By: stuart gowans
- 12th April 2018 at 07:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A missed opportunity? if a mkV was fitted with mk V11 engine bearers and a mkV engine that would allow the fire wall to be extended forward (above the carry through spars) for a set of rudder pedals, also allowing the seating to be lowered.
By: ianwoodward9
- 16th April 2018 at 01:11Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I hope I didn't mislead anyone. Post #21 was about a report of a 'field' modification, rather than a 'field report'. It came with the same photograph as in Post #23 but, being on newsprint, in inferior quality. My printer-scanner-copier is in for 'repair' at the moment, so this is a camera shot of said 1947 report:
By: ianwoodward9
- 16th April 2018 at 08:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is it possible that this was a very senior officer whose initials were used rather than the code for 261 Squadron?
I have very little knowledge about this subject, so I'm just casting around for an explanation that might fit the statements in that report and be congruent with the evidence in the photograph. The 'pilot' must have been pretty senior to engage in 'liaison' work, pretty senior to have a 'batman' ('bagman' might a better word in this case, but the same would apply) and pretty senior to be able to arrange for such a modification to be undertaken. And I do seem to recall that individual initials were applied to aircraft back then, instead of squadron codes, but I can't remember where I got that notion. Am I totally off-beam here?
By: ianwoodward9
- 16th April 2018 at 11:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I say, I have no specialist knowledge. I just found this on-line, however. Is it the right explanation? Between SAAF service and 261 Squadron service?
By: Mark12
- 16th April 2018 at 12:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would be interested to learn why a Maintenance Unit in Sicily is undertaking a two seat Spitfire conversion for 261 Squadron based in India, Ceylon and Burma at this period of WWII flying Hurricanes and latterly Thunderbolts.
A more likely scenario would be the editorial staff at the Aeroplane Spotter or whoever in 1947 did not have the benefit of the Squadron codes information that we now have and got the code wrong.
I would suggest that the conversion was at the behest of the CO of the Maintenance Unit for general communications work in the area, using parts as available. As over 60% of the fuel would have had to be displaced to accommodate the passenger one might imagine the armament was removed to generate space for non standard fuel tanks.
No shortage of surplus Mk V's at 156 MU Blida in Algeria at this time. Probably in excess of 100 fuselages on site.
By: ianwoodward9
- 16th April 2018 at 13:28Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
In answer to your question, Mark12, I;m afraid I have no idea.
The South African website says that 261 Squadron had a two-seater Spitfire and that ES127 was allocated to that squadron. You may know - are these two statements correct?
The photo shows ES127 as a two-seater, everyone seems to accept that the photo was taken in Scicily and none of the South African personnel there at the time can recall a two-seater Spitfire on their charge. Adding two and two together doesn't always come to four but it's good starting point, surely?
AEROPLANE SPOTTER may not be a definitive source but why would they say "261 Squadron"? There was no need to mention the squadron number at all if they didn't know it.
By: Tony Kearns
- 16th April 2018 at 13:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Merlin 70,
Spitfire ML417 was never in Irish Air Corps service, the others listed are correct there were originally six but one MK721 No 160 was destroyed in a crash in 1957.It is all there in Greg Davis' new publication, well woth having.
Tony K
By: Mark12
- 16th April 2018 at 14:06Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
AEROPLANE SPOTTER may not be a definitive source but why would they say "261 Squadron"
Why would a certain UK monthly aviation magazine recently publish a load of inaccurate 'tosh' about the BoB film Buchons?
Why would the Daily Telegraph on the 2nd April this year carry a large colour air to air photograph of a Spitfire on its front page taken by Richard Paver and credit it to another person?
...just sloppy journalists with neither the time to research nor the inclination to check there facts at prime source.
Posts: 4,796
By: ZRX61 - 12th April 2018 at 02:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Too bloody many, the Porsche Panamera of warbirds...
Posts: 10,029
By: Mark12 - 12th April 2018 at 06:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Field report. A great find. The 261 Squadron link is intriguing. KJ-I is the code for 4 Sqn SAAF.
Mark
Image:- David Whitworth
An experiment with RR232. It is tight.
Posts: 2,025
By: stuart gowans - 12th April 2018 at 07:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A missed opportunity? if a mkV was fitted with mk V11 engine bearers and a mkV engine that would allow the fire wall to be extended forward (above the carry through spars) for a set of rudder pedals, also allowing the seating to be lowered.
Posts: 10,029
By: Mark12 - 12th April 2018 at 07:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Stuart,
The diagonal fuselage cross braces between the upper and lower fuel tanks is a major engineering issue.
Unless you want your knees under your chin a substantial reduction in the lower tank volume is required.
Mark
Posts: 1,274
By: T J Johansen - 12th April 2018 at 09:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
:applause: :applause: :applause:
T J
Posts: 860
By: ianwoodward9 - 16th April 2018 at 01:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I hope I didn't mislead anyone. Post #21 was about a report of a 'field' modification, rather than a 'field report'. It came with the same photograph as in Post #23 but, being on newsprint, in inferior quality. My printer-scanner-copier is in for 'repair' at the moment, so this is a camera shot of said 1947 report:
Posts: 10,029
By: Mark12 - 16th April 2018 at 07:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The reporter would seems to have mis-identified the squadron code KJ.
4 SAAF Sqn with code KJ were North Africa, Sicily, & Italy based, fitting in with Catania.
261 Sqn were India Far -East based with the squadron code FJ on their Thunderbolts.
Mark
Posts: 860
By: ianwoodward9 - 16th April 2018 at 08:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is it possible that this was a very senior officer whose initials were used rather than the code for 261 Squadron?
I have very little knowledge about this subject, so I'm just casting around for an explanation that might fit the statements in that report and be congruent with the evidence in the photograph. The 'pilot' must have been pretty senior to engage in 'liaison' work, pretty senior to have a 'batman' ('bagman' might a better word in this case, but the same would apply) and pretty senior to be able to arrange for such a modification to be undertaken. And I do seem to recall that individual initials were applied to aircraft back then, instead of squadron codes, but I can't remember where I got that notion. Am I totally off-beam here?
Posts: 10,029
By: Mark12 - 16th April 2018 at 08:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
ES127 was a former 4 SAAF Spitfire based in Sicily and Italy from August 1943.
KJ was the assigned Squadron code of 4 SAAF and it has been applied in the style and form as all their Spitfire and Kittyhawk aircraft of the period.
KJ are not the initials of a high ranking office in this case.
As SM520 has South African Air Force history post WWII it was thought appropriate to apply the KJ-I to this two seat conversion.
The report is most probably from a 1947 issue of 'The Aeroplane Spotter'...just an enthusiast magazine.
Mark
Posts: 860
By: ianwoodward9 - 16th April 2018 at 11:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I say, I have no specialist knowledge. I just found this on-line, however. Is it the right explanation? Between SAAF service and 261 Squadron service?
Posts: 860
By: ianwoodward9 - 16th April 2018 at 11:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The same website ( http://www.saairforce.co.za/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3306 ) has another photo of it but the same explanation:
Posts: 860
By: ianwoodward9 - 16th April 2018 at 11:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"Just an enthusiast magazine"?
Posts: 2,245
By: Fouga23 - 16th April 2018 at 12:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"An experiment with RR232. It is tight."
Just for fun, I presume? Shame, would be cool to see it fly like that :)
Posts: 1,891
By: Black Knight - 16th April 2018 at 12:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Couldn't a T14 be made?
Posts: 10,029
By: Mark12 - 16th April 2018 at 12:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would be interested to learn why a Maintenance Unit in Sicily is undertaking a two seat Spitfire conversion for 261 Squadron based in India, Ceylon and Burma at this period of WWII flying Hurricanes and latterly Thunderbolts.
A more likely scenario would be the editorial staff at the Aeroplane Spotter or whoever in 1947 did not have the benefit of the Squadron codes information that we now have and got the code wrong.
I would suggest that the conversion was at the behest of the CO of the Maintenance Unit for general communications work in the area, using parts as available. As over 60% of the fuel would have had to be displaced to accommodate the passenger one might imagine the armament was removed to generate space for non standard fuel tanks.
No shortage of surplus Mk V's at 156 MU Blida in Algeria at this time. Probably in excess of 100 fuselages on site.
Mark
Posts: 3,566
By: Bob - 16th April 2018 at 13:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Where are the keys to my time machine?....
Posts: 860
By: ianwoodward9 - 16th April 2018 at 13:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
In answer to your question, Mark12, I;m afraid I have no idea.
The South African website says that 261 Squadron had a two-seater Spitfire and that ES127 was allocated to that squadron. You may know - are these two statements correct?
The photo shows ES127 as a two-seater, everyone seems to accept that the photo was taken in Scicily and none of the South African personnel there at the time can recall a two-seater Spitfire on their charge. Adding two and two together doesn't always come to four but it's good starting point, surely?
AEROPLANE SPOTTER may not be a definitive source but why would they say "261 Squadron"? There was no need to mention the squadron number at all if they didn't know it.
Posts: 268
By: Tony Kearns - 16th April 2018 at 13:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Merlin 70,
Spitfire ML417 was never in Irish Air Corps service, the others listed are correct there were originally six but one MK721 No 160 was destroyed in a crash in 1957.It is all there in Greg Davis' new publication, well woth having.
Tony K
Posts: 10,029
By: Mark12 - 16th April 2018 at 14:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Why would a certain UK monthly aviation magazine recently publish a load of inaccurate 'tosh' about the BoB film Buchons?
Why would the Daily Telegraph on the 2nd April this year carry a large colour air to air photograph of a Spitfire on its front page taken by Richard Paver and credit it to another person?
...just sloppy journalists with neither the time to research nor the inclination to check there facts at prime source.
Mark
Posts: 1,587
By: merlin70 - 16th April 2018 at 15:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
@Tony K
Listing corrected.