Jump to content

1/48 - Supermarine Spitfire Mk.I to Mk.V by Eduard - Mk.I/Ia/IIa/IIb/Vb/Vc released


Homebee

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ray_W said:

EDIT: posted the question in the all things Spitfire thread in WW2.

As good as these ‘All things’ threads are, they are all starting to grow a little too large IMO. We almost need an all things by Mk. number, however that would no doubt throw up further complications. Some aircraft types are way too popular for one thread, but I suppose I could just go pre-millennium and just sit down and read a book?
 

This is all good stuff fellas, some of which is a bit too picky for some, however the choice to include / remove / not bother, is always up to ‘we’ the modeller. 
 

Cheers.. Dave 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like some opportunities for after market companies here - Barracuda, Quickboost.

 

And then there will be the inevitable Brassin sets. It will be interesting to see if they perpetuate their thoughts on the U/C mechanism with their Brassin 'pit.

 

Edit - A Brassin cockpit set IS available already and persists with the pump action U/C mechanism (that was quick!)

Edited by Peter Roberts
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Peter Roberts said:

Looks like some opportunities for after market companies here - Barracuda, Quickboost.

 

And then there will be the inevitable Brassin sets. It will be interesting to see if they perpetuate their thoughts on the U/C mechanism with their Brassin 'pit.

The Brassin cockpit is already available. As are replacement undercarriage legs and etch brass flaps.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, avro683 said:

The Brassin cockpit is already available. As are replacement undercarriage legs and etch brass flaps.

Yes, edited my post as you posted :) Over to Baracuda, Quickboost, et al for some extra bits...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have electronic copies of a lot of Spitfire drawings. The u/c selector was changed on the Mk I. My reasoning is that the drawings of both types of unit are prefixed 300-. That is the type 300, MkI Spitfire. The MkII Spitfire was the type 329 and the drawings are prefixed this way.

 

Also, the drawing for the hand pump lever looks like it was phased out in 1940 (at least that is when all the mods stop). Sadly, the exact date is obscured, but it looks like it could have been April 1940.

 

As far as I can tell, the de-icer for the windscreen was added with the introduction of the armoured windscreen. I cannot be sure, but I think it makes sense as it is easier to fit it in the windscreen assembly and I have no drawings showing a de-icer arrangement with the non-armoured windscreen. This mod was issued on 11-July-1939. No idea when it actually went into production.

 

If Eduard have documentation that contradicts my comments above, I would love to see it because it would add to our knowledge of the development of the Spitfire. At the moment, I believe they are wrong. That doesn't reduce my love for their latest Spitty kit in any way, they have done a brilliant job with it.

Edited by DonH
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just picked up mine - amazing! I am in love. Raised AND recessed rivets on the rear fuselage. Only missing the lapped panels but I wont hold that against them, just lovely!

 

Thank you Eduard. IMHO absolutely the best Spitfire in 1/48 and in IMHO on a par with the Tamiya 1/32 version - each has their plus and minus and both beautiful renditions of a beautiful plane.

 

Now have to gather the courage to build them both and do them justice!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

As good as these ‘All things’ threads are, they are all starting to grow a little too large IMO. We almost need an all things by Mk. number, however that would no doubt throw up further complications. Some aircraft types are way too popular for one thread, but I suppose I could just go pre-millennium and just sit down and read a book?
 

This is all good stuff fellas, some of which is a bit too picky for some, however the choice to include / remove / not bother, is always up to ‘we’ the modeller. 
 

Cheers.. Dave 

Dave,

 

In this case 'we' the modeller chose. The edit is mine. It is not the administrators. It was my question. I was asking a detail question on de-icing and thought maybe I should not log it in this thread. If I get an answer I would come back and say in this thread how I would propose to go about modifying Eduard or confirm if they got it right.  

 

The all Spitfire thread is ungainly but visited by Spitfire experts so more information may come to hand and further there was a very recent post regarding the Mk I tank behind the pilot and I wondered if this was related to an early de-icing solution rather than the low sidewall design that became standard.

 

As a general comment I would prefer to see individual titled questions in the WW2 thread. I find responses easier to search for and find. Also pin to new discussions.

 

Ray

Edited by Ray_W
repeated word
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, DonH said:

I have no drawings showing a de-icer arrangement with the non-armoured windscreen. This mod was issued on 11-July-1939. 

