I`d be shitting my pants, but would also be enjoying every minute of it. To be able to look up and see fighters go vertical that close above my head, They could melt me to dust with their burners and I`d die smiling.

My dad flew the KC-135 during Vietnam. I'm guessing he refueled quite a few of them.

I never got to do arial fueling. That would have been awesome. I just had a truck with 5000 gallon of JP4. I enjoyed refueling transit birds. F 16s, C135s, an F111, several Lear type jets that the higher comand flew around in. It was great to be around all them. To lay hands on some really great and iconic aircraft.

The f105 was something I was introduced fairly recently, I knew of it, but man that thing could climb. Edit: nope meant the f104

Thank you for you service sir

That is @5:44 and if it was 41,000 ft/sec that would be 28,000 mph which of course is impossible.

Honest mistake imo...

@@michaelmurda8899 Yup, I understand.

He does this on a regular basis. It's to generate more comments. And it works.

@@Impedancenetwork Faster than escape velocity from Earth...😂

The F4 wanted to head to space! 😁

😂

So that means it could get from the runway to its service ceiling in under two seconds 😉

Double secret afterburners 😂

If true that would have meant the F4 could exceed escape velocity, which is a mere 36,700 feet per second. It would also be travelling at better than Mach 36 straight up...

🥊

What an awesome childhood memory to have, lucky. lol

Good chance your dad knew my uncle 🤪

Which means that your dad was among the elite CRIMINALS who showered the Vietnamese with NABALM bombs

how does it feel to have a murderer terrorist of a dad?

I worked them in AF and did not know Portland had switched from the Voodoo's when I was downtown after I was out and heard that VERY distinctive sound overhead... surprise.

My buddy in college was in the ANG and flew F4s outta Portland. It's been awhile but I remember them there.

The F4 reminded me of big American muscle cars in that era . Just dump as much fuel and energy as possible into as powerful an engine you can fit in there , point it fairly straight and let it go . Even though the F4 wasn't a dog fighter it was/is one of the most beautiful gutsy classics. There's something really cool about "very fast and powerful" that's hard to outgrow :).

@@pal6636 exactly right. It was so loud and just amazing. I sat in one in the hanger. I was in Cub Scouts.

Me too

Cool facts. Any idea why H designation for McDonald Douglas ?

I can see why it was changed.

@@pj7362 I can only think it was because Douglas (before the the merger) already had the D designation, and McDonnell was already H. They didin't always make sense, e.g. Consolidated (Convair) was Y, e.g. PBY Catalina (First Patrol Bomber from Consolidated).

That was before it was designated F-110?

@@sulufest The F4H was a Navy interceptor first. When the USAF adopted it, they gave it the designation F-110. Then the tri-service designation came and it became the F-4 for both the USAF and USN. Lots of changes happened, the North American A3J became the A-5, the Douglas AD became the A-1 Skyraider. Interesting enough the Douglas A3DSkywarrior became the A-3 for the Navy, but B-66 for the USAF.

I lived at the end of the runway at Ellsworth in R City SD, i was in a mobile home, I watched and felt the B1B Lancers take off at night or early mornings...house shook like a tin can....blue flames of the afterburners shot out 100 yards behind the plane..;.but I loved the noise of those engines...I felt secure, with such awesome power defending us..

What happened

He died trying to kill people

I repaired a fuel leak on a Marine F-4 that made an emergency landing at Charleston AFB SC, they were on their way to Parris Island MB

I worked on the weapons systems radar on the F-4E. (the one with the gun). Once I tried lifting one on my head. It didn't work. I was under it testing the Aim7 missile systems and rose up to fast and high. The plane didn't notice but I certainly did.

I worked it along with other fighters of that era, and it was a dog to work on. Took more maintenance manhours per flying hour than a B-52.

@Doug Dieter ouch! Yeah, it seems like I did that very thing under a triple ejector rack on an F-16. Thought I was clear and went to stand up. Ended up on all 4's with a knot on the back of my head. It's plenty funny now but when it happened it hurt like hell. LOL😆

@Dave I hear that all right. Yep, back then there were certain aircraft that were like that. The F-4, F-111, and B-52 were all like that. Me personally, I worked on the G and H model B-52's for about5 years and they were a real mother to work on. I always hated that about them.

How often did the Sparrows fail?

@@lancekilkenny721 -- I know you didn't ask me but I'll answer for him. It depends on the period. Initially, they succeeded only 14% of the time (meaning "did not hit their intended target"). The biggest problem for the Sparrow - even when it did fire - was the ROE requiring identification... the Sparrow wasn't designed for close-in fighting. The other problem was weapons handling and the impact of landings on the missile. They discovered that weapons handlers were doing things like installing fins with hammers, and other things you aren't supposed to do that severely effected the missile's reliability. The other thing they discovered was that the missile was not being serviced often enough between landings, which were about as abusive to the missiles as the weapons handlers initially were. Once those two problems were corrected, the success rate of the missile was better, but both services had the AIM-9 Sidewinder by then and relied on it more by that time, so the Sparrows didn't get a lot of love after that. For the entirety of the war, the U.S. shot down 199 enemy aircraft in air-to-air conflicts, of which the Sparrows shot down 13 Mig-17s, 5 Mig-19s, 41 Mig-21s, 2 An-2s. Meaning that 61 total planes, or 30% of all enemy aircraft were downed by an AIM-7 Sparrow (not too shabby for a missile that gets so much hate). Meanwhile, the AIM-9 accounted for 45 Mig-17s, 31 Mig-21s, 4 Mig-19s. So, 80 total planes, or 40% of all enemy aircraft downed in air-to-air action. Another thing to consider is the number fired compared to the number of kill results. For the AIM-9, there were 452 Sidewinders fired for a kill probability of 17.7%, whereas the Sparrow was fired 612 times for a kill probability of 9.8%. However, that does not take into account the number of times the Sparrow was used to shoot at things like drones. How many of those were successful? The Sparrow, and the Sidewinder, were both almost certainly far more successful than this basic math equation - comparing the number fired to the number of enemy fighter aircraft (plus two AN-2s) downed - would imply. These results also tell us that the remaining 58 enemy aircraft were downed by cannon fire (something the F-4 totally had for 8 years of the war). Of the 199 aircraft shot down in air-to-air conflicts, 147 of them were shot down by the F-4 Phantom. The F-4 was introduced in Vietnam in August of 1964 (not 1961 as Dark Skies got wrong). On June, 30 1967, the US Air Force received their first F-4E in Vietnam, which had an internal 20mm cannon. So, for eight years (otherwise known as the "vast-majority-of-the-war"), the USAF had an F-4 with a dedicated, *internal* 20mm cannon (the thing every historian loves to mistakenly claim that it DIDN'T have), which they used to great effect.

@@lancekilkenny721 Good question - I only fired one AIM-7 at a drone and it worked as advertised. I was at Udorn when Steve Ritchie was spreading MiG parts all over the north - and if I am not mistaken he got his 5 kills with the Sparrow - he was a brilliant fighter pilot and tactician - I also believe every one of the missiles he fired worked - now where there misfires - yes - but if you knew how to employ the weapon correctly it worked pretty well - I don't have the figures on what percentage failed but I'm sure a search of Google will get you that number

Thanks sir

They also did practice landings on the Autobahn with the F4 I think

@@mipmipmipmipmip yes, in former times there were parts of the Autobahn that could be changed to an airfield by the Bundeswehr. Today these places and parts don't exist anymore

They were at NAS Oceana when I was in an A-6 squadron. They were very loud & their exhaust was very dirty.

Their nickname in the Luftwaffe was Air Defense Diesel

@@PaulJohnson-vn7eh that's why the black exhaust from this jet. Yes, it was called "Luftverteidigungs- Diesel".

I think Iran might still use their old Phantoms

Yes, with updated Avionics, it is a plane that deserves respect...and fear!!!

Now, that's a Coc! 💪

Very similar to today's 'Ghost of Kyiv'.

The Vietnamese say they never heard of him.

The mythic 20 minute to and fro air fight was a made up Navy crew cover story. Courageous embellishment fib hiding fears of actual combat where you could get shot down, captured, or killed. 'It took 20 minutes, but we finally got him.'

