New 1/72 Eduard Spitfire IXc

[Cookenbacher]

One thing I've noticed is that the 'early' IXc has the large cannon fairing and short carburetor intake molded on the wing, while the 'late' IXc has the thin cannon fairing and long intake molded on. I've noticed that the new Fundekals sheet calls for several Spitfire IXc's with the short carburetor and thin cannon fairing, creating a bit of a conundrum. I was going to ask if this was an actual configuration, but there are reference pics in the instruction sheet that seem to confirm it.

I guess a little filing/sanding and some spare AZ parts will take care of it.

[Procopius]

Is there a reason you couldn't use the early wing tops with the late lower wing? I don't see any in the instructions, but I will freely admit to being unable to find common household objects inches from my face.

[Giorgio N]

One thing I've noticed is that the 'early' IXc has the large cannon fairing and short carburetor intake molded on the wing, while the 'late' IXc has the thin cannon fairing and long intake molded on. I've noticed that the new Fundekals sheet calls for several Spitfire IXc's with the short carburetor and thin cannon fairing, creating a bit of a conundrum. I was going to ask if this was an actual configuration, but there are reference pics in the instruction sheet that seem to confirm it.

I guess a little filing/sanding and some spare AZ parts will take care of it.

This is IMHO one of the things that Eduard didn't get right. It would have been possible to mould the wing so that both early and late carburetor intake could be used on the same wing

The alternative here is either mix and match wings as Procopius suggested (that however would leave parts for large bulges and late intake, a very rare combination if not a non existing one) or sand the bulges from the early wing and replace with AZ or other parts. The latter would of course require care to not delete the lovely surface detail but is in any case the one I'm going to follow myself

[Graham Boak]

My concern is that during build some rivets may disappear because of the sanding that may be needed in some areas (the wing leading edges for example).. and a model with some rivets missing and some not is IMHO worse than a model with all rivets or one with no rivets...

.

There shouldn't be any rivets on the leading edge, this was kept clean and flush. There is a seam (which is bad, but forced by the shallowness of the D box structure) but his was filled and smoothed.

Sorry to be a bit late into this one.

[The wooksta V2.0]

One thing I've noticed is that the 'early' IXc has the large cannon fairing and short carburetor intake molded on the wing, while the 'late' IXc has the thin cannon fairing and long intake molded on. I've noticed that the new Fundekals sheet calls for several Spitfire IXc's with the short carburetor and thin cannon fairing, creating a bit of a conundrum. I was going to ask if this was an actual configuration, but there are reference pics in the instruction sheet that seem to confirm it.

I guess a little filing/sanding and some spare AZ parts will take care of it.

A quick look at the sprues of the Profipack IXc late reveal a clean lower cowl (part 6) on sprue H and the very short carburetor (parts 22 + 23) on sprue B. No sign of the small carburetor intake on any sprue but I'm sure it'll be a spare in the AZ IX kit. Small bit of careful surgery and filling on the lower wing and you're laughing.

[Cookenbacher]

Your solution is elegant PC, but as Giorgio says, that would leave a large cannon fairing with the long intake for the next build. I haven't come across that combo yet in any references.

I see what you're saying Wooksta, even the 'late' version sprues come with the parts necessary to build the short intake/narrow fairings combination. It'll just require sanding away the rear half of the intake from the lower wing.

Alright, that's settled, thanks PC, Giorgio, and Wooksta.

[G.E.SAUNDERS]

     hi Peoples ,

 

                            nobody has mentioned that Ailerons are 1mm too deep and stick out of the Wing trailin' edge    cripes!

                        and requires bit off here and bit orff there to make it look right.

 

                      The Kit  "open" Malcolm Hood is too high when placed in the open position and too long when in closed position.  "Jezzz !"

                     This is the only part that needs replacin' with a PAVLA or VENTURA Vac Canopy

 

                                                                                      cheery "Modellin' " mumbas !

                                         

                                                                                                     Geoff

                                                                                                         F.T.G. 3156

[Procopius]

2 hours ago, G.E.SAUNDERS said:

     hi Peoples ,

 

                            nobody has mentioned that Ailerons are 1mm too deep and stick out of the Wing trailin' edge    cripes!

                        and requires bit off here and bit orff there to make it look right.

