April 25, 2017 at 11:39 pm
For their July exhibition the Victoria and Albert Museum have done a fine rebuild of a Mosquito plywood tank but it doesn’t seem to be a true drop tank I.e. one attached by releasable bomb type shackles so is it a fixed streamlined ‘slipper-tank’ cover to go over a drum type metal tank? Anybody know just how it worked?
http://www.vam.ac.uk/blog/conservation-blog/conservation-of-a-de-haviland-aviation-drop-tank
By: longshot - 26th April 2017 at 16:54
I see Bruce has commented on the V&A blog page so communications have begun. I’m beginning to realize how the V&As plywood piece was manufactured, rather like the Lockheed monocoque Vegas and Orions from individual strips of veneer glued (laid up diagonally?) over or in a mould (male or female?)…I wonder which size tank the V&A example is from…50, 100 or 200 gallon…the latter would have been massive ….200 gallons occupies a rectangular box roughly 2x2x8 feet!
By: Bruce - 26th April 2017 at 16:14
P+P
Yes, the Australian production tanks were indeed steel. As you note, they also had a 100 gallon tank, which didn’t have a corollary in wood.
By: PeterVerney - 26th April 2017 at 16:06
Because you cannot get your head round it.
By: powerandpassion - 26th April 2017 at 15:02
I thought these were made of mild steel…probably depends on the country. In Australia 60 & 100 gallon pressed steel versions were used to extend range, particularly on PR Mosquitos. They could be dropped, but not routinely. They were an entire monocoque structure, the topside matching the underside of the wing. I have seen these converted into fairground ‘cars’ for a children’s merry go round, with the top cut out. Kind of like the body of a motorcycle sidecar. I think the AP drawing version shows a pressed steel version including steel baffles…baffling..no doubt ‘baffles’ are a nautical term, but why does something become ‘baffling’?
By: longshot - 26th April 2017 at 12:36
These tanks must have had a top ‘lid’ which matched the undersurface of the wing…..were they ever dropped?…..routinely?….in emergencies? (Did they leak?)
By: Arabella-Cox - 26th April 2017 at 10:42
Here you go…
By: Bruce - 26th April 2017 at 10:21
This is slightly misleading, as this isn’t a complete tank – its the outer shell of one. However, the whole thing was indeed made from wood, and was painted on the inside with a fuel proof lacquer, and dope and fabric on the outside.
There is a bit more structure in order to attach it to the wing, as well as a filler in the front end, and some wooden baffles.
These parts arrived at the museum with another complete tank, courtesy, I think of a local resident.
By: longshot - 26th April 2017 at 10:12
So presumably there was an actual leakproof tank (metal?) inside this fairing and the whole lot was dropped if required (for speed/manouvreability?)
By: Graham Boak - 26th April 2017 at 09:05
It was a drop tank, not just a cover. It fitted on the wing as a slipper tank (or conformal carriage, as we would say nowadays) but had internal shaping so that it entirely enclosed the shackles mounted below the wing. Without the tank in place, what was visible was a conventional fairing around the standard carrier.