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. :)

Homebee

1/72 - MiG-17F "Fresco-C" by Airfix - released

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 12by12 said:

The PF needs more than just a new intake, the fuselage halves would need changing, and the cockpit interior and the canopy.

What's the difference in the fuselage?

 

Also I know the windscreen is different but what's different about the canopy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Well I remember buying Hasegawa's attempt at going the other way, PFM into F. Yes, I wrote canopy when I meant screen, but surely the cockpit has to change to fit the extension of the overall canopy length and AIUI that means the fuselage halves. If I'm wrong, maybe it's kinda possible.  Anyhow, it did not work out well with the Hase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, 12by12 said:

  Well I remember buying Hasegawa's attempt at going the other way, PFM into F. Yes, I wrote canopy when I meant screen, but surely the cockpit has to change to fit the extension of the overall canopy length and AIUI that means the fuselage halves. If I'm wrong, maybe it's kinda possible.  Anyhow, it did not work out well with the Hase.

I don't know how different the cockpit opening is as I don't know the type that well. But like I said I can't see Airfix doing a PF, so if it can be done hopefully an AM set will appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tbolt said:

What's the difference in the fuselage?

Also I know the windscreen is different but what's different about the canopy?

Frankly speaking whole front fuselage (forward of wing leading edge) is different. It has been caught precisely by AZ in their Frescos.

The gun pack is shorter (3x23mm instead of 1x37 and 2x23mm), the fixed canopy part is noticeably longer and the fuselage diameter (both height and width of all the forward frames) is significantly greater in PF than in older (-17A/17F) variants, which were using virtually unchanged MiG-15 nose.

In simple words the A/F (and-15) nose is more conical, whereas the PF one is almost tubular.

Cheers

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sanjuro said:

Workbench update

 

Airfix MiG-17F

Thanks, good stuff. Let's hope Airfix will nail the shape.

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This kit gets a test build in the latest Airfix magazine issue. Had a quick flick through the article and seen that wing leading edge is still wrong :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Col. said:

This kit gets a test build in the latest Airfix magazine issue. Had a quick flick through the article and seen that wing leading edge is still wrong :(

That's a pity.

 

Wrong wrong, or fixable wrong..?

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Hook said:

That's a pity.

 

Wrong wrong, or fixable wrong..?

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

I'll be able to tell you after buying one and having a go at it ;) Hopefully there's sufficient material in the lower wing part to get a bit medieval and sharpen the inner leading edge section.

 

21 hours ago, MiG-Mech said:

Does it still look like MiG-17 ?

Mostly yes but could have easily been better.

Edited by Col.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all the talk of the "error" with the wing, who is actually going to bother? A handful of purists in internet sites like this or, the no doubt thousands of others who will simply snap it up regardless because they're getting an otherwise nice and reasonably priced replica. 

How many people, upon seeing what is actually a very small model are even going to know one way or the other? Personally, I don't see what all the fuss is about. It's unmistakably a MiG -17, warts and all.

Now, if some believe the kit is fatally flawed, unbuildable and, unbuyable then, that is their prerogative and I won't presume to debate their wisdom.

I'm not going to get bogged down in a debate about the why's and wherefores  of how it happened. Airfix has doubtless made a commercial decision to get the kit out there and, if it sells well then, the decision is justified.

I'm not going to condone or condemn Airfix. I'm just happy to ( or will be) to get my grubby mitts on this kit in quite large numbers!😊 . Others will disagree. I respect that. Let's just enjoy the kit. We're all modellers  after all and, we don't all take the same approach to the hobby. I am by the way, genuinely sorry if the model disappoints some of you 

 

Allan

Ps, I am a fully paid up member of the T L A R (That Looks About Right) school of thought!😂 ( Cue cries of "send him to Specsavers!" )

 

Edited by Albeback52

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, MiG-Mech said:

Does it still look like MiG-17 ?

From what I can see in the Airfix magazine (not having my hands on the plastic yet):

 

  • Is it a perfect 1/72 reduction of a MiG-17? No
  • Is it the best 1/72 MiG-17 thus far?  Yes

 

I'm thinking like @Col. that a bit of inner leading edge sharpening might be in order ... or not!  It looks to me like a really nice model (albeit from the build photos) and I am looking forward to getting my mitts on it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Vultures1 said:

From what I can see in the Airfix magazine (not having my hands on the plastic yet):

 

  • Is it a perfect 1/72 reduction of a MiG-17? No
  • Is it the best 1/72 MiG-17 thus far?  Yes

 

I'm thinking like @Col. that a bit of inner leading edge sharpening might be in order ... or not!  It looks to me like a really nice model (albeit from the build photos) and I am looking forward to getting my mitts on it

Exactly!  Just the point I was going to make.

 

I shall be getting a couple of these.

Edited by Wez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wez said:

Exactly!  Just the point I was going to make.

 

I shall be getting a couple of these.

Exactly my intention !

Show me any MiG-29A/UB kit, in box or built and I tell you what's so wrong with it.
There is always one, who can see mistakes.
And many, which nonetheless have fun and can ignore, coz there is no 100% accurate kit and coz, it's just a model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dave Fleming said:

The wing kink is there

Ok but what about...

51682637_2281593175224461_37564257448010

 

Edited by Laurent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 12by12 said:

A few strokes of the file..and you'll wish you never tried.

That sums up my modelling ability very succinctly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talked with a friend: He saw a photo of the sprues. And he said that with all the beauty and accuracy, lead contours to the original will not possible. But he is a sculptor-jeweler and does not use drawings, but only photographs. And he (like me) will not buy a model. Why do "trinkets"? And do not listen to the opinion of the model community? The same Gabor immediately pointed out to the company 3D problems.

Edited by GROWLER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2019 at 12:27 AM, Albeback52 said:

For all the talk of the "error" with the wing, who is actually going to bother? A handful of purists in internet sites like this or, the no doubt thousands of others who will simply snap it up regardless because they're getting an otherwise nice and reasonably priced replica. 

How many people, upon seeing what is actually a very small model are even going to know one way or the other? Personally, I don't see what all the fuss is about. It's unmistakably a MiG -17, warts and all.

Now, if some believe the kit is fatally flawed, unbuildable and, unbuyable then, that is their prerogative and I won't presume to debate their wisdom.

I'm not going to get bogged down in a debate about the why's and wherefores  of how it happened. Airfix has doubtless made a commercial decision to get the kit out there and, if it sells well then, the decision is justified.

I'm not going to condone or condemn Airfix. I'm just happy to ( or will be) to get my grubby mitts on this kit in quite large numbers!😊 . Others will disagree. I respect that. Let's just enjoy the kit. We're all modellers  after all and, we don't all take the same approach to the hobby. I am by the way, genuinely sorry if the model disappoints some of you 

 

Allan

Ps, I am a fully paid up member of the T L A R (That Looks About Right) school of thought!😂 ( Cue cries of "send him to Specsavers!" )

 

I've got your back, Albeback52...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Airfix still opt to go with the deep panel lines. Is this a conscience choice to make them so much more pronounced than on other kit manufacturers' models? Even short-run kits have more subtle panel lines than these.

 

Rest of the kit looks pretty good, if the fit is good I'll probably get one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...