Jump to content

All The spitfire questions you want to ask here


Recommended Posts

Falcon do a set of Spitfire canopies - some of these are released separately under the Squadron name. Hannants have had stock of both. Other people have done Spitfire canopies in the past including Aeroclub, but that was a while ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, i have one question but i dont know if i should ask here (dont want to bring OT to this thread).

Well anyway, here is the thing. I got the Eduard´s late IX boxing and i was thinking, would it be too hard to make VIII out of the IX kit? Would it need some major cuts to the airframe?

Thanks for any info guys

I've a pair of ICM wingtps suitable for your needs going begging.Yours if you want them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a stupid Spitfire question. It's not strictly modelling related and may be more appropriate to Flypast but here goes!

Some Mk I's and Mk II's were converted to Mk V's were any of those V's then converted to become Mk IX's?

Apologies for possibly being slightly off the modelling topic, although if any were (I kinda doubt it but would like to think that one or two may have evolved thus) it would make an interesting modelling subject!

Regards Mike

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some Mk I's and Mk II's were converted to Mk V's were any of those V's then converted to become Mk IX's?

Not actually built and converted, no.

However, some of the large scale long-term orders originally placed for early marks may have subsequently been amended into orders for newer marks to be built. That sort of thing happened a lot in aircraft production.

Edited by Work In Progress
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks Trevor, brilliant advice, this will be a bit of what if anyway, named after the lady who sent me the gift, but has inspired me to do a 1/48 Spit very soon, after nearly going blind installing the photoetch in this scale? Italeri Mk5 it is, thanks again.

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a spare set of wings from the Airfix Seafire Mk46/47. Can I use the fuselage of an Airfix PR XIX with the Seafire wings to make a Spitfire Mk 21?

Yes, but the devil is in the detail. I think you would need new underwing radiators, gear legs/doors, as well.

this is a review of the Aeroclub Mk21 conversion.

http://acc.kitreview.com/aeroclubk833reviewbg_1.htm

Which may help. You would also need to add a crew access door, and the prop might be a little bit bigger.

you might be able to get some bits from John Adams of Aeroclub, or even ask the Airfix spares department for the bits?

The leftover XIX wing could be used to make a PRXI with a IX fuselage... if you don't want the XIX wing I'll give it a home ;)

HTH

T

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, i have one question but i dont know if i should ask here (dont want to bring OT to this thread).

Well anyway, here is the thing. I got the Eduard´s late IX boxing and i was thinking, would it be too hard to make VIII out of the IX kit? Would it need some major cuts to the airframe?

Thanks for any info guys

The late boxing is a E wing? No, not without changing the cannon bay bulges, which would probably screw up the fine surface detail. Converting a C wing IX would be fairly easy, if you don't want the extended tips fitted to some VIII's, add tailwheel and doors, and retractable tailwheel [spares in the Hsaegawa kit for example], cut down ailerons, add oil tank, probably some other fine details, others will know more!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info guys, guess i ll stick with IX for first eduard kit and plan the conversion for some later build :)

To Alex - you are very kind, but i m not from UK, the postage would cost like the ICM kit itself i guess ;) So no worry, but thanks a lot for offer :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info guys, guess i ll stick with IX for first eduard kit and plan the conversion for some later build :)

To Alex - you are very kind, but i m not from UK, the postage would cost like the ICM kit itself i guess ;) So no worry, but thanks a lot for offer :)

A set of wing tips would just go in a letter, so not much. But, as the ICM kit usually has 3 tips, normal, cropped, extended, there are lots in spares boxes.

The extended tips were not commonly used on the MkVIII anyway, I've seen pics of a few in Italy, but that's about it IIRC, but the tips were only for high altitude use, so were really only used on the VI and VII, and a few Aboukir conversions. A lot of VII's reverted to normal tips around D-Day anyway as high cover wasn't needed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not actually built and converted, no.

However, some of the large scale long-term orders originally placed for early marks may have subsequently been amended into orders for newer marks to be built. That sort of thing happened a lot in aircraft production.

Many thanks for such a prompt answer!

Regards Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mk.VIII was initially built with the extended tips as standard, and it was only with experience that they were removed. So all early Mk.VIIIs will be seen with these, particularly those in desert colours. This was continued at least as late as 81 Sq.'s re-equipment and transfer to India. Dogfighting at low level with Oscars proved them a Bad combination.

The initial Mk.VIIIs were also built with the earlier Merlin 61s and 63s, so were more suitable for higher-altitude operation which is where they were used in the Mediterranean as top cover for the Mk.V squadrons. In this role the increased loading on the wingroots and fuselage would not be so critical, and the problems not arise. Or perhaps more rarely, so could be blamed on individual over-stressing rather than recognised as unavoidable? It's true that not many photos are available of this period, but those that are do show the extended tips on these early aircraft. The majority of Mk.VIIIs were the LF variant with the Merlin 66 and standard tips. There were HF Mk.VIIIs later on with the Merlin 70 (mainly MVxxx serials) but these seem to have all gone to Australia.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some Mk I's and Mk II's were converted to Mk V's were any of those V's then converted to become Mk IX's?

Rolls Royce did convert one Mk.I as an early Merlin 61 testbed, but it wasn't a true Mk.IX. They then converted a couple of Mk.Vcs, which would put them closer to "true" Mk.IX configuration. One of those did, apparently, see operational use later!

I don't remember any I/II to V conversions that went on to be converted to Mk.IX. Some of the first "cannon Mk.I", which saw limited combat in the Battle of Britain, then became the first Mk.Vbs, were still in service over the D-Day beaches, however!

