Spitfire Mk 9

Yes there is a small oleo fixed to the end of the pivoting leg on the fixed tailwheel going down to the base of frame 19(a?).

John

Being more interested in aeroplanes with wooden skids instead of tailwheels, my ignorance will show here. Is there any “give” in the tailwheel structure of a spit – a pivot and spring or some such thing?

I must admit it’s a whole different level of obsession if this is what J-P is actually after

Richard

This seems to be exactly what and why J-P is asking his question – presumably so his model can “stand” correctly even though the scale weight/construction is wrong. I presume you can only get the answer with a Spit IX and a tape measure.

As an advanced sufferer of AMS* myself, I recognise the symptoms

Richard

*Advanced Modeller Syndrome. Do you get worried about how many rudder wires a Sopwith Pup had? I do…

Well as a model designer myself with a particular interest in Spitfires (albeit smaller scales) I am having difficulty with the translation.

Surely if there are no working oleos on the model and the model has been made to high quality drawings (?) then the measurements needed are the u/c angle of rake and an average loaded oleo length at rest. Hence my observation that the legs in the picture look too long to me.

May I suggest a leg rake of 15 deg from the horizontal and a loaded oleo length the distance from the wheel centre to the underside of the wing along the u/c leg in full scale of 39 inches (99cm). The tail wheel centre to the fuselage (vertically above the centre) of a full scale 7 inches (17.5cm).

This would give a typical Spitfire “sit”.

John

I should say the distance is the same on all marks of spit!! Cant tell you now but will find out !!

Steve

AFAIK this isn’t so. The were differences in the length of the undercarriage leg and the angle by which they projected forwards.

Regards

Whilst not an exact measurement and given that the wheelbase distance will vary with the weight

John

From J-P:

Thank you very much for your response, but on a spitfire scale 1/1 the rear wheel backs up leaves the weight of the airplane and the enfoncement of the shock absorber. On my spitfire, there is not shock absorber and the distance is not exact, IT IS for this reason that I ask you the exact distance.

This seems to be exactly what and why J-P is asking his question – presumably so his model can “stand” correctly even though the scale weight/construction is wrong. I presume you can only get the answer with a Spit IX and a tape measure.

As an advanced sufferer of AMS* myself, I recognise the symptoms

Richard

*Advanced Modeller Syndrome. Do you get worried about how many rudder wires a Sopwith Pup had? I do…

Whilst not an exact measurement and given that the wheelbase distance will vary with the weight and between retractable and non retractable tail wheels for Vc and above try 20′ 3″ and 21′ (retractable) However the model in the picture has overly long main and tail oleo legs which will further confuse the issue.
I must admit I’m not sure why you would want such a variable measurement?

John

http://www.pursang-du-ciel.com/

New site address for J-P’s Spitfire

From J-P:

Thank you very much for your response, but on a spitfire scale 1/1 the rear wheel backs up leaves the weight of the airplane and the enfoncement of the shock absorber. On my spitfire, there is not shock absorber and the distance is not exact, IT IS for this reason that I ask you the exact distance.

I was going to measure the PR.XI but then realised the dimension is probably a little different from a Mk.IX due to the retractable tail wheel?

Thanks, I have passed it on

Try this guy…
http://spitfire3d.com/

Thanks Gents – so does anyone have the measurements between the wheelbase front and wheelbase tailplane? I have searched google without a definitive answer. The answer is out there, I just need to right question.

The wheels, on the Vc, were 2″ further forward than earlier Marks; this was a change that had first appeared on the Mk.III, possibly because of the extra length of the fuselage, caused by the Merlin XX. This caused the wheel to foul the upper surface, so the leg was allowed to hang lower, in its well, and the leg/wheel cover was curved to allow for it. The 2″ extra rake was carried on to Marks following the Vc, including the IX.
Edgar

Yes, I’m almost certain this is correct – the wheel wells remain the same but the pintle angles changed (by introducing a wedge). This slight change in geometry is why there are slightly dished U/C leg fairings on the later marks, versus the “flat” ones on the early aircraft.

However, I seem to recall that one or other variant had a slight rake forward of the undercarriage – possibly the Vc or similar. I may be completely wrong on that, though!

I thought that the undercarriage legs swept further forward with the ongoing development of the airframe. Particularly noticeable if you compare an early Merlin Mark with a later Griffon Mark – is this to counter the greater weight up front or change of CoG?

JP says:

Thank you very much for your response, but on a spitfire scale 1/1 the rear wheel backs up leaves the weight of the airplane and the enfoncement of the shock absorber. On my spitfire, there is not shock absorber and the distance is not exact, IT IS for this reason that I ask you the exact distance.

He apologies for the slightly misreading translation.

excellant spitfire, what scale ??

According to JP’s website, it’s 1/3rd scale http://jeanpierre.cousinet.free.fr/.
Anyone gonna buy it?:D

Only the nose lengthened between the different variants (Mk.V-Mk.IX etc), so technically there is no real difference.

However, I seem to recall that one or other variant had a slight rake forward of the undercarriage – possibly the Vc or similar. I may be completely wrong on that, though!

Yep, that video is of Jeans spit, beautiful isn’t she?

Unsure of scale but its something like 200 blades of grass to the inch :dev2:

I have been in contact with Jean for quite some time and usually been able to helkp somewhat. But I did note Mk5 airframe so maybe there is a difference between models.

The craftmanship is superb !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AU_Hd-SXf18