Differences between Spitfire Mk. IXc IXe ?

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by mnuyens, Nov 26, 2008.

  1. mnuyens

    mnuyens New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
  2. Doubl3Ac3

    Doubl3Ac3 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2008
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    In my Igloo in Canada
    a quick look at the 2 and i noticed that the Mk.IXe carried 2x.50cal MG as its primary weapon compared to the 2x Hispano Mk.II 20mm cannon the IXc used.
    The Ixc was more versatile with bomb ordnances as bombs could be fixed under the fuselage or on the wings as with the IXe could only carry one 500lb under the fuselage. Im not too sure on this one but it looks like the IXc was also alot faster too clocking in around 400 mph. Durability went to the IXe just cause it had a little more armor, both planes wouldnt be able to take much damage due to their size.

    i hope that helped you a bit i couldnt find much info on them other then that
     
  3. Airframes

    Airframes Benevolens Magister

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    47,691
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Cheshire, UK
    The main external (and structural) difference between the two, especially as far as model-making is concerned, is the wing. The 'E' means 'E' type wing, often refered to as the 'universal' wing. If you are modelling the MkXIV, you will need to alter the cannon blisters of the MkIX, especially if it is a IXc, to the smaller, narrower blisters of the MkXIV.
    If you are stuck for drawings, I THINK I have drawings or sketches of the 'E' wing, showing the differences, and the options for the layout and positioning of the armament. The 'E' wing was configured for 20mm cannon, .50 cal Browning, and .303 Browning, and this armament could be mixed. The 'stub' fairing shown beside the cannon fairing was where the .50 cal was mounted, if used, and could be inboard, or outboard. If the 'stub' is rounded at its outer face, the .50 cal is not fitted.
    If you need to check further, you will be better posting this, I would think, in the Modelling threads. It is possible to do a conversion using two full kits, as I did many years ago. I used the Hasegawa MkV (1/32nd scale) and the Matchbox Mk22/24, using the cowlings, prop, radiators, landing gear and cannon blisters, plus other parts, from the latter. The old Matchbox kit has recently been re-released under the Revell lable.
    Terry.
     
  4. claidemore

    claidemore Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    682
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    British Columbia, Canada
    AFAIK Spitfires came with four different types of wings, A,B,C and E. The A wing had eight .303 Browning mgs, the B wing had four .303 and two 20mm Hispanos. The C wing was the "universal" wing, which could mount either four 20mms, 2x20mm with 4 x.303s or 8 x .303s (rarely). The E wing had the .50 Brownings mounted inboard of the two 20mm Hispanos, never outboard. The "D" wing was the unarmed wing in the recon models with extra fuel tanks in the leading edge.
    I believe the C and E wings have some structural differences that allow the E to mount the .50s. Would have to check drawings to be sure.

    Supermarine Spitfire - the gun wings
    Check out the photo of the Mk IXc at the above URL, it has the narrow blisters over the cannon.
     
  5. Airframes

    Airframes Benevolens Magister

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    47,691
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Cheshire, UK
    Claidemore is quite right, my apologies!
    Although the 'C' wing was the first so-called 'universal' wing, due to the ability to accept differing armament fittings, it is generally accepted that the 'E' wing was referred to as the 'universal' wing. Yes, the .50 cal Brownings WERE mounted inboard on this wing, not out or in as I originally wrote! The reason was, if the cannon and .50cal were mounted, as Claidemore quite rightly stated, it allowed more room for the cannon ammunition and the feedway/feed mechanism, which was a lot 'bulkier' than that for the .50 cal. Also, on the 'E' wing, capable of carrying up to 1,000lb of external stores, it had been found that, if two cannon were mounted (per wing), the weight of the stores and rack was causing stress problems, effecting the structure of the wing, as the rack hard-points were near, if not on, the same mounting area for the guns.
    I have attached two sketches of the relevant wings, and note that the 'E' wing sketch shows the .50 cal in place (blunt end to fairing). On the 'C' wing, the single cannon (per wing) could be mounted inboard, or outboard, depending on time of manufacture, i.e., before later production modifcation. (That was my area of confusion/brain fade in my earlier response!) If the 'stub' fairing has a domed cover, then that weapon's position is empty. Note that on the earlier 'C' wings, the upper surface 'blister' over the cannon hatch was wider, and flatter and, if you need drawings of this, I can supply them. However, when the MkXIV was introduced in the XIV c, the blisters were the later, narrow, long type. Note also the differences in the size/shape of the cannon access hatches on the 'E' wing. NB, the letters (E/C) are normally shown in lower case in the mark numbers, I used upper case for clarity.
    Again, hope this helps, and thanks to Claidemore for prompting me to check my errors!
    Terry.
     

    Attached Files:

Loading...

Share This Page