"Spitfire" Production line re-opened / Enstone (merged)

[Moggy C]

Indeed, linking the distinctive shape of the Vulcan aircraft to the word would give you a copyrightable trademark/logo

Moggy

[TonyT]

A bit like Hoover, it is now a generic name for the product it is no longer a trademark

The suing of a condom company by northrop that is on the pprune link gets me.

[Student Pilot]

Bushfeuer Mk I perhaps ?

Those IO-720s produce 400 hp.

Where did you read it was a 720? I see a blower in one of the photo's, there were turbo'd 720's they used to produce 500hp. There weren't many of those round, just loogin at the photo I'd say TSIO540.

[J Boyle]

A bit like Hoover, it is now a generic name for the product it is no longer a trademark

In America to protect their copyright, firms had to take steps to avoid a proper name from becoming a generic term.
If they didn't do that, the name could slip over into common use.

When I used to get journalism magazines they were full of ads designed for just that purpose. The one I recall is Chrysler reminding journalists that "Jeep" is a registered trademark and not a generic term for any small 4x4.

[Lincoln 7]

Mr J.B. You have just ruined my day by calling the Cobra, surley John you meant to say SHELBY Cobra.Not just "Cobra"
Go and sit on the naughty step for 5mins in penance
Jim.
Lincoln .7

[J Boyle]

Mr J.B. You have just ruined my day by calling the Cobra, surley John you meant to say SHELBY Cobra.Not just "Cobra"
Go and sit on the naughty step for 5mins in penance
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Us "cool car" guys can call it just "Cobra".
We know what we mean...why just the other day I was talking to good old Carroll....

I did meet Mr Shelby once and had a brief conversation about his WWII flying in Texas. Very nice guy.

[DazDaMan]

Anyway, back on topic....

http://youtu.be/21Lc2rrDrqI

[DazDaMan]

And, from the test pilot's point of view...

http://youtu.be/5lLPn80RZ0M

[Moggy C]

Possibly the most boring bit of film we've seen here for a long time. I gave up after about two minutes.

Moggy

[topspeed]

The latter states that Spitfire was pitch sensitive...as was the original. The tail volume coefficient in a homebuilt should be 0.5. What exactly is it in a Spitfire ?

[topspeed]

Okay gentlemen !

I printed the Spitfire MK XIV 3-views and roughly calculated the tail arm and cord of the wing and tail area...and I got TVC into 0.32 and fighter according to Daniel Raymer should have 0.4...but Sabre F-86 has 0.21...so it is kinda smallish and 20% too small so if we go by the book...the washout and planform may contribute. Generally a too small elevator is felt as sensitive for the pilot.

We know a Spit flies well so it must be still ok.
It could make the allovable CG range kinda narrow.

[DazDaMan]

It's a well-known fact that the smaller WAR aircraft replicas have larger than scale elevators/stabilisers to counteract any sensitivity in pitch that they might have.

[Robert Whitton]

Flying a Spitfire is not a superhuman feat. Any average tailwheel pilot could fly one with a little training.

Catherine Grace wasn't suggesting that you have to be superhuman to fly a "real" Spitfire. She just says that the level of skill required to fly the Mk26 is different. I havn't flown either a "real" one or a reduced scale one so can't comment.
Anyone here flown a "real" Spitfire?

[Bushell]

Carolyn Grace has not flown a Spitfire Mk 26, so how can she comment?

[topspeed]

Carolyn Grace has not flown a Spitfire Mk 26, so how can she comment?

Took me a while to understand what a Mk26 was; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire_Mk_26

Listening the video above...I get a feeling they indeed have done something to enhance the flight caracteristic for it.

First it sounds like they stretched it to 90% from 80%..that would make it sorta longer if wing is still the same ???

[DazDaMan]

Took me a while to understand what a Mk26 was; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire_Mk_26

Listening the video above...I get a feeling they indeed have done something to enhance the flight caracteristic for it.

First it sounds like they stretched it to 90% from 80%..that would make it sorta longer if wing is still the same ???

The wing is slightly smaller to allow better penetration through the air (same principle as employed on one of the recent Mustang kits - can't recall which one). That way you can get away with using a smaller engine, therefore reducing costs etc etc, but still having appreciable performance.

The Mk.26A model was an 80% scale fuselage but with a 75% wing.

[merlinai159]

1) Scale replicas are cheaper by a factor of about 20 times - say £150,000 as against £3 million

2) Scale replicas can be built a lot quicker

3) Scale replicas are easier for civilian trained pilots (PPL) to fly

4) Scale replicas are cheaper to insure, run, maintain (Avgas is now £2.00 litre)

Need I go on?

Moggy

All that you say is quite true but it still doesn't change my feeling about it.

[Moggy C]

90%! why not go the whole hog and add the other 10% and lets have them full sized.

So you are saying you are prepared to fork out the £1.5 million + for the full size one?

Can I have a go please?

Moggy

[DazDaMan]

Even the Jurca MJ100 will set you back a fair few quid.

[Moggy C]

To be fair it looks achievable for about £200,000, which is only double the cost of the Jabiru one

Moggy

[DazDaMan]

If I remember rightly, Bob DeFord's had cost him (c.2004) around $250k.

If you didn't know it had an Allison under the cowl, you'd be forgiven for thinking it was the real McCoy.

[TonyT]

Good news, the planning permission for the windfarm has been thrown out, see

http://www.banburyguardian.co.uk/new...tone_1_3505816

[DazDaMan]

Oh, and before I forget, there IS a full-scale Spitfire that might appear as a kit, given enough interest. Two have been built, by two guys in Australia, using plans for the Spitfire V. Engine power is, I believe, a Lycoming of some sort, but the design ethic was to build a replica Spitfire using modern construction methods.

There's a website/blog kicking around for it somewhere, and it's a two-seater to boot.

http://www.saaafnq.com/files/Members...s/English.html

And it has flown, I'm sure.

I was curious as to whether or not this one had fixed gear, but it appears this is not the case (judging by the recess visible in the picture of the fuselage on the trailer.)

Better picture of it here:

[taylorman]

Well, I like the idea of the 'modern' spitfire, but it just doesn't look right... I'd prefer the mk26b.

[DazDaMan]

I dunno, that one's kinda grown on me a bit since I first saw it.