Ingo Degenhardt Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Quote: " By cutting up the 'spare' resin sidewalls to fit the Academy kit, I only needed to scratch up one sidewall component - result" End quote I did basically the same with the BlackBox F-4B Cockpit sidewalls when installing the BB tub to the Academy fuselage failed. Fantastic work on the Splitter plate vents, by the way! Ingo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg B Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Some nice work there, keep the updates coming please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Laidlaw Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Right, watching this with interest as I plan to get the kit soon - Beautiful work so far! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEZ Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Hi Pappy, Great work...Just one observation though. The rear seat with the RIO in situ looks as if it could be raised up a little, so that the top of the seat is more or less level with top of the front seat. regards Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger 9 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 The office and its occupants are superb. Very much looking forward to the rest of the construction. Monty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelvk Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 We'll be watching.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Alpha Yankee Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 Looks great Pappy, hope to see it in the flesh one day which would mean venturing up to the Bris Vegas comp I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Perren Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 Hey Pappy, I'm watching this too. Great work so far, I love the stick / throttle actuators and the seats look good enough with the work that you've done. For my money definitely go with the acrylic rods up the jacksie for the inflight mount. Are you going to do a drogue as well on the probe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calum Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 Great build thread Pappy and very informative as usual. One thing, I think I read elsewhere that the IFR probe position was slightly off so when deployed it would contact the intake.(at least that is how i understood the problem). You might want to dry fit that and check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPaul Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 This is massively impressive, something I can only aspire to, but that is an absolute pleasure to see progress. I love the details in the cockpit, especially the wear marks on the floor made by the pilots feet. Amazing attention to details. Cant wait to see the end product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share Posted January 5, 2013 (edited) G'day people, thank you very much for all your interest and encouragement. Sorry there was no update yesterday, I had to pop into work to take care of some bizzzo. Re: the "orphan" control stick mount for the rear 'pit, I have a vague recollection that, at least on the "B", this is correct - a stick COULD be fitted, potentially for pilot conversion training, but never usually was. I'll have to check my sources, though... By the way, this is a great-looking build so far! G'day Hythe. That is interesting. Flight simulation would still be in its infant stages during the 1960's so that would make sense. If you find any info or pics (we all love pics) in your references, I am sure all the pople following this thread would be very interested. Quote: " By cutting up the 'spare' resin sidewalls to fit the Academy kit, I only needed to scratch up one sidewall component - result" End quote I did basically the same with the BlackBox F-4B Cockpit sidewalls when installing the BB tub to the Academy fuselage failed. Fantastic work on the Splitter plate vents, by the way! Ingo Thanks Ingo, I am sure that in time detail sets will appear that are specifically designed to fit this kit, but in the meantime we will just have to go about it 'old skool stylee' Hi Pappy, Great work...Just one observation though. The rear seat with the RIO in situ looks as if it could be raised up a little, so that the top of the seat is more or less level with top of the front seat. regards Andrew G'day Andrew, the same thought occurred to me however the rear seat is already pretty close to the rear canopy. As my kit will have the lids down, I am thinking that this will not be possible, however for those building theirs with the canopies up this should be very easy to do. Looks great Pappy, hope to see it in the flesh one day which would mean venturing up to the Bris Vegas comp I suppose. G'day Ray, I think you should come up regardless, as you would not be the first 'Mexican' to venture up to see how Brizneylanders do it. We even have people coming from overseas, including a healthy contingent from 'across the dutch'. Apparently they are suffering from plagues of orcs, dwarves and hobbits, our hearts go out to them..... Hey Pappy, I'm watching this too. Great work so far, I love the stick / throttle actuators and the seats look good enough with the work that you've done. For my money definitely go with the acrylic rods up the jacksie for the inflight mount. Are you going to do a drogue as well on the probe? G'day mate, glad to hear from you. I dry fitted a pair of resin (Aires) seats initially and they would fit okay but thought that all that nice detail would be invisible with crew installed and canopies down. I am happy enough with the details I have added to the seats. If I was doing a canopies up version, I would probably go for a pair of resin seats though. My jet will be in a gentle right bank approaching drogue, possibly just a few inches from it with a section of hose behind it, or perhaps already coupled to the drogue and banking, I'll decide as I get closer. Great build thread Pappy and very informative as usual. One thing, I think I read elsewhere that the IFR probe position was slightly off so when deployed it would contact the intake.