| Welcome to Locate and Cement - Plastic Model Kit Review, Advice and Exchange of ideas.. 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: |
| Hammer House of Airfix Horror; - 1/72 Mk22 Spitfire | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 29 2013, 08:27 AM (2,797 Views) | |
| peebeep | Jun 7 2013, 08:43 PM Post #41 |
|
Lots Of Trouble Usually Serious
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Tamiya colours are a pretty close match to the Arms & Armour Press facsimile MAP chips. If you're into the scale colour thing you'll need to bleach them out a bit. Personally I prefer to overspray the whole lot with varnish tinted with pale grey. peebeep |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 7 2013, 09:14 PM Post #42 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, I have now sprayed the undersides using a mix of Gunze 36270 and H57 "aircraft grey" at 50/50 To my eyes it looks perfect- for now. Interestingly, I found this photo set on the web by accident, and the modeller states he has used the Tamiya colours- I assume neat. They look little like the colours I brushed out- I wonder if they really lighten up when they cure? Anyone? http://hogges-modellbygge.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/airfix-172-spitfire-f-mk22-a02033.html |
![]() |
|
| desmojen | Jun 7 2013, 09:42 PM Post #43 |
|
Iwata Goddess
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
http://s3.zetaboards.com/locate_and_cement/topic/7620382/1/#new Jen. |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 9 2013, 10:19 PM Post #44 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Right- Ocean Grey is on- Tamiya (mostly) and cut with X-22 to give a lovely glossy finish ready for decals. BUT- The RUDDER!!! So should it actually be like it is supplied in the kit- or should it be a "normal" rudder- i.e. not with a horizontal split near it's base, and the fuselage sort of continuing along underneath it? Certain photos seem to show it to be one piece- I am confused- and need rapid assistance ![]() http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/8033931440/ Edited by Mentalguru, Jun 9 2013, 10:20 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| peebeep | Jun 9 2013, 10:39 PM Post #45 |
|
Lots Of Trouble Usually Serious
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The aircraft in your link is PK312, the first Mk 22 and essentially a Mk 21 with cut down rear fuselage and bubble canopy. It was eventually fitted with the large fin/rudder that became standard for production Mk 22's and the kit is correct as depicted. I'm not certain, but I think the rudder may have been standardised with those used on Seafires. If Edgar sees this I'm sure he will chip in. peebeep |
![]() |
|
| peebeep | Jun 9 2013, 10:46 PM Post #46 |
|
Lots Of Trouble Usually Serious
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
See here. peebeep |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 10 2013, 06:12 AM Post #47 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If he would be so kind ![]() So basically, the tall tail was required because they lost some lateral stability with the cut down fuselage? OK- I'll keep calm and carry on. (although actually, I need a reason to get a bit edgy- this is all going far too well!) |
![]() |
|
| Walrus | Jun 10 2013, 07:25 AM Post #48 |
|
A bristle short of a full brush
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ok PM me your addy and I will turn up one night outside your house with my big chopper |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 10 2013, 08:00 AM Post #49 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
ooohhh errrr missus |
![]() |
|
| peebeep | Jun 10 2013, 09:34 AM Post #50 |
|
Lots Of Trouble Usually Serious
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Mk 21 which had the high back fuselage was found to have instability in the yawing plane, so there must have been factors other than a cut down fuselage that needed to be dealt with. In the end only a relatively small quantities of 21's were manufactured. peebeep |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 11 2013, 08:42 AM Post #51 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
..... Ocean Grey- ON .....Masking- ON ....Dark Green- ON ...SKY- ON Well, partly anyway. I'm putting on the green in stages- I can't actually do the cockpit area yet, as I doubt my pilot figures from Revell will turn up till tomorrow or so. Unfortunately, Airfix's pilot has his oxy mask hanging off, and his stick arm moulded to his rib cage Once he is on board, then the final 'pit details and canopy can go together. Xtracolour have made a bit of a blooper on the starboard upper wing camou pattern. The Airfix instructions are not qute as bad, but all references I have appear to "validate" the pattern in the photo- not that the photo itself doesn't exactly validate it in the first place- derr. ![]() I have been experimenting with my new Tamiya gloss RAF colours. I do not like the matt finishes of Tamiya paint, and so added about 1/4 to 1/3 X-22 gloss into the paint BEFORE thinning with a mix of celly and Tamiya X-20. I now have a super smooth "ready to decal" drum tight finish which need nil preparation before the decs go on REQUEST_ Can anyone tell me the correct FS- or best match yellow for the leading edges please- and is it the same yellow as the prop tips? Thanks Edited by Mentalguru, Jun 11 2013, 10:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Mike W | Jun 11 2013, 10:39 AM Post #52 |
|
Hook down, wheels down... call the ball
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I always use good old Humbrol 24 Trainer Yellow, for the propeller tips too. See my 48th MkXII http://s3.zetaboards.com/locate_and_cement/topic/7628813/1/#new Edited by Mike W, Jun 11 2013, 10:44 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| peebeep | Jun 11 2013, 11:22 AM Post #53 |
|
Lots Of Trouble Usually Serious
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's the same yellow for roundel outlines, leading edge stripes, prop tips etc. Fredriksson quotes FS 33538, although I doubt there is any direct FS match for any MAP colour. MAP yellow is a strong orangey-yellow colour, BS381c: 356 Golden Yellow is, I think, the BS match. As Mike says, Hu 24 will fit the bill, also Xtracolour/Xtracrylix X011/XA1011 Trainer Yellow ('Trainer' is a bit of a misnomer, MAP documents refer only to Yellow). peebeep |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 14 2013, 06:53 AM Post #54 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thanks PB- I got some a couple of days ago- probably a better match than some of the more orangey yellows that are available (?) I now have my very own Douglas Bader for my Spit- he came in the Revell RAF pilot's set in 1/72. Very nicely detailed and proprtioned, but unfortunately he IS to scale, meaning that his upper torso will fit the cockpit perfectly, but to get him to actually fit the tight cockpit opening in his moulded rigid state, he would have to be included before the fuselage halves were joined (which really is not that bad an idea.) So the pilot had to go through an extremely painful looking Leg-botomy and arse-dectomy to fit...
|
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 15 2013, 11:07 AM Post #55 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Can anyone advise me pls? Does the Mk22 have the yellow warning/danger choppy chopp markings around the main canopy bubble? Starting to do some decalling, and using the Xtracolour sheet- but the artist only shows this for use on the Mk24 options Ok- just found my answer. But- had to share this- isn't this one of the most beautiful aircraft to ever fly? ![]() |
![]() |
|
| Floyd | Jun 15 2013, 01:48 PM Post #56 |
![]()
I like to mottle things.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No. Ugly as sin with a big bumpy nose and strangely pointed tail. A Mk.V is far sexier and a 109 G2 is sexier still. |
![]() |
|
| peebeep | Jun 15 2013, 02:06 PM Post #57 |
|
Lots Of Trouble Usually Serious
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Personally I don't find late production Griffon Spitfires aesthetically pleasing, interesting, yes. The Mk VIII/IX ticks all the right boxes for me in terms of looks. Whatever floats your boat really. peebeep |
![]() |
|
| desmojen | Jun 15 2013, 02:57 PM Post #58 |
|
Iwata Goddess
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
For me, they kind of mirror the 190 Dora in a way. You can't really argue that the Dora is better looking than the Anton, but it has a sort of fierce powerful look about it that the earlier model doesn't. I think the late Griffon Spitfires are the same, they exude a powerful sort of aura that the early Spitfires don't. And although not as pretty outright, there is still a lot of grace in that shape. Jen. |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 15 2013, 05:42 PM Post #59 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Personally, I think the 22 is extremely mature and graceful- rather than pretty- knows what it is about. I love the brutal look of the XII, yet find the high back XIV by far the least aesthetically pleasing. The 22 is like a thoroughbred racehorse to me. |
![]() |
|
| Mentalguru | Jun 15 2013, 05:44 PM Post #60 |
|
Owned by Jen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"a 109 G2 is sexier still." Go and stand in the corner until I say you can come out. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Work in Progress Aircraft · Next Topic » |




![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)









2:37 PM Jul 11





