Jump to content

Building a "better" Spitfire XII


Christer A

Recommended Posts

In the wake of Airfix rereleasing their XII kit I thought it may be helpful to bump this for anyone else considering which kit to get. Thank you all for so much precious information.

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

Hello guys,

 

I bought the Eduard 1/48 scale Mk.VIII to get a proper "blown" canopy for my Airfix PR.XIX. I was delighted to realize that there were two canopies in the box as it meant that I can build "something else" of the Eduard parts as well. It became clear that the Eduard kit is excellent; possibly the best one in the market. It is overly engineered at places but this guarantees the large selection of parts for different models. As I had one "crash landed" Airfix PR.XIX, I decided to have a go for a Mk.XII conversion using the Griffon nose for the project. I was astonished to see the excellent fit between Airfix nose and Eduard fuselage. Only a minimum of sanding was required. The most demanding part was the four bladed propeller.

 

Using high resolution photos of the real thing, it was easy to note all the necessary details that needed to be dealt with: fill some inspection hatches and create some new ones, move the identification lamp and so on. Eduard kit provides all the necessary parts for a late Mk.XII interiors (cockpit, landing gear bays); you just need to locate them on the part trees. One can also find excellent info about Mk.XIIs on various treads here on BM.

 

Some pictures of my project so far:

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

At current my Mk.XII looks like this. I mixed Humbrol Enamels to match Dark Green, Ocean Grey and Medium Sea Grey with the colour chart in the "RAF Museum's book". Humbrol 23 is an excellent match for Sky. The squadron codes are painted using masks cut out of Tamiya tape with small scissors.

 

spacer.png

 

A lower pressure was used on Port main gear oleo causing the plane sit Port wing down (this was done to compensate the propeller torque on take-off). Note also that the propeller blades of the Airfix PR.XIX had to be reshaped as the chord was too broad all the way to the tip.

 

Cheers,

Antti

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Troy Smith my big question is: if you have access to both kits for reasonable/close prices, and are interested in a straightforward build that Looks About Right OOB, which kit should one choose? I will have an Airfix XIV and 22 in my collection, and later (when i find one) a XIX.

Edited by k5054nz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, k5054nz said:

my big question is: if you have access to both kits for reasonable/close prices, and are interested in a straightforward build that Looks About Right OOB, which kit should one choose? I will have an Airfix XIV and 22 in my collection, and later (when i find one) a XIX.

 

IMO, as someone who prefers accuracy and detail over ease of construction, the SH XII is my pick.

 

 

Note, I've not dry fitted the SH kit, and the SH kits are noted for requiring care and adjustment to assemble.    

 

The Airfix kit builds well from one I have seen and general comments, along with dry fitting. 

 

But, the SH kit  AFAIK only has the length and wing position fault,  the Airfix kit has shape flaws that  are noticeable IMO, but that is because I was looking for them.    Both the Airfix XIV and 22/24 are better kits in overal finesse.

The SH kit is better detailed, finer panel lines, better cockpit, some basic etch, IP/seat straps.  

 

My Airfix XII is planned to be DP485,  the Mk.IV/XII prototype, as I can replace the entire prop.    I actually know where both are at the moment, so   

 

 

Inbox of the SH XII

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235077217-spitfire-mkxii-against-v-1-flying-bomb-sh48192-148/

sprue1.jpg

sprue2.jpg

The XII wing above will need the outer cannon slot and bulge filling/removing. Has provision for both types of tailwheel

 

Inbox of the Airfix XII

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235110116-supermarine-spitfire-mkxii-148-airfix a05117a/

 

you can see the deeper fuselage, and lower position of exhaust slots

xiib.jpg

xiic.jpg

 

Note prop blades and taller rudder.   The Airfix also dates from when the still had their Spitfire dropped flaps obsession.... the slightly broader wing chord is also visible.

 

HTH

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

13 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

IMO, as someone who prefers accuracy and detail over ease of construction, the SH XII is my pick.

 

HTH

It does. Thank you very much - I think SH will be my pick, and I'm no stranger to their kits (the Oxford is on my bench right now).

