Jump to content

1/48 - Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25PU "Foxbat-C" by Kitty Hawk - released


Recommended Posts

In the recently released test shot pictures from the future 1/48th Kittyhawk Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25PD/PDS "Foxbat-E" - ref.KH80119 - there was also a two-seat Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25PU "Foxbat-C" test shot - ref.KH80136.
Source: http://www.themodellingnews.com/2013/08/kittyhawks-48th-scale-foxbat1-seater.html

Kittty+Hawk+Mig++25+KH80119+(1).jpg

 

Kittty+Hawk+Mig++25+KH80119+(2).jpg

Kittty+Hawk+Mig++25+KH80119+(5).jpg


Kittty+Hawk+Mig++25+KH80119+(7).jpg

Kittty+Hawk+Mig++25+KH80119+(10).jpg

V.P.

MattMemory2.jpg

Edited by Homebee
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 years later...

All I need is the new nose. For the rest I will wait for another release to come ;-)

DIO, please look at the date of the previous post. I'm afraid it won't happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...
  • 2 months later...

Since both the PU and RU were based on the interceptor airframe, externally the only difference is that the PU could be fitted with underwing missile pylons. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite tempted by this one but only if it isn't a horrific price, horrible to build, and/or horrendously inaccurate. Given KH's previous form I don't much fancy my chances.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2019 at 12:57 PM, Hook said:

Since both the PU and RU were based on the interceptor airframe, externally the only difference is that the PU could be fitted with underwing missile pylons. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Thanks, did not know that.... a bit strange though...

What about the nozzles? Short or long ones?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, exdraken said:

Thanks, did not know that.... a bit strange though...

What about the nozzles? Short or long ones?

Short nozzles, as on the interceptor. As well as the cranked wing instead of the straight one of the operational recce variants.  

 

The only differences were the electronics fitted, plus the deletion of the underwing pylon option which the fighter trainers had. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hook said:

 

Somewone should drop them a hint about the orientation of the Iraqi markings. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Yeah... probably too late already!

Good that those twoseaters are also armed to the teeth!

https://beavercorp.jp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Kitty-Hawk-新商品注文書-148-MiG25PU-2019.08.21.pdf

 

Thanks for the info regarding the RU!

I really thought they were based on the RB....

Edited by exdraken
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, exdraken said:

Yeah... probably too late already!

Good that those twoseaters are also armed to the teeth!

 

Well, the PU could carry dummy AA-6 missiles.

 

Quote

Thanks for the info regarding the RU!

I really thought they were based on the RB....

I contrast to the singleseaters, the MiG-25PU was the first trainer variant to fly.

 

It was probably uneconomical to base the recce trainers on the recce airframe, considering the small numbers built. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no Idea how much they differed ...

If you coukd craft a recce nose onto a fighter variant e.g.... at least physically!

That comes with my not-understanding if the need to have all those differences in the beginning!

Kinked wing, long nozzles, etc.... performance?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2019 at 2:06 PM, exdraken said:

I have no Idea how much they differed ...

If you coukd craft a recce nose onto a fighter variant e.g.... at least physically!

That comes with my not-understanding if the need to have all those differences in the beginning!

Kinked wing, long nozzles, etc.... performance?

 

The interceptor wings has slightly more span too. 

 

My best guess would be that the recce / strike models were geared more towards allout performance and range (longer exhausts = a higher finesse ratio = less drag, less wing span ditto), while the interceptors would probably have slighty more manoeuvrability (in the case of the Foxbat this is rather relative, of course!) due to the wing mods. 

 

Another one is that some of the recce models received an extension to the upper intake lip to compensate for the higher weight when bombed up. 

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Homebee changed the title to 1/48 - Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25PU "Foxbat-C" by Kitty Hawk - released

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...