Author Topic: CF-104D RDAF RT-660  (Read 1090 times)

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« on: September 01, 2026, 07:11:56 PM »
My plan was to build two CF-104s in the colour of the RDAF (Flyvevåbnet) for this Group Build. But as a former danish prime minister (j.O.Krag) so wisely said: “You have a point of view until you find a new point of view”.
When the RDAF received its F-104s as MAP in 1964 it got 25 CF-104s and 4 TF-104Gs The TF-104Gs came directely from Lockheed and falls outside the scope of this GB.
But 29 F-104s were only enough for 1½ squadron. So when RCAF reduced its forces in West-Germany and the Canadians offered 39 CF-104s for sale, RDAF was ready to buy. In the end RDAF signed a contract in september 1971 for the delivery of 15 CF-104 and 7 CF-104D at the price of 235,000 can $ a piece. The Canadians had at first demanded 400,000 can $.
As the CF-104Ds came from canadian service I think they will be alright for this GB.
My build will be based on the old Matchbox TF-104G. It will need a lot of improvement. The cockpitt for instance is just an empty void with two seats, that look like the comfy chairs from a living room. They will be replaced by Martin-Baker bangseats.
The RDAF was great Martin-Baker fans, and had already replaced the american ejector seats in its RF-84Fs, F-86Ds and F-100s with products from Martin-Baker.
The Lockheed C-2 ejection seat of the F-104 gave place to a Martin-baker DQ-7 seat. The Lockheed C-2 could only be used, when the plane was in the air, and if the pilot ejected at low level, he would under certain circumstances end up in the burning wreckage of his plane. The Martin-Baker DQ-7 was a zero-zero seat and rocket propelled.

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2026, 07:13:37 PM »
The beginning:
The Matchbox TF-104G

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2026, 07:16:33 PM »
The end - I hope

Offline Kerick

  • Reportedly finished with a stripper...
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2026, 11:55:09 PM »
Must be a new paint job in that pic. I’ll be watching this build!

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #4 on: September 02, 2026, 02:01:27 AM »
As the matt version of the SM/67 paint soon gave up against the danish climate, it was replaced by a closs version in 1971. My RT-660 will be painted in the post 1971 paint.

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Moderator
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #5 on: September 02, 2026, 03:46:47 AM »
As the matt version of the SM/67 paint soon gave up against the danish climate, it was replaced by a closs version in 1971. My RT-660 will be painted in the post 1971 paint.

Nice! The gloss version is still a very dramatic scheme  :smiley:

Not sure what DND was smoking when they asked $400k per used aircraft (adjusted for inflation that amounts to over 3.2M in 2026 CAD). Even still, Denmark ended up paying the equivalent of 1.9M 2026 adjusted CAD for each CF-104!  :o
It's all fun and games until someone chews through the tree with the eyrie on top.

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2026, 06:38:51 PM »
The build is crawling forward. The cockpitt will have to be scratchbuild

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Moderator
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #7 on: September 29, 2026, 07:38:14 AM »
...The cockpitt will have to be scratchbuild

And there doesn't seem to be any option to scratch building.  :(

I can't find a single online mention of a drop-in resin cockpit detail set intended for the Matchbox TF-104G!
It's all fun and games until someone chews through the tree with the eyrie on top.

Offline Kerick

  • Reportedly finished with a stripper...
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #8 on: September 29, 2026, 09:12:00 AM »
You could go with a resin replacement for some other maker other than Matchbox. Some carving or build up may be required but better than a total scratch build.

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #9 on: September 29, 2026, 02:54:36 PM »
I searched a quite lot for a resin cockpitt, but the result was - no result.
So I had to go with scratch building.

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #10 on: September 29, 2026, 07:20:13 PM »
The fuselage parts are glued together and its time for PSR. And it needs a lot. Typical Matchbox kit - the outline is OK, but details and assembly :o
Most of the schock cones in the inlet are missing and has to be made out of pieces of and old droptank.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2026, 07:24:44 PM by MAT »

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Moderator
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2026, 07:13:58 AM »
... Most of the schock cones in the inlet are missing and has to be made out of pieces of and old droptank.

Good save! Your shock cone looks pretty damned good for a bit of old drop tank  :smiley:
It's all fun and games until someone chews through the tree with the eyrie on top.

Offline MAT

  • Mostly harmless
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #12 on: Yesterday at 07:50:16 PM »
I had already started on the painting of the CF-104D, when i noticed something alarming. To make room for the second seat, the wheel well for the nose wheel were moved back on the two seaters. But comparing with some photos I could see, that Matchbox missed that point. So time for some serious surgery.

Offline Kerick

  • Reportedly finished with a stripper...
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #13 on: Today at 04:11:28 AM »
There was something about where the actual nose gear leg sat in the wheel well. Check some pics as IIRC, it was reversed compared to the single seaters.

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Moderator
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: CF-104D RDAF RT-660
« Reply #14 on: Today at 05:03:42 AM »
There was something about where the actual nose gear leg sat in the wheel well. Check some pics as IIRC, it was reversed compared to the single seaters.

Quite right. The standard CF-104 nose gear retracted forward (for airstream 'assistance' with emergency extension). But, to allow for that second cockpit, the CF-104D nose gear retracted rearward.

MAT: A simple solution might be to model your CF-104D on a stand with gear up?
It's all fun and games until someone chews through the tree with the eyrie on top.