Friday 23 January 2015

Soviet 'Vark



Historical Background
In 1961, the Soviet Air Force's Frontovaya Aviatsiya (Frontal Aviation) took delivery of Sukhoi's Su-7B (NATO : Fitter) ground-attack aircraft. However, as a pre-requisite of FA accepting the aircraft, the Sukhoi Design Bureau was required to develop an all-weather variant of the Su-7 with the capability for precision attack, to be tied with an advanced nav/attack system codenamed Puma. Sukhoi set up preliminary work using the Su-7 airframe but quickly realised that the design was too small to accept the required avionics. At about the same time, the USAF revealed its TFX requirement (eventually emerging as the F-111). The TFX featured variable-geometry wing, allowing for greatly increased payload, range low-level capability. Not blind to this development, Sukhoi set to develop an aircraft design mimicking the F-111's capability but without the usage of the rather complex VG wing structure. In 1962-1963, Sukhoi built a mock-up designated S-6. It was of delta wing design and powered by two Tumansky R-21F-300 turbojet engines with the crew seated in tandem. The lack of progress with the Puma system, coupled with some limitations discovered during tests meant that the S-6 progressed no more.

In 1964, Sukhoi started on the S-58M, a modified version of the SU-15 'Flagon' interceptor. At the same time, the V-VS revised their requirement; it now includes STOL capability with ability to cruise at supersonic speeds at low level. The powerplant was changed to two Tumansky R-27F-300 plus another four Koliesov RD-36-25 lifting engines for STOL operations. A larger Orion radar was fitted and the crew accomodation was changed to side-by-side seating. To test the arrangement, the SU-15 prototype was converted into S-58VD 'flying laboratory'. The S-58VD was then redesignated T-6 in 1965. Initial flights were performed without the lift jets installed. The lift jets were installed in October 1967 and at the same time the engines were changed to Lyulka AL-21F. STOL tests confirmed data from S-58VD flights that the aircraft suffered from severely reduced range as the lift engines occupied spaces normally reserved for fuel. They also cause the deletion of two underfuselage hardpoints. In addition the T-6 suffered stability problems during transition from vertical to horizontal flight. The six-engine configuration was eventually abandoned.

In the meantime the F-111, despite its protracted development, began to be shown to the public, most notably during the 1967 Paris Air Show. It demonstrated the practical advantages and solutions to tehnical problems of the VG design. On 7 August 1968, the Sukhoi OKB was officially tasked with the application of the variable geometry wing on the T-6. The VG T-6, designated T-6-2I was first flown on 17 January 1970. Four further prototypes were built and were tested until 1976. At the same time, the teething problems with the Puma nav/attack system was solved and provided all-weather capability to the FA for the first time. The system consists of two superimposed Orion-A radar scanner, Relyef terrain-avoidance radar which provides automatic flight controls at low level and Orbita 10-58 computer. Trials with the Puma system continue until 1974, even though the first production aircraft rolled off the assembly line at Zavod No. 153 at Novosibirsk in 1971. The T-6 was formally accepted into service as the Su-24 on 4 February 1975. The Su-24 was actually designated Su-19 by NATO until 1981 and was given ASCC codename of 'Fencer'.

The Su-24 has a long fuselage which was slab-sided for most of its length (and earning it the nickname 'suitcase' from its crews). The crew sit side-by-side on Zvezda K-36D zero-zero ejection seats under a split canopy. The high-mounted, variable-geometry wing feature four sweep settings: 16° for take-off and landing, 35° and 45° for flights at different altitudes and 69° for low-level dashes. The Su-24 is powered by two Lyulka AL-21F-3A afterburning turbojets rated at 24,700-lb thrust each. In early Su-24 (Fencer-A), the air intakes feature variable ramps. However as its main mission is low-level strikes, the ramps were deleted to reduce maintenance and weight. While the deletion did not affect the low-level performance, absolute speed was reduced to Mach 1.35 (from Mach 2.18) and ceiling was reduced from 17,500 meters to 11,000 meters. The slab-sided rear fuselage was quickly changed on the production line with a more contoured exhaust shroud to reduce drag. The Fencer is fitted with a GSh-6-23 23-mm rotary cannon together with 500 rounds of ammunition mounted to the right of the fuselage underside. The cannon is covered by an eyelid shutter when not in use. It can also carry up to 17,640 lb of disposable stores across eight (later models nine) hardpoints with the outermost pylons swiveling with the wing sweep. The Fencer was cleared to carry all ordnance the Soviet inventory including nuclear weapons.

The initial Fencer-A was followed by the Fencer-B as mentioned above and they were followed by the Fencer-C with improved ECM capabilities. Sukhoi however did not have separate designations for these variants. In 1983, the Su-24M ('Modified') entered service. Designated Fencer-D by NATO, the Su-24M feature inflight-refueling capability, Kaira-24 laser designator and PNS-24M inertial navigation system. The additional equipment however resulted in the loss of 85 liters of internal fuel. The radome was revised in shape and the forward fuselage lengthened by 30 inches. The Su-24M was offered for export as the Su-24MK with downgraded capabilities. Other variants of the Su-24 are Su-24MR Fencer-E tactical reconnaissance variant and Su-24MP Fencer-F ELINT aircraft. The Fencer was used by the successor states following the break-up of the Soviet Union such as Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Ukraine and the Russian Federation and was exported to Syria, Libya, Iran, Iraq, Angola and Sudan (the latter using ex-Belarussian aircraft).

The Fencer first saw action in 1984 during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. It was used to tackle fixed fortifications used by the Mujahideen and was noted for its precision, speed and variable weapons loadout. Four aircraft were lost due to technical problems. The Fencer next saw action during the 1992-1997 Tajik Civil War where a Su-24M was claimed to be shot down by a Stinger missile. They were again in combat during the Second Chechen War, where one was shot down and was heavily involved during the South Ossetia War in 2008. Outside the Soviet Union/Russian Federation, the Su-24 was used by Ukraine in the ongoing Donbass conflict, by Libya during the Libyan Civil War 2011 and during the Syrian Civil War.

The Kit
Originally, I was quite confused with the origins of this kit, whether its actually a Dragon re-box of an Italeri kit, or vice-versa (it was originally an Italeri kit, as I found out later). In any case, the kit was released in 1992, just after the fall of the Soviet Union. While the kit has nicely engraved details, online reviews mention that dimensions are suspect. The fuselage is too deep while the front fuselage is too long and the rear fuselage too short. In a way, it was not surprising as the kit came out at the time when accurate measuring of former Soviet equipment was few and far between. While external details are quite OK, interior details are quite sparse, especially in the cockpit. External stores are included but just comprise of free-fall weapons. I believe a few guided weapons such as the AS-7 'Kerry' should be included as the 'C' version have limited ability to carry precision guided munitions (something like the F-111A). Decals provide markings for two aircraft: Blue 03 and White 39. No other details were provided.

Construction
Construction started at the cockpit. However for this kit, I used Neomega's excellent resin replacement set. They are a far cry from the very basic cockpit included in the kit with crisp details all around. Furthermore, the resin cockpit is a drop-in replacement for the kit cockpit, simplifying the job tremendously. The cockpit was assembled but I left off the seats and the console in-between the seats at this time. After a test fit, the cockpit was superglued to the lower fuselage half. The wing was then assembled as they need to be trapped between the fuselage halves. There is quite a gap between the upper and lower halves of the wings, but as the joint line is on the lower half, it cannot be readily seen and I left it as it is. The wings were then placed on their pivot mounts on the lower fuselage, aligning while placing them. The upper fuselage half was then cemented to the lower half. And yes, I decided to build the model without correcting the wrong dimensional issues. There is a bit of a fit problem here.

Once the  basic fuselage was completed, the nose and the tail were added. The exhaust 'can' was painted first, stuck to the fuselage and the shroud was then slipped over it. Unlike the kits of the Su-24M/MR, the nose of this kit is in two pieces. The fit wasn't great, leaving a seam line in the middle and a step between the radome and the fuselage. Before cementing the nose to the fuselage, a lead fishing weight was superglued inside the former. The tail pieces were cemented and put into place. The less vulnerable small parts such as cannon fairing and the ventral fins are cemented prior to painting.

