This is what a poster in another forum is claiming:

"But the Airfix PR.XIX is a scale 1.88" too narrow across the cowl Gaston"

Any evidence there is anything to this?

Gaston

Which equals 1mm on the kit; perhaps the "expert" would be good enough to tell us which P.R.XIX he measured, in order to come up with this? As for evidence, the drawings/dimensions, etc., were supplied by Arthur Bentley, who is known for going to the real thing, and taking measurements; I'll take his findings, against so-called experts, any day.
Edgar

Ummmm, thats my calculation Edgar, based on dimensions from both Arthur Bentley as my prime source verified with figures you provided over on BM a couple of years ago as well as my own measurements of PK624 about 7 or 8 years back when TFC had her torn down to bare metal for rebuild.

The front plate of a Griffon cowl is 28" in diameter, the front plate of the Airfix PR.XIX scrapes in at just over 26", making it a shade under 1.9" scale inches, or as you correctly say 1mm, too small.

Of course although Gaston usually sees such 'huge' discrepancies as a 'fatal flaw' (or he would do if it were a Tamiya kit) I dare any normal human being to detect such and insignificant error with the naked eye! I only discovered it by comparison of the XIX with the 22/24 kit and Roy Sutherlands resin prop, I noticed the spinner Roy provides was slightly too big for the XIX so I sat down and did some measurements and calculations.

Oh, and I have never, in all the years I've been modelling, or posting on the Internet, claimed to be an 'expert' about anything.

Hi Les

Thanks for the clarification. So, in your opinion, is the kit correct in width at the firewall?

I fear, as you say, the kit will also now be branded as "fatally flawed" by Gaston, but it's just a question of a spacer at the front and a dab of filler, along with a slightly larger diameter spinner, that's an easy fix.

All the best

Rowan

I honestly hadn't bothered to check the firewall width Rowan, overall the kit is a superb rendition of the Griffon Spit and I only discovered this minor discrepancy quite by chance, to my mind its not even worth correcting. Gaston is making more of it than is worthwhile because he doesn't like to shown to be wrong in his guesswork.

There would appear to be a shade too much taper to the forward cowl dimensions of the kit, packing it out by a millimetre would mean you'd need to find and fit a spinner of larger diameter, Roy Sutherlands 22/24 spinner will do the job but the prop blades are too large in diameter for the XIX, the Quickboost/Aires range includes a number of bits aimed at the Academy kit but I don't think they will work because the Academy kits are bloated caricatures.

Making the forward cowl wider by 1mm would also mean that the distinctive Griffon rocker-cover fairings would then 'splay' outwards in plan view, not by much admittedly but without correction I think that would look far worse, if they were individual parts as in the 22/24/Seafire kits it wouldn't be much of an issue but because Airfix have moulded them 'in situ' on the XIX kit a modification is more complicated.

My hat is off to anyone who feels it's worth the effort of fixing the issue but I doubt anybody would ever notice the correction anyway.

Personally I think its far more worthwhile spending time reducing the doorstep-thick wing, aileron and flap trailing edges than fussing over 1mm in the forward cowl but thats an area of the kit thats consistently overlooked for some reason.

I thought that I had "Blocked Gascon" MUST check my settings

Hi Les

Thanks again. I hate to say it, but the rocker covers on my kit aren't actually parallel (Oh no - it gets even more fatally flawed! ), so a spacer at the front wouldn't be a disaster in that respect... I suppose the real pain would be splitting and filling the lower cowl part to match.

Perhaps we should get Roy on the case with a dedicated prop/spinner? I know from recent correspondence that he's very busy at the moment with some exciting new items, but there's no-one better in the business quality-wise.

And I agree totally on thick trailing edges - a perennial bugbear...

All the best

Rowan

Actually if you make a measurement you'll find that the widest point of the fairings from front to rear is almost exactly parallel at 21mm's across (within a whisker), but its not an easy measurement to make on my completed model with the prop in the way so I'll concede that point Rowan.

As I said my feeling is that trying to correct the discrepancy is a bit of a futile exercise, but if someone wants to have a go at it I'd love to see the results to see if it really makes any appreciable difference to the look of the model.




I was under the impression that Roy had a lot of plans for updates to the kit when it was released, but then again given his passion for the Sea Vixen I'm surprised he's done nothing for that kit either. His work is among the best, the only resin AM that comes close in terms of quality is Ultracast in my opinion.




I don't like the breakdown Airfix have adopted for the flaps, its been the 'house-style' for thier Spits and Seafires since that god-awful Mk.I they released before Hornby took over, they just add to the trailing edge thickness and unecessarily complicate the fit at the wing roots.

Its nice that they try to give us control surfaces we can pose as we want but those flaps are just hateful. I wouldn't miss them if Airfix decided to drop the idea.

