1/48 Spitfire Mk.III

[neilfergylee]

Having worked on the windshield line, I am looking at taking the central windshield of a kit canopy, removing the sides and manufacturing new sides to fit the space.

 

Here is the first stage with the model at the top and comparison windshields beneath.  The middle is the original Mk.III windshield that I am attempting to reproduce and the bottom is the later Mk.III windshield which was essentially that of a Mk,V.

 

[HAMP man]

Not sure if you want to go to the level of 'counter of rivets' but this might be of interest

http://soyuyo.main.jp/spit5b/spit5be-1.html#drawing

 

Box on 

 

Strickers

[Greenshirt]

On 7/22/2022 at 6:01 AM, Troy Smith said:

I'll @gingerbob   @Greenshirt  (Tim did this in 72nd) @Peter Roberts @Magpie22  @lasermonkey  as Spitfire aficionados who may find this interesting. 

Thanks for the shout out @Troy Smith.

 

I finished my Mk III way back in 2016 and unfortunately it appears my photos disappeared from my blog. My approach was to use the M&S refs and pics, then chopped an Airfix 1/72 Mk Ia kit (newest tooling) at the firewall. I made a scale 4” plug and after it was sanded smooth I rescribed. I then replaced the windscreen from another kit to get the internal armored windscreen. Tailwheel came from the spares box (Academy XIVc ??).  Wingtips were the easy mod. I chose the deeper radiator design with the boundary layer (?) splitter by making a box that was open on both ends, then mounting that to some sheet cut to fit the base of the radiator. It took 3 tries but the outcome was satisfying. 
 

Careful study of the limited refs did not convince me the cowls were different nor the thrust line changed. Just a simple shift forward of the engine on the existing thrust line and use of existing panels wherever possible. My thinking is that it would only require a minor lengthening of the mounts with a little strengthening plus longer sheet metal on the panels. Ultimately a mod similar to what resulted for the 2 stage Merlin Marks, and given the Mk III was related to that development it made some sense to me. 
 

it does stand out on my shelf. I’ve had more than one visitor ask if it was a Mk XIVa!

 

Tim

[neilfergylee]

15 hours ago, Greenshirt said:

Thanks for the shout out @Troy Smith.

 

I finished my Mk III way back in 2016 and unfortunately it appears my photos disappeared from my blog. My approach was to use the M&S refs and pics, then chopped an Airfix 1/72 Mk Ia kit (newest tooling) at the firewall. I made a scale 4” plug and after it was sanded smooth I rescribed. I then replaced the windscreen from another kit to get the internal armored windscreen. Tailwheel came from the spares box (Academy XIVc ??).  Wingtips were the easy mod. I chose the deeper radiator design with the boundary layer (?) splitter by making a box that was open on both ends, then mounting that to some sheet cut to fit the base of the radiator. It took 3 tries but the outcome was satisfying. 
 

Careful study of the limited refs did not convince me the cowls were different nor the thrust line changed. Just a simple shift forward of the engine on the existing thrust line and use of existing panels wherever possible. My thinking is that it would only require a minor lengthening of the mounts with a little strengthening plus longer sheet metal on the panels. Ultimately a mod similar to what resulted for the 2 stage Merlin Marks, and given the Mk III was related to that development it made some sense to me. 
 

it does stand out on my shelf. I’ve had more than one visitor ask if it was a Mk XIVa!

 

Tim

 

Thanks for this: I agree with your views regarding the cowling, it's just marginally longer.  The wings were more interesting: I cold sear I had an article stating which rib the wing was shortened to but in its absence and having reviewed several photos, I am satisfied that the wing was trimmed to the rib where, on normal wings, the outer aileron hinge was located.  In turn, I added the enlarged radiator (with boundary layer splitter)  from a Spitfire XIX kit and used a resin oil cooler to replace the grossly overscale Airfix offering. The wingtips were several laminations of plastikard sanded to shape.

 

Here we see the wing, suitable trimmed with a full spam wing for comparison.  The Mk.III wing was a LOT shorter than the normal clipped wing.  Note also the trimmed ailerons.  I nearly butchered a set of ailerons from the XIX kit before remembering - literally with the saw poised - I was using the wing to build a Spitfire PR.XI and so cut out the ailerons from the wing of an Academy XIV (see other conversion) and built them up ready for trimming.

 

 

Here is the revised wingtip:

 

 

And finally, here is the current state of play.  Note the PE flaps, I thought I would bling it up a little.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Neil

 

 

[HAMP man]

A little scratching in the wheel wells? Also black white and silver undersides, interesting choice, I thought that was really early war.

 

Box on 

 

Strickers

[neilfergylee]

8 hours ago, HAMP man said:

A little scratching in the wheel wells? Also black white and silver undersides, interesting choice, I thought that was really early war.

 

Box on 

 

Strickers

 

Not quite with the wheel wells: It's a bit of masking fluid remaining.  I plan to paint the wheel wells in interior green

 

The black and white (with airframe silver) does appear correct for the airframe's early condition.

 

 

Edited July 30, 2022 by neilfergylee

[Troy Smith]

10 hours ago, neilfergylee said:

The wingtips were several laminations of plastikard sanded to shape.

I guess you took out the ailerons first,  as the wings have integral ailerons, so I would have just cropped off the excess and reshape,  even if you hen needed to take out the ailerons, as the fabric effect is overdone.

 

9 minutes ago, neilfergylee said:

I plan to paint the wheel wells in interior green

AFAIK, the external wheel wells, the round part for the wheel,  were never grey green except on the Mk.21/21/24, which had completely enclosed wells.

the confusion is to what consists the internal and external parts of the wheel wells.   From what I can see, the wheel part, which is not enclosed and is visible when the wheel is retracted, is external., so is the exterior colour.

in every photo (bar one, which is an oddity) where you can see in the exterior well wall, it is the same colour as the underside.   No one on here has so far found a wartime photo which shows anything else. 

see here for example, but I have posted up other colour shots. 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234974004-question-for-wwii-aircraft-manufacturing-experts/#elControls_1851442_menu

the inner part, where the leg goes, is not visible when the gear is retracted, and is internal,  and is the internal colour.

Note the main internal colours on Spitfires until late 43 or 44 was aluminium paint, except for the cockpit and engine bearers.

OK, and here is a still from a June 1940 maintenance film,  showing the factory finish of R9962

 

outer well external colour, inner leg internal colour (aluminium) 

 

and this shows the internal cockpit colour (grey green) on the access door, and the aluminium paint in the well and inside the flaps

 

Sorry to labour the point, would rather explain than just say 'wrong' 

8 hours ago, HAMP man said:

Also black white and silver undersides, interesting choice, I thought that was really early war.

the initial Mk.III prototype photographs are from I think March 1940, they are certainly pre Sky undersides, which come in early June 1940.

On 29/07/2022 at 20:46, Greenshirt said:

Just a simple shift forward of the engine on the existing thrust line and use of existing panels wherever possible. My thinking is that it would only require a minor lengthening of the mounts with a little strengthening plus longer sheet metal on the panels.

It's a prototype,  the panels for the engine are one-off hand made panels.   It's thin metal sheet formed, and the strengthening strips/fasteners added.

This is basic body panel metalwork. 

Same thing is seen on the Spitfire and Hurricane prototypes. 

But, looking at the photo, and bear in mind this is a one off panel

 

the shape look different as the forming at the front is less like the stamped production panel, and at the rear as the angles fuel tanks cover bring that contour further forward,  but comparing at this unusual angle shot, you can see the usual forming at the front, and the shape change at the rear,  which  happens further back, as the fuel tank is not angled. 

Spitfire Mk. IIA, 1941. by Etienne du Plessis, on Flickr

 

also note the visible aluminium paint behind the cockpit seat bulkhead,  

 

less clear here, but again a usefulimage for the cowl shape, which is subtly bulged out above the exhausts.

 

@neilfergylee  I hope these posts are not too distracting, some is a bit thinking out loud and trying to then find images to back this up,  which has been very interesting to me personally for pinning down some of the Spitfire III details for myself.

