Spitfire Mk XII

[Neil Whiteley-Bolton]

On 12/12/2018 at 5:35 PM, 72modeler said:

Airwaves/DB did a resin Griffon Spitfire nose/spinner/intake  many years back to be mated to the basic kit of choice to do a Mk XIV; you could use it to make a MK XII I guess, but. you would need to shorten the cowling at the firewall, IIRC 5" as the Griffon II or IV fitted to the XII had a different supercharger; you also need to add the blister fairing for the Coffman starter to the top of the cowling, IIRC. Just make sure, if you go this route, that you use a donor kit that has the C wing as well as the non-symmetrical coolant/intercooler/oil cooler arrangement. Decide which production batch you want as well; one batch was from Vc airframes and had the fixed tailwheel; the other batch was from VIII airframes and had the retractable tailwheel. We had a lot of discussion on building the best XII a while back, so you could look it up. @Graham Boak would be the man to ask, methink,s for the best information. In my opinion, if you can get a Paragon XII conversion, that would be the way to go, as it fits perfectly and covers all the salient features of the XII- in addition, swapping their nose for the donor Hasegawa IX/VI/VIII kit nose corrects one of the issues of their kit. (Maybe Colin could be persuaded to remaster the Paragon conversion to fit one of the new-tool Vc kits?)

Mike

I think that the best way to obtain an accurate XII in 1:48 is to use the Aeroclub fuselage - supposing that you can get one. I'm fortunate in that I have two in my stash.

 

N.

[Greenshirt]

41 minutes ago, Dave Fleming said:

Hasegawa did do a boxing of the mk VII.

I’ve had Hasegawa’s VII, VIII, and IX boxings. All the same base sprues but w added bits and decals for variant in the box. The VII had the compressor intake and instructions to fill key panel lines like the long ailerons and the elevators.  VIII was similar but without the compressor. IX had an insert for the non retractable tailwheel. 

 

They do build eaily and look nice, but don’t set one next to an Eduard kit as it looks noticeably smaller. 

 

I’m on the lookout for another VII as I want to convert it to a PR.X...but I’d rather a dedicated kit gets released so I’m not looking very hard. 

 

 

[72modeler]

2 hours ago, Greenshirt said:

They do build eaily and look nice, but don’t set one next to an Eduard kit as it looks noticeably smaller. 

Tim,

 

I pretty much have decided that it might make for a better XII if I mate my Paragon XII conversion set to one of my Eduard Mk IX's, as I have two profipaks, two week end editions, and two overtree kits, plus one of the Mk XVI combos. Good point about matching the quality of panel lines of the resin cowling to the Eduard kit, but luckily, there's not that much in the way of panel lines on the real cowling, and the fasteners already molded on the resin cowling are actually pretty good. The conversion comes with a resin flat piece to replace the radiator which needs to be removed, along with a new oil cooler, but  a correctly sized sheet of plasticard would be even easier to work with. Giorgio's statement about the low cost of the Eduard kits was right on the money.....now, what the h--- do I do with  the ton of Hasegawa Mk VII/VII/IX kits I have squirreled away?

Mike

[Graham Boak]

Well, you could pass one of them to Greenshirt above.  I suspect that Hasegawa Spitfires will remain quite saleable for some time.  I must admit tending to keep older "superseded" kits and even eventually making them (one day, yeah right), rather than sell on and spend yet more money on new ones.  This could well have something to do with not having too large a stock of kits that are actually untouched and thus saleable!  If they need a bit more modelling than the SuperKit then that's the hobby I'm in, after all.  Which is not the same thing as actually buying an old kit where a better one is available of the subject, though I must admit getting an original Frog Typhoon (which I missed when it came out) just out of curiosity.  There is a certain nostalgic attraction to those 1950s 1/72 kits which I never had at the time nor since - anyone got a cheap Frog Venom going?

Edited December 14, 2018 by Graham Boak

[72modeler]

1 hour ago, Graham Boak said:

Well, you could pass one of them to Greenshirt above.  I suspect that Hasegawa Spitfires will remain quite saleable for some time.  I must admit tending to keep older "superseded" kits and even eventually making them (one day, yeah right), rather than sell on and spend yet more money on new ones.  This could well have something to do with not having too large a stock of kits that are actually untouched and thus saleable!  If they need a bit more modelling than the SuperKit then that's the hobby I'm in, after all.  Which is not the same thing as actually buying an old kit where a better one is available of the subject, though I must admit getting an original Frog Typhoon (which I missed when it came out) just out of curiosity.  There is a certain nostalgic attraction to those 1950s 1/72 kits which I never had at the time nor since - anyone got a cheap Frog Venom going?

