1/72 - McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II by Finemolds - (R)F-4C/D/E/EJ & J released - new boxings in 2024

[Julien]

Anyone seen an news on a G?

[Homebee]

Released

- ref. 72743 - McDD F-4J Phantom II - U.S. Navy - USS Midway 1978

https://www.finemolds.co.jp/FP/72743.html

 

 

 

- ref. 72846 - McDD F-4C Phantom II - USAF - Wolfpack 1967 

https://www.finemolds.co.jp/FP/72846.html

 

 

 

V.P.

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by Homebee

[Fanakit]

Special released for Gifu Kakamigahara Air and Space Museum

 

 

 

 

Available only at the museum ? 

 

source : 

 

 

 

[Homebee]

Two new boxings expected in March 2024

 

 

- ref. 72747 - McDD F-4CD Phantom II - Night Attacker

https://finemolds.co.jp/FP/72747.html

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/11015367

See also: https://twitter.com/finemolds_news/status/1697889599182262519

 

 

 

 

- ref. 72941 - McDD F-4E Phantom II - Thunderbirds - 

https://www.finemolds.co.jp/FP/72941.html 

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/11015368

See also:  https://www.facebook.com/finemolds.co.jp/posts/pfbid02g4fgY22YfKjM23NFoGKPykhS7u33gUDHheppqb9Rpoes33aAKtLpkxNqzR3uLuTil

 

 

 

V.P.

Edited November 2, 2023 by Homebee

[ICMF]

Some ramble-ey thoughts, in case anyone is interested...

 

I've been combing through the Fine Molds kit releases, looking for clues as to their future plans, and came up with a couple of interesting tidbits.

 

#1: there are two sprues that are unaccounted for.

#2: they clearly started with the JASDF types, and expanded from there (which makes sense).

 

Most manufacturers start with sprue A and work alphabetically (almost universally skipping the letter I, though).  Interestingly, FM seems to do the main sprues alphabetically, but starts at Z and moves backwards for the clear sprues.  Also, I've noticed with their latest jet kits, because there are SO many sprues to cover SO many variations, they've resorted to labelling some N1, N2, N3, etc. when it's basically the same sprue, just with variant-specific parts (like the stabs on the F-4, or rudders on the F-15).  So with that in mind...

 

The F-4EJ has sprues A through J (minus I), plus L1, plus Z and Y.  The kai kit swaps out sprue H for sprue K, so sprues A through L, sequentially, cover the Japanese versions.  Again, clearly they came first.

 

Sprue M is for the short exhaust.

 

Sprues N and O are unaccounted for.  Hmmmm...

 

Sprues P, Q and R are for the short nose (specifically Navy) versions.

 

Sprues S, T and U (plus P) are for the short nose AF versions.  Also, they ran out of letters, so the LORAN sprue is labelled NN.

 

V and W are the RF-4EJ-specific parts.

 

Z and Y are the long-nose clear parts; X1 and X2 are the short nose clear parts (weirdly, they tooled a different canopy for the short nose - shouldn't they be the same?)

 

Finally, we have seen L1 (slotted stabs), L2 (slotted stabs w. reinforcement) and L3 (unslotted stabs).  Presumably there could also be an L4 (unslotted w. reinforcement).

 

So, a couple of things.  We can see that things are sequential, and grouped in a relatively logical manner - it gets complicated because there's a lot of mixing and matching, but when you zoom out, it does make sense.  And the sprue with the outer wing panels isn't 'numbered'; it's JUST sprue J.  I can't imagine them NOT doing slatted wings (so many marking possibilities!), and yet I'd expect the hard wing to be J1 with the slat sprue J2, given their naming convention.  Then again, looking at the way their F-2 and F-15 kits are labelled, I'd have expected the exhaust sprues to be G1/G2, not G and M, and the canopies to be Z1/Z2 and Y1/Y2, so who knows?  Maybe if it's being left until the end, it will be something like NX, but it IS kind of... odd. 

 

As for N and O, the most logical explanation to my mind is that N will be the thin wing and O will be the requisite detail parts.  That would give you M, N, O, P, Q to cover the thin wing navy aircraft, making all the sprues grouped sequentially (A-L = Japan; M-Q = B/N; P-R = J/S; S-U = C/D; V+W = recce).  Asian kit makers seem to LOVE the B/N (Academy, Hasegawa Tamiya and ZM all started their Phantom families with it), so it would kind of make sense that it would be 'first' after the Japanese variants.  I wouldn't say it's confirmed, but I WOULD say it's REALLY likely.  But again, if that DOES account for the two 'missing' sprues, that leaves the slat wing without an obvious letter.

