Anyone got any period photos of Spitfires with oil canning?

[Gazzas]

1 hour ago, thierry laurent said:

Indeed, these were the LG bulges. Actually few pictures correctly show them. Adding small bumps in the surface is unfortunately very difficult to reproduce.

 

I agree!  I would be difficult.  Do they appear through all marks of the Spitfire, or do they disappear later?

[fastterry]

I believe the bumps were only on the earlier marks ie I, II & Vb and were eliminated on the Vc when the undercarriage geometry was changed. The change include increasing the forward rake of the main u/c and the bulged u/c covers. Lot's of discussion on this over on Britmodeller particularly in a topic started by Peter Roberts.

 

TRF

[thierry laurent]

3 hours ago, fastterry said:

I believe the bumps were only on the earlier marks ie I, II & Vb and were eliminated on the Vc when the undercarriage geometry was changed. The change include increasing the forward rake of the main u/c and the bulged u/c covers. Lot's of discussion on this over on Britmodeller particularly in a topic started by Peter Roberts.

 

TRF

Not so simple! They disappeared and re-appeared! Look for instance at the last Spitfires or Seafires!

[DrDave]

If you look at the underwing rearming photo closely, every rivet has a tail drag of muck behind it. The tail plane camo has paint runs. There are cracks in the canvas ailerons and how many would dare to have the tail wheel back to front??

[fastterry]

2 hours ago, thierry laurent said:

Not so simple! They disappeared and re-appeared! Look for instance at the last Spitfires or Seafires!

Jeez Thierry, we were talking about the bumps in the photos above. The last Spitfires had a new redesigned stronger wing with longer main u/c legs and different wheels etc. which required even bigger bumps, different sizes between Mk 22, 24 & Seafire 46, 47.

 

TRF

[thierry laurent]

4 minutes ago, fastterry said:

Jeez Thierry, we were talking about the bumps in the photos above. The last Spitfires had a new redesigned stronger wing with longer main u/c legs and different wheels etc. which required even bigger bumps, different sizes between Mk 22, 24 & Seafire 46, 47.

 

TRF

Ok. I just wanted to be sure there was no misunderstanding as finally few fighter marks had no bulge. Those bulges are a major conundrum with regard to their shape and presence, one very good example being the Mk.XII.

[R Palimaka]

Apart from the questions about oil canning and bumps, that is a spectacular series of photographs!!! 

 

Incredibly clear and some great detail. There are some good ideas for dioramas in there.

 

Richard

 

 

[Oldbaldguy]

11 hours ago, DrDave said:

If you look at the underwing rearming photo closely, every rivet has a tail drag of muck behind it. The tail plane camo has paint runs. There are cracks in the canvas ailerons and how many would dare to have the tail wheel back to front??

Okay, sorry, Doc, but I’m looking but not seeing what you’re seeing.  Paint runs?  Cracks in the aileron fabric (it’s not canvas, BTW)?  We are either looking at different photos or I am missing something.  You are certainly correct about the rivets, however.  As for the tailwheel, it looks to be nonsteerable, free-castoring, so any position on a model would be accurate, but even steerable tailwheels have a sweet spot where they will break free and castor so you can push the airplane backwards without damaging anything.  I am slightly bemused to note, however, that with all the talk about dents and bumps and bulges on the wings that no one mentioned the very prominent gear-down indicators on the tops of the wings.  Having never built a Spitfire model on purpose, I was wondering if this is one of those things that Spit modelers often miss.

[DrDave]

Early spitfire ailerons are fabric covered. The cracks are visible in the paint. The paint runs are behind the pilot. We all know it’s a castoring wheel. Point being nobody models it back to front.