Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Sign in to follow this  
greycap

another spitfire question

Recommended Posts

when ,in1943 did the wing walk lines become mirror images.and what were the angles of the gear legs.

cheers.

greycap.

Edited by greycap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1/. With the advent of the pair of radiators, and consequent stronger upper surface covering. Exceptions were the Vs, which were converted to IXs, and which seem to have retained their original markings.

2/. Haven't a clue, sorry.

Edgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the gear leg angle question, which type are you asking about? A/B is different than C.

bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the gear leg angle question, which type are you asking about? A/B is different than C.

bob

all marks,looking from the front and the side.

thanks.

greycap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2012 at 8:54 AM, Edgar said:

1/. With the advent of the pair of radiators, and consequent stronger upper surface covering. Exceptions were the Vs, which were converted to IXs, and which seem to have retained their original markings.

Edgar

 

i-vQ9SZDF-L.jpg

This Mk. IX clearly has the asymmetrical wing walk lines. Based on what can be seen of the codes, it's got to be LH-T (the only other possible first letters being E or Z, neither of which was an RAF squadron code with H), which places it in 350 Sqn. Assuming the information in the database at spitfires.ukf.net is correct, the earliest Mk. IX serial flown by 350 Sqn. was MH428, an LF Mk. IX which first flew in August 1943, well after the Mk. V-to IX conversion production had ended, I believe? If my reading of the data is correct, one would have to conclude that at least some Mk. IXs were still being produced with asymmetrical wing walk lines well into the latter half of 1943.

Edited by Seawinder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting photo. Particularly the code. The Spitfire has an above average 'shiny' finish. I would be pretty sure the code is EH-T the personal Spitfire of W/C E H Thomas. W/C Flying at Biggin Hill. His Spitfire was BR 369

Adjacent to the top of the 'T' some stenciling can be seen. This is the fuselage construction number applied externally on Supermarine built Spitfires only, not CBAF.

So this is very early Mk IX, indeed a Mk V converted to a Mk IX at Vickers High Post.

May I ask 'pnmoss', please, if you could read the construction number stencil with a magnifying glass. It should read 6S-******.

Edited by Mark12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

350 Squadron's codes were "MN."

The only known user of "LH" codes was the Station Flight, Mepal, Cambridgeshire; though there's little information on the aircraft, at least one Spitfire was used.

Following on from Mark 12's item above, BR369 is listed, in a book by Peter Moss, as a V - IX conversion, carried out by Rolls-Royce at Hucknall.

Edgar

Edited by Edgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like "6S417*5" and "C WING or TYPE" beneath it.

It also shows what we've been telling the masses,you can only see Spit panel lines when

you're up close(the wing is very smooth being filled and primed,gun access panels don't

stand out that much either).

It's also fitted with the earlier style IFF,there's a pot on the roundel(as Mark say's,a V conversion).

The cowling cover bungee runs right down the fuselage side and hooks under the

backend of the gullwing fairing(not rags stuffed in a gap).

Also look at the wing panels and aileron beside the rubber mat on the wing,

some ripples and dents in the skin by the look of it(a touch of 'Erk big foot?)

Edited by Miggers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like "6S417*5" and "C WING or TYPE" beneath it.

I would have anticipated 6S-1*****, so possibly 6S-1417*5.

It needs the glass on the original.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting photo. Particularly the code. The Spitfire has an above average 'shiny' finish. I would be pretty sure the code is EH-T the personal Spitfire of W/C E H Thomas. W/C Flying at Biggin Hill. His Spitfire was BR 369

Adjacent to the top of the 'T' some stenciling can be seen. This is the fuselage construction number applied externally on Supermarine built Spitfires only, not CBAF.

So this is very early Mk IX, indeed a Mk V converted to a Mk IX at Vickers High Post.

May I ask 'pnmoss', please, if you could read the construction number stencil with a magnifying glass. It should read 6S-******.

You may ask, but unfortunately I only have the photo in digital format -- can't remember where on the net I found it. In any case, I stand corrected for my apparently faulty research. I will say I looked on http://p.v.free.fr/l_for_love/raf_codes.htm, which didn't show EH as a code used in WW2.

Pip Moss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting photo... The Spitfire has an above average 'shiny' finish...

I'd say that was because the aircraft is wet from heavy rain. Look at the ground and support equipment in the photo, everything has just been soaked during a heavy shower, most likely a standard finish with a layer of water sticking to it.

Also I notice the Spitfire behind our subject looks like an early IX but carries a different, two letter, code ahead of the roundel - EX or FX perhaps? Will this assist in narrowing down squadron, time or location?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be "FY," which would be 611 Squadron, who had Spitfire IXs from July 1942, and were based at Biggin hill from September 1942 to July 1943.

The cover, over the engine, is for a heater, to warm the engine, so the shiny finish could be melted frost, or the residue of autumn/winter fog, which can plague Biggin Hill; with close inspection, there is the hint of a bulge, under the engine cover, which could be the "carbuncle," associated with some IX conversions, too.

Edgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That 'rain' looks very crisp and even..and on the vertical and overhung surfaces.

And note the damp concrete under the wing, which if rain should have been protected.

I suspect more likely the Wingco's special Spitfire with a waxed and polished finish.

Edited by Mark12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that was because the aircraft is wet from heavy rain.

There is a whole series of photos taken at the same time as this one, and in many of them you can see the puddles on the ground. I suspect it had just stopped raining, or in fact it may still have been raining when the photos were taken. I know that's difficult to imagine, the photos being taken in the UK and all, but I'm told by a fairly reliable source that it does in fact rain on rare occasions in the fair British Isles. It's always been severely sunny and pleasant when I've been there :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was actually raining when that photo was taken wouldn't the canopy be closed? I really dont know what RAF practice was,but as an ex motorcyclist I can still remember the unpleasant sensation of a wet bottom :)

It does look a bit damp and I'd say it certainly has been raining.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...