Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

KRK4m

Members
  • Content count

    731
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

328 Excellent

About KRK4m

  • Rank
    Obsessed Member
  • Birthday 25/04/1957

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Krakow PL

Recent Profile Visitors

1,081 profile views
  1. Using an hour of the weekend time (the Museum is open 9-17 in winter and on all the other weekdays these are my office hours 20km afar too) I have measured the front fuselages of 21PF, PFM, M, MF and Bis. And the facts are as follows: The movable green nose cone housing radar is identical for all five versions There are three variants of steel intake lip there: PF and PFM have 89cm diameter, M and MF - 91cm and Bis has 92cm. Moreover in all variants prior to Bis the lip is 10cm long and its coning angle follows the whole nose shape, while at Bis there is a visible kink between the 6cm long lip and the fuselage front part. As in Bis the lip front edge is moved 40mm rearwards compared to the M/MF it is easily understood that its diameter is 10mm greater. The lip itself is riveted to the fuselage with 2 rows of 114 rivets each in PF/PFM, 2x116 in M/MF and 2x118 in Bis. At the sideview all dimensions are the same: 94cm between rear edge of lip and front edge of aux intake door, 202cm between rear edge of aux intake door and the end of fuselage first panel, 160cm length for cockpit upper side panel, 57cm length of debris deflector plate divided 23+34 for 1st and 2nd fuselage panel respectively However there is a notable difference on the fuselage underside: all five a/c measure 88cm between rear end of front u/c bay and datum line of fuselage 1st side panel and all feature the same 124cm long undercarriage doors, but the distance between the rear edge of steel intake lip and front u/c bay forward edge is 99cm for BOTH Bis and M/MF and 101cm for the PF/PFM. Thus it looks that if really the nose part axis of 21Bis is tilted 3 degrees down compared to the 21F, the modification has been made twice - some 2 degrees at the "big mouth" 21PF/FL/PFM introduction and then 1.2 degrees (2cm lower lip edge backwards move at some 90cm intake diameter equals 1.2 degrees) at the R/S/M introduction (the assymetric overnose probe can be the external feature there). But there is NO difference in attack angle between the M/MF and 21Bis. There is a visible difference in nose shape between the M/MF and Bis, but it applies only to some 50-60cm long area between the intake lip and the front u/c bay. Bis looks less conical (more bulbous there). But both "ends" of this area (i.e. forward edge of intake lip and the fuselage at station described as the forward edge of cockpit canopy) feature the same diameter for both variants. To be sure I should also measure the top fuselage distance between intake lip and front of the cockpit canopy. But heavy snowfall today and 7 degrees (C) below zero made climbing the fuselage a little difficult for the 60+ old man and there was no ladder about to help I hope I will come back to this subject once again soon. Cheers Michael
  2. I'm not sure whether you can find a single item common for the F-13 and Bis. Frankly speaking the biggest change in MiG-21 family tree happened with introduction of the -21PF. And this was not only due to the enlarged intake and nose cone, but also due to the totally new main undercarriage (not only larger wheels, as every single part was new there - struts, oleos, covers and even the wing and fuselage bays were relocated). When I have some free time next week I'll try to take some measurements at the Polish Aviation Museum collection. They have more than dozen of variants exhibited, ranging from F-13 to Bis (and including PF, FL, PFS, PFM, M, MF, RF and 4 or 5 five trainers). IIRC the changes you described for the Bis should be introduced a little bit earlier as externally Bis looks almost unchanged from the MF. The only later -21s having anything common with the F-13 were the slim-nosed trainers and Chinese J/F-7s. Cheers Michael
  3. Beaufighter Mark Differences

    I'm not the Beau specialist, but if I remember well from my youth (~40 years ago) the Hercules III powering the Mk.I featured spinnered props while Mk.VI had spinnerless Herc VIs. Cheers Michael
  4. In January the new tool (some 49 parts) T-62 MBT by Trumpeter (#07146) has appeared on the market. Presumably it's miles ahead of the vintage ESCI/Italeri one and the crude ACE short-run. But has anybody of you already touched it in the reality? What is your opinion? Can we call it THE definitive one or should we wait for the Modelcollect #72021 new tool announced at the end of 2017? Cheers Michael
  5. Special Hobby future releases

