I, too, have always liked the F-4. It is the most intimidating looking airplane I can think of. It just looks like it means wicked business. Never enjoyed working on them, too much, but by the time I got the opportunity to work on my first one I had been well and truly spoiled by the F-15. For months I cherished the notion that the F-4 had to be the worst bird to work on, until I got the chance to work on the SR-71. Give me a Phantom ANY day!

My father spent most of his 30 year career at Mc Donnell Douglas on the F15 as a S.M.A.R (sheet metal assembler/riveter). I believe he once said he trimmed the speed brake on ship number 1.

 

In China, replacement astronauts are cheap...

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/NLvfrxL3YGA

 

Ouch!

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/live/JzGkFd3lJU4?si=j2e5jLl1uR9UiuE7&t=5550

https://www.youtube.com/live/_n5QO8yzG1g?si=Fuw8uSlcixwgpthd&t=170

 

Plastic! I was expecting Chinesium at least for a critical safety system.

 

 

 

What was risky about it?

The aircraft was clearly waterborne well past the point that it passed under the bridge, so it was operating under the boating regulations for that river.

Best guess, using the plane as a reference, is that the bottom of the bridge was about 50 ft above the water.

Looks like another case of someone at the Oregonian posting something that they know nothing about without bothering to do any checking first. Must have been a slow news day.