Jump to content

F-4 Navy outer pylon question


Recommended Posts

A quick Q for you Navy guys:

the F-4 outer pylons were mounted vertically (as opposed to the Air Force variant), but to gain clearance from the landing gear things like MER's and TER's were angled outboard, correct? Now my question is, how was that achieved? By adjusting the sway braces asymmetrically (i.e. inboard side extended further than outboard side), or did the actual weapons adaptor have an angled lower surface (making also the sway brace arms asymmetrical)? If the adaptor itself was asymmetrical, that of course would have made it handed, i.e. a different one for port and starboard.

Third option would be different types or thickness of sway brace pads on the MER's or TER's themselves...

Cheers

Jeffrey

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tommy,

 

yes, it's the adaptor that I'm talking about. But if I understand it correctly, the adaptor was ready and in use before MER's arrived, for single stores I assume... it wouldn't make sense to design the adaptor for something that wasn't yet developed...?

I guess I have to go to Duxford and try to sneak close enough to the F-4J to find out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, the bomb dropping capability and the multiple weapons ideas  were developed at the same time. When Finch was fooling around with a Multiple carriage rack for the Skyhawk (which was already carrying single bombs on a pylon), that demo was seen by the Marines and Navy brass, right around the same time that they were thinking about adding bomb dropping back onto the F-4 (it was originally the aircraft's mission design, but, taken off when they got built as interceptors, before production)

 

So, if a person wanted to model the parts used to develop the concept for the F-4, he would use a weapons adapter on the outer pylon, and the MBR. The USAF worked at the same concept, using the MBR on their early Gray over White Phantoms. USAF is the entity that came up with the idea for 3 bombs on the inner pylon. There is a photo of a USAF Phantom with MBRs on the Wet pylon (so, obviously carried over from Navair),,,,and an early attempt at a "3 bomb inner pylon" looking beast. An actual working TER (that was a separate piece from the pylon) didn't come along until after the MER was developed. That ugly "3 bomb pylon" that the USAF tried to develop looked like a huge bomb rack and fairing on the bottom of the pylon, with a bomb rack faired in at an angle on each side, about up where the Sidewinder rail would be.

 

Phantoms carried MBRs on the weapons adapter, on the Wet pylon,,,,,,until the Intruders went down over 'Nam from bomb separation issues,,,,,,once that happened, Intruders and Phantoms got MERs, and the MBRs all got distributed to the Crusader and Skyhawk squadrons. We still see MERs on Skyhawks after that, and still see an MBR on a Phantom for a while, though. (so, it wasn't a 100% division of the two racks between the squadron types, it was still a mix)

 

Oh, and since the same weapons adapter was bolted onto the Wet pylon for bomb racks and missile rails, the sway braces were tightened to give the angle when a bomb rack was mounted (for MBR, MER, or TER), and tightened evenly when a missile rail was mounted out there.

 

So, the only "handing" that a producer like you, Jeffrey, would have to do, is the type you already covered when you made your pylons before,,,ie: the top sway brace pads that you angled to match the wing on each side. If you were to file an angle on your pylons for right and left tilt, then the modeler couldn't use them for missile rails without taking off even more material,,,,,and they will wind up undersized because of that.

 

And since you already include pylons without the weapons adapter with your McD tanks,, you won't need to make the Wet pylon work for Tank, Adapter, and Empty. Modelers like me can just "scoop out" the part to remove the Weapons adapter if we want to depict an aircraft seen in a very few photos that show "truly bare" pylons on the outerwing. ("truly bare" is just my way of saying it didn't have either of the two options installed on the pylon, for whatever reason those items were taken off)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This "angling deal" makes it pretty clear that McD and the Navy thought that drop tanks would be all that hung from the pylons out there. Both types of weapons pylons and adapters had to be angled to clear the gear, but all three tank types hang vertically. I bet they wished that they had put the pylon mounting just a touch farther out on the wing during the design phase.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I think that you are asking because of a product you have in mind. I will offer a suggestion. Make your pylons with tiny slots for "sway brace pieces." Incorporate the angle into the sway braces, so that a 1/48 Z-M modeler will just have to glue them in. That way, whether they build with their MER "shifted forward" or "rear shifted", all they have to do is glue the MER on using the correct pair of pads. (All the MERs used on their F-4s should have four pad pairs on the MER, none should be so new that they only have 2 pairs) Then if some guy wants to put missile rails out there, all he has to do is substitute "squared up" sway bar pieces.

 

Free advice, worth exactly what you paid for it, lol. And typed with the full knowledge that this will probably be a "1/48 only" type of thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much gentlemen and Merry Christmas!

That settles it I think - no handing on the adaptor itself. I'll think about the best possible way to mould the sway braces - I don't think I can do it the same way as in 1:72, they would probably break on de-moulding so separate parts might be better anyway.

The pylon masters need a little tweaking though as the wing undersurface on the ZM kit has slightly less taper than Hasegawa and Academy kits causing my existing pylons to sit very slightly off-vertical.

I tried to reply yesterday btw. but was suddenly locked out for ARC everywhere and couldn't get back on, tried two computers and my phone...

 

Cheers

Jeffrey

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, the downtime was very short,,,,,,,,but, it was right in between a couple of posts I was doing

 

I came back an hour later, and it was all okay again

 

Scale Plastic Aircraft Modeler (SPAM) is still down, though

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if someone made an "IR Sensor for the F-4C/D" there is only a 33% chance that they would make the right one, lol. (25% if we count the "EF-4C")

 

The best chance of "getting it right" would be to make the ECM fairing with the front end having the "EF-4C" bumps on it, and the Mid F-4D with the sled shape on the bottom,,,,,,then include instructions for what to file off for the three versions this would fit. Then the Herpes as a separate item. (this is NOT a "can't see a mm thing",,,,we have all but the "EF-4C" nose in 1/72, 1/48 would be even more noticeable)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...