Sovietwarplanes

(Cross-posted from Hyperscale. Sorry, but am desperate for encouragement... ;-)

With impeccable timing, I just managed to finish my AM 1/48 Sturmovik in time for the new Tamiya to arrive...

I wanted to do this one in a diorama setting, to convey the, erm, "agrarian" look of this aircraft. The czechs apparently used to nickname their Shturmoviks "Kombajn", or "Combine Harvester"...

The depicted airdraft never existed in this form, as the "Mstitel"/"Avenger" inscription, together with the white trim on prop and nacelles were apparently added b y an idle photo censor. After reading about this, I tend to view many on the pariotic slogans shown in soviet photos with distrust - I wonder how many of these were simply painted on either just before the propaganda photo-op or even after, in the dark room? However, this one was just too cool not to do anyway.

This model has been a struggle lasting for more years than I care to admit - let's just say that I am blessed with two kids, two cars and one house more than I had when I started it...

it is the Accurate Miniatures kit with the kitchen sink thrown in: kitbashed motor from the wonderful ICM Mig3, exhausts and spinner/prop from Quickboost, bomb bay and flaps as well as parts of the interior and exterior is Eduard PE. Scratchbuilt the VYa-23 and ShVAK cannon/MG, used minimeca tubing for barrels. Decals are Aeromaster, Paints a mix of Tamiya, Gunze and AKAN.

(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8155/6996420042_d2a88ebb20_b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/83471605@N00/6996420042/)


(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7138/6996422826_76e19145b5_b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/83471605@N00/6996422826/)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7232/6996430352_d65076474f_b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/83471605@N00/6996430352/)



Diorama accessories are from two different ICM Soviet ground crew and pilot kits, one ICM RAF ground crew and pilots kit (The later ICM 1/48 figures are the best I've ever seen), a heavily modified Tamiya GAZ driver for rear gunner. FAB-100s come from a CMK Shturmovik armament set, and were probably the most difficult part of the build - hence the tarp... I scratchbuilt the tool box and ammo box after period photos. Monkay wrench and onther tools were sourced from the Eduard US navy ground crew, which I bought for about 20 bucks just for those. I figure the cost per gram for that monkey wrench on the table is well above that for crack cocaine.

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7132/6996420978_19d53a6f5d_b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/83471605@N00/6996420978/)

(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8012/7142511443_d2887bd3aa_b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/83471605@N00/7142511443/)

Some sources say that the reflector sight was only used in the early models. Obviously, this sight was retrofitted onto the plane by the crafty rear gunner Igor, who is now busy trying to chat up the lovely Serzhant Irina...

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/6996419252_7c82387303_b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/83471605@N00/6996419252/)

Hi Kukuruznik,  :)
Nice model and a realistic diorama.  I can't see anything "agrarian", it looks like a field maintenance scene...  those bombs and rockets are somewhat unnecessary without any armorers - I don't think they would leave them on the ground and then walk away...


FYI, Il-2 "White 25" with the "Mstitel" inscription and white lightning did exist!!!  Those elements were not added (retouched) to the photo by propaganda department.  This was discussed on now defunct "modeling VVS" forum.  John Thompson analyzed some of the photos and it turned out that lightning appears on a couple of photos taken at different angles.  The photographer is known, the date when he flew over Berlin is known, the unit is known, only the pilot is uncertain.
Planes were photographed by the official photographer for propaganda purposes.  Plane with the lightning did appear on a photomontage at the end of the war and later after the war (in 1070es), but it was clear what was added and how.

I have some wartime German magazines "Signal" and have an idea how German propaganda worked.  there are retouched photos, colorized photos, there are nonsenses of all kinds.  Yet when modelers discuss photos of German planes, they never  suspect propaganda lies.  How about those victories painted for propaganda photographers?

Anyway, in the case of this Il-2, it appeared on propaganda photos but the lightning was real... ;D  Same with other Soviet inscriptions!

