Spitfire Mk1. Differences between Mid and Late

[19squadron]

Service damage, which is a very different thing from the whole panel being proud of the wing surface, including and critically, the leading edge which is what Kotare have done, in the face of the whole design philosophy and the reality of manufacture of R J Mitchell's beautiful machine, which in my view is unforgivable and illustrates a fundamental lack of respect for the design and the designer, not to mention all who maintained the aircraft.

Edited January 3 by 19squadron
addition of pic

[thierry laurent]

32 minutes ago, 19squadron said:

Service damage, which is a very different thing from the whole panel being proud of the wing surface, including and critically, the leading edge which is what Kotare have done, in the face of the whole design philosophy and the reality of manufacture of R J Mitchell's beautiful machine, which in my view is unforgivable and illustrates a fundamental lack of respect for the design and the designer, not to mention all who maintained the aircraft.

Fairly, I think that, looking at the effort they injected in their first kit, considering that error as a lack of respect is quite excessive. Do not forget a kit is, like a painting, a representation of reality, not a shrinked copy of a full scale object! So, there are artistic license choices, design choices, limitations linked to the technology and medium as well as possible misanalyzed features or human errors. This is not surprising and to me has nothing to do with human respect.

[19squadron]

33 minutes ago, thierry laurent said:

Fairly, I think that, looking at the effort they injected in their first kit, considering that error as a lack of respect is quite excessive. Do not forget a kit is, like a painting, a representation of reality, not a shrinked copy of a full scale object! So, there are artistic license choices, design choices, limitations linked to the technology and medium as well as possible misanalyzed features or human errors. This is not surprising and to me has nothing to do with human respect.

I disagree, because if you read the accounts J Mitchell's philosophy towards his Racers and the Spitfire plus the records for correcting the ill-fitting access panels on K5054, then a model, which is quite different from a Work of Art is best when it is not only sensitively and accurately done, but pays heed to the original design philosophy. And the Kotare does not do that. So for me the Kotare kit is carelessly executed, and certainly not with the care that both Eduard and Tamiya have exhibited in their work.

[Juggernut]

1 minute ago, 19squadron said:

I disagree, because if you read the accounts J Mitchell's philosophy towards his Racers and the Spitfire plus the records for correcting the ill-fitting access panels on K5054, then a model, which is quite different from a Work of Art is best when it is not only sensitively and accurately done, but pays heed to the original design philosophy. And the Kotare does not do that. So for me the Kotare kit is carelessly executed, and certainly not with the care that both Eduard and Tamiya have exhibited in their work.

 

You'll forgive us if we don't wait for you to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars/pounds into your brand new "more accurate" 1/32 Spitfire kit.

 

[19squadron]

52 minutes ago, Juggernut said:

 

You'll forgive us if we don't wait for you to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars/pounds into your brand new "more accurate" 1/32 Spitfire kit.

 

I'll forgive you.

 

But I recognise that many many people, especially in the US do not hold the Spitfire up as THE most beautiful aircraft of all time, but instead hold the P51 as highest in their esteem, others may feel the same about a Bf109, or an F16?

 

To me the Spitfire holds a very special place, and deserves to be both appreciated and respected for what it is - to me.

Edited January 3 by 19squadron

[mozart]

Simon, let me start by saying that I have huge respect for your knowledge, appreciation and opinions about Mitchell’s beautiful creation, the Spitfire. However for the average aeroplane modeller such as me, the finer points that appear to be lacking in Kotare’s kit are of next to no significance, I accept Kotare’s offering for what it is.
 

All models are a compromise in one way or another and I’m more than happy to live with that. I enjoy researching, building (and usually adapting) and painting my models, making them as accurate as I need them to be but do I worry about a compound curve being wrong……nope. 

 

I wish Kotare all the success in the world; their current “crimes” are to me “very minor misdemeanours”. 

Edited January 3 by mozart

[19squadron]

44 minutes ago, mozart said:

Simon, let me start by saying that I have huge respect for your knowledge, appreciation and opinions about Mitchell’s beautiful creation, the Spitfire. However for the average aeroplane modeller such as me, the finer points that appear to be lacking in Kotare’s kit are of next to no significance, I accept Kotare’s offering for what it is.
 

All models are a compromise in one way or another and I’m more than happy to live with that. I enjoy researching, building (and usually adapting) and painting my models, making them as accurate as I need them to be but do I worry about a compound curve being wrong……nope. 

 

I wish Kotare all the success in the world; their current “crimes” are to me “very minor misdemeanours”. 

Whether it is "a crime" or "a misdemeanor" the important first step is to acknowledge the errors.