(at least that is how i understood the problem). You might want to dry fit that and check. Too late! G'day Calum The IFR error is one of the many errors (mentioned over on ARC by 'Incaroad') pointed out on the kit. http://s362974870.on...howtopic=258786 Some are readily correctable, others less so. Regarding the IFR bay, the issue is the positioning of the IFR bay itself (part G19)as this is slightly too far forward as well as angled incorrectly. The part angles downwards towards the nose, more of less parallel with the cockpit sill immediately above it. To be correct the angle of the IFR bay needs to be angled more towards the horizontal. I had already glued and filled the part when I realised the error, so I didn't feel like correcting it, instead I will have the IFR probe deployed, I think it makes the error less obvious as the eye is drawn to the probe and not the bay, unless you know about the error, "Oh the pain...." If I was building the kit again and I was not going to have the IFR probe deployed, I would install the blanking part G20 (labelled 'not for use' and designed to be used with non USN/USMC variants), fill the resultant seams and then use the separate IFR door (G18) as a template to scribe in the correct door position. Incaroad also points out that the IFR light location is also missing, so this will also need to be added. Other 'fatal' errors with the kit concern the radome and chin intakes. Academy have sensibly designed the nose as a single piece which butts up the forward fuselage at a natural panel line (the rear of the radome), however, they have the radome attaching perpendicular to the fuselage horizontal, whilst the real item has the radome attaching at a very sightly forward angle, approx 1-2 degrees. I will not bother as I can live with it but for others this is a huge issue. Fair enough, I am glad someone pointed out the mistake but I can live with it (I am basically lazy), but I would applaud anyone that was diligent enough to correct the error. The other nose issue concerns the pair of air intakes mounted on the lower forward fuselage (G34, G35). Incaroad has measured the real deal and compared the kit items and they are approx 1mm too narrow. I think I will attempt to fix these as they do look a little off to my eye. Edited January 5, 2013 by Pappy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hythe Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 Hmmm, looks like I mis-remembered about the rear stick... Sorry! (Wonder which aircraft I'm thinking of...?) Fill that sucker!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XV571 Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 Hythe is correct , there was an option to provide a temporary 'twin-stick' solution in the US Navy's Phantoms. There's a picture of the set-up in a QF-4N on page 127 of Daco's 'Uncovering the (Q)F-4B/J/N/S Phantom' book. The layout is like that in the FG1s used by the RAF/FAA for this role; you can see them in the last diagram in a post on a similar subject I made almost a year ago: http://www.britmodel...=20#entry940692 Still, as you're putting the RIO in his seat, you can fill the hole and not worry too much about the floorboards/stick base. Also, I can't remember if Larry (Incaroad) mentioned it, but Academy have mirrored some panel lines on to the right side. The two access panels on the right side of the fin, the rectangle inside the panel immediately in front of the right intake and the vertical line forward of the same panel should all be filled in, if you so wish. For the intakes, I also joined the two halves in order to work the seams, but this may not be the best approach. It should be possible to attach the 'outer' half in to the external fuselage section then add filler to provide a smooth transition before joining the inner half. I have managed to achieve a reasonably good effect using white Milliput shaped while wet, so hopefully they'll look the part when installed. Great build so far, keep it up! Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brody Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 Looks great so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpc7676 Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 Nice Pappy, keep it going mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy Posted January 6, 2013 Author Share Posted January 6, 2013 (edited) Hythe is correct , there was an option to provide a temporary 'twin-stick' solution in the US Navy's Phantoms. There's a picture of the set-up in a QF-4N on page 127 of Daco's 'Uncovering the (Q)F-4B/J/N/S Phantom' book. The layout is like that in the FG1s used by the RAF/FAA for this role; you can see them in the last diagram in a post on a similar subject I made almost a year ago: http://www.britmodel...