"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:39:38 -0700, "Daryl Hunt"
wrote:




McDonnell Douglas classed it as a Fighter/Bomber. Do you mean they are
wrong and you are right?

Despite a role as a "Fighter/Bomber" the Phantom was NEVER at any time
or by any using nation identified with either a FB-4 or BF-4
nomenclature. That includes, but is not limited to F-4B, C, D, E, F,
G, J, K, S and RF-4 versions.

The only application in the modern era of the FB nomenclature was the
SAC version of the Aardvark, the FB-111.

I have never stated that the US Air Force EVER used the term FB-4. But we
both know that the 4 comes at the end of a time that a Fighter/Bomber was
classed just that way. Of course, it was also the first Multirolled Fighter
that all others follow even today. But it's more than a bit of a stretch
not to include it as a bomber as well as a fighter since it did both roles
equally well depending on the loadout.

BTW, Ed, the 404thk00ks also stated that there was nothing ever named with a
FB yet there were more than a few. All I have stated is that the 4 met the
criteria of a FB at the time it was introduced and even MD classed it as a
FB originally.