ICM 1/72 I-16 Conversion to Type 5

[John Thompson]

I found this article on Dishmodels.ru through a link on Scalemodels.ru; translation by Babel Fish:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dishmodels.ru%2Fgshow.htm%3Fp%3D6568&lp=ru_en&btnTrUrl=Translate

I admit that among my dead-end projects is a similar conversion; however, I intended to leave the wings alone with regard to the rib spacing as on early type 5's. The author of this article has apparently taken a pair of wings from the old PM Spitfire Mk.V (they're solid plastic on that kit) and used them as raw material to make new outer wing sections for his I-16. Something I learned from my own attempt (and reading the article may confirm this) is that the Amodel I-16 type 5 isn't such a bad kit after all... 

John

[Massimo Tessitori]

Hi John,
my past experience with Amodel kits is fairly good, except for I-17 that was a very early kit with bad assembling and bad surface detail .
Apart for the work of filing and dry-building that will be required, the less nice thing is the poor quality of the canopy; unfortunately I neither like the windscreen of ICM, that is too flat in profile. I hope to find some vacuformed one for both kits.
Massimo

[John Thompson]

I don't think anyone has made a vacuformed canopy for the type 5, unfortunately - you may be forced to form one yourself by heating a small piece of clear acetate in some kind of frame, then pushing the kit canopy as a master into the softened acetate. There's probably a "How to" feature on this somewhere on the Internet - ARC or Modelling Madness, maybe?

The newer versions of the ICM I-16 kits (the ones in the white boxes) have a much better, more accurate windscreen than the original release versions. I have several of the older kits - I've been thinking about e-mailing ICM to beg for 5 or 6 copies of the new windscreen...

John

[marluc]

Thanks John for the translation.It?s a good conversion work and I like the end result.But still don?t understand why the modeller used an Spitire wing because this one don?t resemble the I-16 wing.Greetings.

Martin

[John Thompson]

But still don?t understand why the modeller used an Spitire wing because this one don?t resemble the I-16 wing.Greetings.

Martin

Hi Martin! I'm guessing that the modeller used it just because he needed a couple of pieces of plastic of the right thickness that he could carve into the right shape, and he decided that the PM Spitfire wasn't worth building. Maybe the outline of the trailing edge is similar? I haven't compared any drawings to confirm that, but it would make it easier to reshape the rest of the Spitfire wing to match the I-16, if I'm correct.

John

[Massimo Tessitori]

I don't think anyone has made a vacuformed canopy for the type 5, unfortunately - you may be forced to form one yourself by heating a small piece of clear acetate in some kind of frame, then pushing the kit canopy as a master into the softened acetate. There's probably a "How to" feature on this somewhere on the Internet - ARC or Modelling Madness, maybe?

The newer versions of the ICM I-16 kits (the ones in the white boxes) have a much better, more accurate windscreen than the original release versions. I have several of the older kits - I've been thinking about e-mailing ICM to beg for 5 or 6 copies of the new windscreen...

John

Hi John,
the thermoforming should be relatively easy for the curved windscreen of late versions, besides I have one from Falcon; but I suspect that the result would be poor for canopies composed by plan surfaces as early I-16 and 17, so I hesitate to take the risk to damage the original canopies.
A new windscreen in the ICM kits? I have to go and look in the boxes of my type 28s, hopefully...
Maybe it worths to ask... However, if ICM sends windscreens on request, I fear that they would need an employee for this work only.
Massimo.

[marluc]

Hi Martin! I'm guessing that the modeller used it just because he needed a couple of pieces of plastic of the right thickness that he could carve into the right shape

Hi John,I think this is the only explanation,perhaps he needed a thick piece of plastic to carve the rib detail,which I think,did wrong because is right for a Type 10 an onwards but not for a Type 5.Anyway,the detailing job he made on its Polikarpov is awesome.
I agree with Massimo that an accurate thermoformed Type 5 sliding hood can?t be made,and that the windshield of I-16 ICM kit is awful,as far as I know the Hasegawa offering has it right.
Greetings.

Martin

[John Thompson]

Hi John,I think this is the only explanation,perhaps he needed a thick piece of plastic to carve the rib detail,which I think,did wrong because is right for a Type 10 an onwards but not for a Type 5.Anyway,the detailing job he made on its Polikarpov is awesome.
I agree with Massimo that an accurate thermoformed Type 5 sliding hood can?t be made,and that the windshield of I-16 ICM kit is awful,as far as I know the Hasegawa offering has it right.
Greetings.

Martin

I'm looking at the book, "The Polikarpov I-16 in Profile and Scale", by Erik Pilawskii. In the drawings in this book, he shows a late type 5, which he calls "I-16 type 5, 1938 model", which has the increased number of wing ribs as you have mentioned were used on the type 10. So it seems that this modification actually began with the late-production type 5 I-16, and the aircraft represented by the model in the Scalemodels.ru article is one of these. It's too bad the photos which are included in the article are all crowded together in one image. I'd like to save this image and then crop it to separate the several different photos to see if any of them show the rib detail, but I haven't tried this yet.

(By the way, Pilawskii also shows a type 12, which appears almost identical to the *early* type 5, including the smaller number of wing ribs and the full canopy. The most obvious difference in the drawings is that the type 12 had two 20mm ShVAK cannons, instead of the two 7.62mm ShKAS machine guns of the type 5. Unfortunately the drawings don't include any detailed explanation of the variations among all of the many "types"; an updated version of the comparison of type details that EP published a few years ago on his hobbyvista.vvs site (link below) would have been a very helpful and logical appendix to this book.)

http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Modeling/Polikarpov/I-16/Kit_Comparison/index.php

John

[Dark Green Man]

John,
are there any further details on the Type 12 ?
I've been thinking of converting a Hobbycraft kit to this configuration.
do these 12 production machines differ from the prototype's armament of
2 ShVAK and 2 ShKAS in the wings?
(TsKB-12P=Pushechni=cannon armed)
a very potent little fighter for it's day (1936-1937)

[John Thompson]

Hi DGM! I don't see anything else in the drawings, but that's why I suggested that a text-based description of the differences among types would have been helpful. As it is, you have to study the drawings very carefully and try to pick out the changes for yourself. Check the page I linked in my previous post - this article does include the type 12, so it may have the answer you're looking for.

John

[Dark Green Man]

after making that post last night I did a quick bit of on-line 'research' and what little I found
seemed to suggest that the production version (type 12) had the ShKAS guns moved to the fuselage.
(like the armament of the type 10)
since they were manufactured in 1937 (and one source said 1938) that would seem to indicate the early sliding canopy and telescopic gun-sight were used, and would seem to mean that the Type 12 were the first machines to have guns on top of the engine.
(gotta go back and double-check this)

[John Thompson]

A new windscreen in the ICM kits? I have to go and look in the boxes of my type 28s, hopefully...
Maybe it worths to ask... However, if ICM sends windscreens on request, I fear that they would need an employee for this work only.
Massimo.

Here's a photo of the two windscreens. The focus is not good, but you can easily see the difference - the windscreen from an original-release ICM type 28 is on the left; the windscreen from a new (white box) ICM type 28 is on the right:



John

[Massimo Tessitori]

Hi John,
looks much better. I'm happy that the kit manufacturers sometimes correct their own errors.
Massimo

[John Thompson]

Hi John,
looks much better. I'm happy that the kit manufacturers sometimes correct their own errors.
Massimo

Now if ICM would just listen to our pleas for a new 1/72 I-153... 

John

[marluc]

Here's a photo of the two windscreens.

ICM made a good job correcting the windscreen,at least to my eye,the "new" one is pretty accurate.Thanks John for the photo,greetings.

Martin