fishplanebeer

Not quite that relevant but I know some of the earlier Vb's sent to Russia retained the sky tail band and spinner along with their standard RAF camouflage, so perhaps there may have been some similar such examples with the later IX's as well? The excellent 'Spotlight On' book of the Spitfire V by Robert Grudzien shows Spit Vb EP210 in such a scheme when flying with 57 GIAP (Guards Unit) in early 1943. Of note is the existence of the aerial wire as those Vb's shipped to Russia were only fitted with HF radios but not sure if the same also applied to the IX's as well? Hope this helps. Colin. Ps. happy to scan and share the page/pic but sadly I have no idea how to insert picture files into a post

Thanks ever so much for the guidance on this. On that basis I'm probably going to go for the Tuck example and then add the Lock version when I've got through more pressing other subjects currently on the go. Thanks again. Colin.

I've just bought the KP Spitfire Vb 'Aces' kit which is excellent but somewhat confused about the camo references it shows so would appreciate some help please. The kit has 3 decal options, one of which is for Stanford Tuck in what they claim is medium sea gray undersides and ocean grey and dark green upper surfaces with a sky spinner and tail band. The second option is for Eric Lock with sky undersides, spinner and tail band and with the upper surfaces in dark brown/earth and dark green. The final option is for R L Milne with medium sea grey undersides, light slate grey and extra dark sea grey upper surfaces with a sky spinner and tail band. Admittedly my knowledge of post BoB schemes isn't great but I'm not sure if any of these suggested schemes is correct, apart from the Eric Lock scheme which seems to fit as this depicts an early Vb possibly before the new camouflage scheme was introduced. Any clues/advice greatly appreciated. Colin.

According to period Air Ministry publications the Mk9 and MkXVI Spitfires were as follows and this has subsequently been used many times since in various articles and publications; F IX Merlin 61; 63 or 63A; two 20-mm. and four .303-in. guns LF IX Merlin 66; two 20-mm. and four .303-in. guns. LF IX (e)Merlin 66; two 20-mm. and two .5-in. guns. HF IX Merlin 70; two 20-mm. and four .303-in. guns. HF IX (e)Merlin 70; two 20-mm. and two .5-in. guns. PR XI Merlin 61; 63, 63A or 70. F XVI Merlin 266; two 20-mm. and two .5-in. guns. Of course in addition to late/post war Spits having the wheel bulges on the upper wing surface there were a number of changes to the engine nose cowling during production but at the end of the day this did not warrant a new Mark number, pre-fix or suffix so they were all still referred to as a Mk 9 or Mk XVI as defined by the origin of the engine. I agree that there was never a Mk 9b but apparently the 'c' suffix was also never used at the time as all Spits were fitted with this standard/universal wing and it was only with the introduction of the 'e' wing (a modified 'c'/universal wing) that it was felt necessary to add the 'e' suffix in order to differentiate such aircraft. Still makes me wonder how MH434 ended up with what appears to be a 'b' wing configuration as this certainly threw me until I studied Shacklady more closely. Hope this helps. Colin.

Mine was an Airfix S6b floatplane when I was around 5 years of age (56 years ago). I was just left to get on with it myself with a tube of glue so god knows how it ended up, but I do recall an argument later between my parents about 'stuff' on the carpet. My second was a Frog Sea Fury, by which time I was allowed some paints which I think were blue and white for the body and wings, and some red for the spinner. This was probably 12 months or so later but had the same result, this time with paint 'stuff' on the carpet. I can't remember my third kit as I suspect my parents left it a while in order to save up for a new carpet! Regards Colin.

Just a small gripe but I wish when a manufacturer produces a kit that has the canopy in its constituent parts so that it can be modelled open that they would also always provide a fully closed example as well. I know moulded canopies are now getting ever finer but I've never come across one yet where the assembled 'open' canopy, when modelled in the closed position, looks realistic and to scale. For example the new-ish tool Airfix Me 262 which is a fine kit but just looks wrong when the 2 part canopy is modelled as closed. Regards Colin.

Does anyone know how common the Aero Vee intake was on merlin Seafires, in particular the type Mk II? It is more commonly seen on the Spitfire VII/VIII/IX etc.. and I've also seen photos of the Mk III with such an intake but I've never seen it on a Mk II so wondered when it may have been introduced and if existing examples could have been retro-fitted? I'm thinking of adding this later intake to my Mk II (robbed from the Heller XVI kit) but only if such a configuration did actually exist. Regards Colin.

