F-4EJ Kai Phantom 8Sq Black Special - Hasegawa 1/72

[Air-to-Air]

Hello and welcome to my build of Hasegawa’s 1/72 F-4EJ Kai Phantom II 8Sq Black Special (Kit 00941).

This is my first WIP on Britmodeller.com and I look forward to your input.

 

Box contents.

 

Instructions.

 

Decal sheet.

 

I will be building this kit out of the box.

Due to personal preference, it will be displayed in-flight with armaments – as its designers intended.

 

As Hasegawa has not supplied an aircrew and armaments, I have effectively broken the out of the box rules before starting by adding an aftermarket aircrew and missiles.

I am using PJ Productions’ US Pilots 80s which, despite being a different decade, nonetheless offers a resemblance of the helmet and oxygen mask of 21st Century Japanese pilots.

 

I am using Eduard’s AIM-9L Sidewinder and AIM-7M Sparrow. Hasegawa’s instructions recommended AIM-9L and AIM-7E but I am depicting the aircraft in 2008 (the final year 8 Squadron operated the F-4EJ Kai) and I don’t think those missiles are correct for that timeframe. My Internet research was inconclusive regarding the operational missiles on the F-4EJ Kai in 2008. I relied upon Ian Black’s McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom 1958 onwards (all marks), published by Haynes (Owners Workshop Manual series) which reported operational missiles of the F-4EJ Kai as AIM-7F/M Sparrow and AIM-9L Sidewinder (p.92).

I was disappointed to discover that I have purchased yet another of Eduard’s bent missile offerings. I am going to have to straighten that one out because I refuse to spend twice as much to arm this bird with the required four Sidewinders.

 

There are a few challenges ahead, principally how to put some life into a black scheme. I am looking forward to it.

[giemme]

Hi Rob; nice build, I'll be watching If you care for some building tips on the Hasegawa kit, here's the link at my build: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234967457-1-72-hasegawa-f4-j-phantom-ii-finished-page-22/

Lots of knowledgeable people gave their support to that, so you may find it useful to properly tackle this kit (mine is an F4-J, but it really has a lot of parts in common with this).

Ciao

GM

[RNoAF Aerobatic Team]

Great to see a Japanese Spook.

I'll be following this.

[Air-to-Air]

Hi Rob; nice build, I'll be watching If you care for some building tips on the Hasegawa kit, here's the link at my build: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234967457-1-72-hasegawa-f4-j-phantom-ii-finished-page-22/

Lots of knowledgeable people gave their support to that, so you may find it useful to properly tackle this kit (mine is an F4-J, but it really has a lot of parts in common with this).

Ciao

GM

Many thanks Giemme. I studied your build when I was researching during the past month. Your build helped identify a number of the fit issues I expect to encounter with this kit. I recommend it as worthwhile reading for anyone contemplating a Hasegawa 1/72 F-4 build; lots of good information and an excellent model to show for it.

[The 3rd Placer]

Nice selection A to A!

I'm a closet modern Japanese fan.

Ryan

[Rhino]

I built this one a while ago, very nice scheme. Only problem I had was the yellow band on the tail, I think I should have painted the yellow as well as the black, instead of just touching up the yellow.

Best of luck with the stencils.

Ted

[Air-to-Air]

I built this one a while ago, very nice scheme. Only problem I had was the yellow band on the tail, I think I should have painted the yellow as well as the black, instead of just touching up the yellow.

Best of luck with the stencils.

Ted

Thanks for letting me know Ted.

I was thinking it might be easier for me to paint the spine and leading edge of the tail as I don't have a lot of experience/confidence with positioning large decals.

But painting the yellow markings introduces another issue; I don't know if I could accurately mask/paint those thin shoulder stripes that run down towards the nose.

I am also not sure whether those yellow decals would be opaque on a black base.

Ted, when you built your one, did you apply those yellow decals over a black base, and, if so, were they opaque or were they partially transparent?

Edited April 29, 2015 by Air-to-Air

[The 3rd Placer]

I think your ok with the kit decals, they look pretty dense, besides the yellow on the box top looks dark against the black fuselage.

Ryan

[Rhino]

Thanks for letting me know Ted.

I was thinking it might be easier for me to paint the spine and leading edge of the tail as I don't have a lot of experience/confidence with positioning large decals.

But painting the yellow markings introduces another issue; I don't know if I could accurately mask/paint those thin shoulder stripes that run down towards the nose.

I am also not sure whether those yellow decals would be opaque on a black base.

Ted, when you built your one, did you apply those yellow decals over a black base, and, if so, were they opaque or were they partially transparent?

The good news is the yellow and white markings were fine over the black frame. I did an RFI on it here. http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234968493-f-4ej-kai-phantom-x2/

It is a nice looking scheme.

Ted

[Air-to-Air]

Thanks for your input Ryan and Ted.

Having considered the appearance of the decals on Ted's build (thank you for the link), the decals look sufficiently opaque.

When things are more advanced, I will have to give more consideration to Ted's observation that painting the leading edge of the tail may be a better approach.

At this stage I am thinking that painting the yellow markings on the spine and tail may be the way I want to go and using the decals for the thin shoulder stripes that run down towards the nose. Executing that properly would be contingent upon colour matching the decals and paintwork. That could be an interesting challenge.

[giemme]

Just to add food to your thoughts: I would paint all of the yellow parts on this AC (personal preference, of course - I try to stay away from decals as much as I can). Masking shouldn't be a big deal, while the key for the yellow is to spray first (I'm assuming you're going to use an airbrush) a light white or off-white coat, then the yellow. Just my

Ciao

[mirageiv]

I vote for painting the yellow too, think it will make a big difference on the final appearance, maybe use a decal piece for under the stripe under the canopy. Sure it will look good whatever you do .

David.

[The 3rd Placer]

Thanks for your input Ryan and Ted.

Having considered the appearance of the decals on Ted's build (thank you for the link), the decals look sufficiently opaque.

When things are more advanced, I will have to give more consideration to Ted's observation that painting the leading edge of the tail may be a better approach.

At this stage I am thinking that painting the yellow markings on the spine and tail may be the way I want to go and using the decals for the thin shoulder stripes that run down towards the nose. Executing that properly would be contingent upon colour matching the decals and paintwork. That could be an interesting challenge.

I still feel the decals will be fine, why complicate a build if you don't have to. I would paint the jet black and drop the spine decal first. You'll know right away if you will have problems before you apply any others. BTW photocopy the decal sheet and keep a few copies for a mask IF tragedy arises.

For a scale looking black, may I suggest Tamiya NATO black.

Respectfully,

Ryan

[giemme]

I still feel the decals will be fine, why complicate a build if you don't have to.

Because we're modellers ...? sorry, couldn't resist, I'll get my

You do have a good point, and now Rob is going to be totally confused

Ciao

[Rhino]

I did use the kit decals, and except for the fin top decal, had no problems. The main problem was getting the decal to meet up on the fin cap, and if I remember correctly, I touched it up with yellow paint. Nobody has commented unfavourably about it when on display.

Ted

[Air-to-Air]

Many thanks gentlemen, lots of good input and suggestions there, much appreciated.

Now to the business at hand: model building!

I am extremely pleased to give my progress report this evening.

I am something of an anal retentive type at the best of times and as you may recall I am committed to building this model out of the box. Accordingly, without an opportunity to while away my days fettling bits of ill-fitting resin and drowning microscopic etch in superglue, I am focusing on fit and finish. Which brings me to the subject of this evening's update. I have completed my initial test fitting of the major components of the kit and I can report that it goes together very well and it looks like a Phantom! Albeit one without wing tips, a canopy or stabilators.

I will provide a detailed photo study in the next day or two, more for my own benefit than yours, as I would like to document the areas where I need to pay attention to get the best possible fit in due course.

There are some minor areas that will need a small amount of sanding and others that will need a little filler (e.g. where the cockpit bulkheads meet the canopy decks) but thankfully I shall not be labouring for weeks to make it look like a Phantom.

[The 3rd Placer]

A good point Rob....fit, finish, and alignment are paramount in model building in my opinion, NOT the amount of aftermarket you can add.

Adding all the resin/ etch/ weathering in the world wont help a landing gear leg that's out of kilter or a poorly finished seam etc.

On the contest table the judges look at the basics first, all the rest doesn't matter unless you nail down the fundamentals.

Ryan

Nice photography also!

Edited May 1, 2015 by The 3rd Placer

[Air-to-Air]

Alright, time for me to take a closer look at what needs some attention and what may need to be approached carefully.

 

COCKPITS

 

First up, the cockpits. I am not going to make any final decisions regarding corrections and finish until the ejection seats and pilots have been test fitted underneath the canopies (working on that now).

The gap between the left and right fuselage halves, at the canopy ledge, is patently obvious.

My initial question was: should I just fill that? After test fitting the canopy, the answer is no. The left and right fuselage halves need to be properly joined at that point so the pilot's canopy fits squarely on to the canopy rail. If not addressed properly, the fuselage would be flared around the canopy at that point, creating a step that does not exist on the actual aircraft. The join between the bulkheads and the canopy ledges could be filled for a cleaner look.

 

There is a gap between the consoles and sidewalls. There is also a gap between the bulkhead and the sidewalls. It is likely that the gap will close somewhat when the fuselage halves are joined at the canopy ledge. I also note the visible recess in the rear cockpit (on which the intakes are mounted to the outside of the model). The recess could be filled for a cleaner look.

 

It is a similar story on the other side.

 

The front and rear instrument panels both fit comfortably.

The trailing edges of the front instrument panel shroud could be thinned for an improved look.

If anything, both instrument panels, and perhaps the whole tub could be raised a bit higher. Clearly, that may require some trimming of the bulkheads but it may also reduce the gap between consoles/bulkheads and the sidewalls.

If I do raise the cockpit tub, the sidewalls at the 3 o'clock position may need to be sanded back to fit the front instrument panel.

 

Similar observations on the port side. However, the instrument panel fit is much closer to the sidewall on this side than the other. Accordingly, the sidewall may need to be reduced, or the instrument panel (or both), if the cockpit tub is raised.

I think the lower part of the rear instrument panel would look a lot neater if it was joined to the canopy ledge above.

Having reviewed some photos of the rear instrument panel, the upper part on the kit looks rather anorexic compared to a USAF F-4E rear instrument panel. Whether the F-4EJ is any different, I have no references to confirm (seems unlikely).

 

The fit of the aft canopy support leaves something to be desired. I'll have to examine some photos to see what to do here.

 

A test fit of the four part canopy. It would have been nice to have the option of a single piece canopy but life's not perfect.

The canopy is one of the areas on this build that is going to get a lot of focus.

You can see from this image that a number of things are not right just yet:

• There is the obvious gap beneath the front canopy and the canopy rail. That is likely to have something to do with the canopy support immediately behind because one of the recesses for the front canopy was completely flashed over and I may not have opened it enough before this test fitting.
• You can also see the step between the front canopy and the side rail (it's actually present on both sides) that is due to the flaring of the fuselage at that point. Once the canopy ledge inside the cockpit is solidly joined, the step should disappear.

The aft canopy does not appear to need any work at all.

 

I used artist's tacky glue to assemble a seat. It comes off in warm soapy water.

The parts of the seat are inherently unstable and do not "click" together at all. I am glad that I had two attempts with tacky glue to sort out a staged approach to assembling the seats. Had I not done so, I imagine that I would have had a nicely painted seat smeared with glue.

I can see that I am going to have to reduce the sides of the seat somewhat as once the seat cushion and seat back are painted, as well as the insides of the seat frame, the parts won't go together properly.

 

The purpose of tacking together the seats is to see whether they and the pilots, sit at the correct height within the canopy "window".

At this stage, things do not appear to be in the right position. I appreciate that the rear seater is bunkered down low in the rear cockpit but at first glance it looks too low on this test fitting. I am going to have to examine a number of photos to determine the correct position. The pilots will need to be added first.

The current position may be a consequence of the whole tub being lower than it should be. Raising the tub would improve the sidewall to console and bulkhead fit, get a tighter fit for the instrument panels and raise the ejection seats in the canopy "window".

Next up, intakes.

[Air-to-Air]

INTAKES

In the image below you can see the bleed air spill louvers running along the inside upper edge of the intake.

Some careful work needs to be done around the louvers. Whilst they appear to be recessed the outer edge of the louvers should, in fact, be flush with the skin of the intake. In addition, the fuselage elements between the louvers appear quite rounded. On the actual aircraft both the louvers and the fuselage elements are quite square at the front and become more rounded towards the rear.

When joining the parts, I'll aim to get the louvers flush with the vertical skin of the intake. I can then work on the fuselage elements between the louvers to get the correct profile.

There's a seam line running the length of the part from the outer edge of the louvers to the rear of the part. That seam could be eliminated. Consequentially, a few panel lines may need to be rescribed. The benefit of doing so would be that the louvers would be flush with the upper surface of the intake, as they are on the actual aircraft.

The other area that needs some careful work is the join between the triangular shaped boundary layer diverter (attached to the fuselage) and the vertical surface of the intake. Whilst it looks as though it would be very easy to run some Tamiya Extra Thin along that join giving a perfect seal, I anticipate that it would be very difficult to airbrush in there.

Any observations from prior experience airbrushing similar areas would be much appreciated.

I also note that I should join the splitterplate (not in the image) to the ramp inside the intake and fill the join on the fuselage side before attaching the intake assembly, otherwise that join will be visible.

 

This is the starboard intake in its dry-fitted "relaxed" state. It is clear that the panel line on the intake does not match the one on the fuselage. The rest of the intake profile seems to match the fuselage profile fairly well though.

 

Once the intake has been coaxed into the correct position with a bit of finger force, you can see what happens: there is a minor step between the intake and the rear fuselage that will need to be eliminated.

This image also highlights the heavy line between the intake assembly and the forward fuselage. Any panel line junction on the actual aircraft at that point, if any, is nowhere near that heavy and I will be filling and smoothing that area.

The problem is not unique to the starboard intake alone, the port intake displays a similar step.

The question now: build up the rear fuselage to match the intake profile or reduce the intake profile to match the rear fuselage? I'll have to look closely at some photos to answer that question.

 

This is some of the view down the intake. As you can see there are some "bits" jutting up in the intake path. The top of the intake is smooth.

In the image below you can see some of the "bits" that are responsible for that untidiness. It is the forward edge of the lower wing part and the forward edge of the lower forward fuselage part. There is also a very big injection pin above that protrusion beneath the lower wing. I'm not convinced all of that bulk is really necessary so I may try for a somewhat smoother lower intake tunnel.

Next up, wings.

[Mozzy19]

Nice work there. Odd that those panel lines don't match though.

Sean

[Air-to-Air]

WINGS

As you can see below, the join between the port wing and the fuselage has something of a gap.

 

It is a similar story on the starboard side.

I will see if a small spacer between the left and right fuselage halves can fix this.

 

This is the lower wing to forward fuselage join.

 

I will need to approach this in stages as the side joins do not align with the forward fuselage.

The approach I will adopt is to glue the rear of the forward fuselage to the lower wing and set it aside for 24 hours for maximum strength.

Then I will glue each side, one at a time at the lower wing needs to be flexed to align with the forward fuselage.

It is important to get that alignment correct because the intakes sit on the conjoined lower wing - forward fuselage assembly.

 

There is something of a small gap between the lower fuselage and the forward elements of the left and right front fuselage halves. This should be fairly easy to fill. The gap is likely to be smaller when everything starts to come together.

