Jump to content

AMMO MiG-17F in 48th scale


Recommended Posts

Just one point in getting back to the argument about Natural Metal finish.

 

I did mention earlier that originally MiG-17’s out of factory had a pure natural metal finish with bare metal surface which was covered with transparent varnish.

Museum aircraft can be either painted authentically or at will of the given museum paint shop (that is any colour and scheme they like). So museum aircraft could be very misleading. This is why one should try to go back in time as much as possible. Look at period photos! The Japanese Koku Fan had a very exciting article way back during the Vietnam war. They had made & published a lot of photos of a very distinct “Red 2533” from a “Red Tail” unit. A lot of photos and many of them were published in colour and fantastic quality. (Not often can you see such authentic details from the “Red side” of that war!)

 

Here is a look at that particular a/c 2533. A lot of information can be learned just from one photo!!!!!!!!!  Here it is with some explanations.

 

Z3NDmNF.jpg

 

 

I think we can agree on one thing. When you paint a given surface with a paint then it will be of a given colour and everything under it would not be visible. So if you paint with an Aluminium paint then all the rivets will be gone and you get a uniform surface where the flash rivets will not be seen!

So if this aircraft was painted with the Aluminium paint as advocated by some book experts then all these nice details would be simply not be visible!!!

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Cooper’s research indicates the clear varnish was tinted with 5% and 10% aluminum.  With such a small amount of aluminum, the underlying details could still be visible, but it would dull the shiny appearance of new aluminum skin - which is precisely what you see on Soviet aircraft of that era.  Compare almost any MiG to a contemporary natural metal American fighter like an F-104 or an F-86.  American types are blindingly bright and shiny.  Soviet aircraft are not.

 

And as I said previously, the very well regarded Armada book on the MiG-15 confirms that aluminum tinted varnish was applied to new aircraft.  I don’t know why they would make that up, do you?

 

 

Edited by Buckmeister
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

 

Hi Dai Phan,

 

Thanks!  I am sure it would be a lot of help to some building the MiG-17 kit/kits. Just as the photos from Yufei.

 

So now you have 2 "plain" version AMMO and 2 Limited with the extras ?

 

Best regards

Gabor

Yes I only planed to order ONE limited but somehow when I completed the buy it showed 2. Dai 

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

I may go to the museum and a take tons of photos. Tell me what I need to shoot for? Dai 

 

If you can, would you get as many of top of the plane as possible, such as wing tops, upper fuselage, top of the horizontal stabilizers, etc.?  I think Haneto's pictures covered the underside of the plane fabulously well already.  Perhaps anything inside the wheel wells, though?  When I go to Nellis on Wednesday, I'll take as many photos of the entire plane as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Curt B said:

If you can, would you get as many of top of the plane as possible, such as wing tops, upper fuselage, top of the horizontal stabilizers, etc.?  I think Haneto's pictures covered the underside of the plane fabulously well already.  Perhaps anything inside the wheel wells, though?  When I go to Nellis on Wednesday, I'll take as many photos of the entire plane as possible.

I will do at as many angles as I can. I wonder if I can climb on top of the plane for for some photos? I will ask the museum curator. Dai 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, dai phan said:

I will do at as many angles as I can. I wonder if I can climb on top of the plane for for some photos? I will ask the museum curator. Dai 

If you can, that would be outstanding!  Thanks for asking!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Buckmeister said:

Tom Cooper’s research indicates the clear varnish was tinted with 5% and 10% aluminum.  With such a small amount of aluminum, the underlying details could still be visible, but it would dull the shiny appearance of new aluminum skin - which is precisely what you see on Soviet aircraft of that era.  Compare almost any MiG to a contemporary natural metal American fighter like an F-104 or an F-86.  American types are blindingly bright and shiny.  Soviet aircraft are not.

 

And as I said previously, the very well regarded Armada book on the MiG-15 confirms that aluminum tinted varnish was applied to new aircraft.  I don’t know why they would make that up, do you?

 

 

 

You are welcome to believe in whatever you want to. As I have said before you don’t have to believe in what I know.

All I can do is to share my experiences and show to fellow modellers what I have seen in the past decades.

 

First, the clear Varnish mixed with the Aluminium powder (actually it is a paste) creates a dull Aluminum colour paint which covers perfectly the surface under it! It will not be transparent! If it is transparent you are not doing your work correctly!  : )   

 

How do I know? Been in the aircraft factory paint shop when it was mixed and surface painted. Feel free to try it yourself.

