Jump to content

1/32 Tamiya F-4E post-Vietnam- Kicked up a notch.


Recommended Posts

Do you have any pic of your 1/32 gold & silver??

Cheers

Neo

Thanks Guys for the nice comments. Here's the Gold winner- admittedly in a thin crowd of slightly modified, but from what I know now about model contests, I should have thrown it in the heavily modified category. It has almost no flaws because all I added was Eduard seat belts.....

Contest7.jpg

And the Silver medal winner in the heavily modified category, flaws and all. It does look killer from 3 feet though....

Contest8.jpg

The F14B in the background is WAY better. Here's a couple more of it from my archives....

_DSC2394.jpg

_DSC2403.jpg

and the CF-18B....

Finalpic18.jpg

Finalpic31.jpg

Finalpic7.jpg

Prelim31.jpg

Oh well!

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

PS Not sure of what configuration you will run with but did you notice the angulation of the outer wing pylon?

The weapons pylons are angled like that, not the pylons for the 370s (wing tanks), lets be clear on that. Obviously the angle was for more clearance from thr weapons and the landing gear door.

Chuck, I should also point out the leading edge bumps you so cleverly put the foil flanges around are the outboard slat actuator housing. The others without the flanges are only hinges.

Chuck, congrats on the contest wins, but I can't say I'm surprised. Your models are truly breathtaking.

Scott W.

Edited by Scott R Wilson
Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations!

I don't find it difficult at all to believe that your Lanc won all those prizes: it is REALLY a masterpiece!

I think that the Phantom has an advantage when compared to the Hornet: it is more "spectacular". The paint jobb is more eye-catching, the weathering can be heavier, the aircraft itself has probably more "authority"...Then - off course - your Bug is one of those builds that I can only dream to have in my cabinet one day...

/Kristian

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the Phantom has an advantage when compared to the Hornet: it is more "spectacular". The paint jbb is more eye-catching, the weathering can be heavier, the aircraft itself has probably more "authority"...Then - off course - your Bug is one of those builds that I can only dream to have in my cabinet one day...

/Kristian

Thanks for the kind words of encouragement guys- and indulging me with a model competition discussion within a build thread. They are sort of related as follows:

1) I agree that the Phantom had an immediate edge because, well, it a PHANTOM! Everybody loves Phantoms because they are big and impressive. That's why I'm building another one right now.

2) I also think that judges- Canadian ones in particular- are getting tired of 1/32 Academy CF-18's at every show. I'm sure they yawned first when they saw mine.

3) CF-18 paint jobs are dull and not very impressive. It's easy to dismiss them- and the build- as unattractive, because they are unless you're a CF-18 nut like I am. I think they look cool in an "all business" sort of way.

4) The judges, as I've found out this weekend, are looking for flaws and build quality first. Unless they read my description sheet on the Hornet, they don't know or care that this bird was heavily modified in just about every way possible. As mentioned earlier, a lot of this stuff was underneath, so I should have stuck a mirror underneath so they could see all the modifications.

5) The camo paint job on the Lancaster was the real seller of this build to make it successful. Now that I know how to do it, applying these same painting techniques to this F-4E should pay big dividends.

6) As I continue with this build, I'm going to keep asking myself what a judge might dislike and potentially give me a deduction for in a future contest. If it's an easy edit or fix that doesn't jeopardize the accuracy of the build, I'll do it. If it somehow compromises the integrity of the build, I won't. No contest is worth that.

I know that many of you will think I'm nuts for worrying even a tiny bit about a stupid model contest that, for some part, is based on subjectivity like a figure skating competition. As successful as the Lanc was, I'm still a bit steamed about the total non-recognition of the CF-18B, which I'm going to channel into this build. I really think it might be my best model yet.

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the kind words of encouragement guys- and indulging me with a model competition discussion within a build thread. They are sort of related as follows:

1) I agree that the Phantom had an immediate edge because, well, it a PHANTOM! Everybody loves Phantoms because they are big and impressive. That's why I'm building another one right now.

2) I also think that judges- Canadian ones in particular- are getting tired of 1/32 Academy CF-18's at every show. I'm sure they yawned first when they saw mine.

I don't think that is the case, Chuck. I can't remember last time I saw one at the RMMC contest.

3) CF-18 paint jobs are dull and not very impressive. It's easy to dismiss them- and the build- as unattractive, because they are unless you're a CF-18 nut like I am. I think they look cool in an "all business" sort of way.

