Tim Hatton [litespeed] reviews this diminutive fighter released by Azur.

Link to Item

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!

This one is really strange

With the canopy of a hurricane
The nose of a Yak-3
And the tail of a MS. 406


Cheers Nick

Hi Tim
You wrote a nice review. It is unfortunate that this aircraft is less widely known modellers population. Is a true jewel. After the war, has seen continued development in the form of aircraft S-49A and S-49c. Purely historical and technical reasons I mentioned a few facts that are misspelled. Constructors engineers Kosta Sivčev, Ljubomir IliĆ, Slobodan Zrnić were Serbs and not Croats. I think it has nothing to do with engineering practice but when you have already mentioned.
Azur is a complete offering two part upper wings. One has three flaps (which is completely wrong) and the other is extended with two flaps which is true (based on engineering drawings and historical material that I had the opportunity to see).
As a source for the painting is listed Avions magazine N ° 149 and no. 150. They are also quite arbitrary and false coloring scheme. Technical drawings are correct..
So much for now, I'm following your work and the reviews and I really like.

Hi Tim

Nice review. I wonder if they have plans to release a 1:48 version too? It would be rather neat.

@ Miroslav - many thanks for the extra information.

All the best

Rowan

Hi all
Miroslav - apologies for the mistake with the nationalities. My sources seemed to all agree that the designers were Croatians. I shall change it straight away. I have to admit I did not know a lot of the aircraft and fell into the trap of thinking well that bit looks like a Hurricane and that bit ............ In fact it's a lovely aircraft in it's own right. I was also taken by the short, but intensive action it saw when Germany invaded and the bravery of the crews. I will take some photos of the dry construction of the model to see what the fit of the main components are like. Oh and thanks for your comments.
Rowan - oh yes to a 1/48 or even a 1/32 version would be very, very welcome.

All the best.
tim

Hi Tim,

I would like to inform you (and the other interested modellers) about some issues...

This model was prepared without enough documentation. It caused several serious mistakes:

- completely wrong spinner shape, not so easy to rework
- wrong propeller blades rotation direction (should be clockwise)
- wrong first canopy frame angle, very visible mistake
(take a look the canopy at
http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.com/Aviation%20history/photo_albums/timeline/ww2/2/Rogozarsky%20IK%203.htm
- the contour of the upper front part of the fuselage, between the spinner and the canopy (should be more curved)
- completely wrong vertical tail shape
- absence of two browning machine guns in the upper nose (curiosity: this model of fighter-aircraft is completely unarmed!)
- wrong unredcarriage (to long "legs", wrong angle, inconvincible details.. etc)
- the small radiator (not the main one) under the fuselage and "flat intake" into it under the front part of the fusselage are wrong, take a look at the real aircraft:
http://inlinethumb19.webshots.com/3602/2216625360060401470S600x600Q85.jpg

Unfortunately, this kit is very far from the corect representation of original aircraft, almost everything is wrong. The model of Spitfire can not represent Hurricane, the model of Jak-1 can not represent LaGG-3... In the same way - this model can not represent Rogozarski Ik-3.

Best regards,

Damir

Hi Tim,
Nice review of such esoteric subject.
Have two of them and both builds without any trouble in nice model for my collection.
Hapilly, yesterday bought the AZUR new issue, Ikarus IK-2 from same producer and find it even better than this IK-3.
Its packed with extra decal set for Serbian market only.


And yes, ignore the DAMIRR's comments, these links given as a data source are joke, like the other stuff mentioned by this person, usually not supported with any valid data source or photo , but by pure imagination and speculation.

Keep going on with great reviews of Royal Yugosla AIr Force subjects.

???????

Both links are for original photos:

Photo 1, take a look at:

http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.com/Aviation%20history/photo_albums/timeline/ww2/2/Rogozarsky%20IK%203.htm

- the first canopy frame angle, the spinner shape, the contour of the upper front part of the fuselage between the spinner and the canopy (curved), vertical tail shape, unredcarriage (angle and length)

Photo 2, take a look at:

http://inlinethumb19.webshots.com/3602/2216625360060401470S600x600Q85.jpg

- propeller blades , unredcarriage (details), the small radiator (not the main one) under the fuselage and "flat intake" into it under the front part of the fusselage

I hope that photos may help to understand how the real Ik-3 looked like...

Best regards,

Damirr

Yeah, this kit requires some work to bring it up to accurate shape, but still is the best game in the town.
Does not any kit on the market need some extra touches, here and there to represent the real thing.
No need to troll such nice review done by Tim/Litespeed, open separate topic on forum and give us your opinion and views how to correct this kit , or suggest which other kit we should buy .
Have a nice, modelling hollidays,

Why is "the best game in the town"? Who are you? What are you talking about?




OK, "here and there" is fixing incorrect spinner, incorrect fusselage profile, incorrect undercarriage, a incorrect vertical tail, the absent small "radiator" under the fornt part of the cockpit and a chanell for it ... making holes for guns, making a brand new canopy...

OK, it is a good challenge for experienced modeller. But it should be mentioned.




What you are talking about? Where is this "separate topic"?

Where is any "suggestion" about some "other kit"? What do you want?

I ask you to start the article about this kit on regular forum, as regular topic, not trolling this review with your comments, please.
Have a nice weekend,
Ljuba

Trolling? I still don't understand you.

I gave links to photos of the original Ik-3 for Tim and the others.. The real aircraft is the best source of information, it doesn't lie...

BTW: you have mentioned here (under this review) some other model of the same company (you wrote that it is "even better than Ik-3"). What was the purpose of that comment?

OK, you ask for it,and please, reply on this thread,
Comparative preview of AvUsk-Xotic/AZ-Models/AZUR-Frrom , Rogozarski IK-3 kit