madcow Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 Hi guys, two questions about Fast Eagle 102 in 1981. I can't find the information anywhere. I know that the loadout for the mission where two libyan Su-22 were downed was 2-2-2. My questions are: 1. Were the fuel tanks under the air intakes used? 2. Were the rear Phoenix pylons in place or removed? Thanks in advance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 From the Nimitz Cruise Book: http://www.navysite.de/cruisebooks/cvn68-82/349.htm looks like no, although pylons in place, and no rear Phoenix pylons. Go to the bottom and click on the Med 80-82 cruise book link and you may find more pics. Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcow Posted January 30, 2017 Author Share Posted January 30, 2017 Thanks Jari. The Tamiya pylons are not that detailed (when not using the tanks), so I think I won't use them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Darren Roberts Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 21 hours ago, madcow said: Hi guys, two questions about Fast Eagle 102 in 1981. I can't find the information anywhere. I know that the loadout for the mission where two libyan Su-22 were downed was 2-2-2. My questions are: 1. Were the fuel tanks under the air intakes used? 2. Were the rear Phoenix pylons in place or removed? Thanks in advance. That may not be totally correct. One of the rails had an electrical short (I think it was 5B), so there would not have been a missile on the rail. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcow Posted January 30, 2017 Author Share Posted January 30, 2017 I didn't know that, Darren. Thanks for the input. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) From information that's been posted over the years, I think the proper load was 2 AIM-7Fs (one under each wing) and 2 AIM-9Ls on the shoulder stations along with the forward AIM-54 pallets (but no Phoenix missiles) for Fast Eagle 102. As mentioned above, Fast Eagle 107 had a bad starboard AIM-9 rail, so it only carried one Sidewinder, plus the two AIM-7Fs. As it turned out, it also had a bad radar, so it only had one usable missile for the engagement. When asked, years after the event, the two aircrews differed on whether they carried external tanks on that mission; although, pictures of the jets (supposedly taken just after the engagement) show the pylons fitted, but no tanks. Regards, Murph Edited January 30, 2017 by Murph Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Darren Roberts Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 37 minutes ago, Murph said: From information that's been posted over the years, I think the proper load was 2 AIM-7Fs (one under each wing) and 2 AIM-9Ls on the shoulder station along with the forward AIM-54 pallets (but no Phoenix missiles) for Fast Eagle 102. As mentioned above, Fast Eagle 107 had a bad starboard AIM-9 rail, so it only carried one Sidewinder, plus the two AIM-7Fs. As it turned out, it also had a bad radar, so it only had one usable missile for the engagement. When asked, years after the event, the two aircrews differed on whether they carried external tanks on that mission; although, pictures of the jets (supposedly taken just after the engagement) show the pylons fitted, but no tanks. Regards, Murph Thanks Murph! I couldn't remember exactly which rail was bad. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcow Posted January 30, 2017 Author Share Posted January 30, 2017 Thanks guys. I'll try to find some 1/48th fuel tank pylons or try to detail the Tamiya ones. The configuration you mentioned is interesting, especially for Fast Eagle 107. I have some photoetch tail stiffeners so it's still a possibility. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 According to the caption, this pic was taken shortly after the engagement: Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcow Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share Posted January 31, 2017 Thanks for the photo. The fuel tank pylons are clearly visible. From what I've seen, it won't be very hard to make the Tamiya ones look half decent. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 4 hours ago, Murph said: .... When asked, years after the event, the two aircrews differed on whether they carried external tanks on that mission; although, pictures of the jets (supposedly taken just after the engagement) show the pylons fitted, but no tanks. Could it be that the tanks were jettisoned during the engagement? Is that even an option on the Tomcat? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Also an interesting note about the straight part of the phoenix pallets on the 107: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234957900-done-hobby-boss-172-f-14a-vf-41-gulf-of-sidra-1981/&do=findComment&comment=1658239 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Skull Leader Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 12 hours ago, Darren Roberts said: That may not be totally correct. One of the rails had an electrical short (I think it was 5B), so there would not have been a missile on the rail. 8a on Fast Eagle 107. Edited January 31, 2017 by Skull Leader Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Darren Roberts Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 17 hours ago, Skull Leader said: 8a on Fast Eagle 107. That's one thing I've never learned on the Tomcat...the numbers of the stations. I really don't know why. I know a bunch, but I've never taken the time to learn them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 21 hours ago, Janissary said: Could it be that the tanks were jettisoned during the engagement? Is that even an option on the Tomcat? It's certainly possible, but I find the disagreement among the crews about whether they carried them at all interesting. I know quite a few pilots that jettisoned external tanks (all in high stress combat situations) and they all remember doing it. It's such an unusual event it sticks in one's mind, so I tend to think they weren't carrying them. Regards, Murph Edited January 31, 2017 by Murph Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcow Posted February 1, 2017 Author Share Posted February 1, 2017 Thanks for all the help. This is how far I got with the F-14. By the way, should this be white or in the fuselage colour? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcow Posted February 2, 2017 Author Share Posted February 2, 2017 Disregard my last post. I just realised I misread the manual and painted the whole section in white when it was only the back part... 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.