grayh Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I have just got the new Revell 1/32 Spitfire , I must say am very happy with it , as far as i can see it is really well made and looks like a spitfire, 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_m Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Is the instrument panel the right way around now? Is there a choice of spinners- blunt/more rounded one provided? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 You only get the blunt-spinner Rotol prop. They have fixed the instrument panel. See the last couple of pages of the main thread here: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234947838-132-supermarine-spitfire-mkii-by-revell-released/page-6 http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234947838-132-supermarine-spitfire-mkii-by-revell-released/page-7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_m Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Where is the blunt (no point at all) rotol spinner mentioned (the most common Mk.Ii spinner)? I only see pointy one in the sprue and test shot photos, and the instructions pdf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) Sorry, yes, you are quite right. Momentary brain fade there. You only get the one prop, but it is not Rotol-shaped, much more de Havilland-looking. While we're on the subject of limited options, you only get the later circular type oil cooler (as seen on the Mark V). Edited June 18, 2014 by Work In Progress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 That's rather unfortunate on a kit purporting to be a Mk.II, especially if they took the time to fix the instrument panel. The good news is that a correct prop and oil cooler fairing will be easy aftermarket items. MDC actually has an oil cooler already, but it is part of a Mk.I detail set. bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've been loaned one, for a couple of hours, so have had a chance for a quick assessment:-1/. it needs a "Mk.I" oil cooler.2/. it needs the crowbar deleting, unless your model dates after January 1942 (the fit was retrospective.)3/. 2-bar rudder pedals are o.k., but need the fabric straps over the top.4/. gun button was brass, with a silver surround, not red (post-war elfin safety?)5/. Very pistol cartridge rack was normally left off, and Castle Bromwich had (red) plastic seats, not (green) metal.6/. seat armour is missing.7/, seat backrest has an odd depression moulded in, which I've never seen.8/. I have no idea what part 40 is, and 41 (oxygen bottle) should be black, not green.9/. part 42 (compressed-air bottles) was silver, not green.9/. rudder and elevators' "stitching" is overdone.10/. I have no idea what the two "lozenges" (on the top of each wing) are.11/. unless your Mk.II dates from 1940, the rudder "prong" shouldn't be there, neither should the aerial.12/. post 1940, IFF aerials were fitted, and the position of the discs is marked.13/. if you drop the flaps, the door, in the top of the wing, needs to be cut out, and opened.14/. 50B is/are/were "station keeping lights," which might have been coloured like the navigation lights, but that remains a mystery, for now. 15/. while over-prominent, the "rivets" are nowhere near as bad as the photos appeared to show. 16/. the fuselage is about 2mm shorter than the Hasegawa Vb (all at the spinner end,) but it doesn't "shout," and it appears to have better curvature than the (somewhat slab-sided) Hasegawa fuselage. 17/, wingspan and chord (minus wingtips) are identical to the Hasegawa Vb. 18/. Revell have matched Tamiya, in the wheel wells, by providing back-sloping walls - very well done - but the "orifices" are too oval. 19/. there are three oblong "protuberances" on the spinner, but Revell do tell you to file them off. 20/. Revell have confused Sky with Sky Blue (oh, yes, they have.) 21/. instrument panel is fixed, but is missing the landing lights control. Sorry, the owner wants it back, so any further "conversation" will have to wait. Edgar 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Vor!!! Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've been loaned one, for a couple of hours, so have had a chance for a quick assessment:- 1/. it needs a "Mk.I" oil cooler. 2/. it needs the crowbar deleting, unless your model dates after January 1942 (the fit was retrospective.) 3/. 2-bar rudder pedals are o.k., but need the fabric straps over the top. 4/. gun button was brass, with a silver surround, not red (post-war elfin safety?) 5/. Very pistol cartridge rack was normally left off, and Castle Bromwich had (red) plastic seats, not (green) metal. 6/. seat armour is missing. 7/, seat backrest has an odd depression moulded in, which I've never seen. 8/. I have no idea what part 40 is, and 41 (oxygen bottle) should be black, not green. 9/. part 42 (compressed-air bottles) was silver, not green. 