Jump to content

Tom Cooper

Banned
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    883

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Tom Cooper

  1. Tom Cooper
    Think this was asked on ARC forum recently too. Few years ago I drew a number of artworks for a series of articles by Holger Müller (leading German MiG-21-expert, and indeed somebody one can 'meet' at Flugzeugforum). These included several Bulgarian, Czechoslovak and Soviet MiG-21s armed with nukes (Soviet example was a SMT as based in Hungary of the late 1970s or early 1980s). Configuration was 'always the same': nuke under the centreline, and either a pair of RS-1U (AA-1 Alkali) or R-3S (AA-2 Atoll) AAMs on inboard pylons. Latter variants (SMT, M, MF) would carry drop tanks on outboard underwing pylons. (Bulgarian MiG-21M armed with nuke had RS-1Us on inboard and R-3S' on outboard pylons). No trace of UB-16-57 on the few reference photos I've seen while working on that project.
  2. Tom Cooper
    Yup, everything explained - in great detail, with photos, artworks, etc. - in Great Lakes Holocaust.
  3. Tom Cooper
    AFAIK, the JRViPVO was using RAF (i.e. British Standard) colours all the time. All the locally-manufactured jet-trainers, light strikers and fighter bombers (like G-2, G-4, J-21, J-22 etc.) were painted with 'RAF-colours'. BTW, the same camo pattern was later applied on MiG-21s Serbs have sold to Mobutu, in 1997. And re. PFM '719': I've got a few old photos of her in NMF - and then inside one of underground facilities at Zeljava AB (that famous air base built into a hill, with only runways outside).
  4. Tom Cooper
    Awesome painting. My hat's off. BTW, that was a trial camo applied sometimes in... 1970s or 1980s...?
  5. Tom Cooper
    Yup, the radome and various aerials are the major difference. Though, connected to the radome: it seems Egyptian Mirage 2000s have no stencil denoting their radar type.
  6. Tom Cooper
    There should be (and quite a famous at that) a photo of Steve Ritchie (or was it his backseater?) leaning on boarding ladders: the stencil in quesiton can be seen right next to him, on the splinterplate, and right bellow two kill-markings.
  7. Tom Cooper
    Jimmy, few questions, if you don't mind (might be 'important' since this build appears to be very important to you too): - Are you building OY 463 as of, say 'spring 1972'? - Or, as on that photo you've posted in your first post? Namely, as of, say, May 1972, this F-4D was not even compatible with AIM-9Js. I.e. during most of her air combats she was armed with AIM-4D Phalcons (usually just one on inboard side of inboard underwing pylons, for a total of two, and usually in combination with at least one ALQ-87 jammer pod), and AIM-7 Sparrows. Most of her kills were scored by AIM-7E-2 Sparrows. This variant was easily recognizable by black 'Ls' on its wings. (Think to recall that it was only during the last mission in which this Phantom scored, in October 1972, that it carried AIM-9J Sidewinders and an ALQ-101 ECM-pod in front left Sparrow bay.) Finally, 67-463 was one of only 20 F-4Ds equipped with APX-80 Combat Tree enemy-IFF-interrogator. On its own, this means nearly nothing 'special' for the outside look of the aircraft - except for a quite obvious 'warning' stencil, usually applied on the left splinter plate (this was denoting a self-desctructor system for the APX-80).
