An explanation about the Mongoose/Super F Skyhawk: from e-mail discussions on the ‘Skyhawk Study Group’ website at two locations:
"Hi All,
Just a few bits of amplifying info to set the record straight regarding A-4E/A-4F air frames and Mongoose configurations and VA-43/VF-43.
The USN used to have four Instrument Training Squadrons, VA-43/45/126/127, based at the major jet NA Stations, Oceana, Cecil Field, Miramar, and Lemoore. During the mid 70’s they were equipped with 2 seat A-4s to accomplish their mission of fleet pilot instrument training and qualification. At this point they did not have any other role. The Fleet Composite Squadrons which flew the A-4 were VC-1/2/5/7/8/10.
Later, as the Fleet Adversary Program evolved, these squadrons received additional air craft, in the form of A-4E/A-4F, F-5E, Kfir, and F-16N models. At some point they may have had some USAF loaned T-38 for a short while. The above mix was not necessarily assigned simultaneously. As the adversary role became the primary mission the squadrons were re-designated from VA to VF.
The pic published is an A-4E in one of the adversary paint jobs; and from the looks of the A-6 air craft, the picture is of the ramp at NAS Oceana, which means that the aircraft was likely assigned to VF-43.
As one would expect, the evolution of the Mongoose was gradual and took some time to finalize what was considered the Mongoose configuration.
The first aircraft to be used to augment the TA-4Js were some A-4Es. These aircraft were modified over time to have the following configuration either prior to or after delivery to the squadron.
1] dorsal avionics hump removed (not all Es had the hump)
2] PW J52 P-8B engine (9,300 lbs thrust)
3] IFR probe extension removed
4] external stores pylons removed
5] 20mm cannon with ammo system removed.
Later I know that VF-43 re-installed the centerline stores pylon and flew the E model with an Aero 1C external fuel tank as necessary for the mission. This configuration was called the “mini bubble” since the Aero 1C was the smaller version of the Aero 1D 300 gallon external fuel tank, which was normally carried by USN fleet aircraft. This smaller tank added enough fuel for longer ACM missions without adding as much parasite drag as the larger tank; and being on the centerline did not cause any air frame stress problems which would have been present if either of the other 2 wet stations, 2 or 4, had been used.
Before the advent of the TACTS Range with the Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation, there was no requirement to carry the Airborne Instrumentation System, AIS, pod. Once the need to carry an AIS arose, the outer external stores pylons were re-installed. I never saw an E with the slats wired or bolted up. That came later with the A-4Fs which were configured like the Es, and also had PW J52 P-408, (11,200 lbs thrust), engine installed. These Fs were referred to as “Mongoose”.
The E in the picture, Bureau Number 151111, does not appear to have any external stores stations installed and no AIS pod is visible. There may have been some A-4s wired to carry the AIS on station 3, but I never saw or flew any. The AIS was carried on either station 1 or 5 on all the A-4s I saw configured with that pod.
A Mongoose/Blue Angel Fs had a better than 1:1 thrust to weight ratio and had the best performance envelope of all Skyhawk variants including the Skyhawk II airframes, A-4M/N/KU.
_________________________________________________
A Super F is/was essentially a Blue Angel Skyhawk. They had some mods the Mongoose did not. The most coveted Blues mod that I would have liked in the Mongoose is the inverted flight fuel mod. We definitely did not want a smoke capability, and the trim mod would have been of no benefit for us in ACM. And a drag chute or a self contained cockpit ladder would have just been nice to have. The Mongoose always operated from long enough runways to make a drag chute unnecessary. Some of the spare Super Fs were “stashed” in units around the US, and saw service as non Flight Demonstration Squadron aircraft.
Yes, the Aero 1C is the 150 gallon drop tank.
The Blues/Mongoose Skyhawks really were like rockets. When you jam accelerated for take off there was a noticeable push back into the seat and the post take off gear up, flaps up had to happen as fast as you read this, so as to not over speed the landing gear or flaps. If you had been cleared for an unrestricted climb you could leave the throttle at take off power; but you had to move the stick aft to the stop initially and establish a rate of climb above what the VSI could display to stay below the 250 knots below 10,000 feet limit. And you watched the air station rapidly shrink in your mirrors. If you had not been cleared for an unrestricted climb, then you retarded the throttle to 85%.
