Dave Fleming Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 http://www.legatokits.cz/Plastic72/Spitfir...7_spitrire1.htm http://www.legatokits.cz/Plastic72/Spitfir...pitfire_pr1.htm http://www.legatokits.cz/Plastic72/Spitfir...tfire_mk2PR.htm http://www.legatokits.cz/Plastic72/Spitfir...pitfire_mk2.htm Very interesting, will be keen to see if the plastic is as good as the photos look!! never having had a Tamiya Spit, I wasn't aware of the alleged fuselage discrepancy. I wonder how it will compare with the Airfix one? I know it will be about three times the price, but when you look at the additional detail parts it might be worth it to some. (I've got plenty of Airfix ones in the stash!!) Does anyone recognise the drawings he is using? (And I wonder who Tony is...?) Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 (edited) The plans are those drawn by Alfred Granger, MISTC, and are taken from Aerodata International No.2 'Supermarine Spitfire I & II' published by Vintage Aviation Publications in 1977. The Aerodata series of books were much imitated but IMHO never equalled for packing so much useful modelling data into such a slim booklet. IIRC the old Hasegawa 1/72nd Spitfire I also suffers from a short nose? Edited September 17, 2009 by Nick Millman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali62 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Dave This does look interesting, we will have to see if any news comes out from E-Day cheers Ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-Jiff Kenobi Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 They look very tasty. Thanks for posting the links. Obi-Jiff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted September 17, 2009 Author Share Posted September 17, 2009 The plans are those drawn by Alfred Granger, MISTC, and are taken from Aerodata International No.2 'Supermarine Spitfire I & II' published by Vintage Aviation Publications in 1977.The Aerodata series of books were much imitated but IMHO never equalled for packing so much useful modelling data into such a slim booklet. Ah yes, I have the Fw190 version somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I'd suspect that they've used the CMR Spitfire as a master. Their Spitful is a rip of the CMR one and full of similar innacuracies. I'd be interested in one each of those though. Thanks Dave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 (edited) All i can say,is,"IN-TER-EST-ING !!" One thing,though....The P.R.I-G Will the CORRECT Canopy,with the,Side-blisters be in the Kit ?? At that price,i bloody hope so !! Cheers,Bazza. Edited September 17, 2009 by Bazza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redboost Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Hi Wooksta, the Spitful is not a rip as both guys (AZ Models and CMR) cooperare on regular basis. Btw, I can ask tomorrow on E-Day the author of the master patterns (hopefully I'll survice as he is originally a butcher ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted September 17, 2009 Author Share Posted September 17, 2009 One thing,though....The P.R.I-G Will the CORRECT Canopy,with the,Side-blisters be in the Kit ?? I would hope so too - I suspect the plastic is generic, as it's missing the side hatch as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airjiml2 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Which oil cooler should the PR.IG have? Mk. I style or Mk V style. I always thought it was Mk. V style, but it appears the kit is using the Mk. I style. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted September 17, 2009 Author Share Posted September 17, 2009 Which oil cooler should the PR.IG have? Mk. I style or Mk V style. I always thought it was Mk. V style, but it appears the kit is using the Mk. I style.Jim I think they initially had the smaller one, but were retrofitted with the later one when fitted the later (mk V standard) Merlin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZP Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 These look very well detailed and accurate. That's wonderful news. They will likely be a bit pricey from AZ, but look worth it so far. Cheers, Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Boyd Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Hi Wooksta, the Spitful is not a rip as both guys (AZ Models and CMR) cooperare on regular basis. Btw, I can ask tomorrow on E-Day the author of the master patterns (hopefully I'll survice as he is originally a butcher ) Cool! Any chance, then, that we might see some Buccaneers in the future, too? At under $100.00 (US) a pop? I'd love a nice Buccaneer, but at those prices, I'll stick to Hasegawa B-24s. Cheers! Byron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Hi Wooksta, the Spitful is not a rip as both guys (AZ Models and CMR) cooperare on regular basis. Btw, I can ask tomorrow on E-Day the author of the master patterns (hopefully I'll survice as he is originally a butcher ) I stand corrected and apologies offered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Boyd Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 The plans are those drawn by Alfred Granger, MISTC, and are taken from Aerodata International No.2 'Supermarine Spitfire I & II' published by Vintage Aviation Publications in 1977.The Aerodata series of books were much imitated but IMHO never equalled for packing so much useful modelling data into such a slim booklet. IIRC the old Hasegawa 1/72nd Spitfire