As the title states, I am working on the Revell-Monogram F-4J Phantom II,
and I have some questions on the ordanance in the kit. I’ve figured out the Sparrow missiles (P/N 17), the Sidewinder missiles (P/N 63), & I think P/N 61/62 are Mk 82 bombs, but I’ve never seen them with a nose like that.
Anyway, my questions are what is P/N 47 (some sort of reconnaissance camera?) & P/N 46/51/52 (gun pod?)
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Jim
Fuse extenders. Designed to detonate the bomb above ground.
50/51 looks to be a ecm pod.
46 is the pod rack
A gun pod would be on the centered station.
I think Stephen is correct about a left over/ AF version and not a Navy J version equipment.
47’s a rear facing strike camera pod. It’s supposed to take photos of the hits for analysis after sorties.
46 is an ALQ-87 ECM pod. Think this is a leftover from the shared sprues with the C/D kit. EDIT, that’s parts 50,51. 46 is the adaptor to fit in the Sparrow bay.
Thanks, guys. I knew someone would know (and how did I know a guy with the name phantom_phanatic would know!). I kind of figured that 46/51/52 couldn’t be a gun pod as I knew that they were centerline mounted, but it wouldn’t be the first time a model company has taken “liberties” with reality. Did the Navy J ever have the gun pod, or was that a USAF thing?
Good to know about those fuse extenders. I was planning on ditching the bombs, anyway, but it’s good information.
Now I’m a little jealous, Ryan, as those directions you posted have a lot more decals that the version that I have. Very small decal sheet, and the box says that it’s supposed to have decals the Cunningham/Driscoll but the cockpit is labeled Eggert/Fearless. Go figure. Might need to look into new decals.
Jim
Happy to help.
It’s one of my favourite jets, but always something new to learn and see. Especially those ECM pods. I know the Navy usually had the gear internally fitted with exterior antenna. But know I’m questioning myself if they sometimes did carry a pod? Intriguing.
As to the guns, Navy never carried them. The SUU-23 Vulcan pod was an Air Force project. The Navy had a different system, the Mk.4 HIPEG, but I don’t think it was ever carried in actual combat. Marine F-4’s could sometimes be seen carrying the pod. As they were mostly conducting close air support strikes it was used for strafing.
I don’t recall the USN/MC F-4s having a gun pod.
Regarding the names, USN/MC do not have assigned aircraft but they can have their names on a plane in the squadron. The AF will typically fly the same plane. As I recall the buno/serial number is correct for the day Cunningham/Driscoll had the 3 kills and made ace which was what Revell was going for.
https://www.vaq136.com/migaces/
Depending on how accurate you want to be, you need only to search for F-4J markings for that kit. AF and USN/MC details are different. Probably can help on MC decals, don’t think I have many USN F-4.
I can check my references for those markings. I think they might be correct for the aircraft Cunningham and Driscoll flew. Iirc they flew the mission with Mk.20 CBU’s on the onboard TER’s.
I appreciate the help. I’m not going for a 100%, museum-quality, IPMS winning model here; but close would be nice. I did see that there are decals available for this kit, and I might just get them as the kit decals are pretty old & are not in a plastic bag, so they’re probably not all that good. This kit was sent to me by a friend in Pennsylvania who found it in his father’s attic when he was cleaning out the house. He didn’t tell me what he was sending to me, only that he had a model & he knew I built models, and I figured free was good.
Jim
Ah yes, old attic decals. I’d change them just to be on the safe side. Plenty of good schemes out there for the F-4J.
Good luck with it.
I do have the kit decals I can send you. I will photo later tonight if you think they are still good.
Thanks, Ryan. The decals for the USAF F-4C/D or the Navy J?
Jim
Navy J.
Cannot guarantee you won’t have issues but they look good to me. I would use them. PM your addy if you want them free of charge. No problem if you don’t, I am good either way. 
Well, they look better than the ones I have.
Jim
The fuse extenders were referred to as “daisy cutters”, the idea in Vietnam was to counter during the rainy season the effects the muddy terrain had on bombs. Specifically a lot of times the bombs would sink in the soft ground a bit before detonating mitigating the explosive effects. The extended fuse help the bomb detonate at ground level or slightly above. More bang for the buck. Plus the worked pretty good to help clear an LZ in a pinch.
they used the out of Chu Lai and DaNang, but not everytime they flew.
gary
@MontanaHunter & @Gary_Totty Thanks for the input. I’m pretty sure I’m not going to use the bombs on this build. I just have to figure out how to modify the wing pylons to remove the bomb mounting hardware so it’s just the AIM-9 Sidewinders.
Jim
You can just omit the bombs and leave those stations open, that’s a normal approach that wouldn’t raise an eyebrow. Or on part 65 just remove the bomb rack flush at the attachment point of the main pylon, in essence what the box art shows. That would replicate the dual sidewinder pylon close enough to the average guy.
If you are doing a land based plane, then load it up with napalm. The Phantom was never known for it’s bombing ability, but was excellent with napalm and rockets. By mid 68, almost all precision bombing runs were done by A6’s and B52’s with a few A4’s tossed in there as well. In country planes rarely carried Sidewinders or Sparrows as there was anybody to shoot at. Out on the fence, big stuff was king, or an Air Force plane able to get refueled. You did see a few A6’s, and F105’s because they could go deep into the valleys. A Phantom didn’t like flying on the deck, and if it came from the coast it was already low on gas
gary
Thanks, Gary, that’s good information. Since this is going to be a Navy plane, I think I’ll keep the Sidewinders & Sparrows, though.
Jim
