1to1scale Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, DeanKB said: I'd be staggered if the kit is that far out. My money would be on the drawing being wrong - very wrong. To me - and I don't model jets, so what would I know? - compared to a real MiG-21MF, the nose of the drawing just looks waaay too long. I thought the same when I saw that drawing, it looked a little big in front. Looking at pictures, the trumpeter “looks” correct. I’m sure it’s off a little, but that drawing may be too. Edited September 16, 2018 by 1to1scale Edit: looking at pictures again, it does look like the trumpeter is a little more tapered on the bottom of the fuselage, but to me, I don’t know if fixing it would be worth it. Harold, LSP_K2 and Alain Gadbois 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Gadbois Posted September 16, 2018 Author Share Posted September 16, 2018 After all this, I guess I will need some actual measurements from a Mig-21. This will clear up the uncertainty about the kit. I think the kit is short in the nose area, but it seems it is all proportional so it is not that obvious when looking at the kit. I certainly never suspected this until my little investigation this week, and it is too early to make any final decision until original info is found. Thanks all! Alain phasephantomphixer and D.B. Andrus 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Mike Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 What drawings are available, and which are considered the most accurate? as Jen said, the Eduard decal sheets are well respected(accurate) but what are they based on? My first impression given the series of complex shapes at the nose, is that some incremental changes may be best, as opposed to one larger modification. D.B. Andrus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Ivanovich Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 (edited) 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: Edited September 16, 2018 by Ivan Ivanovich Alain Gadbois, D.B. Andrus and Martinnfb 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_K2 Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 19 hours ago, Dave Williams said: Back to the original question, I don’t think anyone has brought this up before, and therefore I don’t think anyone has even attempted a fix. Probably because most don't see a problem that needs to be fixed, I certainly never did. Interesting discussion though. Alain Gadbois 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Ivanovich Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 3 hours ago, LSP_Mike said: (...) As Jen said, the Eduard decal sheets are well respected(accurate) but what are they based on? (...) 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. Alain Gadbois 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phasephantomphixer Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 Ain't nuthin like the real thing baby. who has access to one at their local museum? I did in Calif. but not up here in WA. Alain Gadbois 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Ray Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 Well, there is a MiG-21MF at the Evergreen Museum in McMinnville. It is only about an hour away from me, but not sure when I can get out there. The MiG is one you can get up close and personal with, too, so taking measurements would be pretty easy. It sure looks to me like Eduard used the WWP drawings on their kit! Alain Gadbois, phasephantomphixer and Harold 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luca Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 Alain, extends the forward fuselage of 8mm it's the best bet IMHO Alain Gadbois 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Ivanovich Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 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. LSP_K2 and Alain Gadbois 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menelaos Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 to find accurate drawing is one thing, but which are accurate?? I wont change the kit.... things maybe get worse.... LSP_K2 and Alain Gadbois 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menelaos Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 or use that pic for it: Alain Gadbois and LSP_Paul 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Gadbois Posted September 17, 2018 Author Share Posted September 17, 2018 In the end, the fuselage will be 8mm longer, but it all has to be checked and planned to find and correct the errors without creating more in other places. The clear parts cannot be changed so this has to be considered also. A perfect length model that looks wrong is not something that I want of course! Alain Ivan Ivanovich and LSP_K2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_K2 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 5 hours ago, Alain Gadbois said: In the end, the fuselage will be 8mm longer, but it all has to be checked and planned to find and correct the errors without creating more in other places. The clear parts cannot be changed so this has to be considered also. A perfect length model that looks wrong is not something that I want of course! Alain If indeed there is an error somewhere, be it dimensionally or proportionally, by all means have at it. I'm concerned (in my case), that a whole lot of work would take place, for a visually negligible improvement, but that's just me. Alain Gadbois 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luca Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 11 hours ago, Ivan Ivanovich said: 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. check some pics to make the appropriate proportions LSP_Paul, Alain Gadbois and Ivan Ivanovich 2 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