so all i can make out the only wrong in olegs cockpit are the addition of the fuel pressure gauge whereas in the photo of the mk1 pit its absent. No evidence of two fuel gauges nor two fuel cock levers. It sound like in your description that you may have been looking at a Pr version. This would explain extra tanks/gauges and fuel cocks for extra range?

o.k ive just found a drawing of an early mk1. fitted with a ring sight not a refelector gunsight. This one DOES have twin fuel cock levers and the addition of the fuel presure gauge. Still no extra fuel contents gauge. Which takes me back to one of my orignial posts that changes made to spitfires where a constant occurance.

Also with the lack of a radio(im going to have to reasearch this more btw) why would they require night landing lamps. early spits in BOB were ground at dusk. (and i will get back to you on this to be sure)

Sorry Andy, forgot I'd posted in this thread...I can't see that there is anything other than the model to consider for most of the things BOBC mentions. And where there's not minor 3d corrections to make, there's only deletions to make, which are even easier! :)

Two tier pedals - extremely minor 3d correction, texture and normal map to add text if necessary
small diameter clock standing proud of inst panel surface - 10 second 3d correction, texturing at a stretch if anything changed about the clock-face.
One fuel gauge - deletion
Only Volts not Volts and amps below it. - deletion
Box type radio port wall. - slightly more involved but still very minor 3d correction
No landing lamp controller - deletion
Bakelite seat and not grey green aluminium. - recolouring, maybe material/shader changes
All black bakelite deep recessed trim wheel. - minor 3d, recolouring
Just...not very much to do now that the vast majority of the work is already done. I just have to point this out because I'm sick of people pulling out their fanboy suits (I'm not putting you at the top end of that category by any means) and shouting "too much work" over 10 second fixes. Especially when they're in areas of the game that people will be constantly exposed to (well, except for the wonder-woman crowd ;) )
It's possible that these are meant the other way around (can't remember, too busy looking at econometrics ergh), but even then, it's not a HUGE amount of work for a model that people are going to spend years looking at, an ammeter, an additional fuel gauge, and a landing lamp controller (two of which obviously don't even desperately need to be visibly functional)

Maybe you're right Grunch. I think I was really aiming my comments more at the general 'fix everything' comments we were getting. The trouble is, there doesn't even seem to be a consensus in this thread about what a BoB Mk 1 Spit instrument panel should look like. It will be a bit difficult to make a case for changes if we can't agree what they should be.

You have my sympathy over the econometrics. Doesn't sound like fun...

As already stated on page 1 the two images I posted there show correct rudder pedals but............

Make changes sure.

But you will never make the right one 100%.

Some one somewhere will tell you its wrong unless you state that the MkI ac modelled in BoB Sow is a particular one including manufacturing number and squadron allocation date.

Then the assigned ac details can be referenced and check as accurate for the sim.

Now that's then generalizing all Spit MKI's in SoW as one particular plane so everyone gets to fly the one referenced ac.

If like me on the other hand, I don't really care, as I know there were differences between MKI's at squadron level, if we have a "general" pit. it covers then most squadron level Spits instead of tying the MkI down to one particular aircraft.

Whatever :)

Before he saw me........

:D haha LOL. If you're telling the truth mate, that is pretty cool.

If I could pull off a good Polish accent I'd try this.

Agreed, it seems to be the problem in the vast majority of arguments of this nature...given the fact that museum aircraft have almost without exception been subject to minor upgrades during and after their periods of front-line service, not to mention compromises made in restorations. Aircraft that still fly are subject to even more of these compromises, of course. Modern radios, no gunsights, new harnesses, etc.

If I hear the words 'multiple regression analysis', 'multicollinearity' or 'heteroscedasticity' ever again after tomorrow afternoon I'm probably going to vomit. :-x

heteroscedasticity? sounds sexual :P

Perhaps you should try plesiomorphy or homoplasy - from cladistics...

Sadly, looking up the meaning of 'heteroscedasticity' reveals that one would have to have very odd tastes to get sexual pleasure from it.

Hi,
quoting myself :-
Hi MD Wild Weasel, The photos on that page you have found cannot be used to indicate what that Mk1 spit looked like during the BoB, it only shows what official and unofficial modifications were carried out since the BoB. That aircraft structurally (frames etc) would show what it had in 1940, but the instrument panel can be removed, and was. Note the later trim wheel, its also received two starter buttons. BoB spits had a single starter button, an aluminium button mounted on an oval plate with the words engine starter vertically chinese style either side. Then this was replaced along with production spits featuring such, with the square mounted bakelite button, still with a spring loaded protective flip up cover. The double type came later after the BoB.
One fuel gauge , the size of the pic, I can see or can I. a vacant hole, certainly a darker spot ?. All BoB spit crashes had two.
One of the pressure gauges is missing.
Its also seen the gunsight changed to a later square glass type.
The cream hose stbd wall is a later mod for oxygen masks, the BoB period had a fitting on the cockpit wall into which the Mk III* brass bayonet coupling on the end of the braided hose was plugged. That hose is for a type E and onwards mask (rubber concertina hose).
Two tier rudder pedals, again a post BoB mod.
Pics of surviving spit Mk1's simply dont portray what they had during the BoB.

You mention a ring and bead gunsight pic with one fuel gauge. Can you post that pic here please.

Do read again what I have said and see my own quote above. All panels referred to are those frozen in time, crashes from the BoB, not PR spits...oh and that fantastic R serialled spit at Brize Norton footage I mentioned, showing what K,L,P and R serialled spits featured in the 'office'. The X panel I studied also had these features.

..eh ?..they did have radios, VHF then UHF by the time the BoB arrived, they could talk to Ops and also to each other. Mitchell put a landing lamp in, the fact that they found night flying dicey came after the design saw it on the production line.


Hendons Mk1 ..likewise the golden rule applies, do not assume that it indicates a cockpit frozen in time from 1940, they had mods done throughout the service life of the aircraft. Again one fuel gauge and a later square glass gunsight, also a missing pressure gauge, they would have had two, a wine/red coloured one and a mustard yellow coloured one.

Someone has been round that cockpit with matt black paint, they have overpainted the oil pressure gauge and the boost gauge bezel as well as the instument panel, and fittings stbd wall. Their approach to restoration in the period when the BoB hall was created is not what it is now. The Ju88 saw someone with a tin of grey paint do the entire cockpit, sticking masking tape over any lettering on black items, so a mix of black and rlm66 is now all grey with text on black backgrounds peeking through !

Larger clock face with different knobs and face artwork.

um...no...addition..needs two.

..again...no...addition.,..needs Volts and amps

um..no... its ok as is . a box type would be wrong!

I think you lost track..it needs a landing lamp controller.

recolour to grey green.


The aluminium trim wheel is somewhat different, see b/w pic in this thread, and that video I refer to.

certainly some were :!:

QUOTE]it's not a HUGE amount of work for a model that people are going to spend years looking at,[/QUOTE]

Glad to see someone thinks its worth a little time on it.

BOBC