Early PR Spitfire Info needed

[Doug 9]

Hi All,

Can anyone tell me when the blown hood with side blisters where introduced as I have found several pictures of the two (Sky Painted) PR Spitfires with the standard hood and front screen. The only real difference is that the radio mast and guns have been removed?

Also the upper wing roundels have been painted in the middle of the wing rather than the the normal position, is this correct?

TIA.

Doug.

[ben_m 277]

Can anyone tell me when the blown hood with side blisters where introduced as I have found several pictures of the two (Sky Painted) PR Spitfires with the standard hood and front screen. The only real difference is that the radio mast and guns have been removed?

Hi Doug. I have early photos of N3071, and they have the side blisters on the canopy hood and armoured windscreen, so I assume N3069 was the same. The second batch which were B type from the beginning (N3071 and N3069 also were adapted to B type), had blisters and wrap-around screens. I would be very interested if you can you post a photo of a camotint aircraft without blisters? The first non-blistered canopy I can find are pressurised PR Mk.X.

There were other internal changes in the A type- hot air ducts to cameras, etc. Also the wing panel lines where the gun access on the top surface were filled. The cameras were accessed from the underside.

Also the upper wing roundels have been painted in the middle of the wing rather than the the normal position, is this correct?

What do you mean by 'correct'? If you see them in a photo, then that's where they were on that aircraft when the photo was taken.

Edited March 12, 2011 by ben_m

[Fernando 172]

There were other internal changes in the A type- hot air ducts to cameras, etc. Also the wing panel lines where the gun access on the top surface were filled. The cameras were accessed from the underside.

Hi, ben,

In the Airrecce site, there is a picture of the opened camera bays in the wings obviously taken from the upper surfaces. Onthe other side, the well known photos of poor K9791 at Vienna shows hanging underwing panels.

I have to think that the cameras were accesible from both upper and under wing panels.

Opinions?

Fernando

[ben_m 277]

Hi, ben,

In the Airrecce site, there is a picture of the opened camera bays in the wings obviously taken from the upper surfaces. Onthe other side, the well known photos of poor K9791 at Vienna shows hanging underwing panels.

I have to think that the cameras were accesible from both upper and under wing panels.

Opinions?

Fernando

Hi Fernado, Last year I emailed you these photos, but I'll post them here for discussion:

The two reasons why I think the cameras were accessed from the underside on the A and B types are:

As seen above, and in the photos of the captured one on display, the lower access panel (used to be to access the .303 ammo location) has had hinges fitted (unless all Spitfires had hinges fitted to these panels?), which suggests that they were going to be used regularly.

Instructions to modellers always suggest filling the with panel lines for the upper machine gun covers. However, I don't remember seeing a good photograph of the upper wings to proving that these lines were filled on the real aircraft.

Anyone else have any ideas or evidence one way or another?

[petr-pb 12]

Hello Ben_m,

Excellent photos are these two, indeed ! Excuse my asking, any chance to post here or via an e-mail some more from the accident ? I really would like to see particularly the one enhanced in this picture. Wing upper surfaces of the early PR Spits have been my nightmare for looong time Can´t sleep without solving this problem...

Many thanks !

Petr

[ben_m 277]

Hello Petr,

Do you have specific interest in PR or PR Spitfires?

Here is the photo (the only other one from this incident that I have):

As you can see, the upper wing roundels match the size and location of the diagram distributed by the PDU for ID purposes:

(Note the diagram's fuselage roundel doesn't match- too small and too far forward.)

The story that is written alongside these photos is:

Richmond's Effort

____

Took off from Lille, got lost & landed where the ground was like a quagmire. Following this incident he was posted to another unit, a BATTLE squadron.

These are taken from Bob Niven's journal/photo album, and these scans were obtained from Dave Lefurgey, Bob Niven's nephew, who is writing a book about him.

I've been trying to get as much information as possible about the early days at Heston. There seems to be some real PR Spitfire experts about on Britmodeller recently (e.g. Wojtek M.), so hopefully we can all pool our knowledge!

[Fernando 172]

Instructions to modellers always suggest filling the with panel lines for the upper machine gun covers. However, I don't remember seeing a good photograph of the upper wings to proving that these lines were filled on the real aircraft.

Anyone else have any ideas or evidence one way or another?

Based on the same pictures you sent to me, the ones in the Ventura book, and the ones in the Airrecce site, I am prone to conclude that the cameras were accesible from both the upper and lower surface of the wing.

The lower wing panel in the Vienna-Kracow parade is undoubtely hinged (it is actually showed hanging -no, they are not present in the normal fighter wing), but the upper wing ones in the Airrecce pictures are open wide and correspond to the central pair of Brownings and their ammo box compartment. Probably -I am guessing here- normal operation was performed from the underside, while the fitting and adjustment of the cameras was done from the upper surface -it involved some moveable wooden lugs, so a lot of fiddling and checking and readjusting was probably on order, difficult operations to make against gravity while looking up!- I understand that a panel which is frequently opened and closed is better hinged, but, on the contrary, ammo refilling and gun servicing hatches in fighters -when on the upper surface of the wing; interestingly the downwards opening outer gun panels in a Fw 190 are hinged- are not hinged but fastened, and those must be some of the more frequently removed panels! Probably there is something about the hinges interfering with the airflow in the upper surface of the wing... Anyway, it goes against filling and sanding the panel lines in that cases; it looks like they were present and were at least openable even after conversion of the wing into a recce one. Neat idea, on the other side, to make use of the bays already existing in the standard wing.

All this, of course, from an armchair researcher who has never seen a Spitfire -of any kind- in the flesh. Ideas?

Fernando

[gingerbob 3,182]

Never seen a Spitfire?!? You've got to do something about that, Fernando.

I agree that the upper hatches were still hatches on the Type A/B. I've got a photo in Eddie Leaf's book (I think) that shows the camera installation through the top hatch (unless, of course, my memory and/or interpretation is completely wrong!)