Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Navy Bird

1:32 Tamiya Supermarine Spitfire Mk.IXc

Recommended Posts

Nice work Bill :) 

Internals? I think the front of the rudder tubes are brass (where they slide into the tubes connected to the pedals) and 'bare metal' from the adjuster nuts back. No expert though.

 

Have you seen the free trial at scribd.com? You can sign up for a trial and download 'Camouflage and Markings' and 'SAM Modellers Datafile' as pdfs. I have ten or so free guides now - worth a look. Although internal photos are of current, restored aircraft there are guides and graphics on 'the originals'. HTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And did scribd pay for the right to offer them as pdfs? 

 

Don't know about the details in the cockpit- I'll try to have a poke around tomorrow.  Off the top of my head, NASM's Mk.VII should be pretty original, so that might not be a bad place to start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, gingerbob said:

And did scribd pay for the right to offer them as pdfs? 

I assume so Bob... it's a subscription service (after the free trial) so I guess they 'did a deal'?

I didn't cancel my subscription for a while so paid some fees to ease my conscience... but that's just 'old bloke' stuff nowadays I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, CedB said:

Internals? I think the front of the rudder tubes are brass (where they slide into the tubes connected to the pedals) and 'bare metal' from the adjuster nuts back. No expert though.

 

Have you seen the free trial at scribd.com? You can sign up for a trial and download 'Camouflage and Markings' and 'SAM Modellers Datafile' as pdfs. I have ten or so free guides now - worth a look. Although internal photos are of current, restored aircraft there are guides and graphics on 'the originals'. HTH

 

Thanks Ced. I have both of these books (in print even!). The Mk.IX in the SAM volume is one of the BBMF machines, and shows the rudder pedals and tubes in grey-green. I like what you suggest, though, if only to add some contrast. The walkaround photos here on BM and elsewhere are all slightly different from one another, so I suppose I'll just have to pick something and go with it.  

 

14 hours ago, gingerbob said:

And did scribd pay for the right to offer them as pdfs? 

 

Don't know about the details in the cockpit- I'll try to have a poke around tomorrow.  Off the top of my head, NASM's Mk.VII should be pretty original, so that might not be a bad place to start.

 

Thanks.

 

No clue about scribd. I used to be a card-carrying member there, but at some point I ran afoul of their ways and was given a lifetime banishment. Ouch. When I inquired what I had done wrong, I was told that I had never uploaded any material. I told them I couldn't do that because of copyright etc. but never heard back from them. To be honest I can't imagine they have copyright arrangements for all of the material that is on that site. But what do I know?

 

 

In the meantime, a whole bunch of stuff has acquired a nice grey-green finish. Lovely.   :)

 

Next question - some photos of the instrument panel show a coloured border around several gauges. For example, the boost gauge is red, the oil temperature and pressure are both yellow, the water temperature is blue, and what I think is the fuel gauge is red, or possibly orange. I assume that this is so the pilot can easily spot them. However, some photos don't show these coloured borders at all. Should I add this? (The Eduard pre-printed photoetch instrument panel has them, but my copy is printed off-register and I don't think is usable.) Come to think of it, the Tamiya decals go on the back side of the clear instrument faces, and may have the borders already there. I need to check as this would be much easier than trying to paint them.

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC the artificial horizon is wrong on the Tamiya decals, but you knew that. I have the Yahu IP for mine, and mightily impressed with it I am too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Navy Bird said:

Next question - some photos of the instrument panel show a coloured border around several gauges

When I did my Tamiya Spitfire Mk Vb, I found a webpage named "Anatomy of a Spitfire Cockpit" (look it up please, I can't post a link at the moment); it's a restored aircraft, but said to be very accurate. The border around the gauges are colored there, so I did paint mines (in 1/48, so in 1/32 I'm sure you'll be able to take 'em home  blinfolded :whistle:). HTH

 

Ciao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the rudder pedals, I found this thread on the Key Publishing forum

 

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?130020-Rudder-pedal-question

 

Lots of techie stuff and not sure if any of it is of use?

 

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Procopius said:

IIRC the artificial horizon is wrong on the Tamiya decals, but you knew that. I have the Yahu IP for mine, and mightily impressed with it I am too.

 

I remember reading that somewhere, and lo and behold the Barracuda set has decals for the correct instruments. (Those on the Tamiya sheet are modern instruments.) I think I'm going to build both the kit panel, and the Eduard PE panel and see what I like. I wish the Eduard parts were printed properly, I think they'd look a LOT better. I use the Yahu panels all the time in 1:72 and they are impressive even in that scale.

