![]() |
'Threads' |
![]() |
A Discussion on Spitfires - Mk.I/Mk.II Differences and the Mk.II's Oil Cooler
source: Hyperscale
(thanks to Brett Green for permission)
(Bold Italics are added by the Webmaster to clarify the text or correct known errors. Some comments and their order of appearance in the original forum have been edited for clarity)
Cameron
AFV modeller with Spitfire question
Sat Jul 26 22:19:43 2003
OK, I normally build armour kits, but for a change of pace I've decided to build
a 1/48 Tamiya Spitfire Mk.I, but just to be awkward I'd like to build it
as a Mk.II, so what changes if any do i need to make?
Joe Reder
Spitfire Mk.II
Sat Jul 26 23:42:31 2003
Here is what my little reference has to say on the subject Cameron. "The
Spitfire Mk.II (Type 329) was basically a MK I built exclusively at Castle
Bromwich and powered by a 1,175 HP Merlin XII (fitted with Coffman starter and
running on 100 octane fuel) driving a Jablo Rotol three-blade constant
speed airscrew. It incorporated Mk.I refinements from initial
production in the first half of 1940 and whereas the Mk.I had armor plating
added in service, the Mk. II had it installed on production." This is from
the old profile publications number 41 on the Spit.
Boogie Boy
Spit Mk II
Sat Jul 26 22:32:18 2003
The Mark II Spitfire was nearly identical to the Mk.I, but used a different
prop/spinner and had a small bulge on the right side of the cowling for the
Coffman starter. Both of these details can be had from Ultracast
(#48113)(www.ultracast.ca), as well as other, nice goodies such as wheels and
exhausts.
The Modeller
Aside from all this good advice...
Sun Jul 27 09:34:38 2003
...don't forget that there ought to be an armoured plate behind the pilots seat
as well as an armoured headrest in a Mk.II, you'll also commonly see the "appliqué"
alloy armour plate over the fuel tank ahead of the cockpit.
The Tamiya Mk.I doesn't include the pilot's armour at all and don't forget to
trim back the protruding gun muzzles from the wing, a very early feature
dispensed with long before the Mk.II came into service.
And then the thread took off in this interesting direction.....
Edgar Brooks
Spitfire II
Sun Jul 27 02:15:52 2003
Early Mk.II Spitfires were identical to the Mk.I, except for the small
Coffmann starter bulge, but later aircraft also had the larger oil cooler intake
which everyone associates with the Mk.V.
Steve Sauve
I don't that oil cooler remark is correct.
Sun Jul 27 07:33:10 2003
And if it is, that'd be news to many of us. Can you cite any references for
that?
Edgar Brooks
Spitfire Mk.II
Sun Jul 27 10:05:23 2003
The first indication I had was contained in the Mitchell Memorial Symposium, organized
by the Southampton Branch of the Royal Aeronautical Society, in 1976, on the
Spitfire's 40th anniversary. In the notes, from originals by Joe Smith, it
states that the oil cooler area, for the Mk.II, increased from .2 square feet,
as in the Mk 1, to .35 square feet, exactly the same as the Mk.V. Also, on page
107 of "Spitfire, the History," there is a picture of
a Mk.II, used for LOX trials, in 1942, with the larger oil cooler clearly
visible underneath. Don't get the idea that I'm saying all Mk.II Spitfires were
like this, in fact I doubt if the first were anything but identical to the Mk.I, since they were built from kits supplied by Southampton.
Steve Sauve
Interesting...
Sun Jul 27 10:40:59 2003
Do we know of any photos of operational Mk.IIs with the larger Mk.V oil cooler?
By 1942 the Mk.II would be an 'also-ran', compared to the front-line Mk.V and
Mk.IX; maybe this LOX Mk.II was just a test aircraft, not necessarily
representational of the working fleet?
Alternatively, I'm wondering if this larger oil cooler was retro-fitted to the
older Mark aircraft with the smaller Merlins, to maybe have a simpler supply
system, since extra oil cooling would not be a bad thing?
This is interesting stuff, but I don't think I've ever seen anything but a
Merlin 45 (etc.) aircraft with the larger oil cooler.
Derek Pennington
My "History" shows that pic on page 107
Sun Jul 27 10:48:38 2003
Also on the same page, there is mention of fitting a Mk.III oil cooler. Could
this be the oil cooler fitted to the Mk.III Spitfire? Reading it seems to imply
that it was fitted as standard to Mk.II Spits...
Edgar Brooks
Spitfire II
Sun Jul 27 15:15:41 2003
The only clue, that I can find, also comes in "Spitfire, the
History," where a mod, to fit the oil cooler Mk.III, is stated to have
been instituted 11-4-41 (remember, over here, that means April!) Whether this
was the new size oil cooler I have not been able to ascertain, but it was
certainly important enough to rate a mention. I also have a copy of the Air
Publication for
the Spitfire V, and cannot find any mention, in the list of mods to the Mk.V,
of a change to a larger oil cooler. It is very difficult to find any photos of
operational Mk.II Spitfires, especially those built after April 1941, but I
doubt that a Mk.II would have been taken off the production line, and fitted
with Mark V wings, solely to carry out engine tests. Also, I find it hard to
believe, with Mk.II and Mk.V aircraft being produced at the same time, on the
same production line, that a mod to one Mark would not have been incorporated in
the other.
Edgar Brooks
Spitfires
Sun Jul 27 15:37:25 2003
I really must learn to read all of my messages before replying! The Mk.III was
a totally unique variant, fitted, originally, with the Mk. XX Merlin, as fitted
to the Hurricane II, and, as with the Hurricane, it was 4 inches longer (takes
some finding, does that information!) Since the Merlin 45 installation was so
successful, this was not continued. Incidentally everyone continually states
that the Merlin 45 was identical to the Merlin III, in length; it wasn't, it was
actually longer, but, due to some inspired fiddling with the mechanism on the
carburettor (they turned it through 180 degrees,) they were able to fit it into
the same space. It is impossible to spot in photographs, but the carburettor
intake, on the Mark V, is2-3 inches further back than on the Mk.I.
Regarding the oil cooler, according to the Symposium notes the frontal area was
identical in the II, III, IV, V, VI, XII, Seafire I, II, III, and the part
number, for the Seafires, was S.799-3C-528, for what that's worth, but the
number 3 appears again.
Graham Boak
Sorry Edgar, no.
Mon Jul 28 03:56:13 2003
If anyone was using a "spare" Spitfire for engine trials, then
uprating the oil cooler would have been part of the preparation for those
trials. There'd be no point in doing a trial knowing that the cooling system
wasn't going to be up to the job.
Also, the Mk.II and Mk.V (a and b) have the same wing, so it wouldn't need to be
changed, just the new cooler fitted and perhaps some wider piping. No big deal.
I don't know of any reason why the Mk.II production should have been altered to
improve the engine cooling, especially as the Mk.II was being built at Castle
Bromwich on highly standardised lines. Any change would be expected to be
introduced at Supermarine first, so would be visible on late Mk.Is, too. Whereas
there is a very clear reason why the Mk.V needed a larger cooler. None of these
rule out it being true, but it does make it unlikely.
You do need rather more than one photo of a trials Spitfire to justify the
comment.
Edgar Brooks
Spitfire II
Mon Jul 28 07:31:10 2003
I'm not saying that the change was due to the Merlin in the Spitfire II,
just that it would make no sense to stock a different oil cooler, for the Merlin
on the Spitfire II, when the Spitfire V is coming off the production line, at
the same time, with the same wings, and it seems strange that a new oil cooler
is slated as being introduced on the Spitfire II, just as the first Spitfire V
comes off the production line. The big problem, of course, is that the
introduction of the Spitfire V relegated the Mk.II to obsolescence, and, almost
certainly, a training role, hence no photos of service Mk.IIs with a different
oil cooler. Remember, too, that Castle Bromwich had their own test staff, with
the likes of Alec Henshaw, who would have been trusted with any mods required.
Funnily enough the photo on page 95 of Westland-built Mk.I AR238, in "Spitfire, the
History," appears to have the larger oil cooler fairing.
Steve Sauve, Ottawa, Canada
Interesting! Now I can buy
into this as
Tue Jul 29 15:34:38 2003
a late modification of older airplanes, but if those are C1 roundels under the
wings, then that would just about confirm that this is a really late war shot.
Since AR238 was Stuck Off Charge in Jan 45, this photo must have been taken at
the very end of its career (unless someone really 'pooched' the roundel painting
instructions at an earlier time). Can anyone date this photo?
Nevertheless, I think you've shown me that this did happen to Mk.Is and Mk.IIs.
Thanks for helping with this great thread!
Graham Boak
AR238 is a pretty late Mk.II
Wed Jul 30 03:57:30 2003
So the later oil cooler could have been on from the start. We need more pictures
of similar aircraft early in their careers.
Steve Sauve, Ottawa, Canada
Agreed - the search is on! Smithers, release the hounds!
Wed Jul 30 05:07:21 2003
I'm going to keep my eyes open for further confirmations of this one.
