Jump to content
Derek B

New 1/32 F-4K/M (FG.1/FGR.2) Phantom kit announced by HKM

Recommended Posts

On the photos in front of me - on an Air Defence greys airframe - I recon the intakes are Light Aircraft Grey BS381C:627 - on the Raspberry Ripple scheme it looks like white.

 

We spent a day at one of the museums/airfields a few years back measuring up/detail photographing Spey Phantoms.

 

Iain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, timvkampen said:

 

And he measured the beast itself. I do wonder where the original molds ended up. That would help a company further that would be willing to take this further. Until then, not much alternatives, my price lowered a bit :) . ZM is still my best bet I think

 

Yes he did, which is why I asked the original quest of Kag,  who maybe right about the fan face.   Have not had time to check  the book pics he referenced, pages would help speed thing up Kag if you have them.   I have all of the books, including Michael Burns book.

 

All of the CE molds were destroyed when Klaus shut down the company.   The way the company ended also released were all the intellectual property agreements under contract back to the pattern maker/ creator.  It was DonLogan and the creator of the CE F-105 items that prompted me us to start GTR.   Just a reproduction of the CE F-4L/M set with a full cockpit would be in that $500-$600 range with is not good for 99% of those wanting to build one.  That is the price to be profitable and deliver a quality product not dealing with the decal issue or the toner kit.   Then there are those that would pick it to death at the slightest perceived error as seems to be the norm now with every new release, regardless of the forum.   We do this the least of any of the sites, but still it happens.

 

The same goes for a F4H-1 set.  

 

I would bet the that HK bit off amore than expected, so we should be patient since no on has skim in the game.

Edited by ghatherly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ghatherly said:

 

Yes he did, which is why I asked the original quest of Kag,  who maybe right about the fan face.   Have not had time to check  the book pics he referenced, pages would help speed thing up Kag if you have them.   I have all of the books, including Michael Burns book.

 

All of the CE molds were destroyed when Klaus shut down the company.   The way the company ended also released were all the intellectual property agreements under contract back to the pattern maker/ creator.  It was DonLogan and the creator of the CE F-105 items that prompted me us to start GTR.   Just a reproduction of the CE F-4L/M set with a full cockpit would be in that $500-$600 range with is not good for 99% of those wanting to build one.  That is the price to be profitable and deliver a quality product not dealing with the decal issue or the toner kit.   Then there are those that would pick it to death at the slightest perceived error as seems to be the norm now with every new release, regardless of the forum.   We do this the least of any of the sites, but still it happens.

 

The same goes for a F4H-1 set.  

 

I would bet the that HK bit off amore than expected, so we should be patient since no on has skim in the game.

 

I see. So, the company ended in bankruptcy? or filed for it? It is a strange way to operate: destroy what is of potential tremendous value. I read that the legacy PE/Resin/Books company Verlinden also finished business. There were no interested parties to buy it (or parts of the valuables (goodwill, masters etc), so they closed shop and destroyed the remaining stock and masters...a crying shame.

 

Good you decided to jump in the hole left behind!!! Now...how about the F-16A./B conversions in 48 and 32? LOL :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, timvkampen said:

 

I see. So, the company ended in bankruptcy? or filed for it? It is a strange way to operate: destroy what is of potential tremendous value. I read that the legacy PE/Resin/Books company Verlinden also finished business. There were no interested parties to buy it (or parts of the valuables (goodwill, masters etc), so they closed shop and destroyed the remaining stock and masters...a crying shame.

 

Good you decided to jump in the hole left behind!!! Now...how about the F-16A./B conversions in 48 and 32? LOL :)

His wife wanted the business in an ugly divorce, so he killed it rather than hand it over to her and her family, most of which worked for him at CE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've seen some examples of polystyrene - same as regular kit plastic - FDM printing done by WunWingLow and it's very impressive. 

 

I still think all you need are CAD-designed, polystyrene printed: revised inlets, engine nozzles and fin top RWR fairing. 

The more robust Spey rear fuselage contours and fuselage sides could be catered for by carefully designed ribs or part-frames onto which a plastic card skin can be glued, seams filled etc. Voilà. And all using normal polystyrene cement. 

 

The K/M cockpit is so very similar to the J that scratching bits and bobs would suffice. ILS antennae for the fin might be handy, as would a new NLG for an FG.1/F-4K. There's no need to overegg the cake with tons of extras. Kelly Johnson's smarter not harder work philosophy of Keep It Simple - but really fudging clever - is the key.

 

Tony 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The revised inlets also mean revised upper wings (the inlets are much wider).  Literally the only things you can use from an existing kit are the canopy, radome, a/c intakes, parts of the forward fuselage, the main structure of the vertical fin and horizontal stabs, tail hook, outer wing panels, and main landing gear.  Everything else is different.

Edited by Jennings Heilig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jennings Heilig said:

The revised inlets also mean revised upper wings (the inlets are much wider).

 

No need to change wing upper surfaces - a little trimming at the root, if at all.

 

With all this chatter - does anyone actually know if the HK kit is happening, or not?

 

Iain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jennings Heilig said:

The revised inlets also mean revised upper wings (the inlets are much wider).  Literally the only things you can use from an existing kit are the canopy, radome, a/c intakes, parts of the forward fuselage, the main structure of the vertical fin and horizontal stabs, tail hook, outer wing panels, and main landing gear.  Everything else is different.

even the fuel dump on the tail...…..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Iain (32SIG) said:

 

No need to change wing upper surfaces - a little trimming at the root, if at all.

