Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
World War II
Discuss WWII and the era directly before and after the war from 1935-1949.
Discuss WWII and the era directly before and after the war from 1935-1949.
Hosted by Rowan Baylis
NEWS
1:48 Yet another boring Spitfire...
Mecenas
Joined: December 23, 2007
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 03:11 AM UTC
It looks that we will get soon a new 1:48 scale Spitfire Mk.IXc.
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
MichaelSatin
Campaigns Administrator
Joined: January 19, 2008
KitMaker: 3,909 posts
AeroScale: 2,904 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 05:04 AM UTC
I'm sorry, the Board of Governors of the Use of the King's/Queen's English have officially ruled that the use of the words "boring" and "Spitfire" in the same sentence is legally incorrect unless the sentence reads "An aircraft that is boring BECAUSE it is NOT a Spitfire."
Just to let you know. Can hardly wait!!
Michael
Just to let you know. Can hardly wait!!
Michael
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 06:23 AM UTC
This could be of great interest, since I've no knowledge of a Spitfire which was used for drilling holes.
Edgar
Edgar
Jessie_C
Joined: September 03, 2009
KitMaker: 6,965 posts
AeroScale: 6,247 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 06:40 AM UTC
Quoted Text
This could be of great interest, since I've no knowledge of a Spitfire which was used for drilling holes.
Edgar
Through clouds maybe? Certainly they had the propensity to drill holes through Bf-109s and Fw-190s...
Mecenas
Joined: December 23, 2007
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 07:31 AM UTC
Oh this English sense of humour... I'm affraid I'll never get used to it.
Staring at these pictures we can notice few interesting characteristics which stay, for me, in contradiction to the "late version" of Mk.IXc.
We can notice:
- five-spoke wheel rims
- early rudder type
- flare cartridge rack on the pilot seat
- exhausts type of the early IX's
From the other hand we can see late type of the elevators and the elongated carburetor intake with dust filter. There are also narrow-type bulges of Hispano cannons on the wings, more typical for later machines.
I bet Edgar could find more typical characteristics.
Staring at these pictures we can notice few interesting characteristics which stay, for me, in contradiction to the "late version" of Mk.IXc.
We can notice:
- five-spoke wheel rims
- early rudder type
- flare cartridge rack on the pilot seat
- exhausts type of the early IX's
From the other hand we can see late type of the elevators and the elongated carburetor intake with dust filter. There are also narrow-type bulges of Hispano cannons on the wings, more typical for later machines.
I bet Edgar could find more typical characteristics.
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 08:03 AM UTC
I think it will be best to wait for the kit's issue.
5-spoke wheels lasted to the end of the war; 4-spoke were only mandatory for airframes with bombs under wings (yes, I know they're in the illustration.) You can always cover them with the plain, removable, covers, which were used as a guard against sand (not a lot in Italy or Europe,) snow, or mud (plenty of those in 1944/5.)
Fishtail exhausts lasted the war, with round type a post-war modification.
Pointed rudder was normally a "must," with bombs, but some round rudders lasted until very late.
Very pistol cartridge rack was more normally associated with Seafires, but never say never for Spitfires, since the seats were easily changeable.
Edgar
5-spoke wheels lasted to the end of the war; 4-spoke were only mandatory for airframes with bombs under wings (yes, I know they're in the illustration.) You can always cover them with the plain, removable, covers, which were used as a guard against sand (not a lot in Italy or Europe,) snow, or mud (plenty of those in 1944/5.)
Fishtail exhausts lasted the war, with round type a post-war modification.
Pointed rudder was normally a "must," with bombs, but some round rudders lasted until very late.
Very pistol cartridge rack was more normally associated with Seafires, but never say never for Spitfires, since the seats were easily changeable.
Edgar
Mecenas
Joined: December 23, 2007
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 08:25 AM UTC
Many thanks Edgar for your input and comment.
Personally I consider Eduard as a company which listens to the modelers needs and comments. The faster we will point out possible errors of incoming model - the bigger chance they will introduce some improvements or changes and release more accurate model kit. Pointing out of some issues when the moulds are already done may be one minute too late.
Personally I consider Eduard as a company which listens to the modelers needs and comments. The faster we will point out possible errors of incoming model - the bigger chance they will introduce some improvements or changes and release more accurate model kit. Pointing out of some issues when the moulds are already done may be one minute too late.
