Read the forum code of contact
By: - 4th September 2013 at 12:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Spitfires in the photos are alle fitted with e-wing armamant, i.e. a .50 Browning machinegun in the inner gunbay and a Hispano 20mm cannon in the outer bay.
The Spitfire with the spiral painted on the spinner does not seem to have any covers/fairings fitted over the Hispano barrels. (They seem to be clearing it for take-off nonetheless, I don't know if it was standard practice with the l'Armée de l'Air in Indochina to delete these covers ...)
Regarding the bombload question, I know the bombload shown in the photo's (and described by you) was very common for spitfires in 2nd TAF in 1944-45.
Don't believe one version of the Mk. IX was favored over another - specifically for bomb delivery - as they have the same wing (just a different armament installation)
I believe the (gradual) change was made to the e-wing (i.e. .50 Brownings) because the 4 .303 Brownings in the C wing were considered inadequate.(That is the reason that most IX's and most if not all Mk. XVI's delivered in late 1944 or 1945 had that "heavier" armament)
I do seem to recall mention somewhere of the e-wing armament layout putting less stress on the wing because the 20mm cannon was moved outbaord, but I'm sure the Spitfire experts will be able to help you there.
By: - 4th September 2013 at 14:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The modifications, to carry bombs under the wings, were "Special Order Only," and could be fitted to either "E" or "C" wings; one was simply to fit deflectors over the ejector ports, so that empty cases did not hit the bombs, but the other appears to have needed a working party (at least,) possibly the attention of a repair facility, since it required work to be done in the cockpit. Under-fuselage bombs normally needed shortened vanes, to avoid contact with the ground. In all cases, the aircraft needed the four-spoke (i.e stronger) wheels.
The introduction of the "E" wing was held back until the arrival of the gyro gunsight, since the Air Ministry favoured the extra delivery, from the four .303" guns (even though the bullets were lighter) rather than the slower-firing .5", because it gave a better chance, in a deflection shot (at which a lot of the pilots were not very good,) of disabling the enemy pilot. With the new gunsight, there was a better chance of the pilot actually hitting what he was aiming at, so the .5" came into service.
Years ago, a friend of mine found out that the .5" was moved inboard, and forward, to make cocking them that much easier; apparently, in the outboard/aft position, armourers were ripping their hands on the aft part of the gunbay, and the cannon didn't have the same problem.
Posts: 85
By: Farmgate - 4th September 2013 at 03:47 - Edited 2nd October 2019 at 11:40
[ATTACH=CONFIG]220476[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]220477[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]220478[/ATTACH][[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]220477[/ATTACH]
I am researching the bomb configuraton on Spitfire Mk. IX's used in Indo china postwar. I cannot tell from the photos if whether the "c" version is involved or "e" but would appreciate comments from the Spitfire experts.
Did the Spitfire typically carry a 500 lbs. centerline bomb, with two 250 lbs. bombs attached to the wings? Is the Spitfire shown in the photo herein a "c" version of the Mk. IX? Which version was favored for bomb delivery?
Thank you very much.