Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Shorty84

Members
  • Content Count

    184
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Shorty84

  • Rank
    Rivet Counter
  • Birthday 12/01/1984

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Vienna, Austria

Recent Profile Visitors

4,345 profile views
  1. Shorty84

    Website "russianplanes.net" permanently down

    Unfortunately the Wayback machine approach doesn't work. As soon as you click on a thumbnail pic you get nothing, the original pic is lost. Odd is the right word. It seems the problem originated as the media linked the registry of the aircraft with visits of the Russian Foreign and Prime Minister at that time (via RP.net). I can only imagine that the words "drugs", "smuggling" and "Prime Minister" in one article was too much and made some people nervous. Maybe the owner of the site saw that coming and decided to shut everything down before he got "visits" from certain people. I remember that at the beginning of the Russian deployment to Syria you couldn't view images of the aircraft types which were in action at that time (Su-34, Su-30SM, Su-25, ...), I guess for "national security" reasons.
  2. It seems one of the best photo resources for russophile plane enthusiast, russianplanes.net is permanently closed. The reasons are still a bit sketchy but it seems this has to do with the alleged smuggling of drugs via diplomatic post from Argentina to Russia. Argentine gendarmerie released a tape which shows drug packages removed out of a Il-96 (RF-96023), belonging to the State Transport Company Rossiya. Seems the owner of the site “…decided to delete the site, because we have nothing to do with it.” More details see here: https://en.crimerussia.com/drugmafia/flights-registry-deleted-following-the-report-on-supply-of-drugs-from-argentina/ Anyway, that’s a big bow as russianplanes was “the” resource for pictures of russian aircraft for me. Goodby RP, thanks for all the years of enjoyment!
  3. Shorty84

    Su-25 Frogfoot

    Modelmaker does some decals which depict Russian machines in Syria (Latakia Air Base): https://www.scalemates.com/kits/997242-modelmaker-d48078-su-25-frogfoot Regarding the Monogram kit: Yes, it is a bit overscale (read: too big) for 1/48. Other problem areas are: Windshield way too small, nose too big, wing pylons are not the same size and too skinny, the provided weapons are quite inaccurate, the rear fuselage is too fat (it should narrow down quite a bit), the scribing on the wings is pure fantasy and the tail sits too high (shorten the MLG). But the surface details is way better and more accurate than on the KP kit. Another thing since I've often read it: While it is correct that the Monogram kit depicts a pre-serial machine (T8-15) it does not miss certain features (air intake at the vertical stabilizer, ...). Actually the kit represent the BM-variant of the Frogfoot. The Su-25BM was originally developed as a target-tug but retained full combat capability. As it had uprated R-195 engines it's airframe has a few differences compared to the standard Su-25 (san suffix): No air intake at the root of the vertical stabilizer Additional air intake at the side of the exhaust (to mix add. cold air into the exhaust gases) RSDN-10 long range navigation system (not externally visible) This variant was used by the 368th OShap in the GDR, 80th OShap in Sital-Chai (today's Azerbaijan) and is still used by Georgia, Belarus and Turkmenistan. Cheers Markus!
  4. Shorty84

    Fitter loadouts?

    Hi, as I'm working on a Fitter myself I've done a bit of research on this topic. While there are many more possibilities these should be some realistic ones: NATO-era Polish Fitters (according to photos): Outboard wing stations: Fuel tanks or nothing Mid wing stations: R-60 training missile or either APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: nothing Belly stations (x2 or x4): nothing or Outboard wing stations: UB-32 rocket pods or Fuel tanks or nothing Mid wing stations: R-60 training missile or either APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: UB-32 rocket pods Belly stations (x2): UB-32 rocket pods or Outboard wing stations: nothing Mid wing stations: R-60 training missile or either APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: nothing Belly side stations (x2; not included in KH-kit): KH-29T missile on AKU-58 launcher (x1) For soviet Fitters try this site: http://www.16va.be/galeries_vvs/su-17/imgcol/index.html Most common loadouts seem to be: Outboard wing stations: Fuel tanks or nothing Mid wing stations: R-60 training missile or either APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: B-8M rocket pod Belly stations (x4): nothing SEAD-config: Outboard wing stations: nothing Mid wing stations: APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: nothing Belly side stations (x2; not included in KH-kit): KH-58 missile on AKU-58 launcher (x1) or KH-25MP Belly: BA-58 Vyuga guidance pod (not included in KH-kit) Recce-config: Outboard wing stations: Fuel tanks Mid wing stations: R-60 training missile or either APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: SPS-141 jammer pod (left wing) and/or B-8M rocket pod (right wing; for armed recce mission only) Belly: KKR recce pod Other possible configurations are (determined from photos): Bombing (Afghan war, 302th Fighter Bomber regiment): Outboard wing stations: Fuel tanks Mid wing stations: R-60 missile or either APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: FAB-500 M-54 or FAB-500M62 or FAB-250 Belly stations (x2): FAB-500 M-54 or FAB-500M62 or FAB-250 Bombing (Su-17M3; Afghan war, 217th Fighter Bomber regiment): Outboard wing stations: nothing Mid wing stations: R-60 missile or either APU-62 launcher only or nothing Inner wing stations: nothing Belly stations (x4): FAB-500-M62 Bombing (Su-17M3 Russian Navy): Outboard wing stations: FAB-250 Mid wing stations: APU-62 launch rail only Inner wing stations: FAB-500 Belly stations (x4): FAB-250 Hope this helps! Cheers Markus
  5. Shorty84

