Vol 2 All the Spitfire questions here

[Giorgio N]

5 minutes ago, Meatbox8 said:

Further to the discussion regarding high-back, clipped wing Spitfire XIVs I have a similar question regarding the Spitfire IX, namely were high-back, clipped wing Spitfire IXs ever operated during WW2?  Most picture I have seen of similar are Spitfire XVIs.  All the picks I have of Wartime MkIXs have full span wings.

 

There have been a few in the MTO, where Spitfire XVI don't seem to have been used. One such example is MJ730 of 94 Sqn., that was a IXc.

[Meatbox8]

19 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

 

There have been a few in the MTO, where Spitfire XVI don't seem to have been used. One such example is MJ730 of 94 Sqn., that was a IXc.

Thanks Giorgio.  An aircraft which is, happily, still with us and has had a very full 'life'.  Having said that I have been unable to find a period photo of her with clipped wings.  From her 94 Squadron days there are some screen shots in colour of her from a film by none other than William Wyler but she looks like she has full-span wings.  She later became 32 Squadron's CO's aircraft and was the first to be marked with a question mark, starting the unit's tradition of having a question mark instead of an aircraft recognition letter for the CO.  These are the markings she wears today btw.  Tantalisingly the only period photo I can find of her has the wingtips out of frame but other aircraft from the unit appear to have full-span wing also.  There ARE some pics of 32 Squadron Spitfire IXs with clipped wings but they look, to me at least, suspiciously post-war as they have Type C roundels on the upper wings (unusual for the Med during the War?) none-standard unit codes in white and are adorned with 32's hunting horn.

[Vlad]

The Soviet Union operated the IXe and these are usually depicted with clipped wings in profiles, kits and built models, but I can't find a period photo of one.

[Meatbox8]

19 minutes ago, Vlad said:

The Soviet Union operated the IXe and these are usually depicted with clipped wings in profiles, kits and built models, but I can't find a period photo of one.

Thanks Vlad.  Yes indeed.  There are a couple of photos in Alfred Price's book The Spitfire Story of LF.IXEs in Soviet service with clipped wings,including a line up or aircraft during a staged briefing photo.  Makes sense bearing in mind the low level nature of air combat on the Eastern Front. I'm still searching for pics of wartime RAF Mk.IXs with similar but have so far come up blank.  Whenver I think I've found one it turns out to be a Mk.XVI.

[Meatbox8]

On 7/6/2020 at 10:16 PM, Vlad said:

That MSG + Green high contrast scheme is very smart actually, I like it. I guess the reason I've started this conversation is because what I really want is a Mk XII, but there aren't good kits of those either, so I went looking for another high-back, clipped wing Griffon. I've discovered some nice subjects along the way but hit the same issue with kit availability 🤣

 

On the subject of spinners, what's the rhyme and reason behind their colours? For example, Airfix's new 1/48 FR XIVe shows Prendergast's plane with a yellow spinner, but I've seen this aircraft in other kits and decal sheets with a red spinner (and indeed built my Sword kit with a red spinner). Why do Airfix now think it was yellow and which is correct?

Yes, I like it too and might have to build one accordingly. 

[alt-92]

I was under the impression that most IXe-s were used in PVO (air defence). 
Clipped wings make sense for low-level frontline ops, not so much for PVO ops in the hinterland.

 

[Meatbox8]

1 hour ago, alt-92 said:

I was under the impression that most IXe-s were used in PVO (air defence). 
Clipped wings make sense for low-level frontline ops, not so much for PVO ops in the hinterland.

 

Indeed.  Go figure.  I suppose one could take in to account that the Luftwaffe was largely equipped with medium, tactical bombers rather than high altitude strategic bombers like the USAAF 8th AF.  Plus it may have been seen as more advantageous to have a higher rate of role against any escorting FW190s altough not sucg an issue with the '109.  The LF.MkIX still had a good medium altitude performance even with clipped wings and a great climbing performce at low to medium levels. Presumably the types would have been supplied with both clipped and standard wing fairings. If so the Soviets must have considered clipped as best for their needs.

[Graham Boak]

Sorry, but no.  On these variants the clipped wingtips were of only small relevance.  The clipped wings were introduced on the Mk.Vs to compensate for the Fw190's superior roll rate given the generally inferior performance of the Mk.V.  With its excellent ailerons the FW cold roll and dive away before the Spitfire could do the equivalent roll, and the Mk.V had no chance of catching it.  With the increased power of the Mk.IX this disadvantage was of less importance.   On the Mk.IX and following variants the clipped wings were introduced later to reduce stresses on the wing roots when dive-bombing.  Differences in altitude performance were normally coped with by changes to the supercharger, noted by the prefixes, HF. for higher altitude (rarely used) and LF for lower altitude, but whereas this was a very significant change on the LF Mk.V the LF. Mk.IX (and VIII) saw only a small reduction in performance at height traded off against more power at medium and low altitudes.

 

The pointed wings carried by the pressurised HF Mk.VI and Mk.VII did give a small advantage but when standardised on the Mk.VIII and used in combat at lower level, these also resulted in badly distorted wings due to excessive forces on the wing roots, therefore they were removed on the Mk.VIIIs and (I believe) the UK Mk.VIIs.

 

The C roundels on the upper wing were introduced in Europe and the ME from January 1945.

[Meatbox8]

Sorry, what's the 'no' regarding to?  The Soviets didn't use the MkIX as a ground attack aircraft as far as I know but they definitely did use clipped wing MkIXs so it must have been seen to have some advantage unless, of course, they were delivered with only clipped wings which seems unlikely. Also, beairng in mind that most fighter to fighter combat took place at low to medium altitiudes where the performance differences between the MKIX and Fw190 were less pronounced the same reasoning as for the MkV clipped wings would seem to make sense. 

[Graham Boak]

The Soviets retained the Mk.IXs for interception duties in the PVO rather than in air support over the front, because even the LF variants had superior altitude performance to anything else in their armoury.  Some of them did have clipped wings but this is probably because they were delivered that way, as common in late RAF service, rather than it mattering too much to them.  However my comments were addressed to RAF use.  I would agree that the Fw190 would still be able to initially out-roll a standard wingtip Spitfire Mk.IX, but it would be unable to get away so easily. and would find itself with a Spitfire on its tail when it tried.  When the Mk.IX was introduced the majority of the combat was not at low altitude, the aircraft were operated as high cover for other formations.  It was only later in its career that low-altitude operations would become normal, and complaints of wing failures rose.

 

 

[Meatbox8]

2 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

The Soviets retained the Mk.IXs for interception duties in the PVO rather than in air support over the front, because even the LF variants had superior altitude performance to anything else in their armoury.  Some of them did have clipped wings but this is probably because they were delivered that way, as common in late RAF service, rather than it mattering too much to them.  However my comments were addressed to RAF use.  I would agree that the Fw190 would still be able to initially out-roll a standard wingtip Spitfire Mk.IX, but it would be unable to get away so easily. and would find itself with a Spitfire on its tail when it tried.  When the Mk.IX was introduced the majority of the combat was not at low altitude, the aircraft were operated as high cover for other formations.  It was only later in its career that low-altitude operations would become normal, and complaints of wing failures rose.

 

 

Which brings me back to my original point.  Were MkIXs with clipped wings used by the RAF in either NW Europe or the Med?  I only seem to be able to find photographic evidence of MkXVIs being equipped in this way.

[Meatbox8]

I have just found a picture in Osprey's Spitfire Aces of NW Europe, page 85, which shows LF.IX NH316 of 332 (Norwegian) Squadron with clipped wings although the shot was taken just after the War before the unit returned to Norway.  Interestingly the Spitfire from which the photo is taken has full span wings!

[Graham Boak]

There's not a lot of photos of fighter-bomber Spits in Western Europe, but I recall one of 73 Sq taxying in Italy where at least one of the aircraft has clipped wings.   This was in the old Aircam, but it appears elsewhere.  The 2TAF books would be a good place to start looking.

[alt-92]

2 hours ago, Meatbox8 said:

Were MkIXs with clipped wings used by the RAF in either NW Europe or the Med?

Certainly not in 126 Wing, and I'm guessing not that many in 2TAF in 1944. 
There's a balance to be struck between take-off performance from ALGs while used as fighter-bombers (uh... not really what a Spit is good at by design), and the perceived need for higher roll rates.

