Inboard pylon ALQ-131

[PhantomHans]

I noticed there's the option to load inboard jammers, I think including ALQ-131.  

However these block the pair of AIM-9s.

Shouldn't it be possible to load AIM-9s and Sidewinders at the same time due to the Combat Tree modification?

I know it was done with ALQ-87 and ALQ-101, sometimes even with one each per pylon, and still carrying AIM-9s, during Vietnam.  I would assume they wouldn't go backwards in capabilities with later pods?

[Northstar98]

Doesn't look like the combination is listed in the stores limitation chart, I'm not sure on the dimensions but it looks like their could be a potential clearance issue (ALQ-87/101 are both thinner and not as tall).

[PhantomHans]

5 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Doesn't look like the combination is listed in the stores limitation chart, I'm not sure on the dimensions but it looks like their could be a potential clearance issue (ALQ-87/101 are both thinner and not as tall).

I would have expected an adapter or spacer and not the sacrifice of 1/2 of your AIM-9s.

 

Although perhaps by the 80s the only jets loading it on a pylon were RF series and not carrying AIM-9s anyway?

[Northstar98]

5 hours ago, PhantomHans said:

I would have expected an adapter or spacer and not the sacrifice of 1/2 of your AIM-9s.

The problem there might be that it impose ground clearance problems if placed on an adapter. Again, it's not a configuration listed in either of the -1s I have (unlike the AN/ALQ-71/72/87/101, which is explicitly mentioned as being able to be mixed, the 119, 131 and 184 are only listed by themselves). That doesn't necessarily mean it's not a possible configuration, it just means that it's a configuration that isn't explicitly mentioned.

[PhantomHans]

3 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

The problem there might be that it impose ground clearance problems if placed on an adapter. Again, it's not a configuration listed in either of the -1s I have (unlike the AN/ALQ-71/72/87/101, which is explicitly mentioned as being able to be mixed, the 119, 131 and 184 are only listed by themselves). That doesn't necessarily mean it's not a possible configuration, it just means that it's a configuration that isn't explicitly mentioned.

I went and looked at some photos and I think you might be right about the clearance problems.

The 119, and especially 131 and 184 are a lot taller than I realized so you probably haven't got the room to lower them to clear AIM-9s.

Even if you did, by the 1980s when the 131 came around, why spend money optimizing a mostly bomber for air to air work?

[Northstar98]

7 minutes ago, PhantomHans said:

I went and looked at some photos and I think you might be right about the clearance problems.

The 119, and especially 131 and 184 are a lot taller than I realized so you probably haven't got the room to lower them to clear AIM-9s.

Even if you did, by the 1980s when the 131 came around, why spend money optimizing a mostly bomber for air to air work?

That was the main thing that stuck out to me, in comparison to the other ECM systems which are mentioned in the mixed w/ sidewinder charts. I'm not sure which are in the plans (though I think the 119 and possibly the 101 are confirmed, though only the latter is listed with the mixed and only as a slant load).

[PhantomHans]

1 hour ago, Northstar98 said:

though only the latter is listed with the mixed and only as a slant load).

Slant load?  How so?

 

I'm certain that the 101 could fit on the pylon with a pair of AIM-9s above it.

Same for the 87.

I think it's a well documented loadout for the Combat Tree F-4s. 4x Heat, 4x Radar, 1x ALQ-87, 1x ALQ-101.  I wanna say one of the USAF aces got a few kills like that.

[Northstar98]

11 minutes ago, PhantomHans said:

Slant load?  How so?

It might be version dependent and that's what it looks like for the AN/ALQ-101(V)10, which is a bit bigger than some other, earlier versions and a slant-load is what's in the stores limitation diagram (with Sidewinders to the right of the pod being present, but not the ones on the left).

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1108849721566576671/1176344245880242277/1543933467_esm-ew_w0003269_.png?ex=665a8373&is=665931f3&hm=a362afe8278e9eb843fba36314b2fa756cd2ed3a927236882cef80a64057845f&

[PhantomHans]

8 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

It might be version dependent and that's what it looks like for the AN/ALQ-101(V)10, which is a bit bigger than some other, earlier versions and a slant-load is what's in the stores limitation diagram (with Sidewinders to the right of the pod being present, but not the ones on the left).

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1108849721566576671/1176344245880242277/1543933467_esm-ew_w0003269_.png?ex=665a8373&is=665931f3&hm=a362afe8278e9eb843fba36314b2fa756cd2ed3a927236882cef80a64057845f&

Ah okay, the V10 is post Vietnam I think.  I want to say the 101A was the Vietnam Era version I'm used to seeing with the full missile load.