December 18, 2012 at 2:27 pm
As is well known, various low back Spitfires ( XVI’s ) were modified with ‘false’ backs to form the ‘Mark Addie’.
This was achieved with timber decking and fabric, and of course looked quite convincing. My question is was the modification fit for flight, or static use only?
By: Seafuryfan - 19th December 2012 at 07:01
And you won’t get it, unless you want to pay a hefty sum or chance find it a car boot…
By: mackerel - 18th December 2012 at 22:14
Thanks daz, I havent got that book.
Steve”P”
By: DazDaMan - 18th December 2012 at 22:08
Robert Rudhall’s book lists:
RW382
SL574
TE311
TE356
TE384
TE476
(Would TE308 count since, technically, it was a low-back before conversion to Type 509?? :diablo: )
By: mackerel - 18th December 2012 at 21:47
Does anybody know which low back airframes were used.
Steve”P”
By: Mark12 - 18th December 2012 at 19:56
Not fit for flight but actually made of aluminiun.
Mark

By: DazDaMan - 18th December 2012 at 18:47
Indeed.
I believe that, if you look closely at the aircraft in the film, the non-flyers can be identified by a lack of rudder trim tabs (although I could be wrong on that).
By: Propstrike - 18th December 2012 at 18:24
Thanks for the feedback.
So we concur, do we, no flyers ?
By: DazDaMan - 18th December 2012 at 18:01
TE311 being one such aircraft – a good photo of it in the make-up department was in Robert Rudhall’s Battle of Britain film book.
By: Robert Whitton - 18th December 2012 at 14:57
My question is was the modification fit for flight, or static use only?
Static and taxiing. Never seen any photos of them under alteration so don’t know how the additions were actually attached.