Brad-M Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Gents, I'm looking for info as to what the typical MigCAP loadout would be for an F-4D during the Vietnam War in July-August of 1972 with the 555th TFS. Would it have mattered if using Combat Tree or not? TIA Brad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EagleAviation Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Triple Nickel F-4Ds used the Combat Tree in their missions. The employment of that system would bring the advantage to the F-4s in the matter of time to decide about the hostile declaration. Usual loadout 4 AIM-9s and 4 AIM-7s Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brad-M Posted December 10, 2015 Author Share Posted December 10, 2015 Thanks, but which AIM-9 and which AIM-7, and did they use ECM pods if any, and which stations? I assume they would have two wing tanks and the belly tank as well correct? Cheers Brad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikar Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 I don't think they used the center tank that much except for long distance ferry flights. There normally tankers available. It wasn't unusual for me to see at least 3-5, sometimes more tankers launch after the B-52s got off. F-4s would normally only land at our base for unspecified reasons, and even then not very often. I would think the center line station would probably carry a Vulcan when possible. ECM pods were often carried under the AIM9s. That way they could carry 8 missiles instead of 6 or 7. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) The flight leads were typically in Combat Tree equipped aircraft with a 4 x 4 load (AIM-7E-2 and AIM-9E), while the wingmen had the leftovers. IIRC Steve Ritchie's wingman carried something like a 2 x 2 configuration (AIM-7E-2 and AIM-4D) on Ritchie's first kill. Of course that was in May of 72. Regards, Murph Edited December 10, 2015 by Murph Quote Link to post Share on other sites
f4h1phantom Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 (edited) Please note the picture with the Pave knife pod is reversed. They were always carried on the left inner starion. A careful study of the camouflage pattern on the F-4 also serves to verify this. The pod's nose tip stencils can now be identified as being "NO STEP" and "CAUTION". Best regards, Jorge. Edited December 11, 2015 by f4h1phantom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brad-M Posted December 11, 2015 Author Share Posted December 11, 2015 (edited) Thanks Murph, Ikar and Jorge. Brad Edited December 11, 2015 by Brad-M Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 During the summer of -72, the usual loadout became 4xAIM-7E2 + 4xAIM-9J. Earlier the loadout was 4xAIM-7E and 4+AIM-9E, and prior to that 4x-AIM-7E and 4xAIM-4's. There were overlaps however, so you would probably see AIM-9J's and -E's during the same time period within the same unit, although not on the same fighter. You can also add the SUU16/23 gun pod into the mix too :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
f4h1phantom Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 (edited) Found a couple of net pics of 555 TFS aircraft with air-to-air ordnance. Caption for this one says: "F-4D - 66-7468 Then 1973 555thTFS 432ndTRW Udorn launching out on a MIG CAP mission, Thailand 1973 - photo James Wright" Chuck DeBellevue posing for a publicity shot: HTH, Jorge. Edited December 11, 2015 by f4h1phantom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Gents, I'm looking for info as to what the typical MigCAP loadout would be for an F-4D during the Vietnam War in July-August of 1972 with the 555th TFS. Would it have mattered if using Combat Tree or not? TIA Brad Should not have mattered. BTW, short of checking the serial number, the only way to tell if an F-4D was equipped with Combat Tree (a very useful bit of kit) was to look for a small warning label noting that the aircraft was equipped with a destruct charge that would destroy the Combat Tree equip if the crew ejected. On a related note, were late war F-4E's equipped with this device or just the D-models? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Should not have mattered. BTW, short of checking the serial number, the only way to tell if an F-4D was equipped with Combat Tree (a very useful bit of kit) was to look for a small warning label noting that the aircraft was equipped with a destruct charge that would destroy the Combat Tree equip if the crew ejected. You can see the red warning label on the photo of 66-7648 above. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
onescale Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 On a related note, were late war F-4E's equipped with this device or just the D-models? Hello, if I remember correctly I somewhere read that the F-4E's where standard equipped with the Combat Tree stuff. I also read that because of the larger dish the F-4D radar had a slightly bigger range than the F-4E one?! By the way I think there is no decal of this warning label in 48th scale available!? Unfortunately! Best regards, Jens Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Hello, if I remember correctly I somewhere read that the F-4E's where standard equipped with the Combat Tree stuff. I also read that because of the larger dish the F-4D radar had a slightly bigger range than the F-4E one?! By the way I think there is no decal of this warning label in 48th scale available!? Unfortunately! Best regards, Jens the Cutting Edge sheet that had Ritchie's markings for 463 included the Combat Tree placard, if you can find one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ReccePhreak Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 (edited) . Edited June 19, 2016 by ReccePhreak Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andre Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Yes, it does, even though on my sheet, you can only read the word "WARNING". The rest of the letters are illegible. Good thing I probably will not be using those markings, only the RF-4C markings. Ah, a fellow Tumbleweed appreciator..! ;) Cheers, Andre Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Thanks Murph, Ikar and Jorge. As well as the others who have since joined in. The expertise and sharing on ARC is just amazing! Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ReccePhreak Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) . Edited June 19, 2016 by ReccePhreak Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brad-M Posted December 13, 2015 Author Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) As well as the others who have since joined in. The expertise and sharing on ARC is just amazing! :worship:/>/> Gene K Yup!! Brad Edited December 13, 2015 by Brad-M Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mrvark Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 The vast majority of USAF kills during Linebacker were made with AIM-7E-2 'Dogfight' Sparrows (with the 'L' markings on their wings). This was because of the introduction of Combat Tree, which allowed earlier identification of targets by reading their IFF codes. In contrast, the vast majority of USN/USMC kills were by the superior AIM-9G Sidewinders, reflecting the Navy's lack of Combat Tree and introduction of Top Gun training. AIM-9B Sidewinders were no longer in front line use by 1972. Also, the MiGCAP jets needed gas more than guns, so they didn't carry the SUU-23 gun pods, which (along with the earlier SUU-16) were used for MiGCAP during Operation Rolling Thunder in 1967-8 by the 366 TFW (at DaNang) and 8 TFW (at Ubon). The USAF tried using the AIM-4D Falcons (again) until mid-June 1972 when they finally had to admit that they were pretty much useless in a dogfight. The loadout was three fuel tanks, four AIM-7E-2s, two AIM-4Ds mounted on the inboard sides of the inboard pylons using LAU-41 (right pylon) and LAU-42 (left pylon) launch rails. They carried an AN/ALQ-101(V)1 ECM pod on the right inboard pylon and an AN/ALQ-71(V)2 'Special' ECM pod on the left pylon. The Falcons were replaced on USAF MiGCAP jets with AIM-9E Sidewinders for most of rest of Linebacker (which ended in October). The AIM-9J didn't get introduced until early August 1972, and then in a limited way on Combat Tree aircraft (read 555 TFS). The basic loadout remained the same, but with the four AIM-9E/Js loaded on AERO 3B rails that were attached to the inboard pylons with the tubular spacers. [uSN/USMC jets were using AIM-9Gs by this time which required the LAU-7 launcher to provide seeker cooling.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 The vast majority of USAF kills during Linebacker ... What an open treasure chest you are here on ARC. Much appreciated, Jim. Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brad-M Posted December 16, 2015 Author Share Posted December 16, 2015 The vast majority of USAF kills during Linebacker were made with AIM-7E-2 'Dogfight' Sparrows (with the 'L' markings on their wings). This was because of the introduction of Combat Tree, which allowed earlier identification of targets by reading their IFF codes. In contrast, the vast majority of USN/USMC kills were by the superior AIM-9G Sidewinders, reflecting the Navy's lack of Combat Tree and introduction of Top Gun training. AIM-9B Sidewinders were no longer in front line use by 1972. Also, the MiGCAP jets needed gas more than guns, so they didn't carry the SUU-23 gun pods, which (along with the earlier SUU-16) were used for MiGCAP during Operation Rolling Thunder in 1967-8 by the 366 TFW (at DaNang) and 8 TFW (at Ubon). The USAF tried using the AIM-4D Falcons (again) until mid-June 1972 when they finally had to admit that they were pretty much useless in a dogfight. The loadout was three fuel tanks, four AIM-7E-2s, two AIM-4Ds mounted on the inboard sides of the inboard pylons using LAU-41 (right pylon) and LAU-42 (left pylon) launch rails. They carried an AN/ALQ-101(V)1 ECM pod on the right inboard pylon and an AN/ALQ-71(V)2 'Special' ECM pod on the left pylon. The Falcons were replaced on USAF MiGCAP jets with AIM-9E Sidewinders for most of rest of Linebacker (which ended in October). The AIM-9J didn't get introduced until early August 1972, and then in a limited way on Combat Tree aircraft (read 555 TFS). The basic loadout remained the same, but with the four AIM-9E/Js loaded on AERO 3B rails that were attached to the inboard pylons with the tubular spacers. [uSN/USMC jets were using AIM-9Gs by this time which required the LAU-7 launcher to provide seeker cooling.) Super, thanks Mark. Brad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Since there are many Phantom affectionados here - what is the antenna on top of the aircraft behind the rear cockpit as shown in Jorge's post? (I realize it's not air-to-air peculiar) [ Thanks, Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JackMan Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 It's the dude from Napoleon Dynamite! https://www.google.com.sg/search?q=napoleon+dynamite+brother&biw=1280&bih=567&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwj18PW13ODJAhUCkI4KHdTzCCsQ_AUIBigB :lol:/> Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brad-M Posted December 16, 2015 Author Share Posted December 16, 2015 In the link provided, does anyone know what the device is on the bottom right hand side of the sprue is? Would this be an ECM pod, maybe an ALQ-101 perhaps? TIA Brad http://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/aca/pages/aca_12294_parts2.shtml Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 it's actually an ALQ-119. 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.