Davec_24 Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 My first build for this GB is the Matchbox F-4K Phantom in 1:72 scale. Last time I built this kit, I was about 9 and it was the second model I ever built - needless to say, I hope to do a little better this time. I'm building this OOB, even though there is nothing to speak of by way of undercarriage bay detail, and it will have the pilots in to hide the relative lack of cockpit detail. Here's the sprue/box shot with everything laid out: When looking at this lack of detail, one has to remember just how old this kit is - I think it would be unrealistic to expect it to hold its own against more modern kits of the Phantom. For all its relative simplicity, the quality of the moulding is actually very good - cleanly done and with only a couple of minor fit issues - Matchbox sure knew how to make a kit that fits together. Of course the traditional Matchbox problem of the kit being moulded in three different colours of plastic applies to this kit, but a good coat of primer should sort out any issues that this would otherwise have caused. The cockpit is painted grey and some nosewight added in the form of plasticine, both under the cockpit floor and in the nose cone. A bulkhead of plastic card was added and shaped to seal off the area where the noseweight is, to prevent it all falling aft if and when the plasticine dries up in 10 years' time. Here's some pics of the nose with weight in (the nose cone is held in a clothes peg there): I've now got the fuselage together, but this is all still drying so pictures are to follow in the next installment... 1
tornado64 Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 remember making that kit as a nipper lovelly little kits i for one as a kid and in fact adult prefered them to airfix as they were a much superior build finnish ..and cheaper with nice subjects particularly in the armour kits as they were supplied with a diorama too ..who realisticaly wanted an airfix tank with that sort of deal they also did far superior soldier figures to go with the armour .. revell still mould a lot of the old matchbox range can't wait to see this complete
Davec_24 Posted January 11, 2009 Author Posted January 11, 2009 I have to agree with you about the Matchbox armour Tornado, I'm really glad Revell now do a fair bit of the old Matchbox range (minus the dodgy multi-coloured plastic of course). I'm doing this Phantom OOB partly because of nostalgia I suppose, it reminds me of being a kid and how much fun my brother and I used to have with models! I see this as a good thing as it keeps modelling a joy for me rather than a chore, and should help prevent me getting sick of it! 1
Davec_24 Posted January 11, 2009 Author Posted January 11, 2009 The main components of the airframe are now together - a couple of shots in glorious 3-colour plastic: A little filler was needed, particularly to blend in the step where the underside of the nose meets the underside of the fuselage centre section. This still isn't perfect where the grooves for the Sparrows are, but since I plan on putting these on, it shouldn't be visible on the finished model. I'm still not sure on the rest of the weapons fit, but I'm thinking of sidewinders on the inboard pylons. Most pictures I've seen of Phantoms flying off the Ark have fairly light stores, and rarely have all 3 drop tanks on, so I'm not sure whether I'll do all tanks on, or just the centreline tank, or both wing tanks fitted but not the centre tank. 1
Deon Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 Good luck with this one Daz.. I have one started and bought the aeroclub pack with seats, u/c and pipes, but Ive not gathered the momentum to finish it, so I'll be interested to hear how this one goes for you.
AnonymousFO98 Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 Good luck with this one Daz.. I have one started and bought the aeroclub pack with seats, u/c and pipes, but Ive not gathered the momentum to finish it, so I'll be interested to hear how this one goes for you. Me too Deon!- except i haven't started it yet will also be watching with interest
John B (Sc) Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 Good luck with this. I will be very interested to hear what you and others think of the canopy arrangement. My recollection from years ago is that this was one of the few early Matchbox kits I found disappointing because of the low cockpit profile and what seemed to me to be a slightly short nose. Other than that it seemed better detailed than the older Airfix F4B offering. But that's memory from what? - twenty years ago plus - so maybe I'm remembering the wrong kit. I think you are right about stores loadings. Mostly the F4Ks launched fairly light inthe picturesand videos I've seen, perhaps because Ark was a challenge to operate the Phantom from anyway. Cheers, John B
AnonymousFO98 Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 (edited) Good luck with this. I will be very interested to hear what you and others think of the canopy arrangement. My recollection from years ago is that this was one of the few early Matchbox kits I found disappointing because of the low cockpit profile and what seemed to me to be a slightly short nose. Other than that it seemed better detailed than the older Airfix F4B offering. But that's memory from what? - twenty years ago plus - so maybe I'm remembering the wrong kit. I think you are right about stores loadings. Mostly the F4Ks launched fairly light inthe picturesand videos I've seen, perhaps because Ark was a challenge to operate the Phantom from anyway. Hi John I ordered the Aeroclub set with replacement canopy because it does look a tad flat - not checked it against pics or drawings but that was my gut feeling about it . have got to get another as i have a second kit now. re loads. my brother was a NAM in 892 on the Ark, and IIRC the standard was: 4 Sparrows in the semi recessed fuselage points, twin(?) sidewinders on the in- board pylons, fuel tanks on the out board pylons would have thought the primary role would have been fleet protection the centre line was occassionaly used edit-there was the big pod supplied with the kit that wasn't often if ever used by 892- might have been for the RAF version and the slot possibly used for the stand-not got the kit to hand to check. something tels me that the large centreline pod had some recce function- but can't remember will get back with confimation, unless someone clarifies meantime Edited January 11, 2009 by walrus
Davec_24 Posted January 11, 2009 Author Posted January 11, 2009 The big pod for the centre pylon is indeed a reconnaisance pod, and the instructions say to put it on one of the RAF versions. It suggests bombs in place of sidewinders for the RN version, but I think you're right that their main role was fleet protection (they had Buccs for the bombing role) and I will probably be putting the 'winders on there (one twin rack per pylon). If I remember the one I built when I was little correctly, the canopy does sit a little low. I'll probably leave it how it is, unless it is unbearably terrible in which case maybe posing the canopies open (and adding some emergency detailing to the seats and cockpit) would improve things. It does come with a pair of boarding ladders so that you can pose it like this, so that might be an option. I would have to shorten the nose gear leg or pinch the one off the F-4M version (they are slightly different though, aren't they? I don't know exactly how but I seem to remember hearing that they are...) if I was putting the ladders on it of course. 1
bexwh773 Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Looking good so far Dave The EMI Centreline pod was for the RAF versions only, specifically 2 & 41 Sqns only (RAFG Laarbruch & RAF Coningsby respectively) Further reading if you feel the urge here: Spyflight Linky HTH Bex
Davec_24 Posted January 12, 2009 Author Posted January 12, 2009 Thanks Bexy, I thought as much. I'll probably do the two outboard drop tanks, and 4 Sidewinders and 4 Sparrows. I'll leave the centre pylon empty unless the model looks too plain underneath, in which case I may put the centre tank on too - we'll wait and see.
