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

3 hours ago, Tbolt said:

Yes it's a museum piece but like I said it's apparently original paint and to me the top cowl looks like it matches the rest of the paint work so I would say it's not a replacement, unless it was a replacement in the war early in it's career, but you can speculate all sorts of things and things changed all the time. Don't forget our models are just one moment in time - just build it as it is unless you have a clear of the airframe you are building.

I assume this airframe is P7973 in the Australian War Memorial at Canberra. If it is, this Mk II was built in January 1941, at which time it would have been painted in Green/Dark Earth. It was in 33 Maintenance Unit at least twice before ending up at the Central Gunnery School in 1944. At some point, according to the IWM site, it was converted to Mk V standard, and. I would guess, repainted in Green/Grey Day Fighter scheme. The repaint, to me, looks a bit scruffy, not like the images I have seen of Spitfires at Castle Bromwich where the paint jobs are always very clean and precise.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, john224 said:

I assume this airframe is P7973 in the Australian War Memorial at Canberra. If it is, this Mk II was built in January 1941, at which time it would have been painted in Green/Dark Earth. It was in 33 Maintenance Unit at least twice before ending up at the Central Gunnery School in 1944. At some point, according to the IWM site, it was converted to Mk V standard, and. I would guess, repainted in Green/Grey Day Fighter scheme. The repaint, to me, looks a bit scruffy, not like the images I have seen of Spitfires at Castle Bromwich where the paint jobs are always very clean and precise.

Yes that;s the airframe. The the Australian War Memorial says it was fitted with a Mk>V spinner and prop it doesn't mention anything about the engine and cowl being swapped out. They also say "It was selected for the AWM in 1944, and shipped to Australia in 1945. It is unique in retaining its original Second World War paint scheme." 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Tbolt said:

Yes that;s the airframe. The the Australian War Memorial says it was fitted with a Mk>V spinner and prop it doesn't mention anything about the engine and cowl being swapped out. They also say "It was selected for the AWM in 1944, and shipped to Australia in 1945. It is unique in retaining its original Second World War paint scheme." 

 

 

The exhausts are also Mk V, so I would imagine the engine would also have been changed. That wouldn't be unusual, I doubt an aircraft would go from 1941 to 1944 in wartime with the same engine.  I don't think replacement cowls or panels would ever be noted anywhere, cannibalising air frames to keep aircraft flying was a commonplace practice. The aircraft suffered a serious forced landing on Predannock airfield in September 1941 after hitting a telegraph pole in a sweep over France, so who knows what was changed in that repair (or whether the re-spray was done then).

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, john224 said:

The exhausts are also Mk V, so I would imagine the engine would also have been changed. That wouldn't be unusual, I doubt an aircraft would go from 1941 to 1944 in wartime with the same engine.  I don't think replacement cowls or panels would ever be noted anywhere, cannibalising air frames to keep aircraft flying was a commonplace practice. The aircraft suffered a serious forced landing on Predannock airfield in September 1941 after hitting a telegraph pole in a sweep over France, so who knows what was changed in that repair (or whether the re-spray was done then).

Good point about the exhausts I wasn't paying attention. Of course they moved parts between aircraft a lot which is why you can never say something like this is complete wrong for your model. Did the Mk.V upper cowl change shape slightly at the front as the Valiant Wings A&M books mentions it did? I was just wondering if Eduard will be using the same fuselage for the MK.V or not?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tbolt said:

I was just wondering if Eduard will be using the same fuselage for the MK.V or not?

 

 

I don't see why they couldn't, early MkVs were converted Mk I and IIs, and very few external changes were made to the fuselage of the Mk V as production went on, and any changes were minor anyway. Have to wait and see I suppose!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The front top of the Merlin didn't change throughout production, changes being mainly to the supercharger at the rear.  This doesn't mean that different means of producing the cowling shape weren't tried, just that it wasn't something driven by the internals.  Given the complex shape, I suspect that the initial production form may have been with a separate nose piece, which may or may not have been replaced by a single pressing.

 

It is unlikely that any Mk.I or Mk.II were refitted with the Merlin 45 of the Mk.V other than those recorded as such.  The earlier aircraft were used in training units and as hacks, there would be plenty of spare early engines around from spares produced for Spitfires, Hurricanes, and Battles, to name the three main users of the Mk.III - although only the Mk.II used the Merlin XII (I think!). 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

It is unlikely that any Mk.I or Mk.II were refitted with the Merlin 45 of the Mk.V other than those recorded as such.  The earlier aircraft were used in training units and as hacks, there would be plenty of spare early engines around from spares produced for Spitfires, Hurricanes, and Battles, to name the three main users of the Mk.III - although only the Mk.II used the Merlin XII (I think!). 

