Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I definetly prefer a recce version from you guys. Lots of voices for this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JeskiM Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I'd for sure buy two each the following: PD, PDS, BM, Recce So that's 8 of them ! - Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Definitely need a good old P in there too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MoFo Posted November 16, 2015 Author Share Posted November 16, 2015 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) Definitely need a good old P in there too. Add to my edited list then. Perhaps we should do a poll? Thoughts on a poll here? What are the choices? BM P PD / PDS RBV RBT RBF Edited November 16, 2015 by Martin @ AMK Models Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 RBF ? they were often camouflaged apparently. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Add to my edited list then. Perhaps we should do a poll? Thoughts on a poll here? What are the choices? P PD PDS BM Bomber RBV RBT Dear Martin, - PD and PDS is different only in minor details which would be catered for from parts of the early MiG-25P. So this would be just one kit. - There were a handfull of BM's, minimal use, minimal historic value! - The letter B in RB, RBT, RBV, RBS, RBK . . . stands for "Bombardirobchik" this is the bomber type (dual role as the name show: Razvedchik (recon) and Bombardirobchik). The BM was a "Wild Weasel" with primary mission against air defences with Kh-58 missiles. So the proper bombers were the RB, RBT, RBV, RBS, RBK . . . The bombers had a lot of service, with some colourful markings and even the camouflaged version!!! Best regards Gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Petarvu Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Thanks jennings. Don't get me wrong. I really don't think that we will ever do a trainer version of this. Perhaps I would be the only one to buy it. To make it worth it Sio would make me buy 1000's of them LOL. My initial thoughts are that it could be: 2x Interceptor and or bomber boxing (?) (P / PD / PDS / BM Bomber)? 1x Recce boxing (RBV / RBT?) Sio will decide, of course, so I can only speculate at this time. So, its up to you all to make the case for each variant. BM is SEAD variand and it is a must!!! It has cool camouflaged options +4 x H-58 ARM BTW I would definetly buy two seater! I am not sure it would not sell....? Anyway, minimum is interceptor , recce/bomber and SEAD variant. Cheers P Quote Link to post Share on other sites
boom175 Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 I think the interceptor version is one of the icons of the cold war and definitely needs to be kitted accurately both the P and the PD, Having whatever parts necessary to kit Viktor Belenko's Foxbat would be a important selling point. From what I understand you just can't put a Red #31 and get away with it. Plus I think the Interceptor version has been exported more ( I could be wrong on that tho :o ) Next would be the recon/bomber versions. I would like to see the MiG-25BM Foxbat F, myself Then the trainer's This is how I would do it, my opinions only! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxmulder_ms Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) As I wrote before, I prefer recce version, more specifically, recce/bomber version. Frankly I do not know the differences among RB, RBT, RBV, RBS, RBK??? Are there dramatic differences? Also, I remember reading that a variant of Mig-25 which can carry Kh-31. Is this true? If so, can Kh-31 be produced as a single piece gem? I would LOVE to have that... :D I would prefer that version of Mig-25 over anything, if it really existed. It will be a great looker with those missiles. Edited November 16, 2015 by foxmulder_ms Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Dear Martin, - PD and PDS is different only in minor details which would be catered for from parts of the early MiG-25P. So this would be just one kit. - There were a handfull of BM's, minimal use, minimal historic value! - The letter B in RB, RBT, RBV, RBS, RBK . . . stands for "Bombardirobchik" this is the bomber type (dual role as the name show: Razvedchik (recon) and Bombardirobchik). The BM was a "Wild Weasel" with primary mission against air defences with Kh-58 missiles. So the proper bombers were the RB, RBT, RBV, RBS, RBK . . . The bombers had a lot of service, with some colourful markings and even the camouflaged version!!! :woot.gif:/> Best regards Gabor :thumbs: thank you. I have rearranged my list accordingly. BM is SEAD variand and it is a must!!! It has cool camouflaged options +4 x H-58 ARM BTW I would definetly buy two seater! I am not sure it would not sell....? Anyway, minimum is interceptor , recce/bomber and SEAD variant. Cheers P Roger I think the interceptor version is one of the icons of the cold war and definitely needs to be kitted accurately both the P and the PD, Having whatever parts necessary to kit Viktor Belenko's Foxbat would be a important selling point. From what I understand you just can't put a Red #31 and get away with it. Plus I think the Interceptor version has been exported more ( I could be wrong on that tho :o/> ) Next would be the recon/bomber versions. I would like to see the MiG-25BM Foxbat F, myself Then the trainer's This is how I would do it, my opinions only! Interesting. Thank you. As I wrote before, I prefer recce version, more specifically, recce/bomber version. Frankly I do not know the differences among RB, RBT, RBV, RBS, RBK??? Are there dramatic differences? Also, I remember reading that a variant of Mig-25 which can carry Kh-31. Is this true? If so, can Kh-31 be produced as a single piece gem? I would LOVE to have that... :D/> I would prefer that version of Mig-25 over anything, if it really existed. It will be a great looker with those missiles. Might be tough to make a one part Kh-31. I'll double check. Sio is the man who can of course. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Viper316 Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Any version that has a colorful scheme. Looking very much the MIG 31. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
