[Busko]

The F-4 Phantom was a work horse for a long time. Early Eighties it carried the NATO Flag in Germany. While we had the older bird it out worked the 15 and the 16.

[Jacquerie]

Way too many Naval Aviators got smoked in peacetime ops flying the Phantosaurus off of carriers.

[NorthMountain]

F-4 Phantom: Objective proof that if you put enough engine on a brick, it can go supersonic ...

And yeah, one of my favorite aircraft:

[tanknetter]

The F-35 is really more of a stealthy A-7 than F-4.

[GBA]

Has any new plane gotten a warm review or have the critics beaten on each and every new design that came along as an overpriced, and probably dangerous, failure?

The planes we love today got about the same treatment the F-35 gets now. Remember the F-22? The V-22? "SSDD" Different airplane, but the same story, same criticisms. Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.

The critics who hated the F-15, F-16, F-17 >> F/A-18 when they were prototypes under trial now love them and, of course, now hate the F-35 and think more F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18s are the answer.

Decade after decade, design after design, it's the same old, same old.

[CPOSharky]

It’s a one-size-fits-all jet for the Air Force, Navy and Marines, and yet it doesn't really meet any of their needs.

And the last time they tried a tri-service fighter it worked out so well...

[SampleMan]

The F-4 was not a great fighter plane. It was a good fighter-attack aircraft and a good interceptor.

That said, it would have had a much better record as a fighter, if the AIM-7 Sparrow missile wasn’t such a POS during the Vietnam war. The failings of that missile made most encounters a knife fight, where the MiG 17s and 19s were allowed to maximize their strengths.

[rdcbn]

The F-35 is a much more capable aircraft than it’s detractors give it credit for.

[RaceBannon]