warhawk Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 (edited) Hello, I've been musing myself with making a vac canopy for my model (since the Pavla Vac doesn't fit the Revell 1/72nd kit). I have noticed that some frames are internal, to which the perspex is just screwed-on. Both wartime and restored example walk-arounds seem to confirm this: But then, I found some more (both wartime and restored example) photos, which depict these (and all other) as external: Some drawings clearly show them as internal: While this one shows all frames of the same depth (i.e. external): Soooo.... What's up with that? I thought it might be an early-war / late-war machine difference, but my wartime external photo shows an early machine (as denoted by the small window on the fuselage), while "Just Jane" is restored to a late-war standard (wide props, bigger blisters and everything). Or maybe it had something to do with the astro-dome size? Any opinion is most welcome Regards, Aleksandar Edited March 18, 2017 by warhawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jure Miljevic Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 I doubt the astrodome size is a factor here. Check the following photo of NX791: http://www.aviationbanter.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=53868&d=1328786202 Not of the best quality, still, one can discern both high astrodome and internal framing. Cheers Jure 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloegin57 Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 (edited) This may help, from the Lancaster Course Notes RAF Wigsley May 1945 :- Basically, moulded rear canopy over wooden formers held in place by external metal strips. HTH Dennis Postscript :- The Astrodome, referred to in the text as the "Astral" dome, was a separate item to the canopy and only differed in height on later aircraft - not diameter. Asttodome is item 17 in the diagram and the loop aerial for the D.F. wireless is item 16 :- Dennis Edited March 18, 2017 by sloegin57 ASTRODOME INFO ADDED 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warhawk Posted March 18, 2017 Author Share Posted March 18, 2017 Thanks for the info. Very interesting read. Might there be an, let's say, early version with the spruce frames and metal strips on the outside, and a late version with the internal metal framing and just bolt heads sticking out of the perspex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloegin57 Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 14 minutes ago, warhawk said: Thanks for the info. Very interesting read. Might there be an, let's say, early version with the spruce frames and metal strips on the outside, and a late version with the internal metal framing and just bolt heads sticking out of the perspex? No Warhawk. The canopy as described was the same for the Manchester, right through the Lancaster production and, with only a slight increase in height, was also fitted to the Lincoln. The only major change in that area was the increase in height of the astrodome to cater for a change in sextants late in the war. If, as you suggest, just bolt heads were on the outside, airframe vibration would have caused the moulded perspex to crack and eventually the whole perspex rear canopy would have been blown off. Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warhawk Posted March 18, 2017 Author Share Posted March 18, 2017 1 hour ago, sloegin57 said: If, as you suggest, just bolt heads were on the outside, airframe vibration would have caused the moulded perspex to crack and eventually the whole perspex rear canopy would have been blown off. I would have to disagree with You. You have proven that there was one type in use, the one with external frames. But that does not exclude the other one, as my first two photos clearly show. However, internal frames with rivet (or bolt?) heads outside could just also be a modern reconstruction thing... (?) The reason You have noted, the vibration pulling the perspex off, doesn't seem valid, because of two reasons: 1) Not all frames of the rear section on the "internal frame photos" are internal, there are some external ones (namely the outermost and vertical ones), to provide some extra support. 2) There are two airworthy Lancs - PA474 and FM213 - with rear internal frames, flying around with no problems whatsoever. img source: JIM SIMPSON AIRCRAFT IMAGES Regards, Aleksandar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 I don't know the reason for this change, but would suggest that modern perspex and bolts might well be considered stronger than wartime examples. It would be interesting to find some confirmed wartime photos of these internal mountings. If so, another explanation could be a difference in production standards at different sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warhawk Posted March 18, 2017 Author Share Posted March 18, 2017 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Graham Boak said: It would be interesting to find some confirmed wartime photos of these internal mountings. If so, another explanation could be a difference in production standards at different sites. Graham, please take a look at the first photo I have enclosed: That is a photo taken during Queen Elizabeth at 156Sqd RAF Warboys Feb 1944 Some more here: http://s1087.photobucket.com/user/eurocoast/media/Lancaster Bomber/Queen_Elizabeth_at_RAF_Warboys_Feb_1944_IWM_TR_1554_zpsy9e0qzy0.jpg.html But the problem is that almost as many pictures depict external frames... http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/4th-september-1942-a-ground-crew-refuelling-and-reloading-a-lancaster-picture-id3421888 Edited March 18, 2017 by warhawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Jones Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 (edited) Since UK Lancaster production was dispersed around a least seven manufacturers and probably hundreds of component suppliers , it is entirely possible that slightly different production methods were used by some of them , hence the variations seen in the canopy construction. Incidently Lincoln's have the internal rear framing seen on some of the Lancasters here. Andrew Edited March 18, 2017 by