Read the forum code of contact
By: - 30th May 2019 at 16:14 Permalink
For what its worth, I think the Spitfire F XIV is by far the most graceful, and dare i say it, the most beautiful of all the Spitfires ever produced!
There that's that can of worms opened!!
Old Towzer.
By: - 31st May 2019 at 07:32 Permalink
I think you are correct!
By: - 31st May 2019 at 22:01 Permalink
This is a superb observation, and one that seemingly has not occurred before. It looks like Joe Smith made a clever leap when going for a higher seat for better view. He re-used the high-back jigs for a bubble canopy design. Smart engineering.
By: - 2nd June 2019 at 08:36 Permalink
I agree, what an interesting observation!
Now it begs the question that if there is a dataplate out there we could see a company like Airframe Assemblies or HFL/ARCo build one? We need to find a rich investor first of course! As for the wing, isn't it similar to the Attacker?
Like most things, anything could be done with buckets of money etc I guess....I'll stop daydreaming now LOL. But how nice would it be to see a Spiteful fuse built up??
Right-O......back to the real world of fixing an Auster
By: - 2nd June 2019 at 22:06 Permalink
I agree, what an interesting observation!Now it begs the question that if there is a dataplate out there we could see a company like Airframe Assemblies or HFL/ARCo build one? We need to find a rich investor first of course! As for the wing, isn't it similar to the Attacker?
Like most things, anything could be done with buckets of money etc I guess....I'll stop daydreaming now LOL. But how nice would it be to see a Spiteful fuse built up??
Right-O......back to the real world of fixing an Auster
I believe a forum member owns the data-plate/identity and some pieces from the prototype Spiteful NN660, which crashed in '44.
Posts: 581
By: - 3rd June 2019 at 00:11 Permalink
The tail unit from a Spiteful/ Seafang is being used in the (I believe) airworthy rebuild of a Seafire 46.
By: - 7th June 2019 at 02:41 Permalink
The tail unit from a Spiteful/ Seafang is being used in the (I believe) airworthy rebuild of a Seafire 46.
Not quite true, but the assembly is identical.
By: - 7th June 2019 at 06:38 Permalink
I have many parts from NN660 recovered over the last 10 or so years. She was not a true spiteful, but beautiful none the less. I have a true Spiteful canopy
By: - 7th June 2019 at 21:13 Permalink
Over 3000 Type 371 (Spiteful) drawings have survived including assembly drawings for all of the fuselage frames. It should be easy enough to compare these with the equivilent for late mark, high back Spitfires
By: - 7th June 2019 at 22:28 Permalink
Believe this is Spiteful.
Definitely seems so! Where is this from?
By: - 8th June 2019 at 08:13 Permalink
Definitely seems so! Where is this from?
37127...27 would indicate fuselage group including the fin post. By the Supermarine system, technically I believe this part could have come from a Mk 22 Spitfire.
Mark
By: - 8th June 2019 at 10:28 Permalink
It is part of the side longeron, just behing the cockpit, so fuselage group makes sense.
By: - 10th June 2019 at 04:43 Permalink
Right-O Rocketeer. You need to find the member with the dataplate (probably we all know who that would be...maybe?) and with your parts get a project on the market???
Or I could trade you some Mk6 & 7 Auster spares for your Spiteful bits and I could find the dataplate.....
Or I could just get my coat and leave LOL.
Seems like a great opportunity, probably the only way we will ever have the possibility of ever seeing one in our lifetime.
Ok, i'll stop dreaming and get my coat!
By: - 10th June 2019 at 15:07 Permalink - Edited 10th June 2019 at 15:07
The answer to the question in post #1 is no.
The attached image is of frame 13 for a Spitfire on the left and Spiteful on the right. In both cases frame 13 is two frames behind the seat back and aligns with the back of the canopy on the Spiteful.
[ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\tFrame 13.jpg Views:\t0 Size:\t60.2 KB ID:\t3864933","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3864933","data-size":"small"}[/ATTACH]
By: - 10th June 2019 at 16:43 Permalink
That makes perfect sense. The top part of a high back fuselage would be too narrow for a raised seating position.
