Brad-M Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 Gents, Does anyone have pics or links to Hugo Armstrong's FY-F BS435 Mk IX Spitfire? TIA Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally7506 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 Gents,Does anyone have pics or links to Hugo Armstrong's FY-F BS435 Mk IX Spitfire? TIA Brad Here are four pictures of her (two with "Sailor" Malan in the cockpit, one color, and one of her leading 611 Sqn in formation), and a profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad-M Posted December 12, 2009 Author Share Posted December 12, 2009 Brilliant, Thanks Wally! Cheers Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spadegrip Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 That second and third pic looks like Hugo in the cockpit and Sailor as Biggin Hill wing leader standing on the wing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally7506 Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Brilliant, Thanks Wally!Cheers Brad But wait! Here's one more! Sqd Ldr Armstrong in his MKIX, Biggin Hill, 8th Dec 42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheModeller Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Here is another of her all bulled up for the press. Couple of points of interest, she seems to bear some signs of wear despite the polishing, looks like scuffed paint at the wingroot, and the spine anti-collision beacon seems to be a dark coloured glass, I've never noticed this before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Dick Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 (edited) First of all many thanks to Brad Main for vectoring me to this site. I'm going to be doing this aircraft with the Tamiya 1/32 Spitfire, and many thanks for the photo's. One thing I've noticed though, is that the tarmac beneath the Spitfire is quite wet as if it has just rained, even a bit of shine on the tires! This could boost the glossy look of the aircraft as well. The colour shot and the other "in cockpit" shots don't show the same level of gloss. Also does the cannon blister in the bottom shot not look close to the questionable one in the Tamiya kit? Regards, Jeff Edited December 17, 2009 by Jeff Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheModeller Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 First of all many thanks to Brad Main for vectoring me to this site. I'm going to be doing this aircraft with the Tamiya 1/32 Spitfire, and many thanks for the photo's. One thing I've noticed though, is that the tarmac beneath the Spitfire is quite wet as if it has just rained, even a bit of shine on the tires! This could boost the glossy look of the aircraft as well. The colour shot and the other "in cockpit" shots don't show the same level of gloss. Also does the cannon blister in the bottom shot not look close to the questionable one in the Tamiya kit? Regards, Jeff I don't think its the rain, the majority of the tarmac seems quite dry, there are wet patches here and there but I wouldn't expect the gloss to be so even if it were just wet from the rain. One of Wallys pics of the squadron in the air was taken during a press-day, all the aircraft look quite shiny, I think the above pic was taken at the same time and the gloss is because they were all polished for the press. The regular day-to-day finish was probably more of a semi-gloss sheen. The broad cannon cover Tamiya supply isn't the same as the one depicted, the front edge should be more curved, the kit part looks far more like a Mk.Vc cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad-M Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 I think it might be a combination of both, there is one more detail that needs to be pointed and that's the flare port that is visible just above the aircraft code "F". It's a great shot though. Cheers and thanks Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheModeller Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 (edited) I think it might be a combination of both, ...... It's a great shot though. Cheers and thanks Brad Not so sure, over a beeswax polish its unlikely water would settle so evenly, beeswax was the most common stuff used at the time, also the area under the Spit is very wet, but behind and ahead of it comparably drier, maybe the hardstand was washed down before the COs Spit was wheeled in? If she'd been standing in the rain I'd have thought the area underneath would look drier than the surrounds. Nope, I think she just well polished for the press-day. YMMV. PS, yeah, its a lovely pic! Edited December 17, 2009 by TheModeller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 I didn't realise there was any difference between the broad cannon bulge on the Mk.Vc and that on the Mk.IX. Can you describe the differences please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad-M Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 (edited) Well, here is a link to a pic on HS that shows a version of the wide blister on a Mk Vc in flight, that may be different from the blisters in the pic of Armstrong's Mk IX. Scroll down about half way through the page... http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index....98113&st=40 Cheers Brad I didn't realise there was any difference between the broad cannon bulge on the Mk.Vc and that on the Mk.IX. Can you describe the differences please? Edited December 17, 2009 by Brad-M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Yes, that one and the SAAF examples look different, however are either normal for the Mk.V? I'll have a look through my Malta photos, but I don't recall anything as blunt as that. Also, the example at the top of the page is different from the straighter-sided examples on the FY-coded aircraft. I suspect we are looking at different production standards, possible CB vs Supermarine, rather than Mk.V vs Mk.IX. These aircraft never get any simpler, do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheModeller Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Maybe it was a different production plant, maybe some fairings were carried over from the Vc's the early IXs were converted from, maybe nothing is ever simple. My point is that the larger fairings Tamiya provide don't seem to be a type regularly fitted to Mk.IXs, all the pictures I've seen show a more curving front edge, the only place I've seen fairings similar to those in the kit was in a picture of a Vc with twin 20mms fitted, might not be exactly the same and I don't recall which book it was in but given a few days I might be able to find it. As the ARC thread shows, aftermarket replacements are already being made, I daresay we will eventually see a far wider variety of fairings than likely existed in real life! Just for the record I opted to avoid this whole can-of-worms and picked a subject fitted with the later narrow fairings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally7506 Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 (edited) Of equal importance is the PROOF in three of the pictures that the crowbar was painted Interior Grey Green (whatever flavor you prefer). Edited December 17, 2009 by wally7506 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Dick Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 (edited) I don't think its the rain, the majority of the tarmac seems quite dry, there are wet patches here and there but I wouldn't expect the gloss to be so even if it were just wet from the rain. One of Wallys pics of the squadron in the air was taken during a press-day, all the aircraft look quite shiny, I think the above pic was taken at the same time and the gloss is because they were all polished for the press. The regular day-to-day finish was probably more of a semi-gloss sheen.The broad cannon cover Tamiya supply isn't the same as the one depicted, the front edge should be more curved, the kit part looks far more like a Mk.Vc cover. Fascinating about the bee's wax polish, I used to be an Aircraft Refinisher (painter) and the company I worked for specialized in warbirds. I personally detested the super high gloss finish that you see on a lot of warbirds and pushed for a semi matte finish which a lot of the customers went for, you could still wash it but it looked more the part. Here they have real wartime aircraft with a matte finish and they polish them!!! Go figure! In any case thanks for the info, I will probably have more of a semi matte finish on my little warbird spitfire. Jeff Edited December 18, 2009 by Jeff Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennings Heilig Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Note that like many early Mk.IXs, this one has the Mk.VI style symmetrical prop blades, not the later "steak knife" style commonly seen on Mk.IXs. I suspect the new prop wasn't available in quantity yet, so they used the older one. IIRC the Mk.VI prop was metal, not wood. J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 But wait! Here's one more! Sqd Ldr Armstrong in his MKIX, Biggin Hill, 8th Dec 42 Hi Interesting I didn't know the long range belly tanks were in use in dec '42. cheers Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Hi Interesting I didn't know the long range belly tanks were in use in dec '42. cheers Jerry First use of the slipper tanks in the UK was about March '42 (the first Vc's to a home squadron). AFAIK the IX was equipped for them from the beginning, though someone may well prove me wrong! bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 First use of the slipper tanks in the UK was about March '42 (the first Vc's to a home squadron). AFAIK the IX was equipped for them from the beginning, though someone may well prove me wrong!bob Hi Bob, Many thanks for the info, i always just assumed for some unknown reason it was later. cheers Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now