The Ultimate green garden gnome

gjamo · #1 10-02-03, 08:11

I can just image towing this back home up Geelong road with the wings sitting in a cradle on the tray of the C60S.
http://www.fowles.com.au/tender/spitfire.htm

Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP) · #2 18-02-03, 15:29

C'mon guys, I'm dying to know how much a VB (albeit modified) is worth... someone must have stayed for the auction!!

gjamo · #3 18-02-03, 22:14

As of 08:00 Melbourne time this morning the aircraft is not sold but under negoiation. So there is still time Geoff for a last minute bid.

Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP) · #4 18-02-03, 22:20

Wonder if they would take Canadian Tire money?

Y'know, I was discussing this with another old aeroplane phreak here at work, and we figure we could start and taxi it... then maybe, just maybe, taxi it fast enough to lift the tail, then maybe... well, maybe just pull back on the stick just a bit...

Martin IJdo · #5 18-02-03, 23:06

I hate to play "wise-guy" here lads, but if this particular machine has ever been a Mk. Vb, it is definitly not right calling it that anymore now. To me it looks like the remains of a Mk. V fuselage stuck to the front end of a Mk. 9.
Still, this would not keep me from accepting it if it where offerd to me...........

martin.

Don Dingwall · #6 19-02-03, 04:44

LZ844 was built on the 8th order for Contract No. B19713/39, as part of a lot of 680 Vc's and IXe's.
It is indeed a Mark Vc, and was at 38 Maintenance Unit on April 20/43, then to 47 MU by the 26th of that month and was handed over to the Royal Australian Air Force on July 2nd, 1943.

Martin, the 12 stacks and 4 blader are more common to see on restored Mark V's than the original 6 stacks and 3 blade Rotol or Jablo blades. Most restored V's have this engine/prop set up.

No big deal to most, as all a Mark IX was, was an upgraded Mark V.

Don

Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP) · #7 19-02-03, 12:59

If you read their downloadable (pdf) history and profile, it indicates this aircraft suffered damage in a landing accident in New Guinea, was largely cannibalized and the remains pushed off into the jungle. It was recovered in the 70's and rebuilt for static display with the front end off a Mk.VIII and the engine out of a Mossie...

Martin IJdo · #8 19-02-03, 19:59

The main difference between the earlier Spits up to Mk. V, and the later variants before the Griffon engined versions, is not so much in blades and smoke stacks, but in the lenght of the nose. The Mk. V is powered by the Merlin 45-50 variants, whereas the mk. VIII and IX used the improved Merlin 61-66. To house this engine the nose was lengthened a couple of inches, and got a much sleeker profile. The spinner has a much longer pointed shape. it is indeed often seen that earlier versions sport single stacks instead of the older double ones. Good example is the unique BBMF Mk. IIa. This was originally built with double stacks as well.

Martin.

alvin5182 · #9 10-03-03, 02:56

Gentlemen:
A short article in the Mar 03 issue of Flypast Magazine indicates this is a composite a/c assembled over a 25 yr period. The fuselage is that of LZ844 which was indeed a Mk V and the engine area and prop assembly is taken from an un-named MKVIII.
The four bladed prop, the longer nose profile, the 12 exhaust stacks coupled with the "universal" filter at bottom area of the cowling indicate the Mk VIII front and everything else from the firewall back indicates Mk V .
LZ844 was operational with 79 Sqn RAAF coded as UP-X.

Jon Skagfeld · #10 04-04-03, 03:42

Indeed, LZ844 was a Mk Vc as reported. However, the aircraft is depicted as being a Mk I of 609 (West Riding) Sqn, who flew the Mk I from Aug '39-May'41. Mk Vb and Mk Vc weren't flown until May '41-May '42 in 609 Sqn.

I'm not sure when the radio antenna configuration changed, but what is shown is typical of Mk I aircraft, Mk V.

The weapons ( 2 x 20mm cannon, 2 x .303 in machine guns) are typical of a Mk Vb, whereas the Mk I of 609 Sqn had 8 x .303 in guns.

Certainly, no Mk I had a four blade propeller.

Given that this aircraft which is for sale was cobbled together from wrecks, still it offends my military collector sensibilities that it is shown not as what it originally was, but as it is purported to be,... incorrectly.

Here, in Toronto, a similar situation existed when a PRU Spit was painted up as if it were a 401 (RCAF) Sqn aircraft when 401 never flew PR duties. It, too, incorrectly sported a four blade prop.

If anyone is interested, I have a great deal of research info related to Spits in general and LZ 844/R6915 in particular.

alvin5182 · #11 04-04-03, 04:13

Jon:
i remember that Spit when it used to be parked down beside HMCS Haida at Ontario Place. First time I saw it , kind of a "What the hell is that ?" reaction. Wasn't it owned by the Canadian Fighter Pilots Assoc or some similar organization?

I know I read a story about it but can't recall, any idea where it is now?

Al Davis

Jon Skagfeld · #12 04-04-03, 19:09

Al, I remember that Spit well. There was a discussion about it and other items of military interest on the Lakeshore on the "old" MLU forum.

The last I heard, the Spit is located at the Ontario Science Centre. moved there after Toronto city council demanded that the "war-like" thing be removed.