Painting and Decaling
There were only two marking schemes for the model: 'White 39' is grey/white while 'Blue 03' is grey with camouflaged spine, fin and upper wing surfaces. I decided to paint the model in grey/white while using bort number '03' as the decals are so old that the whites (and the carrier film) have yellowed. By using the blue numbers, I was hoping that the yellowing issue can be minimised (yes, I know, let the decals soak in bright sunlight for days but it has been raining and/or cloudy for days at the time I build this kit and I'm not really a patient guy). Anyway, the white is painted using Tamiya Spray TS-27 Flat White while the grey is Tamiya AS-26 Light Ghost Grey. The latter might not be right, but it does look like the grey used on Fencers.

Despite the age and yellowing problem, the kit decals behave suprisingly good. They went on without any problem and respond well to Mr Mark Softer. Despite using markings for Blue 03, I left the 'Sukhoi Wing' emblem on the nose, turning the model into an even more generic Su-24. To further minimise the yellowing problem, I try to cut out as much of the carrier film as possible.

Finishing
I began by assembling the landing gear. They have been already pre-painted on the sprue and after assembly was complete, I retouched the paint at the sprue gate scars. And I must also mention that there isn't much detail for the landing gears. Once the cement has hardened and the model can now stand on its own, I added the pylons and weapons. As stated before, Dragon only include a small number of ordnance to hang on the pylons. Thankfully I have in my stash an equally old Dragon Soviet Modern Aircraft Weapons Set 3 - Rockets and Bombs. I decided to hang FAB-250 GP bombs and PROSAB-250 cluster munitions on my model with the cluster bombs hanging from a centreline multiple ejector rack. There aren't enough of them to fill the racks however, being one short. The GP bombs were hanged from the wing and two other underfuselage pylons.

With the weapons done, the rest of the parts can be permanently fixed. The ejection seats were superglued into place but I decided to just place the canopies into their places without cementing and friction take care of them. Finally, the multipart (just two actually!) probe, the T-shaped aerial on the back and a few other carpet monster-fodder were superglued. The model then received a sludge wash, made lighter because of the colour scheme and finished with a spray of Tamiya Semi-Gloss Clear.

Conclusion
The Italeri/Dragon Su-24 is a creature of the 1990s at the time when kit manufacturers had to rely on just published photos and rather inaccurate drawings as starting points. Even though the Cold War was thawing by the time this kit was made, full access was not available to them, hence the rather wrong dimension for the kit. Nevertheless, it provides a good base for those who are able and willing to do some surgery on the kit in order to get a more accurate profile. The Dragon Fencers has been reboxed by others, including Zvezda but they remain the same as this one. They have been surpassed by the Streem offering but the latter is harder to find, at least here in Malaysia.

As an addendum, while I try my best to publish an entry every week or so, the actual build process actually have taken place weeks, if not months (even years) ago. The Fencer was the first kit I built after a break of some three months due to illness (December 2012-February 2013).

  

Sunday 11 January 2015

Stuart, Little

Historical Background
In 1935, the Rock Island Arsenal developed the T2E1 Light Tank for the infantry branch of the US Army. Accepted for service as the M2, the first 10 units were armed with a .50-cal heavy machine gun in a small turret while subsequent units were of a twin-turret configuration, with the second turret armed with a .30-cal machine gun. Following the Spanish Civil War, the US Army decided that it needed gun-armed, rather than machine gun-armed tanks. In December 1938, an M2A3 was pulled out of the production line and modified with heavier weapons and armour. As the M2A4, it was equipped with an M5 37mm gun, 25mm of armour and a 7-cylinder radial petrol engine. 365 M2A4s were produced from May to March 1940 plus another 10 in April 1941. War which had erupted in Europe in September 1939 showed that the M2 design had become obsolete and the need for the Army to improve the design. With armour increased by another 12.7mm, but still armed with a 37mm gun and five (one AA, one co-axial, one the bow and one each on the hull sponsons) .30-cal machine guns, the M3 entered production in March 1941. Later units were armed with longer M6 37mm gun and the sponson machine guns removed.

