Sovietwarplanes

Hello everybody,
I have begun here http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=2386.0 a discussion with Massimo about possible 2 tones camouflage of I-16  type 5.
Massimo thinks that  the 2 tones on  the picture that I had choosen   in "Painting evolution of the I-16" could be due to high contrast between  green on metallic and wooden structure (http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/i16camoredstar.jpg)  

He proposed me to look at this one taken during the Nomonhan incident
(http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/i16khaliningol56iapjuly39.jpg)

It's well known that I-15 bis, I-153 and SB were camouflaged in the field during this "incident" (more than 8000 deaths in each of the 2 armies)

In "Air War Over Khalkhin Gol, The Nomonhan Incident (V Kotelnikov)" , there are pictures of Type-10 and their interpretation as camouflaged  aircrafts.
I suppose that the artist had the originals in hands because I find that the reproduction in the book could be interpreted as worn paint.
Furthermore, I disagree with the comments of the profiles . As grey I-16 are uncommon, if these planes are really camouflaged, I think that it is rather blotches of grey which were painted on AIIz/AIIg planes.
(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/camo_n13.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/393)


In this book, there is a picture of V. Skobarikhin in front of his Type 10. The contrast is better than those of the previous pictures. One could see  handbrushed grey strips like those done on green I -15 bis or I-153 . I have made an attempt of colorization (I'm not an artist) . If the planes on the  first picture are really Type -5 ( lack of fuselage gun is not obvious as it's blurry) , I could have found a 2 tones Type -5 to paint. :D
Any idea?



(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/camo_n12.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/392)

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,

The plane of Skobarikhin shows well the camo, I think that the lines are serpentine curves instead of vertical strokes. Pity that the number is not shown.
I suggest to see if some russian speaking friend can write a question on Scalemodels.ru or other russian sites to know if better versions of the photo of n.4 do exist, or if the version can be identified via other historical sources.

Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
Thank you for your always quick answers.
My question was not about the shape of the grey camo , but on its reality. 
You agree with grey on AII green.
If all these I-16 are camouflaged, the camo varies from thin serpentines to large blotches.
If we bet that the first I-16 on the picture is a type 5, I could paint mine like  that ??
(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/t-5_no10.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/395)

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard, do you see a light spinner? i think that it was as the front plate.
I see that the panel under the engine wasn't black, so the nose had to be green, not black. I have seen that type 5 often had black nose, but not always- My visual impression of the top of the nose is of a type 5.
I would continue the light blotch on the cockpit area backwards.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
The light colour cone is due to the fact that i'm not comfortable with colorization procedures. I forgot to fill the mask of the cone with green. I agree with you,  the front is green. The blotches are not accurate. I draw them quickly  only to have a general impression and your advice.
My purpose is not to make the model of the 4 seen on this picture, but a camouflaged Type 5 in Nomonhan template. I will use the profiles of the Type-10 #3 and 5  as guides.
Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
this sounds fair, such a plane would be likely enough, and it would be difficult to demonstrate that it is wrong.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
Last question. Blotches and underside, same grey?, AE9? I have read in a discussion that the underside of   I-16 from Zavod 31 production was a light blue which change quickly
by aging to light grey. On the I-15 bis, the underside is lighter then the serpentines.


(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/camo_n12.jpg)

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
certainly not AE-9 that is very light, as the cowling of the I-15bis.
None knows the exact color, I think. I would go with a medium grey.
Regards
Massimo

Thank you Massimo for all this advices.
I will send you the result of my interpretation in a few days.
Best regards
Bernard

Hi Massimo,
The Nomonhan Type 5  picture is labelled "Voennaja Armada,2, 2001"

I have found in the forum that it was sent to you by ChristanK . In the post http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=698.msg3411#msg3411 he said that he has blurred the picture.
 
Do you know what is "Voennaja Armada", a magazine I suppose but I have found nothing on the web, even spelling Voennaya.

Have you seen a better picture than the one you published?

Have you still contact with ChristianK ?
Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
you can try to send a personal mail to ChristianK via the forum to invite him to enter into this topic.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo
I will do that with little hope, as Christian has not visited the forum since 2015.
Regards
Bernard

Hey there, I am still alive  ;D

And I discovered that, back then, I messed up the citation. The photo was not printed in "Voennaya Armada" but in "Voennaya Letopis". Bernhard, I've send you a PM..

Cheers,
Christian

Hi every body.

Thanks to Christian to be alive ;)  and more seriously to have send me very quickly the original picture which is more readable than the one available here.
Furthermore, I have been able to find "Voennaya Letopis", 2, 2001 here.

https://fr.calameo.com/books/00135292801b0829b8012 .

Unfortunately, the scan is a rather low definition .
So, if someone may find a print of this magazine , we could have a good picture of a 2 tons camouflaged type-5

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/voenna11.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/412)

With this better picture, the planes are clearly type 5. And apparently , types with windshield (the first) and closed canopy , (the second aircraft). This is coherent with what D.Nediakov wrote  in"In the skies of Nomohan", Crecy classic:  Before the incident, the 70IAP had 30 I-16 type 5 and 6, 13 were airworthy.
All the I-16 send after were type 10 and 17.


Here is an enlarged picture of the I-16 type 5 bort number 4

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/nomonh11.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/413)


and an atempt to colorize

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/nomonh10.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/410)

Cheers
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
so, the dark line visible on the second plane could be the tube-typa aiming device with the lided forward canopy still covering it, while the closer plane has the later collimator contained into the windshield.
Good thing to have found that citation from Nediakov, now you can make a relatively accurate model of type 5 with a fairly good reference.
I think to know a link where to download the scans, but I fear that a download from such site could be risky for the health of my pc.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
I think that all the scans of Armada Letopis that we can found on the web have the same origin  and that the definition will not be better than what Christian provided me or what I found on Calameo. I have a russian friend which is looking for the printed issue . The other and best option would be to know the reference of the picture published by Armada and try to find a copy.
A russian speaking member of the forum could write to the editor.
But all this efforts are not necessary for my project. I have enough arguments to make a late type 5 in 2 tones camouflage
Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
I would add a grey brush stroke on the upper right side of the cowling, it is less visible because the frontal lightening put the side of the cowling into shadow.
Each grey dot looks made with a mess of light curved lines.
I think that the lower surfaces were painted light grey on their metallic parts, and silver on the wood and fabric skinned ones.  I don't know if the dark dots on the lower surfaces are real, probably they are defects of the photo (it's easy to delete them on the sky and ground, but not on the details of the photo).
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
Thank you for this precisions. I will follow your advices for the blotches. It's sure that the dots underside are photo defects.
The question of the underside grey/alu or light blue for the I-16 during the period 37-39 is always a debate. ???
I have no opinion. You says Grey/alu, and  AlexGRD  says AIIg. :-\
 Apparently, Zavod 21 never used  grey/alu  but a light blue changing to light grey when aging. So for the Type 10 which were all built in Z21, we have the answer.  The type 5 were built in  Z21 and Z153 in 1938, and all came from Z153 in 1939.
Due to geographic proximity, it would be logical that I-16 sent to Mongolia came from Novossibirsk. So the question is how were painted the I-16 at Zavod 153 end of 1938-beginning of 1939?

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
my consideration on the undersurfaces is based on this photo:
(http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/i-16line.jpg)
The first planes had a dark shade on the undersurfaces, probably early blue or blue-grey, and black cowlings visible on the lower side too.
The far planes have light undersurfaces, I think silver and grey, without the black cowling.


(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/nomonh11.jpg)
From what I think to see on your photo, the planes in Nomothan war look closer to this look even if they were type 5. Besides I think to see a difference in shade on the undersurfaces of plane 4 between the outer wing panels, presumably silver, and the part inside the landing gear that was metallic, presumably grey.

For what I know, AII light blue came in use in 1940. If someone has good reasons to think that it was in use before, I am interested of course.

Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,

You are right . No AIIg before 1940 and  two options for 1937-39  if we trust  Vahlamov and Orlov.Ae-9 or  or Ae-8/AII-Al

Here is a discussion introduced by KL about I-15 which confirm your opinion.

http://scalemodels.ru/modules/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20208&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
seems that we have reached some conclusions on the likely look of that plane. It would be a good color profile. Even a profile of plane n.5 would be possible, with the early type canopy.
For I-16s with early type canopy, will you use the one of the amodel kit or do you know any vacuformed replacement?
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,

For the contrast between Ae8 and AII Al, are this pictures good exemples ?

(http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/i-16silver1a.jpg)
(http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/I-16silver1b.jpg)


IS 66MISOS HERE? :D
 If I could have several advices to interpret the pattern on the picture, I would find myself more comfortable



Yes, those I produce myself.  ;)
I used the very nice canopy found in the box of the TsKB-12 produced by Prop and Jet to make a master, so I have been able to prepare several closed canopies. For the windshield, I have used both canopies  of the Hasegawa kit (it's nearly the only accurate part of the kit) and the falcon canopy found in the clearwax set N°24 to make masters

The P&J canopy

(https://i62.servimg.com/u/f62/19/84/12/04/05deta11.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/146)

Vacuforming
(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/vacu_v10.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/288)



The result on Seguey Tharkov Type 5.
(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/28fini10.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/443)

I have begun to post my production here . There are the TsKB-12 and the Type 4 on line and the UTI-2 pending.
I will post the different Type -5 when this Nomonhan will be finished

http://fighters.forumactif.com/t88113-polikarpov-i-16-du-proto-au-i-185-pj-amodel-icm-artmodel-1-72


Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard, it is an excellent thing to be able to produce good vacuformed canopies.  I've a type 5 of Amodel still to build that would need one, plus a second ne could be good for the TsKB-15 (I-17); I've provisionally utilized the one of the kit, but it is not very satisfying. Do you think that could be good as a master?
Another canopy that I should vacuform is that of the I-30 (Yak-3 of 1941) that is defectively done on the windshield.
About the photos: yes, they are in line with other photos of planes with the same livery. Grey AE-9 appears very light on photos.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
The Amodel canopy  is a little bit too wide, so if you make the master with it + the thickness of your acetate/PVC/polyester .... the result will be far too wide
My technic is to make a silicon mould of the canopy I have choosen, so it remains usable, then to cast a plaster with resin  .
With the Amodel which has a good global shape but which is not usable directly, too thick, opaque and with surface defects, you can trim and polish it to the right shape for a master = a litlle less thant the real canopy to take in account the thickness of the material, then mold it and make the master. It's not possible  to use it directly as a master if you heat directly the sheet as I do. Furthermore, with a mold you can do several masters  .
The second way is to use the Amodel canopy without improvement  to make the mold and to trim and polish the master(s)  to the right shape. With several assays, you may obtain  the perfect one.
The 3rd, buy the TsKB-12 kit. There are 2 canopies in it. ;)

Regards
bernard

Hi Bernard,
your suggestions are good, just I hoped that there was an easier way to do it. Working directly on the canopy of the kit is risky in case of failure, so a resin copy of it would be better.
I've worked with silicon and resin in the past, I know they are expensive and dirty. I hoped to find some other way to do it, but I fear that there is not any better method.
The TsKB-12... nice, but certainly expensive.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo
When I say plaster with resin, it's not PU used to make kits. It's plaster with vinylic or acrylic resin which are already mixed  . It's possible to use plaster used on walls of houses like this one you can find in Italy.

https://www.leroymerlin.it/catalogo/gesso-da-muro-axton-1-kg-36615544-p. 2,4€/kg

It may be coarse and difficult to use in small molds


I prefer to use a plaster for artist that hardens quickly and is made to be  be poured . Even in very small volume ( a 1/72 type 5 canopy) it works  without bubbles

https://www.amazon.fr/dp/B0027ITVR6/ref=pe_3044141_185740131_TE_item

 9.9€/kg. If it remains usable , I have enough until my death.
This kind of plaster is hard and may  be filed,sanded,  carved and polished .


 
I use a silicon from an italian company. Resin pro. The I-gum is very easy to use even in very small quantity, like 1 or 2 grams . It's like siligum, but less expensive.
 It's a gum, not a liquid and you have to mix the 2 parts in equal quantities like the the modeling clay of our childhood.
Not dirty at all. You have about 5mn to make the mold and it's usable after15 mn.

https://www.resinpro.it/product-category/gomma-siliconica-e-squishy/

If you dont want to use silicon, there are reusable plastic you can melt in hot water like the blue stuff of "green stuff" shop. I have tried, the molds are not as fine as the silicon's, the melted plastic is very hot and the fingers suffer, like the object if it is fragiel.

http://www.greenstuffworld.com/en/26-reusable-blue-stuff

Hope this can help.
Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
plaster for artists and siligum look promising, they are not too expensive. I think I'll buy some of it and try with canopies and maybe some other pieces.
Blue stuff... it could be interesting to try it as a material to make pieces, although I fear that they could deform if accidentally exposed to the sun light.
Thank you for your suggestions.
regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
???

The blue stuff is used to replace the silicon to make the molds. To make pieces, it's green stuff or milliput.

Look at these videos at the end of this page.

http://www.greenstuffworld.com/en/reusable-blue-stuff/2-blue-stuff-mold-4-bars.html

As the blue stuff is reusable, the price for a mold is nearly null. However, I prefer silicon gum.


