The Floatplane Spitfires
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 07. 2024
- The Spitfire was kind of the British "Go To" aircraft practically whenever a requirement came up.
And that included several attempts to convert the type into a floatplane fighter.
Suggested Reading:
Spitfire The History Of A Legend - amzn.to/3yCEtno
Sources for this video can be found at the relevant article on:
militarymatters.online/
If you like this content please consider buying me a coffee or else supporting me at Patreon:
ko-fi.com/ednashmilitarymatters
/ ednash
Want another way to help support this channel? Maybe consider buying my book on my time fighting ISIS:
amzn.to/3preYyO - Věda a technologie
I'd be willing to bet that a pilot assigned to fly Hurricanes off of freighters over the North Atlantic would gave loved to have a set of floats available
Geeze. I hadn't thought of that. Talk about a match made in heaven! CAM and MAC with floatplane Hurries. It's . . . genius. Nice thought.
Given the usual sea state of the North Atlantic, I suspect the floats wouldn't have made much difference to a belly landing... could have even made it worse
That's just wrong...
I would rather try and land a parachute on a ship's deck.
They never lost a pilot using thr CAM System
I always feel a pang of pity at the thought of aircraft designers who, having diligently wrung every ounce of speed and agility they can from their available material and intellectual resources, then hear that someone has ordered their sleek creations fitted with floats.
Yes, that´s quite the fitting comparison.
Same for the Zero designers, they made an excellent carrier fighter, and then someone fitted it with floats and made a sitting duck.
Hmm, 100% landlubber are ye'? ;-)
That may be but a lot of what made Supermarine a success was the Schneider trophy Seaplanes and thats where the designer developed his ideas for the Spit. The Gryphon with contra prop. engine version would have been a good bet.
As might the single center line float and smaller outrigger floats.
On the US side, in addition to a floatplane variant of the Wildcat, there was also a floatplane prototype of the C-47 that was well liked by its crews. This didn't go anywhere as the PBY Catalina was already filling the same role
Some poor English aero engineer's question: How many times do I have to drive a wooden stake into the heart of the Spitfire floatplane concept? It JUST won't die! :LOL:
A dear friend, Sqdn Ldr Ian Shand, sadly now passed away, was with 237 Rhodesia Sqdn in Egypt when the great bitter lake experiments were under way. Being a Spitfire pilot himself he was very interested in this and using a gun camera from a wrecked aircraft filmed some of the trials. In the early 90's he put all this cine film onto VHS tape and I have the copies here. The footage is surprisingly good but of course not that easy to get onto social media! Ian continued with the campaign up Italy and ended up as the highest decorated Rhodesian of the war. His other achievements were the laying out of Thornhill air base for the EATS set up and also was credited with the idea for forming Lake Kariba, this while serving as a land extension officer before the start of the war.
If you can please do upload them!!
hardpoint beer barrels, cheers
Poor Blackburn Roc, getting another kicking from Ed.
The Spitfire is also the most beautiful work of art of all time …Thank you R J Mitchell..
No, the Mustang
Eh
@@robmclaughjr Wrong again. Corsair… then the Sea Fury
No the Lotus 25 that Jim Clark drove holds that spot, but it is certainly a creditable effort.
@JZ's BFF nope
All the way through this vid I was thinking "but what about the under-wing radiators?" :D
Water going through the radiators is fine. It's the engine air intake that you need to keep water out of.
You might be thinking of radials, where the intake and cooling are in the same place.
@@anzaca1 Still lotsa' radial floatplanes - aren't there? ;-)
I mean, if you're concerned about the floats mounting where the radiators would be, it's visible right at 3:16 lol.
@@dallesamllhals9161 That's because radials are more reliable, due to the lack of a radiator. Perfect for long distance.
But radial seaplanes etc always put the engines forward of the floats/up high.
@@anzaca1 No Shit!? Thanks for telling me...
I remember the children book ,Biggles in the Baltic ( written by Capt W.E. Johns in 1940) when I was 9, about a secret squadron made up of S 6 float planes operating from a secret base attacking the Nazis.
I wonder if the RAF read the book ?
