All The spitfire questions you want to ask here

[Troy Smith]

Are the leading edge gun covers solid red- I have seen a few with black centres but am assuming rightly or wrongly that this is to depict where the guns have been fired through them. Could someone please help..

The edge covers were doped fabric, paper or basically, elasoplast. black holes, cover shot away yes. They have been seen done with blue dope as well, maybe yellow,

There is film of this in the Czech Spitfires film linked here on youtube - http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234958555-colour-czech-spitfire-film-on-you-tube/

Also- I take it, it should be thoretically possible to mate an Eduard MkIX wing with an Airfix MkVc?

yes, but why? the IX wing has the twin symmetrical radiators. The Airfix Vc is the old Vb kit with slightly retooled [for the rads] IX wing. The Vb Fuselage is fine raised panel lines. Has a high thrust line and so too big a spinner.

Airfix are planning a new Vb kit in the summer. Could be good if they carry one from their XIX success.

[Alan Kelley]

I have an old kit in my stash that the wings are ruined on- used it as a test bed for airbrushing.

I wouldnt mind building it as a weathering test bed, using the spare wings from my Eduard Royal Class boxing.

[Edgar]

The covers were just pre-coloured fabric, with clear dope added after application; if they'd been doped prior to use, they'd have been like stiff little pieces of hardboard, making them murder to bend round the curved l/e, with the added danger that some could flake off, inside, and get into the guns.

There's a photo of a Beaufighter (in Malta,) where it's plain to see that the fabric has had red dope slapped onto it (and the surrounding airframe,) but how many other photos can you find, where the red overlaps the edges of the fabric? I doubt that the armourer would have had the time (or the desire) to paint each square in such a precise manner that they never went off the edges.

On Key Publishing's forum, a few months ago, a contributor found some left-over "covers," which had been used on Spitfires before mid-1940; they are metal circles, with clips inside, which appear to have just clipped onto the gun muzzles. As they were a "once-only" item, it's fairly easy to see how they might, at times, have been in short supply, so armourers had to make do with newspaper or sticking plasters, and why they soon gave way to the fabric patches.

With regard to the gas warning indicator patch applied to the upper surface of the Spitfire wing, was it applied to the left side only or either side

Sorry, but I just don't know; I believe they were only used in one place, where a pilot could easily see them, but, being paper, one doubts whether they had much long-lasting ability. Gibson said that, when tested, they often didn't work, which hints at their fairly rapid abandonment, at least in this country.

Edgar

[atvd1020]

What are the differences between the PR Mark X and Mark XI?

[gingerbob]

When first planning a 2-stage Merlin PR Spit, pressurization was desired, as with the fighter Mk.VII. The designation PR.Mk.X was accordingly reserved for this. But rather than wait for the pressurization, un-pressurized ones were accepted (the PR.XI). It probably helped that a pressurized PR Mosquito was becoming available- and indeed there was some question whether PR Spitfires would still be required in the future.

The PR.XI was, essentially, a "Mk.IX'ed" PR.IV. In other words, it was the evolution of the production PR type, incorporating the changes necessary to fit the Merlin 61-series engine. It did, however, include the new retractable-tailwheel tail section after the first few, which was a Supermarine-wide shift (as with Spit Mk.XII). (It retained the frameless PR windscreen.)

When the call later came for some pressurized PR Spits as an urgent need, Supermarine used F.VII fuselage structure as the most expedient way to achieve this. (To convert the fighter fuselage to PR rather than pressurize the PR fuselage.) It retained the fighter (Mk.VII type) windscreen and hood, and also had the larger wing-attach bolts of the VII/VIII. Supermarine suggested dusting off the "PR.X" designation since that had been meant for a pressurized 2-stage Merlin PR type all along.

At the same time, some Griffon-powered (unpressurized) airframes were asked for, for maximum "medium-altitude" performance, and Supermarine asked that it be called the (PR) Mk.XIX, presumably to associate it with the 20-series Griffon fighter Spitfires. Even though this same request had been rejected for the "interim" Griffon fighter, which was instead to receive the next number in line at the time (XIV), this time the Air Min accepted Supermarine's suggestion.

The decision was made to develop a pressurized Griffon-powered airframe to replace the PR.XI as the standard (Spitfire) PR type, and Supermarine recommended keeping the same PR.XIX designation for this. (It was assumed that a PR 20-series and/or PR Spiteful would eventually follow, but Supermarine argued that there was no real advantage to the former, versus the PR.XIX.)

bob

Edited April 8, 2014 by gingerbob

[atvd1020]

Thanks a lot gingerbob, that cleared up things for me!

Edited April 8, 2014 by atvd1020

[derek burton]

Edgar ,

Just a quick one ref the upward firing recognition device, where did the opening for the downward firing device sit.

Thank you in advance

Dek.

[Edgar]

[derek burton]

Cheers Edgar,

That was swift, can we take it that the cover was"probablly" a red doped patch as for the upward version?

Dek.

