Zhengdefu 1/72 MiG-31 Foxhound

ZHENGDEFU 1:72 MIG-31 FOXHOUND

Reviewer: Mark B (SMAKR Webmaster) (smakr@bigpond.com)
Kit Review submitted: 28 February 2002

Aircraft:
The West first heard about a "Super MiG-25" under development in September 1976 when Lt Victor Belenko defected to Japan in an early model Foxbat. He described a MiG-25 with a larger and stronger airframe for supersonic flight at low level (something the Foxbat was unable to achieve), with new avionics, a much more powerful engine, and underwing stores to carry a new long-range missile type. While the West dismissed his claims to some extent (although they did keep their eyes and ears open) his description did provide the inspiration for one aspiring author, Craig Thomas, who wrote a book that later became a film starring Clint Eastwood and that of course was Firefox - a fictional MiG-31 aircraft able to translate thought processes etc.

The West did in fact refer to the new aircraft as a MiG-31 but were soon taking notice when one was spotted by satellite destroying a target under 200 feet from a range of 20 km while flying at 20,000 feet - crediting Lt Belenko's claims in an instant. In a later test the aircraft also destroyed a pilotless flying vehicle at some 70,000 feet.

Norwegian fighters began intercepting the aircraft in the mid-80's by which time the reporting name of the type was designated as "Foxhound" and the West soon began to fear that the aircraft was a much more capable interceptor than first thought. Once the demise of the Soviet Union came about then much of the mysteries of the MiG-31 were solved and its capabilities soon brought back to a more realistic level.

Like most modern Soviet aircraft the MiG-31 underwent numerous modifications during production. One of the major changes was the repositioning of the airbrakes from on top of the intake ducts, to underneath. The MiG-31 has larger intakes than the MiG-25 and these have been modified to allow for better fuel consumption and drag reduction. A crude in-flight refuelling probe was added to the port forward fuselage of later production aircraft, but was not added to earlier ones.

The Kit:
The origins of this kit are unknown although if it is a [pirated?] copy then it is most likely that of Revell's. The only other three kits I am aware of for the MiG-31 in this scale are ICM, Condor and Zvezda which are all relatively new releases, but this kit as far as I am aware was out before them (I picked it up here in Australia while discussions about the others having just come out elsewhere were taking place). It is suspected that the molds are probably copied from the old and inaccurate Revell kit although the plastic is very much like Zvezda quality and molding. It is the first (and probably only) time I have been exposed to this manufacturer after learning their alleged traits in the modelling world. But Like the Lee Mirage I reviewed sometime ago, it is still worthwhile and a service to the modelling community to review a kit such as this one without going into supporting them as a whole.

This kit was incredibly cheap at around $7 AUD (you can only get 1/144 kits less than this as a general rule!) and comes in a big blue box, which I thought at first glance was Revell! Inside there is one large plastic bag containing three Zvezda-like sprues and around 82 light grey parts, with some very minor flash that will be pretty easy to clean up. The two-piece canopy is bagged separately which was an excellent idea but the tiny decal sheet floats loosely amongst the parts and somehow became bent. Panel lines are finely raised with some rivet detail as well.

Instructions:
Approximately sized A3 folded into a booklet with essentially Chinese text throughout with some "literal translated English" as well - which makes for often confusing and amusing reading. The front page includes a very brief history (hard to read given the way it is translated), sprue diagram and symbol info. Generic colour names are quoted by way of letter labels throughout construction - Italeri style - but no FS numbers or actual ranges quoted. Some insufficient exactness will frustrate the novice modeller at times (especially where there are no locating pins, tabs, etc, eg: aerials, antennas, seats etc) but otherwise the six assembly steps are straight forward to follow. The final page features a three-view markings sketch including missile markings.

Construction:
The cockpit is relatively sparse. You are provided with three-piece seats to attach to a floor that has sidepanels (with generic raised detail) and rudder pedals already molded onto it. There are no locating tabs to put the seats on, so you best interpret it from the instructions - control sticks are also provided. Both seats are a bit crude with visible seam lines, and the pilot seat is particularly crude and needs a bit of cleaning up before affixing to its armchair sides, and cockpit floor. The floor is attached to the top of the nosewheel well bay that has some structural detail provided and also locating pins for correct positioning. Its best to attach the floor to the nose-bay before attaching the rear seat, as you risk putting the seat too far back and not fitting. So test fit the rear seat in place once you test fit the floor/well unit in place, and you will probably also find the rear seat has to sit too far forward. I accepted this, but an alternative would be to shave off the locating pins on the top of the nosegear well and fit the floor in a more correct position. I had already made decisions about the predicted outcome of the kit, so a few shortcuts were taken.

