BobKatPeter, that looks as if it might fit the bill for the oil reservoir – one connection at the bottom, two at the top and what looks like a protruding piece near the bottom as in Air Ministry’s diagram. Hopefully somebody may be able to confirm?
Can you confirm whether your picture was of the port or starboard undercarriage well?
BobKatI have looked at the Autopilot diagrams in AP2062A and also on a diagram from AP 1469A posted by Air Ministry elsewhere on this forum.
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?112104-Mk-IV-Turn-Regulator-6H-1351
These diagrams seem to suggest that the oil reservoir is situated somewhere behind the pilot’s controls, but it is not clear where. The system is linked to the oil cooler in one direction (at the bottom in Air Ministry’s diagram) and to an air drier and compressor (back to the oil cooler circuit) in the other (at the top in Air Ministry’s diagram – hence the two outlets on our piece) which makes me think that the most likely location for the oil reservoir is somewhere near one of the engine bulkheads. Is anyone able to confirm, please?
BobKatThanks, Air Ministry. Do you know where this was located on the aircraft? It was found some distance from where the main fuselage came to earth. Was it near one of the engines?
BobKatMany thanks Air Ministry – it looks right to me. Does part 11 have a name in your list, or do you just have the illustration? I’ll see what additional information Laurent can provide.
BobKatNew items: 61, 62 and 63
I had thought that my posting of items 59 and 60 was going to be the last for a while. I had suggested to Laurent that he might like a rest after all his strenuous activity. I don’t know how he has found the time, but he clearly has the bit between his teeth and is determined to carry on! The rainfall has meant that the track to location 12 is still not readily accessible, so we will have to wait for a bit longer before any further activity there.
He makes the point that the light is much better in the winter with no leaves in the forest canopy, and the undergrowth is less prolific. As a consequence, now he can see where he is, he has been able to place some of the locations more accurately than on the earlier version of his map!! However this has no fundamental effect on the overall view of where things have been found.
The latest findings, further into the forest, are:
#61 – another connection for the portable oxygen breathing apparatus (the same as one of the pieces in No.43) which is not pictured;
#62 – pictured – a distinctive item with the numbers B-42 and 6H/68. An earlier piece (the serial number plate for the Autopilot Servomotor) had the reference 6H/1030, but this was an Air Ministry reference – I suspect the latest one is an Avro reference; and
#63 – a piece of not readily distinguishable fuselage (not pictured).
If anyone recognises item 62 I would be glad to hear, please.
BobKatAh … many thanks, Peter – back to my first thoughts!!! Nice to have it confirmed that we seem to have a piece of the wing-tip.
BobKatGreat picture, Peter (and a few more from the same source which I have had a look at). I reckon we probably have a piece from the outer wing-tip between the navigation lamp and the formation-keeping lamp at the top of the picture. Many thanks.
BobKatItem 57: wing tip piece?
Now that Air Ministry has confirmed that we have a formation-keeping lamp fairing from the wing tip, I am going to have one more go at trying to identify the piece of fuselage (No.57) found nearby.
I attach new pictures. Is it my imagination or does the first picture have a ‘dark earth’ hue and does the second (the other side) have a ‘night black’ look? They are definitely contrasting shades. These are opposite sides of the same piece and are both are riveted to an angled section connecting them. Laurent thinks that the piece may be from the wing.
Can somebody please help me as to how the trailing edge of the wing-tip was configured? I cannot find any pictures in sufficient close-up detail, but is this not exactly how it might have been structured? A strip along its length (about one inch wide?) with the upper and lower wing-tip panels riveted to it in this fashion. Where else on the aircraft might such an arrangement occur?
Looking at the standard stencilling pattern for the camouflage paint on the Lancaster, the rear of the port wing-tip is painted ‘dark earth’ and the rear of the starboard is painted ‘dark green’. Have we finally found evidence that this is the port wing, or is this just wishful thinking?
BobKatMany thanks, Air Ministry – much appreciated. Sorry to hear of your eye infection – I wish you a speedy recovery.
The upshot is that we simply have to rely on the balance of probabilities as this piece being from the port wing.
BobKatAir Ministry, sorry to be a pain, but it would be great if we could positively identify the formation-keeping lamp fairing as being from the port wing. On closer inspection it seems to be the lower half of the fairing, but presumably this might be mirrored by the upper half on the starboard wing. Or do those holes on the channels seen in the lower of the first two pictures only appear on the bottom of the piece (presumably to release the lamp fitting)?
I should much appreciate your further advice, please.
BobKatAir Ministry, great to hear from you again, particularly as you have confirmed the good news about a piece from the wing-tip. It now seems that we have pieces from virtually the whole length of the wing. And all this started with your identification of rib no.17!!! Very many thanks indeed.