Cheers,
KL  


  

Hey KL - thanks for your comments! The story behind the diorama is this - plane was just about to be bombed up before the mission when the maintenance crew or the pilot discovered a hydraulic failure - note that the FAB:s are fused, but the rockets aren't? So now, they have aborted the mission, and trying to establish what's wrong - hence the troubled faces on the "grease monkeys, and the happy smile on the gunner. See, it all figures out! (also, I wanted to show the loadout in a good way...) :-)

"Agrarian" refers more to the look of the Ilyusha - it really has the look of farming machinery, compared to the beautiful lines of the Yak series and the later La:s.

Cool info about the Mstitel slogan - I've seen the same slogan on a B-25. I found an old tread with a long answer by you here on sovietwarplanes, will give it a thorough read. Would be great to know that it actually existed! While I am at it, I have two questions for you, as you seem like a very knowledgeable guy, and native russian speaker to boot:

1) My next major project will be a super detailed Peshka Razvedchik of 99 GvDRAP, with a huge snarling lion painted on the nose. I found a pic of this beauty on p 39 of "Pe-2 in action", but there are no pictures of anything but the nose. Do you know of any other pictures of this plane showing bort number, other marknings and camouflage? What camo would you recommend for that one - all AMT-4, AMT-4/AMT6 or AMT4/12/1?

2) Slightly stranger question: I am looking for a caption for another diorama I am working on, showing a couiple of infantrymen dragging a wounded pilot out of his crashed I-16 while under fire. I would like the russian caption to read something like "Let's get the f**k out of here" in "correct" "Mat" idom. Would that be something like "Pashli, pashli, mat' voyu"?

My colloquial russian is not very impressive, as you probably understand... Hope I do not offend you with the last question - my few russian words were learnt during the Swedish military service...

regards,
Peter

Answers:
1)  no other photos.  Photo was originally published in a little buklet by Kotelnikov & Leiko in early 1990es, drawing of this Pe-2 was on the covers.  It is a late Pe-2 (359th series or later) and it should be camouflaged in 1943 3-colour scheme.  Guards status also points to the second half of the war -  Regiment became "Guards" in June 1943.  So, that early drawing is wrong...

(http://zoneland.ru/pics/images4/5699091.jpg.jpg)

2)  >:(

Cheers,
KL

Excellent modeling Peter, I'm impressed!

Many of the armor slogans were chalked on for photo ops, significant events such as the receipt of new vehicles and the markings would simply wear/wash off. I don't see why this wouldn't also apply to the air force as well.

I wish I could help with the idiomatic Russian but the best I can do also is a remnant of my military service: I can ask for a beer and shout "don't shoot--I know military secrets!!" in at least 12 languages. ;D

Beautiful diorama, Peter!  Brilliant work!  Konstantin, regarding Nemetskiy propaganda, I'm always amazed at how trusting most Western modellers and historians are when it comes to the Luftwaffe, for instance, the extraordinary kill claims the Luftwaffe posted whilst fighting in the Soviet Union.  In one particular series of books, the Luftwaffe claims, no matter how outrageous (55 kills with only three losses, or some such nonsense), are treated as if they came directly from God, whilst the Soviet claims are always treated with great suspicion.

Regards,

Jason

Peter, you are correct about the internal gunsight - it evidently wasn't used in later Shturmoviks, like the arrow.  How hard would it be to just "pluck" it out of the cockpit?  Of course, that's easy for me to suggest, since it's not my model.  Still, overall the model does look great!

Regards,

Jason

@Konstantin - thank you for your help on that Pe-2! Now, I don't want to be flogging a dead horse here, but when I look at that lion there is something slightly weird with the front end. The quality of the photo is not too good, but it looks to me like the outline of the lion has  been touched up (on the photo) with quite a heavy hand at some time. I have noticed the same thing with other photos, notably a 3 IAK Yak-3 that had its "angel's wing" insignia redone on the negative. Would this simply be the result of someone trying to compensate for low-quality film and development process, or is there something else going on here?