G,

 

I agree with your points, but selected the Hasegawa VII as that's what the Paragon conversion was made for, and my friend who is building one said the conversion bits fit perfectly- I had told him about the fuselage length issues, but he said he was too far along to try to splice in a plasticard spacer, so I told him not to park it by any other non-Hasegawa kits! It's such a gorgeous airplane, I want to do it right....now I'm thinking Eduard VIII with the Paragon conversion- now I will have to see how the cross sections mate up! It's always sumthin'!

 

PM me regarding a Frog  Venom.

Mike

[Giorgio N]

Mike, if going the Eduard/Paragon route, get a Mk.IX, not the VIII. The latter has the correct wing for the Mk.VIII, so shorter ailerons, tanks in the leading edge and other details.

Of course the risk that the sections don't match is very high, as the conversion was afterall designed for the Hasegawa fuselage. In any case, there's only one way to find out... someone has to try 😁

[NPL]

What is the special thing about Paragon -- long time gone?

 

I do not have the Paragon set but these 

 

Airwaves SC40048                      Spitfire Mk.XII (Airfix Mk.VIII)

ARBA 2000                                 Spitfire MK.XII Conversion

Bringuier RC-003                       Spitfire Mk.XII Conversion (Tamiya Mk.Vb)

 

Still when depressed because of such discussions, I taje from my collection Falcon's body for a Mk.XII. Normally they had almost everything right, also dimensions, but of course, it's a vacuform. 

Maybe I should make them some day. The PR Mk.XI conversion also seems very nice ... and for everything you get Falcon clear parts.

 

 

 

[Troy Smith]

2 hours ago, 72modeler said:

.now I'm thinking Eduard VIII with the Paragon conversion- now I will have to see how the cross sections mate up! It's always sumthin'!

 

One point that has been overlooked in the blizzard of possible aftermarket,  the XII (and Seafire XV /XVII) all have the single stage, short Griffon.

the later Griffons are two stage, and thus have more gubbins at the back end...

 

The point I'm trying to make the the front end of any Griffon Spitfire is basically the same, so you could use the front of any accurate Griffon Spitfire, and just cut at the appropriate point.

the 4 blade prop is trickier, but 'some modelling skill' could turn a 5 into a 4 blade.   Not totally easy, but a possible work round.

I'm away from my kits,  but an old fashioned swap would be say, using an Airfix XIX and a suitable IX,  to make a XII and PR XI, remember it's possible to cut back the XIX fin, and I was very surprised to learn from @gingerbob that the rear section of the Merlin 60 series pointy rudder is the same on a XIX rudder...

 

now, this where you want @The Wooksta! to pitch in

 

30 minutes ago, NPL said:

What is the special thing about Paragon -- long time gone?

 

I do not have the Paragon set but these 

 

Airwaves SC40048                      Spitfire Mk.XII (Airfix Mk.VIII)

ARBA 2000                                 Spitfire MK.XII Conversion

Bringuier RC-003                       Spitfire Mk.XII Conversion (Tamiya Mk.Vb)

 

Still when depressed because of such discussions, I taje from my collection Falcon's body for a Mk.XII. Normally they had almost everything right, also dimensions, but of course, it's a vacuform. 

Maybe I should make them some day. The PR Mk.XI conversion also seems very nice ... and for everything you get Falcon clear parts.

 

HI Nils

These are all 1/48th?   in 1/48th if  you want a Spitfire XII, these days you straight to Special Hobby. Even with the bother of fixing the slight length issue, it's still much less work than any otehr route, and it has some etch, the right cockpit side walls and 4 decal options.

 

the above show their age by the recommend base kits.

Paragon are noted as they did very high quality work.  The mould still exist, and at some point the owner may reissue some of his items.

 

The Falcon vac sets were great for their day, and with 'some modelling skill' will still produce a good model, but their are easier methods.  

A little off topic, but given the availability and relative cheapness of the 1/48 Airfix PR XIX, i'd think this would be the best starting point for any PR Spitfire with the bowser or "D"  wing.  

 

You and gingerbob should compile a 1/48th Spitfire/Seafire kits, bits and decals archive,  so folks know what's what...

