Jump to content

Tamiya 1/48th F-4B Phantom II (item#61121)


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
On 5/1/2021 at 8:28 AM, Curt B said:

 

So, is it the case that aircraft, when being 'reworked', were repainted, and the repainting covered the factory stencils, without the stencils being restored on the new paint?  Is this/was this typical?  Is its true today?  I'm guessing that the newer military aircraft, with RAM paint, don't have as many stencils, anyway, but I have nothing to back that up.  I'm also thinking that determining whether a given aircraft frame either had, or did not have, stencils, would be pretty hard to determine, based on photos, unless the photos were walk-arounds (where the photos might show close ups on panels).  But it's got to be hard to determine if stencils were present on a particular plane based on 'regular' photos, such as of the entire aircraft.  Unless I'm missing something.  Just curious as to how one might determine that level of detail.

 

The Phantom's maintenance and data markings story is complex and varied, to say the least! You are right Curt; often it's hard to determine the extent of coverage from period photographs; were they "full meal deal" factory applied markings? Depot level minimum treatment? Depot level full stencil treatment (similar to, but not the same as factory original). Or something in-between?

 

However, I do think that it's safe to say that for the 3 markings choices Tamiya have selected for their initial kit release, the basic set of maintenance markings as provided in the kit are appropriate.

 

153019, shortly after it's (second) MiG kill of the war...no panel numbers visible

OeUhNlC.jpg

 

Ditto for this Chargers jet, a stablemate of 153020

nCC6xfb.png

 

The same thing can be said for the kit's third markings option, the Screaming Eagle CAG bird, based on other photographs.

 

The separate access door decal "Set A" or, alternatively, this sheet from Furball Designs would be for jets still carrying the original McDonnell factory applied markings, like this one from 1965...

JZDLmeX.png

 

For yet another variation, check out these USMC Bravos. While both airframes had already been repainted at least once by the time these photos were taken during the late 1960s, access door numbers have been reapplied, this time in stencil form and not in the original McAir font and color (yellow having replaced medium gray for the underside markings).

 

Here, ziggyfoos's  excellent set of decals could be put to good use.

svXzPaC.png

 

SZIhShX.png

Edited by RichB63
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the detail reply, Rich.  I had a feeling it wasn't going to be a simple answer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant speak to usn policy but can shed a little light on usaf. Simply put, as successive repaints occurred, fewer and fewer service markings were applied. You’ll find good documentation of aircraft in the mid to late seventies covered; white on green areas, black on tan. I specifically recall that by the late 80s the only markings required were the nato symbols for nitrogen, oxygen, grounding points etc. The very basic markings. This was essentially a time and money saving initiative. A common practice not visible was the stenciling of the last three tail numbers inside the various removable panels. This was to ensure mix ups in hangers and inspection docks was lessened. 
   My question is the missing main gear door on the VF-84 jet on the cat. I’ve seen other pics of usn shipboard jets so configured. Why?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2021 at 7:48 PM, BillS said:

I cant speak to usn policy but can shed a little light on usaf. Simply put, as successive repaints occurred, fewer and fewer service markings were applied. You’ll find good documentation of aircraft in the mid to late seventies covered; white on green areas, black on tan. I specifically recall that by the late 80s the only markings required were the nato symbols for nitrogen, oxygen, grounding points etc. The very basic markings. This was essentially a time and money saving initiative. A common practice not visible was the stenciling of the last three tail numbers inside the various removable panels. This was to ensure mix ups in hangers and inspection docks was lessened. 
   My question is the missing main gear door on the VF-84 jet on the cat. I’ve seen other pics of usn shipboard jets so configured. Why?  

the Marine jets in Chu Lai had very few service markings on them. About the only serious markings were for critical stuff and weapons systems. The A6 Intruders were almost bare! Can't remember much about A4's. Another interesting thing about the Phantoms and Intruders was that a good bit of panels and parts came from jets parked in the bone yard, and the colors didn't quite match each other. The very first Intruder I walked past caught my eyes with all the replacement panels and the fact that it was so big! 

      When a plane circled into the arming pit; there were actual instructions for the guys painted on the side of the plane. They were written in an order telling them to look for the pilot's hands and so forth.

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ChesshireCat said:

the Marine jets in Chu Lai had very few service markings on them. About the only serious markings were for critical stuff and weapons systems. The A6 Intruders were almost bare! Can't remember much about A4's. Another interesting thing about the Phantoms and Intruders was that a good bit of panels and parts came from jets parked in the bone yard, and the colors didn't quite match each other.

