ViggenFan Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 I know Quickboost make Spitfire mk.1 DeHaviland propeller and spinner, they also do a mk.V rotol with spinner most commonly used on Vb as I understand it. Many Spitfire mkVc used DeHaviland propeller, were they the same exact type size on mk.I and later mk.Vc and what about the spinner itself was the mk.i same as mk.Vc? I guess the early exhausts I bought will be correct for all mk.I-II and the few mk.V which did not have the firshtail shaped exhausts (Maybe earlier marks rebuilt to Vb or Vc airframes). I will use them for all my AZ model mk.I to V and my Sword Mk.Vc kits. The more I try to learn the less i understand i know about the spitfires and theis specific individual variations. I hope my text makes some sence. /Fredrik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) I'm quite happy that the DH spinner as used on early production Mk.Vb and Vc is the same as that on the Mk.I. I'm not so sure about later aircraft with the Hydromatic system, as the dome for this may have required a longer spinner. Edited May 12, 2016 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 12, 2016 Author Share Posted May 12, 2016 I'm quite happy that the DH spinner as used on early production Mk.Vb and Vc is the same as that on the Mk.I. I'm not so sure about later aircraft with the Hydromatic system, as the dome for this may have required a longer spinner. I agree with you in that, the Rotol Equiped Mk.Vb have a longer more pointy spinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnd Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 I think Graham is referring to the Hydromatic units that were produced by de Havilland under licence from Hamilton Standard. They worked in a different way to the previous designs so may well have different spinner size/shape. Propellers are a dark art (much like printers are to most IT people) and subtle difference in spinner shape are lost on me so I've got nothing more to offer than that, I'm afraid. John. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Yes. All DH props were under Hamilton licence, but the earlier ones used bracket weights as opposed to the pressure dome on the Hydromatics. The Hydromatic was used on the final carrier deliveries to Malta after summer 1942, but not on the earlier ones. I must admit finding it difficult to see the difference in the spinners, but some people are certain it existed. There is also likely to be some difference in the propeller blades, probably a small increase in chord, to cope with the increased power of the Merlin 45, but I don't know exactly what, if any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 12, 2016 Author Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) Graham you put the finger on exactly what I question. The first DH Hydromatics in early mk.I-II and the DH constant speed units used on later Mk.Vc as used on malta. Were the blades skape and diameter and all externally the same? In the different 1/72 scale kits the earlier DH props seem less wider and a bit smaller than the kits with later DH props. What I wonder is if they are infact exactly the same blades and should therefore be the same shapewise on all my DH prop Spitfires? To me there is ofcourse a difference between the DH and the Rotol prop spinners but I very unsure if there is any difference on various DH equiped airframes? Edited May 12, 2016 by ViggenFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 The Hydromatics are the later ones. All Hydromatics are constant-speed, but the bracket ones began production as two-position (variable pitch is the phrase used) and were modified to constant speed just before the Battle of Britain (there'd been arguments over what was thought to be an inflated price). I would not rely upon the kit blade shapes. I was working on the logic that a blade designed for a 1000hp engine would not be ideal for a significantly more powerful one. So if you want to show this, then use kit props with wider blades for your later Spitfires. There are people on Key Publishing's Historic forum that are much better informed about the different DH blades - though of course a different blade number may not imply a noticeably different shape. If you want to take this further I suggest you ask there as well as here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 So I found out that the early DH propellers was called 5/21, then Rotols on some Mk.2 were used, Rotol props on many Mk.Vb and DeHaviland 5/20 propellers on mk.Vc mostly and later. I guess there is some difference as to which factory built them and also what time period it was built and finished. Somewhere it is stated that all Mk.2 were equipped with the Rotol 3bladed prop which had different look at the root than the later. The big question is why can I not clearly see or find photos of any of the Mk.2 kits i have that any was using it in duty on photos? The Spitfire individuals I will