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
Cromwell    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/3/2005 2:34:23 PM
But the Spitfire equivalent to the F-6 would be something like the Spitfire FRXIV, which also retained its armament.
 
Quote    Reply

larryjcr    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/3/2005 3:11:08 PM
And what was the operational range of an armed Spit XIV compared to a Mustang? If it didn't increase internal fuel (which in a Spit required removal of armament) about 300 mi. combat radius. Puts serius limits on what you can use it for. Combat radius for the full armed F6 was over 800 miles.
 
Quote    Reply

Shooter    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/3/2005 4:17:35 PM
>>2. Extra range is of only minimal advantage. As I said earlier the spit had enough fuel to go full bore for an hour.<< The Spit's engine would not last 6 minutes at full throttle! Once reserves are counted the Spit of BoB fame has about 40-45 minutes in the air. This ONLY if at part throttle for MOST if that time. >> The aircraft is also limited by ammunition load. Two one hour sorties have more possible attacks than a single three hour sortie.<< Not at all! You use the time to get ready and make the best possable attack. Use all the ammo or targets whichever goes first, then land and service the planes. In this way you only use as much fuel and ammo as required. In addition the Allison engine did not need to have it's spark plugs replaced after EVERY full throttle use. This time alone could give the P-39/40 and extra sourte. >>4. Sandhurst wargamed it in 1974 with various conditions (mostly to give the Germans an advantage) and not once did the Germans actually win. This is also consistant with a number of books I have read. British fighter production was far in excess of German production at that time in the war, they also had far fewer pilot losses than the Germans and were getting replacements quicker as well. The Germans simply lacked the ability to maintain a persistent numerical superiority over RAF. << I know of this game, IIRC, there was no invasion alowed in it. When the Germans invade, the Brits loose. The Germans have air supiriority if the continue to attack the airfields instead of bomb the cities. Then they invade and britan falls.
 
Quote    Reply

Shooter    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/3/2005 4:33:31 PM
>>the p40 availible in 1940 wasnt the p40 used in the desert, it was a lot slower, and turn climb and dive rates were also very inferior, had the 1941 P40 been availible then I would agree but the early model wasnt a match for the hurricane let alone the spit/109, and if you are taking 41 models then the hurricane II carried a better set of weapons with 4x20mm whilst giving little away to the p40. plus the P40 worked better at lowish attitudes whilst the bob was fought at farely high ones. the early kittyhawk was significantly inferior to the hurricane in an interceptor role,<< This is simply not true. The early American fighters were better than the Hurricane! Every single P-39/40 was supirior to Every single Hurricane ever made. Some of the early planes were faster than the BoB Spitfires!!!!! And they has SS tanks at a time when there were none in England.
 
Quote    Reply

Shooter    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/3/2005 4:41:10 PM
Photo recon was not done from High altitude! None of the PR planes from any source used Pressurised cocpits at least as far as I can find. I have the production figures for Spits and none of the pr ships had it as far as I can tell. In any case the extra weight would be a detriment to performance below 10,000'?
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/3/2005 5:30:12 PM
In the Sandhurst games the Germans were allowed to invade. They ended up loosing tens of thousands of men as a result. They didn't have the shipping to maintain a steady flow of supplies and reinforcements. Of the PR spits pressurised ones were the PR.X and the PR.XIX. The PR.X wasn't liked by pilots and the PR.XI was prefered. The PR.XIX, however, was the predominant version of the PR spits by the end of the war. The first, pressurised PR mossie was the PR.XVI, a development of the B.XVI, which was also pressurised. Most PR work in spits was done at high altitude, in excess of 30,000 feet for the XI and 40,000 for XIX. There were variants for low altitude that mounted oblique cameras however.
 
Quote    Reply

Shooter    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/4/2005 12:06:22 AM
I was stationed in HQUSAEUR/Hiedelburg at the time and remember the games some what? Could you please list the source for the notion that the Germans were alowed to invade? As I recall the rules were set to deffeat the invasion no matter how well the germand rolled dice and were even by their own admission, not very realistic! I realy would like to see the whole thing online! One of the reasons I had such a cushy job at the time was because they needed someone who was "OFF THE WALL" or as we say now "thinking out of the box" I was that "wall banger". I played in dozzens of war games between '72-75, and was invited to many "FUN" matches in the back room of the "O" club just so some could steal a few of my ideas! I am proudest of the week end WAR COLEDGE game where I lead the germans to win WW-II, while stationed at Vint Hill Farms ASA base out side Washington DC in 1971!
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/4/2005 1:21:57 AM
They definately gamed it so the Germans could invade and I believe they even removed the RAF entirely for one scenario, which still resulted in a German defeat. http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/althist/seal1.htm http://www.wargamesdirectory.com/html/articles/various/sealowe.asp This thread has a good debate about whether or not Germany could have successfully invade. http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/12-2400.asp
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/4/2005 4:26:39 AM
shooter what rubbish, the early p40/p39 were inferior to Hurricanes, all BOb british fighters had self sealing tanks, by 1940 all RAF planes had them except a number of Leand Lease aircraft. the spit had to have its plugs changed after every fight? hwer do you get this rubbish from, there are many accounts of spits having there refueling cut short to renegage and are you tellinng me that it was quicker to change plugs than refuel? yes the spit merlin had a 5 minute window on emergency power, as did the p40 and i bet the p39. you find one account of early p40/p39 that claim they were superior to the huricane, I certainly cant, I can find reports that the RAF transfered there Hawks + kittyhawks to the middle east as the regarded them as so inferior to the Me109
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    RE:How to fix the design defects of the Spitfire airplane of WW-II.   11/4/2005 4:44:50 AM
" I can find reports that the RAF transfered there Hawks + kittyhawks to the middle east as the regarded them as so inferior to the Me109 " The RAAF pilots who flew Tomahawks in Nth Africa regarded them as absolute dogs compared to the Hurris they flew in England. One of my uncles was a Kittyhawk pilot and also considered them to be a dog of a plane. They were robust but more or less considered useless when compared to Hurris. He flew Hawks, Hurris and eventually a Beaufighter. (the "beau" was his all time favourite aircraft, and in his view could walk all over a Lightning)
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics