Spitfire
 

Why is it that there aren't many models of the later mark Spits? My favorite is the Mk 22/24 with the bubble canopy. I have a hard time finding plans for it though I know there are at least a couple smaller versions (.60 size) available.

Are the earlier marks easier to model? If so, what about them is easier? What would be most challenging when modeling a mk 22/24?

Thanks,

RE: Spitfire
 

How about Century Jet Models Spit 22/24 see www.centuryjet.com

http://www.centuryjet.com/webstore/g...0View%20LG.jpg

The late mark spits are probaly modelled less due to their long noses which makes them prone to nosing over on takeoff and landing - also slightly less historic.

Best regards

Jason

RE: Spitfire
 

when they hightened the tail, stuck THAT wing on, and that bubble thing on top, it stopped being a spitfire, all the grace went out of it, it stopped at the PRMK19

RE: Spitfire
 

Century Jet has a nice plane. I have seen them fly in the past..

Ty

RE: Spitfire
 

Granted. That is a very good point.

Also, I wasn't aware of the CJM Spit. Thanks!

Oops, sorry. I beg to differ. To me it looks like the most advanced, powerful yet graceful tool of aerial warfare in the lineage. Kind of like the Sea Fury and Bearcat--too late for WWII but just awesome machines.

RE: Spitfire
 

Ty,

I'm going to take exception with you on this. I bought the CJM Deluxe Spitfire kit back in '98 and paid big bucks for the thing. Off the top it sounded wonderful! Laser cut parts, fiberglass fuse, foam wing and it even came with CJM retracts. What a box of junk!!!!!!!!!!!

The laser cut parts looked as if they were cut with a torch freeehand, the retracts had slop galore, the instructions were abismal and customer support was minimal, at best. In all fairness, the fiberglass work was VERY good but not good enough to offset the rest of the kit's shortcomings. I struggled with this abortion for six months then sold it to a flying buddy for a fraction of what I had paid for it..............and, yes, I DID tell him the kit was junk.

I have had two sets of CJM retracts prior to this kit and neither one was what I would call "worth the price". I should have known better than to plunk down big bucks on a company that does "blacksmith" work on what should be precision-made parts. (I apologize in advance to any blacksmiths who may be reading these comments. Blacksmiths do fine work but they don't claim to do precision laser cutting, either.)

CJM will never see another dime from me.

Al

RE: Spitfire
 

I think the reason you don't see too many models of the very late Mk Spits is related to the fact that they did not see combat in WW2, were not produced in large numbers, and were not used by as many nations as the earlier Spits. Quite honestly, you don't see too many models of the very early Spitfires either. Most everything seems to be either Mk.IX or Mk.XIV which were the quintessential Merlin and Griffon Spitfire Marks. I must agree with rrudytoo above concerning the CJM Spitfire kit, having had the displeasure of framing one up for a customer some years back. Unless they've improved it a whole bunch my advice would be to do your homework prior to making any decision to purchase.

RE: Spitfire
 

Production numbers and the fact that most of the late Mk:s didn't see combat in WWII are probably the main reasons that Mk. 22 and 24 are rare birds at any flying field. Also one of the reasons many people decide on building a Spitfire is that beautiful elliptical wing which the late Mk:s didn't have. However, I agree with you js3, I like Spits to have a bubble hood and the enlarged pointed tail. My personal favourite is the Mk.XVI, which has these features, but retains the elliptical wing (see pictures below of a Mk.XVI on it's way to new owners in Sweden).

The early Mk:s have shorter noses than the later aircraft, something that may cause c.g. problems, most Spitfies tend to end up tail heavy. That propably accounts for the fact that the Mk.IX/XVI and the Mk.XIV are so popular.

RE: Spitfire
 

What about available plans? The only ones I can find are the Dennis Bryant 60" span from Bob Holman. I'd like one somewhat bigger--say 78" to 88". Big, but not huge.

I actually have plans that were published in RCM back in the late 80s. I think it was by a guy named Gordon Whitehead but that one is even smaller and I don't really know how "scale" it is.

Thanks for the responses!

RE: Spitfire
 

Al,

I regret that you were not happy with our product and support in 1998. I can’t remember talking to you so I can only assume you talked to my partner.

In 1998, laser wood cutting was in its infancy stage and today, you can write you name on a piece of wood and not affect its structural strength. I am attaching a photo of the bulkheads installed inside the current fuselage. If anyone wants to see more construction photos, please contact me at [email protected].

In 2003 I revised the instruction manual and developed a new photo manual that complements the plans and instruction manual.

Later this year, we will release our composite, ONE piece fuselage Spitfire for the same price as our current kit. There will be no bulkheads in the fuselage other than the firewall and tail wheel bulkhead.

The Spitfire is one of the most graceful planes every built and flown in combat and it desires to live for ever.

Bruce Sanders, President
Century Jet Models, Inc.

RE: Spitfire
 

Other than the RCM (Whitehead?) and Bryant plans you've already referenced I'm not aware of any plans for the late Mk Spitfires. The RCM airplane always looked good to my eye although, admittedly, I've never put a ruler to the plans to check for accuracy.

RE: Spitfire
 

Guys,

I found this set of plans available from IMP. [link=http://www.impscale.com/html/spitfires.html]IMP Spitfire MK 22/24[/link] (scroll to the bottom of the page)

At 73" span it is a touch smaller than I was thinking but still might make for an impressive model. Anybody have experience with IMP? All comments welcomed and most appreciated!

RE: Spitfire
 

Most, if not all, IMP plans were drawn by Claude Baskin. I have a set of his P-51A / A-36 plans which I purchased from IMP. The plans look decent enough but are pretty sparse, ie, no rectracts, radio, engine installations shown. All this is left up to the builder to decide. I don't know if the Spit plans are the same but it's not necessarily an issue if you have the experience. My .02 cents worth.

RE: Spitfire
 

Thanks Chad. While I'm just starting to get into warbirds, I do have quite a bit of kit and plan and even some scratch building experience. That aspect doesn't intimidate me.

RE: Spitfire
 

Leo Spychalla sells a conversion kit to modify a Yellow Spit kit in ot a bubble top spit. Check out SpychallaAircraft here on RCU.

I am building a 12 foot Spit Mk.IXB:D Re; What Chad said in post #7 from IMP/Baskin plans now on RCSB. I like the BAskin plans. The spit plans do show the gear instllation while not all the Baskin plans do, as Chad says. It looks like BAskins later plans all have the gear installation shown.

Jeff

RE: Spitfire
 

practcal models, here in the UK do a bubble topped spit 88inch span, i think,

RE: Spitfire
 

in the warbirds over the rockies DVD there is a late mark featured piloted by a young man by the name of Spychalla I do believe,could it be the son of Leo?nice looking plane as well.

RE: Spitfire
 

Yes thats Leo's son.. a really nice kid..

RE: Spitfire
 

Surely its not a big deal to alter a reg; kit of say a mk 9[the most popular] into a mk whatever .
only need some pics & a good 3 view , thats what i would do , maybe have to make your own canopy .

RE: Spitfire
 

There are manifold differences beyond just the canopy between the early Mark Spits and the Mk.22-24.

RE: Spitfire
 

Perhaps its the difference between a scratchbuilder & a kit builder as to who is making the changes - maybe the mk 24 you mention is a tough one - I haven't looked at it - but many other mks are feasable to alter .

RE: Spitfire
 

Actually there are lots of differences between the early marks and the later marks. The fuse, wings tail group etc..

RE: Spitfire
 

OK I surrender !!! Maybe it is not practical to butcher a kit/arf to make a later MK , so suggest that if one does want a later mk of Spit; one should either get some plans OR draw them up onesself . I am about to start on the mick Reeves 1/6th [74"]Spit .--- Plans ,retracts canopy f/glass cowl ----- I saw him fly this very one in Ottawa in 1980 I think it was .

RE: Spitfire
 

then you might be interested in contacting MR JOLLY, on here, he has an extensive build of this superb semi kit in his own web site

RE: Spitfire
 

Couldn,t find the "MR Jolly " site you mentioned , Sounds interesting