The Definitive Spitfire Mk.1 Thread

[Bozothenutter]

I found the spitfire at war and complete fighting history......is the reproduction quality of the real books as bad?

Looks like scans of photocopies.....

[NPL]

The Morgan and Sharklady Bible with this extensive catalogue of the fate of all Spitfires was certainly not redundant when it first appeared. It was before the internet. It is still a must. 

[stevej60]

Hi folk's I,m just finishing Airfix's 1/48 Mk1 in the 1938 scheme with the two blade prop,were the red patches covering the muzzle openings

applicable to these pre-war Spitfire's?

[The wooksta V2.0]

No.  Wartime fix to prevent freezing at altitude.  The artwork on the 72nd mk I/IIa was wrong.

[Graham Boak]

Prewar they initially had protruding anti-flash muzzles on the outer guns, so the patches wouldn't fit anyway,  However, the patches were certainly in use by the BoB if not as soon as the muzzles were shortened.  Gun freezing would have been noticed before the outbreak of the war, but the patches also served to prevent insect infestation and dust/muck getting into the barrels. In practice they also served as a rapid guide to the ground crew as to whether the aircraft had seen combat, if any guns had failed to fire and which needed rearming.

[stevej60]

Many thanks guy's.

[11bravo]

On 11/30/2010 at 5:27 PM, Steve N said:

I did a bit of Googling: P9306 is a Mk.1A, with five kills to its credit in the BoB (one in the hands of Sailor Malan himself!) After combat, it served with several training units before being presented to the museum in 1944 (hence the later camouflage.) It was simply put on display as-is, and other than occasional cleaning is completely original (although it appears the RAF removed the squadron codes.) Apparently the engine engine was removed for weight considerations, and Mk.V exhausts substituted.

SN

 

Very interesting aircraft if the paint is truly original.  If so, it seems to put into doubt the theory that all British camo was hard-edged.  This is, at best, a very rough paint job.  Which makes it all the more interesting if it's indeed original.   I believe I read somewhere that the Ju-87 in the background is although in authentic colors.

 

How common was it for Mk I and II's to be repainted in grey / green once assigned to 2nd line duties?

[Steve N]

I don't know what the latest thinking is, but I believe it's assumed that the masking mats were used at the factory.  Since this aircraft was repainted later in its career at a depot, I suppose anything goes. 

 

As for the Stuka, I've been given to understand that most of the paint is indeed original, but having examined it many times at close range it's obvious that it has been touched up considerably over the years.  Just how much is difficult to tell, but the underside in particular has a very patchy appearance, with the unweathered repainted areas very evident.

 

SN

Edited January 14, 2017 by Steve N

[Troy Smith]

40 minutes ago, 11bravo said:

 

Very interesting aircraft if the paint is truly original.  If so, it seems to put into doubt the theory that all British camo was hard-edged.  This is, at best, a very rough paint job.  Which makes it all the more interesting if it's indeed original.   I believe I read somewhere that the Ju-87 in the background is although in authentic colors.

 

How common was it for Mk I and II's to be repainted in grey / green once assigned to 2nd line duties?

the paint is original,  but as Steve says, it's a repaint.

 

How common 2nd line repainting?  Standard practice from what can be observed from the few aircraft that were photographed, certainly two preserved Hurricanes in the UK, (L1952 in the Science Museum and P2617 in Hendon) were with OTU's (Operational Training  Units) and were photographed post war in Day Fighter Scheme.

here's some Hurricane's with OTU's

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235013545-the-squadron-needs-a-new-painter-hurricanes-at-otu/

bear in mind that obsolete fighter types were passed on OTU's,  Operational being the important bit,  so were camoflaged and marked in current fighter schemes.

