PR Spitfire I type C. Rotol prop?

[Killingholme]

Hi all,

could anyone comment whether this is a rotol propellor on this Spitfire PR.I Type C?

Secondly, does anyone know what colour this spit might have been painted? It was downed in 1940 before PRU blue was standardised. It certainly looks quite light colour. a camotint shade perhaps?

Thirdly, in another picture taken in Germany the aircraft has a bulge that looks for all the world like a Coffman starter. The picture caption labels this K9791. Wouldn't a 'K' series Spitfire would be a MK I, not a MKII? Does anyone know the story there?

I profess to know next to nothing about spitfires (shameful I know), but I have been given enough spare parts from a 1/72 Pavla kit to make a PR1C, and this particular machine interests me asit was displayed in Vienna alongside other war booty. I think I'll enter it in the spitfire groupbuild if I can be certain enough about what I need to convert the airfix kit.

Sorry to ask what are probably elementary questions, but this aircraft seems interesting enough to warrant a model.

Will

[Enzo the Magnificent]

It certainly looks like a Rotol prop.

As for the colour, I think it is probably the Camotint shade that later became known as Sky.

Are the upperwing roundels in the weird mid-wing position?

[Killingholme]

The pictures I am working from are from here; http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/...ffe-3473-4.html

The roundels look to be in the usual positions to me. Is the position of roundels indicative of what colour the airframe was painted? On reflection I have seen Pink PRU spitfires with the aforementioned inboard roundels.

Cheers for the positive ID on the rotol. Maybe when I've got all the bits together for this build there'll be precious little airfix kit left!

Will

[lufbramatt]

it does look like a rotol with the blunt spinner, but i would have thought a laminated wood rotol prop blade would shatter rather than bend? was there a variant of the rotol prop that had metal blades?

Edited March 9, 2011 by lufbramatt

[Test Graham]

I agree that it is a Rotol, but wasn't the bulge for the Coffman starter on the other side of the cowling? The early PR Spitfires were all PR Mk.Ix, regardless of their equivalent fighter mark number whether I, II or V.

Sky is a strong possibility, but other colours such as pink and light grey have been reported - the two are possibly different reports of the same colour.

[The wooksta V2.0]

Cheers for the positive ID on the rotol. Maybe when I've got all the bits together for this build there'll be precious little airfix kit left!

Hang on a few weeks for the new Airfix Mk Ia/IIa. It'll give you the Rotol prop and Coffman starter from the box. Failing that, the 3D Mk II conversion is ideal and inded for both new and old Airfix Ia plus the Tamiya kit.

[Steven Eisenman]

Pink / Pinkish-White....

Edited March 9, 2011 by Steven Eisenman

[Killingholme]

This might be interesting. I dug around in my copy of Shacklady's history of spitfire;

K9791. Air Member for Development and Production- reserve aircraft. Boscombe Down from 5-10-38. Equipment trials from 18-10-38 (cannon mounts, three blade- 2 speed DH airscrew. December 1938 to Martlesham Heath for gun firing trials, DH constant speed prop trials, testing 2x 70gal fuel tanks under wings. Fitted with Merlin XII. Transferred Photographic Development Unit @ Benson (precursor of PRU?) 4-6-1940. Failed to return (missing) 17-08-1940.

So if I understand this correctly, at the time of it's loss, it had a Merlin XII, so was technically converted to MKII standards, but still classed a PR.I?

Sheesh, no wonder people avoid modelling PR spits!

Will

p.s. Wooksta, thanks for the headsup on the imminent airfix Spitfire II. I think I'l living in a cave...

Edited March 9, 2011 by Killingholme

[greatgonzo]

It is Rotol metal blades propeller, seen commomly on MkII Spitfire. The blades differed at the base from those made out of wood.

[The wooksta V2.0]

p.s. Wooksta, thanks for the headsup on the imminent airfix Spitfire II. I think I'l living in a cave...

