Otto Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Is there any way to fix The Airfix Spit XII? Has anyone attempted to kit-bash something together using this kit as the base and possibly other parts from other kits? I have found a real simple way to Fix the few small errors on the ICM spits, mostly because I have about twelve of them and I do really like them. This also means I have some kits I could sacrifice for parts to fix one of these Mk-XII kits. I really like the model and the kit but once you place the fuselage halves together it looks like caricature. A pregnant spit ready to give birth. Any Ideas? Any attempts? PICTURES PLEASE!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sweier Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) Is there any way to fix The Airfix Spit XII? Has anyone attempted to kit-bash something together using this kit as the base and possibly other parts from other kits? I have found a real simple way to Fix the few small errors on the ICM spits, mostly because I have about twelve of them and I do really like them. This also means I have some kits I could sacrifice for parts to fix one of these Mk-XII kits. I really like the model and the kit but once you place the fuselage halves together it looks like caricature. A pregnant spit ready to give birth. Any Ideas? Any attempts? PICTURES PLEASE!!! You have a good eye. Most seem to agree that the fuselage is 1mm too deep and the prop needs replacement. I can't even *measure* 1mm and certainly can't see it so I didn't bother. Shane (edit: grammar) Edited July 26, 2015 by sweier Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 Sand .5mm off the spine/upper cowling; sand .5mm off the keel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted July 28, 2015 Author Share Posted July 28, 2015 If I'm not mistaken, the early Mk.XIIs were modified Mk.V airframes. I wonder If I used a Mk.V fuse with the nose from this kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chek Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 I wonder If I used a Mk.V fuse with the nose from this kit. That'd be my plan. But then Airfix did rethink their quite recent Mk I and really hit the mark, so they may do the same again, Here's hoping... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mawz Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 If I'm not mistaken, the early Mk.XIIs were modified Mk.V airframes. I wonder If I used a Mk.V fuse with the nose from this kit. That's not correct. The XII's were built solely as XII's, the first run used serials from a Mk.V block and had Mk.V style tailwheels, the second batch used Mk.VIII serials and had VIII style tailwheels, the change was due to the tooling in use at the time of each batch's construction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chek Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 That's not correct. The XII's were built solely as XII's, the first run used serials from a Mk.V block and had Mk.V style tailwheels, the second batch used Mk.VIII serials and had VIII style tailwheels, the change was due to the tooling in use at the time of each batch's construction. Whilst that may be true, the essential similarity is the continued use of the asymmetric under-wing radiators as used by the early marks and the universal 'C' wing as introduced on the Vc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted July 30, 2015 Author Share Posted July 30, 2015 I did the research and they were built on Mk.II airframes. This means both the Mk.I or V would be fine for the fuse. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chek Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I did the research and they were built on Mk.II airframes. This means both the Mk.I or V would be fine for the fuse. I'm not sure that's true Otto. Certainly the ones in the MB serial range have retractable tailwheels which strongly suggests they're based on the Mk VIII fuselage. And should that be so, it in turn suggests that the early batch with EN serials would have raised rivets on the rear fuselage as per all the early marks, but the later ones with retractable tailwheels would be flush riveted overall. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I did the research and they were built on Mk.II airframes. I've no idea where that came from, but it's a complete nonsense; Mk.II production ceased 25-7-41, and all serials were in the PXXXX range, while the first XII wasn't built until October 1942. The Mk.II was produced at Castle Bromwich, with only the "A" or "B" wing, while the XII was built by Supermarine, had the "universal" wing first seen on the production Vc, and had a fully flush-riveted fuselage. There was a need for a low-altitude Spitfire, to counter low-level Luftwaffe attacks, but a shortage of low-altitude Merlins dictated the use of a low-level Griffon. Two Squadrons were felt to be enough, and the standard complement, for a Squadron, was 50 airframes, hence the order for only 100 Mk.XIIs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chek Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Thanks for the information Edgar. Have you any insight into why some had regular tail wheels and some had retractable ones? It seems strange having two varieties when they were built as a 'one-off' batch. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 It seems likely that it was all done "ad hoc," since the serials are not 100% consecutive. The EN serials came from the same series as the Mk.IX, so fixed tail wheel, while MB serials were from the Mk.VIII series, so had retractable wheels. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 I've no idea where that came from, but it's a complete nonsense; Mk.II production ceased 25-7-41, and all serials were in the PXXXX range, while the first XII wasn't built until October 1942. The Mk.II was produced at Castle Bromwich, with only the "A" or "B" wing, while the XII was built by Supermarine, had the "universal" wing first seen on the production Vc, and had a fully flush-riveted fuselage. There was a need for a low-altitude Spitfire, to counter low-level Luftwaffe attacks, but a shortage of low-altitude Merlins dictated the use of a low-level Griffon. Two Squadrons were felt to be enough, and the standard complement, for a Squadron, was 50 airframes, hence the order for only 100 Mk.XIIs. My link Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edgar Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Don't believe everything you read; the Mk.XII prototype DP845 was converted from the Mk.IV prototype. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mfezi Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 My link But your link only speaks of the origin of the airframe that they used for the original prototype - it says nothing about the production airframes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted August 1, 2015 Author Share Posted August 1, 2015 If I'm mot mistaken the basic fuselage outline and shape on the Mk.I - Mk.XII was the same. So any of the early mk. fuselages should provide a new fuselage for the mk.XII Airfix wing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mawz Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 If I'm mot mistaken the basic fuselage outline and shape on the Mk.I - Mk.XII was the same. So any of the early mk. fuselages should provide a new fuselage for the mk.XII Airfix wing. But only for the first 50 airframes, the last 50 were built with VIII tooling and have the retractable tailwheel of the VIII. The rear fuselage was different between the two production runs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 Isn't the Mk.VIII a pressurized version of the Mk.IX? Even though the Mk.IX was a stopgap variant which actually came out before the Mk.VIII. The outline of the Mk.VIII is the same as the Mk.IX with the exception of the tailwheel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mawz Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Isn't the Mk.VIII a pressurized version of the Mk.IX? Even though the Mk.IX was a stopgap variant which actually came out before the Mk.VIII. The outline of the Mk.VIII is the same as the Mk.IX with the exception of the tailwheel. No, the Mk.VIII is not a pressurized Mk.IX, and did not come out after the IX, and the rear fuselages are different (same basic outline, but that outline continued right up to the XIX and 21, the actuality is different, only the RV fuselage Spitfires have a different basic rear fuselage profile). There are detail differences in the fuselages such as radio hatch locations, presence of rear fuselage fuel tanks and other minor changes and fairly significant internal changes. Different wings as well, but that doesn't apply to the XII conversion as it had its own Vc-derived wing which was common to both runs of the XII. The VIII was the definitive 2-stage Merlin Spitfire and had significant changes from the earlier models, it was derived from the pressurized VII. The IX was essentially applying the most basic of the VIII changes to the Vc to get a stop-gap solution until VIII production could ramp up to meet needs (which never entirely happened) and the IX got a number of the other VIII improvements over the course of production, including the RV fuselage which never reached production for the VIII (but was developed with a VIII prototype). All the Spitfires after the IX/XVI & XI are from the VIII lineage. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 I am talking about fuselage shape outline. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chek Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 As I understand it, Spitfires from Mk 1 to Seafire Mk47 are identical in length from Frame 5 (engine bulkhead) to the rudder post. With the exception of lo-back models, the fuselage outlines are also identical. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted August 3, 2015 Author Share Posted August 3, 2015 That's what I thought. I have plenty of spitfire kits to use than. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted September 20, 2015 Author Share Posted September 20, 2015 I completely forgot about the Special Hobby Mk.XII. Is it any better, worse, same? I know that Special hobby copied many of the issues from the Tamiya spitfires in the first kits. Did they change that? I am sceptical in buying their kits because they in general do not get good reviews. I have the IL-10 and put it on the back shelf because of quality issues. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted September 20, 2015 Author Share Posted September 20, 2015 I went online and I believe answered my own question, which is, that the Special hobby kit introduced even more mistakes even on top of the ones Airfix made. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
seafuryfb Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 No, the Mk.VIII is not a pressurized Mk.IX, and did not come out after the IX, and the rear fuselages are different (same basic outline, but that outline continued right up to the XIX and 21, the actuality is different, only the RV fuselage Spitfires have a different basic rear fuselage profile). There are detail differences in the fuselages such as radio hatch locations, presence of rear fuselage fuel tanks and other minor changes and fairly significant internal changes. Different wings as well, but that doesn't apply to the XII conversion as it had its own Vc-derived wing which was common to both runs of the XII. The VIII was the definitive 2-stage Merlin Spitfire and had significant changes from the earlier models, it was derived from the pressurized VII. The IX was essentially applying the most basic of the VIII changes to the Vc to get a stop-gap solution until VIII production could ramp up to meet needs (which never entirely happened) and the IX got a number of the other VIII improvements over the course of production, including the RV fuselage which never reached production for the VIII (but was developed with a VIII prototype). All the Spitfires after the IX/XVI & XI are from the VIII lineage. The difference between mk IX and MkVII & VIII series is the mkXI was to be a stopgap until mkVIII became available, mkIXs were remanufacture mkIs , mkII,mkv airframes brfore actually manufacturing new aiframes, mk VII,mkVIIIs were from the stillborn mk III airframe refinements. MkXIIs were purpose built airframes to counter FW190 menace as they out classed the mkVs 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.