Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nash
Spitfire XVIs served in fairly small numbers, becoming involved very late in the war.
The information I have seen is that the RAF had to abandon the use of 100/150 fuel, which allowed 25 lbs boost in Merlins, in their Spit XVIs because it was causing problems with the Packard engines.
The truth is, the types weren't usually mixed and matched, because different spares and tools were required, which would make servicing a nightmare.
There's a good reason why they gave a different model number to the Spitfire XVI (which was a Spitfire IX, but with the Packard built engine). It wouldn't make much sense to create a new model, then go and mix the engines up afterwards.
|
Nash
Spitifre XVIs saw some extensive service since late 1944 and comments about them were varied. Complaints about quality, similar to those concerning CBAF Spits back in 1940, were mixed with appreciation in those units, that had a mix of rather clapped Mk IXs dating back to 1942!
A mix of variants in one Squadron was theoretically possible and I think differencies were minor for a qualified groundservice, the key was doubtless spares supply and rationalisation of spares stock within a unit.
I have to say that I never saw any complaints concerning Packards in Mustangs used to chase V1s but that they worked quite rough. Perhaps no direct comparison to RR Merlins there?
15th February 2005, 15:49
Threaded Mode