That’s better.:) and I still can’t figure out what the aircraft behind them is.

The aircraft behind are Neptunes.

I always seem to forget that many times links to external sources get changed and then finding information can get a bit difficult down the road.

Here is the paragraph describing the synchronization of the props in the B-24 from the link.

“We had slipped into our place in the formation, and I was concerned about the number three engine, which was just outside my window. I had synchronized the props, first by tachometers, then finer synchronization by changing prop pitch until you got rid of the changing shadows seen by sighting through the two props on the left, then the two props on the right. Final synchronization was by killing the sound “beat” of the two left props being a little off timing from the right. If you listened, you could hear a varoom-varoom-varoom. I would then speed up or slow down the right pair to sound-synch with the left with gentle nudges on the pitch of the props, resulting in the sweet smooth roar of our well-synchronized engines. I’m pretty hard of hearing now, and I like to attribute it to my glory days as a B-24 Pilot and Co-pilot. Well worth it to have had such a once-in-a-lifetime privilege.”

I don’t think the author would mind me pulling this from a very interesting story.

Truc

Truc.
I think the only question left in my mind is that of there possibly being some variation of Left and Right Synching. I had come across two versions.
A. As above with both wing groups being synched first and then brought into tune together by slowing the beat until it went. ( I subsequently deleted this part from my mail because I also then recalled):
B. In which the outers were firstly very slighly pulled back together and the comparitively louder inners initially synched by sound, with then the outers “brought up and in ” by visually strobing. (This of course could potentially result in a bit less yaw compensation being required from the pilot , and therefore be a smoother overall operation if being performed by, for example, the engineer).
Finally ,I do note the remark in the manual of words to the effect IIRC that with experience one could actually do it all on sound alone.

Thanks for info, looks like just what we were after, I wonder if thats why many older multi prop aircraft have a fuselage window level with the propellors?

Yes, one reason indeed ; and often adjacent to the flight engineer’s position

. In zulu too some of the zulu warriors were wearing watches too. LOL

Down here they still are.

Conversely. How many times do they get the sound track right?

Yes, and the dorsal turret too.

Strip out all the redundant plumbing, the engine driven hydraulic pumps (originally one on each engine supplying power to one turret each) except leave two pumps to supply the tail turret (for redundancy in case of loss of one engine).

As far a centre-of-gravity for a Lancaster I’m sure the bombload could have been re-arranged to cope with any problems (the Halifax lost its nose turret without problems).

On a Lancaster the nose turret FN5 alone (without guns or ammunition) weighed 237lb (107kg) and the dorsal turret FN50 alone (without guns or ammunition) weighed 340lb (155kg) loaded with guns and ammunition it weighed 699lb (318kg)!

Working on a figure of 22lb (10kg) for each Browning 303 gun and 180lb (82kg) per 1000 rounds of ammunition per gun the FN5 nose turret should weigh about 641lb (291kg) loaded!

Not forgetting of course the gunner for the dorsal turret at about 180lb (82kg).

So a total weight for both turrets of about 1500lb (682kg)…plus a fair amount of drag…and all this had to be carried all the way to the target and in almost every case all the way back.

Without these turrets a Lancaster would fly higher and significantly faster and these were by far the best defences against night fighters. Alternatively some of this weight loss could be traded-off for better range, better bombload (an extra two 1000lb bombs to any target) or a combination of these.

Also when a Lancaster was lost only six crew would be lost or to put it another way a saving of maybe 7000 aircrew lives over the course of the war.

And, yes, I know there are some flaws in this argument but I’m happy to discuss it. 🙂

IIRC I think precisely that argument was put forward at Farnborough during the war.
Logic versus psychology!

I think what JDK may be alluding to here is some form of stroboscopic affect that would allow engine RPM to be accurately matched, rather that any blade position consideration.

Indeed. You matched the inners and outers by precisely what JDK is alluding to and was described by Eddie in an earlier post ( #16) in this thread.
Often this was done from the flight engineer’s position , especially if the flight deck was a long way forward of the propellers, as in the case of aircraft such as the Hastings for example. The Beverley, incidentally, was not alone in having Sync indicators (the little white props on the eng. panel) ; they were usually used (if at all) during initial setting up of synchronisation .

By looking through the inner prop disc to the outer disc you then strobed out the relative motions of the props to get the engine pairs perfectly “in sync.”
In the case of at least one trimotor (IIRC the Ju 52) you looked back from the cockpit ,through the wing engine prop disc, to a mirror on the front of the engine nacelle which was positioned to show the nose prop disc through its propeller ,then matched each prop rpm to that of the middle propeller by the same strobing technique.

Putting engines out of synch was deliberate, not an error.
If you don’t believe me, try listening to some soundtracks of pre-war German civil multi engined aircraft. I cannot imagine an FW200 or Ju 90 crew ( or passengers for that matter) putting up with unsynchronised engines for hours on end. Nowadays the same argument still applies with those few Ju 52’s still operating – and they predate most of the types we are talking about.

However, if you would have us to believe German aviation engineering technology was behind everyone else in the thirties……………