Alternatively, if you're feeling flush, you could get the AZ Spitfire PRIG, which gives you the prop as standard (plus two spare) and has the Coffman starter moulded on the cowling. It has the PR canopy too.

[Greenshirt]

I've got some decals whose directions indicate both PRU pink and a "blue-grey (PRU blue)" could be applied in 1940.

K9791 was built as a mark I. My refs (not extensive) indicate the earliest PR conversions were N-series Mk I's and all subsequent conversions/production were later serials of various I/II/V airframes until the PR Mk VII/VIII.

My eyes may be playing tricks, but there appears to be the faint outline of "L" just aft of the fuselage roundel (very little contrast). Am I seeing things?

My impression is that German uniforms were a mid-dark grey, about the same intensity as PRU Blue; which is to say the color would/should be either pink or sky. Given how dark the red in the roundel is, my guess, just that, is a pink color would appear darker than sky. So I would consider it camotint (Sky).

Regards,

Tim

[Killingholme]

My eyes may be playing tricks, but there appears to be the faint outline of "L" just aft of the fuselage roundel (very little contrast). Am I seeing things?

Regards,

Tim

Your eyes are pretty sharp! This same aircraft on display in Vienna shows it was wearing 'LY' codes as used by the PDU unit. Books I have read say they were probably medium sea grey which would also go a bit further to indicate we're dealing with a camotint aircraft.

Well spotted!

Will

[ben_m]

These photos from the thread on WW2 aircraft.net (http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/...ffe-3473-4.html) were published in the Ventura Merlin PR Spitfires book. The aircraft is almost certainly K9791, and it was lost during a flight from Heston on 17th August 1940. In June 1940 this aircraft was tested by RAE Farnborough with a rotol prop, see second to last section on this page:http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-I.html.

It does appear to have LV codes, if this aircraft is indeed the same as displayed by the Germans (prop damage seems very similar/same).

As for colour, I think it is too dark for Sky, and not quite right for PRU blue. Definitely not pink, which was only used for armed low-level dicers, and appears almost as white on film. There is another Spitfire's (a PR type B ) photographs in that thread, the first PR Spitfire to be captured, that is thought to be a blue-grey (more blue than grey)- due to its tone as well as the ring around the roundels, hinting that the colour was a shade of blue. I think K9791 was likely to be an experimental grey colour, no evidence for this other than how the colour appears in photographs, and knowing that they were experimenting at this time.

Edited March 9, 2011 by ben_m

[Test Graham]

I think you are being too prescriptive about the use of "pink". I don't think there is confirmation that all such were armed, as low-level PR was required at all times to complement the high-altitude flights.

[ben_m]

Your eyes are pretty sharp! This same aircraft on display in Vienna shows it was wearing 'LY' codes as used by the PDU unit. Books I have read say they were probably medium sea grey which would also go a bit further to indicate we're dealing with a camotint aircraft.

Well spotted!

Will

I don't think you could get Sky to look darker than medium sea grey, even if using a red filter, and the codes appear as a significantly lighter colour in those photos.

I didn't read your earlier post fully before- Can you check your Shacklady's history of spitfire for the PDU being at Benson (not Heston), the PDU had become PRU by the time it left for Benson- I don't remember the date of the top of my head.

[Steven Eisenman]

I'll venture a guess that the picture was taken with a green or blue filter. Early pan film was very sensitive to blues, making them prominent. Camera guides for the period '30's to '40s often advised the use of green or blue filters to reduce the impact of blue. The effect was to lighten blues and greens and make yellow and red a bit darker. Not quite the full effect of ortho film. As the red is not as black as seen in ortho film, but the blues are light (sky, roundel, etc), I would suggest that aircraft may be bluer in colour than it appears to be at first impression.

[ben_m]

I'll venture a guess that the picture was taken with a green or blue filter. Early pan film was very sensitive to blues, making them prominent. Camera guides for the period '30's to '40s often advised the use of green or blue filters to reduce the impact of blue.

