I can relate to what he’s talking about. I started out on F-15’s in 1976 at Langley AFB, Virginia. They were far more advanced than F4’s but you still had to troubleshoot them, they wouldn’t tell you what was going on. What he said about leaking and having problems after some down time was so true. The more they were flown the better they got. I went on to work on F-16’s and A-10’s but my true love was the F-15. F-16’s didn’t break as much but they were squirrelly to troubleshoot. The A-10’s hardly ever broke at all. It was my experience that the older planes made for a better technician. One would have to be able to really learn their trade. Guys I met who came from B-52’s were damn good technicians because of the maintenance that went into them.
Very well said. You know what you're talking about concerning the aircraft technologies. Your comment about the F-16s being "squirrelly" had me laughing and brought back some late night memories trying to keep warm in an aircraft shelter in West Germany. I worked the same jets as you and a couple more as a 462...weapons troop. Glad to meet a fellow Eagle Keeper!
Daniel Miller You must have been at Hahn. I went to Kunsan, Korea with a follow on to Hahn but I was having way too much fun going TDY all over the Pacific so I extended at Kunsan. I spent many a cold night out working on F-16’s. I did get a ride in one though. I was an electrician but. Nice visiting with you Daniel. Go Air Force!
I used to deliver avionics for the RAF Phantom. I remember going to BAE where they did in depth life extension work which involved stripping down the airframe. I was taking to one of the engineers and the aircraft in the bay at the time still had battle damage scars from Vietnam.
I was 15 tango crew chief on a uh60 black hawk. And I agree input from the ground crew is good to hear as well. Part of a good aircraft is turn around time and the maintenance aspect. But to me the F 4 will always be 1 of the best aircraft ever built. My uncle flew them in Vietnam and it's ability to take damage and stay in the air. Is the only reason I got to meet him
Love to see people make an effort to save them, it's such a great aircraft. I especially love the earlier ones with the large nose, they just look _right_
Great interview- every bit as interesting in it's own way as any aircrew interview. Inspiring to hear the admiration and affection he has for the Phantom. Interesting how some aircraft seem to do that. Not so many current service ones I wager. To top it off this bloke is saving Phantoms that remain, with a sense of urgency. For what it's worth- very well done.
Wow, play this back to back with one of the Brit QRA F-4 pilot interviews and you get "The Complete Phantom". Great interview! A real step up from just a talking head.
Very interesting to hear the ground crew's perspective. Had an uncle who worked on Mosquitos on 418 sqn during the war. Became an electrical engineers afterwards. Didn't really like talking about the war though but loved the Mosquito and to him it the greatest airplane ever made. The older the airplane the more interesting !
I spent a couple of years at RAF Leconfield (60 MU) between 73-76 working on major structural modifications to Phantom F4K &M. Totally gutted the jets and did a bunch of different modifications to repair fatigue failures in certain skins and stop the fatigue/corrosion problems in the wing skins and spars, plus fitting the ECM on top of the fin and the two side aerials it was about the most intensive, interesting work I was involved in, and stood me in good stead in 82 modifying Harrier GR3s in Germany to go to the Falklands as replacements for aircraft already there. As the man said great days, lots of work but lots of fun too.
Interesting. I was at Halton in 83, doing my mechanics course. Then spent the next four years at Church Fenton on Jet Provosts. Some aircraft that were always going wrong were nicknamed Hanger Queens
Was an armourer on Phantoms. First posting after Halton was Leuchars (missile city), then Germany, then back to Coningsby (228 OCU), Germany again, then back to Coningsby once more, this time in ASF. I eventually returned to Coningsby for a third time this time as an Instructor on the Phantom Servicing School, teaching the Phantom weapons system. That was probably the best job of the lot but short lived, as the worst possible thing that could happen - happened! Communism in Russia collapsed, and that sounded the death knell for the Phantom with the RAF and thus the school.
X F-4 airframe fitter here: In B-check, we checked & replaced loose fastners in the "fish scale" hot zone titanium panels rear to the engines. N.B. To my recollection, the arrestor hook is made of solid titanium, not stainless. I miss the Phantoms.
Good effort Paul, checked your pins but forgot about the brake chute! :-). Ex 228 fairy but got there in 88 so probably after you left. Keep up the good work, didn't realise poor old 409 got scrapped a few years ago, had some history with that one and last saw it down south outside the terminal building.
