Can anyone identify this Britannia fuselage?

found this picture for sale on ebay (item number 6617351976) looks sorta like the above?

Nothing new to report apart from the fact I’ve managed to track down Mr Paul Jackson who took the original photo published in Wrecks & Relics.

Unfortunately Paul took the photo on B+W but has scanned the neg for me and I’ve attached it here for you all to get a better look at the beast.

From this photo you can just see the name ‘Pluton’ above the forward part of the lighting flash which was reported by W&R and in addition, a definate Britannia only item, evidence of the round crew emergency exit in the cockpit roof.

I fully agree with you Martin, this is what I have been trying to tell them all along – this is indeed a very good ‘mock-up’, but ‘NO’ we are going round in circles trying to find some reason why this shouldn’t be! I think we have to admit it’s a very convincing ‘mock up’, but there it is!

Actually, this fascinating thread seems to me to be a classic investigation – various possiblities of varying probability investigated and eliminated before reaching aconclusion that stands up to interrogation.

OK, its a mock-up, but not in the same sense as the C130’s…

I cannot believe there would be no record in the company archives, that is a lot of work, fittings, cockpit and cabin glass, doors on the belly holds etc.

Its not something someone could knock-up over lunch!

Pete

Oh, Poo! 😮

Now, please don’t tell me that’s from a slide as I’m still looking for a slide G-ALBO/7708M! at St.Athan. Can you post the whole image?

Here it is, indeed at St.Athan in 1960 (no. the tail’s not chopped on the slide!)

And what about this fuselage – remiss of you not to have a shot! :
…sorry, don’t shoot ‘mock-ups’ 😉

I fully agree with you Martin, this is what I have been trying to tell them all along – this is indeed a very good ‘mock-up’, but ‘NO’ we are going round in circles trying to find some reason why this shouldn’t be! I think we have to admit it’s a very convincing ‘mock up’, but there it is!

I agree too 🙂

Simon.

….err, ahem!!

Oh, Poo! 😮

Now, please don’t tell me that’s from a slide as I’m still looking for a slide G-ALBO/7708M! at St.Athan. Can you post the whole image?

And what about this fuselage – remiss of you not to have a shot! :p

I fully agree with you Martin, this is what I have been trying to tell them all along – this is indeed a very good ‘mock-up’, but ‘NO’ we are going round in circles trying to find some reason why this shouldn’t be! I think we have to admit it’s a very convincing ‘mock up’, but there it is!

To clarify actual production (and I’m sure someone will prove me wrong here!)

By the way, a Britannia was allocated an RAF ‘M’ serial – it being G-ALBO which was given, although never carried, the number 7708M.

….err, ahem!!

Looking at the photo of 12875 this is not going to be the source.

We now need to establish what airframes were in service June 1966 that then cannot be the one in the photo. From those then left over we should try to establish 100% what they were doing in June 1966.

This may give us a list of candidates, but suspect it wont! Are we sure no other frames were withdrawn from the production line?

Looking again at the school today I can find no photos of the frame with us. The photographic section at Brize do not hold any archives older than 2-3 years so nothing to be found there. AHB and PRO (TNA) Kew may have something. RAFM Hendon may also be worth a look.

A friend has checked the RAF ‘M’ serial ledger and there is no entry for a Brit…

Again, someone who worked on it suffered in the belly holds enough to confirm it was a proper airframe and not a mock up, all the right features were there

Pete

To clarify actual production (and I’m sure someone will prove me wrong here!) including c/n 12875, a total of 86 Britannia’s were laid down and built.

The production line had long since closed by June 1966 and with the exception of the write off’s up until June 1966 all aircraft were in service and operational.

By June 1966, 8 airframes had been lost in accidents, they were:

3 x Series 100

G-ALRX written off Bristol 1954
G-ANBB crashed Ljubljana September 1966
G-ANBC written off Khartoum 1960

5 x Series 200/300

G-ANCA crashed Filton 1957 (prototype)
G-AOVD crashed near Hurn 1958
CF-CZB crashed Honolulu 1962
G-AOVO crashed Innsbruck 1964
XA-MEC written off Tijuana 1965

The crashes are exactly that, so not much left of the airframe after the accident but the write off’s consitute an airframe where it’s not commercially viable to return to service.

After all the communication in the thread my view now is that the fuselage we’re looking at is a 200/300 series and so from the list above that closes the door on G-ANBC, leaving just XA-MEC and realistically I cannot see the fuselage from this aircraft being transported back to the UK. In fact there are reports that is existed for 2-3 years following the accident slowly being robbed of parts before being cut up.

So, where does that leave us…? As the door is also closed now on 12875 (it being a 100 series also) in June 1966, the whole production line is accounted for.

So I beleive in line with Andy’s last comments we’re looking at one of the Series 200/300 mock-up’s. Now to clarify the term ‘mock-up’. My own personal view of a mock-up is one where by a 1/1 scale representation is made from any suitable material. For smaller aircraft wood was often used, but as far as my current employer is concerned (and I beleive manufactures of the period), a mock-up is a 1/1 scale build of the item you’re representing but with non fuctional parts (NFP) – sometimes call non serviceable parts (NSP).

This then gives credibility to the fuselage being or feeling ‘real’ as someone has already confirmed to you. In addition and its already been said, the photos certainly give the impression the fuselage is ‘real’ – i.e. metal skinned and I beleive was built as a fully functional mock-up for MoD purposes, hence the fitment of the ‘right’ sized freight door. HP81 may prove me wrong here but I’m pretty certain that prior to June 1966 not many, if any, civil Britannia’s had received the freight door mod from either ATL or Eagle.

Besides this (and again I stand to be corrected if wrong!) the door mod carried out by ATL and Eagle provided an aperture and door that was different in size to those in use by the RAF aircraft.

So in summary, I think this is a fusealge that was built (in the 50’s) to demonstrate the Britannia’s qualities to the MoD – hence freight door, and once production was over, Bristol passed it on to the MoD for training purposes. The problem is, because it seems currently so little is know about these airframes/fuselage’s, providing actual ID data is going to prove challenging!

By the way, a Britannia was allocated an RAF ‘M’ serial – it being G-ALBO which was given, although never carried, the number 7708M.

And regarding photo’s, can you clarify where Brize’s old photos are now? Where do they get archived? It’s difficult for me to do any digging at Kew or Hendon being sat here in Taipei! But, I’ll ask people I know that live close if they can go and have a poke around when they get the chance.

Also I’m sure that someone out there will have taken some more/better photos of this fuselage when on the Brize dump.

Albert – I’m sure you haven’t got any otherwise you would have posted already but do you know anyone that may have?

The ‘fleet’ at DMS Brize is….

C130K Mk.1 Mock-up
C139K Mk.3 Mock-up
C130J Mk.4 mock-up

VC10 XX914 cut’n’shut . Has front hold, rear hold and enough of the rest to give a 20 foot cabin upstairs. It is mounted such that the belly hold doors and main freight door upstairs are at actual heights. Was still being robbed for bit for the active fleet up to about 5 years back!

Also have Gazelle ZB684
Lynx XZ174 (Cabin section only)
Harrier GR3 XZ994.

Pete

Albert

You of all people should know better than to call Brize’s Vicky 10 a mock-up!!! :diablo:

If you recall, that ‘mock-up’ once flew with the RAE from Bedford as XX914…and before that BCAL and BUA as G-ATDJ… :diablo:

If my memory serves me right last time I was at Brize I heard that it’s affectionately known as the ‘VC-5’ due to its now shortened fuselage!

I didn’t call XX914 a mock-up, but was merely quoting from the RAF Brize Norton Station handbook, so assumed they were talking about another one in the Air Movements School section………

handling, and dangerous air cargo procedures are taught to experienced tradesmen, while specialised ADP training courses are available to both Service and MOD civilians. Classroom theory is consolidated through realistic exercises using the extensive practical training facilities
available within the school. These exercises range from a passenger check-in simulator to full size aircraft mock-ups of the VC10, and Hercules C130 K and C130 J. A wide range of equipment and vehicles are also maintained, which can be loaded to the various aircraft mock-ups to reinforce practical skills and techniques.

Brize Brit

Evening.

Things we do know….(99.9%)

The fuselage from ATDU Abingdon was passed on the the AMTS at Abingdon in December 1966. It was in service with ATDU June 1966 (From the photo)

Looking at the photo of 12875 this is not going to be the source.

We now need to establish what airframes were in service June 1966 that then cannot be the one in the photo. From those then left over we should try to establish 100% what they were doing in June 1966.

This may give us a list of candidates, but suspect it wont! Are we sure no other frames were withdrawn from the production line?

Looking again at the school today I can find no photos of the frame with us. The photographic section at Brize do not hold any archives older than 2-3 years so nothing to be found there. AHB and PRO (TNA) Kew may have something. RAFM Hendon may also be worth a look.

A friend has checked the RAF ‘M’ serial ledger and there is no entry for a Brit…

Again, someone who worked on it suffered in the belly holds enough to confirm it was a proper airframe and not a mock up, all the right features were there.

Pete Webber
Also sat in Swindon…developing into a local thread now!

If I remember correctly from my Belfast days this means that the Aden wreck could have been flown back to the UK, then crudely repaired. Which might explain the slightly odd appearance of the fuselage in the original photo

Simon

The numbers don’t add up for it to be XL638. If the bare metal fuselage was at Abingdon in December 1966, this was 10 months before XL638 was written off.

I’m positive it’s not XL638.

