On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 20:52:34 GMT, Air Commodore Guy Alcala, Director
of Fighter Operations wrote:

At the rate you're going I'd better begin, before you retire and take over from Freeman at MAP. I
shall miss your sagacity, judiciousness, dare I say genius, that has made my own job immeasurably
easier. The country owes you a debt of gratitude that it can never repay. I remain, Sir, your most
humble and obedient servant.

I'm only holding this Production job down until I can replace
Coningham in 2 TAF, which will let me play with all those new toys I'm
producing for his command meanwhile. That's one of the reasons I want
the XIV and I'm also breathing fire down people's necks to get the
long-nacelled Meteor III available ASAP.

P.S. Are the rumors correct that AM Hill is going to be promoted from AOC 12 Group to AOCinC ADGB,
about mid-November? 12 Group will have to be the base for our long-range escort force, so we'll need
an AOC there who's fully committed to making long-range escort a reality.

Hill followed by Robb sounds good. You've already got some good Wing
leanders, like Lloyd Chadburn at Digby and Laddie Lucas at Coltishall.
Once the experiment is demonstrated to be successful, and the numbers
of LR Spits expand , 11 Group bases like Martlesham, Bradwell Bay,
Hornchurch and North Weald can be included. They'll be seeing more
combat than the 11 Group Spit squadrons, so you can count on the more
enthusiastic and aggresive squadron and wing commanders trying to get
in on the act.

My impression, and it isn't any more than that, but it is nonetheless
based on some limited research on 125 Wing which fielded the first
Spit XIV sqns in 2 TAF, is that 110 is representative of the
RB-serials delivered in late '43 and early '44.

Fine by me. The Mk. XIVs are for the continent anyway, as that 110 gives them about the same range
as the Mk. IX, but less endurance.

Initially my aim is to replace the Spit Vs in the 2 TAF squadrons with
short-ranged XIVs and IXs for the invasion period. I also want to
replace the LR Spit VIIIs and IXs in ADGB with Mustang III (LRs), with
the deleted rear fuselage tank in 1944. Hopefully this can begin in
the second half of 1944, and allow 2 TAF to re-equip with LR Spit
VIII/IXs and LR XIVs to allow strategic escort operations to take
place from 2 TAF bases in France and Belgium. By the second half of
1944, all Merlin-engined Spit production will be to an LR standard
(enlarged 96 gallon front tanks, 27 gallon wing tanks and 75 gallon
rear tank) so supply shouldn't be a problem.

The leanest time will be in spring 1944, as LR wastage will only be
replaceable from the Mk VIII production from the Eastleigh group as
Castle Bromwich converts, and operational wastage will be high. There
should be an easing during D-Day and Normandy, as the Germans move
back to France to face the tactical fighters, and Castle Bromwich
comes on stream. This should allow extensive re-equipment at the same
time as Mustangs become available. There should be enough Mustangs to
re-equip two wings (as in OTL; in this TL less Mustangs are being lost
in spring 1944 as the LR Spits are taking some of the strain) which
should go to 12 Group, and allow 11 Group to re-equip.

Listen, I'm all for your LR VIIIs, and I'm even helping by pushing for
rear-fuselage tanks for them, but the quid pro quo is XIV production
beginning on schedule, and the fitting of rear tanks to them whenever
possible.

Whenever possible is fine, as long as it doesn't delay our increasing standard Mk. VIII production.

The maximum loss to Mk VIII production will be 10 airframes per month
in December 1943 - January 1944, any further increase being covered by
new production of Mk VIIIs, or more likely from increasing LR IX
production at Castle Bromwhich thereafter. I think you should be able
to rely on a minimum allocation of 90 Spit VIIIs in October, November
and December 1943, moving up to 100 to 120 per month for the first
three months of 1944, and some of these appearing with rear-fuselage
tanks. In return, I should be getting deliveries of 10 Mk XIVs per
month from December to March 1944, going up to 20 and thirty per month
thereafer as Griffon 65 production increases. Remember that the XIVs
will be taking the short-ranged airframes first, and we won't start
producing LR XIVs until you're getting about 200 LR series ii Spit
VIII/IXs per month in April or May 1944.

On the other hand, this will give us an excellent tactical fighter to
counter the Fw190D, and one that can have rear-fuselage tankage
installed at the end of 1944 to give us more intermediate-range
escorts with Mustang-equivalent performance.

I've just been thinking of this. Why not run the rear tank via a pump
(or two for redundancy) to the main tanks to keep them full while
running down the rear tank, just like the approach with the wing
tanks?

The one account I have of the L.e. tank usage says that they are transferred to the main(s) once
space is available. Otherwise, the excess gets vented overboard, which is rather counterproductive.

Yes, I think a direct feed from the rear tank and drop tank might be
less of a handling problem, providing it was used after take-off and
the initial climb, and the switch to the other tanks was done at the
right time..

I'd think 200 IAS cruise at escort height would be about the minimum we'd want over the continent.
200 IAS @ 25kft gets us 300 TAS, @ 30kft 327 TAS, ignoring P.E. and C.E. in both cases.

2,400 rpm + 4lbs and 66 gallons per hour it is then.

Yes, there were several firms involved, some locally around
Southampton. I think CBAF made their own. I don't want to
investigate that nightmare much further.

snip

Oh, admit it, you enjoy hunting through boxes of stuff at the PRO, peering at miniscule type on
yellowed, 50+ year old mimeographed copies so you can discover that a/c in serial range XX-1XX
through XX-127 were fitted with canopy enmergency release pin 2C-5392-9 rather 2C-5587-6, owing to
the delivery van breaking down.

Thankfully, this sort of detail generally isn't recorded at the PRO,
although the odd bureucratic struggle between the MAP and Air Ministry
and suppliers does emerge over troublesome embodiment loan equipment.
This gives you some acerbic comments about Lucas electrics not
delivering the generators required under contract x/xxxx-xx for
Manchesters, but this not being a problem as Avro hadn't got the right
mountings for the generators made yet anyway.

The level of detail you want will be stored at the supplier and
contractor's end, if it is recorded at all. Good luck!

This is where my political considerations kick in: the promises to
the DAF, the 12th AF and the Russians and the Far East already exist
and need to be serviced. Almost all the VIIIs being produced are
being shipped out to overseas theatres.

Which is why we'll replace them with Mk. IXs temporarily (Mk. VC Trops to the Far East if we don't
have enough Mk. IXs), until we can ramp up production.

This is easier the earlier it is done: by September 1943 a lot of Mk
VIIIs are on merchant ships, and you've only got a pool of a couple of
dozen available to you in MU storage waiting to be shipped out.

If you want the whole of Mk
VIII production, when does this decision get made?

End of September '43 seems like a good date, and continuing for the next few months.

What provokes this at the strategic and political level? I'd suggest
an earlier date, maybe June 1943 before Hamburg and before Schweinfurt
collectively hyped BC and depressed the fortunes of daylight bombing.
It would take a couple of months for the procurement decisions to be
made and things shaken out to the point of doing something at the
squadron end.

[snip LR Vc on hold pending AMR&D AVM Stickney's report from RAE and
A&AEE]

Sounds like the way to go. I'm not sure that we even need Castle Bromwich to transition. If we can
get say 150-200 Mk. VIIIs a month,

That will need CBAF: it's beyond the capacity of Supermarine's at
Eastleigh even with the marginals like Westland thrown in.

that will probably do the trick until we're on the continent
and/or get our Mustangs. By all means, though, let's make sure we get at least 96 gallons in the Mk.
IXs from now on. It's ridiculous to be building a/c with 85.

Yes, I think it should break down something like this. [Fantasy time,
but this should have some rational basis after the thrashing we've
given the subject]

R&D

1. Development on Seafires at Eastleigh (Mk XV, etc) to stop
immediately. FAA will survive Vc's being converted to Seafire IIIs
and L.IIIIs from storage; i.e. no new output of Seafires once Westland
have converted to the Spitfire Mk VIII. FAA to get by on US supply
otherwise.

