Requirements to build a 1/48 High Back spitfire XIV

[Tail-Dragon]

Here's an observation on the Eduard overtree approach.  I'm interested in an RCAF Spit Mk XIVe (as I understand it, the RCAF machines were almost exclusively 'e' winged). So, Eduard do not produce a Mk VIII 'e' wing, the two closest would be the sprue 'D'  (Mk IXe, or Velvetta Spit) and would require the shortening of the aileron, as well as the leading edge tanks, or, sprue 'H' (HF VII or Aussie * kits) and would require conversion to an 'E' config - new canon fairing, re-cutting shell chutes and lower wing blisters. Am I missing anything?

 

 

 

 

[P_Budzik]

You are correct about the wing mods.  If I were doing an "E" wing Mk XIV, I would stick with the Airfix kit all the way and just add the spine.  I think the Eduard approach gets the best "C" wing.

 

Paul

[Work In Progress]

No model-maker produces an E wing VIII because Supermarine didn't either.

[Gwart]

 

 I would go with the XVI wing ,green is add,red is remove.Much easier than making an VIII C wing armament into an E.

 

 Shane.
 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2019 by Gwart

[mike romeo]

I picked up my Airfix XIV kit last night and gave the sprues a good fondle.  I noticed that on the wing interior there is a recess cut immediately around the cannon stubs.  If these were cut and swapped between wings, would you have the basis of a c wing?  I'm guessing you'd need long barrel cannon fairings and outer m/g cartridge ejector ports too (the latter are not present as flashed over holes). 

 

I note the presence of a number of other flashed over holes in the underside of the outer wing, which look like they might be for the location of underwing ordnance.  Any clues?

 

Off topic, but I notice that in Section 10 of the instructions, the ip is shown with the compass housing present.  This is not present on the ip moulding and I couldn't find a reference to fitting this as a separate part.  A bit cheeky, methinks!

 

Regards

 

Martin

[Work In Progress]

3 hours ago, mike romeo said:

I picked up my Airfix XIV kit last night and gave the sprues a good fondle.  I noticed that on the wing interior there is a recess cut immediately around the cannon stubs.  If these were cut and swapped between wings, would you have the basis of a c wing? 

Apols if this is restating the obvious, but just to check -- you're not trying to make a low-back XIVc, are you? 

[mike romeo]

23 minutes ago, Work In Progress said:

Apols if this is restating the obvious, but just to check -- you're not trying to make a low-back XIVc, are you? 

Nope, just asking some questions.

[Giorgio N]

On 8/27/2019 at 9:08 PM, Welkin said:

It's a depressingly familiar story - we get endless kits of every variant and sub-variant of the Me. 109 and the Fw.190, but there seems to be no chance that we will ever have a kit of all the Spitfire marks, whatever our chosen scale.

 

Really when I think of operational Spitfires there only a few recce subvariants that have not been made available in kit form in one scale or the other, and even these can be made using aftermarket sets. As we're speaking of high back Spit XIV here, this is a variant that has been offered by several companies in the past and a 1/48 kit is easily available from Academy... that this is an inaccurate kit it's another story of course...

[Tail-Dragon]

Rather than kit bash (and destroy another kit), I'm trying to convert Airfix's PR XIX into an FR XIVe just with rescribing and scratch building.

 

Upper surface of wings with the ailerons shortened, rescribed, and small blister from stretched sprue, large one is a reprofiled bomb.  (using the FR XIV Bubbletop as a pattern)

 

 

 

Lower surface rescribed, shell chutes cut, and with missing ID light added, blister from sprue.

 

Incorrect panel lines and access panels filled with either stretched sprue, Zap-a-gap and Talcum powder, or Millput.  Large blisters, and the air cond. intake on fuselage first backfilled with melted sprue squashed in, then cemented (to give a good base for rescribing.  It will have the 'E' cannons, access door and seat from Ultracast, and a Rob Taurus Vac canopy

 

I still have to add some more scribing, finish sanding the reworked areas and prime to check, and add the fasteners, but the worst is over. 

 

I just can't bring myself to chop up an Eduard's kit, especially if it's still going to need reworking.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Tail-Dragon

[P_Budzik]

I did that and I have two previous videos on how I fabricated the blisters. I think that approach makes the most sense if you're using the PR XIX kit. It is interesting to note how far off the PR XIX fuselage is though ... and I plan on showing that in the final bit when I wrap up this adventure.  Heading to Hendon today and maybe gathering a little first hand info.  But I have no idea of what is on display and how accessible it will be. 

[Troy Smith]

3 hours ago, Paul Budzik said:

Heading to Hendon today and maybe gathering a little first hand info.  But I have no idea of what is on display and how accessible it will be. 

Spitfires?  In March they had a Mk.I, Mk.XVI (which you can sit in if you pay) and a Mk.24,   and a Vb on a pole in the first 'interactive' bit.

You can get some close up pics,  anything else you'd need to about in advance.

Using the library needs a bit of advance notice.

 

11 hours ago, Tail-Dragon said:

large one is a reprofiled bomb.  (using the FR XIV Bubbletop as a pattern)

as I have said before, and not my idea, cut blisters out of ICM wing panels, they are too shallow, but if you use the depth of the door as well, they are pretty close. And the ICM kit has 3 types in every box.

