I was on a roll with high altitude fighters, so it made sense to look at the Spitfire ones. Also it was a nice change to discuss a high altitude fighter that actually saw service and had some success 👍✈️
The normal elliptical wing with wash out of ordinary Spitfires was so efficient that even at and above the Spitfire's service ceiling the extended wing tips gave no real induced drag performance increase. Notice the reduced span ailerons on the Mk VII wings, carried into the VIII and XIV Spitfires.
That is well illustrated by the fact that Spitfire Mk.V's in Northern Africa were able to reach 40,000ft and combat the Ju.86. Albeit atmospheric conditions where better in Northern Africa, but it still quite impressive
As a matter of interest the Spitfire Mk IX owed its performance to the work of Stanley Hooker who worked on the supercharger for the Merlin giving it considerably more power and made the plane both faster and with a greater ceiling. He later became Sir Stanley Hooker and was brought back to work on the RB211 jet engine after it had suffered problems during development at Rolls Royce.
I've always felt that the Spitfire IX was aesthetically the prettiest aircraft of WW2, while the Bf109K and Fw190D series aircraft were the most functionally dangerous/cool looking. The P-51D is like a middle ground. On the topic of the Ju86R, it would be funny if the Spitfire came up at it like a SAM on a U2, like, I ain't here to shoot'cha, Fritz, I'm here to crash into ya!
nice and I would say for the most part I would agree. However for the Spitfire I've always loved the early variants like the Mk.I, Mk.II and Mk.V. It would be an interesting tactic. To a degree they had to use that tactic with V1 bombs. They had to bump it off course with the tips of the wing
Nice video. I really think that the MK VII was one of the very best Spitfires. Not only could it climb high (and faster than most WW11 fighters), it was also the fastest merlin engined variant. The Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment (AAEE) at Boscombe Down tested a MKVII - serial No MD176 in September 1944 and it achieved a top speed of 412 mph at 26000 ft, 424 mph at 29400 ft, 420mph at 34000 ft and 409 mph at 40000ft. Only the Griffon engined Spitfires had better performance and I imagine not by much at those altitudes. It is a shame that they were that bit more difficult to manufacture. The MK IX could achieve most of what a MK VII could (top speed and range excepted) with only 80% of the effort as they were largely based on the less rigid MK V airframe which was easier to produce quickly. Although the MK VII looked similar to a MK IX , the MK VII was a complete redesign of the airframe and wings, making it a much stronger structure. Having said that, there were no bad Spitfires. They were all brilliant, and we were very lucky to have a aeroplane capable of so much development in a fast changing war.
The Ju86 was an old bomber design withdrawn after the Spanish Civil War. It had good taper on the wings a bit like the Vickers Wellington which increased aerodynamic efficiency. It had external trailing edge flaps and ailerons as with the Ju52/3M and Ju87 Stuka. The P and R could have extended wing tips.
@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 It is interesting to see that while the design was obsolete before the war it still soldiered on in such a unique role.
As far as I'm aware the flaps weren't modified at all. Apart from the extended tips, pressurized cabin and different engine the Mk.VI was very similar to the Mk.V and likewise the Mk.VII apart from some additions was similar to the Mk.VIII
People under-rate split flaps, they allow a perfectly clean undisturbed airflow over the entire top surface while still driving extra airflow up over the leading edge. Simple flaps like the Bf109's go turbulent and effectively lose wing area.
This video is very bad for something you usually only do a bit, unnecessary repetition of aircraft names. Between the 7 and 9 minute mark I think you said Ju-86 at least six times in about a minute. There was a lesser instance with the Spitfire earlier in the video. If this was in your script then you might look for someone to do a quick proofread before you record - just looking for stuff like this. We often become blind to this sort of thing when we're in the middle of creating.
Thanks for the feedback appreciate it. I've gone back and had a look and know exactly what you mean. I'll make sure it isn't this bad in future videos 👍✈️
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Live] : ONE 168 วันนี้!! "โจนาธาน vs ซุปเปอร์เล็ก"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0jIN65KgJsI/mqdefault.jpg)
Very pleased to see you carried on the high altitude aircraft...especially with this one...always a pleasure seeing Spitfire variants 🙂👍
I was on a roll with high altitude fighters, so it made sense to look at the Spitfire ones. Also it was a nice change to discuss a high altitude fighter that actually saw service and had some success 👍✈️
I understand that engagement between the modified MkIX and the Ju-86 was the highest-altitude combat of WWII. Anywhere.
Yes I believe that is correct. Quite high up 👍✈️
The normal elliptical wing with wash out of ordinary Spitfires was so efficient that even at and above the Spitfire's service ceiling the extended wing tips gave no real induced drag performance increase. Notice the reduced span ailerons on the Mk VII wings, carried into the VIII and XIV Spitfires.
That is well illustrated by the fact that Spitfire Mk.V's in Northern Africa were able to reach 40,000ft and combat the Ju.86. Albeit atmospheric conditions where better in Northern Africa, but it still quite impressive
As a matter of interest the Spitfire Mk IX owed its performance to the work of Stanley Hooker who worked on the supercharger for the Merlin giving it considerably more power and made the plane both faster and with a greater ceiling.
He later became Sir Stanley Hooker and was brought back to work on the RB211 jet engine after it had suffered problems during development at Rolls Royce.
That is very interesting, thank you for sharing 👍✈️
He wasn't much of an engineer though.
@@andrewcockburn7484 I have that book 🙂
Ah....thanks for a video on one of my favorite topics. Great photos. I always liked those pointed wings on the Mk VI and VII. Thanks again!
No problem, those tips do give a unique look to the wings 👍✈️
I've always felt that the Spitfire IX was aesthetically the prettiest aircraft of WW2, while the Bf109K and Fw190D series aircraft were the most functionally dangerous/cool looking. The P-51D is like a middle ground.
On the topic of the Ju86R, it would be funny if the Spitfire came up at it like a SAM on a U2, like, I ain't here to shoot'cha, Fritz, I'm here to crash into ya!
nice and I would say for the most part I would agree. However for the Spitfire I've always loved the early variants like the Mk.I, Mk.II and Mk.V.
It would be an interesting tactic. To a degree they had to use that tactic with V1 bombs. They had to bump it off course with the tips of the wing
Hawker Tempest has quite a presence I would suggest.
@michaelcohen904 well it got its wish with the MkIX on
@@russellmarriott9396 Not above 34800 ft believe
Nice video. I really think that the MK VII was one of the very best Spitfires. Not only could it climb high (and faster than most WW11 fighters), it was also the fastest merlin engined variant. The Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment (AAEE) at Boscombe Down tested a MKVII - serial No MD176 in September 1944 and it achieved a top speed of 412 mph at 26000 ft, 424 mph at 29400 ft, 420mph at 34000 ft and 409 mph at 40000ft. Only the Griffon engined Spitfires had better performance and I imagine not by much at those altitudes. It is a shame that they were that bit more difficult to manufacture. The MK IX could achieve most of what a MK VII could (top speed and range excepted) with only 80% of the effort as they were largely based on the less rigid MK V airframe which was easier to produce quickly. Although the MK VII looked similar to a MK IX , the MK VII was a complete redesign of the airframe and wings, making it a much stronger structure. Having said that, there were no bad Spitfires. They were all brilliant, and we were very lucky to have a aeroplane capable of so much development in a fast changing war.
Thanks 👍✈️ That is really interesting to read. The Spitfire is a great aircraft.
Wilbur will not believe you.
Thank you.
Aircraft I'd never heard of spit mk6,7 and JU86.
Have a great Christmas.
All the best for 2023.
Cheers
Thanks and likewise 👍✈️
The Ju86 was an old bomber design withdrawn after the Spanish Civil War. It had good taper on the wings a bit like the Vickers Wellington which increased aerodynamic efficiency. It had external trailing edge flaps and ailerons as with the Ju52/3M and Ju87 Stuka. The P and R could have extended wing tips.
@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 It is interesting to see that while the design was obsolete before the war it still soldiered on in such a unique role.
That's pretty high pretty much as high up as a modern airliner travels .
indeed it is. Pretty impressive by a Spitfire
There is a Mark VI at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in Washington DC.
👍✈️
THE BIG SHOW is worth a read re the Orkneys.
Exactly who was involved is historically unclear, Pierre implied in the book that he was present.
I'll have to check it out. There isn't much on the internet about the Orkneys
Pierre Closterman recounts his time flying high altitude Spitfires acting as fleet defence. @@AntiqueAirshow
good stuff, thanks
Thank you 👍✈️
All Spitfires from the MkVI on could get to 40000ft+ except for the Mk XII which was restricted to absolute 39000ft
Were the flaps modified in any way? By Fowler, flaps and the like?
As far as I'm aware the flaps weren't modified at all. Apart from the extended tips, pressurized cabin and different engine the Mk.VI was very similar to the Mk.V and likewise the Mk.VII apart from some additions was similar to the Mk.VIII
People under-rate split flaps, they allow a perfectly clean undisturbed airflow over the entire top surface while still driving extra airflow up over the leading edge. Simple flaps like the Bf109's go turbulent and effectively lose wing area.
FebRUary.
StrAYfing not strarrfing.
Strafe. Vowel consonant vowel. Hard A.
This video is very bad for something you usually only do a bit, unnecessary repetition of aircraft names. Between the 7 and 9 minute mark I think you said Ju-86 at least six times in about a minute. There was a lesser instance with the Spitfire earlier in the video. If this was in your script then you might look for someone to do a quick proofread before you record - just looking for stuff like this. We often become blind to this sort of thing when we're in the middle of creating.
Thanks for the feedback appreciate it. I've gone back and had a look and know exactly what you mean. I'll make sure it isn't this bad in future videos 👍✈️
He can't re-name or re-number it can he? What do you expect?
@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 He understood, even if you do not.