Phantom at Fallon

[F9pnthr]

While visiting the flightline at NAS Fallon in early September, I photographed
a Phantom taking off. On examining the photo today, it appears to be an F-4E
from the nose configuration. Also, it's a darker grey than the navy aircraft in
other photos. Does anyone have any thoughts on what this aircraft mey be?

[Ed Rasimus]

On 11 Nov 2004 18:19:34 GMT, (F9pnthr) wrote:

>While visiting the flightline at NAS Fallon in early September, I photographed
>a Phantom taking off. On examining the photo today, it appears to be an F-4E
>from the nose configuration. Also, it's a darker grey than the navy aircraft in
>other photos. Does anyone have any thoughts on what this aircraft mey be?

Good chance it was an F-4F from the German AF training unit at
Holloman AFB.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

[Jdf4cheval]

Thanks, Ed. I thought of that, but if so it didn't have the national marking
stripes along the top of the Vertical Stab.
Joe

[Jim]

Jdf4cheval wrote:
> Thanks, Ed. I thought of that, but if so it didn't have the national marking
> stripes along the top of the Vertical Stab.
> Joe
Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
required to have U.S. markings.

[Jdf4cheval]

Our markings, but the Luftwaffe trainers had three thin lines of black, red and
yellow across the top of the vertical stabiliser.

<< Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
required to have U.S. markings.
>>

[Jake Donovan]

It would probably be a VX 30 Bloodhound.

They are technically QF4s but several of them are painted all grey with a
low profile wolf painted on the tail

Jake


"F9pnthr" > wrote in message
...
> While visiting the flightline at NAS Fallon in early September, I
> photographed
> a Phantom taking off. On examining the photo today, it appears to be an
> F-4E
> from the nose configuration. Also, it's a darker grey than the navy
> aircraft in
> other photos. Does anyone have any thoughts on what this aircraft mey be?

[Pechs1]

Chief-<< Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
required to have U.S. markings.
>><BR><BR>

Don't think so. I flew in RedFlag with brit and german A/C and they were marked
like normally.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Ed Rasimus]

On 12 Nov 2004 14:45:19 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

>Chief-<< Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
>required to have U.S. markings.
> >><BR><BR>
>
>Don't think so. I flew in RedFlag with brit and german A/C and they were marked
>like normally.
>P. C. Chisholm
>CDR, USN(ret.)
>Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Those at Red Flag would have been national force aircraft here on NATO
TDY. The Tornados and Phantoms down at Holloman have USAF star-and-bar
on the fuselage and HO tail codes. Originally they had the black
Luftwaffe iron cross on the fuselage side, but that was changed.
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

[C.D.Damron]

I don't think it is a law, but a military policy that foreign aircraft that
are permanently based in the US should wear US markings. I'm not sure if
German traiining units participated in Red Flag, but they normally wear US
markings.

With regards to Germany, at one time, post-war German law prevented
permanent basing of troops abroad. For a number of years, German training
was technically a lease-back program where the US "leased" German planes
flown by German pilots in training.

At least in the post-war period, there were some sensibilities to be
respected. Many veterans would not have been comfortable with planes
wearing the Iron Cross flying overhead.





"Pechs1" > wrote in message
...
> Chief-<< Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
> required to have U.S. markings.
> >><BR><BR>
>
> Don't think so. I flew in RedFlag with brit and german A/C and they were
marked
> like normally.
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

[José Herculano]

> Don't think so. I flew in RedFlag with brit and german A/C and they were
> marked
> like normally.

That's because they were not based in the US. The F-4F that the Germans have
for training in Holloman fly with US markings.
_____________
José Herculano

[Leanne]

> Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
> required to have U.S. markings.

I can remember a German F-104 flown by a civilian Lockheed pilot at MCAS El
Toro. It came down from Burbank and was painted with a green preservative
paint to somewhat cover the marking, but they were visible up close. It was
there for testing a hook system and were using the field arresting gear.

Leanne

[Jake Donovan]

There are 2 squadrons of German F4's at Holloman with all US Markings with
the exception of the Black, Red and Yellow stripes on the top of the tail.
The HO on the tail is very dark and prominent.

