User Panel
From a post I made a year ago about pops' Martin-Baker experience over the Baltic:
We came across this page: http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1969.html and noticed something a little concerning. Between 69-0371 and 69-0381: Five Crashed; One was shot down (by that retard in a Tomcat over the Med); three are now drones; one is on a popsicle stick and the other is at AMARC. Out of eleven consecutive aircraft, six met rather untimely demises! |
|
Since the last QF-4s were retired fairly recently, does anybody know what was done with them? If ever there was a plane that's a last best option for putting in museums, that'd have to be the one so I hope they are all preserved and homed out to museums.
|
|
|
|
Quoted: What use is off boresight missiles and IRST to the Nork when an AWACS has told the ROK or JASDF Phantom when the MiG has taken off and exactly where he needs to be to salvo his AIM-7s? If they miss, the Phantom is just going to run for home and the 29 will run out of fuel if it tries to follow. View Quote |
|
|
Quoted:
It was my favorite. It had the hard wing (no slats) of the J, and I think the same radar as the S, with this wonderful thing for the time called "Digital Auto-Acquisition". You just pushed a button and it would sweep your lift vector and lock onto anything within five miles. The slats on the S added a thousand pounds of weight. They would give you one (and only one) good turn. I think they encouraged pilots to ignore the strengths of the F-4 (speed, and the thrust-to-weight for a vertical fight) and try to turn with airplanes that had a better turn rate/radius. Disclaimer: As with Dr. Blasey-Ford, this was a long time ago and my memory may be imperfect. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
@Rodent F-4 Super J? Heard of the J and S. The slats on the S added a thousand pounds of weight. They would give you one (and only one) good turn. I think they encouraged pilots to ignore the strengths of the F-4 (speed, and the thrust-to-weight for a vertical fight) and try to turn with airplanes that had a better turn rate/radius. Disclaimer: As with Dr. Blasey-Ford, this was a long time ago and my memory may be imperfect. VI (Visual Identification) Mode had a max range 5 NM could be manually selected on the RSC by the RIO or engaged by the pilot (by pressing a button on the stick... left side, adjacent to the right thumb, IIRC). When VI mode was engaged by the pilot, it overrode the settings on the RSC and engaged Auto-Acq by default. It could also be used in combination with SEAM (Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode) and VTAS (Visual Target Acquisition System). VTAS was pretty cool in its theory of operation. Once calibrated by the pilot, the radar antenna could be slaved to the VTAS helmet so it would point to wherever the pilot was looking (within the mechanical limits of the main radar antenna, 60 deg from boresight). When coupled with SEAM, the Sidewinder seeker head was also slaved to the VTAS helmet (looks that kill). The system worked, but was rarely used. I was told the VTAS helmets were a touch too heavy under G. D(6354)Peacher |
|
Quoted: The prototype design originally was a multi-role plane, but the Navy changed the requirements to it being an interceptor. As they had the A-4 and the F-8, but no long range interceptors at the time. Since it had the foundation for a multi-role capability, it was easy for all branches later to adapt it to multi-role duties. But the F-4 as the Navy received it in 1960 was an interceptor much like the F-14. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
The last US ones flying (not counting QF-4s) were Boise Idaho F-4Gs, retired in 1996. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the last ones flying were recon birds in the National guard out of Birmingham Al. Someone I know had a family member shot down in the build up to GW1. They flew very fast and very low. Not a lot of room for error. The pilot ejected safely. That's still one of the weirdest news stories ever. |
|
Quoted:
Those folks were all before my time, although I'll bet a few of them were still working when I started. We have an engineer on this program that started in 1962 on the F-4, a boss when he retired, a job shopper now. That building in the back ground is used by a commuter airline now, and building 2 just over their left shoulders is mostly rotting down. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
My dad, lead engineer with his crew, front and center https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/5205/IMG_0607_JPG-360417.jpg That building in the back ground is used by a commuter airline now, and building 2 just over their left shoulders is mostly rotting down. |
|
Quoted:
In the mid-2000s, a QF-4 crashed in New Mexico. The pilot ejected safely. That's still one of the weirdest news stories ever. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the last ones flying were recon birds in the National guard out of Birmingham Al. Someone I know had a family member shot down in the build up to GW1. They flew very fast and very low. Not a lot of room for error. The pilot ejected safely. That's still one of the weirdest news stories ever. Is it because you don't know that QF-4s flew lots of sorties with a pilot in the cockpit? |
|
Attached File
IAI Super Phantom A separate Israel Aircraft Industries project was proposed for a PW1120-powered Phantom, and one prototype built. IAI's F-4 "Super Phantom" or F-4-2000, which could exceed Mach 1 without afterburners, was displayed at the 1987 Paris Air Show. (Allegedly) McDonnell Douglas scuttled the F-4-2000's development because it equaled the F/A-18C/D in performance and could endanger future F/A-18 sales. The Kurnas was powered by two Pratt & Whitney PW1120 turbofans developed for the IAI Lavi. The powerplant endowing the Kurnas with a 17% better combat thrust-to-weight ratio, 36% improved climb rate, and a 15% improved sustained turn rate than the F-4E. I think Japan came up with an improved version that was shot down as well by M-D. |
|
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about?