Visited Coningsby in 99/00. Gate guard directed us to far side of airfield. There we could just see some Phantoms, in grey, being cut apart, put together, taken apart again, by RAF apprentices. Very sad.
Assuming XV408 was with 92 Squadron in 1987, I would have worked on it's wheels, external fuel tanks and oxygen equipment - I did a YTS scheme with the air force at RAF Wildenrath, working in one of the external bays.
yep 408 was flown then by 92's boss wing commander Ken Claxton, one of the nicest guys i have had pleasure knowing, there is a video of him taking 408 on its last operational flight before it was brought back to the UK
What he missed out was the electrical after flight ground checks. This included checking the heaters on the stabilator feel probe and pitot probe mounted on the vertical fin were still working. You had to walk along the spine, often when it was cold, wet, windy and dark to take off the covers that someone else had had to walk along the spine to put on. Then return to the cockpit, check the seat pins and switches were safe, put power on and then switch on the probe heaters for about 15 seconds, switch the heaters off then power off before walking back down the spine to check the probes were warm and refit the covers. Before setting off for another flight someone had to walk along the spine again to remove the covers.
Jet fighters are like expensive sports cars. Spend more time working on them than driving them. Lol. But that's the way it is. It's designed for air to air and air to ground combat. Definitely like he said, complicated.
Were British FGR2 and RNFAA F-4J/K assembled in UK, from kits made in US, or were compl;ete aircraft delivered for local modifications? Perhaps soup ro nuts complete fabrication and assembly as part of offset agreement?
One of my favorite childhood aircraft, and enjoyed the hung over British guys take on it. What's up with that o so British eyesore of a paint job? CAG aircraft maybe? Just being silly but am curious and thanks for sharing.
Big Beast is right,bigger than a WW11 Wellington Bomber! Had a Thrill Of A Lifetime Sitting In The Back Seat Of a USAF F4 Doing A Fasr Taxi at RAF Alconbury Back In The 70s
You'd think the RAF would have removed or cut the hook off? It just gave the ground crew an extra thing to worry about and if it weighed 400lbs it was dead weight.......
Such a confusing aircraft to fly I don't think I could get used to it. Up at speed you use the rudder peddels alone to roll and Bank the aircraft. if you were to use the control stick the aircraft would actually roll in the opposite direction of stick deflection.
Not quite... It's low speed and high AOA where you use the rudder to roll, not at high speed. There is a saying F-4 pilots use, 'when it buffets, use your boots...', or words to that effect! :-)
I'll never forget back in the 90's I almost bought a fully built up but not active ejection seat out of a Phantom for $500. Wish I hadn't passed that one up.
Dang, should’ve done it! I worked ejection systems on F-15C/D’s and F-22A’s from 2003-2009. Those jets have the ACES II seat in them. I’ve still got some spare parts from them and would kill to have an actual seat. Not sure what an ACES II seat shell would cost these days. F-4’s had the Martin Baker seats didn’t they? Meet your maker in a Martin Baker was the saying.
I used to work on F/A-18, legacies and Rhinos, as well as sh 60s. Helos are pain in the ass because they don't tell you shit, especially when it comes down to troubleshooting the rotors.
What Tom Ling said. Occasionally brakes fail even if properly serviced, so most military air bases have an arrestor system. The cable spool used contains a longer cable than the one used on an aircraft carrier so the deceleration is much gentler, spread over a much longer landing run. This means even if a non-carrier aircraft has to use it the stresses won't break the aircraft. The hooks on non-carrier aircraft are quite weak and in come cases need replacing each time they are used. Since they are considered to be emergency equipment that is not as bad as it sounds.
Why don’t you tell Paul, or pass a message onto Paul you don’t need to build a website any more, it might be advisable if you looked into building of Wix site, this will cost £110 a year including the domain name, plus you can build a shop into it and many other things including newsletters... I have built them for many customers.
I decided that I still like Sea Vixen more for two reasons. 1. SeaVixen is a slicker, sexier looking aircraft. Like a pancake. 2. I am inherently an evil man. Once I saw the radar system's officer station in SeaVBixen, I decided that I want to torture another man by shoehorning him into SeaVixen RSO pit. In dark, cramped, with tiny little porthole. In case of emergency or ditching, the poor RSO had very little chance of escape. I figure only British could torture an officer like that.
