MiG 3
As I contemplated pensioning off my Limbo Dancer after over six years of good service, I began to think of putting the Ultra motor into a fighter of some sort. I have never done a true warbird with retracts and, with the advent of LiPo batteries, felt that it ought now to be possible to convert an ARTF i.c. model without too much of a weight penalty. After a few hours on the web trying to sort out the differences between the various Mustangs, Spitfires etc. on offer, I was getting a little jaded when all of a sudden I came across this model. With its white colour scheme and bold red stars it looks totally different from the average warbird. True, it is only semi scale but, whereas a poorly proportioned model of a well known fighter such as the P51 instantly looks wrong, most of us have no such ingrained blueprint of the MiG to generate such negative feelings. I did have a search for the model at the Sandown show of 2006 but without success. Then the Astro 15 in the Cub burnt out and the Ultra motor got pressed into service there, so the warbird project went on the back burner. Not for long though! A month or so later, I finally crashed the Logo 10 helicopter. A first estimate of the cost of the parts needed to fix it came to over £200, so I decided that I would rather spend my time and money applying the newly liberated motor and radio gear to something new and different. As luck would have it, the next weekend was the Woodsprings model show, and what is more, after inspecting a couple of P51 offerings, I turned to the next trade stand and there was the MiG 3. This kit is by Air Loisirs, but is made in Vietnam and also bears a 'VQ' logo, so it may be marketed under other brand names too. There was a review of the Air Loisirs Macchi C205 Veltro in the August 2006 edition of Aviation Modeller International (which, due to the time-warping date conventions of magazine publishing in the UK, I was able to read before buying the MiG two months earlier, if you see what I mean). It is clear that the two models are very similar, and certainly all the various criticisms levelled at the C205 such as missing spinner, poor quality wheels, mismatching paint, fiddly retract installation and poor instructions are equally applicable to the MiG. So too though are the good points: Construction quality is good and lightweight, the main components fit well and line up with each other. Apart from the tailwheel, all hardware parts were useable, although I couldn't bring myself to use nylon clevises on the elevator and aileron linkages. One of the distinguishing features of this model is the covering. This is pre-printed with panel markings etc, but the material is more reminiscent of that '60s shelf covering favorite, Fablon, rather than the heatshrink materials we are used to nowadays. That said, it was wrinkle-free and well applied and I suspect will prove to be very stable when parked out in the sun. We shall see.
For someone with the right skills and equipment, I have no doubt that bending the legs accurately is perfectly possible. However, I felt that my chances of getting it right were not very good so I sat down with a cup of tea instead. Eventually a memory stirred. Six years ago, I built the DC3 and fitted the optional retracts. The kit though included all the parts for a fixed u/c - including some axles. A bit of rummaging in my bits box soon located them but the holes in the axle hubs were imperial whilst the Air Loisirs u/c legs were metric. However the wire almost went in and I felt that easing the hole in the axle hubs was a much less hazardous process than bending the legs. Of course, it did mean that two more flats had to be ground on the legs for the setscrews in the hubs but, if these were not initially spot on in position or angle, they could at least be adjusted with a touch more grinding. On offering up the retract units to the mountings in the wings, I found, just as in the AMI review of the Veltro, that the bearers had to be relieved in order to accommodate the retracts. Once in there though, it was reasonably easy to adjust the retracts to close neatly into the wells. Bending the wire operating pushrods to shape was a bit of a challenge but, once I decided to ignore the drawings in the instructions and instead bend up a dummy pushrod out of softer wire by trial and error, I got on a lot better. With a standard retract servo installed and a few more slivers of balsa and plastic removed here and there, the retracts eventually worked well, locking positively in both up and down positions. Joining the wings posed no great problem. The dihedral brace did need easing a bit but then the wing roots lined up accurately. Just as well really since, although the instructions tell you to check the dihedral, no actual measurement is quoted. Next comes the aileron servo and linkage. This model is perhaps a bit unusual by today's standards, using a traditional single servo and torque rods rather than two separate servos. The ailerons are full span and are already hinged, with the torque rods fully fitted so, starting from here, there is little point in contemplating changing anything. I did though fit a mini servo rather than a full-size. After all, I did have four of them left over from the helicopter.
Elevators and rudder are supplied hinged to their fixed counterparts. However, when I cut the fuselage covering away to reveal the tailplane slot, it was closed at the rear end. The instructions show the tailplane being inserted with one elevator removed and a quick tug at the elevators confirmed that the hinges were not actually glued in. This sent me off for a quick check of the ailerons and rudder just to confirm that these really were firmly stuck. They were. It will come as no surprise to learn that the tailplane slot had to be eased somewhat but, yet again, once in there, the tail surfaces lined up perfectly. Installation of the rudder and elevator servos and associated linkages (substantial piano wire pushrods running in pre-installed guide tubes) was straightforward, so the rudder and elevator hinges were glued into position and the tailwheel unit fitted. As mentioned earlier, the tailwheel was a weak distorted apology for a wheel and was substituted for one I had in stock. All that was left now was the cowl and canopy - plus of course a redundant engine mount and fuel tank. I hate canopies, so it was time to tackle the motor mounting so that the model could be balanced in order to work out where the battery would have to go.
Individually, I was quite pleased with my motor mount, battery box and switch mounting fabrications. However, when I came to assemble things, I found it all a little awkward. Basically the problem is that the ESC and switch have to be fed into place through a hole in the firewall, as the motor and gearbox are brought into postion. The battery box cannot be installed until the internal wiring has been positioned - then the retaining screws are inaccessible because of the motor. This situation was made even more awkward once I fitted some baffles and deflector plates to the motor mount to direct cooling air up to the motor, because I then couldn't get a screwdriver onto the bolts securing the motor mount to the firewall. However, once I swapped to socket headed screws, it all finally went together.
I won't bore you with the convoluted path of experiments which I followed over the next three weeks but essentially there were three problems: i) The Kontronik speed controller has difficulty starting the motor when used with a gearbox. ii) Having replaced this with a Hyperion speed controller, I encountered serious radio range problems. iii) The closely spaced ball races on the MEC gearbox struggle to cope with the cantilever load of the three inch alloy spinner. As you can imagine, one consequence of working my way through all of this is that the awkward assembly sequence of motor, controller and battery box grew into a major source of irritation. I did though manage a couple of flights with this power configuration which at least confirmed that the model was worth persevering with. Flight characteristics were very good - just the sort of smooth, groovy handling that one would want with a fighter. The retracts held up well, working off our grass field. On taxying back though, I found that one one of the legs was rotating in the retract unit, so I made a mental note that it was probably time to replace my 15 year old tube of threadlock!
The good news is that, having done the switch, both models are now flying well - and both are interference-free. The only downside as far as the MiG is concerned is that the Ultra motor is heavier than the Kontronik / MEC setup. As a result, the cg is further forward and this, combined with the overall weight increase, has led to a tendency to nose over on landing. I am still experimenting with adjusting the cg and it may be possible now to revert to the original plan of using a BEC and so shed the weight of the Rx battery. However, since the latter is behind the cg, this may result in some lead being needed at the tail. If the nose over tendency continues to be an issue, I may consider cutting out the plastic wheel wells and re-modelling them to accommodate slightly larger wheels. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |