mingwin Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 so there's gonna be a lot of scratchbuild work to do with that one too... and there will be a lot of work again for the aftermarket producers... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
janman Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 (edited) I haven't looke at the shape but Trumpeter has put a frame at the base of the windscreen when there isn't one: http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/isaac_..._007_of_120.jpg Yeah, that's another thing I noticed. If that's all, it can easily be sanded off. That could also correct the front corner of the side windows (the sharpest angle on the windscreen side windows). On the model the corner is almost like on a right-angled triangle, whereas it should look like on the rear side windows of a BMW (you get what I mean ). There seems to be a mistake also on the upper corners of the side windows, at the point where they meet the windscreen rear frame and the upper part of the front window panel. It seems the front panel and the rear frame almost touch on the model, whereas on the real bird there's a short longitudinal frame between them. Edited March 2, 2010 by janman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fuji Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 Some (possible) issues I noticed while looking at these photos and the photos on the 4+ MiG-23 book. And tried to play with my 1 year old kid at the same time...Apart from the intakes this is what I found: -canopy *is* bulbuos. It shouldn't be. -windscreen. There's something wrong with the shape. -spine. I was going to say the spine is too round, but it probably isn't. -splitter plates. Isn't the foremost part, the "lip" a bit too long? -intakes on both sides of vertical stab. A bit too high and prominent? -bullet shaped fairings on both sides of the stab. They appear to be a bit too shallow and lame and also the "ventral fin" under it near the rear tip (where the parachute pops out)has a wrong shape. -nose. Got to be too pointy/undernourished. Also, this being an ML, isn't the whole stance of the kit on the ground more like on the MF, ie. nose up and tail down? On ML it should be more horizontal. On the other hand, for example the IP looks pretty nice. Look, I was being positive! EDIT: I think even the whole overall outline, the wings and the fuselage look pretty ok to me. Hard to say. Another EDIT to make this more understandable... Janman, that's a great assessment, direct and to the point. Many thanks. Would you say the nose is more like the export Flogger E overall shape? As for the stance, here are some samples - keeping in mind that the photos are subjective, depending on the photographers angle, stance, distance, lens selection and whether they can keep their horizon straight or not. http://www.airliners.net/photo/Libya---Air...23ML/1601247/L/ http://www.airliners.net/photo/Czech-Repub...23ML/1346190/L/ http://www.airliners.net/photo/East-German...23ML/1335748/L/ http://www.airliners.net/photo/East-German...23ML/1276568/L/ http://www.airliners.net/photo/Libya---Air...23ML/1170627/L/ http://www.airliners.net/photo/Libya---Air...23ML/1167950/L/ http://www.airliners.net/photo/Libya---Air...3MLD/1601245/L/ http://www.airliners.net/photo/Libya---Air...3MLD/1595370/L/ Who would have thought that the Libyans having air shows would be so advantageous? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nird551 Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 thanks guys... my main mistake was not asking your help with regard to the subtle differences on the different models of mig-23... anyway, if there are any future pre-production models that drops on my work table, i'll give you all a heads up... keep the comments coming, you never know what corrections will be considered by trumpeter in the future... as per the latest conversations with trumpeter personnel, they are taking solid steps towards improving their design and production processes. also, i'd like to acknowledge ipms philippines BA. http://ipmsphilippines.com/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nird551 Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 and yes, i put some time pressure on myself to finish it quickly... there won't be much point to finish it when the kits are already in the hobby shops... took me about a week and a half worth of evenings... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 (edited) Also, let's face it, we'll never have another 1/32 scale kit of this beautiful aircraft. That means I'll probably get one (be it a '23 or '27, which actually somehow looks better). But only if other and more serious issues won't come up. This is inline with something I posted on the Su-24 thread, but this is a bit different situation. While the Su-24 unmistakingly looked the part (regardless of the obviously too short spine and the too wide exhausts), these squared intakes are really killing the specific MiG-23 look. This is obviously requiring major surgery to correct which is out of my league and since the squareness continues to the wing root part, I'm not so sure how easy it is to make a replacement part. I think I'll hold my order until the MLD (or maybe even MF) comes along and has either the corrected intakes or the aftermarket part is available/announced. I can't understand how they can send this 3D model to production with such a glaring error. It's almost as if they have some software which builds the 3D model from the top and side-view plans and whatever comes out, gets accepted. Edited March 2, 2010 by ijozic Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Av8fan Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 Hmm, I think I will wait for 1/48. Nird, Is it possible for you to share any more information on how Trumpeter is making changes re accuracy? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxmulder_ms Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 I dont think canopy is that bad. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pollie Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 here are some clearer pics.. hope this helps... i've been told that the kits are in transit to different countries already so hopefully you guys can take a look at the real thing soon... cheers.. Thanks for taking the time to post all these pictures. I hope this is not the version in transit, because this seems to be an MF airframe with an ML tail, so a what-if.... I had intended to buy one to turn into a Polish 28PLM example, but now I'm not so sure....... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
VADM Fangschleister Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 I like it. Looks like a MiG to me. Were I to acquire the kit, I would spend time with the shape parts and fashion new out of epoxy putty. Time-consuming, perhaps even a little frustrating but I wouldn't be afraid to do it. Cost notwithstanding, it's hard to expect a perfect kit. It's always the little things, though that seem to cause the most annoyance. But they are very noticeable and I would want them fixed too. Either by my own hand, the aftermarket wizards or by the manufacturer themselves. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zactoman Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 these squared intakes are really killing the specific MiG-23 look. This is obviously requiring major surgery to correct which is out of my league and since the squareness continues to the wing root part, I'm not so sure how easy it is to make a replacement part. I think I'll hold my order until the MLD (or maybe even MF) comes along and has either the corrected intakes or the aftermarket part is available/announced.I'd be willing to bet there will be an aftermarket fix for the intakes and splitter plates soon after the kit is released :D Thank you for posting the pictures Nird! What is happening inside the intakes? The sprue shots posted don't seem to show any kind of internal trunking. Is there a need for aftermarket seamless intakes? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
VADM Fangschleister Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 Chris, remind me to invite you over to play poker next time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nird551 Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 (edited) hi guys! 1. i'm not sure i can go to specifics but basically, there are people who screw up constantly in the company. they are being replaced. hihihi... let's see if things improve. 2. there is no intake trunking. in fact, it's one of the mistakes. thanks for bringing it up. i forgot about it. it's kinda similar to the hobby boss f-111 and trumpeter su-24. 3. there are two tail versions... so you can make both. i'm not familiar with the mig-23 variants but im sure you can make the correct one. i guess i made the mistake of using the wrong one. Edited March 3, 2010 by nird551 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
janman Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Janman, that's a great assessment, direct and to the point. Many thanks. Would you say the nose is more like the export Flogger E overall shape? I'm glad you found my very unscientific assesment helpful. What comes to the nose, it's hard to say anything certain. It looks like on the very early Floggers, but that might be the angle of the photo or something else. thanks guys...my main mistake was not asking your help with regard to the subtle differences on the different models of mig-23... anyway, if there are any future pre-production models that drops on my work table, i'll give you all a heads up... keep the comments coming, you never know what corrections will be considered by trumpeter in the future... as per the latest conversations with trumpeter personnel, they are taking solid steps towards improving their design and production processes. also, i'd like to acknowledge ipms philippines BA. http://ipmsphilippines.com/ Nice build - especially considering the tight schedule! I really do hope some of the comments will reach Trumpeter HQ. Thanks also for the photos, although some nice side shots taken from the same height as real bird shots (more or less human eye level) might solve some further mysteries. These were mostly shot above whereas most of the walkaround photos or the excellent airliners.net pics linked by Fuji are from the eye level. these squared intakes are really killing the specific MiG-23 look. This is obviously requiring major surgery to correct which is out of my league and since the squareness continues to the wing root part, I'm not so sure how easy it is to make a replacement part. For me the intakes don't look that bad - when it comes to correcting them. Ugly they are and nothing like on the real Flogger, but for me it seems some heavy sanding could resolve it. I dont think canopy is that bad. Not that bad, although I haven't checked the exact dimensions, this is just my overall impression based on those photos. Again, sanding might correct the issue. I'd be willing to bet there will be an aftermarket fix for the intakes and splitter plates soon after the kit is released That's so sweet! Zacto intakes..? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 FWIW..... Ken Quote Link to post Share on other sites
janman Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 I remember reading from somewhere that a PE sheet would be included with the kit. I could be wrong. There seems to be clear recesses on the splitter plates (the part nearest the actual mouth), which makes me wonder whether it's meant for a PE part with "a same number of perforations as on the F-4". Otherwise those recesses wouldn't make any sense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 I'd be willing to bet there will be an aftermarket fix for the intakes and splitter plates soon after the kit is released Now that's something! Maybe some missiles and rails would also find a way :lol: The kit ones look rather plain for the scale. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B sin Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 thanks guys...my main mistake was not asking your help with regard to the subtle differences on the different models of mig-23... anyway, if there are any future pre-production models that drops on my work table, i'll give you all a heads up... keep the comments coming, you never know what corrections will be considered by trumpeter in the future... as per the latest conversations with trumpeter personnel, they are taking solid steps towards improving their design and production processes. also, i'd like to acknowledge ipms philippines BA. http://ipmsphilippines.com/ nird551, Please tell Trumpeter personnel, thank you for your efforts. And please tell them three more things, Accuracy, Accuracy, Accuracy! Thank you Brad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pommie Commie Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Why does that built up one have the Sukhoi Archer on the tail? Paul in NZ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Why does that built up one have the Sukhoi Archer on the tail? :D Paul in NZ Well spotted :D I never even noticed until you pointed it out. Ken Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KursadA Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 (edited) Why does that built up one have the Sukhoi Archer on the tail? Just invest a couple minutes in reading the article and you will find out: • Decals used came from trumpeter su-27 kit. Edited March 3, 2010 by KursadA Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 hiya! with the wing root inserts they will need to be lined up and blended into the top of the intake, rather than the default? position shown Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B sin Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Any more info out there about this kit. Brad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.