Just to add to much of what has already been said that NG354 was built as part of an order for 400 BI Lancs by Armstrong Whitworth which were delivered between July 1944 and February 1945. Following service with 186 squadron it subsequently served with 626 around July 1945 before finally being struck off charge on 14th December 1946. As far as the vertical tail band(s) is concerned all my references show them as being yellow regardless of what they were intended to signify or how many were applied so a safe bet would be to go with this as the correct colour. Not sure about the flap position as there would be no need to deploy them whilst on terra firma so perhaps just a wee bit of slack in the system accounts for the slight drop here? There is a pic on page 32 of Lancaster At War by Garbett & Goulding which shows a Lanc with the flaps slightly lowered whilst parked, plus pics on pages 33, 37 and 39 where they seem to be in a more fully deployed state, so pretty much anything goes I suspect. Also worth noting, along with the paddle blade props and covered side windows, is the enlarged astrodome that was a feature of later produced Lancs. I can't recall off hand if the Airfix kit provides the larger or smaller astrodome so you will need to check this one out. Hope this helps Colin.

Dear All, Having perused many of the excellent recent builds of these two aircraft it makes me realise just how 'unrealistic' my efforts are when it comes to painting the exhaust manifolds as they still end up just looking like painted plastic. I'm not after any trade secrets, and I know that practice may eventually make perfect though sadly not true in this case, but can anyone share some basic tips on how I can get them to look as if they are actually made from metal and far more like the real thing please? Apologies if this has been raised in a previous thread/topic. Kind Regards Colin.

Dear All, Many, many thanks, I now have all the answers I was looking for. The excellent fuselage diagram in Shacklady shows all the various Merlin Seafire mods (page 539) along with pics on pages 525 and 529 which show the front spools in place (now I know where they went and what they looked like). The fuselage diagram also confirms the location of the forward and rear 'slinging points' for all the Merlin Seafires including confirmation that the rear one on the II and III was the rear spool spigot. Thank you all again. Colin.

Dear All, Does anyone know where I can find plans/diagrams showing the location of the forward catapult spools on the Mk II versions III. I've perused many photos without success and just know that apparently they were supposed to be located somewhere on the underside behind the nose but no idea exactly where or what they actually looked like. Many thanks. Colin.

£40+ for 5 kits is a lot when I'm only interested in the 2 merlin kits in the box, but thanks anyway. I suppose I could sell the other 3 but these are still quite easy to find at the moment, it's the merlin versions that are proving to be very elusive. Regards Colin.

Dear All, Further to my previous post on Merlin Seafires and my intention to build all 3 versions,1B, IIC and III I've just managed to buy the Sword Mk III / SW72084 late boxing which, with all Sword Seafire and Spitfire kits, are like hens teeth these days. I've read the excellent review of this kit on Hyperscale by Mark Davies (below) which confirms my initial thoughts that the kit is excellent with the only obvious error being the lack of panel lines on the wings showing the wing fold. http://www.hyperscale.com/2014/reviews/kits/sword72083reviewmd_1.htm Given the lack of wing fold lines and the plethora of spares also included, as apparently these are from their previous Spitfire V model which Sword still left in for some reason, I'm wondering if the kit could also be built as Mk II as well? Would love to hear from anyone who has bought/built this kit who could confirm, along with any build issues that the kit may have, as I'm very much a Seafire virgin and still learning as I go. Regards Colin. Ps. any clues as to where I might find any more of the Sword Seafires for sale as mine was the last and only one left with Kingkit and trawling Google has yielded nothing?

Sorry, just to add that whilst I believe the '2' is not white it does appear to be a little lighter than the yellow cowling, so perhaps the cowling and number used different shades of yellow possibly? Again just a thought based upon the misinterpretation of the von Werra E-4 that ran and ran for quite some considerable time. Regards Colin.

Sorry, I did indeed mean '2'. 🧐 Thanks for correcting me. Regards Colin.

Dear All, For what it's worth, possibly not a great deal, I suspect the '3' is more likely to be yellow rather than white. If you look at the white tail band its tonal value is very, very close to that of the white background of the JG27 emblem on the cowling, which fits perfectly. With the latter definitely being white the '3', by comparison, clearly has a very different tonal value to both the tail band and JG27 emblem and therefore must be another colour I would have thought. This is similar in some respects to the issue surrounding the colour of the cowling on Franz von Werra's Bf 109-E4 which for many years was mis-interpreted as being white. Just a thought. Regards Colin.

Dear All, Apologies if this has been raised before in a previous post. I'm looking to build a merlin powered Seafire, the 1b, IIc or III version from a Spit V donor kit but unsure what type of arrestor hook was used and if it varied at all between these 3 versions? I'm a late comer to the Seafire but I believe the 1b and IIc were converted from existing Spit Vb/c airframes and the III was a new build airframe incorporating the previous mods that had been made (plus some new ones as well) but all three were essentially a Spit V in very general terms. Regards Colin. Ps. I have just managed to find a Sword Seafire III which hopefully is a good choice for this variant (?) but did it have a different hook arrangement to the Ib and IIc?

Just another question due to my ignorance but I thought there were also HF Mk9 versions, fitted with the series 70 Merlin rated for better altitude performance, although not sure which wing type they would have. Presume it would have been the 'c', or possibly even the 'e' in the latter low back configuration more common with the XVI? Apologies again for my lack of knowledge here as I'm no guru when it comes to Spits and simply basing this upon the relatively few references I have plus the different kits that are out there in 72nd scale. Kind Regards Colin.

