Did you know that the Spitfire was Inspired by....

[funked]

Yes Pongo.
BMW 139 (?) was a copy of the Wasp.  801 was a scaled up version.

[funked]

Kieren what I'd really like is a Mustang Mk. I.  With a checkerboard on the nose of course (309 Sqn. markings).  

[GRUNHERZ]

Hi

The S6B wing is not eliptical. Every picture of it shows it to be constant chord with rounded wingtips. Rounded wingtips does not mean elliptical. Ill dig up a 3 view to confirm this as soon as I can. The point is S6B wing looks nothing like a Spitfire wing. Please compare that to this:

 

BTW plese keep it civil.  

thanks GRUNHERZ

[GRUNHERZ]

Hi

Ripsnort The Heinkel He112, competitor to the 109, did have a broad eliptical wing. So did the He111 bomber. Why not the 109, well the 109 was a Messerschimt product and he had different ideas about fighter design than did Heinkel designers.

thanks GRUNHERZ

[Hangtime]

What? Damn.. there's gotta be half a hunnered era aircraft that have widley divergent originations and yet look incredibly similar. And fer crissakes, EVERYBODY steals from everybody else in aircraft design. And elliptical wing planforms had been around quite awile when Heinkele used it.

You guys seem to focus on the planforms elliptical shape and it's effect on the aircraft, and as far as that goes there's merit in the claim for clouded 'heridity'..

Hell yes, sure; Supermarine was looking to reduce drag, and mebbe they outright stole the planform to go the further steps they felt they had to take to continue to refine their airframe and reduce drag... (so did the germans) but there's a lot more to what became a Spitfire than the wing planform.

The airfoil, wing construction, spar arrangement; control size; placement, moments, CG stability, power to weight, etc all make the spitty a Spitfire.

In their search for a faster airfoil; certainly Supermarine used the lowest drag planform available, and the results speak for themselves. A joy to fly; lots of power, very nimble and responsive thru an astounding speed and air density range.

However.. consider; in Supermarines 30 year exhaustive search for a faster airfiol they never hit on the RIGHT answer. Guess who did.  

"A special NACA laminar flow wing profile was adopted for the Mustang. This was an airfoil which had a thickness that kept on increasing far beyond the usual location, i.e., to 50 percent chord rather than the usual 20 percent. The symmetrical airfoil had no camber, the undersurface being almost a mirror image of the upper. This wing was much more "slippery" than the airfoils then in use, and provided far less aerodynamic drag at high speeds... "

And that's what makes a pony a Mustang.  

Hang

 

[AKSeaWulfe]

 

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Hi

The S6B wing is not eliptical.

No, it's not. The spit wing IS based on it though. You straighten the leading edge of the S6B's wing, and it's elliptical. It took refined wing from the S6B to form the Spit's highly successful wing.
-SW

[GrinBird]

HeHe Seems to be a good day for trolling

 

[LJK Raubvogel]

 

Originally posted by AKSeaWulfe:
No, it's not. The spit wing IS based on it though. You straighten the leading edge of the S6B's wing, and it's elliptical. It took refined wing from the S6B to form the Spit's highly successful wing.
-SW

Wonder why your book doesn't clearly state that? I'm more inclined to believe a quote from one of the Spit designers than your extrapolations. Time for me to get up on the "aircraft know-it-all" pedestal...where's the proof?



------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps

[Biggles]

Here's a plane I used to own that has Spitfire-type wings. Can anyone guess what it is? A couple of clues. It was built in 1941, and the designer of the plane went on to design a line of general aviation aircraft that is still being produced. Click image for bigger picture.

     

     

     

     


[This message has been edited by Biggles (edited 11-01-2000).]

[AKSeaWulfe]

 

Originally posted by LJK Raubvogel:
Wonder why your book doesn't clearly state that? I'm more inclined to believe a quote from one of the Spit designers than your extrapolations. Time for me to get up on the "aircraft know-it-all" pedestal...where's the proof?
[/B]

No need to be hostile. I said the wing was BASED not taken from the F6B. The F7/30 was BASED on the F6B and the Spitfire's wing was based on the F7/30(224).. modified a lot but nevertheless based on it.

Here you are, same book, page 275.
"The structure of the wing was unique, and in part a legacy fromt he 224. The steam-cooling system of the Goshawk engine demanded that the entire leading edge of the wing be devoted to condesers, and to this end the leading edge forward of the single main spar was sealed and formed into a structural torsion box. The technique was refined on the 300(Spitfire MkI) to provide sufficient stiffness and strength in the thin, large-area wing. The mainspar itself was formed of square section tubes 'telescoped' together so that the narrowest and longest extended to the tip of the wing;..."

If you want to read more, buy the book.

Do you smell something? I do.. BURN!!!
-SW

[Sundog]

FYI, When they are referring to the Spit's using an Elliptical Wing, that not only means in planform, but also Lift Distribution across the wing. This allowed the Spit's wing structure to be very efficient (I.E.-Low weight for the given load).  The Heinkel was the first to use this, from what I have been able to find. However, I am also pretty sure that the airfoil section on the Spit was modified from the airfoil section used in the S.6B. I just received this book:

SpitfireBook

and I will read the first chapter next week (Which covers the development by starting at the Supermarine F.24/F.30 series aircraft) and see if it sheds any light with regard to this issue.

P.S.- Gore probably invented the elliptical wing planform and distribution. Bush probably thinks he can get us better air to fly in. Nader...who's Nader.

[This message has been edited by Sundog (edited 11-01-2000).]

[LJK Raubvogel]

 

Originally posted by AKSeaWulfe:

No need to be hostile. I said the wing was BASED not taken from the F6B. The F7/30 was BASED on the F6B and the Spitfire's wing was based on the F7/30(224).. modified a lot but nevertheless based on it.

Here you are, same book, page 275.
"The structure of the wing was unique, and in part a legacy fromt he 224. The steam-cooling system of the Goshawk engine demanded that the entire leading edge of the wing be devoted to condesers, and to this end the leading edge forward of the single main spar was sealed and formed into a structural torsion box. The technique was refined on the 300(Spitfire MkI) to provide sufficient stiffness and strength in the thin, large-area wing. The mainspar itself was formed of square section tubes 'telescoped' together so that the narrowest and longest extended to the tip of the wing;..."

If you want to read more, buy the book.

Do you smell something? I do.. BURN!!!
-SW

I don't smell anything yet. That excerpt only states that the torsion box technique was refined in the Spit MkI. I don't see anything about an airfoil or wing shape. And I wasn't getting hostile, just playing the role of all the people who jump on any Luftwaffe claim. If you show me something referring to an airfoil or wing-shape, I will gladly accept it. I'm not really taking a side here, because I know nothing about it.


------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps

[Citabria]

mooney?

[scout]

 

Originally posted by Hangtime:

As far at the P51 is concerened; I've heard this "British Design" nonsense before.. the facts are:

"In April of 1940, Kindelberger (NA C.E.O) was summoned by the British Air Purchasing Commision and asked to manufacture the Curtiss Hawk 87 (P-40D) under license for the RAF. Kindelberger responded that NAA could do that if it were really required, but countered that he and his company could build a better fighter than the P-40 and that they could design a REAL fighter in the same time that it would take to put the P-40 into production. The British commission felt that they could take Kindelberger at his word, and on April 10, 1940 they accepted his proposal on the condition that the first prototype be ready in 120 days. The design was assigned the company project name of Model NA-73.

So; in short, British NEED for the plane inspired its initial full scale production; (Kindleberger already had the plane designed on 'spec' by his own team; a key member of that team reportedly having been involved in the development of the bf-109) but it's DESIGN and concept was American as apple pie; baseball and Superman. Further, it's success as the pre-eminent escort fighter for the allies was an AMERICAN accomplishment. If the Britsh could have done it; they WOULD have.    

Hang

I've read this book
"Mustang designer", Edgar Schmued
began before but completed after his death.

Correction, according this source, the notion that the P51 was inspired by the 109 or by a member of the 109 design team is nothing but a myth, drawing on nothing except Schmued's german heritage and the fact that both had square wings.

A contributing reason to the British purchasing commisions acceptance of Kindelbergers offer to design a better fighter instead of building the P40 was that the british was very impressed by the quality of the (North American) T6 Texan then used as a british trainer.

Schmued had for a long time (years) toyed width the idea of designing a fighter, he had studied comtemporary designs and made sketches of detail design solutions.

So then North American got the order he was well prepared.

[Vermillion]

LOL!! I thought that post would generate some interest  

Sorry but I should point out that it was originally Gunr's post over on AGW, and I accidently cut his callsign off when I cut and pasted the original message.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure