Fencer-1

Rear canopy with LOROP camera sights. Sorry for phone qquality photo. Front canopy details

Thanks Thierry for explanation, yes, RF-4EJ is conventional Mitsubishi-built F-4EJ adapted to carry one of three (TAC, LOROP and TACER) reconnaissance pods. I intend to make one of them ( LOROP, I think) in 3D and then print. Many details are already made not only for cockpit, but for external airframe and engines.

Just finished cockpit for RF-4EJ conversion from basic Tamiya F-4EJ. Quinta Studio + some custom 3D printed parts.

I had some thoughts about such possibility. Some sources hint at such hypothetical chance of using early floor parts up to D-30 series. I had to made additional research to make sure in my initial conclusion. There are two reliable sources I can refer to: "Parts Catalog for P-47D-25 Through P-47D-40" and assembly drawing 89F11237 for corrugated floor for all P-47 up to D-25 model. Catalog doesn't have any other reference than 93F12237 (flat floor assembly). Drawing 89F11237 has some remarkable note: "See drawing 93F12237 for later P-47 models. This assembly (89F11237) is not interchangeable with 93F12237."

I absolutely understand the reasons for such option. It was unclear when the flat floor was introduced, but today we can prevent wrong choice making some notice with 100% reference from factory drawings.

The only P-47D I've built is 1/48 old good Monogram as David Schilling personal mount. It was around 25 years ago, and yes, no exepition, it had incorrect corrugated floor also. I just didn't know the difference that time. Many models have just "universal" cockpit for all P-47 variants and Monogram P-47 is one of them. Why should we continue to repeat old mistakes again when we know how it has to be done?

It's just wonderful to have an options and you make great work here, but there is no real option for Razorback Jugs because of lack of rear bulkhead, early seat mount, armor plate, radio etc. It is obviously not universal cockpit set and intended only for Hasegawa's Bubbletop P-47s. Am I right? Modelers continue doing mistake selecting corrugated (even making it from scratch like here Another Hasegawa Bubbletop) floor for Bubbletop P-47D versions. In case of your beautiful set totally unclear what second corrugated floor intended for. I'm just try to point attention to these details one more time. With full respect to you, Alex. P.S. Fresh sample of incorrect choice: Beautiful Gabreski's Jug by Tolga Ulgur

By the way, all "Bubbletop" P-47D versions, including D-25 had flat cockpit floor. MDC cockpit mistakenly represents corrugated floor of earlier Razorback up to D-23 model. Here is data table from Republic factory new flat floor drawing. It's clearly seen that it was installed from D-25 up to N-25 inclusive - all bubbletop series.

Very promising start! I like JASDF Phantoms. My Hi-Res F-4EJ Kai & RF-4EJ walkaround from Hayakuri for the help: Hayakuri gate guards and More F-4EJ Kai go around procedure at Hayakuri.

Parachute container for high drop.

Please look at this brilliant work from Russian scratchbuilder Ivan Zhukov. I think that it is good idea to present it here with Author's permission. The Author’s concise description and lot of photos below: Initial work started 3 years ago with 3D model in Rhinoceros 4.0 to get proper shapes. Later 3D model was used as “master” to cut internal structure details. The main airframe components were cut from 2 mm foamed PVC sheet and covered by shell of the same plastic, but 0.7 – 0.9 mm thick. The nose section framework was soldered from 0.9 mm copper wire using cardboard jig and templates for frames proper shape and alignment, then nose section was stuffed by all necessary equipment and “avionics”. The crew was modified from various plastic figures parts using two component epoxy putty. Cockpit glazing was thermoformed over plaster moulds. The M-88 engines are totally scratch built, using white metal casting for cylinders. Wheel wells interior structure and landing gear are soldered using copper wires, brass tubing and sheets. The next tricky task was to cover entire airframe with aluminium skin. The same technique, as Peter Castle’s (Airscale) one. Forming, cutting, riveting and so on. Long, long way to finish. Tail control surfaces have plastic internal structure and 0.2 mm thick PVC skin. Wheels were formed in plaster moulds using epoxy putty. Some external addition such as torpedo and its racks, machine gun, gunsights, wheel well doors etc. were 3D printed and painted to finish the project. Wingspan of finished model is around 700 mm and length about 470 mm.