 

Now to sift through the F-15 instructions. 

[giemme]

46 minutes ago, ICMF said:

Z and Y are the long-nose clear parts; X1 and X2 are the short nose clear parts (weirdly, they tooled a different canopy for the short nose - shouldn't they be the same?)

I guess you are referring to the windshield, which is shorter for the long nose versions. Actually, Finemolds is the only company that got it right (at least in 1/72); they are in fact different, check this link out for a very exhaustive comparison:

 

https://soyuyo.main.jp/f4/f4e-2.html

 

Other than that, your post revived in me the (probably vain) hope that FM will produce slatted wings F-4s at some point.... Thanks!  

 

Ciao

[Skawinski]

I'd put my money on sprues N and O containing nose and other parts of RF-4E used by JASDF, so far not released by FM (they had the existing, non-slatted wing).

 

As for the slatted wing - I lost hope after doing similar analysis to yours some months ago. Simply wing sprue doesn't have a numeral suffix.

 

Nevertheless if future releases will prove me wrong wrt wing, this will be the sweetest proving wrong ever! They could introduce two-letter sprue designations after all (e.g. AA, AB, AC etc.).

Edited January 17 by Skawinski

[Terry1954]

2 hours ago, giemme said:

your post revived in me the (probably vain) hope that FM will produce slatted wings F-4s at some point....

 

We can but hope Giorgio!

 

Terry

[Robert]

If you want to go to the finer details the wing fences on the slatted wing were different between the USN and USAF also where does the  F-4G fit into this ?

 

Regards

Robert 

[Dennis_C]

Can any Phantom expert here advise if any of already released F-4E boxes work for IDF Kurnass? I think there is just one E box released for Vietnam + a Thunderbirds box on approach. Or I'd better wait for several more years for dedicated IDF release

Edited January 18 by Dennis_C

[Skawinski]

It depends what you understand by 'Kurnass', as this airplane evolved during its service life (as all Phantoms did).

Initial deliveries were with non-slated wings and without formation lights - if you want e.g. Yom Kippur War Kurnass the right choice will be F-4E (Early) "Vietnam War" boxing (FP 41).

Starting from November 1972, newly-delivered Phantoms had already slatted wing and until 1978 all previously-delivered F-4Es were converted to slatted wing, that Fine Molds does not offer, I'm afraid. And we don't know still if it is going to be produced.

Hope that helps,

Michal

[KRK4m]

20 hours ago, ICMF said:

As for N and O, the most logical explanation to my mind is that N will be the thin wing and O will be the requisite detail parts.  That would give you M, N, O, P, Q to cover the thin wing navy aircraft, making all the sprues grouped sequentially (A-L = Japan; M-Q = B/N; P-R = J/S; S-U = C/D; V+W = recce).  Asian kit makers seem to LOVE the B/N (Academy, Hasegawa Tamiya and ZM all started their Phantom families with it), so it would kind of make sense that it would be 'first' after the Japanese variants.  I wouldn't say it's confirmed, but I WOULD say it's REALLY likely. 

Your investigation @ICMF is impressive, but I absolutely cannot agree with this one statement. In my opinion, the lack of the new F-4B/N tool in 1/72 is what the market suffers the most. And here I think you mixed up some facts.

• The only Far Eastern manufacturer that started its Phantom adventure with the thin-winged F-4B/N was Academy. But it was in 1/48, because in 1/72 - despite promises that are already 10 years old - the Academy still does not offer this original variant.
• Tamiya also has F-4B only in 1/48, because in 1/72 it only has Italeri reboxes (but also without F-4B/N).
• Hasegawa released the Phantom as a "new tool" three times in 1/72 IIRC. First, in the mid-1960s it was the F-4C, less than 10 years later they made the long-nosed family, which was initiated by the F-4EJ boxing, and the latest tool from the 1990s debuted as the F-4J (incidentally, the same as the 1/72 Academy some 30 years later). Moreover, in 1/48 Hasegawa also started somewhere in the mid-1980s with the F-4J, which was soon joined by the British FG.1.
• And Zoukei-Mura, first of all, does not have the Phantom in 1/72, and in 1/48 it offers 11 boxes, covering all variants except... F-4A/B/N and all RF-4s.

To sum up - I and thousands like me have been waiting for the 1/72 new tool F-4B for years

Cheers

Michael

[Robert]

I would not be surprised to see a F-4B/N in 1/72 from Tamiya as they seem to do 1/72 and 1/48 of the same subject.

