(Sheenko’s?) “Za partiyu bol’shevikov”
MIKOYAN & GUREVICH, MIG-3 (Late)
172-nd IAP , 23-rd of February, 1942 and
122-nd IAP, 201-st IAD, 1st Air Army, (Soviet) Western Front. circa Spring of 1942.
Likely to have been flown by a commander of a flight, Lieutenant Nikolai Mikhailovich Sheenko.
“Za Partiyu Bol’shevikov” was one of the three airplanes which were gifted by the workers of Moscow’s Aircraft Repair Plant number 1 named after Stalin, to the aviators of the 172nd IAP, on February 23rd 1942. The other two airplanes were ‘Za Rodinu’ and ‘Za Stalina’ . 172nd IAP was equipped with LaGG-3 and Yak-1 airplanes at the time of the ceremony and did not have any pilots who were trained to fly the MiG-3, therefore these machines were passed on to the 122nd IAP.
122nd IAP was based in the west of USSR and clashed with the Luftwaffe from the very first day of the German invasion on June 22nd, 1941. One pilot of the regiment (P.A.Dranko) is credited with shooting down a FW-189 [1] on that fateful first day of the Great Patriotic War.
In the famous photo of the gifting ceremony we can see that out of the three MiGs “Za partiyu bol’shevikov” was probably meant to be flown by the commander of a flight. This is because out of the three airplanes, this one was equipped with a radio. And indeed, after the planes were passed on to the 122nd IAP, this airplane is presumed to have been flown by a pilot who was a commander of a flight. The pilot’s name was Nikolai Mikhailovich Sheenko. But, as is often the case in aircraft design, one advantageous feature can compromise another, and so it was in the case of “Za partiyu bol’shevikov” where the presence of the radio made the airplane heavier and therefore less maneuverable, according to V.V.Rybalko. So much so that Rybalko even refused to fly it for that reason, choosing to fly “Za Stalina.” and “Za rodinu” instead.
Unfortunately, no information could be found about N.M.Sheenko or any of the results which might have been achieved in “Za partiyu bol’shevikov”.
Noteworthy Visual Characteristics
The plane as it looked during the gifting ceremony on the 23rd of February 1942
General. This striking looking plane looks to be freshly painted in the photo reference. The stars are in the usual 6 positions. The airplane is adorned with two large red arrows on each side of the fuselage - a decorative element, these arrows are not associated with identification markings of any particular unit. The shade of red colour of the arrows and the spinner seems to differ slightly from the red of the stars and differs very slightly from plane to plane in the photo of the three of them. This could be simply because of the bad quality of the photograph.
Having been gifted by an ‘Aircraft repair plant’ it is possible that these were not brand new airplanes, but refurbished machines, possibly veterans of the ‘Battle for Moscow’. Regardless of whether this was the case or not, there is a high probability that these were some of the last MiG-3s to be built, in which case they were probably equipped with only 2 machine guns.
About 315 (or 350 according to other sources)late production MiG-3s were armed with 2 x 12.7mm caliber UBS machine guns, with ammunition increased from 300 to 700 rounds each. 215 of them were equipped with 2 x RO-82 rail launchers for firing RS-82 rockets, same as can be seen in the photos of “Za patriyu bol’shevikov”
About 30 (or 50 according to other sources) late production MiG-3s were armed with 2x 20mm caliber ShVAK cannons instead. [2]
As far as the external appearances go, the 2-gun version of the airplane probably looked the same externally as the 3-gun version, it just lacked the extra gun which fired through the middle slot, but it’s likely that the middle (external) slot was still present.
1. The vertical red lines (on both sides of the plane) under the horizontal stabilisers indicate the area for lifting plane’s tail during repairs.
2. ‘За партию большевиков’ (Za partiyu bol’shevikov), translates to ‘For the Bolshevik Party’ .