Note the Spitfire Mk.I at the Imperial War Museum is ex-OTU,  and in original paint

 

HTH

T

 

 

 

[Work In Progress]

"... and in original paint"

 

Troy, I know you know this and your full post does of course explicitly make the point that this is a repaint. But things sometimes get subsequently quoted partially and out of context. So to avoid misleading people who might read this later, and misunderstand the history of R6195, we should avoid using the word "original" altogether for that paint. "Wartime paint", yes, "original paint" no. The finish of R6195 is a valuable artifact because it is in a genuine WW2 repaint that it wore in second line service, but of course those aren't the original colours, i.e. the ones in which it was delivered and used in front line service in the summer of 1940.

 

I mentioned this to the IWM when I saw the aircraft in display last week as the way they describe it in the display and on the website --  "Famous Battle of Britain fighter, preserved in its original wartime OTU livery" -- should have the word "original" removed in my view. Their wording implies wrongly that the aircraft was some kind of late production, delivered straight to an OTU and, by further implication, was new in a timeframe where those colours were in use.

 

Edited January 14, 2017 by Work In Progress

[Graham Boak]

9 hours ago, 11bravo said:

 

 If so, it seems to put into doubt the theory that all British camo was hard-edged.  

 

Any such theory was an over-generalisation.  There has always been evidence that some British aircraft were hand-sprayed at the factory.  However, some companies used mats to mark out the outline, and this was scoffed at by some theoreticians in the face of comments from those who had actually used such mats.  There's the closely-related argument as to how best to represent the tight edges on a small-scale model, where hand-spraying produces grossly exaggerated effects.

[Steve N]

Since this old threat has been resurrected, I thought these might be of interest.  We paid one of our periodic visits to the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry a couple months ago, and as I now have a "real" camera, I was able to get some better quality pictures of P9306.  Hopefully Photobucket won't reduce the resolution too much.  Anyway, here they are.  As mentioned above, the paintwork is pretty rough..the camouflage was obviously sprayed on rather quickly and without too much finesse.  There is also a hard-edged patch of solid green on the inboard right wing..no idea what the story is behind that.  And as I mentioned earlier, the kill markings are likely a later addition..I certainly doubt she ever carried them in service after being repainted.  Note that a hole has been cut in the top of the fuselage ahead of the cockpit, then crudely patched..an opening for the original suspension cable?  Note also that there's a hole in the canopy.  I remember when I first visited the museum as a kid in the early 70s the wingtip lights were illuminated.   Graham: I notice that the Science Museum Spitfire also has no squadron/aircraft code letters on the fuselage.  Was this common on aircraft repainted for second-line duties?

 

Cheers!

Steve

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Graham Boak]

No, the aircraft would normally carry the appropriate codes for the unit, or at least numbers within the unit.  However, P9306 suffered Category B damage at 61 OTU and was returned to Vickers for repair, so the code are likely to have been removed there. (STH actually says WA not VA but WA is not relevant, unless it stands for some other abbreviation than given in the Glossary.  perhaps Westland?)

[NG899]

Hi chaps,

 

Anyone up for a challenge to help a major Spitfire build?

 

I'll whisper the words: Fabric Ailerons.  What I need to help me are photos of the fabric taping on both surfaces, specifically the location of the span-wise tapes at about the back of the hinge slots.  The top surface I may be ok with - photo in Andy Saunders excellent book P9374.  The under surface is another matter; no photos in all the usual sources, including umpteen Aeroplane and Fly Past magazines.  Any photos of the fabric ailerons fitted to P9374 or N3200 - the only flying Spitfires with fabric ailerons - showing the line of the tapes would be very welcome.

 

(The images of P9306 from Steve N in this thread and those of P9444 elsewhere on BM show both aircraft now have metal ailerons fitted.  As this mod reached the squadrons and OTUs from Sept/Oct 1940, all remaining fabric ailerons would have been replaced on Spitfire Mk.Is in those units.  This is why the ailerons on the restored P9374 and N3200 had to be specially made and are the first fabric Spitfire ailerons produced since 1940.)

 

Thank you.

 

Nick

Edited January 15, 2017 by NG899
Forgot to say...

[Work In Progress]

Not sure I understand your question, I fear I may be missing something. The rib tapes cover the stitches which attach the fabric to the ribs, and therefore by definition they follow the lines of the ribs.

