|
|
|
|
Last Updated: Aug 21st, 2020 - 13:06:35 |
Two kits of the same aircraft, both seemingly accurate in outline and major details. But what a difference! A-Model kits are rather variable in quality, usually heavily moulded and needing lots of cleaning up. This MiG-3 certainly needs that (and how!), which coupled with an awkward design means it is a ***** to build. Barry Wood abandoned his in disgust, so I’m not tempted to start mine. Especially now that ICM have released their MiG-3.
I like ICM kits, as they choose great subjects (Russian!) and they are continuously improving. This new MiG-3 is something of a quantum leap over the Yak-7s, themselves very nice kits and better than the previous Yak-9s. Cleanly and crisply moulded, very detailed, this MiG-3 is the one to go for. As with the Yak-9 and Yak-7 kits, a complete engine is included. With the earlier kits I left out the rather crude engine mouldings, but here I’m rather tempted to build it up as a separate model – it comes as 20-odd parts, including engine ancillaries and engine mount! – as it looks very accurate compared to my photos of preserved AM-35s.
Construction of the ICM kit is rather complex, but it is a clever piece of design allowing them to accurately reproduce the rather odd MiG-3 contours and provide very good wing root air intakes. Much to my surprise, it all went together very well (after some careful dry runs!), and very little filler was needed.
The two kits’ instruction sheets rather mirror the mouldings – A-Model’s usual crude and simplifed effort versus a very comprehensive ICM booklet. Both, however, manage to include reasonably comprehensive colour details.
As I said at the beginning, both kits look pretty accurate. In fact, they are so similar to each other in shape, size and details that I suspect they’ve used the same set of plans to work from! ICM’s fuselage is a mm or two longer than A-Model’s, but otherwise they match, as do the wings and tailplanes. ICM’s canopy is MUCH better, clear and sharply moulded, whereas A-Model’s is lumpy and full of bubbles, as well as having a poor shape. ICM fall down on the heavy detailing of the control surfaces (remove!), but provide that rarity in single-engine fighter kits - a properly offset fin! Undercarriage – no contest. The ICM version is beautiful, doors included, almost Accurate Miniatures standard, whereas A-Model’s would not be out of place on a ‘50s Aurora kit (oops, showing my age there!).
ICM also supply details not found on the other kit, like a good set of underwing rockets and separate wing slats. They also supply underwing gun pods, but these are NOT correct for this version of the MiG (see below).
Both kits provide an awesome number of colour scheme options, 7 for A-Model and 10 for ICM. Only a couple are duplicated, but these show up the superiority of the ICM decals (and the much better camouflage scheme diagrams). I would advise some caution, though, as not all the options are relevant to the version provided by the kits (see below) – check your references! (A-Model: V1/2/3 OK, V5 wrong, V6/7 dubious; ICM: no.3 wrong, 1&2 dubious, others OK.) Do note that not all a/c had radios - the ICM drawings correctly show which did/did not.
Both kits represent the same, late production, version, rather than the earlier one of the Classic Airframes kit. Mind you, most MiG-3 references cheerfully ignore the rather significant differences between early and late versions, so some care is needed in looking at photos and deciding on colour schemes. Look closely at the top of the cowling, and compare with the sketches here. Late machines were slightly longer, and also had wing slats (not often visible in photos), and no fittings for wing guns – though these were rarely fitted to earlier aircraft in any case. (The guns were in underwing pods, with the ammunition trays in the wings.)
Ignore the A-Model kit, it’s too crude a basis for a decent 1/48th MiG-3. The ICM effort is so much better that it has to be the first choice. Indeed, by anyone’s standards it is an excellent kit, and if promised future releases (TB-3, etc.!) match this I shall be delighted.
Roger Wallsgrove
WARNING!
A couple of us have had bad experiences with masking and spraying ICM canopies. Using liquid masking media (Maskol & others) coupled with sprayed acrylic paints, there has been an unpleasant reaction between the masking and the paint, leading to damage to the plastic. The use of tape, BareMetal foil or Parafilm masking is therefore recommended instead - and check that your chosen paint doesn’t react with ICM’s clear parts!
Anyone else has similar problems, with ICM or other kits? Reports please!
© Copyright 2004-2015; VenturaPublications.com and contributors.
Top of Page
|
|
|
|
