SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

The Official F-4 Phantom II Group Build 2011

619213 views
2992 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by Thunderbolt379 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:29 AM

Jim -- I've looked at having some masks sent from the Czech Republic and despite the fact they weigh a few grams and should post for the minimum cost of a letter, they manage to put about $4.50 postage on things of that size, they'd probably charge something along those lines to post a PE fret.

Today's progress in the -K:

Sparrow wells masked, main gear doors on:

And painting underway. Flat black over the canopy frames, satin black on the radome:

It's amazing how paint reveals gaping flaws. As soon as I applied the flat black it became obvious that the one piece canopy doesn't fit very well. It doesn't show too clearly above, but the windscreen was standing clear of the hull by what must have been a scale four inches! Next time I'll file the fit, this time all I could do was run in clear parts cement by capillery action and hope it does the job. I'll give it another application tomorrow. I'm using a wetted paintbrush to wash away excess, and hoping very much that when I remove the masks they won't pull the cement out of the joint, and take the paint job with it...

She's at the shaggy-dog stage now, that's for sure. I've done some prep work on three other Phantoms, all of which needed the triangular reinforcing plates removed from their stabilators and the panel lines rescribed on them. Tomorrow I'm hoping to get the metallics done for this one, and hopefully all four sets of stabs...

Cheers, Mike/TB379

http://worldinminiature.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    June 2009
Posted by jimbot58 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 11:19 AM

That price doesn't sound so bad, considering it cost me $2.84 to have a set for my F-105G sent from Sprue Brothers in Liberty, MO. to Denver.

Guess I could try an order to see how much it adds as long as I don't complete the sale. Kind of a pain, though as you have to register as a customer first.

I see you masking the Sparrow recesses-Would they be different than the rest of the underside of the craft?  Just wondered if I should be doing something different with my "F" as they are not capable of carrying the Sparrow. (Although I believe upgraded versions could)

*******

On my workbench now:

It's all about classic cars now!

Why can't I find the "Any" key on my keyboard?

 

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • From: Endicott, Va.
Posted by Bomber Boy on Thursday, July 14, 2011 11:21 AM

Hey Guys, I know I just joined this group build last week and let me first thank you for havin' me. When I signed up I had already started 2 Phantoms, one a F-4J and a F-4C, The J is for the Reels category in the Virginia Shootout in Roanoke, Va. in Aug. I'm building one from the movie The Great Santini, more on that later. For the C it is one of a collection I'm doing of all the aircraft that have in the past and today  flown for the 4th fs/ftw. out of  Seymour Johnson AFB, in Goldsboro N.C. I grew up watching these fly overhead as a kid, we lived about 40 miles of the end of the runway.So still to come from the 4th will be the E and G models, and I may get to slip them into this GB later on in the year. 

So here is what I got so far, a little on the heavy side with the photos, but now we will be caught  up after this.

Enjoy!

The F-4J

this next photo shows my recast seats as well as one side of the done one,

now the F-4C 

Thanks for Looking!   James

James Herndon II __-_-_/"\_-_-__

Endicott ,Va

beandawgartworks.com

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Thursday, July 14, 2011 5:12 PM

Hey Bomber; That's a great start!

I like the weathering on the seats and tub, well worn all right. The only thing you missed are Wrigley Spearmint chewing gum wrappers!...lol...

  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by Thunderbolt379 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 6:13 PM

BB -- great start, that's going to come together in no time!

Jimbot -- Re masking, yes, the Sparrow wells are different from the rest of the underside... They get glue in them to mount the Sparrows, and it doesn't work so well over paint...Whistling

M/TB379

http://worldinminiature.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    June 2009
Posted by jimbot58 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 6:55 PM

Thunderbolt379


Jimbot -- Re masking, yes, the Sparrow wells are different from the rest of the underside... They get glue in them to mount the Sparrows, and it doesn't work so well over paint...Whistling

M/TB379

Ah, I see.....I guess I do it the hard way by scraping away the paint afterwords Before glueing. But then I always seem do do everything the hard way.  Still I wonder about the "F" and the fact that they don't do Sparrows.

Here's something funny: I was examining the Fujimi F-4E kit in my stash one day and was puzzled why the Sparrows only had fins on 3 sides.....*SMACK* That was the sound of my slapping my forehead as I realized why!

*******

On my workbench now:

It's all about classic cars now!

Why can't I find the "Any" key on my keyboard?

 

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by Thunderbolt379 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 7:01 PM

Hahaha -- yeahhhhhh. Which F is without Sparrows? The RFs would be without them as a natural course, but every other fighter variant should have them. The good thing about the Hasegawa and Fujimi multi-version approach is there's often unused stuff, and when doing a loadout with TERs you save a couple of Sparrows from the forward wells too, so there's always a well-stocked styrene arsenal.

Sometimes I scrape paint, sometimes I mask, depends how accessible the area is -- convex or concave...

M/TB379

http://worldinminiature.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    November 2010
  • From: Lafayette, Indiana
Posted by Son Of Medicine Man on Thursday, July 14, 2011 7:15 PM

Just remember to connect your 6 foot of safety wire to the fuse!  (Per Berny!)

Ken

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Panama City, Florida, Hurricane Alley
Posted by berny13 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 8:11 PM

Son Of Medicine Man

Just remember to connect your 6 foot of safety wire to the fuse!  (Per Berny!)

Ken

Not the fuse, the rocket motor.  Didn't you learn anything from my dicussion at the museum.   Big Smile

Berny

 Phormer Phantom Phixer

On the bench

TF-102A Delta Dagger, 32nd FIS, 54-1370, 1/48 scale. Monogram Pro Modeler with C&H conversion.  

Revell F-4E Phantom II 33rd TFW, 58th TFS, 69-260, 1/32 scale. 

Tamiya F-4D Phantom II, 13th TFS, 66-8711, 1/32 scale.  F-4 Phantom Group Build. 

 

  • Member since
    November 2010
  • From: Lafayette, Indiana
Posted by Son Of Medicine Man on Thursday, July 14, 2011 8:15 PM

berny13

 Son Of Medicine Man:

Just remember to connect your 6 foot of safety wire to the fuse!  (Per Berny!)

Ken

 

Not the fuse, the rocket motor.  Didn't you learn anything from my dicussion at the museum.   Big Smile

I learned to read between the lines!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    August 2009
  • From: Toledo Area OH
Posted by Sparrowhyperion on Thursday, July 14, 2011 8:18 PM

LMAO.. Some people never learn Berny.  Unless you whack em over the head that is. 

WHACK!

Its the MOTOR Ken!  LOL

There I think he got it now.

 

berny13

 

 Son Of Medicine Man:

 

Just remember to connect your 6 foot of safety wire to the fuse!  (Per Berny!)

Ken

 

 

Not the fuse, the rocket motor.  Didn't you learn anything from my dicussion at the museum.   Big Smile

In the Hangar: 1/48 Hobby Boss F/A-18D RAAF Hornet,

On the Tarmac:  F4U-1D RNZAF Corsair 1/48 Scale.

  • Member since
    June 2009
Posted by jimbot58 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 8:42 PM

The Luftwaffe F's did not carry them.

"F-4F

The Luftwaffe also intended to equip two fighter and two bomber geschwaders ("wings") with a simplified single-seat version of the F-4E Phantom which had already been proposed for the TFX USAF program. This was reconsidered due to the cost of that version and instead, under the Peace Rhine program, the Luftwaffe purchased the F-4F, which was based on the F-4E.

The F-4F had one of the seven fuselage fuel tanks omitted along with the capability to carry AIM-7 Sparrow missiles and bombs. It was equipped with air combat maneuvering leading edge slats and had a higher thrust to weight ratio, approaching 1:1 when fuel was low."

*******

On my workbench now:

It's all about classic cars now!

Why can't I find the "Any" key on my keyboard?

 

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • From: Endicott, Va.
Posted by Bomber Boy on Thursday, July 14, 2011 8:44 PM

Bockscar

Hey Bomber; That's a great start!

I like the weathering on the seats and tub, well worn all right. The only thing you missed are Wrigley Spearmint chewing gum wrappers!...lol...

Thanks Bockscar, I noticed after I posted that the belts are still shinny but I have now coated with dull yet, I do that at the same time as the rest, as not to have to spray that stinking stuff too often.

James Herndon II __-_-_/"\_-_-__

Endicott ,Va

beandawgartworks.com

  • Member since
    June 2009
Posted by jimbot58 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 8:50 PM

The F-4F (Model 98NQ) was a version of the USAF F-4E built explicitly for the West German Luftwaffe. After having considered the Dassault Mirage F.1, the Lockheed CL-1200 Lancer, and even a single-seat fighter version of the Phantom under the designation F-4E(F), the Luftwaffe opted for 175 two-seat F-4Fs.

Back in 1960, McDonnell had entered a single-seat version of the Phantom in the IFX fighter contest. The US government promised that the winning design would be exported in substantial numbers to America's overseas allies. This contest was won by the Northrop F-5E, and the concept of a single-seat Phantom was quietly abandoned. It was briefly revived in 1971 when the West German government ordered such an aircraft under the designation F-4E(F). The F-4E(F) was to dispense with Sparrow capability and was to have a simplified electronics suite. However, before the F-4E(F) could enter production, the West German government changed its mind and decided instead to purchase a more straightforward two-seat cost-reduced adaptation of the F-4E. The designation F-4F was assigned to the project.

175 examples of the F-4F were ordered by the West German government. The F-4F emerged as a lighter and simpler F-4E which was significantly cheaper and incorporated major components that were manufactured in Germany. The number 7 fuselage fuel tank was removed and all Sparrow equipment was eliminated. The AN/APQ-120 radar was simplified, with no beacon search or constant wave illuminator being provided for Sparrow or Falcon missile launches. Although no inflight refuelling receptacle was initially fitted, the internal plumbing needed for midair refuelling was installed at the factory. An unslotted tailplane was used as an economy and weight-saving measure. The F-4F as originally designed lacked the capability of carrying nuclear weapons and it could not carry or launch certain air-to-ground missiles such as the Maverick, Shrike, or Walleye. The design that finally emerged was 3300 pounds lighter than the stock F-4E.

The first F-4F took off on its maiden flight on May 18, 1973. The 175 F-4Fs were assigned the Luftwaffe serials 3701/3875 (and for contract management purposes were also given the USAF serials 72-1111/1285). Major components were manufactured in Germany by MBB and by VFW-Fokker. The J79-MTU-17A engines were built under license from General Electric by Motoren-und-Turbinenen-Union Munchen GmBH.

Deliveries of the F-4F to the Luftwaffe began on September 5, 1973, and ended with the delivery of 3875 in April of 1976. They equipped two interceptor wings (JG-71 'Richthofen' and JG-74 'Molders') and two ground attack wings JBG-35 and JBG-36. JBG-35 was a dual-role fighter-bomber wing, which has previoulsy operated Fiat G-91s. The other wings had previously operated the F-104G Starfighter. JBG-35 was renamed JG-73 in 1994 and is now a fighter wing.

Twelve F-4Fs were assigned the unofficial designation of TF-4F while they were being used to train Luftwaffe crews in the United States. These aircraft were later flown to Germany and restored to full F-4F operational configuration.

Between November 1980 and late 1983, Luftwaffe F-4Fs were retrofitted with inflight refuelling receptacles and were upgraded with the capability of firing the Sparrow missile as well as the ability to handle the AGM-65 Maverick and the new AIM-9L Sidewinder. They were provided with a digital weapons computer and improved electronic countermeasures equipment, cockpit displays, and all-weather systems.

A further upgrade resulted in the F-4F ICE (Improved Combat Efficiency), which will be described in the next article.

 

Serials of the F-4F:

72-1111/1119 	McDonnell F-4F-52-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3701-3709) 
72-1120/1134 	McDonnell F-4F-53-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3710-3724) 
72-1135/1158 	McDonnell F-4F-54-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3725-3748) 
72-1159/1182 	McDonnell F-4F-55-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3749-3772) 
			37+56 w/o Sept 13, 1995 in southwest Germany
72-1183/1206 	McDonnell F-4F-56-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3773-3796) 
72-1207/1230 	McDonnell F-4F-57-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3797-3820) 
72-1231/1254 	McDonnell F-4F-58-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3821-3844) 
72-1255/1285 	McDonnell F-4F-59-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3845-3875) 

*******

On my workbench now:

It's all about classic cars now!

Why can't I find the "Any" key on my keyboard?

 

 

 

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:06 PM

Jim:

Thanks for the history, so, are the sparrow indents in the fuselage eliminated?

Should I buy more Squadron putty?...lol....

  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by Thunderbolt379 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:08 PM

Thanks for the post, Jim -- what was throwing me was the early 80s upgrade that restored Sparrow capability. It's hard to think of a Phantom without Sparrows, but I guess in the tactical environment of the central European theatre of the 70s Sidewinders and a Vulcan were plenty, especially as the original Fs had such high T:W they could operate in a similar regimen to the next-generation planes coming along at that time. All fascinating Spook history!

M/TB379

http://worldinminiature.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:22 PM

Thunderbolt379

Thanks for the post, Jim -- what was throwing me was the early 80s upgrade that restored Sparrow capability. It's hard to think of a Phantom without Sparrows, but I guess in the tactical environment of the central European theatre of the 70s Sidewinders and a Vulcan were plenty, especially as the original Fs had such high T:W they could operate in a similar regimen to the next-generation planes coming along at that time. All fascinating Spook history!

M/TB379

Yeah!!!

F-4 without missiles....McNamara....rolling over in his...errrhhh....silo....lol.....

Mike, please unpack the T:W acronym, I think that means Tire to Weight Ratio...lol...

  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by Thunderbolt379 on Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:32 PM

Thrust to weight ratio -- with 3300 pounds off the airframe, a low fuel state close to the end of a mission would put them into the same -- or similar -- excess thrust (= sustained manoeuvre capability) situation as the F-15 and F-16...

M/TB379

http://worldinminiature.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:51 PM

Thunderbolt379

Thrust to weight ratio -- with 3300 pounds off the airframe, a low fuel state close to the end of a mission would put them into the same -- or similar -- excess thrust (= sustained manoeuvre capability) situation as the F-15 and F-16...

M/TB379

Ahhhhh....I was so close, but still, so wrong....lol....to think i like J-79's .....Embarrassed

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: State of Mississippi. State motto: Virtute et armis (By valor and arms)
Posted by mississippivol on Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:51 PM

James, and Mike, ya'll are making some great progress! I gotta get more done on my "J"...

Glenn

  • Member since
    June 2009
Posted by jimbot58 on Friday, July 15, 2011 3:50 AM

Bockscar

Jim:

Thanks for the history, so, are the sparrow indents in the fuselage eliminated?

Should I buy more Squadron putty?...lol....

Hmmmm....didn't mean to sound as if I were preaching. Sorry.Embarrassed

It seems that the RF-4E I have, the Sparrow bays have been eliminated in the front and fillers are provided for the rear. Don't go and buy that putty, because I found several photos of the bottom of the "F" and Sparrow bays are there, even though they couldn't use them. Kind of interesting that there were plans for a single seat version of the Phantom!

Perhaps the indents were left in as it would have been even more added expense to change them???

The ICE upgrade gave them the ability to use AMRAAM's but I don't know about the Sparrows.

Wonder if my aircraft would have been included in the upgrade and I could include those AMRAAM's? It would seem less naked!

*******

On my workbench now:

It's all about classic cars now!

Why can't I find the "Any" key on my keyboard?

 

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by Thunderbolt379 on Friday, July 15, 2011 9:02 AM

Given that streamlining blanking plates existed for the Sparrow wells (am I right, Berny?) and that the RFs had clean undersides, I'd have thought the Fs would inherit those components... Could the F-with-bays you saw be an F post-1983, with Sparrow armament reintroduced?

Not much progress to report on the -K today. I was going to do the metallics but pulled out the Hasegawa RF-4B I'm planning to do in markings for VMFP-3 (Bicentennial) and found that even this kit has the strengthening plates on the stabilators. I checked photos of the VMFP-3 birds, and could not find one with this feature, let alone the bicentennial paint scheme bird, so removed it. I figured I needed to do some more smoothing and polishing of plastic before committing all these stabs to paint, metallic is unforgiving of imperfections to say the least.

I also finished masking the seekers of the Sparrows, and an upcoming job will be the 'Missile Factory,' full armament for three planes...

M/TB379

http://worldinminiature.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Panama City, Florida, Hurricane Alley
Posted by berny13 on Friday, July 15, 2011 9:48 AM

Thunderbolt379

Given that streamlining blanking plates existed for the Sparrow wells (am I right, Berny?) and that the RFs had clean undersides, I'd have thought the Fs would inherit those components... Could the F-with-bays you saw be an F post-1983, with Sparrow armament reintroduced?

