Best of the Battle of Britain
In this corner, the Vickers Supermarine Spitfire; across the ring, the Hawker Hurricane. Which is the more valuable restoration?
- By John Fleischman
- Air & Space magazine, March 2008
This Spitfire had it all.
It was a Mark Vc, the distillation of everything the Royal Air Force had learned in the desperate days of the Battle of Britain. "This is the gold standard," Martin Henocq tells me.
"This is the one everyone wants."
Henocq is the shop foreman at Historic Flying Limited in Duxford, England, a private restoration outfit that specializes in raising highly desirable Supermarine Spitfires from the dead. As Henocq sketched out the beauties of this example, I suddenly wanted to sit in the cockpit—badly.
The object of my lust was a Spitfire with the airframe number JG891. It had returned to England in 1999, 56 years after it was shipped to the Royal Air Force's fleet in North Africa. En route, the crated Spitfire was diverted to an assignment with the Royal Australian Air Force. In 1944, JG891 attempted a landing on a wet jungle airstrip in the Solomon Islands, ran off the far end, and flipped. Thirty years later, a New Zealand flying enthusiast hauled the wrecked fighter to his home for a back yard restoration. He never quite finished. Twenty-five years after that, Historic Flying imported the fuselage, most of the wings, and a wild miscellany of leftover parts. The restoration shop had the resources, skills, and special wing jigs required to make JG891 whole again.
It's the wings that separate the amateurs from the professionals, says Henocq. "Everyone does the fuselage. They like having it there in the shop so they can sit in the cockpit and think they're nearly there, nearly done with the project, and nearly ready to fly. They'll say it's almost done but it's never done."
Historic Flying got its start in the late 1980s, when the Royal Air Force was persuaded to replace many of its deteriorating "gate guardians"—surplus Spitfires stuck on poles at air bases—with fiberglass replicas. The gate guardians were trucked away for reconstruction as museum pieces or flying restorations.
The golden era of the gate guardians is over, though. "We're running out of good airplanes to do," says Henocq. These days, available Spitfires are often abandoned private restorations, ex-gate guardians from air forces in faraway lands, and crashed aircraft back for a second or third rebuild. "Finding customers doesn't seem to be the problem," says Henocq. "It's the supply."
Single Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »





Comments (5)
As a 52 year old Brit, with a WW2 father who was in the RAF, who wouldn't know about the Battle and the mythology of the Spit being better than Willy Messerschmidt's Bf109, etc., Radar, Rolls Royce Merlin, ad nauseum. Very good article. I have always wondered why 8 .303 Colt Brownings became the pre-WW2 British standard. I always assumed 2 then 4 then maybe 6, or hey, whatabout 8 as the pilot can't lean out and clear jams anymore. Besides the Air Ministry didn't like the idea of cannon, just not sporting Old Boy; just like the Army didn't like sub-machine guns. Of course, people like Douglas Bader and Stanford Tuck quickly found that even eight .303s didn't really cut it. Goering is quoted as saying that the cal .50" Browning was why the Luftwaffe couldn't hold it against all the B-17s daytime. I'm not sure about that the Finns knocked off that design for their Brewster Buffaloes!
Still loved the article - I for one am glad that Fighter Command had all the Hurribirds (or was it Hurry Backs?) and Spitfires at Dowding's disposal come the Fall of France.
About 12 years ago I had the chance to pay £1200 for a 20 minute flight from Panshanger in the back of a two-seat Spit. Did I? Well let's just say I still feel wistful, but did enjoy the article.
Posted by Edward Lisney on April 25,2008 | 04:33 PM
Has no-one else remarked on the fact that the cover photo (also on p6 of this article, above) is not a 'real' Spitfire at all - it's the modern Australian 'kit build' 3/4 scale one, which looks quite good from a distance, but has many very obvious differences from the real thing, one being a modern engine which doesn't sound a bit like a Merlin...
Posted by Dave Evans on May 6,2008 | 11:49 AM
Beverley Shenstone, a Canadian aerodynamicist, was perhaps the youngest member of the Spitfire design/engineering team. R.J.Mitchell reputedly did not take kindly to adice from such a young and inexperienced theoretician (see AEROPLANE,July 2008, P.57). The article above seems to misquote Shenstone re the He70 elliptical wing. The WIKIPEDIA aricle on Spitfire has Shenstone arguing that the He70 elliptical wing was not the basis for the wing design of the Spitfire. Furthermore, there were other aircraft makes with elliptical wings, so Heinkel's was neither original nor unique.
Posted by J. Fred Brailey on July 9,2008 | 07:24 PM
Sorry Dave,
Yourlooking at an actual Spit Mark Vb done in Polish colors of BM144. Circa 1942 - 1944.
The kit you speak of yes,indeed is very different from the photo and sound. Also it is approx 80% not 3/4 as mentioned.
You have the full meal deal here in the pic.
R.J.
Posted by R.J. on August 4,2008 | 08:02 PM
An excellent article, much appreciated.
It has been my 'opinion' for over 50 years, that Mitchell and or Shenstone were overawed by the performance of the HE-70, to the point where one or both of them decided to employ an elliptical type wing in the Supermarine Type 300, F.37/34 design submission.
Posted by J.C.S. on December 31,2012 | 06:19 AM