Whilst discussing the RAF's Mk XVI Spitfires..

Great result Mark, you would think there would be the odd picture of it about of it dumped or scrapped, must have been an unusual-ish sight back then and in that colour.

I have today written to the pilot.

In 1955 there was still quite a lot of Spitfire ‘junk’ littered around RAF stations in the UK.

Mark

This afternoon I spent an enlightening half hour chatting with Air/Cdr Reggie Spiers RAF Retd.

As a Flight Commander with 64 Squadron he made the last flight in TE357 on 6 December 1954 at Duxford.

That day there had been a ‘queue’ waiting to fly the Spitfire, possibly the last chance for most in the RAF.

Immediately after take off Flt Lt Spiers, a very experienced pilot, noted that the aileron response was very heavy and something not quite right. After 20 minutes of flying he alighted on the grass making a heavy landing and puncturing a tyre, thought to be caused by a jagged edge on the PSP.

The aircraft was immediately towed back to the hangar. The next day Flt Lt Spiers was advised by a party, presumably the Engineering Officer, that this aircraft should not have been flown. Some metal distress was pointed out in the footwell spar area.

This could well account for why there is no accident card. It is thought that the Spitfire was quietly scrapped off, which would have been noted on the movement card, and replaced by SL542 for the 1955 display and ceremonial season.

Mark

That naming the individual could resuly in Key being prosecuted
Then don’t mention them in the first place !

Not me guv, I have no knowledge of who this is. You can’t tar me with that one.

What Trumper and myself have a gripe with is the ‘I know but can’t tell’ situations as they start too much speculation and bickering.

So I gather, but I read this and could see that some people seemed to want to find out the identity of someone that ought not to be named, at least not in this sort of forum.

This medium should be for the sharing of knowledge, equally amongst all the members whatever their interest, depth of expertise etc with the bottom line being everyone enjoying and understanding the subject more and for the common good.

To a degree I will agree, but there are things that some people prefer to keep quiet for whatever reasons. In some, and perhaps many cases, this should be respected.

There is undenialbly however an elite section.

I am not sure there is, there are some people on here who are acknowledged experts in their field but, in the main, I can only see them sharing information.

On the whole their extra knowledge can be facinating and informative but unfortunately sometimes there is an element of “I/we know and you don’t” that can creep in, as is clearly evident in this very thread.

Bruce has dealt with that but speaking for myself, as someone who is not privvy to this guarded nugget of information, I could see that this was something that was clearly not, or indeed should not, be shared and so I ignored the comments.

Be it the naming of an individaul as in this case, or disclosing the contents of an incoming or outgoing shipping container, who now owns/has purchased/sold what to whom/where/when etc….etc …ect . If it is the case that any further disclosures on a given matter could result in legalities, be personally sensitive, commercially confidential, result in the bean spiller losing their credibilty with the person/organisation/operator who gave them the information ‘in the strictest confidence’ in the first place. etc…. then for goodness sake don’t mention any of it in the first place.

I agree with you 100% and will point you to a comment in my answer above, many of the people that like to claim they DO have access to this information often don’t. Bean spillers, in whatever walk of life, will end up on the sidelines. However, I also see on here a lot of effort to find out those identities, shipping infos etc so there are as many people digging for information as there are those that appear to be hiding it.

I am not in the upper echelon, I don’t expect that Trumper feels himself to be either and probably like me, he doesn’t care. What he does care about however, exactly like me, is the feeling of being excluded, which his first short post alluded to and his second clearly states.
I hope my second “two penneth” on the matter makes things a little clearer as there is apparently a great difference between bothering to read a whole thread (which incidentally like Trumper I also have) and ‘understanding’ a whole thread which………………………………………

understood but, in this instance, it was very clear to me that far from being a nugget of interesting information this was something that should not be revealed unless it is done so in the proper manner or to the proper authorities. That is what I meant when I said read the thread, this was not a ‘shipping container’ moment.

I suppose the ‘Upper Echelon’ could be a little like the SAS. It is not a bad rule of thumb that anyone that claims to have been in the SAS generally wasn’t. Like wise anyone hinting or claiming they are upper echelon, probably isn’t either!

As i have read the whole thread and don’t know the inside story as many of you on here seem to, i find your remarks rather rude and ill placed.How are people that have no knowledge of the “information” being given supposed to glean the answers :confused:

I don’t know the inside story either, but I have read the thread and can clearly see that someone is accused of nicking the data cards and naming them could be a problem. I can also work out that it is none of my business and I have no wish to glean the ‘information’. There is no conspiracy of keeping information from others, just being sensible with the legalities of the situation.

You can also rest assured that many of the people on here who *do* claim to know ‘secret’ information and drop hints to the effect generally know far less than they claim as by dropping hints about things they are clearly not to be trusted with the important stuff.

Thanks, it will be interesting to hear any further info.

So was there any associated confirmation of the fate of the aircraft?

I have today written to the pilot.

In 1955 there was still quite a lot of Spitfire ‘junk’ littered around RAF stations in the UK.

Mark

Yes, …..post 26. Are you sure you are reading the whole thread? 🙂

…and yes I know the name, rank and unit of the pilot who ‘cocked up’ but did not name him for similar reasons to not naming the villain in my first post.

It is called responsible reporting.

Mark

So was there any associated confirmation of the fate of the aircraft?

I dont think the ‘I know something you dont’ happens all that much on here, though it does rear its ugly head from time to time.

In this case, it isnt so much that as an acknowledgement that there is someone out there, who has deprived us of historical documents. Some of us know who that person is, some dont, but it is not necessary to know that identity to discuss the broad facts of the case.

I try hard not to make clever remarks that upset people; I may have overstepped the mark here, but it wasnt intentional.

Bruce

It is called responsible reporting.

Mark

Of which I am wholeheartedly in favour of ! 😀

So it was a similar ‘blue’ to the other Swift!
Re the fate, I take it we don’t know what happenened to it, ie did it survive in chunks, or where it was scrapped?

[I]

Apologies for thread drift folks, have we found the missing machines fate yet whilst I have been waxing ? 😉

Yes, …..post 26. Are you sure you are reading the whole thread? 🙂

…and yes I know the name, rank and unit of the pilot who ‘cocked up’ but did not name him for similar reasons to not naming the villain in my first post.

It is called responsible reporting.

Mark

What a load of rubbish, if you have read and seen that naming the individual could result in Key being prosecuted. This has nothing to do with ‘in crowd’ and more to do with ‘can’t be bothered to read a whole thread’.

That naming the individual could resuly in Key being prosecuted
Then don’t mention them in the first place !
What Trumper and myself have a gripe with is the ‘I know but can’t tell’ situations as they start too much speculation and bickering.

This medium should be for the sharing of knowledge, equally amongst all the members whatever their interest, depth of expertise etc with the bottom line being everyone enjoying and understanding the subject more and for the common good.
There is undenialbly however an elite section. On the whole their extra knowledge can be facinating and informative but unfortunately sometimes there is an element of “I/we know and you don’t” that can creep in, as is clearly evident in this very thread.

Be it the naming of an individaul as in this case, or disclosing the contents of an incoming or outgoing shipping container, who now owns/has purchased/sold what to whom/where/when etc….etc …ect . If it is the case that any further disclosures on a given matter could result in legalities, be personally sensitive, commercially confidential, result in the bean spiller losing their credibilty with the person/organisation/operator who gave them the information ‘in the strictest confidence’ in the first place. etc…. then for goodness sake don’t mention any of it in the first place.

I am not in the upper echelon, I don’t expect that Trumper feels himself to be either and probably like me, he doesn’t care. What he does care about however, exactly like me, is the feeling of being excluded, which his first short post alluded to and his second clearly states.
I hope my second “two penneth” on the matter makes things a little clearer as there is apparently a great difference between bothering to read a whole thread (which incidentally like Trumper I also have) and ‘understanding’ a whole thread which………………………………………

Apologies for thread drift folks, have we found the missing machines fate yet whilst I have been waxing ? 😉

I must admit it looks like gull or ocean grey there to me, the colours around it seem correct enough.
I wonder if it was repainted, I certainly wouldn’t describe it as a beautiful blue.

Wing tips and fresh paint acquired at some time between June 1954 at Baginton and September 1954 at Biggin Hill.

Mark

New paint.

What a load of rubbish, if you have read and seen that naming the individual could result in Key being prosecuted. This has nothing to do with ‘in crowd’ and more to do with ‘can’t be bothered to read a whole thread’.

As i have read the whole thread and don’t know the inside story as many of you on here seem to, i find your remarks rather rude and ill placed.How are people that have no knowledge of the “information” being given supposed to glean the answers :confused:

Yes they can ! The BoB film saw a lot of Spitfires gain wingtips !

A bit like this

http://www.ww2color.com/nennius/webapps/slides/slides.php?action=update&primary_key=01447

Is it me or does TE357 appear to have wingtips on in this photo, whilst in the airborne shot it has clipped wings? Could wingtips be reattached onto cropped wings?

I must admit it looks like gull or ocean grey there to me, the colours around it seem correct enough.
I wonder if it was repainted, I certainly wouldn’t describe it as a beautiful blue.

That looks like overall silver paint to me, admittedly with a blue cast?

DD

Behind the Spitfire is a Vampire T.11 in the standad Silver Scheme. When the image is enlarged the two are different so I think this is the blue colour on the spitfire

A bit like this

http://www.ww2color.com/nennius/webapps/slides/slides.php?action=update&primary_key=01447

That looks like overall silver paint to me, admittedly with a blue cast?

DD

Precisely the reason that I and quite a few others these days merely surf throught here and straight back out again without participating any more.
Can we please have a closed sub forum for the favoured “in crowd” to play in so us mere mortals don’t get so p*ssed of with the “I know a secret and you dont brigade”. 😡
2 penneth donated and therefore TTFN. :diablo:

What a load of rubbish, if you have read and seen that naming the individual could result in Key being prosecuted. This has nothing to do with ‘in crowd’ and more to do with ‘can’t be bothered to read a whole thread’.