R6915Re post 46, You are correct, and I am very pleased to be able to tell Mike J that the £20K guarantee has NOT been forgotten, nor are the subsequent actions of the then Exec members been forgotten.
R6915Snoopy’s last paragraph in Post Nr. 40 says
“It’s the loveliest of all aircraft, but the world is awash with Spitfire information now, there is little to be said or learned”[/I][/I] .
So I suggest the Soviet Airforce usage of the aircraft as one example where so little is yet known. Post 44 – Tangmere1940, too, is quite correct regarding future priorities. To lose such a large chunk of money over the Polesden Lacey event in July last year was, in my persoanal opinion, disgusting. And all the more so because a number of patrons and members warned the then Executive to cancel it at least nine months earlier.
R6915I have to disagree. The problem with the abundance of data on the Spitfire is that there is a lot of misinformation. I spent a day volunteering with the Eastern Wing of the Society at Duxford on the weekend (lovely weather!) As usual, we had a steady stream of visitors asking questions, telling us about family members who flew during the war, sharing information & photos etc etc. There is always something new to be learned – and in turn, we try to educate and inform people about all aspects of the Spitfire – something we plan to continue doing.
I have to agree with NightReaper because Snoopy 7422 is, may I say very politely, not up to date on the subject of membership criteria. David Green (DG), the founder, by 1991 recognised that in the future the membership would be self limiting if the society maintained its stance of current and ex Services Spitfire connected personnel only. Snoopy is, however, quite correct in saying that it was the original basis for membership. In 1984 when the society came into being I suggest that no one reading FlyPast at that time would have thought that world wide interest in Spitfires or any other classic and historic aircraft would develop in the way that it has to today’s levels. In fact in one of the last conversations I had with DG he said he could believe the changes that had occurred in the public perception of this subject that engages us all.
In recent years the society has followed the path of trying to make sure that those who wish to, can get ‘up close and personal’ with Spitfires and have access to any and all information on the subject that is possible. Added to which it has a series of funds that can be made available as the result of generous bequests to the society in recent years
because the broader aims and aspirations of the society include encouraging students to make a career within the aviation industry. The Grants Secretaries rigorously review those applications to ensure they meet stringent criteria so that those precious funds are not frittered away on inappropriate projects. The Royal Aeronautical Society and others helped greatly some years ago in suggesting the guidelines.
Back to Snoopy 7422, if he would look into Spitfires used by the Soviet Airforces he will find that there almost zero knowledge here in the west just as an example!
R6915Is it? I would suggest that the Society has had little or no real relevance since the events following the farcical AGM held at Duxford last year, which quite a number of us posting here attended. As it continues this steady slide into oblivion, I have wonder who these days really cares any more.
Is it? I would suggest that the Society has had little or no real relevance since the events following the farcical AGM held at Duxford last year, which quite a number of us posting here attended. As it continues this steady slide into oblivion, I have wonder who these days really cares any more.
I believe that the membership of the Society DOES have great relevance as do the Aims and aspirations society. There are a few members that have worked with passion for over two years to try and get this society back into good shape. It would appear that the Charity Commission is, to quote Tangmere 1940 from some long time ago, “a paper tiger”. I suggest the Commission is strong on its Quango presentation but severely limited by statute, in reality.
To judge by the very recently published journal, the excellent Vice Chairman Chris Brice has been side stepped by the Exec. Committee who say that his vote at the EGM was held illegally, ignoring the fact THEIR positions must therefore also be in doubt as they too were voted in at the same time. They choose to ignore the fact that the Charity Commission stepped in and issued an Order ( following a member’s complaint) to ensure the legality of any voting that day by setting aside the requirements of the society Constitution for the occasion. The result was that the EGM became a Charity Commission meeting ABOUT and FOR the Spitfire Society.
What will happen next ? Will the Exec commence excluding Chairman Norman Parker as well ? They have tried to remove at least one outspoken member by a variety of methods, publicly defamed two other members at the AGM last May. And there’s much more besides.
To answer MOGGY directly when he asks about references and links ………Yes there are, but we are being discreet for the moment.
R6915All being stage managed by the same man, whether or not he makes a living at it, I really don’t know………we’re no longer communicating.
Baz
I’m delighted to learn that the truth is slowly seeping out and. Plus, I believe that a new prospectus was issued during the summer, mildly modified but largely the same. And now the sale has fallen through – has it? would be intersting to learn for certain!
R6915The late Gordon Mitchell told me that he was on the film set at Holmsley (New Forest) on quite a few occasions that summer and I’m pretty sure he said that was during his summer holiday from school.
A year or so later he worked on a Dorset farm and when he was old enough went in to the RAF Air Sea Rescue. So he also flew in his father’s other creation the Walrus!
R6915Sometime around 1968 I was forunate to have a chat with Bill Bedford and asked him about PZ. He told me that the dark blue with the silver cheat lines AND civil reg G-AMAU were indeed Princess Margaret’s racing colours. Peter Townsend was her favourite (pilot, as well) RAF equerry to the Royal Household at that time. I saw it Sept 1956 at the RaES Garden Party at Wisley when Bill B flew it against Jeffrey Quill in the Wisley based Spitfire Vb AB910. This was the first time that those two pilots put on a very good ‘winding match’ for the industry crowd gathered there that Sunday afternoon. They repeated that show a number of times over the next few years. With both aircraft in flying condition it was an almost unique show in that era.
Further more I think Bill B lived somewhere around the north side of Liphook, Hants and I would see him put on a good aerobatic display in the area on a summer Sunday afternoon. Not to be outdone, Mr Quill in AB910, also put on a masterly show over the same area from time to time and if my memory serves my correctly it was usually after lunch on a Sunday afternoon as well! Those really were the days!
