balalaika82 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 hi comrades, Good day to all! I am new here and I would like to ask for your help on what is the most obvious conversion from a Mig-21 PF into a PFM model? REfernces say it has a 23mm gun pod under belly but what more? Do I need to saw some edges, or add air scoops, aerials etc? thanks for the help guys! cheers! Balalaika82 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sebastijan Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Main visual difference would be the the broader (MF like) tail. I'm no MiG-21 expert but I use the shape/size of the tail to set the PF and PFM apart. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Netz Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 The biggest is the Front hinged canopy to the Side hinged. Curt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 * The PFM had a new cockpit with the KM-1 ejection seat replacing the SK of the earlier PF version. * This also resulted in a new canopy, side hinged. * The tail was broader. * The brake parachute was relocated to the base of the fin from under the tail position. * No internal gun, just a GP-9 container under the belly or missiles, bombs, UB blocks. Best regards Gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 You guys all missed the biggest difference - the PFM has blown flaps, the PF doesn't (except the very few PF/SPS built). That makes the flap hinge under the wing different. Early PFMs had the single piece canopy, later ones had the side hinged, so that's not a positive ID feature. Early PFs had the narrow chord vertical fin, later ones (also the Indian FL) had the broad chord fin. A late PF/SPS and most PFMs are externally identical for all practical purposes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 so that's not a positive ID feature. The most positive ID would be a factory number of a particular aircraft. :D I would say that the side hinged canopy with the PF like spine, larger tail is far more noticable that the flaps and their operational system (on the underside of the wing) on a PFM. Do we want to go into all the particular details of every production block difference in the PF and PFM line. It is the same question as that of a transition from MiG-21S, SM, SMT, MFearly, mid and late production. There is no clear dividing line between them, there was a continuous development of systems and airframe so there is a considerable overlap between identifying features. One can make only general statements and the list I have given was just that for main VISIBLE features of the PFM in comparison with the PF. balalaika82 was asking for very general differences. If I was him, would waite a little for the Eduard kit of the PFM if it is in 48th scale. Untill then there are few other kits on the market to spend the modelling time. . . Best regards Gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 (edited) That makes the flap hinge under the wing different. Yes. To be more precise. PF: small flap actuator coaming on the strip between the flap and the aileron; guiding rail on the fuselage PFS and later: larger flap actuator coaming on the middle of the flap, overlaping the wing and the flap Early PFMs had the single piece canopy, later ones had the side hinged, so that's not a positive ID feature. The Aerofax said this but it doesn't make much sense to me. The Kubinka aerobatic team "early PFM" of the Bilek kit or Begemot decal sheet was an FL. For me the transition from single piece to two piece canopy happened during the production of the PFS. Distinguishing a late PFS and a PFM is the difficult part since the PFM had only small differences (IR tracker, different wheel brake system, some things like that). Edited January 26, 2012 by Laurent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
balalaika82 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 (edited) thanks comrades! I was asking this because I have an old Academy 1/48th Mig-21 PF that is lying around. I noticed that it has no cannons so I am thinking of modifying it into a PFM so I can use the GP-9 cannon but aside from it it looks like it has a lot more to upgrade like the tail rudder, flaps and the canopy. any thoughts on whats the easiest, but least expensive way to do it? Thanks guys! Balalaika Edited January 27, 2012 by balalaika82 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 You cannot do a PFM with just a PF kit (if you had an MF kit, you could have used the front fuselage and canopy on the PF kit).If you want to use the GP-9 pod, you can build a Polish PF (Piotrek S could confirm but I believe that Poland modified some of their PFs to use the GP-9 pod) or an FL (Indian, Arab). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Netz Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I just combined the 2 kits as Laurent said, you could order the forward fuselage tree as a replacement part instead, but it can be done. Curt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
balalaika82 Posted January 28, 2012 Author Share Posted January 28, 2012 Thanks LAurent and Netz! Great help! Im planning to do an Egyptian AF '21 Fishbed during the height of Arab Israeli conflict ('67-'73) As mentioned above, would a Polish PF variant stand for the Egyptian MiG? Or should the EAF variant should remain without the GP-9? I cant find ref photos of an EAF PF with a GP-9 gunpod :( All I have are MF ref photos. Thanks again! Balalaika Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Thanks LAurent and Netz! Great help! Im planning to do an Egyptian AF '21 Fishbed during the height of Arab Israeli conflict ('67-'73) As mentioned above, would a Polish PF variant stand for the Egyptian MiG? Or should the EAF variant should remain without the GP-9? I cant find ref photos of an EAF PF with a GP-9 gunpod :( All I have are MF ref photos. Thanks again! Balalaika Look the 3rd profile on http://www.acig.info/CMS/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=209&Itemid=1 . That's not a PFM but an FL. Tom Cooper must have used a photographic reference for this profile. The famous Indian FL C992 : http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/Aircraft/Images/C992.jpg Polish GP-9ed PF: http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/6823/mig21c74.jpg from http://modelwork.pl/viewtopic.php?t=15055&start=71&sid=28d33d174e5d6349255eb1ed1cb173b6 (login required) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
balalaika82 Posted January 28, 2012 Author Share Posted January 28, 2012 Look the 3rd profile on http://www.acig.info/CMS/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=209&Itemid=1 . That's not a PFM but an FL. Tom Cooper must have used a photographic reference for this profile. The famous Indian FL C992 : http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/Aircraft/Images/C992.jpg Polish GP-9ed PF: http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/6823/mig21c74.jpg from http://modelwork.pl/viewtopic.php?t=15055&start=71&sid=28d33d174e5d6349255eb1ed1cb173b6 (login required) thanks again LAurent! hmm so i can use my GP-9 pod on my academy PF kit for replicating the six day war EAF mig-21 based on the 3rd profile? Pardon me as I am only a fledgling ac modeller :D Thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 hmm so i can use my GP-9 pod on my academy PF kit for replicating the six day war EAF mig-21 based on the 3rd profile? So it seems but I don't know on what photographic evidence Tom Cooper based his profile. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 So it seems but I don't know on what photographic evidence Tom Cooper based his profile. Honestly, unless there's a photo of the exact same a/c in the same book as the profile, I wouldn't trust it. Lots of his stuff is 100% fiction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Piotrek.S. Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Looking for the photo . So far I have a monograph of 1 Fighter Regiment "Warsaw". Inside there is a story of... ...blah... ...blah... ...blah... are You reading it? In meantime I have found the picture I was thinking about TADAM: Knew it 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.