Jump to content

Any ideas, correcting Airfix Spitfire Mk-XII


Recommended Posts

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!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by sweier
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...