It varied. Other than replacements/repaints, overall the A-6s at Chu Lai 1967-69 were still new and would've had the Grumman factory airframe data. 1967-68 -533 had mostly sequential 15263x-15264x series, 68-69 mostly 15415x-15416x. A-6 data was a lot more subdued compared to the F-4, plus A-6s didn't have all the panel numbering data.

 

F-4s there could've had full data/panels, depending on date/specific a/c, they'd either still have factory, or depot type, or none/little. Rich showed some examples of the full rework type, here's another, specifically -323 at Chu Lai in late 66/early 67 after rework with full data:

143054404_4965696256805431_6089581278403

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ziggyfoos said:

It varied. Other than replacements/repaints, overall the A-6s at Chu Lai 1967-69 were still new and would've had the Grumman factory airframe data. 1967-68 -533 had mostly sequential 15263x-15264x series, 68-69 mostly 15415x-15416x. A-6 data was a lot more subdued compared to the F-4, plus A-6s didn't have all the panel numbering data.

 

F-4s there could've had full data/panels, depending on date/specific a/c, they'd either still have factory, or depot type, or none/little. Rich showed some examples of the full rework type, here's another, specifically -323 at Chu Lai in late 66/early 67 after rework with full data:

143054404_4965696256805431_6089581278403

 

that plane was on in use about a year when the photo came about (well maybe 18 months). Can see that the guy's been down to the local vill for that set of Tiger Stripes!

The A6's pretty did nothing but but bombing raid north of the DMZ, and did get beat up quit a bit. Still there were a bunch of airframes to rob parts off of (usually kept to a handful of airframes in the bone yard). In there, there were a lot of Navy planes with just about every carrier name you could think of. Never really understood why they made a guy flying a shot up plane bypass Da Nang and go over a hundred miles due south to Chu Lai. Phantoms and A4's in Chu Lai were the primary air strike aircraft for most all of I-Corp, but you still watched them take off all the time and head due north with a full bomb load.

 

Reason I noted the Phantom didn't have a ton of hours on it was that prior to 67 the run way was metal plate, and a Phantom with a heavy load out didn't work well. In December 67 the concrete was said to still be curing out (how would I know?), but they were launching heavy loaded aircraft 24/7. Seems like they poured concrete till the end of August, but may be off a month. Once they got the two 14,000 foot runways done, things seriously ramped up. Where all the aircraft came from and when they got there I cannot begin to say. Let alone that boneyard. Supposedly the runways were built to land a B52 bomber on, but that never happened as long as I was there. They did land C141's there when the 82nd Airborne arrived. Three to four days a week we walked thru that bone yard on the way to the MAAG 13 PX and then onto the main post Americal PX. We were in there everyday getting water and other things (I was located about 3.5 miles south). Chu Lai had the only potable water station till you got to

Da Nang. My Battalion HQ was located right across Highway One from the airbase. So we were up there all the time. 

 

I used to have to man an LP for one week at a time that over looked the arming pit and the POL in Chu Lai. Watching what was happening really helped the time fly by. The LP's location was ugly, but was so damned new I didn't know any better. Left about the first of May, and only came back for a week or ten days. Then went deep in the Valley. 

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ChesshireCat said:

I used to have to man an LP for one week at a time ...

 

Not familiar with that acronym - what's LP ?

 

Thx

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, habu2 said:

 

Not familiar with that acronym - what's LP ?

 

Thx

known as a listening post. Usually 250 to 400 hundred yards outside the wire. Ours were fairly close to the wire, and usually in the 200 to 300 yard range. Not far in daylight, but miles away when the sun went down. Anything further became an ambush point. 

 

The listening post was kinda boring, so you found things to kind occupy the time. That's why I watched the arming pit and the corner we called Hollywood & Vine. That was the intersection between Highway One and the road that took you past the POL, bomb dumps, and Napalm storage. It then went up by the bone yard and around near the beach. Like I said, I was a new guy and most certainly scared to death out there. But the guys that'd been there awhile left that for the new guys. 

