Massimo Tessitori

I remember to have been shocked, a lot of years ago, when I first saw a frontal photo of a Tu-22M and saw how sections were different from the Esci kit in the cockpit and air intakes area.

I suggest to use Humbrol or Revell acrilic silver by brush, several layers slightly thinned with water. Each layer has a poor covering, but the summative result is good, it doesn't show brush strokes nor the grain of the pigment. Some base coat with a different base color, maybe with colors differentiated on each panel, should give an interesting result.

Hi, the plane is 100% Mongolian. The markings are visible, and it is written on the original source. Thank you for the link and the photo. I had to modify my old profile of Mongolian Il-2 at https://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/il-2/il2-camo/postwarforeign/postwarforeign.htm My considerations are at the end of the linked page.

The Mongolian markings are visible on the second photo, both under the wing and on the fuselage. Only, the supposedly yellow parts appear darker than the supposedly red areas. It could be due to the film type.

Mongolian indeed, thank you. The markings are recognizable. Do you know the source, please? In my opinion, the base camouflage is the Soviet one: green, brown, dark grey. The plane was built in factory 18, as recognizable for the guns fairings, so the wings are certainly metallic, with fabric covered ailerons. I suppose that the rear of the fuselage was wooden as wartime ones, but some were rebuilt with metallic rear fuselages after the war's end.

Hi, you can find my profile of Mongolian Il-2 and the only photo of which I'm aware at the end of this page: https://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/il-2/il2-camo/postwarforeign/postwarforeign.htm In my idea, it is a standard Soviet three-shades camouflage (green, grey, brown) with partial green overpainting to obliterate the original Soviet markings and let space to Mongolian ones. Best regards Massimo

I suggest to check the protections of the headlight, their rear part should be a bit different compared to the kit. The kit, as it is, should reproduce a Mk II more than a Mk III, the vertical shape of the hyposcopes should be as on Mk II while on later marks they should be inclined outwards.

Interesting, I made some projects on Floggers in the late '80s and my documents were limited and dated. I remember that I made a resin copy of the landing gear, seat and pylons of Airfix for improving kits of Hasegawa and Academy. I preferred to point on these kits because the ground attack versions were available or feasible, but the Airfix wasn't good for this. Later I had way to look at kits of Zvezda, they looked better as proportions but something was visibly wrong on the canopy area.

The kit of Airfix has a too long tail cone (or perhaps misplaced tail surfaces) but it is not a Flogger-A. The early type had a conical radome and no tooth on the leading edge wings. In museums, often the original radome is replaced with ogival one typical of Flogger-B. In many respects, the kit of Airfix is much better than Hasegawa: the main landing gear is much closer to real, and the sections of the rear fuselage, with the blending of the dorsal spine, are more accurate; besides it gives the possibility of make the tail surfaces angled down, that is a thing often seen on MiG-23 both in flight and on the ground. The elevators should be shortened at their tips. The canopy is a bit too flat, and it is difficult to correct. The missile pylon is good. Overall, it's not a too bad kit and better than Hasegawa and Academy. Pity that it doesn't allow to make ground attack variants.

Hi, it is likely that this plane had a 3 shades camouflage of green, dark grey and light brown. About the spinner, I guess red, black, white.

http://cwlam2000.epizy.com/caf14.files/image012.jpg It really resembles a metallic or grey Ju-52 with green mottles. No codes or details are visible, but I suppose they should be. It's a weak base to paint a model.

Hi, here is the profile, but it's hard to consider it as a piece of evidence.

Hi, I've found an old profile describing 27 as painted with white over a wood aerolak background. The name of color looks inspired by EP. If the profile is old and the photo has not yet emerged, it looks a bad omen.

The photo has a lot of cyan-green on it. For what I remember of the photos of both Soviet and East Germany photos of that time, there was a four shades camouflage with sand (or tan), light green, very dark brown, very dark green that was common at that age on many MiGs and Sukhois.

Hi, thank you both.

Thank you. Is there some match for Tamiya or Federal Standard?

Hi all, the instructions sheet of the kit of Meng gives a three-shade camouflage for a Rolls Royce still in use in 1942. The colors should be: sand MC-013/N27 green MC-235/n78 dark green MC-411/N63. I've looked for images of these colors on the web, but with unsatisfying results, particularly for the second color that is represented as a light grey-green on the boxart, a grass green on the sheet and seems a dark grey-green on the chips seen on the web. Any help will be welcome.

I've built one years ago, it is fairly good, but I had to work on the front of the turret that is missing of a slot, besides all the bolts of the front have to be cut away and remade using those printed on one sprue. The tracks were too long, I had to shorten them but the joint was hidden by the skirts. Besides I had to close some gaps inside the lot of the gun and a small recess inside the rear plate of the rear bustle. Paint (humbrol, if I remember well) peel off the tracks when they are deformed to be mounted on. The suggested paint is Mr Color 303, so a relatively light green; this can be when the vehicle is faded, new paint instead should be a bit darker and a bit more olive, more or less as Humbrol 86. The uparmoured version was seen, for what I know, in Iraq only. If one wants to omit the additional armour, he has to rebuilt part of the shirts. An earlier kit without th additional armour is availble, but it has a prototype style gun barrel that should be replaced.

I see, it should have some fairings at the base of the lower wing that are not on the drawing. Do you see other things to correct?

Maybe there is something useful here: http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/r-5/tapani/profiles.htm Planes red 2 and red 3 are armed and could give some input.

They weren't on the site, I had them in my hard disk. I was working on a remake of the MiG-3 page, but it is going slowly now also because of the depressing news.

I don't know, i would use the normal green for outside.

Hi Andrew and John, here are some photos from Russian sites: My impression is of green paint, with black cap. The most part of the struts shows the colors of aluminum and rusty steel, but it's likely that they were painted.

Could the rear part be dirty for jet stains?

My impression from the photo is that it was painted with AII aluminum. The dark areas seem reflections of shadows.