1/32 British Phantom FG.1/FGR.2 conversion for the Tamiya F-4J?

[Tony T]

That's good news - seems like the HKM offering(s) might be the most accurate F-4s ever kitted.

 

I haven't measured CE, Rhino or GT J79 inlets but they look the part. I.e. Okay.

 

TBH, it's nice to have new tool kits to create a new building experience.

 

Tony

[Chek]

So even if I build the Tamiya kit as an F-4J(UK) It looks like I need new inlets! C'est la vie......

 

Dave

 

I wouldn't be so fast in writing off the Tamaiya kit Dave. 

You're presumably measuring the width to the back end of the intake fairing (or nacelle as Tommy names it) including the air outlet louvres on the top and bottom corners.

The intake width measurements are taken to the position of the intake ramp outer surface which is a variable.

The true comparison with your Tamiya model would include the width of the ramp on that particular subject added to the intake measurement of that subject.

[Tony T]

That makes sense to me. So, actually, the Tamiya spacers poking out from the fuselage might possibly be a fraction too long (?) as well as the vari-ramp assembly being a mite chunkier, or poor assembly create inaccuracy and asymmetry between L and R inlet.

 

When I referred to the "taller" Spey inlet I meant the external contours, not the orifice. It does seem to have more of a hump in side profile. 3 ins wider - assuming the lip is the same thickness - is 2.38 mm in 1/32 scale and noticeable, so duly acknowledged.

 

Tony

[Chek]

That makes sense to me. So, actually, the Tamiya spacers poking out from the fuselage might possibly be a fraction too long (?) as well as the vari-ramp assembly being a mite chunkier, or poor assembly create inaccuracy and asymmetry between L and R inlet.

Tony

 

While they are a bit of a pain to sand and ensure they're properly level with the spacer moulding, I haven't yet devised a better method of depicting the ramp/fuselage stays myself.

 

Admittedly mainly working in 1/48 scale with D-Mould intakes, even drilling the fuselage halves after fitting the intake nacelles leaves a clean-up job in a very awkward spot, even when (after the first trial) using brass rod hammered flat so as not to knacker the stays through over sanding the necessarily round drilled hole accepting the nominally airfoil stay itself.

 

Accurate moulding to the Tamiya style is preferable by far.

[Luca]

we wanna this bad guy soon! 

56 Sqn RULEZ! 

[LSP_Kevin]

It's odd that I can find several discrepancies between the profile drawing and the photos of the real thing, without even trying. Does the profile not represent exactly the same aircraft?

 

Kev

[Tony T]

There are two FGR.2's in the photos (XV428/P & XV470/D) and there may have existed others with the shark's mouth.

 

My favourite jet in 56 Sqn Firebirds markings was the EE Lightning.

 

Tony

[LSP_Kevin]

There are two FGR.2's in the photos (XV428/P & XV470/D) and there may have existed others with the shark's mouth.

 

My favourite jet in 56 Sqn Firebirds markings was the EE Lightning.

 

Tony

 

But notice that the rendition of the eye in the drawing doesn't appear to match either of the real life examples, and the red is far too bright as well.

 

Kev

[Tony T]

But notice that the rendition of the eye in the drawing doesn't appear to match either of the real life examples, and the red is far too bright as well.

 

Kev

Yes the red's a bit vivid but the markings may have been based on this one...

 

 

Tony

[LSP_Kevin]

Yes the red's a bit vivid but the markings may have been based on this one...

 

 

Tony

 

Now that makes more sense!

 

Kev

[Chek]

... but then the ejection seat triangle (singular) doesn't match up. Hey ho...

[Tony T]

FGR.2 XT901/Y as seen at the International Air Tattoo in July 1983, celebrating the Phantom's 25th Anniversary (!)

 

The later style with the revised eye came along a few years later nearer the end of the FGR.2 - though I may be wrong.

 

Anyway, some great schemes. Really looking forward to this model.

 

Tony

[Chek]

Indeed, and it's not as if I've never mixed up decals to get another cool design on the model 'cos I ain't doing another one (at least for quite a while).

 

But I suppose the decal maker's art is to be correct and leave any 'creativity' to the builder's conscience.

[Le Lapin Mal]

But notice that the rendition of the eye in the drawing doesn't appear to match either of the real life examples, and the red is far too bright as well.

 

Kev

 

To save Jennings some effort, I'll just remind you of his maxim that all profile painters just copy other profile painters.

You just can't trust the b*st*rds, no matter how beautifully rendered their profiles are...