Special Hobby is currently working on their new project which is 1:48 scale Spitfire Mk.XII.



Link to Item

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!

Strange things happens. Read through the criticism of the Special Hobby Seafire XVs. Correct, how they got the wing so wrong i s amystery. As to the length I just compared it to the Airfix Seafire XVII fuselage, and the difference is a fraction of a milimeter. The back part of the fuselage on the Soecial Hobby item is exactly (give and take o,2 mm) the same as Airfix's. So really a black out with the wings' position. But noway otherwise as bad as argued by Gaston.

Here no amateur fotos is of much help.

But Michal,

my question still stands: Why a Mk.XII? The Airfix one is not difficult to get right, and it is quite new. Why not a Mk.XIV. Here we are really in need of a decent rendering.

I also wonder why this obsession with the Mk.XII? It was short lived, and built in small numbers, definitely a first try with a new motor.

NP

NP

Quoted Text

---

But Michal,

my question still stands: Why a Mk.XII? The Airfix one is not difficult to get right, and it is quite new. Why not a Mk.XIV. Here we are really in need of a decent rendering.

I also wonder why this obsession with the Mk.XII? It was short lived, and built in small numbers, definitely a first try with a new motor.

NP

NP

---

Presumably , because Special Hobby consider that a MkXII only needs a simple retool of the Seafire XV kit that they already have.

Andrew

But Michal,

my question still stands: Why a Mk.XII? The Airfix one is not difficult to get right, and it is quite new. Why not a Mk.XIV. Here we are really in need of a decent rendering.

I also wonder why this obsession with the Mk.XII? It was short lived, and built in small numbers, definitely a first try with a new motor.

NP

NP

Gaston, this is elliptical wing. It depends very much of the angle of taking particular photography. It also depends a lot where do you see the root of the trailing edge. Taking your photo I drawn a simple line (I still can't believe I did it) and to my eyes it looks pretty much as on Special Hobby fuselage.

Anyay this discussion is pretty much pointless as SH is making absolutely new fuselage for Mk.XII and the Mk.V wing (published in my report) is used just as a base for Mk.XII wing.

Quoted Text

---

But Michal,

my question still stands: Why a Mk.XII? The Airfix one is not difficult to get right, and it is quite new. Why not a Mk.XIV. Here we are really in need of a decent rendering.

I also wonder why this obsession with the Mk.XII? It was short lived, and built in small numbers, definitely a first try with a new motor.

NP

NP

---

actually, if you ask me, the airfix mk. XII is not very good. I recently dumped the kit on ebay because i decided I would rather wait and see if special hobby decided to do one.

the special hobby spitfires are very good in my book.

as for the airfix kit - panel lines are trenches, plastic had rough texture and the fuselage behind the wings is WAY too deep compared to pretty much any other spitfire kit worth beans. I had a hard time deciding if I wanted to source the wings to the Aeroclub fuselage to make a XIV, but i came to the conclusion they weren't high enough quality to spend that kind of effort.

I, for one, am ecstatic that special hobby is doing a VII, and I hope the go for a XIV please and thank you very much. I think they, of all the kit makers currently going, have the highest chance of getting a VIX done in a passable manner.

Sorry, to say that the Airfix XII is not very good is much too easy. In which way is it not good enough? I have seen other discussions here, e.g., about the supposed short nose which is, however, absolutely OK, as the XII was shorter than the IX. Edgar came in here.

But when such a general statement is offered, people should be more specific about what is wrong. Because the Airfix XII is not perfect (don't like the Matchbox-like trenches).

NPL

panel lines are trenches, plastic had rough texture and the fuselage behind the wings is WAY too deep compared to pretty much any other spitfire kit worth beans. I had a hard time deciding if I wanted to source the wings to the Aeroclub fuselage to make a XIV, but i came to the conclusion they weren't high enough quality to spend that kind of effort.