 

When this Alu paint was used the resulting surface turned into a dull and completely uniform surface, panel lines are visible, the service panel screw / fasteners visible. No rivets visible. It received a cover of clear varnish for secondary protection giving it a little shinny surface.

 

The reason for making such a paint was to give

* a final overall finish to an aircraft,

* cover up different materials (different metal surfaces) for surface protection,

* to cover any surface damages which have been corrected / puttied / sanded.

If it is transparent then it is completely useless!!!!

 

Here are different MiG-15 surfaces painted with Clear Varnish mixed with Alu powder. How many rivets are visible on them? How many different metal textures are visible? NONE! It is an overall “dull” greyish aluminium finish!

 

Xy1BlG5.jpg

 

6vJt92f.jpg

 

Comparing US and Soviet jets next to each other, as to which is more shiny? Interesting question? But actually there is a good period photo answer to this question. Please look up the photo by Basil Clark of defecting “Red 2057” MiG-15 bis landing in South Korea and stopping next to a Sabre in September 1953. How shiny they are, exactly the same! Actually the Mig is brighter!

 

OK, so how about a comparison of an unpainted natural metal surface with a painted one? Is that possible? Yes!

The interesting thing is that it is visible here on the exactly the same aircraft. It is a MiG-15 bis, where the wing was taken off. Under the wing roots cover panels the surface was not painted so the natural metal surface with rivets and all sorts of naked metal surfaces is visible. While exactly next to it is the outer surface which was painted with Varnish mixed with aluminium.

 

lNw8GVr.jpg

 

Best regards

Gabor    

Link to post
Share on other sites

How bright a natural metal surface on a Soviet made aircraft when it is really natural metal? As a journalist and aviation photographer throughout decades I have followed several general overhauls of different aircraft and helicopters from the initial landing, all the way through the overhaul to the very end of painting and the given airframe departing back to its fighter unit.

 

In initial stage of overhaul ALL paint was stripped chemically from the surfaces going back to bare metal! In the coming mouths this remained throughout system integration, testing and the first test flights. Only when everything was ready and accepted was the aircraft painted as a last step. The next photo was taken during first test flight when the completely bare metal was visible, no varnish, no nothing. Is it as bright as a Starfighter or F-86 surface? I don’t know since have not seen the US planes in “real natural metal” form, but of this MiG took hundreds of photos, most of it on Kodakchrome 64 in bright summer sun light. Everyone can judge for themselves. This is what the Soviet metal companies were able to provide to aircraft factories, in this case to the Gorkij based unit. They were built as fighting machines and not as a show exhibits, the metal surface was what it was. The photo is a magnification of a fraction of the original photo to show the surface.

 

Exactly the same metal surface is visible on those Koku Fan photos of Vietnamese MiG-17’s even if those particular airframes are Chinese built J-5 versions. The building technology was same. Rivets, different metal shades, textures are visible.

 

lbLuMEv.jpg

 

Speaking of books, one cannot have them all. There is no point in doing so. I am sure your Tom Cooper is an excellent author.

 

Speaking of famous authors, a name springs to mind. He has published dozens of books on Soviet aviation, aircraft, both modern and WW2 as the only expert on the subject for Squadron Signal. All this was decades ago. He is the Swiss Hans-Heiri Stapfer. Some 30 or 40 years ago I did meet him personally, he was very “energetic” in collecting everything that he could lay his hands on. His publications are basically a collection of all sorts of photos and drawings which are interesting on their own but the attached text in most cases shown that he had absolutely no clue of what he was talking about. So famous authors. . .  

 

The Armada book on MiG-15 history was published in 1999 and written by E. Arsenjev & L. Krilov to the best of their knowledge in 1999. But it was not written by OKB MiG, the aircraft manufacturing factories or paint shop workers. It is one of the best booklets on the MiG-15 ever published! It has a small chapter dealing with painting of different parts, metal surfaces and paints / colours used on different types of systems. I have already mentioned that some parts of the Migs were actually painted with Varnish+Alu for corrosion protection. This is exactly what they are saying also.   

