AZ Models 1/72 mk I/II Spitfires

[ben_m]

Anyone got their hands on one of these yet? Where's the best place to buy them?

[The wooksta V2.0]

One of the traders on Ebay has them. Dealt with him before and delivery is pretty fast. Faster than Hannants anyway.

[Barracudadude]

Gentlemen (and the rest of you scurvey lot).

The first and biggest problem I can see with this discussion up to this point is using the Aerodata drawings as a reference!

The Grainger Spit I/II drawings are very crisp and beautiful to behold. Some of his drawings are very good, but the Spit I/II is NOT one of them. It has been a long time since I have seen them used as a gold standard reference. Without getting into hair splitting measurements, there are a number of red flags in these drawings.

1) The long graceful sweep down from the windscreen to the spinner. In actuality, this line should be almost dead straight until about a foot from the spinner backplate.

2) The overstated S curve of the upper spine, an error copied from the Supermarine fuselage station drawings which is NOT an accurate side view.

3) The elliptical profile of the wings is a mess.

Unfortunately, I do not have the AZ kit yet. I would be much more comfortable if the Bracken drawings were used as a gauge for accuracy on this subject. I still think they are the best Spitfire drawings out there. The Monforten IX drawings are superbly detailed, but there are some odd shapes and details on them, and he seems to think that Spit IXs were fitted with B wings early on! he also makes no mention of the fact that the upperwing tyre bulges are a post war fit (with a possible exception or two, I suppose).

Be also aware that many photocopiers can stretch and distort drawings. I used to fix copiers, and if the mirrors weren't perfectly aligned, they would distort images subtly. If the scan carriage was not perfectly synced with the drum rotation, they could stretch or compress the copies lengthwise. To test your copier. Copy a piece of graph paper and hold them up to the light together. digital copiers may be more accurate.

HTH Roy

[gingerbob]

To test your copier. Copy a piece of graph paper and hold them up to the light together. digital copiers may be more accurate.

HTH Roy

Rather off track of the thread, but file this tip in the bulging "So bloody obvious it never occurred to me!" drawer... Thanks Roy!

bob (one of the scurvy lot)

[Nick Millman]

Unfortunately, I do not have the AZ kit yet. I would be much more comfortable if the Bracken drawings were used as a gauge for accuracy on this subject. I still think they are the best Spitfire drawings out there. The Monforten IX drawings are superbly detailed, but there are some odd shapes and details on them, and he seems to think that Spit IXs were fitted with B wings early on! he also makes no mention of the fact that the upperwing tyre bulges are a post war fit (with a possible exception or two, I suppose).

Be also aware that many photocopiers can stretch and distort drawings. I used to fix copiers, and if the mirrors weren't perfectly aligned, they would distort images subtly. If the scan carriage was not perfectly synced with the drum rotation, they could stretch or compress the copies lengthwise. To test your copier. Copy a piece of graph paper and hold them up to the light together. digital copiers may be more accurate.

HTH Roy

Not to labour the point but it appeared from the initial post that AZ used the Aerodata plans upon which to base the model. I think I already made the point about the vagaries of copied plans - whilst one can check one's own copier the accuracy of other copiers - and other plans - is a little more unpredictable.

Nick

[Edgar]

Arthur Bentley discovered this, when his drawings were transferred from M.A.P. to Nexus. Nexus's photocopier stretched his drawings, so that he had to redraw them shorter, in one plane, to allow for the distortion (whether any other drawings received the same treatment, I don't know.) Now that Arthur has got them back, he's drawn them back to their original standard, and reproduces them photographically, rather than on a copier.

Edgar

[Ed Russell]

The drawings by AR Clint in my copy of the Robert Bracken book "Spitfire - the Canadians" doesn't include Mk I or II drawings. Earliest is a Mk Vb. I only have Vol I though.

I have put the A-Z kit up against the Mk Vb drawings and, allowing for the obvious, it looks okay. I'm reluctant to make conclusions based on a Vb drawing though.

Unfortunately, I do not have the AZ kit yet. I would be much more comfortable if the Bracken drawings were used as a gauge for accuracy on this subject. I still think they are the best Spitfire drawings out there.

[Test Graham]

The nose length is the same for a Mk.I, Mk.II and Mk.V: apart from the spinners, where relevant.

[Edgar]

The only variation, between the V, I, & II, is the position of the carburettor intake, and, in 1/72, that's only likely to be of any interest to a female gnat. Over here, it was generally felt that Cox's drawings, of the Mark I, were the best (with the Nexus caveat, above, unfortunately,) and they're now owned (or should be) by My Hobby Store. The one thing, that I'd be wary of, on that kit, is the painting instruction for some of the early Mk.Is; they're a sort of cobbling together of 1/2 pattern A & 1/2 pattern B, so that it ends up as a mirror image of itself.

Edgar

[brewerjerry]

Hi

Another slight difference is, I think i read somewhere there is a cowling bulge for the starter on the Mk II & V, and it is not on the Mk I.

Cheers

Jerry

[Ed Russell]

Mea culpa - there is a Spitfire II drawing in the AR Clint set! Mine have been enlarged from the originals on a calibrated photocopier and are close to 1/72 scale. A side-on photo adjusted to the same scale covers the drawing fairly exactly.

I placed the A-Z Spitfire II fuselage over it and compared.

and they are pretty close in shape. When you move it around, the best match lines up the nose, cockpit and wing root. However this leaves the rear fuselage seeming to be a bit short. The tail looks correct.

If this is noticeable it's an easy fix - just add a little bit in the rear.

Caveat - I know a little bit about Spitfires but I'm not in the expert category. One of my friends called the corner of my workbench "Castle Bromwich South". Obviously he's been looking at too much James May.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Ed Russell