Tamiya 1:48 Spitfire Mk.Vb en830

[Mike]

I first saw this over on FSM, which piqued my interest, and my love of all things esoteric. Here's the text from Unreal Aircraft, reproduced to whet your appetites

Hybrid Aircraft - Supermarine/Daimler-Benz Spitfire

Spitfire Vb serial EN830 / NX-X fell into German hands late in 1942. It crash landed on November 18th 1942 while being flown by P/O (Sous Lt.) Bernard Scheidhauer of the Free French Air Force, attached to 131 "County of Kent" Sqn. RAF. He and his No.1, P/O Henri de Bordas, had been on a "rhubarb" to Normandy during the afternoon. EN830 was hit by light flak and made a forced landing in a turnip field at Dielament Manor, Trinity, Jersey.

Sous Lt Scheidhauer was taken prisoner by the Germans and, like his aircraft, was transported to Germany. On March 24th, 1944 he and 80 other RAF officers escaped from Stalag Luft 3. He was captured along with his escape partner Sq. Ldr. Roger Bushell in Saarbrucken. The were both shot for their part in the "Great Escape" on 28th March 1944. His aircraft was captured virtually intact, and in good enough condition to be flown in November 1943, with black crosses in place of RAF roundels, to Rechlin for testing.

In early spring of 1941, another Spitfire had been tested here. A suggestion that it be tested with a Daimler-Benz engine to enable a more direct comparison with the Luftwaffes' Messerschmitt Bf.109 led to it being flown to the Daimler-Benz facility at Backnang, near Stuttgart, on April 24, 1941. There it was to receive a DB 601 engine. This work proved to difficult and the project was abandoned. That aircraft returned to Rechlin on September 9, 1942.

The acquisition of the second Spitfire, EN830, revived the idea. The Spitfire was sent to Echterdingen, south of Stuttgart, where Daimler-Benz operated a flight testing division. Flugkapitän Willy Ellenreider and his staff were responsible for testing to improve performance of other current aircraft, and a number of types served as flying test-beds. Among them were Ju.52s with a DB 605 engine in the centre position; He.111s, Hs.130s, Bf.109s and 110s, a Ju.87 and an Fi.167.

Spitfire EN830 was repainted to German standards, dark green above and pale blue below, with bright yellow tail control surfaces and large, black crosses. Radio code letters CJ+ZY were painted on each side, below and, unusually, above the wings; and the British serial transferred to the fin above the swastika.

The Spitfire reached Echterdingen minus guns and ammunition, with the gun ports closed. The radio had been replaced with ballast, but it still had its original Merlin 45 engine. Several flights were made by Daimler-Benz pilots before conversion was attempted. A decision was made to replace the intruments and the entire electrical system with standard German equipment, because the Luftwaffe used a 24 volt system, whilst the RAF used a 12 volt standard.

After the Merlin engine was removed, it was discovered that the Spitfire's front fuselage cross-section was very close to that of the standard Bf.110G's engine cowling. A new engine support was designed, and a standard DB 605A-1 engine (Wk-Nr 00701990) was mounted to the fire wall. The work was completed at the Sindelfingen Daimler-Benz factory, near Echterdingen.

A 3.0 m. diameter Bf.109G propellor was added, together with the carburettor scoop from a Bf.109G. This made the modified Spitfire's all-up weight, without armament, 6,020 lb. (2730 kg). The armament weight was an estimated additional 661 lb. (300 kg.). Its weight with armament, before the engine modification, had been 6,680 lb. (3030 kg.).

After a couple of weeks, and with a new yellow-painted nose, the Spitfire returne to Echterdingen. Ellenreider was the first to try the aircraft. He was stunned that the aircraft had much better visibility and handling on the ground than the Bf.109. It took off before he realised it and had an impressive climb rate, around 70 ft. (21 m.) per second. Much of the Spitfire's better handling could be attributed to its lower wing loading.

The Spitfire's wing area was about 54 sq. ft. (5m²) greater than that of the Bf.109. The Messerschmitt was faster at low altitude, but at 11,000 ft. (3350 m) the speeds evened out. The DB 605A engine gave better performance, according to the test group, than the Merlin, which was rated 150 hp below the German engine. It gave the Spitfire a ceiling of 41,666 ft. (12700 m.), about 3,280 ft. (1000 m.) more than a Bf.109G with the same engine and 5,166 ft. (1475 m.) more than that of a Spitfire Mk.V.

After a brief period at Rechlin confirming the performance data, the modified Spitfire returned to Echterdingen to serve officially as a test bed. It was popular with the pilots in and out of working hours. Its career ended on 14th August, 1944, when a formation of US bombers attacked Echterdingen, wrecking two Ju.52s, three Bf.109Gs, a Bf.109H V1, an FW.190 V16, an Me.410 and the Spitfire. The remains of the hybrid Spitfire were scrapped at the Klemm factory at Böblingen.

Someone mentioned that Fusion made a resin conversion kit, so I tracked them down, and ordered one from their website here, over in the US. It's quite pricey once you add the postage over here, but I was hooked.

[Mike]

Here's the parts list so far, and we'll start with the obligatory use of the word "obligatory" when referring to the box shot

I've also got a Cutting Edge Vb cockpit for this job, which is ostensively the same as the Mk.1 pit I put in my first Spitfire, which you can see here, with the addition of an armour plate between the seat & the bulkhead.

And of course, the excellent Fusion nose & other conversion parts:

The rectangular part near the props is the jig that combined with a pattern on the instructions allows you to set the correct angle & pitch on the blades when building them. You also get a set of simple decals, and a painting guide, which has the nose & undersides painted yellow, with the upper surfaces painted with a simple camouflage of RLM 74 (Dk grey green) & RLM 75 (Grey violet), and some very light mottle on the fuselage sides. Apparently, the engine ran very dirty, and covered the sides of the aircraft with thick soot, so that'll test my weathering skills, while the mottle will test my airbrushing skills... or lack of them

First job will be to chop the fuselage & make the two halves fit, before moving on to the cockpit

[Mike]

Big buggery man-vegetables!

I was sat there merrily cutting away at the resin pour stubs on the Cutting Edge cockpit set, and noticed that one of the replacement sidewalls was missing. bottom! :temper tantrum:

I've fired off an email to Hannants to see what they'll do about it, but in the meantime, I can't do a damn thing on the project I'm also waiting for the cockpit for my Mossie project, and I'm in the waiting for stuff to cure for the other two, so all I have left to do at the moment is glue the canopy on my Hawk

BORED!

[Miroslav]

Just,head on,man!Dont worry,be happy

[Mike]

I'll live... providing I don't get the "we don't believe you" from Hannants. If they do, I'll order another one, copy it in resin & then send the original back.

Bill - what're Hannants like on making up short parts on resin sets?

[Mike]

Here's how the fuselage fits to the new engine cowling... very snug indeed. I also built up the prop, which was a piece of cake with the template & jig

Now we wait......

[Skii]

You are mad sir. quite mad.

Hehe - very interesting though

[desmojen]

Don't bother with the resin cockpit Mike, the Tamiya one is adequate, and you could use the resin parts as a guide for adding wiring and such. Send the defective resin set back and spend the money on herbal tea instead!

Jen.

(Impatient to see messyspit done)

[Mike]

Don't bother with the resin cockpit Mike, the Tamiya one is adequate, and you could use the resin parts as a guide for adding wiring and such. Send the defective resin set back and spend the money on herbal tea instead!

Jen.

(Impatient to see messyspit done)

Too late Jen, I've chopped all the rest of the parts off their pour stubs Herbal tea? Are you insane? Tea is the liquid of

[desmojen]

Thats why you're poorly, not enough tea!

If you've not chopped the kit about yet to accept said resin, there's nothing to stop you not using it in the kit. You'll be waiting a while for a replacement, so keep it for your next Spitfire project instead, you could even stick it in akit that needs a replacement cockpit, like an Airfix one!

Jen

[Mike]

Thats why you're poorly, not enough tea!

