My Grandfather flew from 1940-48 his favourite Spitfire was Mark 9 he flew 60 sorties, previous to that MK2 MK5 then Tempests, he flew first generation of Jets, but loved the MK9 which he said was the perfect balance of speed, handling, and firepower, he was shot down 3 times and died in his armchair aged 91 yrs..
🙏 Respect & Salute to your beloved Grandfather who flew the Supermarine Spitfire Mk XI during WWII ... May Grandfather be blessed to a Better World & Realm ... & be Reunited with His Loved Ones in due Time & Space! Many Happy Good Blessings in Return to Grandfather & to His Families! 🕯🌷🌿🍎🍊🌏💜🕊🇬🇧
My Uncle Felix was an aircraft fitter at Roll-Royce Hucknall, he stayed in England after the war and settled in Langley Mill, a small town in the same area. He met and married my Father's sister Eileen, they had a son and two daughters and lived next door to us. Felix never lost his strong accent, his puckish sense of humour and his romantic Polish nature. He was a wonderful man and we loved him dearly.
I remember reading about how a young Spitfire pilot had returned from a Sweep over France where he claimed to have been in a battle with a radial engined Me 109! His Intelligence Officer told him he was daft as there was no such aircraft. Unfortunately they were both right and both wrong. The young pilot had got back from a scrap with the new Fw-190, and the RAF was about to loose it's hard fought air superiority over France. The Mark V Spitfire was now second best and it would be many difficult and costly months before the Mark IX could be rushed into Squadron service in suitable numbers to counter the Fw-190 Butcher Bird. Mark from Melbourne Australia
Hi Mark, I also remember this anecdote from my long lost youth. I think it was in from Wing Leader, Johnnie Johnson's memoir. He was bemused that the intelligence officer suggested these radials were French leftovers from before the war, like Curtis Hawks, something like that. Which outperformed their brand new MkVs with metal ailerons etc lol
@@enzannometsuke8812 Now that is starting to ring some bells! Do you think that the Intelligence Officer really thought about it before he made his comment? Pre-war Curtis Hawks suddenly able to best Mark V Spitfires? C'mon, what was he thinking? Maybe he wasn't really thinking, but he also had to deal with excited young pilots fresh from combat. He was probably used to taking everything with a very big grain of salt. But if enough pilots said that they encountered a radial engined German fighter that had cut down a number of their fellow pilots then he should have been paying extra close attention.
Well I knew that MK V Spitfires were early conversions to MK IX prior to refined MK IX production but never knew about the relatively crude mods to make the cowlings work! You just never stop learning do you? 🙂
Brilliant work. I have been lucky enough to get up close and touch PV270, a Bromwich built LF MK IXC finished in the markings of Alan Deere as it resides about ten minutes away from me.
It's a bit of a myth that it was the Fw 190 that caused the disproportionately high RAF losses. It took time for the Germans to get good numbers of this new fighter operational. In the meantime, it was the Bf 109F, which RAF admitted was superior to the Spitfire V, that caused the vast majority of the losses.
That's not really true. The two Channel Jagdgeschwaders were JG 2 and JG 26. JG 26 introduced the FW 190 in Autumn of 1941, and during the Spring/Summer of 42 was entirely equipped with it. JG 2 began introducing the FW 190 in Spring and also moved fully to it by the Summer. The RAF had sustained the offensive throughout Summer and Autumn 1941, and it was these missions of late Spring and Summer of 42 that finally convinced them that things had to change. It's true that the 109F inflicted casualties at a rate favourable to the LW, and with a not massively dissimilar trade ratio to the 190, but 1. The RAF pilots clearly perceived the 109 as less dangerous and felt they did better against it, 2. The 190s were used aggressively to cause high casualties to single units. You have events like the mauling of the Debden wing on the 1st of June, or No.403 losing half of its aircraft on the 2nd, which wasn't happening often against the 109. So I'd argue that the 190 was present in decisive quantity throughout 42, and that the difference was the 109 was good at harassing RAF formations at low risk to itself, but the 190 was capable of formation destruction, which is what seriously worried the RAF.