Edited by k5054nz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, k5054nz said:

I think SH will be my pick

One point, having been thinking about prop blades, in reply to @Antti_K   I think SH use the Seafire XV blades, and the Spitfire XII blades are not as wide at the base.. maybe the Airfix blades are not as bad as i thought, though, IIRC, they did then use them in their Seafire XVII kitA quick reveals them to be still too slim and the wrong shape.  I used the blades in the Aeroclub XII conversion as guide when I tried to reshape them,  it a lot easier removing some excess than it is to build up a too slim blade....

Spitfire-F-Mk-XII-MB882-%C2%91EB-B%C2%92

Spitfire-F-Mk-XII-MB882-%C2%91EB-B%C2%92

You can see the lean to port from the reduced gear leg pressure as well

 

Both from here that has a load of Mk.XII photos

https://www.destinationsjourney.com/historical-military-photographs/supermarine-spitfire-mk-xii/

HTH

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

5 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

You can see the lean to port from the reduced gear leg pressure as well

 

V interesting - hadn't clocked that. Did other Griffon Spits have it as a rule, or was it the personal choice of the pilot? (And do I need to get the saw out....?)

 

Justin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bedders said:

V interesting - hadn't clocked that. Did other Griffon Spits have it as a rule, or was it the personal choice of the pilot? (And do I need to get the saw out....?)

 

Justin

 

Hello Justin,

 

I found the information about differential oleo pressures in "Spitfire - The History" (by Morgan & Shacklady). There is a page giving all the technical specifications for Mk.XII including oleo pressures. I would say that the pressures were set at the factory. The photos from IWM collection give the modeller an idea what to do. I used the photos to calculate how much to remove from the oleo.

 

As I used Eduard Mk.VIII as a base for my Mk.XII conversion, I had to cut the landing gear leg, shorten the oleo and re-attach the lower part again. I used my modelling knife (Tamiya) to cut the gear leg.

 

Cheers,

Antti

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

The prop issue seems to be the big one giving me pause for thought so everyone's info is greatly appreciated.

 

And then there's the fact that I want to model EN224 as she's restored (which at this point would, I believe, be parts in jigs and boxes!) so there will be ample photographic reference when she's done! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I believe there were two types of propeller fitted to this type as follows:

Griffon IIB or III

R/13/4F/5 Dural blade RA10108, Spinner 4/FD/1

R13/4F5/6 Wood blade RA10107, Spinner 4/FD/1

Both 10ft 5ins diameter

 

The spinner is effectively an enlarged version of the ESII but probably a CSA type.

 

The same spinner was used on the Seafire Mk XV, 16, 17 and FR17 (R22/4F5/8 hub). The blade used on the Mk’s XV and 16 (and probably the others listed) was different to those above being RA10167. The shape is rather different to those above, being more of a left handed version of the RA690 Mk V type. Similarly, the Mk XII blades are in appearance, left handed variations of the late Merlin Spitfire blades.

Prop diameter 10ft 5ins.

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

On 5/21/2022 at 1:02 PM, Troy Smith said:

One point, having been thinking about prop blades, in reply to @Antti_K   I think SH use the Seafire XV blades, and the Spitfire XII blades are not as wide at the base..

Tony and @V Line: would the Revell Seafire XV prop be any better for a XII?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, k5054nz said:

Revell Seafire XV prop be any better for a XII?

I doubt it.

It's a rebox of the SH Seafire XV kit.

 

the blades look the same as the SH XII

2434_1_SPH48116_2.jpg

 

I as talking about the SH blades maybe needing reshaping for a Spitfire Mk.XII,   not for a warbird using Seafire XV blades.....

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

34 minutes ago, Antti_K said:

I would reshape those propeller blades (see the photo in Troy's post). The blades are far too broad, the general shape is wrong and they should be rounded at the base.

 

Cheers,

Antti

For  a Spitfire XII, yes,

But for a Seafire XV/XVII,  they are not bad, these are the Seafire XVII/17 at Yeovilton.    And OP was asking about doing the Mk.XII warbird, using Searfire XV blades...  Handy as this has made me aware of the different blades types....

137%2004.jpg

 

Some useful image here of the Seafire XVII, which has a single stage Griffon as the Spitfire XII,  useful for nose contours

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, k5054nz said:

Tony and @V Line: would the Revell Seafire XV prop be any better for a XII?

