Italeri OA-4M 1:72

[klr]

Alongside the single-seat 1983 Italeri A-4M, I will be building the 1998 two-seat OA-4M variant, which shared as much of the A-4M tooling as as was possible. Markings are included for two USMC H&Ms (Headquarters and Maintenance) aircraft.

 

 

[modelling minion]

Another excellent choice klr.

The OA-4M has a meaner look than the F or J two seaters, possibly due to the faired in hump and also the camouflage.

I don't remember building one of these so I am interested to see how it turns out.

[klr]

1 minute ago, modelling minion said:

Another excellent choice klr.

The OA-4M has a meaner look than the F or J two seaters, possibly due to the faired in hump and also the camouflage.

I don't remember building one of these so I am interested to see how it turns out.

I would have bought these Italeri kits way back when there was nothing else available in the line of 1/72 A-4 kits - to me anyway. I didn't have access to Fujimi kits, and ESCI were hard to find, but I did track a few of those down. The choice is much better nowadays, but that doesn't mean I should ignore the Italeri kits.

[modelling minion]

4 minutes ago, klr said:

The choice is much better nowadays, but that doesn't mean I should ignore the Italeri kits.

Absolutely not, we all need to learn to build the kits we actually have in the stash.

[Anatol Pigwa]

The Italeri A-4F is not bad at all. (don't know about the OA-4M)

 

I am only slightly perplexed about the missile shown on the boxart is it a HARM? a Sparrow? AFAIK neither was cleared for the Skyhawk, but maybe I stand to be corrected.

[modelling minion]

11 minutes ago, Anatol Pigwa said:

The Italeri A-4F is not bad at all. (don't know about the OA-4M)

 

I am only slightly perplexed about the missile shown on the boxart is it a HARM? a Sparrow? AFAIK neither was cleared for the Skyhawk, but maybe I stand to be corrected.

It's a Shrike ARM, and very much cleared for the Skyhawk.

[Anatol Pigwa]

Yeah. Forgot about the AGM-45!

 

Thanks!

[alt-92]

Nice little kit Still have my 1990s built one, hairy-stick painted. 

Unfortunately, I didn't overcoat/seal the decals then, so they're discoloured and flaking off. 

Good thing the replacement is in the stash, the challenge will be matching the decal colours to recent paints.

[Hook]

On 3/1/2021 at 10:57 AM, modelling minion said:

It's a Shrike ARM, and very much cleared for the Skyhawk.

But never carried operationally by the FAC roled OA-4M.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[basket]

Hello .

Very interesting choice . 

I don't know if any among the 20+ OA-4M built ever flew with a Shrike under it's wings ?

BTW , I'm a fan of your avatar ( and of Fagen and Steely Dan also !!! )

 

[Hook]

9 hours ago, basket said:

I don't know if any among the 20+ OA-4M built ever flew with a Shrike under it's wings ?

These were FAC-roled, fuel bags and rocked pods (seven shot) for smoke marking were the usual loads, with the occasional ACMI pod during exercises.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

[Hook]

Oh, one more small thing to take into consideration - OA-4M's (and TA-4KU's) had a vent on top of the port intake that was absent on all other Skyhawk variants. It is visible on this pic of the Hasegawa boxtop. No kit that I'm aware of has this represented OOTB. 

 

Just another of those details that you never see until you see it! 

 

HTH!,

 

Andre

 

Edit: TA-4KU links added. 

Edited April 5, 2021 by Hook

[klr]

On 4/3/2021 at 8:43 AM, Hook said:

These were FAC-roled, fuel bags and rocked pods (seven shot) for smoke marking were the usual loads, with the occasional ACMI pod during exercises.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Thanks, I already had reservations about a FAC aircraft carrying anti-radiation missiles. So when the time comes (hopefully in a week or so), I'll see what I can fit in their place.

 

10 hours ago, Hook said:

Oh, one more small thing to take into consideration - OA-4M's (and TA-4KU's) had a vent on top of the port intake that was absent on all other Skyhawk variants. It is visible on this pic of the Hasegawa boxtop. No kit that I'm aware of has this represented OOTB. 

 

Just another of those details that you never see until you see it! 

 

HTH!,

 

Andre

 

Edit: TA-4KU links added. 

Now that I look at that picture, the vent is very clearly visible. Annoyingly, it is not mentioned or shown in the Wings of Fame A-4 version briefing article that is one of my main references for this GB, and that includes lots of detail about version differences. It would be tricky to accurately reproduce, but we shall see.

[klr]

On 4/2/2021 at 11:08 PM, basket said:

Hello .

Very interesting choice . 

I don't know if any among the 20+ OA-4M built ever flew with a Shrike under it's wings ?

BTW , I'm a fan of your avatar ( and of Fagen and Steely Dan also !!! )

 

I spent a long car journey before Christmas* with one of my brothers listening to Steely Dan and Donald Fagen 😀

 

*The first time I'd seen my family in 9 months, because of you-know-what.

