Hello
I got a questions about the propellers on the flying version of the about planes flying today.

How many are flying with wooden propellers and how many use metal propellers ?

Probably best to answer this seperately as the answers are quite different. Spitfires: virtually all are flying on wood based props today, apart from AR213 and AR501 (when she was and soon will be again airworthy).

Because the Hurricane can (and should, if its a Canadian manufactured example) be fitted with a Packard Merlin/metal blade Hamilton Standard prop combination around half of the flyers are so configured. The reasoning for this is a combination of technical accuracy and ecconomy. Metal blade Hamilton Standard props are significantly cheaper to aquire and maintain than a Rotol unit. Most Packard built engines (apart from the Merlin 266) generally have the correct prop shafts to take the Hamilton prop too (fewer splines on it compared with RR built versions).

Can you run a wooden or metal propeller on the same plane at differnent times?

With the Spitfire they would be relativley easy to swap between the two. With the Hurricane, less easy due to having to change the drive shaft on the engine to suit the propellor.

Hope this answers your questions.

That’s the “Blue Peter” Spitfire, isn’t it?

That’s the one – with Peter Wood in Twyford.

Enter ‘Anneorac’…….

Only Sixty Spitfires left.

They said “fewer than sixty”, the real crime was to have omitted the word ‘airworthy’ :rolleyes:

During WW2 why did RAF fighters have a yellow ring around the red, white and blue roundel on the fuselage? Why also were the roundels on the wings only the standard 3 colour and when did the yellow ring start getting painted thinner?

Pictures from http://www.airliners.net

The roundel type III with the thin outer Yellow (and White) rings was put in to widespread use from May 1942 onwards and replaced the earlier type with equally proprtioned rings. It was simply seen as a way of making roundels slightly less conspicuous in the geographical location of action at that time (and also worked for night bombers for obvious reasons). The evolution of roundel design and placement were continuing throughout the war against a background of changing tactics and geographical location of action. The basic need for national identification markings was seen by all sides as an essential requirement but this was moderated by the need for camouflage concealament. The two requirements were, to varying degrees, in constant confliction with each other, however there are some fairly consistant patterns, for example the upper wing roundels of RAF fighters based in Northern Europe remained constantly what was reffered to later as Type B (Red and Blue only) throughout the war up until early 1945. This was due to the need for concealement of aircraft on the ground where it was felt that Red and Blue alone would offer the best compromise of clarrity of national identity without being too bright and attracting undue attention. It was not until 2nd TAF in Europe in early 1945 felt confident enough to change to a more readily identifiable Type III (C1) upper wing roundel as by then it was felt there was more advantage to ensuring friendly aircraft could identify their own when on the ground at forward operating bases (and also of course due to the Luftwaffes diminishing offensive ability at that time).

Do you have any official documentation on the changeover to the wartime colours (as in a date)? I’ve got some “experts” (self-appointed) who insist that Ducimus and other “definitive references” state categorically that the bright colours were used until 1942 when the new roundels came into use. I posted this, but it didn’t change their minds..

Tks

J

Well I am an ‘enthusiastic student’ and not an ‘expert’ but I suspect you may be getting confused between the terms ‘used’ and ‘officially specified’, in other words making a distinction between what should have happened and what actually happened in a wartime situation. The isolated use of the ‘bright’ pre-war colours up to the end of 1940, as I said earlier, has been confirmed from archeological evidence and is not disputed. However this was unusual, not officially sanctioned and somewhat rare. Stocks of the old colours must certainly have been around, in all probability in great enough quantities to have encouraged Glosters to continue to use them against official policy. Distinguishing the older colours from the ‘new’ wartime colours is also hampered by the names Red and Blue etc (rather than ‘Dull Red or ‘Dull Blue’ which would make it easier to be clear about the distinction in shade).

There are many knowledgable people on her (such as ‘Roobarb’) who can confirm all this. If you want detailed printed references I would point you to Paul Lucas’s superb ‘Camouflage & markings No. 2 – The Battle for Britain’ which gives a very detailed description of the evolution of British aircraft markings from the immediate pre-war period up to early 1941.Or ‘British Aviation Colours of World War II’ (re-print of official wartime AP’s) or perhaps Peter Vachers book on Hurricane R4118, all excellent works of reference and normally available on http://www.abebooks.co.uk.

Basically you are correct. The wartime red and blue were not however called ‘Dull Ident Red’ or anything like that – they were simply termed ‘Red’ and ‘Blue’ (and ‘Yellow’). There are some documented instances of the pre-war bright red and blue shades being used (erroneously) in wartime, one that springs to mind is Gloster manufactured Hurricanes in 1940. The reason could be as simple as their having large stocks of the old paint.

And no (before anyone asks) – the wartime roundel colours do not appear in BS381C.

What’s with the wing? The wingskins seem to be draped over the spar like cloth:confused:

Caused by high energy impact with the ground – aircraft inverted at the time. As an aside, both the pilot of PT879 and that of the sister Spitfire with which it collided both bailed out at 1,500m and survived the incident.