In the early years of WW2 the Spitfire was roughly equal to the Bf109, when the Fw190 was introduced to the Luftwaffe in 1941 it proved superior to the current model Spitfire V. By the end of WW2 the Fw190 was probably inferior to the Spitfire IX. I understand how speed can be increased but how can the manoeuvrability of a plane be improved without considerable structural changes?
And is there a limit to how many structural changes can be made before a plane is effectively a new model and should then be renamed?
By: Edgar Brooks - 1st March 2015 at 16:23
Bigger, more powerful (especially at height) engines; propellers with 3, then 4, then 5 blades; lengthening the spinner to stop air being lost round propeller blade roots; fully flush-riveted construction; windscreen armour moved inside the windshield; multiple “fishtail” exhaust stubs adding thrust; different mirror housing giving less drag; change from cellulose to synthetic paint, which was smoother; filling and sanding down panel lines and rivet dimples on wing leading edges; adding extra cowling fasteners to stop drag-inducing gaps; employing “Aircraft Finishers” to keep surface finishes as immaculate as possible; higher octane-rated fuel enabling higher boost levels on engines; retractable tailwheels; deletion of aerial wires; eventually replacing aerial mast with a whip aerial.
There were many items, and far more than here.
By: Orion - 1st March 2015 at 09:55
Improved fuel performance and very much better metallurgy to allow the engine to cope with the higher temperature and pressure caused by the improved fuel.
Regards
By: alertken - 1st March 2015 at 09:41
Renames: no hard and fast. Today, Certification is easier cheaper if the firm submits evolution, not revolution: so Fokker 50 is an F-27, 70/100 is an F-28; 747-8 and 737NG are straightforward variants – honest, guv! VS T.368 was to be Victor, T.372 Valiant, so far did they drift from Mk.1 Spitfire. The Customer preferred the cachets of Spitfire Mks. 21/23. Also helped to deflect Treasury from enquiring too closely into likely R&D cost/time.
By: WZ862 - 28th February 2015 at 14:38
See also this thread on fuel additives:
WZ862
By: Graham Boak - 28th February 2015 at 10:58
The major improvement to the Spitfire’s manoeuvrability came with the introduction of metal ailerons, with the consequent improvement in roll rate. The same applied to the removal of the wingtips, although this came with a penalty at higher altitudes. There was a run of modifications to the wing root to strengthen this area, but the major change came with the redesign that produced the Mk.20 series of aircraft. A new name was considered for these. There is no specific rule about when an aircraft should be renamed, but normally a new wing (as opposed to any amount of changes to the fuselage) would imply a new aircraft. Although the 20 series Spitfire wing was structurally new, it had the same aerodynamic shape. The aeroelastics were enormously improved, moving the aileron reversal and divergence speeds beyond the operating envelope..
Generally manoeuvrability, coming from stability and handling, is considered different from performance. Increasing the power of the engine not only improves top speed but also acceleration and climb rate, hopefully more than compensating for inevitable mass and drag growth during development.
Sign In
February 28, 2015 at 10:48 am