[gingerbob]

Sorry Troy, too Sisyphean a task for my taste.

[Graham Boak]

1 hour ago, Troy Smith said:

 

The point I'm trying to make the the front end of any Griffon Spitfire is basically the same, so you could use the front of any accurate Griffon Spitfire, and just cut at the appropriate point.

 

 

Is this right?  Or is the thrust line of the single-stage Griffon higher?  Just an impression which may be wrong, but the Mk.XII always seems a little bit "perkier" than the sleeker, perhaps slightly drooped Mk.XIV.  I could be being influenced by the old Frog Mk.XIV, which definitely did need the thrust line dropping, but is surely a poor guide to the earlier variant.

[Seahawk]

13 hours ago, Dave Fleming said:

interesting point about the Hasegawa canopy, that gives me an idea for my Eduard mk VII conversion........

Do tell: I could fancy building one of my Eduard Mk VIIIs as a VII.

 

 

[Troy Smith]

17 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

Is this right?  Or is the thrust line of the single-stage Griffon higher?  Just an impression which may be wrong, but the Mk.XII always seems a little bit "perkier" than the sleeker, perhaps slightly drooped Mk.XIV.  I

the actual nose ring, rocket bulges, exhaust slots, panel breaks are AFAIK if the thrust line is different,  and I think it'sthe same,  that's not that hard to adjust either

hopefully this will help

 

the front of the noses, especially in 72nd , are functionally the same, and the lower line of the cowl after if curves down  is basically flat, it's not unlike the way the front end of a Hurricane I and II are basically the same

 

Given I suggested cutting back a two stage into a single stage,  it's in the realms of do-able

 

I noted later that earler,  @72modeler suggested something similar with a resin nose, but a kit one would be easier to work with.  

[NPL]

11 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

 

One point that has been overlooked in the blizzard of possible aftermarket,  the XII (and Seafire XV /XVII) all have the single stage, short Griffon.

the later Griffons are two stage, and thus have more gubbins at the back end...

 

The point I'm trying to make the the front end of any Griffon Spitfire is basically the same, so you could use the front of any accurate Griffon Spitfire, and just cut at the appropriate point.

the 4 blade prop is trickier, but 'some modelling skill' could turn a 5 into a 4 blade.   Not totally easy, but a possible work round.

I'm away from my kits,  but an old fashioned swap would be say, using an Airfix XIX and a suitable IX,  to make a XII and PR XI, remember it's possible to cut back the XIX fin, and I was very surprised to learn from @gingerbob that the rear section of the Merlin 60 series pointy rudder is the same on a XIX rudder...

 

now, this where you want @The Wooksta! to pitch in

 

HI Nils

These are all 1/48th?   in 1/48th if  you want a Spitfire XII, these days you straight to Special Hobby. Even with the bother of fixing the slight length issue, it's still much less work than any otehr route, and it has some etch, the right cockpit side walls and 4 decal options.

 

the above show their age by the recommend base kits.

Paragon are noted as they did very high quality work.  The mould still exist, and at some point the owner may reissue some of his items.

 

The Falcon vac sets were great for their day, and with 'some modelling skill' will still produce a good model, but their are easier methods.  

A little off topic, but given the availability and relative cheapness of the 1/48 Airfix PR XIX, i'd think this would be the best starting point for any PR Spitfire with the bowser or "D"  wing.  

 

You and gingerbob should compile a 1/48th Spitfire/Seafire kits, bits and decals archive,  so folks know what's what...

As to Vacforms, I know. Only done a couple myself, and it is way back in time. However, the quality of Falcon's vacforms is excellent. It should not be too difficult to get them together, and for the Mk.II, it is only the fuselage they provide(d). They had complete kits for the Mk.XVIII and 22/24.  It was the dimensions which have been praised.

 

As to decals, I have my archive, inluding almost 1600 Spitfires and Seafires (waiting just now for the Renaissance sheet , and the new Fündecals Mk.I, that will make me pass the 1600 mark). Recently added the new sheet of Greek Spitfires Mk.Vc which are splendid. Now it is possible to make Spitfires from every nation that flew the plane. It would be possible to present a pdf-file with a list. 

 

I started my project of collecting for a full series after Neil Robinson published his idea about such a project in Quarter Scale Modeller back in 1997: Robinson, Neil (ed.), Spitfire Special (Quarter Scale Modeller, December 1997). And have since then played with a manuscript called my Spitfire project, which now is about 40 mbs. It will never be published -- too many copyright problems -- and is not really worth it as it is a personal choice.

 

As to kits, my personal collection includes:

 

Academy Mk.XIVc

Academy Mk.XIVe

Airfix Mk.I – new tooling (2015)

Airfix Mk.I/IIa (old tooling)                          

Airfix Mk.Va

Airfix Mk.Vb

Airfix Mk.Vb – new tooling (2014)

Airfix Mk.Vc/Seafire L.IIIc

Airfix Mk.IXc/XVIe

Airfix/Arii/Otaki Mk.VIII

Airfix Mk.XII

Airfix FR Mk.XIV* [2019]

Airfix Mk.XVIe [special edition for members of the Airfix Club]

Airfix PR Mk.XIX

Airfix Mk.22/24

Airfix Seafire Mk.IIc

Airfix Seafire Mk.17

Airfix Seafire Mk.46/47

Alley Cat Prototype [resin]

AZ Models PR Mk.XI [basis ICM]

Classic Airframes Mk.Vc [from Special Hobby]

Eduard Mk.Vc [from Special Hobby]

Eduard Mk.VIII

Eduard Mk.IXc/e

Eduard Mk.XVI (two versions, low and high back)

Eduard Mk.22/24 [from Airfix]

Grand Phoenix Seafire 47/46 [from Airfix]

Hasegawa Mk.Vb                                                                            

Hasegawa Mk.VI

Hasegawa Mk.VII

Hasegawa Mk.VIII

Hasegawa Mk.IXc

Hasegawa Mk.IXe

Hobbycraft Mk.XIVc

Hobbycraft Seafire Mk.XV

ICM Mk.VII

ICM Mk.VIII

ICM Mk.IXc

ICM Mk.IXe

ICM Mk.XVIe (also Revell)

Italeri Mk.IXe (from Occidental)

MPM Mk.IXc (from Occidental)

Occidental Mk.IXe

Occidental Mk.XVIe

Planet Models Mk.21 [resin]

Planet Models Seafire Mk.45 [resin]

Special Hobby Mk.Vc

Special Hobby Mk.XII

Special Hobby Seafire Mk.II

Special Hobby Seafire Mk.III

Special Hobby Seafire Mk. XV (2 versions) (also Revell)

Tamiya Mk.I

Tamiya Mk.I* [2018]

Tamiya Mk.Vb (normal & tropical).

 

I have the old Revell Mk.II which I love although it is 'überholt' by modern kits, and Monogram's Mk.IX which is just awfull. 

 

 

 

 

[Denford]

20 hours ago, Greenshirt said:

I’ve had Hasegawa’s VII, VIII, and IX boxings. All the same base sprues but w added bits and decals for variant in the box. The VII had the compressor intake and instructions to fill key panel lines like the long ailerons and the elevators.  VIII was similar but without the compressor. IX had an insert for the non retractable tailwheel. 

 

They do build eaily and look nice, but don’t set one next to an Eduard kit as it looks noticeably smaller. 

 

I’m on the lookout for another VII as I want to convert it to a PR.X...but I’d rather a dedicated kit gets released so I’m not looking very hard. 

 

 

Without drifting too much off thread (Spitfire Xll) there's  an easier, better and more accurate way to make a PR X and avoid the faults of the Hasegawa Spitfires.

Freightdog offer a PR XlX to PR Xl conversion using the Airfix XlX as the basis.  Yes, I know it has its faults but they are minor compared with those of Hasegawa.  'Extra' work is confined to:

- Removing and re-using the blower intake from the redundant nose section; long and patient abrasion till it's free.

- Providing a fighter windscreen with rear view mirror.

And that's it!  You don't even have to correct for the fact that XlX was pressurised while the Xl was not!  The main canopy parts fit perfectly, of course, as they are installed on the kit for which they were designed.

I did mention this to Freightdog with a rather non committal response.  Perhaps as PRX conversion kit would require, in clear plastic either a new windscreen or more likely a completely new screen, canopy and rear-part combination.

Good luck

 

 

[malpaso]

There is the Brigade conversion in 1/72, if no one's already mentioned it.  I only have the decals from it, which seem okay and cover most of the famous XIIs.  Although meant for Italeri I presume it would fit any of the decent modern kits, only thing is the conversion kit seems quite expensive. 

[NPL]

37 minutes ago, Denford said:

Without drifting too much off thread (Spitfire Xll) there's  an easier, better and more accurate way to make a PR X and avoid the faults of the Hasegawa Spitfires.

