Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The only real external difference is the refueling probe, "F" bent "E" straight, the hump can be found on the "E" also, check reference of the a/c you want to build, all the parts should be in the box, assuming your building a Hasegawa 1/48.

Curt

Link to post
Share on other sites

"almost" all F's had the hump

you also want to look at steerable nose wheel mechanism to see if you need it or need to trim it off

Edited by Rex
Link to post
Share on other sites

Red 56 is a very famous A-4F SuperFox

in the first pic on the header of this article http://www.modelingmadness.com/others/features/17a4.htm , you can see the "bumped intake bulge" of the SuperFox intakes (it looks almost like a "dent" in the green paint, just behind the sand)

that is a very nice looking build of the Hasegawa Scooter

Link to post
Share on other sites

The E and the F had some very minor differences inside the cockpit that got even more minor (but not totally identical) once the E was reworked with the hump. E's and F's had different engines, if that engine that comes with the kit means anything to you. And while the E didn't have spoilers, there is a panel line on the wing in the same place they put the spoiler, so you don't need to fill anything in.

Nope - humpless A-4F's were flown by the Blue Angels, several adversary units...

Yeah, but those had the hump taken off. Every F had one to start with except the very early production ones, and they got humps very quickly. I mean, at least one M had its hump taken off as an aggressor, but I don't think anyone would say "most M's had humps".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but those had the hump taken off. Every F had one to start with except the very early production ones, and they got humps very quickly. I mean, at least one M had its hump taken off as an aggressor, but I don't think anyone would say "most M's had humps".

Some of them even had the hump taken off after they flew in their aggressor colors for awhile. I don't think Red 56 carried that scheme with the hump though but it may have carried the hump as an aggressor in another scheme.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I only mentioned the Red 56 aircraft article to point out that "hump or no hump" is not the way to tell an A-4F from an A-4E

Red 56 wouldn't have been flown in that scheme, with a hump,,,,,,because, as the author describes the process, the scheme was designed and then put on a SuperFox, not a Virgin Echo, Super Echo, or a regular A-4F

Link to post
Share on other sites

I only mentioned the Red 56 aircraft article to point out that "hump or no hump" is not the way to tell an A-4F from an A-4E

Red 56 wouldn't have been flown in that scheme, with a hump,,,,,,because, as the author describes the process, the scheme was designed and then put on a SuperFox, not a Virgin Echo, Super Echo, or a regular A-4F

Rex, that NFWS 56 was an E model (the author of the article you link to even says so in the text), as far as I can tell BuNo 150023. The MiG scheme is one of at least 7 that that airplane carried while assigned to TopGun. It apparently lost it's hump about the same time it gained the bent refueling probe, which was probably about the same time that it was transferred to TopGun from the Test Pilot School at Pax, March of 74. I've seen pictures of that jet at TPS and it had the straight probe and hump, but I've also seen a photo of it soon after it went to NFWS and the hump is gone and the bent probe is installed. The scheme it was wearing at the time was a 3-color upper camo of brown, tan, and light green over white or light gray (similar to the Israeli scheme) and it had side number 23 at the time. It picked up side number 56 sometime around 76 or so, and kept it until it left in about 89, when it went to VC-1 at Barbers Point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have got to start reading slower,,,even after you mentioned it, I missed it again,,,,,,then, I caught it in the "other aircraft" part of his article

I need to give some "super fox intakes" another squint at, too,,,,just to make sure I don't have a bunch mislabeled,,,,,,I'd swear that bump is visible,,,,when it plainly can't be in that pic if it isn't an F

That is why we discuss this stuff, I guess,,,,,,,good thing I still consider myself a student, eh?

Rex

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...