Building an F-4D by using an………F-4B?

[DrumBum]

Hi all,

 

Im looking to build a Vietnam era F-4D but none of the available D’s appeal to me for various reasons.

 

So I was wondering if a Tamiya B could be converted to a D.

 

I will list the changes required as far as I can tell:

      Weapons pylons from after market

      Delete the refueling probe door and re scribe a refueling hatch on the spine

      Changes to the cockpit in particular the rear side walls

      Some different antennas etc and a little of general re scribing

 

Am I missing anything major here? Its a great kit and if the changes are not too drastic Im thinking it would be preferable to building an old Hasegawa D or re shaping a ZM D?

 

Cheers and any thoughts would be interesting to hear.

 

 

 

[Nigel Bunker]

50 minutes ago, DrumBum said:

Am I missing anything major here?

Wings - the F-4B (and F-4N) had 'thin' wings whilst all other marks had thicker wings to accomodate the wider mainwheels. So you'll need new wheels as well, note that USAF F-4s had different wheel hubs from USN F-4s.

 

Also as you said USAF cockpits were different to USN covkpits as F-4B, J, N & S models (also F-4K &M models) incorporated a refuelling probe which meant the rear cockpit had no right hand side console.

 

Lastly the F-4D had longer exhaust nozzles than the F-4B.

 

I think you'd be better building your kit as an F-4B and getting an F-4D kit.

[Giorgio N]

Yes, you're missing one major difference: the B had thinner main wheels. When the thicker wheels were introduced on the C, this required a new bulged profile of the wing over and under the wheel well area, blended along a good part of the wing chord. Modifying a B to introduce such bulge is not an easy task, would mean heavily reworking upper and lower wing surfaces and a few other things (like new wheels and wheel well doors).

 

(Nigel beat me to it while I was Typing)

 

[tempestfan]

I think you could build one of the earliest F-110As, which were Navy Bs loaned to the AF and returned soon after (IIRC). However, memory is hazy...

A cheap way for a fairly nice D would probably be the Esci/Scalecraft/Ertl kit, but the mould is something like 40 years old and should probably not be presented directly beside a Tamiya or ZM Phantom...Same goes for the Monogram.

[Retired Bob]

What about the Academy C/D kit, it's not a bad kit, cockpit is a bit basic but it's probably cheaper than the ZM C/D kits.  The other option is to wait for the Tamiya kit but that could be years away.

[exdraken]

Not entirely sure why you do not like any of the available D models?

ZM, Academy... all great kits especially if you'd prefer to hack up a B model to get to a D... 😜 

[Memphis]

You need to do that get correct version B: 
- "fat" wing. Can you buy "fat" wheels. 
- you need to do or buy cockpit version B (I don't know anybody do it);
- need to do new nose. The radar station on B was smaller diameter than D version;
- you can buy correct exhaust noise;

- maybe you need to correct the top of the tail.
You need to buy many aftermarket sets and to do a big work if you get correct version D. I think this isn't a great idea. 

Edited January 16, 2023 by Memphis

[DrumBum]

Thanks all for the input. I did some further reading and yes as pointed out, the wings are different!!!!

 

I have always wondered how thicker wheels could be accommodated!

 

exdraken

 

I dont know much about the ZM or Academy kits but I have read that the ZM kit is a little odd looking around the rear end?

 

I have built Academy before and found it to be satisfactory so maybe I will track down a C or D.

 

My last 2 builds were Tamiya and I just wanted to stick with the awesome fit of these kits!!!! 
 

thanks again

 

 

[tempestfan]

22 minutes ago, DrumBum said:

My last 2 builds were Tamiya and I just wanted to stick with the awesome fit of these kits!!!! 
 

thanks again

 

 

Then definitely Monogram is not for you 🙂

[Shorty84]

1 hour ago, DrumBum said:

I dont know much about the ZM or Academy kits but I have read that the ZM kit is a little odd looking around the rear end?

The ZM Phantom (short nose) is a bit too fat in some areas of the rear fuselage. If this difference is enough to discard the kit is entirely up to you:

 

https://www.hyperscale.com/2019/reviews/accessories/hypersonic48029reviewdc_1.htm

http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/305824-zoukei-mura-f-4d-corrected-fuselage/&do=findComment&comment=2934166

 

Cheers

Markus

[Julien]

On 16/01/2023 at 11:49, Retired Bob said:

What about the Academy C/D kit, it's not a bad kit, cockpit is a bit basic but it's probably cheaper than the ZM C/D kits.  The other option is to wait for the Tamiya kit but that could be years away.

