Test Graham Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Thanks Trevor. It should be 32ft 8in so that's less than 1mm in scale. This suggests to me that the error in the wing leading edge is providing most of the "too short" impression. So all you have to do is move the wing aft. Yeah. I feel that whereas model companies should get it right, an error of 1mm overall is understandable enough, and not discernable. Locally....maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 I believe you are referring to the Academy moulding, which does look like a Spitfire on Steroids... This is because of canopy and top fuselage being way wider than they should be... Fujimi high-back XIV looks good to me, if you assemble the top fillet correctly (flush with lower fuselage, without making a step)... I'm afraid not. The sliding canopy hood on the Fujimi XIV is far too bulbous, and significantly larger than any other manufacturer's hood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 I measured both the 72nd Airfix XIX and 22 using a caliper, lengths in inches, no spinner, no rudder: XIX Nose to FW 1.195 FW to rudder post 3.33 (about 2mm short) Nose to rudder post 4.54 22 Nose to FW 1.17 FW to rudder post 3.40 (spot on) Nose to rudder post 4.59 So the XIX nose is 1 mm longer than the 22, but the FW to rudder post is 2mm shorter. According to my 1977 Peter Cooke plans, the length for nose to rudder post should be 4.56" making each about a mm off. It appears a perfect fuselage would be a marriage of sorts. But a mm suits me fine. Nose to wing LE: XIX 0.82 22 0.86 Plans 0.90 So both have a short nose, consistent with the 22 fuselage, but the XIX appears noticeably shorter at 2 mm. Nose to FW: XIX 1.195 22 1.17 Plans 1.195 So while the cowling is right on the XIX, the too short fuselage and wing too far forward can make it look wrong. I'm also compiling some two stage Merlin kit measurements, but I still don't have good plans. Based on some standards, I believe none are long enough. For early Merlin Spitfires, only the Airfix Vb and their new I/IIa are correct in length FW to rudder post. But I have more measurements to make... Error is about .0025 +\-. I can reliably judge if the caliper is .00, .005, or .01, with rounding, but more accuracy would require a digital measure and more skill on my part. Tim 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 For good plans, you can't do better than Monforton. The Airfix Mk.IX fuselage appears to be spot on, and is indeed slightly longer than previous kits (Ventura, etc.... they are all longer than the Italeri!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Graham, you're right there's no Griffon measurement in Monforton's, must have got the measurement from somewhere else in that thread. Couldn't find the measurements of the various kits but found this picture in my photobucket archive: Here the Afx I is the old mould kit, that for a while had been considered the best shaped of all 1/72 spitfire kits. The IX and XIX are the newer mould. ACB XIV is the Aeroclub vacform fuselage meant to be used with the old Airfix Mk.V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Graham, The Montforton Press website is a bit sparse on details. What scale are the plans in the book, and frankly, is the book worth the price to get the plans, or would I be better served just getting the plans and the ebook separately? Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 (edited) The scales vary. The endplates are 1/48. Fuselage profiles are 1/35. Details such as cowling are 1/10. The plans shown on the site, I suspect, can only be a small subset of the detail included in the book - there is very little text and some of that misleading (Mk.IXb - pfui!). I have no experience of ebooks of this order of complexity, but it must be tempting to try, as much of the dimensions you'd be interested in are printed, either on the drawings or in tables and so can be read from a screen. How much this is worth is entirely up to you: how much of a Spitfire enthusiast are you? I don't think any genuine enthusiast interested in the aircraft's shape and dimensions can be without it. PS The Fujimi canopy is somewhat taller than others, but the main problem would seem to be the final segment rather than the sliding hood. I think it would be possible to fit it on other Spitfire kits without too much abuse, by sanding the lower edge and lowering the sills slightly, though perhaps replacing the final segment might still be necessary. Edited August 26, 2013 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 PS The Fujimi canopy is somewhat taller than others, but the main problem would seem to be the final segment rather than the sliding hood. I think it would be possible to fit it without too much abuse by lowering the sills slightly, and perhaps replacing the final segment. I have tried something of the sort with a sacrificial lamb. The rear windows (or whatever the proper term for them is) are definitely the initial problem, but I was unable to make a more normal-sized hood (from a Sword kit, I want to say) fit when I sawed off the old hood from the rear section. As the spine itself is modular, I suppose some clever fellow could make a corrected resin replacement that might resolve all of this, but until then, I plan on trying to see if the Falcon vacform for the kit corrects this. Fingers crossed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 How much this is worth is entirely up to you: how much of a Spitfire enthusiast are you? I don't think any genuine enthusiast interested in the aircraft's shape and dimensions can be without it. Thanks Graham, Well, I've little desire for inside details today, although that could change in the future. As en enthusiast I enjoy more the why and how, not the what, if that makes any sense. So for half the price I can get a set of drawings and an ebook. Although books are the future, today they don't print well; nirvana is the ability to print a page (a profile, or plan view) and at the desired scale. Value for money seems to be the book, today. So I'll get the book, thanks again. Tim PS. A rather circuitous route to the decision... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Just picked up SH's Mk.21. Looks like a lovely kit and oodles of spares since the bits sprues are common to the 21/22/24 and 45/46/47. Especially the extra rudders (5 included) and props (three sets of blades, two for the 5-blade units plus a contra plus 1 5 blade spinner and 1 contra spinner). It also comes with all 3 canopy variations (highback, both lowback variations) If you get the SH Seafire 46, you get a spare fuselage as well as all the rest - find a 20 series wing and some radiators and I guess you'd have enough for a complete kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Maas Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 If you get the SH Seafire 46, you get a spare fuselage as well as all the rest - find a 20 series wing and some radiators and I guess you'd have enough for a complete kit. I've got a Rareplanes Mk47 in the stash as well as an Airfix 22, so the spares are pretty much spoken for (the 22 will become a 46, the 47 will get most of the remaining bits as replacement for Vac details). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 Be aware that the Rareplanes 47 was apparently underscale, not to mention lack of gull wing underneath. Be better to use the 47 as a pattern to convert the Airfix 22. It'd also give you the deeper nose cowling. Also, I think the contraprop on the SH Spits/Seafires is too small in diameter. Certainly smaller than the CMR and Aeroclub examples I compared it to. The one in the AZ Griffon spits is better but a pain to clean up and fiddly to assemble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael51 Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 So, if the two 1/72 Spitfire VB choices readily available in my part of the World were Revell's and Tamiya's, which one would forum members consider the better in terms of accuracy? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnAndersen Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 3 hours ago, Michael51 said: So, if the two 1/72 Spitfire VB choices readily available in my part of the World were Revell's and Tamiya's, which one would forum members consider the better in terms of accuracy? Michael If the Revell kit is the one without scallops under the fuselage, then it's Tamiya. The Tamiya could use a replacement canopy, though. It does not look right. HTH Finn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 The Tamiya kit does not need just a better canopy, but fuselage and wings too. Many people don't notice... You don't have to. No personal knowledge of the Revell unless it still is the now elderly one. However I'm sure that you could (for example) get an AZ kit posted to Denmark which would be better than either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnAndersen Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 1 hour ago, Graham Boak said: The Tamiya kit does not need just a better canopy, but fuselage and wings too. Many people don't notice... You don't have to. No personal knowledge of the Revell unless it still is the now elderly one. However I'm sure that you could (for example) get an AZ kit posted to Denmark which would be better than either. Michael lives in Australia and wants to choose between what is available there. Agree that the AZ is a better kit, dimension wise. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 Restricting modelling to what is locally available is pretty restrictive. If I can get resin tanks from Australia, then Australians can get plastic kits from Europe. Current COVID restrictions possibly accepted. The AZ it is a little short in span but looks more like a Spitfire. The Tamiya will fit together the best, and the Revell one from the 90s is OK if you can live with a flat bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 If you mean the most recent 1/72 Revell kit, the answer is not easy,,.. in terms of basic shape it looks quite nice overall. What however are not nice at all are several very visible parts like the canopy and the radiators. These IMHO totally spoil the overall result, making this kit not very good from the box. Radiators and canopy can of course be replaced but while the radiators are easy enough the canopy is not as finding one that fits seems impossible. I tried the ones in the Falcon set and they don't fit, maybe others will but I've given up trying. Have to say that other less visible parts would be better replaced... this is a kit that does not live up to the expectations. In addition to the poor accuracy of certain parts, mould finesse is not great and fit not good. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael51 Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 6 hours ago, Graham Boak said: Restricting modelling to what is locally available is pretty restrictive. If I can get resin tanks from Australia, then Australians can get plastic kits from Europe. Current COVID restrictions possibly accepted. The AZ it is a little short in span but looks more like a Spitfire. The Tamiya will fit together the best, and the Revell one from the 90s is OK if you can live with a flat bottom. Graham, Thank you for your advice. I am not sure you are getting the point: Not 'available' but 'readily available'. I applaud your procurement of resin tanks from our sunburnt shores but as FinnAnderson pointed out, it is somewhat a little further down the track than Denmark. We all deserve to give and receive kindness, MIchael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael louey Posted August 25, 2020 Share Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) Hi Michael, I'm in Melbourne too and I think I've seen the KP Spitfire Vb around - https://www.scalemates.com/kits/kp-kovozavody-prost-jov-kpm0074-spitfire-mkvb--1020635 It's had reasonable reviews but haven't got one myself. I think I might have seen it at Gundam Plus and/or Metro Hobbies. There is a seller with some on ebay currently - https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-72-WW2-Fighter-Supermarine-Spitfire-Mk-Vb-Early-aces-RAF-KP/263766758688 https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-72-WW2-Fighter-Supermarine-Spitfire-Mk-Vb-Early-RAF-KP/263878065744?hash=item3d705bbe50:g:VAkAAOSwdm1bKLuR&frcectupt=true Cheers Michael Edited August 25, 2020 by Michael louey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael51 Posted August 26, 2020 Share Posted August 26, 2020 2 hours ago, Michael louey said: Hi Michael, I'm in Melbourne too and I think I've seen the KP Spitfire Vb around - https://www.scalemates.com/kits/kp-kovozavody-prost-jov-kpm0074-spitfire-mkvb--1020635 It's had reasonable reviews but haven't got one myself. I think I might have seen it at Gundam Plus and/or Metro Hobbies. There is a seller with some on ebay currently - https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-72-WW2-Fighter-Supermarine-Spitfire-Mk-Vb-Early-aces-RAF-KP/263766758688 https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-72-WW2-Fighter-Supermarine-Spitfire-Mk-Vb-Early-RAF-KP/263878065744?hash=item3d705bbe50:g:VAkAAOSwdm1bKLuR&frcectupt=true Cheers Michael Hi Michael, Thank you very much for your help. I just bought it. Brilliant! Regards, Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now