 

                      The Kit  "open" Malcolm Hood is too high when placed in the open position and too long when in closed position.  "Jezzz !"

                     This is the only part that needs replacin' with a PAVLA or VENTURA Vac Canopy

 

                                                                                  

 

Geoff, can you go into a little more detail on how you determined these? I've not seen the ailerons proud of the trailing edge in any completed build. The moment I read your post, I ran downstairs and compared an Eduard closed canopy to the Sword Vc and AZ Vb canopies: it's a bit crude, but they appear to match almost exactly in length.

 

Sword Vc:

 

20170107_213058 by Edward IX, on Flickr

 

AZ Vb:

 

20170107_213147 by Edward IX, on Flickr

[Wm Blecky]

On 9/5/2016 at 3:37 AM, Giorgio N said:

This is IMHO one of the things that Eduard didn't get right. It would have been possible to mould the wing so that both early and late carburetor intake could be used on the same wing

The alternative here is either mix and match wings as Procopius suggested (that however would leave parts for large bulges and late intake, a very rare combination if not a non existing one) or sand the bulges from the early wing and replace with AZ or other parts. The latter would of course require care to not delete the lovely surface detail but is in any case the one I'm going to follow myself

Although intended for the Airfix kit, what about using Pavla's Spitfire set in this instance:

 

Yes, it's a little work and elbow grease, but it does have both types of wing bulges, plus there are some other little bits that look useful.

 

Alternatively, if you are one of those fellas who like to play with RTV and resin, you could make a simple mold of the Eduard wing bulge you want, cast a few sets and just sand off the bulge you want to replace.  Just a thought.

Edited January 8, 2017 by Wm Blecky
specify which kit's wing bulge - Eduard

[The wooksta V2.0]

Or utilise the spares from the AZ mk IXs which I suspect most us Spitfire fanatics have in some numbers.

 

I already have plenty of wing bulge moulds too, although largely the thin ones to use with the Airfix kit for whiffery. 

[G.E.SAUNDERS]

hi Procopius ( wot does that mean pal ?)

   

      your photo is of a  one piece Canopy .... not an open Canopy !

      and wot Spitfire Model do you picture ?

      ...coz.... its not the EDUARD MkIXc ( late version)  #70121 ) !

    Have a look at all the photo's of this Kit's builds....none of them have the Ailerons flush

     ......... of wot is pretty normal when the A/C is parked  

 

                                                             modellin' mumbatations !

 

                                                                       Geoff

                                                                          F.T.G. 3156

[The wooksta V2.0]

I've just dry fitted mine and it's less than half that.  Quick swipe with a sanding stick and you're done.

[Dave Fleming]

Re the Canopy - in the open option, Eduard have moulded it slightly too large so it fits over the rear fixed portion of the canopy. Same as in their 1/48th kit

Edited January 9, 2017 by Dave Fleming
Stupid autocorrect

[G.E.SAUNDERS]

       hi Dave ,

 

                   as to the Malcolm Hood part  # C13 even when placed in the retracted position and lining up on the runner groove

                  the inside of the edge sits the equilent of 3" above the Fuselage ( will be even more when I trim the inner surface down to

                  a more realistic thinness.   I don't want to trim the bottom edge down as the framework would then go over the bulging part of the

                  Perspex 

                 There are roolly good Photo's of a Spifire's Canopy in the closed position in the    "  A Spitfires Anatomy site "

                    and there are lots of excellent,clear photo's of the Cockpit's gear .

 

                 I think its the fully restored Spitfire that they recovered from a Normandy Beach.

 

                          BTW:    Wooksta !    did you dry fit the Aileron to an assembled wing..... that's where the difference is .  

 

                                                                                            cheery "modellin' "mumbas !

                                                                   

                                                                                                      Geoff

                                                                                                         F.T.G. 3156

                 

[Procopius]

On 1/9/2017 at 6:14 AM, G.E.SAUNDERS said:

hi Procopius ( wot does that mean pal ?)

 

It means I'm very pretentious.

 

On 1/9/2017 at 6:14 AM, G.E.SAUNDERS said:

      your photo is of a  one piece Canopy .... not an open Canopy !

 

Yep, my confusion; I misread what you wrote as being about the closed canopy.

 

On 1/9/2017 at 6:14 AM, G.E.SAUNDERS said:

      and wot Spitfire Model do you picture ?

      ...coz.... its not the EDUARD MkIXc ( late version)  #70121 ) !

 

Correct; as I said, it's a Sword Vc and an AZ Vb, for comparison.

 

On 1/9/2017 at 6:14 AM, G.E.SAUNDERS said:

    Have a look at all the photo's of this Kit's builds....none of them have the Ailerons flush

     ......... of wot is pretty normal when the A/C is parked  

 

I did check just now on the two I'm building at present -- they are slightly proud. I was able to fix it on my Fw190 from them and I'll fix it here too. Slightly annoying, but no big deal.

[G.E.SAUNDERS]

           hi Procopus ,

 

                                   thanks for your response ,yes I agree it is annoyin', I found that the Aileron problem was difficult to correct

             as it involved trimming (3) surfaces without ruinin' the look of the Area ...... a bit here and bit there 

            However there a few other unexpected Issues with this Kit....... and I'm NO Spitfire Expert !....just an old Aircraft Fitter ( Airframe )

         ....and THAT'S MODELLIN' !

 

            btw:  I have decked the Aircraft out as an RAAF 453 Sqd   EN522 FU-F flown by W/Com John.R RATTEN (a Tasmanian )

            who was the 1st Australian to pass the Empire Training Scheme, He survived the War....but died in a Hospital from an illness

             Never got Home .

 

                                                                                                 cheery "modellin' " mumbas !

                                                                                                  

                                                                                                                       Geoff    

 

                                                                                                                            F.T.G. 3156

[Tom R]

I am not sure how much you people would trust the Monforton plans but they show the ailerons protruding beyond the wing trailing edge by a quite small amount. It is quite noticeable on the outboard end of the aileron on the clipped wing.

This is different to the leading edge of the Frise-type aileron protruding below the lower surface of the wing in some positions.

[Graham Boak]

I put a lot of credence on the Monforton plans.  Just how big an extension is this?

 

Can anyone tell me whether the short carburettor intake on the Eduard kit is the right size for the Mk.IX, or the smaller one as used on the Mk.V?  A number of kits have got this wrong, particularly the older ones.  It might be interesting to have a list of those that have got it right.  Presumably Monforton did (I don't have access to my books, kits and models at the moment).

[The wooksta V2.0]

It's a barely noticeable extension, perhaps less than a millimetre.

 

The small carb intake is not the one from the V.

[Dave Fleming]

2 hours ago, The Wooksta! said:

It's a barely noticeable extension, perhaps less than a millimetre.

 

 I'd say less, and looking at photos may actually be accurate as mentioned above.

 

[Procopius]

4 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

I put a lot of credence on the Monforton plans.  Just how big an extension is this?

 

I know you're not a big fan of the WIP section, but my build there goes into it a little. CedB also covers this a bit in his build.

[fewr9fkr9595]

Mine stick out a touch on the inboard part. Flush with wingtip. Never noticed it till now. Not a massive deal breaker and doesn't detract from the kit I think. Are we getting too fussy? Or are people gluing the trailing edge too tight when assembing the wings together so when you add them they don't 'slot in' enough? 

 

 

here is finished build - 

 

 

Edited January 11, 2017 by Tony Oliver
Pic

[Procopius]

49 minutes ago, Tony Oliver said:

Or are people gluing the trailing edge too tight when assembing the wings together so when you add them they don't 'slot in' enough? 

 

That might be happening -- I tried to get the trailing edge a little thinner. Your ailerons are in much further than mine, it looks like.

[Chuck1945]

1 minute ago, Procopius said:

 

That might be happening -- I tried to get the trailing edge a little thinner. Your ailerons are in much further than mine, it looks like.

 

Agree, at least in my own experience. Early reviews and build discussions stressed the importance of making sure everything fit  to get the fuselage halves to fit properly around the cockpit assembly. I carried that over to the wings, clamping the ends and trailing edges to the point where the kit wing tips fit proud of the wing and the ailerons didn't want to fit quite right either.

[Procopius]

4 minutes ago, Chuck1945 said:

I carried that over to the wings, clamping the ends and trailing edges to the point where the kit wing tips fit proud of the wing and the ailerons didn't want to fit quite right either.

 

Exactly my experience as well.