I also suffers from a short nose? You know, I have Aerodata International No.2. I had actually pulled mine out a day or so before this post to look at the AA (Absolutely Awful - according to some) Tamiya Spitfire in 1/72, and I have to tell you, what I saw did not look like the picture on the website. Lengthwise, my Tamiya Spitfire Mk I was absolutely spot-on with the plan, and not short at a bit. Now, I will admit that I have the version bundled together with the Bf-109, Hawker Hurricane, P-51, P-47, FW-190, etc..., published by Squadron in the early '80s. I'm wondering if Squadron reduced the size ever so minutely, and if so, whether the folks at Tamiya and Hasegawa might have used that version in their the production of their kits. It would still represent incomplete staff work, but it could be a viable explanation of why we keep getting short nosed Spitfires... Also, I should point out that if you pulled the test shot Mk I off of the plan of the Mk II (with Rotel propeller), you will note that the propeller backing plate on the Mk II is easily 2 - 3 times longer that the similar item on the Mk I drawing. As the test shot comes up the edge of the spinner front, this would imply that perhaps the new item is a bit too long in the nose, although this is admittedly a whole lot easer to fix that the short nose problem... Byron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousA667 Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 I'm wondering if Squadron reduced the size ever so minutely, and if so, whether the folks at Tamiya and Hasegawa might have used that version in their the production of their kits. It would still represent incomplete staff work, but it could be a viable explanation of why we keep getting short nosed Spitfires... The drawings in my copy are quite close to 1/72 scale, very slightly under-size. The scale span works out at 11160mm whereas the book itself quotes 11227mm, so there is a scale difference of 67mm (about 2.75" in old money). peebeep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 Nice to see Douglas Bader's markings included in the mk II. Does anyong do the markings for the guy who shot him down? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted September 23, 2009 Author Share Posted September 23, 2009 Nice to see Douglas Bader's markings included in the mk II. Does anyong do the markings for the guy who shot him down? :-) Which squadron was he? Two Spits together would make an interesting 'Dog Fight Double'...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 (edited) "You know, I have Aerodata International No.2. I had actually pulled mine out a day or so before this post to look at the AA (Absolutely Awful - according to some) Tamiya Spitfire in 1/72, and I have to tell you, what I saw did not look like the picture on the website. Lengthwise, my Tamiya Spitfire Mk I was absolutely spot-on with the plan, and not short at a bit." You know, I have Aerodata International No.2. And I have to tell you, what I see looks exactly like the picture on the website. Nevertheless here is a direct comparison of the website image with a scan from the book to demonstrate that I am not deluded, deliberately lying or have crap powers of observation. The two additional vertical lines appear to have been added to facilitate the ruler measurement but other than that there are plenty of points of identical correlation in appearance, layout and typography to lead me to conclude the plans are one and the same and/or that the plans used by AZ are identical copies. I won't list them all as I think they may just be obvious. What d'ya think? Edited September 23, 2009 by Nick Millman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousA667 Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 What d'ya think? Never did like the Tamiya kit. The fuselage above the centre section and around the cockpit just doesn't look right and according to these drawings (which scale out correctly for length) is demonstrably short. This new AZ kit looks very promising. peebeep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Boyd Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) You know, I have Aerodata In"ternational No.2. I had actually pulled mine out a day or so before this post to look at the AA (Absolutely Awful - according to some) Tamiya Spitfire in 1/72, and I have to tell you, what I saw did not look like the picture on the website. Lengthwise, my Tamiya Spitfire Mk I was absolutely spot-on with the plan, and not short at a bit."You know, I have Aerodata International No.2. And I have to tell you, what I see looks exactly like the picture on the website. Nevertheless here is a direct comparison of the website image with a scan from the book to demonstrate that I am not deluded, deliberately lying or have crap powers of observation. The two additional vertical lines appear to have been added to facilitate the ruler measurement but other than that there are plenty of points of identical correlation in appearance, layout and typography to lead me to conclude the plans are one and the same and/or that the plans used by AZ are identical copies. I won't list them all as I think they may just be obvious. What d'ya think? Nick, I think that your highly selective quotation of my comments allows you to 'rise up in righteous anger', as it were. Had you quoted my second paragraph, which stated that my version of Aerodata International, Vol 2 was bound as part of a six-volume set published by