Vickers Aviation

The Vickers Aviation Products catalogue from 1929 captures much of the detail and features of British aircraft from the interwar and early WW2 period : Vickers Potts Oil Coolers, two way and three way valves, flying wires, fasteners, oleo -pneumatic struts…if only they could be purchased today!

Japanese WW2 Materials

A remarkable analysis by Australia’s Department of Aircraft Production (DAP) in 1946 engaged translators in transcribing wartime Japanese Material standards and these were then compared and matched with wartime British and US standards. This document provides the most detailed forensic engineering analysis of Japanese wartime aircraft structures, with further BIOS reports dealing with Japanese engines. These BIOS reports are quite complimentary of the workmanship and materials in Japanese radial engines. Today, these structures are a ‘lost world’ in engineering terms and it is very difficult to penetrate into Japanese literature to find answers, particularly because the written Japanese of the time varied from region to region. To me, it is amazing to accept the idea that a Japanese person might not have been able to read some information written in another region in 1945. A fluent Japanese speaker of today must grapple with archaic regional dialects and a historic, obscure, technical language. I have tried to have Japanese technical data plates translated today by university level speakers and it is hard, slow work to translate terms such as ‘hydraulic reservoir’. Finally there is enough information here to provide a comprehensive English language guide to the identification and substitution of wartime Japanese materials.

This engineering information was purposefully destroyed in postwar Japan as the fascist war machine was de-fanged. Even today, the restoration of wartime Japanese aircraft in modern Japan generates mixed emotions. I acknowledge these feelings but also think that without the physical evidence of the Pacific War, in the form of restored Japanese wartime aircraft, this part of history will be harder to tell and re-tell to a younger generation.

DTD Standards

Over 750 DTD Standards are now available, including wartime originals, as well as an Index that can assist in identifying which DTD Standards eventually became British Standards. A common inquiry is DTD390, Alclad, which most 1936-1945 British structures were made of. Unfortunately an original DTD390 standard has yet to be located, but by reference to to the documents in the Substitution Page, a link to US 24ST, or today’s 2024, may be obtained. A researcher must be careful to understand the difference between Alclad 2024 and 2014, a lower strength, far more ductile material, in following this journey.

Often the difference between 2024 and 2014 was a further run through a mill, to work harden 2014 into 2024. As mill time was valuable during the war, the preference, in British design thought, may have been to use a 2014 grade, rather than the more expensive (in time and money) 2024. This becomes relevant today when some British structures require bending into forms that only the more ductile 2014 can achieve, where the less ductile 2024 may buckle or resist a satisfactory result.

Wartime Alclad in the UK was often 2014, while wartime Alclad in the US was often 2024. In 1940, one country was in a desperate struggle for survival while another country had more time and space to allow double conversion into 2024 and indulge a ‘do it right first time’ design and build philosophy. Many US structures were designed from the outset as 2024 structures while many British structures were designed from the outset as 2014 structures. In Australia, much 2024 Alclad came from the US, and was applied to 2014 UK designs such as the Beaufort and Beaufighter. US and UK sheetmetal gauges were also different. How US materials were adapted to British designs depended on the geometry of the structure. Some 2014 shapes could not be obtained in ‘stiffer’ 2024. Some 2014 thicknesses could be reduced by the use of ‘stronger’ 2024.

We do live in a US material world today. US materials are often more available and at a lower cost, which is a great thing. It is unremarkable that a historic British, German or Japanese structure may be made from US materials with different mechanical characteristics and different gauges, in comparison to the original. By understanding the non US original, a more informed basis can be made on the safe selection of modern US materials.