The M3 was powered by the Continental W-670-9A radial engine which also powered various US Army training planes. The engine was mounted at the rear, with the shaft running through the fighting compartment to the transmission at the front. The radial engine also caused the shaft to be placed high off the hull bottom, reducing room in the fighting compartment. To relieve the demand for aero angines, while offering better ergonomics, a new version powered by twin Cadillac V-8 auto engines with twin Hydra-Matic automatic transmission was developed. The new model also had a redesigned hull with a sloped glacis plate. Armour was roughly the same with M3, despite the fact that German tank ammunition was getting better. Despite criticism that the M3 (named Stuart by the British after American Civil War general JEB Stuart) was underarmed, the new version was still equipped with the 37mm gun - practically useless against panzers but still effective against Japanese tanks. The engine was relatively quiet and the transmission has fluid shifting, making it stealthy enough in the reconnaissance role. It was also quiet fast with speeds up to 36mph. It was designated Light Tank M5 (originally M4 but was redesignated M5 to avoid confusion with the Sherman tank)

The M5 first saw combat during the Operation Torch in November 1942. It gradually became the standard US Army light tank, supplanting the M3. Because of its limited firepower, the M5 (and the M3) was only used in the scout and reconnaissance role, specifically in the European and the Mediterranean Theatre of Operations. In the Pacific, it made its combat debut in that theatre during the invasion of Roi-Namur in 1944. There, the 37mm gun was still effective against Japanese armour, including the Type 97 Chi-Ha medium tanks. The Stuarts were eventually succeeded by the M24 Chaffee in late 1944. A total of 6,810 M5s were built.

The Kit
Until fairly recently, the only mainstream (read: plastic) 1/35 M5 Light Tank kit in the market was the venerable Tamiya kit. In 2003, AFV Club came up with a newly-tooled kit of the M3A3 Stuart and finally, in 2010, came out with the Early Production version of the M5A1. The kit consists of 290 parts in olive drab styrene, 72 parts in black styrene (individual track links from AFV Club's own track set), a small PE fret, turned aluminium 37mm gun barrel, a length of twine, a few vinyl poly caps and of course the decal and instruction sheets. Apart from the running gear, main armament and some small details, the M5 kit did not use the M3A3 moulding as, after all, the M3 and M5 have different dimension. The kit is finely moulded with sharp details although I think some of them are too fine (what a complaint!) and require care when removing them from the sprue. There are also bolt heads moulded on the sprue runner which can be used to enhance the detail of this kit and are very useful for other projects that require them (and being me, I totally forgot about them and were binned with the rest of the sprue tree!). The vinyl tracks have good detail and unlike the Tamiya kit, the end connectors are at the correct positions.

The decals provide markings for six vehicles:
1. 'Carol' / C-34, 3rd Battalion, 33rd Armored Regt, 3rd Armored Division, Normandy 1944
2. 'Loup',  Free French 1st Squadron, 2nd Regiment, Chasseurs d'Afrique, 1st Armored Division,  Rhine crossing April 1945
3. Republic Of China Army, 1950s
4. 'Margaret', 4th Marine Tank Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Saipan July 1944
5. British Army, 23rd Hussars, 29th Armoured Brigade, 11th Armoured Division
6. 34th Tank Battalion, 5th Armored Division



Construction
Unlike most tank kits from the Far East with one-piece lower hull tub, the M5A1 has separate panels. It made for greater details although one would have to exercise a little bit of care to ensure correct alignment of the walls. Once they are in place, the bulkhead separating the fighting compartment from the engine is put into place. While serving its purpose, the bulkhead also allows final alignment and stronger construction of the lower hull. Bolt heads moulded on the K sprue were then sliced off, put on the tip of a sharp modeling knife and were placed onto the final drive housing. Nothing out of the ordinary except that the bolt heads are real tiny and would be forever lost if dropped. I then went back to the actual first step in the instructions: the suspension and wheels, AFV Club provides two types of road wheels - solid or open spoke. The solid wheels are of two types, with four for each type. While it was not unusual for a Stuart to have a  mix of road wheels, it is unusual for them to be evenly divided. In any case, I decided to use the open spoke wheels. The drive sprocket also came in two types: open fancy type and solid. The instructions however only directed the modeller to use the solid type. The same goes with the idler wheels. The running gear was completed but left off the hull in the meantime and I continued with the engine access doors, tow hook and eyes and the rear sponson.

Moving on to the upper hull, I first glued part F1, which formed the bulk of the upper hull's shell onto the lower hull. Parts for the hull machine gun assembly were mated together and slid into place on the glacis plate (Part I2). The hull roof was then glued into place and was followed by the glacis plate. The side sponson covers at the rear, front fenders and engine deck cover were then cemented to the hull. The intake openings were covered with fine PE mesh but unfortunately, the screens allow the empty interior to be seen from the outside. And like the final drive housings, tiny bolt heads (20 of them) are to be scraped off the sprue and placed around the grilles. The hatch covers for the driver and co-driver's positions were assembled and then cemented in the closed position. Afterwards, various smaller parts such as fuel filler caps, towing eyes, ventilator covers, headlights and horn were cemented onto the model. The light brush guards were also added but they were delicate and needed patience to remove them from the sprues.

The turret assembly was next and was started by assembling the gun. The process was straightforward but rather fiddly due to the small size of many of the parts. The mating surface between the co-axial machine gun and the gunner's sight to the main gun were also quite small and needed to be lined up correctly so that the parts can be inserted into the mantlet without trouble. The shell of the turret was then assembled. Again, assembly is rather tricky if done according to the instructions as there are no locating pins. To add a bit of strength early in the assembly, the rear panel was cemented onto one half of the shell (I glued it onto the right half) and then cementing them onto the left half. The radio set was cemented to the back of the turret, followed by the gun assembly. The periscopes were assembled and fitted to the front turret roof panel and the roof was then cemented onto the turret. The rear roof panel did not fit well and I have to trim it down a bit. Finally the hatch doors, aerial base and the AA machine gun mounting were fitted.

Painting and Decaling
Generally for WW2 US tanks, you can paint them any colour as long as it was Olive Drab. I used Tamiya XF-62 Olive Drab for this build. The tyres were painted Gunze H77 Tyre Black. The pioneer tools were originally painted the usual colours - steel for the metal parts and Buff/Red Brown for the handles. However I found out that the pioneer tools for US vehicles were actually painted olive drab, so they were repainted. But visual interest's sake, I only painted the 'wood' parts OD and left the 'metal' parts in steel. For markings, I chose the first option, 'Carol'. The decals were fairly thick but apply beautifully. However, after the decals has well and truly settled (and the cement long hardened), I managed to buy a copy of Military Modelling magazine featuring an article by Steve Zaloga about the M5. And there it is, a photo of 'Carol', fitted with the solid wheels! Oh well, another exercise in 'creative license' again!

Finishing
Maybe I did it out of sequence but I decided to add sandbags on the front plate of the tank. While I do have Tamiya's Sand Bag set, they cannot be used on vehicles, plus they are way oversized. So I used the tried-and-trusted (by others) method of using two-part putty. This was actually the first time I crafted anything using them and for this build, I used Tamiya's Epoxy Putty. I used a cut reed from a traditional-style broom to act as the stopper for the sandbags as I have run out of styrene sheet. The 'sandbags' are piled on the front plate. I was quite pleased with my first attempt but needless to say, there are still room for improvement. The sandbags were then painted XF-57 Buff.

The tracks were painted XF-69 NATO Black and the 'metal' parts were washed with AK Interactive Track Wash. The tracks were then glued and fitted onto the model. The grousers were painted XF-64 Red Brown, given the Track Wash treatment and were then hanged on their racks. There aren't enough of them to fill the racks though. The pioneer tools, machine gun and the towing cable were then permanently fixed onto the model. Stowage was then added courtesy of Tamiya Allied Vehicle Accessory Set and Academy Tanks Supplies Set II. The lower hull and tracks were then weathered using a mixture of Mig Productions European Dust and Rubble Dust pigments.

Conclusion
Another great kit from AFV Club. However, construction is a bit fiddly and require a bit more attention, especially for the turret. The addition of interior parts, although not comprehensive allow modellers to show the interior, perhaps with a figure to hide things a bit. The marking options also show a good selection of markings, from Europe to the Far East. A good successor to Tamiya's venerable M5A1. 

