Seafire XV questions

[Plastic Hacker]

Hi all,

Just bought the Aviation Workshop On Target Profile 5 for some Seafire inspiration. A couple of questions arising are...

Page 23. SW912 is in a batch supposed to have the later low back fuselage and bubble canopy but is drawn as a high back - Is there photo evidence for this or is the serial wrong?

Page 37. Canadian roundel and fin flash are quoted and drawn as Bright colours but the roundel and fin flash style implies Dull colours??

Just wondered how much is provable and how much is speculation that has or will become fact?

Alan.

[alvin5182]

Alan:

With regard the the Canadian roundels, they were originally in the dull colours (same roundel as FAA a/c) when delivered. Upon repaint and the addition of the RCN roundel (with the maple leaf centre) they were changed to the brighter colors. Thusly it would depend on which particular a/c you were interested in, and, which paint finish/period you wished to model.

Alvin5182

[Col.]

Have the same book and using it for the same purpose on several up-coming projects. While I've not checked any of the references noted having them quoted gives me some faith the authors have at least taken the trouble to research their subject rather than simply printing some pretty pictures.

[Miggers]

Not sure about SW912 supposed to be built as a low-back.

I have heard the rumour about some XV's having cut down rear fuselages and bubble hoods

but I've never seen one.

According to Spitfire Main:

SW912 Seafire XV West GVI RNDA 13-9-45 RDU Culham 19-9-45 802S 12-45 to 2-46

That seems as though she was your common or garden Westland's built XV fitted with a Griffon VI.

First flew 13-9-1945,went to Culham six days later and served with 802 RNAS from December 1945

to February 1946.

[Welkin]

The final batch of Seafire XVs had the same low-back fuselage and bubble hood as the Seafire XVII.

Serial numbers were SW876-879 and SW896-921.

[Plastic Hacker]

As posted by Welkin and my original question, I have that information in 3 books... Warpaint 20, Seafire pages 5/6 - Wings of Fame 16 page 58 - Seafire, The Spitfire that went to Sea (Brown) page 27.

They were the last 30 Seafire XVs built by Westlands.

Alan.

[Andrew Jones]

The final batch of Seafire XVs had the same low-back fuselage and bubble hood as the Seafire XVII.

Serial numbers were SW876-879 and SW896-921.

At least two of these aircraft , SW909 in Canadian service and SW899 as Burmese AF UB420 can be proven from photographic evidence to be high-backed , so it would seem very unlikely that these batches were built with low-backs and bubble hoods.

Andrew

[Miggers]

The final batch of Seafire XVs had the same low-back fuselage and bubble hood as the Seafire XVII.

Serial numbers were SW876-879 and SW896-921.

As posted by Welkin and my original question, I have that information in 3 books... Warpaint 20, Seafire pages 5/6 - Wings of Fame 16 page 58 - Seafire, The Spitfire that went to Sea (Brown) page 27.

They were the last 30 Seafire XVs built by Westlands.

Alan.

Contract numbers/Mod leaflets?

[Welkin]

My information was from 'Spitfire - The Story of a Famous Fighter' by Bruce Robertson.

He has a detailed breakdown of all the production batches, but the book was published 1961; more recent research may indicate differently!

[gingerbob]

Yeah, I'd really like to nail down that "low back XV" idea. My inclination so far is to discount it as a misunderstanding that, by being repeated, has become "fact". I don't even have enough data to propose a theory to explain it, but I also haven't found ANY evidence to support the claim (which doesn't mean there isn't some somewhere, of course...)- statements in books don't count!

The Seafire XV/XVII is a bit of a jumble to untangle- they were built by Westland AND Cunliffe-Owen, and the chronology between the two gets muddled, and there isn't (that I have yet) as good documentation on these as there usually is for Supermarine production.

bob

Edited October 9, 2012 by gingerbob

[Jennings Heilig]

Also note that any RCN aircraft in the two-tone grey camouflage that was painted in Canada (vs. a delivery scheme from the UK) was grey, not Sky. There has been a HUGE amount of misinformation bandied about regarding the RCN camouflage scheme. When I did the RCN Sea Fury article a few years ago I had a great deal of discussion with several really knowledgeable people in the RCN history field, and they can find no use of grey-green Sky in Canada. Only on a/c that were delivered in EDSG/Sky from the UK. The Canadian repaints were all two-tone neutral greys.

[Edgar]

There is a test report, in Kew, for "Seafire F.XV NS.493 (Griffon VI,)" which states:-"Seafire F Mk.XV NS493 which is representative of production Mk.XV aircraft subsequent to about the 100th aircraft.............." The accompanying photos show a bubble canopy airframe, with, curiously, "No navigation lamps on wing tips or rudder," and "Deck landing arrestor hook beneath fuselage," which sounds like an early example (it does have the prototype "P" on the side.)

A test report on NS.487 (with another "P") shows a "normal" high-back airframe.

Edgar

Edited October 10, 2012 by Edgar

[Andrew Jones]

It has been stated that the last 30 Seafire XV's were converted to MK XVII standard. Is it not possible that this means exactly what it says. These aircraft could have been converted to include the improvements of the Mk XVII , ie. undercarriage ,fuel capacity ,equipment ,etc, but retained the high-back of the Seafire XV.

Andrew

[gingerbob]

My idea (well, one of 'em) is close to yours, Andrew, except I imagine them actually becoming XVIIs, rather than XVs by designation (and being low-backs). Here's a distillation of the problem, as I see it:

allocated serials: ordered as Seafire XV, but built as?

chronology: "last 30"- built period? built by Westland? built by Cunliffe Owen? last 30 serials?

designation: the moniker "Seafire XVII" might have appeared relatively late in the game, previously being just [my words] "XV with improvements"

change of plans: "Well, we were going to start building low-back XVs, but the other mods were ready and there was a delay with the hood, so on with the XVII"

There is a test report, in Kew, for "Seafire F.XV NS.493 (Griffon VI,) which states:-"Seafire F Mk.XV NS493 which is representative of production Mk.XV aircraft subsequent to about the 100th aircraft.............." The accompanying photos show a bubble canopy airframe, with, curiously, "No navigation lamps on wing tips or rudder,"...

No lamps IS curious! What's the date of that report? First impression is that the comment "representative of..." is anticipation, rather than accomplished fact (and therefore subject to change). It is clear that the RV mod (low back) was an independent development, at least initially (it was, after all, also going onto the XIV at Supermarine and the IX/XVI at Castle Bromwich), but these other Seafire improvements (long stroke oleo, etc) were also coming along. It just occurred to me that I have some comment somewhere about the first __ Sea XVIIs not incorporating certain features... that could be a clue.

bob

[Edgar]

What's the date of that report?

Tests were carried out 13-21/June/1944, and the report is datestamped (date of receipt, presumably) 8 July 1944.

Edgar

[Miggers]

SW876-879.

Note the bit about "rear view" for 876:

SW876 Seafire XV West GVI Rear view RNDA 31-8-45 787S Westhampnett 6-9-45 SW877 Seafire XV West GVI RNDA 20-8-45 RDU Culham 22-8-45 802S 10-45 to 2-46 SW878 Seafire XV West GVI RNDA 20-8-45 Trincomalee store from 1-46 SW879 Seafire XV West GVI RNDA 3-10-45 RDU Culham 8-10-45 Trincomalee store from 1-46 rep 2-4-49 �2254/0/4d

Edited October 10, 2012 by Miggers

[Test Graham]

Sturtivant's FAA Aircraft 1930-1945 has for SW876 "mainly fitted rear view fuselage from this aircraft onward"

It also has a photo of NS493 with the teardrop canopy, described as "reduced area rear fuselage". It was one of the four Mk.XV prototypes, and is described as being converted by Westland to Mk.XVII prototype at the end of 1945 (post 11.10.45, when it was with VA High Post).