Nicest handling Spitfire?

Bearing in mind that there were no changes to the fin and the two rudders interchange, the prime reason for the pointy tip may just be to maintain the horn balance ahead of the rudder hinge axis to compensate for the broader chord behind the hinge axis.

Mark

…Or it could be that 😀

My log book tells me I was lucky enough to fly MKs 1, IIA, Vb and 9, both single and two seat, during the BofB film. I don’t remember much about the MK1, but know I really liked the IIA and Vb. And, as the BBMF pilots quoted say, the 9 was not quite so pleasant from a pure handling point of view, but much better for serious business. Flying the two seater from the back seat, with only a camera in the front, was interesting, if only because of the acres of aeroplane in front of you, specially on landing.

The IIA was my favourite because it was the last Spit I ever flew, ferrying it from Bovingdon to Coltishall to join the BBMF, via Cranwell for lunch to show the budding Harrier and Phantom pilots what a real aeroplane was like!

Thanks for all the information!!

But who is fastest of the ground: Merlin Spits or heavier and more powerful Griffon Spits?

Speaking to Paul Day and Shinney Simmons at BBMF a few years ago they agreed that the baby Spits were the best handling with the Mk.Vb being prefered over the Mk.IIa, this was because the former had metal ailerons and the elevator horn balance was of later design. They said that the Mk.IX felt heavier and was not as agile. Griffon Spits look sleek but are brutes to fly by comparison.

I imagine weight increase would be negligible – rather less than increases from things like Hispano cannon, two-stage superchargers and so on.

As far as the pointy tip is concerned, from the little cod-aerodynamics I know, this would seem to be to encourage the vortex further up the rudder and try to get it to bleed off the tip instead of further down. low-aspect ratio foils with blunt tips tend to lose some of the effective length of the device and have a larger vortex bleeding energy from the whole. A falcon’s wing is one way of doing this by bringing the tip to a point. An eagle’s wing is another way, with the turbulence bled off bit by bit, but still allowing a broad tip and lots of area for soaring.

Anyway, I imagine the broader chord rudder allows greater area and directional stability/control, while the pointed tip recovers some of the lost efficiency from the extra wetted area.

Bearing in mind that there were no changes to the fin and the two rudders interchange, the prime reason for the pointy tip may just be to maintain the horn balance ahead of the rudder hinge axis to compensate for the broader chord behind the hinge axis.

Mark

Why did they replace the early rudder type with the broad chord rudder type?

It looks to give more drag and problably weight as well?

I imagine weight increase would be negligible – rather less than increases from things like Hispano cannon, two-stage superchargers and so on.

As far as the pointy tip is concerned, from the little cod-aerodynamics I know, this would seem to be to encourage the vortex further up the rudder and try to get it to bleed off the tip instead of further down. low-aspect ratio foils with blunt tips tend to lose some of the effective length of the device and have a larger vortex bleeding energy from the whole. A falcon’s wing is one way of doing this by bringing the tip to a point. An eagle’s wing is another way, with the turbulence bled off bit by bit, but still allowing a broad tip and lots of area for soaring.

Anyway, I imagine the broader chord rudder allows greater area and directional stability/control, while the pointed tip recovers some of the lost efficiency from the extra wetted area.

^^ Good answer! 😀

Why did they replace the early rudder type with the broad chord rudder type?

It looks to give more drag and problably weight as well?

It looks just sooo much sexier:D

Why did they replace the early rudder type with the broad chord rudder type?

It looks to give more drag and problably weight as well?

In my humble opinion, the 1973 Mk IV with the uprated rear susspension was a dream…

However the 2.0 ltr straight 6 otherwise known as the GT6, when mastered was great fun.

:diablo:

mick

Would that be the rotoflex? Personally I think anyone that has flush rivetting will handle the best…

Griffon tail?

Perhaps the later interchangeable pointed ‘Broad chord rudder’?

Mark

Exactly.

from what i’ve heard the mkiiiv was the nicest all round;)

Is there a difference in handling between a Spit IX with a Merlin tail and a Spit IX with Griffon tail?

Griffon tail?

Perhaps the later interchangeable pointed ‘Broad chord rudder’?

Mark

Is there a difference in handling between a Spit IX with a Merlin tail and a Spit IX with Griffon tail?

Arguably the best handling in terms of stick waggling would be the lightest…

In my humble opinion, the 1973 Mk IV with the uprated rear susspension was a dream…

However the 2.0 ltr straight 6 otherwise known as the GT6, when mastered was great fun.

:diablo:

mick

Dunno about flying, but for pushing em around a bit TFC’s former MkIX was a doddle to move. SG & myself pushed it out early one morning when he was off for a Jolly someplace & I carried on singlehandedly while he trotted ahead to open the gate to the live side.

At the other extreme would be be the MkVIII as we had to move that one morning & it took damn near a dozen of us to barely move it. Something about the toe-in on the undercart…:mad:

That would be ML417 and MT719 – I remember you saying that before…. 😉

Dunno about flying, but for pushing em around a bit TFC’s former MkIX was a doddle to move. SG & myself pushed it out early one morning when he was off for a Jolly someplace & I carried on singlehandedly while he trotted ahead to open the gate to the live side.

At the other extreme would be be the MkVIII as we had to move that one morning & it took damn near a dozen of us to barely move it. Something about the toe-in on the undercart…:mad:

A particular favourite of Jeffrey Quill was the prototype DP845, basically a MK V fitted with the short single stage Griffon engine.

The most grunt in the lightest airframe under 10,000′ – the Mk XII.

Mark

Hmm… I thougt later LF V where better at low altitude
Spit V with M50m or M55m had the same amount of power as an IX and alot lighter.

If you get the chance to read Raymond Baxters autobiography then he recounts a meeting he had with Alex Henshaw and Ray Hanna, sadly all no longer with us-

RB preferred the XIV
RH preferred the IX (obviously!)
AH preferred the Vb

Oh to have been a fly on the wall!

TT