Jump to content
Jan-Arie

What's the difference between a mk IXc and a Mk XVIe Spitfire

Recommended Posts

Good evening I have a question, I was looking at Spitfire TB 885 that is flown in the Netherlands is it correct that this is a high back version?
Is there any body who can tell me what the difference is between the Mk IXc  and the LF Mk XVIe that the TB 885 is.
Because when I look at the photo's I can't detect much differences between the two but i'm sure there are searched google but couldn't find any satisfying answers.

Wanted to know if it's possible to use the Tamiya 1/32 MK XIc for that if the differences aren't to big...

Jan-Arie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is who made the engine.  Mk IX had a Rolls-Royce Merlin, Mk XVI a Packard Merlin.  There were subtle differences in the cowlings and some other details, but basically the IX and XVI were the same airframe.  They even had the same Supermarine type number (361).  If you're going to use a Tamiya Mk IX for a XVI, just don't buy aftermarket rocker covers with a "Rolls-Royce" legend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The engine is an important difference, but the guns are also different between a Mk IXc and a Mk XVIe.  The Mk IXc has the C wing, with 1 x 20mm cannon and 2 x .303in Browning machine guns each side.  The Mk XVIe has the E wing with 1 x 20mm cannon and  x .5in Browning machine gun each side, with the machine gun being mounted just inboard of the cannon.  This is probably the most important visual difference between the 2 planes.  Check out the 5th reply here.

 

https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/differences-between-spitfire-mk-ixc-ixe.15778/

 

Cheers,

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jennings Heilig said:

The short answer is: the engine.  The Mk.XIV had the Packard Merlin, and (AFAIK) all of them had the slightly bulged upper cowling.  The 'c' vs. 'e' is referencing the wing armament.

 

4 hours ago, Dpgsbody55 said:

The engine is an important difference, but the guns are also different between a Mk IXc and a Mk XVIe.  The Mk IXc has the C wing, with 1 x 20mm cannon and 2 x .303in Browning machine guns each side.  The Mk XVIe has the E wing with 1 x 20mm cannon and  x .5in Browning machine gun each side, with the machine gun being mounted just inboard of the cannon.  This is probably the most important visual difference between the 2 planes.  Check out the 5th reply here.

 

https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/differences-between-spitfire-mk-ixc-ixe.15778/

 

Cheers,

Michael

Apologies, I omitted to address the "c" and "e" suffixes in your query, Jennings and t'other Michael are quite correct that it denoted the wing configuration.  But the only thing that differentiated the mark numbers was the engine: there were IXc s and IXe s.  I don't think there was ever a XVIc variant - anyone know otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, is it windy yet? said:

You will need different 1:32 scale tools to service the engine........

 

Like the tools that came with the Packard Merlin engines on the Mk III Lancaster, much sought after by ground crews rather than the Mk I Merlin engined set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could find the article - I think it may have been in Air & Space Magazine a few years ago.  When Packard got their pattern engines from RR ahead of starting production in Detroit, their engineers told RR they couldn't produce the engine as RR had done.  RR engineers assumed that was because of the extremely tight tolerances that RR used for them.  In fact it was the opposite.  Packard's more modern, automated production methods demanded *much* tighter tolerances on everything that what RR's more hand built production methods could accomplish!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mozart said:

Like the tools that came with the Packard Merlin engines on the Mk III Lancaster, much sought after by ground crews rather than the Mk I Merlin engined set.

I don't have the reference to hand at the moment but I read that it was to do with the bolts and nut types/sizes.

US/Whitworth/Imperial etc.

I recall the US built engines used a different type so had to have different tools from the British built version.

 

EDIT:

Just found the reference as regards the Merlin 266 manufactured in the US and fitted in the MkXVI

"The Packard engine was manufactured to American measurements which made it different enough from it's Rolls-Royce counterpart to require separate servicing tools and spare parts".

A bit like US -v-Imperial gallons etc.

Edited by PhilB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Jennings Heilig said:

Huh?  Are there Imperial inches and American inches?  

British Standard and Whitworth fasteners were different than US (not sure if SAE was around yet here) standard ones.  Bolt head sizes and thread profiles were not compatible or interchangeable.  Plus, I believe the British method for identifying wrench sizes was tied to the bolt diameter vs. the US method of sizing the wrench to the distance across the flats of the bolt head or nut.  So a 5/8" wrench means something different depending on which side of the pond one is on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...