LanceCriminal86

They could launch and trap, but they couldn't go below decks. Which is why there's the clips of them doing carrier quals on Coral Sea, and the story of a jet each from VF-114 and 213 that landed on Midway due to weather and low fuel state and launched the next day.

They've answered that so many times, NO, there isn't info on the APG-71, and NO the D is not on the docket.

Yes

The things presented either had photos provided, seen in cruise videos, or SMEs provided direct guidance of what was used. The photos of the wires have been posted plenty, I've seen the plate in either a photo or cruise video, and I vaguely recall seeing the tape in one or the other as well.

The AIM/ACE jets? Yes, I have most of the resources I need to make them, I am just waiting for the early externals to see what I actually will have to work with. But I have names and photos for each of the 6 jets.

I found that finally after some digging, doing a test of it now. The contrast definitely matches, messing with the pattern a little bit to get a less crisp layout and those patches on the intakes.

Double check the movie please.

Remember that the original film used, how it was processed, and then how it was scanned is going to impact how the colors look. Some scans of old Kodachrome slides, if you don't adjust for it needing tungsten lighting, will come out way blue. It's hard to tell if that was FS35237 Medium Gray or a different mix as it does come across as very blue. This is from '81 and you can see a 3-tone on the nosecone. It's difficult to make out but there could be 3 tones in there, with the belly being a different and much lighter gray than the light ghost we're used to. Or the dark ghost could be deeper and bluer than we're used to. Here's a good example of the same jets, possibly taken around the same time or day even, but different scanning/processing making the colors and contrast very different. Here's that jet into 1982

Maybe it's a contrast thing but the "35237" used on their F-4s just doesn't seem to jive with the same shade as used on things like the Tomcat and other Navy aircraft. Maybe it's the juxtaposition of the other colors but the HAF one always has seemed far more "blue" to me. I had experimented with using the same shade as I had used on Tomcats and it just didn't look right. Other big issues is trying to find good HAF jet shots where folks haven't blown out the contrast or gone with "HDR" or faux HDR style shots where the balance is completely out of whack to emphasize all the grunge. The middle shot seems to be better balanced at least.

As could cat launch without AB, and they definitely did it in the earlier years with light loads. Later on with increasing loads and aircraft weight it became the SOP to always use burner.

They haven't even decided which Navy Phantom they plan to do, and it's years out most likely.

Definitely not happening. Not only because documentation, but it was immediately discontinued from use and started being removed from jets partway through the first F-14 cruise, and not mounted on any later jets. And the team has elsewhere expressed those early jets are well out of scope.

The HGU-55G is planned eventually with a more proper German pilot.

They're just counterweights for TARPS pod. On cruise or during workups fleet squadrons would just use the Phoenix pylons, and it was eventually just how the remaining squadrons did it in the 90s. But during the 80s and early 90s you'd definitely see shore-based squadrons with the Sparrow slugs, I don't have copies that are web-hosted but I've got shots from VF-202, VF-124, etc. showing them. I don't believe they were even a wired-in CATM, but rather just a Sparrow body full of concrete from what some former maintainers said. VF-202 even stenciled 'Superheats' on theirs.

Because they didn't get the capability until 2002.