Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

G'day

I would like to ask if anybody know about real "Cold War era" fighter jet wich can be converted into a Thunderbolt Fighter and has similiar size.
All fighter jets I saw are just too long. Wingspawn is mostly okay.
(Source of FW Thunderbolt size: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/511324.page#5346305)

Few examples:
MiG-25 Foxbat - Wingspawn (in 1/48 scale) is okay (11inch) but its 15.7inch long (Thunderbolt is only 10)
F-4 Phantom II - Wingspawn okay, but its almost 14inch long.
A10 Thunderbolt - Wingspawn 14inch, 13inch long.
MiG-29 - Wingspawn 8.6inch, 14inch long.
Harrier Jumpjet - Wingspawn 6inch, lenght 11inch + it's ugly.

I use 1/48 scale because is closest to W40k scale.

Thanks for answers and sorry for my possibly bad english.

I'm not aware of any real-world planes that match the proportions closely enough to justify an attempted conversion over scratchbuilding, honestly. Both the wings and fuselage tend to be slimmer and longer in real planes - 40k flier design is notoriously brick-like. With templates available online, I'd recommend putting the money for that model kit towards plasticard, instead, and scratchbuilding the whole thing. The angular forms lend themselves well to simply assembling flat pieces and saves you the trouble of trying to mate the new engines, fattened up wings, etc. to an existing model that is likely much sleeker and rounder. The rough surface detailing/paneling is included in the design of the templates, too, if memory serves.

Someone with a broader knowledge of aircraft design might have a suitable kit to suggest, of course, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Oh, and don't worry about your English - I could understand you just as well, if not better, than some native speakers that post here.

I'm making an army wich uses highest possible amount of converted vehicles, as a custom FW pattern. I already made a Leman Russ out of WW2 Panther tank. (Hull is just one inch longer than original one, other measures fit).
So I want to make a real-world based Thunderbolt. Using templates and creating Thunderbolt on my own isn't bad idea, but this would be the second last option. (Last one is buying that original (and overpriced) FW kit)

Closest match I found is the "Panavia Tornado" (only 3 inch longer than Thunderbolt) - Considering only length and wingspan. Not wing or fuselage thickness.
(Some guy here told me to try to make conversions as close as possible to original measures)
Maybe some WW2 planes could match, but those are propelled by propeller. Maybe P-80 Shooting Star or Me-262 are only mass produced models of WW2 jets. I don't really like their design.
I will keep searching, but thank you for answer It would come handy.

OR I can scratchbuild my own design wich fits original measures

And one ultimately noobish and heretical question:
How it could affect the game, if I use a converted vehicle with a bit different measures than the original one? (I never played a game. I neither bought an codex yet. )
(Except the case when opponent won't let me use that vehicle for some reason)

If it's a thematic point, then it's worth the extra effort to find a suitable kit. I assumed (wrongly ) that, as a new user, you were also a new hobbyist and simply thought you needed something to build off of.

As for the size affecting gameplay, you generally want to be as close as possible, because the game uses TLOS (true line of sight). Being that this is a flier, though, you have a bit more leeway - you aren't going to be parking behind a small hill or building to claim cover, so being a little bit shorter won't matter, nor will an extra few inches of length be likely to nudge your guns into range of a target they couldn't otherwise hit. Size is much more important for ground-based models (both troops and vehicles) that interact more directly with the terrain, have smaller movement values, etc. Either way, a little difference here and there isn't likely to bother anybody that would allow a converted model (or supplemental rules/units, for that matter) in the first place, but using a 1/72 fighter for a Thunderhawk or a Baneblade for a Rhino would be a bit too much for anyone to swallow.

If you meant hobbyist like wargamer, then you were right. If you meant modeller, then not.

But that "Panavia Tornado" looks promising.

Thank you for explaining.
So if my fighter will be 3inch longer than real thunderbolt, it wont greatly affect the game. Right? I could fix that plane to base using same length as Thunderbolt have, to eliminate possible gun range advantage.
And if a understood well, I should also place weapons as close as possible to place where they are on original model (nose in this case).

1/72 is too tiny. You are right. But a small curiosity: 1/48 fighers have okay wingspan but too long fuselage. 1/72 fighters have okay fuselage but small wingspan
Yeah I got it. Thats abundantly clear.

Hawker Hunter?

Otherwise the Tornado can be made to look a bit close by just cutting off the radar tip of the fuselage to square the nose off a bit. Plus if the wingspan is a bit short don't forget the Tornado is a swing-wing so you can actually model it with the wings at maximum extension to make the span bigger.