Spitfire Mk.V into a MK.IX

[tommyinuk0]

Hi all,

Just wanting to know what visual differences there would be if I was to use a model of a Vb spitfire and change it to be an early Mk.IX. I believe that it had a different engine with a 4 blade prop, but the wings, tail and armament were the same. Is this correct or would it be too much of a change to do?

Also while you are here...... I am wanting ideas for a Mk.Vb spitfire, that looks different, maybe a scheme not often seen, any ideas welcome.

Many thanks

Tommy

[Don McIntyre]

IIRC the oil cooler fairing on the 9 was a little different than the one on the 5, although I'm not 100% sure about that.

[stevehnz]

The first RR converted IXs had the Mk V cowl pushed forward by 8" (?) with panels inserted to fill in the gap between the wing root & cowl underside as in the Mk V. They also had a reshaped cowl top to allow for different plumbing in this area on the 60 series Merlin. Freightdog did a resin conversion for this a year or so back. The oil cooler was replaced in the IX with a second radiator bath which combined the function of the oil cooler & the extra radiator area that the more powerful engine required to give a symmetrical underwing shape viewed head on.

Here at Hannants, though out of stock. Copy into your picture viewer & fiddle with the contrast to bring up the panel lines.

Steve.

Edited October 11, 2013 by stevehnz

[Test Graham]

The armament is also different - the MK.IX had the universal or C wing not the B wing. Compared with the B wing, you will see different panels and bulges, a further protruding barrel and an additional outboard stub. The wingroot bulge of the B wing is missing - the c wing was strengthened in this area so the undercarriage sat a little lower in the wing, this showing as a curved door leg (usually missed in models). The axle was also positioned 2in further forward, giving an increased rake to the udnercarriage. Other differences will rather depend upon just which Mk.IX you want to do.

The air intake is also larger.

Generally, this is the kind of conversion people used to do in the old days, but with the range of models available nowadays it really isn't worth the aggro.

Edited October 11, 2013 by Graham Boak

[Troy Smith]

Hi all,

Just wanting to know what visual differences there would be if I was to use a model of a Vb spitfire and change it to be an early Mk.IX. I believe that it had a different engine with a 4 blade prop, but the wings, tail and armament were the same. Is this correct or would it be too much of a change to do?

Also while you are here...... I am wanting ideas for a Mk.Vb spitfire, that looks different, maybe a scheme not often seen, any ideas welcome.

Many thanks

Tommy

Tommy

I assume you mean in 1/24th? [as you have 2 x 1/24 on bench?]

this may help http://spitfiresite.com/2010/04/concise-guide-to-spitfire-wing-types.html

but does not show external differences.

this is a VB http://spitfiresite.com/photos/galleries/joy-of-flight-testing/index.htm

this is VC http://spitfiresite.com/photos/galleries/shuttleworth-collection-ar501/index.htm

which has the C wing as used on early IX

Kits for Cash do a IX conversion

http://www.kitsforcash.com/spitfire-ix-conversion-kit-26-p.asp

which shows the new bits

Unless your really good at scratchbuilding it's money well spent. This has the bits to make a later IX as well.

Alternate schemes for a VB?

Turkish, Soviet.

have a look here http://wp.scn.ru/en/ww2/f/52/137

HTH

T

[pipthepilot]

On 12/10/2013 at 00:22, Test Graham said:

The armament is also different - the MK.IX had the universal or C wing not the B wing. Compared with the B wing, you will see different panels and bulges, a further protruding barrel and an additional outboard stub. The wingroot bulge of the B wing is missing - the c wing was strengthened in this area so the undercarriage sat a little lower in the wing, this showing as a curved door leg (usually missed in models). The axle was also positioned 2in further forward, giving an increased rake to the udnercarriage. Other differences will rather depend upon just which Mk.IX you want to do.

The air intake is also larger.

Generally, this is the kind of conversion people used to do in the old days, but with the range of models available nowadays it really isn't worth the aggro.

I realise this is quite an old post but I came across it whilst research and wanted to add to your comment because the original Mk.IX did have the B wing.

