Jump to content

1/48 F-4B. Zoukei-Mura Conversion. VF-51 CAG Bird


Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Just finished this F-4B in VF-51 Screaming Eagles CAG Colors.    This jet Killed one MIG and displayed the 4 MIG kills the squadron scored on its last Vietnam cruise.  The kit is the new Zoukei-Mura F-4J kit with the following additions:

Accessories used:

  • Eduard Brassin F-4B wheels
  • Master Metal Pitot tubes and AOA Sensor
  • Eduard Brassin Seats w/ PE
  • Furball Decals - They Fit Perfect!

Scratch Built items are:

  • Chin Pod
  • Fin Cap
  • Thin wing including the wheel well and speed brakes
  • Non-Slatted Plain Elevator
  • F-4B WSO left side panel
  • F-4B WSO Upper and Mid forward Instrument Panel
  • Scratch built Canopy sills, Breaker bar
  • Short Exhaust Nozzle, Trim,  Exhaust tube, and burner assembly
  • Intake fans. (The Kit supplied full engines were not used)

 

fullsizeoutput_22e_zpsfrvp5dua.jpeg

 

IMG_3884_zpslbatfml9.jpg

 

IMG_3885_zpsyfmki0do.jpg

 

IMG_3902_zpsx8k228g1.jpg

 

IMG_3903_zpswk4tdrtn.jpg

 

IMG_3919_zpsoivvahp4.jpg

 

IMG_3910_zpswwmhfneu.jpg

 

IMG_3911_zps9gdyf1tc.jpg

 

IMG_3916_zpsn1pf0l2x.jpg

 

IMG_3917_zps0qrd8e3n.jpg

 

IMG_3900_zpsgfeimbdd.jpg

 

IMG_3892_zpsnuvgw3av.jpg

 

IMG_3890_zpsrdawtwtc.jpg

 

Edited by ghatherly
  • Like 38
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello ghatherly, 

    Beautiful work on the Phantom. Im just getting into them myself. I have an 48 scale academy F-4b kit though academy issued it with N markings for VF-111 in 1975. I know this through exhaustive research over a rwo month period talking to actual 111 crew and maintence personel. My 2nd is a conversion of a Revell "C" to an early "J", done in VMFA-334 markings out of Chu Lai in '69. Not hard considering Revell left the cat. launch hooks molded into the lower wing. 

      New here on BM and not trying to be rude. I would like offer one minor point on your Phantom. I've talked to several pilots and maintenance guys from the Phantom days and was told by several of them that if you have the big gas bag (drop-tank) on the centerline you only used 2 sparrows in the rear stations. Best to go in with less weaponry than ignite the tank by launching a missle. Of course the corps  prefered the two wing tanks as did the USAF.  And the air force would opt for either a recce pod early on or an ecm pod in the port forward sparrow bay in later models.

    Again not trying to be rude or overstep just offering my two cents. And again Beautiful work 

 

dennis

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for the kind words.  

 

1 hour ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

 

      New here on BM and not trying to be rude. I would like offer one minor point on your Phantom. I've talked to several pilots and maintenance guys from the Phantom days and was told by several of them that if you have the big gas bag (drop-tank) on the centerline you only used 2 sparrows in the rear stations. Best to go in with less weaponry than ignite the tank by launching a missle. Of course the corps  prefered the two wing tanks as did the USAF.  And the air force would opt for either a recce pod early on or an ecm pod in the port forward sparrow bay in later models.

    Again not trying to be rude or overstep just offering my two cents. And again Beautiful work 

 

dennis

 

 

Hi Dennis,

Sounds like these guys were pulling your leg.   The CL drop tanks could only sustain 3-4 G and therefor was punched off  before engaging a MIg.  As you can see the rear fins would physically hit the tank if not jettisoned before combat.   This was one reason that later on the USAF used the F-15 tank in the CL position on E & G Phantoms.  I would also point out that sparrow missiles do not ignite or launch from the jet as do the AIM-9's.   Sparrows drop free at launch and ignite well clear of the jet that fired it.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Gary

Edited by ghatherly
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes anything always helps. Not sure your background. Were you ever pilot/ground crew? Or just aficionado like myself. Of course I will take any info and store it in the old file cabinet in my head. Its always possible i was being had. Just not sure if several people would all say the same thing at various times and places. Unless there was a kernal of some truth to it. And also its possible that regs changed at some point. That can account for both viewpoints being accurate. Thanks for the input and again i still think the model is top notch 

