Zoukei-Mura 1/48 F-4G officially announced

[ElectroSoldier]

On 5/21/2022 at 2:50 PM, falcon91352 said:

The A-10 on this picture reveals another interesting fact I discovered first during a visit at RAF Bentwaters in 1986. Some of the 81. TFW planes had a fourth colour in the camouflage scheme. You see the very dark green on the wings and engine cowl? But we can go deeper in this after the release of the Academy and GWH Thunderbolt kits become closer.

Yeah Ive heard that said before but I dont see it.

 

The three colours around the cockpit and national insignia are the only colours I see on that jet, all the other shades are just a trick of the light.
Unless you can prove otherwise.
But you would have to colour match it to make me believe it.

[MRF]

9 hours ago, JeffreyK said:

Ok, I stand corrected then. I don't have any FM F-4's, was just going with what I saw in reviews etc. and I thought I recollected some disappointment expressed by some that the cockpit bulge wasn't there. But as you say, maybe it's there just maybe a bit subtler than on Tamiya's kit.

J

To be honest I was quite surprised the problem even occurs in F-4 kits. But knowing this now, most likely I will skip the idea of buying ZM G variant, since list of inaccuracies seems getting bigger and bigger. Also it makes price tag on ZM kits questionable indeed.
Perhaps I'll stick to Hase kit on G, and will wait patiently for J from Tamiya.

[JeffreyK]

6 hours ago, MRF said:

To be honest I was quite surprised the problem even occurs in F-4 kits. But knowing this now, most likely I will skip the idea of buying ZM G variant, since list of inaccuracies seems getting bigger and bigger. Also it makes price tag on ZM kits questionable indeed.
Perhaps I'll stick to Hase kit on G, and will wait patiently for J from Tamiya.

Well, the Hasegawa kits are certainly still good, shape-wise, but extremely under-detailled. Also, the panel scribing, in particular on the long nose variants, is quite inaccurate.

The ZM kits have got some compromises and inaccuracies but in particular the long nose type(s) are pretty good and I think you get a lot for your money, comparing it to other contemporary kits. Certainly, a full F-4 range by Tamiya would blow everything else out of the water but we can be 95% sure that won't happen.

With some attention and care the ZM can build up nicely. The cockpit problem is less apparent with the canopies open as well. And it's on Hasegawa's kits as well.

[ElectroSoldier]

25 minutes ago, JeffreyK said:

Well, the Hasegawa kits are certainly still good, shape-wise, but extremely under-detailled. Also, the panel scribing, in particular on the long nose variants, is quite inaccurate.

The ZM kits have got some compromises and inaccuracies but in particular the long nose type(s) are pretty good and I think you get a lot for your money, comparing it to other contemporary kits. Certainly, a full F-4 range by Tamiya would blow everything else out of the water but we can be 95% sure that won't happen.

With some attention and care the ZM can build up nicely. The cockpit problem is less apparent with the canopies open as well. And it's on Hasegawa's kits as well.

Hasegawa was great back in the day but that day was 20-25 years ago. A lot has changed since then, they were limited on detail back then and considering the asking price they are woefully under detailed now.

The ZM kit might or might not be 100% accurate, but considering the competition and its asking price then its the way to go

[Dave Williams]

1 hour ago, ElectroSoldier said:

Hasegawa was great back in the day but that day was 20-25 years ago. A lot has changed since then, they were limited on detail back then and considering the asking price they are woefully under detailed now.

The ZM kit might or might not be 100% accurate, but considering the competition and its asking price then its the way to go

LOL, more like 40 years ago.  I built my first Hasegawa 1/48 F-4 back in 1983.

[TheGloriousTachikoma]

My biggest problem with the Hasegawa F-4 kits in the current day are the exhausts; they're awful. So each one has an automatic extra $20-25 just to fix that, and I'm not even a huge detail freak.

 

[ElectroSoldier]

21 minutes ago, TheGloriousTachikoma said:

My biggest problem with the Hasegawa F-4 kits in the current day are the exhausts; they're awful. So each one has an automatic extra $20-25 just to fix that, and I'm not even a huge detail freak.

 

Theres a lot wrong with it compared to a kit of relative cost now.
The cockpit and canopy, the exhausts and the general over all detail.
Like I said it was good 20 years ago but not now. The only thing wrong with the ZM kit is the lack of internal detail in the engine bays when open, but thats nothing you cant fix with some scratch building.