 

Regards

Robert 

[Dennis_C]

1 hour ago, Skawinski said:

It depends what you understand by 'Kurnass', as this airplane evolved during its service life (as all Phantoms did).

Initial deliveries were with non-slated wings and without formation lights - if you want e.g. Yom Kippur War Kurnass the right choice will be F-4E (Early) "Vietnam War" boxing (FP 41).

Starting from November 1972, newly-delivered Phantoms had already slatted wing and until 1978 all previously-delivered F-4Es were converted to slatted wing, that Fine Molds does not offer, I'm afraid. And we don't know still if it is going to be produced.

Hope that helps,

Michal

Thank you! That is helpful explanation. And it's a great question what Kurnass I want... Attrition war/Yom Kippur is tempting. Later slatted Phantoms for 1982 war are also interesting. Kurnass 2000 version is cool - as I understand there should be modifications in the cockpit layout, updated wing tips and not sure what about pylons and armament set. After all there is Orev as well...

[Giorgio N]

1 hour ago, KRK4m said:

Your investigation @ICMF is impressive, but I absolutely cannot agree with this one statement. In my opinion, the lack of the new F-4B/N tool in 1/72 is what the market suffers the most. And here I think you mixed up some facts.

• The only Far Eastern manufacturer that started its Phantom adventure with the thin-winged F-4B/N was Academy. But it was in 1/48, because in 1/72 - despite promises that are already 10 years old - the Academy still does not offer this original variant.
• Tamiya also has F-4B only in 1/48, because in 1/72 it only has Italeri reboxes (but also without F-4B/N).
• Hasegawa released the Phantom as a "new tool" three times in 1/72 IIRC. First, in the mid-1960s it was the F-4C, less than 10 years later they made the long-nosed family, which was initiated by the F-4EJ boxing, and the latest tool from the 1990s debuted as the F-4J (incidentally, the same as the 1/72 Academy some 30 years later). Moreover, in 1/48 Hasegawa also started somewhere in the mid-1980s with the F-4J, which was soon joined by the British FG.1.
• And Zoukei-Mura, first of all, does not have the Phantom in 1/72, and in 1/48 it offers 11 boxes, covering all variants except... F-4A/B/N and all RF-4s.

To sum up - I and thousands like me have been waiting for the 1/72 new tool F-4B for years

Cheers

Michael

 

Actually when Hasegawa launched their "new" Phantoms in 1990 they issued the B/N together with other variants in the same year. I still have the catalogue from that year and all variants were shown together in a single picture.

Interestingly the B/N and the EJ seem to be the only ones that have been in constant production in their basic boxes over the years while boxes like the J and the slatted Es have come and gone. The slatted Es in particular seem to be ones with smaller production runs, that is in a sense surprising since they cover many subjects pretty popular here. Guess that with Hasegawa's market being predominantly Japan the local modellers prefer the EJ for obvious reasons while having a soft spot for US Navy subjects. Something that does not bode well for the appearance of a new slatted wing E from Fine Molds....

Personally I'm at a point where I've decided to use the Revell outer wings on a Fine Mold EJ to build a good slatted wing F-4E...

[giemme]

2 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

Personally I'm at a point where I've decided to use the Revell outer wings on a Fine Mold EJ to build a good slatted wing F-4E...

Agreed, me too. If anyone is interested, here's my WIP on how I did that:

 

 

Ciao

 

 

[ICMF]

23 hours ago, giemme said:

I guess you are referring to the windshield, which is shorter for the long nose versions. Actually, Finemolds is the only company that got it right (at least in 1/72); they are in fact different, check this link out for a very exhaustive comparison:

 

https://soyuyo.main.jp/f4/f4e-2.html

 

Other than that, your post revived in me the (probably vain) hope that FM will produce slatted wings F-4s at some point.... Thanks!  

 

Ciao

 

Well, yes and no.  The actual glazings on the real airplane ARE the same, but the way they're mounted makes them look different, so you need different windscreens on a model kit to reflect this apparent difference.  And yes, FM have depicted this difference: the long nose windscreen is sprue Z; the short nose windscreen is X2. 

 

But the weird thing is - and what I was referring to - they also tooled a different canopy sprue (as in, the actual, moving sections above the crew) - the long nose uses sprue Y, while the short nose uses X1.  I can't imagine why they would do that, as those parts should(?) be the same on all the kits.  Guess I'll have to dig out my kits to compare.

