F-4F, AIM-9L

[Godvana 533]

I found some other stuff you guys might be interested in.

 

F-4F with an AN/ALQ-101 ECM pod mounted in the forward left missile bay (and BL 755 cluster bombs).

Spoiler

 

F-4F ICE with an AN/ALQ-119 ECM pod mounted in the forward left missile bay.

Spoiler

 

F-4F with an SPS-141 ECM pod (from a Su-22) mounted on the right wing-pylon.

Spoiler

 

More shots of AGM-65s, though these appear to be B models. It seems pretty much all of the Luftwaffe AGM-65Bs had the three black stripes.

Spoiler

 

7 minutes ago, da12thmonkey said:

 

First one might be a D/G but quite confident the second two are Bs

D/G have an opaque amber/golden colored sensor window for the IR seeker made of zinc sulfide, rather than a transparent glass one

 

What has me intrigued about the first one is it doesn't look like a typical GAF AGM-65, it's lacking the three black stripes they normally seem to be adorned with.

[da12thmonkey 43]

5 minutes ago, Dontkev@psn said:

is it just me or is our AGM-65B Model off from the IRL one? on all these pictures it looks like the booster is longer then im game

The ones in the pictures don't have actuator fins so they look longer behind the wings. They're for captive-carry/acquisition training so just the sensor head on a dummy body with no actual motor or control surfaces

[Dontkev@psn 1,300]

2 minutes ago, da12thmonkey said:

The ones in the pictures don't have actuator fins so they look longer behind the wings. They're for captive-carry/acquisition training so just the sensor head on a dummy body with no actual motor or control surfaces

ah, thats why

[Godvana 533]

Another interesting image showing AMRAAM and IRIS-T.

 

[Dontkev@psn 1,300]

IF someone has sources for weapons then the WTD 61 (Wehrtechnische Dienststelle für Luftfahrzeuge und Luftfahrtgerät der Bundeswehr/Defense technical department for aircraft and aeronautical equipment of the Bundeswehr)

Edited June 2, 2023 by Dontkev@psn

[Jεcka 4,618]

I've sent a message to WTD 61, lets hope for a fast and positive (for us) answer.

Edited June 2, 2023 by Holouu

[Target1331 3,055]

23 minutes ago, Dontkev@psn said:

IF someone has sources for weapons then the WTD 61 (Wehrtechnische Dienststelle für Luftfahrzeuge und Luftfahrtgerät der Bundeswehr/Defense technical department for aircraft and aeronautical equipment of the Bundeswehr)

Ordered AirDoc on WTD 61, as a German Aviation forum entry noted it contains a picture of an F-4F from WTD 61 with an AGM-65D on it:
https://www.flugzeugforum.de/threads/f-4f-phantom-bewaffnung-bei-den-jabog.48756/post-1504923

 

Other than that found this one, but too small of a picture and does look like AGM-65B:

 

Best regards,
Phil

---------------- Manual signature until those and profile pics are returned ----------------
Bring back forum profile pictures and signatures!
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/578365-return-custom-avatar/

My complete tech trees (incl. all special vehicles) spreadsheet is updated to match 2.23 (only accurate atm for list & status of vehicles): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13bjEgsDhTjJhXt9N4fzIzvWa7cvy-KSDQc1HNNOZuaI/edit Contains probably all vehicles WT has published.

[Godvana 533]

AGM-65D

 

[Dontkev@psn 1,300]

1 minute ago, Godvana said:

AGM-65D

 

@Smin1080p Is this proof enough? Together with the report from earlier?

[Thodin 6,784]

Would it mean we've get a better target pod than the existing one? Which unfortnately only shows grey in grey images, which make it impossible to spot targets...

[Jεcka 4,618]

Just now, Thodin said:

Would it mean we've get a better target pod than the existing one? Which unfortnately only shows grey in grey images, which make it impossible to spot targets...

Yes, AGM-65D is a thermal variant. 

[Thodin 6,784]

Just now, Holouu said:

Yes, AGM-65D is a thermal variant. 

 

Good job digging out the WTD61 source. Should suffice.

[Dontkev@psn 1,300]

And now while we have all that sources which we would need, wait and see how Gaijin will excuses it and refuse to add then because (it would require) a BR change...

But we found the F-4F ones, now lets Search the Mavericks on the german Tornado xD

[Abrams_X 1,234]

34 minutes ago, Godvana said:

AGM-65D

 

Actually the missile in the photo is AGM-65B. It has white body, and "SCENE MAG", "U.S. AIR FORCE" markings are visible.

AGM-65D has brown body.

Compare that with AGM-65B.

This may work, but since it is a secondary source, one more source needed...

SIPRI will not be accepted as it is unreliable source.

[Jεcka 4,618]

8 minutes ago, Abrams_X said:

SIPRI will not be accepted as it is unreliable source.

Why is it unreliable?

[Abrams_X 1,234]

5 minutes ago, Holouu said:

Why is it unreliable?

Because it is proven wrong many times in other country's data.

For example, SIPRI listed M18 GMC in US-to-South Korea trade register, but South Korea never purchased an M18 tank destroyer.

Due to such inaccuracy, it can't be used as source material.

[Jεcka 4,618]

10 minutes ago, Abrams_X said:

Because it is proven wrong many times in other country's data.

For example, SIPRI listed M18 GMC in US-to-South Korea trade register, but South Korea never purchased an M18 tank destroyer.

Due to such inaccuracy, it can't be used as source material.

But those are irrelevant to the topic on hand? Literature has also been wrong before on things, some authors have been wrong as well, so were manufacturers - but they will still be used as sources. I don't see a reason to disregard SIPRI outright because of situations like that when majority of what they say is very likely to be correct (i've double checked what they say for weapons exported from US to Germany and to me it looks like everything's correct too, but still waiting on confirmation for 65D and 65G from WTD 61), especially when what they say adds up to what Flame shared. 

Edited June 2, 2023 by Holouu

[Abrams_X 1,234]

Just now, Holouu said:

But those are irrelevant to the topic on hand? Literature has also been wrong before on things, some authors have been wrong as well, so were manufacturers - but they will still be used as sources. I don't see a reason to disregard SIPRI outright because of situations like that when majority of what they say is very likely to be correct (i've double checked what they say for weapons exported from US to Germany and to me it looks like everything's correct too...), especially when what they say adds up to what Flame shared. 

Only one photo of an AGM-65D in Luftwaffe service will be enough. SIPRI need supporting source material.

On the book Flame shared says,

Quote

The Luftwaffe does not currently have the AGM-65D, but intends to introduce it into service.

So this book is written prior to AGM-65D introduction for Luftwaffe...

That's why I need a solid proof that indicate Luftwaffe has actually purchased the AGM-65D.

[Abrams_X 1,234]

[Jεcka 4,618]

Just now, Abrams_X said:

What report is this from? 

[da12thmonkey 43]

1 hour ago, Abrams_X said:

Actually the missile in the photo is AGM-65B. It has white body, and "SCENE MAG", "U.S. AIR FORCE" markings are visible.

AGM-65D has brown body.

This isn't always the case with colours. In the previous pages of this very thread there are images of white "IIR" marked AGM-65D

And some examples of non-white AGM-65Bs. But yes, true enough they are always marked "SCENE MAG" on Bs or "K", "H" etc. on later CCD models

Nowadays you see a lot of mavericks with different coloured seeker head and warhead/motor section because they've gone through maintenance, modernisations and other things and had the seekers and warheads separated off and swapped around with what's available

 

The only definitive way to determine what model of Maverick something is, is to look at the seeker head window, and the warhead color band.

AGM-65D will have an opaque seeker window (usually appears amber/gold zinc-sulfide but some lots have another material) with a black HEAT warhead band and AGM-65G will have an opaque seeker window and a yellow BLAST/FRAG warhead band.

Then there's AGM-65E with a clear window like a B, but a much much larger opaque sensor head behind the window

Edited June 2, 2023 by da12thmonkey

[Abrams_X 1,234]

Just now, Holouu said:

What report is this from? 

First one is from The INF Treaty: February 22, 23, 24, and March 3, 1988

Second one is from Department of Defense Appropriations for 1984

Both are primary sources.

[Jεcka 4,618]

1 minute ago, Abrams_X said:

First one is from The INF Treaty: February 22, 23, 24, and March 3, 1988

Second one is from Department of Defense Appropriations for 1984

Both are primary sources.

Both dates comply with;

1) Date of when Luftwaffe began testing of the AGM-65D (per the photo posted by Godvana, and as @da12thmonkey  shown, AGM-65D could've been white).

2) Date of when Luftwaffe/Germany ordered the AGM-65D per SIPRI.

 

Still waiting on answer from WTD61 on the topic though.

[Abrams_X 1,234]

6 minutes ago, Holouu said:

Both dates comply with;

1) Date of when Luftwaffe began testing of the AGM-65D (per the photo posted by Godvana, and as @da12thmonkey  shown, AGM-65D could've been white).

2) Date of when Luftwaffe/Germany ordered the AGM-65D per SIPRI.

 

Still waiting on answer from WTD61 on the topic though.

Don't worry, since both are primary, they are enough to forward the report.

I've forwarded your report as suggestion.

[Jεcka 4,618]

Just now, Abrams_X said:

Don't worry, since both are primary, they are enough to forward the report.

I've forwarded your report as suggestion.

 

I'll update it with info from WTF 61 whenever they respond.