F-8 versus F-4

Here's another Hunter Reunion thing.

Met several pilots at the reunion that transferred out of VF-201 quickly
when it transitioned from the F-8 to the F-4.

None of them had ANY interest in going from a fighter to an interceptor.
Was this common during that period? AND was it a mission thing or a
single-seat versus two-seat thing?

--Woody

It was like trading your sports car for a pickup truck, albeit a very
powerful and fast one.

As to the hun, except that it was a 1.3 jet vice 1.8, didn't have the legs
w/o tanks, didn't have nearly the overall maneuverability of the F-8
(although its instantaneous turn was close) ... yeh, I guess they were
close.

Certainly there was a single seat mentality ... "Never met a RIO yet worth
300# of gas!" OTOH, there were RIOs worth their weight in gold.

R / John

"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message
...
Here's another Hunter Reunion thing.

Met several pilots at the reunion that transferred out of VF-201 quickly
when it transitioned from the F-8 to the F-4.

None of them had ANY interest in going from a fighter to an interceptor.
Was this common during that period? AND was it a mission thing or a
single-seat versus two-seat thing?

--Woody

F-8 vs F-4? I assume you refer to dogfight/sidewinder comparison. The
F-8 with an F-8 pilot driving would usually beat an F-4 with an F-4
pilot driving prior to 1968. An F-4 with an F-8 pilot driving would
usually beat an F-8 (which was only flown by F-8 pilots). After 1968,
the F-4 with either F-8 or F-4 pilot driving would usually beat an F-8.
As an interceptor, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Carrier
landing suitability, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Make
that, overwhelmingly superior. I personally never observed an F-100
beat an F-8 at anything. I'm sure it happened sometime but I never
heard of it in my short 22 years of flying. It was single seat and
single engine but kind of a lead sled. Admittedly parochial.

"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

F-8 vs F-4? I assume you refer to dogfight/sidewinder comparison. The
F-8 with an F-8 pilot driving would usually beat an F-4 with an F-4
pilot driving prior to 1968. An F-4 with an F-8 pilot driving would
usually beat an F-8 (which was only flown by F-8 pilots). After 1968,
the F-4 with either F-8 or F-4 pilot driving would usually beat an F-8.

Not in my experience. Certainly the Phantom community learned considerably
from the Top Gun effort (originally just a bunch of VF-121 instructors
flying VF-126 A-4's). But it remained a difficult aircraft to exploit and
up to CAG-19's departure on the last Fighter Eight cruise in 1975, the ole
gator usually prevailed.

There were guys who mastered the Hawg and were the exceptions to this rule.
After I transitioned to the F-4 and started fighting it, I originally
observed "No wonder we beat up on this pig." After a few hundred hours that
became, "How did we EVER beat up on this beast?" Two J-79's could transform
their shipping containers into a formidable machine, but given the Phantom's
flying qualities it wasn't easy to extract its performance.

As an interceptor, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Carrier
landing suitability, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Make
that, overwhelmingly superior. I personally never observed an F-100
beat an F-8 at anything. I'm sure it happened sometime but I never
heard of it in my short 22 years of flying. It was single seat and
single engine but kind of a lead sled. Admittedly parochial.

A clean F-8 was a joyful machine to fly, but its radar and WCS were
obviously inferior to the Phantom. It was, ah, unforgiving around the blunt
end of the boat while the Phantom was utterly stable and predictable
(although ramp strikes were not unheard of).

R / John

On 5/11/05 7:18 AM, in article , "John
Carrier" wrote:


"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

F-8 vs F-4? I assume you refer to dogfight/sidewinder comparison. The
F-8 with an F-8 pilot driving would usually beat an F-4 with an F-4
pilot driving prior to 1968. An F-4 with an F-8 pilot driving would
usually beat an F-8 (which was only flown by F-8 pilots). After 1968,
the F-4 with either F-8 or F-4 pilot driving would usually beat an F-8.

Not in my experience. Certainly the Phantom community learned considerably
from the Top Gun effort (originally just a bunch of VF-121 instructors
flying VF-126 A-4's). But it remained a difficult aircraft to exploit and
up to CAG-19's departure on the last Fighter Eight cruise in 1975, the ole
gator usually prevailed.