Thanks Don,

My question is not only an 'if' and 'when' but 'how'.  I am very familiar with the usual Spitfire de-icing system. It's lack of presence in a June 1940 supplied, armoured windscreen Spitfire Mk I  tweaked my interest. I am not saying it's not there just possibly an earlier design with different piping installation and equipment. If that was the case, to copy the usual de-icing installation and put it into the Eduard Mk I cockpit would be wrong. I note you said you "have no drawings for the de-icer arrangement with the non-armoured windscreen", does that mean you do for a Mk I Spitfire armoured windscreen? 

Ray

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ray_W said:

Thanks Don,

My question is not only an 'if' and 'when' but 'how'.  I am very familiar with the usual Spitfire de-icing system. It's lack of presence in a June 1940 supplied, armoured windscreen Spitfire Mk I  tweaked my interest. I am not saying it's not there just possibly an earlier design with different piping installation and equipment. If that was the case, to copy the usual de-icing installation and put it into the Eduard Mk I cockpit would be wrong. I note you said you "have no drawings for the de-icer arrangement with the non-armoured windscreen", does that mean you do for a Mk I Spitfire armoured windscreen? 

Ray

Hi Ray,

 

Yes, I do. Again, the prefix to the drawing is 300, so it is for a MkI. I don't think the arrangement changed after that and would be common for all marks of Spitfire.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DonH said:

Hi Ray,

 

Yes, I do. Again, the prefix to the drawing is 300, so it is for a MkI. I don't think the arrangement changed after that and would be common for all marks of Spitfire.

Thanks Don, can you share some detail?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, if you are going to be really picky, all BoB Spitfires were fitted with two step rudder pedals to reduce the risk of pilots blacking out under g.

 

Frankly, you can't see the pedals once you have built the model, so don't sweat it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 minutes ago, DonH said:

Here you go.

Don, Fantastic. What date on the drawing? The reason for the question is here is a June 1940 supplied aircraft. No de-icing installation left of and low on the sidewall from the emergency undercarriage CO2 cylinder. And yes the drawings show the standard installation in later marks. 

 

SpitfireMkI_X4009_PatHughes_Construction_11

 

 

Edited by Ray_W
More info
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great question. I can't read the dates on the drawing. Let me consult Messrs Morgan and Shacklady and I will get back to you. I think it was pretty early on as Dowding (?) wanted his pilots to be able to see out of the cockpit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a lot of room for the new de-icing system on that lower side wall with the hand pump undercarriage system. Not only does the morse key need to be moved, which it was with the elimination of the hand pump system, I also think the tank will not fit in the proposed new location with a hand pump. I know this is the early windscreen but again I think it conflicts with Eduard's position of hand pump only in the BoB unless the de-icing installation layout was different. (Edit: Checking a few things I see Eduard does provide a Brassin kit allowing for the tank and Tamiya provide it attached to the hand pump and as a separate part so it can fit if they have scaled correctly. This still does not answer why such a visible and important bit of kit is missing in the maintenance video).

 

By the way, it is also a great image of the pipework and bayonet fitting for the pilot's oxygen supply as was in the Mk I and II.  High on that right side wall piped around the name plate. Hose is with the pilot mask. Push in and lock with a turn. Remember to release if you go to bail out. No wonder they changed to the right rear push in hose system after the Mk I and II.

 

 

SpitfireMkI_X4009_PatHughes_Construction_12

 

Edited by Ray_W
Updated information
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

As good as these ‘All things’ threads are, they are all starting to grow a little too large IMO.

I completely agree with you Dave, this discussion would be better and more useful for the majority of Spitfire builders if it was in the 'All the Spitfire questions answered thread'. But the latest Eduard release has generated some controversy about the cockpit fit and well, if you can't beat 'em...

 

4 hours ago, Ray_W said:

there was a very recent post regarding the Mk I tank behind the pilot and I wondered if this was related to an early de-icing solution

A useful pic of this posted on page 61 of Vol 2 All the Spitfire questions here by @Crimea River who thought it might be the hydraulic fluid tank which actually should stick up into the area covered by the perspex. It could be a hydraulic fluid header tank, but the pipework seems a little thin and it bears a resemblance to the later de-icer reservoir. But until we get a more authoritative source, this is speculation.

 

3 hours ago, DonH said:

Let me consult Messrs Morgan and Shacklady and I will get back to you

I looked in Morgan and Shacklady (p62) @DonH, but couldn't see a reference to the de-icer where it discusses the installation of the armoured windscreen - the Dowding reference. But on p72 in Modifications incorporated into original design and dates'; 99 Provide defrosting of bullet proof W/S 11-7-39. Now we just need to see how they did it!

 

2 hours ago, DonH said:

BTW, if you are going to be really picky, all BoB Spitfires were fitted with two step rudder pedals to reduce the risk of pilots blacking out under g.

Don, that's marvellous thank you! I was about the remove the 2 step arrangement from my 1/24 Airfix Spitfire. (This of course has no bearing on this thread :rolleyes:).

 

2 hours ago, Ray_W said:

By the way, it is also a great image of the pipework and bayonet fitting for the pilot's oxygen supply as was in the Mk I and II.

Great pic Ray, thanks. Going back to an earlier question I posed about the colour of the pipework, as is usually the case with old B&W photos judging colour is very tricky. But the oxygen pipe appears similar to the background interior green and it would make sense for the manufacturer to install many of the fittings and then spray the paint. As was the case with the emergency undercarriage CO2 cylinder in your photo above. In restored cockpits this is usually black, and was the lever painted red. But the lever in the 1940 film appears to be the same colour as the tank.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Johnson said:

I looked in Morgan and Shacklady (p62) @DonH, but couldn't see a reference to the de-icer where it discusses the installation of the armoured windscreen - the Dowding reference. But on p72 in Modifications incorporated into original design and dates'; 99 Provide defrosting of bullet proof W/S 11-7-39. Now we just need to see how they did it!

Haha, yes, I was just reading the same thing! You can see how they did it in the drawing a few posts above. I think its some kind of spray bar fitted into the bottom of the armoured windscreen assembly. The pipework went from the tank (fitted on the LHS of the cockpit wall) up behind the instrument panel to the windscreen. I believe it was hand pumped up there using the pump situated next to the emergency u/c cylinder. Or maybe it was hand pressurised, like in a garden spray gun.

 

I don't believe that it was possible to fit something to the old windscreen and so the armoured one needed to be in place. I also believe (without any proof) that the de-icing system and the bullet-proof windscreen were introduced at the same time.

 

You could model an armoured windscreen without de-icing and no one could say you were wrong until some other documentation turns up. If you did an old style windscreen with the de-icing stuff in the cockpit, I would say you were wrong, even if nobody else did 🙂

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Johnson said:

A useful pic of this posted on page 61 of Vol 2 All the Spitfire questions here by @Crimea River who thought it might be the hydraulic fluid tank which actually should stick up into the area covered by the perspex. It could be a hydraulic fluid header tank, but the pipework seems a little thin and it bears a resemblance to the later de-icer reservoir. But until we get a more authoritative source, this is speculation.

Just answered my own question on this one.

 

 I have discovered a better description of the silver tank as seen in some images of the Mk I. The Germans, in their analysis of a captured aircraft, describe it as the landing gear tank. My guess it is an oil header tank related to the hand pump operation and could be good indicator for a manual operation undercarriage pump system.  The knowledge is available already because restored P9394 and N3200 have manual gear operation. Someone should have the definitive answer.

 

SpitfireMkI_X4009_PatHughes_Construction_13

 

Edited by Ray_W
clarification
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DonH said:

You could model an armoured windscreen without de-icing and no one could say you were wrong until some other documentation turns up. If you did an old style windscreen with the de-icing stuff in the cockpit, I would say you were wrong, even if nobody else did 🙂

I agree with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ray_W said:

I have discovered a better description of the silver tank as seen in some images of the Mk I. The Germans, in their analysis of this captured aircraft describe it as the landing gear tank. My guess it is an oil header tank related to the hand pump operation and could be good indicator for a manual operation undercarriage pump system.  The knowledge is available already because restored P9394 and N3200 have manual gear operation. Someone should have the definitive answer.

That's very useful - for me and my 1/24 Airfix. If confirmed, I will remove the 'tank' behind the headrest as it will have the later hydraulic u/c system.

 

But also useful for those with the Eduard kit where it could be added, should the modeller wish to.

Edited by Johnson
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Johnson said:

That's very useful - for me and my 1/24 Airfix. I will remove the 'tank' behind the headrest as it will have the later hydraulic u/c system.

I am still guessing that it is part of the manual system. I hope someone can confirm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I note the in initial release has two fuselages with appropriate details - early and late.

 

Does anyone know which fuselage/details are in the Sept/Oct re-issue of this kit? Early or late fuselage/details.

 

Edit - created a separate post for this in case it got lost in other details of the kit.

Edited by Peter Roberts
Link to comment
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...