Troy Smith

according to this, (though @NAVY870 will know for sure) https://www.neomega-resin.com/raf--rn-aircraft-104-c.asp the Venom FB4 has a Martin baker Mk.2 seat http://martin-baker.com/products/mk2-ejection-seat/ though a google will show up more. The blue straps are so you don't mix up parachute and seat straps which could be unfortunate.... and this is well worth a read, about what would be in an operational seat Which may or may not help.....?

sorry, crossed wires I thin The underwing is the type C, 32 inch, as shown on the drawing, same as the fuselage minus the yellow ring, which is 36 inches total width. Fin flash better, no camo Dark Earth under the tailplane,(it's shadow and dust in the above) the U is too small, the roundel is 36 inch, so use that to size, the serial is too thin, too far forward and too low down. The serial is 8 inch, and details of position are in the camo drawings I posted. The roundel maybe a tiny bit too small. Can you not use the colour pic and 'map' it onto the below for the sizing? The picture is very evocative, I've been looking at Hurricane pics since I was child, so little detail jump out at me. HTH

Hi Fernando a scan from The Official Monogram US Navy & Marine Corps Aircraft Color guide, Vol.2, Note ANA 610 Sky. I don't know that ANA 613 OD and ANA 603 Sea Gray would show up that differently, and depends how they fade, and the film/filter used. . This would be easier if you could post the relevant picture... There is the photo, likely taken in Ceylon FAA Grumman Martlet, Burma? by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr Note comment in link by @85sqn IF the above is a Wildcat V, then note the OD is lighter the the Sea Gray. @iang may know the history of the above photo? also, perhaps @Bruce Archer maybe able to add a little. HTH

Depends when built. If you look up the serial here http://www.airhistory.org.uk/spitfire/production.html This will give you a date, and some other info, and useful if you are doing other Spitfires as well. All the Spitfire photos above are from here BTW, http://flickr.com/search/?w=8270787@N07&q=spitfire @Etiennedup fantastically useful Flickr of WW2 colour images.

This is actually a broader questions about internal colours. At some point in 1943 there was a change of internal colours. Up till then, all the interior APART from the cockpit was to be aluminium paint (or dope) AFAIK, the aluminium paint starts behind the seat, as only the cockpit was specified to be Grey Green. All the interior includes the inside of the flaps and inner leg part of wheel well,(not visible when UC retracted) the wheel part is external, (visible when wheel retracted) and is the underside colour. After 1943 there was a switch, and all interior areas were Grey Green. @anj4de For the Mk.18 you are planning, all Grey Green. Examples Mk.IX in 1943, aluminium oil tank Mk.VIII in italy in 44, Note aluminium oil tank and engine bearers late mk.IX, note oil tank and engine bearers are Grey Green. Spitfire Mk. IIA, 1941. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr if you enlarge this, you can see the Grey Green armour plate, and aluminium frame at rear of canopy Spitfire Mk.V cockpit. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr note aluminium painted bar at top of canopy Spitfire cockpit, 1943. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr same again HTH

Taken over Brooklands in 1939, pre war.

They got 3 ex-Yugoslav planes, which had fabric wings. Romania got 12 Hurricanes from the UK, numbered 1-12, the ex Yugoslav were 13-15, and had the Yugoslav camo pattern. (details in Romanian Fighter Colours) There have been threads on Yugoslav Hurricanes with detail of camo and markings if you need them @wombat Is it possible to have a link to the publishers or more information. Assume the book is in Serbian? Are there many photos? EDIT this one? http://leadenskybooks.com/hawker-the-yugoslav-story 42 euro posted it seems. Have to see if the Aviation Bookshop are going to stock it, cheers T

good idea, though I'd just go for scribing in the new lines did the copy of Alfred Price - the Spitfire Story ever materialise? Just it has plans is all. I scanned and rescaled them, so could use them as template My "intention" if i ever get around to this would be to use a Spitfire kit with raised panel lines, as then it's just sand them off and scribe away. (most likely the old Airfix Vb, yes, the bulges need dealing with but once done the detail is easy to remove, I have done this for another stalled project.... ) A good scriber BTW is a medium sewing needle in a pin vice, and it helps to use it to mark in the line ends with a little indent first, and then join up the dots. If using the template paper idea, you can just dot on the line ends by pricking through the paper laid over the wing.... I theorise at least. The other would be to get some metal vernier calipers, eg https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/6-150MM-STEEL-SLIDING-CALIPER-VERNIER-MEASURING-GAUGE-DEPTH-HEIGHT-TOOL-NEW/292549986063 if ypu use the proges on the right, they are sharp, well mine are, and they can be used to dot out measurements, and it's a handy tool to have for modelling work in general, and for £3.50 posted, a bargain. Digital ones are easier to read, but metal ones are like this are solid, and don't need batteries ...a tool that has multiple uses HTH T

the prototype is often referred to as having a clinker built wing.

are they your personalised plates as well

Is that the only one in the kit? If not,, this maybe a spare, perhaps this is for an E wing?

Yep. EDIT the below was written on the assumption you wanted the pictures error checking for detail, as they are digital and editable files, if not, my apologies. are you working from photos? The fin flashes are wrong on both. the fuselage roundel looks too far back on both the underwing roundel on V/KL293 is too big as I so often post, read this https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Modeling-References/Camoflage-Markings/03-Hawker-Hurricane Does not cover MTO, but the marking placement and size are the same on all schemes, for the above look at the detail marked after May 1942 note also there is a formula for wing roundel position, roundel centre is 1/3 of span in from tip, with a 2 inch gap either side of leading edge and trailing edge, not going over control surfaces. Hurricane 40ft span, or 480 inches, from centreline 240 inches, /3 = 80 inch, note dimension above. the Dark Earth on the IID look too dark. this is HV663/U Hurricane Mk II d . by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr the cam pattern is wrong on the rear fuselage/tail, the pattern is the mirror of the one shown above. This is the factory pattern. Note also the red spinner, MTO theatre marking. Possibly these have orange roundel centres as a SAAF sq. Note 'font' of HV633 'S' has a replacement panel by the roundel. the pattern of exhaust stains is wrong. It's very distinctive. Hurricane 1944. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr Camo pattern on tail/rear of KL293/V is wrong, again, compare. You have both sides of the pattern in the images above from here https://www.flickr.com/search/?w=8270787@N07&q=hurricane while a Spitfire, this is excellent for showing faded vs new touch up paint, look at the 'AN' area RCAF Spitfire V, 1943. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr the above photos are good for the actual colours as well IMO. I might add in an edit, but the above covers everything that I can see so far. HTH

tricky assessment Ray. I know that the Hase Stuka was in part derived from measurements of the Stuka that was at Hendon, as a chap from my model club and ex model shop owner talked about climbing over it to do this. One suggestion, lay the Italeri and airfix over a squared up cutting mat or graph paper, and if possible, add some actual measurements, so better comparisons with the Hase can be made. If/when I get chance I'll dig out a hase Stuka, I have both B and D models stashed, as well as old and new tool Airfix, and a broken down Monogram G. AFAIK Airfix still have a lot of their older research (ie pre 81 ) and they did do a 1/24th Stuka then, (which I also have the remains of) The Classic publications Stuak book has drawing from the Ju87 manual, and that listed the D as being 11 m. (Book, like Hase kits, not too hand) but 11.10 m, 10 cm is 4 inches, and this could easily be due to a longer spinner. re the Italeri this image link broke in a linked thread, but this may help, I tried to find a similar angle shot, and note there looks to be a difference in length between firewall and windscreen visible. And how awful the Italeri B spinner is.... Comparisons with the B model kits would be good too. I'd get the Italeri kits if I found them cheap, but only then, and they tend to be expensive new in the UK, so even at a discount, are still more than I'm prepared to pay (which isn't much TBH) HTH

same was found in reality, and they were then done in "India White" quoted as being 5 parts white to one part roundel blue... EDIT - for clarity, they were initially white, and then the toned version was used when found too bright. I can see the above is not as clear as it should be! this info is online. Tip, many kits have their instructions as .pdf's up on Scalemates.

Really? Did you read the post I linked? Seen a fair few built, some have had issues, others report no problems. This to me implies user induced error in some cases. I lament that Airfix seems to use a cheaper moulder in India, as well as the plastic type, which seem to be the limiting factor on finesse, but 'absolute dog' is into the realm of hyperbole, and lacks perspective. If Tamiya and Eduard are A grade, yes, Airfix seem to be in the B category in some areas, but then if you want a mk.XIV Spitfire in 1/48th, there is this, Academy, or Hobbycraft, or conversions. They are moulded in India. Mould made in China IIRC. Central and Eastern Europe I don't think are as cheap as you might think, but then I doubt either Zvezda or Eduard are saddled with being part of Hornby and all that entails. Airifx have suffered from the albatross of inherited debt and beancounter limits since they went bust the first time in 1981, as even then the kit division always made money. Nowadays they are a small, but profitable part of a larger group in debt, and I suspect the creative part of Airfix is rather put out to say the least by the financial constraints and lack of quality control. I think they are doing well on the right subjects, and to contrast, they do seek modeller and subject matter expert opinion, @Sabrejet was consulted on their new Sabre kit for example. And they are getting more hits than misses on the 1/48th subject recently.