By: - 10th June 2019 at 16:58 Permalink
Presumably frame 19 would be common if the tail of the Spiteful was used on the later Spitfires, and NN664 had a Spitfire tail originally?
By: - 10th June 2019 at 19:29 Permalink
I don’t believe any makers plate was found from NN660, so nice try. The wreckage from NN660 showed how VS reused parts from early Mk’s. If it was not broke, don’t need to modify it, if you like.
The 371 numbers were all hand stamped so often wonky. A few examples; pipe tag 371 87 (hydraulic system), 371 08430 (bottom outer main plates which would be specific to the Spiteful wing), 371 50 (chassis undercarriage main, again very specific), 371 1117 (top outer aileron).
Regarding Spiteful’s photo, it looks like something we dug from a dump.
I need to check my canopy for pix
By: - 11th June 2019 at 14:42 Permalink - Edited 2nd October 2019 at 14:50
A couple of drawings, I borrowed the pilots notes a while back and copied part of it.
[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","title":"Spiteful012.jpg","data-attachmentid":3865009}[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","title":"Spiteful013.jpg","data-attachmentid":3865010}[/ATTACH]
By: - 11th June 2019 at 15:05 Permalink
[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","title":"PICT0041.jpg","data-attachmentid":3865012}[/ATTACH]
As you can see the rudder pedals are now virtually level,the step is I believe the two fuel tanks under the panel shown in the drawing, so you would need to raise the cockpit accordingly to enable to pilot to fit.
Posts: 21
By: Lythronax - 30th May 2019 at 02:45 - Edited 2nd October 2019 at 11:40
Discussions on this forum suggest that the fuselage of the Spiteful is a low-back Spitfire fuselage raised above the datum longeron with some other modifications. However upon comparing side-drawings, it appears to have been (up to the now-reclined frame to the rear of the cockpit, I couldn't quote the specific number) a stock high-back Spitfire fuselage with changes to access panels and such, although the big tail somewhat distorts how it looks:
[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","title":"97_by_lythroa_dd82y1u-pre.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9MTEwOCIsInBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcLzgyOTMwODllLTdiYTAtNDM3NC04YzAzLTcwNjRmOTI4YjFhMVwvZGQ4MnkxdS1lNWMyY2VhMy1kMGNhLTRlNzYtOTMyNi1hMWY4NmU3MTYwOWUuanBnIiwid2lkdGgiOiI8PTEyODAifV1dLCJhdWQiOlsidXJuOnNlcnZpY2U6aW1hZ2Uub3BlcmF0aW9ucyJdfQ.wGIjHZnITjBoE0qT8w-qJTt4F15SdOTaRnwFGgVRyEo.jpg","data-attachmentid":3863680}[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","title":"100_by_lythroa_dd82ybv-fullview.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9Mzc0IiwicGF0aCI6IlwvZlwvODI5MzA4OWUtN2JhMC00Mzc0LThjMDMtNzA2NGY5MjhiMWExXC9kZDgyeWJ2LTU4MDk3YTAzLTBhZmItNGI0Ni1iMGIxLTE5ZDIwNzA5NjQ3OS5qcGciLCJ3aWR0aCI6Ijw9MTI4MCJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.Ekrxn5pmwidq78-iG4eTyfTfhnCic98MSVtw5yJxEQk.jpg","data-attachmentid":3863681}[/ATTACH]
This isn't a perfect comparison, as the Spiteful is not fully side-on to the camera, but you can see the similarity: [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"center","data-size":"full","title":"dd82zhh-0685f67a-55e9-4438-a482-f0e993caca34.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcLzgyOTMwODllLTdiYTAtNDM3NC04YzAzLTcwNjRmOTI4YjFhMVwvZGQ4MnpoaC0wNjg1ZjY3YS01NWU5LTQ0MzgtYTQ4Mi1mMGU5OTNjYWNhMzQuanBnIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.A9OU8tTi6CdK1bkhcfK8BsOC8QjANWUmE54TqpaBJ6M.jpg","data-attachmentid":3863682}[/ATTACH]
Are there any available original drawings which may corroborate this?