That would explain why I see so many with napalm during that period. Genuine question though, would carrier based aircraft have carried napalm? I would imagine with the risk of fire they would keep that stuff off the carriers and only use it from land based aircraft?
M1A1 Fuze Extender, colloquially referred to as a ‘daisy cutter’ fuze. https://www.bulletpicker.com/pdf/TM%209-1325-200,%20Bombs%20and%20Bomb%20Components.pdf#page=272
1 Like
Thanks, wasn’t expecting a massive document about US bombs! I’m sure it will be useful, just hope I haven’t put myself on some sort of watch list after it downloaded!
1 Like
There is a great book called “One Day In a Long War, May 10,1972”. It covers all of the air strikes flown by the USAF and USN into Hanoi & Haiphong, and all the resulting air combat that day. It covers the morning and afternoon Navy Alpha Strikes, and goes into detail on all the Mig Kills, as well as the USAF strike on the Paul Domier bridge in downtown Hanoi. Highly recommended if you like reading about that air war. I haven’t read the book in a few years, but IIRC, Cunningham was tasked with flak suppression on the afternoon strike on a rail yard and was carrying six Mk.20 Rocky CBUs for that task, plus Sidewinder (x4) and Sparrow (x2) AAMs. His triple kills came after the strike on the rail yard and trying to get back to the Connie at Yankee Station.
1 Like
A Phantom was a loud and fast mover (what we called them), but never really was a great plane on the deck. In a dog fight it was fantastic unless the other guy knew the game plan. If he took you down to the three hundred foot mark (or less); then you might and might not make it out alive. This really came to light with the Mig21MF, as it was a different beast. On the other hand an F105 could fly quite well under three hundred feet, but lacked the stall speed needed for pin point bombing. The Phantom could roll thru at 200 knots and scatter napalm all over the place. Thus covering a greater area. The F100 could get so low that it would make the palm trees wave in the blast, but also could slow down to a crawl. The Sky Raider was even better. And A6 Intruder was pure evil. It was night capable. Flew well in the rain and fog while putting a 500lb. bomb in your back pocket. The A4 was also a pretty good platform, but the A6 was much better. Three B52’s would completely destroy a half mile by a mile and a half box in 45 seconds, and you never knew he was there till the first explosion. Ideally, an A6 with a Marine pilot was as dangerous as it could have gotten. Nobody flew close air support like Jarheads, and he’d just keep coming and coming till you were toast. I owe my life many times over to those Jarheads, and I’m sure I’m not the only one.
gary
2 Likes
you’d be right. You also must look at your time frame. I Corp never saw fuse extenders till the end of March in 68 (remember I Corp was at the bottom of the food chain). When I was going in and out of Chu Lai (where most in country air strikes came from), a fuse extender was an uncommon sight. By the time I made my first trip out west they were often seen, but usually west of the fence. I’ve heard first hand that the Navy did not like napalm on air craft carriers, but were big on rockets and things like that.
gary
The Navy ditched rockets on carriers after the Forrestal and Enterprise fires in 1967 and 1968. Both were cause by Zuni rockets. They gave all Zunis in the inventory afterwards to shore based squadrons like the Black Ponies and to the Marines. Of course that does not apply to their helos, just fixed wing types.
buddy of mine was on the Saratoga on two cruises, and they started using them again late 71 or 72, but with 110% different procedures. One of the things that caused the fire was over heating, and they fixed that
gary
From what I’ve read two things were causal factors into those fires, particularly on the USS Forrestal.
1, the pigtails for the igniters on the Zunis were connected earlier in arming before launch to speed up launch cycles. Older procedures had them not being connected until just before getting on the catapults.
2, the mobile on deck generator APUs were a factor when their heated exhaust was directed onto the Zuni pods.
you’re getting way past me in the technical stuff. All I’m saying is what Bill Clark told me. Myself; I’ve heard everything from static electricity to John McCain. Bill said they later brought large fans to sorta direct the heat away. I wasn’t there for sure, and I’m only repeating what a crew man told me
gary
I do not have any information about ordnance, but I have an interesting story about Monogram’s F-4 series.
In 2020 I came across former Monogram employee Mr. Robert Johnson and started corresponding with him in 2021. (You can find here on KitMaker a couple of his articles he allowed me to post.) That autumn he and I talked for about an hour. One of his stories was about Monogram’s range of F-4 Phantoms. McDonnell-Douglas provided Monogram with F-4 draftsman blueprints scaled 1/10 which Monogram made their kits from, and the kits were/are very accurate. So accurate in shape that for reasons I do not recall (I hope I have this written down but I think this is all memory), that when Wright-Patterson was performing an ordnance release program, they contacted Monogram asking if the kits were accurate enough for testing. Long story short, Monogram provided some 1/48 F-4 kits and W-P used them, saving millions of tax dollars. Monogram received some official commendation from W-P/USAF for their assistance.
I have a few other amazing stories from him, i.e., Ben Rich never liked Revell’s SR-71 kit and loaned SR-71 drawings and data to Monogram based on Mr. Johnson’s Top Secret USAF clearance. Rich was overjoyed by Monogram’s kit. Mr. Johnson thus snickers at “experts” - as he calls them - who point out “inaccuracies” of Monogram’s Blackbird.
Fellows of all ages bought these kits and elevated Monogram from #4
in kit sales to #1 by 1986… Subjects that we felt were risky became
the heart of new excitement!! It was one step at a time… Rich Skinner
at Northrop… the F-20 still one of my favorites… it was a truly
Golden Time…
2 Likes
Interesting stories, Fred. Those are very cool indeed.
Now, next stupid question: did the USN use “Remove Before Flight” tags on their aircraft on aircraft carriers during the 1970s? If so, would you have seen them on the flight deck, or only on the hanger deck?
Jim
Yes, this photo was taken aboard the USS Midway during the Linebacker flight operations in 1972. Note the RBF tag on the pylon.
Thanks. Now I have to locate some 1/48 RBF tags.
Jim
2 Likes
Marines did. I used to do an LP that over looked the arming pit in Chu Lai, and watched them do this 24 hours a day. I’d have to assume the Navy did this as well.
gary
1 Like
Recall my story about Monogram’s sources for their 1/72 SR-71? You can read it here:
Model Industry History: Monogram’s SR-71 and Their 5800-Series Aircraft Kits
2 Likes
Eduard #49009, from wherever you get your add-ons.
Thanks, I’ll take a look.
Jim
This may be a little off this subject, but it does have to do with F4 ordinance, although I don’t know if it’s appropriate to your Navy bird. This is a follow-up to what I wrote a while back about how accurate Monogram’s F4 really is. My source, retired Monogram draftsman through executive Bob Johnson, recently sent me the following memories when he provided me with a couple more rounds of Monogram’s and model history.
In my mind, truly “milestone” Monogram kits were the 1/48th F-4C/D/J/S, the Republic F-105, the NA F-100 “Super Sabre”, and the 1/48th Bomber Series, the C-47, B-25H/J, and B-26B among the vesry best… even when more parts are included by China, Korean, and Japanese mfg’s, the Monogram F-4 “most looks life” a Phantom!! John Brooks and “Beaver” Blake found out that the mylar loft lines that were created to build a 1/10th scale F-4C were MORE ACCURATE than the actual aircraft mylars… I worked with Jim Rotramel to ensure that the munitions load-out was actually what the F-4C/D carried… TER Rack, low drag Mark 82 “low drags” with 36" fuse extenders, and an SUU-20 gun pod on the centerline station… Man, if the attached image could look any more “real”, I do not know how???
1 Like
The Monogram F-4C/D/J/S was based on 1/10 th scale loft line mylars for a large wind tunnel Model cut from aluminum… 5800 is a milestone creation…
1 Like