Jump to content

Sukhoi Su-9 -The Flying Pipe ***FINISHED***


PeterB
 Share

Recommended Posts

And here is my proposed 3rd entry. Built at around the same time as the F-106 and in parallel with the Mig-21 which I may also enter.

DSC03976

This kit was originally released in 1993 by UNDA and went through another 5 reboxings in the next 10 or so years - this is the 3rd from Cooperativa in Russia, and distributed by MPM. Serge tells me it is even less accurate than the later A-Model one but when I bought it there was nothing else available so I will build it anyway.

 

Pete

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PeterB said:

Serge tells me it is even less accurate than the later A-Model one but when I bought it there was nothing else available so I will build it anyway.

 

Pete

Main problem fat wing, in one of the Russian reviews, the wing of this Su-9 model was called "like the TB-3"!

In other unlike short-run A-model it is a full steel press-form model as Hasegawa, Revell, Monogram e.t.c.

9 hours ago, PeterB said:

 

DSC03976

The lack of stencils in the decals of this repack is a complete disaster!  The real plane was actually strewn with a stencil. 

 

B.R.

Serge

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Serge,

 

When you say the wing is too "fat" I assume you mean too thick rather than too large in area - if so I can perhaps thin it down a bit.

 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, PeterB said:

Thanks Serge,

 

When you say the wing is too "fat" I assume you mean too thick rather than too large in area - if so I can perhaps thin it down a bit.

 

Pete

Yes, Pete  too thick in in front view. I don't remember exactly, but in my opinion, the rest of the geometry is not bad.

In principle, in this topic have compassion all comparison of all three known drawings for the Su-9 from Zlinek magazine, V.Pankov (M-hobby magazine )  and Zenkin (Aviation and Time magazine) ,

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic.php?t=46318&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60

 and what is most important in this topic, these drawings are reduced to a normal view in length and width, because in the magazines themselves the drawings are printed with errors due to printing. 

Therefore, drawings should always be checked for compliance with the basic geometric dimensions.

In general, I recommend that You look through the pictures in this topic in full

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic.php?t=46318&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

, this is an excellent collection of information on the Su-9 and an example of a wonderful conversion of the Su-9 from the Su-7BKL on a 48th scale.

 

Most full stencil on Su-9 have this decal:

(Warning! This ad may not work and prices may be out of date!)

 http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic_t_65327.html

and I have two such decals, and I would gladly give you such a decal ... but You are well aware of the problems for which I cannot do it.

The most I can do for You is to take a more detailed photo of the decal itself and the instructions.

The decal contains a variant that participated in the well-known unsuccessful (fortunately for the pilot!) Su-9 attack on the U-2 Garry Powers, the Su-9 air defense Baikonur cosmodrome and my favorite

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic_t_71293.html

"DMB-84 May Donbass"/ "Yury and Lena was here" (analoge "Kilroy was here")😁 which never flew in this form, because the nose-art  paint  by hooligan-soldiers guarding the storage base and some madness-romantic loving couple Yura and Lena.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

 

 

 

Edited by Aardvark
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Serge,

 

Don't go to any great trouble but if you could PM me a photo of the decal sheet and instructions it will give me an idea of what I need.

 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PeterB said:

Thanks Serge,

 

Don't go to any great trouble but if you could PM me a photo of the decal sheet and instructions it will give me an idea of what I need.

 

Pete

Pete, I think shouldn't hide in private messages what can be used by other modelers, especially since Kanga company that released this decal has long ceased to exist.


20201105-180618.jpg

20201105-180648.jpg

Translate version.

1. Su-9B Air Defense USSR, airfield Nebit-Dag, Turkhmenia, 1971 year, aircraft used for flight young pilot after flying school;

2. Su-9B Air Defense USSR, underground airfield "Mirnyi-14" near cosmodrome "Severnyi";

3. Su-9B used in intercept spy plane U-2 Garry Powers 1 May 1960 year;

4. Su-9B used as weather scout at one of the airfields of Belarus in the late 70s.

5. Su-9B from the warehouse of decommissioned aircraft on airfield Marinovka, Stavropol VVAUL (Higher Military Aviation School of Pilots) 1986 year

 

 

20201105-180713.jpg

20201105-180728.jpg

Stencil on decal no reading.
The original feature of the decal is the paper instruction glued to the decal paper and the fact that the lacquer substrate of the decal reacts with white spirit.
The manufacturer, in a conversation with me, simply recommended to get wet the white spirit decal applied to the model and the decal should be welded into the paint as painted.

