Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

Thanks Janman!

 

Best regards

Gabor

Hi Gabor,

Sorry for hijacking the thread but I have a quick question to ask:

was the camouflaged Mig-21MF, red 9514, on HAD sheet #72114, Gorkyi or Moscow factory built?

Also are the camo color call outs correct?

Thanks,

Mario

in NYC

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, sakai said:

 

was the camouflaged Mig-21MF, red 9514, on HAD sheet #72114, Gorkyi or Moscow factory built?

Also are the camo color call outs correct?

Hi Mario,

 

Sorry I have no idea which aircraft are covered on the mentioned decal sheet. I don’t have it, never seen it.

 

If this 9514 is a Hungarian aircraft (I think we did have one with this number) then NO it is not be a Gorkiy aircraft!  The Hungarian AF NEVER had this late MF Gorkiy version. By this time (mid 70’s) we were introducing into service the far better MiG-21 bis versions!

 

Since I don’t have the decal sheet I could not comment on the colours. Once again sorry.

If they are Hungarian standard colours then all I can say is that original paint samples were provided to MrPaint and the appropriate colours are available in MRP range.

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I see it. Yes, it is a "Moscow version", the older version, the main production version of which thousands were made. We ONLY had these REAL so called Type 96A versions, the export aircraft.

 

And yes it is painted with the same colours as provided by Mr. Paint. These were the standard colours used on all our aircraft. Well, almost, because aircraft were stored out in the open and the colours weathered seriously with time. The dark green became much lighter with more yellow in it. The brown more or less stayed the same with just a little fading, while the underside light blue was almost 100% the same as when delivered from the paint show, only difference was dirt, oil and gun gas stains.

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to the question of plastic shrinkage on the vertical fins and other parts of the kit.

 

Was thinking about leaving as it is, but it would have left a bad taste in my mouth. So let’s see what can be done about it. The surface is uneven from the plastic shrinkage. While it is not one of my favourites but it has some advantages. Super glue was used. Several layers were laid over the visible shrink marks. Super glue is fast but still need some time to cure completely especially if it is thick. It is possible to build it up with additives but here there was need for it.

 

Used a home made sanding block with old 800 sanding paper. It is old, well used and so not so “sharp” but at the same time will remove enough material and keep it level. Attention was payed so that I don’t sand into surrounding surface details. A lot of water was used for the sanding and constantly checking how far I got. Few holes were discovered so another layer of glue was needed and back with the sanding block.

The biggest problem is on the right side, and I am speaking of the Profipac version. On the Library edition the shrinkage is not so noticeable, but needs attention too.

 

 

This is the same Profipack fin as shown many posts ago with the very visible shrinking

 

XXtDJEt.jpg

 

 

 

vC9quXp.jpg

 

 

 

Had a look at the left side. The shrink marks are also visible here, bit les but visible. On with the super glue and after drying the sanding block. The biggest problem here is with the SARP (flight data recorder) panel and the area around it. It was interesting that I should have used very little super glue initially as the biggest problem here is with the uneven surface. I would recommend first give it a go with a sanding block and if the shrink mark is still there then apply super glue to any visible “holes” on the surface. On the left side so little needs to be sanded down that the engraved panel lines and fast locks were not damaged in the process. This is good news, there was absolutely no need for any scribing of details.

 

 

 

 

 

ZSL4xF1.jpg

 

 

 

Here there was absolutely no need for super glue, just sanding solved the problem. This is why I say go at it with some sanding paper and only if there are visible shrinkage points visible get the super glue out.

 

 

ZQrV1tL.jpg

 

 

 

On the right side the shrink marks are in a middle of nowhere, a completely flat and “detail-less” area only five rivets at the centre. Since super glue was used, it was transparent and the exact location of the rivet/screw heads was perfectly visible so they were replaced / drilled.

To finish off simple 1000 and then 1200 sanding paper was used with lots of water. A polish with plain paper handkerchief in the end gave the surface back its original shine.

 

 

On the wings the shrink marks are not so visible on the top surface while it turned out that they are covering a fairly big area. Same procedure with super glue was followed. Here extra care should be taken not to damage surrounding surface details and not to “round down” the edges. Lots of water and constant checking. Once again there are no surface features where the shrink marks are so no need for the scriber or riveter.

On the underside of the wing the shrink marks are less visible and there is simply no need to deal with them. The area will be covered with pylons anyway.

 

Here is the result on the wing.  

   

 

TUduajs.jpg

 

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

The kit as it is for me a little bit “sterile”, too much orderly, everything is closed tight, not at all representing a real life Fishbed on the flight line. Things were sagging here and there and some panels were not even fitted for the simple reason that they did not have any detrimental effect on the flight characteristics but made servicing that much easier.

