Jump to content

F-105 Thunderchief Foible


71chally

Recommended Posts

I've been scanning in some slides for a friend, some of which are of F-105Gs refuelling.

 

When I looked closely at the scan image (below) it looks like the main gear inner door is open, then I noticed the same thing on the aircraft behind, and then the same appears on a scan of a third aircraft. 

On the nearest aircraft you can even see where that door should be closed in the wing by a shaded area.

 

Thinking this might have been an issue with the one aircraft, but a bit weird to be the same on all three jets, I looked more closely, it appears that the 'door' is actually a door shaped impression in the very light grey underside paint of the aircraft, and it appears to me that these 105s were likely painted with the main gear doors open against the fuselage sides and simply left that way.  The shaded patch under the wing also suggests that the undersurface of the doors, which would be against the fuselage sides when open, weren't painted either.

Seems really odd, and I wondered if these particular ones were painted in a hurry, but you think a quick blow over in the light grey would have been done.  

 

50223228206_3e25de9e13_b.jpg

scn279 (1) by James Thomas, on Flickr

 

I've never seen this before despite years of being a Thud fan, but I've trawled the net for  images since and there are other images showing different Thunderchiefs displaying this same anomaly.

 

I'm guessing the colour of the 'door' impression and the undersides of the doors would be the primer/undercoat?

 

 

Hope it is of interest, and if rendered on a model could get some funny looks from the judges I reckon!

 

 

 

Edited by 71chally
  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of the USAf jets were painted in a hurry in SEA.

 

Not sure about the thud but some F-4s had 3 tone camo applied directly on top of grey from previous conus squadrons. Makes for a very interesting weathering project as the green and brown wore off revealing different stencils and markings underneath.

 

My guess is a repaint in the field without jacking and retracting?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Creepy Pete said:

@DrumBum This migt be the case with an early F-105D, that had been in a silver lacquer finish before being overpainted in theatre. But this is an F-105G which means it had been converted in a factory and repainted there. 

That's probably the biggest puzzler for me, as like you I would have thought the Gs got a full factory repaint in the conversion process, so how could this happen and what colour are we seeing in the 'missed' areas?

 

I even wondered if these particular aircraft had worn the all over wraparound camo scheme and then repainted with grey undersides, but I think being 1978 it would be too early for that? 

 

Edited by 71chally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, iainpeden said:

@Old Viper Tester might have a solution.

Sorry gents, but it is a mystery to me as well.

 

The image in the original post is very odd. As Pete pointed out, these jets would have been painted coming out of the F to G conversion. Even if they were painted Fs going into conversion, the ECM/ESM fairing would have at least been painted after installation. That the "shadow" ran down the fuselage and similarly covered the fairing would make the washing with the gear down a more logical explanation.

 

At Nellis, the outdoor wash rack took in jets standing on their gear - this would argue for the 'dirt shadow'. But I find the distinct outline in the original post image rather fantastic. The guy washing the jet just went along the fuselage with the wash nozzle perpendicular to the jet? I would have expected some 'under-spray' similar to what we get with airbrushing and would have produced a more feathered appearance, especially at the fairing/fuselage intersection. Also, I would have expected a conscientious crew chief would have manually cleaned such a "shadow" - but then, it was war after all.

 

And then there is this image provided by Finn...

21 hours ago, Finn said:

F-105_Thunderchief_underside.jpg

 

 

Those are training bombs on the centerline and training Shrikes on the outboards, so someone must have had time on their hands when this image was taken, even though the jet is pretty dirty.

 

That's as far as my thinking takes me, as F/L MacDonald would say.

 

Sven

Edited by Old Viper Tester
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Squadron/Signal book "F-105 in action" there is a picture which appears to show a similar discolouration: the two a/c are from the 354th and 357th TFS/355th TFW coded RM and RU (over Vietnam) and both have the anomaly.

 

All other in-flight pictures show that area as "clean".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think we are looking at two different things, one does seem to be an impression of dirt left by washing the aircraft, but I would definitely say the aircraft in the images that I've posted does seem to be a repaint issue, but just very, very odd.

The impression is so well defined, and coloured, along with the underside of that gear door.

 

I will look for the other images I've seen, one is very clear and you can make out the door shape curving around the ECM blister.

 

Thanks for all the input so far, appreciated 👍

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/13/2020 at 10:38 PM, 71chally said:

The shaded patch under the wing also suggests that the undersurface of the doors, which would be against the fuselage sides when open, weren't painted either.

I have the feeling therein lies some kind of clue although I'm not sure how - I've read multiple accounts of all kinds of SEA in-field ad hoc solutions for very mundane problems, such as the white warning stripe on the B-52D external fuel tanks to counter the problem of everyone hitting their head against the night-black tank at night. So maybe the F-105G thing was done on purpose because of of something similarly maintenance-related? Maybe to do with gear-up testing on the ground? Maybe to check proper alignment of the door when deployed? Or perhaps related to checks between door and fuselage during pre-flight? Something like that.

