Marcel111 Posted April 20, 2017 Share Posted April 20, 2017 Found this pic online of what appars to be an A-4M agressor without the hump. http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/525220-af-1b-skyhawk-brazilian-navy-rollout-video.html#PhotoSwipe1492717759637 Was this a one-off or did this happen more frequently? Thanks guys, Marcel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Uncle Fester Posted April 20, 2017 Share Posted April 20, 2017 (edited) Sorry....it just screamed an invitation for this... Edited April 20, 2017 by Uncle Fester williamj, Marcel111, Kagemusha and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2017 Share Posted April 20, 2017 Sorry....it just screamed an invitation for this... LOL ..........Harv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brenhen Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 While I don't have an exact answer for you on other A-4M's without the hump, the Fights On A-4 Adversary Part 1 decal sheet has an M without the hump that is a different BuNo than the one in your picture. Their documentation says that a few of the M's flew without the hump. Like Jennings said, it was not too much work to remove it. While I couldn't find any pictures in my files of other M's without the hump, I did find some interesting pictures of F's with no humps and M style tails. I guess there was a lot of variation in the adversaries. All pictures are not mine and are from Aero Research Aggressors No 1 and 3 sets. Lud13 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 This was limited to some Adversary A-4Ms. Keep in mind that the number of A-4Ms used by such units was VERY limited. So, even if removing the hump was not uncommon, we are considering less than ten possible planes here...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcel111 Posted April 21, 2017 Author Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) Thx guys! That said, that's the only A-4M I've ever seen without one. Jennings, yes, same here, is quite odd. I know the E and F humps were bolt-on but seem to remember reading that the M humps were more of a permanent fixture. Brenhen, thx for the pics, very nice... but they are all F's, not M's (note "flat" canopy and windscreen). Cheers, Marcel Edited April 21, 2017 by Marcel111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamfists nz Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 All the RNZAF ones had their humps removed as the avionics contained in them could be reduced down to a shoebox by the end of the century (they were originally A-4Fs) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 FYI, Here is a list of Adversary A-4Ms I identified out of a total of 160 airframes: - OMD Dallas: 159477, 160027 (no hump) - VX-5: 158417 - VF-126: 159789 (no hump), 159483, 159486, 158413, again 160027 (no hump) and an unknown one with the red 30 modex. - Top Gun: 158171, 158426, 160045, 159044, 160034, 159417, 159145/160145?, 159472 and an unknown one with the black 57 modex. Out of this list, I only found pictures of two planes without the hump including the one you found (160027). However, I will never say this list is exhaustive in any way as the planes were used for years... The list is longer than I thought but in any case, we are considering less than twenty planes! Hope this helps Thierry Marcel111 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 There was no structural change. Thierry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcel111 Posted April 21, 2017 Author Share Posted April 21, 2017 Thx guys. Thierry, do you happen to have a pic of 159789 with VF-126 without the hump? Would be a cool modelling project, I like the A-4 without the hump and I think it would look even better with the more bubbly cnopy. Why change something like that for the sake of changing it? It would have required some substantial engineering and changes to structure and production methods, to no real advantage. I would imagine there would be some weight savings potential there but obviously not worth the effort. Cheers, Marcel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcel111 Posted April 21, 2017 Author Share Posted April 21, 2017 ... found some pics of 159789 and now I know which A-4 I need to model :-) Any top view pics out there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcel111 Posted April 22, 2017 Author Share Posted April 22, 2017 Thierry, turns out 160039 was also a humpless A-4M, at least for some time. She is covered quite extensively in the Vagabond Decals 1/48 sheet. You can find a pic in this collection: http://photorecon.net/fighter-town-usa-top-gun-at-nas-miramar/ Cheers, Marcel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now