I think this is a fairly good kit, and certainly a lot cheaper than the ZM kit

[Tomas Enerdal]

It seems like mr Jumpei Temma has done just that, See 1/48 McDonnell Douglas F-4C Phantom II Tamiya part1 (soyuyo.main.jp) (even though the original article is i Japanese, automatic translations often turn out surprisingly well these days)

Now, mr Temma must be one of the worlds most skilled modeller, never miss a detail, and often end up making his own drawings, I just expect him to have covered everything in his beautiful build! See and enjoy, follow if you can.

 

[Keith T]

14 hours ago, Shorty84 said:

The ZM Phantom (short nose) is a bit too fat in some areas of the rear fuselage. If this difference is enough to discard the kit is entirely up to you:

 

https://www.hyperscale.com/2019/reviews/accessories/hypersonic48029reviewdc_1.htm

http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/305824-zoukei-mura-f-4d-corrected-fuselage/&do=findComment&comment=2934166

 

Cheers

Markus

Using the Hypersonic correction set to fix the ZM’s ‘chunky hips’ is very straightforward - certainly easier than trying to convert the Tamiya B into a decent D.

[JeffreyK]

2 hours ago, Tomas Enerdal said:

It seems like mr Jumpei Temma has done just that, See 1/48 McDonnell Douglas F-4C Phantom II Tamiya part1 (soyuyo.main.jp) (even though the original article is i Japanese, automatic translations often turn out surprisingly well these days)

Now, mr Temma must be one of the worlds most skilled modeller, never miss a detail, and often end up making his own drawings, I just expect him to have covered everything in his beautiful build! See and enjoy, follow if you can.

 

...and having seen this model in person a couple of times I can say it's every bit as good as the pics and the article   And if you have a 3D printer you can download all sorts of goodies Temma-san designed for free as well.

J

[silverkite211]

As others have already said, it's easier to make an F-4C/D into a B than the other way round. As it happens I did just that, using a Monogram F-4J as the donor kit , removing the kit radome and replacing it with a F-4C radome. Slimmed down the upper and lower wing bulges and replaced the main wheels with resin ones of the correct type. From the spares box came stabilators, catapult bridle hooks and the side curtain for the rear cockpit from a Hasegawa kit. I have a WIP thread about on the forum somewhere.

[DrumBum]

On 1/18/2023 at 4:10 AM, silverkite211 said:

As others have already said, it's easier to make an F-4C/D into a B than the other way round. As it happens I did just that, using a Monogram F-4J as the donor kit , removing the kit radome and replacing it with a F-4C radome. Slimmed down the upper and lower wing bulges and replaced the main wheels with resin ones of the correct type. From the spares box came stabilators, catapult bridle hooks and the side curtain for the rear cockpit from a Hasegawa kit. I have a WIP thread about on the forum somewhere.

thanks again for the input folks,

 

Just to confirm I have it correctly, the various models have the same wing with the exception of the upper and lower bulges to accomodate the wheels. ie, away from the bulges its the same wing? 

 

Still going for an academy but just curious

 

cheers

[CT7567]

On 1/16/2023 at 3:29 PM, Memphis said:

You need to do that get correct version B: 
- "fat" wing. Can you buy "fat" wheels. 
- you need to do or buy cockpit version B (I don't know anybody do it);
- need to do new nose. The radar station on B was smaller diameter than D version;
- you can buy correct exhaust noise;

- maybe you need to correct the top of the tail.
You need to buy many aftermarket sets and to do a big work if you get correct version D. I think this isn't a great idea. 

 

 

On 1/18/2023 at 7:10 AM, silverkite211 said:

As others have already said, it's easier to make an F-4C/D into a B than the other way round. As it happens I did just that, using a Monogram F-4J as the donor kit , removing the kit radome and replacing it with a F-4C radome. Slimmed down the upper and lower wing bulges and replaced the main wheels with resin ones of the correct type. From the spares box came stabilators, catapult bridle hooks and the side curtain for the rear cockpit from a Hasegawa kit. I have a WIP thread about on the forum somewhere.

 

OK, both of the above posts reference a supposed difference between the radomes of the F-4B and F-4C/D.  Can either of you please clarify and quote a source for this?

 

I know the prototype and pre-production F4H-1/F-4As had smaller radomes, but those are not available as kits and differ from the B.  The radar equipment *inside* the nose radome is different between the B and USAF versions, and the undernose fairings vary, but none of my references on the Phantom describe any difference in the overall size or shape of the nose radome between the various "short nose" production variants (B, C, D, J, N, or S).  Also, to the best of my knowledge all manufacturers that offer a B and also any later USAF or USN "non-gun/non-recon" versions share common tooling for the radome parts for all the relevant variants.

