Well, there's a different view
The Hurricane is well documented as being much worse for cockpit fire injuries than the spit...it is not a case of favourite aircraft here !
I was going to link a few articles but decided it was in bad taste.
I can see the Hurri being easier to repair in certain circumstances but we never ran short of aircraft - the number of available pilots was the critical shortage in 1940 !
I was going to link a few articles but decided it was in bad taste.
I can see the Hurri being easier to repair in certain circumstances but we never ran short of aircraft - the number of available pilots was the critical shortage in 1940 !
Chatted with Wg Cdr Nicholson one night in the Calcutta "Grand", where we were on leave after my "prang". No 'side' to the man at all. Looked at my battered face, "Reflector sight trouble ?", he asked sympathetically. (Only VC I ever met).
Danny.
Danny.
rgds LR
Geriaviator
Your father would have been contemporary with mine at Halton, in fact it is likely that he taught him ( 39 Entry). Not surprising that their first hand experiences resulted in opinions that pretty much tally.
Cockpit fire was of course a nightmare for pilots of both Hurricanes and Spitfires (e.g. Richard Hillary ) and I think many of us can recall meeting and talking to survivors -some whom served on in the RAF until the early 70's.
" Did you see the 'Battle of Britain' film, Sir?"
" No, being in the play was enough for me."
Regarding reflector sight injuries such as suffered by Danny, these could be fatal on nose overs, particularly on Spitfires whose pilots ( particularly shorter ones) had loosened their straps to see round the nose on approach. Again, this is from listening to people who had been first on the scene to witness the result , not from any statistics.
Your father would have been contemporary with mine at Halton, in fact it is likely that he taught him ( 39 Entry). Not surprising that their first hand experiences resulted in opinions that pretty much tally.
Cockpit fire was of course a nightmare for pilots of both Hurricanes and Spitfires (e.g. Richard Hillary ) and I think many of us can recall meeting and talking to survivors -some whom served on in the RAF until the early 70's.
" Did you see the 'Battle of Britain' film, Sir?"
" No, being in the play was enough for me."
Regarding reflector sight injuries such as suffered by Danny, these could be fatal on nose overs, particularly on Spitfires whose pilots ( particularly shorter ones) had loosened their straps to see round the nose on approach. Again, this is from listening to people who had been first on the scene to witness the result , not from any statistics.
Last edited by Haraka; 11th Dec 2015 at 03:53.
Guest
Posts: n/a
BUCC09 (your #24),
I've had a good look at the German test reports on the captured Spit V, with its Merlin and then with the DB601. First I must make it clear that I have no engineering qualifications whatsoever, and my opinions are solely those of an old Spitfire pilot. I have not looked at the Google translation, trusting to my own fading memory of the language. With those caveats, I've just plucked interesting "plums" out of the narrative, left them in German (which anyone with "O" Level in German should have no trouble with), and added my comments (for what they're worth !) BLOCK LETTERING MINE
Bit of a puzzle here, "Rumpfmotor" translates as "cylinder block", but that cannot be the meaning here. Wiki tells me:
Perhaps they substituted a DB605 for the nose engine of this "Tante JU" ?
And so says every pilot who has had the good fortune to fly one !
The cannon would weigh around 100lb [Wiki]. At a guess, the same for its ammo. IIRC, the twin-303 installation in the VV plus ammo came in at 200lb. So say 800lb for the lot - roughly 12% of the loaded weight of a VB [Wiki]. Taking that out should improve the performance.
You can say that again ! They had all kinds of mods to make, for example:
They had to move the 9-gallon oil tank from underneath to a position behind the engine. The capacity of the upper (39 gallon) fuel tank had to be reduced [they cannot mean "reduced by 170 litres", 39 galls, for that was about the whole tank].
Our coolant radiator was better placed and more efficient than theirs.
The lower fuel tank [200 l - 45 galls] was left in use. Therefore there would be no room for the 20mm cannon which fired through the centre of the DB605 spinner, having the barrel between the (inverted) cylinder banks and the breech and ammo drum behind.
Leave well (the pneumatic system) alone !