Biggles Hits the Trail ..still my favourite
EDIT: I'm a xennial :-O
First 'proper' book (ie, far more text than pictures) I ever read was a copy of *Biggles in the South Seas* which a lass who worked for my grandpa and had been conned into babysitting me gave me to shut me up. (Well, she'd done the job previously so....). I was 7. Never heard of Biggles 'til then, never thought of reading such a 'tough' book (I liked dinosaur books with pictures and could bore for Britain on the subject by then) ...............
That was it.
I was hooked.
I owe 'Captain' WE Johns a massive debt of thanks.
@@Farweasel
G'day,
With me, it was
Biggles and the Camel Squadron... Or some such. I was 6, in 1967.
The effect was deep and lasting.
Backtrack me to my Videos, or title search YT for,
"National Transportation Museum ; Visiting My First Aeroplane !"
I made the pilgrimage 2 days ago, to visit what took me for my first Solo, in 1978, when I was 17.
An earlier Video I posted (11 years ago) was a Slide-show from old Photos, and magazine articles , it's titled,
"The 8-Hp, 1975, Red Baron Skycraft Scout ; World's 1st Legal Minimum Aircraft !"
I think I ended the new Video with the observation,
"Once a Biggles Fanatic
Always a Biggles Fanatic...!"
And, when one outgrows reading W.E. Johns, then one takes up Nevil Shute (!)
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
I read that one as well! But the only thing I remember was that one of the pilots (certainly an Australian) had nicknamed his plane "Willie-Willie".
@@WarblesOnALot Hell no - Why read Neville Shute when you can read Terry Pratchett.
It was probably 'The Camels are coming' ........... Which causes several search engines to blank the search for some reason these days.
Top video about what look like the first steps for microlight/ultralight flying in Australia BTW.
Any plane is a floatplane if the pilot is brave enough.
Or desperate enough.
I love the era of float plane racers, these planes are all so sleek and look amazing. I wonder if Italy ever came up with a similar idea considering their enthusiasm and world speed record in the Macchi MC72 of 440+mph.
Sooo... Floatfire?
-Spit- Splashfire.
Spitwater
Spittoon
Seems like just the sort of aircraft that Biggles and his mates would have flown in some grand aerial adventure!
Yet another superb posting Ed, keep em coming matey.
Seaplane fighters are a concept I personally love. Reminds me of a cartoon show I watched as a kid called Tailspin. I have loved Seaplanes ever since. Excellent video as always. Cheers mate!
Ditto. That show shaped my childhood and gave me a good love of aviation.
I absolutely love the Spitfire, and this a such a good idea! Great Video!
Ah! They should have used a Boulton Paul Defiant to convert ...Each float could hold a turret and ...
Hahaha!
Hallelujah Ed ! I actually knew about the floatplane Spitfires ! That's made my day ! 😁😁😁
I'm always amazed at the number of times that float conversions although slower than land based fighters seem to be just as maneuverable.
Floats can actually improve maneuverability, in some ways, by functioning as airbrakes and allowing higher power settings without an increase in speed. Anyone who has flown into a small wilderness lake can attest to this.
Although the Spitfire was developed from some wonderful floatplane designs, without which, it might never have existed, I feel that it had evolved to a point that speed and manoeuvrability was it's key to success. Adding large floats and the fairing that held them, could only impair it's performance in that respect, and this a personal comment - it looked ugly and cumbersome! Super interesting video - thank you for your continuing great content.
When I first saw the title, I was reminded of the "Rufe" (WW2 Allied Codename) which was a floatplane version of the Zero. It couldn't do much since the Zero was borderline underpowered (hence why it didn't have any protective features that most Allied fighters had) the addition of the Weight And the Drag killed the performance! Fact is, that some aircraft designed from the ground up by the Japanese Aircraft Companies actually could to some degree outperform the Rufe!!!
The N1K floatplane fighter turned into one of the premier what if" planes of the war: the N1K2J. The N1K was probably superior to either older floatplane design.
@@WildBillCox13 Yeah, it had a powerful engine, and it looks like the floats and the struts for the floats were very streamlined!
However, the Japanese had issues with primer for aluminum, which would have caused even greater issues with saltwater corrosion than the Floatspits had....
I think the finest morale role was shipping beer, but then, I suppose it's fighting prowess merits mention.. Beautiful, effective and powerful.
Ahhhh yes, the memefire mark I, mark III, mark Vb and mark IX (kind of a shame that they didn't experiment with griffon spitfires). Can't wait untill it's suggested to developers of Warthunder. Would be wonderful to see them in that thing to make japaneese and german float fighters with their superior speed.
Wonderfull episode Ed!
I wonder how it would have been aganist the a6m zero in the pacfic
About as well as the float plane version of the A6M against F6F Hellcats. ("Sitting duck"? You bet!)
@@Otokichi786 the Rufe had a couple structural changes to accommodate the float so it wasn’t a true zero but more of an inbred cousin
Floatplane Spit vs Rufe would have been interesting
Against the Rufe floatplane variant of the A6M? Interesting.
You're a master of digging up these gems Ed. Never heard of this variant but I'd love to own one (and be living in the Bahamas)
Well, I heard of it, and seen one, count them one, photo.
All these photos are new to me.
Wonderful Video.
Thanks
I remember my friend had a model kit floatplane spitfire in the seventies. We both thought it was fantastic. Now I know the real story of the floatplane versions.
Enjoyed your video so I gave it a Thumbs Up
Thanks for vid. Never knew anything about these abnormalies.
I knew that a few were made... it's a pity that we didn't have some available Re mid atlantic .. might even have been able to reuse some.. would beat doing a hurricat job any day..
Agreed.
@@WildBillCox13 - Would the fitting of floats have not made a catapult launch untenable?
'Pilot Lurch, report to your contraption & we'll have another go; just try to keep both floats with you this time'. : )
A few Supermarine floatplanes?
@@loddude5706 Looking at pictures of CAM ships at the moment. Looks like the plane rides a trolley under the fuselage and the gear hangs down to either side. See what you think: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CAM_ship_%28catapult_armed_merchant_ship%29
@@WildBillCox13 - Yep, see what you mean. Still looks dodgy, & could a Hurri on floats actually catch a startled & flat-out Condor?
As far as I know the Japanese Rufe was the only floatplane fighter to see widespread service
I wonder if the Spit could have had improved performance with a single float, but the British never were keen on single float seaplanes. As an aside, the Germans also tried out the Arado 196 as a single float seaplane, but also settled on twin floats. The French and Italians went the same way, while the Americans went single float and the Japanese went with both. I'd be curious to know why the Pacific seemed to be more suitable for single floats than European waters.
@@mikearmstrong8483 Twin floats have supirior seakeeping and handling on the water. European waters, in general, are much rougher then the ones found in the PTO. Therfore, using Single foats and using there advantages made a lot more sence there.
@@mikearmstrong8483 i think it was so the catapults on ships had been designed to handle single float aircraft such as the Kittiwake
@@shawnmiller4781
The Kittiwake was a flying boat rather than a floatplane. Different catapult design. It came in the 1920s, but the British have pretty consistently stayed with twin float seaplanes since early in WWI, with the Short Gurnard and Mussel of 1930 being notable exceptions. But I commend your knowledge on the topic; the Kittiwake is rather obscure.
@@mikearmstrong8483 My bad….I meant the OS2U Kingfisher.
Is it too late to blame the autocorrect on this phone?
Japanese and British: build a floatplane version of fighters for island service,
U.S.: build a proper airfield on the island.
A very good informative video on a plane I thought was just a drawing board concept !
Very interesting and informative video. I had no idea that the RAF converted any Spitfires to float planes.
Man that bird looks good no matter what you do to her. Same thing done to say the P-47 would have resulted in a lumbering Walrus on skis.
Maybe the British would have called it “The Floating Milk Bottle”?
@@mo07r1 I'd say so, it most certainly wouldn't have left the water for beaching itself, like said milk bottle 😄😅
THANKS ED NASH FROM AN OLD NAVY FLYING SHOE🇺🇸
Looks like it flew straight out of Studio Ghibli's Porco Rosso.
So true! He-he-he...
Alternate scenario here. If they're sent to Pacific specifically against a6m-2ns, in significant numbers, then they would've made mincemeat out of the rufes
Reason for that is 1, the floats of those rufes drastically cut their flight performance by half (got that from history Channel) & 2, speed of those *"floaty brits"* (yeah I just coined that; "floaty spits" if you prefer it better) are only reduced by 40mph from stock Mk-v's 364mph but maneuverability is still retained; but performance from Mk-ix's, even better
Interesting thanks. I am currently building a Brengun 1:72 floatplane Spitfire.
Fascinating
Interestingly, the Japanese Sieran floatplane carried by submarine aircraft carriers used a similar pylon arrangement for mounting the floats with an additional feature. The floats could be removed so the aircraft could be stowed in a special pressure vessel on the deck. So the engines could be maintained at normal operating temperature for quick launching, hot oil was circulated through the engines when stowed.
The Hurricane never gets as much love as it deserves next to the Spitfire. Almost as good in most things, and better in few. But how can you truly compare something made to dance in the sky, and a taxi with wings?
This is going to be good. I’ll watch it later. M.
It was great, thank you. M.
What I'd like to know is, why did the British never even seem to even consider a floatplane fighter for use on the CAM ships?
When you're flying against Fw 200s, it doesn't really matter if the floats reduce the fighter's performance. It's not as if a 4-engine bomber is going to be able to dogfight with you. And a floatplane seems like an obviously better solution than requiring the pilot to bail out and let his fighter crash into the ocean.
The invasion of Norway 1:05 , 9th of April 1940, not third. Otherwise, an excellent video. Cheers.
Hawker thought the idea of a floatplane Hurricane dubious? And yet they were willing to try out a Hurricane with a jettisonable 2nd wing. Got to wonder about the thought processes there.
not really, since the Slip wing was a Hillson idea, not Hawkers, they were just allocated a war weary Hurricane for testing.
@@ThePsiclone
Valid point. I'd forgotten that detail.
I read some pretty bad article on the plane just based on this comment; was the idea to make a Hurricane that could climb faster (probably in air raid response role)?
@@derrickstorm6976
Yep, basically. Climb like a biplane, then jettison a wing and have monoplane speed. It worked in testing, but wasn't feasible for service; it was complicated and resource intensive, and by the time it was considered for production the Battle of Britain was over and the need for fast climbing interceptors for home defense was no longer there.
@@derrickstorm6976
"Ed Nash's Military Matters" has a decent video on the Hillson biplane Hurricane.
The Hurricane was libel to water damage. So they thought it would be better to build the Hawker Sea Hurricane instead.
This interesting because, as we know, the Japanese did a floatplane version of the Zero with some 327 being made.
Along the same lines Ed I'd like to see you do a video on the convair sea dart
The Spit's ancestors had floats, so I'd have thought Supermarine would have had more success.
Insert random thought about turret fighters.
Imagine a shinden with a hemispherical turret as the entire nose.
Maybe the Miles M20 could have been a more suitable candidate for this conversion if it had been persued earlier.
I was thinking about floatplane Spitfires several hours ago and now I see this video that was released nine hours ago... spooky coincidence lol.
That would be an interesting air combat between Spitfire and Kawanishi N1K1 Kjófú 'Rex' floatplanes. Just like a scene from a dieselpunk movie... :D
The irony is of course that the Spit was a direct descendant of the Schneider Trophy planes yet couldn't make it as a floatplane fighter.
That shot at 0:52 is not actually a pre-war Supermarine racer but a modern visual re-creation of the S.5 in the mid 1972, G-BDDF, operated by Leisure Sport. Although it looked the part it has a completely different structure and was powered by a 210 hp Continental
I dunno how they would find that the float equipped Spits "maintained the maneuverability of the original fighter" that sounds like a lot of bunk lol. Maybe they were just enthusiastic in writing their report.
Many an Airfix kit can be given a balsa wood floats upgrade to increase your collection of rarer ww1/2 float planes variants.
I wonder whether perhaps the Mk.V floatplane was the first Spit with a four blader. Or did the Speed Spitfire record attempt aircraft have one?
WOW!!! I WANT THIS PLANE!!! 🤩
I always wondered why aircraft like this were not used to go after German MPA in the Atlantic or Pacific before escort carriers.
The Japanese did well with this idea. A large central float with small wingtip floats...
Similarily, Nakajima built a floatplane version of the A6M2-N Zero, the Allies called ''RUFE.''
Impressive how fast they were.
And they are the prettiest floatplanes I think I have ever seen.
But I have never understood adding floatplanes to fighters (like the Japanese Zero).
There is no way they can take on front line fighters.
And even long-range fighters (like the bf-110) probably would be difficult to shoot down.
Plus, their short range precludes using them for reconnaissance.
So, other then taking on lumbering, unescorted, long range bombers/seaplanes?
I am not sure the purpose they would fulfill.
Anyway, thank you for this, Ed.
I knew of them - though vaguely.
So I still found this informative and interesting.
☮
"The floatplane Spitfire seemed to retain the manoeverabilty of the original fighter"
This just boggles my mind - when you think of the care and attention that went into fabricating as closely as possible the exact theoretical shape of the eliptical wing, how can shoving two massive canoes on the bottom of the wing have such a small effect? I will never understand aerodynamics.
To be fair i suppose its a similar to the podded underwing jet engines that came along a bit later - they were found to have minimal effect. These float planes just seem more extreme!
Its interesting to hear the floats didnt affect the mark 5's maneuverability too much, id of thought the floats would of increased wing loading to the point of a big increase in its turning circle
I guess you are aware that the Supermarine S5, you showed, was the Leisure Sport replica, and that you were interesting in comments about it.
🙏
"It'll never replace the Fokker DXXI." -Ilmari Juutilainen
Can you imagine the trouble that pilot would've been in had he jettisoned those beer kegs for combat?
It really just doesn't LOOK right, does it? Thanks for another informative dive into the backwaters of aviation history. Can't help feeling sorry for the designers, though: "They want us to make WHAT??!"
Never heard of these.
Anyone remember Paddy Payne flying one of these? 😁 I suppose the Mediterranean/Adriatic would have been a great place for floatplane fighters (if you've ever watched Porco Rosso).
Interesting
0:39 +1 Aaaaeh Beer ♥
5:30 Is that Winkle Brown driving?
Well the USN had success with their Curtis Seahawk. They must of had to deal with salt water corrosion as well I would think they would hose it down with fresh water but maybe fresh water is not easily available in hot climates.
they probably took steps to counter it (alloy choice, coatings etc) being designed and built that way, rather than just being a landplane conversion. Lets face it, the only way a Spitfire was ever expected to encounter salt water was if it ditched, at which point corrosion was the least of its problems. Also and by all means correct me if I'm wrong, but the Seahawks operated in the Pacific, which is slightly less salty.
Could a floaty Spitfire with a Crecy engine have been faster than the Macchi Castoldi MC 72 ?
It was never a fighter. it was an interceptor?
An interesting video as always.
I did experience some specific problems with audio and it's not the first time with one of your videos. This is the scenario; I watch CZcams videos on my desktop computer (always fine) and on my television via an AndroidTV box and that's where I experience problems watching your videos. The video is fine but the audio cuts out, dropping a second or two every 20 to 30 seconds; this makes your videos unwatchable there because it's your well-researched dialogue that makes your videos great to watch. I haven't noticed the same problem with videos from any other channel I watch and can only assume it has something to do with audio CODECs that cause your videos to be affected. I can watch them on my computer so not asking for a solution but thought you'd want to be made aware of this.
A single, central float with retractable outboard stabilisers might have worked better. The resulting plane could have been used by Atlantic convoys to attack German recon/bombers and to spot U-boats.
YES YES YES MORE FLOAT MORE BOATS WWHHOOOOO
Seaplane Spitfire → _Splashfire_ 😉
Cant wait for float version of harrier😂
They missed a beat by not calling it the Floatfire. :-)
I wonder what it's performance had been if they had done what the Japanese had done . Have one float with two small out riggers .
I can only look at this wearing welding goggles.
...Supermarine doing a full circle...
Please tell me you were inspired to make this video after seeing my PM models Spitfire floatplane unboxing a few weeks ago 😂
I didnt know you did one! Lol shouldve checked!
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters 😂 great minds think alike
Still a beautiful aircraft even with boots on 😂
Since Supermarine started with high speed seaplanes. This seams logical.
This idea seems to have floated quite longer than anticipated
OUCH!
curious to me that Europeans tended to do dual floats, and the Japanese and some others opted for the single center float with outriggers. I feel like the centerline float would be a better choice, but I could be wrong.
Outriggers would have more drag, but less weight (Three frontal areas vs two, but two of those three are much lighter). Since the Japanese were obsessed with weight savings, it would make sense that they would go with that model, plus it would keep the majority of the weight in the middle of the aircraft, which would help preserve handling as well.
@@sgthop Are you sure? the outriggers are smaller, and so you have 1 larger pontoon and 2 smaller ones, compared to 2 larger ones. and given the placement and length of the outriggers, they may not combine with the central pontoon teh same way 2 larger ones would. Drag is complex, and there is more than just "frontal area" going on.
The central pontoon with outriggers could also be lower drag as well.
Good point about the Japanese obsession with weight. When low on horsepower weight is important. And the Zero was definitely short on horsepower the entire war.
Side bar, why does no one talk about what a Zero could have been with a proper engine with more horsepower? People speculate on so many other things, but never that.
@@SoloRenegade While yes, it's not so straight forward as pure frontal area, more area exposed to the wind is going to generally have more drag. The Cd of a float is generally going to be decent, so looking at that frontal area is a pretty good way of making a rough estimate.
Another point is that centerline float designs are much easier to operate off of ships, which the float Zero did.
@@sgthop "more area exposed to the wind is going to generally have more drag" in general, yes, but not always true. It depends upon when you put that drag into play in relation to the rest of the aircraft (position fore/aft on the aircraft). If you study drag in enough detail, you'll learn of aircraft where more frontal area was added strategically in multiple places to reduce overall drag and increase speed (NASA's F-8 Crusader is a case example).
Another example of frontal area not holding up is wire bracing, such as on WW1 biplanes. You can replace a thin wire cable with a rather large aerodynamically shaped strut for the same total drag. The frontal areas is massively increased, but at no drag penalty, and possibly resulting in a drag reduction depending upon how big the strut really needed to be.
@@SoloRenegade Yes, those are some examples, however they don't really apply here. Like I said, it's just a rough estimation anyways, considering similar design philosophies between the A6M2-N and this Spitfire, and likely similar design philosophies between other contemporary, equivalent aircraft, not ultra-cutting edge scientific research aircraft or differences in technology.
We have a pretty decent baseline from the video. The Mk.V Spit lost 40mph from its float conversion, whereas the the A6M2-N had a 61mph speed penalty over the A6M2. Considering the fact that the Spitfire flies at a higher speed, and as drag increases with the square of speed, it's pretty obvious that the Spitfire had a less draggy design.
It would be interesting to know if they ever considered a single central float with outriggers.
At first thought that would be simpler and more aerodynamic.
wasn't the spit initially a record breaking float plane?
It evolved out of a series of Schneider Trophy winners, yes.
@@ericstromberg9608 and what a universally revered plane it was .. and those RR boys know how to make a motor
1:06 3rd of April 1940, you say?
Yep, misread the script somehow *sigh*
Blame wikipedia ;-) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_campaign#German_invasion
There is a model of this if you can find it. Here is a review of the kit 13mins. czcams.com/video/EJkxpLBpHbk/video.html
I remember that video. That poor kit needs an overhaul.
Trumpeter do a 1/24 version.
Except the Hurricane - which was a sink-plane.
Ah yes this. In theory interesting but not quite practical for a Warbird.
Imagine a P-40E with floats.
Might need a periscope, too.
:)
Another great “what if” scenario; floaty Spitfires and a milk cow submarine operating like soggy salty SAS or (Super)Marine Raiders inside enemy lines.