TuveB Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Arrgh, still in blue at HLJ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
moeggo Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Arrgh, still in blue at HLJ 28th is the release date in Japan... only a couple more days! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Terry McGrady Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 I want to build what might be the most famous Spit flying today, MH434, but found out, it's a IXB. Can i easily make a B-wing out of a C-wing? No such thing as a "B Wing " MKIX they were all "C WIng " Actually there was no Spitfire IXB .Its just a term that for some reason has slipped in over the years. Cheers Terry McGrady Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 No such thing as a "B Wing " MKIX they were all "C WIng " Actually there was no Spitfire IXB.Its just a term that for some reason has slipped in over the years. Actually the RAF (officially or unofficially) used Spitfire IXA and IXB quite a bit during the war to denote the variations in which type of Merlin an aircraft had. Apparently (according to Wojtek Matusiak) the designation crept into official paperwork throughout the war. J Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Terry McGrady Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Actually the RAF (officially or unofficially) used Spitfire IXA and IXB quite a bit during the war to denote the variations in which type of Merlin an aircraft had. Apparently (according to Wojtek Matusiak) the designation crept into official paperwork throughout the war.J So far as I'm aware the terms were unofficial- might have been used on squadrons , as were other terms ie the use of the name Warhawk or Goshawk for Merlin engined Kittyhawk MKII by 260 Squadron Quote Link to post Share on other sites
moeggo Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 HLJ Have them in stock now! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 MH434 doesn't have the canonport stumps beside the 20mm, was this normal on C-wing, is MH434's wings modified or are they B-wings? MH434 does have the same cover on top of the wing as the C-wing. According to the listing in Spitfire the history and on Airliners.net MH434 is a LF.IXB and in Spitfire the history it is written that she got normal wing tips for the movie Battle of Britain. I checked my account at HLJ and my order is being processed so i think i'll have it around 8th of dec :D and my creditcard will be strained more Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Terry McGrady Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 MH434 doesn't have the canonport stumps beside the 20mm, was this normal on C-wing, is MH434's wings modified or are they B-wings? MH434 does have the same cover on top of the wing as the C-wing. According to the listing in Spitfire the history and on Airliners.net MH434 is a LF.IXB and in Spitfire the history it is written that she got normal wing tips for the movie Battle of Britain.I checked my account at HLJ and my order is being processed so i think i'll have it around 8th of dec :D and my creditcard will be strained more No such thing as a "B" wing on Spitfire MKIX.The Cannon port stub could be removed . In fact the cannon could be in the outer bay and the stub on the inner giving the impression of an "E " wing Cheers Terry McGrady Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 OK, now i know the facts, thank you Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 MH434 was re-winged post-war, so anything could have happened. Edgar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Has anyone seen wartime photos of MH434? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 In March, 2002, FlyPast issued a free book, with 51 "then and now" photos of airworthy Spitfires. On the front cover is MH434 as ZB-B, of 222 Squadron. The photo's rather grainy, so it's a toss-up whether the empty stub is there, or not (I'd say not,) but the length of cannon barrel, plus the extra forward rake of the u/c., definitely denotes "C" armament. Edgar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Thanks for that info! Clipped or standard wings? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Standard; clipped winged IXs, in the U.K., were rare as hen's teeth, after all they were preferred for mid-to-high usage. I have a copy of a report on clipped-wing trials, which basically says it's a waste of time, and not worth bothering with. Edgar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Got my spit today, 5 days from Japan to my livingroom in Sweden But wy have they bothed the IP up? Black discs???? Is there a qick fix or do i have to wait for Eduard? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 I've got photos of MH434 taken in the early 1960s, and she's got a standard C wing with standard C wing bulges, only without the outboard blast tube openings and without any hint of the cannons (which would have been removed when she was demobbed). More later... J Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Notdoneyet Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Got my spit today, 5 days from Japan to my livingroom in Sweden :D But wy have they bothed the IP up? Black discs???? Is there a qick fix or do i have to wait for Eduard? TuveB, The IP decals are not botched up - the black discs are the BACK layer of the dial decals. The front of the decal (with the dial face printing) is printed on a layer underneath the black so that when you apply the decal to the rear of the clear IP parts the dial face printing becomes visible. HTH, Ian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 OK. With the extra decal in Victory's set i can make MH434 Are the nose art and killmarkings she has today genuine? The IP decals seems to be "reversed" after examining the instructions. Time to bury my nose in the Monforton book! I will build MH434 from one of the kits and a what if in swedish marking of the other as we nearly bought IX's, the air force general rejected the IX, he wanted XIV's, he then turned to USAAF to buy T-Bolt's and 30 were earmarked for Sweden but in the end we ended up with about 160 Mustang's! The only Spit we bought were 50 mk XIX's, most of the pilots loved them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MESHER Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Like the F-16 kit I know they will release the Spit in 1/48 the question is how long will that take I wonder? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kaysersoze Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 mmmmmmmmmmmmm.............do i get one for christmas from SWMBO.........or do i use my payrise from work and get one myself tomorrow.............???? ive been wanting one of these since i first heard about it, and am champing at the bit now. WHEN i get one, i will have to do J*EJ......... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brad-M Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Why not let your wife get you one, and you get yourself another..I hope you do JE*J, but if you do, you might want to use different decals, as the kit decals have the incorrect font style. Cheers Brad mmmmmmmmmmmmm.............do i get one for christmas from SWMBO.........or do i use my payrise from work and get one myself tomorrow.............???? ive been wanting one of these since i first heard about it, and am champing at the bit now. WHEN i get one, i will have to do J*EJ......... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 No such thing as a "B" wing on Spitfire MKIX.The Cannon port stub could be removed . In fact the cannon could be in the outer bay and the stub on the inner giving the impression of an "E " wing Not without a fair bit of work; I've just found a drawing, for the heating "plumbing," and the pipes, to the outer .303" guns, ran behind the 20mm, then alongside it, in the "spare" compartment, turning at right angles when they met the spar. Moving the cannon out would have involved moving the pipes in, then somehow working a way to take them across the barrel of the 20mm (while still heating its breech,) and out to the .303"s. This is probably why Supermarine said that converting a "C" to an "E" (though they never used that expression) had to be done by an Air Ministry working party. Plumbing for the Vc was a completely different arrangement, so its compartment could be chopped and changed at will. Edgar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 To add more confusion about the mk IXb issue. On page 69 in Modellers Datafile no 3 about the Merlin powered Spitfires there is a sketch with the F/LF/HF mk IXb. It tells you to modify the Hasegawa IX wing to a B-wing in 72, Use Tamiya Vb in 48 and H-gawa Vb in 32?? I checked the Aeroclub parts and there are no C-wing parts, the only wing part is V198, new gun blisters. Have SAM made a misstake in reserch? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TuveB Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 A Tamiya IX in 48? Can the dream come true? The "Baby" Spits are fantastic kits to build. Mk XIV and XIX in both 48 and 32?? we can only hope but looking at how long i takes Tamiya to make other verisons of the same plane type or "rescale" a kit, i think at least three years before a 48 mk IX, and a XIX in either scale? Well 8 to 12 years or ......never. At least a mk XIV, that we might se in maybe 5-6 years, can be converted to a XIX rather easily. Looking at the 32 mk IX i'm convinced other versions, "Baby" Spits or Griffon Spits, will follow. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Have SAM made a mistake in research? For a company who can show eight models of the Mosquito, in Datafile no.1, with one elevator up, and the other down, I'd say there's a distinct possibility, even likelihood. Edgar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.