Seawinder

I used the Quinta set on the early F-14A kit and really liked the way they came out.

I built mine with extended wings. Checking it out I can see no sign of a step (it's even hard to tell there's a joint there), and I don't remember any build issues.

Did I get it wrong? It's on page 16; there's a photograph too. Pip

According to Dana Bell in "Air Force Colors Vol. 3" (Squadron), the width was specified as 30 inches. The official mandate called for one stripe on each side, but P-51s were photographed with as many as three on each side.

Got a calculator? Do 1 divided by 8 (which I'm sure you know is what the fraction 1/8 indicates). You'll get 0.125.

It's pretty close. 4 inches in 1/32 scale is .125 (1/8) inch, which converts to 3.175 mm.

I actually have those decals in hand. The letters measure scale 22 inches high with scale 4.5 inch stroke. I don't know how Tamiya obtained those numbers or whether they're plausible. FWIW their roundels are right on at scale 36 inches.

Can you explain the second option further? I'd say separate hubs is a no-brainer, but is there an engineering down side that makes it controversial?

D-25-RE for sure. I think you could also do a D-26-RA using the Curtiss Electric propeller that's an option in the box. Probably a D-27-RE as well although I don't know which prop was standard. Of course, lots of Jugs had props replaced as newer, more efficient ones were developed -- mainly CE symmetric and asymmetric paddle blades. It's hard to tell from sprue photos, but it looks as though the kit supplies the original, narrow CE prop along with the Hamilton Standard, which was factory stock for the D-25-RE.

Yes, sorry. I corrected the number in my post above.

Sorry about the typo in the color code. It's corrected now. Mr. Color also has a flat Sky (C368) the look of which I like better than C026. It's labeled BS381C/210.

Assuming Peter meant to type 10' 3" for the RX5/10, it would appear that the other two parts in the Eduard box are for RX5/14 and RS5/24, both of which appear to be scale 10' 9". Does anybody know on what, if any, Spitfire variants they were ever mounted?

Thanks again Peter! After putting up my last post, I came to the conclusion that the DeHavilland prop would be the way to go. Glad to have the confirmation. Do you know offhand if/when the longer Rotol props were used on Spitfires, especially Mk. Vs?

Thanks again, Magpie22, for all the information. Unfortunately, I had finished painting the model before you post, under the impression that the plane received a total repaint, so it's going to look brighter than it probably actually was. Do you (or anyone else) have any idea what propeller type is shown in the photos of A58-254? And are you familiar with the Eduard 1/48 Vc kit? It provides four different props, only two of which are called out as options (P24, DeHavilland and S1, Rotol maybe Jablo? very broad near the hub and pointed at the tip). To me the blades in the photos look more like Eduard's S14 or S23, both of which have more rounded taper and tips and are slightly longer than the other two options. Thanks! Pip

Hi Peter. What you're saying makes perfect sense, but I'm still given pause by the photo of the port side where all three exhausts are basically light colored, but the heating pipe at the rear of the manifold is much darker, to my eyes the same color as the Foliage Green surrounding it, and you can clearly see a demarcation from light to dark just aft of the rear stack that seems to correspond to the camouflage demarcation.

Thanks again, Ed, that's very helpful.

Yes, thanks! I have that photo as well. What about the heating pipe at the rear of the port manifold? Again looks pretty dark. Does seem unlikely that the manifolds would have been painted. While I have you, were you able to come up with a plausible camouflage scheme for the wings and horizontal tail? From what I can see in the two photos, it's not standard. Does the Red Roo sheet have a diagram? I can't seem to find it online. Thanks again.

I've decided to go with QY-V A58-254, repainted in Dark Earth/Foliage Green over Azure Blue in a non-standard pattern. There are two photos of the plane posted to another thread, one of which is this: Am I completely off base, or is the exhaust manifold, at least the forward segment, overpainted with the camouflage color(s)?

Having built it, I'd say it's a very fine kit, and you shouldn't have many problems with it. The cockpit is extremely well detailed OOB and a little bit fiddly. The only nit I'd pick is the sliding canopy: it's simply too narrow to pose open, and Tamiya doesn't supply an alternate part. Since I wanted mine open, I substituted the part from a Hasegawa A6M5, which fit perfectly. FWIW, although I don't generally paint with acrylics, I found Tamiya's XF-11 and XF-12 IJN Green and IJN Gray to be very good matches to my references for a Nakajima-built a/c. Note that Nakajima's under surface color was different from Mitsubishi's, which was pretty much the same as the J3 SP greenish gray they used for the overall color of their A6M2. Per Nick Millman's call-out at aviationofjapan, I mixed Mr. Color 126 Mitsubishi Cockpit Green and 127 Nakajima Cockpit Green 2-to-1 for the cockpit color. Also, Nakajima had a different cowling color from Mitsubishi: Nakajima's was a black-gray (black with just a bit of white added), while Mitsubishi's was black with a bluish cast. Finally, the Nakajima paint scheme (and most A6M5s were Nakajima built) has the green-gray demarcation curve up to the stabilizer leading edge while Mitsubishi's has the demarcation go straight back below the horizontal tail. You may well know all this, but if any of it is helpful, fine.

That was my experience as well (with two builds). Should have added: It's not that hard to get the two parts of each strut cemented together if you do it before trying to install them in the wing. Once the bonds are set and solid, the completed struts go into the lower wing pretty positively. The down side (no pun intended) is that you'll have the struts sticking out through the rest of the assembly including gluing the wing halves together, so care has to be taken not to break them.

With all due respect to Colourcoats aficionados, IMHO the best currently available renditions of M-485 Blue Gray that I've found are MRP 133 (a bit darker and less greenish) and Mr. Color 367. Both are quite close to FS35189, which has been posited as a good approximation. According to Elliott in the Monogram USN Color Guide Vol. 2, Blue Gray is problematic because, although the Bureau of Aeronautics began prescribing its use in December 1940, "the exact shade of Blue Gray was not specified. In fact no directive has ever been located that specifically identified this color." The sample chip Blue Gray 1 in the appendix is close to, but a bit darker than, FS 35189. Elliott states in the color notes that this color was "found by Grumman Aerospace during restoration of National Air and Space Museum FM-2. 35189 is the closest equivalent in 595a."

Brilliant, Troffa! So Tamiya isn't necessarily wrong with their black call-out for the insulating plate.

The Tamiya instructions in their Mk. I kit call for black for the plate. I take it that's in error? That also begs the question, was it the same arrangement for a/c (like the Mk. I) with strung wire antennas and lead-ins?

Thanks Troffa! Up late (=early in the morning). The older I get (currently 77), the more night-owlish I seem to become.

Eduard's painting instructions for their 1/48 Spitfire Vc Trop show the ovaloid radio mast housing either painted in the surrounding camouflage color or in a dark wood color (they call out Mahogany). I presume this item was made of wood, but was there any rhyme or reason for its either being painted or not? Thanks! Pip