Jump to content

Tom Zeller

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About Tom Zeller

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
  • Interests
    German Shepherds

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The Hasegawa will suit my purposes for creating a PR MK. XI. Sure I could probably horseshoe the kit to fit but unless I have some compelling reason I'd just as soon do what the kit recommends. I did say that I'm buying Eduard's three MK. IX kits which will be sufficiant to show that progression of Spitfire development. The PR MK. XI is a part of a side project showing the development of photo recon Spits. I don't need an Eduard kit for that. The whole endeavour is far from cheap so I will find savings where I can. I got the Hasewaga quite inexpensively. It would be inadvisable to throw it awa
  2. Yep, I quite agree re: Eduard for MK. IX Spits. I do have all three of theirs in my plans. However, as I said in my post, the Quickboost PR MK. XI coversion kit requires the Hasewaga. Thanks very much for your reply and the link. I appreciate all your help. - Tom Thanks, 303! I think that's the very picture I saw in my research. Good to know I'm not completely bonkers. - Tom
  3. Thanks for answering so quickly, Troy. I would try fitting them if they were both here but the Hasagawa is enroute still. Doing some ordering and I thought I'd get a jump on it. I have seen the XI wearing a slipper and it was in my history reading that I even came across this. It's an important mark to my project because, at least according to my reading, the PR XI was the most produced PR. The reading stated that the PR. XI was an adapted MK. IX and that is indeed what Quickboost calls for in their kit. I appreciate the link. I'll look through it. I guess I'll just order the slipper tank late
  4. One of the builds I have planned is a conversion of the 1/48 Hasegawa Spitfire MK IX to a PR. MK. XI using the Quickboost parts. In my reading I noted that the PR. MK. XI often used a 90 gal. slipper tank which Quickboost does sell for the Hasegawa MK IX. In getting other builds ready I noticed my Airfix Spitfire MK. I kit with all the wonderful extra parts in the newer red box has a 90 gal. slipper tank. Will this fit the Hasegawa or do I really need the Quickboost slipper tank because of fuselage width? TIA
  5. I've been doing a lot of reading for my Spitfire project and along the way I read that the MK XII was the first Spit to be equipped with a Griffin but they used MK IX fuselages that were adapted to accomodate the Griffon. The Spitfire MK XIV and later Spitfires and Seafires has fuselages that were designed for the Griffon rather than being adapted Merlin fuselages. I would surmise that this was the reason for the magnetos' bump.
  6. I don't know Mosquitoes that well but ScaleMates says this canopy mask from Montex will work on more than one Mosquito including the 1/48 Airfix PR. XVI. https://www.scalemates.com/kits/198940-montex-mm48230-dh-98-mosquito-b-mk-xvi-pr-xvi
  7. Thanks, Graeme! I appreciate the info very much. I hadn't seen those. Yours and Troy's additional info are quite helpful. Tom
  8. I'm sorry you've taken an adversarial stance. That wasn't my intention. You express concern with having threads "spread all over the place" while I'm concerned with having to sift through a bunch of posts to find what I'm looking for. I think it better to have threads about the topic title. Silly me.
  9. Thank you so very much, Tbolt! This is exactly the kind of answer I was hoping for. You answered all my questions perfectly. I now know which way to go in my build. I'll get the Brengun flaps and sell the Eduard ones that came in my Big Ed packet. Historical accuacy is met best by the Brengun flaps as you made quite clear. I do see your point about the extra work involved in getting them to sit right on the wings but I'm up for the task. I may be new to this forum but I'm an experianced model builder having gotten my start way back in 1967. Kind Regards, Tom
  10. I see, so being a new member I have no right to expect an answer is that it? Speaking of behavior yours is hardly welcoming. If it were me being a long time member I'd be incouraging to a new member as I have many times in the other web based and social media groups I belong to and those I administer.. Fortunately I finally got a good answer of which I am quite appreciative.
  11. Wouldn't it have been better if people put as much effort as your post and the others into creating their own threads about it? It takes all of two seconds and it's just simple politeness. All anyone need do in any such case is start their own thread with, "I saw such and such on someone else's thread and not to take anything away from their thread I started my discussion here." Not that hard is it? It's what happens in virtually every other web group I belong to. It's just that there have been six posts here by others none of which are in any way related to my question and now you're taking i
  12. So far my looking for answers in the forums is not off to a very good start. Six replies and not a one in answer to my question and most of them not even in any way related to my question. Color me disappointed.
  13. Gee, I hope somebody actually reads my question and answers it rather than hijacking my request for information about PE flaps into a thread about bomb color. Five replies and not a one in answer to what I was asking. .
  14. Thanks for the replies guys. I do appreciate the time you took to make them. However, my questions did not include if flaps were raised or not on the ground. I'll see if I can try Troy's suggestion and rename the thread to hopefully get the answers I'm looking for.
  • Create New...