USAF Phantoms on deck?

On May 2, 7:29 am, John wrote:
Did USAF Phantoms ever land and take off from a carrier deck? I
believe that at least the USAF F4-C was at least initially was nearly
identical to the Navy F4-B. Was the F4-D and F4-E capable of taking
off and landing from a carrier deck? Was it ever done?

If the F4-D/E was not capable of carrier operations why? Was it from
systems not being able to take the stress or was it structural?

John Dupre'

AFAIK the quick answer is "no." I'm not sure that there was any
structural/systems reason behind it, I guess there was just never a
need. Again, AFAIK, there wasn't any MAJOR structural differences
between the USN and USAF versions that would have made them unable to
do carrier landings, they used the same Landing Gear and even the same
tailhook on both.
I would think the longer nose of the E-model would have made carrier
landings even more exciting…

On Fri, 2 May 2008 07:06:01 -0700 (PDT), Don McIntyre
wrote:

On May 2, 7:29 am, John wrote:
Did USAF Phantoms ever land and take off from a carrier deck? I
believe that at least the USAF F4-C was at least initially was nearly
identical to the Navy F4-B. Was the F4-D and F4-E capable of taking
off and landing from a carrier deck? Was it ever done?

If the F4-D/E was not capable of carrier operations why? Was it from
systems not being able to take the stress or was it structural?

John Dupre'

AFAIK the quick answer is "no." I'm not sure that there was any
structural/systems reason behind it, I guess there was just never a
need. Again, AFAIK, there wasn't any MAJOR structural differences
between the USN and USAF versions that would have made them unable to
do carrier landings, they used the same Landing Gear and even the same
tailhook on both.
I would think the longer nose of the E-model would have made carrier
landings even more exciting…

I'll ditto that. AFAIK, no USAF Phantom landed or catted on a carrier.
The C/D/E all had a trap capable tail hook and the same landing gear,
but they didn't have the extensible nose gear to establish attitude
for the cat shot and they didn't have the bridle fittings for the cat
hook-up.

I don't think that the E-model was any more difficult to see over the
nose than the pug-nosed versions.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

On May 2, 10:31*am, Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2008 07:06:01 -0700 (PDT), Don McIntyre





wrote:
On May 2, 7:29 am, John wrote:
Did USAF Phantoms ever land and take off from a carrier deck? *I
believe that at least the USAF F4-C was at least initially was nearly
identical to the Navy F4-B. *Was the F4-D and F4-E capable of taking
off and landing from a carrier deck? *Was it ever done?

If the F4-D/E was not capable of carrier operations why? *Was it from
systems not being able to take the stress or was it structural?

John Dupre'

AFAIK the quick answer is "no." I'm not sure that there was any
structural/systems reason behind it, I guess there was just never a
need. Again, AFAIK, there wasn't any MAJOR structural differences
between the USN and USAF versions that would have made them unable to
do carrier landings, they used the same Landing Gear and even the same
tailhook on both.
*I would think the longer nose of the E-model would have made carrier
landings even more exciting…

I'll ditto that. AFAIK, no USAF Phantom landed or catted on a carrier.
The C/D/E all had a trap capable tail hook and the same landing gear,
but they didn't have the extensible nose gear to establish attitude
for the cat shot and they didn't have the bridle fittings for the cat
hook-up.

I don't think that the E-model was any more difficult to see over the
nose than the pug-nosed versions.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"www.thunderchief.orgwww.thundertales.blogsp ot.com-

Didn't the USN models have their electronics better protected from
salt water?

In article
,
(Don McIntyre) wrote:
On May 2, 7:29 am, John wrote:
Did USAF Phantoms ever land and take off from a carrier deck?
AFAIK the quick answer is "no." I'm not sure that there was any
structural/systems reason behind it, I guess there was just never a
need.

Presumably USAF pilots - except for the few that had done a rotation to
USN carrier service - would not be trained for carrier work?

--
John Dallman, , HTML mail is treated as probable spam.