 

With all this chatter - does anyone actually know if the HK kit is happening, or not?

 

Iain

Sorry Ian to disagree, but the entire fuselage is wider than the GE powered J.   Yes you could trim all the wing top as you suggest,  but adding the extra width to the entire fuselage down the center of each engine section is a real skilled project not many would undertake.    We are only talking inches but it is wider.

 

  Now if someone produces a kit that offers a few items as Tony suggests,  we get back to the discussion of close vs exact in respect to details and correctness and this crowd  would get rip it apart  for not being accurate and keeping in the spirit of the UK jets.  In my opinion, and I may be wrong, a no win situation for a company to produce.   One of the major items Klaus changed  that Frank never addressed is the wider fuselage.   What you have is the extra width in the intake is carried trough all the way to the fan face.  IF not there would be no point in widening the intake.  

 

In real world, Not widening the fuselage would also screw up the aerodynamic efficiency of the area rule shape.  That is a critical equation with a tight design window,  too much shape is almost as bad as not having shape at all.   Think f-102 redesign here.  Also, since the Spey is a larger diameter than the GE, you cannot create space on the inside of the airframe as there is the main structural fire wall that separates the engine bays.  The GE was already so tight that bypass air had to by used to vent the heat from the engine bays out of the rear of the airframe.  Hence, the entire airframe is wider.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Jennings Heilig said:

The revised inlets also mean revised upper wings (the inlets are much wider).  Literally the only things you can use from an existing kit are the canopy, radome, a/c intakes, parts of the forward fuselage, the main structure of the vertical fin and horizontal stabs, tail hook, outer wing panels, and main landing gear.  Everything else is different.

 

36 minutes ago, phantomdriver said:

even the fuel dump on the tail...…..

 

Both over egging it. Part frames that can be glued onto the existing fuselage, then skinned.

Such would require very clever design. Fuel masts etc are really mere cosmetics that can be easily scratched.

This way, you could get a conversion set for maybe £100.

Just an idea, before it gets (yet again) complicated out of existence. I reckon it would satisfy 99% of the calibre of modellers found at LSP.

 

Tony 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting thread, even if some of the ideas would appear to be either prohibitively expensive or likely to be well beyond my capabilities as a modeller.  Given the gestation period of their Lancaster are people not being a bit presumptuous writing HKM off so soon?  While I am as keen as anyone to see an IM UK Phantom in 1/32, having been waiting for one for well over 40 years and drawn back to LSPs on the promise of one being produced, I am happy to wait a bit longer for one to materialise.  As some users appear to have links with HKM, has anyone actually asked if they are prepared to say whether they are still intending to produce the kit and, if so, a likely timescale?

 

Nige     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gary,

 

I know that - and I have dimensions/photos of the relevant areas of the airframe.

 

I understand how the wings interface with the intake trunks - I've seen - and measured - the separate parts of the real aeroplane in front of me.

 

I'm *not* saying the fuselage isn't wider  :)

 

Iain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony T said:

 

I've seen some examples of polystyrene - same as regular kit plastic - FDM printing done by WunWingLow and it's very impressive. 

 

I still think all you need are CAD-designed, polystyrene printed: revised inlets, engine nozzles and fin top RWR fairing. 

The more robust Spey rear fuselage contours and fuselage sides could be catered for by carefully designed ribs or part-frames onto which a plastic card skin can be glued, seams filled etc. Voilà. And all using normal polystyrene cement. 

 

The K/M cockpit is so very similar to the J that scratching bits and bobs would suffice. ILS antennae for the fin might be handy, as would a new NLG for an FG.1/F-4K. There's no need to overegg the cake with tons of extras. Kelly Johnson's smarter not harder work philosophy of Keep It Simple - but really fudging clever - is the key.

 

Tony 

Tony,  if you can do the work you suggest then there would be no need for the simple items you suggest.   Not looking to upset you here, but really if one can do the airframe work as you suggest, building a few add ons and an instrument panel are within ones skill set making the purchase of your suggested set  a dead product.

 

On a separate note, in all of your travels did you ever meet Kelly Johnson?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony - I'm with your thinking - different method - but same result.

 

More areas than you list - as Gary states.

 

I had a cunning plan - before I got sidetracked researching - *if* the HK kit is toast (??) I may have to re-visit my original thoughts.

 

Iain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Iain (32SIG) said:

Hi Gary,

 

I now that - and I have dimensions/photos of the relevant areas of the airframe.

 

I understand how the wings interface with the intake trunks - I've seen - and measured - the separate parts of the real aeroplane in front of me.

 

I'm *not* saying the fuselage isn't wider  :)

 

Iain

NO worries,  I figured that you did but many might not know, so I went off on a bit of a tangent.  I have been really thinking the build through as I may not use any of the wild hare kit when I build mine.   I would love to see your data if you would consider sharing it, as a trip to measure one is not in the cards for some time.   Maybe coming to Telford one of these years but not any time soon.

 

One thing I can say is that the cheapest way to get a UK bird is an updated version of the CE kit with a cockpit and any other corrections that can cost effectively be made.  IF 50 could be sold the cost of the tooling, materials and production would lead to a sale price of $450.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×