Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Just so everyone is clear, the Greg's Aviation site is not mine. It's another Greg. I like some of his stuff, but some of his contentions are a bit suspect, at least to me. Still, pretty good efforts on his part in general.
I like them WAY more than I dislike or disagree with them.
What was Quill & Brown's rationale?I find it completely baffling that so many of you are putting so much effort into finding out reasons why the Spit shouldn't have it's fuel capacity increased, I can't think of any aeroplane that didn't benefit from it. Jeffrey Quill and Winkle Brown both pushed for it
Actually that's exactly what happened later in the war, the Spit's lack of range meant they did pointless short range escort missions and saw nothing or pointless fighter sweeps over the low countries also seeing nothing. A fighter that had expended it's ammo is heading home regardless of what it's mission is, giving the Spit more fuel allows more chance of it getting into action, ideally you want them coming home empty, that means they are doing their job.I'm not saying that all Spitfires expended their entire ammunition supply on short-range missions; they didn't. But a large percentage did. If they kept returning without seeing any action, then they would have been reassigned to other missions where they DID see action. Nobody keeps flying non-effective missions for too long. There is no point.
More endurance, the Spits biggest handicap was it's lack of endurance. Go and read about the Spit in WW2, everything it did was dictated by its range, it's lack of range,What was Quill & Brown's rationale?
Also did they have any known specific proposals for stuffing more fuel in?
Okay.Please Pat, let it go.
Actually that's exactly what happened later in the war, the Spit's lack of range meant they did pointless short range escort missions and saw nothing or pointless fighter sweeps over the low countries also seeing nothing. A fighter that had expended it's ammo is heading home regardless of what it's mission is, giving the Spit more fuel allows more chance of it getting into action, ideally you want them coming home empty, that means they are doing their job.
Greg, the Spit had 85G of fuel for one reason and that was because that's all that could be carried aloft with the then available engine power, the airframe had great growth potential and adaptability as shown by the vast number of models and rolls it was developed into which coincided with Merlin/Griffin engine development. The need to limit it's fuel capacity based on 1937-9 engine power was long gone by 1942, anyway I'll take glennashers advice and leave it.That only happened after the war was essentially won, when the competent Luftwaffe was getting scarce. When that happens, your range available from your short-range fighters doesn't matter, you have won the war and the enemy only has to realize it and surrender. Any aerial action after that is almost superfluous.
That was mostly after about February 1945. In 1944, the USAAF averaged 869 German airplanes destroyed each month. In Jan - Mar 1945, they averaged 558. In April 1945, the USAAF destroyed 4,257 German aircraft, 3,703 of them on the ground. Can you say "Collapse of the Luftwaffe as a Fighting Force?"
No.Actually that's exactly what happened later in the war, the Spit's lack of range meant they did pointless short range escort missions and saw nothing or pointless fighter sweeps over the low countries also seeing nothing. A fighter that had expended it's ammo is heading home regardless of what it's mission is, giving the Spit more fuel allows more chance of it getting into action, ideally you want them coming home empty, that means they are doing their job.
Scones are Scottish. Biscuits are the Brits.Perhaps they had to get back for tea, scones, and darts?
Biscuit is French for "cooked twice" (you may note a little thread drift here)..and now I know.
Scones are Scottish. Biscuits are the Brits.
The best southern biscuits are made with White Lily Flour.Biscuit is French for "cooked twice" (you may note a little thread drift here)
And covered in breakfast gravy!The best southern biscuits are made with White Lily Flour.
Pat,A fighter that had expended it's ammo is heading home regardless of what it's mission is, giving the Spit more fuel allows more chance of it getting into action, ideally you want them coming home empty, that means they are doing their job.
Internal fuel capacity is the determinant - not external tanks. Whatever you have left after dropping externals and a.) fight for 20 in, b.) economy cruise home, c.) loiter for 30 min is central to Combat Radius estimates.
P-51B/D with fuse tank = 269gal.
Spitfire was designed to slightly lower stress limits than Mustang - at the beginning of its life cycle.
Both the wing and the cooling drag attributes contributed to superior cruise and top speed aerodynamics for the Mustang although the thin(er) wing of the Spitfire gave slightly better Cdmach profile than Mustang wing.
Changing the cooling system approach to imbedded Radiator system would have been a huge fuselage re-design (my speculation) due to differences in aft frame volumes and structure to accomodate the new Meredith type system.
Significant is he lack thereof in the later models of Spit after several years experience and knowledge of the 'do/don't do' of Mustang I and evolution of external/internal configuration changes. Even with the original allotment of NA-73/83 airframes for Merlin conversion, no attempt was made to lift the cooling system into a later model Spitfire toimprove aerodynamics. All the major changes were horsepower driven.