Warthog Territory Forums
http://warthogterritory.net/forum/

Phantom \"Killer Zombie\" Drones
http://warthogterritory.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=12883		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Weasel Keeper [ 13 Oct 2008, 18:30 ]
Post subject:  Phantom \"Killer Zombie\" Drones
Just in time for Halloween, the mighty undead Phantom (F-4 for you young'ns) may not have to keep haunting the scary boneyard much longer. As a proven UAV target drone in the QF-4 program it may become a possible alternative or addition to the MQ-9 Reaper UAV as a killer once again. :D

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/10/a ... s-new.html

Wonder if I could get a Crew Chief job with them...I worked F-4E/Gs for 6-7 years. ;)
Author:  Ice Pirate [ 13 Oct 2008, 23:21 ]
Post subject: 
WOW, the old girl just keeps plugging away don't she. Imagine a UCAV, supersonic, carrying gobs of ordinance, and costing a fraction of what the new reapers go for. Now that's what you call making the most of what you have. 8)
Author:  Weasel Keeper [ 14 Oct 2008, 02:18 ]
Post subject: 
Hehe, yeah...kinda. The maintenance on those beasts is insane. Would be cool to see them though. :)
Author:  Dutchy [ 14 Oct 2008, 06:31 ]
Post subject: 
\"Killer Zombie\" I like that name. It sounds good. Phantom is returning from his death. :wink:
Author:  Old Chief [ 14 Oct 2008, 11:16 ]
Post subject: 
I'm with Weasel Keeper on this one. Just where, in the CFS (can't fix $hit) Air Force of today, are they going to find anyone to work an F-4? The jet is from an era of tech schools that were 6-10 months long and no such thing as TO's that had JG or TS in its numbering system. The only people that'll have a \"Phantom Fixer\" patch on their shirts will be contractors.

OC
Author:  Ice Pirate [ 14 Oct 2008, 19:43 ]
Post subject: 
Granted Chief, those birds were from another era, but the TO's do exist and even though the numbering system was different, they still contain all the info that is needed.

From a weapons stand point, I'd doubt much has changed at all. Almost all of the weapons racks are still in use today. Granted, the release systems have probably changed a good bit, but the basic hardware is still the same.

I wouldn't think it'd take much to retrain some motivated young troops, and hell, if they ain't up to the task, all the AF would need to do is log on here and ask for Volunteers. :wink:
Author:  mattlott [ 15 Oct 2008, 02:34 ]
Post subject: 
lol now you guys are going to show us how a vacuum tube and old school hydrolics can kill just as well as flyby wire.
Author:  Weasel Keeper [ 15 Oct 2008, 04:29 ]
Post subject: 
Well, the Phantom was and still is the world's leading supplier of used MiG parts. There was something right. ;)

Now where's my Snoopy?
Author:  Ice Pirate [ 15 Oct 2008, 22:14 ]
Post subject: 
Now hold on there dag-nabbit, tant nothing wrong with vacuume tubs. :idea:


You know, back in my day... :roll:
Author:  mark59 [ 15 Oct 2008, 22:44 ]
Post subject: 
\"You know, back in my day...\"


Rocks dont live that long Frank.
Author:  30mike-mike [ 16 Oct 2008, 12:29 ]
Post subject: 
ouch!
Author:  Ice Pirate [ 16 Oct 2008, 19:31 ]
Post subject: 
As I recall Mark, you and I are about the same age. :wink:

Have to admit though, my last couple of years in, I started working with some young airmen who had less time on the planet than I had time in service. Now that makes you feel old.

My first duty assignment was DM with the 358th, about 6 months before they got their first A-10s. As I recall, the 333rd got the first ones, then we got ours and shortly after, the 357th got theirs. The 354th was either at another base or inactive at that time, 1978-80.

True story though. As ya'll might know I work as an IT Designer for the US Antartic Program, and have for 10 years now. On my first trip to McMurdo Station in 1999, I had to admit that I was more than a little shocked when I saw that their primary HF radios for communicating both with aircraft and the other stations, still used vacuume tubes the size of footballs. It was almost 5 years later that we finally upgraded our transcievers, and only then because we lost our one and only supplier of the tubes. :roll:
Author:  mark59 [ 16 Oct 2008, 21:10 ]
Post subject: 
I still think your older than I am....... :wink:

The 354th and the 357th were both flying A-7's in 1978. BTW....Frank, do you remember a weapons load crew chief named Tom Neilson?
Author:  Ice Pirate [ 17 Oct 2008, 22:29 ]
Post subject: 
Yeah, I used to work for Tom in the 358th. He threw a great party over at his place one Christmas I think. He had a whole wall shelf unit to house his stereo that he'd built up from old 2.75\" Rocket crates.

You know where he is these days?
Author:  mark59 [ 18 Oct 2008, 02:29 ]
Post subject: 
Yup I sure do.....the company he works for does alot of business with my organization.
Author:  koobster [ 18 Oct 2008, 13:24 ]
Post subject: 
i would go back to work on her again. I might be a MSgt now but I can still turn a wrench.
Author:  M21 Sniper [ 21 Oct 2008, 19:42 ]
Post subject: 
An F-4 combat UAV would need all new sensors, so that 800k per airframe price tag is not even remotely realistic. You can add at LEAST one zero to that.
Author:  TheBigThug [ 01 Dec 2008, 12:52 ]
Post subject: 
M21 Sniper wrote:
An F-4 combat UAV would need all new sensors, so that 800k per airframe price tag is not even remotely realistic. You can add at LEAST one zero to that.


Thats shooting to low, up your Dope a few mils.

It will need everything a current manned jet needs with the Geriatric support of an aged airfram on top of its human replacement support.

Comparing a UAV Predetor squadron to a UAV Phantom, doesnt equate.


Its better to compare it to a Manned F4 Squadron then triple the ammount of resources needed to sustain it.

In the end it is still a system that has a loiter time of what it is and will and always be. A manned Fighter jet.

An artilalry battary is cheaper.


Build more a10s TBQFH
Author:  sgtgoose1 [ 02 Dec 2008, 01:12 ]
Post subject: 
It would be \"a [shock] [shock] to the \"Rag-dolls\" but then again you could see it coming and hearing MILES AWAY. But what a \"Show of Force\".

You could load it up and on it's way lets say it has a \"Hydraulic Failure\" or a number of other \"Code3\" problems you can just say \"What the Hell, pick a target and let it go down with Honor taking out the Bad Guys\" it would make a big \"BOOM\" .

They should take out storage any old \"SANDY A-1's\" if there is, and use those if their not going to build another A-10 .

Drones are \"Great\" but really a \"Manned\" Aircraft flown by some \"Fly by the Pants Air Jockey\" with the firepower of a \"Sandy\" would be only 2nd to the A-10 as far as CAS and SAR. You could always hang a few \"Hellfires\" on it.

Some Load Toad would figure it out.

Goose
Author:  Old Chief [ 02 Dec 2008, 03:02 ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
They should take out storage any old \"SANDY A-1's\" if there is, and use those if their not going to build another A-10 .


Don't think there's any left Goose. Remember, those things had R2800 radial engines..just not maintainable..no parts, no expertise.

There's an RFP (Request For Proposal) on the street right now for an airframe that'll take some of the workload off the Hog. Some of you may have heard the rumors. I don't have a lot of details but I'll share what I know with anyone I recognize if you want to PM me.

OC
Author:  M21 Sniper [ 10 Dec 2008, 04:09 ]
Post subject: 
Thanks for the info chief! :)
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/