​@@thefrecklepunyyep. War propiganda never really changes

My uncle flew the F4 for the Israeli Air Force. He said that and the Mirage were like strapping the jet to your back and flying. Said the F15 onwards that pure seat of the pants started to gradually go away

A lot of pilots transformed their aircraft into slower-moving models right before ejection to improve survivability.

Hshaha go to ukrania now. Hahaha

@@CarlosGutierrez-vz1gn For what? To see the Wagner duraks being ejected? 😑

As in the 1958 Robert Mitchum movie « The Hunters » the about to crash 💥 F-86 suddenly turned into a F-100 before 💥

@@minhthunguyendang9900 Good morning, Vietnam. In 1958, I was only 9, so I missed that one. 😑

German guy here. I lived in a small town up on a hill on the "Lahntal" in Hessen (50km from Frankfurt Airbase) When the A10's the F104 and the F4 rumbled down the Lahntal i could watch them in their cockpit ! (Close to day by day) Our house was higher on the hill than they flew ! |How i miss the noises and thunder ....

Your English is about flawless, German friend. Sorry that the FRG was seduced/pressured into buying the F-104; as a result, so many Luftwaffe men died in the plane, IMO, one clearly unsuitable for any role outside of pure interceptor.

@@brianjob3018 : Thank you bro. I agree 100% with you, but is was the German "government"s" false not the F104"s. Funfakt : When i served my time in the German Navy as a "Seal" (German mine diver are close to the same as your Seals), my Captain was a former F104 pilot who crashed his bird into the Baltic Sea ... lololol Funfakt 2 : I protected the USS IOWA from under water attacks in 1987 when this beauty was in Germany. Greets from Poland (Where i live since 2019)

ow truly? never heard this

Interesting. Whilst l was watching this video I was wondering if pilots ever shot down planes from their own side and blamed the enemy.

I caught that too 🫣🙄

But sadly, the pilot will permanently attached to the seat.

The Space Shuttle only climbed at around 2000 feet per second, pulling 4 to 9 g, depending on boosters and remaining fuel, etc.

Warp 1 😂

@@nostradamus7648 Then we should rename the Phantom to Phoenix.

I worked on them, they didn't break like the F5 & F15

@@lesheath6216 that’s cool.

US does not have access to the Vietnamese records from the era.

@@chrisrautmann8936 then how do they he existed then?

@@daveriddell3704 It is guessed that Col. Toon was more than one pilot (as he "flew" multiple types of aircraft), and was a very useful propaganda tool. An equivalent would be the mythical "Ghost of Kyiv" last year. Also, reports of enemy fighter kills are almost guaranteed to be exaggerated. Lastly, Duke Cunningham was charged and convicted of fraud. He has a history of not being 100% honest about his past. It's a good story, but I don't know if there's any independent evidence of his shootdown of Col. Toon. It's still a good story.

Yes, the 'legend' has been dispelled

And Iran

Turkish Air Force sent 2 of them to RIAT /Duxford in 2019

Warp 6 Mr. Sulu

Yeah, I came down here to comment on that. Hahaha

Should be per minute. I remember standing near the runway at Marine Corps Air Station ElToro CA in 1966 and watching an F-4 go vertical from takeoff.

Figured someone beat me to it 😂

It was a mistake. An honest mistake imo...

Having others comment like this just does my heart good.😃

Why the Japanese battle flag on the tails??

@@DaveSCameron One USN squadron has that logo. Not sure why.

@@Frankie5Angels150 Ah really, I appreciate your reply here thanks 👍

What year were at kaneohe bay? I live a few miles from there now...

@@uraigroves7898 83’ - 87’

Flying brick.

An AFROTC buddy of mine described it as a 90% efficient machine for turning JP4 into noise.

Wings optional

Right there with ya...USAF 77-81 Homestead AFB 31TFW.

Hence the nickname "Lead Sled"

Young Sheldon had already figured it out.

greek pilots for the f4 were insane and brilliant . great u tube videos of the recce birds scaring hell out of beachgoers

@@danf4447 They fly in conditions similar to war everyday.

Wow…!

Figures. That’s Naval Intelligence for you.

It just looks menacing and dangerous...just sitting still...and it still is.

