Skip to comments.
Seafire XV restoration story.......
YOUTUBE ^
| 9/10/13
| Scott Schaefer
Posted on 12/27/2013 8:05:26 AM PST by Doogle
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
ENJOY
1
posted on
12/27/2013 8:05:26 AM PST
by
Doogle
To: Chode
2
posted on
12/27/2013 8:05:57 AM PST
by
Doogle
(USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
To: Doogle
I gotta ask - what’s the difference between the Seafire and the Spitfire - they look the same to me.
To: Doogle
I’m sick and tired of You Tube videos that automatically devour my whole computer screen, and won’t let me shrink them to normal size. Whenever I encounter that kind of self-importance, I immediately close the screen.
4
posted on
12/27/2013 8:10:50 AM PST
by
Standing Wolf
(No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.)
To: Standing Wolf
..hang on a sec...I’ll get ya the other one
5
posted on
12/27/2013 8:12:03 AM PST
by
Doogle
(USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
To: Doogle
Beautiful plane. I bet it could win the whole Syrian Civil War by itself lol
To: Doogle
Awesome! I put over a thousand hours in Spitfires in online WWII flight simulator battles. It was my all time favorite plane from WWII. I was a fanatic on WWII aircraft in my high school years (around 1970), but there was not much information back then on the Seafires. Just enough to know that it was a carrier ready Spitfire.
To: Doogle
8
posted on
12/27/2013 8:12:40 AM PST
by
SWAMPSNIPER
(The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
To: Standing Wolf
That’s one thing, another is everyones incessant need to set their videos to crappy music.
9
posted on
12/27/2013 8:12:45 AM PST
by
Axenolith
(Government blows, and that which governs least, blows least...)
To: rusty schucklefurd
I gotta ask - whats the difference between the Seafire and the Spitfire - they look the same to me.
Seafire can land and takeoff from an aircraft carier. It is a sea version. The name actually means “Sea Spitfire”.
To: Standing Wolf
11
posted on
12/27/2013 8:13:24 AM PST
by
Doogle
(USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
To: Standing Wolf
To: rusty schucklefurd
The Supermarine Seafire [all Marks] had the following modifications to qualify it for carrier use: 1) strengthened landing gear to take the violent landings aboard carriers (this is what separates carrier planes from land planes); 2) an arresting hook for carrier landings; 3) folding wing tips (due to height restrictions on British carrier hangar decks); 4) folding wings for carrier stowage. The F4U-1 Corsairs used by the Fleet Air Arm had their wing tips clipped so that their folded wings would clear the overhead of the hangar deck on the British flattops.
To: Doogle
This is simply awesome! Thank you for posting it!
14
posted on
12/27/2013 8:45:35 AM PST
by
Howie66
(Molon Labe, Traitors!)
To: Doogle
An amazing labor of love.
15
posted on
12/27/2013 8:50:27 AM PST
by
Flick Lives
(Got a problem with the government? Have a complaint. Get a free IRS audit!)
To: Howie66
16
posted on
12/27/2013 8:53:10 AM PST
by
Doogle
(USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
To: MasterGunner01
I believe the Seafires utilized a different engine, the Rolls Royce Griffon. The propeller spun in the opposite direction and the Supercharger was optimized for lower altitude work than the early Mark Spitfires.
Eventually the Spitfires traded their Merlins for Griffon’s in later Marks as the missions became low/medium level. Chasing down V-1’s and Ground-Attack.
17
posted on
12/27/2013 8:58:59 AM PST
by
Tallguy
(between taglines...)
To: EveningStar; Paleo Conservative
18
posted on
12/27/2013 9:03:53 AM PST
by
Rodamala
To: rusty schucklefurd
Yes, I guess it was the Navy’s version of the Spitfire. You know, no service will adopt another service’s airplane as is.
19
posted on
12/27/2013 9:09:46 AM PST
by
expat2
To: expat2
“You know, no service will adopt another services airplane as is.”
The corrosive effects of sea water are an important difference, as is the higher humidity and the prospects for degradation of electronics.
Landing on an aircraft carrier is not trivial thing. Approach & landing speeds have to be lower. The landing gear must be able to take the equivalent of the aircraft’s entire loaded weight being dropped from 10 - 12 ft. Do that with your average air force plane and you’ll trash it.
20
posted on
12/27/2013 9:28:40 AM PST
by
Tallguy
(between taglines...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson