Susaschka
-
Content Count
149 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Susaschka
-
-
5 hours ago, Finn said:
Here are live Mavericks, and ECM pod:
Jari
Nice pic and loadout!
I've also read that when AGM-65's were carried on LAU-88's, they would only carry two on the inboard and bottom position of the LAU-88.
This loadout is now also back in the game. 🙂
-
Found this picture from a F-4D in an Airdoc publication and I have to say that I like this loadout too. 🙂
-
On 11/19/2021 at 3:12 PM, Cajun21 said:
To best of my knowledge no EF-105F's or F-105G's were ever stationed in Europe.
Cheers
Itch
If I've researced correctly, the SEAD/Wild Weasel mission was only introduced with the 52TFW with the (E)F-4C and no F-105's at Spangdahlem were ever tasked for this.
This really means I'm only left with a very clean F-105F with only two droptanks if I want it to be realistic.
Maybe I will try to scratchbuild the bomb bay after all, but we will see. 🙂
The F-105G at the gate of Spang has indeed never flown there, is 100% fictional, but it does exist.
As this is allready fictional, I will load this one up as a pure Weasel with a Centerline fueltank, one droptank, an AGM-78 and two AGM-45's.
-
23 hours ago, seawinder said:
Those are great photos! Question: some of the NMF birds look like unpainted aluminum, with a lot of contrasting surfaces, while others look like overall aluminum lacquer, much more uniform. Is that what the photos are actually showing, or were they all aluminum lacquered with a lot of wear?
If I remember correctly they used to be bare metal in the beginning, but during one of the upgrade programs they were painted overall aluminium.
-
I have an additional question:
Does anybody know if the F-105F's that were based at Spangdahlem were ever tasked with the SEAD mission (with AGM-45's) or were they only used for training the nuclear mission?
-
1 minute ago, arg said:
I thought a nice change-of-pace from Vietnam F-105Ds would be to do a nuclear-armed one. Built the 1/48 Monogram F-105D with a scratch-built weapons bay, and added a Mk 28 from Belcher Bits.
That looks really nice, well done! To bad there is no aftermarket bomb bay available for the F-105, because I'm not that experienced with this level of scratchbuilding. 🙂
-
On 11/15/2021 at 1:31 AM, Finn said:
The Mk/B28 had the Y - Yield as well:
As per your highlight, the nose section looks too bulbous for a external tank, maybe it could be a Mk/B43 with the N43-Mod 0 nose:
or even a SUU-21 for counterweight for a training mission?
Now I understand where the Y stands for. 🙂
Think you could be right about the droptank, but it looks to me like it is also to bulbous for a Mk/B43 with Mod 0 nose too...
I will not be using a SUU-21, because I would like my models to have a loadout without practice ordnance. 😉
-
1 hour ago, Niels said:
Captive AGM-65, likely dummy MK82's on TER
Thanks, however I don't really like dummy ordnance...
Guess I will be building a (What-If) European One and not-updated Spang A-10A with an early nineties loadout of four AGM-65's, an AN/ALQ-131, two AIM-9's, six Mk.82's on two TER's and 4 Mk.20's to fill the gaps.
My other A-10A will be the updated Ghost Grey version and will get the more sophisticated ordnance used around 2000 like the LANTIRN pod, JDAM's and LGB's.
-
On 11/12/2021 at 10:41 AM, Niels said:
They should - here is more info incl. picture. As you will recognize, it is the shape of the MK20
Indeed, at first glance only the markings are different.
-
17 hours ago, Stefan buysse said:
Hi,
Yes, I agree that there should be no ALQ or Sidewinder on the outboards for the 1962 Victor Alert load-out.
I can think of two reasons for keeping the outboard pylons. Possibly, they added a bit of stability. Second reason might be to keep the Soviets guessing about the nuclear load-out in USAFE.
Thanks Stefan. There are quite a lot pictures to be found online from USAFE (Bitburg and Spangdahlem) F-105D's with the outer pylons removed, so I will not be installing them on my model.
-
2 hours ago, Finn said:
In the Modern Military Aircraft Series book Thud by Lou Drendel it has a pic of a Thud in the Far East, Okinawa i think, with a Mk-28 on a wing pylon, can't see the other wing so two shapes on wing pylons would be okay. The B61 didn't show up until around 1967 so either Mk-28 or Mk-43 would be the more common ones for that early time period.
Jari
Thanks Jari. I think you mean this picture?
It does look like there is a droptank under the right wing, which I've highlighted in green below.
When loaded with only one nuke this would make sense, as the centerline fueltank would contain 650 Gal oppose to a wingtank carrying only 450 Gal thus giving more range.
It indeed could be a B28, but could also be a B43. I do realize the picture below is from a model kit, but looking at the shape and location of the "Y" number it looks a bit more like a B43:
-
14 hours ago, Wild Weasel V said:
As I understand it, the A-10s started transferring from the UK in May 1992 with aircraft flying to Spangdahlem every two weeks; the last leaving for Germany in March 1993 after which RAF Bentwaters/Woodbridge closed. This would be consistent with a rolling repaint schedule prior to delivery so it's highly probable none were in European 1 when operating with the 52nd FW. If 77-0264 was transferred in April it would give base personnel continuity training before the first squadron arrived . Since it was the first jet to transfer and was probably not intended to fly again, there was no necessity to go to the expense of re-painting it.
You can also just see two grey A-10s at Bentwaters in the background of this photo taken in September 1992; one I think is 81-0952: https://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Air-Force/Fairchild-A-10A-Thunderbolt-II/5862715
If you're set on the European 1 camouflage and SP codes you could still build 77-0264 and load it with a typical weapons configuration as part of a training exercise, just not 'live' ordnance; otherwise you'll have to build an all grey jet for an actual operational aircraft.
HTH,
Jonathan
Thanks for the pictures and info, another mistery solved with photoproof!
I do want to build this A-10 in flight (like all my models) even if it would be a "what if" (like the F-105G at the gate), but do you have any idea what is considered a "typical weapons configuration as part of a training exercise"?
-
15 hours ago, Wild Weasel V said:
- even thirty years ago it's unlikely that USAFE would want Joe Public wandering around a fully serviceable aircraft with full hands-on access as seen in your photo!
The 77-0264 A-10 picture was indeed taken during the same 4th of July 1992 Open House that I made my picture and during that day there where almost no fences placed at all.
Just the F-16 had some pylons with a rope around it as can be seen below: (Apologies for the quality, but these are raw and unedited scans from my slide scanner)
-
Wow, thanks for the pics. Interesting that the bombs lost their top fins in order to fit in the F-105 bomb bay.
According to your schematic, the F-105 should be able to carry:
- One Mk.28 or 43 internally or:
- One externally on the centerline or:
- Two externally on the inboard pylons.
The Smissonian website states the following: (https://www.si.edu/object/republic-f-105d-thunderchief%3Anasm_A19820064000)
The F-105D was originally intended for the nuclear strike role, with the primary armament being a "special store" (a nuclear weapon) housed in the internal weapons bay.
This weapon was usually a Mk 28 or a Mk 43. However, a Mk 61 could be carried underneath the left or right inboard under wing pylon and a Mk 57 or a Mk 61 could be carried underneath the centerline pylon.
The Air&Space Magazine website states: the following: (https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/thuds-the-ridge-and-100-missions-north-47278311/)
From the bases in Germany and at Kadena Air Base in Okinawa and Osan, South Korea, the pilots began standing alerts, nuclear weapons tucked into their airplanes’ bomb bays or hanging from wing pylons, waiting for the terrible moment to arrive.
The question that remains: What configuration did the -105D's use during their Victor Alert duties at Spangdahlem?
- Which types of bombs: Mk28 (B28), Mk43 (B43), Mk57 (B57) or TX61 (B61)?
- Were these loaded internally or externally?
- And if they were loaded externally did they carry one bomb on the centerline or two on the inboard wing pylons?
You are right about the AN/ALQ-87 jammers, these were indeed only developped around 1967.
I also wonder if anyone can confirm the removal of the outer pylons if these were not used.
Personally I think that a load of one nuke internally with two droptanks or one nuke on the centerline pylon combined with an bomb bay fueltank and two droptanks would be the most logical configurations considering combat range, but this is my opinion so I could be wrong.
The configuration with one (or two) external nuke(s) would definitely be one of the nicest loadouts for my model. 🙂
-
1 minute ago, ElectroSoldier said:
Thats not the grey scheme Im talking about.
You are right, this is the very early grey/grey scheme.
I wasn't able to find any pictures from the the current grey/grey scheme on any Bentwaters/Woodbridge A-10's.
-
On 11/9/2021 at 12:48 AM, Stefan buysse said:
Hi, Erwin.
There could be a problem unless you are planning "what-if" F-105's?
I believe that the D-models were gone from USAFE before the "late" 1960's, the 36th TFW had them until 1966 and the 49th TFW had them until 1967. Over here, their mission was overwhelmingly nuclear strike. It's possible they had a secondary duty with conventional weapons, but almost everything they did or carried was dedicated to training for nuclear strike.
They were dead serious about their Victor Alert duty. Training flights and training in Libya were seen as necessary, but regretted as it meant less aircraft were available to stand Victor Alert.