As the photo above shows, the blades are unfortunately the wrong shape as I suggested in my post.

I think much would depend on how confident you might be with sanding and re-shaping. The good thing is that the at least the blade leading edge faces the correct way and is plastic rather than resin. Whilst of a different rotation, photos of the Mk IX blades would provide a useful guide to shape.

 

From the sprue photos, the Airfix prop looks to be pretty close.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terve Troy,

 

yes, you are right. I was of course talking only about Spitfire XII. Looking at the sprues I would use the Airfix Spitfire XII propeller as a starting point for my next Mk.XII project. It would probably mean far less work than reshaping Airfix PR.XIX blades.

 

And I would still do some work with the propeller blades for a Seafire as well. The shape looks pretty good but to my eye they still are too broad.

 

Cheers,

Antti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2022 at 8:18 AM, Troy Smith said:

and OP was asking about doing the Mk.XII warbird, using Searfire XV blades... 

I was just wondering whether they were similar - I've no clue which blades my subject aircraft will fly with. Thanks for clarifying!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So, my bad Angel encouraged me to buy an Airfix Spit XII, and this thread is very interesting.

 

I think, for me, that I'd want to try to reduce the fuselage height a bit, and use an Eduard rudder.  @Troy Smith, I have seen your earlier pics, but do you have any further details on the front fuselage cut?

 

Rgds

 

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mike romeo said:

I think, for me, that I'd want to try to reduce the fuselage height a bit, and use an Eduard rudder. 

The plastic is thick.  Looking at mine, I took some off the spine, between the fin and just behind the cockpit, and about 1mm off the entire belly, and what look like 0.75 mm off the top if the fin.

3 hours ago, mike romeo said:

@Troy Smith, I have seen your earlier pics, but do you have any further details on the front fuselage cut?

The nose cut, hmm.

I'm looking at the kit,  I need to have a loner ponder,  the nose cut runs just above the line of fasteners,  taking out 1 mm at the rear.   Though it was a long while ago, and it also involved messing about with the wing,  certainly at the rear to raise the wing up 1mm, and also to do with reshaping the wing. 

You also need to move the exhaust stack up the cowling, by 1 mm, and this then gives you the correct line for the rockers covers.  Thye may sound small, but they really change the look.  The simpler option is to move the exhaust up.  If you have the Airfix Mk.XIV or XVIII kit, the nose is very good,  compare the positions of exhaust/rocker covers and depth, the front of the Griffon engined Spitfires is the same, just the two stage engines have a added length in front of the firewall for the longer engine part at the rear,  the main engine block is the same, so the front is the same, if that makes sense? 

 

I'll need to pull out various kits and posts to refresh my memory, i've not though much about it for a while.   If you have an accurate 1/48th Spitfire, use that and compare the rear fuselage. 

Please ask for clarifications or additional questions.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello guys,

 

I scaled up an old set of drawings published in Scale Modeller in 1979. And I also collected data about Spitfire XIIs from various discussions here on BM. Fellow modellers Edgar and Johnaero provided measurements taken from a Seafire XVII(?) at Yeovilton as it had similar engine.

 

spacer.png

 

As you can see the drawing gives 39,42 mm for the upper cowling and Edgar's measurement gives 39,82 mm along the lower edge of the upper cowling. His statement about the similarity of the cowlings of Spitfire XII and Seafire XVII sounds good. According to Edgar the fuel tank cover panel should measure 17,99 mm. The Eduard Mk.VIII had plenty of room for conversion as it measures 19,18 mm. As I said earlier the fit between Airfix PR.XIX nose and Eduard Mk.VIII fuselage was excellent. There wasn't no step at all between the parts!

 

Note also what Troy said about the exhaust pipes and their correct location. If you use the nose of a PR.XIX make sure to reshape the rocker covers as they are too long and too pointed at the rear for Mk.XII.

 

Cheers,

Antti

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Antti_K said:

I scaled up an old set of drawings published in Scale Modeller in 1979. And I also collected data about Spitfire XIIs from various discussions here on BM. Fellow modellers Edgar and Johnaero provided measurements taken from a Seafire XVII(?) at Yeovilton as it had similar engine.

