Sovietwarplanes
May 20, 2019, 09:14:09 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This forum replaces the old sovietwarplanes.com whose domain has expired in January 2017. It has been updated with the posts of the year 2016.
The new location of the site 'Sovietwarplanes pages' is at http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Yakovlev Yak-1 & Yak-1b profiles  (Read 4424 times)
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« on: November 21, 2017, 10:51:40 AM »

Hi,
here I have started work on Yak-1 serie:

1. Yak-1, HSU J.Z. Slepenkov, 21 iap VVS KBF, 1943:




2. Yak-1, HSU M.D. Baranov, 183 iap, Stalingrad front, autumn 1942, this one will be 4-view:



3. Yak-1b, P.M. Chuvelev, 427 iap, August 1943:




Regards,
   66misos

Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5692


« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2017, 01:28:07 PM »

Hi Misos,
the first and second profiles are too 'humpback', while the ventral line should be curved.
You have drawn the windshields different, are you sure of this? I think that they should be as on the prototype. The horizontal frame shouldn't be oblique. The rear profile of the cooler should be straight, and more extended rearwards up to the end of the karman.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2017, 06:59:52 PM »

Hi Massimo,
thank you for comment. So I reworked the first one and here is finished profile:


According to this photo:

the plane looks quite clean and camouflage color doe not look worn. It looks like factory overall painting with the white color.
 
Regards,
   66misos
« Last Edit: November 22, 2017, 05:48:29 AM by 66misos » Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5692


« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2017, 09:07:05 PM »

Hi Misos,
nice work. I would check the rear of the cooler, it should be more angular.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2017, 05:44:56 AM »

Hi Massimo,
thank you. I corrected and replaced picture above - the board number chanded from 31 to 51 (comment from Modelforum.cz), added sight (I forgot it previously), tiny antena mast and slightly reworked rear canopy window.
Regarding cooler I did not find reliable picture, on some pictures it is shorter, on other same like here and o other looks longer/thinner etc. So I let it as is.
Regards,
    66misos
« Last Edit: November 22, 2017, 05:49:00 AM by 66misos » Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5692


« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2017, 08:16:14 AM »

Hi Misos,
the cooler is tricky because it is rounded in section, but angular in profile. So, an oblique photo shows it rounded.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2017, 01:57:48 PM »

Hi Massimo,
I still think also about the camouflage, I am a bit confused now.

1.   The whole bottom part of the front fuselage and front cooler is bright, e.g. white. But top of the fuselage around canopy and sides of the rear fuselage are darker. The tail is apparently brighter, again white. The surface is hard matt, so it is not shining.
2.   However, open landing gear cover, e.g. in the same position against the sun as the side of the front fuselage and front cooler, is quite dark, apparently not white.


3.   This photo shows that the plane was matt white. But also canopy cover is matt and looks to be not very translucent. So the plane could be either quite clean and not weathed, or weathered but covered by icing during that photo session. I do not know whether is matter of this photo scan/copy but surface looks a bit blotchy, not homogenous white.


4.   According to the NKAP the white color had to be applied in the very thin layer allowing original blac/green camouflage th shine through it.

So putting all that together it starting to look to me now more like white camo over original green-black with underserfaces leaving light blue than overall homogenous factory white painting.
What do you think?

Regards,
   Misos
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5692


« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2017, 08:43:37 PM »

Hi Misos,
I see the different impression from the photos. I can't fully explain this; probably the light from the front gives some contribution for the strange lok of the first photo.
About undersurfaces, I can't be sure, but I suspect that AII blue highlighted with the snow reflection from below could give the impression of white.
It could be that white was sprayed in soft way, so delimitation lines are not visible.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2017, 05:52:27 AM »

Hi Massimo,

here is reworked winter Yak-1. Changed/corrected whole rear fuselage, bottom cooler, cockpit - all that according to the photo and detailed drawing, moved no. 51 and added light blue AIIg:



Regards,
  66misos
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 06:01:29 AM by 66misos » Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5692


« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2017, 10:19:23 AM »

Hi Misos,
well made.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
Spitfire
Full Member
***
Posts: 141


« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2017, 08:23:23 PM »

This looks pretty fantastic work to me, I would not have a clue how to do this, all I need now is for a model manufacturer to produce a kit in my favourite scale of 1/32.

Cheers

Dennis
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2017, 05:20:10 AM »

Hi,
thank you for comments. I am glad you like it.  Smiley

Here I still corrected position of the red star on the tail:


And here I tried to make a bit more weathered version to give it look similar to the photo with the whole plane:


And now, let's move on to Baranov's Yak-1.
Regards,
   66misos
« Last Edit: November 24, 2017, 07:17:41 PM by 66misos » Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5692


« Reply #12 on: November 24, 2017, 06:45:58 AM »

Hi Misos,
it looks a reasonable compromise to match the photo from far.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 25, 2017, 07:28:25 AM »

Hi Massimo,
thank you.

Let's continue with Baranov's Yak-1 now, here is work in progress:



Regards,
   66misos
Logged

66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1474

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 25, 2017, 04:21:41 PM »

Hi,
I have a little problem with Baranov's plane.

View from the left:
- 24 victory starlets,
- field of the starlets on the bottom does not reach to the edge on the fuselage,
- inscription goes to the oposite side over the top,
- tiny antena mast is not visible:



View from the right:
- inscription from to the oposite side is not visible not the top of the fuselage,
- only 23 victory starlets,
- field of the starlets is bigger and on the bottom it reaches reach the edge on the fuselage,
- tiny antena mast is clearly visible:




Victory starlet no. 24 is just being painted:


Is is one repainted and reconfigured plane during several photosessions or are they several different planes, that were "on hand" and appropriately decorated for the actual prohosession?
Regards,
   66misos
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 06:08:33 PM by 66misos » Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!