The Australian & New Zealand Military Aircraft Serials and History site has P7973 as being converted to a Mk Va in November 1941, presumably following its forced landing in September 41. The IWM picture gallery also has it listed as a Mk V. This would imply that it was re-engined with a Merlin 45. It seems that for some reason this airframe was looked on favourably, when others might have been scrapped.

 

Looking forward to the Eduard Mk 1 being released, don't know if I fancy paying £50+ for the Spitfire Story edition though!

Edited by john224
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, alt-92 said:

Picking the pre-order up tomorrow, sprue shots wanted?

Yes please!

 

Must say the 1/48ers seem to be getting a lot of good stuff at the moment: Eduard Mustangs & various Spitfires, Airfix Griffon Spitfires, Modelsvit P-51H (very tempting) etc etc. I'm trying to stick to my 1/72 beliefs but it ain't easy....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've put the whole kaboosh in an album for those that want to peruse the rest without pic overload in topic.

https://1drv.ms/u/s!AixJDhsXffc7trlKsW3dQMFltOUe-w?e=0xBQpO

 

Just a few highlights ánd lowlights (Shocker! Eduard is not perfect! Grab your torches and pitchforks!)

We've seen the boxart, and it's a dual so no point in showing that there are two kits packaged.

Box PE:

y4magkCyqi3UhWML9kk2GoK2ON-6zr5Zr5-_KrQo

 

Resin figure:

y4m71Q9w_xfb4k8eAud2euTY9q7QxVMyzoLuXt-v

 

Big decal sheet - no real problems there, all in register and good colours. Different, non-standard roundel styles as well, and artwork.

y4mGZDadBiBvmijHpklI7ghStlnNLYaLHreZSzKa

 

Not so sure about the dark grey they've picked for the code letters though.

y4mhV5XzHe-1jBL-HyMiRFFViEUfCSIh2cRukkVm

 

 

Full sprues are in the album so some of the details here:

y4mFXjUirTAJB7GdurLKv_DKgZKDRWo5ges1tSKz

 

The dark spot is pressure stress from the locating pin on the other side.

 

Frise ailerons:

y4mogXzRJmNiaRDWmdytzjp4KbP7oDZMSASQpNc2

 

Watts prop with two spinner types.

Here is where some moulding imperfections show up:

y4mVMNpiHdf_EM6XHcgpj08u6hvuMy4TFpDkn85i

 

Main sprue contains the rhomboid seat pan (planning ahead apparently)

y4mM6Pb_8snd-eyCe0_z1tsgsz3mGg7RgTw99HFK

 

Planning ahead is also needed if you want to build it. 

First order - get some replacement exhaust stacks, because they have pretty nasty sink marks.

 

y4mBbXvesWakWPITOS2xSRA3ZD9udXCBMfREJhlX

 

Wing bottoms have nice gull shape, uppers here:

y4mM1UmwLmuKw53S2NnXDay82hNdRivp8EnKyTZz

 

That discoloration around the gun ports is not glare sadly. It's stressmarks.

Some ejector pins are pretty large (not a bad thing per se, larger surface reduces stress) but as long as they're out of sight not a big deal.

 

y4mfs_D26gJfYky_VpVSXVaTQ6-n5rvGejZDy370

 

Fuselage - there is a faint, almost scratched-like pattern on the aft wing roots.

y4mU8cYCSFETC3LrBVmh3lf2kqekBT3cji1yxf4K

 

Wonder if that has to do with the ejector pin on the other side?

Separate sprue for DH and Rotol blades & blunt spinner.

 

y4mOTDFqK89U_jQptdPPKVO6KmfToMT6andO_N32

 

Also contains the older metal seat with the regular chute bucket & the plastic seat.

y4m1jOkPabqPi3tKwEw6b-EbsAHqRYoG0M1VYZRn

 

Clear parts, three types of hood, three armoured and non-armoured windscreens.

 

y4mfUhf4pRChwfNrnE1hAyB3YyKu2_5KmmY6y8iW

 

y4mzClVljN0hUZxaiJ5Vnuj_7Y-cHFIJM3EwMal1

Also contains the blown hood. 

