The Official F-4 Phantom II Group Build 2011

Hi folks.  Sorry I haven't been on.  My landlord pulled a dirty trick with our electricity and it took a while to get our power back on.  My priority project is almost complete then I will get back to my FGR2.  All of the replacement parts have arrived and I have already rebuilt the cockpit sub assembly.  I'll post some pics when I find my camera.  Question..  Does anyone remember what page in the thread that the pics of the 69-260 F4E were posted on?  I downloaded it once but now I can't find it.  Specifically the "sick too oh" landing gear door shot.  And Berny, please message me your shipping address, thanks.

Rich

berny13

 

TarnShip:

 

that bird would be "capable of hitting anything except the Mach"

that's a load of iron right there, Berny

which station on the Mer's was left empty?, if you remember, that is

Extremely tempting to build that load out and label it "per Berny's memory" and put it up amongst a bunch of other jets on the shelf,,,,,,just to see if anyone says "yikes' when they are casually looking at models

most already don't believe the asymmetric LGB/Guidance Pod load outs were real, lol

cool, 18,000 lbs usable, plus the bring back weight on the 7 stores

Rex

 

 

The aft lower stations on the MER were left empty because of clearance on take off rotation. 

By the time the jets started carrying LGB/OGB/Guidance Pods, I had left combat outfits and was working in DEPOT as a RAM Team Chief.  When I deployed over for Linebacker from Eglin AFB, I saw many asymmetrical loadouts.  You wonder how the aircraft could maintain balance on return.  That had to be a lot of drag on one side.  One 370 tank outboard and a large guidance pod on the inboard pylon just doesn't make for a streamline load. 

I understand the rotation on take off,----Krike....that weighs more than the trash I boought for text books...lol...

Those MER empties are interesting for a future build, I would have never have stumbled upon that guys...

Shish.....and Jane survived......

TarnShip

that bird would be "capable of hitting anything except the Mach"

that's a load of iron right there, Berny

which station on the Mer's was left empty?, if you remember, that is

Extremely tempting to build that load out and label it "per Berny's memory" and put it up amongst a bunch of other jets on the shelf,,,,,,just to see if anyone says "yikes' when they are casually looking at models

most already don't believe the asymmetric LGB/Guidance Pod load outs were real, lol

cool, 18,000 lbs usable, plus the bring back weight on the 7 stores

Rex

The aft lower stations on the MER were left empty because of clearance on take off rotation. 

By the time the jets started carrying LGB/OGB/Guidance Pods, I had left combat outfits and was working in DEPOT as a RAM Team Chief.  When I deployed over for Linebacker from Eglin AFB, I saw many asymmetrical loadouts.  You wonder how the aircraft could maintain balance on return.  That had to be a lot of drag on one side.  One 370 tank outboard and a large guidance pod on the inboard pylon just doesn't make for a streamline load. 

Bockscar

berny13:

That's a light load Bocks.  The heaviest I saw my jet loaded was a MER on the outboard pylons with five 1,000 pounders loaded on each outboard.  The inboard was loaded with a TER and three 1,000 pounders loaded on each pylon.  A 600 gallon centerline tank, two AIM-7's on the aft stations, an ECM pod loaded on the left forward missile well and a strike camera loaded on the right forward missile well.  That is 16,000 pounds of bombs.  It took a lot of engine power to get the jet moving. 

 

Shish, Berny, that's a load alright. Do you recall if they hit anything?

They took down a bridge on that mission.  I saw the strike camera film at ops the next day.  One bomb hit the bridge support and another hit the bridge.  The last bomb hit on land and took out two SAM launchers loaded with SAM's.  

that bird would be "capable of hitting anything except the Mach"

that's a load of iron right there, Berny

which station on the Mer's was left empty?, if you remember, that is

Extremely tempting to build that load out and label it "per Berny's memory" and put it up amongst a bunch of other jets on the shelf,,,,,,just to see if anyone says "yikes' when they are casually looking at models

most already don't believe the asymmetric LGB/Guidance Pod load outs were real, lol

cool, 18,000 lbs usable, plus the bring back weight on the 7 stores

Rex

berny13

That's a light load Bocks.  The heaviest I saw my jet loaded was a MER on the outboard pylons with five 1,000 pounders loaded on each outboard.  The inboard was loaded with a TER and three 1,000 pounders loaded on each pylon.  A 600 gallon centerline tank, two AIM-7's on the aft stations, an ECM pod loaded on the left forward missile well and a strike camera loaded on the right forward missile well.  That is 16,000 pounds of bombs.  It took a lot of engine power to get the jet moving. 

Shish, Berny, that's a load alright. Do you recall if they hit anything?

That's a light load Bocks.  The heaviest I saw my jet loaded was a MER on the outboard pylons with five 1,000 pounders loaded on each outboard.  The inboard was loaded with a TER and three 1,000 pounders loaded on each pylon.  A 600 gallon centerline tank, two AIM-7's on the aft stations, an ECM pod loaded on the left forward missile well and a strike camera loaded on the right forward missile well.  That is 16,000 pounds of bombs.  It took a lot of engine power to get the jet moving. 

berny13

...I came in work one morning and my jet was loaded with 2,000 pounders outboard, two 1,000 pounders hung on TERs on the inboards....

Whaaaaaat?  I'm a sucker for unusual and/or heavy loads, and that one sounds awesome!  Can you tell me more about this load?  I'm guessing there was a belly tank?  What about missiles?  Berny, I think you've piqued my interest...

-O

berny13

With a bomb load that heavy it is more than likely he is going after a bridge, large ware house, or train depot.  I came in work one morning and my jet was loaded with 2,000 pounders outboard, two 1,000 pounders hung on TERs on the inboards. I asked the crew what the were after and they told me a bridge.  After they got back I asked how they did and the WSO told me they killed a lot of fish but no damage at all to the bridge.   

Too bad about missing the bridge though.....Jane mighta' been posin' on it....lol....

With a bomb load that heavy it is more than likely he is going after a bridge, large ware house, or train depot.  I came in work one morning and my jet was loaded with 2,000 pounders outboard, two 1,000 pounders hung on TERs on the inboards. I asked the crew what the were after and they told me a bridge.  After they got back I asked how they did and the WSO told me they killed a lot of fish but no damage at all to the bridge.   

oortiz10

 

Rex, you're right, that shadow doesn't help matters much, does it?  I downloaded the photo onto my computer and played with it in some photo editting software to see if I could make out what was in the shadow.  I over exposed the pic, under exposed it, changed the contrast and brightness, color saturation; everything!  I couldn't find any evidence of the plate being there.  Just my luck!  Although, my hass-lafed attempt at "research" can't really be considered "accurate, I think I'm going to leave the plate on the plastic.  It'd be more hassle than it's worth to remove them and replace the panel lines. 

Thanks Tarn, I won't be using those plates on USMC or Navy craft!

Oh, did I mention I like those fire crackers?...lol...

TarnShip

that's a 2,000 hanging out there in the breeze

Mike is the most likely to know "when to Roo, and when not to Roo", I'd bet

made myself up a little "weapons note card" for that bird,,,,,,,too cool not to put on the shelf, and I need variety anyway

Rex

Those fuses are set to go off at tent height...lol.....could bloody ruin a NVA s'more with one of those....lol....

Omar -- interesting research puzzle! I can confirm that we had the blue-white-roo by 1971, so for an Aus bird to be wearing an RAF roundel on the intakes is definitely an exceptional situation. We carried the Aus roundel on the rear fuselage in exactly the same location as the USAF star and bars, over SEA camo, so insignia on the intake as definitely non-standard. It may relate to an RAF pilot on exchange, or symbolise a combined exercise, perhaps. There was a Brit F-4K in some sort of combined exercise back in the 70s, in which the US white star was added to the RN roundel as an extension of the white area, so it's not unknown. Also, the paintwork doesn't look much like SEA camo, so again there's a big questionmark against it.

Cheers, Mike/TB379

that's a 2,000 hanging out there in the breeze

Mike is the most likely to know "when to Roo, and when not to Roo", I'd bet

made myself up a little "weapons note card" for that bird,,,,,,,too cool not to put on the shelf, and I need variety anyway

Rex

TarnShip

...could that shadow have possibly been in any more of the wrong place? 

I sure like that bomb load though...

Rex, you're right, that shadow doesn't help matters much, does it?  I downloaded the photo onto my computer and played with it in some photo editting software to see if I could make out what was in the shadow.  I over exposed the pic, under exposed it, changed the contrast and brightness, color saturation; everything!  I couldn't find any evidence of the plate being there.  Just my luck!  Although, my hass-lafed attempt at "research" can't really be considered "accurate, I think I'm going to leave the plate on the plastic.  It'd be more hassle than it's worth to remove them and replace the panel lines. 

Since I seem to remember that we have a Aussie in our GB midst, I'll throw this out there.  The website mentions that the Phantom in question was piloted by  RAAF personnel on exchange with the USAF.  That would explain the roundel on the intake.  What I can't determine for sure is the design of the roundel.  After blowing up the photo to see if I can make out the details, it looks to me like it's the blue-white-red of the RAF, not the blue-white-roo of the RAAF. 

Did the RAAF ever use the blue-white-red of the RAF?  Did the RAAF roundel always have the 'roo in the center?  If not, would the RAAF roundel have had the 'roo in '71?  Would the RAAF have "flown" with RAF markings?

Oh, one last thing, are those 1000 or 2000 pounders on the outboards?

Thanks!

-O

just watching your six for you Berny

Rex

After some time away from the bench I finally started the second round of putty on the Testors kit. OMG I hate this kit, should have went for the Hase.

Edit: Oh, wait. I was in the FIRST F4 build. Wow, been away longer than I thought.

SUPRISE.  I am still alive.  I am between doses now and am able to function.  Rex is right about the USAF versions and not the USN/USMC aircraft having the beef up plates installed on their jets.  Thanks Rex, for clearing that up.  I neglected to mention that.  At least there is someone to keep me straight. 

There is a lot of nice looking work being done now.  It would take several pages to mention all of them and I might miss some so I'll just say, Good job everyone. 

Time to go take my knock out pill and spend the rest of the morning sleeping.    

wow, O,,,,,could that shadow have possibly been in any more of the wrong place?

It goes just this side of what we are trying to see, lol

a 1971 shot of a bird built in FY 1967,,,,,,with the early D nose

I would be tempted to say no plates,,,,,,but, if you built it with plates, and used that photo as your source,,,,,,who could tell you it was wrong?

the way the stab assembly swapped on there,,,,,it's possible the very next day it might have a different assembly anyway,,,,,,,,I have a pic of a B,,,,,with a USAF camo'd C stab assembly on it,,,,borrowed from the AF

I sure like that bomb load though

Rex

Bocks, hey, at least you have parts glued together.  I think the only "assembly" I've done is glue the scoops and intakes onto the fuse sides.  Besides that, there has been no "assembly"...

Ken, thanks for the response.  I'm bummed to hear about Berny, but if you speak to him, thank him for the input. 

Now, knowing the timeframe of my potential project, let me ask you all this:  If you look here and scroll about two-thirds of the way down, you'll see a -D in 1971.  Does it look like this jet had the triangular reinforcement plates to you?

 Cheers!

-O

as Berny and myself have both said before "all the models had them by,,,date,,,,,," only applies to the USAF based versions,,,,,,the USN/USMC aircraft never got those plates at all

just making sure someone new doesn't wander in and get confused

Rex

I see two on there now in the US for $15 but they only ship in the US.  One actually has free shipping in the US.

Nice jig! Never saw that one up here in the sticks!...lol....

Shish-ka-bob....gotta get me one a' those.....$650 on Ebay....lol....

Thanks!

That stand is the old Black and Decker Workmate Hobbycrafter.

I love this thing and have had it forever. 

This is the kit that is a pain.

But I'm turning the corner on it!

oortiz10

Hey gang,

I have a question about the triangular reinforcement plates on the stabilators.  I know the "later" Phantoms had 'em while the "early" ones didn't.  Would anyone (Berny) know when those plates started being added to jets?  I'm interested in building a -D (66-7501) as it served in Vietnam.  Before I burden myself with sanding off Revellogram's plates and replacing the panel lines, I wanna make sure the plates weren't on that jet.

Thanks!

-O

 

Hi O,

I just talked to Berny.  He apologizes for not being on here to chat with everyone personally.  The medication he is on makes him sleep alot.

I asked the question you posted, and he said it was more of a time frame than a model.  All the models eventually got the reinforcement plates.  They started putting them on in 1969 and by 1973 almost all of the Phantoms had them installed.  If you wanted to be exactly accurate, you would have to find a picture of your aircraft at the particular point in time that you are modeling.

Ken

Hey big 'O', nice to see you're still in the game!

Every 2 months or so I'll try to send you inspirational shots of what real snails do for a living!...lol...

68GT;

Ummm....that's looking like it's wortha 'pain' or two...lol...

Nice robo-stand!

Hey gang,

I have a question about the triangular reinforcement plates on the stabilators.  I know the "later" Phantoms had 'em while the "early" ones didn't.  Would anyone (Berny) know when those plates started being added to jets?  I'm interested in building a -D (66-7501) as it served in Vietnam.  Before I burden myself with sanding off Revellogram's plates and replacing the panel lines, I wanna make sure the plates weren't on that jet.

Thanks!

-O

Got a little more done to the F-4J.  Once this is done I'll get back to that RF-4E thats been a real pain in the A.