 

Jay

Edited by Mountain goat
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/14/2020 at 3:41 AM, Creepy Pete said:

@DrumBum This migt be the case with an early F-105D, that had been in a silver lacquer finish before being overpainted in theatre. But this is an F-105G which means it had been converted in a factory and repainted there. 

Yep, that makes sense. 

 

22 hours ago, Finn said:

Here is an early D with almost new SEA camo:

 

F-105 Thunderchief, FH-505,  36th TFW, 23rd TFS, Bitburg Germany, John DeBock, Michael DeBock, #3

 

Jari

Very odd pylon and tank paint scheme applied on this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit more speculation. I noticed that all the pictures where the discolouring showed were of the port side of the a/c. I have found, in a Dutch book about the USAFE, pictures of an F and D, on deployment from Tinker, at the point of startup - the smoke cloud is on the port side of the a/c so maybe something to do with a vent.

 

In the D&S book on the 105 (vol 8 ) a couple of photos stood out: one with the port side inner u/c door open in flight,  the other where the starboard side inner u/c door seems to fit into a recess in the ECM pod mounted on the side (a bit like the indentations discussed on the Hunter tanks recently.)

 

Always like a good excuse to trawl through the library!

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some thoughts from Dennis R. Jenkins:

 

“Hi Martin,

 

Things are well here (excepting the obvious) so I will not complain. Hop you are also safe and well.

 

That is certainly an interesting thread. I looked through the tech manuals, and there is no way it should be possible to deploy the inboard gear door in flight. For a moment I wondered if they had rigged up a way to take advantage of the extra engine airflow offered by the auxiliary inlets inside the gear well (used during take-off and the source of great embarrassment on a few very early wheels-up landings), but that does not appear to be the case (the inlets were locked closed when the gear was up and the inboard door was linked to the main gear, so could not be opened independently).

 

I agree there would certainly be incomplete cleaning of the aircraft if they were hosed down without specifically going behind the gear door, so that probably explains most of the visual effects. All of the photos I looked at that were high enough resolution to be certain, it was simply a “dirty” outline (although truthfully, I had never noticed it before).

 

Painting was seldom (if ever) accomplished by operational units … it was done either at Depot or at Air America/Asia (for the SEA squadrons). See attached photo for a silver Thud getting its camo at Air America/Asia in Taiwan. I doubt the Depot would ever paint over the gear door …

 

I am going to look at our F-105 when I go to the museum on Tuesday (Board meeting, so mandatory attendance). I just want to look it over.

 

Not sure any of that constitutes an answer …

 

Stay safe.“


Martin

 

PS I am still hoping for an operational view From Dennis Wills :)

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RidgeRunner -  I hope I am putting 2+2=4 from your reply.

I didn't think we had an F-105 in the country anymore; the Lakenheath one being burnt, the UH/Croughton one scrapped and the Duxford one being returned. However your location and reply suggests there is and I'd be grateful if you could give details.

Thanks

Iain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to former Thud Crew Chiefs it is just an accumulation of dirt - that undercarriage door prevents a JP4 soaked rag from being rubbed across that section of fuselage. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Haydn said:

According to former Thud Crew Chiefs it is just an accumulation of dirt - that undercarriage door prevents a JP4 soaked rag from being rubbed across that section of fuselage. 

 

I was wondering about that; however, the outline of the first images in posts #1 and #3 still appear (to my eyes) to be pretty sharp for somebody with a rag.

 

That is also a discoloration in the same area on the natural metal aircraft in post #13, isn't it?

 

Could the effect be some kind of reaction, from heat or chemical action to whatever is inside the fuselage in that area, as well as the door? 

 

 

This aircraft has a similar effect to the first photo in this thread, in that the gear door also appears to be similarly coloured to the 'stain':

hmA8rbo.jpg

 

 

Also, to my eyes, it looks as if the 'stain' has been partially overpainted - although that could be my eyes and the grainy photo:

MWbkG.jpg

 

 

Edited by Blimpyboy
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

Some thoughts from Dennis R. Jenkins:

Many thanks for asking your knowledgeable friend to contribute, and to Dennis for taking his time to reply. 

In a way I'm glad the confusion extends to people in the know!

 

I do get the dirt thing, and I reckon the first picture in the last post (aswel as some of the other pics) is just that, it matches the undersides dirt quite well.

But in the photo I've posted it doesn't look like dirt to me, it's far to even, it has a certain tone, a very defined shape and you can see surface detail in the shaded area.

That last photo does look like the same thing, and interesting that some of it is either painted over or wiped off. Would love to see a high rex image of that one.

 

Thanks again for all the interest in this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, it looks like someone has taken a rag to it. A nice shot of a nice machine. Sadly my trip around Andrews AFB in 1981 was marred by the refusal by the Duty Officer, despite prior permission, to access the Thud ramp and shoot a few kodachromes of the last remaining machines :(. 

 

Martin

 

 

  

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...