Sunday 4 January 2015

Double-Winged Gull



Historical Background
In 1927, Nikolai N. Polikarpov designed and built a single-seat biplane fighter with the designation I-3. It was a success and eventually led to him being assigned to head a team tasked to design and deliver a 'modern' fighter designated I-6 by the middle of 1930.  The project failed and the engineers, together with Polikarpov, was sent to the gulag. While in prison, he was assigned to develop the I-5 fighter with Dmitri Grigorovitch. The project was a success and he was eventually freed in August 1932. In the meantime, Andrei Tupolev was designing a modern monoplane fighter designated I-14. He was concerned about the design and ordered two back-up biplane designs, the I-14A and I-14B. Polikarpov was handed the I-14A project, based on his experience designing The I-5. The I-14A flew in October 1933 and proved to be an excellent design and was ordered into production as the I-15. The I-15 was followed by the I-15bis with a straight, rather than 'gulled' upper wing, spatted undercarriage and a longer engine nacelle.

In July 1937, in a meeting chaired by Stalin, it was concluded that the biplane Fiat CR.32 was superior to the monoplane I-16. The Fiat had scored impressively against Soviet aircraft flown on behalf of the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War, but this was mainly due to the I-16 pilots dogfighting against the more nimble Fiats, rather than using their superior speed to break off combat. The presence of the Bf 109 was ignored, and instead of producing a superior monoplane to succeed the I-16, an improved biplane was sought. Polikarpov was instructed to carry out studies to improve the performance of the I-15 and the I-15bis without sacrificing their maneuverability. The new fighter was designated in-house as the I-15ter, with VVS designation I-153. The I-153 design was based on the I-15bis but with a stronger structure and was fitted with a manually retractable undercarriage to reduce drag. The upper wing reverted to the gull design of the original I-15. The four PV-1 7.62mm machine guns of the I-15bis were replaced with faster-firing 7.62mm ShKAS machine guns. Power was provided by a Shvetsov M-62 radial engine, replacing the M-25 of the I-15. The I-153 was of a mixed metal and wood construction. The metal frame has duralumin skinning on the forward fuselage and fabric for the rest. The wings are fabric-covered wood while tail surfaces are fabric-covered duralumin.

The I-153 made its first flight in August 1938. The M-62 engine was not ready at the time and it was powered by a 750-hp M-25 engine instead. Although the prototype failed factory testing, production was allowed to continue in conjunction with the ongoing test and development programme. Tests showed that the I-153 surpassed the performance figures for the I-15bis. In 1939, production finally switched to the M-62-based design. The new engine improved performance at altitude although speed at sea level was virtually unchanged. A speed of 443 km/h at 4,600 m was recorded with a service ceiling of 9,800 m. The figures were actually disappointing and caused the I-153 to fail the state acceptance trials. Production however continues as there was an overriding need to not disrupting production until more advanced fighters could be introduced. Numerous proposals were tested to improve the speed but it was obvious that the biplane had arrived at its limits.

The I-153 (nicknamed Chaika = gull) entered service in 1938. It saw its first combat during the Nomonhan Incident in 1939. On 7 July 1939, a flight of nine Chaikas was flown with their wheels down, hoping to trick the Japanese into believing that they are I-15s. Just before they entered combat, the wheels were retracted. The Soviets claimed four Ki-27 shot down in this engagement. The Ki-27 was superior to the I-15bis and I-16 but was more evenly matched with the I-153. The Japanese however learnt their lessons and dealt accordingly; as a result the I-153 could only be used in concert with the I-16. 70 I-153 were sent to the Far East and 23 were lost. The I-153 was also used by the Chinese Nationalist Air Force, operating 93 against the Japanese. The I-153's next combat experience was during the Winter War of 1939-1940, suffering losses against the smaller Suomi Ilmavoimat. Following the war, Finland operated 21 captured I-153s.  On the eve of Operation Barbarossa, the I-153 made up one-third of the Soviet fighter strength in the west, with vast numbers destroyed (mostly on the ground) during the first few days of combat. The I-153 remained as a frontline fighter until early 1942, being also used as a ground-attack aircraft.

The Kit
Classic Airframes until its (supposedly temporary) closure a few years back, specializes in producing lesser-known and lesser-modelled aircraft in 1/48 scale. The I-153 kit was released in 1996 and consists of 24 parts moulded in grey plastic, 9 parts in tan resin, 21 PE parts, photo negatives for instrument panel, two vacuum-formed cockpit windscreens and a small decal sheet. There is minimal engraved surface detail (after all, this is a fabric-covered aeroplane) but the fabric effect looks good. The thick plastic parts suffer from some flash and as with many other short run kits, the sprue gates are larger than those of mainstream kits. The second plastic sprue tree was unique, reminding me of a wagon wheel. Decals provide markings for two aircraft: Red 6, 8th Fighter Regiment, Black Sea Fleet and Red 16, Minsk, June 1941.

