Merlins From Lancaster PB456 At Dumfries

SP- Alright smartarse, you knew what I meant, another ‘lost’ crew commemorated? Happy now?

:rolleyes:

TT

Not exactly. I would have thought Conic Hill would have been a more appropriate place for a memorial. If someone died in Bristol you wouldn’t erect a memorial to them in Southampton.

I’m tired of all of these cliches that the “preservationists” use to justify the grabbing of anything and everything for their own personal collections. Check previous threads on the Braemar Wellington, the Welsh Boston or the Pangham Harbour Typhoon engine to see what I’m getting at.

Best wishes
Steve P

SP- Alright smartarse, you knew what I meant, another ‘lost’ crew commemorated? Happy now?

:rolleyes:

TT

Who?

Another missing crew is commemorated.

Err, hardly a missing crew, and why did they need to recover two engines?

Best wishes
Steve P

wow – you lucky ******s – shame the merlin on our defiant dig in September wasnt as good – they are superb!

Well done to the team for all their hard work.

Another missing crew is commemorated.

TT

Lancaster dig

Cees

The team worked at the dig for over a year, mostly by hand, then on the 2 times I was on-site we used mechanical diggers which pulled out a lot of wreckage, some interesting bits, parachutes, navigation equipment, emergency dinghy radio and of course the 2 Merlin engines. Our search for the other 2 was fruitless.

Welcome to this forum Jim! Would interested on reading a report on the dig and piccies if possible!

New guy on the block was part of the recovery team on Conic Hill near Loch Lomond. What can I help you with?

Welcome Jim
How about a report on the dig? We are a very curious lot and there are a lot of archeologists on this forum.

Cheers

Cees

Lancaster Dig

Can anyone point me towards any further info on this recovery please?

New guy on the block was part of the recovery team on Conic Hill near Loch Lomond. What can I help you with?

Well, with all the posts on this subject, nobody seems to have noticed that. from the photos, both propellors appear to have been feathered.

Hmmmm, yes and no,
I thought the same, but on closer inspection the props on both engines seem to be at different orientations.
the engine slung off the (lovely!) red tractor do look like they’er feathered, whilst if you look at the engine on the ground with the rad cowl.. those blades seem to be at a very coarse pitch but definately not feathered.
Interesting…..

Well, with all the posts on this subject, nobody seems to have noticed that. from the photos, both propellors appear to have been feathered, in flight. One engine looks as if it impacted, inverted, while moving sideways. Did it crash on land or water, Pete?

One prop was feathered as far as I could tell, but the other one was less certain as it had some pitch on it.

About the point that Creaking Door made, the bronze “blade bushing” as it is called is indeed located with screws and dowels, but it is also in a tapered bore in the blade which holds it very tightly in my experience. A special puller is required to get them out and they tend to be tight.
However, I have dismantled crashed examples in which the screws and dowels have sheared off, so what you say is quite possible. Am I contradicting myself here or what?!

Pete

The major components of these hydromatic propeller units are very strongly constructed but…

…the orientation of the blade itself is controlled only by two dowels (approximately 10mm) and four screws (approximately M6 equivalent).

I think it is conceivable (and very likely) that some of these will be found to be sheared in this case allowing the blades to rest in any orientation.

Just my two cents.

WA$.

Thanks for the link, Mr Clark. Looks good preservation ground. Can’t agree with you about the props. The point about feathering is to reduce drag, by turning the blades edge on to the slipstream and that is how these blades are.

The mid air break up occured in a dive, the rear section (about 15-20ft from the rear turret) broke off and landed close to the main site, the rest of the aircraft remained in one piece until impact when it excavated a large hole in the bog.

I always thought the engines were still at that site. I have seen photos taken shortly after the crash, Harry Holmes had them, and there was a huge hole with a few bits of bent metal.

When I visited the site they had done some of the recovery but I didn’t know they had two engines. Well done, the conditions at the site could only be described as wet and very soft.

I think the other two engines are possibly still there judging by the photo of the site in 44.

The props were not feathered, in the second and fourth photos you can see the props from the engines clearly and they are not feathered.

To answer the final question the aircraft dived into a bog about 700ft above Loch Lomond, see www.peakdistrictaircrashes.co.uk, then go to the Scotland section for a photo from 2004.

Well, with all the posts on this subject, nobody seems to have noticed that. from the photos, both propellors appear to have been feathered, in flight. One engine looks as if it impacted, inverted, while moving sideways. Did it crash on land or water, Pete?

I have the log book from one of the Special Duty Operators from 101 sqn, who was very likely flying during September 1944. Very remarkably, he survived his 30-mission tour. Once I’ve dug it up, I report here what his mission was for 13 September 1944, just for interest.

Thanks Pete, btw is that a Massey Ferguson 135, or a 165, and does it have dual power?

Stuart, just for you and Kenb`o, nice close-up of the front-end loader. :dev2:

These engines are in remarkable condition. They look more like having been recovered from water then soil. Merlin 28’s have a more durable finish than the RR’s built ones. We have one from a water recovery as well and it is still als black as the day it was made. A RR’built example had the paint cracking and blistering awaw withing an hour after recovery.

What more was recovered?

Cheers

Cees

Quite correct Cees, Packard Merlin castings are anodised aluminium which prevents corrosion and seems to make the paint adhere better.
All the parts from both powerplants pretty much, such as the cowlings, bearers and radiators. I also saw what looked like an R1155 and some other non-powerplant bits including an oxygen cylinder and the dinghy radio, but not a large amount.

Pete

These engines are in remarkable condition. They look more like having been recovered from water then soil. Merlin 28’s have a more durable finish than the RR’s built ones. We have one from a water recovery as well and it is still als black as the day it was made. A RR’built example had the paint cracking and blistering awaw withing an hour after recovery.

What more was recovered?

Cheers

Cees