Jump to content

Spangdahlem F-100D and F-105D Nuclear bomb questions


Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

Another long shot, but I'm looking for information with what kind of type of nuclear bombs the Spangdahlem based F-100's and F-105's (1961-1967) would have used.

 

I know that F-100's were capable to carry the Mark 7 and Mk 28 nuclear bombs, but I really would like to find out which one they used at Spangdahlem from 1959-1961.

The F-100 was also capable to carry the B43, but as the B43's only became operational in 1961, the same year the F-100's at Spangdahlem were replaced by F-105's, I assume they weren't used on the Spang F-100's.

 

The same question applies to the F-105D: Which type of nuclear bomb was used by the F-105's while they were stationed at Spangdahlem from 1961-1967?

I know the Mk 28IN was specially developed for internal use by, among others, the F-105, so I assume this would the the logical conclusion.

However, I would really like to know if this is the only type used on the F-105, or that also for example the Mk 28EX or B43-0 were used either internally or externally.

 

And a last question about the F-105F's: Were these also combat capable and able to carry nuclear bombs or were these only used as trainers?

 

Thanks for any help.

Edited by Susaschka
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

The pictures I can find of F-100s of 49 TFW jets show them without centerline pylons, which probably means they were carrying the Mk7 under the wing.  LINK  On a related note, here's a pretty good article about the Victor Alert mission in the F-100; albeit, in the F-100C:  ANOTHER LINK  The F-105 was certified to carry either the B28 or B43, and all public documents say they carried both operationally.

 

EDIT:  Checking Lou Drendel's F-100 Illustrated (Kindle Edition).it has an interview with a former F-100 pilot, He remarks that when they moved to Spangdahlem from France in early 1959 they were flying early D models and carrying the Mk-12 weapon under the left wing.  He left Spang for 18 months and returned in August of 1960 by which time they had the later D models which could carry a centerline pylon and they were mounting the B28 nuke there.  So it sounds like they transitioned from the Mk-12 and the wing mount to the B28 and the centerline during the 1959 - 1960 period.

 

Regards,

Murph

Edited by Murph
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks for the info Murph, this answers the first two of my questions! 😀

 

Now I only need to know if the F-105F's also were able to carry the B28 and B43 bombs.

I assume they were, but it would be great if I could find some confirmation.

 

Also an additional question: Do you know if the F-100D's also used the smaller inner pylon fuel tanks when carrying a centerline B28?

Edited by Susaschka
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Susaschka said:

Also an additional question: Do you know if the F-100D's also used the smaller inner pylon fuel tanks when carrying a centerline B28?

 

I had read somewhere that they did initially, but the use of those tanks was eventually discontinued due to stability issues.  I don't know the timeframe when they stopped using them.

 

Regards,

Murph

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Finn said:

Here are some specs on the F-105G, the F would be the same:

 

http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-105G_Thunderchief_CS_-_November_1972.pdf

 

The F-105F was used in combat in Vietnam so there is no reason why it would not be used to carry nukes if the situation arose.

 

Jari

 

Thanks Jari!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Murph said:

 

I had read somewhere that they did initially, but the use of those tanks was eventually discontinued due to stability issues.  I don't know the timeframe when they stopped using them.

 

 

Thanks Murph! I will leave them off my model, as I didn't like the look of these anyway. 🙂

Will just be a Mk28EX on the centerline and 2 fueltanks on the middle wing pylons.

 

I'm only wondering if the other wing pylons would be empty or that they would remove these.

Any chance you know this?

Edited by Susaschka
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Susaschka said:

I'm only wondering if the other wing pylons would be empty or that they would remove these.

Any chance you know this?

 

In the pictures I've seen of F-100s carrying either "shapes" or live weapons only the pylons carrying the weapon or fuel were fitted.  Since it was almost certainly a one-way mission they wouldn't want to lose the pylons that weren't going to be used.

 

Regards,

Murph

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the F-105 had an internal bomb bay (apparently that was a plus point over the F-107 that the USAF found in it's favour), wouldn't the nuke be carried internally with fuel tanks on the wings?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys.

 

Range wise a nuke on one wing pylon and a fuelltank on the other one together with an internal and centerline fueltank would give the F-105 more range, but I don't know if this was done at Spangdahlem.

