??? Which one and why???
Foxbat - the rest is obvious…
The Flogger is a more well rounded aircraft. When evaluated by Western Air Forces after the fall of the Iron Curtain it was found to be far more capable than previously thought, especially the later models. BVR, Look Down-Shoot Down radar, and decent dogfighting abilities. Far more of a fighter and not just an interceptor. Not just a one trick- go fast in a straight line. Dont get me wrong, the Foxbat is quite impressive in its’ own way and I do like it, but I believe that the Flogger is all around more lethal in more areas.
I’m really trying to track down a 1/48th Italeri Flogger (MiG-23)…hard to find!!! Anyone know where one can be had? I’m turning into a BIG FLOGGER Groupie…
There is a new 1/48 Trumpeter kit coming real soon. [H] Much better that the old ESCI/Italeri kit
http://s362974870.onlinehome.us/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=253260
Yea but alot more expensive,
Btw, I say FOXBAT!
Wait till you have a box of one, the thing is BIG.
With regards, Ninetalis
Flogger just sounds more fun to me…
The ESCI MiG-23 kit is so-so. Thick plastic and good though heavy detailing. Pretty good representation of of the complex landing gear. Since it was created during the Cold War I have no idea how accurate the kit is. Not a bad kit at all but I wouldn’t pay a great deal for one Manny. The Trumpy kit looks much, much nicer! Plus hopefully we’ll see more kits of all the different versions of the aircraft.
The Revell MiG-25 is pretty crude. It’s something you could do a lot with super-detailing but the kit out of the box is simplified and lacking a lot of detail.
Well both the 1/48 Revell MiG-25 and 1/48 ESCI MiG-23 & 27 kits date from the late 70s. The height of the Cold War. And Soviet OKBs, the Soviets themselves, or any of their client nations were not too keen on letting model companies get close enough to do close up inspections of those birds. Details and measurements were missed or “guestimated” off of open source photographs. Both are fun dated kits, but need work to bring them true accuracy beyond outline and markings.
Manny, the ESCI Flogger is pretty rare these days. I have not seen one in a LHS since the 80s or at best early 90s. Awhile back they were easy to find on Ebay, but not recently. The Italeri reissue is way overpriced for a new boxing with nothing more than a new decal sheet and instructions.
BTW, on my most recent visits to the LHSs last work, no Hase F-4Bs on the shelves. Just about every other variant in the alphabet, C, D, E, F, G, K, M, and RF…
GREAT NEWS! Wow, you saved me—I also popped on the Trump 1/32nd one (a scale I hate) because its been years that folks have talked about a quarter scale version coming out and I’ve given up…
Any idea when that is gonna hit the retail outlets??? Is that guy building a test shot???
I’m also a Flagon fan…ordered one today from Squadron:
Also got the Eduard Flanker at a bargain:
…snagged it for $80 when it is usually $140…
I’m just a BIG Soviet cold-war jet GROUPIE now…
Thanks SP! Actually thinking about it I swear I read a review years ago that the ESCI MiG-23 was based on photos taken of an export model with a Middle Eastern client. Therefore it was reasonably accurate externally and builds into a decent export Flogger but needs some work to turn it into a Soviet machine. I can’t find the article now so maybe I just imagined it [:(DD] Anyway I picked up mine back in the late '80s and thought it looked mostly like a MiG-23 to me.
The MiG-25 I bought a couple of years ago and frankly wasn’t sure how old it was. Looks like a '70s-'80s kit but wasn’t sure. I guess since it never got the same export sales the MiG-23 did all Revell had was fuzzy photos to go off of.
I think you’ll be much happier with that Trumpy kit Herr Field Marshall. Curious how much ordinance she comes with and guessing that a MiG-27 might be on the way in the future from the same mold with new nose parts?
The ESCI Flogger kit could very well have been based off on Egyptian or other Flogger. It lacks the IRST under the nose as seen with early export models, and came out after relations between Egypt and the West had improved. Situations like that is one reason that the Soviets sold export models rather than top of the line ones to client states, things change and you don’t want your latest falling into the hands of the other side. Making the radome for an export or Soviet Flogger was just a case of how much to paint as radome, and how much to camo. The Soviets had a bigger, more capable radar on theirs. The early Soviet Flogger’s radar had roughly the same capabilites as the radar on a F-4 Phantom and the later models were improved from that. And yes, overall it very much does look like a Flogger. With some work , it can REALLY look like one. Or you can get Trumpy’s forthcoming Flogger…
StiK: It looks like the side consoles are styrene, pretty sure. No word on decals yet. Looks like the early Flogger variant, but still a lot of choices for AtA weaponry! [Y]
Definately gonna grab one of these babies! [H]
Would like a MiG 27 with AtG ordinance as well.[:D]
Von: my vote is with the Flogger. I had the old Revell Foxbat and was not happy with it. Flagon is a godless PVO Airliner killer! [:@]
Sounds good to me!
Amen there! (But then again I bet the Iranians say that about USS Vincennes [^o)] )
Flagon just looks cool…
_fs.jpg)
Too much nose for too little wing…
Flagon don’t care…
Is a Flagon related to the Honey Badger?