 

The front air brakes often drop slightly, they are not really open only a slight drop which just breaks the continuous round surface of the aircraft. The same goes for the front auxiliary air intakes. They are very slightly open. The reason is simple on the inner side of the door there is insulation to protect the metal surface from metal to metal contact when the door closes. There is a slight gap, just one centimetre or less but it is enough to create a brake in the continuous surface. The big main airbrake also has a slight “deviation” from the completely flush fit to the surface. Now this part is shown even on 72nd kit. Something similar should have been done for the front air brake and the aux air intake.  

 

 

Q0OZKav.jpg

 

 

I used thin (0.13mm) aluminium to replicate the airbrake but it gave also a chance to correct the mistakes of the kit. After cutting out the alu brake it was rounded to the same diameter as the fuselage. With sanding the air brake was adjusted to the exact shape of the bay on the fuselage.

 

 

4BmjZcY.jpg

 

 

z6cAdD9.jpg

 

 

 

Took a photo of the front air brake to illustrate the level step on the airbrake. This is a special feature of the MiG-21MF aircraft (from the Moscow production line). Back in 2011 Eduard was told of this feature but it was not incorporated into the 48th scale kit, but sad that so many years later it was ignored once again. On the 72nd scale kit both the Gorkiy and the Moscow version have exactly identical front airbrakes. Unfortunately!

 

 

qJMdxW4.jpg

 

 

At the front of the air brake there is a considerable gap on the aircraft. There is simply a need for space where the air brake can rotate when it is open. The gap is between 1.5 and 2 centimetres (of course on the real aircraft) it is missing on the kit/kits (not only 72nd but also on 48th).

 

 

 

CVDZrAC.jpg

 

 

Remember that almost every aircraft is unique and have slight (or big) differences even if they came off the production line one after the other. This is why replacement raw parts are made oversized, they are adjusted / trimmed to the particular aircraft when the new parts are fitted. The air brake I have is one such raw example.

The inner corner at the back of the airbrake has a double brake clearly shown on the photo. On the new aluminium parts for the kit it was easy to reproduce both the level step and the brakes of the corner. There are also different cut-outs at the edge which were also reproduced.

 

 

The air brake housing was carved out on the kit to make space for the aluminium air brakes. There is no need to do much work here, since I don’t want to show the inside of the bay, just have the air brake in a very slightly dropped position.

 

 

H07V5Rq.jpg

   

 

 

More soon.

 

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great tips, even for a 1/48 kit owner! Comparing your pictures and the official Eduard release regarding Gorky/ Moscow differences, the 1/48 kit is a Orky aircraft, correct?

 

Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the question of the front air brake and just how unique every Fishbed. Here is a view of another MiG-21MF. The top edge of the airbrake has a considerably “uneven” line following the bay and fuselage panels. The trailing edge is also not a strict vertical line and the corners are very rounded. This is what I meant under “raw” replacement air brakes for damaged ones. A slightly oversized outer skin panel is provided on the new air brakes which are “trimmed” to fit the given air frame when installed. Also consider that on the opposite side the brake is not completely symmetrical to this, so it is paramount to go and do your research for the particular aircraft you want to build!

 

 

W00sq6H.jpg

 

 

Just out of interest had a look at the 30 years old PP Models set for the MiG-21. The width and contours of the front are spot on. Back in 1988-89 I only had a limited number of photos and only indirect measurements. The PP Models brake fits quite well even if I say so. B) 

 

SDLUwPU.jpg

 

 

The length is wrong and the internal details are not so good but it was designed for the KP kit with interesting proportions. Anyway I did not plan to use PP set ( it is the only one I have left and will keep it as a reminder (and museum piece) of the early days) but have few ideas for future builds.

 

BBFBcnt.jpg

 

 

Best regards

Gabor

Edited by ya-gabor
Link to post
Share on other sites

Staying with the theme of “broken level surface” and creating a less sterile aircraft which represents more the operational airframe. Had a rummage in my photo archive to show what I want to do on the kit.

Here are few views of the real aircraft, they are operational aircraft, photos that I took on the flight line between flights back in 1990’s when the Hungarian Fishbed force was still operational. The aux doors were slightly open in 95% of cases and the front air brakes had a slight sag, minimal but visible!  Some Czech “experts” were complaining that this would never happens. Well possibly the Czech aircraft were superior and exempt from this.

