K5054 question

I should imagine there was an element of ‘salvage every usable bit off it first’, bearing in mind the relatively small number of them in service at that date. I wonder if any bits of K5054 ever saw action…?

Crashed on landing (Farnborough?) on 4 September 1939, overturned and killed pilot.

Scrapped after serving as a mock-up for PRU camera installations.

Melvyn, as always, good advice, so many thanks!

The wings have been built, too, and the bottom skins applied, but I don’t have any photos of these. He supplied what he had for my website.

I think the guy basically doesn’t get the time to work on it as much as he used to. We had a long and lengthy discussion a few weeks back when I mentioned that I had the plans for the Isaacs Spit – he phoned me back twenty minutes later and said if I made him a good enough offer, it was mine!

I plan on it!

This is the plane as it was about six months ago (I think). Continental C-90 fitted.

Make sure you take an engineer with you to see it. You will need to inspect the PFA build book closely. Also check to make sure that it is up to date. You also want to see that the insides have been finished. A lot of damage can happen to plywood if it is not protected from moisture and this is as easy as slapping a couple of coats of varnish on. I once saw a project that was for sale and it was a write off. The insides were put together OK but hd got wet and were mouldy. There were also some dodgy engineering practices in there too.

I really do not want to appear as if I am criticising the chap that is selling this one. I am NOT. I am sure he is a genuine person and a diligent worker, but the point is that you must be sure from inspection and documentation that this is the case, not just take it on trust.

You also need to know why he is not carry on with it. Again, I am sure the reasons are perfectly fine but the project I saw was because the guy found it too difficult. as a result some of the work inside was a little ‘creative’.

Of course I am ‘devil’s advocating’ here but that is necessary sometimes.

If this is as the owner says and you hope (and there is no reason why it won’t be) then you have just saved yourself a lot of work.

Oh, check out that C90 too. If it has not been overhauled properly then the price should reflect it is a core, not an engine.

Good luck Daz. Mail me if you feel you need to.

Melvyn

I plan on it!

This is the plane as it was about six months ago (I think). Continental C-90 fitted.

Thanks for that, guys. I should have remembered the 3-view in Spitfire Story as I have both versions of the book! D’oh! 😮

Melvyn – not started the Spitfire yet, as I’m considering buying a 70%-built Isaacs Spitfire from a bloke in Wales! Debating, however, as it will take money I really don’t have… 🙁

There is some good stuff in the chapter about putting the Spitfire into production that tells you more about the prototype than the prototype chapter!

Be wary of buying a project. Make sure you get it WELL checked out.

Melvyn

Thanks for that, guys. I should have remembered the 3-view in Spitfire Story as I have both versions of the book! D’oh! 😮

Melvyn – not started the Spitfire yet, as I’m considering buying a 70%-built Isaacs Spitfire from a bloke in Wales! Debating, however, as it will take money I really don’t have… 🙁

IIRC, the wheels were only totally enclosed for the first few flights.
Unusually, the extra door was attached to the bottom of the main door, not the wing.

Alfred Price’s Spitfire story has some good stuff on this as well as a three view drawing showing the wing skins. Depending on what scale your model is you should be able to convert one as the differences were mostly internal. The spar was altered so that the web was on the other face and the D-section skins were thicker. The ribs were altered and the skinning changed as Mark12 has said and this allowed a higher VNE. The tail was integral on the prototype and there were other cosmetic changes.

The radiator was also different to begin with (although this may have been changed when the guns were fitted) with the leading edge following the line of the undercarriage door. The wheels were also totally enclosed.

HTH

Melv
PS have you started the 1:1 scale one yet?

So there’s no way on earth simply modifying, say, a Spitfire Mk1 is going to suffice?

Super – marine

The wing skins were certainly different. Lateral panels across the wing like a ‘clinker’ built boat – origins in the marine craft style of construction.

I believe the fin unit was integral with fuselage on the proto.

Mark

I’m not a Spitfire expert…

But K5054 was essentially a handbuilt unarmed prototype ‘one off’, without full military fit. So, I’d guess (an it’s a guess) that the guns, radio, IFF etc were added, but the basic structure was unchanged. This is because (and what a lot of people don’t realise) the Spitfire prototype was completely unsuited to production, let alone mass production. IIRC, Joe Smith’s first job was to redesign the lot so it could be manufactured; so I believe tha 5054’s panel lines and hatches etc will be different to all the other machines that followed.

Cheers