Reddog
-
Content Count
1,360 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Reddog
-
-
Looks Great!!!
Reddog
-
Jim,
I wasn't taht versed on the A-7 TACMAN back then so I can't comment on that, I just followed the load plan. I do know that the IFC's that where not incorporated into the book filled another book all it's own, we used the TACMAN as a door stop for the Ready Room.
Collin,
Not sure what that is, it's not a Mk 80 series bomb, looks like some Air Force thing the A-7's use to carry back in the late 60'searly 70's.
Also, IIRC, TALD was only used by VA-46 and 72 during DS, it came out too late for just about everyone else.
HTH
Reddog
-
A-7's carried at least one drop tank as a norm but it wasn't for aysmetrical purposes, it was for fuel. The internal fuel for an A-7E was 10.2 K, with a drop tank that gave the pilot 2K more.
Reddog
-
The Skipper was one of the biggest pieces of junk the Navy ever came up with, bigger then the DMLGB and LAU-138 combined. Some idiot thought it would be a great idea to take a GBU-16 and put a Shrike rocket motor on it, too bad they didn't upgrade the guidance section to operate faster due to the faster speed. The only thing you where sure to hit was the ground, everything else was iffy. Think of it this way, put a Tomcat engine on an old commodre 64 computer and that's what the AGM-123 Skipper was, one fast piece of junk.
Reddog :)
-
And what about Mavericks ? Not very common on Navy jets though.
Also, during Praying Mantis the biggest threat was small fast speedboats and other surface vessels. This also posed a serious SAM thread, but would HARMs really be the way to deal with that ? By taking out a vessel with any other piece of ordnance you also take out the SAM launcher. Right ?
We never did Maverick.
As far as the SAM threat from same speedboats, there isn't a threat, the boats are too small to carry SAM's except for shoulder fired type, HARM are not effective against those type. The best way to take out speedboats was with CBU's, LGB's and 20mm.
Reddog
-
Yes, the A-6's would "lase" for us and those are Mk 82's loaded on that A-7.
Also, for an A-6 to have a Winder loaded there had to be something really going on, it would be like putting a nuke on a helo, you'll get the bad guy but then you just have to bend over and kiss rear good-bye.
I left A-7's in late 87, when I was there our most common loaded out (besides blue death) was Mk 82's with either con fins or Mk 15's. We also did a lot of Rockeye, APAM and captive carry HARM's with a few Walleye's, Shrikes and LGB's thrown into the mix to keep us on our toes. Once a quarter we would do a MINE-EX and "other" weapons. Most of the stuff we loaded went on parent rack, only doing heavy's off of MER/TER's every blue moon.
Reddog :blink:
-
The FLIR Pod would go on station 6 (right inboard station), that was the only station wired for the pod. A more typcial weapon for SUCCAP (Surface Unit Contact Combat Air Patrol) would be Rockeye. Since Operation Praying Mantis was primarily an snti-surface unit engagment I would load it down with either Rockeye's or GBU-12's, along with AIM-9M's, a FLIR Pod and Drop Tank on station 3.
Walleye's wheren't used much against surface targets, mostly against land based ones. The only time we used Walleyes for surface targets was during a SINKEX. As for which pylon the Walleye would go on, usually we put them on 2 or 7, stations 1 and 8 where only rated for 2500 lbs and some of the Walleyes marks where pushing that weight limit. We would put an AWW-9 or 13 ERDL Pod on the opposite side of the Walleye.
IIRC the FLIR Pod would be medium grey, that's what color VA-86's where, or they would the same color as rest of the squadrons planes where. And no, the sqaudron would not swap back and forth between HARM and FLIR so if you have a picture with VA-22 with a FLIR Pod then they where a FLIR squadron
HTH
Reddog
-
They are AN/ALE-32 chaff pods which were 15' long, with a max dia of 21" and had a similar contour to a 150 gal tank according to the Aerofax EA-6A EA-6B book.
Jari
I stand corrected.
Reddog
-
I don't know of any Chaff Pod that look like that. To me they look like AERO 1C, 150 gl drop tanks. On the AERO 1 drop danks the fins could be placed in eight different positions.
Reddog
-
Thanks
That's for USMC, Spanish, and Italian Harriers, not sure about UK Harriers.
Reddog :wub:
-
What are the external differences of UK:
GBU-12
AGM-65
to US ordnance models?
This one I will defer to the UK experts, I'm not sure if there are any differences.
Reddog ;)
-
I still can't believe that ever happened. How could they launch a jet with wings folded? The launch crew looks over the bird before it ever taxis out of the line area. There's like ten people involved, including safety PO and a line CPO who are watching everything as it happens. What about the pilot and his control wipeout? Amazing.
Did the wings get folded in flight or something? No WOW switch in the F-8 maybe?
Anyone know?
Back in the day the plane would taxi from the line with the wings folded and the pilot would unfold them on the way to the hold short. We use to do the same in A-7's for a little while, then we made the aircrew unfold the wings and check them during the troubleshooter walkaround.
There has been eight documented incidents of F-8's taking off with their wings folded.
Reddog :)
-
-
I'm not planning on going anywhere, unless Steve throws me out.
But I am getting tired of people taking some book or photo and sticking it in my nose and then saying I'm wrong. I don't respond to questions unless I'm 100% sure I'm giving the right answer, if I don't know the answer then I will say something like "IMHO" or "I believe". I'm not trying to say I'm right 100% of the time, just that I research the answer before I throw it out or know it out hand, I don't shoot from the hip when I answer questions.
I don't give NAVAIR wrong answers, why would I post one here.
Reddog :)
-
ALF,
Just to let you know, the green you are using for your av-bays is the wrong color. The correct color is testors sinc chromate, just dirty it up.
V/R
Reddog
-
And another thing, sarcasm is the Navy's stock in trade. I doubt I could say anything so profoundly snarky as to shock or offend any prior or active-duty sailor or Marine. Any group of people who could refer to a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier , a product of Rickover's empire, as "Mobile Chernobyl" pretty much takes the prize where sarcasm is concerned.
And another thing: Does the navy still use Mk 84 "dumb" bombs, without precision kits, for much of anything? How about Mk 83 dumb bombs on Tomcats, while they were still flying?
Fish,
I have the thickest, toughest skin you can imagine but when my knowledge and reputation is being question I take offense.
To answer your question, yes, the Mk 84 GP Bomb is still in service and used but lately only for training since the emphasis is on PGM's in country. Yes, the Tomcat did use Mk 83 GP Bombs a lot, we dropped a lot of them and Mk 82's when I was in VF-143.
Reddog
-
Herr OberBombenFuhrer, why all the anger? Holiday season stresses? Nobody set out to discredit you, dude, so just take it easy.
Since you're so belligerently eager to be helpful, then help us taxpayers get more return on our investment in educating you: Just how much dumb ordinance was used in the past decade on Navy or Marine F/A-18s? Would Mk 83s be at all common on Hornets in OEF, OIF, or subsequent operations in the 2006-2009 timeframe? How about the various types of unguided rockets? How about Mk. 82s on TERs? About when were CBU-87s phased out of operations? I'm tired of chewing through all this smart ordinance building modern jets, but the Navy.mil picture shows pic after pic of Navy hornets with all that wimpy precision stuff. Honestly, it's like you guys secretly want to be the Air Force. I'm glad they retired the battleships before those beasts had to see what's happened to their Navy. (
) And did at one point the Navy have some sort of conical fuse-cap for the Mk. 83? I ask, because Monogram's set with their F/A-18C suggests this, but I don't know if it was mold-maker laziness or not.
Fish,
You and I have not seen eye to eye on several issues so it is no suprise to see you jump in here and attack me but comparing me to some Nazi ordnanceman, common on, does that make you feel like a big man?
It ain't the holiday stress or anything like that, I'm just getting tired of being called out as being wrong on something that is basic knowledge to me. My credentials have already been estabilshed on this site several times, everyone who has been here for more then three months know them.
If you are going to call me out at least learn how to spell ORDNANCE and FUZE, it would give you a little bit more credibility. Also, what education am I suppose to be getting on your tax payer dollar? ref: " then help us taxpayers get more return on our investment in educating you"
I don't just throw info out on the internet, there is such a thing called OPSEC and it's not just a buzz word. Once you show me your clearance level and need to know I'll answer any questions you have, until then I will continue to be limited with the info.
Now to some of your questions.
"Would Mk 83s be at all common on Hornets in OEF, OIF, or subsequent operations in the 2006-2009 timeframe? "
I will not comment in general about operation load out but any authorized load may have been used.
"How about the various types of unguided rockets?"
Can you be a little bit more specific with this question, I'm not sure what you are asking.
"How about Mk. 82s on TERs? "
Currently, only cleared on the AV-8B
"About when were CBU-87s phased out of operations?"
