The AWACS would have operated somewhere over France. And that would ge quite a raid to go. Best thing Russian would have been able to do is use MiG-5s and or MiG-31s (depending on the timeframe) to make a maximum speed dash against those AWACS. They might have scored a hit. At leat they would have forced the AWACS to leave the station and dive for the ground to get cover. That would have oppened up the area for further strikes by other soviet assets.
On thoe other hand if NATO would have really used F-14s to protect the AWACS (there are some documents that indicate that this was at least discusse) Even such a raid would face a volley of 16 AIM-54 coming in. Add French Super 530 and F-15 with Sparrows it would still be a daring raid.

In general NVR fights would be rare. As all attackers would be doing an ultra low-level profile and then it comes to loo-down/shoot-down performance in which most fighters of the time were rather limited. (Except F-15, F-14, F-18, F-3 Tornado and to a lesser extent MiG-29 ad SU-27 (depending on time frame)) So most fights would be close to WVR range and then I still believe the AIM-9L would have made a difference.

Well what is the typical tactic for german F-4F ICE? Well first of all they are very used to closely operate with a fighter controller, be it in an AWACS or a groundstation. If any of those is available they try to keep their radars off for as long as possible.
The usual layout carried is 3 AMRAAM + 4 AIM-9L + ECM-pod. (at least for flight lead, No.2 often carries no ECM-pod and another AMRAAM instead)
The usual tactic is to make maximum use of the APG-65Y which is superior to most MLU F-16s and older F-18s. Another major factor is the WSO.
And they would choose an attack profile that will hide the smokey exhaust of the J-79s, so that a visual contact is made as difficult as possible.

But even in WVR combat the F-4 (when properly flown is still able to surprise some of the teen-fighters) I have seen some gun camera pics showing F-15s, F-16s and F-18s that have been caught within gun range of an F-4. But honestly speaking at the end of such excercises such victories become rare, as the technical superior fighters learn to win over the F-4F in WVR-combat.

And russian missilies were still a bit behind in the early to mid 80ies. Apart from R-73 (which in early version was not very good head-on) neither the R-60 nor any version of the R13 could compare to the AIM-9L, which was standard among NATO forces.

I think the AIM-9L could have made a difference in the airwar.

I think Airbus could upgrade the A332 to a leve lin which the /e/ is only slightly more economic. And in that case I could imagine that many airlines would decide to vote for the less risky, because tried, alternative.

Well. First thing I do is cut all existing hardware by 50% to save money. Then I will discover that the money saved should be better spent on social care, then on millitary hardware.

After that I open a tender for a too small number of airframes. Say 36 and just before announcing a winner I will close the tender again. I will continue doing so for years. Meanwhile I will only invest a minimum ammount in upgrades of current hardware.

After that I will declare that we are a peace loving nation and do not need a real millitary service, we will only keep a force for natural disasters and peace keeping. A fighter force is not needed.

So my choice would be :

– 12 C-130 for maritime patrol, SAR and transport
– 24 NH-90 for medevac and transport

and some white pigeons

Even old F-4 had a planned service life of 4000 hours. Some german examples are nearing 8000 now.

I can´t imagine how many hours some of the Iranian F-4s will have on the airframes.

I would not trsut the german fans during the EU 2004. Simply because Germany will be gone after loosing 3 games. The team is so crappy.

And especially the games against the Dutch were always critcal. I can not recommend wearing a Dutch shirt when watching the game in Germany.

Ups sorry. My fault. Will have to look at my data again.