Derek B Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 OK Anthony, I have had a quick look into the tailplane anhedral angle issue for you. from what I can find out, the difference in angle may be so small as to not worry about. I do not have any manufacturer's drawings for the J-79 powered aircraft, but the internet specifications all generally quote 23.5 degrees for it (how accurate this is, I do not know). However, I do have manufacturer data for the F-4K tailplane, and this quotes 23 degrees 2 ' 5", so no real noticeable difference really. HTH Derek Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 4, 2020 Author Share Posted October 4, 2020 2 hours ago, Derek B said: OK Anthony, I have had a quick look into the tailplane anhedral angle issue for you. from what I can find out, the difference in angle may be so small as to not worry about. I do not have any manufacturer's drawings for the J-79 powered aircraft, but the internet specifications all generally quote 23.5 degrees for it (how accurate this is, I do not know). However, I do have manufacturer data for the F-4K tailplane, and this quotes 23 degrees 2 ' 5", so no real noticeable difference really. HTH Derek Thanks Derek! Appreciate the research whilst I slept Sounds like keeping it the same is the best way to go. LOVE that HAF scheme you are going to do...very nice! Thanks again Anthony Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 9 minutes ago, Anthony in NZ said: Thanks Derek! Appreciate the research whilst I slept Sounds like keeping it the same is the best way to go. LOVE that HAF scheme you are going to do...very nice! Thanks again Anthony No problem Anthony. I was originally going to complete the model as a RAF Alconbury USAFE RF-4C 'Starize', but decided that I later wanted to complete it as a HAF RF-4E. I went to Athens Flying Week in 2018 (AFW 2018) at Tanagra airbase, where I saw this actual aircraft and wanted to make it, but there were no decals in 1/32 scale for it...until now! Derek AlbertD, Anthony in NZ and vvwse4 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertD Posted October 4, 2020 Share Posted October 4, 2020 Anthony, do you plan to separate the horizontal stabilizer so you can complete the fuselage without it in the way? Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 5, 2020 Author Share Posted October 5, 2020 8 hours ago, AlbertD said: Anthony, do you plan to separate the horizontal stabilizer so you can complete the fuselage without it in the way? Hi Al, yes I do mate. Just have to go back and read how you guys did it! Derek B and AlbertD 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cees Broere Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 Regarding the angle of the tailplane I was led to believe that on the RAF aircraft the dihedral was flatter to clear the bigger cans from the Speys. Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Cees Broere said: Regarding the angle of the tailplane I was led to believe that on the RAF aircraft the dihedral was flatter to clear the bigger cans from the Speys. Yes Cees, but as explained above, it was less than half of a degree! Derek Edited October 5, 2020 by Derek B Anthony in NZ and Cees Broere 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbo59 Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 (edited) From what I have read the people involved in the aircrafts development said the anhedral angle was the same as every other phantom type. Edited October 5, 2020 by jimbo59 Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 1 hour ago, jimbo59 said: From what I have read the people involved in the aircrafts development said the anhedral angle was the same as every other phantom type. That was my thought as well Jim, but I do not have the manufacturer's data to confirm this (only for the F-4K) - internet sources state 23.5 degrees for J-79 powered aircraft, but I would like to see the source data to confirm this. Derek Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 5, 2020 Author Share Posted October 5, 2020 (edited) Also interesting to note is that the BPAPG (British Phantom Aircraft Group...I think that's their name) are rescuing an F-4J(UK) ZE360 at the moment. They removed the horizontal Stabs earlier this year and.....it has an FG.1 style assembly! Definitely not the same one as on a US Built as I expected to see. Same stiffener positions and raised bolt heads along the rear spar. Definitely different to the US ones. When you look at photo's they all appear to have them. So I am theorizing now that they were the same, (or so close it was a negligible difference) that they decided to fit them from the factory, otherwise, why use them on a J-79 powered Phantom? Interesting... Edited October 5, 2020 by Anthony in NZ Derek B, Greg W and AlbertD 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cees Broere Posted October 6, 2020 Share Posted October 6, 2020 That makes sense Derek B and Anthony in NZ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 6, 2020 Share Posted October 6, 2020 Interesting stuff! The MDD 1/30 scale drawing for the F-4B, C, D and J quotes 23 degrees and 15 minutes (23 1/4 degrees) for the horizontal stabiliser anhedral, which, if based upon actual aircraft GA data should be correct for those aircraft marks. The F-4K/M MDD blueprint GA, which is not entirely clear to read, but when enlarged, actually (I believe) quotes 23 degrees 25 minutes for the horizontal stabiliser (not 23 degrees 2 minutes and 5 seconds as I originally thought). Therefore, there is only 10 minutes difference between the two horizontal stabiliser anhedral angles for both aircraft types. However, in reality, what difference that would make to the aircraft in terms of effect is unknown, but I suspect very little or nil (I suspect it may be more likely be related to harmonic frequency and fatigue considerations). Anyhow, in terms of modelling, anything just over 23 degrees to just under 23.5 degrees would work well for all F-4 types; the difference would probably be unnoticeable to the naked eye. Derek Anthony in NZ, Greg W and cmayer 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmayer Posted October 7, 2020 Share Posted October 7, 2020 I came back to this thread to report that the McDonnell F-4B/C/D/J drawing says 23 degrees, 15 minutes "negative dihedral," but Derek already found it... I feel like the guy in the original Right Stuff movie running down the long government building corridor to report "It's called Sputnik!!" "We know." ("Sit down!") Anthony in NZ, BLACK MAMBA and Derek B 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 7, 2020 Author Share Posted October 7, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, cmayer said: I came back to this thread to report that the McDonnell F-4B/C/D/J drawing says 23 degrees, 15 minutes "negative dihedral," but Derek already found it... I feel like the guy in the original Right Stuff movie running down the long government building corridor to report "It's called Sputnik!!" "We know." ("Sit down!") Thanks so much for looking into this for me as well...I really appreciate it! Stand ready son, you might be needed again soon! Edited October 7, 2020 by Anthony in NZ cmayer and Derek B 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 13, 2020 Author Share Posted October 13, 2020 Last week or so have been slow, but I am back on her again now. Trying to finish off the horizontal stabs before the part from Albert turns up so I can complete the heat shield area. Here you can see me adding in all the teeny tiny bolt heads into the rear spar. They are all little pieces of 0.25mm rod (I think, as the 0.5 is much bigger and I have lost the original packaging) inserted into drilled holes. Man this is taking forever! I should have just used Archer rivets on reflection...I dont know why I didnt? One upper left side is done and I am about 1/4 the way down the right side. Then I need to do the underside. They still need to be filed down to the appropriate and even height What was I thinking Kais, Michael931080, Chris Wimmer and 17 others 20 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