After the C, did USAF had bridle attach points? Were the landing gear identical in spec (IIRC, they were less robust on the E)? I think it's likely that the E had structure optimized for its mission and may no longer have been carrier suitable. USN J/S had fat tires too.

OBTW, the T-2A (Had the misfortune to fly iy in basic jet all the way through forms) had a J-34. Idle to Military in 17 seconds. YTou could smoke a cigarette in that amount of time. By comparison, I can remember a mishap board suggesting an F-4 ramp strike had as a contributing factor the "slower spool-up time" of the J79-10B (smokeless) versus the straight Dash-10. In my opinion, a J-79 had essentially instantaneous throttle response. But what do I know?

R / John
"Mike Kanze" wrote in message . ..
In addition to others' comments, there might also have been engine settings in USAF F-4s incompatible with JP-5 fuel used aboard carriers.

Some USN birds (IIRC, the T-2A, with its single J-37 engine) required either different mechanical or switch settings when changing from shore-supplied JP-4 to shipboard JP-5, or back again.

--
Mike Kanze

"The Internet is like one of those garbage dumps outside of Bombay. There are people, most unfortunately, crawling all over it, and maybe they find a bit of aluminum, or perhaps something they can sell. But mainly it's garbage."

- Joseph Weizenbaum (1923 - 2008), MIT computer science professor and inventor of ELIZA

"John" wrote in message ...

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'