 

REAR FUSELAGE

It looks as though it will be easy enough to achieve a clean fit between the rear fuselage halves and the lower wing.

A small amount of filler could be used between the lower wing part and the fuselage just behind the tailhook. I don't think I will fill the whole length though as the recessed part seems to serve some function in holding the exhaust nozzles in.

I test fitted the exhaust nozzles, they can be added after the model has been painted so there won't be any necessity for intricate masking of the exhaust nozzles whilst the fuselage is being airbrushed.

 

Even though the parts are only loosely taped together in the image below, you can see the clean transition between fuselage halves and the lower wing part.

It has been reported previously that the lapped panels on the rear of the fuselage are somewhat overscale. I concur with that assessment. Some work may be done to address that issue.

 

FORWARD FUSELAGE

I anticipate that the nose will go on perfectly in due course.

If anything, there are a few panels across the top of the nose to fuselage interface that may need a small amount of sanding.

An odd thing about this kit is that it comes with its own nose cone sprue but the radome does not have the prominent strengthening detail seen on the actual aircraft. That will be corrected in due course.

 

At this stage, there's a very very minor step between the lower fuselage part and the side fuselage part. There's no problem at the front of the part as you may be able to see. One approach for fixing this would be some tabs mounted on the lower fuselage part to hold the side part out enough to make the two flush.

 

A SMALL DIVERSION

This is an out of the box build, as you may recall.

I may make very small improvements, out of the box, to external elements. The angle of attack probe is one element that could use improvement. The kit rendition is bulky and rounded whereas the actual probe is more slender and pointed.

To create the profile below I stretched some sprue and turned it in my mini rotary tool. I used a No.11 blade to shape the turning sprue.

 

Here's the part ready for painting with an example of the stock from which it was shaped.

To fit it I will need to remove the kit's rendition and drill out a mounting hole and mount from behind for a clean finish.

Until next update, keep wrenching on those F-4s.

[mirageiv]

Very detailed examination! You have highlighted the areas I have so far come across.

Regarding the canopy fit, if you sand some of the edges/faces a little here and there the fit becomes nearly seamless, however I have found some filler is needed on the lower edges with a simple rescribe to restore the lines.

Also the intake fit is like this on all the hasegawa 1/72 phantom line, some a little better than others, but usually 1 intake has a 'step'. Previously I have sanded down the intake profile to match the fuselage profile as it is less work and when done well, you can get it seamless. I started building an F-4J in the WIP forum and sanded the intake,

You can the fuselage profile has no noticeable difference if you sand the intake piece. Also I would recommend you fill the intake/fuselage joint with 'superglue' cyano as there is a panel line in this area, thus scribing over the superglue gives a very neat, clean line. Sorry for rambling on , I just want to tell you how I solved the intake area incase you find it useful, best regards,

David.

Edit, a final tip, I have assembled each fuselage half, so main fuselage+front cockpit fuselage+nose, effectively making the fuselage into 2 pieces only and usually gives a better fit.

Edited May 2, 2015 by mirageiv

[The 3rd Placer]

Rob if your going to pose canopy closed may suggest you start with the canopies. I'd get the clears cleaned up and glued together to form one large clear part. Perhaps use Tamiya extra thin cement...mask off the joins then clean up those seams, finally dip the new single piece clear in future wax.

As far as the gaps inside the cockpit @ the side wall...you could shim those with stock, but not sure it's worth the effort with the canopy closed. Even open for that matter...just saying it wouldn't bother me.

I do enjoy your analytical approach to your build.

Respectfully,

Ryan

[Jens]

The Hasegawa Phantoms are not snap-together kits but by cleaning up the mating surfaces a good fit overall can be optained.

I always join the two/three (depending on the version) fuselage half parts together before joining the (complete) left and right fuselage halves. I use the same approach on the lower fuselage/wing parts.

Jens

[nimrod54]

Great work Rob and all the pre-fit will pay dividends in the end.