Quoted Text

---

Sorry, to say that the Airfix XII is not very good is much too easy. In which way is it not good enough? I have seen other discussions here, e.g., about the supposed short nose which is, however, absolutely OK, as the XII was shorter than the IX. Edgar came in here.

But when such a general statement is offered, people should be more specific about what is wrong. Because the Airfix XII is not perfect (don't like the Matchbox-like trenches).

NPL

---

read it again - I summarize how it doesn't hold up further on in the post:

Quoted Text

---

panel lines are trenches, plastic had rough texture and the fuselage behind the wings is WAY too deep compared to pretty much any other spitfire kit worth beans. I had a hard time deciding if I wanted to source the wings to the Aeroclub fuselage to make a XIV, but i came to the conclusion they weren't high enough quality to spend that kind of effort.

---

Also, I again agree with Gaston (sigh) that the airfix XII nose shape is suspicious, but that wasn't obvious till special hobby put out their seafire XV. Special hobby totally nailed the 'look' of it on the seafire mk XV compared the airfix mk XII nose, which should be similar save for the bump fairing on forward top of the XII nose. Instead, the line of thrust is quite different and as a result the nose dips too much. I do not think the seafire XV nose was any different in overall shape than the XII nose (though I admit only having done minimal research on this). If someone finds evidence the nose from the seafire XV were in fact re-enginered from the spitfire XII and that the thrust line was raised some 5-10cm, then I retract my statement about the nose shape of the airfix kit.

Sorry, to say that the Airfix XII is not very good is much too easy. In which way is it not good enough? I have seen other discussions here, e.g., about the supposed short nose which is, however, absolutely OK, as the XII was shorter than the IX. Edgar came in here.

But when such a general statement is offered, people should be more specific about what is wrong. Because the Airfix XII is not perfect (don't like the Matchbox-like trenches).

NPL

panel lines are trenches, plastic had rough texture and the fuselage behind the wings is WAY too deep compared to pretty much any other spitfire kit worth beans. I had a hard time deciding if I wanted to source the wings to the Aeroclub fuselage to make a XIV, but i came to the conclusion they weren't high enough quality to spend that kind of effort.

Quoted Text

---

Gaston, this is elliptical wing. It depends very much of the angle of taking particular photography. It also depends a lot where do you see the root of the trailing edge. Taking your photo I drawn a simple line (I still can't believe I did it) and to my eyes it looks pretty much as on Special Hobby fuselage.

Anyay this discussion is pretty much pointless as SH is making absolutely new fuselage for Mk.XII and the Mk.V wing (published in my report) is used just as a base for Mk.XII wing.

---

I for one very much approve of the special hobby spitfire kits.

I do, unfortunately, have to agree with Gaston (ACK!) that tamiya and special hobby get their wing-trailing-edge and front-of-rear-canopy line off by about 2mm (saying 3mm is pushing it a bit). Hasegawa gets this feature about perfect.

HOWEVER, to see the difference, I literally have to very carefully line up, side by side, a hasegawa fuselage half to a special hobby one and then look from certain specific angles and cross compare a couple times to really notice it.

the error is SMALL in an area of compound angles that are, on the large scale we can actually notice, quite well reproduced over all.

I've variously done sculpture, CAD drawings, and been a quality assurance engineer in my education and careers, and I can legitemitly claim to have a skeptical eye. I can attest that, taking into account the difficulty of reproducing an area like that, special hobby did an admirable job. Yes, it would be great if they would clean it up in future fuselages, but the misalignment of the trailing edge to the canopy is a MINOR error in an otherwise excellent scale rendition of the spitfire.

the nose has been discussed before. It is the Special Hobby nose which is not curving enough. There are excellent plans, in the MAP series and elsewhere (by some of the top people, including Klint). Edgar also pointed out before that Airfix actually had people measuring early Griffons.

NPL

The thrust line of the Airfix Mk XII and Mk XVII are spot on and also exactly match that of the Aeroclub MkXVII conversion