The wings look a tad large in relation to the body and tailfin... that's probably how the real aircraft is too, but it just seems unnatural to me at (at least from this angle). - Dr. X.
I think this picture just achieved a very weird angle and perspective, the wings look fantastic in the other shots. - Wallopy Joe
Tally ho chaps, Bandits at 12 o'clock. See you back in time for tea and crumpets. Last man home is a rotten egg! - magnus_lauglo
It maybe that your not used to seeing a three wide fuselage, which is actually correct at this scale for a Spit, Hurricae, ME109, Zero, etc.
Is that a stack of jumpers with a cheese slope on top? Very clever! - Duq
I think it looks odd because the wings are bricks and looks thick ... it htink it would have looked more realistic if it was all plates. Kind of how the Star Wars Twilight wing was made.... Besides that brilliant work. looks great - Tekjock
Two layers of plates and a layer of tiles for the finish would only be half a plate thinner and you wouldn't have the shape of the wing or the texture at the front edge. - Duq
You are right, I did consider and actually tried plate, but it didn't work. If Lego did 45 degree plates based on 2x2 studs I might have considered it. Spitfire wings are just so thin that at this scale you just have to accept them being too thick
Or sacrifice landing gear. It's always a compromise... - Miord
try looking at my wing, the rest of the landing gear is pretty cheesie but the angle of wing and gear is correct! - Scott S Hansen
Thanks Scott, however, the angle of the wing and gear is correct on my Spitfire. The landing gear struts are actually angled on the spitfire and are not parallel with the wing leading edge, just Google image and you'll see what I mean.
"Never has so much been owed by so many to so few. " abv.
This is a model of a Supermarine Spitfire Mark IX, built at 1:36 scale
for the celebration of 100 years of British flight at the Museum of
Science and Industry in Manchester (UK) on the 27th March 2009.