Steffen,
Thanks for the heads up on the Tamiya RAF colors. I had no idea they made them. I've put them on the list for my Sprue Brothers order later this week.
Your free hand camo paint scheme looks pretty good to me. Being a neophyte to the world of Spitfires, wasn't the upper Camo scheme fine lined?
As far as the fuselage band goes, I would suggest masking and painting it. I can foresee all sorts of decal issues trying to get it to lay down correctly.
Joel
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
Spitfire Mk.VIII - 1/48 Eduard
Joel_W
Associate Editor
Joined: December 04, 2010
KitMaker: 11,666 posts
AeroScale: 7,410 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 21, 2015 - 07:49 PM UTC
alpha_tango
Joined: September 07, 2005
KitMaker: 5,609 posts
AeroScale: 5,231 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 21, 2015 - 09:23 PM UTC
Hi Joel
I am not sure what you mean with "fine lined". Have you read my comments regarding this point? I would have preferred if I had masks, but I had not (just Mal's A-Scheme for Spitfire, but this does not match the instruction and pictures on Eduard FB site) and thus avoiding tedious copying instructions and masking, it had to be free hand which I am bad at.
Well, in my book more things can go wrong painting it (now). As I wrote: had I read the instructions more intensly I would have known it is not included as decal and would have painted it first (easy task), now it is most difficlut as it starts directly at the tail root.
(image linked from eduards FB site)
I have just "Kleared" the model so I postpone the decision until after decals...
all the best
Steffen
Quoted Text
Your free hand camo paint scheme looks pretty good to me. Being a neophyte to the world of Spitfires, wasn't the upper Camo scheme fine lined?
I am not sure what you mean with "fine lined". Have you read my comments regarding this point? I would have preferred if I had masks, but I had not (just Mal's A-Scheme for Spitfire, but this does not match the instruction and pictures on Eduard FB site) and thus avoiding tedious copying instructions and masking, it had to be free hand which I am bad at.
Quoted Text
As far as the fuselage band goes, I would suggest masking and painting it. I can foresee all sorts of decal issues trying to get it to lay down correctly.
Well, in my book more things can go wrong painting it (now). As I wrote: had I read the instructions more intensly I would have known it is not included as decal and would have painted it first (easy task), now it is most difficlut as it starts directly at the tail root.
(image linked from eduards FB site)
I have just "Kleared" the model so I postpone the decision until after decals...
all the best
Steffen
Joel_W
Associate EditorJoined: December 04, 2010
KitMaker: 11,666 posts
AeroScale: 7,410 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 04:07 AM UTC
Steffen,
Yes I did read that you didn't have masks. And I know how long it takes to make your own. Another advantage of American WW11 aircraft as they were almost all feathered edge applied free hand.
By fine line I was referring to a hard edge.
I see your point about the difficulty in masking now. I've had real issues trying to get decals to conform to compound curves like the one going across the spine.
Joel
Yes I did read that you didn't have masks. And I know how long it takes to make your own. Another advantage of American WW11 aircraft as they were almost all feathered edge applied free hand.
By fine line I was referring to a hard edge.
I see your point about the difficulty in masking now. I've had real issues trying to get decals to conform to compound curves like the one going across the spine.
Joel
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 01:26 PM UTC
There is a lot of misunderstanding about the camouflage patterns supplied to the factory floor.
The design was superimposed on a drawing of the airframe, over which 12" squares were drawn; these drawings were nothing more than a guide, which is why you'll see so many variations throughout the war (even between different factories.)
In certain areas, e.g. where ailerons had to match up to the wing, measurements were tight, but not in general areas.
Edgar
The design was superimposed on a drawing of the airframe, over which 12" squares were drawn; these drawings were nothing more than a guide, which is why you'll see so many variations throughout the war (even between different factories.)
In certain areas, e.g. where ailerons had to match up to the wing, measurements were tight, but not in general areas.