    So no 1/72 2-stage Mosquito yet... Pity Cheers Michael
  6. Surely you're right - I don't mean the French to be the inventors of khaki (neither the word nor the shade of greenish brown). Nevertheless the situation in Poland was specific - although using more than a hundred of ex-RAF aircraft in the 20s no one of them has been manufactured in Poland. On the other hand three Polish aviation factories have licence-built more than 600 French aircraft. And perhaps the camouflage paint formula could been also a part of licence agreement - hence the LWS factory at Lublin and PWS at Biala Podlaska that manufactured 250 and 340 fabric-covered Potez bombers respectively used wrap-around French "kaki" overall painting on their later (indigenously designed) aircraft too, while the PZL Warsaw factory that earlier manufactured Bleriot-SPAD and Wibault fighters (30 and 25 respectively) became used to "vert emaillite" colour applied to metal-clad French fighters. In my opinion this is the main reason why the PZL P.11 (and perhaps the metal-clad PZL bombers) featured a little more greenish and darker OD shade (combined with pale blue-gray undersurfaces) than the PWS-26, which appears to be ALMOST light-earth (Humbrol M29 with a dot of yellow) overall. Cheers Michael
  7. Concerning the AZ7572 kit scheme #3 : This particular a/c H75C-1 no.183 (U083) belonged to the Polish "Kos" flight defending SNCAC (ex-Hanriot) factory at Bourges (hence the Polish insignia on fin). The pilots were: Flt Lt Bronislaw Kosinski, Fg Off Marian Wesolowski, Sgt Wilhelm Kosar, Corp Waclaw Germer, Corp Bernard Kremski and Corp Adolf Pietraszak. Lt Col Marcel Haegelen (a 1896-born WWI ace with 23 German a/c credited) has flown it very rarely (if ever). In 1940 he was the Hanriot chief test pilot, credited with 1 WW2 victory - a He111 on 5th June 1940. BTW I really doubt if Bourges (47 parallel, just 200 km south of Paris) really does belong to AFRICA! Should the Czech textbooks on geography be seriously revised? Cheers Michael
  8. Maybe it's the matter of lighting or simply you were too careful with the topside colour (i.e. not to make it too distant from greens), but in my opinion all these 1930s European aviation "khakis" were more or less based on the French one from decade earlier. For many years all we have been taught by various profile painters that "proper" warplane should sport green upper- and blue undersurfaces. Now we know that this is not the case - plenty of them were brown (either earth or chocolate/chestnut) and grey. I have been totally amused when finding the almost brown khaki during the PZL P.11 restoration at the Polish Aviation Museum, but then came the PWS-26... Comparing these two the PZL lacquer looks almost green Nevertheless the way you treated the pre-war Dutch roundels on the upper wings is exceptional - they look like the real ones on the 1940 photos. Well done, Brother... Cheers Michael
  9. Modelling 1/72 later P-40 / Kittyhawks

    Sorry - I don't have Brassin wheels... And the trim tabs are different - left one (port side) fits totally into the aileron outline looks to be movable, while on the starboard (right) side the tab protrudes behind the trailing edge and looks like the spring one, fixable on the ground only. Cheers Michael
  10. Modelling 1/72 later P-40 / Kittyhawks

    I just have received the new SH 72734 P-40N ... Unfortunately I must correct my previous opinion - the kit has two KINDS (i.e. designs - plain and spoked) of mainwheels, but they both feature 10.6mm diameter which makes 30" in real size. Pity Cheers Michael
  11. 1/72 - MiG-21 Fishbed by Eduard

    It is obvious that being manufactured in series almost 15.000 units long (including Chinese F/J-7s) the MiG-21 is perhaps the most-modelled supersonic fighter worldwide. Unfortunately among the 1/72 kits most are rubbish or almost rubbish. Even the beautifully engineered kits from Revell, Zvezda, RV/KP and Fujimi differ one from another seriously when put side-by-side on the shelf. The problem is that one can easily find the blueprints identical to most of the kits (maybe except for the Hasegawa/Frog one ). Simply there are plenty of drawings published and many of them are also rubbish... One of the crucial areas seems to be rear fuselage with distance between wing and horizontal tail differing seriously between the kits. Using my today visit at the Polish Aviation Museum in Krakow I have measured exactly a dozen of their Fishbeds and Mongols and the dimension is 119cm between the flap trailing edge and the starting point of horizontal tail fixed base (128cm when measured to the start of the all-moving tailplane leading edge itself). Scaled down to 1/72 it makes respectively 16.5mm and 17.8mm. Now you can measure your kits and make the verdict - Revell MiG-21F is a little too short with 16.0 and 17.1mm there. Cheers Michael
  12. Modelling 1/72 later P-40 / Kittyhawks

    For my Hase P-40N I have used the P-51B wheels from old Lindberg kit - look quite pretty. However recent Special Hobby #72374 kit has both sizes on the sprues. All P-40L had four guns, so had the very early P-40Ns. Later P-40Ns were six-gunned again. P-40N had the same wide-bladed prop as P-40M. The part is included in new Special Hobby P-40N kit mentioned above. Hope it helps Cheers Michael
  13. The Ye-152A should look VERY interesting when placed next to the Trumpeter Shenyang F-8-II Cross-kitting of these two should produce the exact copy of J-8-I, as I still don't believe the Chinese have built it having no the Ye-152A blueprints... Cheers Michael
  14. Yes - the P.11f (and 75218 P.11b) have been never flown with Polish insignia. On the other side you can also build the P.11a and P.11c wearing Romanian yellow crosses. In total Romania (with 14 P.7s, 190 P.11s and 30 P.24s) was the second main user of the PZL "gullwings" (Poland had 151 P.7s, 201 P.11s and no P.24s at all). Cheers Michael
  15. Netherlands Fokkers CV and CX camos?

    Thank you very much, Peter, for these Dutch IPMS links. So it looks that C.Vs have been painted dark earth (Khaki K120) overall when sporting roundels and brownish green (Grijs K16) over light blue (Blauw K108) during the 1940 fighting (with orange triangles). However the C.Xs used the "intermediate" camo scheme with Khaki K120 over Blauw K108 with both types of national insignia. Cheers Michael
×