Help from Phantom X-spurts...

[Harold]

What pylons did the "Chico" Phantoms use on their outboard stations. Were they the same as the center line stations?

I can't find good shots of the pylons. I would guess they were the same with some mods to mount them.

Maybe field adaptors?

I want to make a set for the "Chico" Gunfighters.

[Andre]

My best guesstimate would be that the pylons were the standard Phantom outboard items with stores adaptors.

In 1/72nd, the Fujimi US Phantoms have them - other kits have the pylons molded with the outboard fuel tanks, so you'd need to add the adaptor to the underside if you seperate the pylons fron the fuel bags.

HTH,

Andre

[Ben Brown]

Looks like they just bolted directly to the standard outboard pylons:

http://www.ozarkairfieldartworks.com/chicothegunfighter.html

Ben

Edited April 3, 2008 by Ben Brown

[Dave Williams]

F-4s had outboard pylons that were used to hang stores on. They were sort of like the wing tank pylons without the tanks attached (the tank pylons were actually integral with the tanks). In 1/32, KMC made some USAF style outboard pylons. Also, there are Navy style outboard weapons pylons in the Tamiya F-4J Marines kit. I think they are similar to the USAF style, except with an angled bottom while the USAF pylons have a flat bottom. I think if you sand down the bottom of the Tamiya F-4J pylons (or even cut the tank off from the kit’s outboard tank), you’ll get what you need.

[Harold]

Thanks Ben,

I saw these already. I think I will put the standard SUU 23 pylons in the set, and leave it up to the modeler to do the rest.

[Gene K]

  Harold said:

I think I will put the standard SUU 23 pylons in the set, and leave it up to the modeler to do the rest.

Harold,

Not sure what you mean by the "standard SUU-23 pylon"......but...the gun mounts to the centerline ejector rack (in the fuselage) via the Aero-27/A Bomb Rack Adapter (the same adapter that holds the MER). This adapter is unique to the centerline

On the outboard stations, the gun mounts directly to (the ejector rack inside) the pylon.

Note that in the table, the "Tank Pylon and Adapter" listed for the outboard stations refers to the early McD tank pylon that was wired (early tank was separate from the pylon).

Gene K

[Julien (UK)]

Not standard mounts as in the picture but exactly same mounts as on the tanks but seperate.

You get these in 1.72 in the fujimi kits, and in 1.48 are made by Isracast;

http://www.hannants.co.uk/search/?FULL=ISC48005

These are the ones I am using for my "chico"

Julien

[Harold]

  Julien (UK) said:

Not standard mounts as in the picture but exactly same mounts as on the tanks but seperate.

You get these in 1.72 in the fujimi kits, and in 1.48 are made by Isracast;

http://www.hannants.co.uk/search/?FULL=ISC48005

These are the ones I am using for my "chico"

Julien

Thanks Julien,

That's the kind of info I need to do things right.

Harold

[f4h1phantom]

I have never found any book detailing the outboard pylons, so I did my own research based on pictures and drawings gathered over the years.

Initially, the underwing tanks were the Sargent Fletcher variety, in which the pylon was separate from the tank. This pylon/tank combination was used by the Navy and by a few USAF Phantoms when they entered service.

Later, McDonnell developed its own pylon/tank combination in which the pylon was an integral part of the tank. This tank superseded the other one but the Navy continued using the original tank well into Vietnam.

While both the Navy and Air Force adopted the newer tanks, the Navy kept the separate Sargent Fletcher tank pylons to carry ordnance. The bottom of the pylon was curved to follow the tank contours and it appears that the connectors were only god for the fuel tank, so the way to mount ordnance was via an adapter which allowed mounting of TERs, MERs and single rocket pods or bombs. This type of pylon/adapter combination hangs perpendicular to the floor.

The Air Force on the other hand seems to have had very few of the original Sargent Fletcher pylons and with the introduction of the new tank was left with nothing to hang ordnance on the outer wing stations from. For some reason unknown to me, they decided to go with a newly designed pylon that had nothing to do with anything previously seen. The Air Force pylon was exclusively built to hang weapons and already had a flat bottom with the stores carrier incorporated into the pylon. The most interesting feature is that this pylon is CANTED OUTBOARD, the reason for which is obviously to provide more clearance with respect to the landing gear, especially considering that Air Force Phantoms had thicker wheels and bulged doors.

Now something I also want to mention as I have never seen it explained anywhere:

The Navy Sargent Fletcher tank/ordnance pylon anti-sway braces are faired very much like those of the inner pylon, that is with rather large flat-looking surfaces. Also, the inner and outer sway braces are different and are not found on a "side-by-side" configuration, but displaced in relation to one another when viewed from above. The reason for this is that the attachment points for the anti-sway braces are located following a line that is drawn along the wing's CHORD, not a line that is perpendicular to the line of flight.

The Air Force ordnance pylon's anti-sway braces are also displaced like in the Navy pylon, and are faired like them. The external and internal fairings are also different. The SUU-23s should be mounted on these Air-Force-specific outer pylons.

I would also like to mention that the internal and external sway braces of the McDonnell tanks are different, which leads me to believe that unless they are separate from the pylon and can be configured for the left or right wing attachment points, the McDonnell tanks are HANDED. You certainly cannot install a pylon configured for the right wing to the left wing and viceversa, as the attachment points won't match.

I had prepared some sketches to illustrate my findings but they are incomplete, especially as it is extremely difficult to find pictures of the anti-sway braces on the inside face of the pylon. Everybody seems to assume they are exactly the same as those outboard and that they are exactly in the same position (all kit manufacturers certainly do), but that is definitely not the case.

I will see if I can find my sketches. They may perhaps be of use to illustrate what I'm saying with more clarity.

And if anybody can correct/update my "statements", I would be the first one to thank him/her/them!

HTH,

Jorge.

Edited April 3, 2008 by f4h1phantom

[Gene K]

  Harold said:

Thanks Julien,

That's the kind of info I need to do things right.

Harold

Except that's not exactly right. The 1/72 Fujimi kits have the Navy outboard pylons (with the "angled" adapters) - Chico was an Air Force airplane (DUH), so you need the AF pylons as explained by Dave. Isracast has AF pylons in 1/48, as does the old KMC (True Details) and AirDoc. In 1/32, I think the way to get AF pylons is as Dave suggested - flatten the Navy. In a pinch, you could fashion a set by separating the tanks from their pylons, but you'd have to add plastic where the tank curves, even up the rear, and scribe.

Next can of worms would be the angle of the outboard pylons.....

Gene K

[f4h1phantom]

Gene, as the Air Force pylons are angled outboard, they must also be handed, especially considering the wing pylon attachment points which are different on both wings.

No can of worms as far as I am concerned. Looking closely at pictures shows them canted.

What is more intriguing to me is a picture I saw once where the Navy pylons were also canted outboard!!! The aircraft was configured with a TER and two 1.000 pound bombs. There were probably some clearance issues with that configuration, but that is the sole picture I ever saw of Navy canted pylons.

EDIT: I can't figure out how they managed to cant those pylons?

Jorge.

Edited April 4, 2008 by f4h1phantom

[f4h1phantom]

Those Isracast pylons look gorgeous!

They even include handed sway braces. Wish a better pic of the two pylons were included to see if they cattered for the canting.

Thanks for the link, Julien.

Jorge.

[Gene K]

  f4h1phantom said:

Wish a better pic of the two pylons were included to see if they cattered for the canting.

This addresses handed and canted:

Gene K

Edited April 4, 2008 by Gene K

[silverkite211]

I don't have a scanner, so I had to take a photo of a photo.

At least you can see that the gun pod mounts flush to the bottom of the pylon.

[jettdude]

  f4h1phantom said:

Gene, as the Air Force pylons are angled outboard, they must also be handed, especially considering the wing pylon attachment points which are different on both wings.

No can of worms as far as I am concerned. Looking closely at pictures shows them canted.

What is more intriguing to me is a picture I saw once where the Navy pylons were also canted outboard!!! The aircraft was configured with a TER and two 1.000 pound bombs. There were probably some clearance issues with that configuration, but that is the sole picture I ever saw of Navy canted pylons.

EDIT: I can't figure out how they managed to cant those pylons?

Jorge.

Hi guys,

Yes the pylons are definitly canted outboard. I began researching this also about a year ago for a Chico project. There are a few pictures in the "F-4 Phantom Spirit in the Skies" book that show the canted pylons. I have some other references that also show it clearly...I just need to go back and dig them up. I also have pictures of the F-4 at the Wings over the Rockies museum here in Denver. The F-4 in the museum has the weapon pylons on the outboard stations!

From these sources it appears there is a spacer type device that goes between the wing and the sway brace that is about an inch or more thick causing it to be canted outboard.

I will look for my pictures and see if I can post them here to help you out.

I am a huge F-4 phanatic and didn't know any of this until purchasing the Isradecals pylons and saw the instuctions you posted...blew my mind when I saw it. Very tough to find in reference pictures too.

Cheers,

Darren McTee

[Harold]

  Rusty Shackleford said:

Go here: Chico's Story

Note the picture with the gunpod on Sta 1. It is canted outboard.

The pylon is designed this way. The pylon is mounted to the wing via a forward and aft screw. There are nuts on both the aft section of the pylon and a bigger one on the forward section, underneath a removable panel. The wing-like extensions on either side of the pylon are fixed in place and are what cant the pylon outward. The forward attach point on the wing pivots slightly to allow the pylon to be tightened then torqued and safety-wired in place. The rack inside is a MAU-12A, same as what's on Stas. 2 and 8 but NOT the centerline, as previously mentioned. In order to sway the SUU-23 down, the inboards were run down to push the pod outward. Then, they were simultaneously tightened a half turn at a time, twice.

As has been said, not a very common loadout and harmonizing the guns was the most fun part, which I never got to do. Gunshop would do that.

Back in the good ol' days of MMS. (Munitions Maintenance Squadron)

Thanks all...

I may get the 1/48 set and upscale it for the gunfighters gun pods.

[Harold]

  silverkite211 said:

I don't have a scanner, so I had to take a photo of a photo.

At least you can see that the gun pod mounts flush to the bottom of the pylon.

It is also using the "stubby" rear....

[silverkite211]

The feeling that I got, from speaking to people who were/are members of the KANG is that the rear cones were just sort of a nuisance, they weren't really needed on the gun pod, they just got in the way so they were left off. I've noticed in photos that the RAF didn't seem to use them much on their FGR.2s, either, though that has nothing to do with 'Chico', of course.

[Harold]

  Gene K said:

Harold,

Not sure what you mean by the "standard SUU-23 pylon"......but...the gun mounts to the centerline ejector rack (in the fuselage) via the Aero-27/A Bomb Rack Adapter (the same adapter that holds the MER). This adapter is unique to the centerline

On the outboard stations, the gun mounts directly to (the ejector rack inside) the pylon.

Note that in the table, the "Tank Pylon and Adapter" listed for the outboard stations refers to the early McD tank pylon that was wired (early tank was separate from the pylon).

Gene K

It also appears that the SUU 16 didn't have the large vents on the side. I haven't found really good shots of that version. The only photos I have found, has the panel romoved.

[Gene K]

  f4h1phantom said:

Initially, the underwing tanks were the Sargent Fletcher variety, in which the pylon was separate from the tank.

Jorge.

Are you sure it's not the other way around - the McD tanks first with the separate pylon? (Don't rely on the Squadron tank "drawings", if that's part of your reference library). Here's an F-4J with the early tanks, recognized by: the more curved profile; different length front, center, and rear sections; and seams along both sides at the middle (three and nine o'clock as opposed to the single seam at the five o'clock position (left side))

Gene K

Edited April 7, 2008 by Gene K

[Gene K]

Great info, Rusty, thanks. Could you clarify a little, please:

  Rusty Shackleford said:

The wing-like extensions on either side of the pylon are fixed in place and are what cant the pylon outward.

So the those extensions are "fixed in place" on the pylon, making them handed (as opposed to being fixed to the wing)? What I'm asking is whether the extensions were handed and could be attached to a pylon , thus making the assembly handed?

  Quote

The rack inside is a MAU-12A, same as what's on Stas. 2 and 8 but NOT the centerline, as previously mentioned.

If you're referring to my post above, I said the Aero-27A bomb rack adapter was unique to the centerline. "Of course" it attaches to the Aero-27/A Ejector Rack, not a MAU-12 ejector rack.

  Quote

In order to sway the SUU-23 down, the inboards were run down to push the pod outward.

So there should be a space under the inboard wing extension? Was this pylon canting done for all configurations/models?

I assume we're talking AF acft, and in that regard, per my limited carriage charts, looks like AF Phantoms (unlike the Navy) were not certified/authorized to carry TERs on the outboard pylons (but I have seen a rare picture of a TER on an AF outboard station) - any idea why the services differed on the station loading?

Appreciate the info.

Gene K

[tony.t]

  f4h1phantom said:

The Air Force pylon was exclusively built to hang weapons and already had a flat bottom with the stores carrier incorporated into the pylon. The most interesting feature is that this pylon is CANTED OUTBOARD, the reason for which is obviously to provide more clearance with respect to the landing gear, especially considering that Air Force Phantoms had thicker wheels and bulged doors.Jorge.

These outward-canted outer wing pylons on USAF/FMS jets were used for years, not only for SUU-23/A on occasion, but also for such oddities as the SUU-42 flare pod etc. - basically anything other than drop tanks, which had their own vertically-aligned pylon built-in Any stores fitted canted out in sympathy with this pylon. For example, with an Aero-whatsit launch rail, the same system was used by the Weasels for carrying AGM-45 Shrikes, -88 HARMs too, well into the 1990s. The outboard missiles were always skewed out compared with the inner wing pylon weapons.

Tony T

[G_Marcat_Italy]

I add the my contribution to this thread:

While looking for info on a Phantom in 1/32 I found a photo from LARGE SCALE PLANES.

In the photo: http://www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/J...dWeasel2/g1.jpg posted from mr. Paul Stoner in the his article: http://www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/J...ildWeasel2.html there is a FRONT VIEW of a Phantom's pylon that is not vertically aligned.

Hope this help.