 

1 hour ago, giemme said:

When I did my Tamiya Spitfire Mk Vb, I found a webpage named "Anatomy of a Spitfire Cockpit" (look it up please, I can't post a link at the moment); it's a restored aircraft, but said to be very accurate. The border around the gauges are colored there, so I did paint mines (in 1/48, so in 1/32 I'm sure you'll be able to take 'em home  blinfolded :whistle:). HTH

 

http://spitfiresite.com/2010/07/anatomy-of-spitfire-cockpit.html

 

Blindfolded might be difficult. Both hands behind my back and one leg in a hammock is more my style.    :banghead:

 

45 minutes ago, Max Headroom said:

Re the rudder pedals, I found this thread on the Key Publishing forum

 

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?130020-Rudder-pedal-question

 

Lots of techie stuff and not sure if any of it is of use?

 

Wow, that's a more complicated design than I might have expected. Of course, now you've got me wondering how to put the Supermarine logo onto the tread on the rudder pedals. Gawd, I wish I would stop thinking stuff like that...

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The instrument panel is taking shape. I assembled both the Eduard photoetch pieces and the Tamiya kit parts (along with some Barracuda instruments decals and placards) for comparison. I think this photo shows the difference clearly, and you can probably guess which one I'm going to use.

 

IMG_2599

 

As is often the case with these macro-photographs, the parts look so much better in real life. Even with 1:32 scale the photo is considerably magnified. Unfortunately one or two of the instrument face decals moved slightly while they were drying on the clear inserts for the Tamiya panel, so they're not aligned perfectly. To be honest, though, I don't think this will be noticeable once everything is assembled.

 

I painted the coloured bezels by using the edge of the paintbrush, not the tip. I started by painting the inside face of the opening, and then tilted the paintbrush so the edge of the brush would begin to overlap the tiny(!) moulded ring around the gauges. I put white down first as a base. It'll work.

 

You may notice that the Eduard panel has one more instrument on it (on the far left hand side). This doesn't appear in the SAM datafile, so I'm guessing it's maybe a difference between the "early" and "late" Mk.IX aircraft. The Eduard panel is a "late" version, and includes a rounded edge to the top of the inner panel of six instruments. The "early" version has a straight top on this panel, and that's what I used. (Tamiya include both early and late inner panels.)

 

I plan on building Keltie's EN398 as an "early" version Mk.IXc. Based on initial research (and I'm happy to be corrected) this includes:

 

  • "Cheese Cutter" IFF (still need to figure out what that is!)
  • Mk. XII style carb inlet
  • Standard early style rudder
  • Early style elevators
  • Large cannon bulges
  • Fuel cooler
  • Wheel covers (? - ol' Ian is standing just at the wrong spot in the next photo)

 

To be honest, this list came from a thread about EN398 when she was being flown by JEJ. Was it different when Keltie was the pilot? I don't know, but probably not as there was only a month or so when Keltie had it. This is the only photo I've found of Keltie and EN398, supposedly taken in March 1943:

 

mk9-keltie

 

It's hard to discern some of these features. To my eye, it looks like narrow cannon bulges, but that is likely a trick of the camera angle. My understanding is that by the fall of 1943, all surviving Mk.IXs were getting the narrow cannon covers as replacements for the wide ones. But I've also read that photos of EN398 when JEJ was flying her show large cannon bulges, and since Keltie had her before JEJ, it makes sense that she had large cannon bulges then too. There are so many variations and subtleties, even within a specific Spitfire mark, that I'm quite sure I won't get everything correct. I beg your forgiveness in advance!    :)

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice instrument panels Bill B)

 

I think - though I stand ready to be corrected - that the 'cheesecutter' IFF refers to the wires that run from the tips of the stabilisers to approximately the centre of the fuselage roundels. Hard to say for sure but one of them might be visible in the picture above, just behind the head of the chap on the right...

 

Cheers,

 

Stew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work on the IP  Bill.   I am researching a MkV myself at the mo for a bit of a project in 32nd scale once I've finished my long term Tiggie build. 

I am watching your build with great interest.

Keep up the good work. 

All the best 

Chris 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work on the instrument panel.

 

I found this photo of ‘398 when in Johnson’s custodianship.