The F4 was secretly contracted by NASA to reach low earth orbit. 😁

It sure as h**l would be if anything on this planet were capable without tearing the wings off,lol.

Caught that too.

Right. 41,000 feet is about 7.75 miles. 7.75 miles times 60 = 465 miles per minute. 465 miles times 60 = 27,900 miles per hour. 27,900 divided by 767 = Mach 36. It's a wonder it didn't do the first flight to the moon. It's also good to see the A-10 Warthog doing its' bit in the Vietnam conflict. 9:36

Quality has been slipping of late…

Also, apparently Colonel Tomb never actually existed according to postwar research

They used a centre mounted gun pod but it wasn't that effective because the mounting wasn't stable so it would shoot all over the place.

A large gun pod was developed hung on the centerline, but vibration made it less than accurate. The E model introduced the fixed nose gun. A much better solution.

@@lancerevell5979 Thank you!

Not very stable for any deflection shooting at distance which, otherwise NATO rounds are capable of if the pilot is. Eventually what they did is find a place up in front with all that weaponized tech, to put a 20 mm Vulcan Gatling type cannon in the nose of the F4E variants. Aircraft designers innovating new tech just hate to hear when their innovation or idea, whatever it is, isn't going to work and they will put off what they no doubt have convinced themselves is "devolution" as long as they can before actually being forced by the company to trash can the concept. Until then they might just try every Rube Goldberg "fix it" scheme they can dream up to try and make their idea work. .

The Mig 21 isn't that big.

For...?

​​@@who_everhought I was clear on that when I mentioned "an aircraft that broke 16 major speed records." 🤔

Not really even out-accelerate, just a better rate of turn in a dogfight situation.

@Who Ever that'd be the F-4U Corsair. Beautiful gullwing design, marine blue paint, a bitch to land on a carrier... Gimme something hard next time...jkjk. 😉✈️

​@@who_ever You really proud of yourself? You are in a comment section below a video on an F-4 Phantom. Seek help.

@Who Ever you're right, how dare I comment on an aircraft that flew 81yrs ago, considering I'm half that age...what was I thinking??

Those tiny wings were lousy for turning and taking off into the unpredictability of windage, airborne seawater and cat power. Re: the last issue, "The foremost deficiency is that the (steam) catapult operates without feedback control. With no feedback, there often occurs large transients in tow force that can damage or reduce the life of the airframe." (Source: Doyle, Michael, Douglas Samuel, Thomas Conway, and Robert Klimowski. "Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System - EMALS". Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst. 1 March. p. 1.) I take this to mean steam catapults did not provide information to the system sufficient to maintain even acceleration of the piston throughout the entire length of its 225-276 foot stroke. Those transients could lead to inconsistent delivery of forward momentum to the aircraft as well as the more often identified issue with uneven catapult force damaging airframes. I confess to not "liking" the F-4 Phantom one damn bit. Maybe I had my fill of watching Phantoms over the skies of North and South Vietnam. The lines of the fuselage are OK, but those wings look like they belong on a Dodo. This model was delivered as the pinnacle of fighter technology, but without a cannon. This was more of a psychological deficiency as few air-to-air victories resulted from cannon fire. Their inability to perform as a missile carrier was due to a combination of shitty missiles and shittier training. Ergo, the Top Gun program, which has been rendered pointless since the USAF is convinced most future airborne warfare will be conducted BVR. This is why the F-22 was discontinued and the F-15 is being turned into a "bomb truck." Certain the F-35 is too stealthy to be "seen" at the moment, it too has no cannon for WVR engagements. Obviously, this is not 55 years ago, so I hope repeating this deficiency is truly no cause for concern.

The pilot over rotated the aircraft it happens .

I didn’t catch it either

@@mouser485 I thought I was the only one to notice that!

YES!

Yes it was

The RF-4C flew in DS as well. Both Active and Guard.

I saw spares in a Navy warehouse still marked F-110

Grew up near Patrick AFB, as a teenager I remember they had 0V-10 Broncos, an the O2 birds on base.

At this time, you are the 37th person to repeat that comment. Maybe something original next time...

I knew as soon as I heard that, someone had to have commented. I like the ST reference.😆