Tailspin Turtle

For what it's worth: http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2016/01/f-4-phantom-outboard-pylon-and-mer.html For everything I know so far on F-4 external tanks: http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2013/06/things-under-wings-f4h-f-4-phantom.html

http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2011/02/transition-to-martin-baker-ejection.html

The multiple-bomb racks were created for the early A4D Skyhawk, which only had three pylons, one or two of which were usually dedicated to an external fuel tank. It was originally a one-trick pony and intended to carry only one bomb. The Marines wanted it to have a close-air support capability as well, which resulted in a pylon kludge that became standard on many jets. The AD Skyraider was configured with 15 pylons so a TER was unnecessary, as well as adding weight and drag. Also see http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2013/04/things-under-wings-va-25-1-skyraider.html

Somebody else wrote: "Photos of the Eagle Claw '53s show them be in a more yellowish shade of sand, possibly Tan Special 20400, or Sand 33531. Seeing how Navy and Marine Corps aircraft during the 80s, especially helicopters, occasionally received local desert camo schemes in the Middle East using 20400, Tan Special, I would suggest that as a more likely color." Someone else suggested it might have been 30279. See: http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=20400+33531+30279 20400 looks pretty close to me in most online pictures, a bit too dark in others, and nowhere close in a few. The other two colors don't look close, but again that's relying on what those chips and the photos look like on my computer screen. Note that the helicopters were painted aboard ship, having arrived in the standard overall dark blue-gray paint scheme, which might have affected the resulting color. There are not only no stencils in the pictures available to me but no national insignia either.

This will answer some questions: http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-short-tragic-operation-of-f-4.html

I updated my blog post to show the F4D Sidewinder pylon alternatives: http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2010/10/bat-out-of-hell.html

Kitty Hawk has been provided with very good drawings, illustrations, and photos of the production F6U and is aware of the inaccuracies in the Pensacola F6U.

Sure - if I haven't myself already.

I provided pretty much everything I had on the FJ-2/3 to Kitty Hawk at their request a few months ago. I'm hoping to get a chance to review what they've done with it before the kit gets tooled this time. However, I did not get a preview of the CAD that was just released or a request from them for comment yet. That said, it looks pretty good so far. As I think someone else noted, the CAD with the wings extended has the later wing (fixed and cambered leading edge, etc) and the ones with the wings folded has the slats of the first wing, which means they may produce kits of both the early (blue) and later (gray/white) FJ-3s.

It turns out that an FJ-4 fuselage is a good starting point for the FJ-3 from the standpoint of the forward fuselage. See http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2015/04/esci-148th-fj-23.html

They probably are. The problem is while the -8s are obvious if you can see the collar (the upper portion of which is generally hidden by the A-5 airframe), the tips of the outer petals (they are not terminated straight across but have sort of eyelet on each end), the exterior of the outer petals (they do not have a smooth surface), the interior of the petals (there is an obvious longitudinal rib), or the nozzle is completely closed down as it would be between idle and military power, some pictures do not provide a good enough view of those features and in fact the most obvious, petal tips and interior actuator, are hidden by the red cover in the above pictures. However, the nozzle does appear to be closed down like a -8's and the exterior of the outer petals is not smooth.

As far as I know, it was. That's in the first link. There was also a different fairing added to the tip of the vertical fin for an antenna at some point. And a pair of antennas or sensors appears to have been added to the top of the fuselage on a few aircraft but nobody has told me what it is yet.

There wasn't a very good illustration comparing the nozzles in that link. See http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012/12/j79-exhaust-nozzles.html However, I'm still looking for good pictures of the -8 and -10 nozzles in the A-5.

Note that engines were different too, among other things: http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2010/12/vigilante.html

In 1949 (see Revolt of the Admirals), the U.S. Navy was convinced that it could detect incoming B-36s with radar and successfully intercept and shoot them down with F2H Banshees. A version equipped with a radar in the nose was developed to provide an all-weather and night capability; one Banshee was also evaluated with a McDonnell-design afterburner to increase the rate of climb. The superior performance of the MiG-15 at altitude compared to the F-86 and its armament was the direct result of the requirement to intercept B-36s. That's not to say that some Peacemakers wouldn't have gotten to their targets.