3. Note that no radio is visible inside the airplane. Perhaps the radio equipment is set deeper than usual and that’s why we can’t see it? We know that, unlike the other two airplanes in the photograph, “Za partiyu bol’shevikov” was indeed equipped with a radio. Rybalko mentioned that in his interview and also we can clearly see the presence of the antena mast and wires in the photographs. However, strangely enough, the radio is not visible in the photo of the three airplanes, nor in the photo of “Za partiyu bol’shevikov” from spring 1942. To make the mystery more interesting it looks like the radio box IS visible in another photo from the ceremony! :)
4. The plane was equipped with the RO-82 rail launchers. The RS-82 rockets were not loaded onto the launchers during the gifting ceremony, nor are they visible in the photo from spring 1942, therefore I didn’t include them in the illustration above.
5. Please Note! The presence of the inert gas pipe on this airplane is hypothetical.
We have photos showing that the inert gas pipe was present on “Za Stalina.” but wasn’t present on “Za rodinu”. There were no photos of “Za partiyu bol’shevikov” showing this same part of the airplane, so based on the photos of the other two planes the likelihood of the presence/absence of the inert gas pipe on “Za partiyu bol’shevikov” is 50-50.
6. The metal frame of the canopy was probably unpainted, except for the lower strip. It appears to be darker than white as shown by ‘6a’ and lighter than green/black as shown by ‘6b’ .
7. Note the non-retractable tailwheel. The base of the wheel shaft is protected with a canvas or leather covering.
8. This was a late type MiG-3, with slats.
9. The white paint that the plane was painted with might not have been MK-7 temporary/removable white paint, but a more permanent version of white paint instead.
This rationale is based on the fact that in the ‘summer livery’ version of this airplane the red lines indicated by ‘11’ in the diagram seem to have been painted over. This would be more likely if the plane was repainted with green/black over the top of the original white and red, as opposed to the temporary MK-7 white and red being painted over the original green/black and then rubbed off to reveal the original green/black underneath it.
10. The stars on underside of the wings might have been quite large. As per '“Za rodinu.”
The plane as it might have looked in spring of 1943.
General. The plane looks like it was painted over with AMT-4 (Dark Green) and AMT-6 (Black). Though the quality of the photograph is quite poor, it doesn’t seem to show any obvious signs of paint chipping/weathering, suggesting that the new paint work hasn’t had much time to age yet.
12. Note that the red line has been painted over and that some of the (AMT-4 green) paint might have been brushed over some the AMT-7 light blue just under the horizontal stabiliser.
13. The large red arrow might still have been faintly visible under the new coat of paint since there seems to be a hint of it visible in the photo reference.
14. Please Note! The camouflage pattern on the nose of this airplane indicated by ‘14b’ is hypothetical. The antenna mast, indicated by ‘14a’ looks like it was painted black, which serves as one clue is one clue as to what the camo pattern might have looked like. The camouflage pattern of the “Za rodinu” airplane serves as another clue, if we’ll presume that the two airplanes had a similar camo pattern.
Here are a few closeup images to help illustrate the points above. Full set of close-up images is On Patreon
FOOTNOTES
[1] P.A.Dranko was flying an I-16 when he scored that victory, it wasn’t scored in a MiG-3 fighter. This info is taken from http://soviet-aces-1936-53.ru/abc/d/dranko.htm
[2] The info about the 2-gun MiG-3s is based on the info contained on https://airpages.ru/eng/ru/mig3arm.shtml. Also, an excellent page about MiG-3’s armament was created by Massimo Tessitory http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/mig3/guns.html
Links To the reference image and videos
http://ava.org.ru/iap/122/mig-3_zpb_leto.jpg
The link below is to a photo which is of pretty good quality, but unfortunately it looks like it has been touched up by paint (you can tell by looking at the ground). So it might be a bit misleading because it also looks like the airplanes were brush painted, when in reality that’s probably the brush marks of the artist who cleaned up the photo, traditionally, before the days of Photoshop.
All the work presented on this is page is subject to updates and revisions in the light of new information which might present itself. If you have any new information relevant to this page or disagree with anything that's presented here, then please feel free to contact me through the Planes in Profile Facebook page. Thanks:)
