Jump to content


Photo

Mk V'c' Spitfire converted from Tamiya IX'c'?


  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#1 Anthony in NZ

Anthony in NZ

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,649 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted 16 March 2016 - 01:34 AM

Ok, just thinking out loud here for a future project.

Whilst working down at the hangar I got to wondering how difficult it might be to convert the Tamiya IX'c' into a late MkV'c'.

With the advent of the Tamiya Mosquito and the 'short' Merlin may mean a conversion is not so difficult? Possibly taking the Oil cooler from the new Revell Spitfire II and shortening the engine mount and cowls might get me there?

I would be interested to hear your thoughts.

Cheers
Anthony
  • harvey and cbk57 like this

#2 LSP_Ron

LSP_Ron

    Senior Member

  • LSP Moderator
  • 17,017 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cowtown - Canada

Posted 16 March 2016 - 01:51 AM

Might be doable, the Tamiya cowl sides top and bottom would be pretty much useless. There is a port radiator to fill with the oil cooler, different prop and spinner, different exhaust.


  • Anthony in NZ and harvey like this

Ron

 

 

I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.

Douglas Adams

When I die, I'll be on time

 

 


#3 Cees Broere

Cees Broere

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,979 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nowadays far above waterlevel.

Posted 16 March 2016 - 07:00 AM

IIRC when Rolls Royce was converting Mk V's to IX's they lenghtened the side and top cowling pieces. Perhaps the reverse is doable.

Cees


  • Anthony in NZ likes this

#4 Elger

Elger

    LSP Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 43 posts

Posted 16 March 2016 - 07:34 AM

It's a slightly more expensive option, but the Hobbyboss cowl sides appear to fit the Tamiya fuselage quite well. The Hobbyboss top cowl is less round at the back and a little wider than the Tamiya fuselage so there are some minor fit issues there - though nothing that couldn't be overcome.

The Hobbyboss b-wings also fit the Tamiya fuselage quite well so even an 'improved' Vb would be possible this way.
  • Anthony in NZ and Red Five like this

#5 Kagemusha

Kagemusha

    Senior Member

  • LSP Moderator
  • 10,586 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mancunia

Posted 16 March 2016 - 08:47 AM

It's certainly doable - I have plans to do one, cutting down the rear of the cowling parts, so you get to keep all the fine Tamiya detail, a couple of useful threads...

 

http://forum.largesc...ity/#entry48461

 

http://forum.largesc...op/?hl=spitfire


  • Anthony in NZ and Martinnfb like this

#6 Anthony in NZ

Anthony in NZ

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,649 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted 16 March 2016 - 08:48 AM

Hmmm, great feedback gents. Thank you!

 

What about undercarriage legs, I understand there was several changes there?  Would a V'c' have different legs?

 

Cheers and thanks again for everyone's imput

Anthony



#7 Anthony in NZ

Anthony in NZ

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,649 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted 16 March 2016 - 08:55 AM

Kag, thanks for those links mate, he was doing a great job and made it all look fairly easy!



#8 Kagemusha

Kagemusha

    Senior Member

  • LSP Moderator
  • 10,586 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mancunia

Posted 16 March 2016 - 10:56 AM

What about undercarriage legs, I understand there was several changes there?  Would a V'c' have different legs?

 

Same as the IX - they changed from the Vb to Vc.



#9 Cees Broere

Cees Broere

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,979 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nowadays far above waterlevel.

Posted 16 March 2016 - 01:09 PM

I thought they changed from the III into the V.  The forward rake was more pronounced.

Cees



#10 Kagemusha

Kagemusha

    Senior Member

  • LSP Moderator
  • 10,586 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mancunia

Posted 16 March 2016 - 03:48 PM

I thought they changed from the III into the V.  The forward rake was more pronounced.

Cees

 

No it changed from the Vb to the Vc with the introduction of the "universal wing", might have changed previously, but that I don't know...


  • Cees Broere likes this

#11 Chek

Chek

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,305 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 March 2016 - 06:46 PM

No it changed from the Vb to the Vc with the introduction of the "universal wing", might have changed previously, but that I don't know...

 

Pretty sure that's correct. There's an extra small blister near the edge of the well which alerted me when - I think it was Ian's thread on improving the Revell Mk II - he illustrated a u/c detail with a photo of the Shuttleworth Mk V, which has the C wing and was more advanced than the A or B wing appropriate for the Mk II.

 

Not being one to open as kit before starting it, I've only pondered so far whether fitting an adapted Tamiya wing to the old 1960s vintage pure Revell Mk I (not the later Hasegawa hybrid issue) is a feasible option, as the raised rivets on the Revell aft fuselage are more 'authentic' than the Tamiya indented flush rivet detail in that area. And filling in less than a square inch of twin rad recess to fit the oil cooler doesn't appear too arduous. Or failing that, casting a copy of the PCM gull wing insert and splicing that as an inlay to the Revell wing,

 

Though no doubt as soon as I did something like that, Tamiya will issue the definitive short nose Merlin Spitfire with better raised rivets than Revell's.


Edited by Chek, 16 March 2016 - 08:31 PM.


#12 Anthony in NZ

Anthony in NZ

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,649 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted 16 March 2016 - 11:21 PM

Thanks for everyones input, This is very informative for me. Looking more like a 'go' the more I look at it.

I imagine the cockpit will be essentially the same?

Cheers
Anthony

Edited by Anthony in NZ, 16 March 2016 - 11:21 PM.


#13 Chek

Chek

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,305 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 March 2016 - 04:30 AM

I may be just lazy, but the only differences I note between early and late Spitfire cockpits are the circular gun firing button on early birds versus the rectangular rocker switch on cannon armed types.the pump action maingear raising unit on very early examples versus the auto hydraulic version on later ones, and the gun sights. Any other differences can likely be lived with. . 


  • Anthony in NZ and harvey like this

#14 Anthony in NZ

Anthony in NZ

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,649 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted 19 August 2016 - 04:11 AM

Sorry to drag this old thread up again.

 

So it seems entirely feesable from what you guys are saying.  Now I have this Tempest nose correction finished and out the door I can look at some 'me' time at the bench again.

 

Might start tinkering with the wing first, just got to figure out where to get an oil cooler from now...

 

Thanks guys!


  • harvey likes this

#15 Jennings Heilig

Jennings Heilig

    Senior Member

  • LSP_Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,503 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sunny Tucson, Arizona

Posted 19 August 2016 - 01:27 PM

Only the very earliest Mk.V-Mk.IX conversions used Mk.V cowl panels extended. That was just until they ginned up production of proper lengthened panels.
  • Anthony in NZ and harvey like this

"It's all part of the show..."





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users