AndreasBeck
Joined: October 28, 2007
KitMaker: 24 posts
AeroScale: 17 posts
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2012 - 08:55 PM UTC
Definitly not the last Spitfire (or Mustang, or 109,.....)in any scaly, by any brand. My guess for the next one: a Mk. IX by Tamiya in 48th, then a Mk. XIV from ZM in 32nd and 48th, then a Mk. II or V in 32nd from..... and so on til the hobby comes to its deserved end (that means NEVER). The secret of this game is: surprise is surpassed by surprise, we behave like little kids in the last week before Christmas Eve - and we love it
GastonMarty
Joined: April 19, 2008
KitMaker: 595 posts
AeroScale: 507 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 03, 2012 - 09:08 AM UTC
The nose top looks slightly bulged like it is said to be for the Mk XVI cowl with Packard engine.
The sliding portion of the canopy is bizarrely too big compared to the windshield, and especially compared to the side cockpit "door" panel: The base of the sliding canopy part should barely exceed the length of the cockpit side panel by slightly over one and a half times the thickness of the rear sliding canopy frame, or about 15% overall, while on the Eduard CAD this is more like THREE frames or around 40-45% of extra length...
But this being a separate mobile part it is replaceable and thus not that critical: What matters is the windshield, which is part of the fuselage, and that looks OK.
The tail looks OK at long last.
Minus the strangely sized sliding canopy part (based on the CAD, which could be just a scale glitch to allow moving it around open/closed), this seems like the first real Spitfire ever in 1/48th... (That is, without kit-bashing together around five different models, or ignoring the ICM 1 mm too narrow nose or Tamiya's 1 mm too wide for the same on their Mk I/Vs)
Potentially great news.
Gaston
Antoni
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 574 posts
AeroScale: 573 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 03, 2012 - 10:01 PM UTC
Having just released their Spitfire Mk IXc in 1/144 scale kit it should not be a surprise that they would also tool a kit in a larger scale.
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 03, 2012 - 11:22 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The nose top looks slightly bulged like it is said to be for the Mk XVI cowl with Packard engine.
The sliding portion of the canopy is bizarrely too big compared to the windshield, and especially compared to the side cockpit "door" panel: The base of the sliding canopy part should barely exceed the length of the cockpit side panel by slightly over one and a half times the thickness of the rear sliding canopy frame, or about 15% overall, while on the Eduard CAD this is more like THREE frames or around 40-45% of extra length...
But this being a separate mobile part it is replaceable and thus not that critical: What matters is the windshield, which is part of the fuselage, and that looks OK.
The tail looks OK at long last.
Minus the strangely sized sliding canopy part (based on the CAD, which could be just a scale glitch to allow moving it around open/closed), this seems like the first real Spitfire ever in 1/48th...
What part of "It's an illustration" do you not understand? I'd refrained from making any comment about it, since it's an artist's impression, and taking it as gospel is an utter waste of time; however, since you insist on "/reviewing" a drawing, without bothering to wait for the real thing, the "tail part" is not "OK at long last," and we can only hope that it's due to a shortcoming in the CAD software/perspective, and not indicative of the coming kit. As drawn, the spine is a straight line, which the Spitfire's spine, most certainly, was/is not.
Finally, only those not au fait with the Spitfire continue with this business of the bulged upper cowling being on the XVI; it was a modification to the IX, caused by Merlin 266 fittings on the upper cowling, which, due to commonality of parts on the production line, also appeared on the XVI.
Radical, I know, but let's wait for the kit before commenting on it.
Edgar
darreng
Joined: January 21, 2006
KitMaker: 789 posts
AeroScale: 118 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 04, 2012 - 09:33 AM UTC
It always amazes me the amount of people who can identify whats wrong with a model just by looking at the CAD. Lets wait until the sprue shots are posted before making any judgement.
Torchy
#047
Joined: September 13, 2005
KitMaker: 2,016 posts
AeroScale: 475 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 04, 2012 - 11:06 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It always amazes me the amount of people who can identify whats wrong with a model just by looking at the CAD. Lets wait until the sprue shots are posted before making any judgement.
Totally agree mate
SunburntPenguin
Joined: March 15, 2011
KitMaker: 121 posts
AeroScale: 112 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 04, 2012 - 12:19 PM UTC
Can anyone tell me where I can get my eyes calibrated to see all the "potential" errors from a CAD drawing like some others here?
;)
;)
Exator
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 5 posts
AeroScale: 5 posts
Posted: Monday, November 05, 2012 - 11:16 AM UTC
The search for the 'perfect' Spitfire continues un-abated for you Spitfire heads.
Perhaps the Spit is boring after all. What is not boring is the Hurricane.
Salut
.
Perhaps the Spit is boring after all. What is not boring is the Hurricane.
Salut
.
raypalmer
Joined: March 29, 2010
KitMaker: 1,151 posts
AeroScale: 985 posts
Posted: Monday, November 05, 2012 - 01:01 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Perhaps the Spit is boring after all.