Graham Boak
That would depend upon pre-orders
Mon Jul 28 09:27:11 2003
I don't rule out your suggestion, but remember that they are still
stocking the old Merlin for the Mk.II, so all the auxiliaries will still be the
same too. If you have an order for 500 (say) Mk.IIs, then your supplier has a
contract to provide 500 early coolers, and unless there was a real need then you
will fit 500 Mk.II aircraft with the early cooler.
I'm pretty sure that the batch size, within the main production run, was smaller
than 500, but the principle still applies. Of course, the lead time for a change
of production for the Merlin would be greater than that for the oil cooler.
Perhaps the question that needs to be answered is just how many Mk.IIs were made
in parallel with the Mk.V before the complete change-over? (Presumably STH will
tell us that.)
However, once the aircraft gets into service, and used, then spares for the old
cooler will run out and they will be fitted with the new one anyway. So the date
of any photograph would need to be known. The late Mk.II/early Mk.V production
fell into the period of presentation names, so possibly thatis a source of
information of these types as they came off the line. But a photo showing the
name is unlikely to show the oil cooler!
Steve Sauve, Ottawa, Canada
Re: Spitfire II
Sun Jul 27 15:43:05 2003
I suppose the trick now is to figure what the Mk.III cooler looked like, and
that'll solve the riddle. :-)
Wasn't the whole deal with the need for a larger oil cooler solely generated by
going to the higher horsepower Merlin engines in the Mk.V? I don't think that wings from a
Mk.V would necessarily mean changing oil coolers - they and the aerodynamic
outer cover must have been completely removable from the wing proper.
Edgar Brooks
Early Spitfires
Wed Jul 30 15:40:39 2003
Didn't want to say anything, until I was absolutely certain, but we have a Mk.I,
AR213, based near here, which is exactly as it was when released at the end of
the war. It has a Mk. V oil cooler, and the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight's
Mk. II, allegedly unrebuilt, also has the large oil cooler. That has to be a
conversion, at some time, though, since it was the 14th Mk.II ever built.
Steve Sauve, Ottawa, Canada
I think you've convinced us that some Mk.Is and IIs
Wed Jul 30 19:47:45 2003
had the Mk.V oil cooler at some point, but I also think it's safe to say
that these aircraft were being used later in their lives in secondary roles
(like training), when they were well past their prime as fighters.
I now believe that this modification was done on the early airplanes, but now
I'd need to see photos of Mk.Is/IIs in front line service to really get behind
this idea.
I sincerely look forward to finding or being shown photos that support this.
Steve
Graham Boak
Digging into The History
Thu Jul 31 06:50:03 2003
20.138.254.2
The big oil cooler appears on the High Speed Spitfire, and then on the Mk.III.
It is specifically said to fit onto the same mountings and use the same piping,
making the conversion simply a matter of having enough of them. In the list of
modifications applied to the Mk.II is indeed the Mk.III oil cooler, April 1941.
This was at about the same time as the first Mk.V - I didn't bother counting
just how many more MkIIs were to come, but about two pages worth of Pxxxx
serials...
Incidentally, the AR series from Westland didn't fly until July 1941, and
switched over to Mk.V fairly early on.
So it seems quite likely that up to 100 or so Spitfire Mk.IIs COULD have been
fitted with this from the start, and the 50 or so Westland ones probably were.
However, we don't know the status of the modification - presumably it was not a
"must do to all, soonest" but "on manufacture" or "as
convenient"?
Edgar Brooks
Spitfires
Thu Jul 31 13:48:52 2003
Graham, I think that you're absolutely right; if the new oil cooler would fit
the old wings, only requiring an easy-to-fit housing, why keep stocks of the old
type, when Seafires, Mk.IV, V, VI, XII will all be using the new size?
Edgar Brooks
Spitfires
Wed Jul 30 16:03:45 2003
Sorry I couldn't get a reply to you sooner; somehow I suspect that we're
actually of like mind. I don't think that many modified Mk.IIs went to active
Squadrons, but training Squadrons might well have received them, and it would
not have been a difficult mod, just a new housing, since I think that it was
only the frontal area that changed. Actually I begin to wonder how many
photographs, allegedly of Mk.Vs, could have been of earlier Marks. How can you
tell, if you can't see the serial no., and it still has the earlier
externally-armoured windscreen?
I take your point regarding the stock, but 100 aircraft would require far more
than 100 oil coolers. There would need to be replacements for any possible
damage, e.g. a wheels-up landing, + replacement for clogged, worn-out, cores. It
would make far more sense to try to stock only one type for all Marks, wherever
they were.
Incidentally, can you imagine how it felt to read the information, and realize
its possible import, after all those years? It's rather like finding out that
your uncle is actually your father!
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|