Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Lower Silesia-Highlands, Poland

Recent Profile Visitors

1,667 profile views

DominikS's Achievements

Established Member

Established Member (3/9)



  1. Yes. New wings, new fuselage, new engine, new engine cowling, oil coolers...And probably some more. Cheers
  2. In that topic there is a photo of upgraded Mk.Ib. Although not very clear, you can see that it has same (or very similar) underwing cannon bulges as in Spitfire Mk.IIb offered by Eduard. And there are nice diagrams showing two types of underwing cannon bulges used on Mk.Vbs.
  3. Graham, I may be wrong, but the famous photo of No. 92 Squadron Spitfire Mk.Vb QJ-S shows upgraded Mk.Ib and underwing cannon bulges look the same (long, narrow vs kidney-like shape bulges on other known photos of Mk.Vbs).
  4. Their A6M2a (aka A6M2 Model 11 aka Reisen 11) is actually their A6M2b (aka Model 21, aka Reisen 21) with changed canopy. The prototype has some new parts (fuselage, engine and cowling) and some old.
  5. As I wrote earlier in other topic, I'm not sure the "B" wings are correct for all Mk.V. For early, yes. For late, don't know, rather not. Except for early Spitfires Mk.V (after changing from Mk.I), I haven't seen Spitfires Mk.Vb with the same bulges as given in the "Tally Ho!" box. But apart from this, almost all the parts are there. But, I think there should also metal seat option. I once read that Spitfires from Malta received metal seats after plastic ones started cracking during dive bombing. If we talk about bulges: 600d76f642f514b68f425255_SpitfireMkVsamplepages.pdf (webflow.com) (Only for discussion). The last photos show them
  6. Just a quick question about the underwing bulges in cannon armed Spitfires Mk.I and II. Were they the same? The option given by Eduard seems more like Spitfire Mk.I (known from the photos of QJ-S Spitfire Mk.I/V) than Mk.II. I might be wrong, but the Spitfire Mk.II which is in Canada has bulges which look more like those in the colour photo posted in the previous post.
  7. Only the Spitfire Mk.Vbs which were built as Cannon Spitfires Mk.I (the famous photos of Spitfire Mk.V QJ-S). Generally, don't trust Eduard with the information about Spitfires.
  8. As Tamiya is focused on RC models, and ground vehicles I don't think there will be any new aircraft. But I'm sure new tanks, armoured vehicles or racing cars will be there.
  9. I think I saw a photo of Mustandg Mk.III. But probably from Italy or the Balkans. But where did I see it...
  10. I received my Emils (two boxes) yesterday. I'm not a rivet counter but decided to match the kit fuselage to the plans I have (Kagero Monography). I don't know how accurate they are but the kit is a bit too long and some lines and shapes are different. But I think that after building it will look like Emil, so I'll build a few. The pinel lines are nice, much nicer and delicate than in case of P-40E/M/N. The only disadwantage is that we don't find any masks or PE parts, which at that price would be quite nice.
  11. According to Info Eduard, this model will be reboxed as ltd edition by Eduard in 2021.
  12. If I understood correctly, Eduard will release this model too. No dates given so we'll have to wait for their first news in January.
  13. Piotr, No-one wants to take anything from you (maybe apart from your credit card , just joking) but those holes should be called "rivets" not rivets. I wouldn't mind riveting if the rivets on models looked like rivets. As far as I remember, no company has ever made them look like rivets. They are all holes in the surface. I think only one person made them look like the real ones while building FW 190, methinks. So I think we should start call these holes "rivets" not rivets. And as I have said before, de gustibus... I don't like this feature on models, you like them. That's fine with me. I only wonder who made the forms. Eduard or some Chinese company. And I wonder if the engine cowling will fit ok. Happy modelling.
  14. What rivets? I can only see holes on the surface. I know that de gustibus non est disputandum, but lack of these holes doesn't make the model less interesting or more toyish. And I don't think you would see any rivets or panel lines if you scale down the real thing seventy-two times... On the other hand, it's annoying to recreate these "rivets" after correcting some issues or removing seam lines. EDIT. By the way, you can have same or better results without rivets or even panel lines, although the lines are quite helpful
  • Create New...