 

https://goo.gl/images/TH3vZx

 

I see the original and unenlarged elevator, no IFF cheescutter aerial and wheel hub covers.

 

HTH 

 

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stew Dapple said:

I think - though I stand ready to be corrected - that the 'cheesecutter' IFF refers to the wires that run from the tips of the stabilisers to approximately the centre of the fuselage roundels. Hard to say for sure but one of them might be visible in the picture above, just behind the head of the chap on the right...

 

Thanks Stew. Of course, that makes sense. I see what you mean in the photo, but the portion of the "wire" that is apparent in the roundel blue, does not quite line up with the portion in the dark green camouflage. I had noticed that earlier and chalked it up to lines of rivets on two different panels that didn't quite line up, or something like that.

 

2 hours ago, Max Headroom said:

I found this photo of ‘398 when in Johnson’s custodianship.

 

https://goo.gl/images/TH3vZx

 

I see the original and unenlarged elevator, no IFF cheescutter aerial and wheel hub covers.

 

Thanks Trevor, that helps a lot. I found a larger, but not necessarily any better, version of that photo.

 

JEJ IX

 

For some reason I am under the impression that if the IFF aerials on the side of the fuselage are present, then an aerial from the mast to the tail would also be present. True? I can't see that wire in either of the photos either.

 

Cheers,

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Navy Bird

 

Looking at the photo, I think it’s safe to say that there is no aerial running from the mast to rudder. Firstly there is no mounting point on the rudder which would be at a point level with the hinge line. Secondly, the mast has no ‘notch’ near the top rear end which would be the other mounting point.

 

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max Headroom said:

Looking at the photo, I think it’s safe to say that there is no aerial running from the mast to rudder. Firstly there is no mounting point on the rudder which would be at a point level with the hinge line. Secondly, the mast has no ‘notch’ near the top rear end which would be the other mounting point.

 

Thanks! I believe this means that the aircraft also did not have the cheese cutter IFF aerials, as the radio and IFF electrics seemed to be a set (see below).

 

I checked the production records for EN398, and she first flew on 13 Feb 1943, and was delivered to 402 Squadron on 18 Feb 1943 (only five days later - Lockheed, take note). Mod 801, which introduced the R3067 Mk.III radio and IFF set, went into effect on 12 Jan 1943. Did this make it to the production line at Chattis Hill in time for the build of EN398? Perhaps. If not, the aircraft went through modifications at Kenley in April of 1943 (after being transferred to 416 Squadron), and it could have been changed then. For this build, I'm going to proceed with the understanding that the aircraft incorporated Mod 801 from the start. Saves me putting them wires on!

 

(As always, I stand to be corrected. Or sit to be corrected, as I have a bad back.)

 

Keltie's last mission with EN398 was 13 Mar 1943, a little less than a month after the aircraft was first received. I'll go on the assumption that she didn't get too awful dirty during that time. Which is good for me, because I'm not a big fan of heavily weathered models (due to the fact that I'm not very good a producing a realistic effect!).

 

Cheers,

Bill

 

PS. Next silly question - for an aircraft not configured with a drop tank, what position would the fuel cock control lever be in? I ask because Eduard and Tamiya (who both depict the drop tank control assembly in PE) have a disagreement about where this lever should be. Tamiya have it forward, while Eduard have it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thom216 said:

Great work on the IP. I was wondering which was which!

Agreed :clap:

Left hand is Eduard's, and I'd definitely go with that, bar the additional gauges issue

 

Ciao

Edited by giemme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stumbled across this Bill despite being started over a year ago, not sure what planet I’ve been on!

 

looking forwards to your progress :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Continuing on the IFF aerial question, my understanding is that the ' cheese cutter '  was replaced by a post type aerial under the starboard wing just ahead of the aileron hinge line. It's very difficult to say if it was present in the above photo because the area  in question is all in shadow. I also sit to be be corrected

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bill, great job so far. I'm watching with great interest when I get the a chance.

When you say 'aircraft not configured with a drop tank' am I right in thinking you've chosen not to have her kitted out this way (I wasn't sure if you'd got the close-up shot of the 'popeye' image on EN398, or not, 

when fitted with a streamlined drop tank -looks as if taken on the same day as your shot of Ian Keltie)?

 

I wasn't sure if you'd seen Ian Keltie's contribution to Robert Bracken's 'Spitfire II -The Canadians'?

