Small Scale Military Headquarters

The Mig-3 has been one of my all time favorite Russian planes. But in the scope of things the Stomovic would probably fit in with the other 1/18 German planes 21st has to offer. Somebody posted Bad Cats list of popular model planes sold. The Mig-3 was on the bottom of the list ! So we as collectors , wich plane would you guys rather see? Stormovic or Mig-3. I know there are Laggs and what not but these two are MY favs.

I really wanted a "both" option. As much as I love the Mig, if I had to choose only one I went with the IL-2. Give the kraut armor something to worry about.

* What "olifant" said. * =



........... "Remember boys , flies spread disease. So keep yours closed".



Mitch v MG

MG-42 wrote: "Remember , flies spread disease. So keep yours closed".



Mitch v MG

Gotta go with the Shturmovik. Any airplane that has enough armor plate to qualify as a light tank is ok in my book...

the Mig was attractive but not much of a fighter and not very important historically. A better choice would be a yak3/9 or the La-5/7.

Sturmovic gets my vote for now though; it had a huge impact on the war in the east...but i'd like a yak and lavochkin too.

I've had more requests for the Stormovic over the MiG-3 so I'd say the Stormovic would sell better of the two.

The Mig looks cool, is a beautiful plane but it doesn't have as much historical significance as the flying tank Stormovic, which I voted for.

BTW: I love these polls. You need to do more of them.

aferguson wrote:the Mig was attractive but not much of a fighter and not very important historically. A better choice would be a yak3/9 or the La-5/7.

Sturmovic gets my vote for now though; it had a huge impact on the war in the east...but i'd like a yak and lavochkin too.

Yes but the Mig -3 looks so cool. It also for it's lack of performance still faught all the way through the war. From Barbarosa to the very end. Not front line but it was still shooting down Germans in the hands of experianced pilots. Cannon fodder for the not so talented.

Folks, its Shturmovik.

In the original Cyrillic, the first letter, which resembles an E lying on its back, represents the "sh" sound.

Folks, its Shturmovik.

Ha! Score one for Ostketten...LOL But seriously, I don't doubt what you are saying, but I've seen this spelled no less than about 6 different ways...Stormovik, Sturmovic, and so on, and so on...

yes i given up on figuring how it was spelled. Even Russian publications have it spelled different ways.

And pH, if you want to make something that looks cool, make a Macchi 202/205 or a Fiat G.55.....or FINISH THE FRAKING TONY.

I know its not Russian or should say Russian made but what about a Lend Lease Russian P-40?..................
http://news.webshots.com/photo/12052826 ... 8682NXQsuB

zzzzzzzzzzzzz

aferguson wrote:yes i given up on figuring how it was spelled. Even Russian publications have it spelled different ways.

And pH, if you want to make something that looks cool, make a Macchi 202/205 or a Fiat G.55.....or FINISH THE FRAKING TONY.

I do like the snazzy Fogalore. If you look at a Ki-61 and cross your eyes it looks just like the Macchi.

I know uncross my eyes and get back to work.

Darn, tough choice as I like them both! I, too, have always liked the look of the Mig-3, but the Sturmovic has the greater historical significance for the war on the eastern front. If, say, 21c were to tackle this, they would probably make the Mig-3. That company, for better or worse, always seemed to have a tendency to go with the more obscure in favor of the more well-known. Why else would they make the FW-190D9 instead of the FW-190A; the F-104 instead of an F-4, or the M-17 trailer instead of an M-5 Stuart

I was reading the WIKI on the Sturmovic. Lots of interesting stuff. I guess there are still a few around for reference. Anyways I thought the story about penal rear gunners was interesting:

Il-2 Rear gunners: a deliberate sacrifice?


Il-2M cockpit. Museum of Aviation in Belgrade, Serbia
In his book Inside the Soviet Army, Viktor Suvorov alleges the lack of protection for Il-2 rear gunners was part of a deliberate policy. Suvorov claims from 1942 on, all Soviet airfields had attached penal companies of air gunners. Such companies were made up of prisoners who were considered to be "enemies of socialism" or "enemies of the people." The air gunners were not provided with either armour protection, or allegedly, parachutes and were reliant entirely on their machine guns to ensure their own survival. The death rate among the air gunners was exceptionally high and Suvorov alleges Marshal of the Air Forces A. E. Golovanov came up with a special device to keep the guns pointing up after the gunners were killed, or attacking Luftwaffe pilots would realise the air gunner was dead and concentrate on that aircraft. According to Suvorov, prisoners who survived could theoretically clear their sentences after nine missions. The prisoners, however, were always transferred to mine clearing or other units for "medical reasons" before this could happen.
Many Il-2 pilots and rear gunners do not remember seeing or hearing about any prisoner crews, and German propaganda may have broadcast this claim as well. In recent years documents from the Soviet archives have come to light indicating the Soviet Air Force did in fact use "penal squadrons" in some situations,[13] but although they may have been considered expendable, there is no evidence that they would have been deliberately sacrificed.
The rear gunner was in fact provided with armor protection from the start, but this was only 6 mm thick, and protected the gunner only from behind and was not effective against rounds more powerful than rifle-caliber MG.[14] It moreover excluded field modification made to single-seater Il-2s, in which a hole was cut in the fuselage panelling behind the cockpit for a gunner, sitting on a canvas sling with an improvised turret for a Degtyarev MG – so desperate was the need for rear protection.
[edit]V

Repeat after me... Shturmovik, Shturmovik....LOL

IL-2 here.

Kind of strange that the IL-2 Sturmovik don't get any love from any diecast/toy manufacturer since its the most produced military aircraft in history

Stormovic..please.

demonclaw wrote:Kind of strange that the IL-2 Sturmovik don't get any love from any diecast/toy manufacturer since its the most produced military aircraft in history

I always thought that was strange as well. I've been collecting toy planes since the early 70's and only recall a handful of diecast examples of the IL-2. Playart did a couple in the late sixties and early 70's, 1 in roughly 1/100 and another in about 1/200; then theres a 1/72 version made in the former Soviet Union that can't remember the name of the company, Model Power examples in approx. 1/100, and IXO/Altaya also in 1/72. I collect control line gas planes as well and a Russian company back in the day made a super looking IL-2 in roughly 1/18 scale that had a diesel engine versus more modern nitro glow types. They show up on ebay from time to time and run around a grand for a good clean example. I'm probably forgetting about 1 or 2 more as I still buy dupes occasionally coz I just plain forgot I had it...I too voted for the IL-2 but boy would that be an expensive undertaking. The Mig-3 imo is one of the most gorgeous planes to look at and was, as stated, formidable in the hands of a skilled pilot. I'd love to have both but if have to choose...IL-2.

I would have to put my vote in for the IL-2 Sturmovik as well.

IL-2 Sturmovik too but i would love to see a YAK 3 in Free FRENCH "NORMANDIE-NIEMEN" colors !

there is a computer game named , you guessed it, IL-2 Sturmovik and it s a fantastic game ! i think this did popularize the weird plane (flying tank?)

It will be a seller for both the aircrafts guys like me and the armor guys who are mainly fan of GERMAN armors ... it will bring them an huge opponent