Great about the 3-tone camo - that Pe-2 will be something special with the lion and the camouflage.The yellow spinners have to go, though. My best guess would be white spinners, with no other theater markings, as this was a recon aircraft. Hence more demand for a good camouflage, and less for quick recognition. Am I thinking right?

Regards,
Peter

Hi Kukuruznik,
the diorama is really beautiful for his technical and photographic quality.

About the Pe-2, the caption and the exhaust pipes show that it's a 'series 359', introduced in mid 1944. The caption of the drawing on the rear of the cover says that the plane flew on Eastern Prussia in late 1944. So, there are no doubts that it utilized a camo of green/dark grey/light brown paints, probably with victory stars (if not even with kremlin stars, that was the exception).
About the spinners, I don't think they are white, my guess is an alternative between yellow and light blue, possibly the same of the undersurfaces. In the lower part, they look similar to the coolers intake, on the sides they seem as dark as the lion and on their upper, lightened part, they are still darker than the sky.

Regards
Massimo

"Victory" star???  "Kremlin" star???

Like so many other things in his research, Pilawskii made up these names.  Nobody in Soviet Union called 1943 markings a "Victory star".  

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/URSS-Russian_aviation_red_star.svg/252px-URSS-Russian_aviation_red_star.svg.png)

"Kremlin star" was a decorative element seen on few planes, something that should be treated as a personal marking - nothing to do with official markings...

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Kremlin_star.jpg/398px-Kremlin_star.jpg)

Names "Victory star" and "Kremlin star" should be forgotten together with IMUP, wood aeroluck etc.

I've read the terms 'Victory star' and 'Kremlin star' on publications other than Pilawski's ones. However, I have not to justify this with you.
Apart for the names of the stars, of the colors etc, there is a much more important thing, Konstantin: one hasn't to fear a post full of colors, capital, exclamative marks and similar things that let him feel that he's an ignorant or an EP follower (the same thing, in your vision) each time he posts something. Some people has already informed me to have left the forum, or avoids to post, because they are irritated for such way to do. So, please, try to be careful and avoid this. Then, we can return to speak of the stars and of the color.
Regards
Massimo

I respectfully disagree, Konstantin.  Whatever they were called back in 1943, when we use these terms now, people know what is meant.  I'm not going to say or write "the star with the red star, surrounded by a white outline, surrounded by a thin red outline" when I can just say "Victory Star" and people know what I'm talking about.  The same with the "Kremlin Star".  It's a lot easier than saying "the three-dimensional type star, similar to the stars over the Kremlin".  I have to admit that I don't use the terms "Il-2M" and "Il-2m3" even though "Il-2M" is easier to say and write than "straight-winged two-seater", but even I have to draw the line somewhere.  Just because these stars weren't known by these names in 1943 doesn't mean we can't use these terms now; did people in 1917 refer to the war then raging in Europe as World War One?  And whilst the Seven-Years War was being fought, I'm fairly certain people didn't refer to it as such.  Some times you have to accept some anachronisms or modern coinages just for the sake of easier speech and commentary.

Regards,

Jason

Where did you see term "Victory star"?  I saw it for the first time in Pilawskii's book.  I've never seen it in Russian literature; I don't think this term is used in Russia.  Russian modelers will not understand what you are talking about if you reffer to the "Victory star".


How about,say, "1943 standard VVS markings" or "official late war markings"...?  As I said, only those who have read Pilawskii know what "Victory star" is.


those were decorative elements to stress importance.
People who left said it was because of the vitriol and because they felt sorry for Pilawskii.  They liked Pilawskii's "research" and they didn't like it criticized.
Ignorance is OK - if someone doesn't know something and looks for answers.  It's different when someone is ignorant, makes up things and sells his ignorance.

Cheers,
KL

Consider yourself encouraged - excellent work, Peter! I wish I could do as well, both on a model and with the photos!