Freightdog offer a PR XlX to PR Xl conversion using the Airfix XlX as the basis.  Yes, I know it has its faults but they are minor compared with those of Hasegawa.  'Extra' work is confined to:

- Removing and re-using the blower intake from the redundant nose section; long and patient abrasion till it's free.

- Providing a fighter windscreen with rear view mirror.

And that's it!  You don't even have to correct for the fact that XlX was pressurised while the Xl was not!  The main canopy parts fit perfectly, of course, as they are installed on the kit for which they were designed.

I did mention this to Freightdog with a rather non committal response.  Perhaps as PRX conversion kit would require, in clear plastic either a new windscreen or more likely a completely new screen, canopy and rear-part combination.

Good luck

 

 

I was a bit infatuated by the guy here who took an Airfix  Mk XIX (1:48) and mated Hasegawa's c-wing to it, having the basis for a Mk.XIVc, and then used the PR Mk.XIX wings together with something else (was it Eduard?) as the basis for a PR Mk XI. It would of course also do for a PT Mk.X, although the X is pressurised. The problem with the PR Mk.X is that there were so few of them, and practically no decals: My only one is Fantasy Printshop 480-002 RAF Spitfires: PR Mk.X, MD194, 541/542 Sqdn. 

 

As to 1:72, I know nothing. In 1:32 Alley Cat has conversions for PR Mk.XIs -- basis kit Tamiya, so it ends up being a very expensive model.

[Troy Smith]

48 minutes ago, NPL said:

The problem with the PR Mk.X is that there were so few of them, and practically no decals:

you just need the relevant serial,  as they did not have squadron markings.

they were also finished in the high altitude fighter scheme,  Medium Sea Grey upper with PRU blue undersides, NOT overall PRU blue

 

On 26/3/2009 at 22:20, Colin S-K said:

It is the Spitfire PR X, only 16 of them built. Not many photos, and many sources quote Grey or PRU Blue..... All quote gloss. Pink is rubbish, only 16 Sqn used Pink aircraft, for low level, dusk/dawn Recce, when sky was pink...

Wrong.....

It has the same camera fit as the PR XI, but it was pressurised....

Short lived experiment, as it was superseded by the PR XIX. Why build a Merlin PR High Altitude Spitfire, when very soon a Griffon engined Spitfire, went further with better performance.....

Colours, look closely at photos, you can see colour difference on engine cowling. Medium Sea Grey above and PRU Blue beneath. Which matches with High Altitude scheme of that time...!

Reasons for me saying so....

I know a pilot that flew these aircraft......

Look at photo's....

 

 

look at the tonal difference between side and lower cowling, which tallies with MSG over PRU blue

 

3 hours ago, NPL said:

I have the old Revell Mk.II which I love although it is 'überholt' by modern kits,

I had to look 'uberholt' up,  obsolete

Well, I got one of these cheap via our sale page when Revell reissued it.  apart form the slighly short wing (in the tips I think), and lack of gull wing,  I was impressed at the basic shape accuracy.

the basis of a good shelf model with the addition of a few optional parts from other modern kits

3 hours ago, NPL said:

and Monogram's Mk.IX which is just awfull. 

Sure it's crude, had a retracting undercarriage gimmick, and is covered in battleship rivets,  but on a quick compare with an old Airfix Vb (I got both in the same deal) the main basic shapes are good, which is more than can be said about many of the kits done in the 90's and on...

 

cheers

T

 

[Dave Fleming]

8 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

you just need the relevant serial,  as they did not have squadron markings.

they were also finished in the high altitude fighter scheme,  Medium Sea Grey upper with PRU blue undersides, NOT overall PRU blue

 

 

 

look at the tonal difference between side and lower cowling, which tallies with MSG over PRU blue

 

 

 

 

 

Not completely convinced by the PRU/MSG scheme. On that one that looks possible, but look at one below. And MSG over PRU Blue was the high altitude FIGHTER scheme, this was a PR aircraft. And the light grey serial matches practice on overall PRU Blue aircraft.

 

[Troy Smith]

20 minutes ago, Dave Fleming said:

Not completely convinced by the PRU/MSG scheme. On that one that looks possible, but look at one below. And MSG over PRU Blue was the high altitude FIGHTER scheme, this was a PR aircraft. 

I'd agree the image you posted is overall PRU blue, but it is test plane, not in squadron service.

as for the MSG/PRU Blue scheme,  I'm quoting @Colin S-K,  who ran the IPMS recce SIG, who said thsi came from a PR X pilot.

The PR X, being pressurised, was for high altitude work.  while wartime PR XIX were overall PRU Blue, post war they were MSG uppers over PRU Blue. 

Quote

And the light grey serial matches practice on overall PRU Blue aircraft.

 

AFAIK, they used white

P.R. Spitfire         1944. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

not that clear, but brightly  illuminated

Spitfire PR mk.XI, 1944. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

more here colour here, with a few more PR planes

https://www.flickr.com/search/?w=8270787%40N07&q=spitfire

 

 

[Greenshirt]

3 hours ago, Denford said:

PR XlX to PR Xl conversion

Thanks, I have that conversion set...

[72modeler]

On ‎12‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 12:16 PM, Giorgio N said:

Mike, if going the Eduard/Paragon route, get a Mk.IX, not the VIII. The latter has the correct wing for the Mk.VIII, so shorter ailerons, tanks in the leading edge and other details.

Of course the risk that the sections don't match is very high, as the conversion was afterall designed for the Hasegawa fuselage. In any case, there's only one way to find out... someone has to try 😁

Giorgio,

 

You are right on the money! I was aware of the differences in the Mk VIII kits, so I had two possible plans for my Mk XII, Plan A was to use the Paragon conversion on the fuselage of one of my overtree Mk VIII kits and mate it to one of my overtree Mk IXc kit wings- that way I would have the retractable tailwheel  I need for MB882 and the correct ailerons, cartridge chutes, and no LE fuel tanks. Plan B was to use the Paragon conversion on one of my overtree IXc's and graft the rear fuselage of one of my Hasegawa Mk VII's onto it to get the retractable tailwheel, as the Hasegawa fuselage from the transport joint back is identical to the Eduard fuselages. BTW, for any who have the Paragon XII conversion and are interested, the cross section of the Hasegawa and Eduard kits at the firewall where the cut needs to be made is identical, so the conversion will fit either kit. (Eduard could save us all a lot of trouble if they would engineer a Mk XII, Seafire XV,(early and late!)  and Seafire  XVII kit- just need different fuselage sprues...unless the XV and XVII had LE fuel cells? I can dream, can't I?)

Mike

Edited December 15, 2018 by 72modeler
corrected spelling

[Dave Fleming]

21 hours ago, Seahawk said:

Do tell: I could fancy building one of my Eduard Mk VIIIs as a VII.

 

 

 

Nothing more than seeing if the Hasegawa canopy will fit an Eduard VIII (with suitable fuselage mods)

[Graham Boak]

The Hasegawa canopy doesn't quite go down as far as the Mk.VIIs, and it does have a bottom frame.  Worth considering though.

[Giorgio N]

On 12/15/2018 at 5:01 PM, 72modeler said:

Giorgio,

 

You are right on the money! I was aware of the differences in the Mk VIII kits, so I had two possible plans for my Mk XII, Plan A was to use the Paragon conversion on the fuselage of one of my overtree Mk VIII kits and mate it to one of my overtree Mk IXc kit wings- that way I would have the retractable tailwheel  I need for MB882 and the correct ailerons, cartridge chutes, and no LE fuel tanks. Plan B was to use the Paragon conversion on one of my overtree IXc's and graft the rear fuselage of one of my Hasegawa Mk VII's onto it to get the retractable tailwheel, as the Hasegawa fuselage from the transport joint back is identical to the Eduard fuselages. BTW, for any who have the Paragon XII conversion and are interested, the cross section of the Hasegawa and Eduard kits at the firewall where the cut needs to be made is identical, so the conversion will fit either kit. (Eduard could save us all a lot of trouble if they would engineer a Mk XII, Seafire XV,(early and late!)  and Seafire  XVII kit- just need different fuselage sprues...unless the XV and XVII had LE fuel cells? I can dream, can't I?)

Mike

 

Mike, the XV and XVII didn't have fuel tanks in the leading edge but they would require new wings anyway for one important reason: they had folding wings. This means different panel lines (with of course the wingfold lines but IIRC also a few others) and also a different shape of the wheel wells.

This is also a detail to keep in mind if converting a XV to a XII

[Dave Fleming]

One thing I've never been sure about the mk XII is if the oil cooler and radiator are the same size as the ones on the mk V or larger