    Great Wall Hobby 1/48 T-33A "Late Type"

    Hi Igor, the bird in your picture is an IT-33 (a local modification of a T-Bird into a recce machine). The RT-33 has a completely different nose, the IT-33 has the standard "slim" trainer nose with cameras added. I'm doing this conversion right now and use the "early" edition of the GWH kit as I can't see any of the "late" features on the Yugoslav machine (description of "late" features from Modeling Madness): "Late note: Allow me to add some clarification between the 'early' and 'late' T-33s. Thanks to info I got after posting this preview, I found out that the 'late' boxing will have some changes made to it that some (myself included) did not realize existed. At some time in the T-33s life, the following changes were made, most of them having to do with the nose section. First of all, a small NACA vent was added to the doors to the gun bays. Secondly, the pitot was moved from under the nose to where there were two of them on either side of the fuselage halfway down the side and forward of the windscreen. I am also thinking that the upper and lower TACAN antennas were a later addition as well." I think you're save to go with the "early" boxing. Cheers Markus
  6. Unfortunately there are next to zero detail pics of this installation. The best one I've seen is in this thread here at ARC (3rd pic): http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/215133-172-mig-25pd/ The flare dispensers were called KDS-155 and seem to be standard for export Foxbats (PD-version only) as these machines were to be expected to operate at lower heights where they could encounter enemy fighters. Cheers Markus
  7. Hi Romain, nice to see you plugging along on the beast. Looks great, especially the black basing. I've recently picked up my Foxbat again and immediately remembered why I put it back in the box 1,5 years ago. It fights me in ever step. Currently I'm really thinking of taking the ICM kit, the CWS nose plus some scratch modification to get another PD. My hope is that the better buildability of the ICM kit gives me a more pleasant experience (won't touch another KH Foxbat for sure). One question regarding your build. Didn't all Iraqi machines have the larger wing fences with the integrated flare dispensers? I'm asking because you've installed the standard ones which are in the kit (another goof of KH as basically all export machines had them, except the Algerian ones and older exported P's). Cheers Markus
  8. Shorty84

    de-yellowing product for old decals?

    Hi Bobo, it is the UV content of the sunlight which "bleaches" the decals. So you could use an UV Lamp. The problem is that it will yellow again since the yellowing is the result of the glue ageing and breaking down (the same applies for yellowed vac canopies where the plastic ages and breaks down). Cheers!
  9. Shorty84

    Cuban mig 21 672

    Hi, considering this machine was a MiG-21bis, it could carry a combination of R-3R, R-13M and R-60 missiles. Only the R-60 could be carried on double-launchers, all other missiles can only be carried on single rails. See here for possible weapon combinations. Missiles R-24 can't be used by any MiG-21, the R-27 only by the upgraded Indian MiG-21 Bison. Cheers Markus
  10. Shorty84

    Russian Aggressor Squadron?

    As complete aircraft the Russians only ever evaluated aircraft like the F-5A/E, A-37, UH-1, O-1, ... (all captured by the North Vietnamese and given to the russians). It is said that they liked the F-5 a lot and found it partially superior as a light fighter compared to their MiG-21 (I saw the F-5 last year in the Kbely museum in CZ with my own eyes). In Korea they captured a crashed F-86 almost intact and after evaluation there were serious plans to copy it (I read this story in a german magazine a while ago, even an OKB and a production plant were already assigned to produce the "Sabreski"). Edit: found the story here: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=18140.0 They also had wrecks of the U-2 and planned to copy it as the Beriev S-13. Otherwise the had wrecks of the A-4, F-111 (rescue capsule) and F-16 for structural studies. There is also a picture of a Mirage III and an F-4 at Zhukovskiy airfield under wraps. They may be mock-ups made from several wrecks as ground instruction airframes. Here are some links to a few articles/discussions about this topic: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?96448-Russian-evaluation-of-American-aircraft https://thelexicans.wordpress.com/2013/07/30/western-aircraft-in-the-ussr/ http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread70211/pg1
  11. Shorty84

    Russian Aggressor Squadron?

