- Thread starter
- #21
Spitfire Manuals
- Thread starter Micdrow
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Holtzauge
Airman 1st Class
Hi,
I have long been a frequent visitor here and uploaded lots of stuff. So now I think it is time to reverse this and therefore I attach an article I scanned from the German magazine Luftwissen.
Also, I would like to extend my personal thanks to Micdrow for his tireless work in this forum and all the great stuff he has made available to us all.
Thanks Micdrow!
BR//Holtzauge
I have long been a frequent visitor here and uploaded lots of stuff. So now I think it is time to reverse this and therefore I attach an article I scanned from the German magazine Luftwissen.
Also, I would like to extend my personal thanks to Micdrow for his tireless work in this forum and all the great stuff he has made available to us all.
Thanks Micdrow!
BR//Holtzauge
- Thread starter
- #23
Many thanks and your welcome Holtzauge!!!
DKoor
Airman
Nice. Thanks!
Hi Holtzauge,
>So now I think it is time to reverse this and therefore I attach an article I scanned from the German magazine Luftwissen.
Thanks a lot!
An interesting bit of information: "The extremely stiff wing nose box was originally designed to be used as a condenser for the intended steam-cooled engine was implemented for this purpose as a steam-tight and pressure-resistant part."
I've never heard of this before - is it real, or is it some German misunderstanding?
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
>So now I think it is time to reverse this and therefore I attach an article I scanned from the German magazine Luftwissen.
Thanks a lot!
An interesting bit of information: "The extremely stiff wing nose box was originally designed to be used as a condenser for the intended steam-cooled engine was implemented for this purpose as a steam-tight and pressure-resistant part."
I've never heard of this before - is it real, or is it some German misunderstanding?
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
Holtzauge
Airman 1st Class
Yes, it does contain some nice info and astute observations does it not? Typical German thoroughness!
Some quick comments on some German observations:
Page1:
"Flugzeugfuhrer....bemängeln die etwas geringe Längdstabilitet". So the Germans think it's too sensitive in pitch. Intersting to compare with the British complaints about the heavy elevator control on the 109. It's all about what you are used to I suppose
A nice touch is also where they say "Die Leistungen der Spitfire wurden.....stark ubertriben" and go on to mention the discrepancy beween British numbers and what they have measured themselves on captured aircraft. Kinda reminicient of British evaluations of the Me109...
Page 2:
Notice they know of the original plans for only 4 MG's and their observation that the late addition of the other 4 leads to a rather (in their view) poor arrangement of the guns!
Page 3: "Bemerkungen der Aerodynamik": They chalk one up for the Spit on aerodynamics as "recht gut" and "gefähige Formen"
OTOH they seem unimpressed by the choise of airfoil: "Ein Schnellflugprofil stellt es nicht dar"
Page 4: They complain about the air intake (I think?) and that this is made out of an Elektron (Magnesium) cast with 12 mm thick walls weighing a in their view hefty 5 kg?
Page 7: Interesting point on the balancing of the ailerons: "12 kleine 25 g-Bleigewichte" that could be inserted in a tube?. That was new info for me....
Further, they observe that a lot of control surfaces use brass bearings as oppsed to ball bearings. I think the Germans used mostly ball bearings for control surfaces?
It would be good if someone with a good grasp of German could translate it completely though.....
Holtzauge
Some quick comments on some German observations:
Page1:
"Flugzeugfuhrer....bemängeln die etwas geringe Längdstabilitet". So the Germans think it's too sensitive in pitch. Intersting to compare with the British complaints about the heavy elevator control on the 109. It's all about what you are used to I suppose
A nice touch is also where they say "Die Leistungen der Spitfire wurden.....stark ubertriben" and go on to mention the discrepancy beween British numbers and what they have measured themselves on captured aircraft. Kinda reminicient of British evaluations of the Me109...
Page 2:
Notice they know of the original plans for only 4 MG's and their observation that the late addition of the other 4 leads to a rather (in their view) poor arrangement of the guns!
Page 3: "Bemerkungen der Aerodynamik": They chalk one up for the Spit on aerodynamics as "recht gut" and "gefähige Formen"
OTOH they seem unimpressed by the choise of airfoil: "Ein Schnellflugprofil stellt es nicht dar"
Page 4: They complain about the air intake (I think?) and that this is made out of an Elektron (Magnesium) cast with 12 mm thick walls weighing a in their view hefty 5 kg?
Page 7: Interesting point on the balancing of the ailerons: "12 kleine 25 g-Bleigewichte" that could be inserted in a tube?. That was new info for me....
Further, they observe that a lot of control surfaces use brass bearings as oppsed to ball bearings. I think the Germans used mostly ball bearings for control surfaces?
It would be good if someone with a good grasp of German could translate it completely though.....
Holtzauge
Kurfürst
Staff Sergeant
Nice find. At first I thought its the same stuff as the DVL report on the early Spitfire types, but seems to be rather just based on the DVL findings, reproduced in Luftwissen. DVL also expressed its scepticism about specification claimed by the British, so I guess the article roots in the DVL report (which also examines the Mk I and II).
Again, kind of a mirror image of 'Flight Magazine' basically repeating RAE reports..
Again, kind of a mirror image of 'Flight Magazine' basically repeating RAE reports..
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
The Spitfire was designed for another Rolls Royce engine which name escapes me. It was steam cooled and so water needed to be cooled in the leading edges of the wings.
The Merlin had glycol cooling but the design was already fixed so the Spit had a very robust leading edge.
Odd that the evolution of the Spitfire was by such things.
The wings were small for the machine guns so they had to go where they could fit. I don't think the wing was desgned for 8 brownings.
The Merlin had glycol cooling but the design was already fixed so the Spit had a very robust leading edge.
Odd that the evolution of the Spitfire was by such things.
The wings were small for the machine guns so they had to go where they could fit. I don't think the wing was desgned for 8 brownings.
Glider
Captain
The original design for the Spitfire was for 4 guns and had to be inceased which was a good thing.
Interestingly they also reduced the size of the fuel tank, I think by about 20%, which was a mistake the RAF paid for many times over. It would have made a big difference
Interestingly they also reduced the size of the fuel tank, I think by about 20%, which was a mistake the RAF paid for many times over. It would have made a big difference
>German Spitfire evaluation from 1942
Holtzauge-sam, ein Grand Slam des Dankes, obwohl ich Deutschen nicht lesen kann!
Micdrow-sama, a ton of thanks for your great and continuous work!
Certainly the cross-section of the wing main spar is what I have been looking for.
Holtzauge-sam, ein Grand Slam des Dankes, obwohl ich Deutschen nicht lesen kann!
Micdrow-sama, a ton of thanks for your great and continuous work!
Certainly the cross-section of the wing main spar is what I have been looking for.
- Thread starter
- #34
hi iv been asked to produce a 1000 word essay about the flying controls on a chosen aircraft. i chose the spitfire and just wondered if anyone could give me a little help with such info as what flying controls does the spitfire have, there size and location, how are they moved (control rods) any info would be greatly apprecited
thansk Tom
thansk Tom
Crimea_River
Marshal
The Spitfire has conventional flying controls with stick and rudder pedals. The stick moved forward and back for pitch control and the upper portion of he stick moved side to side for roll. Foot pedals controlled the rudder which provided yaw control. Links to the control surfaces (ailerons, elevators, and rudders) were mechanical, i.e they made use of push rods or cables connected to the cockpit controls. There would have been no hydraulic or servo motor assistance as on modern aircraft
This is a very basic description and if you give us a little more to work with in terms of questions we can probably help out a bit better. Such controls are certainly not unique to the Spitfire and if you need to write a 1000 word essay, it's pretty evident that you need a much more in-depth description. I'm sure you could get quite descriptive with the control linkages themselves and then also the secondary features such as trim controls.
This is a very basic description and if you give us a little more to work with in terms of questions we can probably help out a bit better. Such controls are certainly not unique to the Spitfire and if you need to write a 1000 word essay, it's pretty evident that you need a much more in-depth description. I'm sure you could get quite descriptive with the control linkages themselves and then also the secondary features such as trim controls.
Thank you ever so much for your reply thats brillaint thank you.
I dont expect you to write it for me obviously but il write down what i was asked to produce and this may help you provide a little more in depth information.
To analyse the flying controls of a fixed wing aircraft, including primary flying controls, any secondary flight controls and high lift devices.
The report must include,
-A description of the aircraft flight controls
-The method of input to operate each device
-A brief over view of the system between input and flying control
-The effect on the aircraft when each control is operated
-Any limitations on the device
-A conclusion to why the type of control was used
Thanks again, any help is hugly appreciated
Tom
thats brillaint thank you.I dont expect you to write it for me obviously but il write down what i was asked to produce and this may help you provide a little more in depth information.
To analyse the flying controls of a fixed wing aircraft, including primary flying controls, any secondary flight controls and high lift devices.
The report must include,
-A description of the aircraft flight controls
-The method of input to operate each device
-A brief over view of the system between input and flying control
-The effect on the aircraft when each control is operated
-Any limitations on the device
-A conclusion to why the type of control was used
Thanks again, any help is hugly appreciated
Tom
The brief depiction of the Spitfire flying control system provided by Crimea_River fits to the system very well. It wasn't very complex and used with many other planes at that time. All control surfaces I mean ailerons, elevators and the rudder were of metal construction covered with fabric. All of them were mass and aerodynamically balanced ( trim tabs on tail surfaces ) in order to reduce strengths having influnce the control process. Like Crimea River said there was no hydraulic or servo motor assistance as on modern aircraft. The canvas covering on ailerons appeared a problem with increasing of the Spitfire speed. It became clear that the fabric surface was being distorted by the difference at air pressure running at top and underside surfaces of the aileron. This led to the use of metal-skinned ailerons on the Spitfire Mk.V and all late variants of the fighter plane. The ailerons moved from +24o to -18o .
As I mentioned the rudder was of fabric-on-metal construction with a blance weight installed there. Initially, the rudder was of smaller size than the later one. The change was caused by increasing of the power of the Merlin engine and an attempt to compensate the torque effect generated. Also the trim tab size was enlarged for the new rudder and was moved from 6o right to 18o left. The rudder could move through 28o in each direction.
The elevators were of the same construction like the rudder. Although the total area of the stbilizer/elevator wasn't incresed in all Spitfire marks , the size of an elevator was boosted to make the plane more maneuverable at high speeds.The size of the balance weight was also boosted. The elevators could be moved from +28o to -23o . The trim tabs of elevators could move from +20o to -7o .
And here you are the control system in a cockpit. The first diagram shows an early type of the control column, the second one the late variant of the pilot's stick.
The source of diagrams ... different books about the Spitfire plane.
As I mentioned the rudder was of fabric-on-metal construction with a blance weight installed there. Initially, the rudder was of smaller size than the later one. The change was caused by increasing of the power of the Merlin engine and an attempt to compensate the torque effect generated. Also the trim tab size was enlarged for the new rudder and was moved from 6o right to 18o left. The rudder could move through 28o in each direction.
The elevators were of the same construction like the rudder. Although the total area of the stbilizer/elevator wasn't incresed in all Spitfire marks , the size of an elevator was boosted to make the plane more maneuverable at high speeds.The size of the balance weight was also boosted. The elevators could be moved from +28o to -23o . The trim tabs of elevators could move from +20o to -7o .
And here you are the control system in a cockpit. The first diagram shows an early type of the control column, the second one the late variant of the pilot's stick.
The source of diagrams ... different books about the Spitfire plane.
Last edited:
