What I am looking for is those numbers on the nose of the aircraft (on a carrier) I've got 18 F-4 Phantoms. 6 have these numbers: 201-206. what other numbers for the rest of the 12 can I use

on the A-7 Corsairs it was 402, 403, 404, 405, 406 and 410 I need 6 more

for A-6's, I have 501 510 and 511 ---- I need 6 more

I've got a sheet with little numbers on it from an aftermarket company.

The only one I can suggest with some confidence, is you could use "200" on one of the phantoms. I believe that would represent a CAG ship. They have those on the carrier don't they? Or do they remain on shore?

Beyond that, I would would defer to the naval scholars here.

Not much help...I know.

Steve, this is an interesting question, because there are rules, but to make sure they are applied correctly you need to define what airwing you are doing at what period of time, on which ship to be totally correct! But that's pretty easy to determine, and once you know that the rest falls into place.

For the "older" style standard carrier Air Wing you typically had two VF (fighter) squadrons with 12 a/c each, with either F-4s or later with F-14s (There were some exceptions, but since you're doing Nimitz they don't apply). Additionally there were two "light" Attack squadrons (VA) of 12 a/c each, which flew the A-7 until the end of Desert Storm when they were replaced by the F/A-18 and became designated as VFA (Fighter/Attack). And there was one "heavy" attack squadron which flew the A-6 AND the KA-6, a specific version equipped exclusively for the tanker role.

Here's the rules for numbering:

1xx and 2xx are assigned to the TWO VF (Fighter) Squadrons in the embarked airwing, by with the lowest numerical squadron receiving the 1xx series.

100 (and 200) would be the "CAG" bird (also often referred to as "double nuts"). IF the CAG were flying with that squadron, he'd get that aircraft, but I DON'T think that it otherwise NEVER gets flown. You can imagine it's pretty well maintained, and often is very colorfully marked in comparison to the other a/c in the Squadron. 101 (201) would NORMALLY be the Squadron skipper's a/c etc. But given the difficulties of matching crews/missions and a/c availability, crews get assigned to fly a mission with whatever is available.

In a normal squadron with 12 a/c embarked the numbers would be 100 -107, 110-112, and 114. The second VF would do the same thing. The only time I've ever noticed an exception is with VF 213 (Black Lions) when they were with VF114 (Aardvarks) in CVW 11. THEY had a/c 213 because it matched their squadron number, but they're the only time I've ever seen "13" used

So your F-4s can either be 1xx or 2xx, but to be correct, they need to be applied by squadron.

The two light VA squadrons followed the same concept, 12 a/c, 3xx and 4xx with the lowest numbered
squadron drawing the 3xx. Same 12 numbers used.

So your A-7s could either be 3xx OR 4xx, again based on which squadron they're in.

As far as the A-6's are concerned, they used 5xx, starting with 500. But I need to get the exact sequence for the A-6E and the KA-6D's which I have at home.

Of course all a/c in the wing used the same two letter tail code assigned to the wing, starting either with an "A" for Atlantic based wings or "N" for Pacific.

TC

I noticed all the tail designs had "AJ" on them, now I know why. As I have 18 Phantoms, 6 will have to be buried in the hanger as they received the same tail markings. As to numbers for the noses....thanks you really cleared that up Would the CAG bird be extra...or would it "belong to one of the squadrons?

First of all the "CAG" bird is a squadron aircraft, so it isn't "extra". It's simply the one "reserved" for the CAG to fly when he flys with that squadron. But as I said, you can bet that when it's YOUR turn to fly, they will put you into an available aircraft, even if it doesn't have your name on the side.

As far as the 18 F-4s are concerned, you could make some from each of the two squadrons the wing had at that time. The lowest numbered squadron would have the 1xx block and the higher numbered would use the 2xx. Both squadrons would have the "AJ" symbol on the tail which indicates Carrier Air Wing 8. What you will have to watch is that the aircraft of the two different squadrons will have different colors, a different squadron emblem, and very possibly a different "design" on the tail for the letters "AJ". If you tell me what time period you're doing for the Nimitz, I can tell you exactly which squadrons were in CVW 8 on the Nimitz at that time. (Same with the two A-7 squadrons.)

As far as the the A-6, what I found is that generally the Heavy Attack Squadrons embarked 10 (as opposed to 12) aircraft, so they were usually assigned the modex 500-507, and TWO of the following: 510, 511, 512. I've seen pictures with all of the above. (I used 511 and 512 for VA-95 in CVW 11 on the Enterprise).

In addition to the 10 A-6Es, the squadron would operate 4 KA-6D tanker aircraft, and a typical block would be 514-517, but that would vary based on time period, as well as from wing to wing. With the 3 modexes you have, it would represent the squadron commander's aircraft, and the two highest numbered remaining a/c in the squadron.

I'd for sure do 500, and throw in probably 502 and 503, which would generally be the squadron XO and Ops officer's "planes".