To be honest I and my friend have been thinking long time about F-100 rear fuselage skin.

Hello Damian. The best choice is some kind of contact glue. Application technique is the same as Peter Castle (Airscale) uses for thick aluminium foil. In some cases I can use "slow" or Extra Time super glue gel. Before application parts usually being annealed and formed to conform to the surface. The thin (0.05 mm) steel surface is very strong and will not be affected by glue underneath. After application parts can be polished to get necessary tint and shine. Regards, Alex.

The parts made of steel, as on real thing. How do you assess them?

A.M.U.R. Reaver will offer new PE Set next week. There is set of four patterns for different effects, from fine regular grains to irregular stains and splashes. I "played" them yesterday using 1/24 P-47 wing for metallic paints effect test. They are very thin and flexible but very robust, because they are made of 0.05 mm stainless steel and will serve all the lifetime.

Whoa! What a discussion! I think I have something to add. Let's look at the history of our hobby, where we can find some periods. First of all was "Total Scratchbuilt and Handmade Era", then "Wooden Kits Era", then "Plastic Kits Era" and now we reached "Hi-Tech Multimedia & Aftermarket Kits Era". When the word "Kit" appeared we've already had an Indusrtry of scale models. The Market immediately started to fulfill consumers demands to "make modeller's life easier" offering more and more detailed kits, paints, additional sets, tools etc. simultaneously forcing you to spend more money on your lovely hobbies. The main principle of our Scale Modelling hobby dramatically changed from "Learn, Research and Build" to "Buy, Glue and Enjoy". Nowadays Scale Modelling is industry producing millions of kits and sets not to be built, but just to sell them to make money on your pleasure. The drawback is the historical and technical research work "section" is almost disappeared from our hobby. Aftermarket makes our life easier but weaned thinking. Buying modern kits and bunches of aftermarket you bear in mind that somebody made this "dirty" work for you. You are just relying on stranger's opinion regarding credibility of these sets. As for me, the research section is the most interesting part of Scale Modelling hobby, so I don't want to buy all awailable kits and aftermarket before I check the real subject of modelling. About 90% of aftermarket is actually useless in terms of accuracy. Today there is huge variety of modeller's approaches to get finished model, from the "LEGO style" - to buy everything and just assemble, to most interesting complete scratchbuild, using 3D modelling and other state-of-art tools. I really enjoy looking at Peter Castle (Airscale) 1/18 works here for example. The value of a model is determined for me by the ratio of money and labor(including research work) spent on its construction. In case of same result the more labor makes model more valuable for assessing. It is quite simple formula allows me to choose appropriate way of modelling for any case. Everything depends on purpose of your work. If I need precise scale model I prefer deep research and lot of self-made details using different technologies. In other cases, when I need quick build and just visual impact, e.g. diorama with different subjects, I will use as many ready components as I can.

I will try to get it ready until beginning of September. Alex.

As for me, overall shape accuracy is critical factor and I rather prefer scratchbuild than "small caps for large gaps")) aftermarket solutions. By the way, many modellers will be happy to sort out easily many problems with additional aftermarket sets. I also could offer my engines, recently made for my Corsair project, adapted for this "thing". They only need to change ignition system for the late type GE magneto/distributors, but I don't want to spend money for this HB inferrior representation of my lovely airplane to get just aligning reference.

The airfoil shape looks just ugly and thick. As for plan view noticeable issue is wing/nacelle transition area. Click for full size picture.

The best way in this "A-26" hopeless case, I think, is to re-make a whole thing from the beginnning.

Guys, here is 1/32 drawing I made from original blueprints. I think it is good to check the model fuselage accuracy. Just download and print. To be informed, actual turret diameter is 40 inches. Nose section profile is true either for 6-gun nose or 8-gun nose, only panels layout differs.