Seen On The Airfix Tribute Forum

[kitnut617]

Check this out, http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/...html&highlight=

[GTX]

Nice - has an invite been sent?

Regards,

Greg

[kitnut617]

Yes I invited him to join and post his models over here.  You should see his four engined Spitfire.

[Radish]

If it's a Jedi, why isn't it painted as such?

My Jedi Spitfire will be in appropriate colours and markings.
Eventually.  

[elmayerle]

an 'attacker' type fuselage and intakes with 'proper spitfire' wings

Hmm, I like this one.  'Twould look so "normal" at first glance.

Oh, one thought for the Yak-17/-17/-23 style installation, perhaps a Beryl instead of a Power Jets unit to keep cross-section down?

[AeroplaneDriver]

Hardly, because it's using a horrible kit and at least the guy doing it has some basic knowledge of aerodynamics.

Very basic I'd say.  It's gonna need a lot of concrete in the nose to get off the ground.  

But....it DOES look nice!    

[kitnut617]

Hardly, because it's using a horrible kit and at least the guy doing it has some basic knowledge of aerodynamics.

Very basic I'd say.  It's gonna need a lot of concrete in the nose to get off the ground.  

But....it DOES look nice!  

I was going to say 'Blue Circle' Spit

[Allan]

Yes, rough and ready to be sure, but none the less very interesting

four engine Spit--that I just have to see!

Allan in Canberra

[Tojo633]

All

The simplest and cleanest design option would require the fuselage to remain as narrow as possible to reduce drag co-efficients etc. So a nose engine intake design location would be the best option, but what then.... what would the knock on effects be for the rest of the airframe??
Spitfire fuselage was pretty hollow so a rear exhaust is possible.

Sandy

[AeroplaneDriver]

All

The simplest and cleanest design option would require the fuselage to remain as narrow as possible to reduce drag co-efficients etc. So a nose engine intake design location would be the best option, but what then.... what would the knock on effects be for the rest of the airframe??
Spitfire fuselage was pretty hollow so a rear exhaust is possible.

Sandy

THe Spit cockpit is so tight that a nose intake would make it hard to get decent ariflow routed back to the compressor.  I think moving the 'pit forward and the wing back a bit to get the center of lift/center of gravity issues sorted out would be a good option.  

Still...the more I look at this build the more I like it.  It just wouldnt fly as built.

[Tojo633]

MMMMM

cockpit forward engine back.... sounds like the Attacker and all its relatives

I think we need to ponder this some more but it looks like there is not really a viable solution to this one.

Pondered this at lunchtime and sketched a possible solution, consider nose engine location as in the Yak 23, combine it with a stretched nose or more elongated nose, tricycle nose undercarriage configuration, low back rear fuselage and bubble canopy as in the spitfire 16s.

will see what I can dig out

Sandy

[Excalibur]

awesome build, I've invited him over as well as he didn't quite get kitnuts sense of humour *L*

Here's the link to the same guys 4 engine Spit
http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/.../about6582.html

[Brian da Basher]

The cut-out he made in the elevator to accomodate that rear contra-prop is sheer genius!

Brian da Basher

[Mossie]

Vickers Valiant MRS.2, in winter camo and toting Martels.  Based on a real world proposal to convert Valiants in to long range anti ship aircraft.
http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=27611&start=25

[NARSES2]

That is very nice. Makes you realise how big Martel was