Hi again Les

Maybe I bought a bad'un - but even to the eye my covers aren't quite parallel, and there's daylight (OK - monitor light) showing at the front with calipers set against them at the rear. It'd be interesting to see if anyone complained the nose was too wide if I added 1mm (or even noticed...) - the difference would be so subtle.

All the best

Rowan

I measured with calipers the rocker covers as 16.23 mm in the rear and 16.17 mm in front, so they appear to be close to paralell, depending on how you squeeze them...

This is unfortunately not a good deal, as Les is more or less correct that the Airfix spinner, being 14.03 mm and so 26.5 inches in diameter, is indeed noticeably undersized to the claimed measurement of 28 inches.

.79 mm is a pretty big chunk to add: More on that later...

If true, it would be over five percent; well within what is easily noticeable next to a correct kit. By itself, it depends...

The Airfix Mk XII spinner was said to match closely a real spinner, but is 14.28 mm.

Special Hobby's Seafire XV is 15.13 mm, which works out to 28.5 inches.

(Incidently, the Special Hobby kit looks seriously undernourished in the rear lower nose profile, and slightly so in the lower forward tail profile, but the spinner diameter looks plausible vs the overall profile, which inclines me to believe the figure of 28 inches: Another problem with the SH kit is that the position of the main trailing edge is level to the middle of the rear canopy perspex, instead of at the front of it, a good 2.5 mm discrepancy, or five inches)

.79 mm in width throughout is a pretty big chunk, and at least .7 mm of that must be added throughout the entire nose between the fuselage halves (in part because of the paralell moulded-in valve covers)... That is, if the correct larger spinner diameter can be hoped to be matched!: This would in turn throw off completely the width of the cockpit at the front... Worse: The Airfix PR. XIX cockpit opening has the correct width in 1/48, being close to the correct 600 mm, (the Special Hobby kit is around 625 mm). Eduard's cockpit opening is noticeably too narrow at 575 mm, or .5 mm under: Ironically, if that had been the case with the Airfix PR XIX, the problem would have been more easily solved: Add .7 mm spacers throughout the nose/fuselage, and a Special Hobby spinner...

The model looks good enough on its own: The narrow nose is hard to notice without a correct kit next to it. On the real aircraft, a significant nearly flat area appears to stop the cross-section radius of the fuselage in front of the windscreen, and this is absent on the kit...

Since I am not a kit manufacturer charity organisation, and the error is not really fixable wihout making other things much worse, I will now sell my P.R. XIX, and no longer say it is the best Spitfire in 1/48th.

Les has indeed proven me wrong, and it the priviledge of culture to enjoy this: No doubt he will have learned something new as well...

Gaston

Hi all,

Interesting read as always...

It happens that my latest builds are two Airfix Spitfire PR.XIX so I take the occasion of this thread to show some images of them if you don't mind. The first one is the model with some Eduard photo etch added while the swedish machine is strictly out of the box. I have even included the pilot... who is way to big to fit inside the cockpit. I had to trim it's feet by no less than 1mm! What is Airfix thinking?

















Jean-Luc

Both are lovely models Jean-Luc.

They amply demonstrate that fussing over a millimetre here or a percentage there is often a waste of time when the completed model captures the look of the original aircraft so well.

For my part I'm very pleased with my PR.XIX now its on the shelf and I'm eagerly awaiting the rumoured Airfix Mk.XIV kit to sit alongside it.

Hi Jean-Luc

Beautiful work on your new Spits! I'm very impressed at how clear the canopies are - having the pilot figure really shows it off.

@ Gaston - "I will now sell my P.R. XIX" - No-one could ever accuse you of over-reacting, could they...

I truly think you've chosen the wrong hobby in scale modelling, because in your quest for absolute "perfection", I'm sad to say you're destined for a life filled with disappointments if you carry on as you're going.

All the best

Rowan

There is no disapointment if you know before the kit is started.

I'd much rather know now than after expending much time and effort that could have gone to a more pleasing kit: Granted, the problem is not that obvious in this case, but knowing is sufficient makes one "see it", every time, and a model is a great effort that should be spent the best way possible.

Gaston

You know Gaston, I have to agree with Rowan, I think it'd be best for you to give up modelmaking.

Instead you should devote your time to inventing a viable 'shrink-ray' as featured in the cult-classic movie Fantastic Voyage starring Raquel Welch and subsequently perfected by Stewie Griffin in the Family Guy episode #39 - Emission Impossible.

That way you're voracious appetite for the perfect scale replica can be sated, simply chose your subject and shrink it down to the scale you want.

I await the results of your efforts with baited-breath!

Hi Jean-Luc. Both of these are so well done; I do admire your seemingly insatiable appetite for Spitfire projects. I'm betting your display shelf contains a number of fine Spitfires, of all marks.
Well done.

P.S. I can't seem to notice if these are 1/2mm out in any direction. Perhaps I require new glasses.

My son explained it to me - http://imgur.com/nNJOMBD ...