A main instrument panel (with no detail) is provided as a dashboard and this is rather small and does not take up the allocated space it is supposed to. Decals are supplied for the main and side instrument panel but the main instrument panel decal is twice the size of the panel itself! The side panels need their detail sanded off if you were to place decals thereon. This whole unit is then encased in the forward fuselage halves which are affixed together accordingly. Fit was very good in this part. The instructions say that the interior should be painted Bright Green, which is pretty well correct, it certainly contains a yucky green colour which is hard to describe so best look at reference photos and achieve a match as I did with a bit of Humbrol emerald, grass green and Russian green and black.

The large intakes were sub assembled at this point and I noticed the inner wall had straight leading edges when in fact they should curve like the outline of a snake. The top of the intakes have separate intake bleed outlet ducts attached, which are raised parts when in fact they should be depressed into the intake roof. You need to interpret reference material and the instruction sheet for correct placement, and I laid both intakes side by side so the outlet was lined up with the other one. The intake duct control vanes (those large louvre-like shutters inside the intake) are a touch smaller than the allocated space, so I used a dab of filler to fix up the gaps. The instructions say to paint the interior white, the photos don't really match this so I chose aircraft grey with aluminium vanes.

Building wheels up models means the gear doors have to be closed and these all fit reasonably okay providing you both test fit and trim the doors accordingly, with a dab of filler to seal up any small gaps. The main wheel wells have some good plumbing detail provided. The nose wheel well was the hardest to close up, the middle doors were added first and left to dry individually, lest they get pushed into the cavity! Then the front panel containing the landing lights was added (check the instructions to see which way it goes!) although the shape of the part suggests it is being attached sideways when it is not! To save myself from inadvertently pushing the door into the bay (and possibly losing it) I employed an old trick of mine in squeezing filler into the cavity - enough to almost fill it up but not enough to fill it in (if you get my meaning) so the panel has something to rest on while it dries in position. I have heard of other tricks too, like measuring the depth of the cavity and cutting a piece of stretched sprue to length to act like a table leg right in the middle of the well. I had trouble fitting the rear panel in place - it was very small. So I simply filled it in with filler and sanded smooth (and no one is the wiser!).

The main fuselage section is split into upper and lower halves and I gave them a quick once over with the excel blade to rid it of some very minor flash. The exhaust fans were painted aluminium and affixed to the rear of the upper fuselage half very carefully so it would match up correctly to the bottom half later. Then the fuselage halves were mated resulting in a rather obtrusive join line right around so these were sanded smooth and some of the raised panel lines were removed as a result. The rear exhausts matched up as well as hoped for, and overall the fit of these parts was quite good. The forward fuselage was then carefully lined up and affixed resulting in the smallest of steps between forward and main fuselage halves that needed sanding. So far so good.

While this was drying I went to work on the missiles, pylons etc. A large pair of AA-6 missiles and fuel tanks (I assume) are provided for underwing pylons while four smaller AA-9 missiles are attached to smaller pylons under the fuselage. Photos suggest these AA-9's should in fact be pretty well embedded into the fuselage. The rear sections of the AA-6's were warped but this was easily fixed with wooden pegs clamping while drying. All these parts fit well, providing judicious use of pegs/rubber bands to hold them in place to dry. The pylons were added delicately to the missiles/tanks, matching up their alignment with reference photos as there are no locating pins for correct placement. Then the missiles were painted white - a number of coats were needed, with the various fins and panels black, and the AA-6 noses in red. The instructions direct missile painting on the back but best to check out some reference material for yourself as they don't look fully right to me. I used MiG-25 photos for a guide although some had the main fuselage of the AA-6's black with white main fins.

Back to the intakes, which were a bit of a hit and miss affair in relation to fitting onto the fuselage. Firstly, you need to remove any seam line from the fuselage join, on the rear wall of the intake section (ie: front of the main fuselage section). There are probably a few ways you could attach the intakes to the aircraft, either first against main fuselage section (and slipping in the forward fuselage assembly later, although fitting it in might be problematic); secondly, against the forward fuselage assembly, and then both joined onto the main fuselage section; or thirdly the way I did it, which was join both fuselage sections together and add the intakes on afterward. A series of test fits and only a perfect sub assembly will get them to fit well. While they still go on okay, the starboard intake had to be pressed against the forward fuselage resulting in a gap at the rear to be filled and sanded while the port intake was slightly off axis and needed a bit of sanding and fine putty to blend it into the fuselage lines. Took a bit of filler and work to do this but achieved good results on both intakes (although a few raised panel lines were sanded off). At this stage you notice how glaringly inaccurate it is to have the protruding outlet ducts on top of the intakes (they should be depressed) and the wrong straight profile of the inner intake wall (which you could carve with a knife if you were game!).

