Jump to content


Photo

SEA F-4C/D


  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

#91 Tony T

Tony T

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,568 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brigstowe, land of seafaring Pirates

Posted 14 August 2016 - 05:30 PM

Luca, I'm fairly certain I still have a set of CE GBU-10A/B Paveways as used in Vietnam.

Like the Israeli F-4 AAR probe and CE Israeli decals they are lurking in the attic. I will investigate all these after I get back from Cornwall if you still are interested.

Tony
  • Luca likes this
Finally spraying again

#92 Luca

Luca

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 16 August 2016 - 03:04 PM

Luca, I'm fairly certain I still have a set of CE GBU-10A/B Paveways as used in Vietnam.

Like the Israeli F-4 AAR probe and CE Israeli decals they are lurking in the attic. I will investigate all these after I get back from Cornwall if you still are interested.

Tony

 

Hi Tony, yes I'm still interested (CE GBU-10A/B plus Israeli IFR probe). Many thanks!

cheers



#93 Luca

Luca

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 19 August 2016 - 07:32 AM

4x AIM-9B + 6x Mk.118 bombs (3 each side on TERs) on Casper... reliable loadout?  :ph34r:



#94 thierry laurent

thierry laurent

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,655 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 19 August 2016 - 03:35 PM

I guess you mean Mk.117 as the 118 was far bigger!

For the warload, I would say not really even if this was not impossible. When AtoA missiles were carried with bombs, planes normally had Sparrows.
  • Luca likes this

#95 Luca

Luca

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 19 August 2016 - 05:27 PM

yes I mean mk.118 (I didn't know they were so big)... which pylons were they usually carried up by F-4s?



#96 ziggyfoos

ziggyfoos

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 803 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:eastern NC

Posted 19 August 2016 - 05:45 PM

Probably know, M118 was 3000lb bomb while the M117 was "only" 750lb. No 118s on TERs. Where are you getting 118's in 1/32? I didn't think there were any. I know this F-105 scratchbuilt them:
http://www.largescal...cle.php?aid=190
  • Luca likes this

#97 Luca

Luca

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 19 August 2016 - 06:49 PM

Probably know, M118 was 3000lb bomb while the M117 was "only" 750lb. No 118s on TERs. Where are you getting 118's in 1/32? I didn't think there were any. I know this F-105 scratchbuilt them:
http://www.largescal...cle.php?aid=190

 

Fisher Model and Pattern makes them... they are HUGE:

 

http://fishermodels....105-and-f-4-132



#98 ziggyfoos

ziggyfoos

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 803 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:eastern NC

Posted 19 August 2016 - 07:24 PM

Thanks! I've ordered from Fisher many times but completely missed seeing those.
  • LSP_Typhoonattack likes this

#99 thierry laurent

thierry laurent

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,655 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 21 August 2016 - 07:51 AM

yes I mean mk.118 (I didn't know they were so big)... which pylons were they usually carried up by F-4s?

I do not remember immediately one picture of them under F-4 pylons even if I know they were used. So, such use was probably quite rare. The LGB version of the Mk. 118 was carried under the inner wing pylons, so I guess the plain 118 used the same one.

Thierry
  • Luca likes this

#100 Luca

Luca

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 21 August 2016 - 02:03 PM

ok no more Mk.188 then... too big :)

how many Mk.83/84 bombs could be hanged up on each TER?



#101 thierry laurent

thierry laurent

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,655 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 21 August 2016 - 08:25 PM

TERs were rather used with Mk.81 or 82. Larger bombs were used individually.
  • Luca likes this

#102 Luca

Luca

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 22 August 2016 - 10:59 AM

TERs were rather used with Mk.81 or 82. Larger bombs were used individually.

 

IIRC there is a b/w photo on the Squadron Signal in action book that shows a vietnam F-4D (or maybe an F-4E, now I do not remember) with 2 Mk.83 on the opposite sides of the same TER...


Edited by Luca, 22 August 2016 - 11:00 AM.


#103 thierry laurent

thierry laurent

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,655 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 22 August 2016 - 12:53 PM

Hi Luca,

I never wrote the 83 was never used on TERs but again, there is a difference between the theoretical load, the very occasional load and the common ones!

Have a look at the chart below: http://airwarvietnam.com/F4Chart2.jpg

It clearly shows TERs could be used to load larger and heavier stores per pair but this was not very common with bombs. Remember my similar comment about the Mk.118 use. The target locations, rules of engagement and mission profiles actually dictated the warload configuration. Add to this the fact that the fuel alone added 40% of weight to the plane without the warload and you will quickly realize that understanding this matter is far more complicated than what most modellers think. A warload to bomb the area close to Khe Sanh had nothing in common with the one to bomb the Doumer bridge or the Haiphong warehouses in spite of the fact we are considering short nose Phantoms in all cases...

Thierry
  • Luca likes this

#104 Luca

Luca

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 22 August 2016 - 02:35 PM

wow great useful loadout chart Thierry... as always you rock  :bow:

 

For the warload, I would say not really even if this was not impossible. When AtoA missiles were carried with bombs, planes normally had Sparrows.

 

found a pic on the squadron signal "in action"... but it's a recce bird  :doh:

 

ifzfq1.jpg


Edited by Luca, 22 August 2016 - 02:56 PM.


#105 Darren Howie

Darren Howie

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,270 posts

Posted 24 August 2016 - 12:28 AM

F-105's very frequently carried full racks of 83's.
Very rarely see F-4's with anything other than 82's or 81's.
On the centreline I'd be thinking ground clearance would immediately be an issue.
F-105 was quite a bit taller and even then the lower 750 barely cleared the ground.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users