Warbird Replicas Spitfire LF mk IXc

[gillyg1]

Paul your a lucky man to be able to visit " the man" could you elaborate on your/ Richards panel lining technique, please. As it looks very authentic. Thankyou in advance Graham.

[Paul Johnson 4]

Posted by gillyg1 on 11/02/2017 19:43:36:

Paul your a lucky man to be able to visit " the man" could you elaborate on your/ Richards panel lining technique, please. As it looks very authentic. Thankyou in advance Graham.

Hi Graham

I visited Richard and saw his Spit and mine had no panel lines and at first thought wow how do you do that? But he kindly explained and I also experimented and boy does it come to life for some really easy work, and yes it is easy!
if you fancy a go you only need 1 black permanent marker and a white gel pen. I got mine from Tesco's !
low tack Masking tape and matt black paint that's well watered down.
Get some spitfire drawings of the panel lines and copy first with the black marker then on the same side of each black line draw a white line on the lines running from nose to tail, on the sides I drew the white underneath, then a white line behind each of the vertical black lines and wow what a difference it makes.
for the weathering on the panels place low tack masking tape on the front edge of the panel and put a very little black watered down paint on the tape and with your finger brush it in the direction of the airflow.
I used a humbrol oil stain paint which is gloss so looks 'wet' too to give the impression of an oil leak.

It's not compulsory to try this but I did and am really pleased with the results.

be brave have a go
Regards
Paul

[Paul Johnson 4]

hope these shed a little 'light'

.

[Paul Johnson 4]

The light green paint in the foreground on the wing is where I added the wheel well bulge and the paint was still in need of the clear coat finish I applied over the model when done

[Paul Johnson 4]

The one biggest tip Richard gave me was to look at drawings... not photo's of planes, and see how the artist makes a 2D surface become 3D by light and shade. how they use dark for shadows to create the illusion of depth.

It's no till you really look at those drawings that you start to get some ideas on how to add them to your model.

[RICHARD WILLS]

The Spitfire kit really has brought out the best in people . I dont think I have seen a bad one . All of the chaps building their first wooden model , who I normally would have deterred, have made a fabulous model .

Maybe its true when people say ("there is a Spitfire in everyone" .

I think they must be refering to modellers because I cant see a spitfire in Kim Kardashian , unless its still in kit form and was used to pad out her derriere.

I'd like people to have a bit more of a go at the weathering as Paul has shown . Its very satisfying and people always comment on it when they come round . Start with some black and white chalk/charcoal on an old model or some coloured paper . We all have a vast collection of aircraft books with lovely airbrushed illustrations ,So have a look at them and see how with dark and light shading they create 3D .

If you google 1:48 spitfire images you will see some beautiful Spits and all of that is possible at 1/8 scale .

[RICHARD WILLS]

I'm going to take a little historical diversion with your permission (I wont wait for you to reply ,if its alright with you ).

The Spitfire is a beautiful shape and never more appreciated than when you put one together as we all have . The way the elliptical curves follow through from the wing to the tail via those sweeping wing fairings is simply stunning.

Supermarine and the Ministry made a brave decision to develop the Spitfire because although beautiful , it certainly wasnt designed for mass production like the BF 109 . The prototype was pretty much a one off with very little consideration for a production run , Strangely the Merlin also started off looking like a bit of a duffer with lots of breakdowns but after the most development hours on any aero engine in WWII , we had a world beater .

So, we Brits ? Dogged? Persistent ? I think much more .

The Germans had a very similar option The Heinkel112 was an excellent aeroplane . Complicated wing as per the Spitfire , better performance and development potential than the 109 . They went for the quick fix . 109s by the thousand in cookie cutter style . The Heinkel could have followed a much more similar and successful path to our Spitfire .

Then of course , you have the mystery of the Spitfires closest competitor and threat , The Macchi 202 .

The Spitfire was born from Schnieder trophy racing and the only real rival came from Italy . Its no coincidence that the Italians have always made fast cars , motorbikes and aeroplanes .Its in their blood!

The Germans messed up Italian aircraft manufacture from the start by stealing a lot of the Italian staff to work on German stuff. So Macchi , who had already designed the beautiful shape of the 202 had to "unrefine " it to take a horrible radial engine . (I bet they were in tears!) . However , later in the war the Alpha romeo factory was allowed to build the Daimler benz 601 and hey presto the 202 was born .

About halfway through the war , the Germans sent a team of experts to Italy to assess the Italian fighters. The overall opinion was that the Macchi was superior to the 109 in every respect except armament.

However when requested form the German ministry it was turned down flat because of the build time compared with the 109 .

The point is that of course better designs take longer to make, but with time and development , the better design will pay off .

More to come on the Macchi , the Spitfires closest cousin !

Richard

[Jon H]

You aren't wrong about the Italian aircraft. Later in the war the Re2005 and fiat G55 could have given the allies real trouble had they been available in large numbers. The Re2005 in particular was at least a match for spitfires of the time. Great looking plane too

[Colin Leighfield]

I'm a fan of the He112, but it's not correct to say that it out-performed the 109. Everything I've read about the comparative flight tests showed that the 109 had the edge. Also it's worth noting that the 112 was altered quite a lot during development until it reached the final form recently very nicely modelled by Black Horse. There's no doubt though that the He100 had the performance edge on the 109 and if it had come along earlier, things might have been different.

All the things you say about the Italian designs are spot-on for me Richard. Probably the best was the MC205 Veltro with the DB605, rather than the 202, although basically the same plane. This and the Re2005 and Fiat G55 could compete with a Spitfire VIII or IX, but then the XIV would have come along and probably slaughtered them. As far as the Spitfire is concerned, once the tooling had been sorted out it was just another stressed skin monocoque design and the mass production car techniques used at Castle Bromwich banged them out no problem. Because the first one was hand-built with no press-tooling, the wing was built with a "planked" surface. However, a major contribution of Joe Smith was production-engineering the design without altering any of the aerodynamics of K5054, so that it could be tooled up for mass-production. It is popular to say that the Hurricane was much "simpler", but it really was a hand-built effort using Hawker's obsolete 1920's originated techniques, with thousands of bits of tube, rivets etc. and although easy to repair because you could take bits out and put bits in, it took far more man-hours too make han a Spitfire did at Castle Bromwich. The "D" box leading edge was as I understand formed with a single very large tool that produced the whole thing in one go. I believe that one of these was still hanging on the wall of one of the original buildings for many years after the switch to car production. It might still be around somewhere?

As we are all clearly WW2 fighter fans, I've just been watching a video of Tom Neal speaking at the RAF Museum, Hendon in 2010 about the Battle of Britain. He must be one of our all time best and fought all the way through WW2, Hurricanes in the BoB and Spitfires for most of the res of the war, although he spent some time with the Yanks when he had a personal P51. He was CO of 41 Squadron when they flew the brilliant Spitfire XII. Have a look on line for it, it's 41 spell-binding minutes and you might find some of the things he says to be very sobering. He was 90 then but looked more like 60 and gladly, he is still around. If anyone does have a look at it, I'd be interested to hear what their reactions are.

 

Edited By Colin Leighfield on 12/02/2017 12:10:45

[Paul Johnson 4]

Posted by Colin Leighfield on 12/02/2017 12:09:42:

As we are all clearly WW2 fighter fans, I've just been watching a video of Tom Neal speaking at the RAF Museum, Hendon in 2010 about the Battle of Britain. He must be one of our all time best and fought all the way through WW2, Hurricanes in the BoB and Spitfires for most of the res of the war, although he spent some time with the Yanks when he had a personal P51. He was CO of 41 Squadron when they flew the brilliant Spitfire XII. Have a look on line for it, it's 41 spell-binding minutes and you might find some of the things he says to be very sobering. He was 90 then but looked more like 60 and gladly, he is still around. If anyone does have a look at it, I'd be interested to hear what their reactions are.

Edited By Colin Leighfield on 12/02/2017 12:10:45

Hi Colin

Watched the link. Very good speech. I think all too often war is glamourized and he brought home some real truths especially the pilots killed after bailing out by our own side as they where nervous about who was who on the end of a parachute.

I did have a chuckle when he described his 'In depth training' he received on his first warbird after only flying a bi-plane.

I now realised one of the big failings of the Hurricane with fuel fires and the numbers who got burnt due to it.

also his obvious dismay at the reasons some were not honoured for their courage.

Thanks for that

Regards

Paul

[RICHARD WILLS]

Just a little update on my own Spitfires. I have three in various states , One is an experimental hack .

I have been playing around with flying settings . First of all , I must say that I am completely sold on the 580-600kv motor combined with the Dynam 3 blade prop . People ask me about a fourblade option , But its just not a good idea . You have to be practical and a big three blade is a lot better than a horrible 12x6 two blade.

I have also introduced 20% expo to the elevator and ailerons and this really does produce a very scale like flight .

I have whipped out a few undercarriages on windy days and bad landings , but that will happen to us all.

Basically the front of the plate breaks out of the little hooks . So , It is important to put plenty of glue around the plates in the original build . As an after fix . I have either added a piece of hardwood underneath the front of the plate between the ribs and either glued or screwed the leading edge of the plate down, or as a less invasive reinforcement , I simply wrapped pva soaked brown paper round the front of the plate and down on to the spar it sits on .

Generally the Spit is delight and exhibits all of the features of the fullsize . Slow handling is great and the rolls are 100% spit !

Keep up the good work chaps .

Richard

[Denis Watkins]

They are beautiful when they look and fly like this Richard, and stick to your comfortable motor/prop choice.

I cannot help feeling you need to compromise on the elevator expo, as when you need that slight flair on landing, it

Is just not there. How's about turn the elevator down slightly and ditch the elevator expo, or even dial in a small amount

It will be argued that you will learn to fly 20% eventually, but it could be 4 or 5 u/c down the road. My opinion obviously, with no science attached

[RICHARD WILLS]

Fair point Denis . Ive been flying the various versions of this Spit since 2006 , but like everyone , i still cock it up now and again . I also have to push my hacks way beyond the norm to find out what happens before everyone else gets one .

That can take a while , as you might make two planes "the same " , and one will have bits fall off and the other not .

Ive fitted flaps , different motors , all sorts, in some of them . They look like a crash repair delight .

Still , you cant make an omelette without breaking an egg , Also I'd rather me push the boundaries than, you since I know the bloke who makes them .

[Paul Johnson 4]

Please excuse the noob here guys and please put me right if I'm wrong but doesn't expo just soften the centre movement? So would you not retain the amount of travel at the extremes of movement but have a lowering of the rate of angular movement around the centre point?

[Jon H]

yes, and that is why I dislike it as you get a lump of control deflection in one hit which can cause serious control issues.

used correctly expo is useful, used wrong its a nightmare

[Paul Johnson 4]

Thanks Jon.
So a small amount... say 20% will soften it around the centre nicely as a lot of the artf(FMS) seem to suggest about 40% ish.

[Martian]

Thoroughly interesting build blog and thread still not read it all but am hooked Warbird replica Spit has been ordered

[Jon H]

Posted by Paul Johnson 4 on 24/04/2017 19:18:13:
Thanks Jon.
So a small amount... say 20% will soften it around the centre nicely as a lot of the artf(FMS) seem to suggest about 40% ish.

I don't use any expo as a general rule as I don't find it is needed most of the time. only 3 of my 10+ models have it and then only on 1 channel.

Use it when you have the rates set as you need for the required rate of roll or the right amount of elevator. then, if the model is twitchy on an axis use 10% expo.

of my 3 models using expo all of them have it on aileron and for different reasons. the first is a 36 inch plank that spends its entire life flat out and has a rate of roll that makes even spectators dizzy. it was a little twitchy round center so 10% was added. the second is a 1/4 stampe biplane and having enough deflection for a scale roll left it slightly twitchy when cruising. note that my linkage geometry and fast digital servos made this worse. Finally my Hurricane has ailerons that are slightly soft round the middle so I added negative expo to increase sensitivity round centre. again only 10% was needed.

Any instruction that gives 40% as a start point is madness and it lead a friend to make his h9 spitfire almost uncontrollable when landing as he had 60% rates and 65% expo. reducing the rate to 30% and the expo to 0 transformed the model and it wafts in like a butterfly now.

So, rates first, expo as the icing on the cake.

[RICHARD WILLS]

Posted by Jon Harper - Laser Engines on 24/04/2017 18:10:38:

yes, and that is why I dislike it as you get a lump of control deflection in one hit which can cause serious control issues.

used correctly expo is useful, used wrong its a nightmare

I have a lot of Nightmares . I like a bit of cheese on my crackers before bed .

To that end , we keep a variety of cheeses in the fridge .

Depending on the known effect , I label them like Ski runs .

Green being mild , right through blue and red to Black ( being an approximation to

Crack Cocaine mixed with LSD )

You can really expect a lively night on some Bishops Finger .

[Graham R]

You ought to try Stinking Bishop - It is what is says.

[Dickw]

It is a long time since I attempted a scale model so this is almost a new venture for me, but I have just collected a Spitfire kit from Warbirds. The plan is to try and replicate MJ627 which was converted post war into a 2 seat trainer version and is now based at Biggin Hill.

I want to build it in the 2 seat version because that is me sitting in the back seat in the photo, taken when I had the great good fortune to have a flight last year.

Richard has already supplied me with some extra parts, a special set of decals, and lots of good advice, so failure in the attempt will be entirely down to me.

I am in no rush and will probably build it over the winter, so don't expect any immediate updates, but wish me luck.

Dick

Edited By Dickw on 28/04/2017 10:44:07

Edited By Dickw on 28/04/2017 10:44:35

[Martian]

Good Luck Dick enjoy the build ,my kit arrived this morning

[onetenor]

What a wonderful experience .I would love to do it too butt couldn't afford it .Apart from which my O.W. would divorce me if i spent that much money on what she would probably call my "Stupid Hobby " well done that man . John

[Ady Hayward]

Hi Dick,

That flight must have been awesome. You have a good many envious followers now. Your choice of subject is fantastic as you just don't see 2 seater model Spitfires flying. I wish you all the best with your build and hope you enjoy it as much as we have.

Just remember there is no such thing here as a stupid question, and we are all here to help if you need some help with the build.

Adrian

[Martian]

Would I be persona non grata if I dressed my Spitfire in civilian livery