(Note: conversion from I/II to V was less common than we sometimes have the impression of. This is also true of Vc to IX- most of the ones described as "converted from V to IX" are actually airframes completed by Rolls Royce Hucknall using Mk.V cowling panels, but they are NOT converted Mk.V airframes.)

The extended tips were not commonly used on the MkVIII anyway, I've seen pics of a few in Italy...

[Graham slipped in while I was writing this reply.] As a matter of fact, the extended tips were initially standard on the Mk.VIII, which is why you see some in Italy. However, they were dropped in favor of the standard (that is, normal Spitfire) tip in Mk.VIII production, and I suspect most early examples had standard tips fitted somewhere along the way. The HF.VIII that Graham mentions was a special request from Australia, which is why they all went there (and they did not have extended tips).

bob

Edited by gingerbob
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that the 81 Sqn VIIIs that they had in India/Burma had the extended wingtips for a while and then were replaced when it became apparent they caused more problems that they were worth. Alan Peart's book talks about this - I think they were all converted within a few months of them starting to fly the VIII from December 43.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Standard wingtips in lieu of extended type" were not fitted to production aircraft until August 1944, though leaflets, to enable units to carry out their own modifications, were issued during September/October 1943.

Edgar

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it very unlikely that the wingtips weren't changed on production until August '44, but coming up with evidence to the contrary may be difficult. (That would mean all but the last 275, out of about 1650!)

bob

Edited by gingerbob
Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone's interested the latest issue of Aeroplane Monthly (marked 'summer' and with a C-47 on the cover) has the Spitfire V and IX in it's Database thread.

Trevor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but best read in conjunction with other sources. It does have some interesting stuff on the props, but appears confused over the Merlin variants, misses much of the point of the Mk.III and its link to the universal wing (and other changes). It is useful in pointing out that the DH prop's freezing troubles were spotted even early in testing - something which makes the sad Australian experience even sadder - but when in service the 4 cannon option really was NOT the favoured variant. I haven't read the Mk.IX part yet, hopefully it is better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it very unlikely that the wingtips weren't changed on production until August '44, but coming up with evidence to the contrary may be difficult. (That would mean all but the last 275, out of about 1650!)

The L.T.C. were still discussing it in August 1944, and, with leaflets having been issued a year previous, any Command or unit could easily have asked for a change before delivery, and we'll never know.

Edgar

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem unlikely that those classified as LF Mk.VIIIs, with the Merlin 66, would have received the extended tips, but such logic is unreliable. This would mean all aircraft from JF663, which (perhaps not coincidentally) went to India whereas previous aircraft almost entirely went to the Mediterranean. There's no reference in the available books that any pointed-tip Mk.VIII saw service in India, other than those brought from the Mediterranean by 81 Sq. I have a feeling it is said somewhere that a box with a Spitfire in it had both wingtips provided - it is difficult to see Indian MUs having large stocks of standard Spitfire wingtips to replace unwanted pointy ones.

Could the discussion in August 1944 be specifically related to the delivery of the HF Mk.VIIIs to Australia? Although even then it does seem to have literally missed the boat, as the first loading I've found was on the 30th July. (From a quick scan of STH, I may have missed a slightly earlier one.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without a copy of the "Instructions Issued By The Local Technical Committee," (and they're in the hens' teeth category; in all the years of searching, I've only come across about a half dozen,) it's impossible to say, but, with change to standard tips being listed as the same month, it's tempting to assume that was the topic under discussion.

I'd say that separate wingtips were a fairly normal spare, since they were a specifically requested change from the prototype on the first production run, but did the VIII/VII/XIV's tips differ due to the different ailerons (somehow I doubt it.) During Park's tenure, there's a fairly sharp "request" from the Chief Engineering Officer, to pilots on Malta, not to taxi aircraft into blast pens (due to damage incurred to tips and elevators,) but to stop outside, and, if need be, help the crews push them inside.

Edgar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but best read in conjunction with other sources. It does have some interesting stuff on the props, but appears confused over the Merlin variants, misses much of the point of the Mk.III and its link to the universal wing (and other changes). It is useful in pointing out that the DH prop's freezing troubles were spotted even early in testing - something which makes the sad Australian experience even sadder - but when in service the 4 cannon option really was NOT the favoured variant. I haven't read the Mk.IX part yet, hopefully it is better.

It dismisses the V to IX conversions by Supermarine and Rolls Royce as a minor event, but my understanding is that these formed the bulk of early IX deliveries whilst ground up production got going.

Trevor

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen the Aeroplane feature, but my understanding of the matter is that Supermarine supplied Rolls Royce Hucknall with Mk.IX airframe "kits", though the early ones included Mk.V cowling panels that RRH adapted to suit (were Mk.IX panels not being built in sufficient volume, or were they just using up a surplus?) In other words, this was to accelerate delivery of Mk.IXs complete and ready for service, rather than conversion of Mk.V airframes.

bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rolls Royce used the existing V cowlings extended whilst Supermarine employed all-new items. There's an Air Enthusiast article about this somewhere.

Trevor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I know- my point was that I was wondering WHY they did this? If Supermarine could build enough airframe parts to ship some out to Hucknall for completion, and were making Mk.IX type cowl panels for their own aircraft, why did RRH "resort" to using Mk.V panels? (or, why was Supermarine not supplying Mk.IX cowling panels to Hucknall?) Believe me, they weren't taking Mk.Vcs in one door and rolling them as Mk.IXs out the other.

bob

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Julien pinned this topic
  • Julien unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...