=20#entry940692 Still, as you're putting the RIO in his seat, you can fill the hole and not worry too much about the floorboards/stick base. Also, I can't remember if Larry (Incaroad) mentioned it, but Academy have mirrored some panel lines on to the right side. The two access panels on the right side of the fin, the rectangle inside the panel immediately in front of the right intake and the vertical line forward of the same panel should all be filled in, if you so wish. For the intakes, I also joined the two halves in order to work the seams, but this may not be the best approach. It should be possible to attach the 'outer' half in to the external fuselage section then add filler to provide a smooth transition before joining the inner half. I have managed to achieve a reasonably good effect using white Milliput shaped while wet, so hopefully they'll look the part when installed. Great build so far, keep it up! Jonathan Hythe is correct , there was an option to provide a temporary 'twin-stick' solution in the US Navy's Phantoms. There's a picture of the set-up in a QF-4N on page 127 of Daco's 'Uncovering the (Q)F-4B/J/N/S Phantom' book. The layout is like that in the FG1s used by the RAF/FAA for this role; you can see them in the last diagram in a post on a similar subject I made almost a year ago: http://www.britmodel...=20#entry940692 Still, as you're putting the RIO in his seat, you can fill the hole and not worry too much about the floorboards/stick base. Also, I can't remember if Larry (Incaroad) mentioned it, but Academy have mirrored some panel lines on to the right side. The two access panels on the right side of the fin, the rectangle inside the panel immediately in front of the right intake and the vertical line forward of the same panel should all be filled in, if you so wish. For the intakes, I also joined the two halves in order to work the seams, but this may not be the best approach. It should be possible to attach the 'outer' half in to the external fuselage section then add filler to provide a smooth transition before joining the inner half. I have managed to achieve a reasonably good effect using white Milliput shaped while wet, so hopefully they'll look the part when installed. Great build so far, keep it up! Jonathan G'day Jonathan, Great info there, geez I love the 'net. I missed the incorrect fin panel but i knew about the incorrect panel lines on forward right fuselage. I will have a go at them though. I agree with you about joining the outer intake trunking half to the intake proper and blending this in first, I wish I had thought of that before i joined up intake trunking parts. Reet, on with today's update, In an attempt t6o decrease the transition between the intake wall and the intake trunking themselves, I scraped down the inner edges. Please excuse the crappy pics, I usually take pics outside but it started to rain and the lighting indoors is, well you can see how crap it it is! If left unchanged, the kit trunking parts form a very ugly step where they mate against the intake parts It is very difficult to photograph the transition, or perhaps I just suck at pics, but here is the un-modified intake and here is the thinned down one It will still require some blending in with filler of some sort but it is better than the stock item. I am sure in time some aftermarket producers will make this problem go away but for the time being there is no easy fix. In the meantime a little more assembly has taken place. The fuel dump is supplied as a separate piece. This was glued in place. Care must be taken when attaching this item as it is easy to glue it either too far forward or aft. The dump mast sits in a slot that is also designed to accommodate the fin locating tab. The dump mast can be glued either fully forward or fully aft as the dump mast locating tab will slide the length of the slot, however there is only one correct position. The easiest way to correctly place the dump mast is to dry fit the fin in position then attach the dump mast. This may sound pretty obvious (and it is) but it is a pitfall for the unwary. The provision of the rudder as a separate piece is a thoughtful touch by Academy, allowing the modeller to add a little more individuality to their build. Academy have also provided the upper anti-collision beacon as a separate part moulded in clear plastic. The recess in the fin leading edge is where this part locates , hopefully it will fit nicely. Incidentally, the general fit (apart from the intakes) of the parts so far has been exemplary, there is some quality engineering in this kit, though some of the research could have been better! In moulding the tail boom area in three separate pieces, there is the potential for misalignment between the various pieces, however, there seems to be no sign of any so far. I decided to reward myself and add the cockpit tub to the fuselage. Then I added the 'spaghetti' to the back of the rear instrument panel. The F-4 characteristically featured exposed avionics cabling in this area. I wasn't striving for super accuracy here, just a 'busy' look so I cannot claim that the detail is very accurate, but it looks better than a bare section of plastic. Edited January 8, 2013 by Pappy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy Posted