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

[ElectroSoldier]

8 hours ago, serendip said:

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.

 

 

Academy F-16C kit has a triple rail launcher, so does the Hasegawa weapons set C.

[Piker38]

8 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:

Academy F-16C kit has a triple rail launcher, so does the Hasegawa weapons set C.

 

Does anyone have any images of the F-4G carrying the triple launcher ?

 

[serendip]

6 hours ago, Piker38 said:

 

Does anyone have any images of the F-4G carrying the triple launcher ?

 

Here you go, although in practice apparently only two were carried per triple rack:
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-F-4-Phantom-mostly-carry-only-four-AGM-65-Maverick-on-TERs-while-it-s-capable-of-carrying-up-to-six
 

Apparently a drag penalty issue.

Marc.

[Niels]

There is a photo available online of 69-7208 from ~1979 where it carries 2x3 AGM-65's, however this was a display so not realy relevant. 

 

If you look at the use of the AGM-65 in general, the triple launcher hasn't been much used. Mainly for drag reasons, but also for other reason. On the F-16 I believe you have clearance issues in relation to the drop tanks that "limits" carriage to 2x2 in slant config. For the A-10, I believe a full triple launcher leaves too little space left for anything to be carried on the adjacent pylon, hence this has to be left empty. On the F-4G, you don't necessarily see the same constraints unless firing the innermost could interfere with the nose and gondola in the nose? 
In all cases, the triple launcher do cause great drag which reduces endurance. 

On a side note, the triple launcher was seen in use on some A-10's in more recent times, but with only 2 missiles loaded on each 😉 

[ST0RM]

2 hours ago, Niels said:

On the F-16 I believe you have clearance issues in relation to the drop tanks that "limits" carriage to 2x2 in slant config

On the LAU-88, carrying/launching an AGM-65 from the inner rail would damage the horizontal stab. And the later AGM-65H missiles were heavier than the IR D-model and exceeded the LAU-88's weight limit when carried as 3. 

[Niels]

Thanks Storm, good info 🍺

[A-10 LOADER]

The reason the A-10 only carried two Maverick's on the LAU-88 was because when the inner missile was fired the exhaust/fire from the missile would damage the main landing gear tire.

Steve

[Niels]

Thanks A-10 loader, guessed there would be something like this 

[ya-gabor]

The Zoukei Mura F-4G Wild Weasel has been released today.

 

 

Best regards

Gsbor

[DarkKnight]

cant wait for it to be dissected bit by bit, good or bad!

 

[falcon91352]

10 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

The Zoukei Mura F-4G Wild Weasel has been released today.

 

 

Best regards

Gsbor

Nice! 👍

[ElectroSoldier]

13 hours ago, DarkKnight said:

cant wait for it to be dissected bit by bit, good or bad!

 

Well by the looks of some of the sales sites and pages a lot of people have lost their nest eggs in the Hasegawa F-4G kits so it cant be bad.

[dehowie]

Just grabbed three its lovely. Slatted wing looks very nice seperate leading edge slats trailing edge flaps. Lovely Ha4ms with great looking Lau118’s which might be very cool on a Ukrainian Mig-29 as well.

Decals are printed by Airdoc and look very nice.

Real cockpit looks to normal ZM standard ie outstanding.

Stunning looking kit money well spent!

 

[Skinny_Mike]

Where did you pick yours up?

[TheGloriousTachikoma]

14 hours ago, dehowie said:

Just grabbed three its lovely. Slatted wing looks very nice seperate leading edge slats trailing edge flaps. Lovely Ha4ms with great looking Lau118’s which might be very cool on a Ukrainian Mig-29 as well.

Decals are printed by Airdoc and look very nice.

Real cockpit looks to normal ZM standard ie outstanding.

Stunning looking kit money well spent!

 

Does it still have the same sprue as the E model with the cannon muzzles?

[Nebbor]

And more importantly: can it be build with slats in the retracted position? Or still only slats out and the modeller has to find a way to do them retracted as they are 99.999% of the time?

[JeffreyK]

As on the F-4S kit, the slats are done in the deployed position. To build them retracted you need to remove the inboard slat actuators. It's annoying but not too difficult. The bigger issue for me is that the outboard slats look too deep to me, comparing with photos.

Otherwise, ZM have gone to great lengths to reproduce many detail differences for this variant, making lots of small tooling changes to the main fuselage parts.

The canon muzzle is still there, but as the fuselage parts themselves are changed you can't use this box as the basis for a late E. Also all the cockpit parts are different.

J

[TheGloriousTachikoma]

1 hour ago, JeffreyK said:

 

The canon muzzle is still there, but as the fuselage parts themselves are changed you can't use this box as the basis for a late E. Also all the cockpit parts are different.

J

 

Well...not one that existed irl at least. 🤪

[DarkKnight]

2 minutes ago, TheGloriousTachikoma said:

 

Well...not one that existed irl at least. 🤪

perhaps a Quinta interior would solve that?

[Nebbor]

3 hours ago, JeffreyK said:

As on the F-4S kit, the slats are done in the deployed position. To build them retracted you need to remove the inboard slat actuators. It's annoying but not too difficult. The bigger issue for me is that the outboard slats look too deep to me, comparing with photos.

Otherwise, ZM have gone to great lengths to reproduce many detail differences for this variant, making lots of small tooling changes to the main fuselage parts.

The canon muzzle is still there, but as the fuselage parts themselves are changed you can't use this box as the basis for a late E. Also all the cockpit parts are different.

J

Slats on a F-4S have a different shape. If that is what you mean by deep I guess this means ZM got that part correct for their S kit but just copied their S slats to the G kit. Unfortunately when actually done so they are incorrect for a E/F/G.

 

Some info:

http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012/12/f-4s-wing.html

[arnobiz]

36 minutes ago, Nebbor said:

 If that is what you mean by deep I guess this means ZM got that part correct for their S kit but just copied their S slats to the G kit. Unfortunately when actually done so they are incorrect for a E/F/G.

Did you actually compare the S and G parts? I don't have a clue but I'd rather read facts here, not assumptions which would put me off buying what looks to be a great kit. From what Jeffrey said, "ZM have gone to great lengths to reproduce many detail differences for this variant" so I'm not sure where the assumption that ZM copy/pasted the S slats onto the G comes from.

[Nebbor]

15 minutes ago, arnobiz said:

Did you actually compare the S and G parts? I don't have a clue but I'd rather read facts here, not assumptions which would put me off buying what looks to be a great kit. From what Jeffrey said, "ZM have gone to great lengths to reproduce many detail differences for this variant" so I'm not sure where the assumption that ZM copy/pasted the S slats onto the G comes from.

 

No I did not compare S/G parts and I answered Jeffrey's remark that the slats "look too deep". Only assumption made was what he meant by deep, YMMV. Easy solution for this: can someone check the sprue ID number of the G kit? On the S the slats are on sprue M.

[arnobiz]

Just now, Nebbor said:

 

No I did not compare S/G parts and I answered Jeffrey's remark that the slats "look too deep". Only assumption made was what he meant by deep, YMMV. Easy solution for this: can someone check the sprue ID number of the G kit? On the S the slats are on sprue M.

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying 😉

[JeffreyK]

1 hour ago, Nebbor said:

Slats on a F-4S have a different shape. If that is what you mean by deep I guess this means ZM got that part correct for their S kit but just copied their S slats to the G kit. Unfortunately when actually done so they are incorrect for a E/F/G.

 

Some info:

http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012/12/f-4s-wing.html

No, they are not the S slats. The air foil looks about right for E slats. When I said deep I meant too long in chord, especially towards the inboard end. But this is a preliminary observation from sprue pics that were forwarded to me, I hope I'll get my own kit this weekend.

 

[Nebbor]

5 minutes ago, JeffreyK said:

No, they are not the S slats. The air foil looks about right for E slats. When I said deep I meant too long in chord, especially towards the inboard end. But this is a preliminary observation from sprue pics that were forwarded to me, I hope I'll get my own kit this weekend.

 

F-4S slats have a longer chord when compared to the E slats. Lets wait for someone to check the sprue ID letter. When the same as the S kit sprue, only one can be correct.