An Adversary A-4E with a mini bubble could do an Immelman on take off with ease. These jets were a really good simulation of a Mig 17, but they were more maneuverable than that Mig model.
Needless to say, flying these Skyhawks was always a lot of fun, but then flying any Skyhawk was always a treat for me.
_________________________________________________
The advertised speed at sea level was in the mid 600s, I believe around 670 KIAS.
The mindset of an Adversary A-4E/F Skyhawk driver regarding speed limits was quite different than when you were flying a two seater, or a single seater in the normal fleet attack configuration.
With the Adversary Skyhawk, you could pretty much go as fast as the situation allowed without regard to LBA, Limit(s) of the Basic Airframe, being exceeded. Right or wrong, if you were flying a stripped A-4E/F with either no external stores stations, or maybe stations 1, 3, & 5 installed and you had only an AIS pod on a LAU-7 on either station 1 or 5, you could not hurt the jet by going faster than any cockpit placard or NATOPS limit on airspeed. What kept us from sustained very high speeds was the limited amount of fuel and the amount of training we wanted to get on each sortie. The basic internal fuel is 1600 lbs [error corrected below]. Add a mini bubble and the total is 2600 lbs. Although the Adversary Skyhawks were as light as they could be made, and as clean as possible, the fuel consumption was significant when you were running around the sky maintaining an air speed no lower than the left hand corner of the Vn diagram while you also maintained sustained high G flying ACM. The additional excess thrust we gained from creating these ACM hot rods, was used to generate and sustain the high performance needed to perform the mission. We wanted to get a minimum of three ACM engagements on each sortie. When you consider the time to the ACMI range, the fuel used getting 3 setups and during each engagement, and then the fuel to get home, you did not have much in the way of extra JP-5 to try for a personal best on speed either in level flight or in a dive.
However, when you did a Post Maintenance Check Flight that required the full “A” profile where you went to the service ceiling and did an idle pressurization check, most guys I knew planned it so that they were beyond 30 NM off the Virginia/North Carolina coast and had a block altitude clearance from FL 450 down to 10,000’ MSL. Then they just might do a supersonic run. I forget was critical Mach was for the A-4, but it was likely around .85 IMN or maybe a little higher. So with an E or F that had been souped up you had the extra thrust to push through the high drag spike that began at critical Mach. And if you accelerated to max horizontal speed at max continuous EGT, which was 594°C for a P-8B, at FL 430 and then rolled inverted and let the nose fall through to the vertical you could easily be supersonic in a very short time.
You could do this with any A-4 from the E on, (not sure about the L model?), that had clean external stores stations.
Best, Gary “Zoo” Rezeau
_________________________________________________
PS: As per my replies to..., who were kind enough to point out that I had not mentioned the 3,000+ lbs [3,700?] of wing fuel normally carried in all A-4s, I probably should re-write that paragraph.
For the sake of brevity, what I meant to convey in answering a speed question was that even with full internal, [fuselage & wing], fuel and maybe even an external 1,000 lb fuel tank on the centerline, we kept our speed with the range needed to sustain the high performance turn rates to dog fight with guns and Sidewinders/Atolls as our only weapons. The Fleet Adversary Skyhawks were not meant to be simulators of more modern medium/long range missile equipped Communist Bloc fighters. It was a given that we were dead meat if a Phantom or a Tomcat used a Sparrow on us. Again, this was apropos the mid 70’s. So our ROE reflected the tactics used to find, and engage a guns/short range missile capable enemy fighter.
To answer your “without wing fuel” question, with about 2,600 lbs of fuel, about all we could have done was transit to the MOA, military operating area, and return to base, since we liked to be on deck with about 1,000 lbs of fuel. And we would likely be flying a max range profile to accomplish this if we were flying from NAS Oceana, Virginia.
As an aside, I appreciate the questions regarding my mistake in “attempting to take off with empty wing tanks.” LOL!"