I've started working on weapons and I am quite confused by a couple of pictures I saw showing Showtime 100 with two plylons.
First picture shows AIM-9's on inboard pylons and Rockeye's on outboard pylons.
(pic is reversed for comparision)
Second picture show two pylons but both AIM-9's and Rockeye's on same inboard pylons
Now here is the problem Monogram did not include the second pylon and there is only one pylon provided for both missiles and bombs on TER's. Now the question is... which configuration is correct?
I am SOOOOOO confused!!!!
30 years experience building plastic models.
WIP: Revell F-14B Tomcat, backdating to F-14A VF-32 1989 Gulf Of Sidra MiG-23 Killer "Gypsy 207".
I ain't Berny but maybe this will help.
I know it is for the Air Force Phantom but, I would think they would both be fairly close to the same. I was going to highlight the stations in question but, I couldn't figure out how to do it!! And, if it's any consolation, of all of the pictures I have seen I can only recall one that showed TERs on the outer pylon. I have seen a few with MERs but not TERs.
Thanks very much for the chart, it helps a lot! I looked it over and yes it does show that TER's are mounted to stations 2 and 8 which are the inboard wing pylons and this is represented on my F-4J. The thing that confuses me are outboard pylons on stations 1 and 9 which would carry MER's for multi weapons loading other than AGM's or bombs according to the chart. U.S Navy F-4 load outs shouldnt be all that different, but there is no record that Showtime 100 carried pylons on the outboard stations. Most all pictures I have seen only show stations 2 and 8 with sidewinders and rockeye's and no pylons on stations 1 and 9.
Anyway just to be on the safe side I cut off the pylons from the wing tanks and I might fix them up and add them to the outboard stations if the configuration in the second picture is the correct one. I guess I'll have to wait for Berny to see this and let me know for sure.
Gerald "Hawkeye" Voigt
"Its not the workbench that makes the model, it is the modeler at the workbench."
F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!
U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!
N is for NO SURVIVORS...
HawkeyeHobbies wrote:I hope you are building 'Showtime 100' because its a significant F-4 and not because of the guy who flew it. I have a signed print of Philip Wests painting "Showtime 100" I have it hanging in my den. I wish I had picked up Robin Olds SCAT XXVII instead. Cunningham brought shame to to everything he had been associated with. Country, US Navy and his family. Had I not had deep family ties to the Phantom program this print would have been on eBay...but I keep it only because it was a milestone in the history of the aircraft. Guess it shows even some of the best can be bought-Cunningham in particular. I wonder if his RIO stills stands proudly with him? I'll step off my soapbox. You'll have to research what mission they were flying the day you are depicting your model to represent to determine what the loadout would have been. I think a standard air to air mission would suffice. They woud have dumped the Rockeyes and fuel tanks if they encountered Migs anyway.
Politics and Models do not mix, so lets keep politics out of it. My reason for building this kit is because on that day Duke and Irish became Aces they proved that the F-4 could out proform any MiG. They used its strengths and their training and proved that even a gunless fighter aircraft can beat a MiG when flown right. I am building it because it of what they proved not because they flew it.
First of all from your post I surmised that you have not read about their mission on May 10th, 1972, the day they became Aces. Thier primary mission was an air strike against the Hai Duong Railway and storage depo. Secondary mission was to protect A-7E's on bombing strikes. After having completed both they answered a call for help from 3 Phantoms caught up in a "wagon wheel" with 8 MiG's. They engaged and broke up the wagon wheel saving 3 planes caught in it. The rest is history.
Second, the rockeye's had already been used but, they could not eject the TER's without ejecting the Sidwinders with them. Ejecting the centerline tank wouldn't have left them enough fuel to return to the their carrier. They were not carrying wing drop tanks.
Now, as you can see I have done my homework. My dilema centers on the exact way the Rockeyes were loaded.
stikpusher wrote:I recall reading (at this time not sure where) that the loadout carried on the final mission for Showtime 100 was centerline fuel tank, and inboard pylons with the AIM-9s and Mk20s. The strike package had already hit the target and was on their way out of the target area when the air to air fight began. An undated photo printed in "Vietnam Air War Debrief" shows an apparent VF-96 F-4J (a/c no.110) with a loadout of AIM-9Ds and TERs with a 'flat four" of Mk-20s on the inboard pylons and Centerline tank. No outboard pylons carried. This photo is used in the portion of the book describing the May 10 1972 air battles.
Thats the same configuration I am showing also but....... where the did the outboard pylons come from??? Maybe I should add them anyway.
Just for clarification Mk20's are Rockeye cluster bombs.
Based on the pics I have seen on Navy Phantoms during that time period, it appears that outboard pylons were not carried unless they were carrying MER's. This was probably due to the proximity of the carriers to NVN from Yankee Station. The kits pylons are just carryovers from the common sprues with their F-4 C/D kits. I am planning on building the same bird in its final mission configuration too so I have been looking at the same issues. Although I plan to send the oudbord tanks/pylons to another F-4 kit I have in need of them. Yes, Air Master, the Mk20 is the Rockeye CBU.
and your very welcome post pics when she's done!
You are most likely correct Stick but I am also thinking that if outboard pylons had been present on that day they were most likely empty and were not removed before the mission and this is why there is no mention of them.
What say you?
I was just checking my books on photos of VF-96 F-4s. Based on those I would say the shot I originally mentioned was almost certainly a VF-96 F-4. Also, only one out of a dozen or so phots shows them having outboard pylons mounted. In this shot there are carrying Mk-82 slicks on an apparent medium altitude level bombing mission with TER/AIM-9s inboard and bombs only outboard, along with the stadard centerline tank. ALL other photos show only inboard pylons, centerline tank with various stores. It would apprear based off photos that the outboard pylons were either not often mounted or photographed. All the photos were in the books "Vietnam Air War Debrief", and "Phantom, Spirit in the Skies", both by Airtime publishing. Personally, based on the photos of VF-96 birds, I would go with no pylons. I doubt they would mount the pylons if there was no odinance there. I wouldn't want the drag caused by the empty pylons for no reason.
The proper loadout for Showtime 100 on their MIG killing mission is as follows.
One centerline 600 gallon tank
Two AIM-7E Sparrow missiles on the aft missile wells. The forward missile wells were empty.
Inboard pylons loaded with TER's and 6 MK-20 Mod 1 Rockeyes.
Four AIM-9G Sidewinder missiles.
Outboard wing stations empty. No tanks or pylons were carried.
The biggest defugity (Defined in the senior NCO dictionary as Something Ain't Right) were the markings. The black triangle at the base of the vertical stab is shown with and without the MIG-21 outline. No one can say for a fact it was or wasn't there. The centerline tank is another problem as what type of markings were carried. Some say the tank had a black stripe painted on it. Most say the stripe was not there and had VF-96 painted on the tank. Some say no markings were carried on the tank at all.
Phormer Phantom Phixer
On the bench
TF-102A Delta Dagger, 32nd FIS, 54-1370, 1/48 scale. Monogram Pro Modeler with C&H conversion.
Revell F-4E Phantom II 33rd TFW, 58th TFS, 69-260, 1/32 scale.
Tamiya F-4D Phantom II, 13th TFS, 66-8711, 1/32 scale. F-4 Phantom Group Build.
I bow before you , The Ali Babba Of Phabulous Phantom Goodness . Again you have come through with superior Guru-ness. . I will name my first grand child after you! . LOL
THANK YOU VERY MUCH Berny! This is the info I really needed.
What Choppper said!
Air Master Modeler wrote: Hawkeye, Politics and Models do not mix, so lets keep politics out of it. My reason for building this kit is because on that day Duke and Irish became Aces they proved that the F-4 could out proform any MiG. They used its strengths and their training and proved that even a gunless fighter aircraft can beat a MiG when flown right. I am building it because it of what they proved not because they flew it.
Randy Cunningham's fall from grace has nothing to do with politics, just arrogance, corruption and greed.
FSM Charter Subscriber