John Carrier wrote:

From the former operators whom I work with every day. A-7B 19,500 empty,
A-7E 21.500 empty.

Is that empty, which Jane's and Dorr gives, or (more likely) OWE (i.e. ready to
fly in combat, less fuel, ammo, and payload)?

Typical bomb load off 27C was 8 or 10 Mk82 (depending on
wind ... the cats were short). Otherwise 10-12 Mk82.

Yes, agrees with contemporary photos. There weren't many SCB-27C/A-7 cruises,
but there were a few.

Preferred was 4-6
Mk83 on the parent racks (no MERs/TERs with weight and drag), rare for the
Navy in Viet Nam. Add 400# for two sidewinders (given the ACM capability of
the SLUF, they would have proven more effective mounted backwards).

The A-7D with auto-maneuvering flaps wasn't that bad with just parent racks,
according to a friend who flew them in the ANG as well as A-7Es in the navy.
Not in the F-16's league, which he later flew, but he had claimed both F-4 and
(Japanese) F-15 'kills' in the A-7D when the pilots did dumb things. Besides, a
successful AIM-9 shot in Vietnam was usually on someone who didn't see you
coming, or who'd lost sight, and at least the A-7s had a means of discouraging
head-on cannon attacks.

4 x Mk. 83s (or other) on parent racks was fairly common in DS. They'd pulled
an inboard pylon (IIRR) on one side and the intermediate pylon on the other side
to slick them up. I forget the reason for the assymetry, but it probably had
something to do with allowable loads.

Tanker

typically 2x300Gal drop + D704 = 6000+ lbs. It would appear that your 6K,
give or take, is the typical operational load.

None of those I talked with (two of with combat experience) thought a field
T/O at max gross of 42K was practical unless the concrete was REAL long and
the day was REAL cold. I don't think A-7D's were launching in SEA at max
gross given the typical wx etc. The airplane was a real pig at 38K or over.

Entirely reasonable comments.

Guy