Best piston engined fighter of 1945?

[z42]

It's strange to me how the griffon spitfires aren't in vogue in modern conscience, 90% of flight sims go to the mk 9 at the most or the tempest mk5 for the RAF 1944-45 fighter.
Books, films, where is the last time you saw people who aren't WW2 enthusiasts talking about it?
Seems there's more about the ta-152 with 25 operational at any single time than anything about the mk14s

I can think of several reasons for the relative unpopularity of the Griffon Spits:

• As amazing as the Spitfire was when first introduced, to some extent the Griffon variants are the success of brute power over grace. Hundreds of hp more, hundreds of kg lighter, a fraction of the range, and the Mk XIV achieves the same top speed as the P-51D (Yes, it climbed like a rocket though).
• Continuing on the grace theme, those bulges over the valve covers definitely detract from it. And the latter variants with the cut-down rear fuselage and bubble canopy, while undoubtedly better fighters, further 'destroy' that classical Spitfire look.
• The Mk IX came at a critical moment, and allowed the RAF to get an edge over the FW 190. By the time the Griffon variants entered service, while it was still a long slog until the end of the war, the tide had turned and the outcome was pretty certain.
• Flight sim players don't have to maintain the Sabre in the Tempest V, or have the engine explode for no reason whatsoever in mid-flight.
• As mentioned, there were relatively few of them in the end compared to the Merlin variants. Then again, there weren't that many Tempest V's either.

As for the Ta 152, perhaps it's interesting in the sense of being the pinnacle of German (single) piston-engined fighters, a bit like the Allied superprops that missed the war?

 

[PAT303]

While the first Mk.XIV reached 610 squadron in Dec 1943, only a handful of squadrons were equipped with the Mk.XIV in NWE before the end of WW2 (7?, of which 2 had them for only a short period in 1944 before handing them on to other units, plus a couple of tactical recce squadrons) while several hundred were shipped direct from the factory to India from Spring 1945, where only 3 squadrons re-equipped with them before the war ended, with none of those seeing combat.

The MkXIV was produced in great numbers during the war and served for longer than any of the other super props unless I'm mistaken, but the I agree the MkIX gets all the love.

 

[PAT303]

Good choices all round. Though, in a dogfight I'd give a Spitfire Mk.XIV positive odds against any of the above. Top marks for looks too.

View attachment 795852

Retractable tail wheel and delete the stubs for another 10mph, she's a pretty bird even in LF guise.

 

[MikeMeech]

Retractable tail wheel and delete the stubs for another 10mph, she's a pretty bird even in LF guise.

Hi
Surely the Spitfire XIV already had a retractable tail wheel?

Mike

 

[PAT303]

Hi
Surely the Spitfire XIV already had a retractable tail wheel?
View attachment 796039

Mike

It does but the one in the Photo above doesn't for some reason and the one you posted still has the stubs, why?, they aren't required.

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

Pullman became Silverplate became Saddletree (Baugher says Saddleback) in May 1947 before all of the final batch of B-29 had been converted, in turn Saddletree became part of the Gem program.

Constituted as 509th Composite Group on 9 Dec 1944 and activated on 17 Dec, Wendover Field, Utah, 17 Dec 1944-26 Apr 1945; North Field, Tinian, 29 May-17 Oct 1945; Roswell AAFld, NM, 6 Nov 1945-16 Jun 1952.

46 B-29 built before the end September 1945 reported modified to Silverplate status, by November 1946 four had been lost, 19 more modified in 1947 from exiting stocks as project DOM-515. Then came the B-50 and B-36 modifications. Looking at Baugher, the aircraft cards and delivery logs gives the following list of 46 done by end 1945, block, serial, acceptance date,

B-29-5-BO 42-6259 30-Nov-43
B-29-5-MO 42-65209 24-Aug-44
B-29-10-MO 42-65216 15-Sep-44
B-29-10-MO 42-65217 16-Sep-44
B-29-15-MO 42-65234 18-Oct-44
B-29-15-MO 42-65235 18-Oct-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65236 24-Oct-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65237 26-Oct-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65238 26-Oct-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65239 26-Oct-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65240 31-Oct-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65258 13-Nov-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65259 11-Nov-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65260 14-Nov-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65261 14-Nov-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65262 14-Nov-44
B-29-20-MO 42-65263 15-Nov-44
B-29-25-MO 42-65264 15-Nov-44
B-29-35-MO 42-65384 15-Feb-45
B-29-35-MO 42-65385 15-Feb-45
B-29-35-MO 42-65386 15-Feb-45
B-29-35-MO 42-65387 15-Feb-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27295 19-Mar-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27296 19-Mar-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27297 19-Mar-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27298 20-Mar-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27299 20-Mar-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27300 2-Apr-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27301 2-Apr-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27302 2-Apr-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27303 2-Apr-45
B-29-35-MO 44-27304 2-Apr-45
B-29-40-MO 44-27353 20-Apr-45
B-29-40-MO 44-27354 20-Apr-45
B-29-45-MO 44-86291 18-May-45
B-29-45-MO 44-86292 18-May-45
B-29-50-MO 44-86346 15-Jun-45
B-29-50-MO 44-86347 15-Jun-45
B-29-55-MO 44-86382 26-Jul-45
B-29-55-MO 44-86383 30-Jul-45
B-29-55-MO 44-86384 27-Jul-45
B-29-60-MO 44-86430 27-Aug-45
B-29-60-MO 44-86431 28-Aug-45
B-29-60-MO 44-86432 30-Aug-45
B-29-60-MO 44-86472 30-Sep-45
B-29-60-MO 44-86473 30-Sep-45