[Memphis]

1 hour ago, CT7567 said:

OK, both of the above posts reference a supposed difference between the radomes of the F-4B and F-4C/D.  Can either of you please clarify and quote a source for this?

I don't have exact data and the drawings may have mistakes. But I'm looking at photos. The difference between B and C/D radar diameters can be one or two inches on a real aircraft. But look at the bottom line of the nose contour. B has a straight line from the wing to the start of the canopy and then into the radar. C does this from the front door of the wheel bay. Below is an illustration of my words. Drawing A/B/J and photo B and D.

Some of my Phantom's kits I save in different place and I can't measure these parts now (at home I have only Hasegawa's E and FineMolds' J). But I will do it in future.

[CT7567]

1 hour ago, Memphis said:

I don't have exact data and the drawings may have mistakes. But I'm looking at photos. The difference between B and C/D radar diameters can be one or two inches on a real aircraft. But look at the bottom line of the nose contour. B has a straight line from the wing to the start of the canopy and then into the radar. C does this from the front door of the wheel bay. Below is an illustration of my words. Drawing A/B/J and photo B and D.

Some of my Phantom's kits I save in different place and I can't measure these parts now (at home I have only Hasegawa's E and FineMolds' J). But I will do it in future.

 

Sorry but either I'm not following your meaning "bottom line of the nose contour" with respect to the radome itself, or I'm afraid your pictures aren't showing what you think they might.

 

The profile drawings you posted seem to illustrate most of the Navy variants but are, in a word, a bit of a mess.  From top to bottom I believe what they are intended to show are the F4H-1F (F-4A), F-4B, F-4J, and F-4S, but none of them are entirely accurate and the radome shown for the B looks like a mix between the F-4A and the later variants.  Early prototype and production Phantoms were a mixed bag with several variations in the forward fuselage, but they had standardized by the time of full production for the B-variant on the 32-inch diameter radome.  You can see several photos of the earlier version (and some "production" noses still with early canopies & intakes) at @Tailspin Turtle's blog here:

https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2009/11/early-phantom-iis.html?m=1

 

The first photo you posted seems to be an N (or J with a B/N radome, the IRST fairing wasn't on the J, and the ECM fairings on the intake "shoulders" make the airframe a J or an N; also note the radomes being interchangeable supports the case that the radomes are all the same).  The second photo is a D, identified by the pronounced "bulge" unique to that type, but that fairing isn't what we're discussing (and is usually a separate part from the radome in most kits).  In fact the C version used the same "non-bulged" IRST fairing as the B-model, despite them being empty on the USAF variants.  I'm reasonably certain the radomes themselves are identical - I think any difference you're seeing between the length and curves of the black portion, excluding the aforementioned chin fairings, is just due to differences in the viewing angle, distance from the camera, and type of lens.

 

[tempestfan]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the J radome was slightly larger due to the different radar set (but this may well be incorrect - there are many kits on the market using the same basic radome tooling for B/C/D/J - which of course may be incorrect as well), but as @CT7567 says, I also cannot recall reading about such difference between B and C/D. 

[silverkite211]

8 hours ago, CT7567 said:

 

 

 

OK, both of the above posts reference a supposed difference between the radomes of the F-4B and F-4C/D.  Can either of you please clarify and quote a source for this?

 

I know the prototype and pre-production F4H-1/F-4As had smaller radomes, but those are not available as kits and differ from the B.  The radar equipment *inside* the nose radome is different between the B and USAF versions, and the undernose fairings vary, but none of my references on the Phantom describe any difference in the overall size or shape of the nose radome between the various "short nose" production variants (B, C, D, J, N, or S).  Also, to the best of my knowledge all manufacturers that offer a B and also any later USAF or USN "non-gun/non-recon" versions share common tooling for the radome parts for all the relevant variants.

Well, in the case of the kitbash that I did, I had to change out the radome for the simple fact that I was using a Monogram F-4J as the starting point. The F-4C radome that I used as a replacement doesn't have the pre-amplifier bulge that the D does.

[Memphis]

Thanks for your comments. This is what I love about discussion: everyone has their own opinion and their own evidence! 
I think that the reason for the chaos with the nose dimensions is due to the unification of kits C and D. Variant D has an AN/APQ-109A station with an antenna that is larger than AN/APQ-72 or AN/APQ-100. But not only the size of the antenna determines the size of the radar radome. You also need room to rotate it for scanning. AN/APQ-100 added ground scan mode. This could give an additional downward shift of the station (if it really was, and it doesn’t seem to me). But the question was about D from B, so my words may be fair. But this's only my opinion. You can have other opinion and you may be right. 