The DB-Spit was 660lb lighter than the Merlin-Spit, but the latter had been weighed with its armament, and the former without (??)
Ellenrieder, the chief of the D-B air research department, made sure that he was the first to fly the DB-Spitfire, and for years later enthused over its good qualities. One of the first things noticed was that the Spitfire was far more stable in ground handling than the Me109, which was notorious for its difficulty in taxying. (This chimes exactly with what I've said earlier on the "Pilot's Brevet" Thread - that when we first saw the narrow, spindly undercarriage of our Spitfires at OTU, we expected the trouble we knew all too well with the Harvard - namely that it would ground-loop at the drop of a hat). Unbelievably, the Spit was steady as a rock on grass or tarmac. I have never seen, and never heard of a Spit ground-looping. Others may have done.
Agreed ! The Spitfire was never intended to be a night-fighter, I did no night flying at OTU on them (or ever after) and think it would be almost impossible with the flame from the exhaust stacks.
The DB-Spitfire became the firm favourite of the test pilots at Echterdingen: with its Gothic crosses it was an everyday sight over the town. (I remember, some time in the early '60s, seeing my first GAF aircraft land in the UK, and the momentary frisson that I felt !)
An air attack on 14.8.44 destroyed or badly damaged all the Echterdingen test aircraft - among them a FW190 V16. If that means what I think it means, then it was a good thing that the prototype (?) got no further !
Our DB-Spit was scrapped. A sad end !
Danny42C.
I've had a good look at the German test reports on the captured Spit V, with its Merlin and then with the DB601. First I must make it clear that I have no engineering qualifications whatsoever, and my opinions are solely those of an old Spitfire pilot. I have not looked at the Google translation, trusting to my own fading memory of the language. With those caveats, I've just plucked interesting "plums" out of the narrative, left them in German (which anyone with "O" Level in German should have no trouble with), and added my comments (for what they're worth !) BLOCK LETTERING MINE
...Zudem gab es noch eine Ju 52 im Versuchsflugzeugpark, die als Rumpfmotor einen DB 605 trug...
...Originally powered by three Pratt & Whitney R-1690 Hornet radial engines, later production models mainly received 574 kW (770 hp) BMW 132 engines, a licence-built refinement of the Pratt & Whitney design. Export models were also built with 447 kW (600 hp) Pratt & Whitney R-1340 Wasp and 578 kW (775 hp) Bristol Pegasus VI engines...
...Noch bevor die Umrüstung auf den Daimler-Benz-Motor begann, wurde die Spitfire von DB-Versuchspiloten mehrfach geflogen; sie bewerteten das allgemeine Flugverhalten des britischen Jägers als gut bis sehr gut...
...Die Spitfire V war ohne ihre Bewaffnung, die normalerweise aus zwei Hispano-Kanonen (20 mm) und vier Browning-MGs (7,62 mm) bestand...
...Mit einem bloßen Motortausch war es natürlich nicht getan...
...Da der Schmierstoffbehälter der Spitfire V unter ihrem Merlin-Motor angeordnet war, unter dem DB 605 A sich aber nicht ausreichend Platz an dieser Stelle fand, wurde der 40-Liter-Behälter direkt hinter dem Motor montiert. Das zog wiederum eine Verkleinerung des oberen, nicht leckgeschützten Treibstofftanks auf 170 Liter nach sich....
...Die Supermarine-Ingenieure hatten den Kühler offenbar sehr günstig positioniert, so dass er bei der gegebenen Stirnfläche wesentlich besser als die deutschen Pendants wirkte...
...Der untere Tank (200 Liter)der Spitfire konnte weiter verwendet werden...
...Auch die Pressluftanlage der Spitfire zur Betätigung der Klappen und Radbremsen konnte beibehalten werden...
...Nach dem Umbau in Sindelfingen brachte die Spitfire V mit dem DB 605 A nun 2730 (6000lb) Kilogramm Startmasse auf die Waage. Damit war sie rund 300 (660lb) Kilogramm leichter als bei den ersten Tests mit dem Originalmotor in Rechlin, bei denen sie auch noch bewaffnet war...
...Willi Ellenrieder ließ es sich als Leiter der Daimler-Benz-Flugversuchsabteilung nicht nehmen, die Daimler-Spitfire als Erster zu fliegen. Er schwärmte noch Jahrzehnte später von den guten Eigenschaften des Flugzeugs. Schon beim Start machten sie sich bemerkbar, denn die berüchtigte Instabilität der Bf 109 um ihre Hochachse in der ersten Startphase zeigte die Spitfire nicht...
...Aus heutiger Sicht erscheint es zwar kaum sinnvoll, doch dort wurden die Ergebnisse der Echterdinger bei einem Nachfliegen nochmals überprüft...
...Danach wurde das Flugzeug an die Flugversuchsabteilung von Daimler-Benz zurückgegeben. In Echterdingen diente sie danach weiter als Versuchsträger. Seine guten Flugeigenschaften machten das exotische Flugzeug bei den Piloten der Versuchsabteilung sehr beliebt, und schnell gehörte die Spitfire mit den Balkenkreuzen zum alltäglichen Bild über Echterdingen......
...Ihre Karriere als Versuchsträger endete jedoch abrupt schon am 14. August 1944 mit einem Bombenangriff der USAAF auf den Flugplatz Echterdingen. Fast der gesamte Flugzeugbestand von Daimler-Benz wurde dabei schwer beschädigt oder zerstört. Dazu gehörten neben der Daimler-Spitfire unter anderem auch die Bf 109 H V1 und die Focke-Wulf Fw 190 V16...
...Die Reste der Spitfire V mit dem DB 605 wurden später bei Klemm in Böblingen endgültig abgewrackt...
Danny42C.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Japan
Age: 71
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DB would have been fun to service.
With a Merlin, you'd have been standing on a platform changing plugs and setting valve clearances at waist height. With the DB, you'd have been under the engine, working above your head, with hot (or cold) oil dripping on your head and running down your sleeves.
Oh Joy!
With a Merlin, you'd have been standing on a platform changing plugs and setting valve clearances at waist height. With the DB, you'd have been under the engine, working above your head, with hot (or cold) oil dripping on your head and running down your sleeves.
Oh Joy!
Danny,
Rumpfmotor means fuselage (mounted) engine. Yes, most prototype engines were development flown in aircraft like the Ju 52. The motor mounted cannon on the 605 had a specially designed steel blast tube fitted in the crankcase V, actually passing through the oil drainage channel that lies there. The barrel of the cannon protruded partly into the blast tube, the cannon itself and its mount lay entirely at the rear of the engine. AFAIK the Spitfire is much more prone to nosing over than the 109. As far as swinging, ground-looping etc on take-off or landing, I think that is a very BIG topic!
Cheers
OAP
Rumpfmotor means fuselage (mounted) engine. Yes, most prototype engines were development flown in aircraft like the Ju 52. The motor mounted cannon on the 605 had a specially designed steel blast tube fitted in the crankcase V, actually passing through the oil drainage channel that lies there. The barrel of the cannon protruded partly into the blast tube, the cannon itself and its mount lay entirely at the rear of the engine. AFAIK the Spitfire is much more prone to nosing over than the 109. As far as swinging, ground-looping etc on take-off or landing, I think that is a very BIG topic!
Cheers
OAP
Last edited by Onceapilot; 12th Dec 2015 at 10:22.
Y. ken
The 605 in a 109 is a joy for normal servicing. Cowlings are retained with quick-release fasteners. All 24 sparkplugs are accessable on the outside of the cylinderblocks. Normal servicing would not include setting tappets (done on overhaul) and, the engine would be removed for such major work.
The design concept of the 109 was biased very much towards engine removal for repair or overhaul and the removal of the 109 engine is easy. Cheers
OAP
The 605 in a 109 is a joy for normal servicing. Cowlings are retained with quick-release fasteners. All 24 sparkplugs are accessable on the outside of the cylinderblocks. Normal servicing would not include setting tappets (done on overhaul) and, the engine would be removed for such major work.
