Daily Mail and The Battle

The comments on the similarity of tail shapes remind me of something I read years ago in an aeromodelling magazine. “Many aircraft manufacturers ‘sign’ their products with the fin profile. Examples are De Haviland and Bristol.” Why that has stuck in my mind I don’t know, but it does seem to be true.

Hilarious 😀

Damn it! You think you are headed for glory, a Daily Mail photographer is on hand and he doesn’t even snap the flight just out of sight to the rear where I was flying

Yours despondently,

WZ862

Much like the ‘corporate’ noses on today’s cars. (Autos)

Moggy

So all DH’s look like Spitfires…?

Many, many years ago, while looking at a Dove (a rarity even at that time) a friend…a commercial pilot (and highly decorated Vietnam war helicopter pilot) with a vast knowledge of historic aviation…commented it looked like a Mosquito with a nose gear.
I didn’t see it until he pointed out the tail shape and said all DH’s are similar. A few months later, I bought the DH Putnam book, and the author made the same observation when he commented on the tail shape of the Moths carried over to the Vampire.

I could half understand the mistake if the aircraft were camouflaged although the tail fin is quite similar to a Spitfires.

I guess it makes more sense to call them Spitmunks instead of Chipfires…. otherwise it could be bought down by a damp tea towel.

:very_drunk: ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Loads of air cadets have as well 🙂

Wow !, I can now tell friends I have flown in a WWII fighter ….:very_drunk:

I wondered about the handling and here is an answer from Andy Sephton “From personal experience, there are similarities between the Spitfire and the Chipmunk, but it’s mainly emotional in that both are an absolute delight to fly. In practice, the Spitfire control harmonisation is not as good as the Chipmunk, it’s light in pitch and heavy on the ailerons. The Spitfire also suffers from pitch up at higher angles of attack, which the Chipmunk doesn’t. The Spitfire has more power with a relatively smaller fin/rudder so the torque and gyroscopic effects are more pronounced. It also has lot more inertia than the Chipmunk which can effect certain handling. “

The name is Munk, Malcolm Munk.

‘munk with Malcolm hood!!

I quite like this one…..

[ATTACH=CONFIG]256811[/ATTACH]

The Army Air Corps did paint a couple of Chipmunks in camouflage, unofficially christened Spitmunks and operated them from a Battle of Britain airfield.

Well it is the Faily Dail , i guess someone forgot to tell them these super duper secret chipmunks were fired off rockets and catapulted to 40,000 feet 🙂

And to think people regard the Hurricane as the silent champion of the battle. The Chipmunks contribution has never been told.

The DM is still miffed that their side lost WWII 😉

Broomsticks work for Harry Potter!

Thank got Brittain had Chipmunks! How else to stop the waves of Bf 108’s!!

I’d worry less about “Hollywood” and more about the guys who replaced Merlin crankshaft with broomsticks.

Achtung Chipmunk !