Roobarb,
In regard to post #1030 in the Duxford Diary about Dick Melton/ Charles Church and their Spitfire operations. I have some questions you might be able to answer having been a part of this industry for some time.
I have wondered about the dedication to make these “Super Spitfires”. Was this purely Melton’s ideas being put into fruition, or did Charles Church himself have strong opinions about this?
Has any of the other restoration shops that build Spitfires ever used the same method of incorporating these features at all?
Do you think that (had Charles Church lived on), their way of rebuilding Spitfires would have become the norm in the industry as the 90s and the new millennium dawned?
Did the workforce they had at Micheldever move on to other Spitfire shops in the wake of the Church Spitfire disbandment? And if so, did they influence how Spitfires were rebuilt?
When Church got into this business it seems to me that PPS, Ralph Hull, Craig Charleston and Airframe Assemblies who were on the scene made aircraft for clients, and as such made them to the owners specifications unlike him. When Historic Flying came along they started out rebuilding their Spitfires and then marketing them. That gave HFL the chance to define their rebuilds from day one. Was their intention to keep their aircraft as original as possible while making them pilot friendly?
Puuuuh…. That was a long list!
T J
P.S. If anyone else has got an educated opinion on the subject, please chime in.
By: Bradburger - 22nd October 2017 at 23:32
As Roobarb mentioned in the Duxford thread about PT462 and the use of the short span ailerons, it would seem that Dick Melton favored incorporating modifications that he felt improved, and were best for the Spitfires he was restoring, based on his experiences with them.
(Again, as Roobarb said, and attempt to try and get the very best out of a restored airframe it would seem, from both a build standard and the flying qualities).
Looking at the various CAA Airworthiness Approval Notes (AAN) for the Charles Church Spitfires, he seemed would include modifications that went beyond that particular Mark being restored, so a MKIX for instance would have modifications that were incorporated up to the PR.XIX, or later.
Here is an excerpt from the original AAN for MK.IX PL344/G-IXCC: –
Restoration is LF Marque IX standard using modern materials and incorporating numerous
modifications not previously associated with this marque of aircraft, but incorporated in subsequent
production marques as improvement modifications. All original radio, armament, oxygen, camera
and electrical equipment has been deleted rendering modifications related to this equipment not applicable.
Below is a another section of the AAN which lists the types of modifications incorporated into the rebuild of PL344: –
Mr Melton has raised modification Spitfire DM 043 to define the build standard of Spitfire GIXCC,
to list its equipment and provide a record of the modifications incorporated at restoration.Each of the listed modifications have been evaluated for its effect on the airworthiness of the
aeroplane.Modifications have been introduced in five categories as follows:-
a) To introduce essential modifications and inspections as promulgated by MoD and the RAF
in AP 1565A and E Vol II Part 1, AP 1565 J & L Vol II Part 1 and AP 1565 W Vol II and
various STI’s. (Schedule I and II of DM 043).b) To selectively introduce modifications published in AP 1565 W Vol 2 Part 1 Leaflet Z26
for later marques F14 to F24. (Schedule III of DM 043).c) To incorporate modifications published by the Battle of Britain Flight. (Schedule VII of
DM 043).d) To introduce product improvement modifications generated by Mr R E Melton. (Schedule
VI of DM 043).e) The following Dick Melton Aviation Mods have been introduced DM
032/034/035/038/039/040/041/042/043.In many cases original Supermarine drawings have been used, but a full set has not necessarily
been available and drawings have been introduced by Mr Melton as required.
I’m sure Roobarb will be able to give more info especially regarding PT462 (and PL344!), but as you can see, Dick Melton not only incorporated later modifications from later marks he deemed appropriate or necessary, but also his own which he felt were improvements (a modern and simplified electrical system with an alternator for example).
For those interested, here is the link to the original AAN for PL344 (Issue 2): –
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/AANDocs/22416/22416000000.pdf
And here is the AAN for it when it was rebuilt and certain mods removed by ARC for Tom Blair: –
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/AANDocs/29241/29241000000.pdf
And the AAN for the wing gun bay fuel tank installation: –
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/AANDocs/29241/29241000100.pdf
Cheers
Paul
By: Roobarb - 22nd October 2017 at 22:12
Hi TJ,
I’ll have a think about this. I can certainly say that when HFL started up it was rebuilding Spitfires to a high standard from day 1, but their initial aircraft were very complete unlike today’s projects. The original buyer of TD248 had his aircraft customised to his requirements and all the first aircraft were done for external clients. When HFL changed hands the new owner Karel Bos bought the subsequent projects and had them rebuilt to an in-house standard and then they were placed up for sale. BM597 was the last Spitfire completed (from the initial batch) for an external client, this being the Historic Aircraft Collection. Some later projects since moving to Duxford have been sold and then rebuilt to a contract agreed with the client and this is largely the norm these days. I’ll give this a bit more attention and get back to you.
Sign In
October 22, 2017 at 8:20 pm