Hvd2Pilot wrote:
Do you 3-point the Spit or wheel it? Why?
When the Spitfire Mk.I entered RAF service, the RAF were still using round grass fields. There were a number of cultural and logistic reasons for three pointers, as opposed to wheeler landings. First was that in the 1930s to 1940 RAF wheel landings with power on (i.e. any more than a trickle of power) were regarded as 'poor airmanship' and could cost you pints in the Mess and a reprimand from the C/O. This was, in part a hangover from biplanes without flaps, and the need to land in fields without long runs available.
The Spitfire was designed for
this kind of operation, in the
UK for
this air force. No other operations were seriously considered. (Although it was expected, with the Hurricane, to be able to acts as a night fighter - which proved to be a
very bad idea.) Thus the crude (fully down / fully up) flaps were all that was 'needed' to provide a lower approach speed. (Hence the early example's poor brakes and tailskid rather than tailwheel.) Luckily, as Bill's said the Spitfire had/has benign low speed handling characteristics, something that successor fighter types often didn't have.
Comparing the Spitfire to the Mustang in this environment needs to bear in mind that the Spitfire was a very good/lucky mid 1930s design which was able to be developed much further than anyone would have expected, while the Mustang was a early 1940s design to a very different requirement.
Just some thoughts.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
... that's why I dare ... 
... )
