"Spitfires" by the dozen

[Warbirdnerd]

Ambitious plans by an English Flying Club to build 12-90% scale Spitfire replicas...

So here’s the idea.

We’re going to put together teams of builders/pilots to complete twelve ninety per cent scale Supermarine MK26B Spitfires.
They could be flying by the end of 2011 if we can get this off the ground quickly enough. Builder-pilots who want to can go on to be trained to fly in formation, becoming an amateur operational squadron based at Enstone, in Oxfordshire. This squadron, which I’m calling ‘City of Oxford’ will include ground crews, military vehicle enthusiasts and living history players, making this a truly unique club, with a regular calendar of events as a focal point for every member.

If this sounds of interest please complete the green form we will keep you informed of our progess. For your information, once you submit the form you will receive an email asking for confirmation that you did actually request to get more information, I know its a pain but it does mean the database is not infiltrated by spammers!

Their Website:
http://www.enstoneflyingclub.co.uk/pwpc ... pwpID=4971

[Mudge]

All due respect to their efforts but...a "toy" is a "toy" regardless of what it looks like. I wish them well but IMHO, if it ain't a Spitfire, it ain't a Spitfire.

Mudge the purist

[daveymac82c]

I don't mean any disrespect, but that homebuilt version of the Spit, the 26b, does not look enough like a Spitfire for me to ever consider buying it. There is something that just isn't quite right with its looks.

There used to be two Spitfire replicas at a local airfield called Delta Air Park, but are now at other locations, but they were both so incredibly spot on with their dimensions it was truly amazing. Both were scratch built and both used auto engine conversions, but they were truly spectacular replicas. One was 80% scale while the other was 7/8th.

I'd suggest to this group to look at those versions of the Spitfire before the 26B if they want something that actually looks like a Spit.

Here's the 7/8 scale Spit:
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=101612

I hope this interests people as it is a beautiful replica. I can't find pictures of the other replica I'm talking about.

Peace,

David M

[k5083]

I'm with Mudge on this one. Not buying the historic angle at all.

Question is, are they nice planes in their own right. This was always the problem with the old WAR replicas IMO. Once you got past the WWII mystique, there were a lot better planes you could build.

Whereas, on the other hand, the Thunder Mustang may be no P-51, but it is a hot rod. That's why racing them at Reno, rather than parading them around as if they were P-51s, was a good marketing idea.

August

[Tiger Tim]

I always thought the Tally-Ho Enterprises Spitfire was by far the prettiest scale replica:
http://www.spitfire.org/wilshirephoto.html



So who wants to build a bunch of scaled-down Me-109s and go hunting?

-Tim

[Bill Greenwood]

Thunder is complex and expensive to build.

Mk 26 may be simple easy and cheap, if not high performance. Still may be neat looking and fun if not anywhere near a real Spitfire.

[Enemy Ace]

I still have never seen a replica better than Bob Deford's Jurca Spitfire. I just don't see the point of building an off -scale replica when you could have something like his.

[Hemiman]

Seems that many are missing the point. Yeah, there's "clones" out there that are close, but the idea is to , in my opinion, to not only build an aircraft, but to HONOR the few that flew the originals. Let the flaming begin!

Bill

[spookythecat]

Could someone please explain to me why these are always done just short of full size? It just seems like it's so close, why not go with a full scale replica?

[brucev]

I don't mean any disrespect, but that homebuilt version of the Spit, the 26b, does not look enough like a Spitfire for me to ever consider buying it. There is something that just isn't quite right with its looks. David M

see the kit manufacturer website for better pictures, depending on the effort by the builder and the engine used the scale appearance varies http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/

There used to be two Spitfire replicas at a local airfield called Delta Air Park, but are now at other locations, but they were both so incredibly spot on with their dimensions it was truly amazing. Both were scratch built and both used auto engine conversions, but they were truly spectacular replicas. One was 80% scale while the other was 7/8th.

I'd suggest to this group to look at those versions of the Spitfire before the 26B if they want something that actually looks like a Spit.

Here's the 7/8 scale Spit:
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=101612

I hope this interests people as it is a beautiful replica. I can't find pictures of the other replica I'm talking about.
David M

nice looking airplane

I still have never seen a replica better than Bob Deford's Jurca Spitfire. I just don't see the point of building an off -scale replica when you could have something like his.

Could someone please explain to me why these are always done just short of full size? It just seems like it's so close, why not go with a full scale replica?

it's a big price step from 75 or 90% scale to full scale.

no matter what there would and will be someone who sneers, "if it aint real its crap"

[Kyleb]

Could someone please explain to me why these are always done just short of full size? It just seems like it's so close, why not go with a full scale replica?

Good question. The answer is "the engine". A full scale replica demands a 1,000+ hp engine and the only realistic way to achieve that is an Allison or Merlin. That adds a huge amount of cost, complexity, and weight.

Whereas an 80% scale Spit is really less than 50% of a full Spit. Why? Well, it has 80% of the span x 80% of the length, x 80% of the height, for a total of 51.2% of the overall cube of a "real" spit. Beyond that, since it is a smaller airplane, you can use thinner materials, lets say 60% of original thickness, so you net an airplane that's ~30% as heavy as the original. And now, maybe you need an engine that is 300-500 hp. Which is within the realm of auto conversions (if you have faith in them).

[Mark_Pilkington]

>
for @$8k and an engine from Barnstormers you can buy this butcherbird and mix it with this squadron of spits.

FOLKE WULF 190 REPLICA • AVAILABLE FOR IMMEDIATE SALE • 12 year construction built to scale.Being sold less engine and prop.Includes motor mount, cowl, hydralic, air, oil and fuel systems, instruments, clevland brakes,3200 scot t/wheel, beautifully built all wood construction.Can supply engine/prop for flight or core engine/prop for static display.can also supply service of static, mounted or suspended display for museums, restaurants.Will ship overseas.Aircraft is still fairly large as a replica,26 1/2 ' wingspan,21 1/2' length.Email me for picasa web album of build photos, for all other info call by phone only.trades considered.$7850. • Contact Kurt D. Grasso - AEROSALES, Owner - located Woodstock, GA USA • Telephone: 770-883-0815 . • Posted December 13, 2010 •

regards

Mark Pilkington

[ZRX61]

I still have never seen a replica better than Bob Deford's Jurca Spitfire. I just don't see the point of building an off -scale replica when you could have something like his.

They look too *smooth* when you get up close. Not really faulting it, but it just looks a bit odd.

[Bill Greenwood]

The Mk 26 is a kit plane from Australia. It is a pretty small light airplane, nowhere near Spitfire performance, but still it looks like fun and is a cool little bird. It should be reasonably easy to build. and having a bunch flying together would be great.

I can't say what it is like to fly. I sat in one at Sun N Fun, offered to test fly it, but the owner was not interested, so I can't endorse it from real experience.

I have flown the Thunder Mustang and it is very high performance, right up with a real 51 at low altitude. It's only performance issue is that the wing area is a little small so it lands a little fast, like a real 51, not a smaller plane.

It is complex and expensive,and would not be easy to whip out a few of them in a year in your garage.
The Thunder program was really derailed by that fatal factory demo crash, which was the one I flew, and the cause has not been fully explained or to the point where there are not some doubts.
The recent engine problems at Reno lead to some questions about reliablity if run hard also. To me, the stock engine has good power and I'f fly it that way and not push it with a supercharger or turbocharger.
It is certainly something fun to fly.

[daveymac82c]

Hey Tiger Tim,

that Spit from Tally-Ho Enterprises is the other Spitfire replica I was talking about. It looks like they still have their company based at Delta Air Park, which is where I first saw it. From what I understand it had a gear collapse while taxiing a number of years ago and they're beefing it up and it'll be back flying again, but I don't know when that'll be, or if that's already happened.

I'd agree, it is an absolutely amazing looking replica. Honestly, I'd say it's exactly to scale. I would buy one if I had the money especially since I don't expect to ever have the money for a 100% spit. And to he honest I'd never buy the 26b... no matter what you do with it, it doesn't look enough like a Spitfire for me. No offense.

Peace,

David