« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Spit IXc  (Read 1011 times)

Offline Galand

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Spit IXc
« on: October 13, 2005, 10:58:09 AM »
What is the difference between an IXc Spit and a Mk IX period?

I haven't been able to find any info on the internet about the IXc
Logged

Offline Bruno

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
      • http://4jg53.org
Spit IXc
« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2005, 11:07:07 AM »
It has 4 x .303s...

It's Spitfire F.IXc with a 'c-wing'
Logged

Offline Stratocaster

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 741
Spit IXc
« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2005, 11:15:38 AM »
it also has an ugly arse canopy
Logged
Strat

∼<<∼Loose Deuce∼>>∼

Offline Kev367th

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5290
Spit IXc
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2005, 12:03:01 PM »
Someone really ought to tell them -
No such thing as a IXc. (despite what model manufacturers would have you believe).

Should just be referred to as F IX.

a,b,c designations more properly used on the Mk V Spits.

Original designations and armament -
a - 8x303
b - 4x303 + 2x20
c - 4 x 20

later on the improved 'b' wing started being called the 'c' wing (incorrectly)

later again
e - 2x20 + 2x.50

To further confuse things it wasn't unknown for pilots to refer the IX in the logbook as either a IXA (Merlin 61/63/63a) or IXB (Merlin 66).

Looks good though, at last the wing to fuselage join looks more realistic.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2005, 12:20:16 PM by Kev367th »
Logged
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
Asus M3N-HT mobo
2 x 2Gb Corsair 1066 DDR2 memory

Offline TDeacon

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1553
Spit IXc
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2005, 08:09:25 PM »
You sure Kev?  I am currently buying Spit books, and the first 3 I looked at refer to IXCs in a number of places.  

Spitfire, Flying Legend (Dibbs/Holmes)
Spitfire in Action (Squadron Signal AC #39)
Spitfire (Wilson)

Am currently awaiting the Humphrey's book (with rivet plans) recommended by Greebo (The Supermarine Spitfire, Modellers Datafile No3 by Robert Humphreys).
Logged

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Spit IXc
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2005, 08:20:43 PM »
You guys should let up on this "there was no Spit IXc" stuff...there are too many authors that use that terminology in too many books. Yes, its technically incorrect, but it was and is a common term with too many historians, authors, and modellers (right or wrong).

You arent going to change that by posting here. Yes you are right, but its like trying to defy the sun to come up in the morning, you know? After the 100,000 post correcting folks, you will be no farther along.

You would be doing a better service by explaining what a "Spit IXc" is commonly...which is a "generic term" for a Spit F.IX or a Spit L.F. IX with a "c wing" armament.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2005, 08:26:04 PM by Squire »
Logged
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline Kev367th

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5290
Spit IXc
« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2005, 08:46:18 PM »
Not even a 'c' wing armament.

'c' wing armament was 4x20mm.
What happened was they improved the 'b' wing and for some reason people started referring to it as a 'c' wing.
As stated in wasn't unknown for the pilots themselves to refer to the Merlin 61/63/63a versions as IXA, and the Merlin 66 versions as IXB.

From what I can gather it all became rather adhoc once the IX was introduced, until the arrival of the 'e' wing.
Logged
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
Asus M3N-HT mobo
2 x 2Gb Corsair 1066 DDR2 memory

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Spit IXc
« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2005, 08:47:36 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Squire
You guys should let up on this "there was no Spit IXc" stuff...there are too many authors that use that terminology in too many books. Yes, its technically incorrect, but it was and is a common term with too many historians, authors, and modellers (right or wrong).

You arent going to change that by posting here. Yes you are right, but its like trying to defy the sun to come up in the morning, you know? After the 100,000 post correcting folks, you will be no farther along.

You would be doing a better service by explaining what a "Spit IXc" is commonly...which is a "generic term" for a Spit F.IX or a Spit L.F. IX with a "c wing" armament.


Good point. I think I'd have to agree with you on this.
Logged

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Spit IXc
« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2005, 09:19:50 PM »
"From what I can gather it all became rather adhoc"

-Thats putting it mildly.
Logged
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline Stratocaster

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 741
Spit IXc
« Reply #9 on: October 13, 2005, 10:01:44 PM »
are we going to get a normal spit 9 too? kev can I get that list again?
Logged
Strat

∼<<∼Loose Deuce∼>>∼

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit IXc
« Reply #10 on: October 13, 2005, 10:22:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Stratocaster
are we going to get a normal spit 9 too? kev can I get that list again?

It is a normal Spit IX.  Most Spit IXs had two 20mm and four .303s.  It has an early engine in it though, the same as the current AH Spit IX.

We are getting:

Spitfire Mk Ia (eight .303s, Merlin II at +9lbs or +12lbs boost)
Spitfire Mk Vb (two 20mm (60 rpg) and four .303s, Merlin 45 at +12lbs boost)
Spitfire F.Mk IX (two 20mm (120 rpg) and four .303s, Merlin 61 at +15lbs boost, screenshots of it today)
possibly Spitfire LF.Mk VIII (two 20mm (120 rpg) and four .303s, Merlin 66 at +18lbs boost)
Spitfire F.Mk XIV (two 20mm (120 rpg) and two .50 cals or four .303s, Griffon 65 at +18lbs boost or +21lbs boost)
Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe (two 20mm (120 rpg) and two .50 cals, Merlin 266 at +18lbs boost, clipped wings)
Seafire L.Mk III (two 20mm (120 rpg) and four .303s, Merlin 50 at +18lbs boost)
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Spit IXc
« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2005, 10:38:53 PM »
The IX we saw today most likely wasn't on WEP, so it'll be a +18 model I bet.
Logged

Offline Bruno

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
      • http://4jg53.org
Spit IXc
« Reply #12 on: October 13, 2005, 10:45:00 PM »
No it won't be @ 18lbs boost. Where did you see a picture of the boost gage with the engine running?

Anyway, a Spitfire F.IX with a Merlin 61 has maximum of 15lbs boost just like the current F.IX, just like Karnak said.
Logged

Offline TDeacon

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1553
Spit IXc
« Reply #13 on: October 13, 2005, 10:53:13 PM »
So you guys are saying that the following is wrong?

"The final letter in a Spitfire's designation (eg Spitfire F.VC) denoted the type of wing the aircraft was fitted with, a function of its installed armament.  The basic Spitfire elliptical wing had four derivatives - A, B, C, and E, while the Mark 21 and later models had an entirely new wing with a standard armament and no designation suffix.  In the case of a model which was always fitted witht the same wing, again no suffix was applied.  An example is the Spitfire VIII... "
Logged

Offline Kev367th

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5290
Spit IXc
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2005, 10:54:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Bruno
No it won't be @ 18lbs boost. Where did you see a picture of the boost gage with the engine running?

Anyway, a Spitfire F.IX with a Merlin 61 has maximum of 15lbs boost just like the current F.IX, just like Karnak said.


Wow, we agree on something :) .
Logged
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
Asus M3N-HT mobo
2 x 2Gb Corsair 1066 DDR2 memory
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »