Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

mrvark

Members
  • Content Count

    1,795
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mrvark

  • Rank
    Mr Vark
  • Birthday 04/18/1950

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
  • Interests
    F-111s, US Aircraft Ordnance from Vietnam to Present

Recent Profile Visitors

12,287 profile views
  1. If you plan to buy a set of ResKit wheels, they are presently mis-labeled on the website, but that is being fixed. They should read: Kits RS48/72-69 go to F-111C/G & FB-111A Kits RS48/72-70 go to F-111A/B/D/E/F & EF-111A
  2. Here are a couple of pics of the ECM pod adapter on the front and rear stations.
  3. If it could be done, and I don't know that it could be, the PAVE Tack pod would be stowed and unusable.ere is what it looked like when the AN/ALQ-131 was on the front station and the AN/AXQ-14 was on the rear station.
  4. I'm not sure what you mean by "fully articulated". However, I've attached a pic of what the pod looked like on the ground. The weapon bay doors were open with the pod in the 'standby extend' position, where the turret head rotated backwards protect the window from being hit by FOD. If you were to stand behind the weapon bay, the pod cradle would rotate clockwise to retract and counter clockwise to extend. No one is interested in doing aftermarket for the F-111 kits with the exception of ResKit, who did the engines. I've approached Dmitryi about doing the ECM pod adapter, but so far nothing has come of it. However, it isn't too hard to scratch build one. The only time the ECM adapter was needed on the cradle was when GBU-15s (or AGM-130s post Desert Storm) were being used and the AN/AXQ-14 data link pod took up the aft station. I was not a GBU-15 guy (Thank God--what a pain in the you-know-what that thing was!), so I don't know for sure. I THINK the cradle could be physically rotated open with the adapter on it as long as no pod was affixed to it. But if you were doing the GBU-15 mission, you didn't really need to carry the PAVE Tack pod. So, the only time this would be an issue was if you didn't have time to remove the adapter and needed to use the pod for an LGB mission. I wasn't there for Desert Storm, so can't say for sure but do know that there were a small number of jets that were used for GBU-15 missions (all yellow tails) and a small number of qualified crews with that weapon.
  5. No. Prepare to enter the rabbit hole... The 500-lb GBU-49 Enhanced Paveway II (EP2) is built by Raytheon and involves a modified tail kit to provide the electrical connection between the aircraft and weapon. Other Raytheon EP2s include the 1,000-lb GBU-48, 2,000-lb. GBU-50, and 250-lb. GBU-59. These weapons were developed for the USAF. The 500-lb. GBU-12F/B Dual Mode Laser Guided Bomb (DMLGB) is built by Lockheed Martin for the USN. Although it does the same thing as the EP2 (GPS backup for the laser guidance), it does so using the original tail kit. In addition to the BLU-111 (Mk 82) based GBU-12F/B, the Low Collateral (LoCo) Damage BLU-126 warhead based GBU-52 is also a DMLGB. To complete the GPS-LGB family is the GBU-54 Laser-Guided JDAM (LJDAM) that modifies the 500-lb GBU-38 JDAM with a DSU-38 Precision Laser Guidance System (PGLS) "nose fuze" coupled with a conduit running along the bottom of the warhead to transmit guidance signals to the JDAM tail kit. The other LJDAMs are the 1,000-lb GBU-55 and 2,000-lb GBU-56. However, only the GBU-54 has actually entered production. Aren't you glad you asked? Are we having fun yet?
  6. The -12F/B has a conduit that runs down the right side of the warhead and GPS antennas on the seeker section that looks kind of like a beer can was inserted just in front of the guidance fins.
  7. The original AIM-9A lacked rollerons on the aft outer corner of its wings. When it was launched at high altitudes it corkscrewed through the air, looking kind of like how a snake trail looks in the sand. It thus was named Sidewinder, although the addition of rollers to the AIM-9B pretty much eliminated that characteristic.