[basket]

2 minutes ago, klr said:

I spent a long car journey before Christmas* with one of my brothers listening to Steely Dan and Donald Fagen 😀

 

*The first time I'd seen my family in 9 months, because of you-know-what.

 

Cool !!!!

Surely 5 good reasons to feel good !

[klr]

1 minute ago, basket said:

 

Cool !!!!

Surely 5 good reasons to feel good !

"Feeling good" being the operative phrase, as I didn't even get travel sick, which I suffer very badly from.

 

I was not so lucky during the return journey after Christmas, but that's another story.

[spejic]

5 hours ago, klr said:

Now that I look at that picture, the vent is very clearly visible. Annoyingly, it is not mentioned or shown in the Wings of Fame A-4 version briefing article that is one of my main references for this GB, and that includes lots of detail about version differences. It would be tricky to accurately reproduce, but we shall see.

 

I had to create similar vents in the nose of an A-4AR and the way I did it was to make a whole slice the angle and depth of the intake and then rebuild the sides with plastic card. That way you get the proper depth and sharpness and sanding the sides smooth is a simple task.

 

[modelling minion]

Hi klr, any movement on any of your Skyhawk builds?

With the end of the GB in 2 weeks it would be great if we could get one or two from you in the gallery.

[Hook]

On 4/6/2021 at 5:12 AM, spejic said:

 

I had to create similar vents in the nose of an A-4AR and the way I did it was to make a whole slice the angle and depth of the intake and then rebuild the sides with plastic card. That way you get the proper depth and sharpness and sanding the sides smooth is a simple task.

 

 

My technique for making NACA in 1/72nd: 

 

- drill a hole 

- fill the hole with your putty of choice (I use a sludge of Tamiya Extra Thin with styrene for this) 

- carve a round toothpick to a triangle 

- push said toothpick in the putty when it has almost hardened

- sand 

 

HTH!,

 

Andre 

 

[klr]

On 5/23/2021 at 6:18 PM, modelling minion said:

Hi klr, any movement on any of your Skyhawk builds?

With the end of the GB in 2 weeks it would be great if we could get one or two from you in the gallery.

Here we go ...

 

The cockpit was typical of a 1980s Italeri jet:

 

After that, things seemed to proceed swimmingly. I am going to fit rocket pods to the outboard pylons (as suggested above), so I had to cut away the mounts for the Shrike missiles.

 

When I was dry-fitting the nose undercarriage, the rear part of the nose wheel bay came away. This picture doesn't really show how bad it was:

 

My only option was to force up the back part of the cockpit "bath", to allow me to press down on the bay from above while the glue set:

 

As of early this evening, that hurdle has now been cleared:

 

I've already done a considerable amount of work on cleaning up joins, gaps and seams. The wheels bays and the wheels themselves have already been painted. By tomorrow evening, the kit should be all but complete, and ready for paint and decals.

[modelling minion]

Well you might be a late starter but you really have made up for lost time!

It looks like you almost have a complete Skyhawk already, and a rather nice looking one too. And it also looks like you should make the deadline by next weekend.

[klr]

Just now, modelling minion said:

Well you might be a late starter but you really have made up for lost time!

It looks like you almost have a complete Skyhawk already, and a rather nice looking one too. And it also looks like you should make the deadline by next weekend.

I'm crossing my (prematurely arthritic*) fingers ...

 

*They've been like this for years, and I seem to get by. You do not want to see a picture of them.

 

Getting back to the kit: I am toying with applying one of the more "exotic" OA-4M schemes. specifically a very striking sand/brown camouflage. Time, references and decals allowing of course.

[klr]

On 4/3/2021 at 8:43 AM, Hook said:

These were FAC-roled, fuel bags and rocked pods (seven shot) for smoke marking were the usual loads, with the occasional ACMI pod during exercises.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

As I (hopefully!) try and complete this kit: The four-round Zuni (127mm) rocket pod seems to be associated with the OA-4M, at least in the minds of certain kit manufacturers. But I've seen one OA-4M picture that seems to show a smaller launcher, probably a 7x 68mm LAU-68. I have a pair of LAU-68 pods in an Italeri weapons set, so I will use these.

Edited June 14, 2021 by klr

[spejic]

1 hour ago, klr said:

As I (hopefully!) try and complete this kit: The four-round Zuni (127mm) rocket pod seems to be associated with the OA-4M, at least in the minds of certain kit manufacturers.

 

I think it's because the Playboy TA-4F's in Vietnam used Zuni rockets for marking targets and the OA-4M had a similar Forward Air Control mission. In fact, the FAC-assigned F/A-18D's in the first Gulf War used Zuni rockets for that purpose as well.

 

[Hook]

Indeed. Almost all OA-4M photos I've seen show the smaller seven shot pods, LAU-68 seems spot on.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre