Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @Pastor John how do you attach those solder balls?
  2. This flow chart is reproduced in Donald Nijboer's Graphic War and shows how the different Merlin variants are related: Unfortunately, the image is just too small to read the print that explains the differences between the sub-series (21, 23, 25, etc). It seems to indicate that the main difference between these sub types is at the bottom of the compressor - but other differences are also indicated. I wonder if anyone has a copy of the original?
  3. If you're a purist there are reasons to not go for the Hobbyboss 1/32 Spitfire Vb. The front windscreen is wrong for the type - this is the most obvious issue. Of note is also the spine cross section behind the cockpit, which is very round while it should be somewhat flat on the top. The fuselage also looks a little bit fat. But in terms of engineering and detail it's a great kit.
  4. Oh that sounds interesting! Are the Mosquito engine bearers accurate for an early Spitfire too?
  5. Not a bad idea but it will need a little more work than that. First of all, a Tamiya IX would make more sense because it comes with the fixed tail wheel - the VIII kit only comes with the retractable tail wheel which wasn't fitted to the V. The IX kit is also cheaper. The Hobbyboss wings fit the Tamiya Spitfire fuselage really quite well, which would be necessary for making a Vb (since the Tamiya IX comes with a C wing). If you wanted to make a Vc, you could use the Tamiya wings but would need to fill the area of the Tamiya oil cooler replace it with the small oil cooler type. Alternatively, for a Vc, you could cross kit a Revell mk I and mk IX and source the Vokes filter and prop and spinner from somewhere else, maybe Hasegawa - but that would be a cheaper and simpler solution for a Vc. But you asked about a Vb - in that case the easiest way (if you insist on using a Tamiya fuselage - rather than building a Hasegawa or Hobbyboss kit out of the box) is by using a Tamiya main fuselage, Hobbyboss nose panels and wings. If you don't like the Hobbyboss wings, Hasegawa's Vb wings also fit the Tamiya fuselage quite well, but it has (fine) raised panel lines. The Hobbyboss nose panels are cut off at the same point at the Tamiya nose panels. The side panels fit quite well, but the top panel of Hobbyboss is a bit wider than the Tamiya nose. I don't know how the Hobbyboss Vokes filter would fit, but if you use the Hobbyboss wing I don't imagine the fit would be terrible.
  6. On the other hand, at a fraction of the cost, Revell offers a lot of bang for your buck. Revell has fewer options than Tamiya though - no engine, and in the current edition, only the early tail. Tamiya comes with an engine and early and late tail.
  7. Regarding the Revell kit, if you're not concerned with the kit's inaccuracies, the only thing other than following the instructions that can be mentioned are parts 84A (on sprue b ) and A26. These are marked "not for use" in the instructions but in fact they can/should be fitted to the radiators - they fit sort of diagonally as sloping roofs in front of the actual radiators. Fit them left and right to the lower wing section. When I built mine I found this thread useful. Pictures are gone (photobucket) but the text is still there: https://forum.largescalemodeller.com/topic/1313-group-buildreview-revell-132-bf-109g-6-stage-3-complete/
  8. looking good! what's going on with the oil tank section just in front of the windscreen? Looks like a darker plastic.
  9. I've always wondered about the radar set up on Helmut Lent's aircraft (<<G9+AF). This is how it's presented in all the profiles I've seen but I've seen a photo of this aircraft and it's captioned as having been taken in the summer of 1943. But SN2 didn't become available until the spring of 1944. The photo I know does not show the radar but if it was indeed taken in the summer of 1943 then it should have FuG202. Unless the photo was captioned incorrectly of course. Or is there another photo of this aircraft (that I don't know of) that does show this layout?
  10. thanks! in theory you should be able to fit the front end of a Revell kit to the Tamiya airframe to convert it to a bomber. It would have been considerably cheaper, but I didn't want to bother with a vac canopy mainly. Besides, I honestly think that the HK models kit isn't that bad. I think that the main canopy looks great, even compared to most other kit options in any scale, and I'm very curious how my front side "window fix" will turn out. As I mention in the thread, if it wasn't for my intention of adding a Brassin engine, I probably wouldn't have bothered with adding the Tamiya wings and fuselage. I just got the new IX kit with the intention of one day building it as a USAAF PR.XVI, pretty much OOB.
  11. I'm trying to make that happen by currently working on attaching an HK Models nose to a Tamiya airframe. Not very far yet, but building it here: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235025780-132-mosquito-biv-tamiya-with-hk-models-nose-what-have-i-done/ So yes, Tamiya will announce a bomber version (why not with optional 2-stage Merlins while they're at it) as soon as I finish this.
  12. What's a bigger issue for me is that it's also possible that the H-22 had a different wind screen, and a different instruments panel, as seen for example in RAF Hendon's H-20. This configuration was introduced with the H-16, and several V-1 carrying Heinkels were in fact H-16s. Chukw built a nice 111 in 1/48 scale some years ago, which features the correct configuration: http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/71040-my-heinkel-111/ Hasegawa got this right in their 1/72 H-16 kit.
  13. I think it might be scratch built. YouTuber Plasmo did the same in 1/48 - the segment starts at around 8:55 in this video, and then again just after 10:37:
  14. Jim was kind enough to send me his new Mk XII nose (Mk XII Mk II ) and this morning I compared it to the first one, the Grey Matter nose, the Revell Mk II kit, and the Tamiya IX kit. Took some photos, here are the results: Overall view. The nose is much longer than the first one (=good) and the line at the bottom for the lower panel is straight (=good). The fasteners are quite pronounced but could easily be sanded down if desired. Old nose left, new nose right. Also notice that the overhang of the bulges has disappeared. Great improvement! New nose left, old nose right. The new nose is much taller, which should make it considerably easier to fit to the Revell kits. The new nose doesn't have the step at the back vertical panel that the old one has. I don't know if the Spitfire XII had the step in the rear panel like the Merlin engined variants had. Compared to the Grey Matter nose: Grey matter is flatter on top - Jim's nose is rounder. The other noticeable difference is the bulge in the middle - Jim's is longer which I think is more accurate. The little intake on the back of the cowl is taller on Jim's version, and is hollow as opposed to Grey Matter. I only have the Revell Mk II kit to compare it to, and without cutting off the nose it's a bit tricky to see how well it would bit, but I think it should work just fine: To satisfy my own curiosity I also tried to fit it to the Tamiya IX kit - it actually doesn't look bad and could be made to work relatively easily: Comparison to Tamiya nose panels: Final picture: All in all I would say that at this point in time Jim's conversion is the best way to get a Spitfire XII in 32nd scale.
  15. me maybe? http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=68293&p=918295
  • Create New...