Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

No political or religious topics please. Otherwise, anything goes, as long as we treat each other with respect.
User avatar
Boppinabe
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:25 pm

Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby Boppinabe » Sun Sep 15, 2013 8:16 pm

Years ago, I got the brain bug of "Could an F-4 Phantom be re-engined(or UP-engined?) with a pair of RB-199s as seen in the Panavia Tornado?" Just a wonder.

User avatar
kham
Always Remembered
Posts: 3653
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:52 pm
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont
Contact:

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby kham » Sun Sep 15, 2013 8:50 pm

It was already done, basically decades ago when the the RAF/RN operated F-4s; the J79 engines were replaced with Rolls-Royce Speys (RB-168-25Rs), which were of similar performance (slightly better actually) than RB199s. The result was slightly better range and increased low-level acceleration but slightly reduced performance at altitude. Always a trade off. Personally, I would stick with the J79 :D THAT is the Rolls-Merlin of jet engines

User avatar
schlamm
Posts: 556
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:01 am
Location: Desert realm

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby schlamm » Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:40 pm

It would be possible, but with the age of the youngest airframe considered it would hardly be worth the effort. Phantom's were king in their era, but are far too heavy and slow to turn as a result for today's combat environment.
F-22LW.jpg

This thing can turn 1 3/4 times in the same space the F-4 makes one 360°

User avatar
Duncan Edwards
Posts: 4258
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:41 am

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby Duncan Edwards » Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:44 pm

kham wrote:It was already done, basically decades ago when the the RAF/RN operated F-4s; the J79 engines were replaced with Rolls-Royce Speys (RB-168-25Rs), which were of similar performance (slightly better actually) than RB199s. The result was slightly better range and increased low-level acceleration but slightly reduced performance at altitude. Always a trade off. Personally, I would stick with the J79 :D THAT is the Rolls-Merlin of jet engines


Exactly that. The last Royal Navy F-4's with the Rolls engines operated from the last RN flat deck carrier, Ark Royal. After she was put away they remained in the Royal Navy long enough to do air defense duty from airfields in the Falklands after the war was over.
It's a dirty job but I got to do it for 27 years. Thank you.

User avatar
kham
Always Remembered
Posts: 3653
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:52 pm
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont
Contact:

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby kham » Mon Sep 16, 2013 1:36 am

There was some spitballing about doing a similar swap in the 104s, but thats as far as it got. At the time, the CAF was pretty much wedded to upgrading to the F-18 so it was pretty much a theoretical exercise. Even then, the 104 while no dogfighter, was preferred by the go-fast guys :) since while the 18 is a far superior fighter in dogfight terms and capability, for pure speed the 104 was hard to beat. The 18 tops out about 1.8 mach; the Starfighter, the SLOW light comes on around 2.2 on the machmeter -- and she is still accelerating...:mrgreen:

User avatar
DangerGirl
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:50 am

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby DangerGirl » Mon Sep 16, 2013 8:42 am

Don't tell me you somehow came into possession of an old F-4 airframe and a stockpile of RB-199s...

Magic Engineer
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:39 am

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby Magic Engineer » Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:18 pm

-
Last edited by Magic Engineer on Sat Dec 26, 2015 11:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
kham
Always Remembered
Posts: 3653
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:52 pm
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont
Contact:

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby kham » Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:46 pm

Some things from old books, in the olde pre-internet days :D

Others from Being There while young and stupid, working on the silly things over 30 years ago ;)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Duncan Edwards
Posts: 4258
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:41 am

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby Duncan Edwards » Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:31 pm

Magic Engineer wrote:WHERE did you all get your aviation experience?
I am in shock and awe. Though I kinda know where DangerGirl gets hers from. The rest I'm clueless.
I mean this in the most amazed and humble manner, because I thought I knew a fair amount, and it's obvious I don't. Not to the level of the people that have posted here before me. :oops: :(


Substantial extended navy family and Pop was a CPO in the US Navy who spent a lot of time on carriers. I wanted to do more than that but they said I had a heart murmur among other things and didn't want me. Long story but I'm fifty years old and still running marathons. Must not have been too bad. :roll:

From a very early age I read EVERYTHING there was on the subject so I could at least hang semi-intelligently with my friends who did make it in. I've long since forgotten more than I know. It's all just books and playing.
It's a dirty job but I got to do it for 27 years. Thank you.

User avatar
nachtjaeger
Posts: 2373
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 5:45 am
Location: upstate NY USA
Contact:

Re: Just a Question for Aviation-Savvy Members

Postby nachtjaeger » Sat Sep 28, 2013 12:05 am

Somewhere in an alternate universe, your other self got to work on the Avro CF-105 Arrow.

kham wrote:Some things from old books, in the olde pre-internet days :D

Others from Being There while young and stupid, working on the silly things over 30 years ago ;)
This space for rent- advertise your product or service here!


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests