Jump to content

F-4E Hill Gray Scheme


Recommended Posts

No E's in the TX-ANG bro, AFRES had them two places, 457TFS (TH) and 704th TFS (TX)

Ok, then what are these?

(edit)

Okay, never mind. I thought ANG was AFRES. Anyway, these are the jets I am looking for.

F-4E-74-1629-Bill-Spidle.jpg

F-4E74-1630BillSpidle.jpg

Now does anyone know what the pattern on the wings is? I saw a build up of the D and it looks like a different scheme with similar colors.

Edited by DutyCat
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, then what are these?

(edit)

Okay, never mind. I thought ANG was AFRES. Anyway, these are the jets I am looking for.

Now does anyone know what the pattern on the wings is? I saw a build up of the D and it looks like a different scheme with similar colors.

Diego will be releasing the -E scheme in the future. Maybe he can jump in here and explain a bit more. It's certainly on my to do list.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Diego will be releasing the -E scheme in the future. Maybe he can jump in here and explain a bit more. It's certainly on my to do list.

Wings are standard Hill II. I think I have a decal sheet with this scheme in 1/72 from way back. This scheme was tried on the Ds and Es at Bergstrom and was tried on the RFs too I believe.

Rick

Link to post
Share on other sites

111th at Ellington had one F-4E briefly to familiarize the ground crews with it but a stink between the Texas governor and Washington over something completely unrelated to ANG caused the loss of that upgrade and the jet was sent packing. F-4Ds filled the role until the Lawn Dart started trickling into the squadron. I suppose this doesn't really help your cause...

Link to post
Share on other sites
111th at Ellington had one F-4E briefly to familiarize the ground crews with it but a stink between the Texas governor and Washington over something completely unrelated to ANG caused the loss of that upgrade and the jet was sent packing. F-4Ds filled the role until the Lawn Dart started trickling into the squadron. I suppose this doesn't really help your cause...

No, it really doesn't matter. I THOUGHT the ANG and AFRES were the same thing. Are not the ANG reserve units, or partial reserve? In the Navy, we have active and reserve squadrons, period.

I came by an extra F-4E kit, remembered the Hill gray pics with the F-4E on my computer, and in looking at them saw AFRES, TX tailcodes, the Texas flag fin flash, and assumed they were TX ANG planes. I don't understand the distinction, operationally or politically. Perhaps someone with better knowledge of USAF organizational structure can explain it to me.

I just would like to do the scheme. I could care less whether it is ANG or AFRES.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now does anyone know what the pattern on the wings is? I saw a build up of the D and it looks like a different scheme with similar colors.

Hello,

Indeed, the 704 TFS (AF Reserve) used this unique scheme called "Cloud Grey" on D and E models. It was a variation of the standard "Hill Grey 2" scheme, using the same colors, Gunship and Medium grey, but applied following a differet pattern.

The dark grey was applied as disruptive pattern on the fuselage and on the wings, but not on the undersides (as in case of HG 2). Also the pattern on the wings uppersurfaces was a bit different than on the "HG 2".See link to the instruction sheet:

http://www.modellversium.de/kit/artikel.php?id=3388

The F-4D sheet is already available, the very next one will cover a.o. markings for TX CO in Cloud Grey (black codes with white shadow) and TH CO in Hill Grey (Eagle band on the fuselage in Texan colors).

Cheers

Diego

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it really doesn't matter. I THOUGHT the ANG and AFRES were the same thing. Are not the ANG reserve units, or partial reserve? In the Navy, we have active and reserve squadrons, period.

I don't understand the distinction, operationally or politically. Perhaps someone with better knowledge of USAF organizational structure can explain it to me.

DutyCat,

AFRES are reserves in a Title 10 status (Federal), which is where the command and money come. Probably more like you are used to in the Navy.

ARNG are under the State control under Title 32 status, who has command and control, and controls the money. It gets a little convuluted sometimes.

Though the Constitution allows for States to form "militias" (which the ARNG really isn't), I have never understood why a State needs its own air force with fighters, bombers, refuelers and cargo. Think all ANG should be AFRES. States don't need them for disaster relief. Probably ease a lot of issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ARNG are under the State control under Title 32 status, who has command and control, and controls the money. It gets a little convuluted sometimes.

Though the Constitution allows for States to form "militias" (which the ARNG really isn't), I have never understood why a State needs its own air force with fighters, bombers, refuelers and cargo. Think all ANG should be AFRES. States don't need them for disaster relief. Probably ease a lot of issues.

I find that amazing! I can see stationing fighters around peremeter states for defense purposes, but why in the world would they be under command of the state? Seems ridiculous. What if Virginia had it own Naval Guard, with its own aircraft carrier or submarine force?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Duty Cat,

Chorse6 is correct when discussing the Title10 vs Title32 issue. But, there are a few things that need clarification. First, the acronyms....

AFRES - No longer exists; hasn't since '97. AFRC (Air Force Reserve Command) is the proper term.

ANG - Air National Guard

ArNG - Army National Guard

ARC - NO, not that ARC!?! Air Reserve Component. Inclusive term for the ANG and AFRC combined.

Secondly, I respectfully disagree with Chorse6 regarding the use of the ANG (and AFRC for that matter) during natural disasters. Aerial Firefighting during the CA wildfires last Oct is a recent example. Katrina aftermath and the midwest floods of '93 are also examples that I was personally involved with. There are many many, more examples: many more than can be listed here. Remember, not all ANG units are equipped with fighters; fully 75% of all the USAF's C-130s are owned by AFRC and the ANG. Not to mention, helicopters, rescue assets, etc.

Thirdly, why do both the ANG and AFRC exist? It's a two part equation. First the Constitution allows the states and territories to have militias (National Guard). Remember, the Air Force was part of the Army until 18 Sep 47, and before then, most states already possesed air arms as an outgrowth of their militias. So, when the formation of the USAF occurred, the formation of the ANG naturally formed as well. But it was a difficult birth which leads to the second partof the equation. The new Air Force leadership were very cautious of having a reserve force that worked for the state governors rather than the Federal government. They wanted a reserve force that they could access to without asking for permission from the governors. After much political wrangling, AFRES was born 14 Apr 48 as a sort of compromise. AFRES was a Field Operating Agency (FOA) until 17 Feb 97 when it became a Major Command (MAJCOM) of the Air Force. If you want a good book to read on the subject, I recommend Prelude to the Total Force by Charles Joseph Gross http://www.antiqbook.com/boox/ver/009763.shtml

Next, why do AFRC and the ANG continue to exist seperately? Simply put, access to forces and money. Fiscally, the American public has never supported a large standing Active Duty military force in peacetime. That's why reserve forces were born. A properly trained part-time soldier/airman is much cheaper to maintain and can be called to action on a relatively short notice. AFRC forces are cheap and easy to get to. But while the USAF has easier access to AFRC forces, the ANG is even cheaper to maintain than AFRC because the states fund a large portion of their budget. Believe it or not, there are a lot of ANG planes out there named after Senators and Congressmen/Congresswomen. While AFRC is cheap, the ANG is even cheaper.

Finally, the term part-timers is sort of a misnomer nowadays. All ARC airman are trained to the same standards of their Active Duty counterparts and have the same training requirements to maintain their currency/proficiency as well. Unlike the Army that will require time to get their reserve components up to speed (see Desert Storm), when the USAF ARC components are called, they deploy in a very short time frame. And they do that a lot. Law restricts how often/long a reservist can be called to Active Duty for a crisis. However, there is no restriction on how often/long a reservist can volunteer for. And they're doing it in all phases. There are even ARC airmen driving trucks in the Army's convoys. And remember, every time an ARC airman deploys, he leaves not only his family but his civilian job and livlihood behind.

My hat's off to them,

Jay

Link to post
Share on other sites
Secondly, I respectfully disagree with Chorse6 regarding the use of the ANG (and AFRC for that matter) during natural disasters. Aerial Firefighting during the CA wildfires last Oct is a recent example. Katrina aftermath and the midwest floods of '93 are also examples that I was personally involved with. There are many many, more examples: many more than can be listed here. Remember, not all ANG units are equipped with fighters; fully 75% of all the USAF's C-130s are owned by AFRC and the ANG. Not to mention, helicopters, rescue assets, etc.

Jay,

I didn't mean the ANG units weren't useful in disasters; I know they are,along with AFRC and AD. On principal, my point is you have some states that have and some that don't. Why does a State truly need to have an "air force?" If State A doesn't have C-130s to fight fires, but has fighters, he is screwed (if we look at only the State using their own assets). I know a lot of the time, the guys fighting them are AFRC (the unit on Peterson AFB were rigged to do it.). As you point out, a lot of the ANG/AFRC are Reserve in name only. Again the question is why have a ANG under State control? Pure politics.

As for the comment of the State paying for the ANG/ARNG units, that is not true. It is not State money, but Federal money funneled through the State.

Edited by Chorse6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...