Blackburn Skua Recovered

Hi,

I checked the webiste of he museum in Bode, see: http://luftfart.museum.no/flyene/fly-til-restaurering/prosjekt-blackburn-skua/
It is in Norwegian only but in short:

Due to lack funds and workshop availability the Skua has low priioraty. But in 2011 and 2012 they managed to salvage the engine and parts of the aftpart of the cockpit.

Regards,

Mathieu.

I love zombie threads. I would like to know what progress(if any)has been made in the last five years. I do hope it is positive.

Any news on the Skua’s preservation/restoration?

I am particularly interested in the undercarriage indicator – was this found with the aircraft or has one been found from another Skua? This was the same type as the Whitley. I am looking to make one at some stage and if they are interested I will make several…

Blackburn Skua Recovered

Hi all.

The Skua was recovered from a fiord, laying in sea water for all these years.
Today employees from the museum at Bodo found parts of the serial number (L2896) painted on the inspection hatches on the aft fuselage, and there is no longer any doubt about the Skuas identity. A job well done!

Bengt

Hopefully they find the missing parts as there was mention of some parts falling back into the lake! I like the pic showing the stbd wing with camo and roundel still visible!

Full marks to them.

This essential preservation work is being carried out as we speak.

From speaking more to the team that raised the aircraft, it is becoming apparent just how difficult the task they faced was. The aircraft was on a ledge between a 200m trench on one side, and a cliff at the rear that prevented access. Given that without very careful handling, the aircraft could have fallen down the trench or swung into the cliff, the fact that they raised this important aircraft substantially intact is highly praiseworthy. In addition, a further search will be made for any other items lying on the fjord floor.

Whats next? a Halifax from fresh water…??

If they’re not still washing it, then it’s too late.

I agree with you James,

AFAIK the Italian P40 was put in a tank with fresh water (or preservative) for quite a while. The salt cristals will have to be flushed out (if possible) or neutralized with chemicals, if not the corrosion process cannot be stopped and the whole thing will turn to dust. But I would think the team know what they are doing. I wish them every success.

Cheers

Cees

I tweaked the title slightly to reflect that she has now been recovered.

As commented by others, the critical issue at the moment is to wash and preserve the remains regardless of the future use…

I’m sure my ponderings will not distract the recovery team in any way from their conservation efforts.

Thank you for your views. I wish the recovery team every success and hope that within a decade or so the world may have one (or two) ‘substantially complete’ if not mint-condition Blackburn Skuas.

Skua has now been dismantled ready for transporting to Bodo. Apparently the team are planning to use an ROV to pick up any material that was left on the seabed next week. The ID L2896 has been found pencilled on several components, and partials of the serial found on parts of the fuselage, so there is a very strong likelihood indeed that this is the aircraft in question.

The paint on the fin is very bright and reveals that the aircraft was ‘Green A’ – that is the lead aircraft of Green Section, and indeed the squadron.

Let’s wait until it is all together and cleaned up at Bodo before making too many comments on the condition of the airframe. I’ve a feeling we may be pleasantly surprised yet.

As I said…..for me the only replica would be built with original materials by the original method…

…but does that mean we can’t consider using modern technology to help us get there?

The use of scanning of individual parts in 3-D to create accurate plans may be of worth if automating production? of milling of castings or parts.

The 3-D scanning of folded and rivetted parts would be of questionable value in my mind as against dis-assembly into its component parts.

Again modern technology such as use of laser cutting of sheet materials may be of value in volume production, however there is a lot of work to program up such information to translate it to usable information, and the cost and time to do so would not be justified against the existing methods of manually tracing the existing individual part and then determining the flat sheet requirements, fold radii etc, to build it for a one or two example “production” run. slow, but cheaper and probably easier.

The scanning of the external 3-d dimensions of a Skua wing etc are of little value in the rebuilding of it, it is the dimensions and assembly of the spars, ribs, intercostals, stringers and skins that create the external dimensions, and without these accurately understood and replicated the external dimensions are no use other than to create a fibreglass mould.

I am not aware of any major restoration having or requiring access to the 3-d external dimensions of wings or any other airframe sections for other aircraft, that have been critical to that restoration?

Datum points on spars and main frames, are critical to “jig” and locate the structure as it is assembled, and 3-d scanning might provide that dimensional relationship? However if access of the original part exists to “scan” it, it is still quicker, cheaper and perhaps more reliable to simply jig around the original part, and then remove it from the jig.

As said earlier it is the accurate assembly of the structure results in the external shape, and I cant see modern technology changing that process? perhaps for composite modern designs, but not for this method of design/construction aircraft?

As commented by others, the critical issue at the moment is to wash and preserve the remains regardless of the future use as pattern, or display as-is,

if the airframe is integral enough to set it up to undertake 3-d scanning its probably integral enough to be used to create a jig directly, avoiding the cost and complexity of 3-d scanning, and that process would probably still leave it largely unaffected, if handled gently.

However the dimensions/construction details of the centre fuselage and wing centre-section is the information missing from the other wrecks, and can only really be accessed through dis-assembly of this example, and duplicating the internal structure.

Its condition seems well advanced in dis-integration in any case, and dis-assembly would not preclude re-construction as an approximate of its current wrecked condition, but that would seem to be a waste of time, the best outcome remains use of this frame as pattern and basis of a full static restoration while it is integral enough to provide the patterns.

regards

Mark Pilkington

Was there any work done as far as washing the remains down carefully with fresh water and then using a preservative?

If they’re not still washing it, then it’s too late.

In the case of this Skua which surfaced in a disappointing condition (and that is no criticism of the recovery effort rather an observation of the reality of recovering such an airframe from the sea) I was thinking about scanning being used to provide some sort of reference model to aid restoration (if that is what is done) of this or (preferably) the Yeovilton Skua.

While I agree that dismantling and using existing parts as patterns would be the traditional way to produce drawings and to replicate parts I was wondering if there was a way to gather sufficient data if dismantling wasn’t seen as an option.

I agree with your statement about ‘hidden’ internal detail; scanning certainly has its limitations.

At most you might be able to “mill” out of solid a 1 to 1 trench art replica or full scale mockup, but you might as well just build a cardboard cutout, or print off a large photo, as the outcome would not be a restored Skua?

As I said…..for me the only replica would be built with original materials by the original method…

…but does that mean we can’t consider using modern technology to help us get there?

That is just what I am suggesting, I think 3D Laser Scanning technology has reached the point where combining scans from multiple points, both interior and exterior, can build up an almost complete digital model of the airframe; skin, frames, stringers, rivets, everything.

I would have no interest in fibreglass; for me the only replica would be built with original materials by the original method…..the only problem being that we don’t know what the original method is!

While the scanning technology itself may exist I dont think the software could exist that permitted a 3-d multipart complex object such as an aircraft to be scanned intact, and then contruction details such as stringers frames rivets to be identified, interpreted and referenced into blueprints etc, you might get a 3-d drawing of the entire structure but no meaningful engineering data that would equate to dismantling and using each part as a seperate pattern, or allow an accurate reproduction of all the individual parts to be produced.

There would be some many “internal” or hidden details that could not be “scanned”.

At most you might be able to “mill” out of solid a 1 to 1 trench art replica or full scale mockup, but you might as well just build a cardboard cutout, or print off a large photo, as the outcome would not be a restored Skua?

regards

Mark Pilkington

Was there any work done as far as washing the remains down carefully with fresh water and then using a preservative?

…such scanning…..would seem to of little value if you did not know accurately the structural frame and intercostals etc that sit below the skin…

That is just what I am suggesting, I think 3D Laser Scanning technology has reached the point where combining scans from multiple points, both interior and exterior, can build up an almost complete digital model of the airframe; skin, frames, stringers, rivets, everything.

I would have no interest in fibreglass; for me the only replica would be built with original materials by the original method…..the only problem being that we don’t know what the original method is!

such scanning might be useful if you planned to mould a fibreglass replica but would seem to of little value if you did not know accurately the structural frame and intercostals etc that sit below the skin, the outcome wouldnt be a restored Skua it would be a full scale model?

the structure would need to be dismantled and duplicated rib by rib etc to extend any technical provenance to the new metal outcome being a real Skua?

regards

Mark Pilkington

I could see how it would be useful to duplicate complex cowl profiles and the like but I was thinking of it as a tool to ‘digitise’ the Skua wreck quickly before information was possibly lost due to deterioration, cleaning, storage and dismantling.

I don’t know how accurate this sort of scanning is, I would imagine very accurate but could it produce a viable 3D model of say the cockpit area by combining interior and exterior scans? Problems would be caused by the marine growth of course, and any silt but I’d be very interested to know.