F-4 w/AIM-9 and bombs carriage question

Ed Rasimus wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 21:02:14 GMT, Guy Alcala
wrote:

I've been looking through Shlomo Aloni's Osprey book on
Israeli F-4 Phantom aces, and I note that around the time of
the '73 war when they want to carry AIM-9s, they either

1. don't carry any A/G stores on that pylon (when carrying
two AIM-9D/Gs on the shoulder mounts), or

2. only carry a single AIM-9D/G on one shoulder mount and
delete the store carried on the same side (i.e., either the
I/B or O/B side) station of the TER.

Because they seem to have valued the AIM-9 far more than the
AIM-7 for their strikers, the Israelis were often flying
with a highly assymetric load, i.e. 5 M117s on the C/L, 3
M117s on the right I/B, and two AIM-9s on the left I/B, plus
two tanks. I know that USAF F-4s were only able to fire
AIM-9s OR drop bombs on a single mission prior to 1973 or so
owing to wiring limitations (which is probably represented
by condition 1 above), but condition 2 above implies that
there's a clearance problem even after the wiring was
changed. The Israelis later went so far as to develop an
adapter for the forward right Sparrow well that allowed an
IRM to be carried there, which allowed them to carry two
bombs plus one AIM-9/Python 3 on the left I/B, decreasing
the assymetry to almost nothing and increasing the bombload
while still carrying a pair of IRMs. Can any of our
resident F-4 types comment as to whether there were such
clearance restrictions for simultaneous AIM-9/bomb carriage?

TIA,

Guy

I'm not able to comment on what the IAF was doing, but can make a
couple of observations about the USAF aircraft at the time. The AIM-9
was carried on a "T" launcher suspended from the 14" suspension points
on the MAU-12 adapter on the I/B pylons. Two missiles could be carried
on each I/B station. No other equipment could be carried on the pylon.
Typical A/A configured flights carried 4xAIM-9, 3xAIM-7, an ECM pod in
a forward Sparrow well and three tanks.

By 1974 a mod had been designed for the pylon that allowed for
shoulder carriage of the AIM-9. These bolt-on stations were on either
side of the pylon and allowed for the IR missiles to be carried and
fired with any other normally suspended store on the usual gear.

And the IAF aircraft have both AIM-9 shoes and TERs simultaneously on the
I/B pylons, but they don't load AIM-9s and bombs on the same side of the
pylon.

(I've got to opine that the problem of firing missiles from the
station with ordnance seems moot--if you engage enemy aircraft, step
one is dump the iron.)

While they often had to hit the panic button and clean the a/c up, there
are at least a few accounts in the book where bombs were retained and an
AIM-9 shot was taken. The primary mission was bombs on target, and every
load jettisoned was a victory for the Egyptian/Syrian Migs. The other
thing that occurs to me is that dropping/jettisoning a bomb on the same
side of the pylon as an AIM-9 might hit the missile tail fins, i.e. there
could be clearance problems both ways.


It is possible that the IAF were also carrying ALE-40 or similar

locally produced chaff/flare dispensers. The ALE-40 blisters on the
trailing edge of the side of the pylon might have been the problem for
the shoulder mounted AIM-9s.

I thought of that, but it's impossible to tell from the available photos
if ALE-40s were present -- you need an almost head-on shot of an I/B
pylon, or else no tanks/ordnance on the O/B pylons if the photo is from
the side. They definitely had pods available at the time, ALQ-87s (maybe
even some ALQ-71s) up through ALQ-101(V)4 or so.

OTOH, I'm pretty sure I've seen photos of F-4s with TERs, AIM-9 launchers
_and_ ALE-40s on the I/Bs (the AIM-9 launch shoes definitely clear the
dispenser; I assume the missile tail fins would also), so it appears that
the problem isn't physical clearance, although I suppose there might be
safety limits due to the proximity of the missile(s) motor nozzle to the
pyrotechnics in the ALE-40. However, ISTR that such shots tend to be of
the airshow/museum "everything we might ever _think_ of putting on an a/c"
variety, so I don't know if such photos represent an operationally allowed
loadout. Anyone know if AIM-9s were allowed to be fired if you had
chaff/flares in the ALE-40s?

Guy