The after market required to get the Hasegawa kit to the level of the ZM kit would make it as expensive if not more, especially considering the second hand prices people want for it.

 

Theres nothing wrong with it per say, its only when you compare it to something else. It is much better than the Italeri F-4G kit. 

[MRF]

6 hours ago, JeffreyK said:

Well, the Hasegawa kits are certainly still good, shape-wise, but extremely under-detailled. Also, the panel scribing, in particular on the long nose variants, is quite inaccurate.

The ZM kits have got some compromises and inaccuracies but in particular the long nose type(s) are pretty good and I think you get a lot for your money, comparing it to other contemporary kits. Certainly, a full F-4 range by Tamiya would blow everything else out of the water but we can be 95% sure that won't happen.

With some attention and care the ZM can build up nicely. The cockpit problem is less apparent with the canopies open as well. And it's on Hasegawa's kits as well.

Well, it's the subject to be considered...
Personally I prefer closed cockpits - I just don't like to break clean lines and silhouette of an aircraft by opened canopies, and I just thought careful adding some material in the area of front canopy in order to recreate bulge, may be possible...
After all it's still easier to modify and accurize better kit, than the worse one 😉.
Although I've seen at least two briliantly executed, modified Hase G Phantoms on web... Scale modeling. Game of choices 😉

[falcon91352]

On 7/3/2022 at 7:20 PM, ElectroSoldier said:

Yeah Ive heard that said before but I dont see it.

 

The three colours around the cockpit and national insignia are the only colours I see on that jet, all the other shades are just a trick of the light.
Unless you can prove otherwise.
But you would have to colour match it to make me believe it.

On the A-10A in that picture, I am clearly seeing four colours. Obviously, the FS34102, 34092 and 36081, which are typical for the Euro-One scheme. Beside this, there is a much darker green visible, which looks even darker as FS34079.

 

In case I should get a bit time next Sunday, I will browse through my 81. TFW A-10A slides and scanning those with the ominous dark green as the fourth colour. If my memory is correct, there were a few more A-10s in this livery.

 

If so, I will post the pictures in an other thread, this one is devoted to the Z-M F-4G and I don‘t intend to capture it.

[ElectroSoldier]

54 minutes ago, falcon91352 said:

On the A-10A in that picture, I am clearly seeing four colours. Obviously, the FS34102, 34092 and 36081, which are typical for the Euro-One scheme. Beside this, there is a much darker green visible, which looks even darker as FS34079.

 

In case I should get a bit time next Sunday, I will browse through my 81. TFW A-10A slides and scanning those with the ominous dark green as the fourth colour. If my memory is correct, there were a few more A-10s in this livery.

 

If so, I will post the pictures in an other thread, this one is devoted to the Z-M F-4G and I don‘t intend to capture it.

I can see the colour on the F-4G, on the fuselage, but not the A-10

[ElectroSoldier]

On 7/4/2022 at 5:06 AM, Dave Williams said:

LOL, more like 40 years ago.  I built my first Hasegawa 1/48 F-4 back in 1983.

Yeah I just looked on scalemates.
I can believe its been that long!

 

It makes me wonder how old the ones Ive got are, I know the last one I did wasnt that long but then I remember doing a Spang one for ODS and before that it was in Euro1.
I think my WW one was the Italeri kit...

 

Its crazy how these things get so old without even realising it... No wonder the prices are what they are, antiques now they are!

[serendip]

Hi all,

 

I'd like to arm mine with the AGM-78 Standard. Any idea if that works in the time frame and theatre ZM is offering, i.e. European wraparound?

 

Also wondering if any pylon modifications would be required.

 

Looking forward to your thoughts.

 

Marc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[scotthldr]

Yes the AGM-78 was still around then(1984). There’s a photo on the internet that shows 3x 52FW F-4G/E’s all in Euro 1, armed with a mix of AGM-74, AGM-88 and AGM-45. Hopefully the link works

 

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Spangdahlem_Air_Base?file=F-4G_F-4Es_52TFW_1984.JPEG

Edited August 21, 2022 by scotthldr

[ElectroSoldier]

5 hours ago, scotthldr said:

Yes the AGM-78 was still around then(1984). There’s a photo on the internet that shows 3x 52FW F-4G/E’s all in Euro 1, armed with a mix of AGM-74, AGM-88 and AGM-45. Hopefully the link works

 

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Spangdahlem_Air_Base?file=F-4G_F-4Es_52TFW_1984.JPEG

Not only that.

