My favorite (make that favourite) airplane of all time is the Supermarine Spitfire.
All marks.
And there are a lot of them.
I first fell in love with the Spitfire in 1978, after seeing one at an air show where a few P-47's, my favorite plane up until that point, were gathered. It was dainty, a little sports car of an airplane. It was done in typical RAF day fighter camouflage (dark green, ocean grey upper surfaces, medium sea grey under), replete with invasion stripes. It changed my world.
I had known, up to that point, that the Spitfire was a veritable chameleon, starting off with a two bladed propeller, ending with counter-rotating props, developing a bubble canopy, wing redesigned late war... by the time it ended production it was a wholly different aircraft! I had built a few of them and so was somewhat familiar with the plane (the first one I actually built was the classic Airfix Mk. IXc, late winter 1977. I was actually given the MPC Profile series version of this kit in 1972, but never built it due to the fact that it had German markings by mistake!).
When the Spitfire Madness took to my blood, I sought to build every major variant in 1/72. The problem was, not every version was made in injection molded form. One of my first attempts was a conversion of the very easily obtained Airfix Mk. IXc into an early Spitfire Mk. I, with a two bladed prop.
Suffice to say, horrid results.
Within a week, though, I discovered a plethora a Spitfire variants, available at the nearest hobby shop (Art's) as well as the one at the naval base. Not long after, I managed to cobble together about a dozen kits (they were so inexpensive back then). Pleased as punch I was!
From that experience, I learnt a few things about the kits that were available back then and in the intervening years -
1. If you want to model a Spitfire Mk. I (or a simple conversion to a II), the absolute best kit is still the Airfix model. Yes, Tamiya makes a nice one with recessed panel lines and a very nice interior, but they managed to botch a portion of the profile. Airfix's is still dead on, though far simpler.
2. Amongst classic model kits, there was only one readily available Mk. II kit; Revell. They almost got the underside of the wings right but the plane has length problems (fuselage is as long as a Mk. IX, stretched in a couple of places), longish landing gear and a somewhat squashed canopy (something it shares with the recent Hobby Boss Spits). Frog made a Mk. II/Mk. Va early on, but was pretty scarce during my heyday of building.
3. Back in the day, the best Mk. IX model was the KP Kopro kit, from Czechoslovakia. But it was a fairly uncommon sub-variant; an LF Mk. IXe. Converting it into a usable Mk. IXc (a more common variant) was pretty taxing.
5. Just because a kit is newer doesn't mean they get it right. Most modern manufacturers like to tout things like detailed interiors, wheel wells and a plethora of parts. Yet they still manage to botch certain aspects of the Spitfire's appearance, namely the slight gull wing appearance of the underside. Personally, I've not built many of the newer kits that have come along since the mid-1980's, but I have seen others as built and have read from some pretty reliable sources the shortcomings.
6. Why am I fretting over such details? This is supposed to be fun! Still, I want for them to look right. There are a few "core" kits from which many of the other variants can be built. It just takes a bit of ingenuity.
I have a few Spit kits in the stash already, though I think I know which one is going to be built first.
The classic Airfix Mk. IXc, bumps and all.
All marks.
And there are a lot of them.
I first fell in love with the Spitfire in 1978, after seeing one at an air show where a few P-47's, my favorite plane up until that point, were gathered. It was dainty, a little sports car of an airplane. It was done in typical RAF day fighter camouflage (dark green, ocean grey upper surfaces, medium sea grey under), replete with invasion stripes. It changed my world.
I had known, up to that point, that the Spitfire was a veritable chameleon, starting off with a two bladed propeller, ending with counter-rotating props, developing a bubble canopy, wing redesigned late war... by the time it ended production it was a wholly different aircraft! I had built a few of them and so was somewhat familiar with the plane (the first one I actually built was the classic Airfix Mk. IXc, late winter 1977. I was actually given the MPC Profile series version of this kit in 1972, but never built it due to the fact that it had German markings by mistake!).
When the Spitfire Madness took to my blood, I sought to build every major variant in 1/72. The problem was, not every version was made in injection molded form. One of my first attempts was a conversion of the very easily obtained Airfix Mk. IXc into an early Spitfire Mk. I, with a two bladed prop.
Suffice to say, horrid results.
Within a week, though, I discovered a plethora a Spitfire variants, available at the nearest hobby shop (Art's) as well as the one at the naval base. Not long after, I managed to cobble together about a dozen kits (they were so inexpensive back then). Pleased as punch I was!
From that experience, I learnt a few things about the kits that were available back then and in the intervening years -
1. If you want to model a Spitfire Mk. I (or a simple conversion to a II), the absolute best kit is still the Airfix model. Yes, Tamiya makes a nice one with recessed panel lines and a very nice interior, but they managed to botch a portion of the profile. Airfix's is still dead on, though far simpler.
2. Amongst classic model kits, there was only one readily available Mk. II kit; Revell. They almost got the underside of the wings right but the plane has length problems (fuselage is as long as a Mk. IX, stretched in a couple of places), longish landing gear and a somewhat squashed canopy (something it shares with the recent Hobby Boss Spits). Frog made a Mk. II/Mk. Va early on, but was pretty scarce during my heyday of building.
3. Back in the day, the best Mk. IX model was the KP Kopro kit, from Czechoslovakia. But it was a fairly uncommon sub-variant; an LF Mk. IXe. Converting it into a usable Mk. IXc (a more common variant) was pretty taxing.
5. Just because a kit is newer doesn't mean they get it right. Most modern manufacturers like to tout things like detailed interiors, wheel wells and a plethora of parts. Yet they still manage to botch certain aspects of the Spitfire's appearance, namely the slight gull wing appearance of the underside. Personally, I've not built many of the newer kits that have come along since the mid-1980's, but I have seen others as built and have read from some pretty reliable sources the shortcomings.
6. Why am I fretting over such details? This is supposed to be fun! Still, I want for them to look right. There are a few "core" kits from which many of the other variants can be built. It just takes a bit of ingenuity.
I have a few Spit kits in the stash already, though I think I know which one is going to be built first.
The classic Airfix Mk. IXc, bumps and all.
No comments:
Post a Comment