"Preserved" at Lasham…

dhfan,

The vibration factor wouldn’t surprise me at all!!

The engine mounts, much to our horror, were actually truck radiator mounts from the late ’40’s. Meant to be fitted in compression they are dual mounted in shear. A genuine replacement set will have metal-to-metal contact [at least they fail safe!:rolleyes: ] on at least one of the 4 mounts in about 50hrs of operation. This doesn’t do much for the vibration.

We’ve come up with an approved Unithane filled mount which is proving capable; at least not collapsing, but there’s a bit of a jury decision on the vibration.

G’day 😉

BTW, parts for the Drover obviously used “off the shelf” components from the automotive industry. Take brake master cylinders; our Drover is #20 [last built] and has two different p/n cylinders. There are 4 approved brake cylinder p/n’s. When you take about 6 years to build 20 airframes, I guess stuff like this happens!

Although a huge fan of anything DH, (born and lived in Hertfordshire until about 15 years ago) I don’t profess any indepth knowledge. Lots of books though!
I’ve never heard of any problems with DH props returning themselves to component form on anything else. Could it be the vibration from the Gipsy Majors? I don’t know of any other 4 cylinder applications, but I’m prepared to be educated.

P/s,

After the debacle with the DH VP props coming apart inflight, Gipsy engined a/c were fitted with Fairey-Reed fixed pitch props; fine on the centre engine and coarser on the outboards [and, no, I have no idea why, except that if you shutdown an outboard, the centre is able to provide more symmetrical power.]

There is an AD on the Fairey-Reed’s for a daily preflight hub inspection. This is easily performed without spinners. The other regularly flying [commercial category] Drover has spinners with which it was fitted when acquired.

G’day 😉

Feather -Thanks for the info

From your attached photo, it would appear that the Drover operates without spinners on the props.

Is this usual ?

G’day All!

Wrote a treatise on the Drover for this thread, then lost the lot! Blame Bill Gates.

Nervertheless, a couple of points;

Design; not loosely based, but directly from the Dove with 3x Gipsy Major 10 Mk2 and a tailwheel [3 Chipmunks in close formation.] Fuselage a bit shorter and rivetted wings, not Redux bonded. It was felt that the Gipsy’s and a tailwheel would make it easier to maintain in the bush [one version of the story anyway.]

Development; leaving aside the VP prop drama’s [they fell off a couple of times!], the Mk1 and 2 had Gipsy’s, the Mk3 Lycomings. The intention was to have a modern post-war mini-airliner to take over from the Dragon. RFDS didn’t use the a/c directly until the late 50’s with Qantas and then TAA providing a/c at times in Western Queensland.

Trust that helps a bit. 🙂

A bit more on the Drover. I believe that Russell Whyham, who ran a company at Squires Gate (Blackpool) called Air Navigation and Training, had it for a while. He was going to use it for “Round the Tower” flights but I don’t ever remember seeing it assembled. He also had a Prince or Pembroke and that didn’t fly either. He was unfortunately killed when he crashed into a sewage farm in a Beagle Pup. I very nearly bought a Hornet Moth from him for £395 but got a Mark One Sprite instead. Mark One Sprite today £6000, Hornet Moth £50,000. Oh well !!

On the subject of gliding, the forces club I was at when I was in Germany just happened to share the field with a German club. I was amazed that we managed more launches in a day than they did when they had a two drum winch and an aero tow operating and we had one single drum winch. I think it was down to the fact that we had another glider lined up ready every time the cable came back whereas the Germans seemed to wait until the cable was there before even getting the glider on the launch point, then the instructor and pupil held a 5 minute briefing before they got in the machine then snother 5 minute brief in the glider then they’d strap in. For all their slowness of operation I didn’t see anything to make me think that we were sacrificing any safety issues for the sake of a high launch rate.

Yep – agree about Lasham although it was fairly quiet when I was there, just 4-5 launches every 5 mins…

Flood.

Small point, Flood, about your description of Lasham…you forget to mention that it’s home to the largest gliding operation in the UK. Maybe it was unflyable on the day of your visit. Of course the finest gliding club in the UK is the London Gliding Club, Dunstable. I’m biased, naturally.

She always looked a little sad with no fabric… glad she is coming on! She is alot happier with all her friends then a cold hangar.

I once interviewed for the post of General Manager at the Southend Museum.

In retrospect, I’m quite glad I didn’t get it

Moggy

Bruce,

I concur with every word you say, and I think there is light at the end of the tunnel. Your point about collecting policy of some smaller museums is a good one, I have seen this too. You have to put yourself in the Publics point of view. As you say no one is interested in a rare aircraft because it is rare, they want to see it looking good in the first instance, operating maybe after, as an added bonus, that is only fair. Many small groups overlook that, we realised this back in the late nineties and have never looked back. As medium sized collections are starting to improve greatly, it is unfortunately only highlighting those very small groups that are struggling, hence why they are unfairly highlighted in threads such as these. I also agree with your point about the BAPC, I lasted 2 meetings and was totally dumfounded, talk talk talk, no action. I was trying to be kind in the previous post, since their intentions are good, problem is(my impressions anyway) BAPC is run like an old school tie club, and no ground seems to be gained.