The main wings were assembled, which are simply one large piece separately, and overlapping an inner underwing portion with slots for the two pylons to be placed. These portions fit almost perfectly into the cavity of the main wing but the stores are another matter. The holes are larger than the locating tabs and you need to sand off the raised panel scribing near the leading edge so the pylon fits flush - hold it til at least it grips and then apply glue into the gaps at the pylon roots for filler - required on both inner AA-6 and outer fuel tank pylons. The wings are also a bit hit and miss affair when attaching to the fuselage. The port wing locating tab and hole mate well providing a fit not needing filler but the locating hole for the starboard wing is much bigger than the locating pin! Of course this means that it will sit slightly lower than the port wing. There are ways around this, you can stick a bit of stretched sprue on the underside of the locating tab and file it til it is a snug fit, turn the assembly upside down and slip some filler in the underside gap or shave off the tab and butt-join in place, say with super glue. To get the right dihedral you need to consult reference sources - a couple of well placed playing cards underneath the underwing stores, provide the "jack" needed to keep the model off the surface so the wings dry correctly.

The tailplanes fitted better and require no filler but do need something underneath to prop them up while drying. There is one centre locating pin allowing the tailplanes to be swivelled and fixed in the desired position. The real crafty modeller may be able to fix a stopper on the inside or flatten the ends with a hot knife (obviously before the fuselage halves are affixed) enabling possibly a moving tailplane surface.

The dorsal fins are very inaccurate if you put them onto the model in the positions dictated by the locating pins. You need to fill in the holes, shave off the pins, get your reference material out and butt join the dorsal fins pretty well along the edge of the fuselage sides. If you stick them in the holes, they will sit too far in from the edge of the fuselage sides and look narrow when viewed from the front. Even the boxart and instructions contradict the model!

The canopy comes in two parts and is thick, with a bit of flash but once removed they fit perfectly over the cockpit in the closed position, and then the pre-painted nose (in Humbrol 32 dark grey) with pitot tube was added on to complete assembly, again fits well but I spent some time ensuring the pitot tube matched the right way the nose would attach to the fuselage.

Versions & Decals:
Red 23 is the only version catered for by the kit, and the decal sheet contains only the six red stars, instrument panel decals, and a pair of 23's. The instructions do not really assist with the overall colour scheme of the aircraft so I applied an aircraft grey matching photos of the MiG-31 with Matt Dark Grey nose radome (Humbrol 32 fits the bill well) and the various strips, panels and edges on the dorsal and ventral fins you can see in photos. The instructions do say aluminium on some of these panels, but I chose the dark grey. Also looking at close up photos (again referring to Ken Duffey's excellent collection of MiG-31 pics) some smaller panels just below the cockpit were painted in Dark Grey which I copied onto the model. The decals were very thin and prone to breaking - not unlike propagteam decals. They also needed a fair bit of soaking time but once applied to the model and sealed in with decal setting solution, none the wiser, they are fine.

Accuracy:
This would rate as only a passable replica of the MiG-31 as there are a fair number of anomalies worth noting. The intakes are probably the most obvious flaws in that the inner wall of the intake are curvature but on the model they are straight, a small canard fairing is missing and both top and bottom exterior walls are not quite right in shape, and the LERXs are too shallow and pointed. In fact a lot of small fairings on the intakes are either wrongly included or omitted. The underfuselage AA-9 missiles are attached via pylons in the model kit but on close scrutiny of the photos they are almost embedded into the fuselage with surrounding bulges. There are a few bumps and lumps on the kit's intakes that aren't in the photos and perhaps the worst one of all is the dorsal tailfins, too close to each other and not on the edge of the fuselage as they should be if you simply attach as the locating pins dictate. The frames on the cockpit are questionable as well, although they have been attempted pretty well. Folks, if you want an accurate MiG-31, this kit ain't it!

Overall:
This is actually a hard paragraph to write for a number of reasons - we should not be supporting pirated kit copies (assuming it is one) and on this basis I will not recommend purchasing this kit. On the otherhand, I had expected this kit to be much worse and "cheaper quality" than it really was. I've had much worse fitting kits than this one and overall you would have to say that the quality is reasonably good - much better than the Lee kit I built (now that was a shocker). But it does lack accuracy and your better bet is to go with one of the newer releases. It still poses as an awesome looking aircraft in spite of all the inaccuracies and for $7 AUD this kit as it stands I thought was worth every cent and the example I produced looks like a quality kit basically all the way through. So I will leave it up to you to decide - but just don't tell me! ;-)

Reference:
Ken Duffey's website, and MiG-31 walkaround photos at - http://www.lindenhillimports.com/mig-31.htm
World Aircraft Information Files - Sheet 213

Related Reviews:-

Condor 1/72 MiG-31 Foxhound

Related INBOX reviews:-

web hosting • domain names • video sharing
free online games • photo sharing
free blog • short URLs