…and what a beauty it was too! The explanation of the copper data plate was fascinating, built in 1938 and from a Hurricane, so we were told by the expert, valued at about £1500, which I thought was a bit on the low side (but what do I know?:rolleyes:)
By: Wyvernfan - 26th September 2012 at 15:02
I fully believe my propeller came from a hurricane which flew from Methwold airfield. At one time I did have papers which identified where the plane had flown too but these are long since lost unfortunately. However, I assume this could be discovered from the numbering on the copper plate?
Isn’t this new member advertising her own item thats listed on ebay?
Rob
By: Wyvernfan - 26th September 2012 at 15:02
I fully believe my propeller came from a hurricane which flew from Methwold airfield. At one time I did have papers which identified where the plane had flown too but these are long since lost unfortunately. However, I assume this could be discovered from the numbering on the copper plate?
Isn’t this new member advertising her own item thats listed on ebay?
Rob
By: anneorac - 26th September 2012 at 12:54
Pete,
Rolls Royce Aero Service Bulletin No 3 Issue 19 dated June 1950 gives all the installations for Merlin and Griffon engines under basic sub types.
No Spitfire in the Merlin Mark No 2 box.
Mark
I think your source may be incorrect. Why? Well my first piece of evidence comes from deHavilland Propellers.
They produced the Air Ministry Type 5/29 bracket type propeller for Spitfires fitted with the Merlin III and the Type 5/30 for Spitfires fitted with the Merlin II.
The second and more substantial evidence comes from Accident Cards. Included in the aircraft details on these are the type of engine fitted to the aircraft and the serial of the engine. During January 1939 the following Spitfires suffered a range of mishaps, K9794, K9799, K9800 & K9822. All are recorded as being fitted with the Merlin II.
Anne
By: anneorac - 26th September 2012 at 12:54
Pete,
Rolls Royce Aero Service Bulletin No 3 Issue 19 dated June 1950 gives all the installations for Merlin and Griffon engines under basic sub types.
No Spitfire in the Merlin Mark No 2 box.
Mark
I think your source may be incorrect. Why? Well my first piece of evidence comes from deHavilland Propellers.
They produced the Air Ministry Type 5/29 bracket type propeller for Spitfires fitted with the Merlin III and the Type 5/30 for Spitfires fitted with the Merlin II.
The second and more substantial evidence comes from Accident Cards. Included in the aircraft details on these are the type of engine fitted to the aircraft and the serial of the engine. During January 1939 the following Spitfires suffered a range of mishaps, K9794, K9799, K9800 & K9822. All are recorded as being fitted with the Merlin II.
Anne
By: Rocketeer - 26th September 2012 at 10:55
Shhhhhhsssssshhhh!!! Don’t tell everyone!!
By: Rocketeer - 26th September 2012 at 10:55
Shhhhhhsssssshhhh!!! Don’t tell everyone!!
By: anneorac - 26th September 2012 at 09:09
I have one from a Gladiator which will be fitted to my Hurricane (one day). The differences are suitably small (unless one reads the plate). if there is interest, I could photo my plate?
Would that not make your Hurricane fly backwards? Merlin = Right handed rotation, Mercury = Left hand.
Anne
By: anneorac - 26th September 2012 at 09:09
I have one from a Gladiator which will be fitted to my Hurricane (one day). The differences are suitably small (unless one reads the plate). if there is interest, I could photo my plate?
Would that not make your Hurricane fly backwards? Merlin = Right handed rotation, Mercury = Left hand.
Anne
By: Jane - 25th September 2012 at 23:11
I fully believe my propeller came from a hurricane which flew from Methwold airfield. At one time I did have papers which identified where the plane had flown too but these are long since lost unfortunately. However, I assume this could be discovered from the numbering on the copper plate?
By: Jane - 25th September 2012 at 23:11
I fully believe my propeller came from a hurricane which flew from Methwold airfield. At one time I did have papers which identified where the plane had flown too but these are long since lost unfortunately. However, I assume this could be discovered from the numbering on the copper plate?
By: Arabella-Cox - 25th September 2012 at 22:48
The main question about all this is whether the propellor was likely from a Hurricane, or from something else.
