Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Left main because carb overflow return line supplies return to L. Main. After Group formation, switch to 85gal tank and depending on mission - burn 2-40gal depending on tank fill amt, then alternate externals until near dry (no gauges) - then alternate Mains. At some point near end of mission drain fuse tank to 20gal.Bill,
I know you've posted something like this before but blame closed head injuries and alcohol.
For a typical long range penetration with P-51 using say two 75gal drop tanks, what's the order of tanks that you'd use from start up to mission end? I seem to recall you start with the left wing tank or am I mistaken?
Blame my obsession with minutia for this.
Thanks
That statement is only 25% true!It was used for fuel in the PR Spitfires,
MLG?So again I ask, what is in that inboard space that prevented it being used for fuel?
I will try and keep this simple so you can understand, the 29G ferry tank was only used for ferry operations but the MkIX which used the same fuselage was fitted with a 33G permanent tank in the same position, this is my argument, why fit a 29G ferry tank that doesn't create drag only to remove it and fit a 30G slipper tank that does?.
So simply increasing the original MkVIII/Seafire MkIII tank by 9 Gallons is out of the question yet they were able to design it to take not only four Hispano's but another complete cooling system for all the two stage Merlins?.
The MkIII was the first, I even posted a photo of it.With regard to the Seafire, the Griffon engined Mk.XV was the first variant to be fitted with the leading edge wing tanks.
Sydney Cotton did it, that's probably the reason why he wasn't popular, instead of making excuses he just made it happen.According to the design staff at Supermarine YES or they would have done it.
Plus it would have required design changes and modifications that had not been created when the Mk I, II & V were designed and manufactured.
The design staff at Supermarine were not imbeciles.
Probably the same thing that prevented the rear fuselage space being used for fuel, even after the Americans proved it could be done.So again I ask, what is in that inboard space that prevented it being used for fuel?
No, not the Mk.III...The MkIII was the first, I even posted a photo of it.
An interesting series of posts on the MKIII. I forgot to include the link:No, not the Mk.III...
The Americans didn't prove it could be done until 1944. In the meantime they had to use Spitfires to make up for their slow production of useful fighters.Probably the same thing that prevented the rear fuselage space being used for fuel, even after the Americans proved it could be done.
You posted a photo of a diagram purporting to show it. But other evidence suggests it is wrongly labelled as the Mk.III, even though it purports to come from the FAAM and has been published elsewhere. Perhaps the problem lies with the interpretation of the caption in the bottom LH corner which is referring to the wing fold mechanism first seen on the Seafire III and carried forward to the Seafire XV & XVII.The MkIII was the first, I even posted a photo of it.
Which automatically means that all the guns were removed as they normally passed through the area outboard of rib 8.That statement is only 25% true!
The 66.5 gal wing tank (in each wing) that was first installed in the PR.IV Type D (Special LR) .... ran from rib 4 (not rib 1) to rib 21, leaving the space between ribs 1 & 4 "empty".
I am not familiar with that document - please expand the title. I cannot think of any RAF Air Publication that could be abbreviated to M&S.There is a diagram showing the layout on p243 of M&S (bottom left).
There is a lot of hardware in that area that maintenance staff need to access on a regular basis. The attachment hardware for the main landing gear pintles being the most important and those are inspected regularly and after any heavy landing. The area can be inspected with the cowls off. To inspect it when the area is filled with a tank would require removing the wing and tank for access.So again I ask, what is in that inboard space that prevented it being used for fuel?
You posted a picture of the SEAfire Mk III which is Supermarine type 358 and is a totally different aircraft from the Spitfire III which was the Supermarine type 330 and designed long after the Mk V which was type 349.The MkIII was the first, I even posted a photo of it.
Sydney Cotton did it, that's probably the reason why he wasn't popular, instead of making excuses he just made it happen.
That is from the 8th AF Tactical Development doc, pg 97. It is confusing for multiple reasons, namely the dates are incorrect if intent was to cite Escort Range vs Fighter Mission for planning purposes. The accepted FAREP documents cite both with the Fighter Mission straight line single ship examples.
AgreedWhich automatically means that all the guns were removed as they normally passed through the area outboard of rib 8.
The weight of fuel and cameras carried would have been around the same weight as the removed guns and ammo.
It was a reference to the book "Spitfire The History" by Morgan & Shacklady (hence the M&S abbreviation), which was what I immediately had to hand.I am not familiar with that document - please expand the title. I cannot think of any RAF Air Publication that could be abbreviated to M&S.
Yes, that was the bit I had identified as noted in my earlier post. But I wondered what else.There is a lot of hardware in that area that maintenance staff need to access on a regular basis. The attachment hardware for the main landing gear pintles being the most important and those are inspected regularly and after any heavy landing. The area can be inspected with the cowls off. To inspect it when the area is filled with a tank would require removing the wing and tank for access.
One thing I have wondered about is just how interchangable the different tanks were. For example, the P-47 had that "flat" 108 gal belly tank that I do not think that was used on any other aircraft. Of course its design was to accommodate that low hanging belly of the P-47.For example 108gal Bowater tanks were initially delivered in September but 56th FG for example first used them 'Group wide' in late October,