 

All in all: Great but not perfect.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for this- they’re only human too it seems🙂 mind you if this was in a red box it would no doubt be declared ‘unbuildable!’ by the experts 

😃

 

TT

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

Many thanks for this- they’re only human too it seems🙂 mind you if this was in a red box it would no doubt be declared ‘unbuildable!’ by the experts 

😃

 

TT

all to true

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for the sprue shots! The kit is looking very nice but as you note, there are some intriguing things going on. The sink marks (also small ones on the prop) might be the result of it being the first moldings of this kit - it will be worth watching if they'll show up on the later editions as well... I'm somewhat wondering about the gun ports. If I'm looking at it correctly, it seems to me that the leading edge division is not fully straight and that it has indents around the gun ports (most notable on the outer ones). The bottom wing has a small protrusions, that the upper wing seems to copy, although from the front the upper wing almost looks like a short shot. Will be curious on how it fits together.

 

Thank you again!

 

Jan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the sprue photos, and may I add they were very good photos.  Not had my email from Hannants yet but I have some resin exhausts in the stash ready and waiting.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, jan_cz said:

The sink marks (also small ones on the prop) might be the result of it being the first moldings of this kit

Mmh.. I feel it shouldn't have passed QA (it's in both sprues) personally. Given the amount of flak other mfgs get for it...

..and this is a Limited Edition titled release of a kit a lot of people will be watching for like hawks.
 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

mind you if this was in a red box it would no doubt be declared ‘unbuildable!’ by the experts 

😃

 

TT

Yes, but unlike that manufacturer that puts things in the red box, there doesn't like like there are any great chunks of plastic missing on any of those parts! Plus the faulty parts will be replaced without question and without delay.

Eduard's after sales is second to none.

The exhausts won't be bothering me anyway as i'll be using some Brassin ones.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, tank152 said:

The exhausts won't be bothering me anyway as i'll be using some Brassin ones.

Eduard is that good, you need to use resin AM bits because the plastic parts just don't cut it.

Ok, got it.

As I said, they're not perfect. No biggie, happens to all of us.

Accept it, and move on.

 

I've sent a heads-up to the LHS where I've pre-ordered it anyway, and will see what they do.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, alt-92 said:

Eduard is that good, you need to use resin AM bits because the plastic parts just don't cut it.

Ok, got it.

As I said, they're not perfect. No biggie, happens to all of us.

Accept it, and move on.

 

I've sent a heads-up to the LHS where I've pre-ordered it anyway, and will see what they do.

 

 

Actually, I always replace the plastic exhausts on all my builds no matter who the manufacturer is.

You say it's no biggie, but you seem to have broken your neck to be the first to have found fault with the kit. Would you like a badge for your work. 😉

No one has any reason to moan if you don't like what you see there's always the Airfix or Tamiya kits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes please. I'll PM my address.

 

Easy award, it was such a bloomin' obvious fault, that it would even be found by a blind man because they can read braille which this pretty much looks like.

 

---

All joking aside, it's a bit of a shame and avoidable.
 

 

19 minutes ago, tank152 said:

No one has any reason to moan if you don't like what you see there's always the Airfix or Tamiya kits.

Except it's my money, pal. That means I've paid for the right to moan.

 

 

 

Edited by alt-92
getting personal?
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, alt-92 said:

Yes please. I'll PM my address.

 

Easy award, it was such a bloomin' obvious fault, that it would even be found by a blind man because they can read braille which this pretty much looks like.

 

---

All joking aside, it's a bit of a shame and avoidable.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find all this a bit tedious, already in this thread we've had a discussion about a panel line that should or should not be there, the seat, along with the usual dig about the rivets. 

I'm not sticking up for Eduard, just pointing out that i'm sure they'll replace the parts if you so wish them to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tank152 said:

already in this thread we've had a discussion about a panel line that should or should not be there, the seat, along with the usual dig about the rivets. 

Which is why I asked if shots from the real thing would be appreciated. 

As you must have seen, there's choice of seats, so that point is negated.

Personally, I'm not that bothered by rivets on the L/E or not, or a 0.2mm deviation in a panel line. 
I am bothered about things that concern the production process quality itself - understandable for a 50+ kit.
 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, alt-92 said:

Which is why I asked if shots from the real thing would be appreciated. 

As you must have seen, there's choice of seats, so that point is negated.

Personally, I'm not that bothered by rivets on the L/E or not, or a 0.2mm deviation in a panel line. 
I am bothered about things that concern the production process quality itself - understandable for a 50+ kit.
 

Appreciated the pictures posted by you😁 and also your findings..

And those sinkholes in the exhaust are indeed not nessesary...but hey you have to sell those brassin parts🥴

Regarding the price you’ve got two kits for that price 😉 I ordered mine for just 48,95 si I think it is a good deal for less than 25 euro’s par Spitfire with etch and masking sets and a resin pilot 👩‍✈️ 
Parts replacement however is top notch at Eduards so you should not have a problem getting some good parts from them.

 

cheers, Jan

  • Like 2
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

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...