**** DONE: 1/48 Spitfire MK.IXc - Allied Advance and Defense of the Reich WWII.

[fubar57]

Thanks Andy. OK....time to step back. I went through the books, measured the kit decals and used a scale calculator http://www.scale-models.nl/scalc.html just to make sure, invasion stripes....18'' = 3/8" or 9.5mm ish. MY STRIPES ARE TOO FREAKIN' WIDE!!! What's the deal here 403Sqn.? This is what I have and the forward end of the stripes are marked in red...

...I'm just happy I didn't start painting and decided to check the photo first. I'll remeasure the stripe sizes and redo when I get home.


Geo

 

[Crimea_River]

Not sure I'm seeing the issue Geo. I'm a bit pressed for time as I have to head off to Nanton for the day but will try to help later.

 

[fubar57]

The forward stripe on my model is going to run right beside the radio hatch but in the photo it looks like the stripe is about one stripe short of the radio hatch. I don't think it's an illusion, I think real stripes were smaller, 7mm ish as opposed to 9.5mm ish in scale.

Geo

 

[Crimea_River]

I'm with you now and agree there's something not right. If you start the stripes just ahead of the horizontal stab and make them the proper scale for 18" wide, they will run into the radio hatch. I would scale them to the picture as you can't dispute that.

 

[Airframes]

If you take the forward strip of masking tape as the front of the first white stripe, then move it back to just forward of the wing root fillet trailing edge, then it's about right. [The red line shows the front of the second (black) stripe].
Then divide the area to make the five stripes - white/black/white/black/white - possibly nearer 9mm or 8.75 mm wide for each stripe.
The photo of the real aircraft shows the forward edge of the front white stripe roughly central on the roundel, so there's a chance they were painted slightly narrower than regulations stated.

 

[Wurger]

18" = 457,191mm. It means that the width of each stripe should be 9,5248 mm. You used the value rounded down (~9,5) and losting a little bit for each band. Secondly, the fuselage of the model at the area can be of incorrect width. Have you compared that to any accurate drawings for Spitfire?

Also I agree with Terry's opinion above. However , I would like to pay your attention to the fact that most of D-day bands for Spits were applied in a way the closest to the tail, white strip was overpainting the Sky band partially only. As a result the band there seems to be much wider than others. It can be noticed in many pictures. Because of that the third, right white stripe was applied just behind the rear windows of the cockpit or the antenna mast mostly. Looking at the shot of the MH779 I would say the closest to the tail stripe overpainted the Sky band entirely and therefore the D-day band set seems to consist of narrower stripes while being moved back in fact.. A similar of applying way you may find when looking at the second image.

 

[Airframes]

I agree with Wojtek there.
Also, I've just noticed which kit you're using. I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe the Italeri kit (which I'm fairly sure is ex-Occidental) shares the same problem as the Hasegawa kit - the fuselage is too short in the mid-section aft of the cockpit. Perhaps not by much, which wouldn't normally be noticed by the naked eye - unless there are 'out of the ordinary' markings - or AEAF stripes !!
Just position the forward, white stripe as suggested in my previous post, and space the stripes working back to the leading edge of the tail planes, allowing a mm or two forward, where the rear edge of the Sky band would have been, as the rear edge of the rear, white stripe. This should give the desired effect, with the stripes slightly narrower than the full 'scale' 18 inches, and should match those of the real aircraft close enough to pass.

 

[Crimea_River]

Guys, George is correct. Those stripes are so far off that it can not be explained by round-off error or a too short a fuselage on the model. I pulled out my Eduard Spitfire IXe and set the calipers to exactly 1.875 inches which would be the exact scale width of 5 regulation 18" wide stripes. As you can see, the regulation stripes would run well into the radio access hatch whereas the photo of KH-T has the edge of the white stripe well aft of the hatch. All of the other pics Wojtek posted show that the regulation stripes are much wider in total width than those shown on the KH-T pic.

By my estimation, moving the calipers to where the stripes line up in the photo would mean that the stripes would have to be 1.5 inches in total width, or 0.3" per stripe, making the ones on the real aircraft about 14.5 inches wide. Having said that I have searched all over for other pics of non-regulation stripes and did not find any.

Note that both FU-N and DN-L above have the stripe grouping more forward, with the rear white strip only partly overlapping the Sky band.

 

[rochie]

Hhmmm.......

Might have been a long tailed Spitfire

 

[Wurger]

No wonder these stripes of the FU-N and DN-L are going more forward. It is because the entire set of bands was started not jusrt from the horizontal stabilizers but from the front part of the Sky stripe.