@@dubsy1026 I think it was more about the shock of suddenly meeting a new, formidable fighter which they didn't have developed tactics to counter - especially it's outstanding roll rate and armament. The Bf 109 was a known quantity. The Bf 109F-4 was not inferior to the Fw 190A-2. The Fw 190 was a better roller and diver and had better armament. The Bf 109 was a better turner, faster and had outstanding climb rate and acceleration. Both had its admirers among the pilots.
The 109 was superior to the FW 190 at altitudes above 25000 feet has the Germans found out when they faced the American bomber formations later in the war .The FW 190 was far more survivable and faster at lower altitudes with a better roll rate plus carried four cannon and two machine guns compared to the 109s 1 cannon and 2 machine guns .
@@alanwayte432 RAF had higher losses and a poorer kill ratio in the last half of 1941 when the Bf 109E/F was by far the most numerous German fighter, than in the first half of 1942 when the Fw 190 was most numerous.
I read early encounters with Fw-190's were being reported and the intelligence officers were dismissing them as 'captured Hawks'. The pilots response was "well iwant one!" When flying over France in rhubarbs or circuses the boot was on the other foot, irrispective of the aircraft used the tactical disadvantage of operating at range was ignored in the need for "an offensive stance".
The 190 was very powerfully armed and had a massive radial engine to protect the pilot in a head on. It could also appear to disappear it rolled so fast the spitfire pilots complained.
@@VenturaPublications you’re very welcome! My company has painted a few Mk.IX’s over the past few years but not yet a very early one like these - all have been CBAF examples which were finished in a very specific manner and quite different from the Supermarine manufactured Spits.
Is it plausable that many of the Spitfire losses of 1941 can be attributed to the aircrafts poor range and limited fuel load. In one of the magnificent Armoured Carries Pods , several Seafire pilots complain that there duration was a limiting factor . A R.R engineer said that you can run the engine on full throttle as long as the fuel lasts , which will not be long. Flying over France on Sweeps , keeping an eye on the fuel gauge must be disconcerting to any pilot , who had a date that night.
@@VenturaPublications indeed my old dredging barge was an armorer in the RAF and used to bang on about the Hispano 20mm's....every time i see a 9 i think of J Johnson 'Greycap' and how Bader wouldnt shake his hand post conflict.....brilliant analysis made my day.
My understanding of th Fw-190 is that it had the fastest roll rate of any aircraft in WWII (some pilots reported that Luftwaffe pilots were performing snap rolls in combat when they were merely rolling), but was not a tight turner due to its high wing loading. The Fw-190's relatively small wing area permitted its high airspeed, but prevented it from from rapid climbs and tight turns. Do you agree?
Am I right in thinking that short wings would mean that the moment of inertia around the roll-axis would be relatively small and could explain why the FW 190 could roll so quickly?
@@sirtristram8297 Yes, I think that is right along with excellent ailerons, of course. Roll rate aside, the Fw-190 was not really a dogfighter. While it mixed it up with Spits and did very well against them, at least until they improved the Spit, it was more of an an interceptor-bomber killer. In that role it succeeded famously. However, if even a P-47 (not the Allies' most maneuverable fighter) got the jump on a Wulf, the Wulf was likely dead.
It did outclimb the Spitfire V, but not the IX or Bf 109. Its excellent roll rate compensated for the rather poor turning radius, just like the P-47, another excellent roller.
@@Glicksman1 Yes, if was strange how the rushed to service Mark IX ended up more popular than the original planned successor to the Mark V, the Mark XIV.
Excellent video Malcolm. Do you know if any of the Spitfire Mk.I/IIs converted to Mk.Vs were subsequently converted/re-manufactured to Mk.IXs? That would be an interesting story!
A question I have long had is whether the Spit Vs sent to RR for conversion to IXs had their original single stage Merlins attached, or were sent without the standard Mk V engines? I am not sure whether this is known.
Yeah, they would have had to fly the Vs from Castle Bromwich to RR for conversion. I suppose they shipped the 40 series engines and their props back to BC for installation in the Vs being built there. @@VenturaPublications
@markfryer9880 My presumption is as follows. The Mk V's intended for conversion were flown presumably from Castle Bromwich (BC) to the Rolls Royce (RR) aviation facility (presumably at least some by the RAF women's air corps) where RR removed the 40 series engines to be replaced by the 60 series powerplants. I would assume that RR then shipped the left over 40 series engines and their 3 bladed props (probably the broader wood bladed versions) back via train/truck to Castle Bromwich to be reinstalled in Mk Vs they still being the primary production version (Vs were still in use in frontline use in Europe until late 44, incl invasion stripes in that summer). I have seen a lot of literature on the Spitfire including the big books, and an article earlier this century on the crude initial conversions, with exactly where the Spit Vs came from and how they got to RR not discussed as far as I recall, so take the above with a few grains of salt.
The big difference was re build rates …Britain could and did produce replacement aircraft at a far higher rate than the luftwaffe …not a lot of difference between the spitfire and the bf109 and the FW 190 had a better reputation ….in North Africa and certainly by Sicily the luftwaffe pilots knew that they had lost air superiority and the dip in confidence of the pilots is noted….James Holland book “ Sicily “ quotes individual German pilots by names recognising defeat was inevitable …
Hi.... A bit off topic but I am wondering if you have plans for any more decal sets.... I would like some 485,486,487 488 and 489 decals plus I really want to make the Australian mk21 Beaufighter with the (Beau-gunsville)markings
No plans for those NZ Squadrons right now. Next decals printed will be e revised V4884 with the Canterbury Mustang. I'm not familiar with the Beaugunsville markings. Would you email some info? My eddress is listed with this youtube channel.
@@VenturaPublications unfortunately I have limited inter net access I came across it in a basic Google search for mk21 Beaufighters... I believe the Australian airforce museum has it restored and on display
@@mothmagic1 but the Brits neglected to make the blades any wider, notice a Merlin P51 and notice how wide the prop blades are, they are 4 bladed also and the wider blades transmitted more thrust from the American made PACKARD merlin engine, one of the reasons the Mustang being 2000# heavier was stl over 30 MPH faster with a similiar merlin engine, besides being more aerodynamic and its sleek radiator housing !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Be aware that the 408mph speed bandied about by authors was for the early production Mk IX. later production types with series 66 and 70 would be rated at 414 to 422mph. Anyway! By that time the Griffon engined types came into service with speeds of 450mph and a phenomenal climb-rate and superior performance at medium/high altitude. There was no piston-engined fighter to match it in fighter combat from any side. But let's not deny that the P51D was the best long-range, escort fighter of the war. Especially when they were used in overwhelming numbers.
😊🙏 Thank You So Much Ventura Publication for this informative video tutorial on this magnificent Supermarine Spitfire Mk XI ... 🌷🌿🌏💜🕊🇬🇧
"You want to fit what? - in there?! - blimey, you'd better put the kettle on, gonna be a late night" : )
Now this comment of yours is the typical British humour that I, as a South African, absolutely adore!
My Grandfather flew from 1940-48 his favourite Spitfire was Mark 9 he flew 60 sorties, previous to that MK2 MK5 then Tempests, he flew first generation of Jets, but loved the MK9 which he said was the perfect balance of speed, handling, and firepower, he was shot down 3 times and died in his armchair aged 91 yrs..
🙏 Respect & Salute to your beloved Grandfather who flew the Supermarine Spitfire Mk XI during WWII ... May Grandfather be blessed to a Better World & Realm ... & be Reunited with His Loved Ones in due Time & Space! Many Happy Good Blessings in Return to Grandfather & to His Families! 🕯🌷🌿🍎🍊🌏💜🕊🇬🇧
Jeffrey Quill wrote in his book I believe that he thought the MkVIII was his favourite a Brad new plane and got everything right.
Outstanding. I love technical details as they give everything perspective and clarity but you went above and beyond!
My Uncle Felix was an aircraft fitter at Roll-Royce Hucknall, he stayed in England after the war and settled in Langley Mill, a small town in the same area.
He met and married my Father's sister Eileen, they had a son and two daughters and lived next door to us.
Felix never lost his strong accent, his puckish sense of humour and his romantic Polish nature.
He was a wonderful man and we loved him dearly.
thank you
I remember reading about how a young Spitfire pilot had returned from a Sweep over France where he claimed to have been in a battle with a radial engined Me 109! His Intelligence Officer told him he was daft as there was no such aircraft. Unfortunately they were both right and both wrong. The young pilot had got back from a scrap with the new Fw-190, and the RAF was about to loose it's hard fought air superiority over France. The Mark V Spitfire was now second best and it would be many difficult and costly months before the Mark IX could be rushed into Squadron service in suitable numbers to counter the Fw-190 Butcher Bird.
Mark from Melbourne Australia
Hi Mark, I also remember this anecdote from my long lost youth. I think it was in from Wing Leader, Johnnie Johnson's memoir. He was bemused that the intelligence officer suggested these radials were French leftovers from before the war, like Curtis Hawks, something like that. Which outperformed their brand new MkVs with metal ailerons etc lol
@@enzannometsuke8812 Now that is starting to ring some bells! Do you think that the Intelligence Officer really thought about it before he made his comment? Pre-war Curtis Hawks suddenly able to best Mark V Spitfires? C'mon, what was he thinking? Maybe he wasn't really thinking, but he also had to deal with excited young pilots fresh from combat. He was probably used to taking everything with a very big grain of salt. But if enough pilots said that they encountered a radial engined German fighter that had cut down a number of their fellow pilots then he should have been paying extra close attention.
Greater manoeuvrability…except in the turning circle? That’s enough for me…goodbye.
Thanks for sharing this detail! Big fan of the Spitfire for over 50 years
Love these airplanes!
Well I knew that MK V Spitfires were early conversions to MK IX prior to refined MK IX production but never knew about the relatively crude mods to make the cowlings work! You just never stop learning do you? 🙂
Thanks for the positive feedback. Next up may be something on the Post-war Japanese surrender schemes or the RAAF CAC Boomerang.
Brilliant work. I have been lucky enough to get up close and touch PV270, a Bromwich built LF MK IXC finished in the markings of Alan Deere as it resides about ten minutes away from me.
It's a bit of a myth that it was the Fw 190 that caused the disproportionately high RAF losses. It took time for the Germans to get good numbers of this new fighter operational. In the meantime, it was the Bf 109F, which RAF admitted was superior to the Spitfire V, that caused the vast majority of the losses.
That's not really true. The two Channel Jagdgeschwaders were JG 2 and JG 26. JG 26 introduced the FW 190 in Autumn of 1941, and during the Spring/Summer of 42 was entirely equipped with it. JG 2 began introducing the FW 190 in Spring and also moved fully to it by the Summer. The RAF had sustained the offensive throughout Summer and Autumn 1941, and it was these missions of late Spring and Summer of 42 that finally convinced them that things had to change.
It's true that the 109F inflicted casualties at a rate favourable to the LW, and with a not massively dissimilar trade ratio to the 190, but 1. The RAF pilots clearly perceived the 109 as less dangerous and felt they did better against it, 2. The 190s were used aggressively to cause high casualties to single units. You have events like the mauling of the Debden wing on the 1st of June, or No.403 losing half of its aircraft on the 2nd, which wasn't happening often against the 109.
So I'd argue that the 190 was present in decisive quantity throughout 42, and that the difference was the 109 was good at harassing RAF formations at low risk to itself, but the 190 was capable of formation destruction, which is what seriously worried the RAF.
@@dubsy1026 I think it was more about the shock of suddenly meeting a new, formidable fighter which they didn't have developed tactics to counter - especially it's outstanding roll rate and armament. The Bf 109 was a known quantity.
The Bf 109F-4 was not inferior to the Fw 190A-2. The Fw 190 was a better roller and diver and had better armament. The Bf 109 was a better turner, faster and had outstanding climb rate and acceleration. Both had its admirers among the pilots.
The 109 was superior to the FW 190 at altitudes above 25000 feet has the Germans found out when they faced the American bomber formations later in the war .The FW 190 was far more survivable and faster at lower altitudes with a better roll rate plus carried four cannon and two machine guns compared to the 109s 1 cannon and 2 machine guns .
Sorry that’s not true, my Grandfather flew both MK5 and 9, he was shot down twice by 190s never had a problem with 109f or G in his own words
@@alanwayte432 RAF had higher losses and a poorer kill ratio in the last half of 1941 when the Bf 109E/F was by far the most numerous German fighter, than in the first half of 1942 when the Fw 190 was most numerous.
Very interesting. Thank you.
I read early encounters with Fw-190's were being reported and the intelligence officers were dismissing them as 'captured Hawks'.
The pilots response was "well iwant one!"
When flying over France in rhubarbs or circuses the boot was on the other foot, irrispective of the aircraft used the tactical disadvantage of operating at range was ignored in the need for "an offensive stance".
The 190 was very powerfully armed and had a massive radial engine to protect the pilot in a head on.
It could also appear to disappear it rolled so fast the spitfire pilots complained.
Great detail
Very interesting and well presented. Minor correction at 5.30 - the access door is for the oil tank filler - not filter.
Thanks for your input Steve.
@@VenturaPublications you’re very welcome! My company has painted a few Mk.IX’s over the past few years but not yet a very early one like these - all have been CBAF examples which were finished in a very specific manner and quite different from the Supermarine manufactured Spits.
Very informative, nice one.
Excellent video.
Is it plausable that many of the Spitfire losses of 1941 can be attributed to the aircrafts poor range and limited fuel load.
In one of the magnificent Armoured Carries Pods , several Seafire pilots complain that there duration was a limiting factor . A R.R engineer said that you can run the engine on full throttle as long as the fuel lasts , which will not be long. Flying over France on Sweeps , keeping an eye on the fuel gauge must be disconcerting to any pilot , who had a date that night.
Many years ago "Air Enthusiast" had an article on the early Spit IX ....
10/10 thanks.
Thanks for the positive feedback. My plan is to aim put up interesting pieces that are not just rehashes of what has been "done to death" by others.
AB457 MarkV converted to Mark IX 10 Jan 43 Merlin 61
Brilliant! Ta chap.✌
They are an interesting small group of Spitfires.
@@VenturaPublications indeed my old dredging barge was an armorer in the RAF and used to bang on about the Hispano 20mm's....every time i see a 9 i think of J Johnson 'Greycap' and how Bader wouldnt shake his hand post conflict.....brilliant analysis made my day.
My understanding of th Fw-190 is that it had the fastest roll rate of any aircraft in WWII (some pilots reported that Luftwaffe pilots were performing snap rolls in combat when they were merely rolling), but was not a tight turner due to its high wing loading.
The Fw-190's relatively small wing area permitted its high airspeed, but prevented it from from rapid climbs and tight turns. Do you agree?
Am I right in thinking that short wings would mean that the moment of inertia around the roll-axis would be relatively small and could explain why the FW 190 could roll so quickly?
@@sirtristram8297 Yes, I think that is right along with excellent ailerons, of course.
Roll rate aside, the Fw-190 was not really a dogfighter. While it mixed it up with Spits and did very well against them, at least until they improved the Spit, it was more of an an interceptor-bomber killer. In that role it succeeded famously. However, if even a P-47 (not the Allies' most maneuverable fighter) got the jump on a Wulf, the Wulf was likely dead.
It did outclimb the Spitfire V, but not the IX or Bf 109. Its excellent roll rate compensated for the rather poor turning radius, just like the P-47, another excellent roller.
@@TTTT-oc4eb You got it right. The 190 was why the Spit IX was rushed into service. IMO, the IXs are the best Spits.
@@Glicksman1 Yes, if was strange how the rushed to service Mark IX ended up more popular than the original planned successor to the Mark V, the Mark XIV.
Excellent video Malcolm. Do you know if any of the Spitfire Mk.I/IIs converted to Mk.Vs were subsequently converted/re-manufactured to Mk.IXs? That would be an interesting story!
Hmmm. I’d have to check.
Isn't there a large weight in the tail to correct the CG due to the longer heavier engine.
A question I have long had is whether the Spit Vs sent to RR for conversion to IXs had their original single stage Merlins attached, or were sent without the standard Mk V engines? I am not sure whether this is known.
I believe they were generally flown in as complete aircraft.
Yeah, they would have had to fly the Vs from Castle Bromwich to RR for conversion. I suppose they shipped the 40 series engines and their props back to BC for installation in the Vs being built there. @@VenturaPublications
@@gregp6210 Did you mean ship the engines and props to Castle Bromwich or some other place? If so where is BC?
@markfryer9880 My presumption is as follows. The Mk V's intended for conversion were flown presumably from Castle Bromwich (BC) to the Rolls Royce (RR) aviation facility (presumably at least some by the RAF women's air corps) where RR removed the 40 series engines to be replaced by the 60 series powerplants. I would assume that RR then shipped the left over 40 series engines and their 3 bladed props (probably the broader wood bladed versions) back via train/truck to Castle Bromwich to be reinstalled in Mk Vs they still being the primary production version (Vs were still in use in frontline use in Europe until late 44, incl invasion stripes in that summer). I have seen a lot of literature on the Spitfire including the big books, and an article earlier this century on the crude initial conversions, with exactly where the Spit Vs came from and how they got to RR not discussed as far as I recall, so take the above with a few grains of salt.
The big difference was re build rates …Britain could and did produce replacement aircraft at a far higher rate than the luftwaffe …not a lot of difference between the spitfire and the bf109 and the FW 190 had a better reputation ….in North Africa and certainly by Sicily the luftwaffe pilots knew that they had lost air superiority and the dip in confidence of the pilots is noted….James Holland book “ Sicily “ quotes individual German pilots by names recognising defeat was inevitable …
I'm assuming the tubular engine mount would require lengthening by 5 inches?
Complete new engine support arms, I believe.
@@VenturaPublications yes it was redesigned completely.
You're not really interested in the improved handling?
Nice to hear a kiwi accent on youtube
I wish my gf had a profile like that😎🇦🇺🤫👌
A profile like what? A Spitfire?
Hi.... A bit off topic but I am wondering if you have plans for any more decal sets.... I would like some 485,486,487 488 and 489 decals plus I really want to make the Australian mk21 Beaufighter with the (Beau-gunsville)markings
No plans for those NZ Squadrons right now. Next decals printed will be e revised V4884 with the Canterbury Mustang. I'm not familiar with the Beaugunsville markings. Would you email some info? My eddress is listed with this youtube channel.
@@VenturaPublications unfortunately I have limited inter net access I came across it in a basic Google search for mk21 Beaufighters... I believe the Australian airforce museum has it restored and on display
@@VenturaPublications I think it is also the main gatefold artwork in the Warplanes magazine on the Beaufighter
Mk 9 warranted 4 blade prop
Neede to absorb the extra power effectively and make use of it.
@@mothmagic1 but the Brits neglected to make the blades any wider, notice a Merlin P51 and notice how wide the prop blades are, they are 4 bladed also and the wider blades transmitted more thrust from the American made PACKARD merlin engine, one of the reasons the Mustang being 2000# heavier was stl over 30 MPH faster with a similiar merlin engine, besides being more aerodynamic and its sleek radiator housing !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 yes maybe usa also managed to scavange extra few hp from packard merlins
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Be aware that the 408mph speed bandied about by authors was for the early production Mk IX. later production types with series 66 and 70 would be rated at 414 to 422mph. Anyway! By that time the Griffon engined types came into service with speeds of 450mph and a phenomenal climb-rate and superior performance at medium/high altitude. There was no piston-engined fighter to match it in fighter combat from any side. But let's not deny that the P51D was the best long-range, escort fighter of the war. Especially when they were used in overwhelming numbers.
@@paulbantick8266griffon spits handling degraded but RAF went with extra speed climb
uncle flew a 5 but 9 much better ... then they got heavy later on