BobKatWV-903, Peter,
I am not sure whether this helps or hinders, but attached is an extract from the picture I found of a wheel which may not be from a Lancaster, but which shows a part remarkably similar to what we seem to have found.
BobKatThere have been plenty of views, but nobody seems to be able to help with the function of the piece from the wheel.
I have had a look at some diagrams of a modern drum brake assembly with just two brake shoes (leading and trailing). It has a piece with a similar shape which is described as a “shoe guide plate” which fits on an anchor pin attached to the support plate and which has spring attachments.
I wonder whether this is what we have? There seem to be five of these fittings on the Lancaster’s wheel to go with ten brake shoes and linings, and there is clearly a spring attachment within the piece.
If anyone has a parts listing for the wheel assembly (AP2337 or similar?), it may be that something could be identified as a part which is listed as being used five times in the assembly and which could be what we are looking to identify?
Any help would be much appreciated.
BobKatdaveg4otu, do you have a copy of “Secret War in Purbeck” by Jonathan Penley and Dr Bill Penley CB CBE? I think I obtained this from the museum in Worth Matravers. It has an aerial photo of the Worth Matravers C-Site with marks in the field which seem to be a landing strip? Or is this part of the contradictory information you already have?
BobKatPeter, you have once again pointed me in the right direction, for which many thanks. Now knowing where to look, I have found another picture of our item on a different aircraft’s wheel assembly, so it would appear to be a “universal” part. There seem to be five on each wheel to go with ten brake shoes.
Having at one time thought that the bottom item on my picture no.12 was a different object, I have now established that it is a close-up view of the same wheel hub item from a different angle showing its working parts.
If there is anybody who can explain its function, or provide its technical name, I would be delighted to hear.
BobKatYes, thanks Peter.
BobKatPeter, I have to say I am having some difficulty in seeing which bit fits where!
Perhaps somebody who knows a bit about wheels could come to our rescue!
BobKatItems at location 12
Some time has been spent over the last few days investigating the area where the undercarriage was said to have fallen at the edge of the forest. During the war, the villagers apparently concealed it from the occupying forces, retrieved the wheel and used the rubber to make soles for their shoes!
This point has been marked as ‘12’ on Laurent’s plan, but the attached are the first pictures of pieces found at that location which were buried a few feet below the surface. Armed with a spade (no mechanical digger!) and knowing where he might find something, Laurent has discovered a brake shoe with its pad still attached and, what I assume, are some of the related wheel assembly or maybe undercarriage working parts, but I don’t recognise any of these. Perhaps they are something quite different. The top picture shows the wear marks on the outside of the brake pad on the left: the lower picture shows the shoe (measuring approximately 5.25 inches by 3.25 inches) viewed from the opposite side and which can just be seen fixed centrally to the pad. I have found a picture of the brake unit, but there is nothing which looks like the other parts Laurent has found. Does anyone have a diagram of the Lancaster’s brake system to explain to a non-mechanic how everything worked which they would be happy to share, please? Or could somebody please point me to where I could find one? It seems that AP 2337 may not be a great deal of help.
The finding of a brake shoe at location no.12 is potentially very significant. I have already posted photo 1 (posts #4 and #11) which shows two brake shoes found at location 1 with the main fuselage. Locations 1 and 12 are some 250 yards apart, and it seems inconceivable that all these brake shoes are from the same wheel – the picture of the brake unit I have seen shows that there were ten of them on each wheel. Those at location 1 must, presumably, have come from the starboard undercarriage which was still attached to the aircraft as it fell. So perhaps this means that the pieces found at point 12 are from the undercarriage of the port wing which detached from the aircraft after the mid-air explosion? If so, Air Ministry’s original identification of the leading edge wing rib found at point 11 as being from the port wing may well have been correct all the time (post #309)! Looking at the pattern of where wreckage has been found, this could make some sense.
The part on the right in the upper picture attached has the identification ‘VJN 9 42’. Presumably ‘9 42’ represents the date of manufacture – September 1942. Is the lettering ‘VJN’ recognised? The bottom picture shows another item with a spring. If anyone can tell me exactly what these two pieces are, it would be very much appreciated.
BobKatPeter, the retaining ring seems to be the piece marked ’16’ in your diagram. I doubt whether we are now going to be able to take this much further. vacb certainly seems to have pointed us in the right direction – my thanks to you both.
There is a very high probabilty that what we have is a Vokes filter retaining ring, and that we are leaning towards this being from an oil filter from the engine. It was not found near where the fuselage came to rest, where it might have been expected if it was from the hydraulic system and, to me, this tips the scales in favour of it being engine related as Laurent had thought could be the case.
……….
Laurent has now confirmed that there is no number on our piece and he thinks that it may have had five fixing holes.
BobKatPeter, I have now had a look on the internet and can see that the top part in your picture (with the number) is a solid casting. The lower part seems to be a sliding retention ring which bolts to the upper part to secure the container.
It is beginning to look increasingly likely that what we have is a retaining ring. Having regard to where the piece was found, I think Laurent may have been correct in thinking it was part of the engine if it is in fact part of an oil filter. Would that make sense?
BobKatPeter, many thanks for the picture. I will ask Laurent to check the side – let’s hope it is not on the missing fragment!!
Would this be part of the hydraulic system or part of the oil system?
BobKatAs austernj673 said at the outset, there is little information about undercarriages that seems to be readily available. I am looking for a diagram of the Lancaster’s brake system. Does anybody have any ideas where I might find one?
BobKatPeter, Laurent has not reported any numbers or letters except the “FGS” or similar on the piece of aluminium also in the picture. I am not sure what we should expect to see. If it is a Vokes item, then maybe any manufacturer’s markings would not be on our piece, which I assume would fit between the upper and lower parts of the filter?
Part of our difficulty is that all the Lancasters which survive in Canada are the Mk.X versions. No Mk.III’s survive anywhere. Those that can be seen in England and elsewhere are either the Mk.I or Mk.VII versions. I have searched for photographs and found the following which adds strength to the argument that the Mk.III and Mk.X versions may have been different. On the left is a detail from a picture accompanying a diagram of the Lancaster cockpit. I do not know its original source, but what it shows is clearly different from the one on the right from a Mk.X version. There would seem to be fewer bolts depicted.
I have to say I am very much attracted to vacb’s suggestion that what we have is a fitting from one of the hydraulic oil filters, albeit that we do not yet have a positive answer on the number of bolts we would expect to find.
BobKatPeter, I am afraid that your guess is as good as mine. I have asked Laurent whether the fragment appears to have split away from the ‘ring’ that we have, or whether it may be the missing fragment to complete the ring, but we are none the wiser. It would appear not to be an exact ‘missing link’ with a little more needed to fill the gap, but it seems to be the only obvious explanation for the discrepancy in measurement of the spaces between the bolts. Unless, of course, there was some distortion as the piece broke away – difficult to tell. What would be helpful to know is whether the Mk.III Lancaster’s fittings had four, five or six bolts. The picture you kindly attached and others I have now found are all difficult to interpret, as in none of them is the whole filter visible – they could have either five or six bolts, but almost certainly not four.
BobKatA final early morning thought on our possible hydraulic oil filter part before moving on. I wonder whether I have been misleading myself (and everybody else) by assuming that we have been looking at a four-bolted piece with a split fragment. I think we may also have been rather assuming it was a bit bigger than it has turned out to be once we had Laurent’s measurements – certainly I was!
If Laurent’s picture is rotated (as attached) and the fragmented piece moved more closely to fill the gap, then we end up with what may be a five-bolted piece which is symmetrical about its north-south axis but where the bolts are not equidistant.
Do we therefore have a piece such as suggested by vacb, but with five bolts? Or is it something completely different? Could it be the frame for an instrument, for example? It is curious that only one bolt hole is empty and the others are all rusted.
If there are no more comments today, I will post pictures of Laurent’s latest findings over the weekend.
BobKatCuriouser and curiouser!
Laurent has sent me the attached with very detailed measurements. Basically the cut-out centre is about the same size as described by vacb (67mm = 2.64 inches). However, unless it was not symmetrical in the first place, it must have become distorted as it snapped because the distance between the upper and lower two bolt holes is not the same. The heat of the explosion may have had an effect?
Sign In
