Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,638
- Dec 6, 2006
In both cases no.
When is a Spitfire a Spitfire?
- Thread starter The Basket
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
wuzak
Captain
Except VW (owned by Audi) Golf, Passat, Tiguan etc.
Actually, VW owns Porsche and Audi.
The Porsche and Piech families own a majority shareholding in Volkswagen.
Admiral Beez
Major
It's the Toe Rag that I never understood.Except VW (owned by Audi) Golf, Passat, Tiguan etc.
Just a wee bit of engineering to add to the Spitty versus not Spitty debate. The following is a Spitfire fuselage from Frame 5, the firewall. Between the Mk.III and Mk.22/24 this remained structurally exactly the same with minor alterations, for example to suit a bigger oil tank resulting in a forward canted firewall and a cut down fuselage aft of the canopy, extra fuselage fuel tanks, local strengthening etc. This is from a Mk.21.
Fuselage
Last edited:
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
"Is the F/A-18E/F really an F/A-18?"
My understanding is that (not counting rivets and such) the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet had less than 7% commonality of airframe parts with the F/A-18C/D Hornet. So . . . No. There were, however, many sub-systems in common.
As for the Spitfire, I think that it is fair to call it a Spitfire at least until the Spiteful wing change. By that point in time, how much of the airframe was common to previous marks?
My understanding is that (not counting rivets and such) the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet had less than 7% commonality of airframe parts with the F/A-18C/D Hornet. So . . . No. There were, however, many sub-systems in common.
As for the Spitfire, I think that it is fair to call it a Spitfire at least until the Spiteful wing change. By that point in time, how much of the airframe was common to previous marks?
They looked similar!
I take it back! The Spiteful was intended on using the same fuselage... and to alter this yet again (!) initially a Mk.VIII fuse was tried out with a Spiteful wing, but the production variant had a larger and deeper fuselage, so not the same as above. Eek.
Last edited:
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,638
- Dec 6, 2006
The first batch of Mk XIIs were based on the Mk V, while the second group were based on Mk VIII airframes.
B-25 Pilot
Airman
- 15
- Nov 14, 2019
Yes, they are still part of the same family, even if they all look different
yes, that was my point Porsche family
IMHO every Spitfire is a Spitfire, because it has been a continous evolution from version to version.
As a man in my mid 50-ies I am still the same person that was born in the 1960-ies although I have changed thoroughly over the decades, even the cells in my body have been completely exchanged by natural processes several times. Still I got my memories that help me to say I am the same now I have been as a toddler.
Even Alex Henshaw as the man who as a factory test pilot has flown more Spitfires than anybody else ever acknowledged the last versions of the Spitfire as Spitfires, though he regretted that the superior handling qualities of the early versions had been lost in the course of the evolution of this airplane. To me, the summit of the true Spitfires were the MK.IX and the PR.XI. Afterwards, things changed substantially with the arrival of the Griffon engine. Still, I can easily prop a model of the MK. XIV/PR.XIX besides a model of the prototype K5054 and everybody would rightfully call both of them Spitfires. Even more so, if I place a model of the MK.IX between them.
As a man in my mid 50-ies I am still the same person that was born in the 1960-ies although I have changed thoroughly over the decades, even the cells in my body have been completely exchanged by natural processes several times. Still I got my memories that help me to say I am the same now I have been as a toddler.
Even Alex Henshaw as the man who as a factory test pilot has flown more Spitfires than anybody else ever acknowledged the last versions of the Spitfire as Spitfires, though he regretted that the superior handling qualities of the early versions had been lost in the course of the evolution of this airplane. To me, the summit of the true Spitfires were the MK.IX and the PR.XI. Afterwards, things changed substantially with the arrival of the Griffon engine. Still, I can easily prop a model of the MK. XIV/PR.XIX besides a model of the prototype K5054 and everybody would rightfully call both of them Spitfires. Even more so, if I place a model of the MK.IX between them.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
That's a photo I'd like to see!
Alex Smart
Airman 1st Class
- 138
- Oct 25, 2018
An Apple is always an apple be it a cooking apple or not.
A lot of discussion by high official's eventually came up with the name "Spitfire" for the aircraft. As time went on the design was improved. It was still a "Spitfire", When different objectives were envisaged for later version's it was again those official's who came up with the new names .
Suggest "Spitfire, the histoy"
I agree, its easy to take the wrong meaning from a single post, see my other posts on this thread.
Alex Smart
Airman 1st Class
- 138
- Oct 25, 2018
Sorry, did not know how your Quote was in my post
- Thread starter
- #55
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
But if you say RJ Mitchell chief designer of the Spitfire well he designed the prototype but for obvious reasons didn't get much further.
Parts compatibility is the key so if you can't swap parts across various marks then you have different aircraft. So Spitfire by name only.
Parts compatibility is the key so if you can't swap parts across various marks then you have different aircraft. So Spitfire by name only.
-Odd you should mention that in this context because I've always been unhappy and befuddled over how one computer by Apple has naught to to with the next computer by Apple.
But there was a great deal of inter-mark compatibility--The original tail of the Mk 22 was often replaced by 'Spiteful' tails--you know, that big oval thing you usually se on the 21+s in service?
Last edited:
As I posted earlier, the Spit V, which was essentially a II with Merlin 45 through to the Spit 22/24 all had the same fuselage section, just different wings, empennage, u/c arrangement, engine etc. The fuselage was the same from the firewall to the tail section.
ODonovan
Airman 1st Class
Alex Smart
Airman 1st Class
- 138
- Oct 25, 2018
Maybe, but I was not talking about apple computers, cannot cook them as far as I know