 

The Revell Spitfire MkII is not very good either, not only do I wish Revell every success, but I wonder -  am I not right to say that all the errors in that Spitfire were not only much discussed, but Edgar Brookes wrote a list of the errors for LSP and Brtitmodeller?

 

 

[dennismcc]

14 minutes ago, 19squadron said:

The Revell Spitfire MkII is not very good either, not only do I wish Revell every success, but I wonder -  am I not right to say that all the errors in that Spitfire were not only much discussed, but Edgar Brookes wrote a list of the errors for LSP and Brtitmodeller?

 

Yes and it is a shame that Edgar is not around to check out the Kotare Spitfire, his review of the Revell Spitfire was great and certainly helped me build the kit, I am an average modeller so I only corrected what I thought was the main items and left the ones that I did not have the skill (or knowledge) to fix.

But the point is whether it was correct to the nth degree or not I thoroughly enjoyed the build and was very happy with the result.

 

I really appreciated your chipping in with your knowledge of the Spitfire and please keep it up.

 

Cheers

 

Dennis

Edited January 3 by dennismcc

[Archimedes]

7 hours ago, 19squadron said:

Whether it is "a crime" or "a misdemeanor" the important first step is to acknowledge the errors.

 

The Revell Spitfire MkII is not very good either, not only do I wish Revell every success, but I wonder -  am I not right to say that all the errors in that Spitfire were not only much discussed, but Edgar Brookes wrote a list of the errors for LSP and Brtitmodeller?

 

 

Hi Simon, 

 

This is the list I picked up from (if memory serves…) Thierry Laurent detailing all of the necessary changes required for the Revell Spitfire: 

 

Replace the propeller with a De Havilland one from the Revell 2014 kit, correct its tip shape and add the screws on the propeller edge (generally absent on kits)

- Replace the canopy with an Hasegawa Mk.II spare one

- Enlarge the nose a little bit to be compatible with the propeller diameter

- Reinforce all the seams between the fuselage halves with strips of plastic

- Fill all the huge gaps and add the missing material on the nose panels

- Replace the horrid exhausts (I will finally use the Model Monkey 3d printed ones)

- Add the tank plug in front of the windscreen (and the two small holes located close to it)

- Add the small bumps on the top of the nose

- Add the typical early mirror on top of the windscreen

- Remove all cockpit related tabs or features on the fuselage sides

- Replace all the cockpit components. I will finally use a modified Aires Mk.V pit with an Eduard Mk.II IP, a converted Barracuda seat, some Barracuda parts (essentially the radio ones on the port side), some modified items from the kit and some scratchbuilt parts (such as the radiator lever on the port side of the seat and the armor plate behind it). The seat must be changed to a metal one with the round recess rather than the lozange-shaped one. Finally, I will add the Sutton belts and their rear fixing mechanism.

-  If possible recreate a Mk.I IP (no aftermarket available) or use a Mk.II one

- Add the red-painted tank behind the IP as well as the connection hose (they were partly visible on the Mk.I as there was no bulkhead behind the IP)

- Create the early bell-shaped voltage regulator, its support plate and its cabling

- Add the canopy ejection system (Barracuda)

- Add the structure of internal bulkheads and strengtheners in the fuselage, behind the cockpit (at least what will be more or less visible because that section is painted silver)

- Add the flare launcher (basic shape)

- Add the TR radio box and its supports (basic shape)

- Replace the cockpit door and remove the crowbar supports as the Mk.I did not have it initially (it appeared later and was retrofitted)

- Correct the mast profile (the kit one is too squared)

- Drill the small oxygen hole in the fuselage close to the canopy rail

- Fill most of the heigth of the canopy rail trenches without damaging the fuselage rivets

- Drill and thin the belly intake lips

- Replace the wheels (I will use the Brassin ones on that kit)

- Correct the LG bay doors (thin them, correct the perimeter shape, add the internal side and lengthen them before adding some rivet lines and the four large screws on the external face)

- Remove the brake drums from the LG legs, correct and add many small details on them (including the brake lines)

- Add LG bays (I started from Aires Mk.V ones but removed the strengtheners to add early ones made in plastic). A bean-shaped hole should be added to simulate the embossed wing area intended to give room to the wheels.

- Add the gun camera hole in the port wing leading edge as well as its oblong access panel in the wing fairing front

- Fill the power plug hatch in the rear of the port wing fairing

- Add the small oval bump close to each wing root

- Add the bean-shaped LG well bump on each wing (I made them out of leftover Hasegawa 109 bumps!) and add the missing rivets on the wings (over the LG bays)

- Add the two fairings protecting the exhaust holes of the wing heating system under each wing tip.

- Correct the location of the MG holes in the wing leading edge

- Rebuild all the internal components of the radiator (mix of plastic card, tubes and spare Eduard and RB photoetched radiator parts)

- Rebuild the oil cooler (thin the edges, add a tube inside with Eduard spare round photoetched parts)

- Thin the internal side of the wing trailing edge

- Recreate more accurate wingtip lights

- Sand cautiously the gull wing shape at the fuselage and wing junction

- Drill drain holes

- Drill the landing light, recreate it

- Fill all the huge gaps or add the missing material on the elevators, rudder, and ailerons (remove all the hinges first)

- Add the rudder actuator arm on the side and the visible hinge parts of the elevators if they are positioned down

- Reshape the tail wheel leg, add all the large screws and replace the wheel

 

Kind regards, 

Paul

Edited January 4 by Archimedes

[Christa]

My Kotare 32004 kit is on my bench. Had Simon not posted in such detail and with such intensity I doubt I would have been aware of a slight gun covers issue. I am aware now, thanks to Simon. I may reduce the gun covers with very careful sanding and restore the fastener details as I go, before polishing. I may not. It will depend what I see when I find my big magnifying glass. Propeller blade correction is beyond my abilities or interest, fascinating though it is to know how complex blade shapes are.

 

I do not agree that Kotare's Spitfires evidence lack of respect for anybody, most particularly their customers.  

 

Regards

 

Chris

 

 

[thierry laurent]

6 hours ago, Archimedes said:

Hi Simon, 

 

This is the list I picked up from (if memory serves…) Thierry Laurent detailing all of the necessary changes required for the Revell Spitfire: 

 

Replace the propeller with a De Havilland one from the Revell 2014 kit, correct its tip shape and add the screws on the propeller edge (generally absent on kits)

- Replace the canopy with an Hasegawa Mk.II spare one

- Enlarge the nose a little bit to be compatible with the propeller diameter

- Reinforce all the seams between the fuselage halves with strips of plastic

- Fill all the huge gaps and add the missing material on the nose panels

- Replace the horrid exhausts (I will finally use the Model Monkey 3d printed ones)

- Add the tank plug in front of the windscreen (and the two small holes located close to it)

- Add the small bumps on the top of the nose

- Add the typical early mirror on top of the windscreen

- Remove all cockpit related tabs or features on the fuselage sides

- Replace all the cockpit components. I will finally use a modified Aires Mk.V pit with an Eduard Mk.II IP, a converted Barracuda seat, some Barracuda parts (essentially the radio ones on the port side), some modified items from the kit and some scratchbuilt parts (such as the radiator lever on the port side of the seat and the armor plate behind it). The seat must be changed to a metal one with the round recess rather than the lozange-shaped one. Finally, I will add the Sutton belts and their rear fixing mechanism.

-  If possible recreate a Mk.I IP (no aftermarket available) or use a Mk.II one

- Add the red-painted tank behind the IP as well as the connection hose (they were partly visible on the Mk.I as there was no bulkhead behind the IP)

- Create the early bell-shaped voltage regulator, its support plate and its cabling

- Add the canopy ejection system (Barracuda)

- Add the structure of internal bulkheads and strengtheners in the fuselage, behind the cockpit (at least what will be more or less visible because that section is painted silver)

- Add the flare launcher (basic shape)

- Add the TR radio box and its supports (basic shape)

- Replace the cockpit door and remove the crowbar supports as the Mk.I did not have it initially (it appeared later and was retrofitted)

- Correct the mast profile (the kit one is too squared)

- Drill the small oxygen hole in the fuselage close to the canopy rail

- Fill most of the heigth of the canopy rail trenches without damaging the fuselage rivets

- Drill and thin the belly intake lips

- Replace the wheels (I will use the Brassin ones on that kit)

- Correct the LG bay doors (thin them, correct the perimeter shape, add the internal side and lengthen them before adding some rivet lines and the four large screws on the external face)

- Remove the brake drums from the LG legs, correct and add many small details on them (including the brake lines)

- Add LG bays (I started from Aires Mk.V ones but removed the strengtheners to add early ones made in plastic). A bean-shaped hole should be added to simulate the embossed wing area intended to give room to the wheels.

- Add the gun camera hole in the port wing leading edge as well as its oblong access panel in the wing fairing front

- Fill the power plug hatch in the rear of the port wing fairing

- Add the small oval bump close to each wing root

- Add the bean-shaped LG well bump on each wing (I made them out of leftover Hasegawa 109 bumps!) and add the missing rivets on the wings (over the LG bays)

- Add the two fairings protecting the exhaust holes of the wing heating system under each wing tip.

- Correct the location of the MG holes in the wing leading edge

- Rebuild all the internal components of the radiator (mix of plastic card, tubes and spare Eduard and RB photoetched radiator parts)

- Rebuild the oil cooler (thin the edges, add a tube inside with Eduard spare round photoetched parts)

- Thin the internal side of the wing trailing edge

- Recreate more accurate wingtip lights

- Sand cautiously the gull wing shape at the fuselage and wing junction

- Drill drain holes

- Drill the landing light, recreate it

- Fill all the huge gaps or add the missing material on the elevators, rudder, and ailerons (remove all the hinges first)

- Add the rudder actuator arm on the side and the visible hinge parts of the elevators if they are positioned down

- Reshape the tail wheel leg, add all the large screws and replace the wheel

 

Kind regards, 

Paul

Actually this is the list of changes I made for the Revell Mk.I. The list made by Harold on BM applied to the more recent Mk.II.

[19squadron]

5 hours ago, Christa said:

My Kotare 32004 kit is on my bench. Had Simon not posted in such detail and with such intensity I doubt I would have been aware of a slight gun covers issue. I am aware now, thanks to Simon. I may reduce the gun covers with very careful sanding and restore the fastener details as I go, before polishing. I may not. It will depend what I see when I find my big magnifying glass. Propeller blade correction is beyond my abilities or interest, fascinating though it is to know how complex blade shapes are.

 

I do not agree that Kotare's Spitfires evidence lack of respect for anybody, most particularly their customers.  

 

Regards

 

Chris

 

 

Revell made a lot of mistakes in their kit, but they don't set themselves up as an authority on the aircraft, in fact on the contrary. Eduard made mistakes in their 1/48 Bf109g and withdrew the whole kit, and issued new tooling. Personally, I found the people at Eduard incredibly hard-working and dedicated, despite an extraordinary workload, to make accurate kits, there is no doubt despite a very few small niggles they did a far far better job than Kotare. Eduard are also quite extraordinarily generous and grateful when they receive the help that they judge valuable.

 

The lack of respect I see in Kotare is towards Spitfires and the efforts of R J Mitchell, B Shenstone and J Smith. Their clients will make of the kit what they will, and some people will be moved as with Revell's kits, to add to, or correct the kits. The important thing as Edgar Brookes always used to say is to hold a kit up for what it is and discuss the problems, which is surely one of the reasons for forums such as this?

[Shoggz]

Simon, you are spot on - forums like this absolutely ARE for discussion of kits - its our primary raison d'etre.

 

And as someone who actually considers himself something of a Spitfire expert, I've been impressed by the depth and detail of your knowledge - you've pointed out things even I didn't know, and I'm grateful that you've brought your knowledge to bear on this particular kit - please keep doing it!

 

What I can't agree with/don't understand though, is your assertion that Kotare have somehow shown 'disrespect' towards everyone involved with designing and developing this wonderful aircraft.

 

Having listened to various personalities involved at that company (and in their previous incarnation) in a number of interviews etc., and in person at Telford, they don't strike me as a team of people who take this stuff lightly, and have always sounded to me to like individuals that are dedicated to accurately (and respectfully!) representing the subjects they develop.

 

We can objectively discuss whether they have succeeded in that aim with various types of evidence, and that's great, but I just find it strange that you have taken this view that they are disrespectful. Obviously, I don't know you, but you are coming across almost like an ex-employee with an axe to grind!

[thierry laurent]

Hi Simon,

 

I personally appreciated all your comments related to inaccuracies and indeed such a forum is quite often used to share such information. You also took the time to back them with relevant evidences. However, this is the emotional load you put in the reason why there are some inaccuracies that does not look to be shared by most other people. This dimension is different as this is just a personal hypothesis. Please understand we really value your standpoint about factual evidence. 

 

BR

 

Thierry 

[19squadron]

56 minutes ago, thierry laurent said:

Hi Simon,

 

I personally appreciated all your comments related to inaccuracies and indeed such a forum is quite often used to share such information. You also took the time to back them with relevant evidences. However, this is the emotional load you put in the reason why there are some inaccuracies that does not look to be shared by most other people. This dimension is different as this is just a personal hypothesis. Please understand we really value your standpoint about factual evidence. 

 

BR

 

Thierry 

Yes - If I am really interested in something, I care about it. And caring about something means giving the respect to do justice to whatever it is, not simply exploit it.

 

That is the way I am made.