 

Also, I think I'm less confident about the slats now.  On the one hand, it would be crazy if they didn't, they've already covered smaller details so you'd think the additional cost wouldn't be a factor, and it's just a few parts for a ton of potential boxings.  On the other hand, there just isn't room in the alphabet, unless they start doing AA, BB, etc. (which is certainly possible - as I mentioned, the LORAN sprue is NN, so they've already rolled over), so who knows?  

 

 

23 hours ago, Skawinski said:

I'd put my money on sprues N and O containing nose and other parts of RF-4E used by JASDF, so far not released by FM (they had the existing, non-slatted wing).

 

I wouldn't, as it wouldn't follow the logical order FM seem to have.  Specifically, the sprues for each 'new' version are all grouped alphabetically.  Sprue M is the short exhausts, for the B/N and C/D.  Then there's a gap.  Then there's parts for the (long exhaust) F-4J.  Then the C/D. 

 

If that gap is for a recce nose, then sprue M is completely out of sequence given the way FM do things; you would expect it to be in the parts tooled for the C/D, since it wouldn't have been needed for any of the previous 'groups'.  

 

If that gap is for a B/N, then everything falls into place.  Sprues A-L were done first, to cover the Japanese Phantoms. Then M through Q for the B/N.  Then sprue R was added for the F-4J.  Then S-U for the C/D, then V+W for the RF-4EJ pods.  Adding further credence to this, I'd note that sprue Q also has the intake blisters and smooth radome of the B/N, which would be strange if they were done with the J 'group', but makes perfect sense if they were done as part of the B/N 'group'.

 

It's the same reason I don't think that gap is for slatted wings (which I'd personally prefer to a thin wing): it would put the short exhausts out of sequence.

 

12 hours ago, Robert said:

If you want to go to the finer details the wing fences on the slatted wing were different between the USN and USAF also where does the  F-4G fit into this ?

 

Indeed.  And I could absolutely imagine a separate sprue for the S slats and instrument panels (much like the EJ kai sprue), and I can imagine a separate sprue for the G details... but unless they DO roll over the lettering to AA, BB, CC, there doesn't seem to be space for them.

 

3 hours ago, KRK4m said:

Your investigation @ICMF is impressive, but I absolutely cannot agree with this one statement. In my opinion, the lack of the new F-4B/N tool in 1/72 is what the market suffers the most. And here I think you mixed up some facts.

 

I was referring to Phantom series in general, not specifically 1/72 (I didn't really want to add to the length of an already-long post by citing which specific company released the kit in which specific scale).  You're right though, most actually started with the J (I'm not a fan of USN/USMC Phantoms, so they all kind of blend together 😄)

 

Don't get me wrong though: I'm not against a new B/N in 1/72, and indeed, I think it's nearly certain that the kit is coming.  In fact, I think it's more likely than slatted wings (unfortunately, IMO - I'm mostly interested in the foreign users)

[giemme]

1 hour ago, ICMF said:

Well, yes and no.  The actual glazings on the real airplane ARE the same, but the way they're mounted makes them look different, so you need different windscreens on a model kit to reflect this apparent difference. 

You are indeed correct, and there is the exact same explanation in the link I posted. Modelling-wise, it translates into a different windshield.

 

1 hour ago, ICMF said:

But the weird thing is - and what I was referring to - they also tooled a different canopy sprue (as in, the actual, moving sections above the crew) - the long nose uses sprue Y, while the short nose uses X1.  I can't imagine why they would do that, as those parts should(?) be the same on all the kits.  Guess I'll have to dig out my kits to compare.

Ah, that's odd; I'll dig out my J and D kits too  

 

Ciao

[alt-92]

1 hour ago, giemme said:

Ah, that's odd

maybe not, if they just swapped the windscreen in CAD. 
Yes, it's a new tree/frame/sprue, but the canopies would still be the same design.

[ICMF]

Interesting findings.

 

Just to recap: there are two 'pairs' of clear parts in the series. 

FM originally tooled the sprues for the long nosed Phantoms (in 2020, FWIW), and these are sprues Z (windscreen) and Y (canopy, as either a one piece or 3-piece split)  The Z windscreen is 'shorter' to depict the 'apparent' difference on the revised nose.

FM tooled two new sprues for the short nosed Phantoms (in 2021, FWIW).  These are sprue X1 (canopy; again, both single piece and 3-piece options) and X2 (windscreen).  X2 is 'longer' to depict the 'apparent' difference on the short nose.

 

We already knew the windscreens were different.  And that's a good thing.  The only thing at issue here is the canopy itself (that is, the bits that go over the aircrew's heads, and small, solid bit in between them).  And it's worth noting, these ARE completely different trees.  The letters are different, the dates are different, and the runners actually connecting the trees are different.  It's not a copy/paste in CAD, it's an intentional re-work.  I trimmed the one-piece canopies off to compare, and on first glance, they look to be the same - width is the same at the windscreen and canopy hinge.  Everything seems to line up.  On close inspection, though, they ARE different.

 

The front and centre sections on the long nosed canopy are parallel; ie. the pilot's canopy has the same width at the front and back.  The WSO's canopy sides taper in at the back, but the pilot's canopy is parallel.

The front and centre sections on the short nosed canopy flare outwards; ie. the pilot's canopy is narrower at the front than it is at its back.  Again, the WSO's canopy sides taper in at the back.

 

It's a fairly significant difference, too.  I measured the centre section on the long nose canopy to be about 12.75mm wide, while the same point on the short nosed canopy is about 13.55mm.  The difference SEEMS to be limited to the canopy sills (I didn't measure them, but the actual glazings seem to be about the same dimensions), but it's still an unexpected finding.

 

On a slightly different subject, also interesting to note: there's an extra 'appendage' on the long nosed glazing runner.  One connects to the windscreen sprue, the other just dangles out in thin air.  It's NOT for the JASDF recce pod windows, and the only other things I can think of that would make sense there are either a frameless canopy for late USAF users, or *possibly* windows for a recce nose.  I wouldn't bet money on either, and it could be nothing at all, but if it's a placeholder for a future sprue, those are the only things that come to mind.

[Robertone139]

18 hours ago, ICMF said:

Interesting findings.....

....

On a slightly different subject, also interesting to note: there's an extra 'appendage' on the long nosed glazing runner.  One connects to the windscreen sprue, the other just dangles out in thin air.  It's NOT for the JASDF recce pod windows, and the only other things I can think of that would make sense there are either a frameless canopy for late USAF users, or *possibly* windows for a recce nose.  I wouldn't bet money on either, and it could be nothing at all, but if it's a placeholder for a future sprue, those are the only things that come to mind.

Here's to hoping that they eventually issue a slatted wing for late Es, Fs, Gs and Ss even though the frameless winshield would only be for Es and Gs.

[Hoops]

On 1/18/2024 at 3:04 PM, ICMF said:

Interesting findings.

 

Just to recap: there are two 'pairs' of clear parts in the series. 

FM originally tooled the sprues for the long nosed Phantoms (in 2020, FWIW), and these are sprues Z (windscreen) and Y (canopy, as either a one piece or 3-piece split)  The Z windscreen is 'shorter' to depict the 'apparent' difference on the revised nose.

FM tooled two new sprues for the short nosed Phantoms (in 2021, FWIW).  These are sprue X1 (canopy; again, both single piece and 3-piece options) and X2 (windscreen).  X2 is 'longer' to depict the 'apparent' difference on the short nose. ....

 

See the analysis here: https://soyuyo.main.jp/f4e/f-4e-1.html

 

This shows the difference between the two versions compared to the actual aircraft. The newer tooled canopies, and forward fuselage for that matter, are more accurate on the shorter nose Phantom kits.

 

He goes a lot further to correct the minor shape errors in the kit than I would, but it has a great looking result in the end.

 

Cheers,

Hoops

Edited January 20 by Hoops

[Robertone139]

On 1/19/2024 at 12:17 PM, Hoops said:

 

See the analysis here: https://soyuyo.main.jp/f4e/f-4e-1.html

 

This shows the difference between the two versions compared to the actual aircraft. The newer tooled canopies, and forward fuselage for that matter, are more accurate on the shorter nose Phantom kits.

 

He goes a lot further to correct the minor shape errors in the kit than I would, but it has a great looking result in the end.

 

Cheers,

Hoops

I am impressed, those lines differ by less than a millimiter when enlarged tenfold or more on a 13" laptop screen, the only visible difference is the slope of the different windshields.

[DougC]

I may have missed this earlier in the thread but.....

..... based on some of the expert analysis above, what is the consensus on whether FM will eventually produce a Spey engined British F-4 K & M?

[ICMF]

Extremely low.  It would have to be done as a standalone kit - I think the only sprue that could be re-used is the drop tanks.  Possibly the short nose canopy, as well.  Everything else would have to be replaced.  

 

It's not a 'no' (who knows what they're planning), but they are the least likely versions to be released.