M/TB379

No such plates existed.  The RF's were built without any launcher bays.  The engine bay doors were a complete redesign without the wells and were more square than rounded like the missile carrying versions.  The bulkhead where the missile launchers would be placed was of a different shape and beefed up in the RF version.  The forward fuselage section of the RF had side looking radar where the missile bays would have been.

The missile carrying versions did not have any type of fairing to streamline the bays.  Even on the F-4G where the forward missile bays had part of the APR-38 Radar detection system, a lot of missile firing hardware was removed but the launchers were still installed so the jet could carry ECM pod or other electronic equipment.

The F-4F had the launchers installed but were not capable of firing missiles.  The forward launchers were used with a missile well adapter to carry ECM pods.  Once the F-4F got the Radar upgrade which enabled it to carry the AIM-7 or British designed Skyflash, then missiles could be loaded and fired.  To my knowledge the F-4 was not capable of carrying the AIM-120 because it would take a complete redesign of the missile wells to carry them.  The fins wouldn't fit into the bay and the AIM-120 was much longer. 

Berny

 Phormer Phantom Phixer

On the bench

TF-102A Delta Dagger, 32nd FIS, 54-1370, 1/48 scale. Monogram Pro Modeler with C&H conversion.  

Revell F-4E Phantom II 33rd TFW, 58th TFS, 69-260, 1/32 scale. 

Tamiya F-4D Phantom II, 13th TFS, 66-8711, 1/32 scale.  F-4 Phantom Group Build. 

 

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Friday, July 15, 2011 5:57 PM

jimbot58

 

 Bockscar:

 

Jim:

Thanks for the history, so, are the sparrow indents in the fuselage eliminated?

Should I buy more Squadron putty?...lol....

 

 

Hmmmm....didn't mean to sound as if I were preaching. Sorry.Embarrassed

It seems that the RF-4E I have, the Sparrow bays have been eliminated in the front and fillers are provided for the rear. Don't go and buy that putty, because I found several photos of the bottom of the "F" and Sparrow bays are there, even though they couldn't use them. Kind of interesting that there were plans for a single seat version of the Phantom!

Perhaps the indents were left in as it would have been even more added expense to change them???

The ICE upgrade gave them the ability to use AMRAAM's but I don't know about the Sparrows.

Wonder if my aircraft would have been included in the upgrade and I could include those AMRAAM's? It would seem less naked!

Hey Jim, no worries or apologies needed, I didn't know you were preaching pal...lol....I try to understand as much as I can, but, I know as much about these variation issues as I do about craters on the far side of the moon.....

I figure I should leave the Sparrow wells in. Thanks for your info, it does help. Gosh knows, it helps to have a guy like Berny in town, otherwise, back to best guesses from best sourcesSmile.....

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Friday, July 15, 2011 5:58 PM

Uhhh....Sparrow wells?....I mean't launcher bays.....

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Friday, July 15, 2011 6:00 PM

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 PM

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Ontario, Canada
Posted by Bockscar on Friday, July 15, 2011 6:07 PM

http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ausairpower.net/Active-Skyflash-Cutaway-S.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ausairpower.net/skyflash-slammer.html&h=500&w=1372&sz=108&tbnid=HNs-sWFBfT4_FM:&tbnh=55&tbnw=150&prev=/search%3Fq%3DskyfLASH%2BMISSILE%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=skyfLASH+MISSILE&usg=__KliWJA9HVRmQ-wZK-zdeImtAH6k=&sa=X&ei=t8YgTvv0K6nu0gGd2aGfAw&ved=0CCkQ9QEwAg

 

Wouldn't want that splashing my windshield....

  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by Thunderbolt379 on Friday, July 15, 2011 7:33 PM

Berny -- dang! Where did I get that impression???  Maybe looking at the RFs, I made an assumption maaaany years back and it just stuck in my mind? So I guess the drag penalty of the Sparrow recesses was not enough of a performance degrader for it to be worthwhile streamlining them if Sparrows were not beign carried?

Cheers, Mike/TB379

http://worldinminiature.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    November 2010
  • From: Lafayette, Indiana
Posted by Son Of Medicine Man on Friday, July 15, 2011 8:51 PM

Here you go Dom, an AIR-2A, ready to go!

 

Ken

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.