F-18FL French Navy

[Howard of Effingham]

I just wondered as I managed to acquire one of the C-Scale A-6F conversion kits.

interesting idea evan. if you did a USN EA-6F but gave it current EA-6B markings that really would confuse 'em.

trevor

[elmayerle]

I think the F stay for France. But an EA-6F "Super Prowler" is a cool idea (never thought about that before...).
What about an EA-12 "Prowler II" ? (ideas come quickly today!!)
An EA-5C would be cool, too... there's more room in a vigilante than a in a superbug...

An EA-5D in USAF markings is in my (rather lengthy) "to do" que, along with a KRA-5C and a combination of Monogram A-5A and 'most any decent RA-5C to produce a decent A-5A.

I may well "clone" the A-6F bits to also do an EA-6F (more likely EA-6G given the airframe differences) and a KA-6G tanker based on the larger fuselage of the EA-6B/G.

An EA-12 Prowler II would be difficult as strong emitters are rather difficult to combine with low observables, though a variant of the A-12 dedicated to SEAD would work nicely and much the same recce pod I have in mind for my RF-23A would work, perhaps even two of them, in a RA-12.  The pod is based on some proven LO contours that can be easily integrated with the carrying aircraft.

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

About the EA-6F designation, its not totally a French EA-6B, but it's not totally a electronic variant of the A-6F neither!!

In fact, the F stands for France, as Archie told, but the name was kept because the EA-6F as a lot of common points with the A-6F, except that a lot of modifications were based on French systems, instead of Americans...

For example, the engines are SNECMA M88-G4 engines (fictionnal French engine derived from the M88-3, and with a lower weight and greater thrust than the A-6F's General Electric F404-GE-400D). Two additional pylons stand on the folding parts of the wings, for MICA self-defense missile, or METEOR-AR or HARM anti-radar missiles!!
In the nose there is a new radar, the RBE-3B, an improved and enlarged variant of the Rafale AESA radar, that could be use for air-to-ground, air-to-sea, air-air and jamming purpose, simultaneously and at great range...

For this reason, even if the main mission of the EA-6F is the SEAD, it is also often use as mini-AWACS and mission-leader in the French service (for both Marine and Air Force)

[elmayerle]

That works for me, PD7, though I think you'll still need the A-6F engine bay bulges to model this one as the M88 is still rather greater in diameter than the J52.  Still, 'twould be something different for the shelf and I've got the spare kits....

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

Well, I admit that I just have no information about the diameter of the J52 compared to a fictionnal no-AB M88... That's why I prefered not modified the engine bays of the aircraft in the profile.

In fact, I suposed that a M88 with no afterburner could even be smaller than a J52, including in diameter. Indeed, the M88 (with AB) is smaler and lighter than the F404 (with AB), so, I could suppose that the non-AB variant of those two engine will still have the same difference i.e. the M88 is smaller.
And as the F404 just fit in the Singaporian A-4 with no external great changes on the airframe and the engine bay (well, I'm just not sure of that, but I can't find any major difference), I supposed that the M88 could be near the size (or even smaller) than the J52...


But well, such an engine just not exist, so as its fictionnal, I didn't want to modified too much an airframe I don't really know

[elmayerle]

PD7,

The reason there was no apparent change when Singapore made the engine swap from J65 (Sapphire) to F404 is the diameters of the two engines differs little.  The J52-powered A-4's have some extra room around the smaller engine.  The A-6, on the other hand, is a much more tightly cowled design developed originally around the J52 and thus needing the bulges for the F404 or M88.  The other reason for the bulge is the redesign to accomodate the AMAD gearbox that most modern combat engines drive rather than have their auxiliary drives (alternator, hydraulic pump, starter, etc.) right on the engine; this makes for much faster engine change outs because you only have to disconnect the AMAD driveshaft, not all the electrical and plumbing connections.

The F404 and M88 are both turbofans and thus will almost certainly be larger than turbojets of comparable thrust, but they're also much less thirsty.  I'd expect the same bulges as the for the F404 to work for the M88.

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

Oki Elmayerle!!
Thanks for the info: I just didn't know those little stuffs about the A-4!!

So, if I understand well: if I want to do a M88-G4 engined A-4 for Brazilian Navy (and I DO want!), I have no major changes to do on the rear fuselage because the A-4 could fit bigger engines than J52 (like J65 anf F404, right?).
But if I want to do a French A-6F or EA-6F (I don't want for the moment, but maybe one day) with the same M88-G4 engine, I'd better enlarged the engine's bays!!

That's it??

[Archibald]

I like the work you plan around the Vigilante and A-6F... a way of exploiting the big potential of these aircrafts  ^_^ .
The A-3 Skywarrior was developed into ECM / recon / tanker variants in the 60's.
I suppose that the A-5 and A-6F followed the same path   in your alternate universe (the vigie in the early 70's, and the A-6F in the 90's).

KRA-5C

A tanker Vigilante ? This remind me Ollie's Concorde tanker to refuel CF-105s on their way to Europe.  

In this case, I imagine that this tanker Vigilante would have a buddy refueling pack on the belly  instead of the recon canoe of the RA-5C.
The KA-5C would follow USN  raids (such as Hornets and A-6E  in Eldorado canyon) refueling them on the way back. Its high speed would protect it against ennemies defenses (in the same way as the F-18G Growler for ECM will do).

Pollux, this concept is fascinating    

[elmayerle]

Oki Elmayerle!!
Thanks for the info: I just didn't know those little stuffs about the A-4!!

So, if I understand well: if I want to do a M88-G4 engined A-4 for Brazilian Navy (and I DO want!), I have no major changes to do on the rear fuselage because the A-4 could fit bigger engines than J52 (like J65 anf F404, right?).
But if I want to do a French A-6F or EA-6F (I don't want for the moment, but maybe one day) with the same M88-G4 engine, I'd better enlarged the engine's bays!!

That's it??

Correct, the A-4 would not need much in the way of external changes (the only noticeable change on Singapore's aircraft is the addition of a small NACA scoop on the starboard side to direct cooling air into the AMAD bay.  The A-6F would have this built in as part of the enlarged nacelle and I would presume that a dry M88 version would use the same AMAD and AMAD drive shaft.

[elmayerle]

I like the work you plan around the Vigilante and A-6F... a way of exploiting the big potential of these aircrafts  ^_^ .
The A-3 Skywarrior was developed into ECM / recon / tanker variants in the 60's.
I suppose that the A-5 and A-6F followed the same path   in your alternate universe (the vigie in the early 70's, and the A-6F in the 90's).

KRA-5C

A tanker Vigilante ? This remind me Ollie's Concorde tanker to refuel CF-105s on their way to Europe.  

In this case, I imagine that this tanker Vigilante would have a buddy refueling pack on the belly  instead of the recon canoe of the RA-5C.
The KA-5C would follow USN  raids (such as Hornets and A-6E  in Eldorado canyon) refueling them on the way back. Its high speed would protect it against ennemies defenses (in the same way as the F-18G Growler for ECM will do).

Pollux, this concept is fascinating  

The KRA-5C would use the buddy refueling package in the centerline weapons bay that was cleared by trials on the A-5A.  With the extra fuel of the A-5B/C airframe plus four large drop tanks, it could be quite effective.  I'm also doing an EA-5D to accompany fast strikes.

[B777LR]

I began doing last touches of paint to my EA-6B, when i looked through my decal box, when i got the idea! A special marking French Navy EA-6B to mark 75 years since end of WW2!