Jump to content

Vol 2 All the Spitfire questions here


Sean_M

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, k5054nz said:

I know without photographic evidence it's hard to be sure, but when a Spitfire was ferried from a factory to an MU would it wear any unit codes? Or simply the factory finish with serial?

Unit codes were added when it eventually arrived with a front line unit. That factory didn’t know where it would end up.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To illustrate this, factory test pilots were encouraged to keep in touch with the front line to help feed combat lessons back to the designers.  A Hawker test pilot took the prototype Mk.II to a front-line base during the BoB, and when he returned to it the squadron codes were being painted on.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2021 at 10:34 AM, PhantomBigStu said:

Blast….still I shall scour the internet so I don’t have to sand of the nice bulges 

 

edit indeed....hour and half on google and produced only one candidate and a second glance at the cannons and yep e wing....think those bulges will have to go 

Even more research has turned up nothing...but thinking if I'm already sanding of the bulges and correcting a shape issue with that particular diecast why not go the whole hog and make it unique and add full span wings or even extended wings and convert it into an VIII. Anything else to separate an IX vs VIII aside from tail wheel removal? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you folks!

  

18 hours ago, gingerbob said:

Very early Spitfires were delivered direct, but if I remember right even they arrived "naked".

My subject's a IX that was intended for 39MU but failed to arrive from Vickers at Cosford.

Edited by k5054nz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, 72modeler said:

Somebody messing with the masking mats? That sure is a strange paint demarcation around the cockpit that I don't recall seeing or noticing before!

Mike

 

Great photo, BTW!

Not mats, but free-handed, IMHO. Take a look at the differences in the Dark Green pattern over the exhausts.

Edited by Rolls-Royce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiya 

 

Started working on modeling rhaf spitfire vc ER890:

Untitled.jpg

 

 

ive seen other modelers give this aircraft narrow cannon bulges, but the lm sheet represents the larger type, not entirely sure which is right!

 

Does anyone have info helping confirm which is correct? 🤔

 

On a side note:

knowing that these spitfires were converted from Vb to Vc - looking closer at EP694 the distance of the cannon bulges to the reinforcing strips on the wings seems greater than if the cannon bulges were in the typical C wing position (as on the airfix kit) from the distance it looks like the C type cannon bulges are still in the B wing position!? Am i seeing things? 🤪

 

conv.jpg

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Modelraynz said:

Started working on modeling rhaf spitfire vc ER890:

 

I do not want to stop any up to date commentary on this aircraft and a specific answer to your question, however, you may find the discussion previously had on this aircraft from June 2015 interesting. Edgar, @Graham Boak and @gingerbob with some input on the mods Vb to Vc and Vc to Vb. Click on the link should take you to the page.

 

 Ray

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, 72modeler said:

Somebody messing with the masking mats? That sure is a strange paint demarcation around the cockpit that I don't recall seeing or noticing before!

Mike

 

Great photo, BTW!

 

It's not that unusual, can be seen on many late war IXe, for example most of the aircraft that went to Czechoslovakia had this scheme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 31/08/2021 at 07:27, EwenS said:

Unit codes were added when it eventually arrived with a front line unit. That factory didn’t know where it would end up.

 

And sometimes the need was such that aircraft went into action without having had the codes added - e.g. X4110 of 602 Squadron, which probably had the shortest operational life of any Spitfire

 

C4KrBHnb0ujx8r8eQO_Hq1T14JXh5fNo9sMyjZFO

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need help assessing the size of some code letters.

DW-D, 610 squadron.

In this photo, taken late July 1940, it has smaller code letters than the famous very large ones

Is it an illusion that the D aft of the roundel is larger than the D forward of it?

610%20sqd%2C%20DW-D%20-%20edited-M.jpg

 

From this

610%20sqd%2C%20DW-D-S.jpg

 

From this,  -D is top left

610%20squadron-L.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found a bit clearer image, but of the starboard side:

 

13.jpg

 

In the Dumas book, it gives roundel diameter of 49 inches.   So some cropping and blowing up image, I find both D codes near similar:

 

610-codes.jpg

 

regards,

Jack

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JackG said:

In the Dumas book, it gives roundel diameter of 49 inches.   So some cropping and blowing up image, I find both D codes near similar:

But if you run a straight edge along the top and bottom of the  Squadron DW codes in that blown up image, the bottom of the aircraft code letter D aligns with the bottom of the squadron codes, but the top of the squadron codes runs through the bottom of the rear fixed portion of the canopy, significantly above the top of the D. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same photo can be seen on page 155 of the 2nd volume from the Battle of Britain Combat Archives.  It is a bit clearer, and one thing noticed right away concerning the individual code letter D, is the top is lobbed off due to the rail for the sliding canopy. 

 

So have scanned a portion of said image. and followed up with another study:

 

610-codes-two.jpg

 

The image was rotated slightly so the antenna lies perpendicular to the blue box.  Both the green and red box are same size.  Results look similar to the first one - squadron codes sit a bit higher than the lone D.  This combined with the interference of the canopy rail is what may be creating the illusion of a smaller letter?

 

regards,

Jack

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JackG said:

creating the illusion of a smaller letter?

It's not an illusion, it's a smaller letter.

Drawing perfectly square boxes on the photo won't prove anything as you're not taking into consideration any distortion due to perspective, or the object not being dead central and parallel to the focal plane of the camera. 

Place a straight edge along the bottom of the DW, these are fixed points on the object, and the projected line from these points runs through the bottom of the D

Do the same along the top of the DW and the projected line runs through the bottom of the rear fixed canopy , well above the top of the D

The top and bottom of the DW on the object are parallel, but the projected lines on the screen are diverging, however anything on the projected lines on the object will be parallel, ergo the D is smaller than the DW.

This is only truly accurate if the object is a flat plane, the object in this case is a curved fuselage side, there will be further distortion due to this which the above doesn't take into account, but this will be fairly small compared to ignoring perspective..

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tried one more look at the 610 codes, this time on an actual model - Tamiya's latest boxing.   Tape has been cut to equal heights, and those two pieces representing the letter  D were cut at the same time (tape placed one on top of the other), to ensure they are identical.

 

The tapes representing squadron letters are placed right below the panel line - not saying this how it was done, but would be the most logical starting point.  The third tape representing the aircraft code letter, was placed right along the bottom edge were the rear window sits.   Measuring with a straight edge along the tops of these markings is near perfect. The bottom measure is actually quite close too, though a bit tricky to coax a ruler over a surface that is curved both in  latitude and longitude. 

 

spacer.png

Both images are then sized up so they fit the same roundel width.   The final step is to superimpose one image over the other:

 

spacer.png

 

The letters can be seen through the tape in this translucent setting called 'Wireframe mode'.   The first D looks good, and the tape on the W position good be adjusted slightly to the left.   Now the area of contention, the letter by the cockpit.  To me it looks same height (and width) as the other D, just the tape needs to be lowered by about 0.6mm (this was measured in the vector program) so a little over inch in 1:1 scale, as well as an adjustment away from the roundel edge.  

 

So all I can say is we agree to disagree.   To me it's a difference in interpretation of what's going on with the top of the letter D.  In the period photo it does appear the top of the arm is half the brushstroke width.  Whether this was purposely truncated, or it's the canopy rail and wearing away of paint - I'm with the latter.

 

 

regards,

Jack 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...