su27rules Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 "hemspilot" thanks for the post and I can't wait for the inbox photos!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
neffan01 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 SU-33UB is here, got it on Ebay from a local dealer (cheaper than the single seater). Anyway, cockpit does not offer the access trap in the rear bulkhead and there does not seem to be enough space to allow a fully grown man (let alone one in G-suit and exposure suit with a helmet on) to sneak in between the seats. Nose gear well is completely devoid of any detail. Not sure about the shape of the nose cone and canopy, I am planting fruit trees now, maybe tonight. No canards leading edge kink and no Thrust Vectoring Nozzles. Hi, did you have some pictures please ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hemspilot Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) Stand by guys, I am working on it. Photos The rest of the sprue are identical to the single seater. Edited June 8, 2016 by hemspilot Quote Link to post Share on other sites
757flyer Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 Sprue Brothers in the States listed it as in stock on today's site update... Mike Quote Link to post Share on other sites
neffan01 Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 Thank you for the pics ;-) I think we have 2 big pb’s : Nose and Fin … Hallo Dream Models !!! ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KTesh Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 (edited) SU-33UB is here, got it on Ebay from a local dealer (cheaper than the single seater). Anyway, cockpit does not offer the access trap in the rear bulkhead and there does not seem to be enough space to allow a fully grown man (let alone one in G-suit and exposure suit with a helmet on) to sneak in between the seats. IINM The Russians don't fly with G-suits like the other air forces do... Edited June 9, 2016 by KTesh Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 (edited) Of course they do - they're not supermen !! But Su-33UB pilots would probably wear bulky immersions suits when operating from Kuznetsov... Ken Edited June 9, 2016 by Flankerman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hemspilot Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 Of course they do - they're not supermen !! But Su-33UB pilots would probably wear bulky immersions suits when operating from Kuznetsov... Ken Ken, in that last picture it seems evident that the bulk is not caused by the immersion suits but rather by exceedingly good fare on board Kutsnetzov. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Now in stock at Hannants - and duly ordered! Ken Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mingwin Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Ken, in that last picture it seems evident that the bulk is not caused by the immersion suits but rather by exceedingly good fare on board Kutsnetzov. life on Kuznetsov is not very cosy... the guys on the photos are probably based near Murmansk Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cvn76 Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 http://www.1999.co.jp/image/10378073/10/0 The wing is really bigger than single seat version. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 http://www.1999.co.jp/image/10378073/10/0 The wing is really bigger than single seat version. Thanks for the link - some good images of the instruction sheets and decals etc. Interesting view of the folded option - they are assuming that it folds past the vertical like on the single seater. Anyone ever seen a photo of the Su-33UB with the wings folded??? (I know they do - but it's never been shown AFAIK) Mine should arrive tomorrow - I can't wait! Ken Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hemspilot Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 (edited) After a lenghty examination of videos and pictures, I came to the conclusion that the only real error is that the canopy is too shallow by perhaps 2 mm, while the length is correct it should have a more "peaked" appearance. There is a carrier trials video on Youtube that lasts almost 7 minutes and shows pretty good cockpit footage. Notice how much clearance the pilots have above their helmets. the canopy sides ought to be quite a bit more vertical. This and the increased chord rudders are the only errors that I can see. As far as the wings folding past the vertical, is perhaps because they need to be lower than the vertical fins. Edited June 14, 2016 by hemspilot Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 As far as the wings folding past the vertical, is perhaps because they need to be lower than the vertical fins. They do on the Su-33, but on the Su-33UB, the wing fold is further outboard (in line with the tips of the horizontal stabs - which don't fold) The means that the wingtips could probably be vertical and still be lower than the fin tips (a bit like the F/A-18 Hornet). If only we had a photo of the wings folded on a Su-33UB. Ken Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hemspilot Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 All, it just dawned on me that we are discussing a single prototype built between 1995 and 1998, for which there never was even a small production run. we are now almost 20 years past. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Stand by guys, I am working on it. Photos The rest of the sprue are identical to the single seater. Thank you for those. Could you please compare the radome between the Su-33UB and Su-33? Are they identical too? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hemspilot Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Same sprue, like I said. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Ok, i wasnt sure. That is disappointing. Because clearly UB's radome is shorter and has greater diameter. Wonder if there will be a way to fix that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MoFo Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Saw and putty? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hemspilot Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) I am not sure anout the diameter difference n ow. I have been eyeng those pictures so long... What is wrong is the shape of the fuselage around the cockpit. The side walls are not straight and tall enough to accomodate a cockpit that should be about the same width of the SU-34's, compare the cannon blast protection area in the real aircraft and the kit. Also the canopy should peak more and the windhield slope should be steeper, then they should blend in with the normal SU-33 nose just past the IRST sensor. I compared the cockpit with the Neomega SU-34 upgrade, yes there is a difference in width at the rear bulkhead where the access door should be. There's no fixing this one. Edited June 16, 2016 by hemspilot Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 Like Helmspilot, I too have been studying photos and my refs on the Su-33UB. Regarding the cockpit, Yefim Gordon's mighty tome on the Flanker says.... The flightdeck is not identical to that of the Su-34 - it was somewhat narrower, with the seats located closer together in order to improve visibility during carrier approach. He mentions that any production(?) Su-33UB would have a clamshell canopy - pilot access when wearing their bulky VMSK-3 immersion suits causes problems accessing the cockpit via the narrow nose wheel well and the pilots prefer getting in from an open canopy. Also, I'm not sure I agree with Berkut about the nose - the white section of the radome appears to be slightly shorter than that on the Su-33, but the overall length of the fuselage is the - same according to published dimensions. My tired old eyes cannot see that (to quote Berkut) clearly UB's radome is shorter and has greater diameter - it may be shorter, but I cannot see any increase in diameter. Any evidence Berkut ??? I'm not 'having a go' - just trying to share opinions. As my Su-33UB kit is still in transit somewhere in the postal system, I'll wait until it arrives before making any comparisons. Ken PS - Gordon also say (about the wings) .... The wing folding angles were reduced, the outer wings being almost vertical when folded. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 Just found this photo :- http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-33/gallery/su-33ub_6.jpg .... which may add to the collective knowledge (or not!) IMHO, definitely shorter - but not 'fatter' - opinions ?? Ken 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.