 

Thanks

Dennis

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

Yes anything always helps. Not sure your background. Were you ever pilot/ground crew? Or just aficionado like myself. Of course I will take any info and store it in the old file cabinet in my head. Its always possible i was being had. Just not sure if several people would all say the same thing at various times and places. Unless there was a kernal of some truth to it. And also its possible that regs changed at some point. That can account for both viewpoints being accurate. Thanks for the input and again i still think the model is top notch 

 

Thanks

Dennis

Thanks again for the kind words.   With the length of time that the Phantom was in use I am sure every conceivable load out was used at one time or another. It is great discussion to have and really no right or wrong on the subject.   I am sure all here that have read the thread appreciated your input and remarks,.  Have a great day! 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent model with a very well done complex paint scheme with all the different tones and shades you have used.

It was certainly equipped to do business with that load!  

Andrew. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:wow: Stunning job! :worthy: 

 

I too seem to recall something about not having the four Sparrow bays all loaded at the same time, but my research was limited to Navy F-4J's. As far as I can remember, it had nothing to do with central tank clearance, more with total load - but I might as well be wrong.

The Phantom is a fascinating subject, isn't it? :thumbsup: 

 

Ciao

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, giemme said:

:wow: Stunning job! :worthy: 

 

I too seem to recall something about not having the four Sparrow bays all loaded at the same time, but my research was limited to Navy F-4J's. As far as I can remember, it had nothing to do with central tank clearance, more with total load - but I might as well be wrong.

The Phantom is a fascinating subject, isn't it? :thumbsup: 

 

Ciao

Hello Giorgio,

Afaik, it has more to do with the CG, I have a loading chart elsewhere in my documents, just need to find where

Very nice Phantom, mine is about to be finished, it is a -B from Academy

Nice painting, I like it Congratulations:yes:

Sincerely

Corsaircorp

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, thanks for the kind comments, they mean a lot.    This topic of the CL tanks and Missile load has turned into a great discussion.    Our US IPMS National Convention is in three weeks and I will be seeing many ex Phantom driver both USN and USAF.  I will ask around and see what their thoughts are.  I can tell you though from past experience that when a group of flyers are asked a question, you get three times as many answers as pilots..... in other words who knows!!!!!!

 

Cheers,

Gary

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awesome! And brings back some wonderful memories of building the Hasegawa version of this back in 1987 :blush:

 

I have an Academy F-4B, VF-51 decals and all the bells and whistles in the stash waiting to be built up like this. Great job!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very nice rendition of the supersonic can opener. What a lot of work you gave yourself, I guess you couldn't wait for ZM to release the B/N?

 

With regards to the Sparrow load out with C/L tank debate the RAF always fitted a full complement of Sparrow (later Skyflash) with C/L tank loaded when on (N)QRA. As stated previously the Sparrow is basically ejected from the aircraft so is well below the aircraft before the motor fires. Possibly the USN might have had other reasons for only carrying 2 Sparrows as they often carried a very mixed load out.

In normal operations British Tooms carried weights in the front sparrow bays for C of G purposes (but the trim of the RR Spey powered F-4s may well have been quite different from the J-79 powered F-4s).

 

Duncan B

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have asked the question about centre-line tanks and firing Sparrows of the members of a closed group Facebook page dedicated to the UK F-4s. 

 

According to the 'Flight Manual' the forward Sparrows could not be fired if a c/l tank was fitted, on the missile status panel the fwd locations would show a "TK" light indicating there was a tank on store station 5 (centreline) and the aircraft would not fire the front missiles until the "TK" light was out (If the light was out due to a faulty sensor with a tank fitted the tank would not feed fuel and could not be jettisoned either). The sequence for firing was from front to aft so in that situation the aft sparrows could still be fired but the front ones wouldn't until the c/l tank was jettisoned. In practice the aircrew would prefer the rear to fire first due to the c of g but the normal (automatic) sequence was from front to back if no tank fitted to station 5.

So there we have it, although some of the aircrew didn't remember this so it goes to show that no-one's memory is infallible.

 

Hope that helps

Duncan B

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...