Avro Lancaster Question

[Skyhunter66]

Afternoon folks - I'm currently building the Tamiya 1:48 Lancaster and am wondering about the windows along the fuselage. Are these windows blanked out? I ask as the decals on the side of the fuselage cover one or two of the windows and I'm not sure if I should have these windows as windows or blacked over?

 

thanks

 

chris 

[gingerbob]

A more professional answer will come along, I'm sure, but early production had clear windows.  Later they were painted over and/or replaced by sheet metal/deleted altogether.

 

bob

[Junchan]

Bob gave a correct answer, and I am posting photos to back his answer up.

This is an early production with clear windows.

 

The windows were painted over on this example.

 

Finally, the late productions with no windows.

 

Jun in Tokyo

https://www.flickr.com/photos/horaburo/albums

[Skyhunter66]

Ok many thanks guys this is really helpful.  Great reference photos as well

chris

[chillaton]

You really need to check photos of the aircraft you are making as the above answers are correct but some Lancasters eg the Dambusters had their windows painted over in a creamy colour and only the very earliest ie 1942 Lancasters had the windows clear, these usually also have the shallow bomb aimers blister. The majority of Lancasters (post Oct 43) had no windows at all, and this is further complicated by those early Lancs that survived long enough to need a major service often had the windows deleted (Look at R5868 at Hendon) I have made several Tamiya 1/48 Lancs including NX611 when she was French Blue and it is difficult to completely emilinate the side windows and you always need to re-scribe. best of luck!

[Uncle Pete]

Don't know about the bog standard Lanc but the B3 special has windows.  Don't remember seeing them in other versions.

[stever219]

Deletion (or otherwise) of the windows is not mark-dependent: Mk. I and III Lancasters were built in parallel, the one often being interspersed amongst the other.  Deletion occurred somewhere between the JB- and NX- serial blocks but, as chillaton said earlier, older aircraft that survived long enough often had the windows deleted when they were rebuilt.  AFAIK Canadian-built Lancasters in the KB-serial range had the windows but those in the FM- serial range, which were built after the KB- aircraft, did not.

 

I'm going to disagree with chillaton on the score of the windows in the Dambusters' aircraft: there's a well-known image of S/L "Dinghy" Young's wrecked aeroplane lying on a beach that indicates that the windows had not been overpainted.

[chillaton]

I agree that the photo of Young's aircraft appears to show the windows clear, but look at the well known IWM pictures if Gibsons aircraft they are definitely overpainted in cream or light grey particularly the picture of Gibson's crew entering the aircraft. There probably would be no reason why aircraft in the same squadron should be different?

 

Edited December 14, 2017 by chillaton

[Selwyn]

Another thing to consider was aircraft which had gone through the repair organisation. battle damaged aircraft were often split  along the transportation joints and each section repaired at different locations the repaired sections would be used to replace sections on battle damaged aircraft that could not be repaired, so a early nose on a late fuselage or vice versa was possible, meaning windows  could appear on a aircraft serial no that didn't have windows at production!

 

Selwyn

[T-21]

Deletion of windows seems to have occurred around serial LM360 onwards but needs confirmation.

Edited December 14, 2017 by T-21
.

[rs2man]

 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Upkeep_in_Lancaster.jpg

 

I don't think the Dambusters windows were overpainted  . If you look at the picture of Gibson's aircraft in the above link - sorry but I don't know how to get the photo visible on the page - you can see in the first full window on the left , above the G , that there is a small segment in the bottom right hand corner which is much brighter .  I reckon that's where you can see through the fuselage & out through a window on the other side  .  I think that what chillaton mentioned is not overpainting , but just the light reflecting off the Perspex .

 

John Green

Nantwich , Cheshire

Edited December 14, 2017 by rs2man
Test image post didn't work

[Work In Progress]

Yes, I agree.

On the pic of the crew entering the aeroplane it could also be that there's something fairly pale coloured behind the window. I'm not seeing overpainted windows here at all.

[Seahawk]

On 14/12/2017 at 9:04 AM, chillaton said:

I agree that the photo of Young's aircraft appears to show the windows clear, but look at the well known IWM pictures if Gibsons aircraft they are definitely overpainted in cream or light grey particularly the picture of Gibson's crew entering the aircraft. There probably would be no reason why aircraft in the same squadron should be different?

I'm not sure the fuselage side windows on Lancasters were ever intended to be looking-out-through type windows, more to afford a degree of natural light for any troops unfortunate to enough to be cooped up in the fuselage (remember the Manchester was intended to have a subsidiary troop-carrier role), ie they neede to be more translucent than transparent.  And, since they were essentially redundant, they would not have been a priority for cleaning like canopies and turret glazing.  If the windows were overpainted (as some undoubtedly were), surely it makes sense to do it from the outside rather than the inside? And, if it were done on the inside, why use a non-standard colour like cream or light grey rather than interior green?  What I think I see, including in the famous shot of Gibson's crew boarding their aircraft, is the light reflecting off thickish perspex.         

