BBMF Spitfire MK356 Progress

One of the main reasons that it is painted in bits is you can’t get a whole aircraft into the spray bay at ARCo.

That is often a limiting factor – we came to the same decision with the Yak -but there was a lot of thought before hand as there was no reason to remove the wing other than to get it in to the spray bay (unlike 356 which needs to have the wings off for other reasons).

Painting

One of the main reasons that it is painted in bits is you can’t get a whole aircraft into the spray bay at ARCo.

Very interesting Mark V!

Mark V.

Thank you for your detailed answer.

I know that aircraft are more complex to paint than cars and that was the reason for asking. I now know a little bit more regarding painting aircraft.

Unless you ask – you will never know!

Cheers.

Brian.

Simple version. Is it normal to paint before, during or after a major service?

Hello Brian – well certainly not usually before a service but whether during or after depends on the nature of the work and the type of aircraft, there is no rule as such. In this case any external skin rectification that may have been needed has been carried out and the basic fuselage has been painted, minus engine, cowlings, wings, root fairings etc. There is nothing to stop this being done prior to re-installation of engine, fuel tanks etc, in fact it will help to reduce the overall time the project will take as the critical path will be the re-sparring of the wings (which can only be re-painted when this work is finished). The tail can be painted prior to fitting. The team will need to decide whether or not to paint the wings prior to bolting them on the fuselage (it can and has been done both ways). They are helped a bit by the single colour finish as there will be no tricky camou lines to align and it does look like they are taking advantage of this up to now.

When a Spitfire (or any similar sized warbird) is painted it is nomal practice to remove a lot of the access panels and seal up the openings so that you only get paint on in the right places. If its a flying aircraft these all have to be removed and paint stripped, individually re-painted and then re-fitted. In the cases where an aircraft has been overhauled or re-built a key decision is when you paint it during the work programme. With, for example, AR213 the decision was made to fly the aircraft last year and then paint it this year. The operators were able to carry out the test flying programme without delay and then apply the paint in the winter months prior to the show season – all good sense. With the Kennet Seafire you may recall the decison was made to fully paint the aircraft prior to first flight. To the operator this made sound sense as the test flying programme was to take place near the start of the display season and down time to re-locate the aircraft, remove all the panels etc would have exteneded the overall programme and conflicted with the display season.

Our current project is a Yak-3 and this will be dismantled for painting in a spray booth (fuselage and wings seperately) as this makes sense for the operator to use a facilty available on site, albeit with the added inconvenience of seperating these components. So as you can see there are a lot of factors to consider, not least of which is programme and timing and whether or not the re-paint is being carried out in house.

Eh? – MK356 is having a major – its fuselage has been painted as part of that (as yet incomplete) work.

I know that!

Simple version. Is it normal to paint before, during or after a major service?

The fuselage is clearly not finished as work is still to be carried out, I thought that the exterior paint job would be completed last, (continuity). That all.

Brian.

Is it normal when an aircraft has a new colour scheme to paint before a major refit like MK356, instead of after completion?

Brian.

Eh? – MK356 is having a major – its fuselage has been painted as part of that (as yet incomplete) work.

Talking to Fluffy at Coningsby last September I was told that she was staying clipped winged and the broad chord rudder was staying, the reason is in this configuration the BBMF Mk.IX isn’t as cross wind sensitive than P7 or AB. They may have changed their mind since September, it would be interesting to here from Fluffy or one of his collegues.:)

I would have thought the difference is that the clean stalling speed is quite unlike the approach speed due to undercarriage and flaps etc being deployed.

Is it normal when an aircraft has a new colour scheme to paint before a major refit like MK356, instead of after completion?

Brian.

As I understand it, the increase of the approach speed by 5 m.p.h. is to maintain the same margin to the stalling speed. If the factor 1.3 is correct, the difference in stalling speed should be a little less, maybe 4 m.p.h.

I’m a glider pilot and fly the two seat DG-1000S in two versions:
20 m utility version > stalling speed = 73 k.p.h. (~45 m.p.h.)
18 m aerobatic version > stalling speed = 76 k.p.h. (~47 m.p.h.)
There is no perceivable difference in handling and flying qualities near the stall but the DG-1000S has a comparatively low wing loading. (A comparison of span is a substitute for a comparison of wing area or rather wing loading which would be the more appropriate parameter but I don’t have any data on those to hand.)

I’m aware that I’m comparing apples with oranges but a 2 m increase in span giving a 3 k.p.h. (~2 m.p.h.) decrease in stalling speed for the DG-1000S is an indication that a 20 m.p.h. decrease for the Spitfire is too high.

Christer

I didn’t say they weren’t related, hence ‘…the difference advised for approach may well not be the same difference to the two stalling speeds’ but if the handling is different between versions at low speeds (such as caused by differences in tip or root stall characteristics) then the 1.3 measure is your starting position, and variations brought in to allow for less benign characteristics might be a 10 mph ‘extra’ or so on one version. Just my understanding and opinion of course.

Where’s a Spitfire driver when you need one? 😀

Ahh, but James, stalling speed is very relevant to the approach speed. The optimum approach speed for aircraft (can´t talk about a Spit, ´cause I´ve never flown one!) is 1.3 times the stalling speed! So the approach speed and stall speed are very much related to each other.

On the other hand, 20 mph increase in stalling speed without wingtips seems a bit too much for me! That part of the wing is not generating a awful lot of lift!

I’m not a pilot, but stalling speed isn’t approach speed, unless you want to risk a nasty surprise. There’ll be a margin, and the difference advised for approach may well not be the same difference to the two stalling speeds. The difference is also in handling at lower speeds, IIRC, which I think was more benign with the round (original) tips.

Not that I know much about it!

fitting wingtips makes them more stable on landing & lowers stalling speed by 20mph

I checked the “Pilot’s Notes for Spitfire XIV and XIX” and in the section “Approach and landing” it says

On those aircraft which have clipped wings the speeds above should be increased by 5 m.p.h. (4 knots) I.A.S.

which indicates that the reduction is not 20 mph by fitting the wingtips.

Christer

Makes spits more user friendly .

Wow, a ‘user friendly’ fighter aircraft from half a century ago. 😀

I doubt that the performance difference is of great importance to most Spitfire operators.

Such a shame their sticking wingtips on it when they’ve already got 4 with them fitted.

Hi all, fitting wingtips makes them more stable on landing & lowers stalling speed by 20mph. Makes spits more user friendly .

Steve

and I’ve just bought the hobby master 1/72 model…

with the clipped wings, invasion stripes etc – still, a silver spit will be a change, looks superb, can’t wait to see it.

Nice cant wait to see it in there air flying where it belongs 😎

JAmes

He got the whole thing wrong if you ask me 😎 :p