There were guys who mastered the Hawg and were the exceptions to this rule.
After I transitioned to the F-4 and started fighting it, I originally
observed "No wonder we beat up on this pig." After a few hundred hours that
became, "How did we EVER beat up on this beast?" Two J-79's could transform
their shipping containers into a formidable machine, but given the Phantom's
flying qualities it wasn't easy to extract its performance.

As an interceptor, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Carrier
landing suitability, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Make
that, overwhelmingly superior. I personally never observed an F-100
beat an F-8 at anything. I'm sure it happened sometime but I never
heard of it in my short 22 years of flying. It was single seat and
single engine but kind of a lead sled. Admittedly parochial.

A clean F-8 was a joyful machine to fly, but its radar and WCS were
obviously inferior to the Phantom. It was, ah, unforgiving around the blunt
end of the boat while the Phantom was utterly stable and predictable
(although ramp strikes were not unheard of).

R / John



Good stuff, John.

Hey, drifting the topic... Would you mind e-mailing me a copy of the BRAC
article that USNI Proceedings published. I'm too cheap to subscribe, but
I'd like to read it.

--Woody

On Wed, 11 May 2005 18:27:53 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
wrote:

As an interceptor, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Carrier
landing suitability, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Make
that, overwhelmingly superior. I personally never observed an F-100
beat an F-8 at anything. I'm sure it happened sometime but I never
heard of it in my short 22 years of flying. It was single seat and
single engine but kind of a lead sled. Admittedly parochial.

While even a USAF type such as I will confess to a bit of envy
regarding the F-8, I've got to point out that the F-100 would carry
and deliver real iron and did a nice job hauling a special weapon.
Those are two regions in which the venerable Hun would, could and did
outperform the Crusader.


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

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 May 2005 18:27:53 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
wrote:

As an interceptor, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Carrier
landing suitability, the F-4 was vastly superior to the F-8. Make
that, overwhelmingly superior. I personally never observed an F-100
beat an F-8 at anything. I'm sure it happened sometime but I never
heard of it in my short 22 years of flying. It was single seat and
single engine but kind of a lead sled. Admittedly parochial.

While even a USAF type such as I will confess to a bit of envy
regarding the F-8, I've got to point out that the F-100 would carry
and deliver real iron and did a nice job hauling a special weapon.
Those are two regions in which the venerable Hun would, could and did
outperform the Crusader.

Certainly advantage Hun if you were interested in the various aspects of
urban renewal. For the single-minded air superiority types, "Not a pound
for air-to-ground!"

R / John

While even a USAF type such as I will confess to a bit of envy
regarding the F-8, I've got to point out that the F-100 would carry
and deliver real iron and did a nice job hauling a special weapon.
Those are two regions in which the venerable Hun would, could and did
outperform the Crusader.

Not on real iron, Ed. The Navy had little use for them, but the Marines did
use the two underwing pilons on F-8E/J to carry a good variety of iron. Two
2,000lb Mk84s were not unusual, coupled with Sidewinders or Zunis on the
fuselage rails. That, in my book, is real iron.
_____________
José Herculano

Hi John,
You sound very much like a guy you'd have to beat back to the ready
room to beat. Different opinions are what kept the beer flowing in the
WOXOF room. Every cockpit had a different view.

Must point out to the bluesuiters singing the F-100 AG praises, that,
we carried lots of ordnance into North Vietnam on the F-8, probably
half the hops, generally as flak suppressors. I could be wrong, but I
don't the the F-100 ventured far north of the DMZ carrying iron.
Perhaps their scheduling seniors were just smarter than ours. We
considered hops south of the DMZ as R&R.

"Bob" wrote in message
ups.com...

Must point out to the bluesuiters singing the F-100 AG praises, that,
we carried lots of ordnance into North Vietnam on the F-8, probably
half the hops, generally as flak suppressors. I could be wrong, but I
don't the the F-100 ventured far north of the DMZ carrying iron.
Perhaps their scheduling seniors were just smarter than ours. We
considered hops south of the DMZ as R&R.

That's nice. To the troops on the ground looking for the CAS, it wasn't such
a playground.

Glenn D.