DONE +++ MiG 'Izdeliye 33' a.k.a. MiG-33SE (ASCC code 'Foghorn') of the VPAF

Dizzyfugu · January 06, 2016, 05:18:44 AM

I suppose the early Revell Su-27 is an ex Kangnam kit, like the Yak-38 or MiG-29. They bore only superficial resemblance with the real thing, and the Nakotne kit is really old-school. If you have ever built a VEB Plasticart kit, you might think that the Nakotne kit is a reboxed, vintage kit from the late 80ies... Never came across this mould before, and I have built MiG-29's from Revell/Kangnam, ESCI and Italeri (the latter so far the best).

Dizzyfugu · January 06, 2016, 09:31:53 AM

In the meantime...

1:72 Mikojan-Gurevich MiG-33SE (NATO code 'Foghorn', a.k.a. 'Izdeliye 33'); VPAF, late 90ies (WiP) by dizzyfugu, on Flickr

1:72 Mikojan-Gurevich MiG-33SE (NATO code 'Foghorn', a.k.a. 'Izdeliye 33'); VPAF, late 90ies (WiP) by dizzyfugu, on Flickr

The fin is a composition from a F-16 base and a single F-18 tail. The wings had to be moved forward - not much, maybe 5mm, but this changes things a lot. I also fear that the nose is too long? A bit Pinocchio- or Concorde-ish...

DogfighterZen · January 06, 2016, 12:28:08 PM

That is very F-16ish, no doubt. IMHO, the nose does look a big too big but i imagine that with the windscreen on it will look good, and you get something very different from both the F-16 and the 29.

Dizzyfugu · January 06, 2016, 11:28:44 PM

Yes, I will probably have to apply some more rhinoplasty and take out a section in front of the cockpit.
The nose cone's shape is perfect, but somehow the whole thing is too long for the now-shortened tail section with the more vertical/taller fin. Proportions are the real challenge, not the PSR stuff (which is tedious, yes, but rather straightforward after the parts are in place). Progress is good so far.

Thorvic · January 07, 2016, 12:13:05 AM

Hi Dizzy

Looking at the photos I think you might have needed to put the whole Mig-29 upper fuselage further back on the lower fuselage to get the proportions right.

Its a curse of kit bashing you can find yourself building what feels right and what looks right in your minds eye but when you check back against your reference you discover your mental image to be off (I did four nice VTOL engines for my first HS-681 only to discover I had done them Harrier style and they looked nothing like the drawings or artwork !

)

Geoff

Dizzyfugu · January 07, 2016, 02:52:38 AM

Quote from: Thorvic on January 07, 2016, 12:13:05 AM
Looking at the photos I think you might have needed to put the whole Mig-29 upper fuselage further back on the lower fuselage to get the proportions right.

Yes, that could be the right move. The single engine conversion definitively needs some length to be taken away, even though there's also the front wheel well to consider, and I am now stuck with what I have. $:-\$

Captain Canada · January 07, 2016, 04:26:05 AM

Looks good and close enough to me ! Once she's all done up sent to the photo studio nobody will notice anyway

Thorvic · January 07, 2016, 04:57:19 AM

Quote from: Dizzyfugu on January 07, 2016, 02:52:38 AM
Quote from: Thorvic on January 07, 2016, 12:13:05 AM
Looking at the photos I think you might have needed to put the whole Mig-29 upper fuselage further back on the lower fuselage to get the proportions right.

Yes, that could be the right move. The single engine conversion definitively needs some length to be taken away, even though there's also the front wheel well to consider, and I am now stuck with what I have. $:-\$

Yeap I think the only way to get away with that is to go E-8 or F-16 style with a smaller nose gear in a revised intake, either splitter style or F-16.

Otherwise you leave the nose as is and have the longer nose to accommodate the longer nose leg.

Dizzyfugu · January 07, 2016, 09:31:19 AM

After the tail and the wings were fitted, I was convinced that the nose had to be shortened. While the shape was perfect, proportions did not much, and it was much too drooped. So I broke it off again and cut away about 1cm of the fuselage nose. Now, more/new PSR...

1:72 Mikojan-Gurevich MiG-33SE (NATO code 'Foghorn', a.k.a. 'Izdeliye 33'); VPAF, late 90ies (WiP) by dizzyfugu, on Flickr

Things come together. Stabilizers from an Intech F-16C/D have been fitted - with a dogtooth edged intio the leading edge. They will not appear on the chines, but at least it's a detail from one of the widn tunnel models of the Izdeliye 33. Looks more and more like an F-16! Landing gear is also mounted now - and, yes, as expected, the main struts have to be moved forward. Thanks to the long wells this is rather easy to realize, though. The stabilzer fins come from an Italeri F-16. With the shortened nose, things look MUCH better now.

Otherwise: PRS, PSR, PSR...

1:72 Mikojan-Gurevich MiG-33SE (NATO code 'Foghorn', a.k.a. 'Izdeliye 33'); VPAF, late 90ies (WiP) by dizzyfugu, on Flickr

1:72 Mikojan-Gurevich MiG-33SE (NATO code 'Foghorn', a.k.a. 'Izdeliye 33'); VPAF, late 90ies (WiP) by dizzyfugu, on Flickr

The massive main struts are taken OOB, but other wheels (left over from an X-32) will be fitted. The front wheel strut has to be replaced, the OOB part rather looks like a toothpick. It comes from an Academy MiG-23/27, and a different, single wheel (IIRC a main wheel from a Matchbox F-5B) will be mounted.

nighthunter · January 07, 2016, 10:05:19 AM

Dizzy, if I may offer a humble suggestion?

Split the intake. It would give it more of a Russian feel.

PR19_Kit · January 07, 2016, 11:21:39 AM

But as it is it makes the point that the aircraft is single engined.

nighthunter · January 07, 2016, 11:23:46 AM

Quote from: PR19_Kit on January 07, 2016, 11:21:39 AM
But as it is it makes the point that the aircraft is single engined.

Very True, Kit

overscan · January 07, 2016, 01:50:33 PM

I like it as is. Feels a bit like the Rockwell F-15.

Captain Canada · January 07, 2016, 03:22:46 PM

Rockwell F-15 ? Wha ? Googlin' we go !

Dizzyfugu · January 07, 2016, 11:36:30 PM

Quote from: nighthunter on January 07, 2016, 10:05:19 AM
Dizzy, if I may offer a humble suggestion?

Split the intake. It would give it more of a Russian feel.

No. I considered that, but found the construction of such an intake to be too complicated. I HAVE an MiG E-8 in the stash that could donate a potential implant (as well as a Trumpeter F-107), but... no. There'd have been a long intake to sculpt, and I am also not certain about the front wheel well and position. Sure the ex MiG-29 intake as I kept it is rather unpractical (FOD), but I kept it also for the sleek look. And, AFAIK, several intake layouts were tried/considered, so why should a production aircraft not copy the MiG-29 solution, which, at the time of the Izdeliye 33 development, was about to enter service? The aforementioned T-10/Su-27 also underwent a LOT of tests and trial, with very exotic engine/intake arrangements, including layouts that much resemble the Rockwell thing from overscan.

I see your point(s) and agree, but I went my own route.