mcarleno

Question if anyone knows. I have been laying out a Mig-3 1/6th scale design. Things are going well, but every 3-view I have shows that the vertical stablizer has 2 Degrees of right in it. I am assuming that this is correct? Any input would be appreciated.

BobH

My Feedback: (2)

I would not be surprised if the drawings are correct. Several WWII fighters have off-set fins.

TAZ

i don't know about the Mig-3 but i have read from some of the other F4u guys in hear say that the Corsair had 3 degrees on the tail fin

Chad Veich

My Feedback: (60)

The Corsair does indeed have an offset vertical fin, as do some other WW2 fighters. Those who have built and flown the Brian Taylor Corsair (which has the scale offset) say that it has no adverse affect on the flying of the airplane.

Dimon

Marc,
May be you have drawings for control line Mig-3 model?
On the drafts I've found, fin is stright in line with fuse. [link=http://mkmagazin.almanacwhf.ru/avia/draw/mig_3.rar]Here you may download[/link] them.

Connery

Dimon,

Look back at the first pic that you posted. The top view does indeed show an offset vert. stab. Although it is offset to the opposite direction of the top view that MArc posted.

TLH101

My Feedback: (90)

Dimon,
Don't count on the Russian 3-views. I have seen several the were very inacurate.

Dimon

Connery,
Please note that first plan is combined from two views - top and bottom. It is antenna that makes vertical stablizer to look like offset. At least in the description, there are no words of any offset in fin position.

Terry,
Sometimes it happens.[] But usually there are several versions of drafts to choose the most correct ones. Unfortunately I'm not sure that it is possible to find factory blue prints of all WW2 fighters nowadays []

mcarleno

Here is the image that I clipped the original post from.

The image posted by Dimon has imposed top and bottom view. The top view is the right side and the fin looks straight, however if you were to have the left side instead, it would show the offset. I have about 3 different views, they all are pretty much the same as this one.

orectolobus

I designed a 32" span electric version of the Mig-3 and it has proven to be an exellent
flying airplane.




I used a variety of scale resources for developing an accurate 3-view prior to
developing the CAD drawings.

A copy of my 3-view is at this URL

http://www.tdmsoftware.com/majewski/...3/mig3view.pdf

For more info on my electric vesion feel free to check out my web page
at

[link=http://www.tdmsoftware.com/tdmmodels]www.tdmsoftware.com/tdmmodels[/link]

Terry

Dimon

Marc,
Seems your drafts are inaccurate as Terry AKA TLH101 said.[] I'd say that on your views fin is not offset, it is not symmetric. And on the second pic I've posted you may see at section "N-N" that fin is symmetric.
By the way, you have drafts of I-200, prototype that after tests and some modifications became MiG-1 and then MiG-3.
I'd advise you just to copy right side, then mirror it and use as left side. I don't think you'll need any fin offset in your model.
By the way, as I've mentioned before, unfortunately no MiG-3 factory drafts were found. But in period of 2000-2003 there were found fragments of 6 MiGs crashed during WW2 and now at "Aviarestoration" factory in Novosibirsk city flying copy of MiG-3 is being built. They are even trying to restore AM-35 (AM-38) engine that was used in the original fighter.
Here are the most [link=http://wunderwaffe.narod.ru/WeaponBook/Avia/Mig3/Draw/index.htm]accurate drafts [/link] and [link=http://wunderwaffe.narod.ru/WeaponBook/Avia/Mig3/Pictures/page_01.htm]photos[/link] I've found for you.

mcarleno

Dimon,

I guess I should have reviewed a little more closely. The three I was working with was indeed an I-200.

Though I am going to have to throw away some work (not a lot) I changed my reference material.

Here is the new docs I will be working with.

TLH101

My Feedback: (90)

One thing to keep in mind, if you are building a model for competition, the model must match the 3-views. So if the 3-view is incorrect, just build to it, and dont have any docs (pics) that show the inaccuracies.
Those are a good looking set of drawings to start from. Should make a nice a model. I have always liked to look of the Mig-3. Keep us posted on your progress.
BTW, there is a short article in the latest(vol 41, number 12) Air Classics on a Mig-3 that has been restored in Russia by AviaRestoration Ltd. It has an Allison engine instead of the original AM35A. Also a short about the YAK-3 "Red Heat" belly landing, in Va.

TLH101

My Feedback: (90)

Here's a couple of pics the Mig in the Air Classics article. The pic from the right front looks almost like a model;

Katchmarek

My Feedback: (29)

It appears that the I-200 did have an offset vertical stab, whereas the Mig-3 did not. I have an excellent book "Red Star Volume 13 Mikoyan's Piston-Engined Fighters by Yefim Gordon and Keith Dexter which covers the development of the Mig-3 fro prototype through final production models, as well as other Mig designs. However the book is predominently Mig-3 oriented.
Dimon is correct though, I have several sets of drawings of the Mig-3 and they all are slightly different. So, as Terry say's, don't worry about it and build it to your 3 views! In fact the Mig-3 is such an illusive bird that even the example on display at Monino, the Russian Central Air Force Museum is a reproduction! Be it an older repro than what is being discussed here, a repro none the less. I've attached a few pics that I took last summer of it anyway.
Rob / katchmarek

