1/72 Spitfire PR Mk.X vs Mk.XI

[757flyer]

For the Spitfire experts out there, what would the differences be between the Special Hobby Spitfire PR Mk.X and the MPM Spitfire PR Mk.XI?  From what I can tell, they share the same basic plastic trees, with the exception of the canopy.  Is the standard fighter canopy included with the PR X kit the only real difference between the two?  (The PR XI comes with the single piece PR front windscreen)

 

Thanks,

Mike

 

 

[72modeler]

Off the top of my head:

 

PR Mk X:

actually followed PR XI in production; Mk VII fuselage  and PRXI wings

internal armored fighter windscreen

pressurized cockpit with Lobelle sliding hood

cabin pressurization compressor intake on RH side under exhaust stacks

deeper chin cowling due to extra 14.5 gallon oil tank

guns replaced with a 66.5 gallon fuel tank in each wing

booster pump and fairing under each wing to feed wing fuel cells

 

PR Mk XI

unarmored PR windscreen

non-pressurized cockpit- no compressor intake

deeper chin cowling due to extra 14.5 gallon oil tank

booster pump and fairing under each wing to feed leading edge fuel cells

two vertical cameras and one oblique camera normal fit; two cameras could also be carried in a blister fairing under each wing for tactical reconnaissance

29 gallon fuel tank mounted behind the cockpit

all of the Merlin 70 and 198 of the Merlin 60 powered examples had the longer Aero Vee intake/filter, and almost all had the broader chord, pointed rudder

Merlin 60 powered examples had the fuel cooler in the LH wing root with a small intake

 

You might also see what @Graham Boak has to say, as I'm pretty sure he knows a lot more about the Spitfire than I do, but this list should get you started.

Mike

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[gingerbob]

I can't speak to the kits themselves, but what you say sounds plausible.

 

The fundamental (visual) difference between the two marks is that, as Mike said, the X was pressurised, and used Mk.VII fuselages as a basis, including the "normal" pressure-fighter windscreen and hood.  They were built as a small, "special case" batch.  (Note that, as with all PR versions, they retained the "full length" aileron.)

[elger]

I'm 99% sure that the Special Hobby X kit is indeed based on MPM's XI. The sprues look the same, judging from images available online. (http://www.internetmodeler.com/2000/april/first-looks/mpm_spitfire-prxi.htm for the XI; https://www.super-hobby.com/products/Spitfire-Pr-Mk-X.html for the X). Scalemates also indicates the Special Hobby X is based on the MPM XI kit: https://www.scalemates.com/kits/112501-special-hobby-sh72037-supermarine-spitfire-pr-mk-x

 

Based on the images on super-hobby.com, I would say that the Special Hobby kit only comes with 2 vacuum formed fighter canopies, not the PR canopy.

 

Direct link: https://www.super-hobby.com/zdjecia/4/8/4/1334_1_SPH72037_2.jpg

 

 

 

 

[757flyer]

Elger,

 

Thanks - that was my conclusion as well - only the canopy is different in the two kits.  I did see that the SH instructions have you not use several parts on the sprues, but they do indeed appear to be all the same sprues.  So, if I am correct in my assumption, I can get a one of the vacuform canopy sets for the Spitfire that includes the PR canopy, and I should be able to turn out the same caliber of XI starting with the Special Hobby PR Mk.X kit as I would get from building the MPM PR Mk.XI itself?  (and of course I would need to source different decals)

 

 

Mike,

 

Thanks for all of the detail information.  Most helpful!

 

Mike

 

Edited January 7, 2019 by 757flyer

[Denford]

Another seldom mentioned, but distinctive, difference was that the PR Xl had a 'post' aerial,  whereas the PR X had the 'whip' type.

Why this should be so is unclear, at least to me.  However the PR XlX, (pressurised like the PRX) had the 'whip' type! 

[gingerbob]

Good point on the aerial.  I suspect that the explanation is simply that the X and XIX date to about May '44, whereas the XI had been in production for some time before.  The XIV featured a whip, too, and that appeared at a roughly similar time.  (I believe it was a change for drag reduction, but no doubt also production improvement.)