[Graham Boak]

I take your point about the production availability. No, I'm certainly not sure there is a link to the propellor - I thought I had qualified my comments enough to make that clear. There does however seem to be enough to make a strong inference.

I have since consulted Malta: The Spitfire Year and the relevant deliveries are Pinpoint (July 15th) and Insect (July 21st). Shores describes the Pinpoint deliveries as Mk.Vcs - from Spitfire the History and other sources I make them a mix of Mk.Vb and Mk.Vc from the BR, EN and EP blocks. Insect are all Mk.Vbs from EP but for (maybe) three AR Mk.Vcs. The text describes one Malta veteran's (Ogilvy) comment. "This time we launched with greater authority.... The new Spitfires had laminated wood hydromatic propellors...." So a little confusion there? Rotol were wooden, DH metal. Ogilvy was not with the earlier Pinpoint mission.

The Pinpoint aircraft were delivered to the MUs in May, the Insect aircraft in June.

Somwhere there is a specific reference to a solitary carrier take-off to prove the value of the Hydromatic propellor but I haven't found that yet.

The EP aircraft were Merlin 46s as opposed to the ENs with Merlin 45s - could this be relevant to the propellor change? (Perhaps not, the BRs were Merlin 46 too.) Possibly it is relevant to Ogilvy's pleasure at the performance.

I've long regarded the tropicalised Mk.Vc as the overweight dragmaster of the Spitfire family. Carrying twice the cannon armament pushes the weight difference up further - giving with one hand whilst taking away with the other.