Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Did they?View attachment 665577
All mark III's had leading edge tanks
Seafire tanks were 13.5G from the MkVII/VIIIThis 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 ....."
He was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.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
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.
Why do some sources say 13 and others say 13.5 gallons for the inboard wing-tanks?Seafire tanks were 13.5G from the MkVII/VIII
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.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.
HiHe was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.
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.I have my doubts about the introduction of the 20mm Hispano MK V cannon.
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.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?
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 interestingSo the position of the cannon in the wing can't account for the shorter shroud on later Seafire III.
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.Why do some sources say 13 and others say 13.5 gallons for the inboard wing-tanks?
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 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.
Doesn't matter what the did with airframe/s.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.
He was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.
57 missions or 57 enemy encounters?He was in combat 57 times in 3 years, is that considered busy?.
Hi57 missions or 57 enemy encounters?
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 shouldExcept 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.
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.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.