Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gingerbob

  • Birthday 03/20/1965

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Bucksport Maine USA

Recent Profile Visitors

5,016 profile views

gingerbob's Achievements

Completely Obsessed Member

Completely Obsessed Member (6/9)



  1. @Troy Smith anything to add- besides admonishing on the vague title?
  2. I probably shouldn't do this, but I just got a vague memory that early ones had a jettisonable cover plate over the camera ports. I may be thinking of some scrap of fact that really fits somewhere else...
  3. Welcome to the wonderful world of Spitfire (and of course Seafire) evolution- and Spitfire model mixing and matching.
  4. Maybe spares from an Eduard kit? Lifelike made a couple of sheets, not sure offhand how many wartime examples are on them.
  5. That is just... weird. And in some strange way, works! bob p.s. I immediately starting thinking about a single-seater, with "modernized" canopy, etc...
  6. Nice job! I wonder if it might be easier to use this kit as a conversion for another Draken kit? I have to say that the two-seater isn't the most aesthetically pleasing one I've seen, but that's not your fault.
  7. It just makes me wonder how often people actually SEE these topics! (I usually find these new features by accident, or someone mentions them in a thread I'm reading.) bob
  8. Another possible interpretation is that the "covered items on bomb trollies" were factual, but were to give the impression of nuclear weapons to prying eyes.
  9. Vb is pretty much already done, considering the IIb.
  10. The 'c' wing is a new and improved design, with different armament bays (including one re-positioned machine gun), gear legs mounted at a different angle, and different gear doors. So you need to know beforehand whether you intend to do a Vb or a Vc. I'll let others argue the merits of kits.
  11. I think that this "explanation" in Spitfire the History is a jumble of various PR Spitfire "facts". In particular, the part about wing tanks makes me think that they're really talking- at least in that case- about the handful of "PR.IX" conversions, which were at one time intended to be more numerous. PR.Xs were built as such, though always intended as a special-case limited batch, and the fuselage was based on the pressurised (F) Mk.VII. The question of fuel pump blisters is an interesting one. On the PR.XI, these came with the higher altitude rated Merlin 70. Spit the Hist (p.392) says "By March 1944 only four Mk.XIs with Merlin 60 series engines were awaiting delivery and the first of the Merlin 70 series was about to be delivered." [And it was indeed March that full transition to Merlin 70 was made for the PR.XI, per Vickers' production data.] The PR.Xs were delivered in April/May, and p.395 says that the PR.X had the Merlin 64, which was the type used by the Mk.VII, though some late ones may have had Merlin 71s (the equivalent to Merlin 70 but with drive for cabin pressure pump). bob p.s. The PR.X had the same "clear bits" as the F.VII, so if you're not sure if the photo you're looking at is a PR.X or XI, that's a strong indicator.
  12. I'm honestly just winging it, so don't pay too much attention, but... Didn't "service types" tend to stay in their normal operational colours? For one thing, you never know when it/they might need to be pressed into more aggressive use.
  13. Sorry Jure, but that's a modified Warbird, and cannot be taken as at all representative of a true NA-50/68.
  14. Yes, it is an 'e', based on both the photograph and when it was built.
  • Create New...