Some background/claifiation. These are the Peter Cooke drawings from Scale Models magazine, Sep/Oct 1979. 

The Spitfire XII, Seafire XV and Seafire XVII all have a single stage Griffon engine, and essentially they have the same cowling.

Note, the two Stage Griffon only differs in dimensions by having the longer two stage supercharger at the rear of the engine block.  

Apart from the length insert between the firewall and the rear of the main engine block, the front part of the cowling is the same on ALL Griffon Spitfires and Seafires (except for the Seafire Mk.47, which has a lower intake)

 

Peter Cooke was initially converting the 1/24th Airfix Mk.I to a Mk.XIV, and then  scratchbuilding in 1/24th. 

The plans are from his research and measurement of preserved airframes.  .  They are very good overall,  but have a few glitches.

 

The rear fuselage is slightly too short, the Mk.XVIII details are slightly wrong, (this is the fin height between XIV and XVIII rudders, and misses the different wing panelling) and the important bit here, the Mk.XII cowl is slightly too long.  Note, the Aeroclub Mk.XII conversion is based on the Cooke drawings, and has slightly too long cowling as a result.

The dimensions @Antti_K gives is correct.   Somewhere on one of these threads I posted dimension taken from a Seafire XVII cowling made by the owner, Peter Arnold.

 

The rest of the drawings are correct.   Note the IIRC the Cooke drawings are short between E-F 

51498152517_80406596ee_c.jpgSpitfire- fuslege section length dwg-2 by losethekibble, on Flickr

This was posted by Edgar at one point.  the dimensions are full size in inches. so for mm, x 25.4

 

Fuel tank is 36.25 inch, x 25.4 , = 927.6mm/48 = 19.325 mm,  so the below is incorrect. 

3 hours ago, Antti_K said:

According to Edgar the fuel tank cover panel should measure 17,99 mm. The Eduard Mk.VIII had plenty of room for conversion as it measures 19,18 mm.

 

 

2 hours ago, Antti_K said:

Note also what Troy said about the exhaust pipes and their correct location. If you use the nose of a PR.XIX make sure to reshape the rocker covers as they are too long and too pointed at the rear for Mk.XII.

The rocker covers are the same for ALL Griffon Spitfires, as the main front engine block is the same.

 

The Airfix PR XIX has a slightly too small nose ring, and the rocker covers are moulded integrally.  It's a very good, but not quite right.     AFAIK, the best 1/48th Griffon cowl in 1/48th in the Airfix XIV lowback  kit.  

 

I have been looking at my Airfix Mk.XII,  I had been doing some corrections,  and my intention was to make it into the Griffon Mk.IV/Mk.XII prototype but the main tweaks are the same.  

if/when I feel inspired to do this I shall document them.    

 

 

HTH

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terve Troy,

 

and thank you for the information. As you said, I was talking about Peter Cooke's drawings published in Scale Models magazine in September/October 1979. Just couldn't remember his name and correct date. I compared the Eduard fuselage with the scaled up drawing and it became clear that the rear fuselage was too short in the drawing between locations E and F, just as you remembered. The measurement Edgar gives (69'') matches exactly with the Eduard kit.

 

The nose ring was only 0,6 mm too small in my PR.XIX kit, so I didn't bother fixing it. More problems would have been created than solved.

 

Here is a photo showing the rocker covers of both types.

 

spacer.png

 

The rocker cover shapes are slightly different: the rear end in Mk.XII is more rounded. And they were too long as well when I attached the Airfix nose (maybe the problem lies with the kit). Correct shape was easily created with some filler and sanding.

 

Cheers,

Antti

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

  • 3 weeks later...

I've been thinking about building one of these but looking in my copy of Spitfire - The History, I can see I'd really need an Eduard Mk.VC kit as the base with only the engine and prop from a Mk.XII to do the conversion. I guess I could fit an Airwaves Seafire XV conversion engine and prop like I did with my Seafire XV  but that's a reasonably expensive approach. Unlike the later Griffon-powered Spitfires, the Mk.XII used the smaller radiator and single oil cooler common to the Mk.I-VI. I'm hoping Eduard will do a range of Griffon Spitfires to go with their lovely Merlin range to avoid me doing yet another conversion!

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...