Phantom Weapon Load

[Herod]

A quick question for those that know. What would be a typical weapon load for the RAF Phantom in its various roles?

[weemonkey]

Shiploads of everything.

Now if it got near a target.......................

[SASless]

Here is one example of a US Military F-4 weapons array.



https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e2/e1/ab/e2e1ab427f0c02f0b13a32b4ea151cf9.jpg

[RAFEngO74to09]

QRA (N) - Bruggen: 1 x US B43 / B57 "special weapon" [Jun 72 > Oct 76 under Project E] on centerline + 2 x Sparrow + 2 x underwing tanks

QRA(I) - RAFG Battle Flight - Wildenrath: 4 x Sparrow then Skyflash / 4 x Sidewinder / 1 x SUU-23A Gunpod (M-61 20mm 6-barrel Vulcan "Gatling") / 2 x underwing tanks - centerline fuel tanks available

QRA(I) - UK - Leuchars / Coningsby / Wattisham: 4 x Sparrow then Skyflash / 4 x Sidewinder / 2 x underwing tanks + centerline tank - SUU-23A Gunpod available

Recce: EMI Recce Pod on centerline / Strike Recce Camera (forward port Sparrow station) / 2 x underwing tanks

Attack (before my RAF service so may not be 100% correct):
Carrier Bomb Triple Ejector (CBTE) - UK Only version of US Triple Ejector Rack (TER) - which could carry 1000-lb Bomb / SNEB Rocket Pod / BL-755 - could be carried on all 4 x underwing pylons (outers could have 2 x underwing tank instead)
SUU-23A Gunpod on centerline or centerline tank
4 x Sparrow / 4 x Sidewinder
RN Phantom FG1 could carry Lepus flares on centerline for night illumination during attacks

Various publicity shots of the era showed RAF / RN Phantoms completely tooled up in "everything but the kitchen sink" configurations that would have been a little range limited in practice !

[RAFEngO74to09]

Only 30 x Phantom FGR2 were wired to carry the EMI Recce Pod for use by 2 Sqn (Laarbruch) and 41 Sqn (Coningsby).

[tartare]

What is the heaviest weapon load ever that an F-4 carried?

[Davef68]

Recce: EMI Recce Pod on centerline / Strike Recce Camera (forward port Sparrow station) / 2 x underwing tanks



One of the underwing tanks could be the modified version used to carry photoflash for night time operations. Not sure how widespread that was, but you can see it on this pic of XV406 (which was the Recce trials aircraft, so carries the pod and modified tank in spite of being with 111 at the time)


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x594/xv406_d111sdn2_a68c8b6fcf98da710ceaf844c2ebed7a8659467e.jpg

[57mm]

Don't forget the baggage pod......

[Herod]

Thank you all, especially RAFEngO. That's given me some stuff to sort through.

[Asturias56]

You know looking back it was quite a remarkable aircraft ...............

[Chris Kebab]

....flown by equally remarkable chaps:ok:

[pr00ne]

CBTE could be carried on the centre line pylon as well, certainly on the 38 Group Squadrons.

When I went through it was the favoured destination of all at Valley, except for a few Lightning weirdo’s.

Sad to see in later years it became the destination of the least capable, in a hierarchy extending from Harrier at number one to the F-4 at the bottom, just above Canberra.

Odd and surreal to think that the QRA(N) Bruggen fit was the most commonly uploaded but most rarely, if ever, flown.

[Davef68]

Odd and surreal to think that the QRA(N) Bruggen fit was the most commonly uploaded but most rarely, if ever, flown.

or photographed.

[Vzlet]

The classic air-to-air fit, as seen recovering to Ramstein in 1981:
https://live.staticflickr.com/8694/16850284016_c851bedb9a_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/rF17od)
Zulu Recovery, Ramstein, 1981 (https://flic.kr/p/rF17od) by Vzlet (https://www.flickr.com/photos/vzlet/), on Flickr

[Minnie Burner]

Googled, RAF phantom full load (not too difficult!)
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/750x488/rhinoplastered_4f9eda8efa572011027a34239ce70dd7fef2eead.jpg

[Minnie Burner]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/779x444/13x540_55b35dfb90fc299bf157780a034b16d1e560a630.jpg

[Pontius Navigator]

Following Pr00ne's lead, 3xAIM7, 4xAIM9, 2x3x1,000lb, SUU-23 and a strike camera.

[57mm]

Vzlet, the Rhino in your pic appears to be fitted with the TISEO pod on the port wing. 23rd TFS out of Spang had them when we met them for DACT at Deci; made for some interesting tussles in our trusty F4Ms.

[Treble one]

Fascinating stuff. Just one question. Did we not have our own 'Special weapons' by the early 70's (was thinking Red Beard/ WE177 that would probably pair with a Phantom). Didn't the Buccaneer carry Red Beard prior to WE177 in the nuclear strike role in the 70's/80's?

Cheers TO

[dctyke]

Mid 70's it was definitely WE177 on the buccaneers out of laarbruch

[Just a spotter]

Here is one example of a US Military F-4 weapons array.



https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e2/e1/ab/e2e1ab427f0c02f0b13a32b4ea151cf9.jpg

A sign of changed times. I doubt a modern version of the picture would include the thermonuclear or chemical (sarin) options.

JAS

[Timelord]

Fascinating stuff. Just one question. Did we not have our own 'Special weapons' by the early 70's (was thinking Red Beard/ WE177 that would probably pair with a Phantom). Didn't the Buccaneer carry Red Beard prior to WE177 in the nuclear strike role in the 70's/80's?

Cheers TO

I think that the F4 in the ground attack and strike ( nuclear) role was only ever “interim” awaiting the arrival of the Jaguar +WE177 after which the F4 s all went air defence. That being the case it would not have been worth the considerable effort of integrating WE177 and the US kindly provided their weapons under, I presume, the same dual key procedures as the Canberras which preceded the F4s.
PS Would the US allow a Non US controlled nuclear weapon on a US built aircraft?

[Lyneham Lad]

Q on the FGR2 at Brueggen '70 to '73 was definitely the US-controlled device.

[LOMCEVAK]

What is the heaviest weapon load ever that an F-4 carried?
The aircraft became heavier as the years went by due to modifications, especially the FG1. We flew a trial to increase the max take-off weight from 58000lbs to 60000 lbs in ‘D’ fit (3 tanks) plus 4 Skyflash, 4 AIM9 and 4 1000 lb bombs. But that was not a war load in the late ‘80s when we did this. It was just a means of achieving the desired mass.

Edit: I have thought a bit more about this fit. We definitely had the 3 tanks and 4 x 1000 lb bombs but probably did not have the missiles, and if we did just the Skyflash. My logbook doesn't state the actual load so this is just from memory.

[tartare]

Jaysus.
That's 30 tons.
What a jet...

[RAFEngO74to09]

The US B43 special weapons provided under the dual key US/UK Project E dual-key arrangement for RAFG Phantom FGR2s had previously been used by the RAFG Canberra B(I)8s up until June 1972 until there were replaced by the Buccaneer with WE177.

[Treble one]

Thank you Timelord and RAFEng. I knew these weapons were used with the Canberra, but did not know about the Phantom.

[Davef68]

I think that the F4 in the ground attack and strike ( nuclear) role was only ever “interim” awaiting the arrival of the Jaguar +WE177 after which the F4 s all went air defence. That being the case it would not have been worth the considerable effort of integrating WE177 and the US kindly provided their weapons under, I presume, the same dual key procedures as the Canberras which preceded the F4s.
PS Would the US allow a Non US controlled nuclear weapon on a US built aircraft?

We also didn't have enough WE177s at the time, as production was still underway (and warhead production had concentrated on the Polaris fleet initially.). The RAF's Red Beard stocks had been mainly held in Cyprus and Singapore

[sandiego89]

PS Would the US allow a Non US controlled nuclear weapon on a US built aircraft?

"Allowing" is a difficult word, as I would imagine that certification to US standards would not be permitted. I can think of several US originated airframes that were, or likely were, nuclear capable with non-US weapons, UK Wessex (license built), UK Sea King (license built), Israeli F-16/15, Pakistan....

[gileraguy]

What is the heaviest weapon load ever that an F-4 carried?


I remember reading a paperback some years back I believe was called "Phantom over Vietnam"? Anyway, it was written by a Marine F-4 pilot about his experiences and he mentioned a configuration he called "Super Bomber". You took one F-4, put a MER on the centerline and both outer pylons, a TER on both inner pylons, loaded them all up with MK82 slicks for a total of 24 bombs, and prayed she'd get off the ground! Supposedly only REALLY experienced pilots were allowed to fly the airplane configured like that cuz they were an absolute beast to fly.

[SASless]

A Wessex or Sea King?

I pray it was a teeny weeny very extremely low yield device....as otherwise the Pilot and Crew would have to be wearing white head bands as they committed ritual suicide!

[Davef68]

A Wessex?

I pray it was a teeny weeny very extremely low yield device....as otherwise the Pilot would have to be wearing a white head band as he committed ritual suicide!

Plain old WE177A

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/940x705/we177_wessex_edited_c2f950d2c4275e01b1c8f95070863d37a3392a47 .jpg


They fitted one to a Wasp too....

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x480/we177_wasp_4c2c728284a976060555e422f8c370d168463879.jpg

[ivor toolbox]

Jaysus.
That's 30 tons.
What a jet...
Buccaneer was 63,000LB if memory serves me right.

Ttfn

[ivor toolbox]

....flown by equally remarkable chaps:ok:
and maintained by equally remarkable chaps (and chapesses) too....

Ttfn

[Timelord]

A Wessex or Sea King?

I pray it was a teeny weeny very extremely low yield device....as otherwise the Pilot and Crew would have to be wearing white head bands as they committed ritual suicide!

But the plain old WE177 did have a teeny weeny option for that role.

[OK465]

Buccaneer was 63,000LB if memory serves me right.

A-5 Vigilante max TO wt was slightly over 63,000 lbs. F-105 was somewhat heavyish also.

Re: USMC F-4 (3MERs, 2 TERs config).......A manual bomber in an F-4 with 24 MK-82s actually had a chance of hitting something for a change. :}

(The USAF in VN had a 3 or 5 SUU-23 config on some F-4Ds. :eek: Now that's a gunfighter.)


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x763/5_suu_23s_e934493c1272e275286f0426c16fd59c2bb55cc8.jpg

[beardy]

I met an RAF pilot who flew, in the USA, with 5 suu. He told me that it was heavy and when he fired all 5 at once it nearly stopped.
Some may remember Black Fergie 😁

[OK465]

The jury-rigged wiring for that 5 SUU config was left somewhat less than fully documented and mysterious. We got one of those aircraft handed down to the Reserves. I believe the wing guns went thru the DCU wiring for the nuke.

I fired the center-line SUU-23 on the range one day and a LAU-88 w TGM from an inboard station jettisoned at the same time. First thing I asked was, "How many hits?" primarily to substantiate for the record that I had only the CL gun selected and correctly so. Range officer said "45 hits......plus one skip hit".

(I should clarify the F-105 comment. It only maxed out around 54,000 lbs.....but handled like it weighed 70,000)

[chopper2004]

One of the underwing tanks could be the modified version used to carry photoflash for night time operations. Not sure how widespread that was, but you can see it on this pic of XV406 (which was the Recce trials aircraft, so carries the pod and modified tank in spite of being with 111 at the time)


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x594/xv406_d111sdn2_a68c8b6fcf98da710ceaf844c2ebed7a8659467e.jpg

Photo flash?? Thought that was 1940s era not 70s/80s....and use likes of LLTV and Infra Red as the US applied widely during Vietnam conflict ...

Cheers

[Rhino power]

Photo flash?? Thought that was 1940s era not 70s/80s....and use likes of LLTV and Infra Red as the US applied widely during Vietnam conflict ...

Cheers
The US also used photo-flash cartridges (post 1940s) on the RF-4B and C, right through Vietnam and up until the Recce Phantoms eventual retirement in the 90s. LLTV and IR aren't always the only answer...

-RP

[Video Mixdown]

One of the underwing tanks could be the modified version used to carry photoflash for night time operations. Not sure how widespread that was, but you can see it on this pic of XV406 (which was the Recce trials aircraft, so carries the pod and modified tank in spite of being with 111 at the time)


From what I saw of night recce film coming out of the processing machines, the electronic flash effectiveness was pretty marginal. Special high speed film (N7H) was used but we were always tweaking the machine speed/temperature settings trying to coax an image out of it. Worked alright when there was snow on the ground though! IRLS & SLAR was OK of course. I always wondered how the crews would feel about flying over enemy-held territory with great flashes coming off the aircraft. I seem to recall a II(AC) Sqn aircraft pausing outside our HAS for the film to be unloaded after a low-level night recce sortie. The navigator unexpectedly climbed out, threw his bone-dome onto the floor and swore never to do it again.