What did Luftwaffe F-4Fs carry?

[Procopius]

I know F-4Fs were for whatever reason not equipped to fire the Sparrow when the Germans got them. What were they carrying instead?

[fulcrum1]

Aim-9B x4 and the gun....I think that was the max and all it could carry.

[Andre]

With fuel bags, of course, with the Royal Jet centreline tank being replaced by the HPC one from the early 80s on. AN/ALQ-101 ECM pods, later in the 80s upgraded to AN/ALQ-119, were regularly carried often in the port forward Sparrow well.

These were just the air-to-air loads carried by the Jagdgeschwaders (fighter) JG71'Richthofen' and JG74 'Mölders' at the time - the JaBo (Jagdbomber, fighter-bomber) units, JBG35 and JBG36 "Westfalen", carried pig iron, AGM-65 (added in the early 80s) and British BL755 CBU's.

JBG35 had a secondary air-ot-air role and their F-4F's were thuis also seen with AIM-9B's.

HTH,

Andre

Edited February 21, 2013 by Andre

[RockRiver]

I never understood why they were ordered without Sparrow-capability. Much later, they were modified to carry the AIM-120.

[Andre]

I never understood why they were ordered without Sparrow-capability. Much later, they were modified to carry the AIM-120.

Cost, mostly, and weight, since the F-4F was to be optimised for dogfighting against the MiG-21's of the Warsaw Pact - in addition to removal of the Sparrow capability by not fitting the beacon search capability and constant wave illuminator from the AN/APQ-120, the #7 fuel cell and inflight refuelling receptacle were deleted and the unslotted stab was fitted.

This resulted in the F-4F emerging some 3300 pounds lighter than the F-4E.

Incidentally, the F-4EJ was also without Sparrow capability as-built, but that was due to political considerations.

Cheers,

Andre

[31Tiger]

I never understood why they were ordered without Sparrow-capability. Much later, they were modified to carry the AIM-120.

Because when the Cold war went hot , once they where airborne and wheels up they would immediately be engaged in dogfighting with swarms of MIG's and Sukhoi's. Not much need for heavy BVR missiles

In those days most nations did not have a BVR missile on their fighters (F-16's, F-5's, Starfighters, Mirages,...) It was all Sidewinders

Edited February 21, 2013 by 31Tiger

[ijozic]

Not much need for heavy BVR missiles

In those days most nations did not have a BVR missile on their fighters (F-16's, F-5's, Starfighters, Mirages,...) It was all Sidewinders

That makes no sense. I'd expect they'd rather shoot incoming Soviet fighters from 20 kms rather then risking their chances in the merge.

So, IMHO, it's not because of the lack of need, but because all those fighters you mention were small and cheap and thus incapable of carrying heavy BVR missiles and not having enough space for the large radar systems necessary to guide them.. And you've certainly had larger interceptors in various nations then, too. Mirage 2000, for instance, had the BVR capability with the R530 missile, JA-37 Viggen had the Rb71, British Phantoms, etc.

Edited February 21, 2013 by ijozic

[11bee]

Because when the Cold war went hot , once they where airborne and wheels up they would immediately be engaged in dogfighting with swarms of MIG's and Sukhoi's. Not much need for heavy BVR missiles

In those days most nations did not have a BVR missile on their fighters (F-16's, F-5's, Starfighters, Mirages,...) It was all Sidewinders

Makes sense, we all know that the weather in Europe is always clear and sunny (plus no one flies at night) so why would anyone have needed BVR capability? :)

If they just wanted a good dogfighter that could carry some AIM-9's and do some A2G work, they should have opted for F-5's and saved a bunch of DM's.

[Andre]

Makes sense, we all know that the weather in Europe is always clear and sunny (plus no one flies at night) so why would anyone have needed BVR capability? :)/>

Well, you could evade an AIM-9B by dipping in a cloud.

Thank goodness we don't have much of these over Central Europe..! ;)

Cheers,

Andre

[one-o-four]

With fuel bags, of course, with the Royal Jet centreline tank being replaced by the HPC one from the early 80s on. AN/ALQ-101 ECM pods, later in the 80s upgraded to AN/ALQ-119, were regularly carried often in the port forward Sparrow well.

These were just the air-to-air loads carried by the Jagdgeschwaders (fighter) JG71'Richthofen' and JG74 'Mölders' at the time - the JaBo (Jagdbomber, fighter-bomber) units, JBG35 and JBG36 "Westfalen", carried pig iron, AGM-65 (added in the early 80s) and British BL755 CBU's.

JBG35 had a secondary air-ot-air role and their F-4F's were thuis also seen with AIM-9B's.

HTH,

Andre

In addition to that: the F-4F could also carry the French Matra 25ED 250kg parachute retarded bomb. JBG 36 had a secondary Air Defence role as well.

Kind regards,

Ronald

[one-o-four]

If they just wanted a good dogfighter that could carry some AIM-9's and do some A2G work, they should have opted for F-5's and saved a bunch of DM's.

The Luftwaffe already bought and operated the RF-4E before they introduced the F-4F, so logistically and cost wise it wasn't that strange.

Kind regards,

Ronald

[31Tiger]

That makes no sense. I'd expect they'd rather shoot incoming Soviet fighters from 20 kms rather then risking their chances in the merge.

So, IMHO, it's not because of the lack of need, but because all those fighters you mention were small and cheap and thus incapable of carrying heavy BVR missiles and not having enough space for the large radar systems necessary to guide them.. And you've certainly had larger interceptors in various nations then, too. Mirage 2000, for instance, had the BVR capability with the R530 missile, JA-37 Viggen had the Rb71, British Phantoms, etc.

Cool i love talking about cold war stuff :P/>

my further thinking about the subject

True, but do not forget that when they purchased these birds in the 70's, the Sparrow missile wasn't exactly the most reliable thing around . Also look at where these birds where stationed, it was literaly a few minutes flying from the Inner German Border and when the Rusky planned on coming it was in big big numbers!

The only real BVR players in the 70's and the 80's were RAF Germany and USAFE and they were based much further inland. The only real cold war BVR fighter with a credible chance of hitting anything over the horizon in those days was the F-15 out of Bitburg al the rest was a big maybe.

The dogfights were also expected to be low level, fast, high G's because of the enormous numbers of SAM's on both sides, again not a good environement for BVR missiles

All of this + cost and some politics influenced the decision to ditch the Sparrow capability (remember we are talkin early 70's thinking)

Mark

[Sentry30]

Few additions to the list;

TDU-10 (till late 80's, also a 3 wing variant was used)

Mk82's (snake eyes)

Mk25 exercise dispensers

AIM-9L as of 1984 (?)

I'm pretty shure there is more to hang underneath a German F-4!

Daniël

[Scott R Wilson]

Cost, mostly, and weight, since the F-4F was to be optimised for dogfighting against the MiG-21's of the Warsaw Pact - in addition to removal of the Sparrow capability by not fitting the beacon search capability and constant wave illuminator from the AN/APQ-120, the #7 fuel cell and inflight refuelling receptacle were deleted and the unslotted stab was fitted.

This resulted in the F-4F emerging some 3300 pounds lighter than the F-4E.

Incidentally, the F-4EJ was also without Sparrow capability as-built, but that was due to political considerations.

Cheers,

Andre

Not sure if it was retrofitted or if the "no air refuel receptacle" is just another myth, but F-4Fs had air refuel capability early on. As I recall there is a photo of one refueling from a KC-135 in the old Detail & Scale which dates back to 1982 or so. Likely the photo was taken well before that year. And I'm pretty sure the Sparrow capability was not installed due to treaties done at the end of WW2. Germany and Japan were not permitted to have offensive capabilities and someone decided BVR missiles could be used offensively. That's why you never saw F-4EJs carrying AIM-7s either. This same agreement kept Germany from launching their QRA jets on Alpha (actual) intercepts, which is why the US and Brits always took Alpha launches. Once the Soviet Union fell apart along with the Warsaw Pact the BVR restriction disappeared as well.

We had two QRA F-4Fs divert to Ramstein once in 1984 or 85. I sure wish I'd had my camera that day as I can't remember if they had 370s or HPCs installed, but for sure they had four AIM-9Bs. We were flying AIM-9P-3 Sidewinders and seeing the old Bravos was a real surprise.

Scott W.

[squezzer]

Mirages III were equipped with Matra R530 of both types: IR and semi acrive radar seeker.

This missile was similar to the first Sparrows in range and performance, and they were not reliable too!!!!!

So, they had a kind of BVR capability...

Edited February 21, 2013 by squezzer

[ijozic]

True, but do not forget that when they purchased these birds in the 70's, the Sparrow missile wasn't exactly the most reliable thing around . Also look at where these birds where stationed, it was literaly a few minutes flying from the Inner German Border and when the Rusky planned on coming it was in big big numbers!

Hmm, for some reason I thought they got them somewhat later in the 70s.. My bad. But, still, I got the impression that it was a cost cutting measure and the still limited role of Luftwaffe in the NATO influencing those simplified requirements for the new fighters (they wanted a cheap fighter bomber; initially their F-4s were to be made single-seaters) rather than something considered unnecessary at the time because the frontlines were close. There are so many more possible scenarios that could have developed rather than just a full-scale Soviet invasion. And those frontlines were still there when 10 years later they decided that they definitelly need some BVR capability.

The dogfights were also expected to be low level, fast, high G's because of the enormous numbers of SAM's on both sides, again not a good environement for BVR missiles

All of this + cost and some politics influenced the decision to ditch the Sparrow capability (remember we are talkin early 70's thinking)

It's a bit generalized, as I guess it depends on the mission type. E.g. the SA-2 had a max range of what then? 35 kms only? And it's not that those systems were exactly mobile and tactical. SA-6 was somewhat mobile, but it's max range was about 20 kms. So, if you're flying a defensive CAP over your territory, it's not likely that you'll be forced to lay down low really, especially if you actually plan to intercept something. If anything, the Soviet mid and long range SAMs in the 80s got deadlier and more mobile and still the Germans asked for BVR upgrades.

Edited February 22, 2013 by ijozic

[Jim Barr]

To back up what Scott said about air refueling, here is a shot I took back in 1975 somewhere over the Atlantic when we were dragging some new F-4Fs for delivery to Germany.

Regards

Jim Barr

[RockRiver]

If the reason for not having Sparrow missiles was weight reduction and enhanced dogfight capability, then I think it a strange choice to go for AIM-9B? I'd say there would have been more enhanced versions available in 1974...?

And for the unslotted stabilators - did not the slotted ones add to manouverabilty?

By the way - in June there will be an open day at the JG71 base at Wittmund - the Phantom pharewell of the Luftwaffe. There will be a flying display, some aircraft painted in special schemes (Norm 71 as in the picture above for example)

I will not miss that

[ST21]

If the reason for not having Sparrow missiles was weight reduction and enhanced dogfight capability, then I think it a strange choice to go for AIM-9B? I'd say there would have been more enhanced versions available in 1974...?

And for the unslotted stabilators - did not the slotted ones add to manouverabilty?

Luftwaffe F-4Fs were actually using AIM-9F, basically an improved version of the AIM-9B.

The AIM-9F (also known as AIM-9B FGW.2) was a European development of the AIM-9B, of which 15.000 were built by Bodensee Gerätetechnik (BGT) in Germany. It featured a now CO2-cooled seeker, some solid-state electronics, and a new nose dome. This version entered service in 1969, and most European AIM-9Bs were converted to AIM-9F standard.

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-9.html

[11bee]

On a related note, I seem to remember reading something way about about MDC proposing a single seat F-4 back in the 70's, optimized for dogfighting and lower cost. Maybe this would have been a better match for what the Luftwaffe was looking for?

Out of curiosity, if the German F-4 was only a dogfighter with no BVR capability and no smart weapons - aside from being a 2nd set of eyes, how much value did the WSO really add in these aircraft?

[Procopius]

Visually, is an AIM-9F very different from an AIM-9B? My initial impression is no, given that people who've seen them thought they were AIM-9Bs, but that "new nose cone" has me worried.

[one-o-four]

On a related note, I seem to remember reading something way about about MDC proposing a single seat F-4 back in the 70's, optimized for dogfighting and lower cost. Maybe this would have been a better match for what the Luftwaffe was looking for?

indeed, but the Germans had to to pay further development and testing of this single seat version which would of course add to the price tag a lot.

Out of curiosity, if the German F-4 was only a dogfighter with no BVR capability and no smart weapons - aside from being a 2nd set of eyes, how much value did the WSO really add in these aircraft?

The F-4F had also an air to ground role besides air to air. In that role the WSO proved to be invaluable.

[exhorderhd]

first post - I couldn't resist to answer here, hence the registration ;)

The main reason for the F-4F's limitations was, indeed, cost. The German government had to fulfill a number of German-US offset obligations, that's why they bought an American plane, among other reasons (availability and commonality with the existing RF-4E fleet, mainly). But they decided to limit the budget to 4 billion $ iirc. Therefore, they had to leave most of the fancy stuff behind, such as the Sparrow capability and, much more importantly, up-to-date weapons and nav platforms.

It's true, they wanted the F-4F to be a better dogfighter as well. But cost was the main issue. There were no constraints as to whether Germany could possess BVR weapons; additionally, the planes were delivered with AAR receptacles.