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dai phan said:

I may go to the museum and a take tons of photos. Tell me what I need to shoot for? Dai 

 

 

15 hours ago, dai phan said:

I will do at as many angles as I can. I wonder if I can climb on top of the plane for for some photos? I will ask the museum curator. Dai 

 

7 hours ago, dai phan said:

Hi all,

 

The building has started and so far I am very disappointed. The 3D seat is over sized and worthless. Dai 

 

In-Progress Pics - ARC Discussion Forums (arcforums.com)

 

Hi Dai Phan,

 

Few pages ago I did share here a link to a video I made of the extras included in the Limited edition. Did mention that the 3D printed parts look “strange” to me. I think it was a subcontractor who did it, designed, produced the 3D printed parts. Did raise a question about the authenticity of some parts (ladder, helmet) but also of quality and strange design ideas. Have a look at the depth of the lines on the tire running surface or the visible 3D print layers . . .

 

The fit of parts is good in some places while in others there is very little to go by. I don’t know if it is the same with other Kinetic kits.

 

 

As for the visit to the 8th Air Force museum.

I don’t really think museum people will allow you to get up onto the wings / fuselage. But if speaking to the curator I would most certainly ask him if he could open the cockpit for a better look inside! It could be a good idea to speak to them in advance (so they are prepared for the shock) : )  : )  and there is a ladder available . . . 

Inside the cabin: Ejection seat, side and main instrument panel and have a look at the area behind the seat headrest on the back sliding part of the canopy.

 

Taking overhead views? I use a one legged photo stand (like the predecessor of a selfie rod, only far more professional). Fix the camera on top of it. Extend the telescopic stand and it gives you some 2 metres or so of extra length to your hands! Set the camera for time release, get it over your head and over the part you want to photograph and you have an image! It all looks a bit silly to other visitors around you, but you will have images that they don’t have! Takes some practice to master but it works!

 

Speaking of that surface kink on the wings, if there is anything there completely strait and about a meter long. (basically anything, like a wooden rod, a plank, a handle for a kitchen mop. . .)  Place it on the surface between the inner wing fence and the second wing fence. Looking from the back there will be a gap in the middle. (see the discussion earlier about this)

 

What to photograph? It all depends on available time and patience.

Basically everything is interesting! Curt B. has already given some ideas to you.

Have a look at the main wheels, both the inner side but also the outer hub. I know it is not easy to see it because of the cover, but from the front at an angle you can have a partial view. See those small black antennas on the bottom side of the wing tips. (this system is not present on that J-5 shown by Yufei). But they are there on Red 46. Main and front wheel bays from all directions. See how the airbrakes lay on top of the surface and do not sink in flash into the surface. Engine exhaust petals, interior of afterburner. . .  

 

Have a look at the ARK (round) and MRP (rectangular) antenna covers on the bottom, just ahead of the small fin. I expect that they were overpainted, but still.

In my photo bag I always have a 3 or 5 meter long measuring tape. Apart from general views and detail photos, usually take some close ups with the tape put against the surface to give me measurements for future work.   

 

Have fun and get a “feel” of the aircraft!

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

 

 

 

Hi Dai Phan,

 

Few pages ago I did share here a link to a video I made of the extras included in the Limited edition. Did mention that the 3D printed parts look “strange” to me. I think it was a subcontractor who did it, designed, produced the 3D printed parts. Did raise a question about the authenticity of some parts (ladder, helmet) but also of quality and strange design ideas. Have a look at the depth of the lines on the tire running surface or the visible 3D print layers . . .

 

The fit of parts is good in some places while in others there is very little to go by. I don’t know if it is the same with other Kinetic kits.

 

Gabor

I think ones who want to order the limited edition should really consider. The seat is a waste so it does not make any sense to pay 30 USD extra without this important show piece. Who cares about helmet, wheels or ladder? This morning I was trying to see how the cockpit tub fits and it was a way to start my work day with frustration. The whole thing slides back and forth 1/5 of an inch and there is nothing to go by. I am surprised Ammo did not have assembled model in bare bone like Arma Hobby, Tamiya and I am paying for it now. Had they build a test model they will know there is issue with 3D and fit. Something in 2023 with CAD/CAM technology is rather unacceptable. Dai 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dai Phan,

 

Yes, you are absolutely right to share your experiences!!!

I did the same in having a look inside the box on that video.

 

There is a problem with fitting the cockpit side walls (Parts B20 & B38) but the instruction on page 6 draws the attention to this. One has to cut those surface wire/tube imitations to get a proper fit! If one builds the cockpit as it is, will not be able to close up fuselage sides properly, there will be a gap!!!  So please make a note of this!

 

3u0xHPK.jpg

 

On my example those 3D printed MARS pods had broken parts/ some resin residue not washed after printing and details peeling off. : (  : (  : (  Was it only on my sample???