Other Su-9 decal:
- A-model
20201105-180746.jpg

- MSV Moldova (late version UNDA):
20201105-180801.jpg

- A-model Su-9U:
20201105-181042.jpg

(One decal from my Su-11, one decal from my Su-9U....and one decal I bought separately in a local hobby shop for some funny 0.2 $.

Stencil on this decal reading:
20201105-181055.jpg

And  parent of Your Cooperative, UNDA that started it all:

20201105-181256.jpg

20201105-181320.jpg

20201105-181333.jpg

 


B.R.
Serge

P.S. Of course, , if You want to discuss the situation here, I will always be happy to talk to You at PM.

Edited by Aardvark
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Serge,

 

Just thought the pics would be clearer if scanned and sent as PM. No worries.

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok, 

I will start this GB tomorrow with the Su-9, though as you can see the instructions leave a great deal to be desired.

su9inst

One side of A4 including the sprue diagram - I have blown it up but it is still going to involve a certain amount of guesswork I suspect. As shown in step 4 there is not going to be a lot of room for ballast and I think it will need quite a lot based on my Su-7.

DSC03978-crop

You can see why they were nicknamed flying pipes!. This is an kit I may restore some day. It was made by VEB Plasticart who I think were East German, and released in about 1970. They were crude, particularly the undercarriage but this was the only Su-7 available for many years AFAIK and they were cheap - so cheap in fact that I bought 2 but the other one seems to have been lost when I moved house. I think this may have been the first kit I "airbrushed" albeit with the Humbrol spray gun.

 

As the principle Soviet ground attack plane for many years the Su-7 is far better known than its interceptor "sister" (or should that be brother as the Russians call ships "He" not "Her" I gather), so as ever I will provide a little history.

 

All info from various Midland Publishing/Ian Allan books on OKB Sukhoi, Sukhoi Interceptors and Soviet/Russian Aircraft Weapons since WWII, and grossly simplified.

 

Pavel Sukhoi started work as a designer with the Tupolev OKB (Design Bureau) in around 1925, and in 1939 was allowed to start his own design bureau. During WWII his main product of note was the Su-2 light bomber which had similar performance to the better known Il-2 and due to its rear turret perhaps, had a much lower loss rate, but for some reason Stalin did not like him, and when all the other OKB leaders were promoted to General he was missed out. After the war ended he designed a number of jet aircraft starting with the original Su-9 which Stalin said was too like a copy of the Me-262, and after his Su-15 crashed during tests he fell out of favour and his OKB-134 was closed down in 1949. Sukhoi went back to work for Tupolev, but following Stalin's death he was made head of OKB-1 (later OKB-51) and started work on what were nicknamed “the flying pipes” - the Su-7 and Su-9. Both had very similar fuselages, but whereas the Su-7 fighter bomber had swept wings, the Su-9 interceptor had a delta wing, and yes, they did reuse the number sequence as they had already got to Su-17 by the time they were closed down.

 

As with most Soviet aircraft several variations were test flown and the one known by the factory code T3 was unusual in that it had a pointy radome attached to the top of the intake lip sticking out like a nose over the “mouth” of the intake.

t-3

This first flew in April 1956 and was seen at the Tushino airshow that June. At that point it was intended to arm the aircraft with cannon in the wing root, but with an alternative armament of missiles being looked at.. Problems with the AL-7F engine development delayed testing and when the more powerful AL-7F-1 was introduced the rear fuselage had to be widened. Another change was made to the radome, the PT-7 test plane having one above and one below the intake, but performance remained below the required standards, and the advent of high altitude overflights by the American U-2 resulted in a drive to get the interceptor in service as fast as possible. This resulted in the T-43 prototypes which had changes to the wings and tail, together with a modified intake with a moveable centrebody into which the radar could be fitted if small enough. A twin engined version the T-5 was also tested but did not enter production though it had some influence on the later Su-15 Flagon, as did the T-49 which had the intakes moved to the side of the fuselage to allow a large radome to be fitted for the Oryol (Eagle|) radar. In the meantime the proposed Izumrood (Emerald) radar as fitted in the Mig 19 was replaced by the more compact TsD-30 radar which would indeed fit in the cone. Service testing began and changes were made to stop the engine surging, after which in April 1960 the Su-9 was cleared for production, not long after its rival the Mig-21 in Autumn 1959. That means it was well after the F-102 entered service and somewhat later than the F-106 as well.

 

To be continued as they say.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

 

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PeterB said:

I think it will need quite a lot based on my Su-7.

DSC03978-crop

You can see why they were nicknamed flying pipes!. This is an kit I may restore some day. It was made by VEB Plasticart who I think were East German, and released in about 1970. They were crude, particularly the undercarriage but this was the only Su-7 available for many years AFAIK and they were cheap - so cheap in fact that I bought 2 but the other one seems to have been lost when I moved house. I think this may have been the first kit I "airbrushed" albeit with the Humbrol spray gun.

Welcome to this topic with name "Plasticard-nostalgia":

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50801&start=0

😁

1 hour ago, PeterB said:

During WWII his main product of note was the Su-2 light bomber which had similar performance to the better known Il-2 and due to its rear turret perhaps, had a much lower loss rate, but for some reason Stalin did not like him, and when all the other OKB leaders were promoted to General he was missed out. After the war ended he designed a number of jet aircraft starting with the original Su-9 which Stalin said was too like a copy of the Me-262, and after his Su-15 crashed during tests he fell out of favour and his OKB-134 was closed down in 1949.

Pete, is that where all this wildish comes from in Midland's and what else do you's read in the West about the USSR?

- "Stalin don't like Sukhoi"....Stalin so don't like Sukhoi, that in 1943 he awarded him the Stalin Prize for the Su-6 attack aircraft built in one or two copies and never made it into the series and therefore to the front! A strange way not to love a person is to give him money, a lot of money 😁😁 instead of sending him to the front or to the Gulag, don’t You think?

- "original Su-9 which Stalin said was too like a copy of the Me-262" - Stalin himself proposed to start copying and producing the Me-262, but the designers persuaded him not to do so.  By the way, the design of the Su-9 (LK) began in 1944, even before the living Me-262 came to the USSR.  And the Su-9 is more compatible with the He-280, more precisely, the paper project for the modernization of the He-280, which was never made in metal, and I have never come across any documentary traces of which in the form of scheme or drawings.

- Sukhoi design bureau was closed as Myasishev design bureau,  Alexeev design bureau, e.t.c.....all clear - no you're design bureau aircraft in army/civil aviation  go to the street, because need money for rebuilding the country after the hardest war.  Of course, no one was left without work, but many had to switch from black caviar to ordinary bread and butter.

About Su-2. All metal without armour , after the start of the war, problems with metal began, and an attack aircraft without armor was no longer the same.

And Yes, Sukhoi was why not love one story that his personal design bureau did not want to go to Kharkov before the war to establish the production of the Su-1, because of the unwillingness to lose their apartments in Moscow, is worth a lot.

1 hour ago, PeterB said:

started work on what were nicknamed “the flying pipes” - the Su-7 and Su-9. Both had very similar fuselages, but whereas the Su-7 fighter bomber had swept wings, the Su-9 interceptor had a delta wing, and yes, they did reuse the number sequence as they had already got to Su-17 by the time they were closed down.

 

Pete, de-fact OKB-51 was taken from Kondratyev, who could not cope with copying the Sabre and given to Sukhoi ...Sukoi did not copy Saber, but some of the design solutions in the S-1 future Su-7 used .... and yes, the Su-7 was designed and produced in a small series of about a hundred euse samples as a pure fighter! Than Mikoyan crossed the road with his I-7U. In turn, like a Su-7 fighter against the background of the MiG-21, it looked like 💩,

Therefore, the Su-7 had to be converted into a fighter-bomber, but Sukhoi revenge Su-9 to Mikoyan with his I-75, Ye-150/152 after what, before the MiG-25 Mikoyan played in the Light League.

 

Ship - Корабль in Russian language reality it is because the ship is masculine in Russian.  By the way, heavy aircraft Tu-128, MiG-31 are not called aircraft among pilots, officially the position sounds to a pilot as "Ship Commander".

 

B.R.