 

The Mk.IX was a stop gap to address the issue of the Mk.V being outclassed by the FW190. The Mk.VIII was in development with lots of changes but to expedite the spitfire's performance, the Merlin 61 was joined to the Mk.V airframe which only required changes to the engine cowling to host the new engine. This combination of engine and airframe was then classed as the Mk.IX. As a result, the original Mk.IXs continued to use the B wing configuration. Later, developments from the Mk.VIII were also incorporated into the Mk.IX including the C wing, Merlin 65 engine, larger intake and the more pointed tail with the larger rudder.

 

Sorry for being an anorak :-) 

[Troy Smith]

14 minutes ago, pipthepilot said:

the original Mk.IX did have the B wing.

 

No,  it didn't.   even as a stop gap  why use the inferior B wing when you already have the C wing.

 

been discussed ad infinitum, along with lots of other uber-anorak detail....

 

The IXB confusion is this,  it's an unofficial desigination for engine types.

from the Spitfire site (which seems down)

but this wass the link

http://spitfiresite.com/2010/04/spitfire-mk-ix-xi-and-xvi-variants-much-varied.html

Quote

More rarely seen are the suffixes A and B. These have caused some confusion, as these letters in earlier Spitfire marks define eight-gun and two drum-fed cannon and four machine gun armament configurations, respectively. It would seem that the designations IXA / IXB were used ad-hoc by the RAF units during the early part of the Mk. IX’s operational career, to distinguish the low-altitude-optimized Merlin 66-equipped LF IX (called Mk. IX B from the initial Merlin 61/63/63a-equipped F IX (called Mk. IX A). These designations are sometimes seen in pilot’s log books, squadron Operational Record Books, etc.

 

 

there are photos of the very  earliest Mk.IX's, whch have the extended Mk.V cowling covers and they  are cleary C wing

 

this is a drawing of the early cowling

There is a conversion for this variation available.

http://www.hyperscale.com/2007/reviews/kits/cmr5175reviewbg_1.htm

 

 

see also

HTH

[Beard]

1 hour ago, Troy Smith said:

 

There is a conversion for this variation available.

http://www.hyperscale.com/2007/reviews/kits/cmr5175reviewbg_1.htm

 

There's also one by Freightdog: https://www.freightdogmodels.co.uk/military-products/military-aircraft-conversions/1-72-scale/freightdog-1-72-spitfire-ix-conversion-early-rr-converted.html

[Wm Blecky]

2 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

There is a conversion for this variation available.

http://www.hyperscale.com/2007/reviews/kits/cmr5175reviewbg_1.htm

 

That is an actual complete resin kit (and a very pricey one at that if still available).  Beard 's link to Freightdog Models is of an actual conversion set.  The Freightdog Models piece strikes me as a better alternative not just in terms of cost but also when it comes down to assembly.  I find it more easy to work with a plastic model kit that to be messing around with a resin kit that requires a lot more clean up and test fitting of parts plus mucking around using CA glue.

[Graham Boak]

I think (haven't checked, sorry) that one or two of the prototype Mk.IXs did indeed have had the B wing, but certainly none of the production aircraft did.  Even the early aircraft had a larger air intake than that on the Mk.V, although not the longer Aerovee with the enclosed tropical filter.

 

Both the Mk.VIII and the IX began with the high-altitude rated Merlin 61 and 63.  Both then changed to the lower (not low) rated Merlin 66, receiving the prefix designation LF to suit, although compared to the rating on the LF Mk.V, it was still a high-altitude engine.  They then both received the even higher-altitude rated Merlin 70 for HF variants.

[EwenS]

I seem to recall an extensive article in the old Air Enthusiast back around 2000 that detailed all the differences made to the Spitfire to get from a mark V to a mark IX. I seem to remember about half a page of drawings just of nose variations. Don’t know how easy it would be to track it down.

[303sqn]

Air Enthusiast 95 Sept/Oct 2001. Five to Nine, Wojtek Matusiak.

Also Early Spitfire MK IXs Classic Warbirds No 6. Includes scale drawings.

Former Mk III prototype N3297 was the first to be fitted with a Merlin 60 for trials. It had an A type wing. Cannot find any mention of any conversions with a B wing. During 1943 CBAF converted 14 Mk Vs, mostly MK Va airframes, to which were fitted 13 Merlin 63 engines and one Merlin 66.

[gingerbob]

I'm also unaware of any 'b' wing conversion.  There were one or two other 'a' conversions, purely to get the new generation Merlin into the air (in a Spitfire), but subsequent conversions were to Vcs.  And I'm not talking about Rolls Royce "completions".