kwlf wrote:
The mk26b does 230 knots at low level. Wartime spitfires were faster… But they were not hugely faster at sea level and
The Spit IX did 290kts at sea level, armor and ammo included.
One a slightly off topic side-note: What I find a bit sad about flying compared to my other hobby of sports shooting is that you cannot easily get your hands on a working wartime aircraft. Much easier for sports shooters (at least in countries with somewhat permissive gun laws): Original k98, SMLE or Garand M1 carabines are widely available and not too expensive even in good condition. Compare that to the respective Bf109, Spitfire or P51 for aircraft…impossible to buy one, much less in flying condition :(
Too bad, I’d love to be in the pilot seat of a Bf109 or FW190 for example. Even a sluggish Stuka would probably be fun to fly…
MedEwok wrote:
Bf109, Spitfire or P51 for aircraft…impossible to buy one, much less in flying condition :(
Au contraire. Just get your cheque book out – http://www.platinumfighters.com/warbirds
There are about 150 P-51s flying with the number growing every year, and there’s a small industry to support them. A much smaller number of Spitifires are flying but still significant. Very, very few Bf109s or FW190s. Only one FW190 is flying with the original engine. Planes of Fame at Chino built an amazingly accurate FW190 replica pictured below, apparently using some original parts and I’ve watched it from my hangar 
chasing around with P-51s, a P-47, a P-40 and so on. Its quite impressive in that it’s comparatively very small.
I think you should buy one 
The mk1 did 246 knots at sea level… 26b’s climb rates of 2800-3500fpm are greater than some marks and less than others.
I accept the wartime aircraft were significantly faster, but you often see figures of 450mph psssed about, which were only achieved by later variants at altitude.
And if you could get a replica classified as an ultralight it would be in km/h
There are two things I don’t get in aviation: The obsession with warbirds. And replicas.
But I’m really glad there is a cottage industry for this and that it’s something people love. I’m also really glad there is such enthusiasm for warbirds and history, it helps keep the interest for aviation alive and well. But I don’t get it personally…
Hope you get it.
I think Adam you need to have a lot more money burning a hole in your pocket. Then you will begin to appreciate it
After WW2, you could buy a Spitfire for peanuts – reportedly a hundred quid for a fully working one. When the price went through 1M, quite some years ago, it became worthwhile to make them from scratch, from the original drawings. Having a serial number plate merely increased the value by a few hundred k… Now it is more like 2M. I lost a nice hangar facility (for doing Annuals) a couple of years ago due to this being such a lucrative business
Actually I don’t particularly, though like many of us I grew up with Airfix Spitfires on the ceiling and deactivated naval mines adorning the seafront. I suppose warbirds are the ultimate sports planes – speed and manoeuvrability at all costs. They’re also the ultimate classic aircraft as they pushed the boundaries technologically. But I think the fetishism at least within the UK with WWII militaria is quite unhealthy. I don’t know whether you get it within other countries to the same extent?
That said, the reviews say the Mk26 handles much like the originals and it’s certainly closer in construction and performance than most of the other replicas – the idea of making a spitfire wing out of plywood makes me feel a little ill. In a way, replicas are dishonest. On the other hand, imagine jets didn’t take over post WWII and Supermarine designed a scaled-down trainer so pilots could be trained more cheaply in peacetime – they would probably end up with something very similar to this. Personally I would prefer a LongEZ with a ballistic parachute and the back seat replaced with a fuel tank. I would have a use for such an aircraft.