Serge

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Serge,

 

The summary I gave was mostly based on two books - OKB Sukhoi" by Yefim Gordon, together with Vladimir Antonov, Nikolai Gordyukov, Vladimir Yakolev and Vyachislav Zenkin, and "Red Star 16 Sukhoi Fighters"  by Gordon on his own. Of course we all know that most if not all things you read in books are prone to inaccuracies, and when dealing with anything to do with the former Soviet Union things become worse due to not only problems getting information, but possibly political bias. I am therefore not surprised you don't agree with some of their interpretations/claims, but my sources are limited and I did say this was a simplified version. This is about a  period when the West had limited access to information and a lot of what they got was wrong. and it sounds as if the more recent information we are getting is still not too good! 

 

I am happy for you to correct any errors as it gives me a better view from your side as it were. I dare say that you will find many more in the second and last section when I post it.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, PeterB said:

Yefim Gordon, together with Vladimir Antonov, Nikolai Gordyukov, Vladimir Yakolev and Vyachislav Zenkin

Zenkin & Gordykov ( 

a former employee of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, the author of the Su emblem, which no longer exists in this world:

http://forums.airbase.ru/2020/02/t97425--umer-n-t-gordyukov.1196.html )

better known as draftsmen, I don't know 

nothing about Yakovlev, and Gordon has long been not a Russian author but a British citizen.

😉

As I understand, even with a lot of money, it is not easy, if not impossible, for a foreign national to become a British citizen by not approving or supporting the actions of the UK government....but as far as I know Gordon does not have the capital that Abramovich and Berezovsky and other "rich Pinocchio" oligarchs-emigrants to England had, so he will tell the English public what they have been told about the USSR for many decades and even centuries (if applied to Russia), especially since it is (Russia / USSR  - evil), as I understand it, coincides with his worldview, otherwise why should he immigrate?

 

You understand, Pete, this is not a claim against You and those who read this, in our time of computers and Internet news, reading books is generally an extraordinary and rare phenomenon, :(

this is a claims against those who write such nonsense.  But they don't give a damn about these claims, because "money doesn't smell."

 

Only this.

🤝

 

B.R.

Serge

 

P.S.

If you are interested, and if you do not mind, I can write how all these manipulations and lies occur, using one example of lies about local repression in my city in the 30s.  A very interesting and instructive story, but very distantly (almost unrelated) to aviation.

If interesting.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Serge,

 

No problem!

 

Back in the late 1970's a series of books were published here in the UK on what were described as the "War Machines" of various countries, giving details of the military forces of each one - Army, Navy, Air Force, Intelligence, Radar, Missiles etc.  I have seen three - US, Soviet and Chinese and there may be more, though any such book on the UK would be rather slim! In the "Soviet" one they provide an introduction giving the background to the "Soviet State" in which they say that, more than in perhaps any other country, everything that happens is in effect controlled by the State and completely influenced by the political philosopy of its leaders - Marxist/Leninist as it was called at the time. The belief in the West was I suppose that, with some justification perhaps, the Soviets regarded most of the World as potential enemies and so everything was shrouded in secrecy and what information that was released was often deliberately misleading! Since then things have supposedly changed, but as you suggest it is still difficult to know when fact ends and fiction starts.

 

We all know the potential problem with books - they are just one or more particular author's own take on things, and are therefore not always entirely accurate, and that is particularly true it seems when dealing with the period I am interested in at the moment in terms of Soviet aircraft development. One of the nice things about a forum like this is that we can "talk" to people in other countries and get their side of the story, so by all means tell us anything you think might be of interest and help us understand the background better.

 

I have not heard much news about your particular part of the world lately, but keep safe and well.

 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have made a start on the cockpit.

DSC04006-crop

I have glued the sidewalls onto the floor together with the stick and rudder pedals, and glued the sides and headrest onto the seat. Though the plastic was moulded in Russia, the kit was distributed by MPM who included a sheet of etch with alternative bits for the IP, undercarriage and the three rod aerials above and below the fuselage which I seem to remember are for the IFF system (Nato "Odd Rods" I think?). It reminds me very much of the first MPM kit I ever bought back in the 1990's - the N1K1-J Shiden though this does at least have locating pins on the fuselage and wings. There are however no locating lugs or anything for the cockpit, but there are horizontal panels which go behind the seat and in front of the IP, and I think that these plus the IP will help decide where it is glued. I believe everything inside is painted grey except for the IP, seat cushion and headrest, and of course the side consoles, though in the Mig-19 the interior is green - any thoughts?.

