I also remember some smallish books that where wider than they were long which had a photograph on the left and a description on the right, often with line drawings, but I can’t remember what happened to them. They were all glossy pages and were actually quite thick. They were hardbacks too.

I recall those now too, there were two different series, the “Observer book of…” series which were small portrait format books, and I “think” Putnam? which were a small landscape format?

regards

Mark Pilkington

Here are some poor quality mobile phone pics of the Avro 504K and Qantas Heritage Collection in the Domestic terminal at Sydney

Regards

Mark Pilkington

Camden is still closed,

HARS and Fleet Air Arm are both worth seeing, but quite a drive south of Sydney, if you time your visit to sydney on a weekend you may be able to get access to see the Camden collection by prior appointment subject to dates, or co-inciding with the volunteer days:

Personally I would pick Camden over everything else in Sydney if you can arrange access:

STAY IN TOUCH
While the Museum is temporarily closed for maintenance of the building and collection, we would like to keep you up to date on our progress. If you would like to join our emailing list and receive updated information, please complete the following form and/or submit your contact details via our Contact Us page.
CURRENTLY CLOSED
The museum is currently closed to the public, however private viewing by appointment (subject to available dates) can be arranged by contacting Nicole on 0447 778 020 .

The Camden Museum of Aviation is located at 11 Stewart St, Harrington Park (formerly Narellan). We are 8 kilometres from the Hume Highway – expressway turnoff, and only a few hundred metres from the intersection of Narellan Rd and Camden Valley Way (near McDonalds restaurant Narellan). We are down the road from the Candy & Sweets store opposite McDonalds).

VOLUNTEERS INFORMATION

Volunteer Day
Sunday 21st June 2009
10.00am to 4.00pm

For regular volunteers we will start the day at 10.00 am with a Briefing for the day’s activities and to sort out our work groups. Could any new Volunteers please turn up at 9.30 am to go through an OHS Induction!

BBQ lunch & drinks provided

If you can spare a few hours your help will be appreciated. We have lots of cleaning to do, relocation of engines in the hanger, and moving of spare parts into permanent storage.

Gloves, protective clothing and footwear are required!

For further information please contact Nicole on O447 778 020

Regards

Mark Pilkington

Mark,

The Halifax and Hastings centre sections are identical, it’s the intermediate wingsections that are wider than the Halifax’. The section over the centresection of the Halifax was called the covered waggon, not on the Lancaster. Nice thread by the way, keep it up.

Cheers

Cees

Cees,

I knew there was a difference between the Halifax and Hastings wing, I thought it was in the Centre-section, again due to the fuselage size, what was the reason for the difference in the intermediate section?

I use the term covered wagon to describe the fuselage section built integral to the Lancaster wing centre-section, I have heard its not a correct term for the Lancaster but it does seem to be recognised by others.

I suffer similar problems describing the next section of fuselage aft containing the mid upper turret, which I usually call the “centre-rear” fuselage, as against the tail section of fuselage containing the tail turret, I havent noticed a diagram applying actual names to these sections?

I guess I could resort to describing them via stations or formers?

smiles

Mark Pilkington

My remark was a little off the cuff, and I hoped to spark some debate on the subject wich you have now coverd.

On the subject of Lancaster sections, I was under the impression you had a Lancaster centre section with your project (please post updates) so thank you for dispelling that. What do you have ? The other section you mentioned is a rear section at Aeroventure (Doncaster) not far from Sandtoft.

The Halifax composite is at ELVington. I should note here I would`nt have the first clue where any where is in Australia never mind be able to spell it.

Thank you for your reply

Ben

Ben, in the Lincoln/Lancaster parts recovered from the UK there was only one complete Wing Centre-section, and that is the Lincoln Centre-section from RF342.

Two other sections of Lancaster Wing Centre-sections were recovered, but both with their wing stubs cut off flush from the fuselage, one from KB994 consisting of the covered wagon fuselage section, and the other consisting just of the spar webs and floor/bomb-bay.

The KB994 covered wagon fuselage section, along with the KB994 cockpit, and KB976 centre-rear fuselage were all shipped down-under with the Lincoln are all owned by a fellow enthusiast, in store for an eventual display outcome with a museum he is associated with, he has chosen to keep his identity anonomous at this stage, & I need to respect his wishes.

The other centre-section “floor” is with the Lincoln project at the Australian National Aviation Museum and is intended to supply spares for the Lincoln restoration.

In regards to the Lincoln, it is currently in temporary storage while other parts are sourced in Australia and overseas.

regards

Mark Pilkington

Use the wings in a Lanc rebuild and scrap the rest.

I’m not aware of any current Lancaster restorations or displays requiring a replacement set of wings?, and others exist in any case?

On the other hand I think a ground up new “Lanc rebuild” from surviving sections would be far more difficult than the York, and I dont think its any more viable to “scratch build” a Lanc as it is to restore the York.

