Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Hi.
In our archives we are coming across a few entries that state that the Spitfires in some of the SAAF sqns in the MTO has left to be painted.
I have heard from a 40 SAAF sqn Pilot that he flew his Spitfire that was delivered in natural metal for a few weeks as he had to wait his turn to get his a/c painted in the Standard SAAF colours.
I have seen a 3 sqn SAAF as well as a 7 sqn Spit in Italy in natural metal.
Question.
If the Air Ministry managed to enforce the USA produced a/c to be delivered
cammouflaged,why do we see UK delivered a/c in natural metal.
Is there an Air Ministry order that we have nissed???
These a/c were all end '44-45 era.
Any ideas??
Stefaan

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

All Spitfires had been delivered in camouflage, perhaps with exception of post war late Mk 22/24s. There were several Spitfires in MTO with removed paint, for example MJ250 UF-Q in the summer 1944. I cannot say who, when and why but it was apparently such aircraft delivered to 40 SAAF Sqn.
BTW
Have you found any photos or mentions of Polish Spitfires and pilots in Italy?

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Hi Franek.

That is what is reported by the pilots.I find it funny that the RAF insist
on USA a/c had to be cammouflagred but they themselves can deliver in nat metal.
No I have never seen any photo's or names in the photo albums.
I think there may have been Polish pilots in 7 or 8 Wings,as they had other nationalities flying with them.
They were mostly in the RAF sqns in our SAAF wings.there info will be in the archives relavent to those RAF sqns.
Stefaan

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Stefaan
Removing camouflage was a local initiative and nothing approoved by the RAF. Natural metal had no advantages from operational point of view, performance also remained unaffected.

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Stefaan/Franek

It has taken me a little while to find a document in my files. In among some MAAF papers at the National Archives/PRO I have found an odd, isolated, very brief "Loose Minute" (there were no other documents around it that linked to the same issue). It reads simply:

TO: WAR ORG

SILVER SPITFIRES

The unpainted Spitfire IXs which are being prepared may be sent as normal replacements to any T.A.F. Spitfire Wings except those in Corsica.

Wing Commander
Combat Operations
21st May 1944

Clearly this is not much more help whether your first language is Afrikaans or Polish it is not totally clear in English! http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/images/icons/icon7.gif The note seems to confirm that the command system knew that NMF Spitfires existed and did not regard this as a problem. The words "which are being prepared" could mean that the a/c were stripped in the Med rather than delivered unpainted.

In the excellent book "Spitfires in SAAF Service" by Steve McLaren there are several photos of NMF Spitfires which are ALL referred to as Special HF MkIXs. Are those the photos that Stefaan refers to?

I believe there was quite a lot of experimentation in the ME with suitable colour schemes for high flying Spitfires. Is it possible that the paint was stripped because the colours in which a/c were delivered were thought unsuitable of high altitude work? In saying this I realise that NMF finish is unlikely to be a suitable replacement "camouflage".

Every little bit helps (sometimes)

Steve

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Not quite true, Franek. Stripping the paint off will save quite a bit of weight, and the resulting metal finish (if properly done) will be slightly smoother than the paint, thus reducing skin-friction drag slightly. It won't make the aircraft fly noticeably faster, but will allow it to claw a little extra altitude. So it would be a reasonable thing to try if you needed to operate on or near the ceiling of the fighter - to intercept an Ar.234, perhaps.

Can this scheme can be linked to HF-engined airframes?

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Nope, Graham. Surface was puttied and primed before painting and thus offered a much better smoothness. Note that Mustangs always had puttied and painted wings! Weight penalty was minor, a few kilos or pounds, so I would say weight of a pilot was a much more important factor.
Oh, those are not my conclusions but of the RAF - see Paul Lucas' home based aircraft 1945-1950.
PS You certainly mean Ju 86?

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Sorry Franek, but I assure you, as someone once professionally involved in aircraft performance and drag estimation, that the weight and surface finish of paint on an airframe is a factor: less so on a fighter than a bomber because of its small size, true. Yes, the weight of the pilot would be more noticeable but lacking UAV Spitfires that would be an operational matter for the unit. A more skilled pilot could compensate for any excess avoirdupois. Another step would be taking out the outer mgs and reducing the number of cannon shells - I would be interested to find out if this was done. Lacking such features suggests that what we have is more likely an experiment in the benefits or otherwise of natural metal finishes.

I'm not sure how much puttying was normally done on production Spitfires, other than gap-filling - the primer being part of the part of the paint counts towards the weight. On Mustangs the leading edge was puttied and smoothed in an attempt to maintain laminar flow as far back as possible. Spitfires have a join on the leading edge which would tend to spoil this. In general, Mustangs were built to a higher standard than Spitfires - or indeed any similar type.
When the Spitfires in Alexandria were used to counter Ju 86s then these were puttied in an attempt to smooth irregularities in the surface. Here the paint seems to have been polished/rubbed smooth rather than the airframe stripped to bare metal. However, the Ju 86s were long gone before the time this thread is referring to. I think the Ar 234 is the most likely candidate requiring such measures, although perhaps the Ju 88T is a possibility. The other type involved was the Me 410, but catching these seem to have been within the capabilities of the standard Spitfire. Perhaps this is an opportunity for specialists in Luftwaffe reconnaissance to comment?

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

hello
little bit off the topic, but IIRC in British Pacific Fleet on at least some carriers they concluded that Seafire's .303 mgs were rather useless and removed them. After a while they got a message from Admiralty that the Lordship had noticed that there had not been any expenditure of .303 ammo on those carriers and reminded that per HM regulations those mgs were part of Seafire's armament and so should be reinstalled immediately. On the carriers men solved the problem by dumping some of the .303 ammo overboard so that the expenditure of .303 ammo was on the right proportion to 20mm ammo expenditure and so all were happy. Usually the front line troops were capable to adjust to the situation and did the things as they saw best even if the higher HQs were sometimes out of touch to battlefield realities. At least that was usually case in the Finnish Armed Forces which tended to be not so well disciplined.

Juha

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Where did you read that, Juha? Given that only two BPF carriers had Seafires it shouldn't be too difficult to track down. I don't recall seeing it in Crosley or Winton.

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

If I remember correctly P51 pilots would wax the wings of bare metal aircraft and add a good few miles per hour to their top speed - a matter of life or death !

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

According to Yiannis Mansolas several Spitfire Vb/c were delivered in natural metal to the Greeks as they were about to return home in the Autumn of 1944. These Spits apparently came from Australian Squadrons and in several cases had been painted with sharkmouths already.
I have asked Yiannis if he can verify this information but haven't received a straight answer. Nevertheless there's no doubt some Greek spitfires flew in natural metal OR painted silver after arrival in Greece.

Here's a link where this is mentioned btw

http://imansolas.freeservers.com/Ace...Spitfires.html

Kyrre

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Graham
No Ar 234 flew at high altitude and actually it took some years to improve altitude of jet aircraft - for long years Spitfire XIXs were undisturbed over the Soviet Union. So altitude is out of question.
Concerning puttying, yes, joints and overlaps were puttied, including the leading edge. Weight of a complete paintjob was in the area of 15kgs IIRC. The only advantage was that the natural metal finish was much easier to maintain.
Mgs were quite often removed from home based Spitfires and for a good reason, they were useless. See for example famous BS456 UZ-Ż (UZ-Z and dot if not visible) with two mgs removed.

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Jet engines are, and always were, superior at altitude to piston engines. The Germans used Me 262s to intercept PRU Mosquitos. I bow to your knowledge of the Ar234 operations in Italy, though it does surprise me a little. I suspect it may have more to do with climb to high altitudes taking time, early jets being highly limited in endurance.

The other parts of the intercept problem are the warning available and the rapid climb to an intercept point of the interceptor. Given the short duration of the mission, and the speed advantage of the Ar 234, I would not rule out the stripping of specific airframes in an attempt to improve intercept performance. However, at the moment we lack any evidence that this is the reason for these bare-metal Spitfires. It could simply be the mindless following of US fashion.

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Hello Graham

Sorry I don't have a lightest idea. I thought that easiest possibility would be David Brown's Carrier Fighters (1975) but a quick browse didn't produce a positive result. So Your guess is as good as mine. Could be any book on Spit/Seafire, someone's memoirs, or an article in some aviation magazine, for example in an old Aeroplane Monthly.

Sorry being unable to help :(

Juha

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Yes, jet engines are quite different from the piston ones. It is clearly visible on performance charts. My point is that early jet engines did not offer good altitude performance. MiG-15 was the first Soviet jet to outperform Spitfire LF.IX at high altitude and allowed to phase the latter out.
Interceptions of Mosquitoes - I suppose it was a matter of initial climb and speed that allowed to intercept them, as I do not think Mossies were flying at extreme altitudes. Spitfire XIX should have been unreachable.
Finally, I agree on your comment on NM Spits. We do not know why they were stripped. I know why Tom Neill stripped his own but that is another story.

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Hi Guys.
Thanks for all the responces.
The SAAF operated 2 NM Spitfires HF MK IX's MH993 and MA792 as high altidude
intercepters to catch the Ju 86/88 over Alexandria in 1943.
I have a photo in our book SAAF at War p47.
It was loaned to different sqns as they asked for help with HF Recce a/c.
The photo shows them with 41 SAAF.
These were converted by removing radio and 1 set of 20mm to reduce weight in 1 of the pair.
The lighter a/c got the height and speed to hit the recce a/c,thereby decompressing it forcing it to reduce height.The 2nd standard a/c with radio
then was to shoot it down at a lower height.
They are not part of the problem as they have been reported previously.
The problem is 40 sqn that sent there a/c in batches of 3 to be painted once delivered in camouflage colours.
They were photo recce a/c .
I think Steve's order that he found is very relavent.
Where did you get it and from which Wing was it Steve?
Stefaan

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Photo-recce aircraft in bare metal? I thought that the subjects were fighters? Was 40 SAAF a PR unit - I thought that was 60 SAAF with Mosquitoes? Or is this a reference to FR aircraft - fighters with a fuselage camera for low-level work?

Franek: I suspect that the PR Mk. XIX had little height advantage over the later PR Mosquitoes, but that can be settled by consulting books I don't have to hand. Certainly Mosquitoes flew recce missions over Eastern Europe in the early days of the Cold War. However, it may well be true that the MiG 15 was the first aircraft capable of (regularly?) intercepting the PR.XIX, but that has little to do with the jet/piston argument in principle. It is much more to do with the capabilities of early Russian jet fighters, the Russian Air Defence system, and the ability to route around defence centres. In the same way as the 8th AF rendered the Me 163 threat impotent by simply not flying near their bases.

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Hi Graham

40 SAAF was a PR sqn or FR as you call them.
3 sqn and 7 sqn were fighters.
I am not including 41 as it was for a specific duty ie to catch the PR intruders.
I have seen NM Spits in all these sqns but only in Italy.
40 sqn did Tactical recce work and 60 sqn in the Mossies Strategic recces.
Stefaan

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Graham
Spitfire LF.IX, the most popular or even the only available version in USSR, had a service ceiling of about 12,500m. MiG-9 theoreticaly had a service ceiling of about 12,800-13,000 but IIRC Spitfire simply flew better at altitude, while MiG suffered of several problems disallowing its combat use and was not available in quantities. MiG-15 outclassed Spit, having ceiling at 15,200m and finally replaced her in air defence units. Oh, both had RR engines. ;)
And their enemy was initially Spitfire XIX (with performance superior to LF.IX - I think Griffon had better alt. performance rather than Merlin in Mosquitoes) and then Canberra, I think both with RR engines. ;)
My point is not that the jet engine was a bad concept (at last jets replaced pistons), just only the level of development was not so advanced. Initially, the main advantage was superior speed and climb and not necessarily altitude. With speed advantage of about 200km/h you do not need the latter that much. Of course, the only way to intercept such a beast was to climb higher and then to build up the speed in dive. A very hard task and definetelly a job for an excellent ground control. But still, was it the reason of paint removal?

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Hi All,

I know it is a short and a simple reply but wern't Spitfires that were in Desert camoflage sceme in Italy removed from squadrons and re painted in the Grey/green camoflage more suited to northern climbs ? it is then possible that some were redelivered to Squadrons when needed before the "New" camoflage was applied ?

Alex

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Stefaan: PR in the RAF was something of a private air force, reporting to high command and (at least later in life) largely concentrating on strategic reconnaissance. They were allowed to go their own way with camouflage schemes, although settling on the well-known PRU Blue. FR units were fighters with cameras, flying tactical missions, reporting to local authority and the relevant Army HQs. These grew out of the old Army Air Co-Operation units, and were normally camouflaged in the same schemes as fighter aircraft in the same theatre. So although both flew Spitfires with cameras, they had distinctly different roles and positions in the organisation.


Alex, you may well be right, although the need wouldn't seem that desperate and the apparent concentration of these in SAAF units does imply something else. However, if 41 Sq was dedicated to the interception of intruders, and these bare metal aircraft have been seen in other units, then we can probably rule out the search for performance limits. It begins to look as though local SAAF HQ relaxed the rules on camouflage before the RAF as a whole.

Maybe, however, someone will bring to the forum a mass of photos of baremetal RAF fighters in Italy.....

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

I know nothing about the silver Spitfires but can maybe shed some light on what they might have wanted to catch.

The standard Spitfire could catch an Me 410 but what if it wasn't a standard Me 410?

On 24 July 1944, No. 92 Squadron Spits chased a "silver-painted" Me 410 from Cosrsica to Nice and couldn't catch it. After the Riviera landings an abandoned Me 410 (ex 1.(F)/33) was found with the barbettes removed and a GM-1 tank in their place. Some more about this on my website www.ghostbombers.com (Go to the "Operation Dragoon" article and then to the page "Before D-Day")

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Stefaan

I have been away on business for a few days.

You asked about this document. It is from the National Archives (PRO) at Kew. It comes from AIR51 I do not have the precise details of which piece in AIR51. The papers are from SHAEF and from MAAF HQ. All the records are on microfilm which was apparently made many years ago it is poor quality and often completely illegible/indecipherable. As far as I know this document has no link to a particular Wing it seems to me it was sent from MAAF HQ to all Wings(?). There is no confusion over the date so it would seem that it does not link with a/c being operated in NMF during 1943.

I hope this helps a bit I cannot add anything further

Steve

Re: Natural metal Spitfires.
 

Thanks.

Stefaan