Also the Eduard Spit may have the fuselage section of the proper width while Karl's one may be of incorrect dimension.

 

[rochie]

No wonder these stripes of the FU-N and DN-L are going more forward. It is because the entire set of bands was started not jusrt from the horizontal stabilizers but from the front part of the Sky stripe.

Also the Eduard Spit may have the fuselage section of the proper width while Karl's one may be of incorrect dimension.

I think Wojtek has it, Geo's bird has the stripes covering the sky fuselage band not starting in front of it !

 

[Crimea_River]

That's not the issue. Look again at my calipers and the photo of KH-T. The 18" wide stripes would run into the hatch if started just ahead of the horizontal stab and completely obliterating the Sky band. I disagree that it could be inaccuracy of the model. The model would have to be off by almost 10mm for that to be the explanation! And Eeuard would have to be wrong too.

 

[Wurger]

The fuelage issue may be one of reason for the problem. But I don't state it is for sure. I'm more convinced that the reason for that is the point , the D-day bands started from. Additinally if each stripe was a little bit narrow than the 18" it may have caused that appearance of the marking. Also I would make a focus on the second pic with the kite showing the starboard where the stripes aren't seen at all.

 

[Wurger]

However I have looked around the net trying find more more info about the Italeri kit. It appears the kit is a reboxed Ocidental Replica one. The model has a couple of issues. The main problem is the the incorrect shape of the front part of the fuselage. There is a lack of bulging shape of the top cowling of the engine compartment. Also wings are of incorrect shape. Therefore the issue of the rear fuselage is possible as well.

 

[Wurger]

Oh and one more thing I noticed.... if you are interested of course.. there are two shots of the beer trucks. Each of them wore the D-day bands applied with the different locatons.

It is evindent that the stripes could start either being moved forward ( the white band overpainted the Sky one partially or started from its edge ) or being moved back ( the white stripe was a part of the Sky one ). Although her code letters aren't seen I would say the Profimodeller set covers both of them.

Here are two shots of a model I have found via the net. The modeller used the Italeri/Ocidental Replica kit. Not sure about the decal markings ( possible comming with the kit ). Anyway , please have a look at the width of the Sky band that seems to be more wider than the D-day ones. As memo serves the Sky stripe was of the 18" width too.

And here an experiment ... I have copied a part of the Sky band and pasted as B&W ones making a range for the D-day set of stripes. What do you think? Looking familiar?

 

[Airframes]

I think Andy's nailed it.
The real aircraft appears to have stripes narrower than the regulation 18 inches, which I have actually seen pics of before, somewhere. In fact, one of the BBMFs Spits was (still is, I think) in a colour scheme exactly duplicated from one worn during the Invasion period in 1944, and the stripes were so narrow, they almost looked like half the 'regulation' width !
Given that the stripes were applied in a bit of a rush, it's not surprising there were errors, variations, call then what you will, and we certainly know that, unless applied by factory or MU, as they were on new aircraft arriving after the Invasion, they were often far from pristine, precise, or accurately placed !
Allowing for any possible dimensional errors in the kit, I'd just work from the photos of the real aircraft, and mark out where the stripes align, and paint them accordingly.

 

[fubar57]

Back from the Canuck game last night and as usual they have gone out of their way to disappoint me. This is the 4th live game I've been to and so far 0-4. Anyhoo....really appreciate the input gents. Here's another tack I'm working on. Not only does the rear part of the roundel encroach slightly on the 1st black stripe, the black stripe almost splits the "T" in half.

Here are the dimensions of the 24" T in both mm and 1/16". Been a long day so I'll do the maths in the morning.

Geo

 

[Donivanp]

Looking good Geo. Spits reign supreme

 

[Airframes]

Might help to make some code letter 'roughs' out of tape, to help get the positioning of the stripes as they appear on the real aircraft Geo.
Stick them in place, along with an adhesive disc to represent the roundel, then use these as a reference to mark the positions of the stripes.
Paint the stripes first, remove the 'markers', touch-in the stripes as needed, mask when dry, then paint the camouflage colours.

 

[fubar57]

I think so Terry. This is a very rough copy of how I think it looks. I tried to make this the size of the actual model, this is as close as I could get, the stripes aren't scale sized, the rear white stripe I believe should start a bit farther back but i think it looks right.

ALSO!!!, I couldn't find a good line drawing of the port side so I reversed the starboard view.


Geo