Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I've only posted two identical profiles - I suspect both are from the same source, namely the Squadron-Signal brochure. Which picture are you referring to exactly? The eBay picture fits the "yellow 3" profile well - the tail tip is too bright for red I think.IMHO the pic and the profile you posted above ( I have checked on my copy of the booklet ) don't have anything in common with. Unfortunately the series of the MiF isn't too accurate and provides the general info mostly. What is more, there are profiles that are the authour's wishful thinking often.
PS. the painted tail tip had also the 50 IAP IIRC. But their Migs had the large yellow or white three-digital numbers on the fuselage sides.
The MiG-3 was a big mistake by the Soviets. Almost its only virtue was engine altitude, although it was not designed as a high-altitude interceptor. Its armament was completely inadequate, and its flight characteristics in the altitude range of major air combat were unsatisfactory. I have already mentioned that even Polikarpov himself, who began the development of this aircraft, was against its mass production in the form in which it was proposed by Mikoyan and Gurevich. The attempt to strengthen the armament led to further deterioration of flight characteristics, the aircraft had no prospects as a front-line fighter. An attempt to mount an M-82 on it failed. It was a difficult airplane to pilot, which did not forgive the pilot any mistake.A good airplane for the wrong place. It was the fastest of 1941 at its ideal altitude, but most of the Eastern Front was at low altitude. I can't deny that it was difficult to fly, but those who tamed the "disobedient stallion" had a monster on your hands. The speed penalty from the gunpods wouldn't matter much at higher altitude, especially with the thinner air.
Which picture are you referring to exactly?
1. The top of the number on the rudder on the eBay photo is definitely more consistent with a "3" than a "7".I have edited my previous post and attached the three pics of the "7". In the first shot the digit is covered by the wing and can be seen patially only. The top part of the digit fit the shape of the "top of the "3" used at that time by the VVS. As a result it was thoght it was the "3" but not the "7"
Also it can't be excluded the image was taken with a filter that made the light red colour more lighter. If enlarged the white strip at the bottom of it can be noticed. Additionally the digit on the rudder doesn't look like the "3" top anyway.
You might be wrong there. There was a big enthousiastic bunch of people that took pictures and had those lens filters. Pre war and untill mid 43 the were encouraged. I.g. films etc could be bought in the barracks.It is difficult for me to imagine amateur shooting with a filter in the field in 1941
Compare with the tone of the landing gear cover of the MiG - it is much brighter in both cases.As a result the tail tip of her has the two different tones if compared both shots.
Really interesting!Quite interesting is that the fuselage red star was removed ( retouched ?) for some reson and can't be noticed in the left shot.
View attachment 800363
Even type of photo paper could be chosen here an order for 17 x halbmatt printing. Also the guy printing can do some adjusting. Years ago i had my own dark room. You can put on filters for the lens of the enlarger to get better result on picture.You might be wrong there. There was a big enthousiastic bunch of people that took pictures and had those lens filters. Pre war and untill mid 43 the were encouraged. I.g. films etc could be bought in the barracks.
By the way, the MiG in the right photo has a "flight cap" (as this marking was called by Soviet pilots) on the tail tip. In the book by Timin I mentioned above I did not find any photos of MiGs from the Baltic Military District with a "flight cap", only one of them may have the rudder tip painted.