modelman11 Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Im building two F/A-18E's from VFA-14 and want to hear some options about loadouts used in Iraq of Afghanistan. Right now Im not sure if VFA-14 was in Afghanistan but they were in Iraq. Any info is helpful. I have a few options but want to find the best one!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Persian Gulf (Sept. 15, 2005) >>> Hi Res <<< Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
modelman11 Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 Thanks Gregg!! I've noticed that sometimes these guys fly with one tank under the starboard side with the weapons stacked under the port. Interesting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Yes, that's so the ATFLIR pod on the left cheek station has a better field of view ... :lol: Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 My favorite: http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/pho...N-8446A-004.jpg http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/pho...N-0361G-011.jpg Others: 2 x MK-20 (most likely leaflet drops) with FMU-140 fuzes http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/pho...N-2385R-001.jpg 2 x GBU-12, 2 x GBU-38 http://www.cusnc.navy.mil/photos/2007/hi/0...N-5484G-195.jpg Cheers ATIS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
modelman11 Posted November 11, 2009 Author Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) Wont that tank on the starboard side make the aircraft lean? I mean you could trim but then as fuel was consumed youd have to trim back!? Also, I like the tanking hornet but cant find a buddy pod in 1/72...... Also, does anyone have a closeup of those leaflet mk20's? Way cool!!! Edited November 11, 2009 by modelman11 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherC Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) Wont that tank on the starboard side make the aircraft lean? I mean you could trim but then as fuel was consumed youd have to trim back!? Also, I like the tanking hornet but cant find a buddy pod in 1/72...... <_<Also, does anyone have a closeup of those leaflet mk20's? Way cool!!! Which image are you referring to? All the loadouts looks pretty symmetrical to me. I have seen pictures with asymmetrical loadouts, often if there is a fuel tank on one side there is a large LGB on the opposite side. I'd imagine that by time the fuel is consumed the bomb would have been expended. Either way I would think the aircraft can be made to automatically compensate for any imbalance that may arise. Chris Edited November 11, 2009 by ChristopherC Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 2 x MK-20 (most likely leaflet drops) with FMU-140 fuzeshttp://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/pho...N-2385R-001.jpg Leaflet Bombs (ie B/S Bomb) don't use the FMU-140, they still have the Mk 339's. Reddog <_< Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spongebob Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 2 x MK-20 (most likely leaflet drops) with FMU-140 fuzeshttp://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/pho...N-2385R-001.jpg That was a April/May 2003 SSC load-out. Only 1 tank and the 0x2x1 A2A load. Money says it had an AAS-38 on the other side since ATFLIR was in really short supply then. HTH Spongebob Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Well I guess those are standard MK-20 ROCKEYE ModelMan, sorry to get your hopes up. Guess my tired eyes missed the big "X" they paint on the sides of leaflet dispensers and I don't see a blue band (meaning a non-explosive fill). I never dropped leaflet bombs, just ROCKEY with the fuzes in the pic (FMU-140) and the older MK-339. Cheers ATIS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
modelman11 Posted November 11, 2009 Author Share Posted November 11, 2009 Well I guess those are standard MK-20 ROCKEYE ModelMan, sorry to get your hopes up. Guess my tired eyes missed the big "X" they paint on the sides of leaflet dispensers and I don't see a blue band (meaning a non-explosive fill). I never dropped leaflet bombs, just ROCKEY with the fuzes in the pic (FMU-140) and the older MK-339. Cheers ATIS Hey I think its still super cool!! Any more photos of odd job munitions in combat? usually its just gbu-12/38 and agm-65. Anyone seen GBU-16's? I think they droped some JSOW's early on as well??? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Others:2 x MK-20 (most likely leaflet drops) with FMU-140 fuzes No leaflet dispensers there; those are real Rockeyes, CBU-99. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Man...I make one mistake and the Pax River crowd piles on. No paper plates for you at the SoMD meeting in December. ATIS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Hey I think its still super cool!! Any more photos of odd job munitions in combat? usually its just gbu-12/38 and agm-65. Anyone seen GBU-16's? I think they droped some JSOW's early on as well??? VFA-115 used a load of GBU-16 on station 3 (left midboard pylon) with empty stations 2 and 4, with MK-82/BSU-86 bombs on CVERs on stations 8 and 9 (right inboard and midboard) with station 10 empty, AIM-9M on the wingtip(s) and an AIM-120 on station 7 (right intake), centerline gas bag, and TFLIR (not ATFLIR normally) on the right intake station in 2002/2003 over Afghanistan. For OIF in 2003, they added an AIM-120 on station 2, took the AIM-120 off the right intake, and replaced the MK-82s with MK-83/BSU-85 on CVER on station 8 and a parent-rack MK-83/BSU-85 on station 9. Station 10 had an empty LAU-127 rail installed. This was before GBU-12 and GBU-38 were cleared for use on the SH. No one makes a MK-82/BSU-86 in any scale that I'm aware of, but the MK-83/BSU-85 is included in the original issue Revell FA-18E and the Revell FA-18F kits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Man...I make one mistake and the Pax River crowd piles on. No paper plates for you at the SoMD meeting in December.ATIS That's what you get for defecting to "inside the beltwayland"... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 That was a April/May 2003 SSC load-out. Only 1 tank and the 0x2x1 A2A load. Money says it had an AAS-38 on the other side since ATFLIR was in really short supply then.HTH Spongebob Was that one of the jets that cross-decked to the Lincoln to fly with VFA-115? Concur with the AAS-38 TFLIR; Between VFA-115, 14 and 41 I think the total number of available ATFLIRs was still in the single digits at the time but I'm not positive on that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 That's what you get for defecting to "inside the beltwayland"... Honestly...it's better than a slow death in Southern Maryland....heck... I go to so many program office meetings now for Tomahawk, I'm in Pax 2-3 times a month anyway. In fact...I will stop by your door on Thursday afternoon and yell at you just for the fun of it (I have a meeting down the hall). ATIS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
strikeeagle801 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 http://www.cusnc.navy.mil/photos/2007/hi/0...N-5484G-195.jpg That's the first time I've ever seen a CVER with both a GBU-12 and GBU-38 on at the same time. Any particular reason they would do this instead of doing two GBU-12's on one side and two GBU-38's on the other? I'm assuming (hopefully correctly) that CVER's are pretty common now-a-days, as the VER can carry the GBU-12, but not the GBU-38? By this, I mean that if it was still in short supply, they would be carrying one CVER and one VER, correct? Aaron Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 http://www.cusnc.navy.mil/photos/2007/hi/0...N-5484G-195.jpgThat's the first time I've ever seen a CVER with both a GBU-12 and GBU-38 on at the same time. Any particular reason they would do this instead of doing two GBU-12's on one side and two GBU-38's on the other? I'm assuming (hopefully correctly) that CVER's are pretty common now-a-days, as the VER can carry the GBU-12, but not the GBU-38? By this, I mean that if it was still in short supply, they would be carrying one CVER and one VER, correct? Aaron They are not on a CVER, they are on parent racks, the angle of the photo makes it look like they are close together. Combining weapons on a CVER is a no-no. Also, mixing of CVER and VER's is a no no, besides, the E/F is not cleared for VER's. As for VER's, you would have a better chance of hitting the lottery then finding a VER nowadays. Reddog Quote Link to post Share on other sites
strikeeagle801 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Well, that clears that right up. Thank's for the info, it's greatly appreciated. I figured that it probably would be a no-no, but like you said, the angle of the pic had me fooled. Aaron Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spongebob Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Was that one of the jets that cross-decked to the Lincoln to fly with VFA-115? Concur with the AAS-38 TFLIR; Between VFA-115, 14 and 41 I think the total number of available ATFLIRs was still in the single digits at the time but I'm not positive on that. No, one of the leave behinds. All of the E's that went to Lincoln were set up as 5-wet tankers. For the ATFLIR, I think we had 4 when we got there and collected more as the deployment went on. -41 had all the ATFLIRs until late in the cruise when we finally got enough to go around. For interesting loads, VFA-14 did a strike on a weapons storage facility; GBU-35's on the inboard and mid parent racks (4 total), bag on the center and 0x2x2. One of few pre-planned strikes that CVW-11 did in OIF. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 , the E/F is not cleared for VER's. Reddog Although I know for a fact that at least one flight was conducted dropping MK-83/BSU-85 from BRU-33/A VERs a couple years ago. How that one got past the load crews, QA, the ordnance techs and test engineers and the aircrew is a mystery to me... No, it wasn't my test...but the powers-that-be weren't happy that 1. an unauthorized load was actually hung on the jet, and 2. a flight was conducted and ordnance dropped without a flight clearance! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 No, one of the leave behinds. All of the E's that went to Lincoln were set up as 5-wet tankers. For the ATFLIR, I think we had 4 when we got there and collected more as the deployment went on. -41 had all the ATFLIRs until late in the cruise when we finally got enough to go around.For interesting loads, VFA-14 did a strike on a weapons storage facility; GBU-35's on the inboard and mid parent racks (4 total), bag on the center and 0x2x2. One of few pre-planned strikes that CVW-11 did in OIF. GBU-35? Not 31? I didn't think 1000lb JDAM was cleared on the E/F at that time? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Their not, never have been to my knowledge. Reddog :P BTW: Joe, that's what happens when you don't have a Tomcat Ordie incharge of the load. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Looks like no paper plates for Spongebob at the December meeting. Come on dude... everyone knows E/F's aren't cleared for the GBU-35, just like my leaflet CBU's carried FMU-140's. Come join me in the corner where they put the guys who make mistakes. ATIS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.