Hi, Steve!

No apologies necessary, Steve- I've been "guilty" of the same thing on more than one occasion!

This, I'm sure, is going to be ONE INTERESTING BLOG, my Friends!!!

I ordered my EDUARD Spitfire Mk.I "Combo"-kit a couple of days ago. Given the state of the world with this "virus-thing" going on, the mails have been a bit slower of late. I think a "projected delivery date" of August 19, 2020 IS rather optimistic.

My two cats are trying to make me aware of their appetites!

'Bye for now...

VR, Dennis

Hi Steve

That's worth remembering, because it's certainly true when running the Oxfam shop that I manage!

Still no fresh pics, I'm afraid, but I've got most of the interior parts ready for painting. Dare I tempt Fate again and say I'm planning a full day at the workbench on Sunday?...

All the best

Rowan

Hi Rowan,

It's a small (scale?) world. I worked for Oxfam through the 90's at the HQ in Summertown, Oxford. I think it has moved now.

And no pressure, but I'm really looking forward to seeing your progress when time permits.

Happy modelling,

Steve.

Hi Steve

It certainly is a small world! I went to Oxford for my management training. The HQ is in John Smith Drive now, very close (I think) to the site in Cowley where Tiger Moths were built during WW2 and damaged aircraft of many types were repaired or stripped for parts.

Despite my recent no-show, I haven't been idle on the Spits - and I should (really should, this time(!) ) get a good day at the workbench tomorrow. So I hope to have some updates to post soon.

All the best

Rowan

Hey Rowan,

Well, without diverting your thread too much onto other subjects, it's interesting to read about the Oxfam move and also the historic links to the new site.

So, the Spit' is coming along? That's great news and I'm keen to see more. Right now I'm desperately trying to avoid adding this kit to a stash that I won't get through in my life-time, but the temptation is strong.

I hope it's as satisfying to build as it is to read about.

Hi again

A friend called in at my Oxfam shop today and asked if I was still just staring at the Spitfires' box and day-dreaming about building them, so I reckon I'd better post a few in-progress shots to show I haven't been totally idle! Apologies for the sanding dust - at least it shows the parts were hot from the workbench when I took the photos!

Eduard offer two styles of seat (with and without padding) and two ways of tackling the seat's flare rack: moulded-on or a photo-etched replacement. I really don't like the moulded-on version, because it has ugly seams running through it:


This is one of the few points I'm critical of in the kit. I think a separate styrene rack would have been much better - both in terms of avoiding the seams, and also for anyone who doesn't want to fit the rack (it's a bone of contention among Spitfire enthusiasts as to whether it was fitted, but I'm going by the period photo of an early Mk. I which clearly shows a rack).

The etched rack looks much better, but I found it a tad narrower than the seat itself, so I carved shallow indentations each side to accept the side brackets.

As you can see in the overview of the bulk of the cockpit parts, I've opted for the etched rack on both seats:


The pre-war aircraft doesn't carry armour plate behind the pilot, and I've used the etched parts for the Battle of Britain era machine. There are still a few more parts to prepare, but at things are getting closer to the first painting session.

In the meantime, I've also assembled the propellers and radiators (dry-fitted for the former):




Once I've got the basic interior colours on, I'm hoping things will gain a bit of momentum. (Maybe foolishly...) I've joined the Battle of Britain campaign, so I've got to get at least the later of the two aircraft finished by September 15th to meet the deadline!

More soon. Take care and stay safe.

All the best

Rowan

Good morning Rowan,

That's great progress on the cockpit interiors, and a good choice to use the PE flare rack.

Have you decided which marking options to go for?

As we are swapping a little of our personal stories, I was born in Kent on September 15th! I guess an interest in aircraft and the Battle of Britain was inevitable. The village I grew up would have been in Sector D of Number 11 Group, which included airfields at Manston, Gravesend, Detling and Hawkinge. My grandparents also lived in Kent during the war and told me stories of watching the dogfights over head. Oh crikey just writing this making me itch to follow your lead.

OK, enough nostalgia, I hope you don't mind that second diversion. I promise to behave for the rest of the build.

Keep up the good work and also good luck with hitting that September 15th deadline,

Steve.

Good Morning Rowan, Steve & Anyone Else who may be looking in!

Thanks Much for the great photos of your EDUARD 1/48 Spitfire Mk.I builds!

Well, SEEING is BELIEVING so I'm very happy indeed that I decided to order the "Combo" kit first, as opposed to ordering the "Overtrees" kits. I have only one slightly negative observation to make regarding this new Spitfire kit:

I'm not overly impressed with the choice of the "LEMON YELLOW" EDUARD chose for the surrounds of the Roundels- too light and completely devoid of the slightly "orange-ish" tone of other decal-makers' WWII British National Insignia. Maybe it's just me... That's OK, it's just my opinion; I'll be using other Fuselage and "Gas Marker" decals for my "Spits", anyway. Brett Green over at HYPERSCALE has remarked with the same conclusion I've just voiced in regards to the "off" shade of YELLOW in EDUARD's Mk.I decals...

I've just watched Brett Green's SQUADRON/HYPERSCALE "In-box intro video-review" of this dual-kit Spit Mk.I; hopefully, gathering from the presence of "clipped" Wingtips and a few other bits and pieces, a newly-tooled Mk.Vc just may be in the offing from EDUARD, soon!

Even though videos are nice, I much prefer Rowan's approach in doing a step-by-step photographic-image type of forum for what promises to be one of the greatest, if not THE BEST 1/48 Spitfire Mk.I kit, ever...

In browsing the EDUARD site, I've seen that EDUARD has already released numerous multi-media "upgrades". There are resin and PE bits & pieces, a stunning Engine, Gun Bays, Flaps, Exhausts, Wheels/Tires, (yes, that's "Tyres") and Cockpit replacement sets in their "BIG SIN" and "ESSENTIAL"-ranges of after-market goodies. I'm not 100% sure, but I think there may also be a "BIG ED" set for these kits as well. COUNT ME IN for two Cockpits, and two sets of each: Wheels, Exhausts and Flaps. I very rarely display anything "cracked-open" on my model aircraft save their Cockpits. Of course, Radial-Engine aircraft display a goodly portion of their Engine-faces, so these ALWAYS receive additional resin & PE "baubles". I know it's an extra expense but to my eyes, the resin and PE parts are just that much nicer representations than what the plastic parts can offer, alone. I've "dittoed" the same for my 1/48 EDUARD P-51Ds and TAMIYA P-38s- (Yes, I have a TAMIYA "Limited Edition" P-38H coming, as well!)

Once again Rowan, THANKS Much for the great photos! They're a great inspiration for me as I await the arrival of my EDUARD Dual "Combo" Spitfire Mk.Is!

Stay Healthy, EVERYONE!

VR, Dennis

PS- Regarding paints- Has anyone any opinions concerning the MISSION MODELS or VALLEJO paints for use on model aircraft?

Hello Again, Everyone!

I've just received my Spitfires! I couldn't resist opening the package, and upon inspecting the parts...

In all honesty, WOW!!!

The superiority of the moldings, vis-a-vis the TAMIYA Mk.I, is very readily apparent. Don't get me wrong; TAMIYA has produced a really nice 2nd-Generation 1/48 Spitfire Mk.I, but EDUARD has produced a GREAT ONE! To be fair, I can't possibly compare the AIRFIX Spit to the TAMIYA or the EDUARD kits, simply because I haven't got one in my collection to compare with.

Having said that, (with apologies to Rowan & Brett Green), photos and/or videos can't compare to having the ACTUAL plastic to hand. Personal inspection of this kit is a revelation in and of itself. EDUARD have certainly raised the bar by yet another notch.

Believe me fellas, I'm not trying to hijack Rowan's very capable and astute build-article; I'm only trying to "amplify" upon what he has already posted-

If you love Spitfires, BUY THIS KIT!!!

A quick note about the hints of a 1/48 Mk.V ahead in EDUARD's future:

There are extra CLEAR and "solid" GRAY PLASTIC "Clipped" Wing Tips (I'm assuming the CLEAR Wing Tips will be a choice for modelers who wish to utilize these to more accurately represent "Formation/I.D. Lights" by masking them over in their respective areas). Included in the parts is an EXTRA ROTOL Propeller with the Blades being of a broader chord than the earlier-style ROTOL Prop found on some Mk.Is, Mk.IIs and some earlier Mk.Vs. EDUARD has provided us with the "Parts Break-down" showing this Prop in a Light BLUE shaded area as a "Not For Use" type of a warning, with the same being the case for the "Clipped" Wing Tips. This 1/48 EDUARD Mk.V is starting to take shape in my feverish adhesive-enfeebled mind...

Another "first" for any 1/48 Spit Mk.I kit is the inclusion of separate .303 Machine-Gun Barrels. I should think the "Brassin" Gun Bays set will be including these in a more detailed form. I personally don't need the "Gun Bays" "Brassin" set, as I almost never open up my Gun Bays. I like to build my aircraft "all buttoned up", EXCEPT for their Cockpits. In the Spitfire's case, I prefer to leave the Pilot's Cockpit Door in the "open" position- More details to be seen that way... I MAY even forego the "Brassin" Cockpit, but I might splurge for the "LooK" instrument Panels instead of having to deal with the "fiddly" PE Instrument Panels...

EDUARD has included no less than FOUR different Propellers in this new "Combo"-kit, including the wide-chord ROTOL Propeller seen on Mk.Vs-

Is THAT another HINT of THINGS to COME, EDUARD???

Included in this kitting, one will find the two-Blade wooden WATTS Prop, the very narrow-chord three-Blade DE HAVILLAND, and the earlier narrow-chord ROTOL, which has a broader chord at the base of the Blades than the DE HAVILLAND model. The appropriate Spinners are also included. HOWEVER, all of this wonderful diversity comes with a caveat-

If you're going to model a "specific" aircraft which is NOT INCLUDED in EDUARD's generous choice of no less than TEN aircraft, my suggestion would be to DO YOUR RESEARCH and match the proper parts to the aircraft you're modeling with your own information. EDUARD has done THEIR research, and the various DIFFERING parts are called out in the Instruction booklet which are pertinent to the aircraft you've chosen to model. If you choose to model an aircraft other than one of EDUARD's, you'll want to have YOUR OWN REFERENCES handy. Quite a few times, I've chosen to model an aircraft belonging to a certain unit, but NOT necessarily to any specific Pilot. That's when I call my subject matter "fictitious". Works for me...

Rowan's build is progressing quite nicely, despite life's inevitable vicissitudes...

KUDOS, Rowan! Drive on!

VR, Dennis

PS- EDUARD's upcoming 1/48 "Combo-kit", "ADLERANGRIFF" ("Eagle Attack), featuring two complete Bf.109Es with the choices of no less than THIRTEEN different '109s will make an interesting counterpoint to these Spitfire Mk.Is. "ADLERANGRIFF" is scheduled for this September, while Bf.110Cs involved in "ADLERANGRIFF" will make their debut in October. I wonder if we might even see EDUARD's very own Stukas or Hurricanes..?

Hi Steve and Dennis

Which schemes am I going for? Well, one of them will be Option B - "PN-M" of 41 Sqn. early 1939. The reason for this is that I want to use the 2-blade propeller on one build and also try Eduard's tinted decals to simulate the fresh over-painting.

The other will be a Battle of Britain aircraft, and I'm tempted to go for one of the earlier "Duck Egg Green" painted machines when the undersides colour was in a state of flux and varying from unit to unit (and hence, probably, also slightly from aircraft to aircraft within the unit).

As regards the yellow for the roundels. I agree, as an instant gut-reaction, it's not the best representation I've ever seen - but it's equally, far, FAR from the worst! LOL! (See below for a more nuanced overview of "correct" colours.) The hue didn't come out well in the photo I took for my review, but it's really not "lemon yellow" by any means - although I'd welcome it being a tad warmer. As regards being too light - it's actually slightly darker than a vintage 1940s colour swatch I've got (so that could really throw anyone who's dedicated to "scale colours" on their models).

Overall, I think Eduard's choice of colour is certainly usable - especially viewed in isolation. Basically, I look at it and think "I can work with that". In terms of aftermarket decals, I'd use Iliad Design's early-Spitfire's sheet without hesitation - but this is a review build, so I'll be building OOB, including the decals.

So, (finally!) tommorow will be the big day to start throwing some paint at the pair of Spitfires! And just to add a bit of spice to the colour discussion, I'll be using paints by different manufacturers on each model. For the interiors, I'll be using Alclad II Mil-Spec and White Ensign Colourcoats Grey Green. It'll be interesting to compare how they turn out, but RAF Grey Green (like US Interior Green) is one of those colours that varied greatly - so, assuming they are both within my "subjective ball-park", I expect I'll be equally happy with both interpretations - especially once they're weathered.



And, just to be a naughty little monkey, I'm not going to reveal which is which just yet.

The talk of accurate colours reminds me of how I came down to earth with a bump when I attended a course in aircraft paint restoration at the RAF Museum. Obviously, being a modeller and keen to nail the "exact" hue for any given RAF colour ready for future models, this was an opportunity too good to miss!

I think it's fair to generalise us all; as modellers, we look for "absolute" values for colours etc. - arguably increasingly so as we take our hobby more seriously. I certainly do - or, rather, did. The course was a wake-up call from the word go - WWI-era paint colours were a nightmare to pin down conclusively.

OK... but, surely, we'd be on firm ground by WWII? This is my "go-to" period of interest for modelling, so I went along thinking I already knew most of the answers. Talk about having the rug pulled out from under one's feet! We were presented with a variety of vintage RAF paint samples of various colours - all noticeably different. I naively asked which were most accurate. The lecturer replied "Which ones would you like it to be?".

His point was, there were so many variables in manufacturing, how the paint was stored and applied, and then the conditions it was exposed to, the resulting hues for what was nominally the same colour could be quite radically different.

Talking to the lecturer afterwards, it was clear he was used to modellers coming in with set ideas of how things must be, when the real world isn't so straightforward.

Having been politely "flamed" (let's call it having my tail feathers gently "singed"! ) by a professional restorer with decades' of experience, that's why I talk about my "subjective ball-park" and try not to get too hung up anymore about absolutes that often never existed in the first place.

All being well, I'll have a bunch of new progress to add over the next couple of days.

Take care everyone and stay safe.

All the best

Rowan

Hi Rowan,

I really like your idea of testing different paints, and couldn't agree more with your philosophy and experience when it comes to the 'accuracy' of paint. My personal feeling is that there's usually a range of tones that can look authentic for for any given colour. For me the key test is; does it look right? Of course references help, but when they don't agree or simply don't exist then the answer to the question you were asked (Which one do you want it to be?) is, 'The one I want it to be'.

I hope you have a fun day with the painting. Each post you make tempts me to make Eduard just a little bit more profitable. I've even been looking at references. I can resist anything except temptation.

Bye for now and keep up the good work both on the kit and in the narrative.

Steve.

Hi again

I remembered there was one last thing to do before starting painting - replace the moulded detail on the cockpit door with etched locks.



Eduard offer 2 styles - the commonly seen lever, but also a simple lanyard for the earliest machine.



Despite being pretty tiny, I think the brackets are probably a bit overscale - but the new locks add a bit of extra interest.

Then it was time to get ready for painting, dividing the cockpit parts into two groups - early and late - one to be painted with Alclad II and the other with Colourcoats. I won't show the results yet, but there is a distinct difference between the two. How well that will come out in photos remains to be seen, but it's quite clear to a Mk. I eyeball.

The other thing, of course, is that the hue often changes as paint dries, so I'm leaving both sets of parts to cure thoroughly before judging the results.

More soon. Take care and stay safe.

All the best

Rowan

Hi again

Time for some more colour fun! I stated in the last post that it always pays to wait until paint has cured fully before making any judgement - and, that's never been more true than on this occasion.

I'll caution straight away - treat the images here with caution. I did a fresh white balance on the camera and matched the shots as best as I could to what my Mk. 1 Eyeballs see, but depending on how your monitor is set up, don't rely on the photos in isolation as colour references.

The Alclad II Mil Spec and WEM Colourcoats interpretations of Grey Green looked different straight away - but not THIS different! Coming back to the painted parts after 24 hrs was a bit of a shock, to say the least:



SPOILER ALERT: I'm not going to reveal which is which at this stage - but, for those of you who are impatient - skip to the end of this post.

OK, so I've talked about "my personal ball-park" with colours. The darker and more saturated colour just feels "wrong" for me; RAF Grey-Green does vary a lot - and I've encountered plenty of different versions over the years when I've been fortunate to examine the original finish - but this is outside my "ball-park".

I've taken my RAF Museum facsimile paint chip as an average value (Note: it's been stated that one set of their paint chips can differ from another) and laid it alongside the often quoted nearest FS 595B equivallent - FS 34226:



My gut feeling is that FS 34226 is less saturated than most Grey-Greens I've seen - so I think a better average match lies somewhere between it and FS 34227. But that's my totally subjective judgement based on memory - not comparing paint chips against actual examples:



So, how do the model paints compare? Whether you're going by the RAF Museum paint chip or either of the Federal Standard near-matches - one of the model paints is pretty close, and the other is very dark:



Back to my "personal ball-park" and, for me, it's just too dark. Whether you're thinking in terms of scale colour or not, if a model paint is this much darker than a full-sized paint chip, it's too dark for me. It won't be wasted, though - I'll over-paint it with a thin coat of the lighter colour and use it as a shading layer.

So, after all that... which is which?




Wait for it...




The big reveal...






More soon. Take care and stay safe.

All the best

Rowan

Morning Rowan,

That's lovely progress with your build, especially the neat and clean PE. And, really interesting and thorough research on the cockpit colour. Thanks for sharing all this - it's great reference material and inspiring work.

Bye for now,

Steve

Rowan! While patiently waiting for Eduard to come out with this one in 1/72 I'm enjoying your build instead.

Those etch latches on the doors: just fantastic !



Magnus

Hello, Everyone!

MY GOODNESS, Rowan! An EXCELLENT presentation! These color comparisons are OUTSTANDING!

If I had my way, I'd LOVE to see THESE kinds of color comparisons in EVERY model review and/or build!

I've always said that color perception is subjective; THIS is why I've always, and I DO mean ALWAYS "mix and match" my own EXTERIOR colors. I haven't used the vast majority of my colors "straight out of the bottle" since I was a little snot-nose back in the early 1960s! Back then, we only had the basic colors to work with- Green, Red, Blue, Yellow, Black, White, Brown- You get the idea... Olive Drab? Forget it! Mix your own, Stupid!

Going by Rowan's color-comparisons, my personal choice for the Cockpit would be to use the WEM "Gray-Green" as my "base-color". Just a personal preference, that's all...

Now this has always been "a bone of contention" between myself and my EX-COMPATRIOTS over on "ARMORAMA":

I really, REALLY dislike overall "washes"; I only use "pin-washes", such as when I particularly want to emphasize out-sized panels or doors, or picking out details on Engines and such- I find overall-washes to be messy and they are all too quick to ruin good work on flatter surfaces. I much prefer to paint my "base color", and after a sufficient drying-time, I "shadow" with DRY Artists' Pastel powders, applied with a variety of different sized red sable brushes. Now of course, red sables are expensive. But then, as actor Liam Neeson said in "Schindler's List" while playing the part of "Oskar Schindler":

"Nice things cost money..."

After "shading", I then apply a sprayed-on clear-coat as a fixative. I especially like TESTORS 1960 Lusterless Flat Clear in the spray-can for this type of work. This is a clear lacquer, so make sure there is plenty of ventilation in your work-area and WEAR a respirator with the appropriate filters! Now, the great thing about applying this fixative is that the fixative will actually BLEND the "shaded" areas of the previous work with the base-coat, making the two of them appear smoother and more shadow-like. A light misting is all it takes. It's a really nice visual-effect, which I came upon more by accident than by calculation! Just dumb luck, I guess!!!

Once this has dried, which really doesn't take long at all, I will "highlight" with a very subtle dry-brushing of a lighter color.

In the specific cases of British Cockpits, I've always used TESTORS Model Master II Enamel 2062 RAF Interior Green as my base color. It's a nice, "generic" base color for British WWII Cockpits, I think. I will then "shade" with a darker pastel-powder mix, or straight black pastel powder in the darker recesses. Then, my "fixative-spray" is applied, after which I will "highlight" by very lightly dry-brushing with Model Master II 2049 RAF Sky "Type S", to which I have added a tiny touch of White pastel powder on the tip of my brush to the mix on my Artists' Palette in order to keep a "dead-flat-sheen". Once this has dried, which is almost immediately on account of the powder, ANOTHER Flat clear-coat is applied. Once this has dried, I will then pick out the various details which need to be painted in their various different colors; Controls, Electrical Boxes, Oxygen Regulators, Wiring, etc. Then, and only then, I will even more subtly apply the barest hint of "wear-and-tear" with a Silver or Aluminum (OK, "Aluminium" ) dry-brushing over points which will actually see "wear" on 1:1 scale aircraft. These same techniques can be applied to virtually anything else using the appropriate base and highlighting colors...

OK, I admit this seems to be very time consuming, and it really IS! But the extra efforts and final results are really very rewarding when all is said and done. More than likely I'm crazy, but the best part about being crazy is LIKING IT!

Just "sharing" with you, fellas! Some of you may want to try this way of doing things, but I do have to admit that pre-and-post-shading are much quicker...

Once again, I have to express my sincere Thanks to Rowan for providing this info and his "take" on the various paint-colors and for his reference materials! THIS is what I call "going the extra mile"...

VR, Dennis

Cheers guys

I'm glad you appreciated the look at the Grey-Greens.

