Jump to content

Susaschka

Members
  • Content Count

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Susaschka

  1. 17 hours ago, Ben Brown said:

    I’m stuck on my iPad right now, so click this link HERE. In addition to some other reference photos and info you might find of interest, I’ve added a note about that annotated photo you have above. I’ve learned in the time since I first labeled it that the “unknown antenna” was the data link antenna for the Bullpup missile.
     

    In answer to your questions:

    Yes, the best information I’ve been able to find is that they only carried one.

    It looks like nothing was carried on the starboard inboard pylon when a Shrike was carried.

    Yes, just the black nose Shrike, per my correspondence with author Mick Roth many years ago.

     

    Ben

     

    Thanks for the info Ben!

    Now it is quite funny to look at all the F-100F models carrying 2 AGM-45's with white noses. 🙂

  2. Last week I've started working on my the 1:48 Trumpeter F-100F and plan to build it like a Vietnam Weasel.

    Early on in the deployment they were equipped with bombs + LAU-3 rocket launchers loaded with marking rockets, so they could mark a SAM site and accompanying F-105's could attack it.

    Later on they were equipped with the AGM-45 Shrike together with (among other things) SUU-7 dispensers and this is the weapon load I'd like to use.

     

    However, during my research I came upon some publications that state the F-100F's only used the AGM-45 missile on the port inner station and only refer to them in singular and not plural form.

    Looking for photo proof, I've only been able to find pictures from real life F-100Fs with AGM-45's loaded on the port station and not the starboard station. 

    The only pictures I was able to find from F-100F's carrying 2 AGM-45's, were from plastic models.

     

    They also show that the F-100F's deployed in Vietnam used the AGM-45-1's with the black nose.

    However, i'm wondering if this was the only AGM-45 variant they used.

     

    My questions:

    - Is it correct that F-100F's in Vietnam only used the AGM-45 Shrike loaded on the port inner wing station?

    - If this is the case, what kind of ordnance was most likely carried on the starboard inner wing station when a Shrike was carried on the port station?

    - Did they only use the black nosed AGM-45-1's or did they also use white nosed variants?

     

    Because the Trumpeter F-100F doesn't have the Weasel parts, there will be some scratch building involved.

    If anybody has any additional info or suggestions for the Weasel conversion, please let me know.

    All help is more then welcome! 🙂

     

    Thanks for any reply.

     

    image.png.050ab2cffb89f602097546af91c0fc27.png

     

    image.png.6e03dee04756e7bd8c60a73cd8987e0f.png

     

  3. On 6/4/2022 at 6:53 PM, Nebbor said:

    Murph:  as your stated rule of thumb for the MSIP modification I assume there is not one single distinguishing feature that positively identifies a MSIP F-15? As in a aircraft NOT having the right tailboom antenna and modified right aft formation stripe could still be a MSIP MOD? Or other way around: an Eagle that has these features could NOT a MSIP aircraft? Just curious.

     

    There used to be 2 Wolfpack MSIP update kits for the F-15A and F-15C available, but unfortunately these have been discontinued.

    I've been trying to get my hands on both of these for quite some time now, but I haven't been able to obtain them.

    I anybody has any suggestions where I could find these I would be extremely grateful. 😉

     

    Links:

    http://www.wolfpack-d.com/catalog/htm/wp48010.html

    http://www.wolfpack-d.com/catalog/htm/wp48015.html

     

    image.png.0f6eb9ad4a3684368f668229156e005f.png

     

  4. On 6/4/2022 at 5:59 PM, Murph said:

    F-15C.png

     

    Thanks again Murph!

    Below are 2 pictures of the F-15C I'm planning to build and it has both of the features you mention, so it should definitely be a MSIP.

    I will make sure these features will be present on my model.

    (All my pics taken 26-7-1994)

     

    image.png.e0f12549981f5ef8318b3bbfb2b6dfea.png

    image.png.1dcd0665981fcf881b2c012ab761b6bf.png

     

    F-15D 84-044 present the same day also has these features and should also be a MSIP:

    image.png.982846be7c9eec6fcf368624254ae747.png

     

    However, F-15D 79-012 I also photographed the same day, doesn't have these modifications and therefore should be an unmodified one.

    Guess they where using both modified MSIP and unmodified F-15's at Spangdahlem in 1994.

    I'm also planning to build this one and will safe me some time now that I don't have to modify this one. 🙂

    image.png.ec72d44c676e0e11ee70bf1ec5ba5874.png

    image.png.6709939430b37da7ccc5b6b663495b9d.png


     

  5. On 5/27/2022 at 10:50 PM, Thadeus said:

    I know I'm super late. But isnt that an AIM-120 on the fuselage aft station? On the left side I believe? With AIM-7 on the forward left fuselage station? There is radome visible under the right Sparrow.

    Edit: I suppose thats what Joerg meant by 4 Aim120's, 2 AIM7's and 2 AIM9's

     

    Those are indeed AIM-120's loaded on the aft fuselage stations and inner wingstations.

    Only thing left for me to find out is if the F-15C's at Spang were the regular unmodified ones or the MSIP versions.

  6. Thanks Jari!

     

    Looks like the info in the Osprey Air Combat F-105 Thunderchief book is not accurate, as they are clearly stating the F-105D and F models could be loaded with 4 Mk.28's or Mk.43's.

    However now that I think about it, I don't think F-105's could carry a nuke in the bomb bay and centerline at the same time.

    I think they probably meant that there were 4 "stations" that could take these, but not at the same time.

     

    So it's going to be:

    - 2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.43-0 for my F-105D;

    - 2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.28RE for my F-105F;

    2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.28EX for my F-100D.

    All pylons not in use will not be mounted.

     

    These slightly different loadouts should be interesting to see and accurate enough for my purpose.

  7. LF & WTB Wolfpack WP48010 - F-15A MSIP Mod. Eagle Update Set + WP48015 - F-15C MSIP II Mod. Eagle Update Set

    Hi all, I'm looking for these two Wolfpack kits:
    Wolfpack WP48010 - F-15A MSIP Mod. Eagle Update Set
    Wolfpack WP48015 - F-15C MSIP II Mod. Eagle Update Set
    Is there anybody here that has one or both of these kits in his/her stash, is not going to use them and would willing part with them?
    If anybody knows where I might buy these new, this would also be very helpful.


    Thanks for any reply.

     

    WP48010.JPG

    WP48015.JPG

  8. Thanks guys.

     

    Range wise a nuke on one wing pylon and a fuelltank on the other one together with an internal and centerline fueltank would give the F-105 more range, but I don't know if this was done at Spangdahlem.

    I do know nukes were carried on wing pylons under F-105's on Victor Alert stationed in Japan, together with a centerline fueltank as can be seen below.

     

    image.thumb.png.d27d58a82f8400456878a804c730b25e.png

  9. 8 hours ago, Murph said:

     

    I had read somewhere that they did initially, but the use of those tanks was eventually discontinued due to stability issues.  I don't know the timeframe when they stopped using them.

     

     

    Thanks Murph! I will leave them off my model, as I didn't like the look of these anyway. 🙂

    Will just be a Mk28EX on the centerline and 2 fueltanks on the middle wing pylons.

     

    I'm only wondering if the other wing pylons would be empty or that they would remove these.

    Any chance you know this?

  10. Thanks for the info Murph, this answers the first two of my questions! 😀

     

    Now I only need to know if the F-105F's also were able to carry the B28 and B43 bombs.

    I assume they were, but it would be great if I could find some confirmation.

     

    Also an additional question: Do you know if the F-100D's also used the smaller inner pylon fuel tanks when carrying a centerline B28?

  11. Hi all,

     

    Another long shot, but I'm looking for information with what kind of type of nuclear bombs the Spangdahlem based F-100's and F-105's (1961-1967) would have used.

     

    I know that F-100's were capable to carry the Mark 7 and Mk 28 nuclear bombs, but I really would like to find out which one they used at Spangdahlem from 1959-1961.

    The F-100 was also capable to carry the B43, but as the B43's only became operational in 1961, the same year the F-100's at Spangdahlem were replaced by F-105's, I assume they weren't used on the Spang F-100's.

     

    The same question applies to the F-105D: Which type of nuclear bomb was used by the F-105's while they were stationed at Spangdahlem from 1961-1967?

    I know the Mk 28IN was specially developed for internal use by, among others, the F-105, so I assume this would the the logical conclusion.

    However, I would really like to know if this is the only type used on the F-105, or that also for example the Mk 28EX or B43-0 were used either internally or externally.

     

    And a last question about the F-105F's: Were these also combat capable and able to carry nuclear bombs or were these only used as trainers?

     

    Thanks for any help.

  12. Great info, but I'm unable to find the both 54-520 and 54-543 in your listing?

    The number of the transport behind looks like 15209 and the caption with the picture says: Bentwaters 14-5-60. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/dwhitworth/5797030778/)

     

    image.png.db5aa60e02d41a5f1e08acc101606d8f.png

     

    Also found this picture with caption: "19th TRS (Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron), 66th TRW - Douglas RB-66B-DL Destroyer - 54-511 - at Spangdahlem AB, Rhineland-Palatinate, West Germany, 1958."

     

     

    image.png

  13. The problem are unclear instructions included in this Italeri kit and their conflicting answers.

    I just would like to know which is which to build the correct version I'm looking for. It would be a bit silly to find out afterwards that I've built the Alconbury version for my Spangdahlem project. 😉

     

    But you could be right though: I've been in touch with someone that also told me these jets were from the same wing, went from Bitburg to Spangdahlem and later to Alconbury and were swapped around sometimes.

    However, I would like to know if the green band on the engines were for the Alconbury or Spangdahlem examples. I haven't been able to find any pictures from Spangdahlem examples carrying these.

    Guess this is the only remaining mystery left that needs solving.

     

     

  14. And Italeri manages to create an even bigger confusion... 

    They replied to me today stating that the correct decals for the B (Spangdahlem) version is serial 40520!

    They've sent me the exact same image that they've sent to Jan_CZ but now it is named "1375 RB-66B versione B laterale.jpg" instead of Jan_CZ's image named 1375 RB-66B versione C laterale + numer..."

     

    This would mean that the instructions, boxart and picture sent to Jan_CZ are all wrong and:

    - 40520 is the Spangdahlem version.

    - 40543 is the Alconbury version.

    - The boxart is incorrect.

     

    I replied to Italeri informing them about the confusion they've created by sending two contradictory images and to inform me which version is which. 

    To be continued...

     

    image.thumb.png.90ca08fbe92a72a88b0e093097e2e674.png

×
×
  • Create New...