The dataplate is consistent with a Hurricane MkI.
DAI
By: Arabella-Cox - 25th September 2012 at 22:48
The main question about all this is whether the propellor was likely from a Hurricane, or from something else.
The dataplate is consistent with a Hurricane MkI.
DAI
By: Graham Boak - 25th September 2012 at 22:09
I understood that the Gladiator Watts is smaller in diameter than the one on the Hurricane, because of the lower power.
I’ve seen a (contemporary?) reference to Merlins Mk.I, II and III on the Battle, which I remember because it stated that this made them Battles Mk.I, II and III, which certainly didn’t happen! The significant feature of the Merlin Mk.III was the propshaft, which was common to the DH and the Rotol props. So either could be used without changing the engine.
Whether this implies that the propshaft was also the main difference between the Merlins Mk.I and II I don’t know, but if so it has interesting implications.
By: Graham Boak - 25th September 2012 at 22:09
I understood that the Gladiator Watts is smaller in diameter than the one on the Hurricane, because of the lower power.
I’ve seen a (contemporary?) reference to Merlins Mk.I, II and III on the Battle, which I remember because it stated that this made them Battles Mk.I, II and III, which certainly didn’t happen! The significant feature of the Merlin Mk.III was the propshaft, which was common to the DH and the Rotol props. So either could be used without changing the engine.
Whether this implies that the propshaft was also the main difference between the Merlins Mk.I and II I don’t know, but if so it has interesting implications.
By: Rocketeer - 25th September 2012 at 21:46
The prop is not as nice as my Gladiator Watts that I will be hanging on the Hurri
By: Rocketeer - 25th September 2012 at 21:46
The prop is not as nice as my Gladiator Watts that I will be hanging on the Hurri
By: HP111 - 25th September 2012 at 17:11
A little tale that may be relevant here.
In the late 1940s all sorts of ex-RAF equipment was being sold off as surplus including a stock of two-bladed wooden propellors said to be from Hurricanes. My father bought one. I think he said it cost 7/6d. His plan was to separate the mahogany laminations and use the wood to make furniture. And so the propellor was cut into suitable sections. The delamination process, however, was so much effort that he gave up and some of the remnants including a substantial piece of intact outer blade were consigned to propping up the compost heap. A brass leading edge was buried to serve as an earthing bar for his radio. Years later I retrieved the wooden bits and eventually passed them on to a collector who put them in his garden shed to join various other items.
From what I could gather, the original propellor was approx 11 foot 6 in diameter and was made by Austins in Birmingham. There were wrapround brass leading edges held in place by lots of small brass screws and the hub had a built-up structure to take a spinner. The outer surface was a sort of black rubberised heavy fabric. From what I recall the tip was more rounded than appears in the ebay example, but that example does appear to be damaged.
The main question about all this is whether the propellor was likely from a Hurricane, or from something else.
By: HP111 - 25th September 2012 at 17:11
A little tale that may be relevant here.
In the late 1940s all sorts of ex-RAF equipment was being sold off as surplus including a stock of two-bladed wooden propellors said to be from Hurricanes. My father bought one. I think he said it cost 7/6d. His plan was to separate the mahogany laminations and use the wood to make furniture. And so the propellor was cut into suitable sections. The delamination process, however, was so much effort that he gave up and some of the remnants including a substantial piece of intact outer blade were consigned to propping up the compost heap. A brass leading edge was buried to serve as an earthing bar for his radio. Years later I retrieved the wooden bits and eventually passed them on to a collector who put them in his garden shed to join various other items.
From what I could gather, the original propellor was approx 11 foot 6 in diameter and was made by Austins in Birmingham. There were wrapround brass leading edges held in place by lots of small brass screws and the hub had a built-up structure to take a spinner. The outer surface was a sort of black rubberised heavy fabric. From what I recall the tip was more rounded than appears in the ebay example, but that example does appear to be damaged.
The main question about all this is whether the propellor was likely from a Hurricane, or from something else.
By: Jane - 25th September 2012 at 13:57
By: Jane - 25th September 2012 at 13:57
Sign In
January 16, 2011 at 6:52 pm