F-104C Centerline 225 Gal.Drop Tank

[Michael Vorrasi]

For many years I have searched for a photo of the 225 Gal center line drop tank for the F-104C. It apparently was not a popular item, it seems. The Detail and Scale volume on the 104 shows a load out diagram for the F-104C and it shows a 225 gal. tank on the center line hard point. I think the C is the only model that had a wet plumbed center line hard point. A photo has been identified by Martin W. Bowman, in his book on the 104 (http://www.amazon.com/Lockheed-F-104-Starfighter-Crowood-Aviation/dp/1861263147/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1436803071&sr=1-1&keywords=The+Lockheed+F-104+Starfighter%2C+Martin+W.+Bowman ), as being the 225 gallon drop tanks. Many other sources have flippantly labeled these stores as either nukes, or practice nuke shapes. I have long been suspicious of that. Now that Danny at DACO has released his kit, with all of the nukes the 104 carried, and his book shows photos of them as well, these stores do not match any of the actual nukes. Thus, I believe Bowman is correct. These are 225 Gal. Drop Tanks. They match the style of similar streamlined US drop tanks of various sizes that were not type specific (like the 104 tip and wing pylon tanks were). Here is the photo (https://www.awesomestories.com/images/user/2df3ad0577.jpg ). Note that two of the tanks have the lower fin removed, and just by eyeballing it, the others are a a dip in the ramp pavement away from joining the missing pair. I would like to hear what other 104 fans think.

Edited July 13, 2015 by Michael Vorrasi

[Finn]

Those are Mk-28 nukes (training ones), the lower fin was removed to allow for clearance at times while on the actual shape one set of fins rotated to allow for clearance.

edit: here is a camo F-104C with a Mk-43 training shape with the lower fin removed:

http://i1327.photobucket.com/albums/u676/domboy5/1%2048%20photos/1041_zpsd387f249.jpg~original

Jari

Edited July 13, 2015 by Finn

[nfiler]

Those are Mk-28 nukes (training ones), the lower fin was removed to allow for clearance at times while on the actual shape one set of fins rotated to allow for clearance.

edit: here is a camo F-104C with a Mk-43 training shape with the lower fin removed:

http://i1327.photobucket.com/albums/u676/domboy5/1%2048%20photos/1041_zpsd387f249.jpg~original

Jari

Finn, you are mostly correct. Those are indeed Mk 28 training shapes. But the lower fin was not removed, it rotates. In the photo some have been rotated back to vertical and others have not. We tossed a lot of those things around the Cuddeback range so the fins had to be there to make the thing track accurately. The Mk 28 (real or shape) was so big that the nose gear scissors had to be disconnected and rotated out of the way and the barrier hooks on the front of the main gear doors removed to get the thing under the aircraft. The weight and aerodynamics were supposed to be identical to the real thing.

There was NO provision for a fuel tank on the centerline pylon. The only thing we carried on that pylon was the Mk 28 practice bomb and the 25 pound practice bomb dispenser. The inverted "Y" Sidewinder rail was tried just once and never used again.

[Michael Vorrasi]

Those are Mk-28 nukes (training ones), the lower fin was removed to allow for clearance at times while on the actual shape one set of fins rotated to allow for clearance.

edit: here is a camo F-104C with a Mk-43 training shape with the lower fin removed:

http://i1327.photobucket.com/albums/u676/domboy5/1%2048%20photos/1041_zpsd387f249.jpg~original

Jari

Finn, you are mostly correct. Those are indeed Mk 28 training shapes. But the lower fin was not removed, it rotates. In the photo some have been rotated back to vertical and others have not. We tossed a lot of those things around the Cuddeback range so the fins had to be there to make the thing track accurately. The Mk 28 (real or shape) was so big that the nose gear scissors had to be disconnected and rotated out of the way and the barrier hooks on the front of the main gear doors removed to get the thing under the aircraft. The weight and aerodynamics were supposed to be identical to the real thing.

There was NO provision for a fuel tank on the centerline pylon. The only thing we carried on that pylon was the Mk 28 practice bomb and the 25 pound practice bomb dispenser. The inverted "Y" Sidewinder rail was tried just once and never used again.

I knew I would find the answer here! I zoomed in on the fins as much as this photo would bear, and I do now see a folded lower fin laying close up against the right side horizontal one. Norm, was there really a 225 Gallon center line tank for C models, or is this myth? The diagram in the Detail and Scale book looks like one lifted from a 104 manual. Maybe planned but never implemented?

Finn, good shot of the B43. It is one of the nukes in the DACO set. The others are the B57 and B61. I figured those were all the pocket sized nukes a 104 could carry. Norm is right, that B28 is a big one! The nukes have only recently been shown. For so many years, they were classified, hence my lack of familiarity.

Mike

Edited July 14, 2015 by Michael Vorrasi

[nfiler]

Michael

I just dug out my IF-104C-1 to be sure. Both the fuel system schematic and the text do NOT show any reference to a center line tank. I looked at that pylon many many times and can't remember any fuel lines at all, but it has been over 55 years, only cannon plugs for the bomb dispenser and nukes. Another confirmation is that there is no switch position or or indications of that on the fuel control panel on the middle of the left console.

In my opinion, the Detail & Scale books frequently made assumptions that are not accurate. More fuel is always really nice, but in this case it was never there. I have no idea about the European G and other later models, but I have not seen any photos of those with anything that looks like a tank so suspect it was not there either.

Norm

Edited July 14, 2015 by nfiler

[Michael Vorrasi]

Michael

I just dug out my IF-104C-1 to be sure. Both the fuel system schematic and the text do NOT show any reference to a center line tank. I looked at that pylon many many times and can't remember any fuel lines at all, but it has been over 55 years, only cannon plugs for the bomb dispenser and nukes. Another confirmation is that there is no switch position or or indications of that on the fuel control panel on the middle of the left console.

In my opinion, the Detail & Scale books frequently made assumptions that are not accurate. More fuel is always really nice, but in this case it was never there. I have no idea about the European G and other later models, but I have not seen any photos of those with anything that looks like a tank so suspect it was not there either.

Norm

Thank Norm. It figures that D&S was off course. (And they made that diagram look so realistic and official!) I'm sure the other 104 models did not have a wet center line rack, but that diagram, and Bowman's book caption on that photo had me searching regarding the C model. I should have just looked at the C model instrument and switch panels as you suggested. There is no selector for a center line tank. That should have been my first stop!

Mike

[Finn]

Those are Mk-28 nukes (training ones), the lower fin was removed to allow for clearance at times while on the actual shape one set of fins rotated to allow for clearance.

edit: here is a camo F-104C with a Mk-43 training shape with the lower fin removed:

http://i1327.photobucket.com/albums/u676/domboy5/1%2048%20photos/1041_zpsd387f249.jpg~original

Jari

Finn, you are mostly correct. Those are indeed Mk 28 training shapes. But the lower fin was not removed, it rotates. In the photo some have been rotated back to vertical and others have not. We tossed a lot of those things around the Cuddeback range so the fins had to be there to make the thing track accurately. The Mk 28 (real or shape) was so big that the nose gear scissors had to be disconnected and rotated out of the way and the barrier hooks on the front of the main gear doors removed to get the thing under the aircraft. The weight and aerodynamics were supposed to be identical to the real thing.

There was NO provision for a fuel tank on the centerline pylon. The only thing we carried on that pylon was the Mk 28 practice bomb and the 25 pound practice bomb dispenser. The inverted "Y" Sidewinder rail was tried just once and never used again.

Norm, according to US Nuclear Weapons by Chuck Hansen the Mk-28EX, like the ones in the pic, had 2 fixed fins and 2 opposing fins that could be set either manually or automatically in 15 degree increments. When folded the fins would look like this >< and unfolded they would be X or +, depending on how they were loaded. Most pics i've seen of shapes loaded on 104 c/ls had the lower fin removed resulting in a _|_ configuration. Of course the fins were not the strongest material so i'm sure there were times the bottom ones were left on.

Jari

[nfiler]

Jari,

I have no experience with the Mk 28s other than on the F-104C. The upper and two horizontal fins were fixed. The lower fin rotated. Ground clearance was not really much of an issue so I am not sure why. On take off and landing the a/c rotated on the main gear wheels, and the fins on the shape were ahead of that, so other than just for ground clearance there wasn't an issue with impact on rotation.

As I stated in the earlier post, we scattered a lot of those things around the high California desert. All four fins needed to be there to make an accurate drop.

[Finn]

Thanks Norm, learn something new everyday, the only pics i've seen of Mk-28EX that had the fins folded had 2 fins fixed and 2 folded into ><.

Jari

[nfiler]

Your welcome Jari.

Go back and look at the photo that started this thread. Three fins fixed and one folded to the right. (When viewed from the back). Both folded and extended are shown in that photo. Don't know your background but at that time, and probably even more today, nothing in Uncle Sam's Air Force was done random. There was a T. O. or check list, and inspection and sign off for every little thing. We TAC guys joked that there probably was a check list taped to the wall above the urinals in the SAC O club.

The point I am trying to make is that if the fins in that photo were fixed, not retractable, they would all be identical. Once us junior bird men climbed in and took off, things got a lot more variable. Thus some up and some down.