 

When TET opened up, I was on that same listening post. Watched Chu Lai blow up right in front of me. We were close enough that we could feel the heat

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ChesshireCat said:

When TET opened up, I was on that same listening post. Watched Chu Lai blow up right in front of me. We were close enough that we could feel the heat

gary

 

You guys put up with a lot. Over there and when you came home. I missed the draft & Nam (I enlisted) by 2 years. Nearly all of my NCO's were Vietnam vets. I heard many, many stories, and love hearing yours. God bless ya.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

You guys put up with a lot. Over there and when you came home. I missed the draft & Nam (I enlisted) by 2 years. Nearly all of my NCO's were Vietnam vets. I heard many, many stories, and love hearing yours. God bless ya.

I've said it more than once before, I was so unlearned that I didn't even know where Vietnam was and very little about a conflict over there. It ended up as a brand new adventure for me, or a right of passage I guess.  Have no quarrels with the folks that sent me over there, and still don't. I do have some issues with upper mid level management, and the basement of the Whitehouse. Yet not LBJ himself (strange?).  I was one of the lucky ones; I guess. If I had one bad girl, it was being kept in the dark. Just come right out front and tell me ahead of time, and we'll deal with it. 

 

By the way after TET ran it's course. I did a wild series of strikes to the south. Went all the way south to near the II-Corp border. I later in life figured that out as nothing but OJT training for things to come. Then I went out west (as far as you could go) and that became home. Might still be home; I guess. We joke around that there were no fat boys out there, and you knew what you were doing without being told to do it. Been with nearly all the big players at one time or another (even Marines), and I have great respect for all of them. I did quite a few OP's with the 101st, and they were always gonna be interesting. Some were a flop, and some turned your hair white. They drug us up to the southern end of the Ashau, but never went in there (we were supposed to go in about ten klicks) as the sweeps were a bust (I guess I lucked out again). That same bunch ended up on Hill 927 after I cleared out. Once again the Lord took care of me.  Got to be around several very famous individuals at one time or another. Shook Mr. Hope's hand twice. Followed right behind Bennie Adkins (never really knew him) and heard about him daily.  Bennie may have been the toughest man in country. And of course had a crush on Chris Noel (like everybody else did)

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

You guys put up with a lot. Over there and when you came home. I missed the draft & Nam (I enlisted) by 2 years. Nearly all of my NCO's were Vietnam vets. I heard many, many stories, and love hearing yours. God bless ya.

sometime I will tell you about two big boys from Wisconsin I knew well. You'll laugh for days

glt

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, gtypecanare said:

The Detail Parts Access Door Decal Set A

 

E1UuXgSVoAQgJ_Q?format=jpg&name=large

E1UuXwoVUAEUCzx?format=jpg&name=large

E1UuYANVgAMuFS7?format=jpg&name=large

 

Thanks George but they're not coming through on my browser......Disregard I have them in Firefox...Edge will not show them.

 

Edited by Mr Matt Foley
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, is it windy yet? said:

Interesting that the accessory decals show common and different decal numbers for the B and J.

Good "find". :clap2:

 

Gene K

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, is it windy yet? said:

Interesting that the accessory decals show common and different decal numbers for the B and J. So hopefully we will get the J fairly soon.

 

 

Well shoot if that’s the case maybe we will see an S too

Edited by achterkirch
Link to post
Share on other sites

That video is super impressive!  I just wish it was in English, or at least translatable.  I'm wondering if these models are going to be so superior to everything else (and presuming, as mentioned in the above posts, that Tamiya will end up offering many of the major F-4 variants) that I'll want to part with my Zoukei Mura F-4s.  I have the ZM F-4C and F-4S, and have been waiting for ZM to come out with the later F-4E variant with wing slats before I jump on that one.  I'm inclined to hold off on any more ZM F-4s until 1. we see what Tamiya is going to to in terms of variants and, 2., we see if the typical Tamiya build engineering will be exhibited in this kit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Curt B said:

That video is super impressive!  I just wish it was in English, or at least translatable. 

Curt,

 

Turn on Closed Captions, then go to Settings, Subtitles, Auto Translate, and English. The translation is pretty rough, but you'll get the idea ... most of the time. :whistle:

 

Thanks for the link, Craig.

 

Gene K

Edited by GeneK
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, GeneK said:

Curt,

 

Turn on Closed Captions, then go to Settings, Subtitles, Auto Translate, and English. The translation is pretty rough, but you'll get the idea ... most of the time. :whistle:

 

Thanks for the link, Craig.

 

Gene K

Ah, Gene, many thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Just like we'll see an F-16D too?

 

ZZzzzzzzinggggg !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   

 

Been waiting 14 years... 

 :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:    :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:   :bandhead2:      

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...