Spitfire - the inside story by David Curnock - Haynes book

Profile picture for user allan125

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 374

Anybody else noticed that the famous Spitfire XIV serial RM689 used on the front cover of this new Haynes book shows that it only has a 4 bladed prop. http://www.haynes.co.uk/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=59055&langId=-1 Hopefully the contents have been better researched - does anyone have a copy? Allan
Original post
Profile picture for user Mark12

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 10,028

...and acquired a Merlin engine. :)
Profile picture for user Bradburger

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 1,447

...and acquired a Merlin engine. :)
Indeed. And a rather short port wing! :confused: Looks very badly done - hopefully a mock or 'concept' front cover? That said, given Haynes previous books on the Spitfire and other types, you thought they'd at least know who to ask, and give an opinion and feedback on this kind of thing! Anyway, thanks for the heads up on this one. Cheers Paul
Profile picture for user allan125

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 374

I agree totally with you both, and I haven't seen a copy in my local bookshop. So, hopefully, the contents are better researched as I said in my original entry Allan

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 151

If you ignore the aircraft construction number (and the non-period “wireless” aerial), the Mk XIV fuselage is not that dissimilar to that of the Mk IX, and the blending of cutaway to photograph is a reasonable representation of a Spitfire Mk IX. I’ve done similar “blending” art using a mixture of cutaway drawings and or photos – though for my own amusement, and not for commercial considerations. You are very much limited to available works (drawings, photos, etc) in order to achieve the correct perspective. If you look more closely, you will also notice that the axial alignment of the fuselage centreline is not quite right (a slight bend and twist resulting from the angle of the cutaway and the photo not quite in the same flight direction). Unless the artist was commissioned to produce a new cutaway drawing to match the photo, you could forgive the slight mismatch as a reasonable representation of the aircraft. What I find more difficult to forgive is the shortened port wing! It may match the merge from drawing into photo, but it’s just wrong from a technical and perspective viewpoint. Note that none of my comments above actually pose any bearing on the nature or quality of the contents of the book or the research. That I will leave to those with great knowledge of all thing Spitfire to decide. Regards, …geoff
Profile picture for user Mark12

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 10,028

If you ignore the aircraft construction number (and the non-period “wireless” aerial), the Mk XIV fuselage is not that dissimilar to that of the Mk IX, and the blending of cutaway to photograph is a reasonable representation of a Spitfire Mk IX. …geoff
...lets us also ignore the substantially larger fin and rudder, the fin to fuselage fillet panel and the retracting tail wheel, permanently locked down on this Mk XIV at this time. :) Mark

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 151

Mark, I don't intend to argue with you. My questions are to improve my own limited knowledge of the Spitfire. • Was the Mk VIII spitfire not provided with a taller tail (albeit more pointed in profile than the later Griffin Spitfire tails)? Mk IX = Mk VIII (without the refinements)? I guess the Mk XII and XIV fuselage to fin interface also resembled the MkIX/VIII's on steroids (bulkier profile). • Lock down tail-wheel…..squint into the sun a little….looks like a fixed Mk IX tail-wheel to me. • Wouldn’t know a fin to fuselage fillet panel from a fillet of fish in this case. Happy to be educated. Really, the Haynes book(s) are not intended for the expert (are they?). As long as the technical content holds up to scratch, can we not be a little more forgiving of cover page “artistic flavour”? Perhaps the cover art needs the disclaimer: “The Spitfire art on this cover bears no intended resemblance to any known living Spitfire, and no Spitfires were harmed in the production of this tome.” Regards, ...geoff
Profile picture for user Mark12

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 10,028

Geoff, To answer your questions:- The Mk VIII had the same basic fin area as the early Spitfires including the Mk IX/XVI and XII. The Mk VIII had retracting tail wheel as did some of the MK XII's Late Mk IX's and XVI's, most Mk VIII's and the Mk XII had the broad chord rudder with 'pointy top'. The Mk XIV with long griffon has a totally new larger area fin with fillet panel to fuselage coupled with a larger rudder of which we see two variations...and a retracting tail wheel. The tail wheel on RM689 was locked in the down position by Rolls Royce in the 1950's. The linkage to the doors was disengaged and the doors scalloped to clear the leg. During the reconstruction of RM689, currently on hold, the retracting wheel and doors have been reactivated as seen in the shot by Mike Maskery. Mark http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v634/Mark12/Mark12085/14-RM689BristolApril2010MikeMaskery_IGP1197_zpsae494099.jpg
Profile picture for user allan125

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 374

Hello Geoff "Perhaps the cover art needs the disclaimer: “The Spitfire art on this cover bears no intended resemblance to any known living Spitfire, and no Spitfires were harmed in the production of this tome.” perfect - provided no actual Spitfires were harmed of course!! well, at least it has given a few of us something to write (and smile) about!! I don't think we have to drag politics in to this though - by highlighting the problems with the left wing!! Seriously - I would still have expected that Haynes would have produced a more accurate front cover than this - but then, way back, using their car manuals you could either use the correct tools or a club hammer, with the same result IIRC!! Allan
Profile picture for user allan125

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 374

can't see a problem, what a fantastic advertisement - as they say "the model is designed by experts" and has an "infamous wing" - now what could be wrong with that!! Allan