At last

[The wooksta V2.0]

Dave, re your point about the upper wing blisters. Look carefully under the light and there's a very odd blemish on either wing upper surface in the area where the blisters shoud be, as though the tool had them and then they were removed for some reason!

Hadn't noticed it myself until a lad at wor model club mentioned it earlier tonight.

[Dave Fleming]

Dave, re your point about the upper wing blisters. Look carefully under the light and there's a very odd blemish on either wing upper surface in the area where the blisters shoud be, as though the tool had them and then they were removed for some reason!

Hadn't noticed it myself until a lad at wor model club mentioned it earlier tonight.

Interesting, you can see it on both wings on one of mine, but only one one wing on the other!!

[TonyT]

I had already mentioned those, they are correct for the smaller wheel, but for the larger wheel they did a modification to the wing to allow it to fit in the bay hence the blister, hence is it neither right nor wrong...... it is right for the earlier 10 inch wheel but incorrect for the 12 inch version most flyers have today, and as both wheels sizes are included in the kit, you have to add them for the 12 inchers, would have been a damn sight easier to allow us to remove them than add them though.

Edited August 18, 2009 by TonyT

[Test Graham]

Re Frise ailerons: without checking (this post can be edited later, can't it?), my understanding is that the Mk.20 series wing had simple hinge ailerons, but certainly no "standard" wing Spitfires.

Also, that the booster pumps were on earlier PR aircraft too. There's a nice Hyperscale picture showing them on a Mk.XI, but the text suggests they were not on all.

I'm a bit concerned about this wing trailing edge - how does it compare to the Tamiya one? I do have the Monforton book, which should provide the correct chord co-ordinates along the span, and also a Supermarine drawing. One day I really must do a serious conversion to 1/72. The "classic" error with the Spitfire wing trailing edge is to start the curve of the ellipse from the edge of the fairing, whereas it should be from (almost) the centreline. This results in excessive chord mid-wing - though it was rather more than 1mm on the Tamiya!

Edited August 18, 2009 by Graham Boak

[Dave Fleming]

I'm a bit concerned about this wing trailing edge - how does it compare to the Tamiya one? I do have the Mountfort book, which should provide the correct chord co-ordinates along the span, and also a Supermarine drawing. One day I really must do a serious conversion to 1/72. The "classic" error with the Spitfire wing trailing edge is to start the curve of the ellipse from the edge of the fairing, whereas it should be from (almost) the centreline. This results in excessive chord mid-wing - though it was rather more than 1mm on the Tamiya!

Don't have a Tamiya to compare with, but this is the Airfix mk 1 over the mk XIX. Hard to photograph clearly, but the leading edge and tip are more or less lined up here - the difference starts just outboard of the alieron.

the same difference is apparent in the wing root fairing. As I said earlier, it doesn't bother me that much and doesn't change the view of the wing - and who knows, the Airfix mk 1 may be wrong!!

Edited August 18, 2009 by Dave Fleming

[thx6667]

Nice jeans, Dave!

[Dave Fleming]

£4 at Tesco!!

[Test Graham]

Dave, wash your mouth out with soap and water! The Airfix 1/72 Mk.I, Vb and Vc all scale out to within fractions of a mm.

I've just converted Paul Monforton's Table 7.30 Wing rib profile ordinates (well, the left hand side of it) into 1/72, and the fit is exceptional. OK, I have worked from assembled examples (and a gash ruler), so there could be the odd tenth of a mil here and there.... and I haven't checked it against the Supermarine drawing.

Try it yourself on your favourite Spitfire wing

Chord at dihedral break near root: 34.9mm

Chord at inner edge of aileron: 30.6mm

Chord at outer edge of aileron: 17.1mm

From your photo, it looks as though the Mk.XIX chord is a trifle full at the root, whereas the Tamiya was right at the root and tip, but gave a fuller curve. Difficult to get too upset about 1mm, nothing a bit of sanding won't fix, assuming it doesn't lead to problems elsewhere.

Let's hope they get it right on the Mk.IX.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Graham Boak

[TonyT]

Do ya want me to post photos of da ailawons when me gets home? I could do ya top and bottom me thinks, showing ya the ailewongs, or how about a nice one of that rear curvurture of da wingfing?? snoffings tooo much for ya

I have them on my PC

I might be able to throw in a few engineering drawings of the wings, though may not be 19's

Edited August 18, 2009 by TonyT

[Dave Fleming]

mk XIX 36mm at the root

Do ya want me to post photos of da ailawons when me gets home? I could do ya top and bottom me thinks, showing ya the ailewongs, or how about a nice one of that rear curvurture of da wingfing?? snoffings tooo much for ya

I have them on my PC

Please!

[TonyT]

No probs, will try this evening to up em for ya

[TonyT]

BTW where are these??

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

Edited August 18, 2009 by TonyT

[TonyT]

BTW tried to get a pic of the top of the wing for you, but the forks would not go any higher ............ hehehehehehehehe

BIG PIC BEWARE

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=1

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=1

Edited August 18, 2009 by TonyT

[Dave Fleming]

BTW where are these??

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

Missing!!

The Airfix mk 1 'lost' it's wingtip lights at somepoint in the 90s, so I guess they don't count!!

[Bazza]

Hi,gorgeous pic's of the real bird !!

thanks for sharing !!

BTW regards wingtip lights,i made mine from,(repeated),drops,of PVA tinted Red,or Green.

Cheers,Bazza

Edited August 18, 2009 by Bazza

[TonyT]

Sorry for the delay Gentlemen, Uploaded the pictures you were after lat night but never got them posted.

Ok sorry for the quality of some as they were taken on older Cameras etc, I will when time permits get you some more accurate ones.

Aileron and as you can see unless deflected no hangy out bits, also included deflected images

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

Wing

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

Larger views available @

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_itemId=1047&g2_page=4

Edited August 19, 2009 by TonyT

[AnonymousA667]

Aileron and as you can see unless deflected no hangy out bits, also included deflected images

http://www.skonk.net/main.php?g2_view=core..._serialNumber=2

It's a Frise aileron, so there shouldn't be any hangy out bits unless it is deflected. Your pic shows the aileron leading edge projecting below the wing surface, which is how it should be.

Great pics, thanks for posting.

peebeep

[TonyT]

yes I know it is, I covered that on all of my Aeronautical Engineering exams for all my licences it think,

what I was pondering was the fact people were saying the scribed lines on the perfectly aligned kit ones were wrong.

Edited August 19, 2009 by TonyT

[AnonymousA667]

At least we're agreed on what constitutes a Frise aileron

The others can argue the toss whether or not the hinge line is correct, it's not something that bothers me personally

If from your personal observations you say it's OK that's good enough for me.

peebeep

[TonyT]

I will do a load of pics of better detail when I can, shame I never did some before the aileron went back on, it looked odd BTW flying with to yellow Ailerons, have pics of it like that too.

Edited August 19, 2009 by TonyT

[Dave Fleming]

what I was pondering was the fact people were saying the scribed lines on the perfectly aligned kit ones were wrong.

'People' being me!!

Fantastic pics Tony, thank you for sharing them with us, you truly are in an envious position looking after that beautiful aircraft!

In fact, your first two pics show perfectly that the kit lines are wrong! On the kit, the upper and lower alieron leading edges are straight lines, on the real thing the lower side has an angle change (and increased depth on the alieron) inboard of the outer hinge point.

Not a difficult thing to fix (and as on the underside you can ignore it and no-one will know unless you let them pick it up!) but worth knowing about if it bothers you!!

I find it funny because Airfix did the opposite on their Vb kit 35 years ago!

Edited August 19, 2009 by Dave Fleming

[TonyT]

'People' being me!!

Fantastic pics Tony, thank you for sharing them with us, you truly are in an envious position looking after that beautiful aircraft!

In fact, your first two pics show perfectly that the kit lines are wrong! On the kit, the upper and lower alieron leading edges are straight lines, on the real thing the lower side has an angle change (and increased depth on the alieron) inboard of the outer hinge point.

Not a difficult thing to fix (and as on the underside you can ignore it and no-one will know unless you let them pick it up!) but worth knowing about if it bothers you!!

I find it funny because Airfix did the opposite on their Vb kit 35 years ago!

Ahh got you, i don't look after it, they have a couple of dedicated engineers doing that, I just help out when they get stuck or need a hand as I am next door... I have more tooling than they have as well so that often gets borrowed

[Miggers]

Well,I've got my sticky mitts on one today(a measly £5.50 from Aberystwyth's model shop,Albatross models)and it looks the bees to me.

A bit of work on the interior,airscoops and outlets(thanks Tim)hollowed out,wheel wells boxed in and I think I'll have a model of my favorite Spit to be proud of.

Mark

[128fiddler]

After receiving the Recce Griffon Spitfire sheet from Model Alliance I was wondering:

Is the fuselage and wing from the PR.19 the same as for the PR.18? Except for the changes which are rather obvious offcourse: the bubble canopy, lower back and moved camera window, but is there anything else compared to the 19?

Or to ask it simple, is it possible to build a PR.18 out of this kit? I have a spare Mk.XVI (16) bubble canopy, is that also usable for a PR.18?

Thanks!

[Dave Fleming]

After receiving the Recce Griffon Spitfire sheet from Model Alliance I was wondering:

Is the fuselage and wing from the PR.19 the same as for the PR.18? Except for the changes which are rather obvious offcourse: the bubble canopy, lower back and moved camera window, but is there anything else compared to the 19?

Or to ask it simple, is it possible to build a PR.18 out of this kit? I have a spare Mk.XVI (16) bubble canopy, is that also usable for a PR.18?

Thanks!

The FR18 had a wider rudder & modified fixed fin - Freightdog do a conversion piece designed for the Fujimi kit that might fit. It also had an armed wing ('e' wing) so you would require cannon, cannon bulges and to rescribe the wing as well. Different windscreen as well.

Most of the other differences were internal