Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 WOW!!! Just try telling me that wasn't fun! It MUST have been!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted March 21, 2017 Author Share Posted March 21, 2017 Andrew, Janman, Andrew, thank you very much for the fb. I certainly had quite a bit of fun. The most exciting part was scrubbing the model with warm water and a toothbrush after applying the main camo colors to reveal the undercoats. You never know how it's going to turn out. I did not have high expectations but it turned out weird enough to make me happy :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jack Here Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 That looks like trash. I love it! As I myself age and become chipped and faded, I seem to appreciate worn out aircraft more and more. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stalal Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 Beautiful and very inspiring on this MiG @Janissary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted May 11, 2018 Author Share Posted May 11, 2018 Thank you. The intake trunkings were a hassle but otherwise it is a very nice kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Great build, but do you remember if you've had an issue with the middle missile pylons? There are some small bumps incorrectly positioned in line with them (I presume the initial release pylons which were not wide enough fit well) which block the pylons to be positioned there, but I don't see any mention of problems here in the build log. BTW, on the real airplane, the airbrake can't be open if the central fuel tank is carried or the gears are down. Not sure if it can be open on the ground for maintenance if the central tank is still on. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted October 22, 2018 Author Share Posted October 22, 2018 (edited) Thanks, if you are talking about the oval bumps behind the middle pylon holes shown below, I don't recall having trouble with those. I went through some other photos, but I think the bumps are still there after the pylons were attached. They are very faintly visible (I think) in the photo below. The pylon extended right up against the bump, but without interfering, I think. I am not a 100% because I have not seen a definitive photo of mine that show them to there. However, if I had to shave those bumps down after the paint was applied, that would have been a major headache and I would have remembered it. Sorry the model is not near me right now. Yeah, I did the speed brake strictly for visual interest in mind. I attach them even asymmetrically (bottom one opens more) just give the illusion of a hydraulic/mechanical malfunction. Burak Edited October 22, 2018 by Janissary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 (edited) Hmm, it's hard to tell from the shade, but the bump does seem to still be there. It's a close fit, but there should be some space as the bump should be set further back over the panel line it touches. But, your P-72 (APU-73) pylons seem to differ from mine as they have two pins for the missiles (as shown in the instructions), unlike mine which have only one. Mine also can't really fit AT ALL in the middle position as they go over the bump and if I shave the locating pins off and place them just in front of the bump like you did, the front attachment point would go over the slat line, while yours did not cross it. Here's a photo, you can see the locating pins aligned and the bump interfering. Also, on the left of it is another pylon from my kit, still on sprues, to show how it only has one locating pin on the underside. Also, where did you get those outer P-72 pylons with rails? From the same 9-13 kit? Edited October 22, 2018 by ijozic Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted October 22, 2018 Author Share Posted October 22, 2018 I just checked the model today (which is in my office) and the bumps are still there on both sides. I see no sign of me tempering with them, and neither do I remember altering the pylons. Weird. However, looking at the bump in your photo, it seems more pronounced than what I have. Its location is about the same, but yours looks thicker. All the pylons and missiles were directly from the kit. I wonder if they changed the pylons between different boxings of the MiG-29. I very vaguely remember such a change somewhere in the discussion of the kit, but I may very well be making that up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Janissary said: I just checked the model today (which is in my office) and the bumps are still there on both sides. I see no sign of me tempering with them, and neither do I remember altering the pylons. Weird. However, looking at the bump in your photo, it seems more pronounced than what I have. Its location is about the same, but yours looks thicker. All the pylons and missiles were directly from the kit. I wonder if they changed the pylons between different boxings of the MiG-29. I very vaguely remember such a change somewhere in the discussion of the kit, but I may very well be making that up. You remember well as the initial 9.12 boxing certainly had pylons which were too short. What I do not remember is that if there were differences regarding this among the 9.13 releases. I see that your model has the corrected lower fuselage, so I'd presume you'd get the same pylons as I did, but none of my P-72 pylons have these rails like your outer ones so it's pretty confusing. But, when I try to compare where your pylons end over the wing and flaps/elevons, I get the impression that yours are 2-3 mm shorter so it's possible you've got the initial shorter batch which would explain how they fit before the bump. Perhaps the initial release had pylons with rails option as well. None of the pylons I have can fit over this bump so the only solution would be to slice it up and move backwards to its proper position, but I don't really have some tiny file, just the normal cutter so I hope I won't damage the panel lines much. Nice testing, GWH. Not sure if they fixed this bump thing later on or not as I don't remember reading about this problem beforehand. That being said, you don't hear many complaints regarding the fit of the intakes, but I remember it was somewhat frustrating and that I had to remove the locating tabs and sand the intakes in places to make them fit. The kit is beautifully tooled (the panel lines and details), but the engineering is pretty flaky at places. If somebody else tooled one in 1/48, I'd probably give it a try for the next variant to avoid going through these issues again. Thanks. Edited October 23, 2018 by ijozic Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jose Maria Posted November 11, 2019 Share Posted November 11, 2019 Great wheatering skills!!!! great job 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.