Thank you for clarifying and updating my knowledge of the Spit as MH434 has always been referred to as a IXb previously in various magazines (Flypast etc.) and Shacklady also refers to EN554 as being of this type as well, hence my misunderstanding. Kind Regards Colin.

Dear All, Not directly relevant in terms of the Fw190-D colours but just a quick general thought/observation. For many years the Bf109E-4 of Franz von Verra was utterly misinterpreted in terms of its nose cowling colour with many decal sheets and models showing it as being white, where as in fact it was the standard RLM blue and camouflage colours of the period. It just looked lighter due to lighting, proximity to the camera given film and lens technology at the time, and possibly it even being a fresh/new item fitted. Assessing tonal values from b&w photos is always fraught so my only advice is that if it looks right and fits with the accepted understanding of what was used at the time then nobody can pick holes or criticise with any degree of conviction or certainty. Unlike all those poor souls who have built the Von Werra machine with a white cowling! Kind Regards Colin. Ps. I see Airfix still think the cowling is white which is rather surprising

The photos confirm that this example had the 'c' wing fitted where as some early IX's also had the 'b' wing as this was presumably easier for Castle Bromwich to convert existing Vb's already on the production line and use up the existing airframe/wing assemblies already good to go. The IX'b' seems to be quite a rare bird these days as most if not all that I've seen restored have the 'c' or even 'e' wing but a very fine example of the IX'b' is the venerable MH434 that still flies today and is quite superb after all these years. I first saw it back in 1971 at a small air show at Shobdon airfield in Herefordshire and I still have the programme to prove it! I must admit that my first impressions from the photos of this particular Spit were that it was in fact an updated Vc as the nose just doesn't seem to be long enough to be a IX for me, but clearly my eyesight is no longer what it was. Kind Regards Colin.

Just to add that having perused all sellers on 'tinternet' the FM 'F' versions are only available on 'back-order' from a Japanese web site so no idea if/when they will eventually arrive plus the long delay in delivery. As such I'm more than happy with my AZ and Zvezda choices, even if they may need some tweaks, as at least you can get hold of one and then amend as you see fit. As for the canopy my understanding is that the previous 'glazed' forward elements of the 'E' and 'F' were overpainted on the 'G' but not sure if this was just a paint job or any form of actual metal applied. I'm pretty sure even the 'E' also had a pistol port aperture (F as well?) so presume his would have carried forward and would not have necessitated any change a such to the forward canopy. Perhaps a case of reducing glare in the cockpit perhaps? Regards Colin.

But then again when did the Germans ever do things universally so it is perfectly possible that some factories adopted the new internal strengthening later than others and that their F fuselages did indeed still have the stiffening plates applied to them - very confusing. Just goes to show that you cannot rely upon even several reference sources/books, even if they all say the same thing as mine do, and that the only true and accurate reference is a period photo of the actual aircraft, as expertly evidenced by the wonderful photo from Vonbraun. Regards Colin.

Sorry but just a final thought on the 'F', and apologies if this has also been covered previously and I'm preaching to the converted and covering old ground. The external stiffening strips (2 each side) connecting the tail to the fuselage were put in place to prevent the tail falling off on early versions, akin to the same problem experienced with the Hawker Typhoon, and which resulted in a number of the early F-1's inexplicably crashing for no apparent reason. Something to do with sympathetic vibrations apparently but no real idea what this means as I failed Physics A-Level! Having traced the issue to the tail structure, as it no longer had the tail plane braces fitted to the 'Emil', the strips were added to the F-1 and also to early F-2's before an internal remedy was applied for all later aircraft/versions. However some photos seem to show the strips still evident on what are claimed to be later versions such as the F-4. So are/were these aircraft actually re-manufactured early versions? Sensibly a factory mod to solve the problem would have been universal given its importance and it would have made no sense to do the internal strengthening and yet at the same time still apply these strips as well. Just a thought. Kind Regards Colin.

Just to add that I also rashly bought the AZ Bf109 G2/Trop as it apparently won a Gold Award of some description as per the details on the box. Not sure who by but it seemed a good selling point so I added it to my cart given that it was reasonably priced and assumed it would be a better option than the most recent Airfix and Revell offerings. This one will be a while before it gets to the work bench but from initial examination it does seem pretty good and with lots of extra bits as well, although I've not got to the stage of taking anything off the sprues to test fit or measure up against any scale plans. Ultimately it will end up being 'Black 6' as restored to airworthy condition in the UK before its demise on its final flight but then thankfully fully restored to superb static condition and rotated between Hendon and Cosford (so a must see when I get around to it). Genuine thanks again for everyone's interest, time and knowledge here, such a wonderful forum and still free! Stay Safe. Colin.