[Graham Boak]

The specification for this generation of British bombers called for the transport of a number of ground crew for distant detachments, rather than troops.  Obviously advantage could be taken of such a facility, but the numbers involved wouldn't be significant in terms of land operations.  I do however think that the windows were more for the assistance of the crew moving about the aircraft rather than any passengers - the Lancaster does have rather more than the Halifax whereas you'd expect rather more consistency had it been a requirement for passengers.

[Don McIntyre]

They wouldn't be terribly useful when flying on night ops. 

[Graham Boak]

At the time the design was laid down the RAF was not committed to night operations.  It was believed that the power-operated turrets and close formation flying would make bomber formations much less vulnerable than they turned out to be.

 

Indeed, the windows could be a problem when the searchlights were around, and that's probably why so many were painted out or designed out - the Wellington being another obvious example.

[Seahawk]

1 hour ago, Graham Boak said:

The specification for this generation of British bombers called for the transport of a number of ground crew for distant detachments, rather than troops.  Obviously advantage could be taken of such a facility, but the numbers involved wouldn't be significant in terms of land operations.

I quote from page 11 of Robert Kirby's Avro Manchester, in discussion of the P13/36 specification: "A final option envisaged the carriage of 16 fully armed troops, with no bombload."

[dogsbody]

7 hours ago, Work In Progress said:

Yes, I agree.

On the pic of the crew entering the aeroplane it could also be that there's something fairly pale coloured behind the window. I'm not seeing overpainted windows here at all.

 

Could it be the entry door blocking the window? It was hinged on the forward side and opened to the right.

 

http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205195109

 

 

Chris

[chillaton]

Sorry Guys but some of the windows are definitely greyed out from both the outside and/or inside, those of you who have got Garbett and Goulding's "Lancaster at War" vol one, could look at page 20 and the photo entitled "Unusual angle"  the windows below the camouflage line ie in the black have been greyed out, the windows above the line are difficult to interpret. Also, the picture on page 50 of HK545 shows the window forward of the entry door painted out, and the other windows appear to be painted over in camouflage colours, the picture on page 51 of ED802 also shows this strange mix of windows in the black area painted grey and above the line in camo colours. Possibly on the early lancs it was only the lower pictures that were greyed out and the upper ones clear, this would explain the photo of Young's aircraft where only the upper windows are visible. The plot thickens!

[galgos]

Sorry Mr Chillaton, I simply cannot agree with you about p20 in Vol 1, nor indeed p50.  In my opinion all one sees is the effect of light on the windows, a reflection if you will.

Max

[Work In Progress]

THat's my opinion too.

[Mancunian airman]

Sorry chaps but officially window were stopped on the production line(s) in November 1943.

You are always better to view photos where possible but if an aircraft arrived NEW on squadron strength in January 1944 its most likely without windows.

 

Skyhunter if you could tell us the aircraft serial etc we could probably help you find more precise details ??

Ian

[galgos]

Ian, I'd be very interested to know the source of your statement about the change in production of November 43. I'm not doubting it, I've been looking for this info for some years including conversations with Harry Holmes, without success! 

Max 

[mrp]

The deletion of all  windows aft of former 6  was A.V. Roe modification number 870. Examples of other mods like the introduction of Merlin 38 engines was Mod no 845.These type of mods were introduced and approved on a regular basis.Figuring out production batches where these type of mods were introduced on the production line is the hard part.

On the Canadian production line, it is also hard to determine the exact aircraft number where the change was made. The windows were very short lived though. Certainly by KB710, the eleventh aircraft off the production line, the windows were gone. In the Canadian production documentation that I have, it only lists Canadian airframe mods by serial number. Canadian airframe modifications stop at 329 , and we’re only applied to the aircraft built at Victory Aircraft. A.V. Roe mods were introduced on the line as they were approved, but aren’t listed.The mods would include the windows deletion as well as other mods like the repositioned pitot tube ,the revised nose blister shape and bulged cockpit windows. Certainly KB710 was rolled off the line at Malton during October and November 1943, to give a time line for the deletion of the windows on the Canadian production line.All this makes it problematic to make an accurate model of the  later and Canadian Lancaster in 1/72 and 1/48 due to most kits having the windows for Dambuster versions of each of the respective kits ( Airfix, Revell, Hasegawa and Tamiya).

Edited December 19, 2017 by mrp

[Mancunian airman]

On 12/17/2017 at 9:37 PM, galgos said:

Ian, I'd be very interested to know the source of your statement about the change in production of November 43. I'm not doubting it, I've been looking for this info for some years including conversations with Harry Holmes, without success! 

Max 

I cannot be sure just where I read this, I literally have dozens of Lancaster books so I shall endeavour to find it but mrp points out that the Canadian Lancasters, KB710, has the windows deleted, October/November '43 so that gives us some indication that the 'mod' was in place.

I doubt it only applied to Canadian Lancs as I'm sure there was some liason with the British production team.

I know you want concrete evidence  . . . . .