Squadron/Signal in 1980, and speculated that mine could very well be just marginally shrunken, you would had to have been a bit more civil with your reply. I think that you should seriously consider relocating to the States - you could have an absolutely brilliant career as a journalist at any of our mainstream outlets, since intellectual honesty seems to have been largely dropped from the required journalistic skill sets here. Honestly, I don't know you at all, and I am too unfamiliar with AZ Models to be willing to accuse either you or them of being "deluded, deliberately lying or have crap powers of observation." In fact, I did not level any of those accusations against either of you. I believe that the only thing I said was that mine must be a bit smaller than the ones AZ used. I've no idea at all whether my copy is typical of the production run, or a 'one off' bad copy. I thought that your proof that the plans AZ is using are the Aerodata International plans was somewhat spurious. I had already recognized the plans in the AZ photo as being the Aerodata plans ("You know, I have Aerodata International No.2. I had actually pulled mine out a day or so before this post[/i] to look at the AA (Absolutely Awful - according to some) Tamiya Spitfire in 1/72...") My third comment was yet another subtle hint that I was already aware that the plans in the AZ photo were the Aerodata International plans. No further proof was required. So, did you have a point, or were you simply manipulating my comments to justify your not-so-subtle hint that I might the one who's either deluded, deliberately lying, or have excremental powers of observation? That's what I think. Warmest regards, Byron Edited September 24, 2009 by Byron Boyd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I know one of the lads on the What If site has a few of them - he picked them up recently at Eday and has a pair of Valom Brigands for me (cheers Chris! - so they're out. Not sure how long it'll be before they're available here but I've an order for one of each with my LHS. So we're up to FIVE new 72nd injection Spits with the Airfix IX imminent. A good year for those who like Spitfires! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Byron It is quite possible that the plans on the website are a scan or photocopy of the original and that therefore the Tamiya Spitfire may appear differently against those plans, my plans or your plans, those three perhaps not being identical for various reasons. My response was predicated on an interpretation of your first paragraph as suggesting the source of the plans were not Aerodata No.2 which is why I quoted it. Your subsequent post makes it clearer you were only referring to the appearance of the Tamiya fuselage against the plans (I think) and I thank you for it. I was certainly not suggesting that you were "deluded, deliberately lying or have crap powers of observation" but was referring only to myself in the context of how I had interpreted your first paragraph as being in doubt about the origin of the plans. I am glad you agree that the plans did indeed originate from Aerodata No.2. I have not checked the Tamiya fuselage against the Aerodata No.2 plans but will now do so out of curiosity to see if there is the same difference suggested by the AZ image. Equally warm regards Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) Never did like the Tamiya kit. The fuselage above the centre section and around the cockpit just doesn't look right and according to these drawings (which scale out correctly for length) is demonstrably short. This new AZ kit looks very promising.peebeep Hi,Mate !! You're not the only one hankering,for those AZ Spits !! (or having a copy,of "Spitfire Porn".... ) I really hope they are worth my hard-earned moolah !! Cheers,Bazza. BTW i thought Dougie Bader's Spit was a mark Va,as opposed to Mk IIa ??.... Or did he have more than ONE A/C ?? Only one thing for it........ "EDGAAARRR !!??" Edited September 26, 2009 by Bazza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byron Boyd Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Nick, Ah, yes. English, our "common" language. I apologize for any confusion my first set of comments might have caused you. Yes, you have now correctly interpreted the nature and thrust of my comments, ie, my Tamiya Spitfire fuselage atop my copy of the plans vs. AZ's Tamiya Spitfire fuselage (which I consider a common reference factor) atop their copy of the same set of plans. Although prior to this string I had assumed that my set of plans were accurate, one look at the AZ photo told me that something was not right. Because my set of plans are not the original, standalone copies from the original publisher, my initial assumption has to be that my set of plans are in error, not AZ's. However, the last week has been way too hectic to allow me time to actually sit down with the micrometers to verify this. My second comment was intended to be a more light-hearted way of pointing this out. Again, my apologies for any miscommunication on my part. I stand by my third comment, though. Assuming that AZ possesses the 100% accurate set of plans, if you take the AZ test shot fuselage off of the Mk II profile, and put it over the Mk I profile (a true apples to apples comparison), it's going to be a tad long, pure and simple. Still a very pretty offering, and it won't stop me from buying one or two... Cheers! Byron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now