Vol 2 All the Spitfire questions here

[Tony C]

Thanks, just what I was after

[ilj]

What is the correct name for the broader-bladed metal propellors on Spitfire Vbs and Vcs deployed at Malta in 1942? There seem to be three sorts showing in the contemporary 1942-43 images: a skinny metal one (DeHavilland), a broader bladed metal one (referred to as 'Rotol wide blade metal' by Ultracast) and a triangular wooden one (Rotol, rare there).  I just flipped through Brian Cauchi's Malta spitfire book and did a propellor type count for individual aircraft (ones in which the blade shape clearly visible).  Results:
Rotol wooden propellor 1 (p. 101)
De Havilland narrow blade metal 12 (e.g., p. 93 top)
'wide blade metal Rotol' 48 (e.g., p. 93 bottom, there is confusion about the name of this prop, but its shape is distinctive)

 

Is this (last one^) the 'Hydromatic' prop mentioned by Cauchi?  I though 'hydromatic' was a propellor mechanism not a specific type. What company manufactured it?

 

ilj

[gingerbob]

I thought that this was the Hydromatic, which is a DH (Hamilton Standard) technology.  The way that pitch change is actuated is a bit different compared to the earlier style, though I'd have to do some real brushing up/ learning to understand exactly the distinction.  I knew about Ultracast's label, which I always assumed was a bit of confusion, but the recent posts about the "metal blade Rotol" had me worried that there might be yet another prop type that I had not been aware of.

 

Edit: This is what I had in mind when I said "recent posts"- they were on a Hyperscale discussion: (p.2, post 17 if it doesn't take you straight there)

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/hyperscale/eduard-spitfire-v-sprue-shots-help-t525239-s10.html#p2804180

Edited July 30, 2021 by gingerbob
add link to photos/discussion

[Graham Boak]

There was an early metal blade Rotol, seen on one squadron of Spitfires at Dunkirk, but after that they specialised on wooden, resin impregnated, blades.  I haven't heard of a later metal blade: I don't recall it being mentioned in the Rotol history.

 

The pitch change on the early DH/Hamilton prop was mechanical. but hydraulic on the Hydromatic.  The Hydromatic mechanism allowed a greater pitch change, improving the take-off performance.

[ilj]

Here is the Ultracast propellor they refer to as 'Ultracast 48114 - Supermarine Spitfire Mk V Rotol Metal Wide Blade Prop & Spinner (fits Tamiya & Hasegawa kits)'

 

https://www.ultracast.ca/product-p/ult48114.htm

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftimesofmalta.com%2Farticles%2Fview%2Frevisiting-a-1942-spitfire-crash-in-qormi.867430&psig=AOvVaw0jsDyRy_BlXtpPD1HzvY95&ust=1627731591542000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAgQjRxqFwoTCNj_p_PaivICFQAAAAAdAAAAABAf

 

This is definitely a distinct propellor type that appears in images of most Malta Spitfire Vs in the 1942-43 period - it is broader than the skinny De Havilland type (that also appears in a few images in that time/place.

[ilj]

11 hours ago, gingerbob said:

the recent posts about the "metal blade Rotol" had me worried that there might be yet another prop type that I had not been aware of.

 

Edit: This is what I had in mind when I said "recent posts"- they were on a Hyperscale discussion: (p.2, post 17 if it doesn't take you straight there)

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/hyperscale/eduard-spitfire-v-sprue-shots-help-t525239-s10.html#p2804180

 

yes those posts are mine - there definitely was a second broader bladed metal prop on the go there - I'm asking what the correct name and manufacturer of this propellor is - Ultracast have the shape bang on but refer to it as a wide blade metal Rotol (not to be confused with an earlier metal Rotol associated with a blunt spinner)

[ilj]

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Graham Boak]

The shape appears to be common or very similar to that used by Rotol: what is the evidence that it was metal?  It appears to be the Rotol type of spinner.

[V Line]

3 hours ago, ilj said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

There were two versions of de Havilland airscrews used on the production Spitfire Mk’s I to V both of 10ft 9ins diameter.

 

The original was the ‘bracket’ type with 55409 blades. This was fitted up to June 1942.

 

The second was the later dH hydromatic, fitted to aircraft to be flown to Malta off HMS Furious on 11th August 1942 (Operation Bellows).It seems both VcT and VbT types used this propeller and 455409 blades in the MOT (and of course later in Australia).