 

HTH

[neilfergylee]

Hi Troy,

 

Thanks for your reply, I'm loving this discussion!

 

Regarding your points:

 

Yes, you are spot-on about the ailerons.  I didn't like the Airfix parts with their over-heavy scalloping and, looking at this image (of which more anon), those ailerons look to be metal, hence my desire to replace then with something more representative.

 

 

This brings me onto the undercarriage bays.  In short, you have saved me from making a mistake: I had seen correspondence indicating that the factory finish was interior grey-green for the wheel bays but your information looks pretty definitive to me.  Looing again at the picture above and the one I shared yesterday; it looks like the wheel hub on the post side might be black.  I wish I had a starboard view to compare.

 

Moving onto the flaps and their interior, I thought they would be interior grey-green but now I think aluminium looks to be correct.  Thanks again!

 

I'm pretty confident regarding the undersurface colours.  Later pictures were most probably yellow but not only was the colour scheme correct for early 1940 but the uppersurfaces were camouflaged and definitely not yellow!  The Morgan / Shacklady book is wrong in my opinion and if you look at early photos you can make out the demarcation between camouflage colours.  This is a hill I'm prepared to die on.

 

Regarding the cowlings, I agree that they were almost certainly hand built and, as you say, the fuel tank interface is very different to other Merlin marks (except that one!).  The view above gives a great illustration of the view from behind and although the top cowling looks a little bulged, I don't think it's madly so.

 

I really appreciate your help here.  I'm hoping to sort the top surface camouflage today and shall report back!

 

Best wishes,

 

Neil

 

 

 

 

[Troy Smith]

This is a very interesting pic Neil, this is a transitory version, later than the very first photos, as now has a standard  windscreen, and a Rotol prop, llok at the wide blade base, and look to have 35 inch A1 fuselage roundel and fin stripes.   Much easier to model this one...

 

 

1 hour ago, neilfergylee said:

The Morgan / Shacklady book is wrong in my opinion and if you look at early photos you can make out the demarcation between camouflage colours.  This is a hill I'm prepared to die on.

absolutely on this, AFAIK , the scheme was a standard pattern as well. 

1 hour ago, neilfergylee said:

Thanks for your reply, I'm loving this discussion!

Me too, very interesting.  

 

more later

T

[Dave Slowbuild]

1 hour ago, Troy Smith said:

This is a very interesting pic

Troy, there’s what looks like a semi-circular hoop at the very top of the fin (from the shape of its shadow).  Any idea what it might be fitted for?
 

Regards

Dave

[neilfergylee]

8 minutes ago, Dave Slowbuild said:

Troy, there’s what looks like a semi-circular hoop at the very top of the fin (from the shape of its shadow).  Any idea what it might be fitted for?
 

Regards

Dave

 

It is a guard to prevent an anti-spin parachute from becoming fouled with the vertical fin and rudder.

[neilfergylee]

Oh knickers.

 

Ever heard the adage "Measure twice, cut once"?  I have a new variation: "Check the camouflage scheme twice, paint once".

 

 

Perhaps rushing it a bit too much, I painted the uppersurfaces yesterday.  It was a combination of Tamiya Dark Earth and MRP Dark green and everything went wrong:

 

• I used a can of primer that was too near the end with the result that it sprayed with a very rough texture - I had to flatten it with wet and dry.
• The Tamiya dried too quickly leaving, again, a rather over-matt finish.
• I tried to go for a hand-sprayed effect reflecting the prototype nature of the airframe by using blu-tac and, frankly, I didn't do a good job of it.
• Look at that starboard wing: I've messed-up the pattern.

And the pièce de résistance:

 

I used the 'A' scheme camouflage and then realised to my horror that N3297, as an odd-numbered airframe, used the 'B' scheme.  Take a look at the image below (taken from the image repeated above) and the evidence is both conclusive and damning.

 

 

So, it's back to the paint bay when a fresh supply of paint arrives in a few days.

 

As I said before, knickers!

 

Neil

 

Edited August 1, 2022 by neilfergylee
typo

[Troy Smith]

6 hours ago, neilfergylee said:

back to the paint bay when a fresh supply of paint arrives in a few days.

 

6 hours ago, neilfergylee said:

Tamiya Dark Earth

XF-52?  is a very poor match for RAF Dark Earth.  Far too red and too light(white/grey) ....  if using Tamiya it's mix time, and as of now, I can't offer a simple mix.   I saw one suggested, but not tried that one (I have tried many BTW)  

Not much help I know.  

 

6 hours ago, neilfergylee said:

 

I used the 'A' scheme camouflage and then realised to my horror that N3297, as an odd-numbered airframe, used the 'B' scheme. 

in this case I'd agree, but be  aware in later batches you start to get blackout blocks, (random block of numbers deleted for security) and this messes with the odd/even A/B sequence from what I can see.   The black ot blocks start in the P**** serials, and the A/B got dropped in 1941, fairly early in 1941 IIRC.

Just worth remembering for later batches.  

[HAMP man]

I know I’ve read the internal/external colour thing before but the brain -eye interface seems to not want to function when comes to painting wheel wells. I see a lot of repaints in my future.

Really enjoying the discussions and at least the camo mistake was noticed before RFI.

 

Box on

 

Strickers

 

 

 

 

[neilfergylee]

A full uppersurface repaint.  Much better!  The propellor is just blu-tacced in position.

 

[bigbadbadge]

Looks great Neil. Cracking work .

Chris 

[neilfergylee]

Finished!

 

Images here:

[Troy Smith]

On 01/08/2022 at 09:59, neilfergylee said:

 

 

 

one detail Neil,  I note you spotted the bare metal(?)  fronts,  and did the back likewise, but  look at the image above, and the blade back looks to be black,  and on planes with no black fronts, pre war USAAF  and Japanese come to mind, the blade  backs are plaited to avoid glare.

 

the blade back  look black here, and the bottom blade looks have a yellow tip.

 

looks black here as well

 

 

An odd thought,  even the natural metal blades seen on the Spitfire IV,  have yellow tips

 

could the entire blade front be yellow?

 

Just thinking out loud.

 

The non black blades in both are an interesting point.   I can't think of any other examples of this on a British type.... wonder why? 

 

Finished build is neat, and look really of with those stumpy wings

 

cheers

T

[neilfergylee]

27 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

 

one detail Neil,  I note you spotted the bare metal(?)  fronts,  and did the back likewise, but  look at the image above, and the blade back looks to be black,  and on planes with no black fronts, pre war USAAF  and Japanese come to mind, the blade  backs are plaited to avoid glare.

 

the blade back  look black here, and the bottom blade looks have a yellow tip.

 

looks black here as well

 

 

An odd thought,  even the natural metal blades seen on the Spitfire IV,  have yellow tips

 

could the entire blade front be yellow?

 

Just thinking out loud.

 

The non black blades in both are an interesting point.   I can't think of any other examples of this on a British type.... wonder why? 

 

Finished build is neat, and look really of with those stumpy wings

 

cheers

T

 

Oh blinking heck!  The rear of the blades are black and I can even see a yellow tip!  It just shows how one can study a subject and miss the obvious.  I shall repaint the blade backs but I really am confused about the front.

 

Cheers,

 

Neil

[Troy Smith]

1 minute ago, neilfergylee said:

but I really am confused about the front.

Me too .

2 minutes ago, neilfergylee said:

It just shows how one can study a subject and miss the obvious.

I had not spotted the front of the blades!  

 

Might be  worth a thread of it's own in the WW2 section? 

[neilfergylee]

10 minutes ago, Troy Smith said:

Me too .

I had not spotted the front of the blades!  

 

Might be  worth a thread of it's own in the WW2 section? 

Good idea!

[Biggles87]

Excellent finish, and you have photographic proof that at least one Spitfire was parked with it”s flaps down.

 

John. 🇺🇦

[bigbadbadge]

A cracking job, making this . Looks phenomenal. It is always fun enterpeting old black and white photos and you've  created a wonderful unusual Spitfire 

 

Chris