The design concept of the 109 was biased very much towards engine removal for repair or overhaul and the removal of the 109 engine is easy. Cheers
OAP
Apparently German design philosophy, was based on fast and easy front line servicing with anything more major being solved by exchanging units. All very well when you have a good logistics support and echoed in American thinking. ( " Box changing")
RAF relied a bit more on having trained personnel closer to the scene of operations who could diagnose and handle somewhat more complex situations without having to rely on a bountiful supply chain.
Perhaps proof of this is the large number of German aircraft reportedly abandoned with trivial defects as logistics chains collapsed,some of which were put back into flying condition by RAF Squadron ground crews more familiar, from enforced experience, with cannibalization and Christmas tree methods.
RAF relied a bit more on having trained personnel closer to the scene of operations who could diagnose and handle somewhat more complex situations without having to rely on a bountiful supply chain.
Perhaps proof of this is the large number of German aircraft reportedly abandoned with trivial defects as logistics chains collapsed,some of which were put back into flying condition by RAF Squadron ground crews more familiar, from enforced experience, with cannibalization and Christmas tree methods.
Last edited by Haraka; 13th Dec 2015 at 04:37.
Haraka
Yes, I agree with the first sentence. However, I think the rest is too generalised. Look at the situations where the RAF (or any other air force) were retreating and under-supplied, like the low countries in 1940 or the Balkans or, at times, in N. Africa. TBH, I do not think the ability to do a block change on a Merlin in-situ was an advantage over an engine-change in a 109. In fact, the 109 engine change is simpler IMO. I also wonder how many frontline Merlin block changes were cocked-up? There was also the situation where the tappet gap setting for Merlins was changed and an instruction for field modification resulted in mistakes, leading to unnecessary engine failures.
Sad, but true.
OAP
Yes, I agree with the first sentence. However, I think the rest is too generalised. Look at the situations where the RAF (or any other air force) were retreating and under-supplied, like the low countries in 1940 or the Balkans or, at times, in N. Africa. TBH, I do not think the ability to do a block change on a Merlin in-situ was an advantage over an engine-change in a 109. In fact, the 109 engine change is simpler IMO. I also wonder how many frontline Merlin block changes were cocked-up? There was also the situation where the tappet gap setting for Merlins was changed and an instruction for field modification resulted in mistakes, leading to unnecessary engine failures.
Sad, but true.
OAP
I do not think the ability to do a block change on a Merlin in-situ was an advantage over an engine-change in a 109
Of course I do not try to draw any implications from this for modern servicing and logistics methodology!
Last edited by Haraka; 12th Dec 2015 at 15:52.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Far away aircraft with queer sounding names.
Onceapilot (your #67),
Thanks for confirming my guess !
Wiki gives me (on the more exotic Marks of Vultee Vengeance):
Must've been one hairy aeroplane ! (think it came to a bad end).
Cheers, Danny (onceapilot, too).
Thanks for confirming my guess !
...Danny, Rumpfmotor means fuselage (mounted) engine. Yes, most prototype engines were development flown in aircraft like the Ju 52...
...XA-31B
XA-31A modified as testbed for 3,000 hp (2,240 kW) Pratt & Whitney XR-4360-1 Wasp Major.[20]...
XA-31A modified as testbed for 3,000 hp (2,240 kW) Pratt & Whitney XR-4360-1 Wasp Major.[20]...
Cheers, Danny (onceapilot, too).
Danny:-
I'm intrigued as to what tune this ditty was set to. Oscar Brand famously recorded his USAF songbook on a couple of LPs, all set to well known tunes. The first three lines of your song scan to his "Will you go boom today" track, but even I can see that the fourth one won't:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e70aKcZPIpw
I only raise the point because even in my time ('59-'70) many Mess Bars or Ante Rooms boasted an upright of dubious musical provenance. Anyone who could operate the thing was copiously plied with beer as he went through his repertoire, with everyone else joining in the chorus.
The catalogue might be viewed as falling short of present day PC requirements, but it was of its day as indeed were we. It is as valid a part of RAF history as anything else discussed in these pages, but I do not know of any British version of Brand's "Out of the Blue". Is there one?
PS, Musical notation in your posts Danny? Very advanced!