Americans use to laugh at Russian planes because they're so rude and rough in the finish - now, how'bout this old Phantom here? Rivets and bolts and sheet plate everywhere... How RUDE lol
It's designed in the 50's after all, meanwhile Russian MiG-29's or in some cases even early Su-27's rolling off the production line brand new in the late 80's looked far worse with uneven panel gaps, haphazard riveting and in general mediocre fit and finish of panels at best. While there are very good reasons for some of their engineering solutions there are also some cases where it went way beyond "simple and field serviceable" into just poor fit and finish in general. Also worth noting is the difference in finish on newer versions of the same aircraft models that suggest that there might be something to having a more uniform surface after all, which shoulden't come as a shock to anyone with even a very basic understanding of aircraft construction.
@@vk3139 Are you Danish? Kvist is Danish name, I'm Danish. What I do not understand is the insane amount of money and TIME they throw in the developement and the producing of a high performing, reliable jet engine. Some feat. But at the same time, they throw these expensive pieces into a frame that consists of cheap steel plate, kicked loosely together with rivets that are not only protruding in the wind (monstrous uneven drag) but also adds weight. In the 1930ies (I guess it was, or maybe the 50ies) American aviator and billionaire, Howard Hughes would personally see to that his fantastic race plane was ground down to complete smoohtness for less drag, better speed and manouverability. Even for less fuel consumption, which maybe wasn't mr Hughes biggest concern lol. When I see the cheaply made, rude underbelly of this Phantom, it is almost surreal with the lack of care for those things. Phantom could maybe reach 2-300 kilometers/h more if smoothened - and 30 minutes more airtime on a full fuel tank. And maybe USA would only have lost a fraction of the Phantoms in Vietnam as they did. They lost 800 Phantoms, all causes. Maybe with a better build quality they would've lost only 200??? Impossible to say, but of course, building quality comes at a price of less units sold. So maybe there's good economy in kicking the rude parts together? Quickly fall out of the sky, more Phantoms build/sold. Phantom was actually highly unreliable, a true widow maker. You mention Russsian planes of today still being as rude/ even ruder than what we see here? Hmmm this summer I was standing under a lot of different Ukranian aircraft as the rain was smashing down, literally drowning the airshow (Aalborg). The Ukranians were special guests or something. There were some huge Antonov transport (which we used as umbrella) and I looked thoroughly at it. Yes there rivets, but nothing especial, not worse than our Western aircraft. I also looked closely at an SU-27 Flanker. Rivets protruding, yes - but Phantom here still is the worst case I've seen.
@@MeBallerman "You mention Russsian planes of today still being as rude/ even ruder than what we see here?" Maybe you should learn how to read, I wrote "In the late 80's". I also wrote: "Also worth noting is the difference in finish on newer versions of the same aircraft models" So, maybe go work on your reading comprehension before tilting at windmills that aren't even there in the first place?
Love me an Ausi talkin, can’t understand a word he said, and it’s time to give her a good steam wash way to dirty and oily under her britches 😬 ya just got to take better care of your Phantom man.
Worked the F4 at Bruggen, '70s. Great video Paul, only a lowly A Mech A those days but still remember a whole lot more about the F4 that I do most other aircraft I am still working at LGW as an LAE, 40 something years after that ! Think I might have met you a year or so ago when I had a close up and personal with you on a bit of a tour. Your enthusiasm is infectious and again, well done
21:28 The first Phantom Aim-9 splash in a afew years
Hahahaha
Love these walk around videos really fascinating, pilots and navs usually get all the glory but the ground crew are the unsung heroes !
Cheers mate.
I can relate to what he’s talking about. I started out on F-15’s in 1976 at Langley AFB, Virginia. They were far more advanced than F4’s but you still had to troubleshoot them, they wouldn’t tell you what was going on. What he said about leaking and having problems after some down time was so true. The more they were flown the better they got. I went on to work on F-16’s and A-10’s but my true love was the F-15. F-16’s didn’t break as much but they were squirrelly to troubleshoot. The A-10’s hardly ever broke at all. It was my experience that the older planes made for a better technician. One would have to be able to really learn their trade. Guys I met who came from B-52’s were damn good technicians because of the maintenance that went into them.
Robert Lassiter --- The tldr is that this guy is just talking about himself and blowing his own trumpet.
Very well said. You know what you're talking about concerning the aircraft technologies. Your comment about the F-16s being "squirrelly" had me laughing and brought back some late night memories trying to keep warm in an aircraft shelter in West Germany. I worked the same jets as you and a couple more as a 462...weapons troop. Glad to meet a fellow Eagle Keeper!
