CF104

You're assuming that Eduard did their homework and got the F-4C set correct. The thick wing speedbrakes should be nearly, if not identical between all models. The thin wing speedbrakes are different than the thick wing ones. The Eduard F-4C set appears to be fictional when I compare it to all of my references. It doesn't even represent the thin wing F-4B/N. Cheers, John

The OP is asking about the items circled in red. They are obviously electrical connectors which are more than likely used for ground test purposes. Cheers, John

As with most F-104D's that survived in service past 1962, this one had the early downward ejection seats replaced with the C-2 upward seat and 3 piece canopy. https://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wu316.htm Cheers, John

Hi All, I'm collecting all of the parts required to convert an Academy 1/48 F-4J to a USAF F-4C/D. I have everything except for parts J1 and J2 which are the pieces that cover the bridle hook openings on the bottom of the wings on Navy jets. This sprue also has the USAF inboard wing pylons. If anyone has the complete J sprue or just parts J1 and J2, I'd be interested in hearing from you. Cheers, John

Hi Scott, The speedbrakes on the Hasegawa kit are physically shorter in height by about 1/16" and 1/64" longer than the Kinetic. The Hasegawa intakes are slightly larger so I would think the intake covers could be sanded to fit the Kinetic kit. Cheers, John

The canopy definitely won't fit. I have both kits and will compare the speed brake and intakes. Regards, John

Maybe odd parts like pylons and stores but the kits are very different. The Hasegawa F-104 dimensions are incorrect in length and well as wing and H-Stab shape. The Kinetic kit is the gold standard for the F-104 in 1/48 and everything scales out near perfect. Cheers, John

My bad, sorry for intruding on your post. Regards, John

Yes, it's ex RCAF with a 6-3 hard wing. Here's more information. https://www.aerialvisuals.ca/AirframeDossier.php?Serial=17006

As nice as the kit is, I feel it's over engineered in some places. I'm a firm believer of test fitting before gluing and found the gun port panel will not fit with the backing piece if installed per the instructions. Therefore I omitted the backing piece and only installed the gun port panel. The backing piece looks like it's meant for the later open gun port panel. Weird placement of the gun port panel and its associated panel lines as well. Lots of close seam line filling and rescribing to get the gun port area to look correct. Cheers, John

It's designed to create several lower intensity shock waves which reduce the overall noise of the sonic boom created by the aircraft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_Spike Cheers, John

These are flight sim (DCS) screen grabs of the Heatblur F-14A. In the sim you can remove the gun camera by clicking on it to allow increased viewing area for the approach. IRL, it's pretty much a standard bolt on item and would be there in 1982. Cheers, John

They are the same. When on the left the static dischargers are on top and when it's flipped to the right side they are on the bottom. They are built that way on purpose so you will never see them the other way around. Cheers, John

And a collection of photos of the 50th Anniversary scheme with a good shot of the WAC HUD. 88-0456 50th-anniversary Cheers, John

That's definitely a WAC HUD. Here's a photo from 2009 showing it with the WAR HUD. Cheers, John