1/?? - Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 "Fishbed" by Rye Field Model -

[Homebee]

Rye Field Model is to release a Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 "Fishbed" kit - Scale (1/32nd or 1/35th)? Variant (M/MF/R or J-7C/D)?

Source: https://www.facebook.com/ryefieldmodel/posts/pfbid022J46VfdcfVUtuF464SWDMZje3yiTtQk1DBNqrzt3yCX146cssZZpzxpUvTdP4wTXl

 

Quote

NEW SCALE NEW PRODUCT!!

 

 

V.P.

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by Homebee

[one72]

Looking forward to more updates on this. 

[Piotr Mikolajski]

Missiles looks like AA-1 Alkali, so these may also be early MiG-21 versions.

 

[Laurent]

It looks like a 3rd generation MiG-21 (S/R/SM/M/MF)

- two pylons on each wing

- anti-FOD plates under the auxiliary air intakes

- location of flap actuator fairing suggests an SPS equipped aircraft (blown flaps)

 

The AA-1 missiles seem anachronic. And the canopy cross-section is parabolic when it should be more semi-circular.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Laurent

[drake122]

This surely must be 32nd or 35th scale... or maybe 16th? 🤣... Eduard has all other scales covered, pretty much.

[Piotr Mikolajski]

6 hours ago, Laurent said:

The AA-1 missiles seem anachronic.

 

AFAIK the Warsaw Pact countries used them up to and including the MF version. How much sense there was in this is a separate question.

[Laurent]

8 hours ago, Piotr Mikolajski said:

 

AFAIK the Warsaw Pact countries used them up to and including the MF version. How much sense there was in this is a separate question.

I seem to remember they were used in training to empty stockpiles. Not an unrealistic payload but not an operational one.

[SprueMan]

2 hours ago, Laurent said:

I seem to remember they were used in training to empty stockpiles. Not an unrealistic payload but not an operational one.

Yes, they were also dismantled and rebuilt to create flying targets for missiles.

[Harold55]

If it says "New Scale" then that would preclude 1/35.  I would not be surprised at 1/48, as this is a popular subject and certainly a popular scale.  I don't think it matters much if Eduard also has this.  

[Piotr Mikolajski]

10 hours ago, Laurent said:

I seem to remember they were used in training to empty stockpiles. Not an unrealistic payload but not an operational one.

 

Poland retired these missiles in 2003 and we has still around 1000 pieces. As @SprueMan mentioned, many were converted to targets. We have SRCP for air-to-air combat and SPCP-WR for AA defence training, usually launched from Su-22s.

 

[ICMF]

Probably a dumb question, but what's with the double-bubble on the drop tanks?  Just a byproduct of the perspective (it's not head-on, which itself is kind of weird, actually), or were they actually like that?

[Bozothenutter]

2 hours ago, ICMF said:

Probably a dumb question, but what's with the double-bubble on the drop tanks?  Just a byproduct of the perspective (it's not head-on, which itself is kind of weird, actually), or were they actually like that?

I think the tanks are angled down a bit....

[Laurent]

2 hours ago, ICMF said:

Probably a dumb question, but what's with the double-bubble on the drop tanks?  Just a byproduct of the perspective (it's not head-on, which itself is kind of weird, actually), or were they actually like that?

I rather think the CAD designer didn't clean up the project. There are two 800L centerline tank subsets placed at slightly different height and the CAD designer forgot to remove one of them.

 

I had some time to play with Paint and I tried to make the model cross section more a little more accurate...

... but I believe it's too late: the CAD model is probably too advanced to correct any shape issues.

[MiG-Mech]

I see in this graphic a 1/72 MiG-21bis.

[Piotr Mikolajski]

9 hours ago, ICMF said:

Probably a dumb question, but what's with the double-bubble on the drop tanks?

 

Probably fins, if I understand correctly what you're asking for.

  

9 hours ago, ICMF said:

Just a byproduct of the perspective (it's not head-on, which itself is kind of weird, actually), or were they actually like that?

 

Well...

BTW, judging the accuracy of a model based on renders really doesn't make sense.

 

[RupertTheBear]

I hope it's going to be a MiG-21-93 or an Indian Bison, something even Eduard hasn't touched while working their way through all other variants and markings on the planet. Surely the world doesn't need yet another MiG-21Bis kit, at least not in 1/48th or 1/72.

[Laurent]

14 hours ago, Harold55 said:

If it says "New Scale" then that would preclude 1/35.  I would not be surprised at 1/48, as this is a popular subject and certainly a popular scale.  I don't think it matters much if Eduard also has this.  

I'm starting to think that it's intended to be a 1/48 indeed. RFMs main production is 1/35 armour and the toolings of 1/48 single-engine jets is similar in size.

Eduard kits may not be very well distributed outside of Europe so a 1/48 kit would make some sense for the producer's point of view.

[David Koktavý]

11 hours ago, MiG-Mech said:

I see in this graphic a 1/72 MiG-21bis.

I think it is not real, but I wish to be real 👍

[Borisz]

On 10/30/2023 at 6:07 PM, Laurent said:

The AA-1 missiles seem anachronic. And the canopy cross-section is parabolic when it should be more semi-circular.

 

For example, the Hungarian Air Force used it up to the MF variants, in the '90s too.
 

 

 

 

Displaying a Hungarian MiG-21 PF or MF vith a pair of K-5 and K-13 missiles would be correct - with the socialist star shaped insignia for sure, and IIRC this is okay with displaying with the post '90 insignia too. As they had These two missiles for air to air.

Was the K-15 outdated by the '90s? Yes. They were carrying it however.

 

Anyway, I dont want to go offtopic and all in all I would rather say it is mildly funny insted of anachronic.

[Laurent]

I was puzzled by the stabiliser dihedral and the big distance between wing and stabilizer.

Vladimir Klimov did good MiG-21 drawings used in Yefim Gordon books. The MiG-21bis drawings are interesting because there are two types on front views in it:

- fuselage axis perpendicular to drawings plane

- aircraft on it landing gear so ground plane perpendicular to drawings plane

The second drawing helps to understand the RFM silhouette: stabilizers"dihedral" and wing cross-section come from the nose-down attitude. The angle between fuselage axis and the normal axis is smaller in the RFM silhouette than in Klimov however.

What makes the silhouette look weird is that it represents an aircraft resting on its landing gear when the landing gear isn't represented.

[tony.t]

If it's a 1/32 MiG-21 I'll be over the moon! That would be the best news in years! 

 

If it turns out to be a 1/48 or 1/35 Chinese J-7 or MiG-21 Fishbed series I'm still tempted, but not quite so much. 

 

Tony 

[AaCee26]

Looks like this one has the large, flat tank in the fuselage rack.

 

Cheers,

 

AaCee