RS Resin Detail Scale Aircraft Drawings books ?

[Laurent]

Hi.

I've received my MiG-21 drawings book from Modelimex yesterday. I've had a quick scan at it and I cannot say that I'm really enthusiastic about it (I could develop if someone wants me to). Has someone bought it too ?

Laurent

[haneto]

Mine's still on the way,Laurent.

Any serious problem?

Shape accuracy issues?

[Laurent]

Any serious problem?

A Lancer A having a Bis spine is surprising.

Shape accuracy issues?

The current count:

- the canopy and windscreen are shaped exactly like in the 4+ drawings: the front canopy is sloping down in the profiles and other things

- the RSBN antennas in the Bis-SAU are represented as simple dipole antenna without the reflector/director like in the real antenna

- the shape and size of the underwing flap actuator coaming is the same between Fowler-flaped and SPS-flaped planes

- the cone isn't centered on the intake

- nose shape is the same from the PF to the Bis

The drawings are very nice for the riveting diagrams but I doubt that they can be used as reference. The drawings in the Famous Russian Aircraft book are better.

[haneto]

I see.

But at least this one has its own value due to the rivet details,especially to big scale modelers.

Looking forward to receiving it.:)

Cheers,

Yufei

[Laurent]

But at least this one has its own value due to the rivet details

Sure. 30.50 euros It's true that it's an interesting product for riveting models. Another good point is that the book covers prototypes too. And I've discovered the MiG-21 FR version. And there are drawings of maintenance hardware (ladders, support rigs). And there's a CD-ROM (including pictures gathered on the web...).

There are other things I've noticed:

- drawings of a MiG-21 PF with vanes on the PVD boom ?!?!

- drawings of a MiG-21 bis with 'Odd Rods' on either sides of the fin ?!?!?

- drawings of a MiG-21 PFS type 94 with a two-piece canopy; pretty coherent with what is said in the Famous Russian Aircraft book (no early and late PFMs but early and late PFSs)

- the oval wing panel are on the Bis drawings when they shouldn't be there at all (vrsa knows)

- the windscreen of the single-piece windshielded planes do not wrap around the nose like they should: the windscreen base is a curve in the Bison, RV did a straight line

Here's the argumentation for my canopy shape uneasyness:

Side view: Reality vs RV... front frame not swept enough and too low

Top view: Reality vs RV... canopy cylindrical when it should be bubble shaped (max width at the front frame of the canopy)

Front view: RV... the low front frame mentioned above and the pinched vertical frame gives the canopy a weird bloated look

Edited September 16, 2009 by Laurent

[MoFo]

Just because they have lines of rivets drawn all over them, doesn't mean those lines are *accurate*. Makes them look pretty, but doesn't make them correct. To use another MiG-21 analogy, the Fujimi kit looks gorgeous in the box... but it's wildly inaccurate. Just because it has nicely recessed panel lines, doesn't mean you can use it as a reference for re-scribing someone else's MiG-21 kit.

In other words, if the basic drawings are inaccurate, you might as well save yourself the 30 euros and just make up your own rivet lines - you probably won't be any worse off.

Edited September 15, 2009 by MoFo

[Laurent]

Just because they have lines of rivets drawn all over them, doesn't mean those lines are *accurate*. Makes them look pretty, but doesn't make them correct. To use another MiG-21 analogy, the Fujimi kit looks gorgeous in the box... but it's wildly inaccurate. Just because it has nicely recessed panel lines, doesn't mean you can use it as a reference for re-scribing someone else's MiG-21 kit.

The book comes with a CD-ROM filled with pics made in a Czech aircraft boneyard. I'm pretty sure that the riveting layout represented in RV's drawings of plane versions used in Czechoslovakia is pretty accurate. When it comes to proportions, dimensions, feature of certain areas especially of non-Czech aircrafts, surprising things emerge.

MoFo's right: nice looking doesn't mean accurate. When it's the case of scale drawings (things that some model manufacturers use as reference), it's a bit like if a marvelous house was built on quicksand. I'm not saying that the drawings are just worth to be thrown in the trash can. I'm just saying that they cannot be used as reference when discussing accuracy, especially with versions not used by Czechs.

Edited September 16, 2009 by Laurent

[janman]

Thanks for the information, Laurent. Seems you saved me some money, bro'!

Now I'm off course very interested how the Flogger drawings turn out to be. Especially if the upcoming kits will be based on their own drawings.

[Laurent]

Well all I can say is that I won't be the one who will review the Flogger book and kit. Too disappointing for the price paid.

[vrsa]

Damn' I thought these ones will be accurate. I was going to order Flogger & Fishbed books, but now Fisbed book is out of the question. Well thats another 30 euros saved.

Now I'm off course very interested how the Flogger drawings turn out to be. Especially if the upcoming kits will be based on their own drawings.

I'm woried about the acuracy of Flogger plans also. For this plane its much harder to be sure about accuacy. Its more compexed geometry then Fishbed, but the windshield & canopy area is what I'm intrested. Well I'll buy it anyway, maybe compare with other plans. I suspect that this plans will be close to 4+ plans.