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ya-gabor said:

Hi Dai Phan,

 

Yes, you are absolutely right to share your experiences!!!

I did the same in having a look inside the box on that video.

 

There is a problem with fitting the cockpit side walls (Parts B20 & B38) but the instruction on page 6 draws the attention to this. One has to cut those surface wire/tube imitations to get a proper fit! If one builds the cockpit as it is, will not be able to close up fuselage sides properly, there will be a gap!!!  So please make a note of this!

 

3u0xHPK.jpg

 

On my example those 3D printed MARS pods had broken parts/ some resin residue not washed after printing and details peeling off. : (  : (  : (  Was it only on my sample???

 

Best regards

Gabor

Yes I did remove the molded in tubes in order for the side panels to sit flush with the cockpit floor. The issue is placing the tube inside the fuselage. The whole thing goes forth, back, up down with nothing to guide it in place. Can you please tell me how you assemble yours? Dai 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dai phan said:

Hi,

Here is a question for the Mig 17F Experten. The Red Fox set has this greyish blue panel color. If I custom mix to match the color then paint the tub then it will be accurate? Dai 

 

Unfortunately no! I have spoken to Red Fox and they prepared the colour in accordance with request of AMMO. Since they (AMMO) have decided on a colour for the cockpit which is shown in the instructions. I have sent to them samples to show the real colour from the real MiG-17 ejection seats I have. But there was no response.  : (   : (

 

If you look at the box top artwork it also shows a strange colour for the interior. 

 

It is known that different factories produced their aircraft with slightly different internal cockpit colours. But none of them was this light blue shade as advised by AMMO! In my opinion they had a colour (in their core business paint range) and simply decided to use it what ever happens.

 

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

 

Unfortunately no! I have spoken to Red Fox and they prepared the colour in accordance with request of AMMO. Since they (AMMO) have decided on a colour for the cockpit which is shown in the instructions. I have sent to them samples to show the real colour from the real MiG-17 ejection seats I have. But there was no response.  : (   : (

 

If you look at the box top artwork it also shows a strange colour for the interior. 

 

It is known that different factories produced their aircraft with slightly different internal cockpit colours. But none of them was this light blue shade as advised by AMMO! In my opinion they had a colour (in their core business paint range) and simply decided to use it what ever happens.

 

 

Best regards

Gabor

Damnation say I. I do research online and the color is greyish rather than bluish right? What to do now? Repaint the cockpit as well as the Red Fox panel? Dai 

 

376909974_6632387806851453_813909743339918272_n.thumb.jpg.d86181c7341f5ce6d7217872479dee41.jpg

 

378393888_6632387800184787_2382896945378623731_n.thumb.jpg.05ee5f7dcb8cdc0dda2c710a3be78374.jpg

Edited by dai phan
Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at various Mig 17F cockpit photos and I see greyish blue or dark grey in color. Since there is nothing else beside Red Fox and to paint around the dials is hard to get acceptable results. I will go ahead and call a day on the cockpit tub. Dai 

 

MiG17-cockpit-800.jpg

 

left side of cockpit.jpg

Edited by dai phan
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dai phan said:

Hi all,

 

At this time the only company that provides cockpit 3D set is Red Fox. So to make the cockpit accurate you will have to paint the panels around the dials. Dai 

 

Hi Dai Phan,

 

AMMO did publish separately a small booklet on the MiG-17. It could have some answers to the cockpit colour question. It is possible that one of the aircraft somewhere, maybe in a museum did have such a light blue cockpit. I don’t know.

Which is the right colour? Doing an internet search would in most cases bring up some recently taken photo of a cockpit, like those in museum which have been repainted or the ones which are flying in US and also had a complete repaint. So the authenticity of those colours is questionable. This is where the light blue shade of AMMO comes in.

 

When taking apart my MiG-17 ejection seats found that they have undergone several overhauls during operational carrier. Did the paint shop people in Poland, Bulgaria, Cuba, China . . .  use exactly the same make of paint as the № 21 Aircraft Factory with Soviets? Obviously not, they used whatever they had at hand, similar, available, left over. . .   On my seat on an internal panel there was a fascinating part where with age layers of paint started to peel off. Next to each other I found several completely different greys which were applied over the original Soviet factory colour!!!!!   Every time the aircraft was taken for general overhaul a different colour was used to paint the cockpit and the seat!