Attached File They look like a complete afterthought to the design. |
|
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about? https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG They look like a complete afterthought to the design. View Quote Sorry, linking from an iPad. |
|
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about? https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG They look like a complete afterthought to the design. View Quote Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps. |
|
my thought is to control airflow at certain angles of attack......eta. slow on the draw
|
|
Quoted:
AeroE, can you please tell me where the location is? I have always thought it was Edwards AFB, or GE in Cincinnati. My dad died in '95 and this is one of the pictures nobody knew about until after View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My dad, lead engineer with his crew, front and center https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/5205/IMG_0607_JPG-360417.jpg That building in the back ground is used by a commuter airline now, and building 2 just over their left shoulders is mostly rotting down. I showed the photo to our old timer, but there was no one that he recognized. There are two, maybe three that look familiar, but I couldn't begin to come up with names. |
|
Quoted:
Intake air dirverters. They've been on since day one. They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines. Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that. Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about? https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG They look like a complete afterthought to the design. Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps. |
|
Quoted:
So was it a fucked up design or was it sexy or are you ignoring how successful of a plane it still is because it isn’t sexy? I’m confused. Phantoms were such outstanding planes that they’re still in service. Yes,quite a few were lost in Vietnam and by the Israelis and Iranians but the majority to air defense,not other fighters. The only 3rd generation fighter that turned more MiGs and Sukhois into smoking holes for fewer losses in the air is the Mirage III and to that you can attribute Israeli pilots over Arabs. However,Israeli Phantom drivers shot down Pakistanis,North Koreans and even Russians during Operation Rimon 20. I’d put my money on Japanese and ROK F-4s over Nork MiG-29s today. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
No, it had all that weird retarded flight surface geometry to over-come its poor design. How can the same generation of engineers create the beautiful, perfect SR-71 but come up with the fucked up F-4 design? Oh...the F-4 was good, but by sheer american might, it go there eventually. It was like the ME-104 of WW2 or the spitfire, it got all the attention because it looked sexy but the other planes had far better kill ratios Phantoms were such outstanding planes that they’re still in service. Yes,quite a few were lost in Vietnam and by the Israelis and Iranians but the majority to air defense,not other fighters. The only 3rd generation fighter that turned more MiGs and Sukhois into smoking holes for fewer losses in the air is the Mirage III and to that you can attribute Israeli pilots over Arabs. However,Israeli Phantom drivers shot down Pakistanis,North Koreans and even Russians during Operation Rimon 20. I’d put my money on Japanese and ROK F-4s over Nork MiG-29s today. Leaving nothing to chance, Motti Hod decided to assemble the best possible squad for the mission. Airmen selection rested with the Squadron commanders and each subsequently selected himself. Amos Amir, commanding 119 Squadron and a 5-kills ace at the time, selected Asher Snir (11 kills), Avraham Salmon (6) and Avi Gilad (2) to accompany him. Uri Even-Nir, commanding 117 Squadron and already credited with 3 kills, was to be accompanied by Itamar Neuner (4), Yehuda Koren (7) and Kobi Richter (7). Iftach Spector, an 8-kills ace leading 101 Squadron, was accompanied by Michael Tzuk (2), Israel Baharav (5) and Giora Ram-Furman. The 69 Squadron Phantoms was led by Avihu Bin-Nun, who had shot down 2 aircraft as a Mirage pilot, with navigator Shaul Levi. Also present were Aviem Sella (1) with Reuven Reshef, Ehud Hankin (3, navigator unknown) and Uri Gil (1) with Israel Parnas. To face the Soviets, who had little combat experience and no kills to their name, the IAF was preparing to send up some of its most experienced pilots, with a combined score of 67 aerial kills.[16] Dam Son lol. |
|
Quoted: I am about 99% certain that is in front of building 42 at McDonnell Aircraft in St. Louis. The factory building to their left, building 1 & 2, was built during WWII, and a duplicate was built in Columbus. Building 42 was used for flight test, production and experimental, and I believe it was built after McDonnell Aircraft bought out Curtiss-Wright, but I don't have a date. It's possible there was a similar hangar in Columbus or Cincinnati, the architect designed many similar facilities for the government during WWII. I showed the photo to our old timer, but there was no one that he recognized. There are two, maybe three that look familiar, but I couldn't begin to come up with names. View Quote Funny story: when I was about 16 and living in Wichita KS near MConnell AFB (dad was at Boeing), I used to hang out at the park swimming pool, which was right underneath the flight path for the base. Twin F-4s would regularly pass by low overhead on approach, and the screaming growl was so loud everyone had to stop and wait for them to pass. One day my dad decided to come to the pool and bring my little brother. I wanted to be a fighter pilot at that time, but had no real clue what my dad did besides "engineer". After two F-4s passed overhead, I turned to my dad and said "those are soooo cool. I want to fly one someday." He looked sideways at me and said, "ya think so? Well, I designed the engine nozzle in the back. She'll take care of you." I about shit my pants. I have bad eyes, couldn't get in for pilot. RIP Dad |
|
Here is a link with the interesting story of the plant in St. Louis.
https://dnr.mo.gov/shpo/docs/moachp/Curtiss-Wright%20Aeroplane%20Factory.pdf Page 54 has a photo of the engineering floor where I started. The only difference is that we were packed much tighter with a mix of boards and desks. Page 7 has a photo of the location where the photo of your dad would have been taken. Building 42 is on the left, the bump out for the radio room was removed sometime after the facility was sold. That was a remarkable building. I posted a photo earlier of a view looking in the south main door at the F-4 production during Viet Nam. This is the door visible from the airport terminal building. In the glory days of fighter manufacturing in the late 80's through early 90's, we were building F-15's (3 variations overlapped for a short time, C's, D's, and E's), F-18C's and D's, AV-8B's and TAV-8B's plus the GR variants, and T-45's; the building was a gloriously busy madhouse. Final assembly of the AV-8B had to be moved to the north half of building 45 for room to work. The basement still contained the tooling shop, loft, and some machine tools, mostly small stuff like screw machines. A tunnel led under the railroad tracks to building 27 (owned by GKN now) to the largest numerically controlled machine shop in the free world with about 1 million square feet under one roof. The year before I worked as a co-op student in liaison in that building about 105000 individual details were produced. I salvaged CF-101, Space Shuttle, and MD-10 parts along with the parts for fighters. The adjacent building with sheet metal, some composite assembly, and the laser welders was similar size. Just West of the building 42 I described was b. 45, and then a string of small shops for anodizing and other operations that needed to be isolated. The buildings that should have been preserved at Lambert were on the NW corner of the field a little farther west from the plant, the original passenger terminal and a few hangars operated by Tiger or Zantop built in the '30's from brick in the art deco style stood until the mid 80's. The terminal in particular was a cool building. Zantop let us park our airplanes on their ramp on the rare times we flew to work. That didn't really work out due to the walk from there to the offices, let alone the hassle of getting an airplane ready to go for a 15 minute flight. |
|
Quoted:
A mig 29 with a semi capable pilot will piss all over an f4 in a turning fight. View Quote Odds of a turning fight happening are pretty slim. |
|
Quoted: MiG 25 would be used for defense of Mother Russia, you are not likely to find yourself flying that over someplace like Vietnam or Korea with some American pilot on your tail. View Quote Take off, climb balls-out fast toward where the ground radar operator told you the bombers were, launch missiles, land if you still have a runway. |
|
Quoted:
Auto-Acq and 3-bar scan... On the AWG-10A and B, Auto-Acq scanned the B-sweep from the max range selected on the RSC (Radar Set Control, LRU 12) down to zero, however, the acq strobe was only displayed in the B-sweep from the 50 NM mark and in. VI (Visual Identification) Mode had a max range 5 NM could be manually selected on the RSC by the RIO or engaged by the pilot (by pressing a button on the stick... left side, adjacent to the right thumb, IIRC). When VI mode was engaged by the pilot, it overrode the settings on the RSC and engaged Auto-Acq by default. It could also be used in combination with SEAM (Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode) and VTAS (Visual Target Acquisition System). VTAS was pretty cool in its theory of operation. Once calibrated by the pilot, the radar antenna could be slaved to the VTAS helmet so it would point to wherever the pilot was looking (within the mechanical limits of the main radar antenna, 60 deg from boresight). When coupled with SEAM, the Sidewinder seeker head was also slaved to the VTAS helmet (looks that kill). The system worked, but was rarely used. I was told the VTAS helmets were a touch too heavy under G. D(6354)Peacher View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
@Rodent F-4 Super J? Heard of the J and S. The slats on the S added a thousand pounds of weight. They would give you one (and only one) good turn. I think they encouraged pilots to ignore the strengths of the F-4 (speed, and the thrust-to-weight for a vertical fight) and try to turn with airplanes that had a better turn rate/radius. Disclaimer: As with Dr. Blasey-Ford, this was a long time ago and my memory may be imperfect. VI (Visual Identification) Mode had a max range 5 NM could be manually selected on the RSC by the RIO or engaged by the pilot (by pressing a button on the stick... left side, adjacent to the right thumb, IIRC). When VI mode was engaged by the pilot, it overrode the settings on the RSC and engaged Auto-Acq by default. It could also be used in combination with SEAM (Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode) and VTAS (Visual Target Acquisition System). VTAS was pretty cool in its theory of operation. Once calibrated by the pilot, the radar antenna could be slaved to the VTAS helmet so it would point to wherever the pilot was looking (within the mechanical limits of the main radar antenna, 60 deg from boresight). When coupled with SEAM, the Sidewinder seeker head was also slaved to the VTAS helmet (looks that kill). The system worked, but was rarely used. I was told the VTAS helmets were a touch too heavy under G. D(6354)Peacher Loved the Auto-Acq - just roll towards your opponent and push a button. The antennae would lock on so hard you could feel it. |
|
US Navy F-4J Phantom II aircraft takeoff and crash in St. Louis, Missouri; Fireme...HD Stock Footage |
|
View Quote I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason. |
|
Quoted:
I partnered in an airplane with the pilot of that airplane. I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
I partnered in an airplane with the pilot of that airplane. I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I partnered in an airplane with the pilot of that airplane. I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason. |
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I partnered in an airplane with the pilot of that airplane. I think the first time we flew together he giggled like a girl when I did a tail slide and flop over backwards at the top of a hammerhead turn. He's a good guy, and still around. Liked bunts for some inexplicable reason. |
|
Quoted: I bet somebody's tool control process got loved tenderly. View Quote On the first taxi for a production test flight the pilot started across the ramp, tried to steer toward the gate, and got the wrong response. He reduced power and tried again for sanity check, then shut 'er down and called for a tow. I think that mechanic got pulled off the flight test ramp and probably put on a sucky job, considering how things worked. |
|
Quoted:
You know how QF-4s are retired, right? https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/MEADS.png https://i.ytimg.com/vi/k0MY03UtMls/hqdefault.jpg https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ClearFickleAchillestang-size_restricted.gif They're fresh out of QF-4s, on to QF-16As and Cs, many with GE motors. https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/QF-16.png Here's a QF-16A in use as a target that RTB'd, no missile warhead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBo6iWqLqwo View Quote Attached File |
|
Quoted: Intake air dirverters. They've been on since day one. They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines. Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that. Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
It was so mediocre that over 5000 were built. The most of any Western fighter as far as I know, but the Russians made a lot more of some models of MiGs. It's possible that the F-16 may end up being built in greater numbers than the F-4 at 5195 copies. View Quote https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-produced_aircraft |
|
What happened to the last US built F-4? Museum, crashed, shot down, scrapped? And yes, I googled, no joy.
|
|
Quoted: So was it a fucked up design or was it sexy or are you ignoring how successful of a plane it still is because it isn’t sexy? I’m confused. Phantoms were such outstanding planes that they’re still in service. Yes,quite a few were lost in Vietnam and by the Israelis and Iranians but the majority to air defense,not other fighters. The only 3rd generation fighter that turned more MiGs and Sukhois into smoking holes for fewer losses in the air is the Mirage III and to that you can attribute Israeli pilots over Arabs. However,Israeli Phantom drivers shot down Pakistanis,North Koreans and even Russians during Operation Rimon 20. I’d put my money on Japanese and ROK F-4s over Nork MiG-29s today. View Quote |
|
Quoted: IIRC it was delivered to the South Korean AF and is still in service. The last Phantom built was an F-4EJ built by Mitsubishi and AFAIK is still in service with the Japanese Air Self Defense Force. ROKAF F-4E https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/F-4E_ROKAF_takes_off_from_Kunsan_AB_2009.jpg JASDF F-4EJ https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/18/71/0818715a734d511da1e832e733ad8e28.jpg View Quote Thanks, |
|
Mirages of that era are pretty awesome in DCS. Israel used them in combat against MiGs, but against Arab pilots so I don't know if that's a good thing to measure.
Sorry, in DCS those are Mirage 2000 4th generation fighters. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
My bad: I meant the last US built for the US military F-4. I knew the last one was for SK, but failed to clarify. Thanks, View Quote All the F-4s listed on that site after 1653 were built for other nations. http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1974.html 1653 (MSN 4913) to AMARC as FP717 Jul 12, 1991. Left AMARC for Mojave Apr 2002. Converted to QF-4E drone AF244 Attached File This was the last US Navy/Marine F-4 - 158379 (MSN 4201) with VF-154 collided in midair with F-4J 158364 Jun 26, 1972 while training over the Coso Range, Nevada. Both crews ejected safely. http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_serials/thirdseries20.html |
|
Quoted:
Intake air dirverters. They've been on since day one. They automatically deploy at variable speeds to control airflow into the engines. Engine components don't like supersonic shockwaves, so these dirverters control that. Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
One thing that has always puzzled me is what the big flat panels in frontof the intakes were all about? https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/23703/Capture-690384.JPG They look like a complete afterthought to the design. Different design for the same problems include the F-15 variable angle ramps. Dad said once when he was flying, he and his driver were accelerating and one of the diverters didn't deploy properly... the engine backfired flames out past the nose of the plane and stalled out. |
|
Quoted: From the link below, it looks like the USAF got the last one meant for the US military. All the F-4s listed on that site after 1653 were built for other nations. http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1974.html 1653 (MSN 4913) to AMARC as FP717 Jul 12, 1991. Left AMARC for Mojave Apr 2002. Converted to QF-4E drone AF244 https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/54089/1288153-large-694058.JPG This was the last US Navy/Marine F-4 - 158379 (MSN 4201) with VF-154 collided in midair with F-4J 158364 Jun 26, 1972 while training over the Coso Range, Nevada. Both crews ejected safely. http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_serials/thirdseries20.html View Quote |
|
Quoted:
I don't know much about jets but i do know the F14 carried the Phoenix missile that had a long ass range and could have killed an F4 long before the F14 could have been in range of the Phantom. I know the F14 has a gun too and is probably faster. IIRC the F14 was designed as a carrier borne interceptor designed to attack anti ship planes from long distance, the F4 was a multi role design. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Thoughts and comments on the F4 Phantom II...... best 3rd Gen fighter? Overweight poor maneuvering bucket sitting on two huge engines? How did they fare dogfighting with F14s? https://s14-eu5.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2F3ukr694671p02fhcme3a1bsaiek-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F04%2FCollings-f4-1200x800.jpg&sp=46d040616f31b69101424f112e103486 https://s16-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fairshowstuff.com%2Fv4%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F05%2FIMG_8115web.jpg&sp=5b3950150e3e03529736725f99bf9b7b https://s17-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https:%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2Fi-jSxdRTNmc%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&sp=3d25c4b06b29adccd89b877fce5d5d75 |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.