Longe Range Escort Spitfires? ...

[Mark Allen M]

I've seen several discussions on various forums about the theory of attempting long-range escort missions using spitfires. (presumably an alternate idea before the P-51 became the main focus for that role) I believe the consensus being that the spitfire was never really designed for long-range use, but rather air superiority missions, along with the wing design not ideally suited for heavy loads such as full drop tanks. Sounds about right to me IMO. below are a few photos of a Spitfire IX modified with 108 GAL drop tanks at Wright Field in the US. Interesting look and idea.


Spitfire VII at Wright Field 1944 c 1944 (US National Archives photo)


Spitfire IX modified at Wright Field with two 108-gallon drop tanks c 1944 (US National Archives photo)


Spitfire IX modified at Wright Field with two 108-gallon drop tanks c 1944 (US National Archives photo)


Spitfire IX modified at Wright Field with two 108-gallon drop tanks c 1944 (US National Archives photo)

... and a couple additional photos ...


Supermarine Spitffire P9565 MK-I Long range idea


Spitfire FR264 with center fuselage drop tank

[Mark Allen M]

Discussion here ...
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthre ... P-51-Range

"The Americans modified two Mk IXs, MK210 and MK317, at Wright field. Internal fuel capacity was increased by fitting a 43 gallon tank in the fuselage behind the pilot’s seat, and two leading edge tanks of 16½ gals each. Additional fuel was carried externally in two 62½ gallon P-51 type drop tanks suspended under the wings on P-51 bomb racks. Oil tank capacity was also increased to 20 gallons. The still air range of the modified Spitfires was approximately 1,600 miles. Both flown non-stop across the Atlantic from Newfoundland. MK210 tested by RAE at Boscombe Down. When dropped at speeds over 300mph the tanks fowled and damaged the under surface of the wing."

[K5DH]

Didn't some Spitfires have some kind of conformal "slipper" tanks available?

[Snake45]

I've seen several discussions on various forums about the theory of attempting long-range escort missions using spitfires.

Well, whom would they have been escorting? The British bombed by night. So to escort those Lancasters, etc., the Spitfire would have had to be made into a long-range fighter and a night fighter. That's kinda two steps beyond what the Spit was designed to do.

As I recall, the Allies won WWII, so it all worked out okay in the end.

[Mark Allen M]

I would say the consensus of the idea for a long range Spitfire was more towards a long-range interceptor than a long-range escort. Moot once the P-51 came to be IMHO

[sandiego89]

The British bombed by night. So to escort those Lancasters, etc., the Spitfire would have had to be made into a long-range fighter and a night fighter. That's kinda two steps beyond what the Spit was designed to do.

[/quote]

Not entirley true. Yes, after some heavy losses the RAF heavies went to night missions, but by 1944 the RAF did go back to some daylight bombing- Normandy, in the low coutries, etc. Long range escort could have been of use as the war shifted to over Germany.

Remember there was the Pacific front as well. Spitfires were deployed to the Pacific, and extra range could have been of use in the Pacific. Lancasters were also to play a heavy role in the final assault against Japan (Tiger Force).

Perhaps by the time these tests were done in 1944 the Pacific was also a thought as well?

[Dave Lindauer]

I saw a Spitfire flying with a slipper tank some years back. I think it was Bill Greenwood's at one of the wonderful CAF West Texas Wing airshows at Breckenridge back in the 1980s.

[Stoney]

Those look like 75 gal. tanks to me

[51fixer]

Spitfires had several size drop tanks that fit under the fuselage from the carb air intake to the flaps.
For the Mk XVIII there was the Blister Type 45, 90 and a 170 Imp Gal tanks. There was also a 50 Imp Gal Torpedo-Type tank.
Blister and Torpedo names are from the manual.
1 Imp Gal is 1.2 US Gal.
170 Gal Tank is referenced as for Ferrying Use Only.

[Sopwith]

Spitfire P9565 was for air-sea-rescue, dinghy carried in the port wing appendage.

[51fixer]

As a reference we have roughly 142 Imp Gal Internal Capacity and use around 70 Imp gal per hour with the Griffon at cruise. A Merlin would be around 50 Imp Gal Per Hr. These are todays flow rates. I don't know off hand what wartime would have been or for the smaller HP Merlins, i.e. single stage blower.
The Mk XVIII could have have another 33 Imp Gal of internal fuel if the lower rear tank was fitted for a whopping 175 Imp Gal Internal.

[Mark Allen M]

Spitfire P9565 was for air-sea-rescue, dinghy carried in the port wing appendage.

Sounds logical

This is the info associated with that photo.

"Operations over Dunkirk in May/June 1940 had revealed the Spitfire's limited radius of action, so Supermarine looked to extend it's fighter's range through the provision of an external tank.
Spitfire I P9565 flew with a 30 gallon tank fitted below its port wing in the summer of 1940.
But the advent of the Battle of Britain stymied development until fighter command commenced offensive operations into Europe in early 41.
A small number( approx 60) of Mk IIs were converted to "Long Range" Spitfires in early 1941. These could be recognised by the fixed 40 gal (182 l) fuel tank which was fitted under the port wing. With a full tank manoeuvrability was reduced, maximum speed was 26 mph (42 km/h) lower and the climb rate and service ceiling were also reduced. Several squadrons used this version to provide long-range bomber escort."

[Lynn Allen]

Cavanaugh's Mk8 has its slipper tank on display. Maybe ChuckStang can take a pix and submit it for us...

[Mark Allen M]

A couple of Spits with slipper tanks ...


Supermarine Spitfire Mk. IXC, UZ-Z of No. 306 (Polish) Squadron posing as a prop for press day in Northolt on 16 November 1942. The aircraft is equipped with 30 gal. slipper tank, which by that time was becoming a common attribute of Spitfire operations over the continent.


Spitfire PR XIX fitted with a slipper tank.