So everything is possible, it all depends at which particular segment of time line you want to show you kit. I would say only one thing was for certain, the original grey used by the Soviet factory when the plane was built. Not only the seat but also the seat rails and other cockpit parts were painted with the same paint.

 

But what is the general practise with kit manufacturers and paints they have in instruction sheets? In some cases they have an agreement with a given paint company or few of them. Some have their own brand of paints, like in this case with AMMO.  Obviously they will not produce a new paint which approximately 99% corresponds with the original colour, just so that it will be authentic.

Speaking of Authentic I remember Humbrol building up a very extensive range of paints where they had almost a paint for every possible subject. In long run I don’t think this is sustainable.

In my opinion AMMO has seen something somewhere (a MiG-17 cockpit) and decided to have a look for a paint (obviously from their own range) which is closest and built everything around this. Including asking supplier of cockpit parts to make it match what they already decided.

 

As far as I know Quinta Studio will also be making cockpit parts for the AMMO MiG-17’s in future.  But in my video (AMMO MiG-17F Take One Part 3 about aftermarkets) I did show that the Czech manufacturer has already released pre-painted cockpit parts as well as a Löök set (only instrument panel) and also a Space set. So the choice is far wider than what you get in the Limited AMMO kit. As for colours, it is interesting that one and the same company at the very same time releases the pre-painted cockpit parts with a hue going away more into a darker blue, while the Space set has more a subdued mid grey with a hint of blue in it closer to what I think should be right. Here some people would complain that the pre-painted etchings still have a raster pattern of colour dots.

 

As for the cockpit positioning in building the kit, I only did a dry run fit test of parts to see how it goes.

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

 

Hi Dai Phan,

 

AMMO did publish separately a small booklet on the MiG-17. It could have some answers to the cockpit colour question. It is possible that one of the aircraft somewhere, maybe in a museum did have such a light blue cockpit. I don’t know.

Which is the right colour? Doing an internet search would in most cases bring up some recently taken photo of a cockpit, like those in museum which have been repainted or the ones which are flying in US and also had a complete repaint. So the authenticity of those colours is questionable. This is where the light blue shade of AMMO comes in.

 

When taking apart my MiG-17 ejection seats found that they have undergone several overhauls during operational carrier. Did the paint shop people in Poland, Bulgaria, Cuba, China . . .  use exactly the same make of paint as the № 21 Aircraft Factory with Soviets? Obviously not, they used whatever they had at hand, similar, available, left over. . .   On my seat on an internal panel there was a fascinating part where with age layers of paint started to peel off. Next to each other I found several completely different greys which were applied over the original Soviet factory colour!!!!!   Every time the aircraft was taken for general overhaul a different colour was used to paint the cockpit and the seat!

So everything is possible, it all depends at which particular segment of time line you want to show you kit. I would say only one thing was for certain, the original grey used by the Soviet factory when the plane was built. Not only the seat but also the seat rails and other cockpit parts were painted with the same paint.

 

But what is the general practise with kit manufacturers and paints they have in instruction sheets? In some cases they have an agreement with a given paint company or few of them. Some have their own brand of paints, like in this case with AMMO.  Obviously they will not produce a new paint which approximately 99% corresponds with the original colour, just so that it will be authentic.

Speaking of Authentic I remember Humbrol building up a very extensive range of paints where they had almost a paint for every possible subject. In long run I don’t think this is sustainable.

In my opinion AMMO has seen something somewhere (a MiG-17 cockpit) and decided to have a look for a paint (obviously from their own range) which is closest and built everything around this. Including asking supplier of cockpit parts to make it match what they already decided.

 

As far as I know Quinta Studio will also be making cockpit parts for the AMMO MiG-17’s in future.  But in my video (AMMO MiG-17F Take One Part 3 about aftermarkets) I did show that the Czech manufacturer has already released pre-painted cockpit parts as well as a Löök set (only instrument panel) and also a Space set. So the choice is far wider than what you get in the Limited AMMO kit. As for colours, it is interesting that one and the same company at the very same time releases the pre-painted cockpit parts with a hue going away more into a darker blue, while the Space set has more a subdued mid grey with a hint of blue in it closer to what I think should be right. Here some people would complain that the pre-painted etchings still have a raster pattern of colour dots.

 

As for the cockpit positioning in building the kit, I only did a dry run fit test of parts to see how it goes.

 

Best regards

Gabor

Since you are well regarded in Mig expert I am surprised Ammo did not consult with you ! Dai 

Edited by dai phan
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...