This mold for the I-16 canopy used about 2,5 grams and I got 500g of I-Gumm for 14€ . A mold=7cents , not too expensive for me. :)

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/moulec10.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/445)


Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
did you use some releasing agent on the canopy, or the silicon leave it being extracted easily?
I have to reproduce the vacuformed canopy of I-30 in better way. Is that silicone gum fluid enough to not deformate it while making the mould?
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
I don't use releasing agent and had never problem. Polymerised I-Gum is not sticky at all. Easier to unmold than RTV (liquid silicon) . However, for certain materials or complex shape  it could be useful.
For a vacuform canopy, the gum could be be too hard. It's soft but not fluid
But do you need to make a mold of the external part of the canopy to prepare a master?
The canopy you will obtain will be larger than the model. If you want the same canopy than the model, pour directly the plaster in the vacufrom , after treatment with klir-future to protect it. And use an acetate of the same thickness than the model.
However, if you want to have a larger master to correct it by sanding, fill your canopy with plaster to make it rigid. Then you can mold it with I-gum.

Back to Nomonhan camo: The AII Al, shiny or dull?
I don't feel comfortable with making a lot of curved lines  for the blotches. I'm making trial on piece of plastic, but I will probably paint solid blotches.

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
shiny or dull silver...I think that it depends on the age and state of paint. I would go with an half way.

About vacuform canopies, I see you have made a vacuum table.  What do you use as an heat source, an hair dryer?

Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
I use a thermal paint stripper whose temperature can be adjusted precisely. I make assays with the material and note the temperature. For instance  for the PVC sheet I'm using now , the ideal T° is 230°, soft enougth to reproduce the master and no risk to melt . It's far more comfortable than a tool with fixed  temperature where the sole way to adjust the temperature is to play with distance of blowing.

 https://media.castorama.fr/is/content/Castorama/5052931316892_DECAPEUR_THERM_MEHG2000_MAC2.

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
so, you fix a piece of pvc in a frame, put it over the master on a vacu table, swich on the vacuum, then heat until it takes the shape?
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,

The upper plate  of the box is drilled with many holes 4 mm in diameter. A thin metal grid allows a better circulation of the air, but is not essential. All around the grid, a flexible  seal, (rubber, silicone, etc.). is used for future sealing. I place the masters on the grid, then the PVC sheet, which overflows the flexible joint. The whole thing is covered by a plate the size of the box with a hole just big enough for the size of the canopies to do. I clamp this plate with clips to the upper part of the box (this part protudes from the box) .
Then I begin heating  and plug the vaccuum cleaner on, and continue to blow hot air until I'm satisfied. 10-30s depending of the number and size of masters and the type and thickness of the sheet.
 It's longer to explain than to do ;)

Here are canopies for a UTI-2 that I have recently posted here: http://fighters.forumactif.com/t88113-polikarpov-i-16-du-proto-au-i-185-pj-amodel-icm-artmodel-1-72#1753401 (http://fighters.forumactif.com/t88113-polikarpov-i-16-du-proto-au-i-185-pj-amodel-icm-artmodel-1-72#1753401)

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/22_par10.jpg)




On this picture, you can see the clips and the hose of the vacuum cleaner for a better understanding



(https://i.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/verrie10.jpg)

It's the canopy of this Type 5
(https://i.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/28_fin10.jpg)



If you type "vacuum box canopy " on Google or You tube, you will find many exemples.
One close to mine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nrfh9NBdx-o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nrfh9NBdx-o)

Best regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
your description is very clear.
If I don't miss, there is also a technique with negative moulds. Do you know how to do?
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
I know one I tested before building my box. You dont need vacuum. You fix the sheet on a plate with a hole about the size of the master. You fix the master on a rod, or better you include the rod in the plaster before it hardens . You heat the sheet  then you push by hand the master again the softened sheet. It's not easy nor precise. I often made 5 or 10 trials before a success. The main difference with a box is that you stop heating before molding the sheet, and the sheet is either to hard or melted. And you have to push enough but not too. Furthermore, for a good result , you have to pepare a new plate with the hole adapted to the master each time you change the master.
If you have only one canopy to prepare, it's usable. But to make a box take one hour if you have the right tools, and after you need a few seconds to prepare several perfect canopies.

Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
I've utilized this method sometimes, but it would be a big regress compared to the vacuum.
I was thinking to the method used to prepare many commercial vacuform kits: a negative resin mould with some tiny holes to aspire air, so the outer side of the kit touchs the mold. It should give better outer details, but can leave traces of the aspiration channels. Anyway it is harder to do.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
the results I obtain are suffisant for me.
The finely engraved frames of the Prop&jet canopy have been reproduced by the I-gum mold, then by the plaster and finally I can see them on the PVC canopy.

