UK1 R5609 Avro Lancaster BoscombeDown.jpg

The antennas are interesting.

Waldo.


On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:58:28 -0500, Joseph Testagrose
wrote:

On 20/12/2012 18:49, Waldo Pepper wrote:
The antennas are interesting.

Waldo.


On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:58:28 -0500, Joseph Testagrose
wrote:


They were used to stab the enemy when the ammunition ran out!

;-)

--
Moving things in still pictures

Indeed. I did some poking around. The Lancaster is an obvious early
production model. The antenna look like they are an installation of
ASV Mk. 2. Also the bombbay has been modified - bulged outward. So is
this an antishipping experiment with torpedoes and depth charges.
Looks to be. Though I bet they canceled it due to the demands of
Bomber Command and the appearance of enough Liberators to meet bare
minimum needs.

Here is a closeup of the nose.

Waldo.




On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:32:22 +0000, ®i©ardo wrote:

On 20/12/2012 18:49, Waldo Pepper wrote:
The antennas are interesting.

Waldo.


On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:58:28 -0500, Joseph Testagrose
wrote:


They were used to stab the enemy when the ammunition ran out!

;-)

On 20/12/2012 18:49, Waldo Pepper wrote:
The antennas are interesting.

Waldo.


On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:58:28 -0500, Joseph Testagrose
wrote:


Experiments with Yagis at A&AEE Boscombe Down.

Extracts from "The Secret Years, Flight Testing at Boscombe Down", which
contains this photo and the next one on page 105..

The early promise of the Lancaster on trials and in Service soon led to
its selectlon for special tasks. First from July 1942 was as the carrier
of the Capital Ship (CS) bomb of 5,000 Ib requiring bulged bomb doors.
An early ASV radar was also carried, and some aerials were near the
static source; the Establishment checked the pressure error which caused
an overreading of 8 mph at 152 mph on R5609.

Photo caption:
Lancaster I R5609 in July 1942 modified for the anti-shipping role with
Yagi aerial array on the nose and enlarged bomb bay doors for the large
(45 inch diameter) capital ship bomb. An early form of flame damper is
fitted, together with ice guards. The aerials displaced the pressure
head to the port side of the nose, I and at 152 mph the AS1 overread by
8 mph. The aircraft was on loan from No 97 Squadron

--
Peter

Thank you. Yet another book it looks like I need to track down.

Waldo.


On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 17:42:17 +0000, Ramsman
wrote:

On 20/12/2012 18:49, Waldo Pepper wrote:
The antennas are interesting.

Waldo.


On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:58:28 -0500, Joseph Testagrose
wrote:


Experiments with Yagis at A&AEE Boscombe Down.

Extracts from "The Secret Years, Flight Testing at Boscombe Down", which
contains this photo and the next one on page 105..

The early promise of the Lancaster on trials and in Service soon led to
its selectlon for special tasks. First from July 1942 was as the carrier
of the Capital Ship (CS) bomb of 5,000 Ib requiring bulged bomb doors.
An early ASV radar was also carried, and some aerials were near the
static source; the Establishment checked the pressure error which caused
an overreading of 8 mph at 152 mph on R5609.

Photo caption:
Lancaster I R5609 in July 1942 modified for the anti-shipping role with
Yagi aerial array on the nose and enlarged bomb bay doors for the large
(45 inch diameter) capital ship bomb. An early form of flame damper is
fitted, together with ice guards. The aerials displaced the pressure
head to the port side of the nose, I and at 152 mph the AS1 overread by
8 mph. The aircraft was on loan from No 97 Squadron

On 22/12/2012 15:30, Waldo Pepper wrote:
Thank you. Yet another book it looks like I need to track down.

Waldo.

The Secret Years, Flight Testing at Boscombe Down 1939-1945, Tim Mason,
Hikoki Publications, 1998. ISBN 9780951989999

It probably won't be cheap, as its original price in the UK was GBP
29.95 and it's scarce now. Fascinating contents though, lots of photos,
lus brief descriptions of the tests and tables of aircraft performance.
From the Miles Messenger to the Gruman Tigercat.

Apropos of the ranting in other threads, the A&AEE didn't think much of
the P-39. The P-38 was tested only briefly as it had already been
rejected by RAF pilots in the USA on account of its u8nacceptable high
altitude performance*. Handling was found to be pleasant.

*No turbochargers, of course. I have read different opinions about why
this was, varying from the Air Ministry not wanting them because they
were too complex to service, to the US Government refusing to supply
them. I have no idea what the real reason was.
--
Peter

On 23/12/2012 12:30, Ramsman wrote:
On 22/12/2012 15:30, Waldo Pepper wrote:
Thank you. Yet another book it looks like I need to track down.

Waldo.

The Secret Years, Flight Testing at Boscombe Down 1939-1945, Tim Mason,
Hikoki Publications, 1998. ISBN 9780951989999

It probably won't be cheap, as its original price in the UK was GBP
29.95 and it's scarce now. Fascinating contents though, lots of photos,
lus brief descriptions of the tests and tables of aircraft performance.
From the Miles Messenger to the Gruman Tigercat.

Apropos of the ranting in other threads, the A&AEE didn't think much of
the P-39. The P-38 was tested only briefly as it had already been
rejected by RAF pilots in the USA on account of its u8nacceptable high
altitude performance*. Handling was found to be pleasant.

*No turbochargers, of course. I have read different opinions about why
this was, varying from the Air Ministry not wanting them because they
were too complex to service, to the US Government refusing to supply
them. I have no idea what the real reason was.

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles..._P-38_MkI.html

--
Moving things in still pictures

On 2012-12-23 04:30:46 -0800, Ramsman said:

On 22/12/2012 15:30, Waldo Pepper wrote:
Thank you. Yet another book it looks like I need to track down.

Waldo.

The Secret Years, Flight Testing at Boscombe Down 1939-1945, Tim Mason,
Hikoki Publications, 1998. ISBN 9780951989999

It probably won't be cheap, as its original price in the UK was GBP
29.95 and it's scarce now. Fascinating contents though, lots of photos,
lus brief descriptions of the tests and tables of aircraft performance.
From the Miles Messenger to the Gruman Tigercat.

Apropos of the ranting in other threads, the A&AEE didn't think much of
the P-39. The P-38 was tested only briefly as it had already been
rejected by RAF pilots in the USA on account of its u8nacceptable high
altitude performance*. Handling was found to be pleasant.

*No turbochargers, of course. I have read different opinions about why
this was, varying from the Air Ministry not wanting them because they
were too complex to service, to the US Government refusing to supply
them. I have no idea what the real reason was.

The P-38 rejection issue lay with the British Air Ministry. In their
wisdom they specified that the British P-38 variant, the M322B was to
be supplied with the same Allison V1710-39 as found in the P-40 and in
the Mustang I&II, for exchangeability, and supposed ease of
maintenance. That Allison only had a single-stage low altitude
supercharger. Also, 322B (Lightning I/II) performance was further
hampered by only having right engines and no counter rotating props.

The US P-38's were initially fitted with the up-rated Allison
1710-17/19, then the 1710-89/91 in the P-38J and ultimately in the
P-38L the 1710-111/113 with the two-stage turbo-supercharger, and with
the counter rotating prop configuration.

--
Regards,

Savageduck