PDA

View Full Version : Interesting historical doc from Australian archieves (clipped wing Spitfires)



Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 02:15 AM
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/11.jpg

Source : National Archives of Australia.

mynameisroland
06-26-2007, 02:27 AM
"Spitfire has been getting too much praise while I've been gone, must even up the score ... "

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y294/mynameisroland/RollChartClr2.jpg

Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 02:27 AM
Mynamisroland... check. Anyway, predictable, this is so much more interesting, some actual timed roll curves from the report itself :

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/rolling.jpg

Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 03:09 AM
This is from another report : Clipped winged 'Spitfire' - Rolling performance, from October 1943.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/pilot_opinions1.jpg

This one is a from a Squadron which was late with it's report due to Sqn movements and sent it in later :
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/appendix-1.jpg

ImpStarDuece
06-26-2007, 03:25 AM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
"Spitfire has been getting too much praise while I've been gone, must even up the score ... "

Quote for truth.

These docments have been posted here, numerous times.

They are nothing new.

Someone is interested in forwarding an agenda.

Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 03:48 AM
Nothing new to you perhaps, but I am having the feeling you're not happy that others may be able see them.
There are many newbies here who may have not seen them, and who'd be interested in them. And they don't need your approval. The agenda is yours, you want to dismiss them, and keep them away from eyes I believe. Isn't that so?

hop2002
06-26-2007, 03:53 AM
What's weird about the agenda is the attempt to prove clipping wasn't worthwhile, when huge numbers of Spitfires actually had clipped wings.

This from The Spitfire Story by Alfred Price tells a very different story:


The account below is taken from the report on the comparative trial of clipped wing and standard wing Spitfire VBs, flown by the Air Fighting Development Unit at Duxford towards the end of 1942. The sole difference in the case of the former was that the wing tips had been removed and thin streamlined fairings fitted in their place. Thus wing span was reduced from 36 ft 10 in to 32 ft 6 ins, and wing area from the normal 242 square feet to 231. The removal of the wing tips reduced the fully loaded weight by 30 pounds; wing loading was increased by about one pound per square foot.

Method of Test
Two Spitfire VB aircraft were selected with a performance which was almost identical, the loading and equipment carried were standard in each, and the propeller, engine and finish of each aircraft were similar. A test flight was made under maximum cruising conditions and no differences could be determined. The wing tips were then removed from one aircraft and trials were carried out, each trial being performed twice to enable the pilots to be changed. The wing tips were then replaced on one aircraft and removed on the other and similar tests carried out. Differences in speed were taken as relative increases or decreases owing to possible instrument inaccuracies, and position error differences with and without tips. Readings for level speeds were taken at 10,000,15,000, 20,000 and 25,000 feet; zoom climbs were made 10,000-15,000 ft and 20,000-25,000 ft; dives were made with similar engine settings.

Results of Comparative Tests

Level Speed 10.000 feet.
In each case the clipped wing Spitfire proved the faster by a small margin estimated in the nature of 5 mph.
15,000 and 20,000 feet. The average results at these two heights showed that the difference in speed is not measurable.
25.000 feet. The standard Spitfire is very slightly faster than the clipped wing Spitfire.
In all level speed runs the clipped wing Spitfire accelerated rather better than the standard Spitfire.

Climb
The average difference in time during zoom climbs from 20,000 to 25,000 feet was 15 seconds in favour of the standard Spitfire.
From 10,000 to 15,000 feet no differences were indicated.

Dive
In all diving tests the clipped wing Spitfire drew away from the standard Spitfire.

Manoeuvrability
At all heights to 25.000 feet the rate of roll is considerably improved by removal of the wing tips. The response to aileron movements is very quick and very crisp. Four dog-fights were carried out, starting with the standard Spitfire on the tail of the clipped wing Spitfire. On two occasions the clipped wing Spitfire evaded so rapidly in the rolling plane that it was able to lose the standard Spitfire and reverse the positions in about 20 seconds. On the third occasion the clipped wing Spitfire was also able to lose the standard Spitfire. The fourth occasion was at 25,000 feet and the standard Spitfire was able to keep the clipped wing Spitfire in sight.
The minimum turning circle of the clipped wing Spitfire at 20.000 ft has been increased by 55 feet at 1,025 feet compared with the FW 190 turning circle of 1,450 feet (RAE Farnborough figures). This slight increase does not therefore detract from the fighting qualities of the aeroplane in any way. since the clipped wing version is unlikely to be in combat with the standard Spitfire.

Take-off
The take-off run must theoretically be slightly longer, but in taking off with the clipped wing Spitfire in close formation behind the standard Spitfire, no difference was detected.

Landing
No difference detected.

General
The view downwards over the wing tips, for what it is worth, is improved by a not inconsiderable amount. The strengthening of the wing by removal of the wing tips may permit higher maximum IAS to be used.

Conclusions
The trials have shown that;

Speed
Below 1,000 ft Clipped wings give an increase
15 - 20,000ft No difference
Above 20,0000ft Standard wings are slightly faster

Climb
Below 1,000 ft Differences hardly measurable
15 - 20,000ft Differences hardly measurable
Above 20,0000ft In zoom climb from 20 - 25,000ft from level flight at full throttle, standard wings about 15 seconds faster

Rate of Roll
Below 1,000 ft Clipped wings superior
15 - 20,000ft Clipped wings superior
Above 20,0000ft Clipped wings superior

Acceleration
Below 1,000 ft Clipped wings superior
15 - 20,000ft Clipped wings superior
Above 20,0000ft Clipped wings superior

Dive
Below 1,000 ft Clipped wings superior
15 - 20,000ft Clipped wings superior
Above 20,0000ft Clipped wings superior

Turning circle
Slight increase for clipped wings, amounting to 55 feet at 20,000ft.

Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 04:07 AM
Originally posted by hop2002:
What's weird about the agenda is the attempt to prove clipping wasn't worthwhile, when huge numbers of Spitfires actually had clipped wings.

How many ?


This from The Spitfire Story by Alfred Price tells a very different story:

I am not sure about who to quantify AFdU's usual 'considerably improved' and 'very quick and very crisp'. They sure meant in improvement, it seems AFDU considered to improvement worthwhile, while Boscombe Down measurements on Mk Vs, IX and XII showed it's not worth it and it's not recommended. It seems combat pilots from the end of 1943 also have a pronounced dislike to the modification.

Unfortunately, you can't simply pick the reports you like and dismiss all the rest. You have to understand and analyse all of them. It seems that Spitfires had a large variation of roll rate depending on how well their sets of ailerons were matched.

The stated minimum turning circle of the Vb at 20 k feet is interesting though, at 1,025 feet. This is considerably greater than the reported figures for the Bf 109E or Spitfire I, the earlier variants.

luftluuver
06-26-2007, 04:07 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/pilot_opinions1.jpg

See lots of positive comments in that doc.

hop2002
06-26-2007, 04:35 AM
How many ?

Asking how many is rather like asking how many 109s flew with gunpods. Wing tips could be changed with very little work by the squadron mechanics (two bolts per wing tip, iirc).

However, all the Spitfire XVIs were built with clipped wings, and if you look through a book like Spitfire The History you will see lots of photos of clipped Spitfires.

Kurfurst, are you seriously suggesting clipped wing Spitfires were rare?


The stated minimum turning circle of the Vb at 20 k feet is interesting though, at 1,025 feet. This is considerably greater than the reported figures for the Bf 109E or Spitfire I, the earlier variants.

Is it? Do you have any "reported figures" for the earlier variants at 20,000ft?

I know of the RAE tests at 12,000 ft, which gave the Spitfire a minimum radius of turn of 695 ft, but nothing at 20,000ft.

Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 05:04 AM
Originally posted by hop2002:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">How many ?

Asking how many is rather like asking how many 109s flew with gunpods. Wing tips could be changed with very little work by the squadron mechanics (two bolts per wing tip, iirc).

However, all the Spitfire XVIs were built with clipped wings, and if you look through a book like Spitfire The History you will see lots of photos of clipped Spitfires.

Kurfurst, are you seriously suggesting clipped wing Spitfires were rare? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not suggesting anything, I am asking a question, you don't answer.

You said : 'Huge numbers of Spitfires actually had clipped wings.'
I asked : 'How many?'



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The stated minimum turning circle of the Vb at 20 k feet is interesting though, at 1,025 feet. This is considerably greater than the reported figures for the Bf 109E or Spitfire I, the earlier variants.

Is it? Do you have any "reported figures" for the earlier variants at 20,000ft?

I know of the RAE tests at 12,000 ft, which gave the Spitfire a minimum radius of turn of 695 ft, but nothing at 20,000ft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RAE said the Spitfire 1 at 12k feet back in 1940 has smaller turning radius than the 109E. Which is great, because while we don't have Spitfire I turn radius for 20k feet, we have Bf 109E turning radius for 6000m;
and which is 320 meter, or 1049 feet, and 230 m / 754 feet with flaps, vs 1,025 feet of a clipped wing Spit V and 970 feet of the elliptic wing Spit V, as reported in your test.

This not only shows the Spit V's turning ability degraded with later variants considerably (despite th Mk V's far better engine for altitude), but also that 109E could hold up well against the clipped wing Mk V at 20 000 feet in turns, even outturn both by using flaps.

That puts an end to an old myth of WW2 isn't it?

Irish_Rogues
06-26-2007, 06:56 AM
I love seeing all these old documents, from both sides, it really adds context or filling (for lack of a better words) to the events that were swirling at that moment of history. These types of documents are infinitely more interesting to me then all the memorized numbers, even if this is mostly opinion.

Take the pilots questionnaire, real men with experience fresh in their minds filled that out. To me those men seriously respect the abilities of FW 190 and yet seem merely annoyed with the situation. I get the feeling that they were even more annoyed that this was being touted as "the solution" and it left them less then impressed. This is more meaningful then comparing the best numbers you can find.

I'm sure others my see different things, but either way this is good stuff. I've never seen these particular documents before so even if something is "old news" it can still be new to some.

Xiolablu3
06-26-2007, 07:03 AM
WItht he incredible amount of testing going on at Farnbourough, the RAF decided one day

'Lets clip Spitfires wings, that'll be good for a laugh'

Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 07:07 AM
If you liked that one, you will sure love this one , too ! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I think this one was originally released under the title 'Why fear the little Focke Wulf'.. obviously there's some morale boosting insisted in the title, but it's nevertheless interesting, because all these docs reflect how people saw it back then (right or wrong), not from a 20/20 hindsight...

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/Spitfire_RAF_Instructions_1.jpg
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/Spitfire_RAF_Instructions_2.jpg

Xiolablu3
06-26-2007, 07:07 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
but also that 109E could hold up well against the clipped wing Mk V at 20 000 feet in turns, even outturn both by using flaps.


WHat if the SPitfire used flaps too?

I agree that the turn rate suffered on the clipped wing SPitfires.

I have trouble outurning Bf109's in game already with a clipped wing SPitfire.

Since Aussie data is deadly accurate, Can someone post the Austrailian test of the SPitfire MkVIII?

Kurfurst__
06-26-2007, 07:10 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
but also that 109E could hold up well against the clipped wing Mk V at 20 000 feet in turns, even outturn both by using flaps.


WHat if the SPitfire used flaps too? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It didn't have (combat) flaps, only up/down positions for landing.


Since Aussie data is deadly accurate, Can someone post the Austrailian test of the SPitfire MkVIII?

Here :

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/jf934level.jpg
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/jf934climb.jpg

It seems 330 mph (530kph) at SL and around 393 (632 kph) at alt, and about 4700 ROC at SL.

Xiolablu3
06-26-2007, 07:13 AM
Thats good speed for a Spitfire with much better range than the G6. A SPitfire is usually a little slower than a Bf109, thanks to its bigger wings, thats the price you pay for much better handling. WHat range tho! Far better than a Bf109G6.


You can still use those flaps in combat once the speed comes down to 200mph levels (the speed where the Messer would be able to outturn the clipped SPitfire, when its slats are out).


I used landing flaps on an i16 just the other day to get that extra bit of turn

LStarosta
06-26-2007, 07:16 AM
Jesus Christ, Kurfy, get a life or something.

AKA_TAGERT
06-26-2007, 07:24 AM
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/STFU/ITISALLABOUTME.jpg

Blutarski2004
06-26-2007, 08:26 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/11.jpg

Source : National Archives of Australia.


..... I think it's pretty clear that the motive behind the British clipped-wing modification to the Mk V Spitfire was an effort to match or reduce in disparity the very high roll rate displayed by the FW190A series fighters which were the principal opposition over Atlantic coastal France in 1942/1943. In that respect it was a perfectly reasonable step.

However, use of clipped-wing Spitfires in the Pacific against the Japanese, or on fronts where the ME109 was the main opponent, would not have been sensible; the roll-rate of the Spitfire was not a problem in either of those cases and it would have made no sense to sacrifice performance capabilities in other areas to obtain an unnecessary advantage in one. In order to place the above Australian archival document in proper context, it would therefore be desirable to know the full circumstances behind the original 1943 Australian appraisal.

leitmotiv
06-26-2007, 09:16 AM
THIS IS A VERITABLE CHART MONKEY ORGY!

ploughman
06-26-2007, 09:29 AM
One of the reason 2 TAF liked to clip its Spits was, if I recall rightly, that it increased the manouverability of the Spit in the ground attack role, especially when diving onto a target. While I've no doubt clipping was originally about increase roll rate viz the 190, it later also made sense for other reasons.

Richardsen
06-26-2007, 11:33 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif
Kurfurst is trying to make the Spitfire look bad by posting tests where Spits perform poorly.

And he is hoping Oleg reading this so they can make the 109 and FW190 superior to spitfires in Storm of War.....

JG53Frankyboy
06-26-2007, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by Richardsen:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif
Kurfurst is trying to make the Spitfire look bad by posting tests where Spits perform poorly.

And he is hoping Oleg reading this so they can make the 109 and FW190 superior to spitfires in Storm of War..... but actually , if there will be ever SpitVs and Fw190As in the SoW series, when than the Fw190A is not superiour over a Spit V in generaly - something went wrong http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

faustnik
06-26-2007, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by Richardsen:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif
Kurfurst is trying to make the Spitfire look bad by posting tests where Spits perform poorly.

And he is hoping Oleg reading this so they can make the 109 and FW190 superior to spitfires in Storm of War.....

Fortunately we having plenty of Spit fanatics who do anything to show that the Spitfire won the war and was superior to anything the evil Narzis made, as all the Narzi planes were garbage.

It all balances out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

(I don't think Oleg listens to any of it anyway.) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Irish_Rogues
06-26-2007, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by Richardsen:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif
Kurfurst is trying to make the Spitfire look bad by posting tests where Spits perform poorly.

And he is hoping Oleg reading this so they can make the 109 and FW190 superior to spitfires in Storm of War.....

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

Daiichidoku
06-26-2007, 11:43 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Kurfball is winning this thread, handily

Kurfurst, why dont you do this everytime you post?

na85
06-26-2007, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:

Source : National Archives of Australia.

Thanks for sharing

luftluuver
06-26-2007, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
(I don't think Oleg listens to any of it anyway.) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif He did listen to the cow poo posted/sent to him about wing breakage on the P-51.

SlickStick
06-26-2007, 03:00 PM
What's funny is that what Kurfurst is posting is modeled in the game for the CW Spits. The VIII and IX CWs roll better, are supposed to be slightly faster at low altitude (not sure these days if they are still slightly slower than the full wing, which would be wrong BTW), have worse climb and have slightly worse turning circles, than the full wing Spitfires of the same exact marks.

So, what's the point of this thread then? Kurfurst is just showing that Oleg did an excellent job with the CW Spitfires? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

faustnik
06-26-2007, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by SlickStick:
So, what's the point of this thread then? Kurfurst is just showing that Oleg did an excellent job with the CW Spitfires? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

He is complaining that clipping the wings did not improve the Spit VIII's low level speed enough in PF.

SlickStick
06-26-2007, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlickStick:
So, what's the point of this thread then? Kurfurst is just showing that Oleg did an excellent job with the CW Spitfires? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

He is complaining that clipping the wings did not improve the Spit VIII's low level speed enough in PF. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah, I see. Yes, I would also like to see the Mk. VIII CW faster at low altitude and also roll a bit faster, too. NACA chart roll for all CW Spits, please. I hope Kurfurst is successful in his endeavor to get us more speed for the CW version, which should be faster than the full wing at speeds below 20,000ft. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

taz1004
06-26-2007, 03:15 PM
Does every thread needs to have a point? The documents might've been posted before but I haven't seen them before as I don't come here on daily basis or attempt to read every post. And it was an interesting read.

