XV571

Hi Gaz, Not sure if this is a typo, but the F/A-18D is a Legacy Hornet two seater and I believe you're referring to the AFV Club canopy AC32002 for the Hobbyboss kit? I don't have the Hobbyboss Hornet but looking at the HB F/A-18D instructions their canopy uses a fully separate frame and glazing option. I guess if you're feeling brave then you could trim away the damaged Meng clear sections and see if the Meng frame sections can be adapted to the AFV clear part. I've also compared the Meng F/A-18F and my Kinetic Blue Angels kit K48073 which contains both single and two seat canopies. A comparison indicates they're visually the same with some minor dimensional differences; the Kinetic version is slightly narrower at the base and is has a less noticeable 'Omega' shape but should fit with a little adjustment at the aft top edge and forward lower corners. The dual canopy is also in K48088 so maybe a post in the Wanted section may yield one from someone who has built a single seater using one of those two kits. The clear section is M1 and the internal frame is P2. I'd offer mine but it's the only two seater Legacy Hornet I have and is planned for a VMFA-533 F/A-18D at some point. It looks as if at least one Legacy Hornet two seat canopy may be a viable alternative if you can't source the Meng part. If you're building with the canopy raised then the the Kinetic version could definitely be a suitable replacement. I'm sure it could be adapted in the closed position too if needed. HTH, Jonathan

Update: Took a little longer than expected, to get the reply, but this is what I've been informed that the delivery documentation lists the whites as: Fuselage, Fin and Engine Nacelles are RAL 9003 white overall Wings, including the Sharklets and Pylons (where painted) plus the Horizontal Stabilisers are Matterhorn white on both surfaces. It was also confirmed that these are the same as the standard Lufthansa base fuselage and wings/stabs. HTH, Jonathan

I'm pretty certain that the wings and horizontal stabiliser surfaces will be Matterhorn White. Brussels Airlines is a Lufthansa Group company and as I understand it, their aircraft are acquired as part of a combined contract and then allocated to the appropriate airline, @Skodadriver If you can wait until next week I can make some enquiries to confirm their basic wing and fuselage livery as it should be the same as the DLH A320NEOs. Scott is correct that this is actually a very pale shade of grey and you can see the contrast between the wing and fuselage in Julian's excellent photo. Matterhorn White is the only option for the A350 wing and as it is clearly not a pure white shade I've searched for a long time for a definitive match and finally arrived at FS 17865, also called 'Hawker Beechcraft white' Although I've not used it in anger, AMMO acrylic A.MIG-0119 'Cold Gray' was listed as a match for FS17865 and the bottle I have looks to have the right contrast placed next to a white like Appliance White. The Mig paint looks to have been replaced by an Atom version ATOM-20123 but this is, curiously, matched to FS36628, which is listed as aluminium! I'll have to get a bottle to compare the two. I'll hopefully have a more definitive answer for the wings by the middle of next week. HTH, Jonathan

I don't normally venture into that particular region of the internet but sometimes searches throw up pages that are too irresistible to ignore. One of them is Aviation MT run by Godfrey Mangion, a famous Maltese aviation photographer and modeller. I believe this is the photo that Iain is referring to and should be visible to all: https://www.facebook.com/aviationmt/photos/banking-hard-over-luqa-is-this-raf-phantom-fgr2-xv490-note-centerline-mounted-su/1022535533431432/ Direct link to the image: https://scontent.flhr1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/699650867_1022535540098098_1596594431786067649_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_p180x540_tt6&_nc_cat=103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=fM3TknP2T9kQ7kNvwF9z0Q6&_nc_oc=AdrfPsxd4P4Qb1fcUUu3zq_O2HoWF2GSNx90-xcnof3Jy4pNNYcb_YmD7l2ATnlIOhM&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr1-1.fna&_nc_gid=E74ijufqQcgT_22Zv6rbhA&_nc_ss=7b289&oh=00_Af6oa-kggKlomf9t24RNoDmITJ8tIOhbTptfKnnpGDtk4w&oe=6A0F8108 The outboard panels may be more likely to be a combination of the movement of the serials inboard some time in the mid '70s and the inspections required on the wing structure after cracks were identified as beautifully describe by our own Dennis Robinson: If you want to upgrade the inboard pylons, I recommend the Reskit US Navy pylons, these come with a separate weapons adapter as it was usually removed when the Sidewinder launch rails were installed so you can add a little variation: https://reskit-models.com/scale-plastic-model-kits/navy-inboard-pylons-for-f-4-phantom-ii-2-pcs-3d-printed-1-48 On the RWR/ILS question, it looks as if only one jet, XV464, was equipped with this when operating with 14 Sqn. You can see her here (about 3/4 down the page). The squadron operated the FGR.2 from June 1970 to November 1975 with 14 (Designate) forming on Jaguars in April 1975 and formally standing up on 1st December. I would imagine that during this period priority would have been given to sending RWR equipped aircraft to other Strike units pending commencement of their conversion to Jaguars or to the new Air Defence squadrons converting on to the Phantom. HTH, Jonathan