I do know nukes were carried on wing pylons under F-105's on Victor Alert stationed in Japan, together with a centerline fueltank as can be seen below.

 

image.thumb.png.d27d58a82f8400456878a804c730b25e.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/17/2022 at 10:07 AM, Susaschka said:

Thanks guys.

 

Range wise a nuke on one wing pylon and a fuelltank on the other one together with an internal and centerline fueltank would give the F-105 more range, but I don't know if this was done at Spangdahlem.

I do know nukes were carried on wing pylons under F-105's on Victor Alert stationed in Japan, together with a centerline fueltank as can be seen below.

 

image.thumb.png.d27d58a82f8400456878a804c730b25e.png

Nice picture, you don't see many shots from that era of jets fitted with live weapons.    I'm guessing who ever took this picture was taking some serious risks.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that the shapes of US Nuclear bombs was classified until 1977 or thereabouts, the person would be in a world of trouble if caught taking that photo...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2022 at 3:07 PM, Susaschka said:

Thanks guys.

 

Range wise a nuke on one wing pylon and a fuelltank on the other one together with an internal and centerline fueltank would give the F-105 more range, but I don't know if this was done at Spangdahlem.

I do know nukes were carried on wing pylons under F-105's on Victor Alert stationed in Japan, together with a centerline fueltank as can be seen below.

 

image.thumb.png.d27d58a82f8400456878a804c730b25e.png

 

I have trouble recognizing what weapon it is, B28 would be my best guess because of the nose details. But I don't know whether that fits the time and whether it's an authorized F-105 load. Anyone know?


Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the link Murph supplied, the F-105 was eventually certified to carry the MK-28, MK-43, MK-57 and Mk-61 nuclear bombs, but I'm also not sure which one is loaded.

 

image.thumb.png.dcfd6be88976187b9fd8ffd009d61ca7.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2022 at 10:02 PM, Murph said:

 

In the pictures I've seen of F-100s carrying either "shapes" or live weapons only the pylons carrying the weapon or fuel were fitted.  Since it was almost certainly a one-way mission they wouldn't want to lose the pylons that weren't going to be used.

 

Regards,

Murph

There are photos on the Wethersfield Museum facebook page of F-100's in the victor alert barns which show the weapon on the centreline pylon and 275gal. tanks under the wings. these tanks were later upgraded to 335 gal. tanks HTH

Edited by hooter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Found some additional pictures of F-105's with centerline nukes in the Osprey Air Combat F-105 Thunderchief book:

 

With Mk.28:

image.png.2c744e5b166a63bba2759007076fb601.png

 

With BDU-8:

image.thumb.png.f330ff971d6ab7639933a11ec9116034.png

 

It also states:

image.png.63737448a85e5c5e91f67819c19ec76f.png

 

Knowing the above, I might go for 3 droptanks and 2 Mk.43-0 for my F-105D and 2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.28RE for my F-105F.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Susaschka said:

Knowing the above, I might go for 3 droptanks and 2 Mk.43-0 for my F-105D and 2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.28RE for my F-105F.

 

You can't have 3 drop tanks and 2 Mk43s, pylons have a weight capacity, c/l and inboard ones can carry a good size load, the outboards are limited in  stores weight. Scroll down to pg 8 & 9 here:

 

http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-105D-31_Thunderchief_SAC_-_June_1970.pdf

 

to see what can go where.

 

Jari

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks Jari!

 

Looks like the info in the Osprey Air Combat F-105 Thunderchief book is not accurate, as they are clearly stating the F-105D and F models could be loaded with 4 Mk.28's or Mk.43's.

However now that I think about it, I don't think F-105's could carry a nuke in the bomb bay and centerline at the same time.

I think they probably meant that there were 4 "stations" that could take these, but not at the same time.

 

So it's going to be:

- 2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.43-0 for my F-105D;

- 2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.28RE for my F-105F;

2 droptanks and a centerline Mk.28EX for my F-100D.

All pylons not in use will not be mounted.

 

These slightly different loadouts should be interesting to see and accurate enough for my purpose.

Edited by Susaschka
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

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...