Excellent crossover of the two scale engines, very effective and saves time detailing. Regarding the Phantom, the variants were "endless" as the evolution of missions and sensory and instrumentation progressed, (weapon and detection), so they were almost like the variants of Spitfires . The nose cone configuration can help identify the variant, ( most likely indicated in the directions. The metal behind the engine is indeed Titanium , ( which could have been sourced through the Russians like the material for the SR 71 was due to the availability after one of the several nuclear arms treaties of the time) . The material for the inverted horizontal stabilizers were an alloy of Titanium so it could be painted with metal paints slightly different. (the F-4 could not perform an 8 point roll - that accounts for its short time used by the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels ) - it was a more stable platform at high speeds. Regarding the landing gear bay doors - the box art might show you it is either an Air Force or Navy version. The Navy had a heavier strut with more hydraulics than ground based Phantoms. The "wheels up" configuration would have larger doors and bulge outwards - it would not impact lift physics. (the Navy liked the F-111 slightly more than the F-14 but General Dynamics could not redesign the landing gear and stay within the Navy specifications). Plus as you said model manufactures didn't fully understand the variants and did not have access to mold the F-4 models with precession molding. ( designs were classified well into the 70's). Regarding heat gun, (IMO) that's a really powerful gun that can crank out some heat. You mention running some test - I think your will see the first plastic material you showed will melt quickly - the back and forth motion will help , plus start with the lowest setting. ALSO, wear some gloves, just like using a hair dryer in modeling one hand gets the heat. Last on the costs of kits - great example of the 1/100 scale. I have been seeing a lot of manufacturers coming out with kits at 1/144 - and they can be expensive as well as limiting creativity, unless you are building a huge aircraft like a B-36, airliners, or transport aircraft. Thanks for sharing your experience and idea's. Cheers, Bob
Could be increased tyre size, and/or brake assemblies on latter models (of real thing) of F4 needed for heavier pay load, hence bigger wheel wells?????
so as it turnas out, the navy tyres are the slimmer ones and its the air force ones - bigger tyres only, to allow softer pressure, and hence bulges on the underside of the wings to accomodate them.
Navy Phantoms have narrow wheels/tires. Airforce required wider, making the bulge necessary. I will attach a link ( I did send this before ) that will give a lot of useful info and compares the tire sizes. The second link because it is cool to watch. czcams.com/video/cjQl3OLgwwM/video.html. czcams.com/video/7_RhlA3IciA/video.html The second video has footage of F-4EJs taking off, seen from the front and showing the massive heat plume. Many scenes of open Aux, air doors. The 1/32 Tamiya kits have the same wheel set for all of the F-4 types that are the wide version so to be correct with the F-4J, I ordered a narrow, resin set.
I wonder if this would help to create seamless air intakes in airplanes. In it, latex paint is poured to the intakes. No sanding is required: czcams.com/video/NT2KNHuDD-8/video.html
Excellent crossover of the two scale engines, very effective and saves time detailing. Regarding the Phantom, the variants were "endless" as the evolution of missions and sensory and instrumentation progressed, (weapon and detection), so they were almost like the variants of Spitfires . The nose cone configuration can help identify the variant, ( most likely indicated in the directions. The metal behind the engine is indeed Titanium , ( which could have been sourced through the Russians like the material for the SR 71 was due to the availability after one of the several nuclear arms treaties of the time) . The material for the inverted horizontal stabilizers were an alloy of Titanium so it could be painted with metal paints slightly different. (the F-4 could not perform an 8 point roll - that accounts for its short time used by the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels ) - it was a more stable platform at high speeds. Regarding the landing gear bay doors - the box art might show you it is either an Air Force or Navy version. The Navy had a heavier strut with more hydraulics than ground based Phantoms. The "wheels up" configuration would have larger doors and bulge outwards - it would not impact lift physics. (the Navy liked the F-111 slightly more than the F-14 but General Dynamics could not redesign the landing gear and stay within the Navy specifications). Plus as you said model manufactures didn't fully understand the variants and did not have access to mold the F-4 models with precession molding. ( designs were classified well into the 70's). Regarding heat gun, (IMO) that's a really powerful gun that can crank out some heat. You mention running some test - I think your will see the first plastic material you showed will melt quickly - the back and forth motion will help , plus start with the lowest setting. ALSO, wear some gloves, just like using a hair dryer in modeling one hand gets the heat. Last on the costs of kits - great example of the 1/100 scale. I have been seeing a lot of manufacturers coming out with kits at 1/144 - and they can be expensive as well as limiting creativity, unless you are building a huge aircraft like a B-36, airliners, or transport aircraft. Thanks for sharing your experience and idea's. Cheers, Bob
Nice work on the intakes 👍
Taking me a lot of will power to not start a phantom.
Like the look of those Tamiya 1/100
Could be increased tyre size, and/or brake assemblies on latter models (of real thing) of F4 needed for heavier pay load, hence bigger wheel wells?????
I would assume the landing gear was redesigned for the naval versions of the phantom, as it would require more strength for the landings on carriers
so as it turnas out, the navy tyres are the slimmer ones and its the air force ones - bigger tyres only, to allow softer pressure, and hence bulges on the underside of the wings to accomodate them.
Navy Phantoms have narrow wheels/tires. Airforce required wider, making the bulge necessary. I will attach a link ( I did send this before ) that will give a lot of useful info and compares the tire sizes. The second link because it is cool to watch. czcams.com/video/cjQl3OLgwwM/video.html. czcams.com/video/7_RhlA3IciA/video.html The second video has footage of F-4EJs taking off, seen from the front and showing the massive heat plume. Many scenes of open Aux, air doors. The 1/32 Tamiya kits have the same wheel set for all of the F-4 types that are the wide version so to be correct with the F-4J, I ordered a narrow, resin set.
ah ok cool
I wonder if this would help to create seamless air intakes in airplanes. In it, latex paint is poured to the intakes. No sanding is required:
czcams.com/video/NT2KNHuDD-8/video.html