The current Air Movements School at Brize Norton has mock-ups of a VC-10

Albert

You of all people should know better than to call Brize’s Vicky 10 a mock-up!!! :diablo:

If you recall, that ‘mock-up’ once flew with the RAE from Bedford as XX914…and before that BCAL and BUA as G-ATDJ… :diablo:

If my memory serves me right last time I was at Brize I heard that it’s affectionately known as the ‘VC-5’ due to its now shortened fuselage!

So we still need to identify the Abingdon fuselage now that 12875 seems to have been convincingly ruled out.
The dates for the arrival of the training fuselage seem to rule out either of the previously flown airframes, although I note that the Flight diagram gives the outside diameter as 12’. If I remember correctly from my Belfast days this means that the Aden wreck could have been flown back to the UK, then crudely repaired. Which might explain the slightly odd appearance of the fuselage in the original photo.
I’m not sure that the lack of a pitot mast is too significant. On most aircraft I have seen, when you remove the mast there are only one or two small holes in the fuselage skin.
We need to know more about the test airframes.

Simon.

I would agree with Andy above and stick to my earlier theory that this is indeed a mock-up! The current Air Movements School at Brize Norton has mock-ups of a VC-10, C-130K and C-130J, so why not a Britannia that is now surplus to requirements? As Andy says, compare the details on the original photo with the fuselage of the real thing. It’s very good, but to my eye I’m not convinced it’s real!

Sorry guys, I wouldn’t go as far as to say its 12875 yet. Here is a bit of history:

MoS ordered three prototypes in 1948, all three to be powered by Centaurus, but the second and third could be modified to Proteus when it was available. Development of the Proteus was so advanced by 1950 that there was no need for the Centaurus model, so it was cancelled. In effect, 12873 and 12874 became prototypes 1 and 2, and 12875 was the one that was cancelled. As much of it had already been built, it was used as a functional mock up, aka non-flying prototype (or NFP).

Anyone interested in the NFP should read Flight magazine, 7th March 1952. It describes it and its uses in detail. It does not look like the Abingdon/Brize airframe, as it was effectively as Series 102 i.e. no eyebrow windows etc. Also the fuselage only went as far back as just aft of the wing, just after the second emergency exit window. Here is a photo from Flight whilst on fuel system flow tests, and a drawing of what it looked like.

Now the next blow to the theory. According to the books by Charles Woodley and Frank McKim, G-ANBC was seriously damaged at Rangoon on 9th September 1958, when it ran off the end of the runway, and the nosewheel was pushed thorough the fuselage skin. It was repaired and flown to Filton, and the nose of 12875 was grafted on. It was back in service August 1959.

I’m still sticking with one of the Series 312 functional mock ups at Filton. I dug out my Britannia airframe lecture notes yesterday, and noted the following. The airframes in both the Abindgon and Brize photos do not have pressure head pitot masts, a feature on all flying Brits (below the rear-most cockpit window). There is not even a trace of it being fitted. The skin panel containing the cabin pressure relief valve (round hole beneath the first cabin window) does not look right, normally this has four small locking screws (or something similar) to the left, but on the Abingdon photo it looks much more prominent, and is also prominent on the Brize photo. Perhaps this was the mock up built for pressure tests at Filton.

We still need more info on the Filton Srs 312 mock ups to be sure.

Andy

Aviation Traders converted several more using their own design, ATL99. Among these were CD, VP & VS.

This thread has awakened a dormant interest I had in this wonderful airliner so thank you for that.

Simon.

Simon

Either you’ve been doing some serious reading or you once worked for ATL!!! :p Go on – which is it? I have to admit to forgetting that fact 😮 and now you’ve mentioned it I do recall the ATL conversions.

As I’m sat here 5,500 miles away from my Britannia archives I can only provide what’s in the memory banks – which is getting smaller by every bottle of wine! 😀

Besides those you mentioned it would be great if you can clarify which airframes ATL converted – ta.

Glad to hear this thread has awakened your interest in the Whispering Giant, how would you like to come and work on 496? We’re always on the hunt for volunteers. Have a look at www.xm496.com

Don’t suppose by any chance you’ve got any 35mm slides of Brit’s you don’t want?

To clarify further, the RAF aircraft aside, British Eagle were the only civil operator in the 60’s to invest in a programme of converting passenger Brits for freight use.

In fact, this is the only reason non RAF Brit’s survived so long in service – look to airframes like G-ANCF, G-AOVP, G-AOVS, G-ANCD/5Y-AYR etc. The only reason Boscombe’s Brit XX367 survived is because at one time is was with Eagle as G-AOVM and received the freight door mod.

😉

I can’t let you get away with that statement 😮 . British Eagle converted four aircraft, CF, CG, VF & VM. Aviation Traders converted several more using their own design, ATL99. Among these were CD, VP & VS.
With regards to the oval window fwd of the entry door on the L/H side, all the srs 312 aircraft had this originally, but it was removed during the freight door mod. Finally most if not all srs 300 Brits have rectangular overwing exits.

This thread has awakened a dormant interest I had in this wonderful airliner so thank you for that.

Simon.