Chek

The prefix 'poly' indicates the material is a 'long chain polymer', and is a class of molecule that makes 'plastics' (the noun) able to be formed and moulded to desired shapes or 'plastic' (the adfjective). Polystyrene is a thermoplastic which is rigid when cold, mouldable when heated, then rigid again in its new moulded shape when it cools. The transparencies in model kits are noticeably more brittle than the other parts and are a purer formulation of polystyrene. The rest of the kit parts can have colourants and plasticisers added giving a range of properties from say the hard, brittle, sharply detailed greenish plastic Hasegawa used in their '70s kits to the softer, more flexible and more softly detailed as used currently by Italeri for example. Expanded polystryrene is a foam consisting of about 5% plastic and 95% air generally used in packaging and dry locations for insulation. It's still polystyrene, but the solvents generally used to melt, weld and bond the rigid forms of polystyrene together will instead just dissolve it.

I see what you mean....

Although many think the Lockheed X-35/F-35 won the fly-off because the Boeing alternative was just too egregious looking to be let loose on the world, I happened across this the other day. Now while it may be true that a good artist could likely make the ugliest of Cinderella's sisters look good, I'd never imagined the same might be said of the X-32 or F-32 as it might have been. Does it not have an element of the rakish, purposeful charm of the F-86 Sabre in this rendition, or should I get myself checked over for early onset of Alzheimer's?

I don't think many designers or builders factored in that the FG1 nose gear leg was much more robust (i.e. thicker to accommodate the double extension) than that on a regular Phantom. It's one of those things, once you know about the rake angle and the greater bulk you can't miss it, but is easily overlooked if you don' know.

Tommy Thomason's blog is likely about as authoritative as there is with a fairly comprehensive run down here. There's also a build currently in progress over on LSM here.

This seems apropos not to mention germane to the subject. Posted on Ron Downey's blog, F-4K Phantom II External Access Doors a supplementary manual showing panels and numbers for the Spey Phantom FG1. The more comprehensive manual covering the major USAF.USN types is available here Although I've said it before, I'll say it again: I can't recommend Ron's blog too highly. He often posts gems such as the couple referenced here.

Good news on the Phantom, obvs, but especially so on the Lightning. I haven't seen an Echelon kit for sale for years now, and I need at least another two Lightnings. Lightning models that actually look somewhat like Lightnings, that is.

I'm with Tony on this. A conversion requiring some modelling skill, rather than drop in replacement parts would be dramatically cheaper. The major part would be the intakes (and ramps!) correctly shaped as far back as the rear canopy fairing, which isn't a great deal more than most resin intake/trunking replacements. Aft of them, vac-formed panels to be laid on the fuselage sides as far aft as the jet nozzles, and below either a resin undertray incorporating the Sparrow bays as one moulding or as another vac piece to be dressed up according to taste or weapon load, with the Tamiya kit still inside to act as both strengthener and armature. The keel area would likely need to be another chunk of resin too. Inner and outer tube resin mouldings would also produce jet nozzles to better effect than the CE one piece approach All of this simplification would be vastly cheaper than the CE approach of a huge fuselage moulding with all its inherent complications and expense.

Ron Downey has posted a great link to the manual on F-4 External Access Doors for the F-4B, RF-4B, RF-4C, F-4C, F-4D and F-4J on his blog, available from here. Exact screw/bolt holes patterns, screw/bolt specs and drawings for them and door stencil numbers all included, and what they give access to, external tank connections, pylons and a bunch of information toward making your Phantom model more detailed and more accurate. Be sure to visit Ron's site regularly as he frequently posts such gems, and not only those related to McDonnell, McDonnell-Douglas products.

While I' appreciate the sentiment, Darren, they're not my work I'm just the relay station :) The comparisons were both done by Nick, from here and from here.

Seriously dude, that is no kind of worthwhile recommendation or endorsement whatsoever. So does this:

Not enough of a tank buff to know, but the new Russian movie T-34 has some great tank action and CGI animations. I particularly like the sequence where a shell from the T-34 ricochets off the road and rips the belly out of a Panther (I think). At the moment there are only Youtube and pirate versions available without English subtitles, but in all honesty if you've seen the cliched dialogue in one war movie, you can intelligently guess the gist from the action and the actors' expressions. Like your approach and animation of your model. It's arresting to see a moment frozen in a diorama.

Darren, I think this photo with the Hasegawa 1/32 fuselage overlaid settles it. The Hasegawa looks pretty close to the actual, and the Trumpy 1/24 kit looks to be a overlong in this scaled photo comparison with the Hasegawa.

I would need to see some recommendations by some heavy-duty names and quite a few drawing/photo comparisons before spending that amount of money on a book of drawings. One thing I've learned since days of innocence and naive trust in plans carried over from the print era of model media to the digital era is that 99% of plans are glorified general arrangement drawings, and not any sort of last word on the 3-D reality..

It's a fact that the rear fuselage contours of the Tamiya Phantom are way too boxy looking and need modded. I'm kinda hoping the forthcoming LIDAR'd Tan Model F-4E will accept the Tamiya nose, based on the mostly good congruity between the Tamiya and Revell F-14 and F-15 kits