metroman Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 The only contender for me is an early interceptor like Belenkos, Recon / Trainer = no sale Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) I think "Red 38", a MiG-25RBSh (or RBK, I've seen it called both) is a must. There are good photos of both sides, and possibly some photos of the top--I'm still looking. My kit breakdown would be two boxes: -MiG-25P/PD/PDS (easy to do in one box) -MiG-25RBx (at least two of the recon/strike variants) You could add BM and PU/RU boxes if you really wanted to go crazy; or you could leave those to the resin guys. Luckily the basic fuselages look pretty much identical, with the exception of the nose and exhausts. There are also variations in the intake ramps. The nose section breaks just under the windshield, so it's only from there forward that you need to worry about serious differences between the interceptor, recon/strike, and trainer noses. The other big difference is the wing. If you do the RBx, you'll have to do a separate wing sprue. The PU/RU are both very similar to the PD (except for the nose of course), with the RU omitting the missile pylons. There's a vast number of detail differences--cockpits, antennas, dielectric panels, brake chute housings, various lumps/bumps--but I think all kits could use one basic fuselage. Edit, well heck... Red 38 is an RB-something-or-other! Pieter said RBF in his post. Whatever it is, it needs to be on the decal sheet! Sorry, I keep editing this post... Martin, you could examine the Condor/ICM 1/72 kits to see what they did with the airplane. I've heard they are nice kits. Just wrong scale. (ducks!) http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal13/12201-12300/gal12293a-MiG-25-Mao/00.shtm Edited November 16, 2015 by punder Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Looks like Revell put "Red 38" in their box, for what that's worth... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MoFo Posted November 16, 2015 Author Share Posted November 16, 2015 Hmmm... part of me thinks, given the fact that the fighters and recces are so different and that it may no be feasible to squeeze both families out of the same basic tooling, and given the fact that we do have the KH fighters (as deeply flawed as they are), that if AMK are only going to do one version, it should be the recce family. The other part of me thinks the fighters are just flat-out cooler and more 'iconic', and should probably get the love. Then again, the recce planes open up more foreign user markings (and some more interesting Soviet ones). But something about the giant radome on the fighters just looks meaner... I guess the only solution is to do both! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mario krijan Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 For me BM, RBT would be great :-) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rom Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) Hmmm... part of me thinks, given the fact that the fighters and recces are so different and that it may no be feasible to squeeze both families out of the same basic tooling, and given the fact that we do have the KH fighters (as deeply flawed as they are), that if AMK are only going to do one version, it should be the recce family. I aggree... :thumbsup:/> Moreover, a couple weeks ago I started to build the KH Mig25 lookalike. :)/> With a homemade brand new radome and font fuselage. :bandhead2:/> So I would vote for a Recce/bomber with camouflage ;)/> Romain Edited November 16, 2015 by rom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 I would ***strongly*** disagree. The KH kit isn't remotely even close to the ball park for any version, and shouldn't even begin to figure into the formula for anything other than landfill fodder. The interceptor was the reason for being for the MiG-25 in the first place, was the main production version, and is the most famous version. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 AFAIK the first prototype, and the first to fly, was the Ye-155R-1 which was a recon aircraft. The interceptor and recon versions were developed in parallel. I agree that the interceptor is by far the most famous, but it would be a terrible shame if AMK failed to do the RB. It's a wickedly beautiful airplane, it's historically important (the Egyptian operations, for instance), and unlike the interceptor, it gets you several cool camo schemes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dehowie Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 BM and RB's for me. The Recon birds flew in combat flawlessly and quite successfully against the best Air Force in the world not losing an aircraft. Cranked extended nose birds are exactly where it's at of the recon bird and Wild Weasel. Some nice camo schemes as well. As for the interceptor the KH is out and despite the crap written about it and having to use some modelling skills builds into a decent looking kit. Those of very limited skills may be challenged but a bit of thought and planning gets you through. If AMK can maintain the apparent quality of the 31 then all there kits will be winners. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pieter Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) Some more Mig-25 types I saw at Werneuchen in the early 90's. Hope I have the sub-types correct. In those days the information was not that good :-) Mig-25RB MIG-25RB 53r by Pieter, on Flickr Mig-25RBF MIG-25RBF 59r by Pieter, on Flickr Mig-25RBK MIG-25RBK 52r by Pieter, on Flickr Mig-25PU Mig-25PU 02r by Pieter, on Flickr I would buy the Mig-25PU for 100% sure :-) Edited November 16, 2015 by Pieter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Charlie D. Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 The only contender for me is an early interceptor like Belenkos, Recon / Trainer = no sale +1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 AFAIK the first prototype, and the first to fly, was the Ye-155R-1 which was a recon aircraft. The interceptor and recon versions were developed in parallel. I agree that the interceptor is by far the most famous, but it would be a terrible shame if AMK failed to do the RB. It's a wickedly beautiful airplane, it's historically important (the Egyptian operations, for instance), and unlike the interceptor, it gets you several cool camo schemes. I'm well aware of that, but the *reason* the MiG-25 was developed was to shoot down the XB-70, period. The recce version only flew first because of delays with the development of the interceptor system. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) Some more Mig-25 types I saw at Werneuchen in the early 90's. Hope I have the sub-types correct. In those days the information was not that good :-) Pieter, do you have any shots of the top of that camo Red 38?? Excellent photos by the way! Edited November 16, 2015 by punder 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.