Converting a Mk2 Shackleton into a Mk1…

Hmmm…why would you wish to…?

Only guess – because there are no complete MK1’s left??

Jon

Phillip,

Haven”t you got anything better to do?
You can better convert a Lancaster back to Manchester specs.
Now that would close a gap.

Cees

Only guess – because there are no complete MK1’s left??

Jon

True, just seems a strange idea to me. Given that the II’s are historic airframes in their own right, why convert one into something it ain’t?

It’s been done before with airframes, but its only a hypothetical conversation so I wouldnt worry about it too much. 🙂

So in the spirit I am sure Philip meant the thread, would it need anymore that just a nose swap/reprofile?

Jon

Fair enough- maybe I leaped before I looked! 🙂

You’d have to fill in the ‘ole underneath for the radar too!

You’d have to fill in the ‘ole underneath for the radar too!

Only if they started with an AEW.2, but the original post said MK.2 😉 Also not sure if there is much remedial work needed if you removed the radar?

Jon

No it didnt, but it does still exist. The front end of VP293 is at Duxford these days I think with a private owner.

The Helston example is WG511 which is still there.

Jon

Shack nose

Didn’t the nose of the Strathallen Mk1 go to Helston? Does it still exist?

No, the Anti-Sub radar behind the bomb bay!

If Strathallan hadn’t allowed their Shack to deteriorate until it was only fit for scrap, we’d still have a first-generation machine to admire. I never understand the point of museums taking aircraft if they’re simply going to let them rot.

No, the Anti-Sub radar behind the bomb bay!

And while you’re under there filling said ‘ole, you might as well crack on with changing the retractable twin-wheel tailwheel for the fixed single-wheel unit too…

…Then, while you’re round the back, just whip the pointy tailcone off and bolt the turret (or turret blank, depending on personal preference) on instead…

…Then perhaps Sir would like to ponder- Mid-upper turret, or would Sir prefer the sporty streamlined turretless model?…

…I’ll take me Shack anorak off now 😉

If Strathallan hadn’t allowed their Shack to deteriorate until it was only fit for scrap, we’d still have a first-generation machine to admire. I never understand the point of museums taking aircraft if they’re simply going to let them rot.

It’s easy to criticise 20 – 30 years on and/or with a big dollop of hindsight.

I think it was chopped (plus the Comet) when Strathallan closed down and nobody was prepared to take on moving them by road. Today it seems readily acceptable to cut a large aircraft to transport and then stitch it back together at it’s new home. I’m not critiscising but (in the UK) such operations are fairly new and I doubt it would have been considered when Strathallan closed.

IIRC the Mk.1 (T.4?) was at Farnborough due for the chop. Friend John Berkeley (at that time Chairman of MAM) played a part in getting the machine to Strathallan – saving(delaying) it from the axe.

This kind of thing has happened many times before – sometimes a long-term success, sometimes, regretably, not. Some in the latter category where large aircraft have flown to a Museum to be chopped later: Beverley at Hendon, Convair at Duxford, Vulcan B.1 and (more recently) various airliners at Cosford, etc.

Roger Smith.

Just to get back onto the ‘could it be done’ aspect of the thread, IIRC if your hypothetical donor MR.II was a Phase 3 machine you’d have to strip the interior too, because Phase 3’s were MR.II’s with interiors brought up to MR.III spec…

…NOW I’ll hang up me Shack Anorak! 🙂

To the original question, it would be relatively straight forward to convert a Shackleton Mk.2 to a Mk.1 as the airframe differences are confined to bolt on sections at the fusalage transport joints.
The nose joint is just ahead of the cockpit and bomb bay, it would be a case of taking the original nose section off and fitting the replacement section.
The same goes for the extreme tail section, it being solid and blunt shaped on the 1, and transparent and cone shaped on the 2.
The ventral ‘dust bin’ radome area of the Mk.2 would be fairly easy to remove and re-fabricate flush with the fusalage underside.

However you would only create something that looks like a Mk.1 Shack as the interior and equipment is very different to the later marks.
With only two nose sections, and no tail sections that I know of in existance, the reality of such an excercise is something else.

I think if the parts were around it would actually be a good idea, as no whole example of an MR.1/T.4 exists, neither is any Shackleton preserved in the white with light grey top, worn for many years by the early marks.

Is this post simply a question or are there plans to convert a current tail dragger?

To the original question, it would be relatively straight forward to convert a Shackleton Mk.2 to a Mk.1 as the airframe differences are confined to bolt on sections at the fusalage transport joints.
The nose joint is just ahead of the cockpit and bomb bay, it would be a case of taking the original nose section off and fitting the replacement section.
The same goes for the extreme tail section, it being solid and blunt shaped on the 1, and transparent and cone shaped on the 2.
The ventral ‘dust bin’ radome area of the Mk.2 would be fairly easy to remove and re-fabricate flush with the fusalage underside.

However you would only create something that looks like a Mk.1 Shack as the interior and equipment is very different to the later marks.
With only two nose sections, and no tail sections that I know of in existance, the reality of such an excercise is something else.

…Sure that’s pretty much what I’ve said…

[QUOTE=RPSmith;1535378]It’s easy to criticise 20 – 30 years on and/or with a big dollop of hindsight.

Today it seems readily acceptable to cut a large aircraft to transport and then stitch it back together at it’s new home. I’m not critiscising but (in the UK) such operations are fairly new and I doubt it would have been considered when Strathallan closed.

I think you are right. Certainly when I was at Southend I don’t think there would have been any credence given to a project which involved moving a large aircraft in sections unless it came apart comparatively easily and into manageable sections at transport joints.
I think the truth is that over the past 30 years or so there has been a huge increase in the level of expertise available to most preservation groups possibly in part because more retired engineers are involved now whereas in the 60’s and early 70’s most involved were probably enthusiastic but mainly comparatively unskilled amateurs.
The methods of transporting outsize loads have also improved and bigger and better roads make it easier to move outsize loads around the country.
It can be quite easy to forget that things have moved on a long way since the days when Sea Fury WJ288 was towed to Biggin Hill on its own wheels and with the wings folded (behind a Landrover I believe) with no police escort or road closures to become the first exhibit for what would eventually become the Southend museum.
Try the same trick now and you would get every police vehicle and health and safety rep in the country on your case.

…Sure that’s pretty much what I’ve said…

Not quite, read our respective posts again!

I think we both made similar points if you read back; in that it’s mostly just a question of swapping bolt-on fuselage extremities, removing the dustbin hole and having to totally re-fit the innards. OK so you mentioned bolting the different nose on, I took that as already read, and I mentioned the different tailwheel setup and turret options. But come on, I think we were both talking along the same lines really!