Cheers!
John

Hi Peter,
few details you may consider to change for the sake of historical accuracy:

1.  white line on the upper part of the tailfin leading edge is very suspicious, could be a reflection or retoush.  Other planes had only white triangle in the lower part of the tailfin

(http://waralbum.ru/wp-content/uploads/yapb_cache/mstitel_4411.9u7ytm6il5gck4so48cck04os.ejcuplo1l0oo0sk8c40s8osc4.th.jpeg)

Chech higher resolution scan at http://waralbum.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Mstitel-4411.jpg

2.  there was number 25 on the left wing, same as on the plane number 12 from same unit

(http://weapons-of-war.ucoz.ru/_pu/0/06278.jpg)

3.  yes, stars should have thin red outline as per Sept 1943 standard

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/URSS-Russian_aviation_red_star.svg/252px-URSS-Russian_aviation_red_star.svg.png)

Happy modelling,  :)
KL

Poor Peter!  We'll probably be asking you change the whole thing before we're through!  Actually, though, I think the changes we've suggested so far should be doable without too much fuss, and I think Konstantin's correct about the late-war stars and the rudder.  I rather like having the number on the port wing as it's so unusual.  Again, it's easy for us to say, as it's your model, but at least we're not suggesting you repaint the entire model (you know though, it would look better in brown/green...).

Regards,

Jason

Hi,
Should it be a reflex, it would be present on the other planes too, they are under the same light and perspective. The photo of the first plane is perfectly clear, with a dark tail under a light background, why should them have made a so rough retouch?


There are many photos both of n.25 and of other planes of the same flight, and none shows numbers on the upper wing apart for n.12. Numbering on the wings uppersurface wasn't a standard practise. Or, is there any view where one can see anything vaguely resembling to a number on their wings?
I don't see any reasons to introduce an unusual characteristic that is clearly not visible in photos of the real plane. Else, one could equally paint the arrow and the slogans on all the planes of the unit, including n.12.

Regards
Massimo

1.   tailfin line is not white, or at least not the same colour as the triangle.

  (http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm13/klesnikov/Posted%20in%20forums/Mstitel-tail.jpg)

Other planes did not have line on top of the triangle:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-D0331-0042-012%2C_Russische_Flugzeuge_%C3%BCber_Berlin-Lankwitz.jpg)

2.   In that series of photos, only two planes have numbers: No 12 and No 25.  Numbers are absent on other planes.

There is only one photo of the plane No 12 and two photos of the plane No 25. Upper wing surface and number on it are clearly visible only on No 12 photo.  There are no clear photos of  plane?s No 25 wing upper surface so analogy with No 12 is justified.

If you have a photo that clearly shows that there wasn?t a number on No 25 port wing, please show it to us.

3.   I hope we agree that stars had thin red outline, although the outline is not visible on photos.

Cheers,
KL    

Hi,

I see, it's somewhat darker. I wonder if it could be yellow. The photo shows also that the thin lines on the trim are lighter than the star, perhaps they aren't red as usually thought, or at least not the same red.

This is a detail of the high resolution scan blurried to reduce the effect of the grain and darkened to increase the contrast. The camo is visible, but no white numbers. They should be as light as those on the fuselage, if not lighter.
(http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/il-2/ingr-wing-mstitel.jpg)
A small image of poor quality, but viewed from more above, is visible at
http://sovietwarplanes.com/board/index.php?topic=705.0 (http://sovietwarplanes.com/board/index.php?topic=705.0).
I would give for sure enough that there is not any white number there.
Of course, it was a standard.

Another thing:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-D0331-0042-012%2C_Russische_Flugzeuge_%C3%BCber_Berlin-Lankwitz.jpg)
On this photo the first plane is strangely dark and poor of contrast, but the second has a visible camo, and the third one some number on the fuselage. Too few for color profiles, unfortunately.

Regards
Massimo

IMHO, those photos can't be used as evidence that there wasn't a number.  All those in-flight photos only show that, in given lighting conditions, horizontal surfaces (like wings) reflected much more light than vertical surfaces (fuselage sides or tailfin).  On all photos wing upper surfaces are much brighter than fuselage sides.

