Vol 2 All the Spitfire questions here

[Graham Boak]

E wings would be expected on most Mk.IXs by 1945, too.  Certainly the newer ones.

[Meatbox8]

4 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

It's a blue, but looks rather dark for Azure Blue, the likeliest colour.  Perhaps Mediterranean Light Blue?

Whatever the colour is it is it's a great bit of footage.

[Meatbox8]

4 hours ago, Ray_W said:

@Vlad @Graham Boak @alt-92 @Meatbox8

 

Hi Guys,

 

I've been following the Mk IX clipped wings discussion with interest and I thought how do you visually tell the difference between a Mk XVI and a Mk IX, particularly when the Mk. IX might be late production with the more bulbous cowling as necessarily fitted to the Mk XVI? For example take this not very clear late war 443 Squadron image. A collection of clipped wing aircraft - IX's or XVI's or a mix.

 

 

 

 

or this?

 

 

 

 

Ray

It's a weird thing but somehow Mk.XVIs just look different to Mk.IXs.  A combination, perhaps of markings, pointy rudders (I know some IXs, VIIIs and VIIs had similar) bulged cowlings and E wings, some clipped.  Put it altogether though and you have something that doesn't look like a IX.

[Meatbox8]

Just looking at units on VE Day and of the 17 Squdrons flying IXs in NW Europe eleven of them were based in the UK, presumably on air defence duties and therefore almost certianly not in clipped wing configuration, and six in 2TAF.  Almost completely the opposite to the XVIs in which 14 squadrons were in 2TAF and 4 based in the UK.   Does suggest that if any IXs had clipped wings they would have been rare.

[Ray_W]

12 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

E wings would be expected on most Mk.IXs by 1945, too.  Certainly the newer ones.

Hi Graham,

 

Yes indeed like this another 451 or 453 Squadron image c. May 1945. In the 453 Squadron Operational Record they replaced their Mk IX's with new Mk IX E-Wings in July 1944 with specific mention appreciating the two 0.50 calibre machine guns.

 

 

Ray

Edited July 11, 2020 by Ray_W
More info

[stevehnz]

16 hours ago, alt-92 said:

anyways, something else:

 

 

Black undersides with white stenciling?

 

 

Could almost the the dark blue greyish colour Humbrol 157 had morphed into.  

Steve.

[alt-92]

It's certainly given me ideas for the upcoming Mk.Vc, or one already in the stash.

[Graham Boak]

H157 is a good match for Med. Light Blue, which just happens to be the adjacent colour chip to that of Azure Blue...

[stevehnz]

Maybe we should qualify that Graham by saying it is the older version of Hu 157 being refered to, the latest iteration of Hu 157 is a very good match to MAP Azure Blue thanks to the marathon thread on here started by @John

Steve.

[Wulfman]

On 10/07/2020 at 18:25, alt-92 said:

anyways, something else:

 

 

Black undersides with white stenciling?

 

 

More likely Dark Mediterranean Blue.

Wulfman

[politicni komisar]

 

 Dark Mediterranean Blue or Azure Blue can you see the red UF codes?

The clip is not clean.

 

P.k

[David Hadland]

Best Spitfire Model Kit in 1/72?

 

I did a quick search to see if this question had been asked and answered but it seems it hasn't, so I am wondering which model company makes the best spitfire in the 1/72 scale range, as airfix only seem to do the Mk Ia in this scale.

[Troy Smith]

3 minutes ago, David Hadland said:

Best Spitfire Model Kit in 1/72?

 

I did a quick search to see if this question had been asked and answered but it seems it hasn't, so I am wondering which model company makes the best spitfire in the 1/72 scale range, as airfix only seem to do the Mk Ia in this scale.

"it Depends"

 

By that, on what mark.   And define  "best"

 

Most accurate?  Ease of construction? 

 

Probably the "best" 72nd Spitfire kits are the Eduard Merlin 60 series, VIII/IX/XVI family.  Accurate, finely detailed, lots of options, but lots of small parts, so fiddly, and very fine tolerances.

 

Airfix have several 1/72nd Spitfires, the Ia is maybe the only one available, (also been done as Va, and as early I and Mk.II boxing)  but they have done in the last 15 years a IX, XIX, 22 and are doing a Vc.

 

There are some Spitfire variants that there are not decent kits of as well. 

 

The site search is not great.

 

stick this into google

"britmodeller best spitfire 1/72nd"

 

which will bring up a load of threads.  I recommend this as a way of searching the site for anything, I use it to find old threads all the time.

 

Sorry if I sound like a twonk,  Spitfire variants are a very complex subject, before you start getting into the kits and their issues....  as there many threads on here will attest.   

 

HTH

[Beard]

15 hours ago, David Hadland said:

Best Spitfire Model Kit in 1/72?

Troy is right about your definition of 'best' is, and that the Eduard VIII/ XI/ XVI are the best, in terms of detail and (as far as I'm aware) accuracy.

 

However, I haven't got a lot to do this afternoon so here's my list, based on buildabilty and general accuracy:

 

MkI/ MkII/ MVa - Airfix.

