The RF-4B I will be doing is the Testor's/Italeri 1/72. For the purists among you, I know it is actually a "C" model, but it will have to do. I'll scounge some of the skinny tires for a B model and see if I can eliminate the wing bulge. The indexer lights and catapult hooks are easy to add. I just cannot resist that Emerald Green tail with the gold markings.
John, How about relaxing your rule #4 a little bit to something like, "primary mission assignment must be reconnaissance. Armament as a secondary mission assignment." Two cases come to mind. The P-51 as a recce bird was the F-5, but since the camera was in the aft fuselage, it still retained the six .50 calibre guns in the wings. Recce pilots were instructed, actually ordered, to not engage in air to air or air to ground combat. Getting the pictures was their primary reason for existance. Somehow or another, several of them managed to make "Ace" anyway.
My other thought is the RB-36. All B-36s had 4 bomb bays. In the RB version, the front bay or #1 was converted to a pressurized camera bay with an assortment of cameras, crew members to tend to them and even a dark room to process the film on the long flight back home. Bays #2 and #3 were full of photo flash bombs, while #4 was full of electronic equipment. A little later in life, SAC decided that ALL B-36s had to be nuclear capable, so the electronic equipment was moved from #4 to the tail compartment and #4 was rigged to hold a big boomer.
The Monogram kit is of an RB-36F which was the designation after the change. Maybe you would consider these to fit with in your "defensive armament" category anyway. It IS a little difficult to call a gravity/free fall nuke as a defensive weapon.
I am also working on an SR-71C, which is a trainer and not operational mission capable, for the Stealth GB. Does that qualify for a cross build?
Darwin, O.F.
![Alien [alien]](/FSM/CS/emoticons/icon_smile_alien.gif)