And, yes, Magnus - there's sure to be a 1:72 kit in the works - and it should be an absolute gem! Thanks for the kind words on the etched hinges - looking at the photo in the cold clear light of day, I think I need to get the magnifier out again and straighten a couple of the brackets slightly

Dennis, I'm not a great fan of overall washes either - probably because I've never really mastered applying them and am always fighting "tide marks". Plus - a wash always risks looking like a wash, and that's not something that full-sized pieces of equipment are often exposed to.

I use neat oils for shading, which don't produce "tide marks" and have an added bonus (for me, at least) of producing subtle staining effects. Combined with highlighting and pastels, they do the job for me.

As I say, I'll use the Alclad II as a "shading layer" - that's not something I do every time, but it's produced useful results in the past, so the dark colour won't be wasted.

But, as with everything to do with modelling, there's no "right" or "wrong" way to achieve the effects we want. We're all probably our own harshest critics, so the crucial thing is that we enjoy our hobby. That's all that really matters at the end of day.

All the best

Rowan

Hello Again, All!

Rowan- As you see, I like to stop in often when a particular subject interests me, ESPECIALLY where WWII Fighters are concerned!

No, large washes just don't do it for me. It's just my opinion, but I think better effects can be achieved by practiced and judicious use of ones' airbrush(es) and the use of weathering powders,(Artists' chalk pastels) and Clear-coats as fixatives. Of course, pre-and post-shading come into play as well...

And now, before I launch into another one of my "diatribes", I'm just going to sit back and enjoy your very capable EDUARD 1/48 Spitfire Mk.I builds!

LOOKING VERY GOOD, Rowan!

CHEERS!

Hi again

I over-painted the Alclad II "Grey Green" with a light coat of WEM's version when I got home from work this evening, so there could/should still be a slight difference between the two - which is something I can happily live with, as it will match my experience of the colour in real life.

I've got the day off tomorrow so, fingers crossed, with the re-painted parts sitting overnight in my paint drier (a fancy term for a heated seed propagator from my local garden centre - and worth its weight in gold for modelling projects ), both sets of cockpit assemblies will be ready to work on in the morning.

All the best

Rowan

A very interesting thread. I have various interior greens, but currently only use Vallejo acrylic and Humbrol matt 78. I've used the latter for years but usually with a bit of sky and/or light grey added to taste. It gives a thinner coat than the Vallejo which to my mind is a bit 'rubbery' looking. It's also dead-matt, although that isn't necessarily accurate for British aircraft interiors.

In both cases the colour is close to the WEM (now colourcoats?) enamel, I tried posting a couple of pictures to illustrate, but the page was unresponsive!

Hi Clive

Thanks for looking in. I haven't used it for a while but, from memory, Humbrol 78 is definitely in my "ball-park". Matt paints are a mixed-blessing for me, because they only mean I'll have to take extra care gloss-coating them for decals etc. But, I'll do that anyway for my oil staining/washing so it all works out in the end.

Taking a step back - I realise I haven't found any dramatic shortcuts in the way I tackle stuff in the last 15 or 20 years (if anything - I spend longer on things...).

All the best

Rowan

Hi again all

It's been a Bank Holiday Weekend here in the UK - but muggins here had to work through most of it.

I haven't been entirely idle, though, and the "offices" in both Spits are roughed out and waiting for shading and highlighting. Once I post some pics, it'll be clear that I've strayed away from Eduard's painting instructions in a few areas (based on references).

Where I have followed Eduard's suggestions on one of the Spits is to paint the pilot's seat black. I've never seen a black seat for real, but one of the Mk. I reference photos I've been checking does show a very dark seat...

So, it'll be a point of interest to argue over - which is something I love, because that's as often as not how fresh information comes to light.

All being well, I'll have some pics to post in a couple of days' time.

All the best

Rowan

The back cushion could have been definitely black. The seat itself may have been red-brown plastic, or for the early ones, green metal. This is a Mk.V, but it's pretty darned accurate for a Mk.I also.

Hi Jessie

These are metal seats and pre-date the classic lozenge-shaped recess in the pan. Eduard include the later style for future releases which are sure to come soon.

It's certainly "different" to paint a Spit's seat all black - we're so used to using Grey-Green or "Bakelite" red-brown (it wasn't really Bakelite ) - but there's at least one period photo to back up Eduard's colour-call, so it earns its place in the OOB build.

All the best

Rowan