.
Heresy!!!
After decades of waiting the "perfect" 109 was delivered unto us by Eduard.
They are our last, best hope...
GastonMarty
Joined: April 19, 2008
KitMaker: 595 posts
AeroScale: 507 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 12:00 AM UTC
Aren't you confusing Eduard with Zvezda?
Eduard's Me-109E is much too long in the fuselage in both the larger scales, and has other smaller things wrong with it.
The only remotely "perfect" Me-109 I am aware of is an F made by Zvezda in 1/48th scale...
Gaston
Eduard's Me-109E is much too long in the fuselage in both the larger scales, and has other smaller things wrong with it.
The only remotely "perfect" Me-109 I am aware of is an F made by Zvezda in 1/48th scale...
Gaston
Exator
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 5 posts
AeroScale: 5 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 01:08 AM UTC
from the Urban Dictionary -
sarcasm:
A tongue of which the user speaks of something the complete opposite of what the user means. It often has the best comedic value.
sarcasm:
A tongue of which the user speaks of something the complete opposite of what the user means. It often has the best comedic value.
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 01:09 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It always amazes me the amount of people who can identify whats wrong with a model just by looking at the CAD. Lets wait until the sprue shots are posted before making any judgement.
The problem, Daz, is that there are those who want to get their "/review" in first, while there are others who want to get their review correct, so are prepared to wait for the finished product in the box, and it's extremely rare (in other words virtually unheard-of) for the two systems to be compatible.
Edgar
Jessie_C
Joined: September 03, 2009
KitMaker: 6,965 posts
AeroScale: 6,247 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 03:55 AM UTC
Quoted Text
from the Urban Dictionary -
sarcasm:
A tongue of which the user speaks of something the complete opposite of what the user means. It often has the best comedic value.
Followed by "sarchasm": the gap between an intended piece of sarcasm and the person who didn't Get It.
MrMtnMauler
Joined: January 15, 2011
KitMaker: 224 posts
AeroScale: 223 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 10:10 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Aren't you confusing Eduard with Zvezda?
Eduard's Me-109E is much too long in the fuselage in both the larger scales, and has other smaller things wrong with it.
The only remotely "perfect" Me-109 I am aware of is an F made by Zvezda in 1/48th scale...
Gaston
Gaston, clearly you are unfamiliar with the old saying that goes something like "it's far better to go about your business and keep your mouth shut so people don't think you are an idiot rather than opening your mouth and thereby remove ALL doubt". Get the message? Have just a great day now "ya'll"
Jim
DougN1
Joined: August 08, 2011
KitMaker: 410 posts
AeroScale: 409 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 10:29 AM UTC
Actually the Eduard 109E series are a little bit long (and fat) in the tail, but it is not really apparent to most unless you look at it next to a CyberHobby/Dragon 109E:
We now return you to your scheduled Spitfire discussion...
I wish Eduard (or Tamiya, or Hasegawa) would give us a nice 1/32 Mk I/II/V Spitfire, since most of the ones I want to build are early birds, rather than the late ones we already have
Doug
We now return you to your scheduled Spitfire discussion...
I wish Eduard (or Tamiya, or Hasegawa) would give us a nice 1/32 Mk I/II/V Spitfire, since most of the ones I want to build are early birds, rather than the late ones we already have
Doug
GastonMarty
Joined: April 19, 2008
KitMaker: 595 posts
AeroScale: 507 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 01:25 PM UTC
You call 6 + inches a "little"?
As far as getting the sarcasm, it would have worked a lot better with Eduard's popular FW-190A/Fs, recently described by "Military In Scale" as a much more "modern" kit than Hasegawa's FW-190s of the same year... But then that may be yet more irony I am missing: "More Modern" could accurately mean "inaccurate and full of gimmicks"...
With fine perceptions such as this, one can never assume it is sarcasm...
Gaston
As far as getting the sarcasm, it would have worked a lot better with Eduard's popular FW-190A/Fs, recently described by "Military In Scale" as a much more "modern" kit than Hasegawa's FW-190s of the same year... But then that may be yet more irony I am missing: "More Modern" could accurately mean "inaccurate and full of gimmicks"...
With fine perceptions such as this, one can never assume it is sarcasm...
Gaston
Bink123
Joined: June 23, 2008
KitMaker: 414 posts
AeroScale: 364 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 03:18 PM UTC
Mecenas
Joined: December 23, 2007
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
KitMaker: 1,596 posts
AeroScale: 1,275 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 05:45 PM UTC
Quoted Text
What other aircraft has its own music video?
The Messerschmitt Me-262 by Blue Oyster Cult
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 AeroScale and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.