By: Robert Whitton - 10th January 2014 at 20:57
OK I know these are not “Real” or Full size Spitfires but they are 2 seaters. They look a lot narrower than a real one.
By: Sideslip - 9th January 2014 at 18:30
You certainly had me fooled, but then, I’m just a simple soul.
By: Steve T - 9th January 2014 at 16:27
Heh heh, that was fun. Yep, ’tis SL721 (at the 2013 Hamilton airshow), messed-with for a few minutes in Photoshop (at which I’m certainly no expert). Having seen Furies with two seats under an extended canopy, I’d long wondered what a T.16 Spit would look like…more elegant than the Supermarine T.9 (though admittedly the rear seat would be cramped and visibility not that good), and somewhat less curious-looking even than the “Grace T.9”. Wanted to do my version of that too, which would have a slightly-exaggerated bulge to the front hood and a flatter-than-usual rear one for more of a standard Mk.IX profile, but couldn’t quickly locate a suitably-hi-rez Mk.IX profile in my library.
The tacked-on markings BTW reflect “my” Spitfire; the codes are 403 Sqn RCAF but also my nephew’s initials (can’t use my own on an authentic Spit livery…) and I went with SL542 as the serial since that’s a project XVI that’s been in Canada for some time…straining for a bit of plausibility! All in good fun. (Course VWoC did want to introduce a two-seat fighter into their operation…)
Cheers
S.
By: Newforest - 9th January 2014 at 14:13
Looking at the 1976 photo, you can see where the photoshop opportunity came from!
By: ozplane - 9th January 2014 at 12:14
I don’t know but I think as a concept it looks better than the “high rear cockpit” version. Whatever it’s a Spitfire so it can’t be bad.
By: JollyGreenSlugg - 9th January 2014 at 11:01
C’mon, stop trying to put one over on us!
It’s clearly a 1950s Lockheed proposal for a back-dated piston-engined taildragging T-33, for use in the emerging COIN role. The prototype was unsuccessful, but was later purchased by Hamish Mahaddie to stand in for a Spitfire in the Battle of Britain movie. After the filming was complete, this aeroplane was sold in the US, and painted in this faux late-war Spitfire scheme. But its Lockheed lineage is clearly visible.
Hat, coat…
By: Spartabus - 9th January 2014 at 10:40
The shadow of the fuselage doesn’t match up either.
By: G-ORDY - 9th January 2014 at 09:58
Is that SL542?
No, its SL721 with some badly Photo-shopped codes applied and what looks like a Sea Fury two-seat extended canopy … ugh!
My shoulders barely fit in the cockpit of a Spitfire, the fuselage would be far too narrow to accommodate a jump seat for anyone bigger than a child or small adult … one of the reasons why Dick Melton abandoned his two-seat conversion of MV262 back in 1986 🙂
By: Mike J - 9th January 2014 at 08:40
Going slightly OT, what happened to the two-seater Hurricane (Persian?) that was mooted a few years back?
By: Mark V - 9th January 2014 at 08:34
The file name of the photo is ‘T.16 Concept’…….
By: G-ORDY - 9th January 2014 at 08:33
Dick Melton toyed with this idea with a Mk XIV … Thought better of it.
By: DazDaMan - 9th January 2014 at 08:12
The phrase “WTF” springs to mind….
By: Napper Bantock - 9th January 2014 at 07:21
I really hope that’s a concept photo shop effort…………if so………advice to builders should read………noooooooooooo!
By: Sideslip - 9th January 2014 at 05:35
Is that SL542?
Sign In
January 9, 2014 at 4:53 am
