[NO BUG] MK83s on 1B and 8B pylons use unnecessary(?) TER

[Panny]

nullHi there, please see the picture below.

Unless I'm missing something, but is it strictly necessary that the MK83 on the glove pylon use a TER when it only adds extra drag?

 

Cheers,
Peter

Edited May 31, 2022 by IronMike

[IronMike]

Not sure tbh, we're checking it. Seeing how they don't on the inner pylons, it might not be necessary, but I could be wrong there.

Update: Why exactly we are not sure, but there is no other option offered as per the manuals, only in combination with the TERs.

[Panny]

Very odd

[IronMike]

4 hours ago, Panny said:

Very odd

I am very, very much speculating here, but size of bomb, separation, etc could factor into this, for example that it was assumed without the TERs adding separation from the wing and the aerodynamics at play on the outboard stations, the bomb could potentially damage the wing, not separate safely, etc., while there are different dynamics at play in the tunnel stations. Now, keep in mind, I am utterly pulling this out of my behind, but I could imagine something like this to be the reason for it. I could also be completely off the mark here, so take it with a gigantic grain of salt please, this is really utter speculation on my part.

Edited June 1, 2022 by IronMike

[draconus]

Never seen RL pic of such config with a bomb. Only with AAM, LANTIRN and some Harpoon testing on the shoulder.

[Dragon1-1]

IIRC, the USMC didn't get the Tomcat (despite the fact they initially wanted it) because there were problems getting bombs to separate cleanly on the A model. This might have been part of the solution to this problem.

[IronMike]

4 hours ago, draconus said:

Never seen RL pic of such config with a bomb. Only with AAM, LANTIRN and some Harpoon testing on the shoulder.

This was never carried as such IRL (though possible and tested at some point), so it comes to no surprise that there are no pics of it. IIRC the USN only carried bombs on 3-6. It's a similar issue as with the zunis. Never carried irl, but it was readily available if it would have been wanted (which obviously it was not). Same like say the 18 mk82 bombtruck loadouts etc.

[IronMike]

I asked our F-14 ordnance SME, and this was his reply:

"IronMike, I never configured a Tomcat with a TER on 1B or 8B. We would use 1B and 8B on occasion for different pods, especially in the R&D squadron I was in but we never armed the station. (Couldn’t be jettisoned.) This was done with a BRU-10 in a LAU-93 adapter. With that being said I want to say I recall being told there being a issue with certain stores not separating from the A/C correctly potentially causing a stores strike. Perhaps this is one of the reasons the 83 was on a TER. Allowed for more clearance since the 83 would be lower hanging from the TER. I am clearly speculating on parts of this, like I said I never loaded TERs on 1B or 8B. Hope this helps."

Keep in mind, this, too, is speculation, since it was never used IRL, but as suspected imo this makes most sense to me as well.