Daniel Miller You must have been at Hahn. I went to Kunsan, Korea with a follow on to Hahn but I was having way too much fun going TDY all over the Pacific so I extended at Kunsan. I spent many a cold night out working on F-16’s. I did get a ride in one though. I was an electrician but. Nice visiting with you Daniel. Go Air Force!
If that's tldr it says something more his attention span than anything.
Cowboy Bob Well said!
I used to deliver avionics for the RAF Phantom. I remember going to BAE where they did in depth life extension work which involved stripping down the airframe. I was taking to one of the engineers and the aircraft in the bay at the time still had battle damage scars from Vietnam.
Seeing things from the dirty hands guys point of view is my new favorite ACI episode.
Thanks 😊
Very instructive,like the idea of ground crew input on aircraft as well as flight crew
I was 15 tango crew chief on a uh60 black hawk. And I agree input from the ground crew is good to hear as well. Part of a good aircraft is turn around time and the maintenance aspect.
But to me the F 4 will always be 1 of the best aircraft ever built. My uncle flew them in Vietnam and it's ability to take damage and stay in the air. Is the only reason I got to meet him
I love how the ident plate in the cockpit says "McDonnell", not even McDonnell-Douglas. That really gives away the plane's age!
Great stuff. Esp for those of us who've never seen these beasts up close and personal let alone fly one!
Love to see people make an effort to save them, it's such a great aircraft. I especially love the earlier ones with the large nose, they just look _right_
Great interview- every bit as interesting in it's own way as any aircrew interview. Inspiring to hear the admiration and affection he has for the Phantom. Interesting how some aircraft seem to do that. Not so many current service ones I wager. To top it off this bloke is saving Phantoms that remain, with a sense of urgency. For what it's worth- very well done.
Thank you. 😊
Great video. Spent three years at RAF Wildenrath 81/83 with most of my time on 19 sqn.
Learned a lot from watching the video ! Thanks fellas - enjoyed it .
Had a great time at Wildenrath, 89-92. G.E.F
Wow, play this back to back with one of the Brit QRA F-4 pilot interviews and you get "The Complete Phantom". Great interview! A real step up from just a talking head.
Thanks. 😊
@@paulwright4947 Oh man, I'm honored, and thank you again. That was really special watching a pro do his thing.
Yet again another brilliant interview Paul's a top bloke very interesting to hear from the guys that keep them in the air 👍
Thank you. Very kind
Very interesting to hear the ground crew's perspective. Had an uncle who worked on Mosquitos on 418 sqn during the war. Became an electrical engineers afterwards. Didn't really like talking about the war though but loved the Mosquito and to him it the greatest airplane ever made. The older the airplane the more interesting !
I spent a couple of years at RAF Leconfield (60 MU) between 73-76 working on major structural modifications to Phantom F4K &M. Totally gutted the jets and did a bunch of different modifications to repair fatigue failures in certain skins and stop the fatigue/corrosion problems in the wing skins and spars, plus fitting the ECM on top of the fin and the two side aerials it was about the most intensive, interesting work I was involved in, and stood me in good stead in 82 modifying Harrier GR3s in Germany to go to the Falklands as replacements for aircraft already there. As the man said great days, lots of work but lots of fun too.
Interesting. I was at Halton in 83, doing my mechanics course. Then spent the next four years at Church Fenton on Jet Provosts. Some aircraft that were always going wrong were nicknamed Hanger Queens
Great to have some of the procedures slotted back in my memory after many years 🤪😁 As well as forgetting the sheer size of them.
I was an RAF brat at Halton when Paul was in training there. My dad worked in supply squadron for the hospital.
OUCH! (21:30). That Sidewinder almost got a kill there!
Fox 2!
@@agdgdgwngo : Splash 1 Paul Wright!
It left one hell of a bruise.
@@paulwright4947 : Hahaha, Legend mate.
@@paulwright4947 those sidewinders have got yellow bands on them and the boards say "aircraft armed"....but surely they're not real live weapons?!
Awesome! I'd love to see more of these walk around too.
very interesting and helpful video! using this for reference when making my revell 1/48 phantom FGR 2
Great stuff.
Great stuff Paul,good to get the ground crew perspective down on record
Was an armourer on Phantoms. First posting after Halton was Leuchars (missile city), then Germany, then back to Coningsby (228 OCU), Germany again, then back to Coningsby once more, this time in ASF. I eventually returned to Coningsby for a third time this time as an Instructor on the Phantom Servicing School, teaching the Phantom weapons system. That was probably the best job of the lot but short lived, as the worst possible thing that could happen - happened! Communism in Russia collapsed, and that sounded the death knell for the Phantom with the RAF and thus the school.
X F-4 airframe fitter here: In B-check, we checked & replaced loose fastners in the "fish scale" hot zone titanium panels rear to the engines. N.B. To my recollection, the arrestor hook is made of solid titanium, not stainless. I miss the Phantoms.
I can confirm, every aircraft has its own personality. - former jet mech
Great memories. I had a backseat trip in Zulu whilst we were on APC in Cyprus with 92 Sqn. 1987 iirc.
Wow. What an incredible video. Paul seems like a great chap and an interesting fella! Hooked from start to finish. 👍
Thank you 😊
Good effort Paul, checked your pins but forgot about the brake chute! :-). Ex 228 fairy but got there in 88 so probably after you left. Keep up the good work, didn't realise poor old 409 got scrapped a few years ago, had some history with that one and last saw it down south outside the terminal building.
Forgot brake wear too.
Phantoms Forever!
I knew he'd leave his screwdriver in the cockpit when he climbed back down the ladder ;0)
That was fascinating, many thanks!
Thank you
Brilliant ! Love the sleekiness of the Phantom, Very sexy aircraft. Thanks for that Mike ☺ very informative
That is 1 beautiful aircraft !!!
Excellent! More please! Really interesting.
Visited Coningsby in 99/00.
Gate guard directed us to far side of airfield. There we could just see some Phantoms, in grey, being cut apart, put together, taken apart again, by RAF apprentices. Very sad.
That's the first time I've ever realised the size of a combat jet. It's massive!
Yeah they are huge. The F-15 and some of the Sukhois are gigantic
Tangmere Military Aviation Museum , located at Chichester (Sussex) well worth a visit 👍
Located at Tangmere.
Been there many times. Luckily I now live in Worthing. As an ex a/c engineer, I can't get enough.
Superb!
You've got to love that paint job!!
I worked on the phantom mcs radar, painin the arse with the number of system boxes especially the transmitter...but a great air raft...
About 75 if I remember correctly (including all the sub LRUs ie 4A1A3 etc)?
love the all over blue livery beautiful phantom
They paint inside areas white to quickly identify leaks. Example... wheel wells, engine compartments etc
Assuming XV408 was with 92 Squadron in 1987, I would have worked on it's wheels, external fuel tanks and oxygen equipment - I did a YTS scheme with the air force at RAF Wildenrath, working in one of the external bays.
yep 408 was flown then by 92's boss wing commander Ken Claxton, one of the nicest guys i have had pleasure knowing, there is a video of him taking 408 on its last operational flight before it was brought back to the UK
@21:28 looks like you got bitten by a Sidewinder! BTW- The F-4K was based off the U.S. Navy F-4J. The give a way? The U.S. Navy style Wing Pylons.
This aircraft was on the parade square at Halton when I passed out in 2000.
Well done mate! Good job :)
What he missed out was the electrical after flight ground checks. This included checking the heaters on the stabilator feel probe and pitot probe mounted on the vertical fin were still working. You had to walk along the spine, often when it was cold, wet, windy and dark to take off the covers that someone else had had to walk along the spine to put on. Then return to the cockpit, check the seat pins and switches were safe, put power on and then switch on the probe heaters for about 15 seconds, switch the heaters off then power off before walking back down the spine to check the probes were warm and refit the covers. Before setting off for another flight someone had to walk along the spine again to remove the covers.
Nice Jet , thats an older Version without the gun in the Front, i worked in the later Version with a 20mm gun in Front of the Nose
Would like other videos like this of retired fighter jets
So awesome!!
Thanks 😊
I somehow find the ergonomics of 60s/70s cockpits (or lack thereof!) fascinating.
Excellent!
Thank you 😊
Talky Paul, you haven’t changed!!!
Phantom bite.....as in walking into the missile....or the drains.....or the doors ...or the...... Hahn AB, Germany....E models 79-82
Beautiful Aeroplane, my favourite.
Hiya......Gary 58.....worked on the FGR 2 for over 12 years....29 Sqn...92 Sqn ....19 Sqn.....fandet.....a tech a
You came down to Tangmere? Damn it I didn't know this was happening.
Jet fighters are like expensive sports cars. Spend more time working on them than driving them. Lol. But that's the way it is. It's designed for air to air and air to ground combat. Definitely like he said, complicated.
Ole Smokey!! Those j79s were beasts! That's a big aircraft! Edit: but didn't the Brits change to a different engine?
Yep UK had RR Speys which also meant a wider fuselage!
Bet that hurt when Paul banged his back on the sidewinder.
Yup. Hurt like a b+*ch especially the next day.
Were British FGR2 and RNFAA F-4J/K assembled in UK, from kits made in US, or were compl;ete aircraft delivered for local modifications? Perhaps soup ro nuts complete fabrication and assembly as part of offset agreement?
One of my favorite childhood aircraft, and enjoyed the hung over British guys take on it. What's up with that o so British eyesore of a paint job? CAG aircraft maybe?
Just being silly but am curious and thanks for sharing.
Low level over the sea it is a mix of the sea and the sky
what about the phantom in pieces next to the fence at Coventry aviation Museum
I ♥️ Phantoms
El avión de Duke Mitchell padre de Maverick
Why is it blue?
Big Beast is right,bigger than a WW11 Wellington Bomber! Had a Thrill Of A Lifetime Sitting In The Back Seat Of a USAF F4 Doing A Fasr Taxi at RAF Alconbury Back In The 70s
Serious
Where can I grab the hoodie from ?
Why am I picturing a Spitfire/Hurricane being turned around for it's next sortie during the Battle of Britain as he speaks?
My father was Spitfire groundcrew at Biggin Hill, during the Battle of Britain.
does that have a longer nose wheel?
Dear G*d! The man is taking us through ground pre-flight or post-flight PMCS, entiely from memory. Hail to British education system.
Where is this place?
They should place that beauty not outside to weather and rain.
You'd think the RAF would have removed or cut the hook off? It just gave the ground crew an extra thing to worry about and if it weighed 400lbs it was dead weight.......
He has the privilege to claim he got hit by a missile and survived the encounter. :D
😆
Such a confusing aircraft to fly I don't think I could get used to it. Up at speed you use the rudder peddels alone to roll and Bank the aircraft. if you were to use the control stick the aircraft would actually roll in the opposite direction of stick deflection.
Not quite... It's low speed and high AOA where you use the rudder to roll, not at high speed. There is a saying F-4 pilots use, 'when it buffets, use your boots...', or words to that effect! :-)
I'll never forget back in the 90's I almost bought a fully built up but not active ejection seat out of a Phantom for $500. Wish I hadn't passed that one up.
Dang, should’ve done it! I worked ejection systems on F-15C/D’s and F-22A’s from 2003-2009. Those jets have the ACES II seat in them. I’ve still got some spare parts from them and would kill to have an actual seat. Not sure what an ACES II seat shell would cost these days. F-4’s had the Martin Baker seats didn’t they? Meet your maker in a Martin Baker was the saying.
Where's your screwdriver?
I used to work on F/A-18, legacies and Rhinos, as well as sh 60s. Helos are pain in the ass because they don't tell you shit, especially when it comes down to troubleshooting the rotors.
Why oh why didn't I stick at school :-(
Bit surprised Tornados had hooks.... ?
Most if not all modern day fighters will have a hook to be able to take the wire encase of brake failure.
What Tom Ling said.
Occasionally brakes fail even if properly serviced, so most military air bases have an arrestor system. The cable spool used contains a longer cable than the one used on an aircraft carrier so the deceleration is much gentler, spread over a much longer landing run. This means even if a non-carrier aircraft has to use it the stresses won't break the aircraft. The hooks on non-carrier aircraft are quite weak and in come cases need replacing each time they are used. Since they are considered to be emergency equipment that is not as bad as it sounds.
All birds have em !!
Why don’t you tell Paul, or pass a message onto Paul you don’t need to build a website any more, it might be advisable if you looked into building of Wix site, this will cost £110 a year including the domain name, plus you can build a shop into it and many other things including newsletters... I have built them for many customers.
Yep I will mention that to him mate.
Thanks. 😃👍
Phantom is causing the Earth to wobble.
Aircraft are like women: You may love them and take care of them, but at the end they always hurt you! :-)
PJ!
Now then Sirri.👍😃👍
@@paulwright4947 Now then indeed my friend!
