Airfix B-25 C/D 1/72 Released

[VMA131Marine]

1 minute ago, Wez said:

 

Which is exactly what I was thinking, the comment earlier was the cowling's were wrong with no further substantiation. They may not be correct for a B but as you say, for many C/D's they're fine by my reckoning.

 

I'd rather have them as shown and have to sand them smooth than have to position them all individually - I'm too cack-handed and would invariably biff it up!

It's a bit more involved than just sanding the cowlings smooth. You also have to add a single exhaust stack for the B-model as seen here:

 

[old thumper]

I don't care about all these tiny details, just give me the new kit and I will build it and be happy.

I am sure Airfix will get it 99.9% right and that they will design the kit with the flexibility for as many different versions as possible anyway.  

[Wez]

20 minutes ago, VMA131Marine said:

It's a bit more involved than just sanding the cowlings smooth. You also have to add a single exhaust stack for the B-model as seen here:

 

 

Thanks for the reminder (although I already knew that), I was trying to tease out from the poster of the original comment just what they saw as being wrong with the cowling's.

 

Yes the image of the CAD render shows the individual ejector stub fairings but as has been rightly pointed out, this is fine for many C/D versions

[Albeback52]

MEH!!. But, what the hell!! This is sure to be popular and as long as it keeps the money flowing in, who am I to argue anyway!!. I would personally rather have seen them retool the A-26 or B-26 but, might get lucky some day! Happy for all of you who welcome this kit.

 

 

Allan

[Denford]

43 minutes ago, VMA131Marine said:

The cowlings are not wrong for most B-25C's and D's. They are wrong for a B-25B, which is what was used on the Doolittle Raid. Airfix have announced the kit as a B-25C/D, which suggests that we won't see a Doolittle raider, at least initially.

The oil cooler outlets (above the starboard wing only - why?)  are also different for B-25B.

Let's not forget the Aftermarket - so far not mentioned in postings in this thread, to say nothing of Xtradecal who will have their work cut out with the Sea Fury, Walrus and probably much more too.

[alex]

Even if Airfix doesn't include the "right" parts - remember that there are several after market companies which would like to make some money by filling this gap (Pavla, Eduard, Quickboost, CMK). I guess the Doolittle raid will be covered, if not by Airfix, then by someone else!

 

Alex

 

[mungo1974]

Well I can't wait,lots of markings to choose from N.Africa,SW Pacific,RAF,RAAF,RCAF,Dutch...Russian Lend-Lease to name only afew

 

[AntPhillips]

4 hours ago, Wez said:

 

My understanding is that Airfix will only produce kits of subjects that they can access decent engineering data for, measure and if possible use LIDAR on. LIDAR is not the sole criteria.

 

 

That was my understanding too, the LIDAR is backed up by good old fashioned Engineering Drawings etc. wherever possible, The LIDAR will only give them the exterior shape of the object being scanned, it will not pick up any interior fittings, these would be added by the designer based on old fashioned research.

[VMA131Marine]

3 minutes ago, AntPhillips said:

 

That was my understanding too, the LIDAR is backed up by good old fashioned Engineering Drawings etc. wherever possible, The LIDAR will only give them the exterior shape of the object being scanned, it will not pick up any interior fittings, these would be added by the designer based on old fashioned research.

Not true about the interior. If memory serves, Airfix LIDARed the interior of the Shackleton.

[Britman]

Has anyone seen it yet? ...........

[Max Headroom]

Serious question and I know this is up there with what colour undersides were on AVG P-40's, but were any RAF Mitchells painted in Dark Green/ Dark Earth uppers, or were they all Olive Drab over Neutral Gray (grey??)

 

Trevor

[Wez]

8 minutes ago, Max Headroom said:

Serious question and I know this is up there with what colour undersides were on AVG P-40's, but were any RAF Mitchells painted in Dark Green/ Dark Earth uppers, or were they all Olive Drab over Neutral Gray (grey??)

 

Trevor

 

Right, I used to believe early ones were, then I read that they never were DG/DE uppers but were all finished in OD over NG, but then I have a vague recollection of seeing a film whilst at the Mémorial de Caen of RAF B-25's in a disruptive pattern, but it was a B&W film and it could just have been patchy OD.

 

What this is, is a long winded way of saying I don't know.

[old thumper]

5 hours ago, Max Headroom said:

Serious question and I know this is up there with what colour undersides were on AVG P-40's, but were any RAF Mitchells painted in Dark Green/ Dark Earth uppers, or were they all Olive Drab over Neutral Gray (grey??)

 

Trevor

 

I was on another forum yonks back when this question was asked and the answer was no. There is a misleading photo on which Italieri  based there RAF B25 camouflage scheme but is generally believed to be wrong.

[Troy Smith]

too clarify, (in light of Col Ford'spost below) RAF B-25's were in USAAF  Olive Drab over Neutral Gray, in some pics below you can cleary  see painted out US Star and bars and the serails across  the tail fins

 

But, the OD got pretty grungy and faded....

RAF Mitchell II's, 1943. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

... which in B/W becomes (note this is EV-W as well)

 

 

to an untrained eye this could look like disruptive camo

 

or this  (same press day)

 

 

Another day? 

 

 

 

I've seen mention that this plane has been repainted in RAF colours,  I  assume Dark Green and Medium Sea Grey, note how pale the underside colour is compared to the top colour shot, and how even and unfaded the uppers are.

Melsbroek   1945. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

the colour balance is a bit off, needs more red

 

there is this small pic, which looks to be camo 

 

warbirds done up lik this don't help...

 

finally this thread maybe of use

 

the Ducimus guide discussed in the link above is available here as scans

http://www.boxartden.com/gallery/index.php/Profiles/Camoflage-Markings/22-NAA-B-25-Mitchell

 

HTH

T

 

[ColFord]

The IWM Photo Collection Search is your friend.  A quick and dirty search of the photos in the IWM Collection seems to indicate that Mitchell Mk.I (B-25B, only 3 delivered for trials? ) was camouflaged, but was not deemed acceptable for operational use, so was therefore only used for training/working up the Squadrons.  Photos of Mitchell Mk.II and Mk.III, all with operational units or the usual A&AEE photos of new types under trial, show these later B-25s as being what appears to be Olive Drab over Neutral Gray.  The patchiness of the OD as it weathered in B&W photos could have been misinterpreted as a camouflage pattern if the person was expecting to see a RAF bomber type in the usual RAF type scheme.  But the areas of dark and light don't follow a real pattern as you would expect for a camouflage scheme, more random and consistent with areas of an airframe weathering at different rates.

 

HTH.

 

 

[mhaselden]

35 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

too clarify, (in light of Col Ford'spost below) RAF B-25's were in USAAF  Olive Drab over Neutral Gray, in some pics below you can cleary  see painted out US Star and bars and the serails across  the tail fins

 

But, the OD got pretty grungy and faded....

RAF Mitchell II's, 1943. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

... which in B/W becomes (note this is EV-W as well)

 

 

to an untrained eye this could look like disruptive camo

 

 

 

 

Dumb question...does anyone know the serial number for EV-W with the nice "lion, rampant" nose art?  According to one decal sheet, it was FL212 but we all know of decal sheets that don't reflect reality.  Anybody have any definitive gen on the serial number for this airframe?

[Uncle Dick]

Never seen a B-25 with RATO until now - anyone have any info on this picture was it just trialled or used operationally? Or are these captured German rockets being trialled??/

 

Edited December 22, 2016 by Uncle Dick

[Greenshirt]

I seem to remember reading the USN tested RATO for use of the Mitchell from carriers, later in the war and post-war.  Purpose was to have a larger bomb delivery platform, but high sortie rate and ability to carry larger bombs of CV aircraft late in war somewhat negated that near term need.  None used operationally AFAIK.

[Graham Boak]

I thought that there were more than 3 Mitchell Mk.Is, but that they were used for an OTU in the Bahamas.  The misunderstanding about Dg/DE/Sky camouflage long predated the Italeri kit,  I vaguely recall it with reference to the small-scale Revell B-25 of the late 50s/early 60s.

 

Callin the italeri kit "curable" is only true if you are prepared to cut off the rear fuselage and remove a longitudinal slice.  That's a lot of work.  I don't think it's right for the J either, but certainly wrong for a D.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Graham Boak

[modelldoc]

The good old FROG kit came out with two RAF versions:

 

http://frog.cocardes.com/north-american-b-25-mitchell-ii-ref-f159

 

modelldoc

[Max Headroom]

Another question. Other than solid/glazed noses, turret and other armament and engine nacelles, is there any difference in outline shape between the marks?

 

Trevor  

[Paul J]

16 minutes ago, Max Headroom said:

Another question. Other than solid/glazed noses, turret and other armament and engine nacelles, is there any difference in outline shape between the marks?

 

Trevor  

Other than what you list I don't believe there are any major outline changes.  But the tail gunners position altered that end a bit on late models when the top turret moved forward, from the early versions that d d not really have tail guns. ( other than the broom handles as mocked up guns  on the Dolittle raiders.)

[LanceB]

4 hours ago, Max Headroom said:

Another question. Other than solid/glazed noses, turret and other armament and engine nacelles, is there any difference in outline shape between the marks?

 

Trevor  

Pretty much the entire fuselage aft of the wing was changed with the H model and subsequent.  The fuselage became deeper as the belly was deepened and the spine was moved slightly up.  Discussions on the relative accuracy of the early-model B-25s from Italeri often come down to the fact they got the shallower belly aft of the bomb bay more-or-less right, but the spine is the same as on an H or J model.  The Monogram snap-tite kit is still held to be the most accurate (in outline!) kit of an early B-25, and the spine does slightly taper down as you move aft.

[old thumper]

Call me a pleb if you like but I enjoyed building the old Italeri Mitchell and was satisfied with the result.

[Work In Progress]

I have both the Italeri and Monogram Snaptite. and had been thinking of cross-kitting them but that may be a project too far now. I agree, the Monogram is the better for fuselage outline in my opinion. I'm still fond of the Italeri kit and may still do it as a slam-together.