There are some photos here showing the pods from a side view and front on giving an idea of the depth and angles of the pylons and the pod profiles: https://www.cavalcadeofwings.com/product/usaf-convair-c-131a-samaritan-2/ HTH, Jonathan

Got it 👍I had a look in the Stabilator section of the US Navy F-4 SRM copy I have and found this, which is the exact repair you describe: For the extension of the camouflage into the intake I generally use the following: i) The depth for land based F-4s as 36 inches (about where the wing leading edge meets the fuselage) ii) On naval F-4s use 3 inches (just past the intake lip aligning with the aft edge of the Vari-ramp). This is from the official McDonnell F-4M drawing: There are exceptions: as Duncan mentions and seen in the photo of XT875/K the FG.1s were usually ii) until repainted into the AD greys. Even the ex-FAA aircraft when transferred kept the small demarcation since they just received a rub-down and respray into the Tactical Scheme for integration into 43 & 111 Squadrons. Jonathan

Hi Michael, I think I have found the answer. I believe the aircraft is C-131B 53-7823 which ties in with your observation of the serial. I've found a report titled "Aeronautical Systems Division studies in weightlessness : 1959-1960" this has a section starting on page 17 detailing the use of the C-131 as a Zero G test aircraft which lists '7823 as the aircraft selected. Searching for the serial gives you this: More pictures here: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/53-7823.html?sortBy=relevant The tail badge would then be this: I also found this video (if you don't want to watch the, to modern eyes, crazy way of testing the F-104's C-2 ejection seat) skip to the section titled Weightlessness. There's a shot of the 'How High The Moon' titling on the nose and the same flight profile in white, as detailed in the above report (also seems to be the same black marking under 'Force' on the nose of 53-7791) : As hinted by the video's thumbnail photo, the second half of the section is both rather horrifying and funny at the same time as it demonstrates the effect of weightlessness on cats and pigeons. The rest of the video is a fascinating insight into how the space programme tried to anticipate what would happen to the body during spaceflight. The 40,000 feet reference is definitely bogus; the report details a profile starting at 12,500ft ending up at 10,500ft. Maybe the other video producer conflated the flight mission with the later KC-135 operations. HTH, Jonathan

Hi Pappy, Duncan B's post would explain why there are two types of reinforcing plates seen applied to the UK type stabilators -the repair he describes are most likely the straps running along the spanwise joints where the outboard panels join together. The rods will be to prevent the upper and lower plates crushing the internal honeycomb while transferring loads into the main skin, I've seen similar temporary repairs on composite panels where metal sleeves are used with the plates being clamped by conventional fasteners like hi-loks (on the civil side we very rarely use welding as a structural repair). The more visible type will be the small plate added to the connection between the centre panels of the inboard and outboard sections. This appears as a small rectangular area of the camouflage paint at the boundary between the natural metal panels and the painted outboard panels. For those that haven't seen it, below is the relevant extract from my post in BigTurboFan's epic Spey Phantom build thread: "The British type were more rectangular - ... the [Hasegawa/Revell] kit examples have the correct configuration; the lateral strips along the outboard sections running parallel to the leading edge are a little overscale but in the right light you can see them on the real thing. This is taken from a picture I took of the rear of 228OCU's XV406 at the 1985 Abingdon BoB show: " There is a photo of the FG.1 stabilators being built at the, then BAC, Preston Strand Road factory in the Osprey Air Combat book on the F-4K and F-4M Phantom by Michael Burns showing the original panels with lots of joints where the panels connect to each other which could lead to damage from the exhaust plume especially considering the higher temperatures generated by the Spey. As a result I suspect that the repair was designed relatively early after the Phantoms entered service as there seem to be evidence of these appearing in the 1970s. Maybe @canberra kid has more documentation on the repair or modifications to the stabilators adding the reinforcing plates? Michael, I believe that thread mainly covers the various wing reinforcement plates at the wing fold; unfortunately with the majority of the pictures lost to broken links or the UK block by Imgur a lot of details are missing. HTH Jonathan

Welcome back to the workbench! Good to see the belly strap for the Meng F-4E fits well on the FGR.2; I did have a moment's worry that you were fitting it to the FG.1 as they were not on the FAA's Phantoms, until I saw the blue pylons. Neat work on fitting the Wolfpack leading edge flaps too, I'm also hopeful that Airfix will include them and they'll be a lot easier to fit and align symmetrically. Pity about the right hand intake, is that the same in both sets? It could be a case of shrinkage in that particular batch. I'm waiting for them to come back into stock at Models For Sale so hopefully it's a not a permanent issue with the moulds. Still, it's not unusual to have to deal with fit issues on Phantom intakes. @Pappy I'll post a longer reply in your post in the Cold War section, but in short the reinforcing to the stabilators happened much earlier than the belly strap mods, it pre-dates the changeover to the Air Defence Greys scheme so maybe late 70s as by the mid-1980s most, if not all, had some form of reinforcing installed. HTH, Jonathan

No problem, I'm sure we can sort out what you're looking for once you decide on the airframe. To answer your question, the IDF/AF were mostly hard wing F-4Es during the YKW but there were a few slatted examples delivered beforehand; their first was F-4E-49-MC 71-1071 (McAir #4239) delivered in September 1972 and became #201. It was the same with the Nickel Grass attrition replacements from the USAF. Here's a link to a post I wrote in a thread asking when the belly strap was present on the slatted Kurnasses: I'm sure of those listed in the table as retrofits all would almost certainly have been hard winged during the war (71-0236 was the last hard winged F-4E built as the factory slat kit upgrades started at 71-0237). I'm not aware of any specific cockpit mods other than the block version updates, such as addition of Maverick capability, so the standard 'E' cockpit should be fine for YKW-era F-4E. Jonathan

Tempestfan is correct - there are tie-ups between the US FMS Serials and the IDF/AF Serials in both AirDoc/Double Ugly Kurnass volumes. It's not complete though - there are some gaps, especially in the attrition lists. The William Peake book lists the USAF serial, the McAir Number/Cumulative Number and the contract under which it was delivered to Israel but not the final identification. The Scramble database can fill in some of the gaps, so it will be possible to find some of the block numbers if it isn't in the Double Ugly books. For example: The Kurnass Vol 1 notes Israeli S/N 688 as a combat loss on 30 June 1970 but no USAF tie-up; Scramble lists the C/N for 688 as McAir 4724 which Peake states is 73-1179, a F-4E-58-MC delivered as part of Peace Echo V. However Kurnass 114 lost on 9 October 1973 is not in the Scramble database nor is 182 lost two days earlier. Going the other way 219 lost in June 1986 isn't on Scramble but is logged as McAir 4881 74-1025 a F-4E-62-MC in the DU Vol 1 attrition list. I doubt if there is a fully complete list; the Israeli armed forces may no longer have the detailed breakdown of every single F-4 considering many were lost during a highly chaotic period during the Yom Kippur War. If you're after a specific Phantom and it's not listed on the Scramble.nl site one of us can look it up in the DU and Peake books to see if it's covered there. There is a complete list of the Nickel Grass Karpadas (SEA camouflaged) and Kurnass 2000 jets if you're after one of those. HTH, Jonathan

