Warbird Information Exchange

I was watching a Military Channel show and they were discussing the Spitfire. One pilot commented (I *believe* it was a BOB pilot) that it was a little tricky on T/o and Landings, but once in the air, it was a dream to fly. No vices.

On the other hand, I thought Bill had said, here in WIX, that T/O and Landings are pretty easy.

Had anyone else read/heard of opinions on the topic?

thanks!

A bit less of a problem than the bf109! Narrow gear, powerful engine=Big Trouble!

Budd Davisson has a Spitfire podcast over on airbum.com. If I remember right, he said it was very pleasant to fly and land.
Its like everything else, there's always somebody that says such and such airplane is a holy terror, then you fly one and its not bad.

Steve G

Sure would like the chance to find out for myself.

Mudge the dreamer

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave

A Spitfire is only difficult for someone like Mudge who thinks a real fighter needs two engines, or someone like Gary who thinks a General Motors tractor engine belongs in a real fighter. And the B O B guy might have been raised and spoiled on jets!

Seriously, folks may be interested, so later today or tonight I'll write something more comprehensive, perhaps on its own topic.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

Bill, I'm sceduled to have a flight in a two seater soon. Is there anything you could tell be about flying the Spit that would help me get the most out of this once in a lifetime experience, what to be conscious of, things to remember or be careful of?

Thanks
Zwit

Never said such, Mr. Greenwood. Never said such!

The P-38 is my favorite because of it's beautiful lines. The fact that it has two engines is just an added benefit.
This is not to say the Spit isn't beautiful. It most assuredly is, as are all the WWII birds. (Some more so than others which will remain unnamed as self protection.)

Think about this...If I'm 200 miles out over the water and lose an engine and you're right beside me and lose an engine, guess who gets home dry?

Mudge the prepared

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave

I think the perception of how difficult a plane is to land has a lot to do with pilot experience. Remember that many BOB pilots had far fewer flight hours than most insurance companies would deem necessary by today's standards.

Heck, I had a pretty dicey landing the other day in a plane many people consider pretty idiot proof...but I'm an inexperienced pilot. (In my defense, the crosswind was pretty impressive that day...only grey eagles or some fool in an Ercoupe would've tried it. That fool just happened to be me LOL)

_________________
What is red, furry and on your six?

If I may add my two cents worth...

I have flown two aircraft in my limited flying career, the Fleet Canuck and the Harvard. Landing the Canuck is like landing a leaf, while landing the Harvard is like landing a toolbox. Both airplanes are quite easy to land and both can be royally screwed up . I think that as long as you know what to expect from the airplane, the landings shouldn't be all that difficul. Bill, I would love to hear about anything you have to write about the Spit.

As far as the beauty of an airplane, I don't think I've met a warbird I didn't like. Let's take the Skyraider and the Mosquito....flying the Skyraider would be like grabbing your workpail in the morning and taking off to bring home the bacon - lots of work and satisfying. Flying the Mosquito would be like climbing into bed with two women, one on either side - also quite satisfying.

Hvd2Pilot said - "I don't think I've met a warbird I didn't like."

How about the Grumman Guardian or the Ablemarle?

It's often forgotten that the Spitfire (and Hurricane and 109) was/were designed and initially operated from round grass fields, where take off and landing directly into wind was always possible. So modern 'crosswind limits' were not a factor at all originally and a certain amount of tracking deviation not as critical as it now is.

That said, none of them compromised performance or speed for good ground handling, and they all had varyingly poor forward view on the ground.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

The Mosquito sounds a little more fun to me...

_________________
What is red, furry and on your six?

The Spitfire is EXTREMELY, MIND BOGGLING, ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to fly. It can only be mastered by those few pilots of such incredible skill level that the few who can do it are a super race unto their own. Should you encounter one of these god like creatures, please strew large bills at their feet and offer them cold Dom Perignon and fresh strawberries dipped in chocolate.

Furthermore, should you own an early Spit, like a MK V, or a Bearcat, I'd recommend that you ask the Spitfire deity pilot to fly it for you to give the plane the handling it deserves.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

I have a good friend here in town that flew Spit Vs and Spit VIIIs with the 31st FG in N. Africa. He said the was only only "perfect" airplane he ever flew. He added that it didn't have a natural tendancy to swing on landing and has long has you compensated for torque with rudder take-off was no problem either. Van's only crash was a formation take-off on Royal Baker's wing on a narrow dirt strip and was blinded bby the dust and hit a jeep parked next to the runway.

Spit Vb Trop HL+O 308th FS 31st FG N. Africa 1943

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

Hey Bill,