gingerbob

I'm imagining one of those flow-charts: Company hasn't done it... yet? 109 G-6. in this scale? 109 G-6 in the last 10 years? 109 G-6 with state of the art [insert esoteric and little-noticed detail here]? 109 G-6 without some math error that caused a dimensional problem? 109 G-6 (or, paraphrasing the infamous Cheese Shop: "It's the single most popular kit subject in the world!" "Not round here, mate." "No? And what would be the most popular round here?" "Spitfire Mk.IX, sir. It's terrifically popular."

My earlier comment blew by and receded in the rear view mirror... I do find all this hand-wringing about a leak a bit amusing, considering that we're on "Rumourmonger". 🤐 And as for the whining about whining, remember, apparently the only acceptable comments are, "Gee, how wonderful!" or the Texas-style "Bless their hearts."

Hey, you can make whatever engine sounds you want while you fly it around the house!

It could just as easily be any other Mk.IX on the squadron. (However, we might be able to cross-reference from the logbook.)

Star Trek: The Musical? "The holodeck is alive, with the sound of Klingons..." btw, I think that puppet show may be my favorite part of the movie. Now I'm wishing I'd cast my original votes in a way that allowed me to pull the rug out from some by changing! Come to think of it, I didn't use all my allotted votes, so I suppose I could still mess with some. But dull knives hurt more, assuming you haven't got a spoon to work with...

Funnily enough, when I just clicked the link on the prior page (Wonderland) I get a 404 Error. Perhaps someone realized their mistake. And before we all pile on to Wonderland, which is more the spoiler- their putting it up, or us immediately pasting said information on this thread? Pot? Kettle? I mean, I could do a Finnish one, but this does fall into the "shrug" category for me. Seriously, I don't WANT to get into 1/24th scale (let alone 1/35, when there's a perfectly well represented 1/32 already) so I'm OK with this.

Yeah, I feel much the same, Pat. I'm well prepared to greet the imminent announcement with a shrug (and a little bit of relief). I just hope it isn't, like some of Airfix's hyped up announcements, just barely worthy of being considered a NEW release. New tooling! Yeah, we put a few new parts in... As a Spitfire obsessive, you'd have thought that I'd be all excited about the last 1/24th subject. But I saw one built up at a show and concluded that, other than being somewhat larger, it really didn't offer anything that I wouldn't get from a 32nd Spit. Funny, Gladiator keeps getting mentioned. THAT I would be forced to go for, since my 1/72, 1/48, and 1/32 examples clearly aren't sufficient...

(Note that I have added some comments/corrections in my first post) An additional thought: 130 Squadron took their Mk.IXs to Norway in June '45, with another squadron. There was some photo (press) coverage of this "deployment", so that's a good place to start in looking for images. bob

Shirley III would have been a XIV (high back, with 'c' armament configuration). EDIT: Now that I've looked at the photos in your linked post, Shirley may well have been a XIVe, rather than 'c'. (cannon in outer of the two positions, rather than the inner). I don't know that 'A' was the aircraft he flew back to the UK, or it might not have been so coded yet- note that he only identifies the individual letter on the 22nd. The IXs came from Canadian squadrons 401, 411, and 412, and they only took possession before heading back "home". In fact, the anonymous IX he flew in to Fassberg from Celle appears to have been a late arrival. Perhaps (if it was the same aircraft) it was already suffering some engine troubles? Since there was a mix of previous units, it can't be assumed that the individual letter carried over from the prior squadron's use (sometimes that helps identify letter/serial tie-ups). Note that the low-back APoA (TE215) shown in your linked post did not join 130 Squadron until Feb 1946, so this is not the 'A' you're looking for! I might possibly be able to find a bit more, but wouldn't bet on it! bob

It was hosted by Imgur, which is why you can't see it. I'm in the USA, and so am able to see it. Edit: oops, how rude- Andy, great news!

See, nothing to it! Congratulations- it looks very nice indeed. bob

That's a warbird, and not in PRU Pink. I didn't know about Mountbatten pink, so thanks!

Air Fighting Development Unit!

My favorite, when I was doing phone customer service for a company that sold (among other things) clothing, was, "Would this color look good on me?"

Technically it is a door to clear the flap actuating linkage. I just caught up on your progress, after quite a while. Looking good, but I can't decide whether I'm now more, or less, inspired to build one of my stack of these kits! bob