Joe Baugher gives the following list of 16 modifications done in 1947 out of 19 reported done.

B-29-55-MO 44-86401
B-29-60-MO 44-86437, 44-86439, 44-86440, 44-86443, 44-86444, 44-86445, 44-86447, 44-86448, 44-86451
B-29-90-BW 44-87752, 44-87771, 44-87774, 45-21736, 45-21739
B-29-95-BW 45-21818

Total B-29 production 3,960
3 XB-29 Boeing Seattle, accepted December 1942
14 YB-29 Boeing Wichita, accepted July to September 1943
1,620 B-29 Boeing Wichita, accepted September 1943 to October 1945
1,119 B-29A Boeing Renton, accepted January 1944 to June 1946
357 B-29 Bell, accepted November 1943 to February 1945, May to September 1945
311 B-29B Bell, accepted January to September 1945
536 B-19 Martin, accepted December 1943 to September 1945 (but only 5 built by end February 1944 then a two month pause)

Spitfire XIV squadrons from RAF Squadrons by Jefford, squadron, from, to, note
2 Nov-44 Jan-51 ETO
11 Jun-45 Feb-48
16 Sep-45 Apr-46 ex 268 sqn ETO
17 Jun-45 Feb-48
20 Nov-45 Dec-46
26 Jun-45 Apr-46 ETO
28 Oct-45 May-47
41 Sep-45 Sep-46 ETO
91 Mar-44 Aug-44 to F.21 Jan 45 , ETO
130 Aug-44 May-45 ETO
132 May-45 Apr-46 ETO
136 Feb-46 May-46 ETO
152 Jan-46 Mar-46
155 Dec-45 Aug-46
268 Apr-45 Sep-45 became 16 squadron, ETO
273 Nov-45 Jan-46
322 Mar-44 Aug-44 ETO
350 Aug-44 Oct-46 ETO
401 May-45 Jun-45 ETO
402 Aug-44 Jun-45 ETO
411 Jun-45 Mar-46 ETO
412 May-45 Jun-45 ETO
414 Apr-45 Aug-45 ETO
416 Sep-45 Mar-46 ETO
430 Nov-44 Aug-45 ETO
443 Jun-45 Mar-46 ETO
451 Aug-45 Jan-46 ETO
453 Aug-45 Jan-46 ETO
600 Oct-46 Nov-47 ETO
602 Oct-46 Oct-48 ETO
607 Nov-46 Mar-49 ETO
610 Jan-44 Mar-45 Also Nov 46 to Apr 49, disbanded Mar 45, reformed May 45, ETO
611 Nov-46 Aug-49 ETO
612 Nov-46 Oct-49 ETO
613 Dec-46 Dec-48 ETO
615 Oct-46 Jan-49 ETO

As units were rotated front/rear areas they could give up or gain the latest equipment. First Spitfire XVIII squadron service August 1946.

 

[mig-31bm]

It's strange to me how the griffon spitfires aren't in vogue in modern conscience, 90% of flight sims go to the mk 9 at the most or the tempest mk5 for the RAF 1944-45 fighter.
Books, films, where is the last time you saw people who aren't WW2 enthusiasts talking about it?
Seems there's more about the ta-152 with 25 operational at any single time than anything about the mk14s

I'm super confused about late war griffon spitfire.
So what are the different between XIV, Mk21, Mk22 and Mk24?. They all seem to use the 2000 hp engine?

 

[wuzak]

I'm super confused about late war griffon spitfire.
So what are the different between XIV, Mk21, Mk22 and Mk24?. They all seem to use the 2000 hp engine?

Mk XIV has the wing from the Spitfire VIII, which is basically the same as the previous versions (IX, V, etc.).

