Derek B Posted October 26, 2014 Author Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) Great work, Derek! I'm curious to see how you're going to reduce the diameter at the nose. Take away from the centerline on both halves? And, will you have to do this before modifying the chin cowl panel? I'm sure you have this all figured out already. Good show! John Thanks John. To think that I am thinking ahead and worked out how I am going to achieve that would be accusing me of having a plan! (in reality, I have an aim, but as there is more than one way of solving any particular problem, I have no defined solution to the issue until I consider the options). One elegant solution (if I wanted to preserve the kit detail) would be to take Iain's approach to the problem (http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=51695&p=596325). However, if I were to consider reducing the width of the fuselage at the centreline, it would either taper in the wrong places or reduce the overall width of the fuselage causing it to be too thin (like the Hasegawa kit fuselage), as well as creating potential wing fit issues. My approach - as the kit plastic is reasonably thick and I think can take it - is to most likely take the simple route (and the one that I feel most modellers would opt for) and sand the nose to the correct 19.5mm diameter. Derek Edited October 26, 2014 by Derek B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 26, 2014 Author Share Posted October 26, 2014 Terrific work, Derek! Looking pretty good to these eyes. Thank you Bill. Derek Bill Cross 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martinnfb Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Phenomenal work Derek, thanks for sharing. Cheers Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 26, 2014 Author Share Posted October 26, 2014 Phenomenal work Derek, thanks for sharing. Cheers Martin Thanks Martin. If it is of any help to others, then it is worth the effort. Derek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loic Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 :popcorn: Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacewolf Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 You Sir...are a steely eyed missile man !! Just got on for a bit and found the thread...this is gold ! Very well done and brilliant...informative...just the thing I love about this site and the modelers here. :popcorn: Vaughn Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peterpools Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Derek Enjoying following your progress and the mini tutorials are just what the doctor ordered. Keep 'em comijng Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 26, 2014 Author Share Posted October 26, 2014 Loic, Vaughn and Peter, Thank you for the very kind words gentlemen. I feel humbled that you like these meagre efforts. As far as modelling is concerned, like you all, I am still learning new things despite my long years and experience at this game. However, I never take it for granted that everyone has the same level of knowledge or understanding that I do, which is why I go into so much detail about how I go about things, as it is not always that obvious to some people (even though I probably do overdo it a bit, so apologies for that). Regards Derek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Kevin Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Thanks for the info on the exhaust locations Derek. It's what I suspected, and I was sure you'd be on top of it! Kev Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 27, 2014 Author Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Trying to knock this thing into some kind of shape for Telford, which is looking pretty remote at the moment, but I'll at least try (does anyone know if it is possible to complete the cockpit with fuselage halves joined together?). In the meantime, I have modified the lower nose fairing. As the main wing is now known to be too thick in section, producing a deep forward fuselage, this also affects the lower nose fairing as well. The wing depth issue has been fixed but the lower nose faring is still approximately 1mm too deep at the lowest point, which still make the nose in profile look a little deep. I estimated that by sanding the lower nose fairing location point on the fuselage havles by approximately half the depth of the moulded fasteners, this would give me the required 1mm reduction in height that is needed to make the nose look less deep. Doing this will alter the way that the fairing sits and locates on the wing as there will now be a noticable step so you will notice that in order to allow for this, and help with the fairing modification, I have seperated the fairing at the leading edge and glued the aft section to the wing undersurface. This illustrates the step issue after reducing the fuselage depth at the fairing location. As it was not possible to alter the fuselage in this area, and as the aft part of the fairing was too high, it was a case of 'If Mohammed cannot come to the mountain, the mountain must come to Mohammed...'. Cuts were made either side of the rear fairing that had been attached to the wing and the inner part of the wing leading edge was removed to allow the intake mounting to be bent up inwards into the wing. This was braced with a cross piece of plastic card to help hold it in the correct position. Both halves of the fore and aft lower nose fairing now match each other in height. The resultant gaps between the wing undersurface and the edges of the rear fairing will eventually be filled and sanded. As can be seen, the forward part of the fairing still requires more to be sanded off at the back to make the front align with the spinner base plate location as a result of the fuselage already being shortened by 2mm. Lower nose faring adjusted to best fit. The aft fairing intake mounting on the wing was too bulged to start with, so cutting it and pushing it into the wing , along with the reduction in fuselage depth for the nose fairing, has combined to markedly improve the appearance of the nose section and has complemented the wing depth adjustment modification for this kit, which appears to be the bulk of the work required. One very strange thing that Revell has done is include three raised moulded areas on the inner trailing edges of the wings where the flaps are located (circled in red above). If the flaps are to be displayed lowered then they do not cause an issue (apart from being non-representative anyway). However, if the flaps are to be displayed the up or closed position (as mine will), they will remain partially open due to these raised areas. Additionally, on my wings - because I have reduced the wing root height on the lower wing - I will have to reduce the wheel well height for the upper wings to fit flush with the lower wing. Gap at flaps due to the three moulded raised portions on the underside of the upper wing preventing the flaps from being closed - these will have to be removed. Flaps position after removal of the three raised moulded areas from inside of the upper wing surface. It can be seen that the flap is now correctly located in the closed position. Derek Edited May 5, 2017 by Derek B Out2gtcha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacewolf Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Wow, talk about fix one thing and three other things pop up !! This puts me in mind of modifying and fixing up one of Revells old 60's era kits...You are doing a cracking good job, but it's a lot of work to correct a new mold kit..if it wasn't for the cheap price I'd say it wasn't worth it. :popcorn: Vaughn Artful69 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 28, 2014 Author Share Posted October 28, 2014 Wow, talk about fix one thing and three other things pop up !! This puts me in mind of modifying and fixing up one of Revells old 60's era kits...You are doing a cracking good job, but it's a lot of work to correct a new mold kit..if it wasn't for the cheap price I'd say it wasn't worth it. :popcorn: Vaughn Thanks Maru Well Vaughan, I would say that was a pretty good (and accurate) assessment all round. Derek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Thanks Maru Well Vaughan, I would say that was a pretty good (and accurate) assessment all round. Derek I have to say ... I agree with Vaughan ... There comes a point, for me at least, where a certain amount of mods and fixes exceeds the sum total of the original kit ... You know, D - It might be an idea to pop some moulds out using yours as a master ... Then everyone would then have the kit that Revell should have popped in the first place lol I love your work ... But I have to content myself with admiring from a distance (and I DO admire btw!!!) ... I'll probably be giving mine some AM fixes but that will be all lol ... I guess my Bf109E's will be more accurate that my Spit's Rog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 28, 2014 Author Share Posted October 28, 2014 I have to say ... I agree with Vaughan ... There comes a point, for me at least, where a certain amount of mods and fixes exceeds the sum total of the original kit ... You know, D - It might be an idea to pop some moulds out using yours as a master ... Then everyone would then have the kit that Revell should have popped in the first place lol I love your work ... But I have to content myself with admiring from a distance (and I DO admire btw!!!) ... I'll probably be giving mine some AM fixes but that will be all lol ... I guess my Bf109E's will be more accurate that my Spit's Rog This is turning into something of a labour of love Roger, and as stated, maybe would have been taken somewhat for granted on an elderly and inaccurate moulding from a bygone era, but perhaps not these days from new tooling. I still consider the Hasegawa kit as the best base kit for a Mk.I Spitfire, but even that has its flaws. There is no doubt that Revell got the fuselage depth wrong due to a too deep and incorrectly located wing section - the 2mm increase in fuselage length does not help matters either. My Rotol prop is a one-off for this build and is totally unsuitable for resin reproduction (it would be destroyed in the moulding process and could not be satisfactorily moulded as a single piece item). I have not compared it to the other available AM Rotol props for this kit so cannot comment on comparative accuracy other than to say the the actual Spitfire Rotol CS propeller is markedly different to that used on the Mk.V Spitfire and is also subtley different to those used on the Hurricanes as well (I would have to master a brand new one). By the time I have finished with my kit it will be able to stand alongside the Tamiya and Hasegawa Spitfire kits with equal accuracy of overall shape, but it does require some dedicated (but well within the skill sets of many modellers) correction to achieve this - this is one of my prime reasons for the thread in the first place: Do not be afraid of the plastic! (Making some resin AM stuff fit an IM kit is often much more difficult a task than the pratting about that I have done with this kit). Derek mywifehatesmodels 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 28, 2014 Author Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) Wow, talk about fix one thing and three other things pop up !! This puts me in mind of modifying and fixing up one of Revells old 60's era kits...You are doing a cracking good job, but it's a lot of work to correct a new mold kit..if it wasn't for the cheap price I'd say it wasn't worth it. :popcorn: Vaughn Actually Vaughn, after considering it, the original 60's era Revell Spitfire Mk.I kit is probably more accurate in overall shape...(I'll have to get hold of one from somewhere just to see if this is so?). Derek Edited October 28, 2014 by Derek B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now