A-7D/E Question (was Why no armor for soldiers ?)

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

In article ,
Guy Alcala writes:
John Carrier wrote:

The A-7's empty weight was a bit over 20K IIRC, certainly not 15 (even in
the A-7A version ... the E was much heavier). The A-7 never lifted its
empty weight in stores. That would have taken it well over max gross.

Dorr's book lists the A-7A @ 15,037 lb. empty, MTOW 32,500 lb. A-7D is listed
at 19,781 lb. empty, 42,000 lb. MTOW, essentially agreeing with Tom's data from
Jane's. Typical bombload during Vietnam for Navy A-7s was about 6,000 lb.,
although during DS they tended to operate with only 4,000 lb. such as 4 x Mk.
83 1,000 lb. bombs (plus an AIM-9 or two), as they'd removed two pylons to
decrease the drag. USAF A-7Ds tended to operate with 4-6,000 lb. in Vietnam,
plus two tanks and a pod or two if going into a high-threat area. Navy a-87s
in Vietnam tended not to carry tanks (they were closer to the targets) unless
they were acting as buddy tankers, and they had internal ECM so didn't need to
take up a pylon or two with that.

From the A-7D SAC Chart, Oct 1970:
Empty Weight: 19,733#
Basic Weight: 20,331#
Max Takeoff: 42,000#

Note that: Full internal fuel is 9263#,
Full External fuel is 7848# (4 300 U.S. Gallon cans)
While the weapons loadout charts aren't included, the loads for teh
example missions indicate that each wing pylon was good fpr
2000#. The performace section shows a typical load of 2 M117 750#
(nominal, actual weight was a hair over 800#) each on 4
pylons, or 2 pylons of bombs and 2 tanks.

The '79 Jane's lists lists teh pylon ratings as 3500# each for the
wing outboars, and 2500# each for the 2 pairs of wing inboars, for a
total of 15,000#. Given the SLUF's lack of Excess Power, I doubt that
a load of that size was ever considered.


--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

Peter Stickney wrote:

snip

From the A-7D SAC Chart, Oct 1970:
Empty Weight: 19,733#
Basic Weight: 20,331#
Max Takeoff: 42,000#

Note that: Full internal fuel is 9263#,
Full External fuel is 7848# (4 300 U.S. Gallon cans)
While the weapons loadout charts aren't included, the loads for teh
example missions indicate that each wing pylon was good fpr
2000#. The performace section shows a typical load of 2 M117 750#
(nominal, actual weight was a hair over 800#) each on 4
pylons, or 2 pylons of bombs and 2 tanks.

The latter seems to have been typical in SEA. Dorr has photos of 354th TFW A-7Ds
with 8 Mk. 82s in a slant 4 (possibly a clearance issue with the tanks, if not gross
weight) on intermediate pylon MERs plus tanks on the I/Bs; or 6 x CBU-58s, three per
MER (same location as above) plus tanks. One shot shows the slant four Mk.82 load
(probably. It's an end-on in-flight shot where the bomb type is a bit hard to
define, showing a pair of A-7Ds flying on either wing of an F-111 leadship carrying a
full load of 24 bombs), plus probably single MK. 82s on the O/Bs; for a total of 10.
Oddly enough, for an a/c that was used entensively for CSAR Dorr has no shots of
A-7Ds carrying Mk.82 snakes.

[BTW, the weight of M117s seems to have changed quite a bit during production. The
F-105B & D SACs in the D&S volume shows them at 799 lb., while alll later SACs and
other sources show them at 823 lb.]

The '79 Jane's lists lists teh pylon ratings as 3500# each for the
wing outboars, and 2500# each for the 2 pairs of wing inboars, for a
total of 15,000#.

'82-'83 Jane's has it right (per a former A-7 jock I know): 3,500 for the the O/B and
Intermediate pylons, 2,500 for the I/Bs.

Given the SLUF's lack of Excess Power, I doubt that
a load of that size was ever considered.

Well, it's credited by Jane's with a t/o roll of 5,600 ft. @ MTOW, but that's
presumably in a far lower drag configuration than wall- -to-wall loaded MERs.
Besides 5,600 feet is 520 feet more than the F-105D requires with 16 x M117s (albeit
less than an F-105G at max. gross), so I think we can safely assume that an A-7D's
t/o from Korat at max. gross would make the F-105D look relatively spritely. In any
case, the A-7 handily met the requirement for doubling the A-4's payload/range.

Guy