I fear that even with large number of pieces now identified (now about 100), Laurent might have a spot of bother contemplating a rebuild!!!
As you will have seen we have found a number of pieces with SS and other numbers:
SS 3704
1SS 348B (or 3488)
2SS 3549
3SS 2046
6DP19
7R 2060
10F 359
11Q589
15V 2068
? 35785 or 35795
435744
If you can find some time to spare to have a look at your parts list, it would be marvellous to have these identified if they appear in the index.
BobKatNew items 59 and 60
Despite 200 views since my last post, no luck with the fuselage pieces. It might be that the ‘double-thickness’ piece 57 is a repair?
I attach pictures of two new items, numbers 59 and 60.
Item 59 is very distinctive – it was found close to items 57 and 58 – and I understand that it is made from plastic. The upper of the two pictures (which is the one with the related measurement shown – it is about 12 inches long) looks into the hollow bowl where two parallel tube structures can be seen (enlarged and viewed from the opposite side in the lower picture). The next picture shows it end-on. It looks a little like the trailing aerial attachment, which seems to have varied in style in different versions of the aircraft, but there are a number of similar types of attachments to the outer fuselage, and I don’t know which might be made of plastic (if any) as distinct from metal. The parallel tubes make me think of formation lights on the wing-tip, but is this the right shape? Could it have warped in the heat? Can anyone help with this, please?
Item 60 I can recognise as a Merlin 28 engine exhaust stub. This was found along the northern edge of the forest. I have the engine reference numbers for ED908 and it would appear that the port outer and inner and the starboard inner were all fitted at much the same time and were probably the original engines. The starboard outer has a different style of reference number, suggesting that it may have been a replacement. This might explain what appears to be the rounder style of exhaust stub found at the main crash site and shown in picture T3 in post #35.
BobKatLocations 45 and 57
I have been in touch with Laurent over the weekend. He tells me that he has now searched most of the readily accessible parts of the forest along the northern and eastern slopes. There are some parts which are inaccessible because of brambles, holly and bomb craters. He has concluded that at the time the forest was replanted after the war, the remains of any sizeable pieces of the aircraft on the eastern edge were disassembled and removed for scrap. There are apparently chisel marks on some of the nuts which provide evidence of this.
Laurent is interested in trying to identify pieces of the fuselage from location 57, pictured again below for ease of reference. As previously mentioned in post #566, the item at the lower right has a bolted rectangular plate affixed, which may be a distinguishing feature. Also the item at the upper right is of double-thickness thin plate – two sheets riveted together. Where on the aircraft might this occur? Any ideas, anyone?
I think I have identified the piece of fuselage in photo 45 which is pictured below. It has a threaded circular metal attachment in the top hole, and it looks as if it is from one of the ribs containing the inboard fuel tank. The diagram from AP2062A shows an enlarged detail of the rib with two holes in the former, the upper one containing the tank strap attachment. The photograph on the right looks through the inboard engine ribs to the tank cavity in the background where the strap attachment ribs can be seen (viewed from the opposite side from that in the diagram).
Neither the rear spar nor the outboard tank fittings have the second hole beneath the strap attachment. This piece must therefore have come from the main plane section between the inboard engine and the fuselage. If this is correct, it is significant in that it is consistent with the eye witness report from aircraft 60-G flying alongside that “the whole of the port wing folded upwards at a right angle and completely broke off”. This suggests that the wing must have sheared off at the attachment point to the main fuselage.
There have been two new finds, one of which I can identify, and the other of which I can’t. Rather than confuse this post, I will post details separately shortly.
BobKatThat’s exactly what I thought Peter. So I have had a closer look at the picture. Following the line of the spar, it is just about possible to make out a fainter area on the inner fixing plate in the place where another hole should be (underneath and slightly to the left of the tip of the red arrow).
Below is a link to the picture which Laurent found:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aerofossile2012/4660646039/
Looking at this, although the magnification makes it a little awkward, the extra rivet is just visible on the other rib on the far side, together with what could be the small hole. The only thing I can think of that might pass through a hole of that small size and across the undercarriage well is electrical wiring. Could this be an adaptation for the wiring required for the pulsometer fuel tank pumps introduced on later versions of the aircraft?
I really have no idea, and it is not a vital matter to pursue – purely a matter of curiosity. If nobody reading this knows anything about it and we want to solve the mystery, I will leave it to Laurent, if he thinks it worthwhile, to make enquiries in Paris to see if those working on the restoration of NX664 can help us.
BobKatWith acknowledgements to the links provided, this is what I was referring to last night. On the left the ‘standard’ fitting (starboard wing of FM104); in the centre the ‘modified’ fitting (port wing of NX664); on the right the piece found (ED908). What was that extra little hole for? All very perplexing.
Riveting stuff!?! (I thought I would say it before anyone else did).
Sign In