Edgar
Joel_W
Associate EditorJoined: December 04, 2010
KitMaker: 11,666 posts
AeroScale: 7,410 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 06:52 PM UTC
Edgar,
Since you're our leading expert on Spitfires, I have a question for you. I'm building the 1/48 scale Eduard Spitfire Mk.IXc. The front of the seat pan has a stiffening bar with drilled out lightening holes. The instructions say that they weren't used very often, yet almost every picture I've seen has that bar, the caveat is that the vast majority of pictures are from restored aircraft.
I can see a pilot preferring not to have it as it must have been somewhat annoying, as his legs would be rubbing against it.
I've left it off my build as I really don't quite like how it crowds the cockpit interior. Am I right or wrong?
Joel
Since you're our leading expert on Spitfires, I have a question for you. I'm building the 1/48 scale Eduard Spitfire Mk.IXc. The front of the seat pan has a stiffening bar with drilled out lightening holes. The instructions say that they weren't used very often, yet almost every picture I've seen has that bar, the caveat is that the vast majority of pictures are from restored aircraft.
I can see a pilot preferring not to have it as it must have been somewhat annoying, as his legs would be rubbing against it.
I've left it off my build as I really don't quite like how it crowds the cockpit interior. Am I right or wrong?
Joel
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 07:30 PM UTC
It wasn't a stiffening bar; it was the holder for Very pistol cartridges.
Since the Spitfire had its own recognition system (made by Plessey) built into the aircraft's spine, the Very pistol was redundant, and that frame could get in the way during manoeuvres, so it was usually left off.
Seafires, on the other hand, did make use of the Very pistol (housed in a metal "holster" by the pilot's right elbow,) hence the frame was still seen on their seats (and also in Spitfires supplied by Westland.)
Since the Spitfire had its own recognition system (made by Plessey) built into the aircraft's spine, the Very pistol was redundant, and that frame could get in the way during manoeuvres, so it was usually left off.
Seafires, on the other hand, did make use of the Very pistol (housed in a metal "holster" by the pilot's right elbow,) hence the frame was still seen on their seats (and also in Spitfires supplied by Westland.)
Joel_W
Associate EditorJoined: December 04, 2010
KitMaker: 11,666 posts
AeroScale: 7,410 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 08:47 PM UTC
Quoted Text
It wasn't a stiffening bar; it was the holder for Very pistol cartridges.
Since the Spitfire had its own recognition system (made by Plessey) built into the aircraft's spine, the Very pistol was redundant, and that frame could get in the way during manoeuvres, so it was usually left off.
Seafires, on the other hand, did make use of the Very pistol (housed in a metal "holster" by the pilot's right elbow,) hence the frame was still seen on their seats (and also in Spitfires supplied by Westland.)
Edgar.
As usual, I'm more then impressed with your knowledge. Thanks,
Joel
alpha_tango
Joined: September 07, 2005
KitMaker: 5,609 posts
AeroScale: 5,231 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 10:11 PM UTC
Quoted Text
There is a lot of misunderstanding about the camouflage patterns supplied to the factory floor.
The design was superimposed on a drawing of the airframe, over which 12" squares were drawn; these drawings were nothing more than a guide, which is why you'll see so many variations throughout the war (even between different factories.)
In certain areas, e.g. where ailerons had to match up to the wing, measurements were tight, but not in general areas.
Edgar
Thanks for the insight Edgar!!
the "dispute" with Joel was more about the execution of the camo than the style. I know it must be hard edge (I always thought these were done with rubber masks) but I did it freehand on the model as i did not want to make my own camouflage masks for the whole kit... just a thing of laziness on my side.
all the best
Steffen
surgeon01
Joined: February 20, 2005
KitMaker: 204 posts
AeroScale: 99 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 10:15 PM UTC
Hi Steffen,
nice and clean build on your Spit. The camo scheme looks beautiful. As you mentioned the fuselage band I would go for painting it but to be honest I myself find this to be really difficult in getting right and all lined up.
kind regards ro
nice and clean build on your Spit. The camo scheme looks beautiful. As you mentioned the fuselage band I would go for painting it but to be honest I myself find this to be really difficult in getting right and all lined up.
kind regards ro
Merlin
Senior Editor
#017
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Monday, March 23, 2015 - 03:52 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I know it must be hard edge (I always thought these were done with rubber masks)...
Steffen
Hi Steffen
I'm not sure it's that clear cut. People have probably built careers arguing over the use, or otherwise, of masks. Whatever the technique, I've got plenty of shots of mid- to late-war Spits that show semi-soft edges to the top-surface colour demarcations.
All the best
Rowan
Joel_W
Associate EditorJoined: December 04, 2010
KitMaker: 11,666 posts
AeroScale: 7,410 posts
Posted: Monday, March 23, 2015 - 05:32 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextI know it must be hard edge (I always thought these were done with rubber masks)...
Steffen
Hi Steffen
I'm not sure it's that clear cut. People have probably built careers arguing over the use, or otherwise, of masks. Whatever the technique, I've got plenty of shots of mid- to late-war Spits that show semi-soft edges to the top-surface colour demarcations.
All the best
Rowan
Rowan,
Now that's really interesting. Looks like I'm going to have to do more research before I paint my Spit Mk.IX.
Joel
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Monday, March 23, 2015 - 01:44 PM UTC
At the start of the war "blending" was the approved method, but it was found that some sprayers were achieving it by pulling the gun away from the surface, leaving a rough surface (we all know that effect from using an airbrush too far away.)
In early 1940, Resident Technical Officers were told to introduce mats into the factories (Supermarine had the instruction on their Spitfire drawing from 1937,) which some companies didn't like, in fact Ian Huntley said that Boulton & Paul bevelled the edges of their mats, in order to keep a small amount of blending.
Factories were one thing, but what about Squadrons, M.U.s, even the Civilian Repair Organisation? Did they all have mats (or the material to make them?) It's entirely likely that they had to freehand the job, in fact a former IPMS President told me how he was given the job of spraying an aircraft, to an overspray limit of half an inch (or .5mm in 1/24, never mind 1/72,) and he was kept at it until he got it right.
Around 1942, the rank of Aircraft Finisher was introduced, whose job it was to keep the paint pristine, mostly using wet-and-dry to smooth it down, followed by a wash with clean water.
I asked a paint expert what would happen if a hard edge also had a ridge, so was sanded down, and he said, "You're likely to get a feathered edge."
Edgar
In early 1940, Resident Technical Officers were told to introduce mats into the factories (Supermarine had the instruction on their Spitfire drawing from 1937,) which some companies didn't like, in fact Ian Huntley said that Boulton & Paul bevelled the edges of their mats, in order to keep a small amount of blending.
Factories were one thing, but what about Squadrons, M.U.s, even the Civilian Repair Organisation? Did they all have mats (or the material to make them?) It's entirely likely that they had to freehand the job, in fact a former IPMS President told me how he was given the job of spraying an aircraft, to an overspray limit of half an inch (or .5mm in 1/24, never mind 1/72,) and he was kept at it until he got it right.
Around 1942, the rank of Aircraft Finisher was introduced, whose job it was to keep the paint pristine, mostly using wet-and-dry to smooth it down, followed by a wash with clean water.
I asked a paint expert what would happen if a hard edge also had a ridge, so was sanded down, and he said, "You're likely to get a feathered edge."
Edgar
Joel_W
Associate EditorJoined: December 04, 2010
KitMaker: 11,666 posts
AeroScale: 7,410 posts
Posted: Monday, March 23, 2015 - 07:22 PM UTC
Edgar,
This Is now getting pretty confusing. Are you saying that a feathered edge is actually correct, not a hard masked edge? Even a feathered edge with a .5 inch would look like a fine line in 1/48 scale. What we call a feathered edge would be massive in 1:1 scale.