The other thing I'd do, is "convert" a couple of your A-6Es to KA-6Ds. A small "cowl" on the bottom where the refueling basket comes out, 4 wing mounted and one centerline mounted drop tanks, and the right side number and you're in business.

Since the tanker is usually one of the first aircraft launched, you probably ought to do one.

I DID find a few exceptions to the "no 13" in the photos, but with sailors being a superstitious lot, (not to mention aviators!), most squadrons don't use it.


TC

Does the tanker aircraft look more like an Intruder or a Prowler. I have both. What was the other squadron of F-4's the kits have the Shamrocks which is VFMA 333. I'm good to go with everything else. The kit has a couple of S-3's and A-3's I know what the Vikings are used for but what about the A-3 Skywarriors. Oh there is also a helicoper a Hawkeye and a Vigilante. All these aircraft came with Modex numbers etc. I've got spares from the Tamiya kits and someone sent me a bag full of his excess aircraft. Of course given the beaty of these aircraft the $64 question is am I going to get the Trumpeter Tomcats and Hornets to put on the Enterprise. It's going to depend on finding them on sale I think, or else ordering them from China at $4.50 a set

The tanker is definitely an Intruder rather than a Prowler. It's a two seater not streched like the 4 seat Prowler. If you've got any reference photos from that time period, unless you spot the basket under the fuselage, or notice all the tanks (or the modex number), you might not realize it's a tanker. One other thing some squadrons would do, especially before they went to the "low-viz" paint schemes, was to paint a band around the fuselage of the tankers to help identify them.

BTW, if you are doing Prowlers, don't forget that they almost certainly should have the black three pointed marking on the nose. Visually from a distance on final, both a/c look similar as you can imagine, but have very different landing characteristics. The marking is placed on the nose so the LSO can tell the difference visually and make sure he lines up the landing properly.

Given that one of your VF squadrons is the Marine VMFA 333, I can probably figure out from my resource material exactly which cruise and time period you're talking about, since the presence of a Marine squadron afloat is not the norm.

Based on that I should be able to figure out what other squadrons and Detachments from other squadrons were aboard for that deployment.

The A-3 MAY actually supposed to be an EA-3 which would have preceeded the EA-6B (but not directly) in the EW role. Before they were modified to the EA-3 cofiguration the "Whale" was a heavy attack bomber. As far as the Vigilante is concerned, it is probably the photo recon bird. This role is now done by sticking a TARPS pod underneath a couple of the F-14s, and has been for about 20 years. Obviously the E2-C Hawkeye is your "AWACS".

As I mentioned before, the quality of my Tamiya aircraft and the painting doesn't match what I could do with decals and the new Trumpy kits, but I ain't about to go replacing 86 aircraft.



TC

Plan a litle research on this tanker conversion. As it'll go on flight deck, it won't hinder the Nimitz build. As of now, I have all 18 Phantoms, 12 Corsairs totally done. Working on the finishing touches on the intruders 6 are decaled waiting for landing gear and canopies. 3 need the decals landing gear etc. All the other singles and doubles are also at the decal and landing gear stage. Hopefully I'll get done with these by the weekend and can start placing aircraft in "strategic viewing areas" of the hanger deck before I start work on the flight deck and island phase did i tell you how much fun this is? I'm getting itchy so I might put this down join the Panzer campaign and do an OOB Panzer III H

Here's your answer. If you're going to show VMFA 333 aircraft on board, you have two choices. And if you ALSO want to include the S-3, then you're down to a specific cruise and time period. Here's the info:

August 1975: CVW 8 (Atlantic Training Cruises)

VF-31 (F-4J) 1xxx
VMF-333 (F-4J) 2xx
VA-82 (A-7E) 3xx
VA-86 (A-7E) 4xx
VA-35 (A-6E + KA6D) 5xx
VAW-126 (E2-B) 600-604
RVAH-9 (RA-5C) 60x (Per The Hook History of RVAH-9)
VAQ-130 (EA-6B) ??? (Usually THESE would be 604-607)
HS-15 (SH-3H) (Probably 61x like most helo units)


And Dec 1977 - July 1978 CVW 8 (Med Cruise)

VF-74 (F-4J) 1xxx
VMF-333 (F-4J) 2xx
VA-82 (A-7E) 3xx
VA-86 (A-7E) 4xx
VA-35 (A-6E + KA6D) 5xx
VAW-116 (E2-C) 600-604
RVAH-9 (RA-5C) 60x (Per The Hook History of RVAH-9)
VAQ-130 (EA-6B) ??? (Usually THESE would be 604-607)
HS-2 (SH-3H) (Probably 61x like most helo units)
VS-32 (S-3A) 7xx

The "tricky" parts will be to make sure that not only do you have the right squadrons, but that the color scheme is correct for this specific period, as well as making sure the Nimitz is configured per this time period.

Probably isn't a big deal for the Nimitz, but if you were doing Enterprise for this same time period, the Tamiya kit would be WAY wrong for the island.

SEND PHOTOS!!

PS. No reference anywhere to the EA-3 "Whale" being used on the Nimitz, but I'm looking deeper.

TC

There is a 350 scale kit out there of the "pineapple top" Enterprise. I saw one for sale on Ebay. I think it was academy who made it, I saw it by Minihobbies. I tried to get someone to buy it and swap out the isand for my Tamiya island...never got a taker. did not want (still don't) to go out and buy another supercarrier kit. As long as you've got "the book" out, what can you tell me about flight deck uniforms. I've got a set of 350 figures I figure to paint them all medium blue and then paint the different color vests. can you give me a breakdown on some of those which ones are green, red, yellow, and what other colors ans categories


I sure ask a ton of questions don't I? :-)

Are you getting all this marvelous info from a book, or do you know a website

Several books actually. Growing up (mostly) around Tidewater, and with my Grandfather working his whole life in the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, I always did like the Navy. Had VMI had an NROTC program when I went, I may have been in the Navy instead of the Army.

I belong to the Naval Institute, as well as the Tailhook Association (yes, THAT Tailhook!) mostly because of the GREAT publications available. Additionally over the years, particularly when I was doing the Enterprise, I collected a TON of reference material, for both ships as well as aircraft.

As you mentioned, each of the various specialties among the flight deck crew has a different color, and while I know a couple off the top of my head, let me look them up and get you the full breakdown.

TC

Oh I saw the triangle thing they print on the nose of Prowlers....isn't that the same symbol they put on radiation signs. I saw the regular was yellow with black (as opposed to the low vis of black on a different shade of gray. Never did find a pic of an intruder in tanker mode but I read up on it....just have to figure how to make drop tanks from strecthed sprue

Yeah, I think it does look like the radiation symbol. Larger photos show a "dot" with three triangular arms, wider to the outside. In 1/350 that works out to three small black brush strokes!!!

Rather than use sprue for the actual tanks, I used "sculpy" clay. I just sat down one afternoon and made a "plateful" of tapered and rolled "tanks" and kept the ones that seem the most "consistent" The stuff hardens when you "bake" it and worked out fine. I did use sheet styrene for the mounting plyons under the wings. The one thing I did do with very thin stretched sprue was to make both refueling probes on the nose, and "tail hooks" under the back end. Obviously they wouldn't actually be down on deck, but the DO keep the tricycle geared aircraft from sitting down on the back end which they are prone to do.

And rather than write down all the color codes, how about THIS instead.


http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/1-564/AF.HTM

TC

My stretched sprue came out pretty good. Probably way off in accuracy, but I put four wing tanks and one centerline and it looks right. At that scale and in the middle of everything else, close is good enogh. Thanks for the info on the aircraft and the jersey colors. I'm thinking about putting some little people on the Nimitz and probably a few on the Big "E" when I get around to her. I've seen films of those folks at work. It looks like an anthill that just got kicked over....and just like an anthill group everyone knows what they have to do to and does it.

Pretty amazing when you realize that 90% of the people on that flight deck, responsible for moving all those multi million dollar aircraft around, average about 19 years of age, and when you figure out their wage against the hours they work, they could actually do better at Mickey D. At least they get to be away from their families and live packed together like sardines for months at a time. :-)

Anybody who works the flight deck on a carrier is a hero in my book! The pilots may get all the glory, but most of them know they couldn't do anything without the guys who do the real work.

TC

They are all heros in my book icluding us. We had the hardest job of all....keeping the peace. You and I kept Europe free when the Russia Bear was at the height of his power and threatning to take over the world. You and I stood at the IGB and told him NO ! We won the Cold War Tom and will never ever receive recognition for what we did because it as a non-shooting war. But we know and can be proud of what we did.

What? You mean you don't have your coveted Cold War recognition certificate? (Either??) LMAO :-)

It is a bit funny that I wore the uniform for 30 years counting both the AC and the RC, sandwiched inbetween the Vietnam War on the "front end" and the GWOT" on the back end. Sure GW I happened, but there wasn't the kind of RC presence in that war (at least not by the Combat units in the Army) such as there is today.

But regardless, I know that I served my country, did everything that was asked of me (and more) and that the little I did was part of a much bigger effort, and so I'm fine.

The funny thing to me is, that the period you and I were over in Germany (and the 10-15 years or so preceeding that) is "neglected" in my opinion with respect to much of the "armor" kits available, probably because there was no "shooting" war. Sure you may find the occasional M-48, but have you ever seen a kit for the M59 APC? And what about the softskins from that period? Not much. But afterall, it is much more fun to build something representing a conflict rather than a training exercise!!

TC

Niether do I.

I've always been sort of miffed by the fact that those who served during the Cold War era was never really recognized other than the certificate.

We did our job, we kept the peace and Europe was not reduced to radioactive glass.

okay okay

The only "gift" that I received was the chance to take pictures of Soviet ships while on surveilance dutty - lots of sea days - I still have those pics and I am proud of the job I have done in the past, even if it isn't recognised

Skipper