9/. rudder and elevators' "stitching" is overdone. 10/. I have no idea what the two "lozenges" (on the top of each wing) are. 11/. unless your Mk.II dates from 1940, the rudder "prong" shouldn't be there, neither should the aerial. 12/. post 1940, IFF aerials were fitted, and the position of the discs is marked. 13/. if you drop the flaps, the door, in the top of the wing, needs to be cut out, and opened. 14/. 50B is/are/were "station keeping lights," which might have been coloured like the navigation lights, but that remains a mystery, for now. 15/. while over-prominent, the "rivets" are nowhere near as bad as the photos appeared to show. 16/. the fuselage is about 2mm shorter than the Hasegawa Vb (all at the spinner end,) but it doesn't "shout," and it appears to have better curvature than the (somewhat slab-sided) Hasegawa fuselage. 17/, wingspan and chord (minus wingtips) are identical to the Hasegawa Vb. 18/. Revell have matched Tamiya, in the wheel wells, by providing back-sloping walls - very well done - but the "orifices" are too oval. 19/. there are three oblong "protuberances" on the spinner, but Revell do tell you to file them off. 20/. Revell have confused Sky with Sky Blue (oh, yes, they have.) 21/. instrument panel is fixed, but is missing the landing lights control. Sorry, the owner wants it back, so any further "conversation" will have to wait. Edgar Well another one for the dustbin then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 20/. Revell have confused Sky with Sky Blue (oh, yes, they have.) Strangely although the painting instructions describe 'O' as himmelblau/sky blue the actual Revell Matt 59 paint referenced is marketed as RAF Sky and can be seen here (post # 25):- http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/41520-the-sky-type-s-is-the-limit/page-2 Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tango98 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Very informative; thanks for posting Edgar. Cheers Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Belbin Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Thanks Edgar. Looking forward to mine arriving . . . Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Me too, in spite of it all! I've got the Hasegawa Vb and Hasevell Mk.I/II, plus an example of the ancient Revell Spit (I think this one claims to be a Seafire IIc, but that's another story...), so I'll probably put them all in the blender and see what comes out. (No, I don't mean that literally.) bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hacker Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've been loaned one, for a couple of hours, so have had a chance for a quick assessment:- 1/. it needs a "Mk.I" oil cooler. 2/. it needs the crowbar deleting, unless your model dates after January 1942 (the fit was retrospective.) 3/. 2-bar rudder pedals are o.k., but need the fabric straps over the top. 4/. gun button was brass, with a silver surround, not red (post-war elfin safety?) 5/. Very pistol cartridge rack was normally left off, and Castle Bromwich had (red) plastic seats, not (green) metal. 6/. seat armour is missing. 7/, seat backrest has an odd depression moulded in, which I've never seen. 8/. I have no idea what part 40 is, and 41 (oxygen bottle) should be black, not green. 9/. part 42 (compressed-air bottles) was silver, not green. 9/. rudder and elevators' "stitching" is overdone. 10/. I have no idea what the two "lozenges" (on the top of each wing) are. 11/. unless your Mk.II dates from 1940, the rudder "prong" shouldn't be there, neither should the aerial. 12/. post 1940, IFF aerials were fitted, and the position of the discs is marked. 13/. if you drop the flaps, the door, in the top of the wing, needs to be cut out, and opened. 14/. 50B is/are/were "station keeping lights," which might have been coloured like the navigation lights, but that remains a mystery, for now. 15/. while over-prominent, the "rivets" are nowhere near as bad as the photos appeared to show. 16/. the fuselage is about 2mm shorter than the Hasegawa Vb (all at the spinner end,) but it doesn't "shout," and it appears to have better curvature than the (somewhat slab-sided) Hasegawa fuselage. 17/, wingspan and chord (minus wingtips) are identical to the Hasegawa Vb. 18/. Revell have matched Tamiya, in the wheel wells, by providing back-sloping walls - very well done - but the "orifices" are too oval. 19/. there are three oblong "protuberances" on the spinner, but Revell do tell you to file them off. 20/. Revell have confused Sky with Sky Blue (oh, yes, they have.) 21/. instrument panel is fixed, but is missing the landing lights control. Sorry, the owner wants it back, so any further "conversation" will have to wait. Edgar Interesting assessment by Edgar. Edgar knows his stuff so anything he says I do read and listen to. From a modeller's view point most of these issues are solvable by a competent builder. Most the details of the kit leads me to believe it is based on an aircraft post 1940-41 so it could be ok for an build predicting an aircraft of that time period. Back dating prior to 1940 around the time of BoB would not be all that hard and I know most of the aftermarket guys are already supplying us with the parts to aid with this. Another new mold for the bin? Hardly unless you lack the skills to deal with those minor issues 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've just realised that part 40 (comment 8) might be the operating lever for the landing lights, which should be attached to the left side of the instrument panel, above the pilot's left leg, not (as shown in the instructions) to the starboard cockpit wall. As Revell had to reverse the instrument panel, maybe they forgot to do the same with the position of the lever? If anyone wants photos, from the Pilot's Notes, just ask. Edgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggers Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Ref.Edgar's point 10("lozenges") I wonder if they've modelled the gas patch ?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Naw, it was traditional to stick your lozenge to the wing just before clambering aboard, as a good luck talisman. But since the Spit has no aileron trim, and the lateral balance was a bit fussy, it was found necessary for one of the erks to affix a balancing lozenge on the other side. bob 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Belbin Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Has the radiator trough been dug out? And the wing tip lamp housings sorted? Doesn't matter - fixable anyway. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I wonder if they've modelled the gas patch ?No, too small, and in the wrong place (right on the mainspar line, halfway along,) and on both wings. Looks like some sort of stiffening, maybe, but it's new to me. Should be easy to sand off, though. Edgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Potato Pete Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Gents, What is the difference between a "Mk I" and a "MkII" oil cooler - do they look significantly different? Cheers Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_m Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 The two types of oil cooler are normally referred to as Mk.I and Mk.V, those being the Spitfire Mks that they were used on. The Mk.I's oil cooler, has a front opening that is U-shaped, with the open top part of the U reaching the wing undersurface. The MK.V cooler has a round opening, that doesn't reach the wing undersurface. It seems that Mk.V oil coolers (referred to as Mk.III, in the thread below) were retro fitted to Mk.II: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/67314-spitfire-oil-coolers/ So I guess which type is accurate depends on the aircraft and date you are modelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Not so much "U" shaped, as the Hasevell Mk.I/II does it, but rather "half-round". Mk.I and Mk.II had the same oil cooler. The "Mk.III" type was developed for, you guessed it, the Mk.III, and was then found necessary for the Merlin 45 (Mk.V). During the war, I think it unlikely that many I/II were retrofitted with the later type, unless they also had a Merlin 45 (etc) fitted. When Mk.Vs were first getting built, there wasn't yet an adequate supply of the new coolers, so they initially had the same old I/II coolers fitted, and a retrofit program ran into the summer of '41. The fact is that the new kit really only represents a Warbird, not a typical wartime Spitfire Mk.II of any time period. bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevej60 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Looking at Edgars comprehensive list a lot of easy fixes for the super detailer,s and those that wan,t 100% accuracy,for the rest of us it seems Revell have given us a first class kit and look again at that price! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_m Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 I agree Steve, for just over £18 (Wonderland price), it is a bargain, and a model that its target audience will be very happy with. Hopefully Argos will stock it, like they did the Hawk, and we'll see it in a sale for £10! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gajman Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 21/. instrument panel is fixed, but is missing the landing lights control. Glad I read that before wasting my money 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elger Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 How does the wing compare to the Tamiya IX wing? If has exactly the same chord as the old Hasegawa, is it narrower? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts