improving their ground attack roles.

When you get down to the 70’s, there really weren’t many options left by that time period. You had a lot of new designs in the 50’s and 60’s that were retired by that time. And you had a few entering service late in the decade, which a few dismiss as being too few. So in that respect it is difficult to say that the F-4 was not the best of that era.

It would be fair to ask, however, which version – the AF or the naval version – was the better fighter. As you can see there were quite a few variants.

1960’s

F-4A USN early version
F-4B USN version with 20mm cannon

late 1960’s through mid-1970’s

F-4C USAF version ommitted gun
F-4D USAF version
F-4E USAF version w/ engine and wing upgrades, built-in cannon
F-4EJ JASDF version w/o air refueling or ground attack capability
F-4K Royal Navy F-4J version, spey engines, fleet defense role
F-4M Royal AF F-4J version, spey engines

1970’s

F-4F Luftwaffe’s pure air superiority version
F-4J USN upgraded version also used by USMC
F-4N USN upgraded F-4B
F-4S USN upgraded F-4J also used by USMC

With the easy to traverse highway from SO to the Georgian capital I don’t think basing American planes on their territory is wise at all. The Russians would simply drive the ground and swamp the airbases with people rather than planes. Georgia can only hope to take a page from Finland’s or Serbia’s self defense forces, stick to the mountains with light gear and be willing to trade men for tanks.

Less payload, range, choice of weapons.

That may be true but the Mirage F1 played clean up very well against the F-4’s and F-14’s over Iran.

firebar, where did you get the 10 pheonix launches in Iraq? F-14’s only got two potential intercept opportunities that I can recall. And the Iran-Iraq conflict doesn’t seem to account for any launches of Pheonix against MiG-25’s. What is the source of your claim?

We’ve got one of those out here at the SAC Museum.

http://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/12766