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
RoG: Big Scale Spitlitespeed
News Reporter
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: October 15, 2009
KitMaker: 1,976 posts
AeroScale: 1,789 posts
Joined: October 15, 2009
KitMaker: 1,976 posts
AeroScale: 1,789 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 30, 2017 - 09:34 PM UTC
Revell has released a new mould 1/32 Spitfire Mk IXC
Read the Full News Story
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
thegirl
Alberta, Canada
Joined: January 19, 2008
KitMaker: 6,743 posts
AeroScale: 6,151 posts
Joined: January 19, 2008
KitMaker: 6,743 posts
AeroScale: 6,151 posts
Posted: Friday, March 31, 2017 - 03:57 AM UTC
Looks very promising
Terri
Terri
Posted: Friday, March 31, 2017 - 09:39 AM UTC
I approve.
FalkeEins
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: March 07, 2005
KitMaker: 868 posts
AeroScale: 690 posts
Joined: March 07, 2005
KitMaker: 868 posts
AeroScale: 690 posts
Posted: Friday, March 31, 2017 - 12:15 PM UTC
...lots of fine surface detailing
litespeed
News Reporter
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: October 15, 2009
KitMaker: 1,976 posts
AeroScale: 1,789 posts
Joined: October 15, 2009
KitMaker: 1,976 posts
AeroScale: 1,789 posts
Posted: Friday, March 31, 2017 - 02:48 PM UTC
It does look very good. I'm seriously tempted.
Posted: Saturday, April 01, 2017 - 11:40 AM UTC
I hope this is pointing at Revell adding more Spitfires to their range. I need more Spitfires because as everyone knows, "You just can't have too many Spitfires" I hope that they learned from the mistakes with the MkII and that we can look forward to a Mk XIV. This can't be as good as the Tamiya kit but the price is very much less, what is the price? I'm assuming there but Revell kits usually have a good price. I will be able to buy hundreds, there are many schemes to do
bill_c
Campaigns Administrator
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
AeroScale: 1,198 posts
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
AeroScale: 1,198 posts
Posted: Monday, April 03, 2017 - 02:55 AM UTC
Could be good for those who can't afford the Tamiya.
FalkeEins
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: March 07, 2005
KitMaker: 868 posts
AeroScale: 690 posts
Joined: March 07, 2005
KitMaker: 868 posts
AeroScale: 690 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 09, 2017 - 12:04 PM UTC
.. I think there is a difference between 'afford' and 'justify' when it comes to the Tamiya kits. But to answer Mal's query my (first) Revell IX cost just £19 from my local aircraft museum shop. (RRP around £25 IIRC, ie about a quarter the price of a Tamiya 32nd scale kit) I don't know about the 'errors' in the Mk II that Mal refers too either - I didn't read any reviews - but the Mk IX went together without too much hassle and looks the part to me. You get an enormous amount of plastic for the price. Probably lacks a little detail - the cockpit looks less 'busy' than some 48th scale Spits. My only other reservation is the wing dihedral. My kit was built to represent Brendon Deere's PV 270 restoration - although I'd already sanded off some of the uppersurface 'bulges' by the time I had settled on a finish. I should perhaps have painted the crowbar red to reinforce the point!
Posted: Sunday, July 09, 2017 - 04:22 PM UTC
I picked up one of these last week and I have a second on order, as I have also bought a MkXIV upgrade for it
overall this is better than their "MkII" which has some very odd mistakes. One of those has been carried over to this Mk and that is the seat! The back rest bares no resemblance to any Spitfire seat and it shouldn't have the flare rack. One other thing that is carried over from the MkII but it isn't wrong for that mk is the head rest, which was deleted sometime in the MkV production run. I haven't checked everything but those are the stand out issues that immediately jump out at me.
Also take care when you look at the built up model on the back of the box and on the front page of the instructions, and accompanying the news article, regarding the antenna and the wire. It has been built with the antenna back to front and there should be no wire! The instructions show it the correct way round and without any wire, but the basic shape is wrong. It does have a representation of the fitting for the pully wheel, which is correct but it has straight taper, on both sides, when in reality it only tapers from the rear an is straight at the rear for a small portion of its height!
The elevators are fabric covered (or appear to be?) and I think that they should be alloy covered?
I can't tell if you have lowered the flaps? You have the flap hinge door open, so I guess that you have. It was very rear to see lowered flaps on Spitfires on the ground. They were only used for landing and should be raised as soon as possible, to prevent any damage (apparently pilots would be fined if they didn't!) If the flaps are not lowered then these doors should not be open.
overall this is better than their "MkII" which has some very odd mistakes. One of those has been carried over to this Mk and that is the seat! The back rest bares no resemblance to any Spitfire seat and it shouldn't have the flare rack. One other thing that is carried over from the MkII but it isn't wrong for that mk is the head rest, which was deleted sometime in the MkV production run. I haven't checked everything but those are the stand out issues that immediately jump out at me.
Also take care when you look at the built up model on the back of the box and on the front page of the instructions, and accompanying the news article, regarding the antenna and the wire. It has been built with the antenna back to front and there should be no wire! The instructions show it the correct way round and without any wire, but the basic shape is wrong. It does have a representation of the fitting for the pully wheel, which is correct but it has straight taper, on both sides, when in reality it only tapers from the rear an is straight at the rear for a small portion of its height!
The elevators are fabric covered (or appear to be?) and I think that they should be alloy covered?
I can't tell if you have lowered the flaps? You have the flap hinge door open, so I guess that you have. It was very rear to see lowered flaps on Spitfires on the ground. They were only used for landing and should be raised as soon as possible, to prevent any damage (apparently pilots would be fined if they didn't!) If the flaps are not lowered then these doors should not be open.
FalkeEins
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: March 07, 2005
KitMaker: 868 posts
AeroScale: 690 posts
Joined: March 07, 2005
KitMaker: 868 posts
AeroScale: 690 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 09, 2017 - 08:56 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I haven't checked everything but those are the stand out issues that immediately jump out at me.
Also take care when you look at the built up model on the back of the box and on the front page of the instructions, and accompanying the news article, regarding the antenna and the wire. It has been built with the antenna back to front and there should be no wire!
thanks Mal. Yes, got all of those points. There is no seat armour either. Easy enough to replicate. I kept the head-rest in the end. If you know PV 270 you will know that it was restored with this in place. The box build pic showing an antenna wire (!) is not the fault of the kit though. I did deploy the flaps down, hence the upper surface indicators (scratched). The Spit in my local museum (Manston) is on display in this configuration.
Posted: Monday, July 10, 2017 - 01:19 AM UTC
Quoted Text
.. I think there is a difference between 'afford' and 'justify' when it comes to the Tamiya kits.
Hi Neil
Great build - and beautifully stated. Revell definitely do suffer in the snobbery stakes - perhaps that goes with having been around so long and having a back-catalogue that includes classic kits that arguably should have been retired? - but when they get it right with their new-tool offerings, they can compete with the best in the business and offer great value for money.
All the best
Rowan
Posted: Monday, July 10, 2017 - 12:00 PM UTC
Quoted Text
thanks Mal. Yes, got all of those points. There is no seat armour either. Easy enough to replicate. I kept the head-rest in the end. If you know PV 270 you will know that it was restored with this in place. The box build pic showing an antenna wire (!) is not the fault of the kit though. I did deploy the flaps down, hence the upper surface indicators (scratched). The Spit in my local museum (Manston) is on display in this configuration.
It seems that Revell seem to "faithfully" reproduce museum examples, which was the real problem with The MkII kit! So lack of Armour and the head rest suggest this too for this kit. I think that they have just taken the MkII seat that they produced and put it in this kit! What I haven't said though is this, like the MkII, looks like a Spitfire. There are things that need sorting but you have show very well that, OOB it looks very good. And yep, the antenna wire on the built up model is not down to Revell but you can bet that it will be replicated because it is there. The builder should really have done some research and Revell really ought to have known!
You mention removing bumps on the wings? I haven't looked at those yet and that in itself can prove to be a complicated subject!
I may actually wait for Eduard to bring out a Brassin Cockpit. I have one for the Mk II and it is superb. I am back dating it to early MkI standard for my second build of that kit
I just want to go on record here by saying that I love these Revell kits. For their faults they do build up in to exceptable replicas and the price means that you can afford any necessary updates for them. It is annoying that they only seem to use flawed museum exhibits for there "research" but the price, sort of, makes up for that? I was contacted yesterday, my second kit has arrived