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

[Sheriff001 397]

I believe that the reason for using the wing station for the cold soak trials was to ensure the aircraft didn't warm the missiles (as it might have with the missiles in the fuselage recesses). On the wings, the missiles were literally "out in the cold".

[+streakeagle 871]

i have to correct me , the F-4 FG.1 (and i assume as well the FG.2) are not able to carry AIM-7 on pylons , i just got the weapons manual for the FG.1 and there is only the 4 fuselage bays for AIM-7 / Skyflash

 

and in all F-4C/D/E/F/G weapons delivery manuals are only the 4 fuselage bays for AIM-7 , what is logical because the USAF does not use the Navy pylon and therfor this aircraft are not able to launch any AIM-7 , the only ever exception was the RAAF

 

I am sure those are later delivery manuals.

Except for a very few systems (no AAA-4 Infrared, different comms, and fat wings for fat tires), the early blocks of F-4C was for all intents and purposes an F-4B right down to the paint job on initial delivery. The early F-4D may have retained the capabilities of the F-4C, but most certainly couldn't even carry AIM-9s on the wing pylons as delivered and had to be field modded to get them back after the AIM-4 proved to be useless in dogfights. So there is not telling what the F-4D could or not carry -- but the missile status panel still had the lights up to a certain point, so maybe the wires were still there? Until later control panel upgrades and/or wiring changes for "special" weapons, it is possible that the only thing keeping USAF F-4s from carrying AIM-7s on their wings was the lack of the Navy pylon. Aside from the odd RAAF photos, it is safe to say, possible or not, the USAF F-4 variants never actually carried the wing mounted AIM-7s and therefore any "realistic" loadout ini files for them should not permit it. At the same time, photographic evidence and cockpit lights indicate that USN F-4s appear to have always retained the wing pylon capability. While not commonly used, it should probably be a valid loadout ini entry for all USN F-4s.

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Finished them all yesterday.........

[+streakeagle 871]

Found some more info on USAF F-4s and wing mounted AIM-7s at an old website I used to frequent: http://www.webring.org/l/rd?ring=vv;id=87;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwebspace%2Ewebring%2Ecom%2Fpeople%2Fhu%2Fum_688%2F

It is a site created by an F-4 tech that maintained the WCS and here is his FAQ that provides some additional insight:

Eight: Four AIM-7E/F and four AIM-9M. Early F-4Cs could carry two additional AIM-7Ds, one on each outboard station, in place of wing tanks. 

( They had a TG-76 single-station tuning drive inside the special pylon. All series had a small RF window about half-way out on the leading edge of the wing to support outboard AIM-7s, even though the capability had been removed.) Prior to 1974 or so, the larger AIM-4D Falcon missiles were used in place of AIM-9s, ( except for PACAF aircraft ).

 

So, it is originally all about the pylon. Can't use the AIM-7 without a TG-76 regardless of control panel switches.

But note that he is talking about carrying 2 x AIM-7 on the outer pylons instead of fuel tanks.

Edited June 25, 2013 by streakeagle

[Spinners 15,986]

I don't understand why he specifies AIM-7D for this outboard station.

Edited July 17, 2013 by Spinners

[+streakeagle 871]

The USAF Museum displays Robin Olds' SCAT XXVII with AIM-9s and bombs. This isn't a mistake despite the lack of photos of USAF F-4s carrying both at the same time. When Olds requested to have the F-4Ds retrofitted with AIM-9s after he confirmed the dismal performance of the AIM-4s,  he also asked for some sort of spacers to be shoehorned in to allow simultaneous carriage. I don't know if he was aware of the Navy's use of this configuration (were they even doing that in this time frame? don't recall). But it made sense to him and he personally tested firing the AIM-9s with bombs still attached before allowing the configuration to be used in combat. Olds also turned off his RWR gear. He felt all the beeps and flashing lights were just a distraction given the false alarm rate and the fact that they were almost continuously painted with radars the whole time they were in the combat/target area. Even after F-4Ds showed up with much better RWR equipment, he still left it turned off. He preferred visually searching/tracking/evading SAMs.

[+Dave 2,322]

The USAF Museum displays Robin Olds' SCAT XXVII with AIM-9s and bombs. This isn't a mistake despite the lack of photos of USAF F-4s carrying both at the same time. When Olds requested to have the F-4Ds retrofitted with AIM-9s after he confirmed the dismal performance of the AIM-4s,  he also asked for some sort of spacers to be shoehorned in to allow simultaneous carriage. I don't know if he was aware of the Navy's use of this configuration (were they even doing that in this time frame? don't recall). But it made sense to him and he personally tested firing the AIM-9s with bombs still attached before allowing the configuration to be used in combat. Olds also turned off his RWR gear. He felt all the beeps and flashing lights were just a distraction given the false alarm rate and the fact that they were almost continuously painted with radars the whole time they were in the combat/target area. Even after F-4Ds showed up with much better RWR equipment, he still left it turned off. He preferred visually searching/tracking/evading SAMs.

 

I have touched his aircraft the the museum and felt its greateness. Not many people know about his turning off the RWR equipment. When and if he ever used was to turn on for a few seconds to see what was out there then turn "that damn noisy thing off" as he said.

[+streakeagle 871]

My wife decided not to go last year, but we have confirmed tickets for this year. She is going to run the 1/2 Marathon. I get to spend 1 or more days at the museum plus whatever else we can find to do in the Dayton area. I think we will be at the airport by noon on Thursday and return home Sunday evening, so we should have plenty of time to browse the museum in spite of her running engagement.

 

I have been there only once, but what a grand trip it was. The XB-70 and X-3 made it unique (superior?) compared to the Smithstonian.

 

I just finished Olds' autobiography. He was an amazing individual and did so many things that I loved and respected. But he failed on the home front. He put his career almost completely ahead of his family and chose a Hollywood actress for a wife who refused to support him and had many of the problems that Hollywood people have. Having briefly attended and resigned from West Point myself, I enjoyed Olds' comments about it. He had it made, only had to endure 2 years of that before graduating and getting trained to fly P-38s. Unlike some of the aces (i.e. Steve Ritchie and Randy Cunningham), he seemed to be a down to earth person respectful of everyone around him rather than focused on his own image and legend. The contrast between the way the military worked back then and now is just way too funny. They lost planes to training or lack thereof at amazing rates from WW2 right up to the late 1950s. Olds hopped into planes and flew them with little or no ground training. He did informal formation air shows, sometimes with losses. He wanted to see what it was like to depart an F-4 with adverse yaw in his very brief conversion training. He fell from about 30,000 feet down to 10,000 before finding a way to recover. I still wish stock Thirdwire SF unslatted F-4s properly exhibited this behavior. I want DCS level F-4 Phantoms so badly!

 

Olds seems to have preferred the P-51 to the P-38, but apparently loved the F-4 more than anything else he had flown. I don't know if performance and handling was much of a factor. I think he simply preferred whatever aircraft he happened to be flying when he was having good experiences and he appears to have enjoyed his time flying F-4s in Vietnam more than anything else in his life.

Edited July 31, 2013 by streakeagle

[+Dave 2,322]

Well I only live 5 miles form the museum.