Graham Boak Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 (edited) That's ok for wing/armament type until the introduction of the e, so any of the books giving a full mark/serial listing will do that. Spitfire The History is the obvious. The wing tips are another matter. Yes for the high altitude tips on the Mk.VI and VII, but early VIIIs also had them and they were removable. They were removed on some Mk.VIIs and VIIIs. Mk.XIIs were clipped but in all other cases it was a choice made at the time and could be changed in service. I don't think there were many, if any, late Mk.XVIs with other than clipped, but there's no definition of "late". Given your level of interest, I don't think that you can do without Spitfire The History. Edited February 15, 2015 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean_M Posted February 18, 2015 Author Share Posted February 18, 2015 I was graciously given a copy of an image of Malan standing by ZP-A. A lot of referances depict the letter as a big ZA small A on the starboard side and the reverse on the port side. Looking at the panel lines in this photo the height seems uniform I have put the link in here to the file on my server rather than imbed it - its 1.2MB in zize SailorMalanZPA.jpg would anyone like to comment on what size they think the letters are/and should be? Thanks Sean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Knight Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 24 inch A, 30 inch P A man's elbow to finger tip is about 18 inches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 (edited) Likeliest is 20", allowing for perspective distortion. Due to the slim fuselage, Spitfire Squadrons had a special dispensation to use smaller letters than originally ordered by the Air Ministry. With the hood open, there was not enough space, between the bottom line of the hood and the top line of the wingroot fairing, to fit the decreed 24" letters, so they were allowed to use 20". Edited February 18, 2015 by Edgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardPrice Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 I was graciously given a copy of an image of Malan standing by ZP-A. A lot of referances depict the letter as a big ZA small A on the starboard side and the reverse on the port side. Looking at the panel lines in this photo the height seems uniform I have put the link in here to the file on my server rather than imbed it - its 1.2MB in zize SailorMalanZPA.jpg would anyone like to comment on what size they think the letters are/and should be? Thanks Sean Off the back of that photo, how common was it to have the mirror on the inside of the windscreen? Was it a pilot option or were they just stuck with what they got? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean_M Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 Off the back of that photo, how common was it to have the mirror on the inside of the windscreen? Was it a pilot option or were they just stuck with what they got? I believe that it was common for Hornchurch Spitfires to have mirrors mounted internally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Supermarine didn't start to fit mirrors until 24-9-40; if, as seems likely, that's a mirror "borrowed" from a car showroom, it would have been fitted as the pilot requested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles87 Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Having just seen Edgar's diagram in post 864, am I right in assuming that the emergency undercarriage lowering system was fitted to all marks including early Mk1s? I am at the pre-pre-planning stage for my BoB group build Spitfire and would like to get it right. TIA John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Seems likely, since it appears in issue 1 of the A.P., dated June 1938, and it's just visible in the only photo I have of K5054's cockpit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles87 Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Thanks Edgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles87 Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 One more please. On the starboard cockpit wall of MH434, just behind the bracket for the spare gunsight bulbs is something which looks like the landing light control fitted to early Spitfires. Can anyone tell me what it is please. TIA John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean_M Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 24 inch A, 30 inch P A man's elbow to finger tip is about 18 inches Why would they have gone bigger if 24inch was the standard? I can understand the need to go 24inch and then use a 20inch. Not disputing your calcs. In fact the decal sheet support you. Having had another look zoomed in I think the Z is the same size as the a as it touches the panel lines. I am guessing 30" P 24"Z and A on the starboard side. This is based on the photo 24" ZP on the Port side Just fit. The A places about the same are as the P so my best guess would be 30" A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Why would they have gone bigger if 24inch was the standard? I can understand the need to go 24inch and then use a 20inch. Not disputing your calcs. In fact the decal sheet support you. 24 inch was a later specification, the initial specification was for 48 inch letters [ 4 ft, or about 120 cm] which didn't fit on fighters sides, but is the reason that 32 sq Hurricanes had those 40 inch high codes, and part of the reason codes varied so much.. Hmm, OK, dug out the 'British Aviation colours of WW2' book. 1939 orders state, Code letters to be painted 48 inch high with 6 inch strokes, Smaller letters are to be used when the space on the fuselage makes such a course unavoidable. Cue chaos.... HTH T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmsphoto Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 What do you need to convert a spitfire mkIxc to Ixb? Many thanks Graeme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Rogers Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 MkIXb isn't really an official designation, it's an early MkIXc. If you take an early MkIXc, like Johnny Johnsons JE-J, EN398, it's an early MkIXc with a small air intake, early rudder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmsphoto Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Could you build it from the Tamiya 1/32 ixc? Many thanks Graeme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Rogers Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 I don't have the Tamiya 1/32 kit (yet) but as it has EN398 as an option, I'd have to conclude yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmsphoto Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 (edited) On the starboard cockpit wall of MH434, just behind the bracket for the spare gunsight bulbs is something which looks like the landing light control fitted to early Spitfires. Can anyone tell me what it is please. Edited February 22, 2015 by Edgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles87 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Thanks for the photo Edgar, the device I was looking at is just out of shot, the other side of the bracket next to the signal switchbox. I have now identified it as the fuel hand pump. Was this always in the same position because I havn't seen it in many pictures of Mk IXs? Thanks again John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Maybe, then, it's the wobble pump (it's real name, honestly,) which was only fitted to IXs with the Merlin 66 or 70 (and not all of them, according to the A.P.) I've changed the photo to an illustration, which might give the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles87 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 That's definitely it, and also explained why it's not seen in many photos, all I have to do now is make one for my MH434. Cheers John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark12 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) PART I—DESCRIPTIVE and the pressurising control (50) is below the right-hand side of the instrument panel. The cock control (58) and jettison lever (59) for the auxiliary drop tank are mounted together on the right-hand side of the cockpit, below the undercarriage control unit. The jettison lever is pulled up to jettison the drop tank, but cannot be operated until the cock control is moved forward to the OFF position. The cock forthe rear fuselage tanks (when fitted) is to the left of the seat. 4 Fuel pumps .—On Bendix-Stromberg carburettor installations an electric booster pump, operated by a switch on the left-hand side of the cockpit, is fitted in the lower main tank. On early aircraft this pump is not fitted, but a hand wobble pump is provided instead, just forward of the remote contactor. NOTE .—On aircraft which have rear fuselage tanks a second pump is fitted (in the lower rear tank) and the control switch described above then has three positions. 5. Edited February 23, 2015 by Mark12 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Cornes Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 A nice and easy question regarding Spitfire paintwork. For both an HFVII and a PRXI finished with PRU blue undersides, what colour are the undercarriage bays and inside of the gear doors. I would say PRU blue, as in 'the same as the rest of the underside' but I'm not sure. Many thanks Simon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky Pilot Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Does any one here have experience in using the Miracle Masks products ? Opinions would be appreciated. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts