Spitfire Rebuild.

[BBdave]

It's a technicality Dave. It's called a frame 'whichever one the original data plate is attached to (and I can never remember)' rebuild. By retaining that original plate the aeroplane retains the identity of the original.I've seen N3200 in the flesh and they did a beautiful job of it. It's a shame that the programme makers didn't do the same

Cheers

Steve

This practice was stopped with military vehicles years ago specially (restoration) land rovers to avoid tax. Not knocking the build a fantastic outcome but I'd like to have seen more on the construction side of things (even that vet bloke does a better job) but that's my interest.

I'll probably be shot for this being a Lincolnshire lad myself but I do find Guy Martin annoyingly OTT .

I was surprised though that when the real one crash landed that the Germans didn't take it away to study it.

Dave

[Guest]

He should stick to racing bikes. I really don't think his presentations skills lend themselves to serious TV documentaries!!

(......and I live in Lincolnshire!)

[Vaughan]

I echo all that has been said. A very disappointing programme an hour and a half with ads every five minutes, thank god for Tivo boxes. Why oh Why did they use Guy Martin as a presenter. For a start I couldn't understand what he was saying half the time and when I could it was of no importance anyway. When John Sergeant presented the programme about the Lancaster Bomber at least he was far more creditable.

[Dave W]

It was still better than watching 'X factor,Britains got no talent,Towie or any of the multitude of shite programs that are on these days.

[Guest]

Yes, but, in all fairness, that isn't setting the bar very high Dave!!!

[stona]

Martin would have been good at presenting more of the engineering side of the restoration, he does have an empathy for that kind of nuts 'n' bolts stuff.

The programme was completely unfocused and didn't seem to know what it was trying to say. I think they probably thought a documentary about the restoration would have less attraction to the man on the Clapham omnibus than a vague and dithering affair that just regurgitated a lot of the old nonsense about the Spitfire and the battle of Britain. I reckon they only mentioned Stephenson because it meant they could also mention Bader and the Queen, and drag his two daughters in for a bit of painfully staged 'human interest'. Aside from that anyone could have been flying the aircraft when it was lost. It was dire.

After an hour and a half I had not learnt anything I didn't already know and could point to many, many things that the programme got wrong. It's inexcusable and just reflects the sort of sloppy journalism and programme making we have inflicted upon us in these days of cheap TV filling hundreds of channels.

BTW what the hell has a .50 calibre Browning got to do with a Spitfire Mk I ? Maybe it was the only machine gun the producers could get their hands on. They'd have been better off showing the real problem, how little damage the .303 did, particularly against an armoured target.

The Germans already had a couple of Spitfires by the time this one went down, and in more flyable condition.

Cheers

Steve

[Guest]

To be honest I was really surprised at the lack of damage to the car. I expected it to be much more of a mess for the size of the rounds used. There again the first few bursts seemed to miss completely but the holes that were made in the car seemed to be surprisingly small to me. I guess only a single gun looks a lot weaker than a full burst and it only takes one round in the right place to bring down an enemy aircraft.

[BBdave]

To be honest on soft skin the .50 won't do much, rounds go straight through they should have shown what it could do to an engine block or a piece of 1" steel plate but as has been said why not the 303s.

I know Guy is a mechanic but for what he did build wise Dan snow would have done a better job on the history side of things. I am not a big Spit. Fan (hurricane for me) but still interested how they were put together and even who was funding it etc.

[Dave W]

They mentioned that the Spitfire was latter fitted with bigger guns.I didn't think they meant the mk1.Even so,They didn't even mention the 20mm cannon.Which was tried out on some mk1s and fitted as standard to latter mk's after they'd sorted some early problems with the weapon.That would have made a bigger mess of the BMW.Especially with explosive tipped rounds.Would have neededa more substantial mount than the .5's tripod though!.

[Paul Davies]

I think this programme was made for entertainment and not aimed at people like yourselves that already know a lot about the subject.

[stona]

I think this programme was made for entertainment and not aimed at people like yourselves that already know a lot about the subject.

I think so too. But there is still no excuse for the many factual errors.

As regards the .50 calibre I think it was mentioned that the Spitfire was 'up gunned' with the weapon, but even this is not strictly true. The objective was always to get cannon fitted to British fighters. As Dave says some Mk Is were fitted with two 20mm cannon in the spring of 1940. 19 Squadron were the guinea pigs.

It wasn't until after the BoB, in November 1940, that a more successful cannon installation was developed and a compromise armament of two cannon and four .303 machine guns was fitted to the Spitfire IBs of 92 Squadron. This armament was to equip the vast majority of Spitfires built.

The .50 calibre is a bit of a red herring and didn't become part of the Spitfire's standard armament until late 1944. As I said, what the hell has that got to do with a Spitfire Mk I? It just made for what the producers thought was good entertainment, shooting a .50 calibre Browning at a German car in a rather pointless demonstration of the fact that bullets make holes in things. A demonstration of a 20mm cannon blowing things to bits might have got me watching

Cheers

Steve

[ojays]

Another on this afternoon 'The hawker Hurricane' Movies For men channel 48 free-view . 16:25pm ---17:10pm.