Ray O'Hara wrote:
"Marta" wrote in message
...
;-))





the clipped wings were for faster low level flight.

That's not strictly true. The clipped wingtips allowed a faster roll rate.
The greater low altitude performance was provided by cropped impeller blades
on the supercharger.

Many "low altitude" Spitfires *did* have both modifcations, but the clipped
wingtips weren't actually necessary for low altitude work. The Mk.IX
Spitfires were originally issued to squadrons with standard superchargers.
Some batches were issued with cropped impeller blades and they became
unofficially designated "Mk.IXb". All of these aircraft were built with full
span wings.

The "IXb" designation has caused problems for historians and modellers as it
seems to imply that these aircraft had the "b"-type wing. This is not true.
All early Mk.IXs were built with the "c"-type wing. The confusion was later
cleared up with the introduction of the "e"-type wing. The unofficial
designation "Mk.IXb" was replaced by the official designation "LF.IXc"

Incidentally, the aircraft shown has the "e"-type wing. It could be a Mk.IX
or a Mk.XVI. The difference between the two was that the Mk.IX had a
Rolls-Royce Merlin engine while the Mk.XVI had a Packard Merlin. Some early
XVIs were built with a full rear fuselage while some late IXs were built
with a cutdown fuselage and bubble canopy. The presence of the bubble canopy
does not automatically denote a Mk.XVI..

However, given that TB675 was an LF.XVIe with a bubble canopy, and has an
earlier serial number than this aircraft, I would hazard a guess that TB995
is a late model F.IXe.

--
Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.