I have recently been given some fragments of unidentified wwii aircraft canopy perspex. I was surpised by the varitation in thicknesses. They are 2/16ths 2/8ths and the thickest bit I have is 5/16ths. Is it possible to hazard a guess as to what canopies/windows or blisters the might have been? they are all small fragment with some curavature so not flat windows. Not really expecting positive ids from my vague desriptions just idly thinking about why so much variation.
Something that might be answerable is why one of them has the remains of paint on it, black with a bit of camo green on top so resumably bomber related. Why would a window have been painted out?
By: Graham Boak - 11th September 2013 at 18:14
I believe that the long side windows on Wellingtons were also painted over in many cases to reduce the glare from searchlights. However, this reason would be unlikely to require both green and black paint. Also, like the other examples quoted, these would be flat not appreciably curved.
By: Mr Merry - 11th September 2013 at 17:52
Also the Mk1 Blenheims had painted windows in the nose, or were the panels aluminium?
By: Edgar Brooks - 11th September 2013 at 13:57
Some P.R. canopies were double-walled, to act like a vacuum flask, and stop misting internally, so would have been thinner than others.
Manchesters and early Lancasters had fuselage windows, which, at first, were painted over, when night bombing became standard, eventually disappearing completely.
By: Rocketeer - 11th September 2013 at 13:19
We have parts with various thicknesses from our Mustang dig…..I guess the cariances can be due to different componets (i.e. quarterlight and canopy or turret – in your case) and also variances on some components due to manufacturing process (i.e. ‘wasting’ where there is a big convex curve as opposed to flat bits).
If anyone knows the best way to mend/i.e. glue perspex/plexiglass that would be appreciated!
Sign In
September 11, 2013 at 12:48 pm