Speedy Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 On 10/19/2016 at 10:38 AM, Finn said: Check the 5:11 mark of this video: to see a F-4 with a load of LGBs on the i/b pylons and napalm on the c/l MER. The LGBs are normally dropped from high altitude while the nape is delivered much closer to the ground. Jari Hi. I bumped into this video a while ago. Not looking this was an old thread, but I want to react to this. From Videoaviation there is a nice kit for a MJ-1 ammo loader. In the video a larger version, I thinks it's a MJ-4, is at duty with different loads. How does this MJ-4 compare to the MJ-1 in size. Want to build one using the MJ-1 for comparison as I have it on my desk. Anyone having more info on this vehicle? Google search I already did, but not very satisfying for building an accurate model. Kind regards, Robert Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted March 1, 2018 Author Share Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) There is this: There are quite a few differences between the MJ-1 and MJ-4. Jari Edited March 1, 2018 by Finn Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Speedy Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 Thank you Jari. Now this is American design, so all measurements will be inches, but I have a clear drawing to work with. Kind regards, Robert Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
onosendai Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 There is a model of MJ4 but in scale 48 (Arsenal in France), before closing it had also started by Verlinden, for me it is a very complicated subject to reproduce, maybe one day I will do it but not soon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Speedy Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 Expected you to reply to this, onosendai. Started with a scratch build this afternoon, Thai had a religious holiday, so factory closed. Did some shopping and had afternoon to get some hobby done. Will show my progress on this project very soon. Used your MJ-1 kit for reference, as the back of the vehicle seems to be identical(almost). Kind regards, Robert Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
onosendai Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 1 hour ago, Speedy said: Used your MJ-1 kit for reference, as the back of the vehicle seems to be identical(almost). Yes, the starting point is that, good work, it will not be one easy task. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grey Ghost 531 Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 Is the MJ-4 the same thing as an MHU-83? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Speedy Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 Hi Grey Ghost 531. I think it is, Google showed me that when I went for MJ-4. Might be a NAVY version? Kind regards, Robert Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Speedy Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 MHU-7K/E Found with Google. Looks like a ver modern type I think. Regards, Robert Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
onosendai Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 Usaf is MHU-83 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grey Ghost 531 Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) 14 hours ago, Speedy said: Hi Grey Ghost 531. I think it is, Google showed me that when I went for MJ-4. Might be a NAVY version? Kind regards, Robert Jan We called it a SATS loader in the Marines. I'm not sure what SATS means but the aluminum runway plates used at expeditionary airstrips were called SATS mats so it may be "Short Airfield for Tactical Support" (picking from the list on "acronym finder") I think the bladder fueling system had "SATS" in the name too. A little googling shows the designation for "SATS loader" is A/S 32K-1A/1B/1C, the pictures look the same. I think "MJ-4" might be the old Air Force designation. SATS loader Edited March 2, 2018 by Grey Ghost 531 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted March 2, 2018 Author Share Posted March 2, 2018 You can see a couple in the background: Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Speedy Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Hello again. Bought a Wolfpack Design kit with 2 SUU 23/A Falcons. I wonder, is the SUU shown on this picture, with the rear in changed position (upwards) technically different from the one I get in a double pack from Wolfpack Design. Is it an aerodynamic feature? Building the set there are 2 version, one with 'rear dome', the other one is flat and shorter. Are they from the same operational time set, e.g. both used over Vietnam, or maybe on other F-4's like E's from a different theatre? Also, about the paint scheme, is this a typical example used over Vietnam? Kind regards, Robert Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rex Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Think of that rear cover as an open radome. It is just open like that for clearance while being carried on the Loader. When it is lifted up onto the aircraft, that cover will be attached in line with the rest of the Gun Pod. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SebastianP Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Quick question, since this seems to be the go-to thread for Phantom armament questions... Did US Navy Phantoms ever carry HARM or Shrike, or was that an Air Force only thing? I can't find any pictures on Google, the only thing that turns up are pictures of the F-4G, even if I specify F-4B, N, J or S. If they did, I'd be interested to know which squadrons might have done so operationally. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Speedy Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Like the 'go-to thread for Phantoms'. Guess there are a lot questions answered in other threads, but I still have the confusing matter of the BLU 27 with no fins. Have the kits from video aviation on my bench for a load out. All is inspired by the video shown in this thread.I want to make MER's prepared for missions. I have some Eduard sets to fill. To do it correct I need to know what to do with the caps. Are they 20º of - or not when building a Phantom F-4 D based in Thailand '68 / '72, Ubon or Udorn? There are more video's, like Noº 3, showing all MER's & TER's displayed. Great Diorama stuff. Kind regards, Robert Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 3 hours ago, SebastianP said: Quick question, since this seems to be the go-to thread for Phantom armament questions... Did US Navy Phantoms ever carry HARM or Shrike, or was that an Air Force only thing? I can't find any pictures on Google, the only thing that turns up are pictures of the F-4G, even if I specify F-4B, N, J or S. If they did, I'd be interested to know which squadrons might have done so operationally. Think this was "reserved" for the EA-6A/B's together with the A-7's Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 On 20.3.2018 at 12:05 PM, Speedy said: Hello again. Bought a Wolfpack Design kit with 2 SUU 23/A Falcons. I wonder, is the SUU shown on this picture, with the rear in changed position (upwards) technically different from the one I get in a double pack from Wolfpack Design. Is it an aerodynamic feature? Building the set there are 2 version, one with 'rear dome', the other one is flat and shorter. Are they from the same operational time set, e.g. both used over Vietnam, or maybe on other F-4's like E's from a different theatre? Also, about the paint scheme, is this a typical example used over Vietnam? Kind regards, Robert Jan The short-end that comes with the Wolfpack and other SUU-23's are for when the gun pod was mounted on the inner pylons, as the long end would otherwise interfer with the main landing gear. But this doesn't mean that it was limited to mounting on this station - RAF Phantoms and ANG F-4C/D's carried the short-butt on any station Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rex Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Niels, add "and A-4, A-6A to E Tram, F/A-18" and etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rex Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Sebastion, I would love to find a photo of a Naval Phantom with Shrikes or HARMs on the pylons, if they had operational tail codes. I'd build one of those in a hearbeat. Unfortunately, all I have ever seen are some test Shrikes on a Navy test Phantom, back in the early days when the weapons lists were being made by the branches of the service. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Not many F/A-18's during the VietNam war Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rex Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Haha, you are so right. That leaves A-7, A-4 and A-6. (HARM on EA-6 being after the war, too) And the F-4 tests were before Vietnam, so my other idea doesn't count. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 :) The EA-6A did fly with the AGM-78 in addition to the AGM-45. A-4's and A-7's only flew with AGM-45 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SCOUT712 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Nils, I think you mean A-6Bs instead of the EA-6A. Cheers Scout Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GW8345 Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 Just to backup what Rex and Niels have posted, Navy F-4's were never cleared (operationally) for the AGM-45 Shrike and AGM-88 HARM (which came out very late in the F-4's career). Though they may have been tested (fit check, flight tested), the Navy F-4's did not the avionics for anti-radiation missiles. Also, the A-6B's were cleared for the AGM-78 Standard ARM. 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.