Scrap of wartime lyric to a pop song of the time:
♫.... "I'd love to fly a Spitfire Five,
And put it in a Power Dive,
And pull it out at Five Nine Five, *
It's Foolish, but it's Fun !"... ♫
And put it in a Power Dive,
And pull it out at Five Nine Five, *
It's Foolish, but it's Fun !"... ♫
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e70aKcZPIpw
I only raise the point because even in my time ('59-'70) many Mess Bars or Ante Rooms boasted an upright of dubious musical provenance. Anyone who could operate the thing was copiously plied with beer as he went through his repertoire, with everyone else joining in the chorus.
The catalogue might be viewed as falling short of present day PC requirements, but it was of its day as indeed were we. It is as valid a part of RAF history as anything else discussed in these pages, but I do not know of any British version of Brand's "Out of the Blue". Is there one?
PS, Musical notation in your posts Danny? Very advanced!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Chugalug,
Google comes to the rescue, from the 1940 film "Spring Parade"):
.
It was well said of Deanna: "Some could talk, but few could act, and fewer still could sing"
Additional lyric:
( * in the Wardroom, a Sub-Lieutenant, of course).
One or two ran to a Baby Grand (but that was usually in a separate Music Room, which was mostly deserted).
NAAFI upright Pianos had a "pitched roof", so a pint couldn't be parked on them.
.
Not so, my revered Mentor, simply Alt + 14 = ♫ Piece of cake !
Salaam, Danny.
EDIT: PS: Chugalug, I know you're a Railway buff, have a look at:
Google comes to the rescue, from the 1940 film "Spring Parade"):
...DEANNA DURBIN - IT'S FOOLISH BUT IT'S FUN LYRICS
DEANNA DURBIN - IT'S FOOLISH BUT IT'S FUN LYRICS
Deanna Durbin - It's Foolish But It's Fun Lyrics. ... are bad for me And I'll be sick as I can be It's foolish but it's fun While wise men seek. ... Top 10 Jazz Songs ..
DEANNA DURBIN - IT'S FOOLISH BUT IT'S FUN LYRICS
Deanna Durbin - It's Foolish But It's Fun Lyrics. ... are bad for me And I'll be sick as I can be It's foolish but it's fun While wise men seek. ... Top 10 Jazz Songs ..
It was well said of Deanna: "Some could talk, but few could act, and fewer still could sing"
Additional lyric:
"I'd like to climb an apple tree
With a Flight Lieutenant * after me
If I could see what he could see...
It's Foolish but it's Fun !"
With a Flight Lieutenant * after me
If I could see what he could see...
It's Foolish but it's Fun !"
...Mess Bars or Ante Rooms boasted an upright of dubious musical provenance...
...Anyone who could operate the thing was copiously plied with beer as he went through his repertoire, with everyone else joining in the chorus...
PS, Musical notation in your posts Danny? Very advanced..
Not so, my revered Mentor, simply Alt + 14 = ♫ Piece of cake !
Salaam, Danny.
EDIT: PS: Chugalug, I know you're a Railway buff, have a look at:
BBC News Magazine The end of a much-loved railway 13 December 2015
Last edited by Danny42C; 13th Dec 2015 at 22:12. Reason: Addn:
Guest
Posts: n/a
1stspotter (your #3),
Don't you just love Google translations #! Of course, it means "going off the runway" or (more pedantically) "off the Aircraft Movement Area" (as we used to call it - do we still ?)
# No mockery intended: Google knows more Italian than I do ("ciao" and "arrivederci", and I'm done).
Danny42C.
...letting the aircraft from the corridor of asphalt assigned to the control tower...
# No mockery intended: Google knows more Italian than I do ("ciao" and "arrivederci", and I'm done).
Danny42C.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Danny, for quite some time aircraft were parked on pans until someone, Murphy I expect, confused an aircraft directed to a pan with on in a pan so overnight (10 years at least) pans became aprons.
Can't remember but I think it was Spud who got confused when someone said Take Off, I know it wasn't Susannah York who was confused.
Can't remember but I think it was Spud who got confused when someone said Take Off, I know it wasn't Susannah York who was confused.