Sukhoi T-4MS

[General Melchet]

Mossie, I got some from MDC, very quick delivery, it's great stuff, I use it for just about everything, ( model-wise of course, I wouldn't try tiling the bathroom with it  !!),

try here,

http://www.shopcreator.com/mall/productpage.cfm/ModelDesignConstruction/_P119/83379/Mr%20Dissolved%20Putty%20%20%20%20%20%20%2040ml

If a piece broke off easily then there probably was an underlying crack or air bubble, easy to fix, superglue, accelerator, smear of Mr Hobby, quick sand..good as new.Restoring panel lines is a breeze to, I use an Olfa cutter, ( little pressure needed!).
Deino could well be right about the art work, but hey, this is 'what-if' anything goes!!

Andy

[nev]

Regarding colours, I like the black/grey suggestion, but how about something really sexy.  The likes of Egypt, Libya and Iraq got Badgers and Blinders in funky desert camo schemes......

[Mossie]

Deino, I'm fairly sure it's part of the real design.  There's a couple of paragraphs in Soviet Secret Projects that refer to it

.....wind tunnel testing also showed that the T-4MS was catastophically unstable because the centre of gravity shifted too radically when the wing sweep angle was altered.  As a result Chernikov decided to amend the design and versions now emerged featuring an extended nose and additional conventionally positioned horizontal tail surfaces.....

The final selections featured an extended forward fuselage with an extremely streanlined flightdeck canopy so that the upper fuselage contour was virtually unbroken...

Also, Nick has a Russian language book that has a three view plan of the version of the I posted.  I've got to admit, there's some doubt without being able to read the russian text, but the whole book is full of real projects & doesn't seem to go into conjecture (I think this is right Nick??? ) so I think it's fairly close.  I'll probably post on Secret Projects in a few days when I can pick up Nicks three view.

The one thing that makes me think that this might be conjecture, is that it only shows a two man crew, although the three view shows a compartment behind the cockpit that could house other crew, although it may just be an equipment bay.  I guess the pics could be conjecture around the above statements.

Beautiful pictures by Jozef!  Thanks for sharing these Deino!

Andy, I'll get hold of some of that Mr Hobby putty straight away.  Thanks for the tips!

Nev, that would be sexy & very tempting!  I probably won't go the camo route, I want it to be fairly recognisable as a Blackjack alternative, so I'm looking at similar markings & paint schemes.  I'd love to do several of these, unfortuantely, the wallet won't stretch!

[Nick]

Let me try and post the plan on here. I saved it as a BMP but this forum only likes JPG......
My Russian books I showed off at Telford last year and I'll bring them again this year. They have projects and plans for nearly all the Soviet aircraft I've heard of including the M-52 Bounder ZELL as seen in General Melchet's thread.

[Mossie]

Thanks Nick it works!  It's the front view I'm lacking, that really helps.

I found this one on the web some time back which shows some cross sections too.  The main thing I'm trying to work out is wether the compartment behind the cockpit would be an equipment bay or would have housed some other operators.

[Mossie]

Arrrggh!  I've just made a discovery.  I overlaid the 'early' & late' plans on top of each other.  I assumed from the description I mentioned earlier that the nose was extended & no change made to the rest of the airframe.  I was wrong, the change is much more substantial than that.  The overall length remains the same, but the proportions between the three major sections change significantly, at least enough to make an accurate depiction of the late version from the kit much more difficult.

Comparison (Ignore the fact the two don't 100% match, this is more due to resizing the late version plan):


So I've got three main choices:

1.  Build an accurate version.  Probably too much work, especially in time for Telford.  Not sure I want to do the work involved with an indefinite timescale anyway (nearly a full scratchbuild).
2.  Fudge it, go for the 'representative' option.  Continue with the approach I was going down (just adding a new nose & tail sections) & accuracy be damned.
3.  Build the early version.  Forget about any plans to modify it.  Trouble is, I now have my heart set on the 'late' version.