I also don't think that CF-18 paint jobs are dull and not very impressive. I believe that if someone has artistic talent they offer a very unique opportunity to do some incredible weathering. I love the jet personally.

4) The judges, as I've found out this weekend, are looking for flaws and build quality first. Unless they read my description sheet on the Hornet, they don't know or care that this bird was heavily modified in just about every way possible. As mentioned earlier, a lot of this stuff was underneath, so I should have stuck a mirror underneath so they could see all the modifications.

Yup. Having been a judge at the contest I can say that they look for the basics first. The WOW factor is not what it is all about. I wouldn't say that they don't care about all the work put into a project but rather they don't get blinded by the light. You can make the worlds best icing, but if you can't bake the cake....... Please don't take that it any way as a slight towards your models as it is not. I am making a simple analogy. I saw your models. While I did not get a good look at anything there before I had to hasten my departure, I thought your entries looked incredible. A note on sticking a model on a mirror. The judges judge the model as it sits and, as such, only what they can see - they won't pick it up and flip it upside down. If you put a model on a mirror and the underside is now revealed, that too will be judged.

5) The camo paint job on the Lancaster was the real seller of this build to make it successful. Now that I know how to do it, applying these same painting techniques to this F-4E should pay big dividends.

6) As I continue with this build, I'm going to keep asking myself what a judge might dislike and potentially give me a deduction for in a future contest. If it's an easy edit or fix that doesn't jeopardize the accuracy of the build, I'll do it. If it somehow compromises the integrity of the build, I won't. No contest is worth that.

Agreed! No contest is worth compromising the personal satisfaction that you get out of the hobby - whatever that is for you.

I know that many of you will think I'm nuts for worrying even a tiny bit about a stupid model contest that, for some part, is based on subjectivity like a figure skating competition. As successful as the Lanc was, I'm still a bit steamed about the total non-recognition of the CF-18B, which I'm going to channel into this build. I really think it might be my best model yet.

I don't think you're nuts at all. You go through what lots of entrants do after putting their heart into a project. I think sometimes there is a sense of entitlement one gets after pouring hours and hours into a kit and not getting what they think they should after entering it into a contest. That's what happens, though. It's both subjective and objective and we can take it very personally. I think one should enter a contest just for the pure fun of it and whatever happens, happens. It's not at all what the hobby is about or why any of us build in my opinion. Modellers aren't perfect and neither are the judges. But if anyone is to enter their models into a contest they should do so without expectation. Hey, be thankful. At the Northern Wings Contest in Edmonton the judges shine flashlights on the models looking for flaws! I'm not judging that but just saying that's how they do things. Terrific work on your models and good for you for taking home the awards you got on your first model contest.

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck!

Firstly, my huge congrats on your awards! Now you do know what the contest is all about and I hope your current build will be an apparent... no, ABSOLUTE contest winner that you took into account all the judges' tricks! ;)

Cheers and happy modeling!

Alexander

:salute:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck, congrats on your competitive success!

It is of course hard for us ARCers to judge the competing merits of your builds, they all look, as Paris would say, hot.

Do you have any transportation and packaging tips you can share?

Cheers,

Marcel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for all your comments, especially you Tom for taking the time to explain a few judging things I didn't know before.

Do you have any transportation and packaging tips you can share?

Marcel

Not really. I put my huge models in those Rubbermaid plastic containers that slide under your bed, with a thin layer of bubble wrap underneath for a cushion. Since the height of these things is limited to about 6-7" so that they can clear a bed. I stuck a towel under the nose gear to raise the front and drop the rear so that the vertical stab's didn't hit the top lid. Then I drove to Nanton like a Granny to church.

One guy packing up his models did have a really good idea for smaller models. Using a similar container but smaller, he lined the base with a thin layer of styrafoam, placed his models inside, then stuck toothpicks into the foam all around the model to hold it in place so that it wouldn't slide around. It looked like a really good way to transport small (under 12") models.

Enough contest talk. LET'S MODEL!

"A little experiment that went right" (for a change). I stole that line from Marcel when he discovered his Rustoleum trick for rough walkways, so I thought I would recycle it again because I think I'm on to something. I hate to beat a dead exhaust nozzle to death :deadhorse1: , but I think I finally figured out how to get the right width, length and sufficiently detailed nozzle into the Tamkiya F-4 kit. This subject has been bugging me for weeks, especially since my last attempt was really kind of pathetic. For background info on this subject, see Post # 109 and 188

In review, the choices you have for this kit are:

- Tamiya kit. Too small in diameter, little detail

- Revell kit. Correct diameter, no detail at all and way too short

- Aires resin. Too small in diameter, but the detail is excellent

- Cutting Edge resin (If you can find them). Too small in diameter since they used the Tamiya can as a base, but detail is much better.

- CAM resin (If you can find them). Correct diameter, good detail, but a bit short with usually a lot of bubbles in the resin.

- Joe's resin. (fox3tornado on ebay) Correct diameter and good detail, but the length is a bit short and the outer lips of the petals are too thick. Make sure you extend the inside flame tubes outward about 1/8" to get correct length if you use them.

But now there is a brand new product from Eduard, which are called "Brassin F-4 Phantom II Exhaust Nozzles USAF Late (TAM kit) #632010". Details from Sprue Brothers can be found here:

http://store.spruebrothers.com/132-eduard-brassin-f-4-phantom-ii-exhaust-nozzles-usaf-late-tam-kit-632010-p26895.aspx

For those of you who haven't been following this topic in the Jet Forum, I can save you a bunch of time (and lots of money at $48!) and jump to the punch line: Although they are the very best in terms of detail and there's even a nice new tail hook, they are IDENTICAL in size to the Aires cans. What a bummer! The Aires nozzles are already terrific, but the only thing people really want now is correct size.

This brings me back to the nozzles I made already (Post # 188) using Joe's resin. Besides being too short, I really don't like the thickness of the petals at the rear of the can. I was going to use the Aire's ones again, but they still look way too small, which brings me back full circle to this post.

Here's a pic of some of the choices, Tamiya, Aires, Joe's and Revell, left to tight...

Cans1.jpg

To get the right width and detail, many have used the Revell can and added the Eduard photo-etch kit (32-080) and either left it short or extended the base. The problem with this method is that the flame tube to nozzle join shows and the base of the can has no detail, because this brass set is for the outer petals only.

Karl has a neat approach, using the Revell outer can and sticking the Aires can within it with some careful sanding of both tubes. It looks pretty good, but again it's short and needs an extension within.

Another guy on the LSP forum used the Aires cans which are beautiful (same for new Eduard ones), but he cut the lower fuselage to constrict the nozzle opening so that the cans didn't look lost within it. So far this has been the best method in my books, but the can is still a bit too small in diameter.

Talking to the owner of a local hobby shop on the weekend about the problem, it struck me how to get everything we want with the parts that are readily available! The solution is to use Joe's nozzles, lengthen them, thin the outer petals, then stuff the Eduard brass within them.

Here's a pic of Joe's cans on the resin block beside the one I painted already. The nozzle on the left really isn't all that dark, but taking pics of anything against that resin white is tricky. To lengthen the can about 1/8" which is all I need, all I have to do is to cut a hole in the resin block on the bottom and recreate the base. The BETTER way, which is too late for me, is to simply extend the flame tubes back 1/8" and cut off the nozzle from the block as it should be on the left...

Cans2.jpg

To trim the resin block I cut a square hole in the bottom and then used my Dremel tool with a sanding cylinder to get things nice and smooth inside to the correct inside diameter to fit on the flame tube. The outside of the block was trimmed the same way. BTW, when you do this WEAR A RESPIRATOR! That resin dust looks and likely acts just like asbestos in your lungs....

Cans4.jpg

With the length now good, the next problem to fix was the width of those outside petals. Here's the unaltered can on the left next to the Aires one, which is nice and thin....

Cans3.jpg

Using the same Dremel tool, I CAREFULLY ground down the interior of the nozzle, using slow speed and rotating the can often. There, nice and thin compared to the old version on the right. I might have gone a little thinner, but I think the risk of breaking through the resin wouldn't have been worth the reward of a few more millimeters....

Cans5.jpg

Next up is the Eduard photo-etch brass set, which is made for the longer Tamiya nozzles. These needed to be trimmed at the top and the bottom, as I did with the brass on the lower right, compared to an unaltered version on the top. The reason for the top being cut off is that by flexing it over the top lip of the can, I'll wind up with thick burner can petals again. The bottom part, meanwhile, interferes with those little hinges on the bottom set of petals within the can. Joe's cans have some decent detail down there and I don't want to hide it...

Cans6.jpg

The base needs to be built-up as well, or else the join with the flame tube will be exposed and make a contest judge pee his pants with glee that he found a goof-up! :P To fix this I used some .030 X .125" Evergreen strips....

Cans11.jpg

Gluing this set within the nozzle and those little bits I cut off the top to the outside of each petal, things look pretty darn good now compared to the other cans......

Cans7.jpg

A few close-up shots...

Cans8.jpg

Cans9.jpg

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The outside bits glued in place. The outside petals don't have the great detail the Aires cans have, but maybe I can do something interesting with my painting to get close.....

Cans10.jpg

Now the REAL test: How do they fit and how do they look? First another shot of the real deal. Note how stuffed in the fuselage that big nozzle is- and where the length should be outside of it...

Engine2.jpg

Pretty good length and width.....

Cans12.jpg

Good detail within....

Cans13.jpg

No lip inside to excite a judge.....

Cans14.jpg

And the cans are snug within the fuselage without alteration. Pretty darn good if I do say so myself. I'll paint these up when I do the titanium painting, because I'll be using almost the same stuff.

Cans15.jpg

Thanks for your continued interest in this build.

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your attention to detail is superb! I wish I could find it in myself to be as meticulous, but I always lose my patience and wind up in the "I just want to get this done" mentality. Kudos.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input Pierre. One thing I noticed with the Eduard set is that the blade on the inside is too long and the Tamiya can has those little hinges for the outer blades in the wrong place. They should be below each main blade, not between them, which is no doubt why Eduard made them long so that they fit nicely between them. Here's a pic of the Tamiya can (right) and the Aires one (left), which is correct....

Engine5.jpg

Here's what I mean using a pic of the real deal (ignore the "thingy" flame holder comment). Follow the main blades down to the 2 hinges which are right below it....

Engine10.jpg

Joe's cans on the left (Aires on right), which have it right as well.....

Burner1.jpg

That's why I cut off the bottom of each Eduard blade (which shouldn't be there anyway), so that it wouldn't cover the hinges....

Cans6.jpg

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck, no doubt the best Phatom nozzles ever built, other than the real ones.

I really appreciate your in-depth explanation of all the offerings and considerations out there, will add major value to my (future) Phantom builds.

Marcel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck your mental state is worse than I thought e058.gif

No sane man would ever have noticed... c038.gif

Hey Pierre, I almost hit the floor when I saw the paint had pulled off your nozzle and you "did not care that much". If it was me, I would have been on suicide watch! :wacko:

Keep sending me stuff though, so that we all can learn about some of the details you have come across before. I never would have known about the fuel dump nozzles on the wings if you hadn't pointed them out. I'm really happy to find out about them now- rather than later when it's too late. :thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I get started on the front fuselage, I thought I'd finish the back because I want to hit the titanium areas with gloss black before I use Alclad on all the bare metal parts. I use MM enamel paints exclusively, which I really like for drying times and toughness. The gloss colors, however, take FOREVER to dry thoroughly, so I may as well get them started now. Lacquer based Alclad on enamel paint that's not quite dry = wrinkled paint. Not pretty.

The last area to detail at the rear, other than the vertical stabilizer, is the compartment for the drag chute. The Eduard photo-etch set has some good pieces for this area, but there isn't a proper compartment in the tail. All you have is a hole that you can see into with some trim on the outside.

Jake's book has some good pics of this compartment on pages 126 and 127, but I have one of my own I took at Nellis.....

Chute1.jpg

Compared to Jake's pics, the similarities are an oblong rectangular hole with rounded corners, a rust colored interior (looks like fiberglass), a thicker lip on the bottom than the top and the holes along the outside trim. What is different is the color of the center circle on the chute door and the hole patterns around the outside edge. Jake's is white while this one is orange, which I like better for contrast- "correct" or wrong.

I thought long and hard on how I was going to accomplish creating such a compartment that had a similar shape but was seamless. Styrene card might have worked, but then I would be stuck with trying to remove a seam line in a tight space and I wanted something that would hold its shape. Searching around my garage for ideas, I settled on using a 3/8" plumbing supply tube for a faucet. It was about the right size and the copper core is easy to bend. Better yet, it won't lose its shape. Here's the beginning of creating something that would work, along with the Eduard trim piece and some styrene to fill the large gap on the bottom and sides of the chute opening. I cut off about 5/8" of the pipe then started to bend it using needle-nose pliers....

