What Mark Spitfire is this?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Why am I reminded of a Johnny Cash song?
 
What a great link! I didn't notice the article's date. Could it be that the Planes of Fame Museum in Chino, California (a great place to take the kids to see what beautiful things math and science can create) actually has 2 actual Zeros in the same place?
 
From a friend whose father was building Thunder Mustang, I was told that it was powered by a V12 built upon Chevrolet big block V8 engines. They must have created a V12 blocked based on the Chev 454 ci engine.
 
In 2019 I visited the Boeing museum of flight in Seattle. Their collection of replica WW1 aircraft is amazing.

Here in southwest Ontario, Canada I have to recommend a day out at The Great War Flying Museum
 
What's the point in stopping at 80% scale? You're almost there, why not make it a true to scale replica?

There is an old saying that the last 10% of building an airplane takes 90% of the time. That extra 20% probably would translate into infinity.

And what engine would you use? The guy who built the full scale Spitfire in the US used a V-1710. The difference between an automobile V-6 and a V-1710 is enormous.
 
If you're spending a load on a full size replica, I'd get a big block crate engine, like this 700 hp beast Edelbrock.com: Performance Crate Engines - Chevy Ford GM

$18k will get you a 1,000 hp 632ci Big Block Chevy Pro Street Engine 1,000hp+ 18° Built-To-Order Dyno Tuned | eBay
 
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
With few exceptions, automobile engines are designed to produce big bursts of power - for acceleration - and then settle back to a much lower output - for cruise.

Airplane engines are assumed to operate at much higher power levels, for the entire length of the flight, if required such as in 75% cruise, but have the ability to operate at 100% for extended periods if required.

Thus, most straight adaptions of auto engines for aircraft are not successful. Even assuming you handle the gear reduction problem to match the prop, usually the valves wear out far too fast.

One way to handle this problem is to use an auto engine that is much too large and just operate it at lower power. I recall reading where a clever gentleman built a 3/4 scale P-6E and used a big auto engine, bolting the prop right to the crankshaft. In terms of "Scale" it matched a 3/4 scale Curtiss Conqueror quite well and he just ran it at no more than 75%. And he used a truck engine, which was designed to operate at much higher power levels in the first place.

I read recently where an actual, real, engineer fitted a modified boat engine which was in fact a modified truck engine, to a Cessna 172 and reports that it is excellent in terms of performance, fuel economy, ease of operation, and acquisition cost. His purpose was to provide his daughter with an airplane that was suitable to learn to fly and was better than the Cessnas he learned in over 30 years ago. I wish him the best of luck!
 
What's the point in stopping at 80% scale? You're almost there, why not make it a true to scale replica?

It's a good question and the answer does lie in scale, An 80 percent replica of a Spitfire doesn't require an 800 hp engine, but a full-scale Spitfire requires a 1,000 plus hp engine and dealing with that kind of horsepower in a homebuilt could be disastrous. For most homebuilt pilots, they might have had long careers flying airliners or air force aircraft and piston-powered machines of Piper Navaho and so forth capacity or they mightn't, but to fly a WW2-era piston engined fighter is no mean feat, even when you have had this experience. Warbird pilots not only have years-long careers from either the military or civil world, but they'll tell you that getting into a Spitfire or a Mustang is something else that requires all your skill and accumulated experience as a pilot. They are not for the scant of experience or training.

There's a story about tyro pilots buying surplus P-51s from scrappies after the end of WW2 ending up as smoking holes in the ground and as we know, even the best, most experienced warbird pilots find it hard to fly these machines.
 
In 2019 I visited the Boeing museum of flight in Seattle. Their collection of replica WW1 aircraft is amazing.

It's a place I'd love to go to. I'm fortunate in that I used to work at the RAF Museum for a bit, which meant I had contact with a varied and extensive collection of Great War aircraft a couple of buildings away from my workspace and I used to spend breaktimes wandering through the hangars. It's cathartic. I am a fan of these aircraft. They have an ethereal beauty unmatched in modern aeroplanes.

The Grahame White Hangar at Hendon, with its Vickers Gunbus reproduction, part original/part reproduction FE.2b and almost original Sopwith Camel.

RAFM 46

We are fortunate here in NZ in that we have the likes of Peter Jackson and his wad of money and passion for Great War aircraft that we get to appreciate what we have here. Seeing things like BE.2s and FE.2bs lazily skidding about the sky is something special and makes us appreciate that stuff even more, even if they are reproductions and not original.

Dogfight
 
getting into a Spitfire or a Mustang is something else that requires all your skill and accumulated experience as a pilot. They are not for the scant of experience or training.
How much training did the 18-22 y/o Spitfire pilots get in 1939-41? I'd think they were giving some hours on a Tiger Moth, the a Master, then thrown into the Spit.
 
There's a story about tyro pilots buying surplus P-51s from scrappies after the end of WW2 ending up as smoking holes in the ground

There's a story about a Texas oilman who had a wife that got interested in airplanes and her pilot's license. He decided he wanted a divorce, but instead bought her a surplus F4U Corsair. And an old warbird and a funeral is cheaper than alimony.
 
Last edited:
How much training did the 18-22 y/o Spitfire pilots get in 1939-41? I'd think they were giving some hours on a Tiger Moth, the a Master, then thrown into the Spit.

It kinda' proves my point. How many of them were killed in the first hours of combat? How many were killed in training? The problem here is the context of what you're proposing, Admiral; warbird pilots have vast amount of experience that means they can fly these things and they're not being shot at.
 

Users who are viewing this thread