 

MkIb/ MkIIc/ MkVb - Kovozavody Prostejov.

 

MkVc - Sword (if you can get one) or Kovozavody Prostejov.

 

MkVI - AZ did one (it's the same plastic as their MkIb/ MkIIb/ MkVb) still available second-hand but I'd consider converting one of the Kovozavody Prostejov kits

 

MkVII - AZ did one, it's short run though. You could convert an Eduard MkVIII

 

MkVIII - Eduard

 

MkIX/ MkXVI - ditto

 

MkXII - good luck getting hold of the Xtrakit model. How to kit-bash one is mentioned elsewhere in the WWII section (hint: start with a Sword Seafire XV).

 

MkXIV - Sword.

 

Mk18 - AZ or convert a Sword XIV

 

Mk21 - AZ

 

Mk22/ 24 - Airfix

[David Hadland]

I think it will just be cheaper and easier to get a hobbyboss Mk. Vb with Desert Filter probably the cheapest option out there at the moment.

 

However, much appreciation for going the extra bit to get the best info.

Edited July 14, 2020 by David Hadland

[stevehnz]

1 hour ago, David Hadland said:

I think it will just be cheaper and easier to get a hobbyboss Mk. Vb with Desert Filter probably the cheapest option out there at the moment.

 

However, much appreciation for going the extra bit to get the best info.

David, be aware that the HB Spitfires, while generally accurate in their airframe detail have quite bad short comings in the areas of prop (too spindly & wrongly angled) undercarriage( no doors on the legs) & canopy (way over sized, possibly to enable it to be set open but it is still way too big) there're also a weird wedge shaped thing sticking out of the underside of each wing just out board of the u/c recess that needs removing. If you haven't got plenty Spitfire spares to deal with these things, one of the KP kits might be a cheaper option after all.

Steve.

[Grissom]

Hi everyone,

 

I have a question regarding RAAF Spitfire Mk Vc's and, specifically, about their gun heating plumbing.   Please be gentle as I'm still learning at lot about Spitfires.   .   I understand the RAAF Mk Vc's obtained hot air to heat the guns directly from the engine's exhaust manifold and that this particular system gave the Australians a lot of grief.   Apparently, the plumbing rattled, cracked and fell apart in quite a few aircraft.   As I understand it, this explains why some of the plumbing is missing from the exterior of the engine cowling in some photos.   My question is: Because the gun heating was obtained from the exhaust manifold, does this mean there wasn't any gun heating plumbing present in the rear section of the radiator duct?   Put another way, does anyone have a nice photo of the rear section of a RAAF Mk Vc's radiator duct?    Thanks in advance.

[Graham Boak]

The tube from the rear of the exhausts was for cockpit heating, as on other RAF aircraft such as the Halifax.  That's why it is usually missing on Tropicalised aircraft.  However the Australians needed to intercept enemy bomber formations at up to 29,000ft, something outside previous experience leading to many of the early problems encountered.  Early Spitfire Mk.Vc had a bulge on the upper wing, inboard of the aileron and just ahead of it, where the heating tube to the outer guns was raised to pass over internal structure.  This can be seen in early aircraft going to Malta: I haven't seen it on Australian examples but then I haven't looked.  This bulge is missing on later aircraft because of a change in the heating system.  This was described by Edgar Brooks in a much earlier thread on this site, but I'm afraid I didn't keep a copy.

[Ray_W]

@Graham Boak

 

Hi Graham,

 

I think @Grissom is referring to the gun heating off the manifold as mentioned here: http://darwinspitfires.com/index.php?page=the-spitfire-vc-s-faulty-armament and visible in the following image fitted off both manifolds to the cannons. 

 

 

And happy to be corrected on that particular pipe if it has another function as the outlet from the exhaust manifold for gun heating curves into the cowling and this does not look right in the above image. 

 

Moreso like this snaking down from the right of the gentleman's head kneeling on the right wing.

 

 

Ray

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by Ray_W
More info

[Giorgio N]

9 hours ago, David Hadland said:

I think it will just be cheaper and easier to get a hobbyboss Mk. Vb with Desert Filter probably the cheapest option out there at the moment.

 

However, much appreciation for going the extra bit to get the best info.

 

The Hobbyboss kit may be the cheapest but it is not the cheapest by such a margin as to be the best option: the Airfix Mk.I can be found for a pound or so more and will give you a much better model from the box compared to the HB option.

I know price is a subjective thing and a fiver more may not make a difference to me but may make a lot of difference to others.. still, I would rate the Eduard Weeekend Edition Spitfire as a kit with a great value for money factor: around £10 will give you a kit that is accurate, with great detail and quite easy to build even if it has a lot of parts

[Grissom]

Thanks Ray_W - that's an excellent reference to the issue I'm talking about.   I note the following in the second paragraph of your linked text:

 

"In Battle of Britain era Mark 1 Spitfires, the freezing up of the .303 inch Browning machine guns at altitude had prompted a simple modification, by which hot air from the radiator was ducted into the wing cavity and then vented through an exit port on the underside of the outer wings. With the Mark VB’s introduction of the hyper-sensitive Hispano 20mm in 1941, this system had had to be supplemented by a second, heavier-duty heating system. Air was now heated at the exhaust manifold and thence ducted outboard through the wings to the cannons via a system of aluminium piping. This was known as Modification 314, applied part way through the Mark V production run.[2]"

 

The word 'supplemented' in the second sentence explains why I am unsure.   Does supplemented in this context mean 'in addition to' or does the writer mean 'alternative'?   In a nutshell, I'm modelling a RAAF Mk Vc and want to know if I should add gun heating plumbing to the rear of the radiator duct.  Thanks for your prompt replies.

[fastterry]

Re the gun heating question the small pipe coming from the back of the exhaust pipes runs down inside the cowling and along inside the 'D' section of the wing to the two outer brownings only (on both sides). The cannon bays were still heated from the back of the radiator. This info gleaned from Edgar and a number of other posts on here. I am surmising that the reason for this arrangement was the projected fitting of two cannons per bay and the need to heat these guns adequately. One thing I haven't been able to figure out is if the Mk I & II aircraft needed outer wing underside vents to extract the heat what happened to all the heat from the radiator and the exhausts? Regarding RAAF Mk Vc's they can be seen with and without the small pipe coming from the back of the exhaust so a photo of your intended victim is the only way to know for sure. HTH

TRF

[Grissom]

Hi fastterry,

 

Thanks for your input.   I can picture the exhaust manifold plumbing being routed through the leading edge of the wing - makes perfect sense.   The reference that Ray_W posted specifically mentions that that plumbing (from the exhaust manifolds) heated the cannons, not the .303 MG's.   I'm not disagreeing with you, mate, I'm simply pointing out that there is conflicting information on the web - hence, my query.   About the hot air extracted from the radiator ducts; do you know if there would have been two 'scoops'/pipes behind the radiator - plumbed through both sides of the duct?

 

Regarding your query about the venting of hot air from the wings, this topic was recently addressed on the Large Scale Planes website: https://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?/topic/85798-early-spitfire-wing-heating-outlets/

 

Thanks, once again, for your help. 

[Ray_W]

40 minutes ago, Grissom said:

The word 'supplemented' in the second sentence explains why I am unsure.   Does supplemented in this context mean 'in addition to' or does the writer mean 'alternative'?   In a nutshell, I'm modelling a RAAF Mk Vc and want to know if I should add gun heating plumbing to the rear of the radiator duct.  Thanks for your prompt replies.

On this I am not certain. Others will chime in with more expertise. I am leaning towards the "additional to" argument.

 

36 minutes ago, fastterry said:

The cannon bays were still heated from the back of the radiator. This info gleaned from Edgar and a number of other posts on here.

My only question here is that the article referred to by Anthony Cooper http://darwinspitfires.com/index.php?page=the-spitfire-vc-s-faulty-armament is very well referenced. I do not have a copy of Spitfire modification 314 that he refers to but he says and I quote:

 

The Hispano 20mm cannon was peculiarly sensitive to cold, which did not bode well for gun reliability after prolonged flight at or above 30 000 feet - as was normal in Darwin operations. To make matters worse, the gun’s inherent problems were exacerbated by the failure of the aircraft’s gun heating system. In Battle of Britain era Mark 1 Spitfires, the freezing up of the .303 inch Browning machine guns at altitude had prompted a simple modification, by which hot air from the radiator was ducted into the wing cavity and then vented through an exit port on the underside of the outer wings. With the Mark VB’s introduction of the hyper-sensitive Hispano 20mm in 1941, this system had had to be supplemented by a second, heavier-duty heating system. Air was now heated at the exhaust manifold and thence ducted outboard through the wings to the cannons via a system of aluminium piping. This was known as Modification 314, applied part way through the Mark V production run.[2]

 

Were Copper's statements refuted in previous BM threads?

 

Also 

36 minutes ago, fastterry said:

Regarding RAAF Mk Vc's they can be seen with and without the small pipe coming from the back of the exhaust so a photo of your intended victim is the only way to know for sure.

Excellent advice but without a clear cowl removed view this is hard to determine. I am yet to see a RAAF Vc that does not have an exhaust stack with the heating tube passing through it, although you will see images with the curved tube from the exhaust into the cowling removed. How much internal piping is removed is hard to know. When I built my recent RAAF Vc there are early images of the actual aircraft with the exhaust heating tube entering the cowling and later removed. Though you need to be careful with the timeline and age argument because older machines often have the tube in place possibly a result of implementing fixes both official and local. 

 

Ray

Edited July 15, 2020 by Ray_W
clarification

[fastterry]

There is a diagram in the SAM publication of Merlin engined Spits, page 109 which shows clearly that the exhaust heat was only fed to the outer brownings. I'm sure the same diagram is in the Shacklady book too. A real annoying thing about all of this is that there are almost no clear photos of the rear of Spit radiators in the walkarounds and I suspect the heating pipes from the back of the radiator would have been removed during restorations anyway to improve cooling airflow. No guns to heat either of course.

TRF