BobKatJules,
If you go to the National Archives ‘Discovery’ website and enter “578 Squadron Operations Record Book” in the search box, and scroll down the results, you will find the monthly Record of Events for August 1944. The search facility is a little sensitive – if you abbreviate “Squadron” to “Sqn” you will get no results!! The document can be downloaded for a cost of £3.30. There are also ‘Summary of Events’ records which might prove of assistance.
BobKatPeter, it was in post #836. It is not the right shape for the handle to the sliding window – unless it was a non-standard fitting.
BobKatWreckage plan
After Laurent’s recent finds, it is time for another forensic view of the crash site.
We have now found two almost complete portable oxygen cylinders, one at location 42 by the lane at the left end of the field immediately to the north of the edge of the forest, and the other at location 89 at the other end of the field, about 300 yards away. This is where I need help from experts in the examination of crash sites, but these finds seem to confirm Planehunters’ view that there must have been an explosion shortly before the main fuselage came to earth, with the two oxygen cylinders likely to have been originally located near the front and rear of the aircraft respectively.
The pattern of the way in which the wreckage was scattered can be seen from the updated plan below, with recent finds (since July 2014) highlighted in yellow.
Laurent has pointed out to me that the path at the eastern edge of the forest now follows a slightly different track from that depicted on the plan and this has been noted accordingly.
What is proving to be slightly curious is the two finds close together at locations 62 and 87, and the other items found on the higher slopes of the forest. Item 62 has been identified as the union for the autopilot oil reservoir, located in the port-side undercarriage well (Air Ministry’s post #604). If we have correctly identified item 87 as a part of the frame for the pilot’s sliding window, then this would seem to be further evidence of an explosion before the aircraft hit the ground, but it is more likely to be as a consequence of the original mid-air explosion when the port wing became detached, than the scattering of pieces from the remaining part of the fuselage which took a different path. It seems probable that other items found close by, such as our mysterious ‘handle’ (item 80), would have been from the port side of the aircraft, damaged by the force of the original explosion? This may provide some assistance in potential identification.
If anyone has any thoughts to share, I should be glad to hear.
BobKatYes, Peter, they do. Thanks very much. I think we may have a piece of the flat outer side of the frame – your left-hand picture.
BobKatItem 87
Peter, I attach a couple of diagrams so that others can see what we are discussing. The rivet pattern on our piece 87 looks very similar to that on the diagram, although the poor condition of the item makes it difficult to be certain. I have asked Laurent to have another look at the piece to see if he can determine what the material is between the two aluminium strips.
BobKatThat was my initial thought, Peter. I am not certain how positive Laurent is about the material between the two metal strips – presumably this would be Perspex if it was the sliding window?
BobKatWV-903, your household chores seem to have prevented you from making any further progress on the identification of item 86! There is probably nothing more to be said on this one, unless you can come up with something.
In the meantime Laurent has found a few more pieces on which I have carried out some preliminary research.
Item 87 is two lengths of diagonally riveted metal with what Laurent tells me is an aluminium strip sandwiched between them. I had thought that the filling might have been wood or discoloured Perspex, and that it might have been the bottom part of the pilot’s sliding window – the diagonal rivet pattern is similar. The only possibility I can now think of, looking at illustrations I have, is that it might be part of the wing tip where it joins to the outer wing?
Item 88 is a union and pipe connector, but without any readable markings. The shiny nut is 18mm wide (0.7087 inches), and the pipe is made of aluminium and is 7.85 mm (0.309 inches = 5/16ths) in diameter. These are the measurements for the BB size of AGS sleeve. The pipe dimensions of sleeves in the list I have (courtesy of Air Ministry – post #301) are mostly measured in BSP units. This thread of this piece is shown as 0.600 x 19TPI. Whether this makes it more readily identifiable I do not know.
Item 89 is a very rusty portable oxygen cylinder – the second such item to be found. Despite its condition the valve was still in working order and, amazingly, oxygen was released when it was turned!
Any thoughts on items 87 and 88 are welcomed.
Photo-gallery link:
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=bcf75e8ad40adf0d!164&authkey=!AJrxfdmdr6MXSdw&ithint=folder%2cjpg
BobKatThanks WV-903. I have had a browse through my parts list and I have spotted a few candidates for our piece. I haven’t found anything obvious for the hydraulic or fuel systems, but I suppose these should not be ruled out. I am not sufficiently expert to know whether the items listed below fit the description (noting that there may be flexible piping attached), but here they are:
Emergency air bottle system: ¼ inch non-return valve (Dowty)
Hydraulics piping to undercarriage valves: non-return valve (Dowty)
Oxygen system economiser: cut-off valve
And Peter has suggested possibly the high-pressure priming system?
The other thing I should mention is that Laurent has now pin-pointed where the piece was found on his plan. It was further up the slope than our ‘handle’ at location 80, quite some distance from the other wreckage found – nearer the target indicator casings. This suggests that it may have travelled some distance as the consequence of an explosion. Whether this makes oxygen related equipment the more likely choice is difficult to know.
I suspect this may end up as being an unidentified high-pressure system valve.
BobKatLaurent has produced a few more photos of our item 86 – (no camera probe I’m afraid, WV-903!!). The bottom left image shows a square discoloration on the cylindrical sleeve – I’m not sure what significance that might have? The internal diameter can be roughly gauged from the bottom right picture.
I hope this helps.
Link to picture gallery:
BobKatPeter, that’s a great piece of research – it must have taken a while – many thanks indeed for all your time on this. So the layout appears to be exactly as depicted on Terry P’s diagram in WV-903’s post #924.
It now seems possible that ED908, which had spent some time at the PFF NTU before returning to operational activity in July 1944, might well have had the nitrogen system fitted. It would be good to hear if anybody knows when the system was first introduced into Lancasters. The Lancaster Manual notes modifications up to January 1943, but our difficulty in researching this suggests maybe the first installation may not have been until sometime in 1944 at the earliest?
WV-903, I would be interested to hear why you think we are looking at a non-return valve and not a pressure-reducing valve? I am not sufficiently technical to understand how their internal workings would be designed, and so a basic question: is our item more likely to be from a gas system rather than related to a hydraulic or fuel system? If so, this obviously narrows down the possibilities. At first sight, our sprung item looks a bit like the mechanics of the Palmer valve.
I doubt whether Laurent has ready access to a camera probe (nice idea though) – just something rather more basic!! And he may not want to take the piece apart and damage it – let’s wait to see what more information he can provide.
BobKatThanks Terry P and WV-903. Lots to think about. I’ll see what Laurent can come up with.
BobKatTerry P, many thanks for your continued help.
If I am reading the diagram and notes correctly, these illustrate a completely separate nitrogen circuit for fire suppressant use. I am, therefore, assuming that this is quite separate from the fire extinguishers mounted behind each of the engines and controlled by four push buttons on the pilot’s instrument panel and which were, I think, operated electrically.
The reason I am struggling to understand this, is that neither the Lancaster Manual nor the Parts Lists that I have, make any mention of this alternative (or supplementary?) system, and I am therefore wondering whether this was fitted on the Mk.III Lancaster?
And yet, what is shown in your diagram, and what is described by Laurent, seems to strongly indicate that we are looking at a sprung valve similar to, but not identical to, the Palmer type. A bit of a conundrum!
BobKatWe seem to be struggling on this one, Peter, although we have narrowed things down a bit. I have asked Laurent if he can provide some pictures of the end(s) of the piece in case that helps.
BobKatYes, I have Peter. There are a number of valves mentioned in the fuel system, but nothing that is immediately identifiable as our piece in the illustrations. I guess the problem is that, if we are looking at a slightly different version of the high-pressure reducing valve described by Terry P, then neither the Manual nor the illustrations in the parts list seem to cover it – which is odd!
…………………..
It is now midnight UK time, so I will sign off for the night. Maybe if there are any valve experts on your side of the Atlantic, there might be a reply waiting for me in the morning!
BobKatThat’s a pity!! Maybe our first thoughts were nearer the mark, but it is the sprung valve that intrigues me. If this is uncommon, then perhaps WV-903 and Terry P have pointed us in the right direction?
Sign In