AnonymousFO98 Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Hi Dave for what my 2 penneth is worth- i would leave off the centre pylon it is a personal choice ofpreference. i guess i have been brought up on the configuration without centreline stores there is also an aesthetic aspect for me as i like the "flat" plane of the belly with the vertical stores on the wings- has a good proportion about it will keep schtum now - your bird and you will be the one to sit back and enjoy the finished model
zero Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Thanks Bexy, I thought as much. I'll probably do the two outboard drop tanks, and 4 Sidewinders and 4 Sparrows. I'll leave the centre pylon empty unless the model looks too plain underneath, in which case I may put the centre tank on too - we'll wait and see. you mean like this. it's a configuration that looks better, I think. Dave
wingslinger Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 I remember that kit... I was about 10 when I made it and I LOVED the artwork... I always thought Matchbox kits were the bees knees in those days... always felt 'crisper' than Airfix...
Davec_24 Posted January 12, 2009 Author Posted January 12, 2009 Something like that Zero, but in Royal Navy livery of course! If not carrying the central tank, would/could they have had the central pylon fitted but left empty, or would there be no pylon on the centre at all if there was no tank fitted there? I was thinking of deciding about this one a little later when I'm in a position to test-fit everything to my satisfaction. Of course the problem with this plan is that if I leave off the pylon *and* the tank, I'll have a nice big hole under the fuselage which will need filling...
Davec_24 Posted January 12, 2009 Author Posted January 12, 2009 The aircraft has received a couple of coats of light grey to even out the base colour, and then got a bit of black roughly dry-brushed with varying intensity, the intention being for it to act as a sort of pre-shade. I tried this on my Hawk and found that it broke up the barley grey underside colour quite nicely, so I figured it might work with thite too, and if it doesn't work then you won't be able to see it anyway so nothing lost in trying! I also did the same on the upper surfaces, though it may not show through so well because of the darker colours: I'm currently in the process of applying a few thin coats of white to the undersides to try and get a nice, subtly disrupted finish on the undersides. I'll probably weather her a bit under there too, but ideally the main "visual interest" in the finish will come from subtle areas of different colour. Well that's the idea, we'll see how it turns out and go from there... 1
zero Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) Something like that Zero, but in Royal Navy livery of course! If not carrying the central tank, would/could they have had the central pylon fitted but left empty, or would there be no pylon on the centre at all if there was no tank fitted there? I was thinking of deciding about this one a little later when I'm in a position to test-fit everything to my satisfaction. Of course the problem with this plan is that if I leave off the pylon *and* the tank, I'll have a nice big hole under the fuselage which will need filling... Yep don't you just hate those pre drilled holes and slots. Sadly I never did build a RN spook, but did a Brace of RAF birds http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1409/6773...4/248725861.jpg the matchbox kit is a nice build, the other (blue one) is an Airfix conversion job Good luck with yours Edited January 12, 2009 by zero
Davec_24 Posted January 12, 2009 Author Posted January 12, 2009 I think I rather like these things in low-vis grey - if and when I get a 1/48 one I will be sorely tempted!
Deon Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 looking good dave, are you going for open or closed canopy?
Davec_24 Posted January 12, 2009 Author Posted January 12, 2009 looking good dave, are you going for open or closed canopy? Hi Deon, the plan is for closed canopies at the moment. However, they are slightly too shallow, so if it looks silly with them closed, I may pose them open - it's a "wait and see" sort of thing for me at the moment!
AnonymousFO98 Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Hi Dave this might be worth a look http://www.phantomf4k.org/index.cfm?fa=contentGeneric.home
PHREAK Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Hi Deon, the plan is for closed canopies at the moment. However, they are slightly too shallow, so if it looks silly with them closed, I may pose them open - it's a "wait and see" sort of thing for me at the moment! Can I recommend that you pose the canopies open? As you say, it does look a bit silly with them closed...far to shallow I'm afraid. Watching!
kstater94 Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 It's been a while since I looked at the kit as well However, I think the problem with the shallowness of the canopies (if I remember correctly) is that Matchbox molded the canopy frames as part of the aircraft... This led one to think that the canopies were too shallow if you displayed the canopies open... Cheers John
baldrick Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Dont build the kit, much too rare. I have a massive Matchbox collection, but NOT that one. Move away from the model!!!!!!!!!!!!! Opsessed Dave....
Recommended Posts