SlickStick
06-26-2007, 03:27 PM
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/8273/spitviiicwfj1.jpg

I like the cut of this guy's jib. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Kettenhunde
06-26-2007, 06:05 PM
In order to place the above Australian archival document in proper context, it would therefore be desirable to know the full circumstances behind the original 1943 Australian appraisal.


BLUTARSKI

The RAAF is quoting the RAE report conducted in England. The test was conducted by the Australian's; it was copied and passed on to their units.

It would be interesting to see what their conclusions were for the modification against the JAAF and JNAF fighters. IMHO it would have been good modification for the RAAF Spitfires.

Here are the trials of a Zeke vs Spitfire.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1182902580_26.jpg

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1182902599_27.jpg

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1182902656_28.jpg

All the best,

Crumpp

DKoor
06-26-2007, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Fortunately we having plenty of Spit fanatics who do anything to show that the Spitfire won the war and was superior to anything the evil Narzis made, as all the Narzi planes were garbage.

It all balances out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

(I don't think Oleg listens to any of it anyway.) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Well..... truth to be told, at this point I don't really care what Kurfurst posts, whether it's a real deal or fake, when I see such orchestrated attack on the user of this forum and not the things he posts (mind you it repeats from thread to thread) I think it's just another witch hunt rather than attempt of some kind of the interweb communication.

DKoor
06-26-2007, 06:21 PM
Also I'm using the opportunity to point out at the very interesting part of the document that Kettenhunde posted.........


"Where speeds are in excess 250mp/h (roughly 400km/h) the "G" which a pilot can impose without "blacking out" is the limiting factor so that no advantage can be expected on either side."


I found similar note in some of the P-38 pilot thoughts on PTo..... there seem to be unanimous agreement that they should not lower their speed below 250mp/h in combat vs IJA/IJN ac.

JG14_Josf
06-26-2007, 06:45 PM
5. The acceleration of the Spitfire is relatively poor. It is therefore dangerous to cruise at, say, +2 boost and 1900 r.p.m. when the Hun is about, because the time taken inacceerating to maximum speed will allow him quickly to draw into firing range.

I din't write that so don't blame me.

Ratsack
06-26-2007, 09:40 PM
Thanks for posting that scan, Crump. It's worth noting that the Spitfires operated by No 1 Wing RAAF were tropicalised Spit VCs. None of them were clipped.

In this context it makes a lot of sense that they kept them full-wing. 1 Wing was the only RAAF unit - or Allied unit - operating Spitfires in the Pacific at this time. The wing was deployed to Darwin to defend against high altitude raids. Contrary to the popular conception of the air war in the Pacific theater being a low-altitude affair, most of the raids on Darwin came in above 25,000 feet. They were always escorted by Zeros (probably A6M2s).

Under these circumstances, it makes a lot of sense to keep the Spit wings full span.

cheers,
Ratsack

Blutarski2004
06-27-2007, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by Ratsack:
Thanks for posting that scan, Crump. It's worth noting that the Spitfires operated by No 1 Wing RAAF were tropicalised Spit VCs. None of them were clipped.

In this context it makes a lot of sense that they kept them full-wing. 1 Wing was the only RAAF unit - or Allied unit - operating Spitfires in the Pacific at this time. The wing was deployed to Darwin to defend against high altitude raids. Contrary to the popular conception of the air war in the Pacific theater being a low-altitude affair, most of the raids on Darwin came in above 25,000 feet. They were always escorted by Zeros (probably A6M2s).

Under these circumstances, it makes a lot of sense to keep the Spit wings full span.

cheers,
Ratsack


..... Thanks for filling in that data hole. It confirms the necessity of placing even documentary evidence in correct context.

JG53Frankyboy
06-27-2007, 06:22 AM
and at least once, japanese Bombers (in that case it were Army Bombers) were escorted by Army Ki-43s on the Darwin raids.

the Zeros might be of the Versions Model21 and/or Model22 - a Model32 would lack the Range i guess.