 

The ‘garage servicing’ photo usefully shows both types together.

 

There was no ‘Rotol metal wide blade propeller’ in this context. Ultracast have misidentified their product, although it looks to be there or thereabouts in shape.

 

As mentioned above, the first Rotol’s fitted to operational Spitfire Mk I’s were 10ft 9ins diameter using magnesium blades which were carried forward onto the Mk II. Subsequent to that, I do not believe Rotol metal blades were used on the Spitfire until the introduction of the Mk IX or possibly Mk VIII.

[Graham Boak]

The Hydromatic was a different operating mechanism, but did it involve a different propeller blade?  (This is a genuine question not an implied denial.)  I don't think this was a necessary combination, although I can well imagine a need to alter the DH blade to cope better with the higher power engines.

[ilj]

47 minutes ago, V Line said:

There were two versions of de Havilland airscrews used on the production Spitfire Mk’s I to V both of 10ft 9ins diameter.

 

The original was the ‘bracket’ type with 55409 blades. This was fitted up to June 1942.

 

The second was the later dH hydromatic, fitted to aircraft to be flown to Malta off HMS Furious on 11th August 1942 (Operation Bellows).It seems both VcT and VbT types used this propeller and 455409 blades in the MOT (and of course later in Australia).

 

The ‘garage servicing’ photo usefully shows both types together.

 

There was no ‘Rotol metal wide blade propeller’ in this context. Ultracast have misidentified their product, although it looks to be there or thereabouts in shape.

 

As mentioned above, the first Rotol’s fitted to operational Spitfire Mk I’s were 10ft 9ins diameter using magnesium blades which were carried forward onto the Mk II. Subsequent to that, I do not believe Rotol metal blades were used on the Spitfire until the introduction of the Mk IX or possibly Mk VIII.

 

THANKS - you've answered my question.  So, the propellor in question is a DeHavilland manufactured metal item with a wider blade 455409 than their earlier 55409 thinner model.  I suppose Ultracast should consider changing their label to 'DeHavilland wide blade metal hydromatic propellor with 455409 blades'.

 

Hope you don't mind if I quote you over on Hyperscale - plane talking.

 

cheers,

 

ilj

 

 

[Ray_W]

31 minutes ago, V Line said:

he original was the ‘bracket’ type with 55409 blades. This was fitted up to June 1942.

 

The second was the later dH hydromatic, fitted to aircraft to be flown to Malta off HMS Furious on 11th August 1942 (Operation Bellows).It seems both VcT and VbT types used this propeller and 455409 blades in the MOT (and of course later in Australia).

 

There was no ‘Rotol metal wide blade propeller’ in this context.

 

I have always hoped that someone would drag out the drawings for the De Havilland DP55409 and the DP454509 blades and put us out of our misery. Clear primary evidence of the dimensional differences. I agree that Ultracast is labelled incorrectly appearing very similar to the latter DH blade typically fitted to the DH licensed Hydromatic hub.  And, if it was Rotol metal then a rare beast in this application, A Rotol blade on a DH Hydromatic - strange indeed.  For my Australian Vc build I modified the Airfix prop to the wider later DH form. I was happy with the result although some more confidence would come from the primary evidence. 

 

Ray

 

 

[Graham Boak]

There was a regular contributor to the Key Publications Historic Forum who was carrying out a detailed study of the DH propeller profiles.  I'm among those who haven't gone back to it after dramatic changes greatly reduced its readability and usefulness, but it might be worth your while having a look over there and perhaps asking some questions.

[Ray_W]

1 minute ago, Graham Boak said:

but it might be worth your while having a look over there and perhaps asking some questions.

 

Thanks Graham, great idea. There was a nice intro here https://www.key.aero/forum/historic-aviation/3860948-spitfire-v-propellers-and-spinners-trying-to-pin-down-visual-differences started by our @Troy Smith who usually knows some of the contributors who frequent BM. It is one of those subjects that has not been on my agenda recently. However, with the new 1/48 Eduard Vc ordered, it's time to revisit the subject with a heightened level of interest. What's this? August, and I have not built a Spitfire this year. Sacrilege! That will need to be corrected quickly.

 

Ray

[ilj]

Unfortunately, Eduard has not included anything resembling the 'DeHavilland wide blade metal hydromatic propellor with 455409 blades' in their new Spitfire V production - they do include a skinny 55409 prop.  Fortunately, the Ultracast part looks really good for the 455409 to my eye.

 

ilj

[alt-92]

7 minutes ago, ilj said:

'DeHavilland wide blade metal hydromatic propellor with 455409 blades'

That's the sort of product name Microsoft tends to come up with (sorry, IT shoptalk). 

It would probably work on the description blurb, but 'DH wide Mk.V' would make life much easier on stock keepers.

[Ray_W]

While the Ultracast resin looks good for the DH wider prop blades, that spinner does look too blunt for the Hydromatic installation. You can see it in the photos posted earlier in the Malta examples and here in an Australian example.

 

 

You can go crazy on the spinner variants just as easily as the prop blades. There did seem to be at least two versions of pointy spinner. Just check the photo evidence of your subject if these things worry you. It did for me so, I reshaped the spinner and widened the blades on my Airifx Vb->Vc conversion. 

 

It is also worth watching the video showing the fitting of the Hydromatic Airscrew to a Spitfire. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvCmQAetyag 

 

Ray

 

 

[ilj]

^this is noticeable looking at spinners in contemporary images of Malta aircraft 1942-43 - a few show the pointy spinner illustrated above, even more show at least two types of slightly bunter units.

[Tea Taster]

Hi folks, I raised a query on the Rumourmonger forum regarding the 1/48 Eduard Mk.1 - Mk.V Spitfire.

On reflection, not the right place to ask this question, so here goes. 

 

The new Eduard boxing 'Eagles Call' contains newly kitted Mk.Vb and Mk.Vc, and overtrees are available for the Vb labelled as Mk.Vb late.

As well as a new fuselage for the internally armoured windscreen, there is a new lower wing for the Vb (part M3).

The lower wing is different from that released in the IIb kit (part L3), the shape of the cannon fairings has altered, the landing lights have been deleted, and some minor changes to a couple of panels, and a new electrical socket near the cut-out for the carb intake.

 

From trawling through the excellent information contained in the two Spitfire questions forum, I know that the landing lights were deleted in March '43, but what about the change to the shape of the lower cannon fairings?

 

I was rather over enthusiastic with my purchase of the Tally Ho! boxing of Mk.II s, assuming I could build most of them as early Mk.Vb s. Ultimately I can, as no one but me is going to know. The devil is in the detail though, and Eduard have gone to a lot of trouble producing multiple parts for changes in production specs.

 

[PhantomBigStu]

Can anyone confirm my suspicions that I'm on a deadend path. Got a a diecast spitfire IX for modification and repaint but the parts on it are a bit of a unicorn combination.

C Wing with clipped tips 

Pointed rudder 

Late elevators 

Post War wheel bulges 

Cowling Vent 

Guessing my markings options will be slim? Probably will have to remove the bulges, vent or add full span tips in some combination right? 

[Graham Boak]

Fairly standard late production Mk.IX in postwar service (not sure what you mean by cowling vent).  Shouldn't be too difficult to find something interesting.  It really depends what you are looking for.

[PhantomBigStu]

1 hour ago, Graham Boak said:

Fairly standard late production Mk.IX in postwar service (not sure what you mean by cowling vent).  Shouldn't be too difficult to find something interesting.  It really depends what you are looking for.

As per this xvi https://www.google.com/search?q=spitfire+xvi&rlz=1CDGOYI_enGB598GB598&hl=en-GB&prmd=isnxv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwicu8qYvc_yAhWbEMAKHbpRDlUQ_AUoAXoECAMQAQ&biw=414&bih=720#imgrc=I1auk6oukoG0aM encouraging to hear I not going to be limited with options 

Edited August 26, 2021 by PhantomBigStu

[gingerbob]

It is the 'c', rather than 'e' armament that might be difficult.

[PhantomBigStu]

On 8/27/2021 at 2:08 AM, gingerbob said:

It is the 'c', rather than 'e' armament that might be difficult.

Blast….still I shall scour the internet so I don’t have to sand of the nice bulges 

 

edit indeed....hour and half on google and produced only one candidate and a second glance at the cannons and yep e wing....think those bulges will have to go 

Edited August 30, 2021 by PhantomBigStu

[k5054nz]

I know without photographic evidence it's hard to be sure, but when a Spitfire was ferried from a factory to an MU would it wear any unit codes? Or simply the factory finish with serial?

Edited August 31, 2021 by k5054nz