I didn’t get any of my choice of postings either 🤷🏻♀️😂
Well i suppose if your looking for help i cant give you filmers but my uncle worked phantoms and harriers if that would help
I decided that I still like Sea Vixen more for two reasons.
1. SeaVixen is a slicker, sexier looking aircraft. Like a pancake.
2. I am inherently an evil man. Once I saw the radar system's officer station in SeaVBixen, I decided that I want to torture another man by shoehorning him into SeaVixen RSO pit. In dark, cramped, with tiny little porthole. In case of emergency or ditching, the poor RSO had very little chance of escape. I figure only British could torture an officer like that.
Another Phantom bite 🙄.
Phantom jet always remind me charles bronson.ugly.dependable and fantastic.
All Phantoms leak...lol
Americans use to laugh at Russian planes because they're so rude and rough in the finish - now, how'bout this old Phantom here? Rivets and bolts and sheet plate everywhere... How RUDE lol
It's designed in the 50's after all, meanwhile Russian MiG-29's or in some cases even early Su-27's rolling off the production line brand new in the late 80's looked far worse with uneven panel gaps, haphazard riveting and in general mediocre fit and finish of panels at best.
While there are very good reasons for some of their engineering solutions there are also some cases where it went way beyond "simple and field serviceable" into just poor fit and finish in general.
Also worth noting is the difference in finish on newer versions of the same aircraft models that suggest that there might be something to having a more uniform surface after all, which shoulden't come as a shock to anyone with even a very basic understanding of aircraft construction.
But western plates and rivets are sleek sexy small and extremely over priced.
doesnt seem good build quality
@@vk3139 Are you Danish? Kvist is Danish name, I'm Danish.
What I do not understand is the insane amount of money and TIME they throw in the developement and the producing of a high performing, reliable jet engine. Some feat. But at the same time, they throw these expensive pieces into a frame that consists of cheap steel plate, kicked loosely together with rivets that are not only protruding in the wind (monstrous uneven drag) but also adds weight. In the 1930ies (I guess it was, or maybe the 50ies) American aviator and billionaire, Howard Hughes would personally see to that his fantastic race plane was ground down to complete smoohtness for less drag, better speed and manouverability. Even for less fuel consumption, which maybe wasn't mr Hughes biggest concern lol.
When I see the cheaply made, rude underbelly of this Phantom, it is almost surreal with the lack of care for those things. Phantom could maybe reach 2-300 kilometers/h more if smoothened - and 30 minutes more airtime on a full fuel tank. And maybe USA would only have lost a fraction of the Phantoms in Vietnam as they did. They lost 800 Phantoms, all causes. Maybe with a better build quality they would've lost only 200??? Impossible to say, but of course, building quality comes at a price of less units sold. So maybe there's good economy in kicking the rude parts together? Quickly fall out of the sky, more Phantoms build/sold. Phantom was actually highly unreliable, a true widow maker.
You mention Russsian planes of today still being as rude/ even ruder than what we see here?
Hmmm this summer I was standing under a lot of different Ukranian aircraft as the rain was smashing down, literally drowning the airshow (Aalborg). The Ukranians were special guests or something. There were some huge Antonov transport (which we used as umbrella) and I looked thoroughly at it. Yes there rivets, but nothing especial, not worse than our Western aircraft. I also looked closely at an SU-27 Flanker. Rivets protruding, yes - but Phantom here still is the worst case I've seen.
@@MeBallerman
"You mention Russsian planes of today still being as rude/ even ruder than what we see here?"
Maybe you should learn how to read, I wrote "In the late 80's".
I also wrote:
"Also worth noting is the difference in finish on newer versions of the same aircraft models"
So, maybe go work on your reading comprehension before tilting at windmills that aren't even there in the first place?
Minger
Love me an Ausi talkin, can’t understand a word he said, and it’s time to give her a good steam wash way to dirty and oily under her britches 😬 ya just got to take better care of your Phantom man.
He aint an Aussie. He is a Brit.
Idiot...
Worked the F4 at Bruggen, '70s. Great video Paul, only a lowly A Mech A those days but still remember a whole lot more about the F4 that I do most other aircraft I am still working at LGW as an LAE, 40 something years after that ! Think I might have met you a year or so ago when I had a close up and personal with you on a bit of a tour. Your enthusiasm is infectious and again, well done
We are only interested in the plane, not that man words.
so guys not a pilot then
No, he works for a living . . .😊
I remember this kite at my basic training in 1998....