I'm not aware of photos of USAFE F-105D's with conventional bombs. If they exist, Jari would be the guy who could find them.🙂
You are right about that not being the same as the Eduard MER. There was an evolution of bomb racks before the definitive MER was created.
Cheers, Stefan;
My f-105D will be from around 1962, just before they left the area.
I do like an interesting loadout, but it should be a realistic one for Spangdahlem.
Therefore I think I will switch the armament to a Victor Alert nuclear strike version.
Did they carry B-43's/B-61's internally together with two droptanks under the inner pylons, or did they carry these in the inner wing pylons?
And what did they carry on the outer pylons: An AN/ALQ-87 and AIM-9B perhaps?
Any idea's?
-
There is indeed a lot of info to be found, but unfortunately almost none of them are about the color schemes.
I will have to rely on the available pictures online + those in my own collection and conclude that (unless proven otherwise) all Spang A-10's had the grey/grey color scheme.
-
On 11/8/2021 at 7:47 PM, Niels said:
FYI - during Desert Storm leaflet bombs had the old casings of the Mk 20 but different stripes around the bomb body. So as leaflet bombs they were carried, but not as cluster bombs, at least not by USAF. This also because the modern armored cars and other vehicles can withstand (most of) the shrapnel of the MK20.
I didnt know this fact. They should have called them Paper Clusters. 🙂
-
On 11/9/2021 at 8:14 PM, VADM Fangschleister said:
If I remember right, we put the Mk20’s on TERs a lot. The SUU-30 dispensers we also loaded a lot but I can’t remember if we put them on the bottom TER stations or not. The munition could clear the ground just fine but I can’t remember if the jammer table and arms could fit to get under the TER for Sta 1. But we definitely put three Mk20’s on each TER. I say SUU-30 because that’s the “canister” that held whatever was inside and that’s what determined the numerical designator for the munition. Mostly we got them as CBU-52’s.
HTH
Thanks! I'll propably go for two SUU-30/CBU-52's side by side on a TER
-
17 minutes ago, Niels said:
Originally the A-10A had the grey/light grey scheme in the late 70's, which soon gave way to the EURO1 scheme which in turn was retained until early 90's. Bentwaters, with exception for a period in the late 70's, had EURO1 scheme.
Then I guess the A-10's that were transferred to Spangdahlem were repainted prior to being moved, as I'm unable to find any pictures from grey early 90's Bentwaters/Woodbrigde or green Spangdahlem examples.
-
9 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:
If they were never any Euro1 camo A-10As at Spangdahlem were there any grey camo jets at Bentwaters/Woodbridge and Alconbury?
There were grey examples at Bentwaters/Woodbridge, but I don't know the dates. Looking at the backgroud a very long time ago?
-
Thanks all, now I know that this was a maintenance trainer and I guess that this is the reason for the European One camouflage.
Never knew that these were designated GA-10A.
Arrival date and method will most likely remain a mistery.
Only found one other picture from this plane taken 31-05-1997 and at that time it definitely was not in the best condition anymore:
-
During the open House at Spangdahlem on the 04-07-1992 I was able to shoot this 510th TFS A-10A in an immaculate European One color scheme.
This is the only Spangdahlem A-10 that I've ever seen in European One colors and I've never seen any other A-10's flying from Spangdahlem in these colors.
After some online searching, I found that this plane apparently was transferred from RAF Bentwaters to Spangdahlem around April 1992 and was used as a maintenance trainer.
At this moment the 77-0264 is preserved as a gate guard on a pole at one of the gates at Spangdahlem.
The questions that I have:
- Did this plane fly in from Bentwaters or was it transported to Spangdahlem?
- If it flew in, was it ever operational and in flying condition or if was it immediately WFU after arrival and only used as a maintenance trainer?
- Were other operational A-10's at Spangdahlem ever painted in the European One colors scheme or were they all grey and was this really the only green one?
Thanks for any reply.
-
39 minutes ago, Finn said:
In addition to what was said above, if you plan to have MERs on the wing pylons of the F-105. the inboard sides of the MERs did not have the racks installed:
http://aviation.watergeek.eu/images/f-105/f-105_1.jpg
Jari
Thanks, I hadn't noticed this detail and since my F-105D will get 3 TER's loaded with Mk.117's, some modifications to the TER's are in order.
Is it me, or does the MER in the picture look more simple than the Eduard MER?
Spangdahlem F-4D colors and weapon loadout questions
in Jet Modeling
Posted
Found this picture in the "Squadron Signal Publications - Wild Weasel: The SAM Suppression Story" book where it states "This F-4C from the 81st TFS carries fuel tanks on the outer pylons and four CBU's on the centerline."
Guess I've found the loadout for the centerline station on my (E)F-4C! 🙂