Jens

Thanks a lot Pete! Jens

Oh, please reload them. It is a nice and different way to display the Walrus. Thanks, Jens

It looks like you have a huge step in the joint between the main fuselage and the tail turret. I had that on mine too. Why Airfix couldn't creat anything better than that is beyond me! Jens

Those Danish markings do not look quite right. It appears as if there is slightly too much red in the roundels (the radius should be divided 50/50 between red and white). The wing roundels were 350 mm in diameter, while the fuselage roundels were 250 mm in diameter. Also, the cross in the tail flag is too heavy, and the white part should not have a cut-out anywhere (square ends like a real cross). HTH, Jens

I am pretty certain the fuel tank length is not the same on the Draken and the Gripen, the former being the longer version. HTH, Jens

I have been unable to locate the emails from Bill Spidle including the images that were attached. They were probably lost in a HDD crash several years ago. Anyway, the type of wings on BuNos 153114 and 153115 were confirmed in 2005 where Bill Spidle wrote: I found the information in this 10 years old ARC thread: http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/213618-rf-4b-photos-needed-153114-or-153115/ Jens

Despite what Joe Baugher's list say they just repeat the often repeated fault that there were 12 RF-4Bs with thick wings. It does not really add up the the last two airframes in a production batch should have a different wing the all the previous ones. There was an approximately three years gap between the first 36 airframes and the last ten as the latter were attrition aircraft for the ones lost in Vietnam. It was confirmed years ago by Bill Spidle in an F-4 email group I was in back then that only the last ten RF-4Bs had the thick wing. I will see if I can dig out his email from somewhere. Jens

That is not correct. The last 10 (TEN) RF-4Bs had the thick/bulged wings - all in the BuNo 1573xx range. Jens

I believe I have two sets of TB 48-017. PM me if interested. Jens

Those tiny white outlines on the national markings show why it's better to paint the white last. Apart from that, nice progress. Jens

I have found that mating the front port side fuselage to the aft port side fuselage - and likewise with the starboard side - before joining the two fuselage halves will give you near perfect joints across the fuselage. Jens

No, wrong information causes confusion. The chisel nosed RF-4Es in Iranian and Israeli service were not exceptions, they were part of the rule. As for the RF-4Cs on loan, do you have any information on the ones supposedly operated by Iran? I mean, other that the usual rumours and the misinterpretation of the two RF-4Cs in Israeli colour scheme? The two RF-4Cs loaned to Israel were 69-0369 and 69-0370, both with the chisel nose. The were on loan in 1970-71 and were photographed in the UK upon return to USAF. Incidentally the Israeli chisel nosed RF-4Es all wore the IAF scheme while the rounded nosed ones wore the compass ghost grey scheme. Jens

The majority of USAF RF-4Cs were not retrofitted with the rounded profile nose (I have noted less than 50 airframes with both nose profiles). It was introduced on the production line around FY66 and was used and produced alongside the angled nose profile. Jens

It wasn't just the German RF-4Es that had the angled nose profile. The initial Iranian and Israeli deliveries also had the angled nose profile. Later deliveries for both countries had the rounded nose profile. I believe the FY69 and FY72 RF-4Es for Iran had the angled nose profile. The original Greek and Turkish RF-4Es were identical in that the had the rounded nose profile AND slatted wings (the only countries to operate slatted wing RF-4s). Later on both countries received some RF-4Es from Germany, and these had the hard (non-slatted) wings and angled nose profile. Using the Japanese Hasegawa RF-4Es depends on the wing tips. RF-4E Kai received larger wing tip RWR antennae so backdating it to a standard RF-4 wing tip would require some cutting and sanding. HTH, Jens

The MLG bulges were present both on the top of the wings and on the bottom. The latter are the hardest to remove if one tries a conversion to a B/N. Jens