Jump to content

Airfix Phantom FG.1 AAR Probe


Des

Recommended Posts

I bought a couple of the Airfix FG.1 when they were released and have kept them with their parts still sealed in the bags planning to get round to them one day but have followed some reviews and builds as time has passed and have noted some of the adverse comparisons drawn on this most up-to-date rendition of the type with the previous best in breed from Fujimi thirty years earlier.

 

However it was not until buying the September crop of UK modelling magazines and seeing a built example on the front cover of one that I opened one of the kits up to verify what I was seeing and discovered just how poorly the one-piece Air-to-Air Refuelling probe and door had been represented perhaps to the point of best being ignored and the panel fitted closed or an aftermarket alternative sought instead.      It almost seemed that after having spent time and effort to provide so much detail on the rest of the kit that the AAR Probe was added as an afterthought and while only one part if modeled opened the Airfix effort and reality differ quite considerably , seems a pity to have got it wrong.

 

Rant over and apologies if this particular aspect of the kit has been previously ranted upon , did have a quick look to see.

Edited by Des
Too many insteads
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tempestfan said:

I think it’s a fairly rare occurrence on USN-based versions to see the IFR probe extended on the ground ...........

I believe that in UK FG.1 and FGR.2 use on landing back at an airfield following AAR it was extended while taxying back in  so that it could be checked for any damage and necessary servicing but other than that the only times I ever saw any left extended was for airshow static display , bit like the extended nosewheel leg in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

As ex 29(F) Phantom groundcrew, I can say that we regularly did AAR & rarely did we have the probe extended on shutdown. As I recall, the drop in hydraulic pressure after shutting down meant that the probe would start to creep back & retract. Not fully but the only way to keep it out was by fitting a ground lock & you most definitely would NOT be fitting that with the engines running!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2018 at 3:29 PM, tempestfan said:

I think it’s a fairly rare occurrence on USN-based versions to see the IFR probe extended on the ground, and IIRC Fujimi didn’t bother. But then your point is „why provide this part when doing it poorly“... no answer...

I agree, it was quite rare both USN and USMC but certainly not unheard of - usually when parked up onshore after a deployment ended.  Two or three attached - something different to make a model more interesting :-

ObSmxC8.jpg

 

0QijEto.jpg

 

AJtEUeZ.jpg

 

r5O2ybv.jpg

 

 

On 9/5/2018 at 4:48 PM, Des said:

I believe that in UK FG.1 and FGR.2 use on landing back at an airfield following AAR it was extended while taxying back in  so that it could be checked for any damage and necessary servicing but other than that the only times I ever saw any left extended was for airshow static display , bit like the extended nosewheel leg in that regard.

That is true.  At Leuchars, the probe was usually extended after landing and after AAR or Q sorties.  It was also extended in ASF during Maintenance and "just for show" at Airshows :-

L6gTLvW.jpg

 

kFIDpw7.jpg

 

HTH

 

Dennis

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VX-4's 153088 is a queer beast! Soft wing of the S, nose of the B/N, fin without any RWR bulge and none on the intakes top and bottom either. I remember making the Esci kit while still stationed at Leuchars back in my spotty youth and I'm sure I built it as a normal J. I shall have to go back in time and berate myself for not seeking out reference photos.

As for the photo taken in ASF, I'm guessing it was taken at 10am when everyone was in the T-bar shoving 'Jock pie rolls' down their throats.

 

Duncan B

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Duncan B said:

As for the photo taken in ASF, I'm guessing it was taken at 10am when everyone was in the T-bar shoving 'Jock pie rolls' down their throats.

 

Duncan B

I was talking to Tony Dawkins on a Friday afternoon Duncan, when you were all down "The Commie" or "Hendies" practicing for the weekend and pouring 80 shilling down yer throats !

 

Dennis

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Duncan B said:

VX-4's 153088 is a queer beast! Soft wing of the S, nose of the B/N, fin without any RWR bulge and none on the intakes top and bottom either. I remember making the Esci kit while still stationed at Leuchars back in my spotty youth and I'm sure I built it as a normal J. I shall have to go back in time and berate myself for not seeking out reference photos.

As for the photo taken in ASF, I'm guessing it was taken at 10am when everyone was in the T-bar shoving 'Jock pie rolls' down their throats.

 

Duncan B

I think (access to long gone red wine affected brain cells) that the wing slats were not deployable/retractable but welded on as a test for the S. Did it have B or J engines?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iainpeden said:

I think (access to long gone red wine affected brain cells) that the wing slats were not deployable/retractable but welded on as a test for the S. Did it have B or J engines?

Iain and Duncan.  She was a J when I shot her in Oct 75 at NAF North Island en route for rework.  It was during this that I believe she had the Bi-Cenntenial Eagle scheme applied.  The slats were fixed  on the outboard mainplane panels and she had J engines :-

 

mix9qbk.jpg

HTH

 

Dennis

Edited by sloegin57
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dennis

That's an interesting shot; what's the badge on the tail and the significance of the "FX65"? I'm assuming she was with an experimental unit and therefore that the undernose fairing (the B/N nose) held specialist instrumentation.

 

It also looks like the inner wing slat actuators are in place - whether active or not.

 

Thanks

Iain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iainpeden said:

Dennis

That's an interesting shot; what's the badge on the tail and the significance of the "FX65"? I'm assuming she was with an experimental unit and therefore that the undernose fairing (the B/N nose) held specialist instrumentation.

 

It also looks like the inner wing slat actuators are in place - whether active or not.

 

Thanks

Iain

The patch on the fin is a stylised version of NATC's (U.S. Naval Air Test Center - note spelling) patch, based at NAS Patuxent River (also known as Pax.R or Pax River).  The US Navy used the aircraft to test various configurations of slat for the 'S' model at that base :-

koWwZsy.jpg

 

SLTYATZ.jpg

My Collection

 

The code on the fin is effectively the work number for feeding the aircraft through NAF

 

The slats only had two positions as I recall - IN or OUT and could be controlled from the cockpit.  My knowledge of later versions of Navy/Marines aircraft is somewhat limited.  I once started an Itaerli 72nd kit of the 'S' but it is still in the box of doom as "Ugly".  I doubt if it will be finished - ever.

 

HTH

 

Dennis

 

 

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...