Jump to content

1/48 - Supermarine Spitfire Mk.1 to Mk.V by Eduard - Mk.I/Ia released - Mk.IIa & b in December 2020


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Branky said:

I realy hope there is some fun left in your modelling.  

Yes I get a lot of fun out of discussing and modelling these matters. Rarely do I get them totally right, but I do enjoy the journey.

 

In this case, what I found interesting was Eduard's strong conviction that it was "highly probable" all Battle of Britain (BoB) Spitfire's had the hand pump, which is going against the view of the historians, references and modeller's for some time. Eduard may be correct, based on the latest research. So, I started searching for BoB aircraft with the motor driven pump U/C operation and this quickly became evident. For example, in the pre-BoB Spitfire maintenance film and the lack of evidence of the hand pump hydraulic tank (usually associated with hand pump installation and visible behind the pilot) in Mk I images.  So Eduard's claim seems to not be correct. I trust it was not just as an excuse for not including the U/C selector, which is mandatory for any Mk II or Mk V they wish to issue - a blooper as it has been called. 

 

For simple accurate modelling, do an Eduard Mk I with reflector sight prior to June 1940 and you can go with the Eduard interior without trouble. For example a Dunkirk version. Once you get into BoB era then look at the age of the airframe and if it is a recent airframe then I am yet to be convinced a motor driven pump U/C selector is not more appropriate.

 

There is a lot of variables in Spitfire manufacture so good photographic evidence of your chosen subject is always best.

 

None of this detracts from what is a brilliant kit and most enjoyable build. 

 

Ray

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really fun!
The first model was Mk.I early and now it is Mk.Ia! Be glad that it is the Eduard model and not, for example, AZ / KP. Mr.Sulc in with discussion said the U / C selector is different for Early and Late Spit Mk.I and Mk.Ia.
Spits in the BoB kit by serial number had an old U / C selector system. But in the new Spit Mk.Ia there is already a hydraulic U / C selector as well as in later versions.
I supraised that in the UK,they do not know the individual versions of their own aircraft. 😀

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

So now we call it a blooper if the wrong kind of undercarriage selector is included? 

Yes. because it is.  It's been an interesting debate.  I think the main gripe is Eduard's assertion that this was not fitted to the Mk.I, when clearly it was. 

If it was acknowledged this would help, but they don't like admitting they are wrong. (see the original 1/48th Bf109G fiasco)

 

So, it's a blooper, but no-one here has said anything more than this, and has described what should be there, and as @Ray_W shown, it's an easy enough fix.

It's also brought those maintenance films to a wider audience, and shown ways of spotting the difference, which was new to me.

Ironically, the general knowledge of these details from 80 years ago is far greater now than at any time previously,  in part because of forms like this, and the speed and ease of discussion and information sharing.  I'm still amazed at how much still gets detailed,  think back nearly 40 years when I had a small stack of Scale Models magazine, and a handful of books, and what was in the local library, to now when I can link together maintenance films, photographs, documents and a site with list of every Spitfire built, in minutes.

2 hours ago, Branky said:

I realy hope there is some fun left in your modelling. 

Plenty of folks here have lots of fun discussing these details, and passing on their research and findings for all. 

This is why we no longer have models that sort of look like what they intend to represent...

 

2 hours ago, Branky said:

I built a Spitfire of nondescript mark, more or less 1/48 with the markings of some sorts pressed into the plastic and the cockpit was a black empty hole with only an unhealthy looking pilot figure to fill it op....

sounds like the Aurora BT-K... 

936972-12192-98-pristine.jpg

 

2 hours ago, Branky said:

     I has so much pleasure in making it and proud of it when placed om my bedcupboard and happily oblivious of its ommisions and faults …  

Research and knowledge has two sides, but  I'd rather be better informed than not.  And we have plenty of folks who happily build old kits as they are, and enjoy them even knowing their faults and omissions, and get plenty of likes and positive comments when they display them.

Have a look at the thread started by @TonyW for examples of this

All of this exist here together quite happily.  :) 

cheers

T

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, harvy5 said:

But in the new Spit Mk.Ia there is already a hydraulic U / C selector as well as in later versions.