Construction
As usual with aircraft kits, construction started at the cockpit, which consists mainly of PE and resin parts. The resin parts are well cast and the PE parts very petite. Generally it was a rather straightforward assembly. The PE cockpit 'cage' was fiddly though and got a bit crooked because of my ham-fisted handling. Although fairly straightforward, the instructions are rather vague about placements of certain parts such as the breeches of the machine guns and the instrument panel. And, when working with a short-run kit, the rule 'fit twice, glue once' was applied here to ensure a good fit. And since the instructions are vague, I'm willing to take some liberties, as long as the parts fit! Furthermore, most of the cockpit would be actually hard to see from the outside. As for painting, CA just mentioned 'Dark Grey' for the interior colour so, I decided to use Gunze H317 Dark Gull Grey with details in brown, black and gun metal.

The fuselage halves were then mated together.  Once cured, I drilled holes in the fuselage for rigging the model. The wings were then cemented into place and unlike the fuselage halves they went on without a problem. Again holes were drilled for the rigging. The wing struts however presented a bit of a problem as the locating pins did not work as intended. I end up cutting them off and positioned the struts by sight only. To finish building at this stage, the cowling was fitted. CA however moulded all the engine shutters fully closed. It's OK as there is no engine was provided. With hindsight, I think I should have used the extra engine cowling from my Eduard I-16 as both aircraft are powered by the same engine plus the Eduard kit includes the style of cowling used by the I-153.

Painting and Decaling
Despite my predilection for colourful aircraft, I decided to finish my I-153 as 'Red 16'. I found a photo of the internet, supposedly of this aircraft wrecked on the ground. The colour is silver overall with splotchy green upper fuselage. Some modelers paint Red 16 in the style of an I-153 restored in New Zealand, which has large green spots over silver fuselage and light blue undersides. I decided to paint the model as in the wartime photo. The model received a coat of Tamiya TS-30 Silver Leaf overall and then, using an old paintbrush I dab XF-5 Flat Green all over the model bar the bottom. The decals were then applied. They are very thin and settled nicely. However the national insignia on the wings were left off  until after rigging has been completed. They were then subjected to the usual Mr. Mark Softer treatment.

Finishing
I took a slightly different approach this time by doing the rigging first. I am quite nervous as this was the first time I do any kind of rigging on my models (this kit was built before my CR.42, plus the CR.42 has a simple rigging). I used 1-pound fishing line and using the holes drilled into the fuselage as starting points. The lines were secured into their start points using superglue. Once the glue has cured, the lines were threaded into the holes in the wings. They are pulled taut and a drop of superglue was dropped into the hole. I didn't use accelerator so I have to maintain tension on the rigging wire until the glue set. The excess line was then cut using a new blade and the holes filled with putty and sanded. The paint were retouched and I finally applied the star decals.

The landing gears were next and there isn't any problems here. Finally the windshield was applied. This is truly new territory for me as I have never used vacform canopies. To start with I borrowed a pair of scissors from my wife's sewing kit and carefully cut away excess plastic (BTW Classic Airframes supplied two canopies in case you messed the first one up). The windshield was then painted first and then glued into place. Sludge wash was then applied but I only did it on the control surfaces only while regular wash was done on the engine cowling. The propeller was fixed into place and finally a spray of Flat Clear finishes the build.

Conclusion
As mentioned elsewhere, Classic Airframes' niche is basically 'planes no one else want to kit'. World War 2 was not fought with Bf 109s, Fw 190s, Mustangs, Thunderbolts and Spitfires only and many I-15, I-153, MS.406, Bloch 152, Fiats and Gladiators took up the burden during the early years. Classic Airframes deserve a  pat in the back just by filling this niche. As for the kit itself, it exhibits many of the hallmarks of a short-run kit, yet it was surprisingly fairly easy to build. While the rigging scared me at first, it wasn't that hard, mainly due to the actual aircraft's rather minimal rigging in the first place. All in all, a good kit. Shame about CA's announcement that they decided to close shop, apparently for the time being. Hopefully they'll bounce back with new kits!