 

3 hours ago, Paul Budzik said:

It is interesting to note how far off the PR XIX fuselage is though

Hm, more on this please Paul.

there was mention of problems a while back, nose a little narrow, making the spinner a little too narrow on the base and the intergral blisters may have some issues?

 and I noted you used the Caruana drawings, I'm always wary of anything with his name on it... though they looked decent compared to the kits..

 

cheers

T

[Tail-Dragon]

3 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

as I have said before, and not my idea, cut blisters out of ICM wing panels, they are too shallow, but if you use the depth of the door as well, they are pretty close. And the ICM kit has 3 types in every box.

I looked at that, and thought the ICM blisters were too narrow and pointed. as well as being shallow. I found it easier to use spare , small bombs from the Eduard FW-190. They have plenty of meat for the required filing/sanding.

3 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

It is interesting to note how far off the PR XIX fuselage is though

Other than the pressurization intake, cockpit door, rear glazing, small wing root blister for the front spar attach point,  and radio access door, the only issue I was aware of was the engine blisters were a little short at the back end (which I'm going to address). Are there other issues I've missed?  I'm using the excellent plans by Jumpei Temma, and the Spit XIVe bubble top kit, by the way.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2019 by Tail-Dragon

[P_Budzik]

I can't get into it too deep because I'm on my cell, but I'll lead off with "I NEVER get in a dispute over drawing",  i have been drafting for half a century and there is only so much you can draw ... and scanning is not perfect either,  so you just pick your poison and go for it. With that, I'll say that I think the new Airfix xiv is pretty good dimensionally ... it lines up well with their mkv and the Eduard Spits.  Now put the xix half against the new xiv half and tell me what you see.  The cockpit and wing location are further forward,  the fuel/oil tank covers are different,  the rear of rocker bulge is off a foot (not just a bit), and all this makes the fuselage longer.  The XIX fuselage is wider than the xiv in the straight area behind the rocker cover yet the spinner is undersize. So given the fact that the new xiv linesup spot-on with some other respectable models and the xix has some boobs .. I'm going with the new Spit for dimensions.  You might not like the separate rocker covers,  I know I don't,  and I think the molding and fit are not up to par with Tamiya or Eduard, but I think they got the dimensions pretty close ... plus the conversion with the Eduard kit was so easy, it was a kick, I might just do another.

 

Hendon was good  ... the Tempest V is back on the ground  ... now if they would just put it back in a proper camo.

 

Paul

Edited September 4, 2019 by P_Budzik

[Tail-Dragon]

18 hours ago, Paul Budzik said:

I can't get into it too deep because I'm on my cell, but I'll lead off with "I NEVER get in a dispute over drawing",  i have been drafting for half a century and there is only so much you can draw

I certainly wasn't advocating one set of drawings over another, just mentioning that this was the set that I have , and was using. I have no idea which is more accurate. I absolutely agree that the Eduard kits are getting to be the gold standard of kits, but it is 3 times the price of an Airfix kit, and with several of the XIX kits on the shelf, I can't justify chopping up a $60 kit to accurize a $20 kit. I'll correct what I can, and live with what I can't. After all, I've made piece with panel lines that are a scale 1/2 to 3/4 of an inch wide!

[P_Budzik]

As I pointed out in my initial reply, I think your approach is the way I would go if I was using the PR XIX kit ... rather than using an ICM wing as some advocate ... and that's who my comments about the PR XIX were aimed at ... the kitbashers who claim the PR/ICM combo is the best.

So best of luck!

Paul

Edited September 5, 2019 by P_Budzik

[Tomas Enerdal]

On ‎04‎/‎09‎/‎2019 at 20:32, Paul Budzik said:

You might not like the separate rocker covers,  I know I don't,

I found that by shimming up the rocker covers just a little (I used 0,05 mm plasticard) I got them closer to the "surface level" of the surrounding engine covers. This made the seam much less prominent and closer to scale. Not all the way up, mind. There should still be a faint seam. In some small places the seam was still a tad too wide but that was easily handled by narrowing the gap with strips of the same thin plasticard. The remaining gaps will be made even less prominent with typewriter correcting fluid/alcohol. A simple and quick method, but I can already see that I will be very pleased with the end result!

Good luck. 

[P_Budzik]

Actually, since I just photographed the real deal, there should not be a panel line there at all. The bulge fits in from the back of the  cutout ... so it should actually be slightly lower and the main cover forms a lap joint over it .. the joint is barely visible .. you really have to go looking for it.  Certainly would not be visible in 1/48 scale.

 

I think Aifix molded it this way because it was easier and less costly. If you look at the PR XIX, you can see the mold lines ... it was a more intricate design and I think it involved a third piece to accommodate the undercut.

 

Paul 

Edited September 6, 2019 by P_Budzik

[Tomas Enerdal]

Agree, would not be visible in 1/48 scale.

The kit, however, do have panellines, and rivets, fasteners etc that should not be visible either.

I'm toning down them as well as I can without totally eliminate them, I'm sanding down most of the surface.

The method I am testing for the rocker covers seems to reduce/tone down the joints without totally eliminating them. Totally removing the joints would give the impression of no joints at all, I want to keep some joint line, in balance with the others.