If a film is overly sensitive to blue, you would use an orange or red filter to reduce this effect, not a blue filter, as this passes blue light, and makes the already dark yellows and oranges in the image much darker.

I don't think these images were taken with a filter- certainly not a green one, as the trees and grass are quite dark, and would be near white with a green filter.

Edited March 9, 2011 by ben_m

[Steven Eisenman]

If a film is overly sensitive to blue, you would use an orange or red filter to reduce this effect, not a blue filter, as this passes blue light, and makes the already dark yellows and oranges in the image much darker.

I don't think these images were taken with a filter- certainly not a green one, as the trees and grass are quite dark, and would be near white with a green filter.

Wrong. The color filter will hold back the same color as the filter. A red filter will turn red to a near white.

Definitely blue, a light blue filter...

It’s easy to remember what filters do—they lighten their own color and darken their complement. So a red filter lightens reds and pinks while darkening greens and blues, for example. Yellow filters accentuate cloud structure by darkening the blue areas of the sky. Green filters lighten foliage and add ruddiness to reddish skin tones. Darker colors—dark yellow, for instance—produce stronger results than lighter colors. And if you really want to exaggerate the effect of any filter, underexpose the image slightly.

http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/gear/mo...hotography.html

Edited March 9, 2011 by Steven Eisenman

[ben_m]

I think you are being too prescriptive about the use of "pink". I don't think there is confirmation that all such were armed, as low-level PR was required at all times to complement the high-altitude flights.

Not all low-level PR Spitfires were pink, but I do believe all the pink ones were armed, and exclusively used for low-level. I have never seen or heard described a pink unarmed spitfire.

I also think armed PR Spitfires were tested operationally at around this point (August 1940) +/- a month or so, and the first photo or description of a pink PR I Type G is 6-8 months later.

[Dave Fleming]

Looking at that picture in isolation, it's hard to say, but looking at the other 5 pictures in the thread (and assuming it's the same aircraft) then I'd say it's PRU blue (which often shows as quite a light colour in B+W pictures of the time)

[ben_m]

Wrong. The color filter will hold back the same color as the filter. A red filter will turn red to a near white.

What part of what I said was wrong? What do you mean by 'hold back the same colour'? I take it to mean reduce the level of that region of the spectrum, i.e. darkening it. You are using it to mean the opposite.

We obviously agree with what filters do, but I don't think if I was shooting a blue sensitive film I would want to use a blue filter, as this would be making a bad situation worse.

If the film is particularly sensitive to blue, you don't need a blue filter to make blues brighter...

[Fernando]

Hi, all,

According to the Ventura book, it has the Merlin XII, with Rotol metal prop. Code "LY" in MSG, whose low contrast would indicate Camotint Blue-Grey. Also, the fuselage roundel seems to have the outer Yellow ring, which would further indicate this.

Fernando

[The wooksta V2.0]

I'd agree with Dave. It looks too dark for either Pink or Camotint and the uniform of the guy standing near the wing is almost blending in.

Don't forget that PRU Blue has that odd ability to blend in with the background.

[Test Graham]

If you look above, X4944 is described as a pink Mk.IV. It is also listed as a PR Mk.IV, later PR Mk.VI, in Spitfire the History. Mk.IVs were unarmed, having the bowser wing.

Indeed, the picture in STH of the first PR Mk.IG dicer shows it to have retained disruptive camouflage, as is later quoted for the PR Mk.VII as a standard low-level PR camouflage. The link between the pink colour and dicer missions is possible but not exclusive.

[Dave Fleming]

I'd need to go back to 'Above All Unseen' but it does mention the develoment of the low level missions. I've always beens lightly sceptical about 'pink' before late 1940/early 41 and anything earlier seems to be Sky/Camotint (and oyu can see why pink wouold develop as a shade for winter skies)