[Cruver Collecter]

I picked up my first Gemini Aces Spitfire on eBay for just under $15.00 a couple of weeks back. Well the model, Wing Commander J. E. "Johnnie" Johnson Supermarine Spitfire IX, arrived yesterday and here are some of my observations on the model. I was impressed by the way they did the landing gear mounting on this model, pretty interesting method to use and works great too. The landing gear does seem to be angled just slightly forward a bit too much based on scale drawings, but only slightly. Aircraft markings are great and like that many of the miscellaneous information stencils are on the model (Wing tip steadying trestle markings on lower surface of wing as an example). Model also has wing tip navigation lights which are a superior bit of detailing. Aircraft has nicely detailed/accurate tail wheel and unlike the GA Bf 109Fs, antenna mast is to scale. Cannon barrels on model are also nicely done too as where the engine exhaust stubs. Panel line engraving was also standout feature on this model and adds to its overall good looks. There were a few shortcomings that I found on the model though. The wing tips on the model probably would have looked much better if it had been incorporated into the overall at the overall mold of the main wing. They look a bit fragile and mine even has what appears to be glue marks from when wing tips were attached.(Also a bit of a seam associated with this feature). Wind screen on canopy is another issue, but has been covered in previous discussions (Not as bad as FM razorback P-47 canopy though). Finally the one issue that stood out the most to me and that would be the vertical stabilizer and rudder (Funny thing is that box art has this feature correct.). There vertical stabilizer sits at or about 1/8th of an inch to far back. Overall though when balancing observations out, it makes for a nice looking model and looks pretty good sitting up on the shelf with my other Spitfires. (At under $15.00 a real nice model)

[smartd]

Originally Posted by Cruver Collecter

I picked up my first Gemini Aces Spitfire on eBay for just under $15.00 a couple of weeks back. Well the model, Wing Commander J. E. "Johnnie" Johnson Supermarine Spitfire IX, arrived yesterday and here are some of my observations on the model. I was impressed by the way they did the landing gear mounting on this model, pretty interesting method to use and works great too. The landing gear does seem to be angled just slightly forward a bit too much based on scale drawings, but only slightly. Aircraft markings are great and like that many of the miscellaneous information stencils are on the model (Wing tip steadying trestle markings on lower surface of wing as an example). Model also has wing tip navigation lights which are a superior bit of detailing. Aircraft has nicely detailed/accurate tail wheel and unlike the GA Bf 109Fs, antenna mast is to scale. Cannon barrels on model are also nicely done too as where the engine exhaust stubs. Panel line engraving was also standout feature on this model and adds to its overall good looks. There were a few shortcomings that I found on the model though. The wing tips on the model probably would have looked much better if it had been incorporated into the overall at the overall mold of the main wing. They look a bit fragile and mine even has what appears to be glue marks from when wing tips were attached.(Also a bit of a seam associated with this feature). Wind screen on canopy is another issue, but has been covered in previous discussions (Not as bad as FM razorback P-47 canopy though). Finally the one issue that stood out the most to me and that would be the vertical stabilizer and rudder (Funny thing is that box art has this feature correct.). There vertical stabilizer sits at or about 1/8th of an inch to far back. Overall though when balancing observations out, it makes for a nice looking model and looks pretty good sitting up on the shelf with my other Spitfires. (At under $15.00 a real nice model)

So did you like it CC?

Nice pix, now go get latest Buerling version and compare them for us.

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by smartd

So did you like it CC?

Nice pix, now go get latest Buerling version and compare them for us.

I think it compares well with the other 1/72nd scale Spitfires that I currently have. Rudder issue is a bit of a distractor, but overall it is still a nice looking model. I need to pickup one of the Dragon Spitfires now to see what they look like.

[Shamrock]

The Gemini Spitfires are streets ahead of the Dragons IMHO Cruver. To improve the Johnson aircraft you can with care, remove the 'simian' pilot and replace with a more human figure. Be very careful when holding the aircraft. Do not hold by the wing tips!! I did and was very lucky that damage was miniscule as I was left with the wing tip in my hand.

All we need now is Gemini to do MkVs and some MkI/IIs

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by Shamrock

The Gemini Spitfires are streets ahead of the Dragons IMHO Cruver. To improve the Johnson aircraft you can with care, remove the 'simian' pilot and replace with a more human figure. Be very careful when holding the aircraft. Do not hold by the wing tips!! I did and was very lucky that damage was miniscule as I was left with the wing tip in my hand.

All we need now is Gemini to do MkVs and some MkI/IIs

Just as long as they get the rudder right on any new ones. An 1/8th of in off in 1/72nd scale is just at 9 inches off on the real thing (Getting to close to a foot off). Canopy can be touched up so no problem there. With the exception of the vertical stabilizer/rudder, its a nice looking model.

[Canucklehead]

The green used on the first few Gemini Spits is a bit off as well. It looks more like a USAAF colour than the RAF standard. That didn't stop me or a lot of others from picking them up though.

[hworth18]

CC, Its not that the vertical stabilizer is too far back, but the leading edge doesn't curve as much at the base as on the real thing.. The location is accurate, but the form is off... Not enough to bother me though...
real thing

diecast

[Cruver Collecter]

Yep, correct description would be that the vertical stabilizer fillet is out of position and to far back.

[Cardinal]

Taking 'nit-picking' aka 'rivet-counting' to new and uninspiring heights ...

[hworth18]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

Taking 'nit-picking' aka 'rivet-counting' to new and uninspiring heights ...

It may be, but also a new perspective on something deemed "virtually perfect" by the RAF ifficianatos..
I noticed this long ago, and I never expected Gemini to modify their mold to fix it, but I think we need to be somewhat realistic in what we expect from manufacturers..