Spitfire Combat Radius (range) evolution, limitations?

[EwenS]

View attachment 665577
All mark III's had leading edge tanks

Did they?

That diagram appears exactly as captioned in the Crowood book by Kev Darling on the Seafire p61. Yes it purports to have been provided by the FAAM (Fleet Air Arm Museum) but does it represent a Seafire III wing? In Appendix IV in that book then goes on to list the internal fuel capacities as follows:-
Merlin powered - 48gal (fuselage tp tank) 37gal (fuselage lower) for a total of 85gals.
Griffon powered (Mk.XV & XVII) - 80.5gal (fuselage tanks) 19.5gal (wing root tanks)

This from David Brown's "The Seafire. The Spitfire that went to Sea" about the development of the Griffon powered Seafire XV:-
"....To the Spitfire VB-based fuselage and the LIII folding wings were added ...... wing root fuel tanks from the Spitfire IX ....."

And from "Spitfire the History" in the section on the development of the Seafire XV and the changes to get to that mark:-
"F Mk IX Mareng fuel cells were specified for internal wing fuel."
And that same diagram, without the blurb in the bottom left hand corner appears, but with some additional details on spar construction, not in the section on the Mk.III, but in the section on the Mk.XV. See page 554.

David Brown lists the internal fuel capacity as 85gals for ALL Merlin Seafires. For the Seafire XV & XVII 80.5gals in fuselage tanks and 19.5gals in wing-root tanks. These figures are supported by "Spitfire the History", and, as pointed out by Geoffrey Sinclair, the Pilots Notes.

So other than the diagram that you posted, I can't put my hands on any evidence that the Seafire III was fitted with wing tanks. Everything else points to the contrary.

As for the fitting of Vokes air filters to the Seafires, David Brown notes in the section on development of the Seafire IIc, that a number of aircraft were fitted with them but then a decision was taken to delete it from later production aircraft "and the risk of excessive engine wear was accepted". So you will find photos of Seafire IIc on Formidable in 1943 fitted with the bulky Vokes filters. But L.IIc/LRIIc (both production line and by conversion) and early production Mk.III did without any filter at all and the photo evidence supports that. The smaller filter, as fitted to Spitfire VIII/IX etc, was then fitted on the production line from later in 1944 and probably retrofitted to earlier surviving aircraft. So I would question whether any Cunliffe Owen Mk.III were actually fitted with the Vokes filter before the neater version was introduced around Sept 1944.

The Spitfire 'C' wing, as used on the Seafire IIc/LIIc/LRIIc/early fixed wing Mk.III was modified internally for later Mk.III, including deletion of the outboard cannon bay and blast tube. Not sure when that occurred but it must have been later in 1943 or even earl 1944 as there are photos around of early folding wing F.III with cannon stubs. The first 30 or so Mk.III got fixed wings. It was Oct/Nov 1943 before folding wing versions began coming off the production lines.

As for the ejector exhausts this was a later introduction. Even early F.III produced in late 1943 didn't have them. At the moment I suspect that they were introduced initially on the low level rated Merlin engined aircraft like the L.IIc/LR.IIc and which then formed the bulk of later Mk.III production (i.e. all bar about the first 103 Mk.III). David Brown puts the first conversions of Mk.IIc to L.IIc as March 1943 but as the Barracuda had priority for the low level rated Merlin 32 it was mid-May 1943 before the first squadron received its full complement, but by Aug 76 were in service.

As for the change to the slim cannon bulges that was being made on Spitfires from early 1943 (Mk.VIII for example from sometime around Jan-Mar). There are photos of early Seafire Mk.IIc with the broad bulges.

 

[PAT303]

If you read up on the Seafires service in the Med the FAA found the MkII's couldn't catch Ju88's so started looking at ways to solve that, like all Spitfire development war production came first but the FAA started to look for solutions to the problem of lack of performance and lack of range straight away. From what I have found the MkIII was hampered by the production line jigs being wrongly made but the first ones were used at the Salerno landings in 1943, the MkIII also got the Hispano MkV cannons. The FAA did more with less compared to the RAF.

 

[PAT303]

This from David Brown's "The Seafire. The Spitfire that went to Sea" about the development of the Griffon powered Seafire XV:-
"....To the Spitfire VB-based fuselage and the LIII folding wings were added ...... wing root fuel tanks from the Spitfire IX ....."

Seafire tanks were 13.5G from the MkVII/VIII

 

[PAT303]

Hi
JEJ does not mention much about "empty skies" while flying Spitfire XIVs in Chapter 19 'The Fated Sky' in his book 'Wing Leader', in fact he appears to have had a busy time, what source are you quoting?

Mike

He was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.

 

[Shortround6]

I have my doubts about the introduction of the 20mm Hispano MK V cannon.

Land based Spitfires didn't get them until after WW II. Even MK 24s show the longer cannon.
The Tempest didn't get them until the end (?) of the first production batch of 100 aircraft which took until May of 1944 to complete.

Since the barrels were about 10in shorter and had shorter recoil springs good photographs should show the difference in barrel lengths/shrouds.
Fitting a short barrel cannon in a long shroud/fairing is not going to work well.

 

[EwenS]

If you read up on the Seafires service in the Med the FAA found the MkII's couldn't catch Ju88's so started looking at ways to solve that, like all Spitfire development war production came first but the FAA started to look for solutions to the problem of lack of performance and lack of range straight away. From what I have found the MkIII was hampered by the production line jigs being wrongly made but the first ones were used at the Salerno landings in 1943, the MkIII also got the Hispano MkV cannons. The FAA did more with less compared to the RAF.

I'm well aware of the history of the Seafire and its problems. Perhaps more so than you it would appear.

The first operational use of the Seafire was during Operation Torch in Nov 1942. That was a MK.Ib/IIc show. And yes the Admiralty were trying to get the max out of the aircraft. But any improvements to it were in 1943 after that experience during Torch.

The first Seafire III were not used at Salerno. Salerno was a Mk.IIc/LIIc affair. The first issue of the Mk.III was to 894 squadron in Nov 1943, being 12 F.III, after it returned from operating from Illustrious and Unicorn at Salerno. By the time of Salerno (9-16 Sept 1943) less than a dozen Mk.III had left the production line.

As for the switch from the Hispano Mk.II to Mk.V, no one has so far managed to pin down exactly when that change occurred but it wasn't until well into 1944. I took part in a detailed discussion on another site over 2 years ago and the conclusion that we reached collectively was that the changeover must have happpened on the Westland production line late in 1944 (probably sometime between Sept and Nov 1944) with Cunliffe Owen probably being a few months behind that. That was from an analysis of many, many photos by a number of people until we were all going blind looking at Seafires! Many of the aircraft around then were being packed up and sent to the Far East & Australia so relatively few made it to the front line squadrons before the end of the war.

So there were lot of changes to the Mk.III during its production run from April 1943 to July 1945. Some of which I noted in my previous post.

 

[Zipper730]

Seafire tanks were 13.5G from the MkVII/VIII

Why do some sources say 13 and others say 13.5 gallons for the inboard wing-tanks?

 

[EwenS]

I have my doubts about the introduction of the 20mm Hispano MK V cannon.

Land based Spitfires didn't get them until after WW II. Even MK 24s show the longer cannon.
The Tempest didn't get them until the end (?) of the first production batch of 100 aircraft which took until May of 1944 to complete.

Since the barrels were about 10in shorter and had shorter recoil springs good photographs should show the difference in barrel lengths/shrouds.
Fitting a short barrel cannon in a long shroud/fairing is not going to work well.

I agree about the Tempest. The Mk.V was introduced on the Tempest V Series II, in other words after the first 100 aircraft had been produced.

See my comments about the Seafire in my last post.

The Spitfire's issue with the Mk.V cannon becomes more complicated. One point that came out in that discussion two years ago was about a confusion between short barrelled cannon and the position in the wing that the Mk.II cannon was placed in resulting in it needing a shorter shroud when it protrudes from the wing. Compare the Mk.II cannon in a 'C' wing in the inboard cannon bay with an 'E' wing where the cannon is fitted in the outer bay. The former sits further forward in the wing and so needs a longer shroud.

I would agree that most of the Spitfires up to the Mk.24 had the long barrelled Mk.II cannon. But all? I offer you a photo of F.24 VN479 that left the factory in April 1948.

Supermarine Spitfire Mk24 serial VN479 | World War Photos

Spitfire Mk24 serial VN479 on the ground

www.worldwarphotos.info

Compare that with F.22 PK684 that was built in 1946.

Spitfire Mk24 serial PK684 on the ground | World War Photos

Supermarine Spitfire Mk24 serial PK684 on the ground

www.worldwarphotos.info

As I noted in a previous post the wing structure on the Seafire III was reworked at some point to delete the outer cannon bay altogether, a feature inherited by the Seafire XV/XVII. So the position of the cannon in the wing can't account for the shorter shroud on later Seafire III.

 

[MikeMeech]

He was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.

Hi
Sorry I do not understand. It was you who said that in his writings JEJ mentioned that he was flying around "empty skies" in his Spitfire Mk. XIV, I just stated that in the relevant chapter in his book 'Wing Leader' he does not appear to be saying that at all. I just wondered where the information you stated came from? After all he was not flying Mk. XIVs all the time in those three years so what is the relevance to your statement?

Mike

 

[PAT303]

I have my doubts about the introduction of the 20mm Hispano MK V cannon.

Can only go off what I read on the Spitfire/Seafire/FAA web pages/forums, I also think its a bit early but the FAA didn't stuff around with the Seafire, the MkIII was a totally different animal to the MkV based Seafire II, it took a development line similar to the Spitfire MkIII/VIII/XIV not the interim MkV/IX route.

 

[PAT303]

Hi
Sorry I do not understand. It was you who said that in his writings JEJ mentioned that he was flying around "empty skies" in his Spitfire Mk. XIV, I just stated that in the relevant chapter in his book 'Wing Leader' he does not appear to be saying that at all. I just wondered where the information you stated came from? After all he was not flying Mk. XIVs all the time in those three years so what is the relevance to your statement?

I have read he stated that, I will go back and look for the source where I found it, to give you another example, he was the leader of 610 squadron, the first time they had aux tanks fitted and flew across the German border was in September 1944, that's a long time after aux/drop tanks were designed for the Spit and approved for service. He liked the MkIXe the best, it was specifically designed to fight the FW190 at around 20,000ft, it's best altitude.

 

[PAT303]

So the position of the cannon in the wing can't account for the shorter shroud on later Seafire III.

MkIX's also got the smaller bulges but for some reason kept the stub's, it's a bit like they threw the standards out the window sometimes which makes it difficult, but interesting

 

[PAT303]

Why do some sources say 13 and others say 13.5 gallons for the inboard wing-tanks?

The extra 0.5 could be in the lines?, honestly don't know. What's silly is there is enough room for double that but the space wasn't used, look at the diagram, heaps of space for more fuel.

 

[EwenS]

I have read he stated that, I will go back and look for the source where I found it, to give you another example, he was the leader of 610 squadron, the first time they had aux tanks fitted and flew across the German border was in September 1944, that's a long time after aux/drop tanks were designed for the Spit and approved for service. He liked the MkIXe the best, it was specifically designed to fight the FW190 at around 20,000ft, it's best altitude.

Except he wasn't involved with 610 squadron in Sept 1944. He had been commander of 610 between July 1942 and March 1943. Check out the squadron's own website. During his time with that unit they were flying Spitfire V.

No. 610 (County of Chester) Squadron

Led by keen and courageous pilots and supported by a loyal and efficient ground staff, No. 610 (County of Chester) Auxiliary Squadron was a R.A.F. unit of which, not only the County of Chester, but the whole of Britain can indeed be proud.

web.archive.org

In Sept 1942 610 was based at Ludham in Norfolk. You can get the squadron ORB as a free download from The National Archives provided you register, which will let you see exactly what the squadron was doing.

In Sept 1944 JEJ commanded 127 Wing comprising 403, 421, 416 and 443 squadrons. These were all Spitfire IX equipped until Dec 1944 / Jan 1945 when they received Spitfire XVI. 403 and 421 disbanded in June and July 1945 without another change of equipment. 416 finally got Spitfire XIV in Sept 1945 while 443 got them in Jan 1946. Both those units disbanded in March 1946.

As I pointed out 610 squadron was only in 127 Wing in Dec 1944 after which it moved to 125 Wing. By the time JEJ arrived to command 125 Wing at the end of March 1945, 610 squadron was gone. It had returned to Britain on 21 Feb 1945 and disbanded on 3 March 1945.

So the story as you are telling it is nonsense and doesn't fit the facts. Time to go back and reread the book.

 

[Shortround6]

Can only go off what I read on the Spitfire/Seafire/FAA web pages/forums, I also think its a bit early but the FAA didn't stuff around with the Seafire, the MkIII was a totally different animal to the MkV based Seafire II, it took a development line similar to the Spitfire MkIII/VIII/XIV not the interim MkV/IX route.

Doesn't matter what the did with airframe/s.
When were the MK V guns ready?

The MK V was shorter, lighter and fired faster.
Would seem like a no Brainer to fit it in as many planes as you could.
Throw in the shorter barrel shrouds have less drag and there isn't any real down side.

The 10in shorter barrels and shorter barrel shrouds should show up in any decent photo

 

[GregP]

He was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.

You might read on JEJ a bit, if only out of curiosity. No dig intended, Pat; interesting reading, really. He was wounded and spent considerable time in the hospital and in recovery. So, he missed some combat time but, when he WAS in combat, he did quite well.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

He was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.

57 missions or 57 enemy encounters?

 

[MikeMeech]

57 missions or 57 enemy encounters?

Hi
According to 'Wing Leader', at the end of Chapter 18, when he left to go onto Spitfire XIVs he states that in his previous Spitfire IX "... during the previous twelve months, had carried me on nearly 200 operations." The book 'Aces High' by Shores and Williams, pages 357-358, has JEJ with claims of 34 and 7 shared destroyed, 3 and 7 shared probables, 10 and 3 shared damaged. He also of course flew with the USAF in the Korean War during 1950-51 while on an exchange tour (from 1948).

Mike

 

[PAT303]

Except he wasn't involved with 610 squadron in Sept 1944. He had been commander of 610 between July 1942 and March 1943. Check out the squadron's own website. During his time with that unit they were flying Spitfire V.

I'm using it as an example of just how slow the RAF was to fit aux fuel tanks onto the Spitfire, the MkXIV was a brute, it even had a 90G tank approved for combat that wasn't utilized as much as it should

 

[PAT303]

You might read on JEJ a bit, if only out of curiosity. No dig intended, Pat; interesting reading, really. He was wounded and spent considerable time in the hospital and in recovery. So, he missed some combat time but, when he WAS in combat, he did quite well.

He was a hell of a pilot, he shot down a lot of 190's, not doubting that, problem is the RAF had many pilots like him flying the Spitfire that could have made a major contribution to the daylight bombing compain ''IF'' they were given the chance.