Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.
Shooter    5/26/2005 5:12:16 PM
Given 20-20 hind sight, It is easy to see where R.M. went wrong with the Spitfire! The following list of items is my idea of how they should have done it, IF THEY HAD READ ANY OF THE COMMON TEXTS instead of designing a newer SPAD for the last war! 1. Start with the late Seafire or even better the Martin Baker MB-5! they have contra props and wide track gear. The MB-5 also has a much higher LOS out of the pit forward. This is also one of the Spits larger problems. 2. Change the shape/planform of the wing and eppinage from eliptical to trapiziodal. The eliptical surfaces caused the construction time and cost of the Spitfire to be more than double that of the Mustang and almost as much as the P-38. 3. Reduce the wing cord and thus area by 35-40%! This reduction in surface aria will increase the cruising speed substantialy! This is probably the single biggest defect in the design. The change in aspect ratio will also help fuel ecconomy! 4. To compensate for the increased landing and take off speeds install triple slotted fowler flaps with a long hinge extension. This gives a huge increase in wing area and changes the camber for supirior "DOG FIGHT" ability, should you ever need it! ( because the pilot really screwed up!) At full extension and deflection, they would reduce the landing speed by 11~13MPH? (Slip Stick calcs!) 5. Remove the wing mounted radiators and install a body duct like the P-51 or MB-5! This one change would add ~35MPH to the plane? 6. use the single stage griphon engine and install a "Turbo-charger" like the P-38 and Most American Bombers had. This would increase power and save weight, both significant contributers to performance. 7. Remove the guns from the wings! This would lower the polar moment of rotation and give the plane snappier rates of roll! It also makes room for "wet wings" with much more fuel. A chronic Spit problem. It also fixes the Spit's gunnery problem of designed in dispersion! 8. Install the Gun(s) in the nose! Either fireing threw the prop boss/hub or on either side 180 degrees either side of the prop CL. This fixes the afore mentioned dispersion problem. One bigger gun between the cilinder banks or upto four 20MMs beside the engine or both, depending on what your mission needs were! 9. Make a new gun based on the American 28MM or 1.1" Naval AA ammo! This shell was particuarly destructive, had a very high MV and BC and was all ready in service. A re-engineered copy of the existing gun to reduce weight and increase RoF is a faily simple task. Pay the Americans for it if British spring technology is not up to the task! it also frees up much needed production capasity for other things. 10. Design a new drawn steel "Mine" shell for the above gun! Spend the money to load it with RDX instead of the TNT used for the first 4/5s of the war. 11. Pay North American or Lockheed to design it for you, since the Supermarine staff was to tied up fixing the origional spitfire design to get it done any time soon. Did I miss anything?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
gf0012-aust    Boths   4/23/2006 12:00:06 AM
"Ah the Botha, now there was a plane, with a 20,000lb blockbuster under the fuselage and 2 Tallboys under the wings, best bomber of the war." but the irrecontrovertible evidence, the indisputable fact is that they dropped unmanned ordnance ;) (visions of Dr Strangelove!)
 
Quote    Reply

MustangFlyer    RE:Boths   4/23/2006 2:29:38 AM
No they only dropped the Blockbuster. The tallboys (sometimes they had to use medium and even short boys) were the bomb aimers, using a speaking tube to the pilot. "Left a bit, Left a bit, right a bit". When the IP was just to left/right of each of them they were on tager. Why 2 I hear you say, better accuracy and redundancy, lose one and still have another left. They went through a lot of tall boys, hence the use of shorter boys later in the war. So much so that the average height of the Briish dropped by 2 inches by 45. Reportedly, tall cowards sawed off their foots to avoid being picked. Fat boys were avoided due to the increased drag. Jeez, I though everyone knew that. I dunno, the ignorance, the ignorance.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    Bothas   4/23/2006 2:51:21 AM
I never understood all the hoo har on the Norden, after all, you only needed to line up the target where the nose gunner, navigator, bomb aimer and tail gunner were all lined up LOS with each other and then for the ball gunner to drop a "plumbers line" - and you had a perfect approach by using the ball gunners plumbers line, and the turret gunners sextant reading, you could get a close approximation of altitude and approach they didn't need any of that fancy schmancy norden gear...
 
Quote    Reply

MustangFlyer    RE:Bothas   4/23/2006 5:22:04 AM
You could do even better. Put a hook on a cable, when it snags on the target, slide the bomb down the cable, direct hit ... who needs GPS or lasers. Note this is copywrite, anyone who wants to use this please send huge wads of money to the telephone box with the chalk cross on the left hand side of the road, non-sequential bills please.
 
Quote    Reply

MustangFlyer    RE:Bothas   4/23/2006 5:32:34 AM
Hmmm. I think I can make wads of money out of this. All I need is a country that continually spends lots of money of totally crap equipment. Preferably somewhere that has just spent wads on obsolete, non-working, rusting, unreliable, basically useless and total inappropriate kit. Now where did I put the phone number of the ADF? AF can you help out here (10% commission for you)?
 
Quote    Reply

MustangFlyer    RE:Bothas - GF   4/23/2006 5:35:13 AM
I meant GF of course, note how I have cleverly increased the number of posts by using a typing error. We'll make the 1,000 with total drivel yet (look how drivel got the F18 thread over 1,000).
 
Quote    Reply

larryjcr    RE:Bothas   4/23/2006 10:43:09 AM
And don't forget the French bomb aiming system. A system so devastating in its effectiveness that it was outlawed by a special, secret provision of the Geneva convention: the replacement of expensive, inaccurate optical equipment by a committee of gypsy fortune tellers, voting on when to drop the bombs.
 
Quote    Reply

the British Lion    RE:Bothas - MustangFlyer   4/23/2006 12:53:46 PM
I must help in this nobal quest of yours... can't let the F-18 overshadow the Spitfire!! I think the Boltan-Paul Defient was the best of the war!! A turret on a fighter... inspired!! So good and deadly, in fact, that the Germans were forced to shoot them down in order to eliminate the great threat they posed... What a fighter... what a legend... B.L
 
Quote    Reply

MustangFlyer    RE:Bothas - MustangFlyer   4/24/2006 4:27:44 AM
Ah you can just see it. Hoards of Bothas with their blockbusters (and the tall/medium/short boys hanging off the wings doing the aiming), escorted by Defiants. A fiendishly cunning plan, the Luftwaffe uses up all its ammunition shooting them down leaving them totally helpless. British ingenuity wins again.
 
Quote    Reply

MustangFlyer    To British Lion   4/24/2006 9:28:50 AM
Ok here's how this goes to get the 1,000. I'll say "all British planes were crap, heck a Me 108 could take out a Spitfire. Plus all British people are effeminate, class ridden tossers". You come back "What you colonial prison bait. What exactly did Australia contribute to the war, apart from stuffing up building Mosquitos and beating the c*ap out of US soldiers in Brisbane. If we do this a few times we'll get some others sucked in and get the Spitfire thread up and over the 1,000. Deal laddie?
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics