What's the major difference between pics and which one is correct?

[+streakeagle 871]

Hint: Read the column on the right of the Osprey book cover.

 

[+SupGen 79]

The "rail on the right wing"?

[Sheriff001 397]

Is an LAU-115 (or similar) launch rail available for SF2?

Edited April 12, 2013 by Sheriff001

[+streakeagle 871]

At this time, the AIM-7 was considered the most effective/primary weapon of the F-4.

However, AIM-7s carried in the forward wells could not be fired while carrying the centerline drop tank.

So, F-4s frequently flew missions with empty forward wells.

The early F-4B's unique ability to carry an AIM-7 on the wing rail was utilized to balance the load / make up for the empty forward AIM-7 wells.

As of this combat on 17 June 1965, the Navy's faith in AIM-7 combat without the need for dogfighting was validated.

Results with the AIM-9B were very disappointing, so the AIM-7 remained the principal USN F-4 weapon until the introduction and success of the AIM-9D.

The Navy realized that the AIM-7 was less useful and later switched to loads of 2 x AIM-7 + 4 x AIM-9 when not using the forward wells.

Edited April 12, 2013 by streakeagle

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

actualy there is not realy any adapter to carry a AIM-7 , the pylon is the launch rail

 

the Navy pylon with launch rail

 

and here the navy pylon on a RAAF F-4E with a AIM-7E

 

to carry a bomb , RP or a bomb-rack a special adapter was mounted on to the launch rail

[+streakeagle 871]

I probably should not have used the word "unique", since besides the F-4B, RAAF F-4Es (as pictured above) were also wired to permit AIM-7s to be carried on the inner pylons.

As far as I know, no other F-4 variants had that capability and the F-4Bs lost that capability over the years as they were overhauled/upgraded.

Edited April 12, 2013 by streakeagle

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

i´m not sure about it , this pylon type where used on all Navy F-4´s and the F-4K / M did use the same pylons , so it is only the wiring that could make a difference but why would they remove the abilty to carry the AIM-7 on the inner pylons

[TeargasHorse 287]

I certainly would rather have the Sparrows than the Sidewinder Bs. Where is this option in game?

[+streakeagle 871]

You can customize the allowed station loads in the data ini file and the loadout ini file.

 

You can see the loss of the wing Sparrows on the missile select/control panels.

The original F-4B panel shows 6 Sparrows, later aircraft have the wing Sparrow lights blanked off or use an entirely different panel that never showed the option for wing mounted Sparrows.

As for the reason the Sparrow capability was lost on the inner wing pylons: wiring was re-purposed for other systems.

An explanation is found here:

The inboard station lights were not used on the Air Force aircraft as their MAU-12 inboard wing pylons were nuclear weapons capable but not AIM-7, so the select light was removed from the missile status panel (thanks Bob for the explanation).

 

6 Sparrows:

 

4 Sparrows:

Edited April 12, 2013 by streakeagle

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

i think the TW F-4´s dont have the option you have to make some Data_ini editing like Streakeagle did

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

You can customize the allowed station loads in the data ini file and the loadout ini file.

 

You can see the loss of the wing Sparrows on the missile select/control panels.

The original F-4B panel shows 6 Sparrows, later aircraft have the wing Sparrow lights blanked off or use an entirely different panel that never showed the option for wing mounted Sparrows.

As for the reason the Sparrow capability was lost on the inner wing pylons: wiring was re-purposed for other systems.

An explanation is found here:

 

 

the lower panel is from a F-4E the one for the F-4J/N/S look totaly different

 

i have been looking for a explanation quite some time now but i never found one , all the Navy/ Marines F-4 used the same pylon ( some have the launchrail removed ) and would be able to carry the a AIM-7 and even the weaponspanel is not realy showing if they are able to carry or not

maybe if i get the F-4B / J / N manuals i will get some answer to it

Edited April 12, 2013 by ravenclaw_007

[+Dave 2,322]

Ask CrazyhorseB34, I think he made a mod of that for a project him and I were working on.

[Spinners 15,986]

Slightly off topic but I found it most odd that the Airfix 1/72 scale kit (covering the B, C, D, early E and J) totally ignored the the carriage of the 'normal' inner wing 4 x Aim-9 loadout but did have the different pylon for inner wing Sparrows. Buying this kit exactly 40 years ago was a magical experience for me and I thought it was the coolest looking aircraft ever.

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

I have tried two methods and I still cannot get rid of the "navy adapter" look between the Sparrow and the Pylon.......

[+Julhelm 266]

It's probably modelled into the pylon by default.

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

i have the pylons and the wings finish and after i´m done with the F-4E´s i will make the F-4B/J/N/S

 

i´m waiting for some manuals and more books so i can start the work , unfortunatly the NAVAIR 1-245FDB-1T and the Flight Manual Supplement section VIII are not available if somebody can get a copy of those that would be great

 

Edited April 12, 2013 by ravenclaw_007

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Ohhhh, Oh, Did you ever know that your my heeerrooo.....!

[bwild 5]

While we wait for Ravenclaw's next masterpiece, you can try this ini, it has two new pylons added for the sparrow. They are grouped with the sidewinder stations so you can choose one of them.

F-4B_DATA.7z

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Just tried bwild's data. I am afraid to say it does not remove the "navy adapter" it only covers it up. His data uses a vertical attachment position of -1.22, as opposed to -1.28 used in the pics I posted above. But, I am sticking with the -1.22 because it "looks" right. Brain must be right it must be part of the mesh.