January 8, 2013 Author Share Posted January 8, 2013 Well people, only a small update today as I have returned to work so I can only work on this in my spare time now I have begun to assemble and paint the stores. One of the great differences between this and the Hasegawa kit is the abundance of stores, pylons, adapters etc that are provided in the box. The spares box is now positively brimming with goodies. I really like the centreline jug The rear fins are very delicate and a huuuuge improvement over the stubs provided in the Hasegawa kits. The inner wing pylons are also things of beauty and the sharp pointy noses are very delicate. The pylons all feature recessed detail, another point of difference between the two manufacturers (even on their recessed detailed F-4's, Hasegawa's weapon pylons feature raised detail) The downside is that these pylons are slightly more complex to assemble as the side plates are separate items. Take note the plates are also 'handed' so care is needed when assembling them. The LAU-7 missile rails are some of the best I have seen and actually feature the prominent rails on the bottom into which the missile hangers slide. Most kits represent the bottom of the rails as a smooth surface. This is fine if you choose to install a missile, but if you leave them empty, the lack of detail is very obvious. There are also separate pylon adapters and a multi-part Triple Ejector Rack (TER). I think Hasegawa's single part TER's are better as they include the arming umbilical for each station, whilst the Academy items do not. Academy also provide two types of AIM-7 Sparrow and several variants of AIM-9 Sidewinder, some of which would not be applicable to a US Navy jet during the Vietnam conflict. I have started to paint up the AIM-7's. It seemed common practice to only carry two of these, fitted to the rear fuselage wells. This is not to say that four AIM-7's were not / could not be carried (and this did happen on occasion) , however two in the rear wells was the favoured configuration. When four AIM-7's were loaded in the fuselage wells, the forward two missiles would be locked out and could not be fired until the cetreline tank was jettisoned. The AIM-9D's assembled here These come with a nice representation of the rocket motor recess as well, cheers, Pappy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Great work there Pappy! Your thread is a 'how-to' reference for anyone else building this kit. Thanks for sharing, Sean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiffy Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Great stuff. I'm taking notes here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heloman1 Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Ahhhhh, come now Pappy you're spoiling us, that's a lovely cockpit and I do like the crew with their sunburst helmets. This going to look very tasty once completed, not that it isn't now. Â Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingo Degenhardt Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Aren't the Sidewinders you assembled 'B'-models? (instead of D) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hythe Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Hythe is correct , there was an option to provide a temporary 'twin-stick' solution in the US Navy's Phantoms. There's a picture of the set-up in a QF-4N on page 127 of Daco's 'Uncovering the (Q)F-4B/J/N/S Phantom' book. Wow, I'm not quite senile yet, it turns out! Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody37 Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Just caught up with this, looking great, your attention to detail is paying off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappy Posted January 9, 2013 Author Share Posted January 9, 2013 Great stuff. I'm taking notes here. Good because I will be asking questions later...  Great work there Pappy! Your thread is a 'how-to' reference for anyone else building this kit. Thanks for sharing, Sean  No problem Sean, I'm glad that you are finding it useful, but remember that I am not an expert on the F-4 by any means   Aren't the Sidewinders you assembled 'B'-models? (instead of D) See what I mean!  Ingo is completely correct of course, the missiles I have assembled are AIM-9B's which are not incorrect for early Vietnam era jets. My jet will be dated around 1972, so I am thinking that AIM-9D's would perhaps be more appropriate?   Wow, I'm not quite senile yet, it turns out!   No not yet! I am still waiting for pics though Just caught up with this, looking great, your attention to detail is paying off The kit is a great starting point from which to build OOB or on which to base a detailed subject build. The kit has its flaws (what kit doesn't) but I am pretty happy with the progress to date,  cheers,  Pappy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingo Degenhardt Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Ingo is completely correct of course, the missiles I have assembled are AIM-9B's which are not incorrect for early Vietnam era jets. My jet will be dated around 1972, so I am thinking that AIM-9D's would perhaps be more appropriate?cheers, Â Pappy Hi Pappy, yes, I think the D-models would be quite right - the ones Academy uses in the instructions. Ingo ps: I still envy the intake ramp air vents you cut into the ramps rears... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now