  8. Tom Cooper
    There were actually very few such conflicts - and if, then because one of beliguerents turned them 'global' for own advantage. Most of 'minor wars' actually had nothing to do with the Cold War, but were related to local, often centuries old rivalries, few others to post-colonial reasons. Take Ogaden War (Ethiopia-Somalia, 1977-1978) as an example: superficially, a 'classic war of Cold War proxies'. Some might even come to the idea to talk about 'Soviet supported Ethiopia vs Western-supported Somalia'. And it's certain that the Somali government attempted to present it as such in the Western media. But actually: Ethiopians were largely US-equipped and -trained, Somalis entirely Soviet-equipped and -trained. And the sole reason why the Ethiopian government entered an alliance with Cuba and then Moscow was because it found itself confronted with Somali invasion, Eritrean-, Tigrean- and Oromo-insurgencies all at once, and was in a need of a big military. This in turn meant it needed plenty of weapons, at best 'delivered yesterday', which the West was not the least keen to deliver. And... finding out the Somali government was working against its interests, Moscow eventually concluded it might prefer getting Ethiopia on its side... ...with which we're 'back to politics', of course ;-)
  9. Tom Cooper
    Outch... sorry for that with canopy... but, yes: the new one appears to be sitting much better. Re. Arabic title for that MiG-19: inscription says 'al-Mawsil', aka Mosul (city in northern Iraq). Yes, it can be used for one of (ex-Iraqi) MiG-19S' of No. 20 'Araba' Squadron UARAF, period Jun/Jul 1964 - June 1967. That unit was not only a combat squadron, but also something like 'ceremonial guards' unit of the UARAF, escorting any aircraft carrying VIP-visitors of Egypt (statesmen for example). Quite a few of its aircraft were ex-Iraqi examples (donated by Baghdad to Cairo in 1964, when Iraq disbanded its No. 9 Squadron and then attempted to join Egypt into a new UAR), and they wore names of all major Arab cities, from Casablanca, to Cairo (i.e. Qahira), and Baghdad. Re. ID-stripes: these were originally introduced on REAF aircraft already during the first war with Israel. Back then, they were sometimes applied in green and, to be better visible against the background of different camo patterns on Spitfires and other aircraft - 'supported' by a white band in between two or three black or green stripes. The practice was continued when the REAF entered the jet age, with two black stripes being applied on rear fuselages of Meteors and booms of Vampires, for example; plus three around wingtips. But, there was no white band in between the two black stripes around the fuselage. Then this practice was continued on EAF's MiG-15s and MiG-17s, shortly before, during and after the Suez War of 1956, but there is no evidence that Egyptian MiG-19s have got such markings too. Final type to get them was MiG-21. That is: all F-13s, FLs and PFMs that entered service in Egypt before the June 1967 War. Curiously, those MiG-21s that survived that conflict (about 20+ of them) and were camouflaged immediately afterwards, have still retained these stripes. I guess that the idea with 'white band in between black stripes' comes from few photos of few (half a dozen or so) Egyptian MiG-17Fs that were sold to Nigeria, in 1967. They arrived there with their ID-stripes removed in quite a crude fashion, resulting in the area where stripes used to be appearing much lighter than the rest of the fuselage. Because there were so few clear photos of Egyptian MiG-17s available at that time (and even less so colour photos of them), somebody apparently concluded that this meant that there was a white band in between two black stripes. But, this is simply wrong: meanwhile there are enough b&w, and even some colour photographs, clearly showing only the usual two black stripes around the fuselage, and the usual three around the wingtips.
  10. Tom Cooper
    sigh... Most of that decal sheet is still based on 'Arab MiG-19 & MiG-21 Units in Combat', and therefore useless. For example: Iraqi MiG-19s had serials in high 4xx range (498, 499 etc.); Syria has never got any MiG-19s (because there was no Syria at the time these were exported) and even if, they would have no roundels on the fuselage; green ID-stripes are wrong in colour (these were always black); and so on. Bottom line: for a new product, this is 'frustrating'... (I actually do not understand why people making such stuff can't write a few e-mails; but this alone indicates the 'quality' of their 'research')... I'll go back to watching photos of Werner's MiG-17s. They're doing good to my eyes...
  11. Tom Cooper
    Mark Styling drew the artworks for 'Arab MiG-19 & MiG-21 Units in Combat'. And while his artworks were classy, our references - those available 13-14 years ago - were nowhere near as good. That's one of major differences between that book and the Arab MiGs series.
  12. Tom Cooper
    What was Rami flying remains unknown. Fact is: at that time there were no operational MiG-19s left in Egypt (or anywhere else in the Middle East). And Shenyangs were nowhere around the place for another 11 years. That said, there is plenty of mixing of MiG-17s and MiG-19s in recollections of people from both, Egypt and Syria. Even 'informed' people (say, pilots who have heard specific stories from their senior colleagues) tend to mix the two types. Not to talk about SAM-operators etc. This is not the least surprising: it's so that many nowadays kind of 'can't imagine' anybody coming to the idea to fight something as superior, as well-armed as an F-4E with 'something' like a MiG-17F. (And, hand at heart: that was 'crazy', but such were the times and there were no other solutions.) Re. 'Arab MiG-19 & MiG-21 Units in Combat': that book is so old, so small, so limited, and in some parts too chaotic too... it's kind of 'stone age' of research about Arab air forces. Like when archeologists have found ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs but had no clue how to read them... If you're really into 'Arab MiGs' or 'Arab air forces in wars with Israel' - get yourself a few volumes from that series. This is not an advertising or whatever of that sort (and I'm certainly no 'bestselling author earning millions'), but simply a matter of fact. There is a small million of reasons why are there six volumes of that series (five published so far, the sixth delivered to the publisher only yesterday).
  13. Tom Cooper
    It could be said that Egypt had a 'period of MiG-19', and then, decades later, a 'period of F-6s'. These two periods are not to mix. 50 MiG-19S' were acquired in 1960-1962 period. They were painted grey overall (monocolour), and wore serials in range 3xxx. There were plenty of technical issues with them, and only two squadrons were ever equipped with the type: these two were re-formed as one that remained operational by the June 1967 War. By that time, Egyptians have got about a dozen of Iraqi MiG-19S' too. These were grey overall and wore names of major Arab cities applied in white - instead of serials. Starting the June 1967 War with about 20 operational MiG-19S' (many more were stored), that unit flew 39 combat sorties during that conflict, lost 16 MiGs (2-3 of these on the ground), and claimed three Mirage and two Noratlas kills over the Sinai, on 6 and 7 June 1967. Details of the story can be read in Arab MiGs Volume 3. An update on the story of clash between MiG-19s and Mirage-escorted Noratlasses can be found in Addenda/Errata of Volume 4. Specific serials of the aircraft with which kills were claimed remain unknown: with exception of one, all the pilots in question were killed, and those that survived couldn't recall what planes were flown by colleagues in question (i.e. the one that survived is meanwhile old, ill, and not in condition to search for his pilot log book). The type was subsequently withdrawn from service. The F-6Cs (and few FT-6s) were acquired from China in 1980-1981 period, and used as advanced trainers until replaced by Alpha Jets, in the mid-1980s. F-6Cs were camouflaged in two shades of grey and wore serials in range 38xx, FT-6s were white overall and wore serials in range 39xx.
  14. Tom Cooper
    First things first: wow, a cool photo. Re. Syrian MiG-17PFs: well, actually, the 2805 you've just built was originally ordered by Syria. But, once that country joined Egypt into the United Arab Republic, in 1958, all of them were taken up by the UARAF - and brought to Egypt. That's why none were left in Syria, when that country left the UAR, in 1961. Otherwise yes: anything F with Algerian, Iraqi or Syrian markings would qualify very nicely. That said: Iraqi MiG-17Fs have got those Soviet-made underwing pylons, installed somewhere along the outboard fence. These were usually used to carry UB-16-57 pods, no bombs, I'm affraid. Perhaps they were carrying bombs instead of drop tanks, but I've never heard of this, or saw any photos. Good luck with your SA-2 project, Draken.
  15. Tom Cooper
    Ah yes.... there were times when Syrian MiG-17Fs were at least as colourful - if not even more - as that MiG-17PF.
  16. Tom Cooper
    Apparently yes: at least on the Western Front of the 1971 War, IAF MiG-21s were primarily operated as point defence interceptors. Some flew CAPs and as mini-AWACS too (the latter might sound 'crazy' considering MiG-21's crapy radar, but keep in mind: this was the best AI-radar in IAF's service at that time), but most of the times they were scrambled only if some PAF activity was reported. Thus, fuel was not as important and one of pilots even scored a gun-kill against an F-104A that was accelerating away at low altitude (alone considering what a tiny speck that Zipper must've been in the Indian pilot's visor, and then vibrations caused by the GP-9.. that was certainly no small feat).
  17. Tom Cooper
    Null Problemo: as next we're going to build a few additional ones, to put in between.
  18. Tom Cooper
    plus start of the war and related excitement, poor visibility out of most of cockpits... The 5cm thick windscreen on the MiG-21F-13s and PFs was offering such a poor sight, that pilots were trained to angle their aircraft or roll them in order to take looks through the side of the canopy. View outside the cockpit of F-4E was nothing better...
  19. Tom Cooper
    They didn't use any spacers. MER's were attached directly on inboard underwing pylons, with Sidewinder rails in their place, kind of 'sandwiched' in between. BUT. when the TER was fully loaded (usually either with 3x M117 or 3x CBUs), then no Sidewinders could be carried. So, the usual practice was to load just two M117s (or two CBUs) on the TER, and then add one AIM-9D on the inboard rail. MERs were used a lot, but primarily under the centreline station. Usual loads consisted of 4 or 5 M117s, or 4 CBUs. Mk.82s were used alternatively too, of course, but it seems the Israelis preferred heavier bombs or CBUs, Is probably related to soft sand of the Sinai (for example) greatly dampening the detonation of lighter weapons. Perhaps to the long toss attack profiles used heavily too (in order to avoid entering heavily protected areas). Few observations about Egyptian POV about this battle: - Yes, a quartet of MiG-21MFs led that attack, each deploying four Egyptian-made runway-cratering bombs; one of them was shot down by Israeli flak and crashed into a row of sun-shelter... curiously, no Israeli source is even mentioning this loss. - Rest of attack formations consisted of MiG-17Fs, with two additional flights of MiG-21s providing top cover. - While admitting a loss of two MiG-17s, only one Egyptian pilot ever saw any Israeli F-4s nearby - and recalled that this distanced without engaging. So, overall confirmed EAF loss for that battle: 1 MiG-21, 2 MiG-17s.
  20. Tom Cooper
    The MiG-21FL is usually considered something like 'Indian variant'. But, actually, it was exported to Egypt, Iraq and Syria too. Although Soviets considered it something like 'early PFM, their Arab customers tended to call it FL as well - if for no other reason then because of influence of Indian instructors that used to serve at Academies in Egypt and Iraq, in the 1960s (and later). Technically, the FL is something like 'mid' between the PF and the PFM. It has got the earlier, forward-hinged canopy of the F-13 and PF variants, but a wider fin of the PFM. Starting in 1969, most of surviving FLs (whether those in India, Egypt, Iraq or Syria) were modified to carry the GP-9 gun-pod under the centreline. This was rarely deployed in service, because fuel was at premium for this aircraft, and thus the centreline drop tank was considered 'more important' than the GP-9 pod.
  21. Tom Cooper
    It's more than 15 years since I've seen photos of an UARAF MiG-17PF in such markings for the first time. All of this time I kind of hoped for somebody would build such a good replica of it... and what you did is beyond excellent. Can only say: thank you very much, Draken.
  22. Tom Cooper
    Hi Alex, well, I'm not that good in WP aircraft, but this one is making me curious. I recall that kit from when it originally came out, back in 1986 or so (or was it earlier?), and was always wondering what it looks and feels, and what can (and shold) one do with it. So, all your modifications are 'exceptionally interesting' for me. That said, guess, I'll be of more help when it comes to painting and arming your duck-MiG ;-)
  23. Tom Cooper
    Though, at the second look (and an additional review of all available photos): must not be. Take a look at the photo with row of MiG-17PFs I've sent you: it appears there were two sizes of that insignia.
  24. Tom Cooper
    A tad too large (2-3mm), but nevermind. Now, get the masks down, so everybody can enjoy the final effect.
  25. Tom Cooper
    ... or 'Other People's Wars'...?
×
×
  • Create New...