January 9, 2005 at 12:54 am
What a great site! Amazing pictures, lovely mis-captioning (how many errors can you call?) and the individual images won’t load.
What a tempting closed sweetshop.
http://www.tuaf.mil.tr/public/fotograflar/albumanasayfa_e.asp?bastar=1924&bittar=1950
By: HP57 - 10th January 2005 at 15:49
I didn’t mean the number of cannon, but the wing design.
Voytech,
Thanks for putting me in place in such a polite way :p
Over to the experts again. 😎
Cees
By: Swiss Mustangs - 10th January 2005 at 14:19
okay – another one in the same serial range –
Martin
By: Mark12 - 10th January 2005 at 14:16
VoyTech, Martin,
Referring to ‘Spitfire International’.
JK664 was a F.Vc Trop
All the F.Vb Trop aircraft listed to Turkey are in the serial ranges EP x1 and ER x8.
Blown up, the pixallation is heavy. It that isn’t a ‘K’, I would suggest an ‘R’
It could therefore be a very risky ER481 at a pinch.
Mark
By: VoyTech - 10th January 2005 at 14:09
That’s an EN-serial…. looks like EN896 – but I don’t have books here to check individual serials…
No EN-serialled Mk Vs at all. The only Mk VBs with serials starting with an E were: EP195, EP258, ER277, ER319, ER476, ER481, ER590, ER622, ER643, ER661, ER810, ER938, ER985, ES359.
Perhaps they have taken out a cannon out of each wing to save weight. A common practise I understand.
I didn’t mean the number of cannon, but the wing design.
By: DazDaMan - 10th January 2005 at 13:52
VCs were, if I remember correctly, rarely fitted with four cannon.
They’d have no need to remove anything, and I doubt removing the outer cannon stub would be much in the way of beneficial.
By: HP57 - 10th January 2005 at 13:39
Perhaps they have taken out a cannon out of each wing to save weight. A common practise I understand.
HTH
Cees
By: Swiss Mustangs - 10th January 2005 at 13:37
That’s an EN-serial…. looks like EN896 – but I don’t have books here to check individual serials…..
Martin
By: VoyTech - 10th January 2005 at 13:22
JK664 is my best shot, but I am not 100%
Mark, yes it looks like JK-something to me, but all JK-serialled Spitfires delivered to Turkey were Mk VCs (this is clearly a Mk VB) delivered later (Turkish numbers in 57-range). A puzzle…
By: Mark12 - 10th January 2005 at 12:54
Cool, isn’t it? Now, it seems like the RAF serial in the usual DAF small size characters on the rear fuselage. Who can read it?
Voy Tech,
JK664 is my best shot, but I am not 100%
Mark
By: VoyTech - 10th January 2005 at 12:23
Guys I might not know the differance between the Spit Types But I do know that this isn’t a P-40 😮
It appears to be a MkV am I right 😉
Cool, isn’t it? Now, it seems like the RAF serial in the usual DAF small size characters on the rear fuselage. Who can read it?
By: VoyTech - 10th January 2005 at 11:49
I can’t enlarge the thumbnails, like JDK
On my computer it is the difference between Netscape and Explorer. The site seems to have been created with only the MS product in mind.
By: crazymainer - 10th January 2005 at 01:25
Also thanks CM/Rob for the offer. ‘Baklava Yeppie’ – that sounds Turkish, Cypriot or Greek and a Zillion calories.
Mark
Mark12,
I make it with a Greek Recipte 😀
Did you get my e-mail on David T. Stuka Question
Dave thanks
Cheers
RER
By: Veltro - 9th January 2005 at 22:43
PV140 was probably photographed in Britain, as the picture appears in many old publications including (IIRC) the stalwart Aircam. It was sold to Turkey but the ferry flight was unsuccessful and the aircraft ended up at Brindisi. It was eventually taken on charge by the Italian Air Force at Lecce on 19 May 1949, becoming MM.4286.
The same occurred to RK803, which became MM.4287, but for which no photo seem to have emerged so far.
Prints or very high resolution photos of either Spit very welcome!
Veltro
By: Mark12 - 9th January 2005 at 15:16
That Mk I Spitfire looks like a very early model, doesn’t it? Two blade prop, and flat canopy hood. Plus the exhausts are odd.
Dave,
It is the Prototype K5054, most probably at Eastleigh.
Mark
By: Dave Homewood - 9th January 2005 at 15:10
That Mk I Spitfire looks like a very early model, doesn’t it? Two blade prop, and flat canopy hood. Plus the exhausts are odd.
By: Mark12 - 9th January 2005 at 14:32
Here you go Mark
Dave,
Many thanks.
There are some very interesting and new shots here. Turkish Spitfire photos, like Turkish Spitfires 😉 , are a bit thin on the ground.
Also thanks CM/Rob for the offer. ‘Baklava Yeppie’ – that sounds Turkish, Cypriot or Greek and a Zillion calories.
Mark
By: Dave Homewood - 9th January 2005 at 13:37
Here you go Mark
By: DazDaMan - 9th January 2005 at 13:28
The “Spitfire MkIX” is clearly a typo – it’s a XIX.
By: crazymainer - 9th January 2005 at 13:25
Hey Mk12
No problem if you like I can do this when I get home and send i to them via a e-mail. I’m off to work for the day got to make some Baklavia Yeppie :p
Cheers
RER
By: Mark12 - 9th January 2005 at 11:01
Ok Now,
Guys I might not know the differance between the Spit Types But I do know that this isn’t a P-40 😮
It appears to be a MkV am I right 😉
Cheers
RER
Rob,
I can’t enlarge the thumbnails, like JDK, but find I can access the ‘Curtis’ from your post.
Can you please post up the other ‘Spitfire’ shots as ….wait for it… I want to ‘right click’ and save what are some fascinating shots that have been uncovered here.
Thanks.
Mark