GW8345

My pleasure, glad to be of help. GW

Those are intake screens for an A-4 Skyhawk. GW Edit: believe confirmed, those were for the TA-4F/J specifically. -501 for the port side -502 for the starboard side https://nationalstocknumber.info/part-number/5578293-1_00-815-2277

Always a pleasure to help out. GW

Forward one - "EMER NLG DOOR SAFETY PIN" Aft one - "STEP PULL DOWN"

Unless the loading crew dropped it, the fins should be 90 degress apart. At least that how they were on all the ones I handled/loaded.

The beaver tail used for both aircraft is the middle one in the anft link you posted. hth GW

Those appear to be electrical cannon plugs but don't know what they are for, suspect they are for some test set connect to.

There was the Mk 79 Firebomb, looks like a drop tank or from a distance a Mk 84 GP Bomb.

Wait, so you are blaming someone who doesn't work for UPS for UPS's brokerage fee? Is there mythical individual directing UPS to charge exorbitant amounts for brokerage fees?

Just getting ahead of the "Imgur needs to fix their site" crowd.

You missed my point. My point is that foreign companies aren't under any obligation to follow a foreign country's laws, such as an American company having to follow a British law. Now, that foreign country can bar that company from operating in their country and that company can so ok, and no operate in that county. That is what Imgur has chose to do. To me, that's not an issue with the company but an issue with the country. If a country want's a foreign company to implement some new policy/restriction then that country should be willing to pay for that policy/restrict

If I'm not mistaken, all USAF A-1E's had the cowl petals removed.

I didn't know that Imgur was a porn site.

Yes, the DSU-33 is externally the same as the DSU-38 (GBU-54 Laser Detector) except for the laser sensor spot on the nose. If you are converting a GBU-38 into a GBU-54 you will need to add the wiring conduct that run's along the belly of the bomb and the conduit retaining bands. hth GW

So let me see if I understand what the issue is; An American company declined to not spend money to change their business just to follow a foreign country's law and non-American's are having an issue that an American company refuses to follow a British law. Did I get that right? GW