Lanc Wheel To Restore Or Not!!

This is the other bit that I will keep as it is!!

glass bead blasting then etch primer

Let us know how you get on!
By the way what is the best way of stripping out the corrosion from wheels?

Before we treat every piece of old metal like the Holy Grail, ask yourself, “Would the IWM (or other major collection) make room for this on display?”
If the answer is “yes”, then it’s probably historically significant.
If the answer is “No”, than it’s a nice, neat, old airplane part.

And quite a bit of semi historic stuff has ended up in the Duxford skip over time I would wager!

oh ha ha! I was in a rush!!

“This would allow me to have something to use when I do displays to children”

I can’t say I agree with that sort of thing, but I admire your honesty.

Fascinating thread chaps and some thought provoking stuff. This is one of the first threads where actually everyone is right. I can see Geoff’s view and I can also see Bruce’s and everyone else. My original question was should I bother to restore? I have collected any parts I can get for a many years. I have another piece of Lanc yoke that most certainly will not be used in this restoration even though it has two of the parts required – the reason? It is a relic in its own right and I bought it when I was 11 for £1.60 that included P&P!!! I will post a piccie if someone wants! Though some may think me silly not to include it in the resto
I am keen on sympathetic restoration and will be restoring this yoke to utilise as much original as possible. None of the donor parts have any history other than scrapyard….sadly.
I am still keen to buy one of Geoff’s. This would allow me to have something to use when I do displays to children.
Thanx Guys!
PS I have one like Denis too off a Fort

I agree with Bruce.

I say restore!

Mark

Its worth noting what Tony says about the wheel – its a collection of parts from different aircraft, with some new build. It isnt therefore significant in and of itself, so it would make a degree of sense to me to restore it.

Bruce

I agree with J Boyle, if the wheel had some sort of unique history or exceptional provenance with it then yes leave it, but Lancaster wheels arn’t rare, sypathetic restoration to a good display standard seems acceptable.
Buying a newly made wheel, why? It has absolutely no past what so ever and is just a facsimilie of an aircraft componant, surely the point of collevting this stuff is to present/display some history.
I think we can be a bit precious about some of these things, its a very small drop in a very big ocean.

Preserve if possible if there is enough paint,covering still present.Restore if it is starting to fall apart.

I think I would go for mounting it as complete as you could and having it on display Tony.. The more restoration done on it the further away from its history you get..?

There is a scene relevant to this discussion in the first India Jones film…..forgive me if the words are not exactly correct

“See this watch ?
whats it worth?
ten dollars?
now if i drop it in the sand and its dug up in a thousand years,whats it worth then?

A mass produced component? Of course it WAS…Hundreds of the for sale on ebay?? I think not……Valuable? only worth what someone is willing to pay on the day…But the parts of the wheel in question sure bear the marks of passing time,from the picture Tony posted it looks to be a recovered relic,some poor sod might have made a prayer to his maker during the course of its previous history….we do not know, but does that lack of knowledge justify the rebuilding of that object into a pastiche of its original form?

As to the rebuilding of historic airframes we now find ourselves back on the “data plate” merry go round another minefield

Might be cheaper to have one of my repros and frame/mount it with the relic parts.The “restoration ” of historic artifacts is a veritable mine field.Glueing things together and slapping a coat of paint on is not restoration,in fact it is a path to further destruction.This is a subject that haunts many conservators and museum curators,as time moves on and older methods are superseded by more “scientific “ideas.

If we were discussing the very wheel Gibson held on the dams raid, I’d certainly agree…but a mass produced component from a (probably) anonymous aircraft doesn’t quite fit the bill, IMHO.

As I said earlier, if we strictly used your criteria, there would be no flying warbirds. 😀

Before we treat every piece of old metal like the Holy Grail, ask yourself, “Would the IWM (or other major collection) make room for this on display?”
If the answer is “yes”, then it’s probably historically significant.
If the answer is “No”, than it’s a nice, neat, old airplane part.
Something to be treasured as part of a personal collection, but not necessarily an object of veneration that MUST be preserved as-is.

The historical responsibility point was very well put Geoff, I’ve been putting together a Spitfire panel and in the process have pretty much destroyed, bit by bit, a complete oxygen regulator from an RAF Mustang.

Yes – very wise words Geoff and indeed food for thought!

Nice control wheels by the way – they look great.

Just buy a plastic one Runway, I know a guy who makes some really good ones.

Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore, Restore,

You have some lovely words Geoff, I wish I’d thought of them!

Might be cheaper to have one of my repros and frame/mount it with the relic parts.The “restoration ” of historic artifacts is a veritable mine field.Glueing things together and slapping a coat of paint on is not restoration,in fact it is a path to further destruction.This is a subject that haunts many conservators and museum curators,as time moves on and older methods are superseded by more “scientific “ideas.
The British Museum displays many thousands of objects as an example of “distressed display”that of the Sutton Hoo artifacts might serve as an example ,some are displayed mounted on perspex mounts ,just to support fragments in relative original positions and to allow handling without touching,there is an excellent example of “display reconstruction” a large cauldron displayed mounted on a massive iron frame that supports the structure,over size hexagon headed bronze nuts and bolts hold it together these are inserted through original holes…this is done so there there is no doubt about what is old and what is new….and allows visitors to understand how it would have looked
In times gone by a coating of “varnish ” was acceptable,now microchrystaline waxes are used…these [hopefully] stop oxidation and further degradation of surface finishes and can be removed easily with out damage.
How many of us have paper artifacts that have been repaired in the past with the dreaded sellotape,now permanently damaged with a brown gunk soaked into the surfaces,and the tape integrity long since gone
The days of handling museum objects are passing,white cotton gloves [or latex] are the order of the day

So please Tony et al ,leave the bits as they are,mount then sympathetically,and preserve their history [with as much recorded info as you can]You will never get it to look right,it will never be new again.The knocks dings dents etc are part of the story,respect that.
We are all just temporary keepers of these objects,why spoil them for future custodians?