Need advice to build 1/32 CF-104

[Dave Williams]

Picture and history of CF-104 ‘754’

 

http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wC754.htm

 

[AlbertD]

You gave 8 reasons for your CF-104 build. How about a 9th. There's no hockey. I can't think of a better reason then that.

[Gazzas]

4 hours ago, chuck540z3 said:

 

If you can show me one good example of using foil, I would consider it.  By "good example", I would like to see super close-up pics.  Most foiled model pics are taken from 2 feet away which look terrific from that distance, but they don't really tell you much about how well the foil was applied close up.

 

 

Hi Chuck,

   I rarely take photos of any of my builds a second time around.  And when I built this Italeri F104 A/C with its it's trench-like surface detail, I only had a phone to take pictures with.  These new pictures are taken with my wife's Canon Olympus.  And they were a bit of an eye-opener.

 

But I am still quite pleased by the surface finish I got.

 

Now....it is easy to lay on the Microscale Micro cement for foil too thick and have textures show up.

 

 

You won't get this smooth of a finish with Bare Metal Foil, either.  It uses a rubbery cement that can leave a pebbly texture that takes a lot of force to make smooth....  and is expensive.

 

 

After three years, you can barely see the carrier film of the decals...  with the camera.

 

It's much shinier from a distance.

 

Gaz

 

[chuck540z3]

3 hours ago, Gazzas said:

 

Hi Chuck,

   I rarely take photos of any of my builds a second time around.  And when I built this Italeri F104 A/C with its it's trench-like surface detail, I only had a phone to take pictures with.  These new pictures are taken with my wife's Canon Olympus.  And they were a bit of an eye-opener.......

 

After three years, you can barely see the carrier film of the decals...  with the camera.

 

It's much shinier from a distance.

 

Gaz

 

 

Compared to most of the foiled models I've seen Gaz, you did a terrific job!  As mentioned, most of the foiled models I see around here are from 2 feet away.  They look terrific, until you look close, which is rarely shown.

 

Still, I think I can do better with Alclad.  An example from my P-38L build, that is close.  This CF-104 won't look this pretty, but parts of it will (fingers crossed).

 

 

 

Cheers,

Chuck

[Neo]

 

Hi Chuck

 

since canuck decals are OOP now ive been looking at maketar mask for alternative 

https://shop.maketar.com/?product=132-caf-roundels-standard-canadian-air-force

 

I belive also the newer boxing of the 104 have the corrected Roundels in it. 

 

Also for the Foil vs Alclad @Out2gtcha made an amazing P-51 mustang years ago 

 

[Neo]

14 hours ago, Rockie Yarwood said:

Hey Chuck, I am really looking forward to seeing what you do with this project! I had dreams of doing a CF-104 with the Vinten Recce pod, and was really bummed when Italeri chose not to include it. So, mine will be a German RF-104G instead. Consequently, I have a Belcher Bits CF-104 decal set that I don't need. I would be happy to donate it to the cause, if you think it might be useful. It is yours for the asking.

 

Cheers, Rockie

 

 

Humm well look at that i never know this set existed ! To ebay i shall seek!! 

[Gazzas]

6 hours ago, chuck540z3 said:

 

Compared to most of the foiled models I've seen Gaz, you did a terrific job!  As mentioned, most of the foiled models I see around here are from 2 feet away.  They look terrific, until you look close, which is rarely shown.

 

Still, I think I can do better with Alclad.

 

 

Cheers,

Chuck

 

Thank you Chuck.  I look forward to seeing your endeavor.

[Finn]

Hope you have your rivet tool handy Chuck:

 

 

also note even though the CF-104 didn't have the inflight refueling probe, the stencil for it's location was there, even when they went camo some still had it.

 

Jari

[iaf-man]

On 11/17/2020 at 6:42 AM, chuck540z3 said:

 

YES PLEASE!  I have been looking all over for decals for this project and haven't found any, knowing the kit ones were flawed.  PM coming.

 

Thanks,

Chuck

Belcher is still in business

http://www.belcherbits.com/lines/decals/bd6.htm#

[jenshb]

8 hours ago, Finn said:

Hope you have your rivet tool handy Chuck:

 

 

also note even though the CF-104 didn't have the inflight refueling probe, the stencil for it's location was there, even when they went camo some still had it.

 

Jari

I think a better representation of what we see would be to use HGW rivet decals where you peel off the decal film afterwards.  These rivets are silver, and against a polished metal background should give a reasonable contrast in shine.

 

Looking at Gazzas' foiled 104, I think that surface looks more like metal than the Alclad which simply is "too perfect".  The foil has the microscratches and swirls you would expect to see on a bare aluminium surface in real life, whereas the paint doesn't.  Alclad will work great in smaller scales, but in 1:32, I think it requires "more"...

 

Jens

[belcherbits]

4 hours ago, iaf-man said:

Belcher is still in business

http://www.belcherbits.com/lines/decals/bd6.htm#

Yes, I'm still in business, but sadly, the 1/32 CF-104 sheet is long sold out. How very generous of that member to offer it to you!

Mike Belcher

[chuck540z3]

4 hours ago, jenshb said:

Looking at Gazzas' foiled 104, I think that surface looks more like metal than the Alclad which simply is "too perfect".  The foil has the microscratches and swirls you would expect to see on a bare aluminium surface in real life, whereas the paint doesn't.  Alclad will work great in smaller scales, but in 1:32, I think it requires "more"...

 

Jens

 

While I agree my P-38L finish looks "too perfect", it was meant to be, since this is a restored museum bird that actually looks like that.  For this model, consider Alclad over a scratched up surface (see the top of the first picture), or maybe steel wool over a finished surface.  I also have some experience with a weathered metallic finish like my Mustang below (and decals over same), so as mentioned, I think I can have some fun with this finish, so time will tell!

 

 

Cheers,

Chuck

 

[chuck540z3]

Thank you all for your very informative input which has taught me a lot about CF-104's and also saved me a lot of grief.  Key items are:

 

1.  Forget the Aires cockpit because it's too wide.  Searching around the 'net, this fault is universal and the only "success" with it has been painful.  I've read the CMK version is also problematic and since I have a Black Box cockpit already with a great looking C2 seat, I will likely use the best of it and the kit parts instead.  Thanks Carl.

2.  Early wheels and early exhaust.  I'm using the new ResKit versions for both, because the wheels are correct while the exhaust has the flame tube in one piece, missing from the Eduard Brassin version.  Thanks Dave.

3.  Forget the highly detailed landing gear bays, since the main landing gear doors are usually closed when the jet is parked.  This reminds me of my F-15C build, which does the same thing, so I skipped detailing those as well.  Thanks Dave again.

4.  The kit appears to have the correct decals, but aftermarket decals for this bird from Canuck, Leading Edge and Belcher Bits are OOP and effectively non-existent. The set donated should help me a lot as a back-up or substitute for some of them.  Thank you again Rockie!

5.  The Belcher Bit decals are for a post-1965 bird, because the roundels are the more modern version.  Thanks Jennings. 

6.  I have ordered the Belcher Bits 1/32 T-33 decals, since they have the correct roundels.  I have no idea if they are the right size, but I'll likely build a CT-133 one day anyway.  Thanks again Carl for that tip.

 

Sorry if I forgot anybody, but I have ordered all the parts I think I need and should be on this project in a few more weeks.

 

Cheers,

Chuck

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 2020 by chuck540z3

[Mark P]

What of the TF-104 in Canadian service?

 

Same wheels and exhaust as the single seat?

 

Mark Proulx

[jenshb]

CMK and Eduard both do a C-2 seat that may be a useful addition.  I heard from an ex-334 Sqn RNoAF (CF-104) crew chief that hte CF-104 used an S-2 seat that is very similar to the C-2 seat.  Can't recall what the differences were, but they were minor.

 

If you are making a bare metal CF-104, you may not need to add the RWRs under the radome and on the rear fuselage, though they are not too hard to scratch build.