Bill Greenwood's Spitfire

kr1360 · **Joined:** Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:46 pm **Posts:** 18

Any news on this?

corsair166b · **Posted:** Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:51 pm

Last I heard the Lone Star Hurricane was NOT going to be returning to Middleton's shop for repair, the Lone Star guys were going to fix it in house, but then that's the last I heard.....always subject to amendment. However, with Bill's Spit in the shop and the Firefly in for work, I'm wondering where they would fit it at present....

51fixer · **Posted:** Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:59 pm

DarenC1 wrote:

DH82EH wrote:

I had posed this question in a recent photo thread with no response. Is there a way for the casual Spitfire observer to tell a Mk XVIII from a low back XIV at a glance?

I thought the XVIII has a slightly different rudder (referring back to a post over on Key from YEARS ago!) but I can't recall now.

However, I do remember that Spitfire MV293/"MV268", owned by The Fighter Collection, has/had a Mk.XVIII rudder...!

Later MkXIV has basically the same fus as a MkXVIII. The XVIII wing being significantly different in structure and strength.
My guess is the fus engineering for the mk22 fus is pretty much the same for the later XIV and XVIII.
The Type number seems to be 356 for the 20 series, 369 and 379 for the XIV and 394 for the XVIII.
In some cases changes made on one seem to get incorporated over time into the others late in the war and post war.
The XVIII has the split trim tab on the rudder of the 20 series. I've seen them on some XIVs as well.
Factory Drawings for all these types are incomplete so its hard to know what was used where.
The spare parts list for the XVIII (type 394) I have has part numbers for all models going back to 300 or MkI incorporated some where. Example on the rudder the hinges and attach pins are 300XX P/N or the same on all models going back to the Mk I although the Rudder P/N is 39423 sit 1 or Mk XVIII. If a part was changed for the Mk V and never needed to be upgraded again it kept the 349XX number.
A quick look shows 37918 sht 4 S and P for the Horizontals, Elevators are 35120 sht 2 (Mk VII), Rudder 39423 sht 1, rear fus (tail- stern group?) appears to be a 37927 sht 21, Canopy 37939 sht 10, The main fus doesn't list an assy number but ribs are mostly 379 with a couple 359 prefixes suggesting MkXIV.
The PR XIX shows the same tail 37927 sht 21 but a rudder 37923 sht 1.
Comparing individual parts it appears the 379XX rudder ribs start with 366 (Mk VII) and the 394 rudder has the same ribs identified with 373XX. I don't have any reference for what Mk a 373 is. Both rudders have different trailing edge P/Ns as well.
I don't have a print of the 394 rudder, just a parts list. Someone else probably has the different dimensions of each.

PeterA · **Posted:** Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:38 pm

51fixer wrote:

DarenC1 wrote:

DH82EH wrote:

I had posed this question in a recent photo thread with no response. Is there a way for the casual Spitfire observer to tell a Mk XVIII from a low back XIV at a glance?

My guess is the fus engineering for the mk22 fus is pretty much the same for the later XIV and XVIII.

Hello Rich,

The 22 may look superficially similar to XIV/XVII in fuselage terms as a complete entity but...

It was massively strengthened with stainless datum longerons, steel lower carry through spars fully .5 inch wider apart to accommodate the .25 inch steel reinforcing plates either side of the spar booms on the wings. Most of the major pick up points are reinforced with stainless or up-guaged spreader plates.

PeterA

Bluedharma · **Posted:** Fri Nov 16, 2012 12:15 pm

*Mod edit to remove off-topic reference, yet retaining Paul's helpful info*

On another note... this may interest some of you. I found this a while back digging around on the net.
About the TE308...

I forget who had this... otherwise I would post the credit.
-Paul Gordon

Bluedharma · **Posted:** Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:45 pm

I wrote this article several years ago (2007).
Can anybody see any issues with it besides the profiles images (livery colors) of the aircraft?

Would like to clean it up and improve the accuracy.
Any feedback?

Spitfire MK9 TE308 History N308WK
http://www.airport-data.com/articles/view/Spitfire-MK9-TE308-History-N308WK:58.html

muddyboots · **Posted:** Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:52 pm

Thanks for the article, Paul. I always wondered why it was built that way.

k5083 · **Posted:** Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:59 pm

Couple of minor things.

It is Jerry Billing, not Billings.

The RA-F paint scheme was put on before the rear seat was covered over. For a while it flew with 2 seats and the RA-F markings.

The change from CF-RAF to C-FRAF was not really a registration change, it was a change in how Canada formatted its registrations.

August

Bluedharma · **Posted:** Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:20 pm

k5083 wrote:

Couple of minor things.

It is Jerry Billing, not Billings.

The RA-F paint scheme was put on before the rear seat was covered over. For a while it flew with 2 seats and the RA-F markings.

The change from CF-RAF to C-FRAF was not really a registration change, it was a change in how Canada formatted its registrations.

August

Thanks August!!!!

WIXMOD-Baker · **Joined:** Thu May 12, 2011 9:20 am **Posts:** 119

Thread cleaned up.

Any following posts which are not directly related to TE308 or the interesting segue into identifying later Spitfire variant will be removed. Warnings will be issued where necessary.

WIX is a big place. People come here from many places, with many views. There are going to be disagreements and personality clashes. If you have a problem with someone's views, or you're bothered by something that someone has said, please do the following;

1) Remember that there is a person behind the words on the screen.
2) Remember that in many areas, we're allowed to hold differing opinions,
3) Decide whether you need to say anything about your difference of opinion.
4) If so, contact them off-forum. PMs are a good way to do this.
5) Act like adults. Maybe this should be Number 1 for some people...

Thank you
WIXMOD-Baker

Cking · **Posted:** Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:51 am

corsair166b wrote:

Last I heard the Lone Star Hurricane was NOT going to be returning to Middleton's shop for repair, the Lone Star guys were going to fix it in house, but then that's the last I heard.....always subject to amendment. However, with Bill's Spit in the shop and the Firefly in for work, I'm wondering where they would fit it at present....

Don't forget that the Hurricane had salt rubbed into it's wounds when hurricane Ike went through Galveston. Poor old Lone Star went throuh it that year

.

Rgds Cking

JimH · **Posted:** Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:52 pm

DH82EH · **Posted:** Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:24 pm

Thank You Jim
For posting that fabulous image!

May she soon feel air under her wings again.

Andy Scott

RickH · **Posted:** Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:41 pm

The LSFM Hurricane was stripped of fabric and flushed thoroughly with freshwater The empanage was pretty much gone and the left wing had already been sent to Ray. After the freshwater bath she was soaked in Corrosion X. We tried to get as much as we could down the individual tubes as we could.

k5083 · **Posted:** Tue Nov 20, 2012 9:00 am

That's a lovely shot Jim. Nice atmosphere.

Classic lines even with the double bubble.

August

Warbird Information Exchange

Bill Greenwood's Spitfire

Who is online