Great looking birds and an excellent build; not a jet flyer myself but what I learned from watching I can apply to my prop job warbirds; I wish I had half the talent you have; enjoyed the build very much.
I had the exact same wing fit problem with my twin F-4 that I bought years ago. The spars are not parallel, it was/is a production problem. Skymaster was no help, my only solution was to force it into position which is putting a lot of stress on the wing/ fuse mounts. My F4 is at least 10 years old so this problem seems to have never been corrected as Skymaster knew at least 10 years ago about the problem because I told them about it.
In this case the wings fit great but you could pull on them and create a gap in the rear 3/4 of the wing root. Definitely an oversite on their part to not add a wing fixing bolt or tab on the rear section.
This was another excellent series of videos, where, more than the satisfaction of seeing your work, the learning opportunity was once again very well taken advantage of. Now I actually look forward to seeing so many projects debut in flight!
Awesome! Just fantastically awesome! You did a great job on the build... and you have to admit, the United States Navy, particularly in the late 1960s thru the early 1980's had some of the coolest paint schemes on their naval aircraft. The VF-84 is my favorite. by the way, the VF stand for "Navy Fixed Wing (V), Fighter (F). And 84 is the squadron, known as the "Fighting 84 Jolly Rogers". I thought that scheme looked best on F-14s but this Phantom here looks sweet too. Anyway looking forward to these taking flight!
Totally Hey!!! So dang nice. What does it for me is when you shut them down and they both go down to zero RPM together and you can here them at slightly different RPM and sounds. MUSIC for sure!
I love this phantom. Is the chute rigged with Kevlar cordage? 🤔 I’m interested as to how those elevator covers work and whether there’s a “binding” risk involved with their operation. Also, when the fuel runs low, won’t the aircraft have problems being tail heavy (the most undesirable kind of CG asymmetry) and potentially un-flyable? I always thought that the tanks in these aircraft were baffled and precisely over the CG. That Zicoy “balance and weight meter” is a beautiful little device.
Thanks! I believe it's kevlar cord. RCJETCHUTES have a full size F4 Chute in their possession so they also make it as scale as possible. The hole covers on the aileron work quite well. No issues with binding as all the parts are fastened down. The only contact surface is between the outer keeper pieces and the inner sliding piece. With the Older F4. the saddle tanks are on the CG location and the front tank is forward of the CG. Front drains first and then the saddles last, one at a time. CG completed on old aircraft with Zero Fuel. So with full Fuel, CG is forward. On the new F4, All the tanks are in front of CG. CG checked with a landing amount of fuel in the system, 1L in a 6L system. So when it's full it will be nose heavy. As you near the end of the flight it will get closer to proper CG location. That's one of the major issues with some of the Scale Aircraft, Tank Location. It would be ideal to be as close to CG as possible but due to design and intake layout it's often not possible.
@@thelightersideofrc Ahh I see, if anything the only CG asymmetry is forward during takeoff (which isn’t a problem) and with fuel low the CG will only be where it should be, I get it. Thank you for taking the time to explain Johnathan, you’re a legend mate! 👍🤓❤️🇬🇧
Hi Jon another great build series and to have the opportunity to do a single and duel set up comparison was really interesting. With Daves having a few more Flashy bits than yours was a good comparison on what ya can do either way. The ole F4,s just look like Brutes they both came out great. Good to see the Gremin checks showing there ugly heads now and not at the field. Right NEXT. keep at it. ;0)
Hey Jim. I didn't pay much attention but my guess is that the nose leg wasn't extended? That's the reason the nos leg needs to be extended when retracting. The scissor linkage sits funny and prevents the gear from retracting properly and the nose door from closing properly.
I would be interested if you build another set of F4s... I was going to make an offer but yours sold. You said bigger? If it's not bigger than a $$$ new Ford Raptor, I'm in!
Why to the engines not seal up to the airframe intakes as well as the thrust tubes ? Wouldn’t it be more efficient and not potentially allow so much airflow inside the airframe itself. Which has more power/thrust the dual or single engine?
Full bypass systems are very efficient but in somecases like this twin F4, due to size contraints it's difficult to accomplish. On the single I could have installed the top portion of the bypass but opted not to do so. If we would have put a 240 in the single, on paper they would have the same thrust output. 2 x 120's or 1x 240. BUT you have to take into consideration that the single used a bifuricated pipe so they is generally a small amount of thrust loss there.
Meh! The owner has a blast flying it in a non scale type flying style as well! Flies it like a sports jet and enjoys it! Much more important In my opinion!
@The Lighter Side Of RC I heard it twice, once on each model old and new. Could have been the compressor, but I think it was something that sounded bad.. Both times that I heard it was after the landing gear came down.