[CT7567]

2 hours ago, silverkite211 said:

Well, in the case of the kitbash that I did, I had to change out the radome for the simple fact that I was using a Monogram F-4J as the starting point. The F-4C radome that I used as a replacement doesn't have the pre-amplifier bulge that the D does.

I'm not familiar with the term "pre-amplifier bulge" but the only difference between the C and J radomes is the IRST chin fairing attached beneath - which was actually deleted on some Cs and Ds.

 

To be fair to the folks in "camp larger radome" I did find a narrative reference on Joe Baugher's site that refers to a "larger radome" on the D vs. the C as a visual distinction between those two variants, but note:

A ) in context I am 99.99999% certain he used the term "radome" in reference to the bulged (D) vs. non-bulged (C) chin fairings, not the main radome, proper.

B ) This whole discussion started with reference to the alleged size difference between the B and C, not the C and D.

 

A little more Google-fu turned up this blog which is probably as definitive as we're going to get on the subject:

https://phantomphacts.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-radome-road-to-32-inch-radome.html?m=1

 

Quoting the key passage:

VARIATION 6: 32" Glass Fiber Nose
Verified on BuNos: 145313b, 146817c and subsequent aircraft.

 

This was to be the production standard for all future F-4(B,C,D,K,M,N,S) Phantoms starting with Block 3. 

[tempestfan]

3 hours ago, Memphis said:

Thanks for your comments. This is what I love about discussion: everyone has their own opinion and their own evidence! 
I think that the reason for the chaos with the nose dimensions is due to the unification of kits C and D. Variant D has an AN/APQ-109A station with an antenna that is larger than AN/APQ-72 or AN/APQ-100. But not only the size of the antenna determines the size of the radar radome. You also need room to rotate it for scanning. AN/APQ-100 added ground scan mode. This could give an additional downward shift of the station (if it really was, and it doesn’t seem to me). But the question was about D from B, so my words may be fair. But this's only my opinion. You can have other opinion and you may be right. 

Wiki isn't the most reliable source of course, but in contrast to 72 over 50 it does not state any increase in antenna diameter of either the 100 or 109 over the 72, only improvements in the electronic components. I'll have a look into one of my various F-4 books later whether they say something; maybe the D&S on the C/D has something to offer, old as it is. 

What makes me doubtful is that I do not see that a 1 inch increase in antenna diameter would yield any improvement (and why an inch?). In contrast, anything larger would have necessitated some redesign to the nose behind the radome I think to blend the larger diameter in, in particular at the sides.

1 hour ago, CT7567 said:

A little more Google-fu turned up this blog which is probably as definitive as we're going to get on the subject:

https://phantomphacts.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-radome-road-to-32-inch-radome.html?m=1

 

Quoting the key passage:

VARIATION 6: 32" Glass Fiber Nose
Verified on BuNos: 145313b, 146817c and subsequent aircraft.

 

This was to be the production standard for all future F-4(B,C,D,K,M,N,S) Phantoms starting with Block 3. 

That looks like a great resource. Not that I need more webpages in my favourites I can waste my time on, though...

[Memphis]

Quote

Так появился вариант F-4D, создание которого было одобрено в марте 1964 года.
Наиболее заметным внешним отличием новой модификации от F-4C было отсутствие обтекателя под инфракрасную станцию AN/AAD-4. Более серьезными были отличия в БРЭО. На самолете установили модернизированную РЛС AN/APQ-109, в которой часть ламповых блоков была заменена полупроводниковыми. Благодаря этому повысилась надежность работы радара и существенно снизилась трудоемкость его обслуживания - новые блоки не нужно было так часто настраивать. Дополнительно был введен режим измерения дальности до наземной цели, указываемой членом экипажа специальным курсором. Поскольку диаметр антенны AN/APQ-109А был большим, чем у AN/APQ-109, диаметр носового обтекателя пришлось несколько увеличить.

This is how the F-4D variant appeared, the creation of which was approved in March 1964.
The most noticeable external difference between the new modification and the F-4C was the absence of a fairing for the AN/AAD-4 infrared station. More serious were the differences in the avionic sistems. An upgraded AN/APQ-109 radar was installed on the aircraft, in which part of the lamp blocks was replaced with semiconductor ones. This increased the reliability of the radar and significantly reduced the complexity of its maintenance - new units did not need to be tuned so often. Additionally, a mode of measuring the range to a ground target was introduced, indicated by a crew member with a special cursor. Since the antenna diameter of the AN/APQ-109A was larger than that of the AN/APQ-109, the diameter of the nose fairing had to be slightly increased.

http://fanmodel.tforums.org/viewtopic.php?t=966