Given that the ribs are all vertical within the aileron, the rib tapes necessarily follow the same pattern on top and bottom of the aileron.

 

I can't reproduce it here as it's too big and on Photobucket, but follow this link for a big pic of the inner structure

http://s713.photobucket.com/user/rewdco/media/N329520Xplaza.jpg.html

 

There's a reasonable view of the tapes beneath the aileron here too, if you get your nose close enough to the screen

 

There is another picture of P9374 showing the line of the rib tapes in slightly different lighting enabling you to see them on the white wing here, if you look closely and maybe blow it up a bit. (I'm not going to put the pic up directly, not only because it's huge, but also because they prefer people not to hotlink images, but just follow the link:)

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled/Supermarine-300-Spitfire-Mk1A/2169702/L

 

 

 

Edited January 15, 2017 by Work In Progress

[Seahawk]

On 04/01/2017 at 0:28 PM, Graham Boak said:

Gun freezing would have been noticed before the outbreak of the war, ...

 

Actually, and amazingly enough, it wasn't.  From G F Wallace's The Guns of the Royal Air Force 1939-45 (Kimber, 1972), p.45.  Emphasis mine.

 

"The first winter of the war proved an exceptionally severe one and we at MAP were soon getting complaints about guns freezing up.... [Section on problem caused by overuse of lubricating oil which then froze.]  Next it was found that if an aircraft first of all passed through moist air which condensed on the guns, and subsequently entered air below freezing point, the condensation would freeze on guns and cause stoppages.  On fixed gun fighters this was tackled in two ways.  First the gun bays were sealed and heated, usually by means of hot air from the exhaust system; secondly to prevent cold moist air blowing down the barrel into the gun bay, the barrels had to be sealed.  Where the guns were sunk into the wing this was done by doping a patch of fabric over the blast tube, but where the gun projected beyond the wing a rubber cover was placed over the gun muzzle.  The disadvantage of this was that it would only guarantee that the guns would remain unfrozen for the first burst.   ...... It might be wondered why this problem had not been encountered during trials prior to the winter of 1939-40.  The reason is that during peace-time the fighter squadrons only fired their guns in the air during the annual armament training camp which always took place during the summer months." 

[NG899]

Hi Work In Progress,

 

Many thanks for your comments, links and the photo of P9374.  The port aileron on that provides me with a good start for what I need - great!  For the avoidance of confusion, let me explain my request in new words...

 

Rib tapes - yep, got those, chord-wise over the ribs.  But, there's also leading edge and trailing edge tapes which go over those and, under them, some spanwise tapes - if the ailerons are given similar treatment to the rudder and elevators.

The picture of the unpainted aileron in Andy Saunders' 'Spitfire P9374' book shows a spanwise tape, underneath the rib tapes, on the top of the aileron which intersects the hinge joints; almost as is reinforcing for the point where the metal leading edge part stops and the fabric begins.  It's similar to the tapes on the elevator upper surface at the same point by the hinge slots and the top to bottom tape on the rudder, visible in other photos.  It's evidence of that spanwise raised ssection between the aileron hinge points which I've been looking for.

 

I hope that resolves any confusion caused so far.

 

Cheers

Nick

 

[Work In Progress]

Ah, I see. Well, looking at those pictures, which on my monitor here I have in 1080p at approximately 1/16 scale, and on which I can't really make out any spanwise surface irregularities,  I'd say they must be *very* subtle in comparison to the ones that follow the ribs.

[NG899]

It's why I'm experimenting with how to best depict what you can see in 1:24th scale... 

5 thou high ribs on their own look to stark

10 thou are too proud, even when faired in with Vallejo tube filler and then sanded down - not right

5 thou under Tamiya tape is better but the tape itself may be too apparent under paint - will find out in an hour or two after coating one side of the completed rudder which has already had 4 coats of Klear on it to seal the tape and try and blend the edges. 

 

Looking at the black aileron there's a distinct shadow between the hinge points...

 

On with the alchemy!