As it is, by late 1944 overstressing wings while pulling out of dive-bombing runs was a relatively minor quibble when aircraft could be readily replaced.

In fact, MJ271/G-IRTY only served less than two months with 401 Sqn. before being withdrawn due to exactly that.

[Graham Boak]

It's only a relatively minor quibble as long as the wings stay on, but is hardly good for pilot morale and would also lead to buckled fuselages which meant a complete write-off.  How many missions would be expected for a Spitfire?  More than was actually happening if the unit was regularly employed in dive-bombing, as these units were.   The problem was taken seriously enough to lead to the re-introduction of the clipped wings, especially on the more dedicated f-bs such as the Mk.XVIs.  Presumably the FR Mk.XIVs was also expected to pull more g at low-level too.

[alt-92]

None of the pictures in the book I've here for 126 Wing RCAF show clipped Mk.IXs. 
Ranging from late 1943 to April 1945, all standard wingtips.  

 

[edit]

Nor any reference to demands for such by pilots or staff - which you would expect if it was that much of a deal. Guess they were more bothered by flak.

[alt-92]

anyways, something else:

 

 

Black undersides with white stenciling?

 

 

[Graham Boak]

It's a blue, but looks rather dark for Azure Blue, the likeliest colour.  Perhaps Mediterranean Light Blue?

[Ray_W]

@Vlad @Graham Boak @alt-92 @Meatbox8

 

Hi Guys,

 

I've been following the Mk IX clipped wings discussion with interest and I thought how do you visually tell the difference between a Mk XVI and a Mk IX, particularly when the Mk. IX might be late production with the more bulbous cowling as necessarily fitted to the Mk XVI? For example take this not very clear late war 443 Squadron image. A collection of clipped wing aircraft - IX's or XVI's or a mix.

 

 

 

or this?

 

 

 

Ray

[Graham Boak]

By the serial, and by which squadrons had Mk.XVIs.  A mix would be surprising.

[Work In Progress]

Yes, squadrons were not issued with mixed engine types: you either had Packard aircraft or Rolls Royce aircraft, never both.

[Ray_W]

6 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

By the serial, and by which squadrons had Mk.XVIs.  A mix would be surprising.

Thanks Graham,

 

I have spent a fair amount of time trying to pick visual differences other than that top cowl shape. This interest originally arose from my research on RAAF 451 and 453 Squadron when they were flying Mk. XVI's (high back and low) and trying to see what was external difference, if any, with Mk IX's. If you're working off serial numbers then it makes sense.

 

Just for interest an Aussie Mk. XVI. ADF-Serials say serial number SM348 photo 31 May 1945.

 

 

Ray

[Ray_W]

5 minutes ago, Work In Progress said:

Yes, squadrons were not issued with mixed engine types: you either had Packard aircraft or Rolls Royce aircraft, never both.

Certainly must of been some aircraft logistics going on. RAAF 453 Squadron flying low level fighter bombing operations moving from type Mk IX to XVI high back to Mk XVI low back to XIV in one year. 

 

Thanks for the response. This is clear.

 

Ray

[alt-92]

28 minutes ago, Ray_W said:

 For example take this not very clear late war 443 Squadron image. A collection of clipped wing aircraft - IX's or XVI's or a mix.

\o/

 

 

Very nice grouping  Interesting also the larger C.1 upper wing with yellow ring, compared to

 

28 minutes ago, Ray_W said:

or this?

That one which is overpainted (the older B still showing).

Those all look to be E wings. 

[Ray_W]

4 minutes ago, alt-92 said:

Very nice grouping  Interesting also the larger C.1 upper wing with yellow ring, compared to

Yes I was happy to find this image for another reason. When I was building my Mk XIV the upper wing roundels (Airfix) looked too large. I had no clear upper wing image although from an acute angle you could say yes the roundels are large and with a yellow band. Then I found this image and relaxed. Good enough for Canadian 443, good enough for Australian 453. 

 

The second image of the Polish Squadron would make a great Mk XVI subject - interesting weathering. Yes E wings as expected for a Mk XVI (or is that cowling too flat?). 

 

Ray