[Edgar]

It's possible, but Supermarine didn't start to fit it until mid-June 1940, and repositioned it at the beginning of April 1941. It's possible that they used a "cover," as originally used on the wings' leading edges, and, thanks to a member of a different site, I now know what they looked like; it's also possible to see them, on early airframes (once you know what you're looking for. ) They were metal, and, if painted silver or Sky, would be invisible in photos.

Edgar

[derek burton]

Cheers Edgar,

Dek.

[derek burton]

Gun ports, was the area around the port painted red, then patches applied it looks like this in some photos of early aircraft In A,Prices books.

Cheers I advance Dek.

[Mr T]

Hi Dek,

My understanding is that the fabric patches were applied and doped in place using the dope that was used to make the fabric taut and protect it from UV light and it was a brick red colour. I am not sure if the dope was applied and then the patch put on and another layer of dope was applied over the top. I am sure Edgar will be along and correct me if I have not got it quite right.

Martin

[Edgar]

As far as I can tell, the fabric was pre-coloured (which is probably why you'll see white - U.S.- and blue - S.A.A.F.) then clear doped after application. Apart from a very rough "patch" on a Malta Beaufighter, I've never seen anything but perfectly neat squares, and I don't believe that all armourers were that neat, with every application of a paintbrush.

There's a photo, of a Mk.II, which shows a dark area, all along the wings' leading edges, which is what makes me think clear dope was more likely.

Found it:-

Edgar

Edited May 7, 2014 by Edgar

[derek burton]

I have found the page with pics on its p75 in the spitfire story.

Dek.

[Edgar]

It's possible those photos pre-date the patches; Supermarine date their arrival as 24-9-40, though there's a suspicion that they might have been playing catch-up with units who had given up on "covers," and found something easier to use.
The photo below is of what is reckoned to be the early "cover," which appears to have simply clipped into the gun tunnel. Whether that's rust, or red paint, I've no idea:-

Edgar

[P.o Prune]

Anyone have any pictures / drawings of the Browning .303 machinegun used on the Spitfire?
I'm also looking for pictures or drawings of the installment and feeding system (Ammo boxex etc)

[Max Headroom]

This may be of use

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15652440

Trevor

[P.o Prune]

This may be of use

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15652440

Trevor

Thanks it helped some. I will have to make the guns and installments from scratch so I need all the details I can lay my greedy hands on ;-)

[Wolwe82]

Hey guys, i have one question but i dont know if i should ask here (dont want to bring OT to this thread).

Well anyway, here is the thing. I got the Eduard´s late IX boxing and i was thinking, would it be too hard to make VIII out of the IX kit? Would it need some major cuts to the airframe?

Thanks for any info guys

[picard]

Hi everyone,

This is a really stupid question, after reading this wonderful technical thread, so I just hope this is in the right place?

I'm now 53, and have not built a Spitfire since I was around 12, so had a very nice surprise to be given the 1/72 Airfix MK1 A starter set for my birthday this year. A lovely little kit indeed except for no stencils and the canopies moulded as a singe unit.

To cut a long story short, I opened the door, installed the wonderful Eduard cockpit, then separated the glazing only to find the main canopy not even close to going on it's runners. Bugger! (plus a small crack! to boot) I followed the brilliant duel Spit build here with the Airfix and Italeri kits, but cannot find the Italeri Mk1/2 any where online at present?

Any advice on a 1/72 scale Spit MK1/2 with a decent three piece canopy moulding and stencils would be most welcome? Or would the Itateri MK5 work just as well?

How's that for a stupid Spitfire question? Any help gratefully received.

Cheers

[Max Headroom]

Hey guys, i have one question but i dont know if i should ask here (dont want to bring OT to this thread).

Well anyway, here is the thing. I got the Eduard´s late IX boxing and i was thinking, would it be too hard to make VIII out of the IX kit? Would it need some major cuts to the airframe?

Thanks for any info guys

From memory the following are needed.....

1) the cowling top needs to be flat and not of the slightly 'hump back variety that was required to accommodate additional gubbuns (technical term) on the Packard Merlin 266.

2) a retractable tail wheel

3) not sure if the 'pointy' tail fin was present on all VIII's.

4) ailerons need shortening from the wing tip (not sure how much)

.....and as far as I know, that's all externally.

Trevor

[gingerbob]

Plus leading edge fuel tanks (not PR type!) - at the very least, the "gas cap" would be visible.

Picard, your best bet is probably a vac-form hood. That'll sit over the fuselage much better than an injection-molded one, and won't crack when you try, either.

bob

[Max Headroom]

Picard

The canopy for most mk.1's was of the bulged top and flat sides variety. All the early 'flat tops' were retrofitted, so in that respect the Italeri V (not a I/II btw) if flat sides will be ok. The next thing to look for is a windscreen with external armour. I'm not sure if the Italeri one does this or has the later internally armoured screen. However, if you boxing is the I/II it will have both so that bit could be salvageable if a bit thick and over scale if modelled with an open cockpit.

Trevor

[SARowl]

I have a spare set of wings from the Airfix Seafire Mk46/47. Can I use the fuselage of an Airfix PR XIX with the Seafire wings to make a Spitfire Mk 21?