[bwild 5]

That is odd, it works over here. The pylons them selves are fixed, the adapter however is not, it is called for in the inner weaponstations:

 

 

[LeftInnerWingStation]

SystemType=WEAPON_STATION

StationID=3

StationGroupID=4

StationType=EXTERNAL

AttachmentPosition=-2.05,2.74,-1.28

AttachmentAngles=0.0,-1.0,0.0

LoadLimit=1400

AllowedWeaponClass=BOMB,CGR,TER,RP

AttachmentType=NATO,USN

ModelNodeName=adapter_inner_L

PylonMass=10.89

PylondragArea=0.00

LaunchRailNodeName=

MinExtentPosition=

MaxExtentPosition=

 

that is why I added two new weaponstations, specifically for the sparrows, with no ModelNodeName so the adapters don't show up:

 

 

[sparrowWingStationLeft]

SystemType=WEAPON_STATION

StationID=17

StationGroupID=2

GroupLimit=4

StationType=EXTERNAL

AttachmentPosition=-2.05,2.74,-1.22

AttachmentAngles=0.0,-1.0,0.0

LoadLimit=1400

AllowedWeaponClass=SAHM

AttachmentType=NATO,USN

ModelNodeName=

PylonMass=10.89

PylondragArea=0.00

LaunchRailNodeName=

MinExtentPosition=

MaxExtentPosition=

[+streakeagle 871]

I will give this ini edit a shot :)

The limitation I ran into is that in the one "normal" loadout ever using the AIM-7 on the wing pylons, it was asymmetrical.

So, to do this correctly, you need to be able to independently assign a pair of AIM-9s or an AIM-7 to either side.

For my loadout ini edit, I chose to put the AIM-7 on the right side due to that being the side used for the mission I was interested in modeling.

However, I have seen photos showing the AIM-7 on the left wing and the AIM-9s on the right wing.

 

I can't find a reference citing that only the early F-4Bs were wired for AIM-7s on wing pylons, so maybe the later modded USAF variants are the only ones that lost that capability.

I would also bet that F-4Fs never had the wing pylon wiring.

It certainly makes sense that F-4Cs should have originally been wired for it.

So it is possible that my aging memory has flipped a bit... but I could swear I read that in a reliable source.

It would make sense to give up that capability even if the control panel still had the switches for it.

Aside from the early Navy BARCAP missions, I don't know of any other photos/texts showing/citing use of the Sparrows on the wing pylons.

Nuclear weapons aside, a lot of air-to-ground weapons came out after the F-4 was designed/built.

It is entirely likely that the unused/unnecessary AIM-7 wiring would be removed to make room for A-G wiring.

Think about ARMs and Mavericks as examples of weapons that might need extra custom interfaces that could push out the AIM-7 connections.

But the "imagined" source didn't cite why, just casually mentioned that only the F-4B had actually been wired.

 

I spent years sorting out the facts about the AAA-4 chin IR detector.

I now know for sure that the F-4B was the only F-4 produced with the IR detector installed.

All other F-4s (modded B/N, C, D) with chin bumps either had empty shells or RWR antennas.

So even the "minimum change" F-4C had major systems removed compared to the original production F-4B.

 

The pilot manuals don't cover that aspect and I don't have the weapons employment manuals.

Most of the references I have don't even mention the capability to carry 6 Sparrows, unless covering the early prototype/development history, and then never mention it again.

So unless some veterans with firsthand experience with the F-4 speak up, I have no solid answer.

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

as for the 6 Sparrows , the RAAF leased there F-4E for just 2 years and returned them back to the US and used them mostly in AG , this F-4´s are able to carry the 6 sparrows by just attaching the Navy-pylon , with out any rewiring to my knowledge , so why should all other Navy F-4´s not be able to do the same ????

i rather think that with the AIM-9G around it was no longer practical to use AIM-7 on this pylons and 4 x AIM-7 + 4 x AIM-9 are a better choice than 6 AIM-7 only

 

and the only Navy pylons with out the launch rail i have seen sofar are on UK F-4M , the US Navy even used the Aim-7 launch rail pylons on there F-4S (maybe only to attach the bomb adapter that would be a possible reason)

 

absolutley certainty about this issue you can only have if you get a copy of the NAVAIR 1-245FDB-1T and the Flight Manual Supplement section VIII , i will get soon a copy of the weapon system manual for the F-4 FG.1 may be i will find something there

[+streakeagle 871]

Apparently it was no longer practical to carry AIM-7s on wing pylons around 1966.

I don't see too many (any?) USN photos after 1965.

The BARCAP loadout was quickly changed to the one used in the faulty book cover in my initial post: 2 x AIM-9 (1 on each outer wing rail) and 2 x AIM-7 (rear recess).

USAF F-4s clearly had their panels rewired to not use the wing pylons.

Later USN panels are not very clear as they removed the old missile control panel.

I don't see where the selected missile can be determined and "ready" status monitored on the new panels.

 

Australia is an interesting case since they primarily trained for strike missions in preparation for the receipt of F-111Cs.

Why would they be even hanging AIM-7s on the wings?

 

Just because the physical rails remained all the way to the F-4S is no guarantee they retained the capability to fire them.

I agree that it is likely that the Navy F-4s retained the capability, but I am almost positive that I read a source that said otherwise.

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Look in the color pic section of the same Osprey book and there is a pic of an F-4J with AIM-7 on inner pylon. If you use the "navy inner pylon" then you can shoot AIM-7..... Bwild I was thinking the same thing I had already made the two new stations before you even posted. I think I might have originally put the wrong node name. Good stuff!

 

^{Page 42, picture 11.}

[+streakeagle 871]

Clearly, from the photos I can find, the Australians operated the F-4E with USAF style pylons, but were initially delivered with Navy style pylons and their loadouts had little to do with whether they were usuable or not.