This is an Air Force CBU and was never cleared for USN/USMC platforms, therefore I defer to the A/F munitions expert. I specialize in USN/USMC Ordnance and a little bit FMS stuff, mainly those who use USN/USMC platforms
"And did at one point the Navy have some sort of conical fuse-cap for the Mk. 83? "
Not sure what you are talking about, conical fuze-cap? If you are referring to the end of the conical fin being close then yes, the early version of the Mk 80 Series conical fins did have the end close off and not a hole like you see now but those didn't last long and not many where in the fleet. If you are talking about a mechanical tail fuze, then yes, there was a Mk 346 Mechincal tail fuze that looked like the M904 mechnical nose fuze but was phased out of service in the early 80's.
The reason why "we" are so secretive is because you never know who's surfing these forums, if you think the bad guys aren't surfing this site think again, I'm not taking that chance.
And yes, your's and Lance's reply where antagonizing, hence my reply. Also, there is a reason why I dont' post what I do and who I support, again it's called OPSEC. I'll give you a hint, if you know what NATIP and WASP is, I'm one of the ordnance SME's for them.
As to your question about the Monogram two place bomb rack, I can not comment on that, have not seen it. Also, what the heck is an HTS Pod? Can you give me a designation or something, HTS is not familiar to me.
niart17,
I'm not being whiny or stress out, I'm just tired of being called out as being wrong on things that I know like the back of my hand because someone read something in some book. As Graves 09 stated, this isn't the first time and quite frankly it probably won't be the last time but again, I'm tired of it. I am no longer going to take the PC route and just ignore it, I will answer the challanges.
Lance,
I understand you are a Marine, I salute you sir but please understand my fustration with being called out on something that is (for me) basic knowledge. This has not been the first time this has happen, you just happen to be the one that finally pushed me over the edge, I apologize for snapping at you, hope you understand my position.
And finally, I don't like being called an expert, IMO there is no such thing. I just happen to specialize in the ordnance and aircraft configuration field and know enough to be dangerous. Some one who calls themself an expert usually ain't, I just know enought to fool the people that I work for.
Reddog
-
@Joe - you are correct, sir! Mk83s with BSU-85. My bad - I remembered them as 82s (the caption does say 83s), and I did not realize there were two different types of ballute retardation systems. Indeed, based on pics I just googled, the bombs on the Harriers have the short-chord, long-span fins of the BSU-85, not the really short-span and long-chord fins of the BSU-49.
@reddog - I was wrong. I admit it. Now stand the f*** down. You can be right without being a prick about it, you know.
Call me what you will but before you call someone out as being wrong you better have all your ducks in a row and your head and A## wire together.
I don't speak from my rear like some other do, I've actually handled the things I talk about, not just read it in a book, when was the last time you handled a Mk 82?
As far as standing down, my post was a direct response to your post, don't like being called out then don't call out someone who has been there done that as being wrong, and maybe you won't get the reaction you just got.
Reddog :D
-
-
To answer the question " I was told that the US Navy doesn't use the mk 82's with the balloon type retarding devices anymore. Is that true? "
No, the USN/USMC does not, and has not used the "balloon" type retarded fins that the Air Force uses on their Mk 82's. I don't think anyone used snakeyes in country, that would require getting low and in the weeds, I believe everyone was staying up high and hitting targets with PGM's.
Reddog
-
I've seen DCAG's name on CAG jets. For single seater his name would be on the right side of the cockpit, CAG's on the left. For two seaters, CAG on the front, DCAG on the back. Must have been an East Coast thing, we always had CAG and DCAG's name on the CAG jet.
Reddog :(
-
You don't need to do an all-or-nothing choice. Have a set with the SLAM-ER and the data link. Another with the Buddy Pod and the Drop Tank. Maybe the LANTIRN and a Laser-Mav/LAU-117 rail combo. Having ALL those weapons wouldn't be possible on one Viking, so people would either wind up with extra stuff or need to buy another S-3 kit. By doing one complete loadout for both pylons, you'd enable someone to equip thier Viking, and be done with it.
:lol:
Reddog
-
To add to what Collin said, the only time our CAG birds looked good was for some "dog & pony" show, otherwise it was as dirty as the rest of the birds in the squadron.
Reddog :lol:
-
ok - knew that...but
I'lll bite here, and ask what a DCAG is ? - Deputy CAG ?
-often found on the other tail to the CAG ?
Yes, DCAG is Deputy CAG, i.e. XO of the airwing.
Reddog :lol:
Guys I'm looking for colours of USN AIM-7's, 9's and 54
in Jet Modeling
Posted
For scale effect burnt iron or some other off shoot of black would be correct. If you are doing 1/72 scale black would be fine, they only look greenish up close, step back a few yards and they look blackish the more you move away.
Reddog