If you've not chopped the kit about yet to accept said resin, there's nothing to stop you not using it in the kit. You'll be waiting a while for a replacement, so keep it for your next Spitfire project instead, you could even stick it in akit that needs a replacement cockpit, like an Airfix one!

Jen

Exhibit A:

Also know as "too late"

[desmojen]

Oh well.....................

Maybe I should start mine tonight and beat you to the finish!

Jen.

[Mike]

Oh well.....................

Maybe I should start mine tonight and beat you to the finish!

Jen.

And just maybe I might sulk

You go right ahead if you want to... I'll try not to brood for too long

[desmojen]

Now I'm confused

Just read that little excerpt at the top, it says the Spitfire was painted in Luftwaffe satandard dark green over pale blue with yellow tail control surfaces. After the engine transplant the cowls were painted yellow and then it flew back to the test airfiled.

So where does the yellow underside come in? And how exactly does RLM 74/75 camo relate to 'standard Luftwaffe dark green' ?

Jen.

[Mike]

Now I'm confused

Just read that little excerpt at the top, it says the Spitfire was painted in Luftwaffe satandard dark green over pale blue with yellow tail control surfaces. After the engine transplant the cowls were painted yellow and then it flew back to the test airfiled.

So where does the yellow underside come in? And how exactly does RLM 74/75 camo relate to 'standard Luftwaffe dark green' ?

Jen.

Dunno mate... The Fusion instructions gave the paint refs, and are a separate entity from the website that I lifted the text from. Perhaps that explains it? My new problem is... which one is correct?

[Mike]

From the pics below, the tail & nose seem to be the same shade - would you agree?

And from those few pics, it looks like someone put together this profile:

Any thoughts?

[Mike]

Here's someone else's take on the story:

It is a Spitfire V (EN830) which was captured and flown to Rechlin in late 1943. In November it was then transferred to Echterdingen, south of Stuttgart, where the Daimler Benz flight test department was, so that a Daimler Benz engine could be installed to enable a comparitive evaluation could be made between the Spitfire and a Bf 109. It was camouflaged to german standards with dark green upper surfaces and pale blue undersurfaces and bright yellow rudder, elevators and nose. The serial EN830 was transferred to the fin above the swastika. It was also converted to have a standard german instrument set and converted to 24 volts.

It spent it's time between Echterdingen and Rechlin and was very popular with the pilots of the test group. It was severely damaged in a USAF air raid on Echterdingen on 14 August 1944. Also wrecked in that raid were 2 Ju52, 3 Bf 109G, the Bf 109H V1, the Fw 190 V16 and an Me 410. The remains of EN380 were finally scrapped at the Klemm factory at Boblingen.

[Mike]

On pic 1, there seems to be a difference in shade between the underside of the tail area & the rudder. I know there's a lot of exhaust staining, but if you look at the cleanest part just under the tail, there seems to be a distinct tonal difference, which lends credence to the argument that the undersides remained pale blue.

If you assume that's correct, then you have to wonder about the color call-out on the Fusion instructions. :hmmm:

[Mike]

Here's an article over on HS that has another pic, which you can see below:

The builder in the article has given the spit a hard-edged spine, which seems at odds with the evidence of the pic, which shows a soft-edged wavy spine. Again, the builder has given the spit a complete yellow underside.

What's the standard underside color on other captured Allied aircraft?

A bit of text from the article on the colro scheme:

Sources disagree about the color scheme. Some have the Messerspit painted RLM 74/75 on the upper surfaces, 75 sides with 74 mottling. Others have it RLM 70/75. Some have the lower surfaces RLM 65 and others say RLM 04. For certain the nose, elevators and rudder were painted yellow (RLM 04).

[Mike]

Here's another captured aircraft - this time a P-38:

Lends credence to the yellow undersides...

[Mike]

Nuther pic of a captured Spit, this time in color. Doesn't reveal much color information on the underside though

[Col.]