MJR

Originally posted by Learning_Slowly
Bruce that is a very pretty avtar 😀

Yes, I thought you would like it!

For the uninitiated, it is my Vampire T-11 at Exeter. I bought her from Learning_Slowly last year. Needs a bit of work, but I am slowly finding enough parts to turn her back into an aeroplane again!

Bruce

mjr

You raise some very good points.

I suppose the point here is that many groups ourselves and yourselves included have developed systems for maintaining and restoring the airframes, that removes some of the problems that one can find with volunteers who stay for only a day or so. That we can do it offers some hope for other groups like the Lasham collection.

There are (in my opinion) problems with some groups who have only a vague collecting and restoration policy, in that they will take more or less anything to display, without giving proper regard for its context within the museum, or regard for its condition, and how long it will take to restore, or even how long it will last without work. This is not a criticism per se – it is something we have all gone through. Those of us who are coming out the other side can offer good advice to other groups.

At the end of the day, Joe public, on visiting a museum want to see well presented exhibits that can hold their attention for an hour or so. They dont actually care what is in the museum, or how many. So many times, I have heard that such and such a museum is getting A N other aircraft in order to bring in more visitors – forget it, it doesnt work.

BAPC is in a mess – it has lost direction to the point where I feel it has become meaningless. It offers no hope and no direction to smaller museums who find themselves in a quandary. I am always happy to offer advice to any individual, particularly on the subject of de Havilland aircraft. If I can help anyone, then I will try!

This has turned into a bit of a ramble – but believe me, I am one of the more committed individuals in the preservation world – driving four hours a day to get to the museum and back gives me plenty of time to think!!

Cheers for now

Bruce

Anyone can summise and express dissapointment/disgust, but until you have been involved in aircraft preservation with small collections, you will have no idea of the titanic task which confronts and the dedication required from all, however big or small.

Above comments from Colin are right on the money. We at GAM experienced similar problems to Lasham some years ago, lots of enthusiasm about, and plenty of self confessed ‘experts’ but very few stayers, (and in this situation you can just end up with half dissmantled wrecks everywhere) hence why many smaller collections struggle to make a big impact, and can come across as ‘not wanting or willing to trust extra help’, since they are cautious.

We developed a system for ensuring the aircraft are most important and that ‘time wasters’ (without wanting to sound harsh) are filtered out. It sounds clinical, but its the only way to ensure that proper progress is made with maximum efficiency, rather than twice as much distruction as progress.This I grant comes across as bitting the hand that feeds you, but it has to be this way. And of course that old chesnut ‘wedge’ is key too.

Also, there is nowhere near enough inter museum co-operation going on in the UK. We work with many other preservation groups and museums regularly, and pool workforce, skills, knowledge materials, jobs etc, which makes the task far easier. This originally was the goal of BAPC, which unfortunately so far appears to be lacking any direction, but a central organisation is what is required and patience may win out. Many airfarmes often get put on display and never touched, becasue funds and skills are not available to small groups. Better the potential, than not being rescued from the start, and allowing complete airframes to be scrapped.

MJR

Bruce that is a very pretty avtar 😀

I have been reseaching the Southend Museum for a few years, The Drover was bought in by road from Liverpool I beleve it had been damaged during transit from down under,

DE HAVILLAND AUSRALIA 3 DROVER G-APXX/VH-FDT.
AUSTRALIA FLYING DOCTORS SERVICE;
S-H-A-M;
DOUG ARNOLD BLACKBUSHE;
SECOND WORLD WAR AIRCRAFT PRESERVATION SOCITY, Lasham;

I would love the aircraft to still be arround in 5 years but looking at the photos on here its looking less & less likely.:(

Yes, they were Gipsy Majors in the Drover. They were robbed out of this particular example many years ago!

Bruce

Certainly looked nicer with a “proper” cowl. I would have to check but I supect the engines were Gypsy Majors, hence the need for three. The Gypsy Major was in production in Australia, by Holden I think, for the Tiger Moth (and Dragon?).

Originally posted by dhfan
Not British – Australian. DHA-1 if creaking memory is right. Loosely based on the Dove and designed,IIRC with the Flying Doctor service in mind.

Creaking memory was wrong. D.H.A.3

Seems to be the only one in the Northern Hemisphere, although it has never flown here.

dhfan your memory serves far better than you think. The Drover was actually designed purely for the RFDS. Mk1s were powered by Gipsy sixes or gipsy qeensI think and Mk2s were powered by lycomings and apparrently the crews prefered the all deHavilland version(must have sounded nicer too)