So which way is correct for the Mk.IX?
Joel
This Is now getting pretty confusing. Are you saying that a feathered edge is actually correct, not a hard masked edge? Even a feathered edge with a .5 inch would look like a fine line in 1/48 scale. What we call a feathered edge would be massive in 1:1 scale.
So which way is correct for the Mk.IX?
Joel
alpha_tango
Joined: September 07, 2005
KitMaker: 5,609 posts
AeroScale: 5,231 posts
Posted: Monday, March 23, 2015 - 11:29 PM UTC
Many thanks for your input!
Just to close the issue for this model here is another pic from eduards facebook site:
this is as hard edge as you can get....
cheers
Steffen
Just to close the issue for this model here is another pic from eduards facebook site:
this is as hard edge as you can get....
cheers
Steffen
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 02:27 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Are you saying that a feathered edge is actually correct, not a hard masked edge?
No, at least not from the factory; that should have been hard edged.
Once it had been in service for a time, though, it's impossible to guarantee that it would retain that finish, what with repairs, retouching, even repaints.
Spares (even wings) were supplied only in primer, so would need to be painted on the Squadron; from 1940 each Squadron was supposed to have their own spraygun, but you can bet they didn't have any mats, and the finish would depend on the skill of the erks.
During a visit to India, in late 1944, an I.C.I. executive found that, although the groundcrews were keen to get a good finish, Aircraft Finishers still hadn't made an appearance, so the crews did the best they could.
Don't get the idea that the Services always fitted the man to the job; my father was in the Royal Signals, and a qualified signwriter. He spent 1944/5 in SHAEF H.Q. bashing a typewriter.
Merlin
Senior Editor#017
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 02:34 AM UTC
Hi Steffen
Yep - that's pretty darned sharp.
Of course, you shouldn't have shown us the pic - now we're all be saying you must do a repaint! 
Seriously, though, that's just the type of scheme I'd simply do with electrical tape to get a nice crisp edge. I've got a plotter/cutter and, while it's perfect for markings etc., trying to do wrap-around masks with sheets of paper or film leaves me cold. From my point of view, it's a "solution looking for a problem" and is actually more hassle than the old established method. But that's just my opinion.
All the best
Rowan
Yep - that's pretty darned sharp.
Of course, you shouldn't have shown us the pic - now we're all be saying you must do a repaint! Seriously, though, that's just the type of scheme I'd simply do with electrical tape to get a nice crisp edge. I've got a plotter/cutter and, while it's perfect for markings etc., trying to do wrap-around masks with sheets of paper or film leaves me cold. From my point of view, it's a "solution looking for a problem" and is actually more hassle than the old established method. But that's just my opinion.
All the best
Rowan
Merlin
Senior Editor#017
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 02:41 AM UTC
Hi Edgar
I do love your anecdote via Ian Huntley about Boulton Paul modifying their masks to produce a softer edge because they preferred it!
You've got to hand it to us Brits - with a war on, and the pressure to produce aircraft as fast as possible, someone still said "Hmmm... you know what? - I don't think that looks very nice. Just give me a moment..."
All the best
Rowan
I do love your anecdote via Ian Huntley about Boulton Paul modifying their masks to produce a softer edge because they preferred it!
You've got to hand it to us Brits - with a war on, and the pressure to produce aircraft as fast as possible, someone still said "Hmmm... you know what? - I don't think that looks very nice. Just give me a moment..."
All the best
Rowan
magnusf
Joined: May 02, 2006
KitMaker: 1,953 posts
AeroScale: 1,902 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 02:45 AM UTC
If I were you Steffen I wouldn't worry that much about the camo, even if you freehanded it it still looks fairly sharp to me! Good work with the airbrush!
Magnus
Magnus
Merlin
Senior Editor#017
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 02:50 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextAre you saying that a feathered edge is actually correct, not a hard masked edge?
No, at least not from the factory; that should have been hard edged.
Hi again Edgar
At the risk of totally hijacking the thread (sorry Steffen!), do you think it might have varied between factories? There's a lovely shot of LF XVIEs on the Castle Bromwich production line (page 163 in Alfred Price's Spitfire Story) where the camouflage is very "tight", but clearly not hard-edged.
All the best
Rowan
thegirl
Joined: January 19, 2008
KitMaker: 6,743 posts
AeroScale: 6,151 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 07:23 AM UTC
Well for being lazy Stefan , you did a nice on her freehand . Cool scheme 
Terri
Terri
EdgarBrooks
Joined: June 03, 2006
KitMaker: 397 posts
AeroScale: 384 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 04:58 PM UTC
Quoted Text
At the risk of totally hijacking the thread (sorry Steffen!), do you think it might have varied between factories? There's a lovely shot of LF XVIEs on the Castle Bromwich production line (page 163 in Alfred Price's Spitfire Story) where the camouflage is very "tight", but clearly not hard-edged.
The problem with the XVI is that they went all over the place. Certain work (removing the air and oxygen bottles from the fuselage, and putting them in the wings, plus fitting the "black boxes" for the gyro gunsight, plus fitting the fuselage fuel tank) was entrusted to an M.U., so, if the aircraft had been through that little lot, it's possible that the M.U. had to refresh the paint scheme before sending them back to Castle Bromwich, to be finished.
Edgar
Joel_W
Associate EditorJoined: December 04, 2010
KitMaker: 11,666 posts
AeroScale: 7,410 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 10:06 PM UTC
Steffen,
Thank you for letting us High Jack your build blog with a discussion on the proper edge for the camo scheme. Being a complete newbie to the world of WW11 British Aircraft, the posts especially from Edgar have been more then just eye opening. Of course now I have to learn how to create masks
Joel
Thank you for letting us High Jack your build blog with a discussion on the proper edge for the camo scheme. Being a complete newbie to the world of WW11 British Aircraft, the posts especially from Edgar have been more then just eye opening. Of course now I have to learn how to create masks
Joel
alpha_tango
Joined: September 07, 2005
KitMaker: 5,609 posts
AeroScale: 5,231 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 - 10:13 PM UTC
As long as you are all happy...
I thank especially Magnus and Terri for their encouragement!! I will stick to my kit as is and add some decals next weekend. Still undecided about the fuselage band... both solutions I think of have their disadvantages.
all the best
Steffen
I thank especially Magnus and Terri for their encouragement!! I will stick to my kit as is and add some decals next weekend. Still undecided about the fuselage band... both solutions I think of have their disadvantages.
all the best
Steffen
alpha_tango
Joined: September 07, 2005
KitMaker: 5,609 posts
AeroScale: 5,231 posts
Posted: Friday, March 27, 2015 - 01:52 PM UTC
Hi all
Finally some more model building. Yesterday I have added some decals to the kit. I really like the look with the shark mouth.
One picture on Eduards facbook sit shows the aircraft with a fuel tank. There is a 90 gal. resin tank in the Mk. XI RC which I will probably add to the model.
all the best
Steffen
Finally some more model building. Yesterday I have added some decals to the kit. I really like the look with the shark mouth.
One picture on Eduards facbook sit shows the aircraft with a fuel tank. There is a 90 gal. resin tank in the Mk. XI RC which I will probably add to the model.
all the best
Steffen
alpha_tango
Joined: September 07, 2005
KitMaker: 5,609 posts
AeroScale: 5,231 posts
Posted: Friday, March 27, 2015 - 05:30 PM UTC
So I dug out my Spitfire IX Royal Class and grabbed a Resin Slipper Tank and the profiled wheels from it. I installed the tank today to make it look similar to the photograph.
Never thought I would build a model with this tank...
all the best
Steffen
P.S. it is not yet painted in the picture...
Never thought I would build a model with this tank...
all the best
Steffen
P.S. it is not yet painted in the picture...
 |
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.