build is the following ones: Mk.I late X4131 (Supermarine built) RY-H DeHaviland Prop is my guess Mk.Ib R6776 (Supermarine built) H-QV DeHaviland Prop is my guess Mk.IIa P8387 (Castle Bromwich built) H-PK DeHaviland Prop is my guess Mk.IIb P8385 (Castle Bromwich built) RF-A DeHaviland Prop is my guess Mk.Va W3185 (Supermarine built) D-B DeHaviland Prop is my guess Mk.Vb AB790 (Castle Bromwich built) J-AK Rotol with straight inner edge and pointy longer spinner classic Vb is my guess Mk.Vb LF BL680 (Castle Bromwich built) A USAAF Rotol with straight inner edge and pointy longer spinner classic Vb is my guess Mk.Vb Trop EP706 (Castle Bromwich built) Rotol with straight inner edge and pointy longer spinner classic Vb is my guess (The rest is Vc up to mk 24 and thoose are not tricky with look on spinner or prop) The Key publishing forum has not activated my account for over a week of waiting now. Hope someone can tell me how wrong I am in my research. Sincerely, Fredrik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 If it was Castle Bromwich built then the Rotol is the safer bet, Supermarine builds were generally DH. All Mk.IIs were CB-built, although there were a few Mk.IIs with DH props. The Rotol spinner on the Mk.II had a fuller rounder shape (almost hemispherical) compared to the DH being stubby and almost conical. These Rotol props have a wide chord where they meet the spinner, on both spinners. The DH prop was more slender here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) If it was Castle Bromwich built then the Rotol is the safer bet, Supermarine builds were generally DH. All Mk.IIs were CB-built, although there were a few Mk.IIs with DH props. The Rotol spinner on the Mk.II had a fuller rounder shape (almost hemispherical) compared to the DH being stubby and almost conical. These Rotol props have a wide chord where they meet the spinner, on both spinners. The DH prop was more slender here. Amazing summary Graham thank you. What i meant with the Mk.2 rotols is that the back corner of the blade where it meets the spinner was rounded in backside and it was completely flat there in typical Mk.Vb Rotol blades. If you get what i mean. I think there is some truth in it. So i have to check for photos of the specific Mk.2 individuals i like to build then and see if possible to see the blad or shapes or spinner shape. Edited May 19, 2016 by ViggenFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I'm afraid so, but Rotol would be a pretty safe bet. I hadn't realised that the USAAF had any LF Mk.Vs - I presumed that you simply meant clipped wing - but apparently BL680 was indeed an LF. Live and learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) I'm afraid so, but Rotol would be a pretty safe bet. I hadn't realised that the USAAF had any LF Mk.Vs - I presumed that you simply meant clipped wing - but apparently BL680 was indeed an LF. Live and learn. I started learning about the early spitfired some years ago after buying different kits in Prague and as you say the more you learn the more you find there is blind spots and exception to the rules and sometimes it is not really production but might be field or unit changes or swapping of parts or engine props and such. And you told me more to understand the picture a bit clearer now. Pure luck that I found the american LF the most interresting to build and that you did not look into that specific airframe yourself. Edited May 19, 2016 by ViggenFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 Here is link to photo of the Mk.IIa which prop and spinner is mounted? http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234986582-spitfire-mk-iia-p8387-308squadr-raf-1941-148/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 The front cover has the round Rotol. The photo shows the pointier DH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 The Mk.IIb looks on video to have been a DH proped one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 The view from the rear appears to show the wide root of a Rotol, but the frontal view is clearly a DH. Perhaps it changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 See comparison RF-W and RF-A and note different blades: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3503162217_9d1221bb67_o.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 20, 2016 Author Share Posted May 20, 2016 I assembled one set of eash propeller tonight One Early DeHaviland with spinner, one Rotol Early and one rotol late Mk.V. I should make photos of them together so you can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 During 1940 I would expect Mk.IIs to have the Rotol with a "notch" at the root and the blunt spinner. The later Rotol with long spinner (similar in shape to the 4-blade Merlin one) was introduced sometime in fall or so of 1941 (Mk.Vs). During 1941 (though I'm not sure of the timing) Mk.IIs began to be delivered with DH props, either because of a shortage of Rotols (Mk.II type) or because the Rotol was preferred for the Mk.V, or perhaps a combination of the two. Consequently, virtually every IIb that I've seen actually has a DH prop. It is possible to see Mk.Vs on one squadron with any of the three props! The Hydromatic looked similar to the earlier DH, but may have had a somewhat broader blade. It was specified for Australian Vcs, but I don't know anything else about its usage offhand. bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Aero Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 In the video I think there are photos of two different Spitfires bearing the same name, note the different script. In the second photo it has a DH prop. The reason why the Rotol spinners are always longer and on the earlier props more 'pudding basin' shaped is the Rotol pitch pump housing has a larger diameter more forwards than on the DH units. The Spitfire colour photo on the cover of the Polish book has an early Rotol prop IMO. John Graham I have some U/c legs for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 (edited) John: pm sent Gingerbob. In mid-1942 HMS Furious was being prepared for a trip to the Med, carrying a cargo of Spitfires for Malta. There was some doubt about take-off, until someone mentioned the Hydromatic prop. A trial was carried out with a single aircraft, and all the Spitfires were then fitted with Hydromatics for the delivery. The reason behind this appears to be that the Hydromatic allowed a greater range of prop pitch. It may have had different blades, but you can fit different blades to either the the bracket hub or the Hydromatic hub. (Presumably the roots are not interchangeable between the two.) I would expect there to have been broader blades with the more powerful Merlin 45 engine, but haven't seen any account of this. Certainly many Mk.Vs were built and flown with the DH bracket hub. Edited May 22, 2016 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 22, 2016 Author Share Posted May 22, 2016 In the video I think there are photos of two different Spitfires bearing the same name, note the different script. In the second photo it has a DH prop. The reason why the Rotol spinners are always longer and on the earlier props more 'pudding basin' shaped is the Rotol pitch pump housing has a larger diameter more forwards than on the DH units. The Spitfire colour photo on the cover of the Polish book has an early Rotol prop IMO. John Graham I have some U/c legs for you. I agree with you that the left first plane is indeed an early Rotol rather than a DH licenced Hamilton. First one looks at the blade tip then id the rear edge is bent eliptical and front edge is much less eliptic shaped then it is a Rotol of early type also if the inner part before spinner is not round but has a trailing edge there then it can not ne the DH kind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 22, 2016 Author Share Posted May 22, 2016 Oh I learned to my horror that there is more than 1 type of later (think Mk.V) Rotols! The early ones were metal blades and of bigger diameter! Early metal Rotol: 3,28m diameter Later Jablo Wood Rotol: 3,12m diameter Both used the same longer pointy spinner. I guess of the Mk.Vb i will build it is most likely that AB 790 built in 1941 John A Kents J-AK Mk.Vb could have the bigger rotol. The other 2 rotol Mk.Vb i think had the smaller diameter Rotol prop in Jablo wood. For me in 1/72 i think i solve it like this: Quickboost Rotol with spinner is exactly correct diameter and the spinner looks the most realistic shapewise for all the Rotol Vb I will build. Sword kits have good enough Rotol blades that are almost exactly the metal blades diameter and i mount them on the Quickboost spinnner. For all early DH Mk.I to Mk.Va W3185 "Lord Lloyd I" of Douglas Bader I will use the Quickboost DH spinner and blades. (I assembled and tried the 1/72 Spitfire Mk.II Longrange Pavla kit spinner and Rotol-early blades. After some cleaning they look good just sad i dont know any airframe i love to build that had one mounted this spinner is more fat blunt round than the others) For the late Vc and PR.MkIV Trop I think i will use the sorter pointier sword spinners with the Quickboost blades but I am so far not sure if indeed the Mk.I Dh equiped Spinners were other shape than the Malta era Mk.Vc airframes. I would love to see a drawing and comparison and dimetional check on the real original Spitfire airframes. If I lived in UK it would be not that impossible to gather this info. it is a bit sadf to find that many modelkits and builders and decal instructions fail to put the correct spinner prop and diameter to the specific airframes and periods used that they depict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViggenFan Posted May 25, 2016 Author Share Posted May 25, 2016 To complicate even more I found a Malta spitfire Mk.Vc with wooden rotol prop so no rule without exception! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now