I'd say the final photo shows a Spit in it's standard RAF scheme with Luftwaffe markings painted over the RAF ones, probably because they wanted to get it tested ASAP. As you say, bugger all help with reference to such a heavily modified airframe as the 'Messyspit' (cool name by the way Jen ). There is a lot of evidence to suggest most captured aircraft had their undersurfaces painted yellow to help identify them as test aircraft and possibly avoid being shot down by so-called friendly-fire but there are also exceptions such as the B-17.

Have a close look at the leading edge of the rudder in your first photo. The tone is exactly the same as the underside of the airframe in that area. Now look at the underside of the elevators, they are very dark due to the shadows and lack of light in that area. One would assume a light colour such as yellow would reflect a little more light but this is clearly not the case here.

Now to add one more consideration to the confusion. I would think the yellow and light blue used by the Luftwaffe at the time are very close in tone, thus it will be very difficult to differentiate between the two from black & white photos.

If I were you I'd go with the yellow as the most likely option and challenge anyone why argues to provide positive proof to the contrary. If they do it's not impossible to re-spray her at a later date.

Edited 'cause I can't spell for toffee

Edited June 7, 2007 by Col.

[desmojen]

You would have to say, the underside of the colour picture Spitfire doesn't look yellow though wouldn't you?

I found and read the Hyperscale article and my first thought was the same as yours, that the underside looks different than the tail. Trouble is, you can see that the exhaust staining goes all the way back, which clouds things a bit and I'd have to conclude that you could go either way.

What I do think though is that none of those three photos looks to me like 74/75, and there is little evidence of mottling, to my eye at least.

Is it fair to say that 74/75 was standard Luftwaffe camo by 1943? If it is, where does the idea of standard Luftwaffe dark green come in? And as a parting thought, I think that it is known/assumed that the yellow underside was a standard tool on captured aircraft and that that is why the profiles etc assume that the Spitfire has the yellow undersides.

If it were me, I'd paint it in 70/71/65 with yellow nose and tail because I think it would look cooler that way <shrugs>

Damned if you do, damned if you don't springs to mind

Jen.

[Mike]

You would have to say, the underside of the colour picture Spitfire doesn't look yellow though wouldn't you?

I found and read the Hyperscale article and my first thought was the same as yours, that the underside looks different than the tail. Trouble is, you can see that the exhaust staining goes all the way back, which clouds things a bit and I'd have to conclude that you could go either way.

What I do think though is that none of those three photos looks to me like 74/75, and there is little evidence of mottling, to my eye at least.

Is it fair to say that 74/75 was standard Luftwaffe camo by 1943? If it is, where does the idea of standard Luftwaffe dark green come in? And as a parting thought, I think that it is known/assumed that the yellow underside was a standard tool on captured aircraft and that that is why the profiles etc assume that the Spitfire has the yellow undersides.

If it were me, I'd paint it in 70/71/65 with yellow nose and tail because I think it would look cooler that way <shrugs>

Damned if you do, damned if you don't springs to mind

Jen.

Also, as Col. says, there's no real way of proving it either way, other than from speaking to someone that was there... not much chance of that today... I quite like the idea of blue undersides. One thing makes me think that they were blue. One of the articles states that they were painted blue originally, but when the engine was transplanted, they were then overpainted with yellow. That seems a bit of a waste of effort to me. I can understand them painting the tail because that's usually what's bobbing around in front of you if you're attacking.

I was also sceptical of the mottling, as it just looked like some kind of grain introduced at some point in the picture's life by copying or scanning. It seems too regular. I suspect that I will mottle it though, as it looks good if done properly. Most of it will be covered by soot anyway. I wonder why the airframe suffered so badly with staining? Maybe it was the different airflow sucking the exhaust back towards the skin, as I can't imagine it being a product of a poorly maintained engine, with all those boffins running round it.

[Col.]

On the subject of topside colour-schemes, I'd say it's a single colour without variation based on the various photos, just as with the P-38. I take it you feel the same Jen, or have I misinterpreted you?

The one thing I did notice is just how battered the lower rear fuselage looks on the port side between the codes and the leading edge of the tailplane! What the hell were they doing with the poor thing?