While the wing outer panels may be identical to Lancaster the York Centre-section is obviously of a wider span due to the fuselage width and significantly different in that area due to the high wing mounting and transport fuselage configuration, ie no bomb bay floor, no mounting for the covered wagon section of fuselage, and too wide for it in any case.

While the Elphington Halifax survives with the wider centre-section of the Hastings, I suspect the Yorks wider centre-section would be very obvious in the finished “Lancaster”, and to cut and rebuild it into a Lancaster section would be a major work in itself, with little of the existing structure being used.

So clearly to undertake a Lanc you would need to access a centre-section, it seems the 2 Lancaster wrecks in Canada both have surviving wing outer panels but totally destroyed centre-sections, “Elsie” in Europe similarly has little surviving of its centre-section, and the Lincoln Centre-section in Canada is cut in two with one section un-accounted for?

Then you need a fuselage, again there is little if any fuselage sections remaining at the 2 Lancaster wrecks in Canada, or at “Elsie”, and there is only one other fuselage section surviving to my knowledge, the composite sections of KB994 and KB976 recovered down under as part of our Lincoln acquisition, however its rear fuselage remains in another collection in the UK.

I am not aware of any other major Lancaster fuselage sections that could form the basis of another Lancaster rebuild?

Of course there are still hundreds of parts beyond the wing centre-section, rear fuselage, nose, tailplanes, fins rudders etc that would need to be pursued, and hours of re-construction to produce such a composite Lancaster, and that would always be the runt of the litter of the remaining survivors.

Given the 2 Lancaster wrecks in Canada both have outer wing panel remains, the raiding of the York does’nt seem warranted in any case.

It would seem far better to utilise the York remains to preserve and display that types own heritage, either in the form of an “as -is” display, or a composite restoration with a rebuilt forward fuselage / cockpit section, although that would be a significant project in itself, and an FSM approach similar to the Elphington Halifax might be the outcome rather than an exact structural reconstruction?

do ALL wrecks have to be recovered?…. re ‘restorations’ you can wipe out a lot of history with a can of paint and a spray-gun …have you ever seen the Halifax displayed in ‘as found’ state in the RAF Museum?….however,I have to admit I’d be impressed if someone got the York out and into flyable condition, and I would say ‘Treasure of the Humboldt Glacier’ (the Kee Bird) is not only a top aviation documentary but it stands up as a great movie about endeavour!…. regards, longshot

Not all wrecks have to be recovered, and many have’nt been, and wont be, before the elements make them unviable to recover or do anything with in anycase.

There is merit in displaying some wrecks “as is” and the RAF Museum Halifax is a good example of the value in such displays as against leaving it in the lake, equally the Trenton example shows how the “restored” approach can equally deliver a good return on effort and still provide preserved history – the debate between the two approaches rages on in this forum elsewhere.

Given there are only two preserved Yorks surviving, that Yorks did play a role in post war air transport in Canada, and a Canadian museum has plans to recover it and preserve it in some way, I dont have a problem in supporting its recovery?, and certainly support that over it being parted out as Lancaster parts?

The recovery, preservation and display “as is”, or complete “restoration” via very substantial reconstruction of the forward fuselage would still seem a better use than letting it rot away? if there is a group with the resources and desire to do so?

Regards

Mark Pilkington

.
Roger

3 in one location for your list:

DH Heron
VH-CLX “Riley” conversion – Australian National Aviation Museum
Bristol Freighter
VH-ADL former PAF Mk 31 – Australian National Aviation Museum
Vickers Viscount
VH-TVR former TAA V816 – Australian National Aviation Museum

Regards

Mark Pilkington

Thanks Mark,

I have a pair of RPM’s 6A-778 (early type) for the Comet project and was sold a pair of RPM generators said to be the correct ones No 6A-4333780 (KGA043). This number seems long but is on the label on the side.

I have been offered another RPM which looks closer in design to those originaly used ..No 6A-1429 and I wondered if the generators I have will still work, but have also seen some other generators 6A-1549 .This is why I was asking about a list to try and help me see if things will match up

Will the lists you have help?

Thanks

ken

Ken,

my listing is a RAAF WW2 Stores publication “Types and Location of Instruments in RAAF”, and as such only lists instruments etc used in the RAAF’s aircraft, however the 6A/778 is listed

The entry is:

RAAF Ident No: G6A/778
RAF Ident No: 6A/778
Maker: A.M.
Type: mk IVB
Detail: 0-5000 (A.C.) Lum.
Aircraft fitted: Beaufighter, Mosquito DH98, Sunderland mkII, Mosquito Mk XVI

The same document lists the following generators as suitable for the same indicator and aircraft, (using the same entry labels as above):

G6A/780
6A/780
A.M.
mkIV
AC for mk IVA & IVB 4:1 ratio

G6A/889
6A/889
Kollsman
mk IV
AC for mk IVA ind 4:1 ratio

Hope that might be of some assistance

Regards

Mark Pilkington