  8. The original Sidewinder launcher was the USN's AERO-3A that was used with the AIM-9A and AIM-9B (I'm going to use the post 1962 nomenclature here to avoid confusion). When the USAF adopted the AIM-9, they made a slight modification to the launcher to allow it to also fire the TDU-11 target rocket (basically a HVAR), resulting in the AERO-3B. The Navy then developed the radar-guided AIM-9C and IR-guided AIM-9D. I've never seen documentation that the AIM-9C could be launched by using the AERO-3A--I suppose it could happen, but I kind of doubt it because of logistics. The AIM-9C was only used by the F-8 to give them a theoretical capability to defend 27C carriers that were too small to base F-4s on. Since they were used alongside AIM-9Ds, they probably used the same LAU-7/A launchers (my guess, no hard evidence). As noted above, the AIM-9D (and follow on G & H) required the LAU-7 launcher that contained the nitrogen cooling bottle. At one point, the USAF wanted to buy the AIM-9D and purchased a small number of LAU-7A/A launchers in anticipation (the most famous proof of this is the photo of Robin Olds next to one of these launchers). However, the AIM-9D had a difficult development and the USAF needed missiles sooner than the Navy would be able to supply them. So, they chose to modify the AIM-9B into the AIM-9E (and follow-on AIM-9J, N & P). These missiles didn't need the nitrogen cooling bottle so they continued to use the AERO-3B. After Vietnam, the USAF and USN jointly developed the AIM-9L (and follow-on AIM-9M). The USN variants of these missiles continued to use subsequent variants of the LAU-7 (up to at least the LAU-7F/A) because generating nitrogen is easy to do on a carrier. The USAF missiles used a small bottle of Argon instead of the nitrogen. They developed the LAU-105 which was used by the F-4, A-10 & F-111 and could launch the earlier AIM-9s or the AIM-9L & -9M. The F-15 needed a launcher that could withstand higher g loading and the LAU-114 was developed for it.
  9. I think I captured that pic off the Internet--just image color.
  10. FWIW, the USAF LANTIRN pod is the AN/AAQ-14; the USN's F-14 pod was the AN/AAS-25. That said, I think they were identical externally. Here's a good side shot showing the inlet.
  11. Just in case anyone else was wondering where the hell this gizmo goes on the Flogger. It is definitely useful with Trumpeter's MiG-23M (kit 2853). It can also be used on MiG-23ML (kit 2855) or the MiG-27 (kit 5802), but the detail on these two kits is better than on the -23M, so it is not really needed on them.
  12. A couple of points: First, if you go to this link you can download my scale drawing of the F-111 weapons bay that shows the various configurations it had. The full sized drawing is 1/24th scale, at the bottom of the page are scaling factors for the various kit scales. (For 1:72 scale, print at 33.33% or make the drawing 3.33" tall; 1:48 is 50% or 5.00" tall.) As to this topic, I draw your attention to the box cutout at the back of the cradle. This allowed the PAVE Tack pod turret to rotate about the pod axis. What I'm doing is just cutting out the box from the kit weapon bay. Once the pod is installed, the concave shape of the actual hump (depression) won't be noticeable. I think if you made the cradle completely accurate, you'd also need to cut into the underlying fuselage (a lot of pain and suffering for minimal gain in accuracy in this scale). The kit pod isn't terrible. What I've done is cut the turret from the pod body and inserted a tube to allow the turret to be positioned in more than the 'snowplow' mode. I also added the top part of the turret shroud and it looks pretty good. (I'd show you a picture, but the parts are out being casted.) The other change that is necessary for both the kit pod (and probably the aftermarket pods as well) is the orientation of the pod body. When mounted on the F-4, the access doors opened on the left side and the cooling air intake was on the right side of the pod and that is the assumption Hasegawa made about the F-111 installation. However, on the F-111 the pod body was rotated 90° so that the access doors were on the bottom of the pod and the intake was on the top and fed by internal cooling air. SO, any hints of the intake cutout on the right side of the pod body should be filled. Scribing the doors is up to you, but I personally think that's another bridge too far.
  13. Custom cradle without pod to more clearly show the 'box' cut out that allows the turret head to swivel back and forth.
  14. Custom PAVE Tack cradle with Eduard PT pod oriented so access doors are down, not on side as it was mounted on F-4:
×
×
  • Create New...