Six stack Spit Vc's were they using a different engine?

[Alban]

Hi, I keep coming up with images of late spitfire V's with six rather than three stack exhausts. Were different engines other than the Merlin 45 being applied to these versions? They all universaly come from the late war era 44 or 45, were spit V's being retrofitted or did the production exhast stack change in late manufacture?. I'm surprised to keep coming over this, as far as I know the V ceased production in 43.

I hope you dudes can give me a hand with this one, i'm a bit bemused.


Cheers
Alban

 

[Jabberwocky]

Hi, I keep coming up with images of late spitfire V's with six rather than three stack exhausts. Were different engines other than the Merlin 45 being applied to these versions? They all universaly come from the late war era 44 or 45, were spit V's being retrofitted or did the production exhast stack change in late manufacture?. I'm surprised to keep coming over this, as far as I know the V ceased production in 43.

I hope you dudes can give me a hand with this one, i'm a bit bemused.


Cheers
Alban

As far as I know, no.

The multi-stack ejectors "six stack" could be fitted to Merlin engines regardless of type. But, the multi-injector wasn't fitted to production Spitfires until the advent of the MK IX.

Seafires operated with with multi-ejector exhausts with Merlin 32 engines, Merlin 46s, Merlin 55s and Merlin 55Ms.

There is an AEA test of an old Mk V that they cleaned up, repainted and waxed. Replacing the standard fish tail ejectors with multi-stack ejectors added something like 8 mph to top speed. They improved top speed from an underperforming 357 mph to 385 mph, about 15 mph better than the Mk V was initially rated for.

To the best of my knowledge, the retrofit was not standard, and was mostly done to Mk Vs LFs in Italy and NW Europe, when they were used as low at bomb trucks. That extra few mph was probably welcome when facing 109Gs and 190As at low altitude.

 

[pbfoot]

I've read of one pilot that had his groundcrew change the stacks from 3 to 6 for the extra power. This took place on a 417 bird in the MTO.

 

[Airframes]

Is it possible that the photos in question are of restored aircraft flying today? There were a number of Spits, including the BBMF's MkV, which at one time were powered by what was available which, in the case of the BBMF's MkV in the 1980's was, I think, a Packard Merlin 266. This particular aircraft also flew with a 4 blade prop at one time. Since then, many warbird owners/operators have tried to retain as much 'authenticity' as possible, fitting the correct exhausts/engines etc etc. for the type, or its appearance.
Just a thought!

 

[Alban]

Thanks guys, I think that feild repairs might have been what was in question but the old type of stack looks decidely "draggy" beside the smaller six stack. Intersting that there was a small increase in performance from the later exhausts, perhaps both issues were at work. Nice to have a question answerd so well.

Thanks again
Alban

 

[magnu]

I can't for the life of me remember where I read it but IIRC A spitfire pilot flying in the desert campaign was so determined to hang on to his preferred exhaust stacks that he always carried an appropriate size of spanner with him. One day he failed to return, only to show up at base walking out of the desert with his exhausts ready to be fitted to his replacement aircraft

 

[Alban]

I can't for the life of me remember where I read it but IIRC A spitfire pilot flying in the desert campaign was so determined to hang on to his preferred exhaust stacks that he always carried an appropriate size of spanner with him. One day he failed to return, only to show up at base walking out of the desert with his exhausts ready to be fitted to his replacement aircraft

Now that's one pilot dedicated to his job.

thanks
Alban