thierry laurent Posted March 22, 2014 Author Share Posted March 22, 2014 Well, to be frank I cheated a little bit as I did not consider correcting the belly slope between the air intakes. I took this decision for two reasons: First, this will be totally invisible and the Trumpy kit profile is already better than the Revell one regarding this. I won't do it on my kit but this is even less obvious when the ferry tank is used. Second, I had already cut so much plastic including the air intakes that cutting as well the belly between them would have resulted in the complete loss of structural homogeneousness of the area. To say it short, it would have increased far more the dreadful risk of misalignment. In fact, I love cross-kitting challenges. BTW, I still have to end my "Frankenzero"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 Ok, Last time I mentioned the wings. Revell wings are one of the rare areas that is more or less acceptable on the German kit. However, as Karl's build linked in the first page showed it, the details are noticeably wrong: - wrong dimensions of the movable surfaces - fantasy panel and rivet lines - erroneous wingtip shape - wrong pylon locations - erroneous wing-fuselage connection AND all movable surface are not separate! So, this reasonably good part of the kit still asks for major work. Hence, it is useless to say that assessing the possibility to use the Chinese kit wings was another motive to mainly rely on the Trumpeter offering. A quick assessment showed that this kit wings had: - accurate dimensions - correct and separate movable surfaces - quite accurate panel lines - correct pylon locations However, we still need to backdate the type to the wing of the earlier 9-12 type. This means: - changing the wingtip shape (I cut the tip fairing from the Revell kit to add it on the Chinese parts). In any case, the Revell wingtip also asks for correction and moving the fairing. So the workload is somewhat similar. - obviously, this results in some panel line changes. - shortening the ailerons and slats as they were longer on the M variant. The removed sections were simply glued to the wings and CA glue was used to hide the seams. - fill the external pylon holes as the earlier marks had not this additional missile pylon. Without any doubt, this is far easier. Here's a view of the underside of one of the Trumpy wings: The filled in pylon holes are obvious. Zero77 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 This similar view shows that part of the ailerons and slats were glued to the wing: The holes in the wing tab are intended to use screws to have a strong bond between the wings and the fuselage. Another plus of the Chinese kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 And finally a view of the upper side (unfortunately a little bit blurry). I still need to re-scribe some panel lines. However, all the ones to be removed have already been filled in and sanded. Next step will be the rear fuselage or the UZR missiles.Wait and see. Zero77 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbetty Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 this is a brilliant solution! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 Well, at least your experience helped me a lot! I enlarged the Zlinek plans and have to say that they are invaluable to build an early MIG-29! I also enlarged them for the missiles as we will see that the picture is not particularly encouraging when we look at the plastic warload :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 28, 2014 Author Share Posted March 28, 2014 Ok, Now, we will have a look at the tail-rudder area. A comparison of the parts from both kits results in interesting differences (to say the least!). The following picture shows the difference in dimension. Ouch! It makes you wonder if the tail was not enlarged when they made new versions! As pointed in Chris Wilson instructions of his correction set, the upper profile of the Revell one is incorrect but the differences are far more numerous. The Revell kit also has a notoriously badly shaped flare launcher fairing. Zacto gives you a very nice part to correct this. However, my plane (an early batch one) had no such launcher. In fact, it seems they were added when the production was already launched as the Russians took the lessons of the airplane vulnerability to the SAM systems used during the Kippur war. The installation of the launchers had a side-effect: this improved the longitudinal stability of the plane and the lower fins were finally considered as being useless. This explains why they were only found on the early planes. If there is any interest, I may publish a list of the most obvious differences between the different MIG batches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 28, 2014 Author Share Posted March 28, 2014 Second look at the tail area. The MIG-29M 9-15 front section of the tails looks identical to the one of the early 9-12 plane. So, this gives me another good reason to rely on the Chinese kit parts. I did not believe that the tail surface changed. The 4+ booklet plans are far from perfect. I identified shape errors here and there so did not want to use them if another option was available. In comparison the ones of the Zlinek book are far better but the booklet has only 9-12 and 9-13 drawings. So, I finally relied on the ones of the big Yefim Gordon's book. I enlarged both plans, cut the tails and put them, aligned in the same drawing. The left side drawing shows the 9-15 tail whereas the right one shows the early 9-12 with the fin and no flare launcher. Here's the result: This shows clearly that the tail main dimensions did not change. This was also confirmed by a side picture of the tail with vertical dimensions I found on a Russian forum two years ago. Unfortunately, the page disappeared in the meanwhile. :-( However, the dimensions of the Trumpeter one and of the plans one are not identical. So some changes will be necessary. Last, this early batch of planes got an extension retrofitted on the rudder rear edge. I'll have to take care of this as well. See you soon. Thierry Zero77 and dutik 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark31 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Great work u are showing here. If i see this i dondt whant to start my mig-29. Keep going Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share Posted March 29, 2014 Great work u are showing here. If i see this i dondt whant to start my mig-29. Keep going Mark Thanks Mark! In fact, it is possible to have a quite good result with the Revell kit plus the Zacto goodies. It is also possible to simply add the Trumpeter wheel wells to the Revell kit. And to avoid the problems linked to the spine, it is still possible to choose the 9-13 conversion from Zacto. So, don't be dispaired, there are other options. Personally, I considered this project as a personal challenge, not as the best option to recommend to everyone! I was at my club meeting yesterday evening and happily found solutions for the elevators and the tails. To say it short I'll rely as well on the Chinese parts! It is a little bit frustrating to see what I'll finally use from the Revell kit... :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepard Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 (edited) wow... this will be a stunning one....love this plane.... cheers shep Edited March 29, 2014 by shepard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 31, 2014 Author Share Posted March 31, 2014 Hello Gents, I was a little bit worried by the conflicting dimensions of the tail. However, as the Trumpeter one looks correct and it corresponds closely to the plans in the Gordon book, I decided to keep it as such. This simplifies the process! The picture below show the main changes to do. Except the rudder and its hinges that will ask for a little bit of work the most noticeable changes will be quite simple to do: cutting the rear edge slope and filling various panel lines. Obviously the antennas will also have to be changed (but later as they are quite fragile). Another problem solved. Next step will be the choice of the best solution for the elevators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted March 31, 2014 Author Share Posted March 31, 2014 I forgot adding this picture. It shows more clearly the wingtip, flap and aileron length changes to be done to backdate the wing to the 9-12 type. Zero77 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted April 1, 2014 Author Share Posted April 1, 2014 Hi, We will now have a look at the elevator parts. The problem is the following one: - REVELL part: not fully accurate shape, fantasy panel lines and heavy rivet lines. - TRUMPETER part: correct for a 9-15 MIG (so it is far too large for a 9-12 as the picture shows it), accurate panel and rivet lines. Again, I think it is probably easier to convert the Chinese part. Zero77 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thierry laurent Posted April 1, 2014 Author Share Posted April 1, 2014 Initially I made the corrections recommended by Zacto. This noticeably improved the look but I'm still not fully convinced by the result. So back to the Trumpeter parts. Zero77 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now