It’s definitely a Seafire seat, and has been used quite late, too; I’ve only just twigged about the two pieces of wood on the backrest. They were fitted in late Seafires, as a brace against the armour plate behind the seat. According to the drawing, it was for metal seats, but has obviously been used on plastic seats, as well.

I understand that Landlords are asking the folks who are renting their properties in the surrounding area to vacate their properties ASAP, as the landlords can hire out the properties for exhorbitant prices due to overseas visitors to the games.
Makes you proud to be a Brit don’t it ?.

Who says that the landlords are all British? As a tenant, who pays rent, a landlord can ask me to vacate, but he can’t force me out.
Regarding your earlier, political, swipe at the present government, it seems to have slipped your mind that all of the contractual arrangements were made by the previous administration.
Funny how there’s all this concentration on the so-called rip-off merchants, who’ll (allegedly) make a fortune, when a recent report said that hoteliers on the south coast, overlooking the sailing events, are saying that their advance bookings are down this year, because their regular customers have been frightened away.

And also, exactly what do they prove?.

Well, if we renege on them, at this late stage, it will prove that you can’t trust the word of the British, and that will really see us in our (what you seem to believe) rightful place as also-rans.

The square glass replaced the circular type in 1941 (R.Wallace Clarke “British Aircraft Armament volume 2”.)
At the start of the war, new .303″ Brownings, with a new style of muzzle, and faster rate of fire, were fitted (Fred Roberts “Duxford to Karachi”)
The red patches are more of a mystery; 24-9-40, Supermarine introduced modification 259 “To delete covers for gun tunnels and empty case chutes and to substitute fabric patches in lieu.” What the original “covers” were, and whether Supermarine were catching up with RAF procedure, are items that I’ve not yet been able to discover.

Mk.Vs had the three-branch exhausts to allow pipes to be fitted inside, and the hot air was piped down beside the engine, then through the wings’ leading edges, and out to the .303″ Brownings. The cannon were heated by the single radiator.
When the IX arrived, the two radiators generated enough heat to supply the cannon and the .303″s. This enabled the multi-ejector exhausts to be used, which added a few mph to the speed.
In January 1944, multi-ejector exhausts were introduced to tropical Mk.Vs.

Between the wars “aircraft” was a plural noun, so could only be used for more than one. An aeroplane, an airship were acceptable, but not “an aircraft.” It was made singular during WWII.

25-8-44 an order, to remove wing, but retain fuselage, markings, was issued, with 25-8 to 10-9 being allowed for it to happen, though there was a warning that some might still be seen after that date, due to possible difficulty in removing them from fabric.
6-12-44 an order was issued that all markings should be removed from 31-12-44.
Edgar

The tubes housed landing flares; the Plessey device was for recognition, a different thing entirely. There’s a possibility that, originally, there were two tubes, since a modification (no.185) in July 1940 was “To delete one parachute flare tube.”
The Plessey six-shot “automatic recognition device” was introduced (to fire downwards) from 14-6-40 as mod 153; 7-4-41, through mod 235, it was repositioned to fire upwards.
The overwing stiffeners were introduced, on the Va & Vb (though earlier aircraft, like AR213, did have them retro-fitted) from 16-7-42; there was an earlier “stiffening” mod, 455, but there’s no indication what it entailed.