Derek B Posted September 14, 2020 Share Posted September 14, 2020 The upper colour does appear to extend down to the lower colour demarcation line behind the splitter plate on the FGR.2 aircraft. However, there is no specific guidance within the RAF paint AP as to how this should look, so it appears that individual aircraft could vary locally in these areas (see images below; the first one would seem to be most typical). Regards Derek Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted September 14, 2020 Author Share Posted September 14, 2020 Thanks guys, talk about motivational! I awoke this morning with a fresh perspective. For now I have to go to work, but I will try and get some work done on her tonight. To move forward now I have realized I need to graft that back end on first. Thanks again, and that's why I love this place! Cheers Anthony.....already itching to get back home LOL Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Posted September 14, 2020 Share Posted September 14, 2020 (edited) Anthony, Just a little more food for thought. Compare the aft hot section of the K/M with that of the J Here is how I added to get the look. Barry Edited September 14, 2020 by Barry screwed up pic link Seversky, Marcel111, Starfighter and 6 others 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertD Posted September 14, 2020 Share Posted September 14, 2020 12 hours ago, Anthony in NZ said: This really is the only difference between the kit part and the resin part. Either I graft this in or I might just rework the kit part??? I need to go to bed soon, my head aches thinking about how to do this bit properly...maybe tomorrow I will be able to think more clearly about it! Either way, there is no coming back from this butchery! Cheers guys Anthony Is the resin replacement part because of smaller diameter nozzles? Just trying to understand what's going on. Oh, sleep is over rated. Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted September 14, 2020 Author Share Posted September 14, 2020 Aaaah nice observation! Thanks Barry, I will need to look further into this when I get home...thank you sir! Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted September 14, 2020 Author Share Posted September 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, AlbertD said: Is the resin replacement part because of smaller diameter nozzles? Just trying to understand what's going on. Oh, sleep is over rated. The diameter is a bit bigger and the engines sit lower down. Necessitating that part to be straight rather than curved. Not sure if I’ve made sense sorry Yeah sleep....pfffft Derek B and AlbertD 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertD Posted September 14, 2020 Share Posted September 14, 2020 3 minutes ago, Anthony in NZ said: The diameter is a bit bigger and the engines sit lower down. Necessitating that part to be straight rather than curved. Not sure if I’ve made sense sorry Yeah sleep....pfffft Oh, ok. I should have realized the engines sit lower being that it's a major part of your conversion. Maybe there is something to that sleep thing. Anthony in NZ and Derek B 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.B. Andrus Posted September 14, 2020 Share Posted September 14, 2020 On 8/11/2020 at 2:28 PM, Anthony in NZ said: What we DO need is someone to produce a range of these hinge decals, they are just too tricky to scribe and do a nice job. They are such a common feature of airframes. We need to petition to someone to do a range of hinge types and sizes..... Fundekals????? Woody at Archer Fine Transfers might be a good go-to guy. (Apologies if someone has already mentioned this.) Cheers, Damian Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted September 15, 2020 Author Share Posted September 15, 2020 7 hours ago, AlbertD said: Maybe there is something to that sleep thing. LOL 7 hours ago, D.B. Andrus said: Woody at Archer Fine Transfers might be a good go-to guy. (Apologies if someone has already mentioned this.) Cheers, Damian Hi Damian...I looked at what they produce (and I have a lot of their sets), but nothing I feel I can replicate that flush hinge... Right-O, home, eaten and chores done. Time to hit the model bench and more surgery LOL Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonH Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Oooooh, nice work so far and an exciting next step.... Remember the first rule of scratch building: Measure twice, cut once, then out with the filler. Derek B, Anthony in NZ and TaffyMan 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted September 15, 2020 Author Share Posted September 15, 2020 3 minutes ago, DonH said: Oooooh, nice work so far and an exciting next step.... Remember the first rule of scratch building: Measure twice, cut once, then out with the filler. Haha...aint that the truth! Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Kevin Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 50 minutes ago, DonH said: Measure twice, cut once, then out with the filler. Why is it that, whenever I do it, it comes out as Measure Once, Cut Yourself Twice? I'm certainly proving that with my Tiger Moth build! Kev TaffyMan, Anthony in NZ and Derek B 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 (edited) 12 hours ago, Barry said: Anthony, Just a little more food for thought. Compare the aft hot section of the K/M with that of the J Here is how I added to get the look. Barry Barry has done some outstanding work on his conversion project (or at least half of the airframe - I never did find out if he replicated it on the other half!). This is another area of the F-4K/M which was also extensively modified to accept the RR Spey in the lower location which very few kits feature correctly - this would also be my approach to tackling the issue in the same way Barry has done (it actually appears that both the J-79 and Spey engines have the same downward thrust angles of approximately 6 degrees, but because of the larger jet pipe diameter, the spey sits lower in the airframe at the aft end). It looks like MDD resolved this issue by essentially grafting an extension to the airframe stations to provide the new shape aft fuselage lower section (although I am uncertain if the airframe anchor point for the arrester hook was unchanged as a result of this - the evidence would indicate that this was unlikely as the centre lower ventral line/keel of the original F-4J appears to remain the same; only the jet pipes (and associated aft airframe 'hot areas' were lowered to match). (LSP Member Check kindly provided these images back in 2012 when this issue was discussed here). Derek Edited September 15, 2020 by Derek B scvrobeson, Anthony in NZ, Seversky and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted September 15, 2020 Author Share Posted September 15, 2020 This is very interesting, the more I study photo's the more I can see the difference! That photo certainly shows the frame difference clearly and matches up with the photo's I have looked at. Without doubt, I need to fix this area... Thanks guys, the deeper I get, the more I learn of the differences. very interesting indeed and this helps me with more accuracy. Brilliant stuff, keep it coming when you spot areas that need attention! British Phantoms 'look' like Phantom's but the similarities (or lack of) to their US built counterparts are becoming more evident the more we all go through this. I am learning a lot, thanks! I am still staring at photo's and working on panel lines and rivets on the upper tail section before I cut it off. Cheers and thanks Anthony Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 (edited) Hi Anthony, looking from the aft forwards, when comparing the F-4K/M to the J-79 F-4's, I visualise the vertical centre line of the airframe as being identical for both aircraft, with the relative location of both jet pipes being similar in terms of width apart and down thrust angle. The main visual difference to me is that instead of the smaller diameter J-79 jet pipes (which are approximately 32 smaller than the Spey jet pipe), you now have two fat Spey jet pipes in the same location, which effectively look lower and wider. In order to match the airframe to the bigger Spey jet pipes, the outside of the upper airframe shape has to more or less 'drape' itself over these larger jet pipes - this may also account for some of the aft fuselage shape differences that you had already noticed. As a consequence, I would expect that the rear lower fuselage 'hot section' would also need to be widened (although it should, in theory, remain more or less the same in side profile) accordingly - it would be nice to compare plan and bottom photographic views of actual F-4J and F-K/M aircraft to confirm this? This link may help as well (full credit to Tommy Thomason and his Tailspin Topics blog for this reference information). Hopefully, that all makes sense! Cheers Derek Edited September 15, 2020 by Derek B Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now