Do you need better quality?

Rather than painting them, I have used sticking aluminium foil cut with my Silhouette plotter to reproduce these frames.

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/canopy12.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/485)



Back to the Khalkin-Gol camo.

I have finally found a good PDF of Voennaya Letopis. All the pictures are printed with a coarse screen which is obvious on the picture I post. Furthermore, the picture of types 5 was of  bad quality compared the numerous pictures of tanks and guns in the magazine. No hope to have a better result if we could find  a printed issue.

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/nomonh13.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/483)

Best regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
the frame made with aluminum cutten by a plotter give an excellent result. You are very well equipped. I'll have to find another way, maybe hand cutten paper.
About that photo of I-16, I think that we have reached satisfying conclusions, I can't hope to find a better version of the photo within a reasonable time.
Regards
Massimo

Hi everybody,
Here are  the results of my reflections (wild imagination ??? :o) , with the advices of Massimo and AlexGRD . I have used also  these profiles of Type-10 to guide me.


(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/15prof10.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/540).


My guess was that the Type-5 which were in Mongolia before the beginning of the Khalkin-gol battle were paint upper AIIz, and bottom, Ae8/AII All. There are pictures to confirm.
Like other aircrafts, SB-2,I-15bis, I-153, DC-3 , they were camouflaged in the field at the beginning of the conflict. I suppose they were hanbrushed,
I have decided to use the same  grey that the metallic parts of the bottom.
  
I have airbrushed the AII Z and hand brushed  the grey I used for the Ae8. I have used  numerous coat of very diluted paint to try to obtain the image seen on the profiles

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/17kg12.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/654)

(https://i88.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/26kg10.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19841204/555)

All comments are welcome, however I will not repaint it ;)

Regards

Bernard




  

Hi Bernard,
the model is nice and the interpretation of the painting is credible.
What plane will you built next?
Regards
Massimo

Thanks Massimo, but I'll try to improve it, . The way I paint it give the impression there are 3 tones.
The 5th and last type 5 will be one of  these .

(http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/12.jpg)(http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/caucasus.jpg)

Apparently , they  were  equiped with a M25V, as the air intake of the oil radiator is visible . May be the last batches of type 5 were built like that, as there is the exemple of the famous grey-N°1 which is comparabel. Another hypothsis, as the pictures were taken in 1943, is that they were overhauled.

(http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/i16painting/I-16silver1b.jpg)

My question  is: are the cowlings black  or the difference of shades is due to the the way paint age on metal and tissue surfaces? I think the second hypothesis is better as the black cowlings were not painted since 1938.

Regards
Bernard

Hi,
the plane of the first photo looks to have a black cowling indeed, while the second one looks green.
The grey plane is appealling, the livery is rare for an I-16.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
Thank you for your advice.
I will do the green one. I have already five  I-16 with black cowlings and none with a star on the rudder. According to the authors, the gray 1 is described as a demonstration plane or the plane of a high rank officer. I prefer a plane which is a good representation of what the VVS used, as they were obliged to scrape the last penny. Rather strange that the Type-5 with black cowling was not repainted in 1943. Maybe , it was out of use in 1938 , stored as is, and overhauled in 1943.
Regards

Bernard

Hi Bernard,
yes, a livery of '30s with a large red star on the tail would be unusual. I wonder if the stars above the wings were still there.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
Too many speculations about the 12. I feel more comfortable with the  green one, it's clearly a post 41 camo, so no stars on the wing.
Regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
I see that metallic parts (not only the cowling, but the pilot's hatch and the plate in front of the fin) are somewhat darker than the wood-fabric ones. As if only the latter were (roughly) repainted with a lighter green.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo,
I will try to combine 2 slightly different greens  beside matt and satin varnish to try to reproduce this aspect
Regards
Bernard

Here is the result


B/W


(https://i.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/05-5c10.jpg)

Color


(https://i.servimg.com/u/f88/19/84/12/04/05-cou10.jpg)

regards
Bernard

Hi Bernard,
your model is very nice and well thought. I hope to see the building notes here some day.
Regards
Massimo

Hi Massimo
As I am a scientist and methodical, ;) I started by posting the building of a model of the first member  of the family I-16 in chronological order here
http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=2394.msg21193#msg21193 (http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/board/index.php?topic=2394.msg21193#msg21193)

Regards
Bernard