 

 

qaOQDnf.jpg

 

 

 

8HlrMaC.jpg

 

 

 

mjZryC0.jpg

 

 

 

 

In case someone is interested and wants to do this. Here is a MiG-21bis returning from a test flight with engine still running and the aux door fully open. The inner lip of the aux intake is visible as a darker border, this is part of the insulation which prevents the door to close fully, flash with airframe surface.

 

 

qG8Imac.jpg

 

 

I have cut out the auxiliary air intakes (pressure relief doors). Once again the intention was to show them very slightly open. The best material was the same thin aluminium sheet as for the airbrakes. Based on the kit a “carbon copy” was made and the aluminium cut to the exact shape and size. The flat aluminium was rolled on top of an ice hockey puck, the best hard rubber for a lot of jobs. The round handle of a scalpel was the tool for giving the right curvature. Continuous checking against the plastic parts is essential.

 

 

The two auxiliary air intakes were first drilled out and then cut with scalpel. Finally using minute Swiss Vallorbe files the right shaped opening was finished. I will need the auxiliary doors open only very slightly so the innards of the intake and other details of the doors were not incorporated. The doors are completely free moving units with just two pivot points. There are no actuators or springs to influence the movement, only the pressure difference inside the air intake ducting and between the outer air opens or closes it when the engine is running.  

    

 

QRDkinL.jpg

 

 

 

wiYqIbe.jpg

 

 

Here the aux door is fitted just ot see the size, it will be glued in place later at the right angle.

 

 

Eifl8we.jpg 

 

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Ahoj MiG-21 Comrades

 

Build is in progress and hope to have up-dates soon. But in the meantime here is a bit that I have seen on a Czech forum where question was raised by Martin Janousek towards Mr. Sulc. As far as I can understand it was concerning the planed (approximate) released date for the next “batch” of Fishbeds, the PF and PFM and the R versions.

 

Martin Janoušek píše: Na kdy vlastně (přibližně) plánujete vydání verzí MiGu-21 PF,PFM a R ve 1/72?

 

 

Here is the answer from Eduard boss yesterday (23rd July 2018).

 

V průběhu příštího roku. PF a PFM, R ještě později.

 

So the PF and PFM will be in year 2019 and the R version latter (2020??).

 

 

Based on this I don’t really have any question about the SMT or the bis version. I don’t think it will be in my life time!  :(   :(   :(

And we are not even speaking about the F-13 or the two-seater U, US or UM versions.

 

Sorry for the bad news but this is life!   :shrug:  

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, sabre45 said:

Q: what scale planes do you use ?

 

Han

Hi Han,

 

Here is an A. to your Q. : 

 

Like most of us (older ones :D), I grew up on 72nd scale kits with a little difference since on this side of the iron curtain the choice was between Czech KP and Soviet Novo (ex Frog). Hard foreign currency (USD, DM, French F.  . . .) was seldom spent by foreign trade companies on toys / kits. Only on few occasions did this happen and you could get an Airfix or a Heller kit in one central shop. Remember an excellent Heller Potez 63-11 kit from somewhere around 1970. :worthy: :worthy: Loved it!!!!!!!

 

It is interesting that for example the KP kits were sold by a Czechoslovak Cultural Shop (subsidiary of the Czech Embassy) so not even Hard Rubbles (used for exchange between Socialist countries) were spent by Hungarian traders on kits but in KP’s case the Czech shop imported them from their own finances (similar to a Duty Free trade) and made some “Hard Hungarian Forints” :winkgrin:  from the sales of Czech products (like Karel Gott LP’s / cassettes :D and amongst others also Kovozavody Prostejov kits) in the shop on Deak square.  

 

Actually the very first kit built around 1968 was a Russian Yak-3 kit from an unknown producer in strange scale (think 1/30 - 1/40 or similar) to be followed by a MiG-9 in similar scale and same producer. Still have somewhere the Yak.

 

Actually the scale is not so important as the subject. Living for long years in London the choice of kits has widened instantly. I would have loved to have the Airfix Harrier GR.1 in 24th scale back in mid 1970’s but it was out of reach financially so the more accessible 72nd kits were on the workbench. Preferred shop was Seagull Models near South Kensington tube station. Left most my pocket money with them (kits, Humbrol paints, Scale Models, Scale Aircraft Modelling mags . . . ).

 

But the choice of subject is far more important than the scale!  Have the excellent Hasegawa 32nd F-5 and F-16 kits which were the top of the cream in late 1970’s! Truly fantastic kits :worthy: :worthy: :worthy:! The F-16 made a lot of money for Hase and at a show they had the kit all “decaled” with US bills. :D

 

The subject is still the most important for me today!  If it is in 144 or in 32 doesn’t matter as long as the subject is something that I am looking for. Getting back to the MiG-21 kit in 72nd scale, was hoping for a good MiG-21 MF kit in 72nd to the standard of year 2018. Well it is good, but a cross between the two versions and more closer to the late Gorkiy produced version which is so close to the hearts of Czech modellers and Mr. Sulc.

Since a separate kit was planned for the true MF version it would have been possible to make it into a real MF with all the differences and not just what Edu is marketing as the differences between the subtypes! Opportunity lost :( , but with some work it is possible to make something out :winkgrin: of it and also something else (far far more)  too but more on this later. B)

 

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I know it has been some time, but as I have said at the beginning this is all about having fun, building a model (or two) at my own pace. This is not a race!  

 

A bit about the cockpit.

Had a look at my photos of several true MF versions taken in the past decades. Decided to do some extra work.

In my view the instrument panel provided in the kit is a bit flat, a little bit too 2 dimensional. OK, I understand:

1 that for the manufacturer it was important to make the instrument panel (E1) as flat as possible so that you as a modeller can add a decal over it, which will be able to conform to the surface.  

2 have to have a similar place so that the painted photoetch (PE6 -7) would fit in the cockpit

3 there are limitation to the injection moulding technology . . .

 

Alright there is an alternative painted photoetch panel provided with the kit, but once again I feel it is too flat. It is still only a 2 dimensional photoetch, while the real panel is far more than that. The new Edu Löök panels look good, but they are in 32nd scale. I think the technology is very far to make something similar in 72nd.

 

Anyway I took the plastic panel (E1) and cut it up. The space for the radar displays “tube” was drilled out. On the real instrument panel this is a big hole in the middle where the whole unit fits and some associated panels too with a considerable gap around it.

The two top panels were cut out and repositioned further forward from the face level of the instrument panel. Few panels with knobs were scratch built and added. In fact the area around the HUD is a bit of a chaos on the real MF. Not only the instrument faces but also the area under the windscreen, but more on this later.

It is purely accidental (no, it is not) that I have one of the radar display “tubes” in my collection with the attached PAU 473-3 camera which is designed to record the radar display data for post flight assessment. The actual tube is made of rubber which on the inner side has black velvet on it to make it completely reflection free and provide an ABSOLUTE BLACK surface. In front of the radar display there is a polarized filter inclined at 45 degrees. It gives the pilot the chance to “adjust” the brightness of the display in a classical manual way. Pure and simple! Just as many technical solutions on this Russian fighter.

 

 

DqFJ5mS.jpg

 

 

So I took the real tube and made a replica in 72nd scale. The prominent hook/ring under it was also added. Once again a simple device, just pull the ring towards yourself (and up) and the whole unit with the camera on it can be removed and the film cassette replaced quickly. Easy and fast servicing.

 

I put the radar display “tube” back and also added two small protector plates at the bottom of the central panel.

 

After a complete cleaning wash, time was for the first layer of grey primer. Here is the original Eduard panel side by side with the new piece.

 

 

DIfiMWG.jpg

 

Qe529oU.jpg

 

pusUow0.jpg

 

Off we go to paint them

 

gduIrkF.jpg

 

 

 

 

More soon.

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sabre45 said:

For me, it is to hot to model. We have 30degree or more in the Netherlands🥛

Yeh, I see that in Northern part of Europe it is unusually hot this summer. Sorry to hear this and understand the problems with region where this is unusual! They have some serious problems in some parts up North. :( :( :(

 

Above 30 is normal for Hungary, we can even go near (every now and then even over) 40. Till now (June and early July) was very pleasant with its approx. 20-25 C weather.

 

 

Actually a friend had enough of hot, Mediterranean holidays and decided this spring to have a cool summer holiday and go to a new place. Guess where was the holiday????

 

To Sweden, right smack in the middle of the hottest weeks! :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D Sorry, but I could not stop laughing when I heard it. Now that was a real cool/cold holiday!!! :D :D :D  How North you have to go??? :D :D :D 

I don’t know what the friend will try next year! :D :D

 

Actually the hot weather and very high humidity can be a problem with painting. Even with water separator the compressor could not cope with the humidity and I have to stop regularly to clean the system.

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, saw the weather forecast in middle europe.Hot.hot,hot.🤣

2 yera ago, I went to Portugal. Flying the first time in a 737-800 (Transavia) and it was hot theser. Albufera is a nice place to stay, with very good places to eat..😀😀😀

 

Maybe you friend can go the north pool....😊

But...I have a cooling fan in my hobby room, so trying to model this week-end. Or not... My oldest daughter is celebrating her birthday tonight, with beer...😁😁

 

BR

Han

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...