I can hold off on decision for a little while, I can get major parts together before I make any attempt at scratching.  I'll post on Secret Projects & see if they can determine if the 'late' version is a flight of fancy or not.  If so, I might just build the 'early' version.  Or maybe I'll just say 'sod it'!

Why aren't things ever easy???

Bugger.

[Thorvic]

Build the kit as is (look way more modern and authentic anyway) but photograph each part so you get a good feel to it.

Then scratch build the design you really wanted to represent perhaps by using a blackjack as a basis with the cockpit removed and and blended in to allow a new tandam cockpit and spaine to be fitted.

G

[General Melchet]

Mossie, I agree with Geoff, build the original version,  it looks way cooler in my humble opinion. If like me you want it to be as accurate as possible then there's a fair bit of work involved, it depends on how much resin can be cut back on the forward fuselage, it looks like quite a bit!!! but that's the beauty oif resin over plastic, it can be very easily shaped and recontoured...

The main thing I'm trying to work out is wether the compartment behind the cockpit would be an equipment bay or would have housed some other operators.

I imagine it would have had the same 4 man setup as the Blackjack and that the area you mention would be equipment bays.
The cockpit tear drop  could easily be modified from a larger drop tank half.

Damn it, all this talk of T-4MS.....I'm going to have to get one of these now

Whichever you choose ...good luck...

[Mossie]

I think you're right guys.  I prefer the late version, looks more considered to me, but the early version does look more radical.  Geoff, I've noticed that the centre section of the Blackjack is close to the T-4MS design.  I know you & Duncan have talked about a 1/72 version, it would be quite a crowd puller!

I didn't get anything done yesterday, we had a health scare with my Father-in-Law & he had to go to hospital, he's okay for now but will need further investigation.  I did manage to get to a model shop at the weekend & got hold of a variety of Zap super glues, thin, medium & a slow acting thick glue.  Got some accelerator too, but it's in a spray & I'm not too sure of it's utility.  I think it's supposed to be used as a surface primer rather than afterwards, I'll see how it goes.  The young lad in the shop tried to tell me you can't get the liquid stuff, but Zap do a product.  I'm not as green as I am cabbage looking.....

[Thorvic]

Erm i'm doing ships at the moment, the mantle for large 1/72 scratchbuilds being passed over to Andy & Duncan !!!!.
May still act in advisory mode with regard the build methods ans source kits but i wont be building it myself.

Looking at the drawing i suspect it may well be a two seater in its final config, as it appear to be a tandem canopy. Otherwise it would have a triple canopy as per the Blinder.

G

[Mossie]

Didn't mean to suggest you'd be building it, just you'd talked about it!

Think you're right about the two seater.  I've found a cutaway diagram for the earlier version, the bay behind the cockpit definitely seems to be for avionics, not crew.

[General Melchet]

Mossie, I use the spray kind you mention, you can apply it to one half first then join or join em first then spray over the joint and capillary action will do the rest. never tried the liquid version.

I would be amazed if it was only a two man crew as the work load would be excessively high for the RIO,WSO/jammer/defensive operator/nav/general dogsbody chap...looking at the original version there appears to be three hatches indicating at least a 3 man crew( as Geoff says ALA Blinder),the others would be buried somewhere inside the forward fuselage.

[thedarkmaster]

Mossie,


we have some Zap liquid acelorater at work, do you want me to get you one ?

Let me know.

[Mossie]

Andy, I was pretty surprised to see a two man cockpit too.  I think you're right, there's something going on in the nose position & this is probably where the third crewman sat.  Thanks for the tips with the accelerator.

Tim, I'll give this spray stuff a go.  If it doesn't work out, I'll give you a shout, cheers!

[Cobra]

Tell me the T-4MS doesn't look like something from 'Thunderbirds' or 'Captain scarlet'!!! hope to see her when you're ready,Good Luck!!!!!!!