Super save on the upper aft area - that's more or less what I was thinking could be the solution. I was going to suggest a somewhat more ambitious option by taking off the complete upper section; easy to do when it's not your model You wouldn't know now it wasn't quite in the right place. On the stabilator reinforcing plates, you've uncovered more AI half accuracies - UK Phantoms did indeed have strengthening strips but not the type in the Hypersonic set; this design were mostly seen on USAF F-4s but were applied to some of the export models and are the ones as described in your post. Also, the 'stabilator units' had to be changed as pairs - they are built as a single centre section with separate outer panels. These panels were the reason for the reinforcing plates since they could occasionally completely depart the aircraft! The British type were more rectangular - one can be seen in the picture you posted of the replacement fuel dump, the 1435 Flight tail underneath shows an example. In fact, the kit examples have the correct configuration; the lateral strips along the outboard sections running parallel to the leading edge are a little overscale but in the right light you can see them on the real thing. This is taken from a picture I took of the rear of 228OCU's XV406 at the 1985 Abingdon BoB show: Neat work on the hydraulic servicing door rework, the refuelling probe illumination light and the LCOSS lens too (Lead Computing Optical Sight System which is a fancy name for a gunsight with some extra functions). The light is an oft overlooked detail, I tend to just use a little clear red but yours looks much better. I've been thinking about getting one of those circular cutters, this might just persuade me. Keep up the great work! Jonathan

Just catching up on your solo mini group build. Superb work on the ordnance and the details. Major kudos on getting the Aires gear bays to fit, especially at the interface between the cockpit and nose leg well; they're a much neater finish than the ones I've shoehorned into an ongoing FG.1 build. For once AI is correct - there's no need for nose weight, the centre of gravity on a Phantom is well forward of the main gear. You'd have to add a lot of weight to the exhaust area to make one tip backwards! At least it'll save you a job on any future F-4 builds. I have the same DSPIAE tool and it's a brilliant bit of kit. I picked up a small collet and set of 2,35mm shank drills from Affinity Models at last year's Avon show for it, which work really well - sure beats the old fashioned pin vice when chain drilling Now for a bit of bad news, your Aires FGR.2 cockpit is indeed too far forward The top part of the rear bulkhead should be up against the face of the 'hump' behind the aft canopy and the socket aft of the seat be where the hole is located on the kit side. However, as you may have seen in Retired Bob's thread in last year's UK F-4 Group Build, the Aires set is actually too short so the front section probably won't be too far out. I make the difference to be about 2-3mm which is roughly the gap created when you separate the two cockpit sections compared to the width of the rear 'shelf' so the front coaming may end up only a little forward of the right place! As you're doing the canopies up it hopefully won't be too noticeable. I wonder if Aires failed to account for this when mastering their F-4 sets as it seems to be the same on all their various versions and the 'instruction sheet' (such as it can be termed) fails to mention where material needs to be removed from the kit. I'm sure someone of your resourcefulness will come up with a suitable solution. Looking forward to seeing the next instalments, Jonathan

Hi Peter, Fantastic start to the project, the SUU-23 is a work of art. Congratulations on getting the Aires main undercarriage bays into the wings, the next challenge is fitting the nose bay and the cockpit into the same space - the front cockpit's floor will need to be virtually transparent to fit! Looking forward to the rest of the build, it's shaping up to be a masterclass! On the blue for XV408, here's a photo of her I took at RIAT 1991 which shows the main colour matching the roundel: Since you have most of the aftermarket I've also accumulated or used over the years, I hope the following observations will help: The Aires 'FGR.1' cockpit has the wrong rear instrument and radar display pedestal arrangement; Aires wrongly used the late F-4J or F-4S version instead of one more like the FGR.2 cockpit. This is the diagram from the FG.1 Aircrew Manual showing the typical configuration (this is the RN arrangement): Possibly the closest, if expensive, solution is to use the rear IP and radar display from the FGR.2 set. Alternatively, the panel from the Eduard FGR.2 etch and the kit radar pedestal would be closer than that provided, or even modify one of the Eduard Löök panels for the F-4B/N or F-4J. The Quickboost 48 748 arrestor hook is, in my opinion, no better than the kit one. The hook end is nicer but the whole thing is a bit weedy in appearance for a component designed to stop a 17 ton aircraft on a carrier ; I have a couple of the 'J79' equivalents (which are identical to the FGR2 version) that have warped! In my last build I used the Eduard 648912 item for the Meng kit but 648732 for the Tamiya kit should work as well and it'll look much better. The fuel dump pipe is for the J79 aircraft, the FG.1 & FGR.2 uses a shorter tube and the vents are angled up. This was to allow the FG.1 to fit on the Ark Royal's deck lifts, being carried forward to the FGR.2. It's a fairly simple mod to the Quickboost part though, cut out a section between the tail fillet and the vent, split the vent in half, bevel the cut edges to get the upward angle then glue the sections back together. I also drilled a small hole in each section to insert a short length of wire for reinforcement. It might be a tad too big but it's a definite improvement on the weedy kit version. I wasn't aware that there is a flap set for the Meng F-4, did you mean the airbrakes? The outer wing panels are mechanically locked in position when folded or extended (although this could fail causing the outer wing to adopt an odd angle) so whichever position the outer wings are, the airbrakes will droop as hydraulic pressure bleeds off so these are commonly seen down as are the ailerons. In any case, be aware that whenever the flaps are deployed both trailing and leading edge flaps operate as they are inter-linked. The Wolfpack folded wing set looks to be based on Hasegawa's J79 F-4 family's outer wings, the panel lines seem to match and don't have the rivet layout seen on the FG/1/FGR.2 kit. On the subject of the inboard pylons, (thanks to Rob @Phone Phixer for posting my photos of 92 Sqn's XV467/Q and 74Sqn's ZE353/E, which has saved me from creating an even longer post ) to add to those two here's one from IAT '83 I took of the 19Sqn participant XV470/G; note the angles of the missile rails and the AIM-9 fins. Also, in the picture of XV467 note the gap between the tank support sway brace and the wing lower surface plus the adjustment spacer. Finally, from the HMS Ark Royal association website, https://www.hmsarkroyalassociation.org/index.php/r09-photos there's this showing 3 1000 pound bombs on the centreline: Not directly Phantom related, go to about 20:18 for a 'did that really happen?' moment HTH, Jonathan

To add to Jabba's list, I've had a look in the Aircraft Illustrated Special I mentioned earlier to see if there was any extra details. This is what's listed for the aircraft with missing dates with some additional comments: XV412. August 1981 XV429 Possibly repainted about mid 1983. Recorded as K with 29Sqn in Jan '82 then with BAe in August 1983. I have a couple of saved photos of XV429, one as 'K' in the Tactical Scheme and one with no squadron markings but zapped by XV Sqn in Air Defence greys; presumably when with BAe. Unfortunately both were undated but logically the changeover would have occurred between leaving 29Sqn and joining the BAe fleet. XV438. May 1982. XV467. Mid 1985. Interestingly, noted as the only FGR.2 to never serve in the UK. Operated with II(AC)Sqn/S ; 19Sqn/C; 92Sqn/Q painted grey and received RWR in 1985 then returned to 92Sqn, again as 'Q'. XV480. Probably repainted mid-late 1983. There's a 1983 photograph in Green/Grey as B with 19Sqn but recorded as transferred to 92Sqn/X by 11/83. There's a photo on AirHistory.net as 'X' in grey dated August 1984. XV494. Between mid 1983 and October 1984 according to photos on AB Pic Visually, as well as the slotted stabiliser and the nose leg the FG.1 retained the catapult bridle hooks and the three small 'traffic lights' for the Mirror Landing System next to the main light on the nose gear door. Markings wise, as Iain says, the FG.1 in RAF service only flew with 43 and 111 Squadrons so any aircraft not in their colours would be a FGR.2. Having said that, 111 Sqn initially operated the FGR.2 between 1974 and 1978 at which time they converted to the FG.1 for commonality with 43Sqn, taking on many of the ex-892NAS jets. Their FG.1s carried yellow codes (white on the grey aircraft, later prefixed 'B') whereas their original FGR.2s had larger letters in red, sometimes outlined in white and were only painted in the Tactical scheme. Due to attrition and the FG.1 running out of fatigue life 43 Sqn operated 3 FGR.2s coded AV (XV406), AW (XV470) and AU (XV489) in 1988; all in AD greys. You can also tell by the Serial Number: FG.1s were XT857 to XT876 and XV565 to XV592 [XT585 to XT598 were designated YF-4K/F-4K] FGR.2s were XT891-XT914 and XV397-XV501 [XT852 & XT853 were YF-4Ms] HTH, Jonathan