    As Janman said, in Soviet time there existed the 1521st Center for Combat Employment, located at Maryy-1 Airbase in the then Turkmen SSR. They had the MiG-23MLD and the MiG-29 for Aggressor training. After the Breakup of the Soviet Union the MiG-29's were transferred to the new Air Force of Kazakhstan. Read here for more info. I guess if there is an Aggressor training today in the RuAF then it is probably handled by the 929th State Flight Test Centre (GLIT) located in Akhtubinsk.
  12. Shorty84

    Mig-31 Foxhound

    Here are a few pictures I found of the weld lines on the fuselage side (near the cannon): http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/foto-video/33252d1315246164-dscn0240.jpg/ http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/foto-video/33265d1315246293-dscn0259.jpg/ http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/foto-video/33251d1315246155-dscn0238.jpg/ http://uploads.ru/JCT9F.jpg http://uploads.ru/2oDCF.jpg
  13. Shorty84

    Mig-31 Foxhound

    As I have both the AMK and the HB kit at home I can share my impressions about them with you. Variant: Here it really depends which variant you want to build. AMK: gives you the variants B/BS (mid production) and the BM/MSM (later upgraded machines). HB: gives you the MiG-31 (without suffix), the earliest variant without refueling probe. The kit contains both the early exhaust with individual longitudinal outer petals and late exhausts To be honest though, I think one could convert the AMK kit (B/BS variant) into the early MiG-31 (without suffix) without too much work. Surface detail: AMK: generally accurate though the panel lines are a bit on the heavy side (my personal opinion). Missing bumps near the parachute housing. HB: Panel lines are finer. More rivet detail (maybe too much). Some raised lines on the fuselage sides (weld lines). Bumps near the parachute housing are there (though one should remove the one left of the housing). Prominent fastener detail on the vertical fins is missing. General detail: To be honest I thing both kits are very well detailed (wheel wells, cockpit, exhaust, ...) so I think there is no clear winner. Both make use of photo etched parts and feature full lenght intakes (though the wall structure is more accurate in the AMK kit). HB also has some metal reinforcements for the landing gear (AMK gives you the possibility to purchase a metal gear as an upgrade set). The only thing I don't like are the rubber tires in the HB kit. General accuracy: AMK: Very accurate in shape and detail. There are some minor details which are not completely correct (missing bumps next to the parachute housing, parachute housing, ...) but no dealbreakers. I think in the dedicated thread here on ARC are some more information about what can be corrected. HB: the upper side of the nose is quite flat while the lower side is a gentle curve. I added a spreader in order to "bulge" the upper side a bit more. Another thing were HB made a mistake are the slats. They should be four-piece and the leading edge above the wing fence should be fixed. In the kit they are only two-piece and there is no fixed leading edge above the wing fence so you need to rescribe these areas. On one of the vertical fins is a blade antenna which should be removed (inner side). Assembly: I don't have them built yet but I've taped the main parts of both kits together to see how everything fits. Here the AMK kit is way better. Everything fits on the spot. The HB kit, though fitting very well too, has some problems with the fuselage fit (very flimsy, sometimes quite tiny mating surfaces). So some reinforcements along the joint lines are definitely needed. Weapons: AMK: provides the correct loadout for each variant, all missiles are single-piece with fins molded in place. HB: missiles splitted in halves and you have to attach all fins perpendicular to each other. An annoying problem is the cleanup of the seam, especially on the R-33s, because you have to preserve all the fine surface details around it. Also the loadout is partially incorrect. I've only ever seen the MiG-31 with a pair of R-40TD (improved variant, infrared homing). The HB kit provides only one R-40TD and one R-40R (early variant, semi-active radar homing). AMK provides the correct loadout of 2x R-40TD (B/BS variant). Price: It really depends where you purchase the kit, but in general the HB kit is slightly cheaper. I got the AMK kit heavily discounted at my LHS for 45€ (49USD ) (normal price was 70€ (75USD )) and the HB kit for 55€ (59USD ). In the end both kits are very good representations of the MiG-31. I don't regret to have the HB kit but in my opinion the AMK kit has a slight edge over the HB kit. I hope this helps you with your final decision. Cheers, Markus
  14. Shorty84

    WANTED: cuban mig 23 MF pics

    That's a pity. I found this picture of a Cuban MiG-23 in a museum which has the splitterplates in natural metal (or aluminum?). So maybe they were simply unpainted? Considering there is almost nothing available (in public sources) in the way of pictures of DAAFAR Aircraft you could go by this approximation and call it good. Btw, which kit will be the basis for your Cuban MiG? Grüße, Markus
×