Spitfire Mk 26 - real or not real?
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Age: 51
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The company owns the name supermarine , as given to them by the family of supermarine who thinks the 26b is beautiful, sooooo it's a supermarine spitfire mk26b , take that for whatever it's worth , and a very nice 14 page article in nov kitplanes with me flying it so I'm a little bias
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squeegee Longtail
It may not be "real" in whoever's eyes, but look at it from another perspective.
With so few Original spitfires flying, it may be the ONLY chance a person, child, enthusiast, son or daughter of an airman killed in the war has
to see the grace, lines, speed and flying ability of an aircraft that
resembles a Spitfire (or is a Spitfire depending on your point of view).
And if that gets another person into the flying fold, even better.
I collect original old firearms and do to an extent look down
on copies but, it allows others to get into the sport who then
progress upwards to owing originals.
It may not be "real" in whoever's eyes, but look at it from another perspective.
With so few Original spitfires flying, it may be the ONLY chance a person, child, enthusiast, son or daughter of an airman killed in the war has
to see the grace, lines, speed and flying ability of an aircraft that
resembles a Spitfire (or is a Spitfire depending on your point of view).
And if that gets another person into the flying fold, even better.
I collect original old firearms and do to an extent look down
on copies but, it allows others to get into the sport who then
progress upwards to owing originals.
Three thought experiments:
1) A company makes Spitfires to the original blueprints, with a few materials changes to sidestep the corrosion problems and a minimal number of other safety-related changes to the original design.
2) In a parallel universe, the war ends in 1942 and 15,000 redundant Spitfire pilots return to a prosperous peacetime. Jets aren't developed, so the RAF holds on to its piston fighters. Supermarine decides to tweak the design to make it more economic and practical for nostalgic private pilots, and to avoid completely disbanding the workforce.
3) Supermarine carries on making Spitfires into 1948, though most never see conflict and are of a type that never flew in WWII.
Would any of these aircraft be real Spitfires?
1) A company makes Spitfires to the original blueprints, with a few materials changes to sidestep the corrosion problems and a minimal number of other safety-related changes to the original design.
2) In a parallel universe, the war ends in 1942 and 15,000 redundant Spitfire pilots return to a prosperous peacetime. Jets aren't developed, so the RAF holds on to its piston fighters. Supermarine decides to tweak the design to make it more economic and practical for nostalgic private pilots, and to avoid completely disbanding the workforce.
3) Supermarine carries on making Spitfires into 1948, though most never see conflict and are of a type that never flew in WWII.
Would any of these aircraft be real Spitfires?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes they would. "Spitfire" is not dependent on where or when they were used. It is dependent on the current Mk/spec that the ORIGINAL manufacturer puts on them.
If some bloke called Henry Ford (not the original), builds a plastic copy of a Mustang with a Fiat 500 engine, is that a "real" one?
Item one would depend on the licence/approval from the original manufaturer.
If some bloke called Henry Ford (not the original), builds a plastic copy of a Mustang with a Fiat 500 engine, is that a "real" one?
Item one would depend on the licence/approval from the original manufaturer.
Last edited by Crash one; 26th Oct 2012 at 08:50.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, we have the ford Capri.....this wasa cult car in the 70's, but to some, the REAL ford capri, is the Consul Classic/375 Capri of '61-'64.
"the car you always promised yourself" caused a sensation (and a lot of pubescent schoolboy wet-dreams) when it appeared in 1969. (mark 2 introduced '74, mk3 '78 to '86 ) BUT surely it's NOT a "proper" Capri?- production of that ended five years earlier!
To me, a Spitfire will always be a WW2 Merlin -powered machine(not a Griffon!) but we have to accept that trade-names are bought and sold, together with designs etc. the Mk. 26 is NOT a "traditional" "authentic" "original" Spitfire.
It's a 21st. Century model that bears a close resemblance to the "heritage" machine....call it a pastiche if you will, it's still a Spitfire,-just not THE Spitfire!
