I think these are pictures are pretty good. And the website below should also be helpful.
http://www.harrier.org.uk/history/history_p1154.htm
Please not the similarity between the cockpit/intake arrangement of the Phantom and that of the two-seat P-1154.

Thanks for that link, it was interesting. I hadn’t realised they’d got as far as building and testing the BS.100.

The XIX would have been in service certainly during the last year or so of the war, and onwards til the mid 50s with THUM and in the far east…

One of the books I referred to said “soon after the war”.

I could go and dig out Spitfire – the History but as I said, we have a few walking Spitfire encyclopedias around here.

Something about having a dog and barking yourself…

Mark, the last mark of Spitfire, as opposed to Seafire, was the Mk.24.

I believe the biggest problem with the Stirling was the Air Ministry’s insistence that the span be less than 100′ so it would fit in a standard hangar. I seem to recall reading that it was also built like the proverbial brick outbuilding. Basically not enough wing.

Nobody organises it. Somebody suggests a date and we either argue about it or go.

I read once that the increase in weight between the first and last Spitfires was the equivalent of a Mk.I taking off complete with 32 airline passengers and their luggage!

Don’t know where they’d sit…

I believe it was the centrifugal casting, rather than the grinding, that was the secret Bristol wouldn’t reveal.
I’ve certainly read they were told to let Napier in on the technology but I wouldn’t know now in which book to check any details.

The difference in that nose leg (?) is staggering. Is it really the same leg? Superb.

Excellent programme, thanks for the heads up, I would have missed it too.

Interesting to hear Sir Frederick Handley Page described as the designer of the Victor. I bet that came as news to the H-P drawing office. 🙂