TA805 gets some air time (Duxford Fri 24th Feb)

That looks like the previous engine. Could be wrong but I thought the current engine was black.

The 500 is a XX series is it not ,i.e 500/20 I did have a photo of the Grace spit from last year with the engine cowling off; thats definately a XX series blower in there. Maybe MH434 did have a 70 series engine originally ;I might have presumed in my ignorance it was a 25 from a Mossie ,but maybe they had 70 series engines as well. Anyway I’m really glad I waded into this discussion without first checking every mk IX personally, maybe what I should have said was that in my experience the only engines I have been offered were all XX series ,and I thought that might be the norm.

Hi SG…..

here’s ML407 with a good veiw of the charger,

Acknowledgements for photo to ML407 website.

The 500 is a XX series is it not ,i.e 500/20 I did have a photo of the Grace spit from last year with the engine cowling off; thats definately a XX series blower in there. Maybe MH434 did have a 70 series engine originally ;I might have presumed in my ignorance it was a 25 from a Mossie ,but maybe they had 70 series engines as well. Anyway I’m really glad I waded into this discussion without first checking every mk IX personally, maybe what I should have said was that in my experience the only engines I have been offered were all XX series ,and I thought that might be the norm.

What I meant was that in this day and age many spits are running a XX series

These would be in a minority these days. I believe the Grace Spitfire now runs a Merlin 500 and the latest UK Mk IX restorations have gone for the original Merlin 66.

MH434 apparently had a Merlin (76?) from a Mosquito before her overhaul by ARCo in the mid-90s, or so I’m led to believe, anyway.

What I meant was that in this day and age many spits are running a XX series ; the BBMF’s mkIX, the Grace spit, (MH434 used to have one installed) there are probably others; the advantage is the huge amount of spares ,some of which are new, I believe that the XX series has the same prop reduction ratio as the early 60 series although whether that makes a huge difference I don’t know.

possibly one reason for the proliferation of mkIX rebuilds is the availability of engines ; probably the most numerous of engines is the XX series, fitted to Lancs, Mossies, Hurris and a few post war prop liners ,even in this age of consecutively numbered rivets there still a few Spits flying with the XX series (which doesn’t fit the earlier mk A/C)

Surely you must mean the 60’s/70’s series(two speed, two stage supercharger) which powered the MKVIII’S & IX’s & PRXI? :confused:

The twenty series (two speed, single stage)was never used in any production Spitfires although I can think of an airworthy MkIX that is fitted with one. 😉

The MKI-V were powered by single speed, single stage Merlins and only a few have the correct series of Merlin fitted like the Shuttleworth MKV, AR501 & the TFC example EP120. BBMF use the later Merlin 35 on their ‘Baby’ Spits as does HAC on BM597, & I understand HFL soon to fly MKV JG891 is fitted with one.

Anyway, nice pics.

Thanks for posting them Darren. 🙂

Cheers

Paul

possibly one reason for the proliferation of mkIX rebuilds is the availability of engines ; probably the most numerous of engines is the XX series, fitted to Lancs, Mossies, Hurris and a few post war prop liners ,even in this age of consecutively numbered rivets there still a few Spits flying with the XX series (which doesn’t fit the earlier mk A/C)

Thanks for that one, JBS. Taken the day after my birthday, too! :rolleyes:

I think JBS can treat us to an image

Ask and yee shall receive

Taken 22/11/2005

She was “strung up” about 4 weeks before my visit

Daz- Buggs ironed out before entering service is nothing to do with the overall flying characteristics of a type. Simply put again the later marks of Spitfire i.e F.21 were not as nice to fly at the earlier lighter examples.

Fair point, but you could say that about the other later Spits, too. Doesn’t stop people restoring them and flying them. I’m pretty sure that I’d like to have a MkXVIII or XIX if one was available (and if I had the money).

As for the F.21’s handling problems (Spitfire – The History):

The rudder over-control was cured by removing the balance action of the rudder trim tab. The elevator over-control was cured by reducing the gearing to the elevator trim tab by half and by fitting metal-covered elevators with rounded-off horn balances of slightly reduced area.

These modifications were incorporated on aircraft LA215, which then showed an immediate improvement during the second series of Air Fighting Development Unit trials in March 1945. The report on the trials stated:

The critical trimming characteristics reported on the production Spitfire 21 have been largely eliminated by the modifications carried out to this aircraft. Its handling qualities have benefitted to a corresponding extent and it is now considered suitable for both instrument flying and low flying.

Where will TA805 be based? (sorry if this question has already been asked)

Daz- Buggs ironed out before entering service is nothing to do with the overall flying characteristics of a type. Simply put again the later marks of Spitfire i.e F.21 were not as nice to fly at the earlier lighter examples. As for
potential flyers – surely LA226 stands a better than most chance of flying again with someone.

Destined?

It has been ‘strung’ for some time.

Finger on the pulse of things Spitfire in Scotland? 🙂

I think JBS can treat us to an image.

Mark

Not quite. Last I’d heard it was “awaiting stringing” :rolleyes:

Besides, there are only three Mk21s around, and none of them currently available for flying rebuilds (especially as one is destined to be strung from the ceiling in a museum in Glasgow….)

Destined?

It has been ‘strung’ for some time.

Finger on the pulse of things Spitfire in Scotland? 🙂

I think JBS can treat us to an image.

Mark

Daz – The Spitfire F.21 was developed a long way from the MK.IX . Examine the numbers of each mark being rebuilt to fly and it very much tells a story apart from the obvious rarity of later marks. The Griffon to power the F.21 isn’t that plentiful either.

So what, exactly, does this have to do with your original comment about the F.21 not being as forgiving a machine as early Spitfires? The F.21 had most of the bugs ironed out before being issued to a squadron, which is what I pointed out.

Besides, there are only three Mk21s around, and none of them currently available for flying rebuilds (especially as one is destined to be strung from the ceiling in a museum in Glasgow….)

It is another Spit in its rightful place, flying. Well done guys.

Aren’t TFC restoring their Spitfire F.22 at the moment, or is it in the queue?

there are far too many Mk IX’s around at the moment

Really – can you back that with statistics? I would suggest that it may have once been the case but the airworthy Spitfire population is now rather more diverse.

In the UK the single seat Mk IX is no more numerous than the Mk V in terms of airworthy aircraft. In fact if you count the V’s:EP120, BM597, AB910, AR501 (although under maintenance this year) you will find there are fewer single seat IX’s, including this latest restoration.

It was so cold, I didn’t wait for him to come back![/QUOTE]
You should have gone for some lunch and returned. You missed the whole display routine! You did indeed look freezing, Full auto-stab on that Hubble-lens thing you were using to take out the shivers? Mind you it was an hour before he came back so you would’ve either been blue or out of pocket courtesy of the DX restaurant! 🙂
Nicely researched paint scheme 😉