I picked this model up this morning at Luchtvaart Hobbyshop near Schiphol. I wasn't planning on buying this model but at 24 Euros it was steal Not vaporware but hardware courtesy of my bank account :



It's a simple straight forward build that should end up as a smart and well detailed example of the Mk. IIa. There seems to be a little flash on some of the sprues but nothing a quick swipe with a sanding stick won't cure. Decals look excellent.

Hi Julian,
So you're planning to build twenty Spitfires, an entire airbase with landing strip, structures, vehicles and personnel, right? Just kidding!!!

--mike

After building 16 midget B-25's the idea of building 20 Spitfires is rather horrifying Mike

You have care .. by that these skies are infected of enemies!!! Jajajjaja This serious as the "adversaries of the channel II" jajajjajajaja who you thinks??

Argh..............The Kurfurst. But, they didn't appear until 1944 I think, so.........................this is a time warp you plan to beat my Spitfire Mk. IIa with


Okay, quick research. The Kurfurst is a collectors item I think, Hasegawa model repopped by Revell. Nice markings and nice model. I wonder what else you have hidden in your stash mr. Moscatelli :-)

Hope this link works:

http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Spitfire2_Manual.html

For the hardcore Spitfire builders,

Jejej I now The K4 is of 44-45 .... jejeje
Dont scare fly calmly. All my candidates in 1/32 are later.
I have a Spit .... but Mk 22....... It is a shame!!!

Serious an honor to battle in the air with you!!

Good luck!!!

Daniel

Congrats on the football victory this week!

Julian,
The little that I've read about Revell's new 1/32 scale Spit 11a, has been all very positive. It should end up being a most enjoyable build for you. Looking forward to your Build posts.
Joel

That will be one big plane. Question - does it have recessed or raised panel lines?

I bought 2 of these yesterday, and I will be buying more; you just can't have too many Spitfires

It is odd that Revell chose the Mk II as I am sure that most would want to build a Battle of Britain (BoB) Mk Ia. It appears that they have measured the BBMF Mk II (which did actually fly during the battle) but, because it has been restored to airworthiness, there are compromises with the details. There also seems to be odd details gleaned from other, or at least one other, Mk II. The only real noticeable external difference between the Mk Ia and the Mk II is the Coffman starter cartridge bulge forward of and below the exhausts on the starboard side engine cowling. So there are a some issues with the kit, but nothing that is insurmountable.

Quickly off the top of my head:
The ailerons are of the metal covered type, this would basically be correct for the 2 marking options, which are circa 1941; although many Spitfires were retro fitted with them, for a BoB Mk Ia fabric covered ones are required. This should be a fairly easy fix and it is very likely that there will be resin ones available soon.

There is an odd plate between the middle pair of machine guns on each wing, on the spar line. These seem to be from a Mk 2 that has these strengthening plates fitted, remove them and reinstate the detail.

The wheel well bulges look a bit iffy in shape, they should be more of a kidney shape, and a bit less prominent? A bit of filler and some careful sanding should fix it.

If you open the cockpit then you might want to remove the moulded on crowbar on the door, also remove the flare rack on the seat. I don't know where the detail on the seat back comes from but it should be widely ribbed padded leather. I still have to check out the colour call outs in the cockpit.

The Coffman starter bulge is a separate item, leave it off for a Mk 1a (Revell could have easily produced a correct Mk Ia and simply included this any way!)

The antenna mast is missing the pulley that diverts the antenna wire down into the fuselage. Simply add this from a triangle of plasticard, as most kits depict it. I will attempt to produce the pulley wheel as well!

The cone shape on the tail fin is more reminiscent of a Bf109?

The elevators are fabric covered, but could possible do with improving, but a light sanding. They are, like all of the control surfaces, separate so they can be built with the correct downward angle for a parked Spitfire

The oil cooler is of the later Mk V round opening type, again this will probably be available as a resin item. I don't think that this will be too difficult to fix.

The wheel wells lack detail, not that there is a mass of detail that is required.

The shape of the spinner and the propeller blades need investigating.

I've a feeling that the pito tube is too large, but I need to check that out.

The surface detail is well done on the wings and upper tail planes, but looks to have been done by a different designer on the fuselage! It consists of recessed rivet detail and panel lines. The rivet detail on the wings is nice and fine but on the fuselage it looks more clumsy? Studying it I think that those on the fuselage are either just deeper or closer together, or both. I think that under a couple of coats of paint they will be OK, we will see.

Thankfully the mirrored instrument panel as seen in the pre-production samples has been corrected and is possibly the cause of the delayed release.

All in all not a bad kit, it certainly looks like a Spitfire and it could become the basis if a very nice model. It is a pity that Tamiya haven't produced the early Mks, but this is far, far cheaper than anything that Tamiya would produce, even with lots of after market goodies. I got my 2 from T7 Models for £20.00 each

Recessed, look quite nice IMHO,

Good morning Mal, thanks for pointing out the "warts" on Revell's latest offering. Not sure I will rectify all the bloopers you pointed out but several are easy to fix. Not planning to dive right in on this build, it will be sentenced to the stash for the time being.
Cheers,
Julian

BTW:
When parked at dispersal would the flaps droop or be retracted?
Is the seat made of that reddish Bakelite?

I was loaned one of these, briefly, on Wednesday, and found the following:-
1/. it needs a "Mk.I" oil cooler.
2/. it needs the crowbar deleting, unless your model dates after January 1942 (the fit was retrospective.)
3/. 2-bar rudder pedals are o.k., but need the fabric straps over the top.
4/. gun button was brass, with a silver surround, not red (post-war elfin safety?)
5/. Very pistol cartridge rack was normally left off, and Castle Bromwich had (red) plastic seats, not (green) metal.
6/. seat back armour is missing.
7/, seat backrest has an odd depression moulded in, which I've never seen.
8/. I believe that part 40 is a leftover from the "wrong-way-round" instrument panel, and is the operating lever for the landing lights; it should therefore be fitted to the i.p., just above the pilot's left leg, not on the starboard wall; 41 (oxygen bottle) should be black, not green.
9/. part 42 (compressed-air bottles) was silver, not green.
9/. rudder and elevators' "stitching" is overdone.
10/. I have no idea what the two "lozenges" (on the top of each wing) are, possibly stiffeners, but not wartime.
11/. unless your Mk.II dates from 1940, the rudder "prong" shouldn't be there, neither should the aerial, since VHF was in use before the end of 1940.
12/. post 1940, IFF aerials were fitted, and the positions, on the fuselage, of the discs is marked.
13/. if you drop the flaps, the door, in the top of the wing, needs to be cut out, and opened.
14/. 50B is/are/were "station keeping lights," which were briefly fitted to Mk. I & II, and might have been coloured like the navigation lights, but that remains a mystery, for now.
15/. while over-prominent, the "rivets" are nowhere near as bad as the photos appeared to show.
16/. the fuselage is about 2mm shorter than the Hasegawa Vb (all at the spinner end,) but it doesn't "shout," and it appears to have better curvature than the (somewhat slab-sided) Hasegawa fuselage.
17/, wingspan and chord (minus wingtips) are identical to the Hasegawa Vb.
18/. Revell have matched Tamiya, in the wheel wells, by providing back-sloping walls - very well done - but the "orifices" are too oval.
19/. there are three oblong "protuberances" on the spinner, but Revell do tell you to file them off.
20/. Revell's "Sky blue" is, I am told, a match for Sky type "S".
21/. moulded-on oxygen hose should be removed; on the I & II it was "attached" to the pilot, and plugged into a socket on the starboard wall.
Flaps were powered by compressed air, so did not "droop"; they had to be deliberately left down, but this was rare, because pilots were told never to taxi with the flaps down (it's in the Pilot's Notes, and forgetful types tended to receive a fine from the C.O.)
Hope that little lot is some help; I have a kit arriving today, so, if I think of any more, I'll let you know.
Edgar

Thank you very much Edgar, a very informative posting. Along with Mal's notes it would appear that the list of "warts" is quite long Where do you get this encyclopaedic knowledge of the specific types of Spitfire? I can pick out the big differences between the BoB models and the later versions but a lot of the points you mention pass me by completely
Cheers,
Julian

Somebody else asked me that, a few years ago, and I simply answer that I'm a nosey so-and-so, and have had a love affair with the Spitfire for around 60 years.
If you dig deep enough, have some idea of where to look, plus a fairly comprehensive library (I have 150 books on the Spitfire,) access to archive material, and are prepared not to write off everything that others have written, the answers are out there, somewhere.
I'm lucky to be retired, still able to drive, and have a (partially) functioning memory.
Edgar

That explains a lot Edgar, thank you.
Cheers,
Julian

Edgar,
I think it's fairly safe to say that you're a real treasure for Aeroscale, and that we're lucky to have you onboard.

I'm semi retired, still drive, as you only need one eye for a license in New York (I'm legally blind in the left eye), but my memory is no where near as sharp and perceptive as yours.

Joel

Hi Edgar

How do the outer gun openings look? They appeared too low on the wing leading edge on the publicity shots.

I'll probably get one of these to support my LHS.

All the best

Rowan

As with every Spitfire kit, they've probably missed (or don't realise the significance) the "wash-out" on each wing.
As the wings were twisted from +2 degrees to - .5 degree incidence, root to tip, the outer guns had to point up, to allow for the leading edge pointing down.
The outermost muzzle hole should be "U" shaped on the upper surface, though, of course the red "fabric patches" will hide a lot of the problem.
Edgar

July 3rd:

These arrived yesterday:




Will improve the instrument panel and cockpit a lot methinks,

You will be entertained some time......
Good luck

Cheers Daniel

Hi Daniel,
this one goes into the stash for the time being.Two projects at a time seem to be enough for me.