Jump to content

F-4J VX-4 Service/Stencil Data


Recommended Posts

I am building a ZM F-4J as a VX-4 "Black Bunny".  The sheet is for 3783.  I can't seem to find a lot of photos through Google searching of this particular timeframe (most do not have the blue/gold bands).  I can find a few and the white stencil data is pretty clear.  I really don't know if I can be sure, but seeing a lot of the yellow service markings (jack points, hoist, etc) is hard.  Hard enough, I'm not sure they were really on the airframe.  And a lot of other people's builds don't seem to have all these yellow service markings either (although I know that could be a bad reference).  Does anyone know if these yellow service markings should be included?  I appreciate any input. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A google image search for "153783 bunny" should turn up a good selection of photos, just a couple of things to keep in mind:

 

This airframe wore (at least) two different versions of the "black bunny" scheme, with some significant detail differences in markings and airframe details. The earliest version has what I refer to as the "derp bunny" on the tail: it is clearly based on the Playboy logo, but the rabbit's head is "squashed" compared to the official version. At this point she wore the full blue/gold/white star trim, but did *not* have the DECM antennae on the "shoulders" of the intakes. 

 

A later version, obviously after depot upgrades, has the antennae added and the bunny matches the official graphic. At least intially this version did *not* have the dorsal and wingtip flashes. Another difference is that the large format "last 4" of the BuNo on the aft fuselage was replaced with a larger squadron ID. I haven't done a detailed study of all possible variations over time, but be mindful there was also an F-4S that became "Vandy 1" and wore a very similar scheme to the later 153783, so make sure you check for slat actuators if you can't confirm the BuNo in a given photo is 3783 or the "S bunny."

 

All that said, the clearest photos of both the early and late versions of 153783's black scheme show what appear to be 100% stencil markings in white or yellow per standard. On the black scheme the smallest of these tend to disappear from any distance (or appear as a slightly weathered area of the black paint). In practice I expect most modelers either don't have full stencils in the proper colors, or just don't bother to apply all of those nearly-invisible blobs of text, but if you're wanting to accurately depict the actual aircraft - especially fresh from a repaint - the stencils should be there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Quixote74 said:

A google image search for "153783 bunny" should turn up a good selection of photos, just a couple of things to keep in mind:

 

This airframe wore (at least) two different versions of the "black bunny" scheme, with some significant detail differences in markings and airframe details. The earliest version has what I refer to as the "derp bunny" on the tail: it is clearly based on the Playboy logo, but the rabbit's head is "squashed" compared to the official version. At this point she wore the full blue/gold/white star trim, but did *not* have the DECM antennae on the "shoulders" of the intakes. 

 

A later version, obviously after depot upgrades, has the antennae added and the bunny matches the official graphic. At least intially this version did *not* have the dorsal and wingtip flashes. Another difference is that the large format "last 4" of the BuNo on the aft fuselage was replaced with a larger squadron ID. I haven't done a detailed study of all possible variations over time, but be mindful there was also an F-4S that became "Vandy 1" and wore a very similar scheme to the later 153783, so make sure you check for slat actuators if you can't confirm the BuNo in a given photo is 3783 or the "S bunny."

 

All that said, the clearest photos of both the early and late versions of 153783's black scheme show what appear to be 100% stencil markings in white or yellow per standard. On the black scheme the smallest of these tend to disappear from any distance (or appear as a slightly weathered area of the black paint). In practice I expect most modelers either don't have full stencils in the proper colors, or just don't bother to apply all of those nearly-invisible blobs of text, but if you're wanting to accurately depict the actual aircraft - especially fresh from a repaint - the stencils should be there.

 

Thank you for the reply!  Searching "153783 Bunny" showed basically the same set of images I was getting for "F-4J VX-4", "F-4J Black Bunny", and "F-4J 3783". 

 

The Furball sheet is the earlier of the two versions.  It has the blue/yellow gold bands and the squished bunny.  I have applied almost all the white stencil data so far (just the side profiles to finish).  These were clearly evident in pictures, although as you pointed out "fade" out quickly. 

 

Based on your comments I'll probably add the yellow stencil data too, which is mostly emmiter points, hoist points, and jack points.  Unfortunately most of these are on the underside and I can't find almost any underside pictures.  Most are a side profiles and while a couple hoist points should be present, it's only a couple.  I was expecting yellow to stand out pretty well, but the images aren't all that high a resolution I'm finding.  I can't convince myself they absolutely were there, but I'm not sure they weren't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ESzczesniak said:

 

Thank you for the reply!  Searching "153783 Bunny" showed basically the same set of images I was getting Based on your comments I'll probably add the yellow stencil data too, which is mostly emmiter points, hoist points, and jack points.  Unfortunately most of these are on the underside and I can't find almost any underside pictures.  Most are a side profiles and while a couple hoist points should be present, it's only a couple.  I was expecting yellow to stand out pretty well, but the images aren't all that high a resolution I'm finding.  I can't convince myself they absolutely were there, but I'm not sure they weren't.

 

Well this is one of the many cases where Occam's razor applies to modeling: if the full stencils are clearly visible on the upper surfaces, it's most likely they didn't leave off *only* the ones on the underside - but odds of clear, well-lit photos of the belly showing up are pretty much nil, so you have to make an informed decision for yourself. Technically, without photos you can't say the Sparrow wells weren't painted lavender, but it's what I'd consider a safe risk 😄

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Quixote74 said:

 

Well this is one of the many cases where Occam's razor applies to modeling: if the full stencils are clearly visible on the upper surfaces, it's most likely they didn't leave off *only* the ones on the underside - but odds of clear, well-lit photos of the belly showing up are pretty much nil, so you have to make an informed decision for yourself. Technically, without photos you can't say the Sparrow wells weren't painted lavender, but it's what I'd consider a safe risk 😄

 

I do agree! However, where things get messy is some of the white upper stencils duplicate the yellow.  In particular, the 3 yellow hoist points on the outer wing fold panels have 3 white stencils in the same location that read "wing fold hoist point" with a white locating circle. 

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...