When is a Spitfire a Spitfire?

The Basket · May 10, 2020

If you look at long lived designs like the Bf 109 or Spitfire, the early aircraft have little in common with the last versions so should we still lump all aircraft as Spitfires?

Should we think of them as new designs?

Glider · May 10, 2020

pbehn · May 10, 2020

With the Spitfire the first of each new main type started life as an earlier type with a new engine fitted, and they all somehow look like Spitfires.

GregP · May 10, 2020

THat's why I put the FM-2 in with all the WIldcats. Same family of fighters.

s1chris · May 10, 2020

They should be together. I mean, just because the 2017 Ford Mustang doesn't look like, and isn't engineered like the 1964 Mustang doesn't mean it's not a Ford Mustang.
So long as a year, Mk, version is stated then it's what it says on the tin in my opinion.
So effectively just a revised And updated design, rather than new.

The Basket · May 10, 2020

How can a 1965 Ford Mustang be related to a 2020 Ford Mustang? Just coz a badge?

Admiral Beez · May 10, 2020

The Basket said:
If you look at long lived designs like the Bf 109 or Spitfire, the early aircraft have little in common with the last versions so should we still lump all aircraft as Spitfires?

Should we think of them as new designs?

I've read that every Spitfire until the bubble canopy variants shared the same fuselage from the firewall back to the beginning of the tail. Maybe that's myth, but if true that's a good amortization of production tooling.

From http://www.historyofwar.org/Pictures/spitfire_sides.gif

s1chris said:
They should be together. I mean, just because the 2017 Ford Mustang doesn't look like, and isn't engineered like the 1964 Mustang doesn't mean it's not a Ford Mustang.

You think that's analogous to the series of Spitfires? Your example of the Mustang is more like the Eurofighter and Hawker Typhoons sharing the same name.

The Basket · May 10, 2020

I was answering to a reply from someone else on a similar topic.

Vincenzo · May 10, 2020

Good question, i've already the doubt if Spitfire I is the same fighter of Spitfire II
the engine is much of fighter change it and you have a new fighter,
in Italy changing the engine was enough for change the fighter designation, see MC 200->202->205V

rochie · May 10, 2020

Remember seeing an interview with Joseph Smith, he reckoned the last true Spitfire was the Mk IX, after that it was a completely different design in roughly the same shape !

Dont know how accurate that really is though ?

RW Mk. III · May 10, 2020

It is interesting that the Lancaster underwent less-significant changes than Spitfire did throughout its life cycle. But became Lancastrian and Lincoln etc.

Shortround6 · May 10, 2020

Could you build a MK XII using MK I or II tooling, or good parts of it. Were major assemblies interchangeable?

I can understand the MK XXs an up perhaps not being "Spitfires" (different wing) but some of the others dis use at least some parts.

In some cases it is "Marketing" in other cases it is because the design has really changed.

Greg mentioned the WIldcat earlier. Early Wildcats/Martlets used Wright Cyclone engine, early Wildcats/Martlets had four guns. A late Wildcat/Martlet using a Wright Cyclone engine and four guns and having a taller tail should be called what? Not a Wildcat?

Vincenzo · May 10, 2020

I've collected some data for my thread but i can post here some on the Spitfire, probably miss some experimentals/trials only and only to 1944
the Spitfires had 3 wings or maybe better a wings with 3 different wingspan
the following Merlin engines:
II, III, XII, 45, 45M, 46, 47, 50, 50A, 50M, 55, 55M, 56, 61, 63, 63A, 64, 66, 70, 71; counting also the Seafire we need add 32
the following Griffon engines:
III, IV, 61, 65

Dana Bell · May 10, 2020

Shortround6 said:
.... A late Wildcat/Martlet using a Wright Cyclone engine and four guns and having a taller tail should be called what? Not a Wildcat?

Actually, Eastern proposed calling the FM-2 the Viking, but the Navy killed that idea. (Maybe they'd have had better luck with Martlet?)

Cheers,

Dana

Admiral Beez · May 10, 2020

Why isn't the Spiteful and Seafang a Spitfire or Seafire? What was so different that the nomenclature finally changed?

Had the Typhoon not garnered a reputation for losing its tail perhaps the Tempest would have been a further mark of the Typhoon. But the Spitfire seems to be the exception.

Perhaps Vickers and their Supermarine office was just aware of good marketing. What other aircraft did they have with a proud name? Walrus was good, Wellesley and Wellington, okay.

Shortround6 · May 10, 2020

Admiral Beez said:
Why isn't the Spiteful and Seafang a Spitfire or Seafire? What was so different that the nomenclature finally changed?

Had the Typhoon not garnered a reputation for losing its tail perhaps the Tempest would have been a further mark of the Typhoon.

Spitefull had a brand new wing.

Not only a different planeform but it was laminar flow (or they were trying for it) so the the airfoil was completely different. You also had the change in landing gear and the different radiator set up.

Tempest likewise got a new wing with a different airfoil.

Deleted member 68059 · May 10, 2020

The Basket said:
If you look at long lived designs like the Bf 109 or Spitfire, the early aircraft have little in common with the last versions so should we still lump all aircraft as Spitfires?

Should we think of them as new designs?

This is actually an extremely complex question, and in my view is only answerable by looking at the design hours put into each new type - which is obviously a direct indication of the proportional similarity of parts to the last version. Based on that, I would say everything up to the Mk21 is a Spitfire, after which I think its justifiable to say the similarity is more visual
than structural. However even the Mk8 was a VERY large developmental change. I think you`ll find similar storys in all planes, and ultimately its probably not about "how many mk1 parts are in mk... version, but at what point the change stops being evolutionary and starts becoming conceptual. All subjective and woolly ! Even up to the Mk24 its still "conceptually similar" in that all the bits are in the same place, they`re just bigger or slighly morphed in shape. Radiators still in the same place etc.

.

gjs238 · May 10, 2020

Was the P-51H really a P-51?
Is the F/A-18E/F really an F/A-18?

fubar57 · May 10, 2020

You say potato, I say potato

pbehn · May 10, 2020

fubar57 said:
You say potato, I say potato

Is that a MkXIV potato or a Mk14? With only 24 variants of Spitfire plus 4 PR versions and then 8 versions of Seafire Some of them need a new name.

When is a Spitfire a Spitfire?

Senior Master Sergeant

Captain

Colonel

Major

Staff Sergeant

Senior Master Sergeant

Major

Senior Master Sergeant

Senior Master Sergeant

Moderator

Airman 1st Class

Major General

Senior Master Sergeant

Senior Airman

Major

Major General

Staff Sergeant

Tech Sergeant

General

Colonel

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads