Griffon or Merlin?

[Wing Nut]

Just because I feel like picking a fight, I wonder which Spit people prefer most.

Personally, I prefer later models.

[ozzy72]

Too late, the marmalade is on the way.
I prefer the Merlin engine, there are two distinct Spitfire camps, the Quillians and the Henshawians.
I'm a Henshaw man, the original lines and the high back maintain the beautiful looks of Mitchells original design.
Whilst I can understand the need for the bubble canopy and the bigger engine for me the original has the right look and sound.

Mark

[HawkerTempest5]

I do prefer the traditional Malcolm style hood to the cut down bubble top versions and I think the later clipped e-wing Griffon MkXIV is the finest looking Spitfire ever. Although the MkIX is my second favourite, the Griffon rules. I think it

[Hagar]

I've seen plenty of Spifires this year & the Griffon-engined variants are impressive. However, I prefer the original Merlin-engined marks with the traditional canopy. There's something about the sound of that Merlin. The Mk V is my all-time favourite & my idea of what a "proper" Spitfire looks like. They never looked quite the same after that & gradually lost the perfect symmetry of the early models. I'm not keen on clipped wings or invasion stripes. The elliptical wing shape is what the Spitfire is all about to me.

In the end I remember what John Romain told me a few weeks ago. When I complimented him on the beautiful Mk XVI he'd just brought into Shoreham he said with a big smile "They're all beautiful" - & he should know.

I'm not sure how accurate this is but the commentator at Old Warden (or was it Duxford ) mentioned that the later model Spitfires could be compared with the original Mk I carrying 32 passengers with 40 lbs of baggage each.

[ozzy72]

It was something like that Doug, the comparison of a MkI with a Seafire 47 if I remember correctly.
I've got some graphs showing the increases in engine power, weight and performance somewhere, I'll dig them out for you, its like looking at the Alps!!!

[Felix/FFDS]

For what it's worth - that last stretch of the "spitfire" design (presuming you also consider the Spiteful/Seafang a further developement) was the Attacker ...  True, just about the final Seafang wing shape remained, and possibly some other bits and pieces, but it was the last "stretch" of the concept.

[Hagar]

[quote]For what it's worth - that last stretch of the "spitfire" design (presuming you also consider the Spiteful/Seafang a further developement) was the Attacker ...

[Felix/FFDS]

A stretch too far in my opinion. .....

Compare these with Sidney Camm's graceful Sea Hawk & Hunter. I'm old-fashioned enough to believe that "If it looks right, it flies right".

I agree with you on both counts

The other airplane that I would add to the "looks right, flies right" list of jets would be the Folland Gnat.

Put the Gnat beside the Hunter and I feel like captioning it "When I grow up I want to be a Hunter!"

[Hagar]

I agree with you on both counts

The other airplane that I would add to the "looks right, flies right" list of jets would be the Folland Gnat.

Put the Gnat beside the Hunter and I feel like captioning it "When I grow up I want to be a Hunter!"

H.P Folland was another experienced designer of the "old school". I believe he was responsible for the SE.5a & Gloster Gladiator, both classics in their own right. This leads to the question, what would R.J Mitchell have achieved had he survived into the jet age?

[ozzy72]

Probably something that made the TSR.2 look like a pram

[Woodlouse2002]

I prefer the MkI to all other Mk's. It's how R.J. Mitchell intended it and it just has beautifully clean lines. The Spitfire just wasn't the same when they cut the back off and added a teardrop canopy and whacked a dirty great five bladed prop on the nose.

[Felix/FFDS]

I prefer the MkI to all other Mk's. It's how R.J. Mitchell intended it and it just has beautifully clean lines. The Spitfire just wasn't the same when they cut the back off and added a teardrop canopy and whacked a dirty great five bladed prop on the nose.

Obviously, with the two bladed wooden prop and the straight canopy ... !!!

[Wing Nut]

Mitchell never intended it to have that bubble canopy or a three bladed prop or two radiators under the wings or cannon or a number of other things that changed...

[Felix/FFDS]

Mitchell never intended it to have that bubble canopy or a three bladed prop or two radiators under the wings or cannon or a number of other things that changed...

Go back to the original concept - cranked wings, fixed gear, open cockpit!

[Woodlouse2002]

Mitchell never intended it to have that bubble canopy or a three bladed prop or two radiators under the wings or cannon or a number of other things that changed...

I know. But aside from the Malcolm "bubble" canopy and the three bladed prop the Spitfire MkI is as it was on the drawing board. Unlike the Mk21 that literally had nothing the MkI had. Even the wings had been tampered with.