2. Development on F.21 at Eastleigh to cease and all R&D priority to
switch to fitting LR tankage as detailed below to Mk VIII and IX
airframe. Final production work on Mk XIV to continue, any further
airframe allocation for R&D purposes to be cleared by AMR&D. Top
priority on increasing Mk IX internal tanage to Mk VIII standard, then
installing and clearing 75 gallon rear tank for operations in Mk VIII
and IX no later than December 1943. Subsequently development work to
be completed on installing same tank in MK XIV when supplies are
available.

Production

1. Eastleigh to continue maximum production of Mk Spitfire Mk VIIIs,
to a minimum MAP quota of 100 per month, increasing to 120 per month
by December 1943 as the highest priority. Entire output to go to
ADGB.

2. All Spitfire production from all sources to standardise on
enlarged Mk VIII tail on all production as soon as possible.

3. Eastleigh to begin production of maximum 10 Mk XIVs per month in
December (plus quota of 10 in October for existing airframes),
providing Mk VIII delivery minimum is fully completed.

4. Eastleigh to install 75 gallon rear-fuselage tanks in production
(Mk VIII LR), beginning December 1943, with priority for equipping
entire production output by March 1944.

5. Eastleigh to install 75 gallon RF tanks in production Mk XIVs (Mk
XIV LR) when tankage becomes available (i.e. when assigned minimum of
200 LR Spit VIII/IXs are being produced with rear-tanks). Target
date, July 1944.

6. Castle Bromwich to plan switch to Mk VIII airframe production,
with report on required machine tools and assesment of impact on
production output of Mk IXs. No action to be taken pending approval
from AMP with consultation from DFO and AMR&D on acceptability of any
production shortfall. [Marginal note scrawled by AMP: "No point
accepting any shortfall of deliveries just for retractable tailwheels
in all our Spitfire production when we're already getting the internal
tankage which is the main point at issue."]

7. Castle Bromwich to maintain full production of Mk IXs, adding Mk
VIII internal tankage (enlarged forward tanks and wing tanks) as a
priority as soon as supplies of tanks become available after meeting
Eastleigh's needs. Production to be spliced with Mk IX (LR series i)
to be Mk VIII-equivalent. Supplies to be directed to ADGB as
priority.

8. Castle Bromwich to install 75-gallon rear tank to begin June 1944
as Mk IX [LR series ii). Supplies to be directed to ADGB as priority.

Taking a wild stab in the dark, I'll make some
hopefully-not-totally-ridiculous minimum estimations of production.

[figures for Mk VIII/IX [LR]/Mk XIV]

Oct '43 - 90/10/10
Nov '43 - 100/10/10
Dec '43 - 120/10/10
Jan '44 - 110/20/10
Feb '44 - 110/30/10
Mar '44 - 110/50/10
Apr '44 - 100/80/20
May '44 - 100/100/20
Jun '44 - 100/100/20
Jul '44 - 90/120/20
Aug '44 - 90/120/30
Sep '44 - 90/120/30
Oct '44 - 80/150/30
Nov '44 - 80/150/30
Dec '44 - 80/150/30

I think there were about 300 Spitfires being produced per month in
this period as a an approximate rule of thumb. These figures leave a
remaining balance of shorter-ranged Spitfires for supply to other
theatres and reverse-lend lease. All Spitfires built by October 1943
were Mk IX or better, as the Mk V production run ended at CBAF that
month with the last half-dozen to be produced, so Merlin 60 supply
shouldn't be an issue.

By March 1944, I think it might be possible to have the entire
production of Mk VIIIs with RF tanks, and the same for the LR IXs by
the summer. The tank production is of course the biggest unknown and
consequently the largest bit of fantasy, but the scaling up here
shouldn't be too far from what Supermarine actually did with the Mk
VII/VIII production earlier in 1943 and what CBAF did with the
rear-tanked IXs and XVIs in late 1944.

Gavin Bailey



--

Another user rings. "I need more space" he says.
"Well, why not move to Texas?", I ask. - The ******* Operator From Hell