They are 2 tone grey. A very dark grey and a lighter grey.

They are also kept spic and span.

The QF4S's at Fallon in Sept were VX30

Jake

On a side note, the same VX30 F4's were put to use as chase planes during
the AF F22 program.

"José Herculano" > wrote in message
...
>> Don't think so. I flew in RedFlag with brit and german A/C and they were
>> marked
>> like normally.
>
> That's because they were not based in the US. The F-4F that the Germans
> have for training in Holloman fly with US markings.
> _____________
> José Herculano
>

[NimBill]

>From: (Pechs1)
>Newsgroups:

>Don't think so. I flew in RedFlag with brit and german A/C and they were
>markedlike normally.P. C. ChisholmCDR, USN(ret.)Old Phart Phormer Phantom,
>Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer
>
Tis true! I can remember taking a trip to an unknown site and examing the
electronics in a captured MIG and it had no USA markings but was flown many
times by Americans to assess its abilities.

The electronis were way out of date by our standards but the aircraft otherwise
was very good.

About 1 hour drive from here is Holloman AFB which is home of the Stealth
Fighters which are actually bombers and also home to the largest contingent of
German Air Force outside of Germany and their aircraft have no US markings.
Mostly they are Phantoms but the contingent is large enough that a German
moving company has set up a center there.

They also have a German language school system in Alamogordo NM.

Living so close to White Sands Missile Range and working there or Holloman AFB
or Fort Bliss and Biggs Army Airfield I often I often see foreign aircraft
being flown by US Military pilots with no US markings.

[Pechs1]

Ed-<< Those at Red Flag would have been national force aircraft here on NATO
TDY. The Tornados and Phantoms down at Holloman have USAF star-and-bar
on the fuselage and HO tail codes. Originally they had the black
Luftwaffe iron cross on the fuselage side, but that was changed. >><BR><BR>

Is that a post 9/11 thing or has that been the way it has always been? I never
noticed.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Ed Rasimus]

On 13 Nov 2004 14:35:44 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

>Ed-<< Those at Red Flag would have been national force aircraft here on NATO
>TDY. The Tornados and Phantoms down at Holloman have USAF star-and-bar
>on the fuselage and HO tail codes. Originally they had the black
>Luftwaffe iron cross on the fuselage side, but that was changed. >><BR><BR>
>
>Is that a post 9/11 thing or has that been the way it has always been? I never
>noticed.
>P. C. Chisholm
>CDR, USN(ret.)
>Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

I assume you're asking about the Holloman birds, since there has never
been a requirement for allied forces aircraft to be remarked when they
deploy to a host nation (we would have done a lot of repainting over
the years!)

The HO birds were painted USAF within about 18 months after the
Luftwaffe program was established, so that was well before 9/11.

For that matter, the F-104G aircraft that were used for training
German pilots at Luke way back in the '60s, '70s and '80s were USAF
marked even though they were owned by the Germans. They were serviced
by Lockheed contract civilians.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

[Peter Twydell]

In message >, Jim
> writes
>Jdf4cheval wrote:
>> Thanks, Ed. I thought of that, but if so it didn't have the national marking
>> stripes along the top of the Vertical Stab.
>> Joe
>Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
>required to have U.S. markings.

Why?
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

[Ogden Johnson III]

Peter Twydell > wrote:

>Jim > writes

>>Jdf4cheval wrote:

>>> Thanks, Ed. I thought of that, but if so it didn't have the national marking
>>> stripes along the top of the Vertical Stab.
>>> Joe

>>Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
>>required to have U.S. markings.

>Why?

Because years ago all of the black helicopter/konspiracy/tin hat
brigade were citing the presence of those German-marked aircraft
and their associated flight training program as proof-positive
that NATO/The Bilderburgers/Various Other Nefarious Organizations
had taken over the United States and all of its military forces.

Since sanity is not required of U. S. Citizens, obviously the U.
S. Gummint and the German gummint felt it was easier just to put
US markings on the aircraft [with the German colors on the tail],
than to waste time fooling with nutcases. I don't even know that
it was the result of an act of Congress rather than just being an
agreement between the two governments.
--
OJ III
[Email to Yahoo address may be burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast.]

