Svetlin

Looks very, very nice! That centerline pylon though should disappear

Hi, the following video contains some close-up shots of the Shafrir 2, though I do not know if that could help from modelling perspective.

Could that be somehow hard-coded into the model during the construction in 3DS or Blender? Honestly, I have no practical knoweldge about 3d modelling. I am drawing my conclusions from my fiddling with data.ini files in trying to add or fix turning front landing gear and shocks. There are models where no matter what ini dancing I did, the front gear would not turn properly along the correct axis and/or the shocks would not function correctly. That made me believe such movements are somehow hard-coded into the model during the construction in 3DS or Blender. So, my guess is, that unless these movements are planned for and provided for during the model construction, the ini file alone will not help. I would put my bet the same applies also for rotors rotation axis. Of course it would be best if one of our 3D experts could confirm or reject that and shed some more light on the topic.

I apologize, Nyghfall, I did not realize the file was removed on purpose. I deleted it from my post above. I apologize once again.

Yes, that's logical. There is hardly any more evident example of this trend than the Hornet and the Super Hornet. On the other hand it seems to me the F-16E/F were labelled E/F instead of F-16C/D Block 60 simply in an attempt to convince the buyer they are buying cutting-edge technology and not something outdated. So, some play with blocks and versions - "Nah, no biggie, it's just another block." vs. "Oh, no, that's a brand new thing, look, it is not the C/D anymore, it is the E/F now", that kind of thing. And that is going further with the F-16V now.

Hi, will the canopy be animated to open/close? If it will, may I suggest that you used the same animation slot to animate the upward turning air-pressure-sensor mast? When the F-13 was parked on the airfield, the technicians would turn the mast up as a safety measure. It would be cool to have the canopy and the mast operating under the same animation.

Well, that is most interesting. I was not aware that other air forces also created locally and used recon pods based on the UB-16 rocket pod. I guess that was some Warsaw pact sharing of ideas and experience

I do not mean to argue, but it does not seem likely that those were modifed MFs. They have the MiG-21R wing with the radio-electronic warfare wingtip pods. Also they have the MiG-21R tube installed on the right upper side of the nose with just an air pressure sensor, whereas the MiG-21MF has other sensors added on the same tube. Why would anyone downgrade by removing some useful sensors to convert a serial MiG-21MF into a MiG-21RF? Some countries, Bulgaria included did have their own recon version of the MiG-21MF. Here it was labelled MiG-21MF-R and at the beginning it was planned to operate with the MiG-21R pods (after removal of the GSh-23L gunpod). That did not work out well, so later on, the MiG-21MF-R performed recon missions with a locally built small pod with camera, converted from a UB-16 rocket pod. That was the RFC-2 pod and shapewise it was something like this (this is just a shape, no skin):

Yes, exactly, Egypt made a local modification to the MiG-21R by adding permanently cameras in a fairing under the nose as in your picture. Sadly I do not have good reference for the recon pods, but it seems the old Eduard 1/48 MiG-21R model kit would be a good reference with respect to stencils and panel lines. Here is a review of the model kit: https://www.themodellingnews.com/2014/06/review-eduards-fishbed-mig-21r-in-48th.html

Having followed the different threads on the topic, I would say we are looking at the result of a cooperation between GKABS and yakarov79. The base models come from GKBAS (A-6A early and late already released here, the A-6B is yet to come) and yakarov79 is making fine-tuning and adding additional details to the models also adjusting his skins to the models.

I have read that the E-7R, which was the prototype for the MiG-21R, was based on the MiG-21PF and in fact it was a serial MiG-21PF that got converted. The first 2 MiG-21R were in fact serial MiG-21PFM (izd. 94) converted into MiG-21R. The MiG-21RF was the export version of the MiG-21R. Since the MiG-21R was based on the MiG-21PF, it did not come from the factory with the subject plates. I myself am more willing to take these plates as FOD protection measure. If you check a side profile of a MiG-21 with such plates installed, you will notice the plates are not simetrically placed under the auxiliary intakes, meaning if you find the center of the auxiliary intake and draw a straight line perpendicular to the plates, that line will not cross the center of the plates. The plates are placed slightly ahead and under the auxiliary intakes, which indicates they are meant to deflect stuff coming from infront below rather than from behind below. And if you connect the center of the auxiliary intake with the center of the plate below it and extend the line, the line will touch the front wheel. That may be just amateur logic, but to me it indicates the plates are meant to protect from debris, lifted by the front wheel.

I am sure Gepard knows better, but from what I have read, the Monsun dual rails were used on the PFM, not the PF and in Poland and in the DDR only. Oddly enough, here is a picture of what looks to me like a DDR MiG-21PF (judging by what appears to me as a PF forward-hinged, single-piece canopy and the narrower PF vertical tail) with the Monsun dual rail, that I came across. Mandatory screenshot - we also had MiG-21Ms , here in camo shortly before retirement.

That is interesting. This seems to be a picture from a training flight, proving the crews were trained into gunpod ground attacks with the A-6. What type is the gunpod and is it available as a stock weapon, or in any of the weapons packs?

Here they are. I just deleted the specific station code entry. RPK10.zip