Pages 36 to 38 cover this and have your shot of Ian plus the close-up of the Popeye image. He also describes combat with Fw190s whilst flying EN398 in her previous code of AE-I (Feb 26 1943).

Also, I couldn't make out properly in your shot of the Eagle Cal decals (or in the photo of EN398 with Keltie), but in Bracken's book, there's a colour illustration of EN398 (can't make out the artist name and can't find that particular credit), showing her with

Yellow borders around the sky AE-B lettering.

This is also seen in the Hussar decals book (48th scale) of AE-B at that time (see link here):-

http://www.hyperscale.com/2014/reviews/decals/hussarspitfireixreviewbf_1.htm

 

I see they mention wide cannon bulges in the text but I don't know their sources.

Also I couldn't see any IFF blade aerial in the close-up Popeye photo (should be visible under starboard wing).

Hope this might be of some use, Bill.

 

Cheers Bob.

 

Addition to last:- 

Just been looking a little deeper and found some more information that might be interesting, Bill?

Hussar do a 32nd scale set of the decals also, (but you'll have to decide whether it's these Yellow outlined ones or the Eagle Cals which are most accurate).

Personally, looking at the photo you have, I can't see any edges that look like the shade of the outer ring of the roundel, but whoever did the artwork might have had a better photo, or first hand information perhaps from Ian Keltie himself? (the signature next to the artwork dated '99 could well be 'Keltie' and Ian Keltie died 29 Jan 2007 aged 86).

 

Perhaps more interestingly, I found a reference in a book to an incident on May 23 1942 where Keltie was flying No.2 to Flt Lt. Malloy. Malloy was attacked and shot down by another Spitfire (!) over the channel and baled out over the channel.

Keltie pursued and 'got hits' on the said Spitfire which crash landed at Hawkinge.

I just checked in the Sqn Operational Record Book on the National Archives pages and it is entered there. 

The pilot who attacked Malloy in error and was then 'hit' by Keltie, subsequently crash landing at Hawkinge was Jean-Marie Maridor of 91 Sqn, who was later tragically killed stopping a V1 hitting Benenden School, 3rd august 1944 (which was being used as a military hospital).

Apologies if you already knew all this.

 

 

 

 

Edited by bobsyouruncle
typing errors and better phrasing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks mates. At this point, I prefer the kit instrument panel, even with my bodgy detail painting. I just don't think the Eduard panel looks realistic in this scale. And apparently neither do Eduard, as they've come out with a new process that looks much better (pre-painted resin instead of photoetch). They call these LööK - and here is a CAD representation of the 1:32 Mk.IX panel:

 

634005_z1

 

Personally, I think they're feeling some heat from Yahu. Here is their panel and compass face:

 

yahu

I'd love to have both of these in my hands and see what they're really like.

 

@bobsyouruncle - I don't have a copy of that book, but I just ordered one. Only $6.95 with free shipping, not bad. So, I guess what you're saying is that Keltie had a slipper tank installed which can be seen in this close-up photo of Popeye. Is that correct? If that's the case, then I need to find out if the lever in the cockpit for the fuel cock is forward or back. I'll dig through the Mk.IX pilot's notes.

 

As far as the yellow borders to the AE-B codes, I've seen this on other decal sheets, and even in the 1:72 CMR kit. The yellow border is depicted as the same yellow as in the roundel. I can't see anything like that in that photo, though, so I'm somewhat confused. The decals that include the yellow border also have Popeye wearing a yellow shirt, again the same colour as in the roundel.

 

Now I must have watched every episode of Popeye there ever was, and read the comics. Typically, he had either a black, navy blue, or white shirt. I don't recall yellow. The photo with Keltie looks very much to me like Popeye has a white shirt, the same colour as his pants. It will be interesting to see what this close-up photo of Popeye looks like in the book.

 

For what it's worth, Eduard's Royal Class Spitfire does not have either yellow borders or yellow shirt.

 

Cheers,

Bill

 

PS. Maybe a little better photo?

 

mk9-keltie-2

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the look ( no pun intended ) of the new Eduard panels, I've always thought that the current ones are too shiny. I think they are worried about the competition from Yahu whose panels are more realistic but, like Eduard, do not always fit.

 

Looking forward to more.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Biggles87 said:

I think they are worried about the competition from Yahu whose panels are more realistic but, like Eduard, do not always fit.

I think you're absolutely right.

Share this post


Link to post
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...