Glare from the horizontal wing surface could obscure white number...  In addition, when laying flat, number's surface is reduced and it blends with the glare easier.
On the photomontage you mentioned, both wings are as bright as the tailfin triangle:

(http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/3243/1945photomontage.jpg)

BTW, my presence on this forum started with this plane,  ;D

Oh, man!

Next one I make will be either South front brown/brown, AII Light green/AII dark green/Cyan or an all-black La-7...

Seriously, thanks for all the input - just I shame I didn't have it a year ago... I think that there clearly is a light leading edge on the tail, but you may be right in it being yellow. Then again, you may be wrong - photo interpretation being what it is... Red star outlines is probably correct, will see if I have the energy to find new ones, and removing the old without harming the clear coats.

The number on the left wing is a cool feature I have never seen anywhere else - this will probably be added even if I agree with Massimo that there is no proof of it in the photos.

I will see when i get any motivation for fiddling with this one back - right now I have a quick, OOB build of an Eduard La-7 to take care of. Maybe with just a little detailing of the cockpit. And corrected mountain eagle emblem. And a painted red arrow. And maybe some photoetch stuff in the gear bays.

/P

Hi Konstantin, ,

Glare can lighten a surface, not darken it. You can see that the surface is darker than the less lightened writing on the sides. In my idea, the detail of the upper wing isn't bad, it let see the upper position and landing light and some of the camouflage.
Besides an unusual characteristic should be assumed only if positively proven or, in case of doubt,  if its absence is uncompatible with what the photo show.

Hi Peter,
I generally avoid to put my hands on an already finished model, it's nice as it is and there is the risk to ruin it in some way.
La-7 of Eduard should be nice, I've one partly done. But why don't you want to paint it all black? None will ever proof that it's wrong, in absence of photos.

Regards
Massimo

Peter and Massimo, I know what you mean about redoing an already finished model.  I'm always afraid that halfway through redoing it, I'll get bored with it and stop, so instead of having a finished, if slightly inaccurate model, I now have an unfinished model (to add to my ever-growing pile).  I normally only "fix" a model if it's something minor and easily doable, like removing the VV-1 gunsight and aiming lines from an early IL-2.  I have an Li-2 I need to redo as it needs the I-16-type engine shutters, external stiffeners around the dorsal turret, it's all-white so I should repaint the undersurfaces blue, etc.  Now my excuse for not redoing it is since Amodel are going to be coming out with their Li-2's, shouldn't I expend that energy on doing them correctly (the Li-2NB is the one I'm going to get)?  Happy Victory Day everyone!  За Победу!

Regards,

Jason

OK, I didn't use word "obscure" properly - I meant the white number is hidden by the glare.

- Sunlight is white.
- Glare is condition when surface reflects most of the sunlight
- Conclusion:  glare would hide white number!

What you see as a faintly visible light gray camouflage field was in reality dark gray, almost black, AMT-12.  How do you expect to see relatively small white number?

Suggestion for Peter:
why don't you make an experiment - apply a temporary white decal on the port wing and try to simulate conditions seen on the b/w photo.  Same angle, equivalent distance (few meters), same lighting, same grainy film.  This may help to solve the mistery.

Cheers,
KL

Beautiful work!

A little large chip in the blades of the propeller, and the rest - very good!

Peter,
Congratulations on the completion of the Shturmovik! The model looks very impressive, and the story of the cancelled sortie is quite convincing, too:)

As for the idiomatic Russian, there could be at least several ways to say it. These are few examples, from the normal everyday language to the least approriate one:
1) Уходим отсюда! (uhOdim atsYUda!)
2) Линяем (Рвем когти) отсюда к чертовой матери! (linYAem (rvyom kOkti) atsYUda k chIOrtavaj mAteri!)
3) Уебываем отсюда нахер (нахуй)! (uYObyvaem atsYUda nAher (nAhuj)!) Regional variation of the first word would be уЯбываем (uYAbyvaem ka vsem chirtYAm!), for example.
Capitalized letters indicate accentuations.
I apologize if any Russian- speaking member of the Forum got hurt while reading it:)
Happy modelling!
Kind regards,
Boris