Chute2.jpg

Here's how it looks as I slid it into place. The sides of the rear fuselage have been filled with styrene and CA glue to ensure a tight fit. I also filed the tube at the proper angle and sanded off the chrome so that the CA glue would stick once fully inserted. The interior of the compartment was painted, but if you can find bare copper pipe, I don't think you need to....

Chute3.jpg

Here's how it looks when completed with the Eduard trim, CA glue and some sanding. I sprayed a bit of Alclad to reveal blemishes and give an idea how it look when finished. Not too bad....

Chute4.jpg

Chute5.jpg

I also made sure there was a rear wall to the compartment, just like the real deal. Excuse the sanding dust- and I better fix that gap on the trailing edge of the starboard stabilizer! This is another reason I do WIP threads. I find lots of detail flaws when taking these close-up pics I would never notice otherwise....

Chute6.jpg

The chute door Eduard parts are really nice, but that central circular part needs to be concave, so I pushed it in with a pencil before painting. Although there's some hinges for the door also supplied, there's no way I'm sticking them on until the very end or they'll break, so tape will have to do for now for demonstration purposes....

Chute7.jpg

Of course these parts need a dark weathering wash to bring out all the detail like the holes, which I'm going to drill out carefully with a tiny drill later. I'll also add that thin gasket around the outside edges, the thin drain pipe near the center, a depression on the bottom for the door catch and the T-shaped handle below the door opening on the port side.

I think that things may slow down quite a bit with the weather getting warmer and the upcoming wedding of my daughter in 3 1/2 months. Plans are already well underway and I'm already getting the evil eye from my wife and daughter that I'm not helping while I "play with my models". :rolleyes: To tell you the truth, if I could get away with it I'd hide under my bed for 3 1/2 months until the big day. As I've found out too many times, Estrogen and CA glue do not mix very well! With a little luck, however, I'll still have my moments to sneak away and make some progress, so bear with me.

Also, after the last model contest, I learned a lot about judging and my goal now is near perfection, because I found out the hard way that 1 wrong can erase 10 rights. There is NO WAY a judge is going to find a deduction on this Phantom! (or at least not too many :lol: ) By taking my time, there should be less screw-ups.

Thanks for your continued interest in this build.

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck, don't forget what's inside the drag chute compartment (when the chute wasn't installed) as seen in this pic found via google:

http://www.flightchief.com/pictures/f-4/DragChute/DSC00482.jpg

Jari

Dang Jari! I saw that part in Jake's book, but I thought, "Who's going to be looking that deep inside for tiny details anyway?" Apparently at least you and Pierre do, so that's good enough for me. In it goes!- and thanks for pointing it out.

BTW, I did a bunch more detailing work last night like adding the big hole on the lower left for the door latch mechanism and I drilled out those little holes on the outside edge a bit so that a dark wash will show them better. I'm really looking forward to building the gun up front next with lots of detail and a drop-down access door with new vents and other details. If I treat each stage as a separate tiny model, the sense of accomplishment is still there without worrying about how long the entire model takes to build. I learned this a while ago from Guy (geedubelyer), my modeling hero. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more for you Chuck :D

Hope this helps :thumbsup:

It does indeed! I bet there's a lot of "right click, copy" and "pasting" going on right now. Thanks for all the info Pierre. :thumbsup:

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

parabrake%20w%20comments.jpg

Hope this helps :thumbsup:

This chute in the photo is actually improperly installed; the yellow fabric on the right is a short cloth tab that should be positioned on the left so that when the door is closed the yellow tab sticks out a bit from between the door and the fuselage. Once the red Remove Before Flight streamer is pulled (along with the long braided wire that holds the pilot chute stowed in the bag) there is nothing else to prove there is a drag chute installed. As it says in the procedures, pulling the streamer is an aircrew function, but if one crew pulls the streamer then ground aborts, the next crew after the jet is fixed will want to see the yellow tab to be sure the chute is indeed installed. The drag chute drogue has a big spring sewn inside of it, and opening the door with the RBF streamer removed means you'll be having to put new drag chute in, after picking up the deployed chute from the ground behind the jet. By the way, I NEVER in three years of working flightline on F-4Es saw anyone close the door, wait the required three to five minutes then pop the door to verify it worked. We stuffed the drag bag, closed the door, stuck a hand inside panel 106R to feel the riser ring in the retaining jaws to make sure it was properly engaged, then closed up panel 106R and moved on to other things. Here's what a proper installation looks like, on an QF-4E I photographed at Oshkosh last year:

EAA7-30-10018a.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...