F-4 & T-33 @ VFW Post 8483 Madison, Wisconsin

[Warbirdnerd]

Earlier this week, (before educating myself on the history of the Satellite Port A Potys ) , I took a road trip into Wisconsin where I found this VFW North of Madison that has a very nice looking F-4 and T-33 on display. Thanks to Mike's Aerial Visuals Locator, they were very easy to find-
http://www.aerialvisuals.ca/Locator.php#TheResults

Scott,if you want them for the registry, help yourself..
F-4S Bu155900-






T-33 53-4903-

[Pogmusic]

It's odd to see a T-33 without tip tanks. Great images.

[Matt Gunsch]

I was by there a couple of months ago and the APC in the background was getting a new paint job.

[cooper9411]

It's odd to see a T-33 without tip tanks. Great images.

Not really as they are a hot commodity. The pair I had was pursued by quite a few T-33 owners/ care takers!

[ffuries]

That is one sweet looking Phantom!

[sandiego89]

Thanks for posting.

WARNING: RIVET COUNTER MODE ON

Can someone help me with the "warload" on the Phantom? Don't quite look right for AIM-7 Sparrows- nose not pointy enough and tail fins are a bit too far forward, Perhaps a different Sparrow version I am not familiar with? Sparrows would normally be semi-recessed under the belly. Would not see an operational aircraft with no tanks and this load out. Not a AIM-120's? HARM? Perhaps generic "missile" dummy?

I get this is a display bird- please no criticism to the VFW or the folks that moved her and care for here- just a question for banter. No need to get the pitchforks out- the plane already has one on the tail (yes I know it is a Trident).

RIVET COUNTER MODE switched to standby

[K5DH]

Can someone help me with the "warload" on the Phantom? Don't quite look right for AIM-7 Sparrows- nose not pointy enough and tail fins are a bit too far forward, Perhaps a different Sparrow version I am not familiar with? Sparrows would normally be semi-recessed under the belly. Would not see an operational aircraft with no tanks and this load out. Not a AIM-120's? HARM? Perhaps generic "missile" dummy?

I can assure you they're not HARM or AMRAAM. They look like early Sparrows to me, but that's purely a guess. You're correct that Sparrows would normally have been carried in the belly positions, but they could also be carried on the wing stations so not totally bogus.

[quemerford]

Can someone help me with the "warload" on the Phantom? Don't quite look right for AIM-7 Sparrows- nose not pointy enough and tail fins are a bit too far forward, Perhaps a different Sparrow version I am not familiar with? Sparrows would normally be semi-recessed under the belly. Would not see an operational aircraft with no tanks and this load out. Not a AIM-120's? HARM? Perhaps generic "missile" dummy?

I can assure you they're not HARM or AMRAAM. They look like early Sparrows to me, but that's purely a guess. You're correct that Sparrows would normally have been carried in the belly positions, but they could also be carried on the wing stations so not totally bogus.

Not early Sparrows either, which had a marked taper along most of the body: I suspect these are constructed from drainpipe and foam.

[Maverick]

Looks like a AGM-45 Shrike. Used a Sparrow III airframe with a radar seeking sensor, larger warhead and smaller tail fins. Navy deployed it on the A-4 around 1965 and later on some F-4s. Carried on the wing pylon.