Spoke to him the other night and he`s going to chat with the rest of the party.Since writing this I`ve found the site was investigated by divers connected to the Stirling Aircraft Association.

I assume the SAA divers found nothing otherwise other activities would have followed?

It is possible that the wreckage could have been reduced from 6 or 8 feet proud of the seabed when found in 1970 to virtually nothing during Bulldog’s seach some ten or so years later, but perhaps unlikely without some form of human intervention. If some form of clearance had been attempted, then the Shoreham authorities would most certainly have been aware of it. Worth asking locally.

That Bulldog conducted a wide search beyond the designated position reflects the uncertainty of the original position. Decca was relatively good for repeatablity of a position but not so hot for absolute positioning without the application of corrections for the local area. If the corrections were not applied then the position could be in error by many hundreds of metres.

A dive on the charted position would be useful to confirm ‘nothing there’ and also to establish the type of seabed – sand, shingle, exposed bed-rock etc. Then a sonar search of the surrounding area would be more productive before contemplating further dives.

Concur with Whitley_Project’s comments

I have just been given a panel to Identify by a local farmer. He was cutting a field of wheat in July 1941 and came across this panel in a field? (About 3 miles SW of RAF Debden) It has been blocking a hole in the grain wall since that date! Until he came across it the other week, any ideas what it came off?

Certainly looks Hurricane I – the curved strengthener following the line of the firewall between engine and fuel tank. V6949 looks the most likely candidate. It came to grief in Scotland, but changing panels was not unknown.

See your ‘visitors messages’.

DD,

The fuselage is one component, as is the centre section, each outer wing, tailplane, fin etc. Each component, except for the fuselage, has its own data plate which lists: component name, drawing number, serial number for that particular part (not the aircraft’s number) and sometimes the date. A good series of examples is in Peter Vacher’s book about Hurricane R4118 (p.78).

The fuselage could be considered as being in two parts – forward and aft of joints G & H. The wooden ‘dog kennel’, where the ‘clipped’ data plate is reported to be, is at the rear end of the ‘front’ part. The main (and complete) data plate, fixed to joint C (lower left side of instrument panel), is also in the front part, so there is still duplication of these plates even if the fuselage is considered as two components.

It would be interesting to see if the manufacturer’s number (starting 41H or G5) is the same on both the clipped and full data plates for the same machine. I expect it would be. Unlike Tangmere1940, who I believe has extensive knowledge from wreck sites, I have not seen a pair from the same machine. Perhaps someone on the forum reading this has a pair and can confirm the serial number is the same. Here’s hoping.

[QUOTE=Discendo Duces;1963547]I believe that it wasn’t an either/or, but that this would have been fitted along with the main plate on the port side of the cockpit near the fuel tap.
I know of several recovered wrecks where both have been found.

Where two plates have been found on one airframe, could you say whether the 41H-xxxxx Hawker Part No. was the same on both plates? Just curious./QUOTE]

Discendo Duces – It would be logical for them to be the same, as that was the manufacturer’s ‘number’ for the aircraft.
Perhaps Tangmere1940, has an example to show that was the case?

Photo finally added to post above!

Hi Pete,

If I remember correctly the farmer was Clive Harvey. He had the airstrip at Andrewsfield where Stan later set up the Rebel Air Museum. I wonder if the engine ever got into the museum itself or only just as far as the farmer’s part of the facility?
Yes, the second engine was ‘almost’ recovered by the East Easex Aviation Museum several years later, but it grounded on a sandbank during the process and before they could complete the operation someone else did it for them – straight to a scrap yard.

Geoff

See http://www.warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=268430

“Hurricane researcher JE Vernon”

There is not much that Jerry Vernon doesn’t know about CCF Hurricanes

Which probably explains why the Flypast article earlier this year (Jan?) avoided mention of the Canadian number and just referred to the UK civil registration identity.