F-4 chaff/flare loads

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 10:23:25 GMT, "Tom Cooper" wrote:

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
.. .

No flares on F-4s in SEA. (Photo-flash carts on RF-4s only). No
self-protection chaff carts either. We carried cardboard boxes (about
the size of a box of Xmas tree tinsel) in the speedbrake wells. Open
the boards to deploy. Try not to use speed brakes earlier in the
mission. One time use.

Ed,
do you possibly know the reasons why no chaff/flare dispensers were mounted
on Phantoms at the time (and, AFAIK, for most of the 1970s)?

From the standpoint of our days this appears as a very strange measure to
me: given how many R-13 shots could have been averted over Vietnam alone....

Tom Cooper

They weren't mounted because they didn't yet exist. The ALE-40 (the
blister dispenser bolted on the side of the wing pylons) came into
production around '73 or '74 after the air war was over. As I
mentioned, the operational E-models got them, but they never got
retrofitted to the C's that were still active. (I don't know about the
D's.)

What's an R-13? Do you mean SA-7 or Atoll?

SA-7 was pretty much a "no threat" for fast movers in SEA. Atoll was a
player, but if you knew the guy was back there, you maneuvered to
defeat. If you didn't know he was there, flares wouldn't have been
much good. A lot of the MiG successes were unseen blow throughs where
flares wouldn't have been employed.

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 10:23:25 GMT, "Tom Cooper" wrote:

They weren't mounted because they didn't yet exist. The ALE-40 (the
blister dispenser bolted on the side of the wing pylons) came into
production around '73 or '74 after the air war was over. As I
mentioned, the operational E-models got them, but they never got
retrofitted to the C's that were still active. (I don't know about the
D's.)

I see. Thanks.

One more question, if you don't mind: what was the chaff/flare dispenser
that could have been mounted into one of the rear Sparrow-bays, and when was
it introduced?

What's an R-13? Do you mean SA-7 or Atoll?

That's the original service designation for the AA-2 Atoll (K-13 was the
design designation).

I know the SA-7 was not that widespread nor as a serious a threat as some
other stuff at the time, and remember from reding Mitchel's "Clashes" and
few other books about the air war in SEA how often it happened that the
first warning from a MiG was either a Phantom or a Thud going up in flames.

But, in several cases the attacks were noticed when one of the crews saw
contrails from R-13s being underway behind them. Clear, the R-13 could't do
much against a maneuvering aircraft (AFAIK any maneuver beyond 2g was too
much for it to track), but, IMHO, perhaps the use of flare-dispensers
could've saved a crew or two more?

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585

Tom Cooper wrote:

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 10:23:25 GMT, "Tom Cooper" wrote:

snip

What's an R-13? Do you mean SA-7 or Atoll?

That's the original service designation for the AA-2 Atoll (K-13 was the
design designation).

Tom, IIRR the AA-2A (K-13) was designated the R-3S in service, while the later
versions switched to R-13 (M and M2 IIRC) to bring the service designation in
line with the design designation. I've got an old Air International article by
Piotr Butowski around here somewhere; he was given access to Vympel's chief
designer as well as their museum, and the different models were described.
There was also a cutaway of what we would call an AA-2D, which IIRR was
designated the R-13M2.

I know the SA-7 was not that widespread nor as a serious a threat as some
other stuff at the time, and remember from reding Mitchel's "Clashes" and
few other books about the air war in SEA how often it happened that the
first warning from a MiG was either a Phantom or a Thud going up in flames.

But, in several cases the attacks were noticed when one of the crews saw
contrails from R-13s being underway behind them. Clear, the R-13 could't do
much against a maneuvering aircraft (AFAIK any maneuver beyond 2g was too
much for it to track), but, IMHO, perhaps the use of flare-dispensers
could've saved a crew or two more?

Carrying chaff dispensers would have been far more use in general, given the
relative likelihood of encountering MiGs and SAMs/AAA. The R-3S could be easily
outmaneuvered if seen in time, or decoyed by the sun, clouds, or the sun shining
on water.

Guy

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...

They weren't mounted because they didn't yet exist. The ALE-40 (the
blister dispenser bolted on the side of the wing pylons) came into
production around '73 or '74 after the air war was over. As I
mentioned, the operational E-models got them, but they never got
retrofitted to the C's that were still active. (I don't know about the
D's.)


I saw an F-4D at Oshkosh about fifteen years ago that had previously been at
RAF Lakenheath, it was brought in by the Minnesota ANG from Duluth. They
had some blisters on the rear of the pylons that I was not familiar with. I
asked the AC about them, he said one side was a chaff dispenser and the
other was flares. They were added some time after the aircraft left
Lakenheath in 1977.

Ed Rasimus wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 10:23:25 GMT, "Tom Cooper" wrote:

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
.. .

No flares on F-4s in SEA. (Photo-flash carts on RF-4s only). No
self-protection chaff carts either. We carried cardboard boxes (about
the size of a box of Xmas tree tinsel) in the speedbrake wells. Open
the boards to deploy. Try not to use speed brakes earlier in the
mission. One time use.

Ed,
do you possibly know the reasons why no chaff/flare dispensers were mounted
on Phantoms at the time (and, AFAIK, for most of the 1970s)?

From the standpoint of our days this appears as a very strange measure to
me: given how many R-13 shots could have been averted over Vietnam alone....

Tom Cooper

They weren't mounted because they didn't yet exist. The ALE-40 (the
blister dispenser bolted on the side of the wing pylons) came into
production around '73 or '74 after the air war was over. As I
mentioned, the operational E-models got them, but they never got
retrofitted to the C's that were still active. (I don't know about the
D's.)

The ALE-40 may not have existed, but (according to Thornborough, pg. 16) the navy
was using the ALE-18 starting from April of 1966, at the same time they installed
the ALQ-51, APR-25 RHAWS and APR-27 LWR (for some reason the navy used the latter
rather than the APR-26). The ALE-29 seems to have replaced the ALE-18 from 1967
or 1968, and I think the ALE-39 was available before the end of the war. There's
no obvious reason why the air force couldn't have used dispensers on their
tactical a/c at the same time. Hell, the F-105D had its dispenser (an ALE-2)
removed from the spec as a cost cutting measure (along with the APS-92 RWR and
ALQ-31 jammer), in about 1959 or 1960.

Guy