AGM-45 and AGM-78 were common right until just before ODS. It wasnt long before that they started to disappear in favour of the AGM-88.

 

The F-4G has a nice range of options for weaponry carried over its years of service. Im quite looking forward to making a couple of them (SP and WW)

[ElectroSoldier]

On 8/20/2022 at 6:25 PM, serendip said:

Hi all,

 

I'd like to arm mine with the AGM-78 Standard. Any idea if that works in the time frame and theatre ZM is offering, i.e. European wraparound?

 

Also wondering if any pylon modifications would be required.

 

Looking forward to your thoughts.

 

Marc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To mount it to an F-4G you would need to use the LAU-80 launcher.

It was finally phased out of USAF service in 1990.

 

They were usually paired up with the AGM-45.
They would require the LAU-34 or later in service LAU-118 launch rail, (also used for AGM-88)

 

None of the Anti Radiation missiles used by the USAF can be parent mounted on the F-4G (AGM-45, AGM-78, AGM-88)

[serendip]

Thanks Electro,

I understand that the combination anti radiation and Electro (no pun intended) Optical were often also used, in practice an AGM-78 inboard left and three AGM-65 Mavericks inboard right.

 

Any thoughts on that anyone?

 

Marc.

[Plastictiger]

2 hours ago, serendip said:

Thanks Electro,

I understand that the combination anti radiation and Electro (no pun intended) Optical were often also used, in practice an AGM-78 inboard left and three AGM-65 Mavericks inboard right.

 

Any thoughts on that anyone?

 

Marc.

By the late 80's the AGM-78s were only in PACAF I believe.  The casing were leaking.  Many crews said if they were forced to carry 78s they would jettison them rather than taking a chance. AGM-45s were deployed to DESERT STORM. The crews didn't like them, but were forced to expend them... If you want a good book on F-4Gs in DESERT STORM I recommend MAGNUM. A pilot kept a journal all through Shield and Storm and turned it into a book.

[ElectroSoldier]

13 hours ago, serendip said:

Thanks Electro,

I understand that the combination anti radiation and Electro (no pun intended) Optical were often also used, in practice an AGM-78 inboard left and three AGM-65 Mavericks inboard right.

 

Any thoughts on that anyone?

 

Marc.

I believe AGM-45 and AGM-65 was a common load out on the SP F-4Gs.

 

As Plastictiger about the AGM-78 above said they were only used on PACAF jets by the end of their use. The AGM-88 was adopted early on in Europe. 

[serendip]

15 hours ago, Plastictiger said:

By the late 80's the AGM-78s were only in PACAF I believe.  The casing were leaking.  Many crews said if they were forced to carry 78s they would jettison them rather than taking a chance. AGM-45s were deployed to DESERT STORM. The crews didn't like them, but were forced to expend them... If you want a good book on F-4Gs in DESERT STORM I recommend MAGNUM. A pilot kept a journal all through Shield and Storm and turned it into a book.

Hi P, do you mean the AGM-78's were only used in PACAF or that but the late 80's they were only still in use with PACAF?

Thanks,

 

Marc.

[Plastictiger]

I can't comment on the entire history of the F-4G or the AGM-78.  I was an EWO for 27 years.  I did not fly F-4Gs. I had regular interactions with my fellow EWOs and Navs across the spectrum. 

[serendip]

Thanks anyway P!

 

I've found a number of pictures with F4G's in European wraparound camoflage with the AGM-78 so its a safe bet these were operational.

 

Marc.

[DarkKnight]

I'd like to see desert storm Weasels in Lizard colors

[Niels]

AGM-78 was phased out in 1988, so any F-4G prior to this can be seen with it. 

 

As for Dessert Storm, both AGM-88 HARM and AGM-45 Shrike was in use, the AGM-45's mainly to use up existing stock. 

[serendip]

I plan to build the model with triple Maveriks. Any idea where the triple launcher rails are available or in which kits? Didn't Kinetic (F-16) and Hobby Boss (A-10 / F-111) include these although I am far from sure.

 

Also Reskit and Eduard sell the missles themselves but seem to have molded part of the launch (for a single, not a triple) system onto the missles itself. I'm not sure about that though, so hoping I'm wrong. Hoping the experts can give feedback on that.

 

Marc.

 

 

[SCOUT712]

3 hours ago, DarkKnight said:

I'd like to see desert storm Weasels in Lizard colors

I recommend dstorm.eu. There were two or three Lizard Geasels flying in DS.

Cheers

Michael