Gremlin Castle

My Feedback: (14)

I have been looking for details of the canopy slide rails and tracks with no success. Have you seen any sketches on this particular part of the airframe?
I am building a 101" Roamin Research airframe and would like to have the canopy sliding for ease of switch installation.

allanflowers

Rob,
I hate to be picky but the Mig3 in your post isn't even a reproduction. It is clearly just a fiberglass MOCKUP of the plane, for display purposes only. For heaven's sake, the tail feathers are molded as one part with the fuselage. They aren't even made as separate parts. It looks like the spinner is done the same way.
Allan

mikeperik

I'd be interested in keeping track of how you are doing with your plans. I'm assuming that you will continue to post to one of the two threads you started.

I've got the rough formers done. These formers are not the ones that will eventually become the real model's formers but I'll use these to get the shape of the fuse and then hopefully take cross section of the fuse where I want formers.

I want to "skin" the fuse, but since this is the first time I've ever done this the learning curve is pretty steep! I figure I'll try to do somethings and learn a little and then try again until I get what I want. I'm not in this to develop a kit, just a learning experience and hopefully I'll have a model in the end, although I've been tempted to just buy the plans from TDM

www.rcscalebuilders.com has a couple threads going right now by two very accomplished builders that are very informational on how two different people go from 3 view to plans.

A question I have is the stab and elevator hinge line. On a lot of the 3 views the hinge line arcs as it get close to the tip of the stab. Is this correct? Does this complicate the hinging of the elevator?
Also, any tips on creating the ribs and getting them to the correct size. I have Profili Pro 2, should I measure the length that I need off of my three view and create it in Profili then export it as DXF and import it into my CAD program?
Should I use a different airfoil? Any recommendations? Clark Y? I've heard of people gradually increasing the thickness of the foil as it approaches the tip by 2% or something like that so that you don't have to put any washout into the wing. The additional thickness provides the washout instead of "twisting" the wing.

Marc, what are your intentions for developing these plans? Do you plan to kit it?

Thanks,
Mike




Mike

mcarleno

Gremlin,

Here is the info you need on the cockpit canopy.

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/mig3/cockpi.html

You will see that it uses three tracks to slide. This sight also has a great link to a walk around.

mcarleno

Allan,

Actually, that is not a model. But I don't think it is original. Here is a picture of the same plane. This picture is available from a walk around.

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/mig3...r/rusavia3.htm

Chad Veich

My Feedback: (60)

For those who may have missed it in Marc's other thread, here is a link to some outstanding detail pics of the recently restored Mig-3 in russia. Well worth a look for anybody working on one of these birds.
http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/mig3...r/rusavia3.htm

Katchmarek

My Feedback: (29)

Allan, Mock-up / non flying reproduction...I'll give ya that one! But as far as the tail feather statement...I have to fight ya there...look at these pics! That's how they were built.
Rob / katchmarek

mcarleno

Mike,

What CAD program are you using. Any interest in sharing some files?

I know that it looks like it would be hard to do on the stablizer, but if you look at how they did the hinges on both the ailerons and elevator, the hinge is at the top of the surface with the movement enclosed beneath the skin. So basically, on the top, elevator stays beneath. Though on the 3-views, it shows the same arc on the bottom, the bottom is exposed.

As far as plans, it was my intention to build and share. I don't plan on trying to make any money, just looking for folks to help me along the way and I will share anything I have with them.

mcarleno

Mike,

I also used Profili but acording to what I could find (un-official) the airfoil at the root is a Clark YH and at the tip, a Clark YH Mod. I programmed in 2 Degrees of washout. I know it probably crazy, but I have been thinking of doing the leading edge slats which would certainly help at low speeds with tip stall.

I also decided to go with Robart Robostrut ready retracts (7/16") and 660 Struts. These are 7.125" and can be trimmed. Looks like the gear will need to be about 6" so the smaller 650 struts won't work (5 7/16"). I also will be using 4" wheels. The 1/6th scale puts the wheels near this. On the full scale they where 600 mm which is 23.62" so at 1/6 thats = 3.94".

CAD -- have done most of the work so far in 2D in Visio (very good with this program) but spent about 3 hours last night learning a trail version of TurboCAD 11 Delux. I got several of the formers done but cann't seam to get the ply doubler for the saddle to align correctly. But then after all of the activity on this thread, realized that I had indead been using the N-200 prototype 3-view. The Mig-3 is very similar but will need to get new formers because the cross section is a little different.

The TDM plans look great for an electric park flyer. The I-16 he has is awsome. Might just have to buy one! But looking at his plans, they have a flat bottom wing and I don't think they would scale to the size that I am going for which is about a 70" span with 1.20 power.

Glad to see you aboard!

allanflowers

M Carleno,
Take another look at the photos in Post 15. It is not the same plane. The one in your post is a real aircraft. The one in #15 is a solid skin model, probably hogged out of foam then glassed over. The tail feathers are not separate pieces. Whoever made this just made grooves in the form to represent parting lines.
Allan