The others looks like Blackburn Skuas.
[edit] No, I retract that. They are Miles Martinets.

Nice photo! I’ve found a second photo but Flickr is not cooperating…

[edit] Here we go:

DSC_5755_resize_copy by Jelle Hieminga, on Flickr

I always wondered why nobody ever tried this with the original Buchons in the BoB film or since
to try and have a similar profile to the DB engined 109E’s ?

That’s a regulatory thing. When they made the BoB film they used what was available and there is a distinct difference between the cosmetic changes to the Spitfires and re-engining a fleet of Buchons. I guess that they also wanted to keep a bit of the budget available for things like the planned Procktukas and such.

With the Merlin engine there is a design for the engine bearer and installation available as this was done for the Buchon version. All nicely drawn up with relevant strength calculations and lots of experience in operating this version. That’s what authorities want to see. The same thing goes for a D-B engine, all the research for that was done by Messerschmidt so even if you are converting a Buchon back to a Daimler-Benz, you are building (or converting) to an existing design.

With the Allison engine, none of this is available so you need to do all the stress calculations, design an engine bearer, work out how the installation issues are fixed, design an exhaust, find a suitable prop and do all the test flying. Within EASA land (or even just the CAA in the UK) that is not going to happen. In the US you can do things like this under the ‘experimental’ classification, which allows for these kind of creative engineering solutions.

If I create a perfect copy of Leonardo’s Mona Lisa, using modern, computerized techniques (very much doable nowadays), and add a little bit of original’s wooden backplate to it, damn, even perfectly recreate author’s signature (should I say “dataplate”? 😉 ) on it, that won’t quite make it THE Mona Lisa, will it?

I do think that there is a distinct difference between the NH341 ‘situation’ and a copy of the Mona Lisa. If Da Vinci had been so inclined and had some wood and paint left, he could have created a second painting but that would still be distinctly different (perhaps not at first sight but still) from the first one. I’m not sure of the official terms but I think that in the case of a piece of art like the Mona Lisa part of the value is in the fact that you cannot create an exact duplicate, copy, etc. The main difference here is that a Spitfire is an object that was designed by Messrs. Mitchell, Smith et al to be produced, reproduced and repaired. If you follow the original procedures, use the same material, stick to the drawings and such then what you get is exactly what they intended for it to be: another Spitfire. So in essence, the opportunity to create more Spitfires was already inherent in the original design. Everyone who has ever seen one fly (I can recommend an air-to-air session for that) and has a bit of enthusiasm for aeroplanes like this knows that it is certainly worth the trouble to get one up in the air, so there we have a motive. The last thing missing is the means, and fortunately there are people willing to spend the large amounts of cash to see another Spitfire in the air. Without taking away from all the other views in this discussion I am willing to say that what is happening here is just a continuation of the original work that was done on the WWII Spitfire production lines.

If there had been no airworthy example left then I’m sure that people would applaud this ‘recreation’, but now that we have several Spitfires flying around, with varying degrees of originality present in their airframes, this is different.

I’ll do my best to get back on track…. I took this photo in August 2013, it is amazing how far you’ve come since then!

WS788_Elvington_August2013 by Jelle Hieminga, on Flickr

Arrrgh! not the pink peril! Archer you definitely didn’t make it up. wrong jet.

I know, I just couldn’t get to my other photos at that point. This any better?

Victor_Elvington_August2013 by Jelle Hieminga, on Flickr

Thanks for clearing that up! For a moment I couldn’t place the type and thought you guys had resurrected a Nene-Viking or something like that… :p

In that nose-on photo of the Kitten, the Canberra in the righthand background appears to be a taildragger. Is that just the perspective?