Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

CLICK HERE to see new posts in last 24 hours
Mark all forums read
Welcome to 72nd Aircraft. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Spitfire F.IX Rolls-Royce Conversion; possible with Eduard kit?
Topic Started: Oct 6 2016, 09:53 AM (633 Views)
Big Kohona
Hero
[ * ]
. .
Goto Top
 
Big Kohona
Hero
[ * ]
. .
Goto Top
 
stimpy
Member Avatar
Is It Safe?..... Nope
[ * ]
I think it is just the cowling area that differed and I bet you Eduard will bring a version out else supply a resin replacement (or Quickboost).

The F stands for Fighter, or, to be more precise "Fuck Off FW190" to the boys.

Now back to the CMR, if Eduard and CMR got it right, I'd just saw off the CMR and ad it to Eduard, be a much easier kit to finish off for sure
No more plastic
Goto Top
 
Greenshirt
Member Avatar
Tim Holland, Southern MD - USA
[ * ]
F = Fighter, LF = Low altitude Fighter, HF = High altitude fighter. However the differences in altitude were not that marked, but performance was optimized. Refs not handy but I can look up the altitudes if interested.

Yes, a F IX is the same as an F IXc. Initially the IX was released without any suffix for the armament, as it was only to have the "c" configuration, which was considered a universal configuration. It was also listed as "B" by some units (not sure I remember why, but it causes confusion today, as the IX, IXB and IXc are all the same - possibly engine variant?).

The difference with the early RR conversions is the cowl lumps/bumps. I suspect, given the configuration of the Eduard kit, that Eduard will release a resin upgrade as part of a later kit, or Quickboost will. Otherwise taking it from the CMR kit makes for a very expensive resin upgrade.
Tim Holland

I'm a "green shirt" because I work on the carrier's flight deck and maintain US Navy aircraft. Safe sorties are my life so we can be anywhere, anytime -- from the Sea.

http://greenshirt-modeler.blogspot.com/
Goto Top
 
Graham Boak
Hero
[ * ]
Not quite: it was the LF Mk.IX which was known as the F Mk.IXB, unofficially. Mk.IX variants were the F Mk.IX, the LF Mk.IX, and the LF Mk.IXe. OK, and the T. Mk.IX, but this was not adopted by the UK so is not an official designation anyway. It is convenient to speak of the F Mk.IXc but this was not used at the time and remains unofficial. This does cover for the fact that the C wing was initially known as the Universal wing because it could be fitted with a range of armament: this had been abandoned by the time the Mk.IX was in production.

Thee was an article done many years ago by Vasco Barbic describing the differences between the F Mk.IX and the later aircraft. One key difference was the location of the intake for the oil cooler, with a large circular hole in the wing root, and the lack of a gun camera. This is regardless of the differences on very early aircraft between RR-converted and Supermarine converted airframes which were initially built to be Mk.Vs.

However, does the Eduard kit have the larger cannon blisters on the wing?
Lancashire, UK
Goto Top
 
Greenshirt
Member Avatar
Tim Holland, Southern MD - USA
[ * ]
Thanks for the clarification Graham. I figured I'd have it wrong unless I checked my references...

Looking at my Eduard kit, no. It only has the narrow blister. It's the "late Mk IXc" so I'd expect it to only have the narrow blister. It's molded on the wing. No blisters on the common sprues.

So my take on Eduard is when they release an "early Mk IXc" it will have a different wing with the wide blister, and other details from the common sprue. Whether they ever release a RR modified variant, would require a new cowling; easily done via a resin add-on in the kit with of course new decals.

Tim
Tim Holland

I'm a "green shirt" because I work on the carrier's flight deck and maintain US Navy aircraft. Safe sorties are my life so we can be anywhere, anytime -- from the Sea.

http://greenshirt-modeler.blogspot.com/
Goto Top
 
airjiml2
Member Avatar
Beast
[ * ]
There is no reason it can't be done, either by Eduard, aftermarket, or scratch. You would need the IX kit with the wide bulges. An example of such a kit is included in the Royal Class, but as said previously, it will appear in its own box someday.

If you were doing it yourself you would need to use the flatter cowl included in the kit and then modify from there.

Jim

Goto Top
 
Greenshirt
Member Avatar
Tim Holland, Southern MD - USA
[ * ]
I don't have my Royal Class boxing, yet. However it says it has 4x of the wing sprues, which on close inspection of the photo, appears they are all "c" wings with narrow blisters. The decal options are certainly varied, for wide, narrow "c" wing blisters and the "e" wing. So i'd expect 2 of one type, and 1 each of the other 2.

Tim
Tim Holland

I'm a "green shirt" because I work on the carrier's flight deck and maintain US Navy aircraft. Safe sorties are my life so we can be anywhere, anytime -- from the Sea.

http://greenshirt-modeler.blogspot.com/
Goto Top
 
Big Kohona
Hero
[ * ]
. .
Goto Top
 
Seahawk
Beast
[ * ]
Eduard Quattro release has 1 x early Spitfire IXc, 1 x late Spitfire IXc and 2 x Spitfire IXe.
Goto Top
 
airjiml2
Member Avatar
Beast
[ * ]
Seahawk,Oct 11 2016
06:03 PM
Eduard Quattro release has 1 x early Spitfire IXc, 1 x late Spitfire IXc and 2 x Spitfire IXe.

Wow, I never noticed that there were two IXe in the box. Excellent!

Jim
Goto Top
 
Big Kohona
Hero
[ * ]
. .
Goto Top
 
airjiml2
Member Avatar
Beast
[ * ]
I am trying to ignore that. Somehow I've already collected 3 mid IXs, an early IX, and two IXe. I was excited because it means I don't have 4 mid IXs as I had anticipated. Either way it is more Spitfire than I need, but I'm sure the Dual Combo boxing will follow me home at some point as well.

If only for a Hurricane IIB of this standard...then I'd really be out of control!

Jim
Goto Top
 
airjiml2
Member Avatar
Beast
[ * ]
Double...
Goto Top
 
stimpy
Member Avatar
Is It Safe?..... Nope
[ * ]
This Eduard thing is all very well but leaves some confusion.

1. Only way to build the IXc Early (and use the resin cowling :D ) is to buy the Royal Box... yikes, and then you get yet another IXc Late.... got enough of them, I want more IXc Early.... yet rather than release in November a Profi box or combo box or carrot box of the IXc Early, they are putting out a combo box of the XVI (and hey another replacement resin cowl for that version).

2. Meantime, their IXe, which, oh my goodness has yet another variety of cowling isn't been issued it's resin cowling replacement, nor is it being issued as a single/double/turnip box, it's only available as the Royal Box... where you get yet another bleeding IXc Late and a rare IXc Early..... so for every IXc Early I want to build, I have to make 6 other Spits.

3. So where is the replacement resin cowl for the IXe? It looks like the IXc Early cowl but the access panels are D instead of circular in shape (or vice versa)... oh hell there's me talking about the Early IXc again.

4. So why this XVI combo so quick on the heels of the IXc?

OK I'm just mumbling here as I'm sure single/double/potato boxings of the various marks will be marketed in the future (or will they?), meantime, picking up the more elusive Eduard Spits is an expensive rudder business.

No more plastic
Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »