Jump to content

Ivan Ivanovich

LSP_Members
  • Content Count

    121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Ivan Ivanovich last won the day on September 5

Ivan Ivanovich had the most liked content!

About Ivan Ivanovich

  • Rank
    LSP Junkie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sipping vodka in a shady spot under a MiG-23..
  • Interests
    Scale modelling (1/32, 1/48 and 1/35), military aviation and aviation history.

Recent Profile Visitors

505 profile views
  1. Ivan Ivanovich

    Undersize Trump. MiG-21 MF Fuselage?

    IMHO, simply extending the fwd fuselage by 8 millimetres without knowing the "root of all evil" is one of the best ways to make things even worse.
  2. Ivan Ivanovich

    Undersize Trump. MiG-21 MF Fuselage?

    Decent type documentation (manuals/handbooks, etc.), tons of photographs, stickers to mark fuselage reference points, good old tape measure and an actual airframe to take measurements from. It's fairly safe to assume that Eduard had "access all areas" while doing the R&D work.
  3. Ivan Ivanovich

    Undersize Trump. MiG-21 MF Fuselage?

    The Eduard MiG-21MF drawings (kit marking guide) are indeed well respected and most likely the "least inaccurate" 2D renditions around to date. I wish I had the time to dive back into our MiG-21 scan and photogrammetry data in order to draw up a set of vectorised 2D scale plans, but the MiG-23 had (and still has) a much higher priority. Just for the fun of it - WWP (blue outlines) versus Eduard:
  4. Ivan Ivanovich

    Undersize Trump. MiG-21 MF Fuselage?

    The WWP drawings aren't perfect, but the overall dimensions and proportions are way more accurate than one might suspect. The specific dimensions available via various MiG-21 aerodynamics/systems handbooks are reliable. When checked against the "real thing", the deviations are virtually negligible. (Back in 2014, we made 3D object scans, using both stationary and hand-held devices, of a MiG-21MF, bis, a MiG-23MF and an MLA)
  5. Ivan Ivanovich

    Italeri TF-104G

    Just an observation while waiting for my two TF-104G kits to arrive... <drool> Bundesluftwaffle F-104F's had a comparatively short career and had been withrdrawn from operational use by 31 December 1971. 1968/1969 Martin Baker GQ7(A) fleet retrofit - YES J79-MTU-J1K fleet retrofit - NO
  6. Ivan Ivanovich

    Is 6,500 kits too many?

    Touché! That makes two of us...
  7. Ivan Ivanovich

    Is 6,500 kits too many?

    6.500 kits is just about right to render an average European garage useless. Unless you don't mind parking your car outside. Over thepast five years, I've managed to downsize my stash from more than 750 kits down to a fairly "manageable" size of 315 kits. Mainly 48th, 32nd and 35th scale stuff plus a good dozen of well assorted Russian/Soviet subjects in 1/72.
  8. Ivan Ivanovich

    Italeri TF-104G

    F-104F ("Version C") -> no ventral pylon, no gunsight, empty/blanked off instrument panel centre colums. F-104F Front IP (typical): F-104F Rear IP (typical):
  9. Ivan Ivanovich

    F-104G Seat

    I wasn't aware of the upgraded Italeri F-104G/S boxing (No.2514) with AG52 markings. Blimey! I've just buried my initial plans to purchase two KH F-5F's and ordered two of each of the latest Italeri F-104G/S and TF-104G boxings instead. So much for "making plans". But I couldn't resist any longer... "The flesh is weak"
  10. Ivan Ivanovich

    Kinetic Kfir and Mirage

    Chances are good, but I wouldn't hold my breath as to the currently propagated release schedule. 2020 seems like a more realistic timeframe.
  11. Ivan Ivanovich

    German F-104 Camo Colors

    Even freshly applied RAL 9006 has a very dull metallic sheen. Like Jennings said, nothing remotely shiny. Many conventional aluminised topcoats consist of clear base lacquer with a more or less specified amount of aluminium powder to be added. RAL 9006 isn't much different, save that it uses a light grey base substrate. The older a RAL 9006 topcoat gets, the duller it will appear due to oxidising Al particles. On operational aircraft, however, you could still spot that dull, subtle metallic sheen - even if "well aged". The belly of the beast...
  12. Ivan Ivanovich

    German F-104 Camo Colors

    The radomes had a so-called "rain erosion protective coating" applied that was less prone to the weathering effects than the predominantly used fuselage epoxy/PU topcoats. The radomes just didn't age that quickly, hence their rather fresh and consistent appearance.
  13. Ivan Ivanovich

    German F-104 Camo Colors

  14. Ivan Ivanovich

    F-104G Seat

    Since you mentioned 1967... If it's going to be a German RF-104G, you might want to consider that the German Air Force was using a different tactical code system before 1968: two letters + three digits. (e.g. AG51 -> EA-coded, AG52 -> EB-coded, "E" denoting a recce aircraft) For a short period, 1966-1968, the tactical numbers were modified by adorning them with a white outline.
  15. Ivan Ivanovich

    German F-104 Camo Colors

    Given the photographs were taken in June 1965, it's hard to imagine that none of the depicted Zippers has been wearing its Norm 63 camouflage for longer than two years. Back in those days, the vast majority of F-104's was parked in the open - fully exposed to the German weather. Before 1967 hardenend a/c shelters were somewhat of an extremely rare sight on GAF bases.
×