Andrew Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 Avro Manchester: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205210120 Avro Lancaster: http://zoom.iwm.org.uk/view/35924?cat=photographs&oid=object-205192910 http://zoom.iwm.org.uk/view/559726?cat=photographs&oid=object-205188822 http://zoom.iwm.org.uk/view/31620?cat=photographs&oid=object-205188205 http://zoom.iwm.org.uk/view/22846?cat=photographs&oid=object-205126854 http://zoom.iwm.org.uk/view/301530?cat=photographs&oid=object-205093636 http://zoom.iwm.org.uk/view/557105?cat=photographs&oid=object-205210630 http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205090443 Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jure Miljevic Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 Hello Function of a metal strip, described in Lancaster Course Notes Dennis provided, is to fasten perspex onto wooden frame inside the canopy. Basically, the strip functions like a number of inter-connected washers with good part of the strip's length serving little or no purpose. Ordinary washers would work in exactly the same way and would eliminate need for a metal strip, hence no external frame. I see no reason why such method could not have been used during WWII. Cheers Jure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hovering Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 I suspect its as Jure described, for some (most likely later) airframes the individual washers were replaced with a metal strip, giving the impression of external framing. I can't find any evidence of a change from wooden internal members to any type of metal framing for the rear canopy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warhawk Posted March 19, 2017 Author Share Posted March 19, 2017 (edited) Thanks, Jure and Hovering, that makes sense from engineering point of view. 11 hours ago, hovering said: I suspect its as Jure described, for some (most likely later) airframes the individual washers were replaced with a metal strip, giving the impression of external framing. I agree with You, but it seems is that the change went the other way around - metal strip to washers. The reason for my conclusion is that I found no period pics Manchester with washers and Lincolns with strips. It also makes sense from a production economy viewpoint (washers are easier to manufacture and install than a specific strip with specific size and number of holes), and also aerodynamic standpoint - If You look at any other aircraft - Stirling, Halifax, etc - there is a clear tendency to reduce external framing in order to reduce drag. Here's another proof of my theory - take a look at the mosquito prototype (W4050) External metal strip is clearly visible. img source: Keypublishing forum Now take a look at the rear canopy of a very-late-war later model: Most longitudinal strips have been switched to washers img source: The de Havilland Flying Club Edited March 19, 2017 by warhawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hovering Posted March 19, 2017 Share Posted March 19, 2017 (edited) Interesting.. as mentioned above, maybe it comes down to who manufactured it? This one from Aug 43 seems to be internal? (Although I'm beginning to question my judgement after looking through pics trying to work it out!) https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/UK0387/ https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/UK0402/ Also interesting in that the perspex above the pilot/FE has an earlier repair. G-George at the AWM has no external strap on those parts as she it today. Presumably since it's not a join of perspex sheets there, the external strip isn't required for weather/strengthening reasons. It might help for repair/replacement if you don't have the long strip to content with. The 1946 Lancaster course only mentions external metal stripping, but I guess it wouldn't be worth mentioning the slight variations for them. Anyway.. you've added a new question when modelling a certain Lancaster.. Did it have internal or external canopy strapping? The 1/32 guys can sand off any raised strip and put down a line of rivets *where applicable. Seems the modern/colour photos show there isn't any attempt of camouflage on the outer face, and it remains black. Edited March 19, 2017 by hovering spelling and figured that crack in the canopy would have given the FE more of a scare than the pilot :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warhawk Posted March 19, 2017 Author Share Posted March 19, 2017 24 minutes ago, hovering said: Anyway.. you've added a new question when modelling a certain Lancaster.. Did it have internal or external canopy strapping? Yep, besides questioning types of bomb-sights, seats, props, canopy blisters, bomb-bay doors; presence of windows, H2S dome and heater fairing, various turrets and/or antennae; interior colors and what not, clearly we needed another conundrum to spice this soup up! 29 minutes ago, hovering said: The 1/32 guys can sand off any raised strip and put down a line of rivets *where applicable. 1/32? I am asking this for a 72nd model (puts back his crazy-hat on)... Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jure Miljevic Posted March 19, 2017 Share Posted March 19, 2017 Hello Warhawk, unfortunately your list is far from complete ... So ... it has been established that Lancaster's canopies with or without external frames had been used. Is there a pattern or do we resign to fact, that this is another aircraft part for which a clear, high-resolution photo of a subject of our build is necessary to replicate it accurately? Cheers Jure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 My information is that there was a combination of a stainless steel frame with a wooden frame in the rear section. By the way, what other parts of the Lancaster used wood in their construction? Navigators table doesn't count. Sorry no prize other than gloating rights. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hovering Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) But seems a bit of wood, turret rings, fin leading edge, and a quick read mentions main crew door and draught-proof doors down the back. Edited March 21, 2017 by hovering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now