Tony beat me to it, that would explain XR808s’ value, but ‘808 was the third built, ‘806 (Scr ’97) & ‘807 before it.

This is a cut and paste from my posts on AIX, if anyone sees that this info needs correcting, please do so.

Early PR Spitfires are a minefield, the problem is is that they were based on existing fighter variants, and could be further modified to different PR variants (PR.I-PR.XIII) and sub designations (A-G), hence one actual airframe and serial number could easily appear across three different variants, for example P9385 was a Mk.I fighter, a PR.III, and PR.VI Type F, X4784 a Mk.I, Mk.V fighter and a PR.VII Type G.
On top of that there were various camera fits (W-Y) which had their own identity letters (W, X, & Y).

Just to add to the mix that the early PRs didn’t get their own orderly Mk numbers in relation to the fighters, these PR mods were usually retro fitted to standard early fighter variants, and the Mark numbers and suffix letters can get confusing.
Identity of these Marks became such a problem that the AM asked Vickers Supermarine to give new distinct Mk numbers to the PR types which eventually happened (from the PR.XI), and to actually rename the aircraft, which needless to say didn’t happen!
So the ORB entries you have may actually be Ok.

My understanding is that ‘D’ was the long range variant with maximum fuel tankage and high speed canopy based on the PR.IV, while the ‘G’ was similar but armed. I think the ‘G’ was only applied to the PR.VII.
PR suffixes ‘A’ – ‘D’ was applied across Mk.I, II, III, & V variants
I think ‘W’ denoted the camera type fitted, sure there was an ‘X’ aswel.

Edit,
All of the following information is taken from E.Morgan/ E.Shacklady Spitfire – The History bible, Key publishing.

Type A, Spitfire PR.IA to PR.III, normal fighter fuel load, 1 F.24 camera in each wing, 1 spotting camera behind pilot.

Type B, Spitfire PR.IB to PR.III, Short-Range, additional 29 Gal fuel tank, cameras as Type A with 8″ camears in underwing blisters.

Type C, Spitfire PR.IC to PR.III, Long-Range, additional 30 Gal fuel tank in Fuse, 30 Gal fuel tank in port wing blister, 1 fuse camera, 2 x F.24-8″ cameras in stbd wing blister.

Type D, Spitfire PR.ID to PR.III, PR.IV, & V, Super Long-Range, additional 66 1/5 Gal fuel tanks in each wing leading edge, 30 Gal in fuse, additional oil, could be fitted with W & X, or Y camera installations. Some as PR.IV(T) fitted with Aboukir tropical filter, K Type dinghy, and drinking water supply.

Type F, Spitfire PR.VI, Long-Range, 20 Gal fuel fuse tank and 30 Gal tank in each underwing blister,1 or 2 x F.8-20″, or 2 x F.24-20″ cameras.

Type E, as above but with provision for Oblique F24 camera.

Type G, Spitfire PR.VII, PR.XIII (Merlin 32), Armed with standard A fighter wing (8 x 303s) and with fighter bullet proof windscreen, 1 F24-5″, 1 F24-14″ vertical cameras, 1 F24 Oblique could be added. Teardrop bulges in each side of hood.

Apart from the G, all the variants were unarmed and featured the smoth high speed windscreen.

‘W’, ‘X’, & ‘Y’ refers to specific camera installations that could be fitted to both PR.IV and PR.XI Spitfires, Types W (2 x Vertical F.8- 20” cameras) & X (2 x Vertical F.24-14”, & 1 x Oblique F.24-14”) were interchangeable and both featured two vertical cameras which were slightly angled off the vertical to one side from each other with their own apertures, the Y type (1 x Vertical F.52-36”) was fixed in to some aircraft. All installations had provision for camera heating.

Examples of serials,

N3071, PR.I Type A, PR.I Type B, PR.I Type C, PR.III
L1004 PR.XIII
N3187 PR.III
X4492 PR.VI
X4786 PR.VII
BP932 PR.IV T
BR419 PR.IV
BS499 PR.XI

It should be stressed that this is a very short overview, and that the book should be looked up for far more detail.

Bob, major servicing doesn’t include the paint, the facilities to paint a large aircraft doesn’t exist at Saints, they are painted at Manchester after the test-flight schedule. In this regard the VC-10s appear externally tidyier on arrival than on departure.
Standards of servicing are as high these days.

VC-10 C.1K XV104 landing on 08 23 March 07 by jamtey71, on Flickr

I was lucky enough to sit in on engine run a while back, istr the engineer explaining to me about being careful with power settings due to certain RPMs causing a certain frequency vibration through the airframe.

Search on Getty doesn’t produce this image and the last four letters still look like ‘egas’ to me! 😉

Sill looks like ‘Getty Images’ to me!;)

In that case it was used for Rotachute development. – as shown here!

The same Rotachute of 1942, and development ended in 1943?

I’m trying to think of rotary designs of the ’45-’47 period and the Fairey Gyrodyne keeps popping up, Bristol (who Hafner of Rotachute/buggy worked for) and Cierva/Weir (to SARO) were also pursuing various projects with different rotor heads and drive systems.

I suppose the possibility exists that the picture shows a pure project feasibilty study that didn’t lead to any known design, conducted by the RAE or similar?

Oxcart the B-29 has 1,440hp short of double the Lancasters power (8,800hp v 5,120hp), but has I,586Ib over double the empty weight of a Lancaster (74,500Ib v 36,457Ib)*.

Lifting two 22,000Ib Grand Slam bombs under each wing is one hell of a claim, not only has the B-29 got to be capable of lifting a 44,000Ib war load, it also has to cary significant fuel, equipment, and crew load.
The other factor is that a Grand Slam is bigger than a Tallboy, so not only does each inboard wing section have to be strong enough to hold a 22,000Ib bomb off a pylon, but there has to ground clearance on an aircraft that sits low anyway. Aso the weight distribution issue, suddenly losing 22,000Ib from one wing must be interesting.
The great ‘Flight’ article that is linked earlier shows what was involved in mounting one Grand Slam to a B-29.

I know some amazing modifications result from war, carrying two Tallboys is incredible, but two Grand Slams…

*figures from Wiki sources.

Have you tried the RAFMuseum for the movements cards of these airframes?
I also wonder if the log books still exist somewhere aswel, RAFM & AHB being the places to try.

Yeah I believe one of the CO’s had flown ‘498, hence the spurious serial.
I have the cut out fuselage serial number in my office.

I’ve also been told that we have a scanner dustbin on the way, to help put 963 one step closer to her old MR2 state. We’re going to have to have a little think in the new year about how far we go – we set out to represent an MR2 with WR963, but with more and more parts coming to light we might be able to get her a lot closer than we originally thought.

Excellent news, I knew you were making progress with cannon fittings etc but the ASV dustbin must have been a bit of a surprise?

Cracking shots from IanF, have to say it though, I can’t wait to see the props fitted to the port inner, it’s a bit like looking at a beautiful girl with a giant boyle on her nose!