 

I noticed that the airbrakes are far too thick for the locating wells so they will need thinning down quite a bit, and I seem to have lost one of the strakes that go on them, but that should be easy enough to manufacture. Serge has pointed out that the leading edge of the wing is too thick so I will have a go at thinning that down a little, but of course that could cause a mismatch with the fuselage to wing joint,

 

Speaking of Serge, you will have gathered he is not impressed with my sources for the background history. Unfortunately they are all I have so I will just have to hope he will point out any errors. The second section is more technical than political so it may be a bit better - anyway, here goes!

 

Produced in parallel with the Mig-21, both aircraft were designed to do the same job – high speed, high altitude interception, had similar speeds of just over Mach 2 and ceilings of over 60000ft, and were single engined aircraft of the tailed delta configuration, but there the similarity ends! The Mig-21 was what now would be called a lightweight fighter, with a length over pitot of 44ft, span of 23.5ft and an empty weight of 8598lb, rising to 12600lb with internal fuel and was quite delicate in appearance. By comparison the Su-9 was a hulking great brute of a plane, 59ft long with a span of 28ft and an empty weight of 16900lb rising to 25200lb loaded. To make up for that its engine delivered 14990lb thrust dry and 21160lb with reheat compared with 8598lb and 12654lb for the Mig-21 but the Mig could be airborne in 3000ft compared with 4000ft for the Su-9. Both had similar ranges of 800+ miles on internal fuel, though that does not take into account loads and use of afterburners I expect, and I don't have any climb rate figures for the Sukhoi but I suspect it was slower. The Su-9 was aptly nicknamed a flying pipe because it did indeed look like one with the wings, tail and bubble canopy stuck on. The fuselage was just over 5ft in diameter in the middle, swelling to 5ft 4” around the engine and with a slight taper to the nose intake, but not as much as the Mig. It was not a pretty plane! Initially Nato code named it Fitter B thinking it was just a variant of the swept wing Su-7 Fitter A. Later it would become recognised as a different design and renamed Fishpot A. I suppose they used some sort of random programme to select names starting with "F" for fighters, but some of them were a trifle bizarre.

 

I stated earlier that the original intention was to arm the Su-9 with guns, but in 1957 the first Soviet Air to Air guided missile entered service – the K-5 or RS-1-U Nato code AA1 Alkali designed by Grooshin's OKB-2. This short range radar guided missile was used on the Mig-17PFU and an upgraded version RS-2-U (AA-1A) was introduced the following year for the Mig-19PM. It was intended that the Su-9 would have a new longer ranged missile known as the K-6 from the Bisnovat OKB but development was heavily delayed and in the end it was cancelled, so yet another version of the K-5 was produced in 1960 that could be fired at higher speeds, and that was called the RS-2-US (S for Sukhoi) – still AA-1A. Eventually Bisnovat managed to produce a medium range missile known as the K-8 or R-8 (Nato AA-3 Anab) in 1961 with a range up to 12 miles against the 3.5 miles of the RS-2-US but this was used on the later Su-11 and Su-15, not the Su-9. It came in both Radar and Infra Red homing versions. Bisnovat also developed the IR homing short range R3S (K13) or AA-2 Atoll, a copy of the AIM-9 Sidewinder which entered service in 1960 but was mainly used by the Mig-21F-13 and PF and some later versions, but again not the Su-9 I think.

 

So, for what it is worth, there is part 2. Part 3 will finish off the history as I understand it.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bit more progress but it is a mix of good and bad as expected.

DSC04008-crop

The fuselage is a very good fit and it turns out that the bit I lost is not after all a strake on the outside of the airbrakes, but instead it is a wedge used to hold them open, and so I don't need it. That's the good news!

 

The cockpit and IP are in place but the seat stuck up too far and fouled the canopy, so I have taken it out and shortened it. The canopy itself may be a little small compared with the opening in the fuselage so I will put a strip of card round the edges to support it. I managed to download the instructions from the original UNDA version and the later Kopro one, and they are interesting. The Kopro ones are much clearer and that is how I found out about the airbrakes. Neither of those boxings have the PE that is in the one I am building, but in general they agree with the instructions I have with one very notable exception - in the pic you can see the two "panels" that close off the cockpit. Both the kit instructions and the Kopro ones show the larger piece behind the seat and the smaller one in front of the IP, though it is actually too small to close the gap completely so I will replace it with a bit of card. The UNDA instructions for the original release however show the large piece in front of the IP, where it won't actually fit, and the small piece vertical behind the seat, and are clearly wrong! Incidentally, the Kopro kit says to put 6g weight in the nose cone, so that is helpful, though the cone is a poor fit so I will probably have to pack it a bit, otherwise the weight will probably make it fall off!

 

Moving on to the backend I have more problems,

DSC04010

The kit instructions seem to show the jetpipe and blanking plate fitted on to the end of the fuselage but a look at the profile of the plane shows they must go inside as confirmed by the Kopro instructions.There are what appear to be two locating ridges and the instructions show the large blanking plug"fitted against the inner one, but it was far too big. After a lot of filing I have managed to get it in, but that leaves the "jetpipe" to fit. As I said the kit instructions are very vague but the Kopro ones confirm that it should glue into the plug. However that leaves it well short of the rear of the fuselage.and it does not even go as far as the rearmost "locating ridge". I have looked at walkround pics but they do not show the interior of the rear end, so I am uncertain just how far back the jetpipe went in the real thing.

 

*********************So here is a question to anybody out there who has any info on the jetpipe of the Su-9, either in real life, illustrations or kit form - my jetpipe will end 1.1cm short of the rear end of the fuselage, ie a scale 0.79m - is that correct or do I need to extend it, and if so, by how much?**********************

 

So, to finish my rant-

About 1100 Su-9 were built together with about 50 Su-9U two seat trainers, and it was partly replaced by the Su-11 and then retired in the 1970's after the Su-15 became available in numbers. According to my sources, the only “known combat” involved the U-2 of CIA operative Francis Gary Powers which was shot down by a SA-2 Guideline missile on May 1st 1960. When the U-2 was spotted on radar 2 Mig 19's were scrambled but had little chance of intercepting it due to the altitude it was at. They tried but could not get within missile range and one may have been shot down by an SA-2 in error (some sources say it was acting as a form of target for an optical missile interception on Powers). At the time a new Su-9 was apparently on a ferry flight between bases and although unarmed was told to intercept the U-2 and try and ram it! Reports vary on whether or not the pilot found the U-2 but in any case he did not actually attack it as far as I can tell - Serge will probably be able to add to or correct this! There may have been other combat attempts but given how secretive the Soviets were at the time we may never know. It was said to have been a pleasant plane to fly but unforgiving of pilot errors. It has somewhat been ignored in the history books, being overshadowed by the Mig-21, but led to the Su-15 Flagon series which initially had essentially the same wing, tail and main fuselage with 2 engines and side mounted intakes with a big nose radome – a legacy of the T-5 and the T-49 respectively I gather.

 

Cheers folks,

 

Pete

 

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, PeterB said:

Though the plastic was moulded in Russia, 

Pete, no Russia - Greeting from Moldova:

20201105-181333.jpg

 

😁

As I  remember that this enterprise was organized on the territory of Moldova, and therefore it has nothing to do with either the USSR or the Russian Federation, of course we can say that this is the zone of interests of Russia, but recent events show that the one that considers itself Russia has big problems with understanding its own interests  ...

20 hours ago, PeterB said:

Speaking of Serge, you will have gathered he is not impressed with my sources for the background history.

 Pete, the whole problem with your sources is that they reflect a single point of view and have no alternative, that's all.

 

About technical part, I have no objections, everything is correct enough.  Well, actually, what can be distorted in the technical part? The truth is this is where the technology of manipulation is built, receiving true technical data, readers automatically believe what is written in the historical part.

Therefore, I always say, if you's are interested, check the data for several sources, and preferably if these are archival sources.

 

About engine, this is the same as that of the Su-7.

I don't know, probably something have in this  topic:

http://forums.airforce.ru/matchast/3285-cu-9-su-11-a/

But 32 pages....

photo engine Su-9 was here:

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic.php?t=17734&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

But link is broken because of the problems that was postimage.org 

B.w. cockpit interceptor Su-9 from technical manual:

http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/matchast/26250d1283364748-062.jpg/

http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/matchast/26249d1283364748-060.jpg/

http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/matchast/26248d1283364748-058.jpg/

 

B.R.

Serge

 

P.S. As for my region, Pete, I am still sure that everything goes to what I was talking about ...

 

P.P.S. For You model was photoetched, now very rare, I published  its scanned on the Internet, but I can't find where.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Serge,

 

I am aware the original UNDA one was made in Moldova, but my Coopertiva Box says "Moulded in Russia," and distributed by MPM in Prague. Please forgive my somewhat arbitrary use of both "Russia" and "Soviet" as I have been  thoroughly confused ever since the USSR broke up. Mind you the same seems to apply to Vladimir Putin at times, but then I had better not start on "politics". That cockpit is what we over here would refer to as "a plumber's nightmare"!

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chrisj2003 said:

Pete, fascinating history; not the model, that looks hard. Must stop learning from these threads and get on with my builds. 😉

 

Chris

Hi Chris,

 

Not really that hard, just a bit tedious. Once I have decided what I am doing with the jetpipe, the fuselage is ready to go together. The wings need sanding down, as do the air brakes, and after that it is just a case of sticking on the u/c, tanks and missiles mostly.. I better get the Master probes ordered I guess as I will be needing them before too long!

 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PeterB said:

Box says "Moulded in Russia," and distributed by MPM in Prague.

Hmmm🤔, probably I sometimes don't know and press-form  left the territory of Moldova and return back?

 

4 hours ago, PeterB said:

Please forgive my somewhat arbitrary use of both "Russia" and "Soviet" as I have been  thoroughly confused ever since the USSR broke up. Mind you the same seems to apply to Vladimir Putin at times, but then I had better not start on "politics". 

Pete, "forgive me" for what?  And I don't see any reasons for an apology on Your side ...

About other, You right, best it is better to make models than to discuss what is happening now, not because of this there will be a holivar on GB, no - here are all adults and educated people, it will just need to write a lot of text and give a lot of links to sources, but when in this  case do models?

 

B.R.

Serge

Edited by Aardvark
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was right - it was tedious, but not difficult. The ruddy airbrakes are curved which complicated matters and I may have filed more off my fingers than the plastic, but having reduced the thickness to half the original they now fit quite well - probably just need a touch of PPP.

DSC04014-crop

As you will see I finished boxing in the cockpit and added some strip inside the opening to support the canopy. I managed to get 5g of lead actually inside the nose cone and another 3g behind it - the lead window strip I use makes it relatively easy to roll it up to get in the cone. Rightly or wrongly I have painted the cone US Medium Green which has a slightly bluish tint, and will do the same at the top of the vertical tail - the alternative seems to be a blue/grey and no doubt some will disagree with my choice, but I found a couple of builds by "Russian" modellers and they had also gone for green. I also found that the kit they were building - 2014 Trumpeter 1/48 - had a full length tailpipe! As my old F-106 is wrecked and I am building a replacement in this GB, I hacked down the one from the old kit and fitted it - OK it is undoubtedly nothing like the one in a real Su-9 but once the fuselage is closed then not very much will be visible.

 

Once the wings, horizontal tail, rudder and nose ring are on there is not much left to do, though the nosewheel could be fiddly if I decide to add the etch. The Kopro instructions suggest the wheel bays and the inside of the doors are painted light blue and the nose ring in light grey - does anybody have any ideas about that? I am intending to paint the plane in "White Aluminium" with some normal Aluminium panels, and was thinking of a "Polished Aluminium" nose ring myself.

 

Coming along quite well so far but I am keeping my fingers crossed.

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In spite of the various adjustments and modifictaions, that did not take long!

DSC04016-crop

I have thinned the wings down a bit but the inboard leading edges are still rather thick - oh well, it will have to do! I need to do a bit of filling, and box in the wheel wells, but it is nearly ready for primer! May need to reprofile the fin and rudder as well.

 

I think that will do for today.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, PeterB said:

The Kopro instructions suggest the wheel bays and the inside of the doors are painted light blue and the nose ring in light grey - does anybody have any ideas about that? I am intending to paint the plane in "White Aluminium" with some normal Aluminium panels, and was thinking of a "Polished Aluminium" nose ring myself.

To the garbage this instructions suggest from 

Kopro instructions!

Grey painted was inside wheel bay.

"Polished Aluminium" nose ring this is a normal decision.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • PeterB changed the title to Sukhoi Su-9 -The Flying Pipe ***FINISHED***

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...