"the car you always promised yourself" caused a sensation (and a lot of pubescent schoolboy wet-dreams) when it appeared in 1969. (mark 2 introduced '74, mk3 '78 to '86 ) BUT surely it's NOT a "proper" Capri?- production of that ended five years earlier!
To me, a Spitfire will always be a WW2 Merlin -powered machine(not a Griffon!) but we have to accept that trade-names are bought and sold, together with designs etc. the Mk. 26 is NOT a "traditional" "authentic" "original" Spitfire.
It's a 21st. Century model that bears a close resemblance to the "heritage" machine....call it a pastiche if you will, it's still a Spitfire,-just not THE Spitfire!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the kit manufacturer is now the original manufacturer – he bought the rights to Supermarine.
Shirley it is a contradiction in terms, how can anything (become) an original?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: With Wonko, outside the Asylum.
Age: 56
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had the immense pleasure of being at Duxford, only a day or two after the beautiful restored Mk I Spitfire was rolled out. I was allowed to observe it very closely, but did not ask to touch.
It seemed tiny, but over-aweing me was its history, not its size. My father fought in WW2, along with his brothers-in-arms and their opposers, far too many of whom did not outlive that conflict.
That sense of history lives on through the Marks, as it does in so much other wartime artefact. We see, and when lucky, can touch, the results of furious efforts to advance technology in the name of freedom.
Do the manufacturers of the Mk XXVI think that their product sits in the same family?
It seemed tiny, but over-aweing me was its history, not its size. My father fought in WW2, along with his brothers-in-arms and their opposers, far too many of whom did not outlive that conflict.
That sense of history lives on through the Marks, as it does in so much other wartime artefact. We see, and when lucky, can touch, the results of furious efforts to advance technology in the name of freedom.
Do the manufacturers of the Mk XXVI think that their product sits in the same family?
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Age: 54
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just read this thread, and have come to three conclusions...
1. Everyone who owns something (whether spitfire, triumph bonnie, or a conker on a string) seems to be convinced that the only 'real' one is the same as theirs, and anything else is not real....not a surprise really, as it helps create a sense of elitism (not meant purjoratively, just literally). I can understand that, but it's all a matter of perspective.
2. Surely a real mk26b spitfire is exactly what it is. It certainly isn't a 'real' mk24, but then the mk24 isn't a 'real' mk IX
3. I wish I could read the article F1 mentions, but can't find a copy of kit plane in any of my local newsagents...Doh!!! Any ideas where I can get one? (am in the uk)
1. Everyone who owns something (whether spitfire, triumph bonnie, or a conker on a string) seems to be convinced that the only 'real' one is the same as theirs, and anything else is not real....not a surprise really, as it helps create a sense of elitism (not meant purjoratively, just literally). I can understand that, but it's all a matter of perspective.
2. Surely a real mk26b spitfire is exactly what it is. It certainly isn't a 'real' mk24, but then the mk24 isn't a 'real' mk IX
3. I wish I could read the article F1 mentions, but can't find a copy of kit plane in any of my local newsagents...Doh!!! Any ideas where I can get one? (am in the uk)
The so-called Spitfire Mk26 is simply a scale model of the true aircraft.
Just as the Isaacs Fury was a 70% replica of the original Hawker Fury, this 'Spitfire' is a 75-90% replica of the original Vickers-Supemarine Spitfire.
To pretend that 'the Mk26B is a new mark of Spitfire from Supermarine' is simply self-delusion.
When is the 'Spitfire squadron' at Enstone now expected to take to the air? I wish them the very best of good luck, but I'm afraid that I have my doubts.
Just as the Isaacs Fury was a 70% replica of the original Hawker Fury, this 'Spitfire' is a 75-90% replica of the original Vickers-Supemarine Spitfire.
To pretend that 'the Mk26B is a new mark of Spitfire from Supermarine' is simply self-delusion.
When is the 'Spitfire squadron' at Enstone now expected to take to the air? I wish them the very best of good luck, but I'm afraid that I have my doubts.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having built a few kit aircraft for myself I doubt if one of the actual MK26A or B Spitfire builders regards their projects as anything other than a scale replica of a charismatic aircraft and nothing more.
For sure the main spar is no replica of the original ones!
Watching a Mk24B being built near Blackbushe I can see it isn't a 'fastbuild' type of kit.
Better a well built scale Spitfire than no Spitfire at all. The French Mosquito replica is better than no Mosquito at all.
But for the hairs on the back of the neck/lump in throat stuff real Merlins propelling real Spitfires and Mosquitos, Lancasters has it every time.
For sure the main spar is no replica of the original ones!
Watching a Mk24B being built near Blackbushe I can see it isn't a 'fastbuild' type of kit.
Better a well built scale Spitfire than no Spitfire at all. The French Mosquito replica is better than no Mosquito at all.
But for the hairs on the back of the neck/lump in throat stuff real Merlins propelling real Spitfires and Mosquitos, Lancasters has it every time.
aviate1138, I would hope that the folks building their scale replicas agree with you.
But there are some out there who insist that an aeroplane is something which it is not. I once encountered some pilot in the USA who insisted that the ex-Luftwaffe Piaggio P149D trainer he owned was a 'Focke-Wulf warbird'.....
OK, it might have been licence built by Focke-Wulf GmbH, but a mid-1950s trainer is hardly a 'warbird'. Which is a silly expression in any case!
But there are some out there who insist that an aeroplane is something which it is not. I once encountered some pilot in the USA who insisted that the ex-Luftwaffe Piaggio P149D trainer he owned was a 'Focke-Wulf warbird'.....
OK, it might have been licence built by Focke-Wulf GmbH, but a mid-1950s trainer is hardly a 'warbird'. Which is a silly expression in any case!
Last edited by BEagle; 28th Oct 2012 at 12:14.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Fake Rolex watches come to mind. Even though they can keep accurate time, they are no more a real Rolex than a Mark 26 is a real Spitfire.”
But what if the fake manufacture bought Rolex out and carried on producing watches?
Rod1
But what if the fake manufacture bought Rolex out and carried on producing watches?
Rod1
There's a funny thing... I have met a handful of ex-WWII aircrew through my line of work (doctor). Just a random sample, which is something you never get on the telly.
One talked about flying with real enthusiasm and had flown for the rest of his life. Another talked about the P51 as 'my plane' but I got the impression he didn't particularly want to talk about the war, so I left it at that. He had told me he'd never flown again though. Another spoke fondly of Tiger Moths... but didn't volunteer anything about his time in bombers and again I didn't push. I was surprised at the diffidence with which many of them talked about their experiences. But of course, on reflection, honourable men don't enjoy killing other men or sending young men on their own side to their deaths. I think it's fair to say that none of them seemed to fetishize military hardware in the way people those of us never involved in the conflict sometimes seem to.
I'm sure those of you from an older generation will have met more of these men than I have, but I feel very privileged to have done so. They saved us from a very bleak future, as did many of their generation who fought in less glamorous ways. It's something that I think about most days.
In 15 years time, few if any of them will still be alive. My son is unlikely to meet any, ever. Eventually WWII and the holocaust will fade into history and the shadow they cast will be no greater than that of Genghis Khan, or Napoleon.
Whilst I will mourn them and remain glad to have heard a fraction of their stories, I will be pleased. Even now, WWII casts such a shadow that it's hard to travel anywhere in Europe and not be acutely aware of how the war continues to affect our daily lives and politics. Ultimately, only time will heal these rifts completely. And by then, we'll have other concerns.
When this day comes, the spitfire will be nothing more than a very nice aeroplane. And there's nothing wrong in that.
One talked about flying with real enthusiasm and had flown for the rest of his life. Another talked about the P51 as 'my plane' but I got the impression he didn't particularly want to talk about the war, so I left it at that. He had told me he'd never flown again though. Another spoke fondly of Tiger Moths... but didn't volunteer anything about his time in bombers and again I didn't push. I was surprised at the diffidence with which many of them talked about their experiences. But of course, on reflection, honourable men don't enjoy killing other men or sending young men on their own side to their deaths. I think it's fair to say that none of them seemed to fetishize military hardware in the way people those of us never involved in the conflict sometimes seem to.
I'm sure those of you from an older generation will have met more of these men than I have, but I feel very privileged to have done so. They saved us from a very bleak future, as did many of their generation who fought in less glamorous ways. It's something that I think about most days.
In 15 years time, few if any of them will still be alive. My son is unlikely to meet any, ever. Eventually WWII and the holocaust will fade into history and the shadow they cast will be no greater than that of Genghis Khan, or Napoleon.
Whilst I will mourn them and remain glad to have heard a fraction of their stories, I will be pleased. Even now, WWII casts such a shadow that it's hard to travel anywhere in Europe and not be acutely aware of how the war continues to affect our daily lives and politics. Ultimately, only time will heal these rifts completely. And by then, we'll have other concerns.
When this day comes, the spitfire will be nothing more than a very nice aeroplane. And there's nothing wrong in that.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Deepest Oxfordshire
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I'll bite.
BEagle wrote:
Well, the first airframe, EN-A (now its RAF-approved tailcode) has now reached its anniversary in construction and is now approaching the first ground run stage:
Hopefully she will fly around the turn of the year.
Now let me state at the outset that this is not a real Spitfire. If she were, she would cost £1.5-2m, would burn 15L of AVGAS per minute at full chat, would need 5 hours of costly, expert maintenance for every hour spent in the air - and I would only ever be able to watch her fly.
This is a 90% scale replica (rather a good one, if I say so myself, as an interested party). Its MTWA is only approximately 80% of that of a Bulldog but it has a much slicker airframe, retractable gear and 25% more power. It burns 38-40L of AVGAS per hour and will cruise all day at 150KIAS - faster if the mood takes you and your wallet will stand it.
It's the closest that mere mortals such as I can ever hope to get to the peerless original. If you're lucky enough to know someone who owns a genuine Spit, has deep enough pockets to operate and maintain it and has been let out of the looney bin for long enough to pass you the keys to the hangar, good luck to you (I know - and, sadly, have known - several that are/were, incidentally).
For the rest of us, this is as good as it gets. And, as one pilot who should know has already put it, it's the best fun you can have with your clothes on.
Tailwinds
Gadget
BEagle wrote:
When is the 'Spitfire squadron' at Enstone now expected to take to the air? I wish them the very best of good luck, but I'm afraid that I have my doubts.
Hopefully she will fly around the turn of the year.
Now let me state at the outset that this is not a real Spitfire. If she were, she would cost £1.5-2m, would burn 15L of AVGAS per minute at full chat, would need 5 hours of costly, expert maintenance for every hour spent in the air - and I would only ever be able to watch her fly.
This is a 90% scale replica (rather a good one, if I say so myself, as an interested party). Its MTWA is only approximately 80% of that of a Bulldog but it has a much slicker airframe, retractable gear and 25% more power. It burns 38-40L of AVGAS per hour and will cruise all day at 150KIAS - faster if the mood takes you and your wallet will stand it.
It's the closest that mere mortals such as I can ever hope to get to the peerless original. If you're lucky enough to know someone who owns a genuine Spit, has deep enough pockets to operate and maintain it and has been let out of the looney bin for long enough to pass you the keys to the hangar, good luck to you (I know - and, sadly, have known - several that are/were, incidentally).
For the rest of us, this is as good as it gets. And, as one pilot who should know has already put it, it's the best fun you can have with your clothes on.
Tailwinds
Gadget
Last edited by Captain Gadget; 30th Oct 2012 at 21:31.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Tr_no 688
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reasoning from defenders of the spit-thing being called a Spitfire seems to be something like.....................................
So what if it doesnt have a merlin, is smaller, has a different construction, less performance etc etc, its still a really nice plane
Yea great, so why try make it look like a Spitfire, call it a spitfire and buy the rights to the makers name?
Why not just make a really nice plane?
So what if it doesnt have a merlin, is smaller, has a different construction, less performance etc etc, its still a really nice plane
Yea great, so why try make it look like a Spitfire, call it a spitfire and buy the rights to the makers name?
Why not just make a really nice plane?