Mk.21 - Mk.24 have the revised wing with slightly different plan form and stronger structure, and fully enclosed landing gear.

Mk.22 was the same as the Mk.21 but with the teardrop canopy and cut back fuselage. The larger fin and rudder of the Spiteful were introduced part way into production, with most being fitted with them.

Mk.23 was experimenting with the wing, not put into production.

Mk.24 was Mk.22 with additional fuel tanks.

 

[Reluctant Poster]

Mk XIV has the wing from the Spitfire VIII, which is basically the same as the previous versions (IX, V, etc.).

Mk.21 - Mk.24 have the revised wing with slightly different plan form and stronger structure, and fully enclosed landing gear.

Mk.22 was the same as the Mk.21 but with the teardrop canopy and cut back fuselage. The larger fin and rudder of the Spiteful were introduced part way into production, with most being fitted with them.

Mk.23 was experimenting with the wing, not put into production.

Mk.24 was Mk.22 with additional fuel tanks.

The wing of the VIII is a bit different from the IX as it has reduced span ailerons

 

[Reluctant Poster]

I'm super confused about late war griffon spitfire.
So what are the different between XIV, Mk21, Mk22 and Mk24?. They all seem to use the 2000 hp engine?

The big difference between the XIV and the 21 that is always overlooked is that the 21 had a larger diameter propeller (11' vs 10' 5"). The Griffon 61 in the 21 had a .45 reduction gear vs the .51 of the Griffon 65 in the XIV to avoid tip speed issues.
I believe the larger propeller was responsible for the higher top speed of the 21 but would perhaps explain the stability problems.

 

[Reluctant Poster]

It does but the one in the Photo above doesn't for some reason and the one you posted still has the stubs, why?, they aren't required.

The photo is of a restored Spifire. Locking the tail wheel down is prudent.

 

[Reluctant Poster]

I can think of several reasons for the relative unpopularity of the Griffon Spits:

• As amazing as the Spitfire was when first introduced, to some extent the Griffon variants are the success of brute power over grace. Hundreds of hp more, hundreds of kg lighter, a fraction of the range, and the Mk XIV achieves the same top speed as the P-51D (Yes, it climbed like a rocket though).
• Continuing on the grace theme, those bulges over the valve covers definitely detract from it. And the latter variants with the cut-down rear fuselage and bubble canopy, while undoubtedly better fighters, further 'destroy' that classical Spitfire look.
• The Mk IX came at a critical moment, and allowed the RAF to get an edge over the FW 190. By the time the Griffon variants entered service, while it was still a long slog until the end of the war, the tide had turned and the outcome was pretty certain.
• Flight sim players don't have to maintain the Sabre in the Tempest V, or have the engine explode for no reason whatsoever in mid-flight.
• As mentioned, there were relatively few of them in the end compared to the Merlin variants. Then again, there weren't that many Tempest V's either.

As for the Ta 152, perhaps it's interesting in the sense of being the pinnacle of German (single) piston-engined fighters, a bit like the Allied superprops that missed the war?

Slightly off topic but for me the Seafire XV was the best looking Spitfire.

The shorter single stage Griffon (note the location of the exhaust vs the wing) and the smaller tail make for a well balanced design.

 

[wuzak]

The big difference between the XIV and the 21 that is always overlooked is that the 21 had a larger diameter propeller (11' vs 10' 5"). The Griffon 61 in the 21 had a .45 reduction gear vs the .51 of the Griffon 65 in the XIV to avoid tip speed issues.
I believe the larger propeller was responsible for the higher top speed of the 21 but would perhaps explain the stability problems.

The 21 had longer, telescoping landing gear to enable this.

The XIV had the engine tilted down slightly at the front to improve the pilot's field of view.

Did the 21?

 

[mig-31bm]

Mk XIV has the wing from the Spitfire VIII, which is basically the same as the previous versions (IX, V, etc.).

Mk.21 - Mk.24 have the revised wing with slightly different plan form and stronger structure, and fully enclosed landing gear.

Mk.22 was the same as the Mk.21 but with the teardrop canopy and cut back fuselage. The larger fin and rudder of the Spiteful were introduced part way into production, with most being fitted with them.

Mk.23 was experimenting with the wing, not put into production.

Mk.24 was Mk.22 with additional fuel tanks.

Somehow Spitfire XIV appear to be far superior to Spitfire Mk 24 in most respect except for top speed at certain altitude?

Performance of the Spitfire XIVe .
Sea level speed: 397 mph (638.9 km/h)
Top speed: 449 mph (722 km/h) at 24,500 ft (7,468 m)
Climb to 20,000 ft in 5 minutes
Engine horsepower: Griffon 65 engine
2,050 hp
Normal take off weight: 8,574 lbs (3,889 kg)
Wing area: 22.5 m2
Wing loading: 172.8 kg/m2
Power to weight: 0.527 hp/kg (0.239 hp/lbs)
Weapons:
two 0.50 caliber machine gun
two 20 mm cannon

vs

Performance of the Spitfire Mk 24 .
Top speed: 454 mph (722 km/h)
Engine horsepower: Griffon 61 engine
2,050 hp
Normal take off weight: 9898.7 lbs (4,490 kg)
Wing area: 23.6 m2​
Wing loading: 190 kg/m2
Power to weight: 0.45 hp/kg (0.2 hp/lbs)
Weapons:
four 20 mm cannon

 

[z42]

Somehow Spitfire XIV appear to be far superior to Spitfire Mk 24 in most respect except for top speed at certain altitude?

There were a number of advantages of the Mk 24. Off the top of my head:

• Bubble canopy for better visibility (some XIV's had this as well I think?).
• The bigger Spiteful tailplane for better control (though IIRC some XIV's also had these? Nope, no Spiteful tailplane on XIV's).
• Stiffer wing avoiding the aileron reversal issue in high speed dives.
• More powerful armament with four cannons.
• Extra fuel tanks for increased range.

(I think some Mk 24's were equipped with Griffon 85 engines producing more power, but sources seem to differ on this.)

 

[Reluctant Poster]

There were a number of advantages of the Mk 24. Off the top of my head:

• Bubble canopy for better visibility (some XIV's had this as well
• The bigger Spiteful tailplane for better control (though IIRC some XIV's also had these?)

Yes
No

 

[Reluctant Poster]

The 21 had longer, telescoping landing gear to enable this.

The XIV had the engine tilted down slightly at the front to improve the pilot's field of view.

Did the 21?

Yes

 

[wuzak]

There were a number of advantages of the Mk 24. Off the top of my head:

• Bubble canopy for better visibility (some XIV's had this as well I think?).

Yes, as did the Mk.XVIII.

There were a number of advantages of the Mk 24. Off the top of my head:

• The bigger Spiteful tailplane for better control (though IIRC some XIV's also had these?).

No, only added during Mk.22 production.

• Stiffer wing avoiding the aileron reversal issue in high speed dives.

Yes, it had a stiffer wing, which also allowed for carrying bombs under the wings.

Later Spitfires like the VIII amd XIV had stronger wings than the ealry versions, so aileron reversal was less of an issue for them than a Mk.I, II or V.

• More powerful armament with four cannons.

4 cannons were possible in the "universal" C-wing used by some Mk.XIVs.

The E-wing with 2 x 20mm and 2 x 0.50" perhap could have allowed for 4 cannon.

In the end, the XIV was not fitted with 4 x 20mm cannon.

• Extra fuel tanks for increased range.

Yes, but it is also true of the Mk.XVIII.

 

[yulzari]

Trivia following the recent Spitfire posts.

I have been told by an ex Hong Kong RAuxAF pilot that the Spitfire 24 had a critical altitude at which it could accelerate faster than an F86 Sabre. The bar bets with visiting USAF pilots was to meet at a certain height and speed and have a short distance race. With a bit of help from manually operating the propellor pitch as well the Spitfire could leap forward initially while the Sabre was metaphorically gathering up it's skirts ready to dash after it but the race would be over before it could catch up. Funded quite a few bar bills it is alleged. The Spitfire ended its fighter service with the Hong Kong RAuxAF in 1955.

The Spitfire PR Mk19s of 81 Squadron in Hong Kong had then only recently finished their service there for long distance overflights of the mainland at up to 50,000ft carrying 296 imperial gallons (307 US gallons) of fuel giving a range of up to 2,900km (1,800 miles).

 

[don4331]

The 21 had longer, telescoping landing gear to enable this.

The XIV had the engine tilted down slightly at the front to improve the pilot's field of view.

Did the 21?

Don't all Griffon engined Spitfires have the engine tilted slightly down? And it has to do with flying level, not pilot's field of view.

After getting your Spitfire trimmed to fly straight and level, if the engine was "level" when open the throttle and the plane flies faster, it would start to climb due to the increased speed of the air over the wing.​

But by tilting the Griffon slightly downward, when you open the throttle it pulls the nose down just a little. The subtle decrease in angle of attack reduces the lift just enough to balance the increased airspeed and your fighter continues to fly straight and level at the same altitude.​

​

Merlin isn't pointed down as much, because the thrust line from the engine versus the drag from the wing was designed to balance from the start, but the change in thrust line (and amount of power) of the Griffon made the change to the engine tilt noticeable.​

​

Those Supermarine boys were pretty darn smart to make it so pilot wasn't continuously having to retrim.