I was under the impression that the "a" designation was just to simply differentiate from the "b" cannon version of the Mk. I introduced in June 1940, which would also be prior to the commencement of the Battle of Britain period. Of course this timing would also work well with the more widespread use of the motor driven hydraulics.

 

If you have access to the serial numbers it would be great to clear this up. What about these 3 builds in the "The Few" boxing - P9443 first flew (FF) 1/4/40, X4382 FF 6/9/40 and X4425 FF 13/9/40 all are kitted with the hand pump? Do you believe this is right or wrong?

 

Ray

 

 

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

What do you think? Header tank or not?

Yes Charlie (  @Johnson ) and I discussed this on an earlier thread. I thought it showed the tank although with a better image I had to agree with Charlie that I could not see it and it is just the skyline.

 

I will be ordering a copy of the Wingleader book on the Mk. I if you go here you will see some images with and without the tank. 

 

https://www.wingleader.co.uk/shop/spitfire-mk1-wpa1

 

The images look of excellent quality and are new to me. Should be very useful.

 

Ray

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, harvy5 said:

Mr.Sulc in with discussion said the U / C selector is different for Early and Late Spit Mk.I and Mk.Ia.
Spits in the BoB kit by serial number had an old U / C selector system. But in the new Spit Mk.Ia there is already a hydraulic U / C selector as well as in later versions.

the Spitfire I/Ia is confusing.

Up until the Mk.Ib came into service, there was only a# a Mk.I

the 'a' was added because of the new wing type.

the same thing occurs with the Spitfire Mk.IX, initially there was only a Spitfire Mk.IX, but when the E wing was introduced, the different wing types become in need of differentiation.

 

1 hour ago, harvy5 said:


I supraised that in the UK,they do not know the individual versions of their own aircraft.

ah hahahahahaha.... really?  Sounds like you have never been here... 

In typical British fashion, it's all a bit vague and confusing, unlike the Americans and their block numbers,  the British only really use Mark number for specific large airframe or engine changes, and letters for other details, like armament. 

Except for the Navy, who do things differently to the RAF.

And, really the only people who care about these things are modellers (and very through airframe restorers) plus much of this information would have been classified, and by the time anyone really started to care,  it has been  scattered, lost, mis-filed or destroyed. 

It's only now, with the ability to post, collate and correct information so easily that these detail are getting pinned down, and even then there are gaps.

 

I have learned an awful lot in the last 10 years from discussions on here, but new details keep turning up, allowing further detail revisions.  

Does give us something to discuss though....

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

the same thing occurs with the Spitfire Mk.IX, initially there was only a Spitfire Mk.IX, but when the E wing was introduced, the different wing types become in need of differentiation.

And one of my favourites the Spitfire Mk IXb actually a normal "C" wing, but used to designate the LF Merlin 66 equipped Mk IX.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

the Spitfire I/Ia is confusing.

Up until the Mk.Ib came into service, there was only a# a Mk.I

the 'a' was added because of the new wing type.

the same thing occurs with the Spitfire Mk.IX, initially there was only a Spitfire Mk.IX, but when the E wing was introduced, the different wing types become in need of differentiation.

 

ah hahahahahaha.... really?  Sounds like you have never been here... 

In typical British fashion, it's all a bit vague and confusing, unlike the Americans and their block numbers,  the British only really use Mark number for specific large airframe or engine changes, and letters for other details, like armament. 

Except for the Navy, who do things differently to the RAF.

And, really the only people who care about these things are modellers (and very through airframe restorers) plus much of this information would have been classified, and by the time anyone really started to care,  it has been  scattered, lost, mis-filed or destroyed. 

It's only now, with the ability to post, collate and correct information so easily that these detail are getting pinned down, and even then there are gaps.

 

I have learned an awful lot in the last 10 years from discussions on here, but new details keep turning up, allowing further detail revisions.  

Does give us something to discuss though....

OK with that Mk.I and Ia I wrote it wrong. I had EARLY and LATE.
And not only the British have a problem with accurate labeling.I have been working in aviation for 30 years, so I know something about that. Last 3 years for BAE Systems.
For example, in the Soviet Union there was only a Mi-8 with different letters. Although it had engines and transmission from the Mi-24 and the export designation Mi-17. Everything has to be compared according to bulletins and s / n 😀

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG a selector/pump or what it is a apperature, may be in November "Spitfire Story - Tally Ho !" a Mk. II dual combo... So, later write to Eduard, and i´m sure he send it a new part... So...where is problem ? :)

 

 

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

I have learned an awful lot in the last 10 years from discussions on here, but new details keep turning up, allowing further detail revisions. 

Troy is absolutely right.

 

The BM forums contain a wealth of information, on a vast scope of subjects. For the Spitfire, a favourite of mine as a post-WW2 kid growing up in the 1950s/60s, it is an absolute goldmine with some really excellent research. But the information is scattered widely across many BM forums and years of posts. Careful searching usually brings the desired answer. But this wide distribution of knowledge is a worry - suppose, God forbid, BM closed down? The loss is unthinkable. I sometimes think that if only it could be brought together, collated, indexed, what a resource we would have. The 'All the Spitfire questions here' threads go some way to this, but there's still masses of information scattered. Seems to me an opportunity here for someone? Not me alas - too many Spitfire kits waiting :unsure:.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ray_W said:

 

I will be ordering a copy of the Wingleader book on the Mk. I if you go here you will see some images with and without the tank. 

 

https://www.wingleader.co.uk/shop/spitfire-mk1-wpa1

 

The images look of excellent quality and are new to me. Should be very useful.

Looks excellent. Birthday next month... another Spitfire book is just what I need!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Johnson said:

Looks excellent. Birthday next month... another Spitfire book is just what I need!

It is excellent indeed. Got also other two and they are superb too.

 

And yes, this forum is a great source of information given by experts. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Johnson said:

Looks excellent. Birthday next month... another Spitfire book is just what I need!

My Birthday isn't until November so I'm not waiting and have just ordered the Spitfire, Hurricane and Bf 109 books.  I promise I will not look at them until my birthday, honest. :wicked:

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happily building this model and my view is as follows:

All the comments about the U/C selection lever are justified but there is another way of looking at it. Maybe the Spitfire Mk I BoB to be released as a Profipack at the end of this month should be considered as the first release, if it has the hydraulic mechanism and more modern cockpit wall we would all be over the moon. I am sure this will be the case if a MkII and a Mk V are next, Eduard are fully aware of the two mechanisms so it is very unlikely they will get this wrong.

Then we look at the dual combo kit as a bonus with the manual lever, imagine the furore if it was missing from that release with all the other goodies (flat hood, two blade prop and the early decals) You still have 4 or 5 decal options for a later kit.
I think it is an excellent kit with all the options, just a bit odd that they released the dual combo first, mind you, great marketing as we went out and bought it with just over a month to wait for the first std kit.

i am building option D, K9955, I would say, but I am no expert, that you could build A, B, C, D and possibly G and argue your case for the manual lever.

Just my humble opinion, please don’t shoot me down!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good.

Not perfect or without flaws*, just really good.

As always, use direct reference materials to determine what needs to be done for your chosen subject. Which includes such details as mentioned above.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

The Spifire II is coming in December in a dual combo box Mk IIa and Mk IIb and with bonus pilots and ground crew

 

spit_i14.jpg 

Edited by Wuger91
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sprue S has the increased size hen balance on the tailplane.

 

Trevor

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Homebee changed the title to 1/48 - Supermarine Spitfire Mk.1 to Mk.V by Eduard - Mk.I/Ia released - Mk.IIa & b in December 2020

Can anyone indicate if one of the two new spinners is the pointy Rotol type please? 

 

I'm wanting to build the Loch Doon Spitfire that's all and she has the later Mk.V type Rotol spinner.

 

Cheers,

  WV908

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Max Headroom said:

Sprue S has the increased size hen balance on the tailplane.

 

Trevor

Also the later type circular-intake oil cooler, in fact quite a lot of stuff there which will be used on various V kits in due course

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...