Jump to content

F-4C/D - Europe1 scheme


rotaliscia

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Christer A said:

Were they mudmovers or fighters?

Both.

 

Standard training stores would seem to be the norm although those units with an Air Defence mission stood on alert 24/7 with live missiles as part of the wider US Air Defence and for a brief period in Europe during Operation Creek Klaxon while USAFE was undergoing a command-wide restructuring.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Christer A said:

Were they mudmovers or fighters?

As already answered, both, an easy way to tell is by squadron, FIS = Fighter Interceptor Squadron, these only undertook the Fighter/Interceptor air defence mission, TFS = Tactical Fighter Squadron, these squadrons undertook the tactical mission which comprised both fighter and attack taskings.

 

-Dazza

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Dazza said:

As already answered, both, an easy way to tell is by squadron, FIS = Fighter Interceptor Squadron, these only undertook the Fighter/Interceptor air defence mission, TFS = Tactical Fighter Squadron, these squadrons undertook the tactical mission which comprised both fighter and attack taskings.

 

-Dazza

 

Not 100% true, mate. I cant access them now but I could post numerous images of ANG F-4s of TFS units with sidewinder rails. That's not a new thing or something peculiar to the Phantom. See the Thunderchiefs in the mid-Vietnam era. They carried a single AIM-7 on the outer pylons for self-defence against the MIG threat.

 

Martin

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

See the Thunderchiefs in the mid-Vietnam era. They carried a single AIM-7 on the outer pylons for self-defence against the MIG threat.

 

Hey Martin,

 

I take it that's a typo for "AIM-9", right?

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6-3-2018 at 5:19 PM, Des said:

and for a brief period in Europe during Operation Creek Klaxon while USAFE was undergoing a command-wide restructuring.

Mind you, all the aircraft in the Creek Klaxon days were in the ADC grey scheme (at least on the photos I saw). Regarding the reason the ANG stepped in, I thought it had to do with the USAFE F-4's being replaced with F-16's. :huh:

Edited by ivand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said, ANG Phantoms were used both by pure interceptor units and by "tactical" units.

The maximum combat load for interceptor duties would have been the standard 4 Sparrows and 4 Sidewinders but in peacetime a lighter load would have been more common.

Ground attack configured Phantoms could carry a variety of loads, including SUU.23 gun pods, CBU-58 cluster bombs, Mk.82 and 84 bombs.

In the timeframe you're interested in, ANG Phantom equipped TFSs were not uniformly equipped as some had aircrafts more capable than others. All F-4C units could only use unguided bombs, gun and rocket pods (and of course the AA missiles). All F-4D equipped units could carry Maverick missiles. A number of F-4D units could carry Pave Spike pods and use laser guided bombs.

Speaking of Europe 1 camouflaged aircrafts, I'm pretty sure that this scheme was only used by units tasked with ground attack, with all interceptor units carrying the ADC grey scheme and later the Hill Gray scheme.All the aircrafts seen in the pictures above are part of TFSs

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all F-4Ds could use Maverick. The early production aircraft were not retrofitted with the digital scan converter and were primarily used for air defence in FIS units, e.g. North Dakota. And the latter used AIM-9s for interception, not self-defence. 

 

The Creek Klaxon deployment was at a time when F-16s lacked BVR missile capability. 

 

The Euro One strike F-4Ds would habitually carry an AN/ALQ-119 ECM pod under the left fwd Sparrow well if Maverick-only capable, and under the right fwd Sparrow well if Pave Spike & Maverick capable (the AN/ASQ-153 Pave Spike pod going under the left fwd Sparrow well. And F-4Es couldn't do this, because of the chunky side-opening NLG door, which made the Spike Ds quite a valuable asset). Note that the aircraft also received the F-15 type c/l fuel bag around this time - c.1983.

 

HTH rather than confuses

 

Tony

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

Speaking of Europe 1 camouflaged aircrafts, I'm pretty sure that this scheme was only used by units tasked with ground attack, with all interceptor units carrying the ADC grey scheme and later the Hill Gray scheme.

I venture to disagree Giorgio.  The 111th FIS of the 147th FIG had at least some F-4Ds in Europe 1 and that was an Air Defence unit: link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michigan ANG kept an air defence detachment of F-4Ds at Seymour Johnson AFB, NC for years. They started out with the ADC gray scheme, then went to Europe 1, and finally Hill Gray. South Dakota ANG also went through all 3 camouflage schemes. 

 

Cheers!

Ben

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a quick question on the Euro One scheme. It appears that the SEA tan colour was simply replaced with a grey? Although the pattern for the underside remains a bit of a mystery?

 

I have a nice decal sheet for Euro One Phantoms :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tony.t said:

Not all F-4Ds could use Maverick. The early production aircraft were not retrofitted with the digital scan converter and were primarily used for air defence in FIS units, e.g. North Dakota. And the latter used AIM-9s for interception, not self-defence.

 

 

I probably wasn't clear in my previous post, all Ds serving in units listed as TFS were Maverick equipped. I have a breakdown by unit published in 1988 showing which ANG TFS was equipped with the various configurations of the Phantom and all Ds in these units were Maverick capable, with others Pave adding Pave Spike capability and others also adding LORAN. I wasn't including FIS designated units. This list also includes F-4C equipped units that all had no special equipment.

 

44 minutes ago, Vultures1 said:

I venture to disagree Giorgio.  The 111th FIS of the 147th FIG had at least some F-4Ds in Europe 1 and that was an Air Defence unit: link

 

That's an interesting picture, 111th FIS received Ds from other units and likely they were in this scheme and were never repainted. As this unit used the D for less than 2 years it makes sense that they were kept in the original scheme.

The same sure happened to other Squadrons, and there are pictures of line-ups with different camo schemes. 184 TFG of the Kansas ANG for example also had a couple of grey aircrafts even if they were supposed to be a "tactical" unit.

 

 

Regarding these schemes, I've found the information that mentioned the use of the different schemes and came from Ogden Air Logistics Center, where Phantoms passed for high level maintenance. From 1983 the Europe 1 scheme was introduced on aircrafts equipped with the systems that made them suitable for use in "tactical" squadrons while ADC grey had been introduced earlier for aircrafts in the interceptor role. Later the Hill Grey scheme was introduced for all aircrafts. Clearly if an aircraft was moved to a different unit without passing through Ogden it kept whatever scheme had with the previous unit. My references are dated 1988, so any later change would not be included.

I'm inclined to believe that those aircrafts originally in grey went directly to the Hill scheme and that aircrafts in Europe 1 in FIS units were replacements coming from other units that had left the D, but I'm not betting any money on this, not yet anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tony.t said:

 

 

The Creek Klaxon deployment was at a time when F-16s lacked BVR missile capability. 

 

 

Yes until the F-15s were deployed? I remember reading somewhere up to 20 different ANG units deployed to Ramstein at this time. There are some nice pictures of their ADC aircraft fully tooled up there.

 

http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Air-Force/McDonnell-F-4D-Phantom-II/1789728

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in touch with Ogden OOALC in the 1980s and they simply replaced the 30219 tan with grey so as "to make use of the old colors". That meant 34102 and 34079 greens staying the same so, yes, grey replaced tan.

 

Tony

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

 

I probably wasn't clear in my previous post, all Ds serving in units listed as TFS were Maverick equipped. I have a breakdown by unit published in 1988 showing which ANG TFS was equipped with the various configurations of the Phantom and all Ds in these units were Maverick capable, with others Pave adding Pave Spike capability and others also adding LORAN. I wasn't including FIS designated units. This list also includes F-4C equipped units that all had no special equipment....

Yes, I wrote the book (USAF Phantoms), with info courtesy of John J Harty at McDonnell-Douglas.

 

Happy Days!

 

Tony

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎06‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 3:47 PM, Christer A said:

A most excellent set of photos @Creepy Pete!

Does anybody know what kind of loadouts were carried by the ANG around 1987?

Were they mudmovers or fighters?

Don't forget the old standby of three 500 pound Mk82 bombs carried on triple ejector racks on the inboard pylons.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Julien said:

Yes until the F-15s were deployed? I remember reading somewhere up to 20 different ANG units deployed to Ramstein at this time. There are some nice pictures of their ADC aircraft fully tooled up there.

 

http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Air-Force/McDonnell-F-4D-Phantom-II/1789728

 

 

Very interesting photo! The loadout is more or less exactly what I hade in mind for my ANG F-4C

4 AIM-9P, SUU-23/A gunpod but what mark of Sparrows?

I'm guessing  E or M?

Also, that strip that runs under the tanks looks like it has some purpose, but what?

(and Academy has only representad that as a raised line, i think i need to improve that on my build)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Christer A said:

Also, that strip that runs under the tanks looks like it has some purpose, but what?

(and Academy has only representad that as a raised line, i think i need to improve that on my build)

I've always assumed that it's a strengthening plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...