R6915That is great and proves the value of this forum!
R6915The source of my information was the original owner of the museum – it’s possible that he passed away a couple of years ago – but I am unsure about that.
However he told me categorically in conversation that R-R Heritage had inspected the engine the previous year and told him THEY were amazed to find he had indeed got the ex air speed record engine.
I took that to be the truth, if that is incorrect, then I have a very red face!
R6915Sorry Schneiderman,
A lack of clarity by me here, I have slightly mislead you, the private museum in Eastbourne has the world air speed / Campbell land & sea winning R Type sprint engine NOT the Schneider Trophy winning engine.
The last I heard, it is correctly inhibited, theoretically capable of being run again and sits adjacent to three early series Merlins similarly supposed to be inhibited and capable of running after minimal work on them.
R6915Hi nick.henderson,
The original S6B Schneider Trophy winner (RAF Serial S1595 ) is on display in London (UK) at the Science Museum. Have a look at this link…
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects/aeronautics/1932-532.aspx
Accepting that a trip over from the Phillipines is not a Saturday morning quick jaunt maybe you can find some one who can contact the museum on your behalf, gain a special permission pass (as I did a few years ago at the RAF Museum ) and be accompanied by a museum staff member to take the measurements you need.
Note that it’s Rolls-Royce “R” Type engine is not installed. BUT, it does still discreetly exist at a private museum near Eastbourne. It is the actual engine that won the air speed record two weeks after the races. After the races finished the RAF High Speed Flight was disbanded. As much as possible of the kit was sold off by the Government in 1931.
The engine was purchased by 1930’s speed king Malcolm Campbell who then installed the same engine in a couple of his BlueBird land speed attempt cars and a couple of the BlueBird water speed attempt boats. He was successful and I believe this is the only engine – ever – to capture world speed records in all three elements.
R6915I last saw the fuselage at Rob’s home about 2005 or 06 in the Lambourne Valley and previously at Tangmere. There was some speculation at that time that this aircraft was planned to be built as a 109B with a Jumo engine.
Presumably if that was so, it was a production line up grade to the 109E. Was that speculation simply idle gossip? Or is the upgrade a proven fact?Can anyone confirm … fact or fantasy?
R6915A very interesting series of postings on quite a fairly obscure subject. If I may add another little known source that is deserving of a much wider audience try to get hold of book entitled Never A Dull Moment written by Dennis Le P Webb, published in 2001, ISBN 1-900511-73-8 from J&KH Publishing.
The author joined Supermarines in 1926 as an indentured Management Apprentice. He retired from BAC after the TSR2 fiasco in 1971. The book has some errors as Denis aged 93 in 2001 ‘forgot’ to proof read the book and just authorised the go ahead to publish. The errors are usually easy to spot and to re-interpret, however.
That book tells more about Supermarines from behind the scenes than I have ever come across in any similar type of publication of any company I have ever read. There are plenty of substantiating facts – why was the first Spitfire order so late in delivery, how they coped after the bombing and so on. But about the Type 317 – almost nothing but he does explain the company situation at Woolston at that time and it can hardly be a surprise that the bomber design had to be neglected.
I also have a copy of Dennis’s unpublished chapter on the TSR2 saga from the management perspective at Weybridge which was his last management tasking before retirement. He thought I would like a copy of it after helping him get his life story published. As he said, Never A Dull Moment.
R6915Shortly after the Spitfire first flew on March 5th 1936 R J Mitchell who was quite unwell with the cancer that would kill him had already handed over the Spitfire design to the production team at Woolston Southampton. His mind was working on the design problems for the Supermarine 4 engined bomber.
It may be a good idea to look at the book by his son Dr. Gordon Mitchell Schooldays To Spitfire for some concise and additional clarity on this subject – there are several editions of this excellent and revealing book. I suggest it is a good basic resource.
I also have a recollection of talking a few years ago with one of Mitchell’s team about this bomber. Harry Griffiths was assistant to Arthur Black the company metallurgist and their laboratory and office were directly below Mitchell’s office at the works. Harry was there on both occasions when the bombing took place in September 1940 and he was of the opinion that the mock up of the bomber fuselage AND the Spitfire mock up were hanging from the rafters in one of the production areas and said both were destroyed. He also said that a completed bomber fuselage was also stored there and also destroyed. But wings had not been manufactured because of the great pressures on the company to manufacture Spitfires.
The point about the Vickers Armstrongs (ie the parent company at Weybridge) being quite capable of designing big bombers is well made. The Wellington was in production, the Warwick was following and so was the Windsor.
The Windsor was a four engined bomber but it arrived too late on the scene and the so successful Lancaster ( not overlooking other types either) especially ensured that there really was no point in continuing to develop it further. Vickers did however do some testing with the three prototypes that were made at their experimental aircraft Foxwarren hangars, taken to Wisley – not Brooklands – and at least the first of the three was flown.
It is an interesting geodetic body design from a collaboration between Rex Pierson and Barnes Wallace but probably owes little to Mitchell’s design from five or six years earlier.
As to the missing drawings of the Mitchell bomber. I believe most of the company drawings were saved in the bombing only to be burnt in the early 1960’s at Hursley Park near Winchester when Supermarine’s left there. Only a few early drawings of the Spitfire still exist inthe archives at Solent SKY Museum in Southampton. Other than that it is off to Cambridge University Library that houses the extant Vickers archives, I suggest.
R6915Why not contact the original publisher who was actually Mr. Dilip Sarkar and ask your questions directly?
Sign In
