The USAF F-4 Phantom II version was authorized to be designated the F-110 Spectre in 1962
McDonnell Aircraft Company delivered the F4H (later dubbed F-4) Phantom II in answer to Navy requests for a high-altitude interceptor to defend carriers with long-range air-to-air missiles against attack aircraft. The aircraft’s maiden flight occurred in 1958, with deliveries to Navy and Marine Corps squadrons beginning in 1960. The US Air Force (USAF) eventually became interested in it due to its performance and versatility.
A small number of the first F-4Bs to join Navy service contributed to the introduction of the Phantom to the USAF, as told by Peter E. Davies in his book Gray Ghosts, U.S. Navy and Marine Corps F-4 Phantoms. Confronted with the undeniable fact that it outperformed all Air Force fighters, TAC borrowed two F4H-1s (BuNos 149405 and 149406) in 1962 for a seventeen-week evaluation. In 1962, they visited several USAF bases, such as Bentwaters in the UK (BuNo 149406), to give the troops a preview of their new fighter.The F-4B had already made an impressive debut in the previous year’s Paris Salon. Both were officially assigned new serial numbers (JF-4B 62-12169 instead of 149406) and transferred to the Air Force.
A further 27 F-4Bs were “bought” from the Navy order for S 147.8 m on the understanding that the Navy would have them back once the USAF’s Phantom variant, the F-4C, began to roll off the line. Initially, the USAF F-4 model had to be designated the F-110 Spectre under the pre-McNamara designations. Later, both designs (Navy/USMC and USAF) were renamed Phantom II to eliminate confusion regarding the different designations.
There were inevitable changes to the design for the production F-4C, but they were comparatively minor. Structurally, the wing root of the F-4B was thickened to accept wider (11.5 inch) wheels with anti-skid brakes on the main gear in place of the 7.7 “skinny” F-4B tires. Navy Phantoms did not come equipped with anti-skid brakes until F-4J BuNo 157242 and higher. Cartridge-starting J79-15 engines were employed, and the AJB-7 bombing system improved ground assault capability. Given that both crew members were considered pilots, a control column emerged in the rear cockpit. A control column appeared in the back cockpit, as both crewmen were regarded as pilots. The in-flight refueling system was converted to the standard Air Force flying boom system.
The 4453rd Combat Crew Training Wing at MacDill AFB, Florida, was equipped with “borrowed” F4H-1s under the command of record-breaking test pilot Colonel Pete “Speedy” Everest on January 1, 1963. These aircraft trained crews for the 12th TFW until November, when “real” F-4Cs started to arrive. The removable control column in the rear cockpit was perceived by RIOs, who were formerly known as Pilot Systems Operators (PSOs) in the Air Force and later as Weapons Systems Operators (WSOs), as an uncertain advantage. Unlike the F-4C’s stick, it had to be unplugged and stowed before the radar controls could be slid out for use.
It’s interesting to note that “front seaters” had to study the radar interception assignment while spending a period of time in the back. The backseater was able to take control of the aircraft with this twin-stick approach, but he was unable to control the landing gear or brakes. Even with the F-4C’s rudimentary throttle controls, the backseater was still unable to land the aircraft alone.
The Air Force experienced some initial difficulties adjusting to the more complicated Martin-Baker H5 ejection seats on the F-4B. The failure to recognize that the “banana-link” mechanism on top of the seat might begin ejection if moved or compressed while the seat was armed resulted in two fatalities and serious injuries to MacDill personnel. Once, during a negative g maneuver, an F-4B’s seat that wasn’t properly secured slid up the rail, fired the canopy jettison device, left the cockpit, and then slid back along the fuselage. Fortunately, the pilot’s parachute was also deployed, and he survived.
The USAF F-4 crews were not on alert throughout the Cuban crisis, in contrast to their counterparts in the Navy and Marines. But much farther away in Southeast Asia, Phantom crews from all three services were soon to find plenty of action. You may see a preview of the F-110A’s TAC evaluation in the video that follows.
Gray Ghosts: U.S. Navy and Marine Corps F-4 Phantoms is published by Schiffer Publishing and is available to order here.
Photo by U.S. Air Force