[Leadfoot]

"F9pnthr" > wrote in message
...
> While visiting the flightline at NAS Fallon in early September, I
> photographed
> a Phantom taking off. On examining the photo today, it appears to be an
> F-4E
> from the nose configuration. Also, it's a darker grey than the navy
> aircraft in
> other photos. Does anyone have any thoughts on what this aircraft mey be?

Civilian contractor using it as a testbed?

The QF4 sounds right. I just wanted to point out another possibilty.

[Peter Twydell]

In message >, Ogden Johnson
III > writes
>Peter Twydell > wrote:
>
>>Jim > writes
>
>>>Jdf4cheval wrote:
>
>>>> Thanks, Ed. I thought of that, but if so it didn't have the
>>>>national marking
>>>> stripes along the top of the Vertical Stab.
>>>> Joe
>
>>>Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
>>>required to have U.S. markings.
>
>>Why?
>
>Because years ago all of the black helicopter/konspiracy/tin hat
>brigade were citing the presence of those German-marked aircraft
>and their associated flight training program as proof-positive
>that NATO/The Bilderburgers/Various Other Nefarious Organizations
>had taken over the United States and all of its military forces.
>
>Since sanity is not required of U. S. Citizens, obviously the U.
>S. Gummint and the German gummint felt it was easier just to put
>US markings on the aircraft [with the German colors on the tail],
>than to waste time fooling with nutcases. I don't even know that
>it was the result of an act of Congress rather than just being an
>agreement between the two governments.


I'd like to think that answer was a joke; as my Dad used to say: "Ask a
silly question, and you'll get a silly answer".

No smiley, or obvious pointers to humour, or other versions, so I have
the horrible feeling it might be true.
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

[C.D.Damron]

"Peter Twydell" > wrote in message
...
> No smiley, or obvious pointers to humour, or other versions, so I have
> the horrible feeling it might be true.

In 1966, I'm sure that the sensitivities of WWII veterans was more of a
concern.

[Mike Kanze]

>No smiley, or obvious pointers to humour, or other versions, so I have the
>horrible feeling it might be true.

H. L. Mencken once said, "No one ever went broke underestimating the taste
of the American public." As a former Procter & Gamble employee, working for
them at the height of the "P&G is owned by Satan, and I know it's true
because I saw it on Phil Donahue / Oprah / Sally Jessie / (you pick)"
nuttiness, I've learned that - yes - there are FAR TOO MANY folks who have
less than a full hod of bricks upstairs.

--
Mike Kanze

"Somewhere in the heavens there is a great invisible genie who every so
often lets down his pants and ****es all over the pillars of science."

- Ernest K. Gann



"Peter Twydell" > wrote in message
...
> In message >, Ogden Johnson III
> > writes
>>Peter Twydell > wrote:
>>
>>>Jim > writes
>>
>>>>Jdf4cheval wrote:
>>
>>>>> Thanks, Ed. I thought of that, but if so it didn't have the national
>>>>> marking
>>>>> stripes along the top of the Vertical Stab.
>>>>> Joe
>>
>>>>Ours or theirs? Foreign military aircraft based in the U.S. are
>>>>required to have U.S. markings.
>>
>>>Why?
>>
>>Because years ago all of the black helicopter/konspiracy/tin hat
>>brigade were citing the presence of those German-marked aircraft
>>and their associated flight training program as proof-positive
>>that NATO/The Bilderburgers/Various Other Nefarious Organizations
>>had taken over the United States and all of its military forces.
>>
>>Since sanity is not required of U. S. Citizens, obviously the U.
>>S. Gummint and the German gummint felt it was easier just to put
>>US markings on the aircraft [with the German colors on the tail],
>>than to waste time fooling with nutcases. I don't even know that
>>it was the result of an act of Congress rather than just being an
>>agreement between the two governments.
>
>
> I'd like to think that answer was a joke; as my Dad used to say: "Ask a
> silly question, and you'll get a silly answer".
>
> No smiley, or obvious pointers to humour, or other versions, so I have
> the horrible feeling it might be true.
> --
> Peter
>
> Ying tong iddle-i po!