Lancaster side widows?

[keithjs]

I want to build my HK Lanc as Mickey The Moocher but can only find photos of the nose area. Does anyone know if she had clear side windows or were they painted over? There are plenty of drawings and side views about but not sure how reliable they are?  Is there a rule for when these were clear or painted or not fitted all together. Thanks.

[warhawk]

Hi,

These are some of the Lanc updates (by approximate date) that I have managed to piece together from the excellent but now-gone forum at Bomber Command History page:

• F.24 Strike Camera - introduced as standard mid 1942
• Paddle blade propeller - introduced on the Lancaster in early 1943   
• Side windows (except large navigator's window) - deleted in production after the end of the ED series, September 1943 (does not apply to cases of over-painted windows on earlier serials)
• Late (large) nose bubble - introduced September 1943 
• Late (large) Astro-dome - introduced beginning of 1944 
• Navigator's bench instead of swivel-seat - introduced in spring of 1944 
   

All You need to do now is find the date Your aircraft was produced.

Hope this also helps You pin down some of the other common Lanc dilemmas

 

Regards,

Aleksandar

Edited May 16, 2021 by warhawk

[Ossington 2]

EE176 was part of a batch of 247 Lanc III's delivered between Mar and June 1943. Could have been modded after though.

[stever219]

As @Ossington says the ED- and EE- serialled Lancasters were built in spring 1943 NF would all have had the rear fuselage windows.  If you look at images of the Operation Chastise aircraft (all late ED- serials) the windows are clearly visible.  Many units overpainted these windows in service but the windows were not deleted from new production aircraft ‘til some time after the JA-/JB- serialled blocks.  However earlier aircraft going through overhaul could emerge with a new, windowless, rear fuselage, e.g. R5868.  

 

Your best bet is either to depict EE176 early in her career with the windows and fewer mission markings, or maybe to risk a “gotcha” and delete them. It’s possible that you may be able to obtain EE176’s record card from m the National Archive but it may not show her full modification state.

[RJP]

There are pictures extant of near-serialled machines with the windows and it's a good bet that EE176 had them from the factory.  They could have been overpainted but it's a stretch to think they would have been removed.  Seems like a lot of effort for little gain.  Of course documentation is unlikely.

 

It's a mistake to think the date of a mod. introduction meant all previously-built machines received the mod., or that there was any proximity to that date if they did.  And not all mods were necessarily made.  You might well find the deep bomb aimer's blister alongside the original pitot location and needle blades on the props, or the shallow blister with the late pitot.  The situation extended late into the proceedings.

 

Have a google for EE182, just six machines later in presumably the same batch as EE176.  After operational service it was flown to Canada for cold weather trials and there are some handy shots of this one having run off the end of the runway at Moran Michigan.  The details are interesting - side windows in full bloom, squadron codes still applied, needle blades on the props, exhaust dampers removed.

 

The best bet is, as always and especially with Lancasters, to believe photographs.

[Ossington 2]

That batch of 247 machines ran from ED783 to ED842, then ED856 to ED888, ED904 to ED953, ED967 to ED999, EE105 to EE150, EE166 to EE202. I think the lack of numerical continuity was due to contractual reasons between the Air Ministry and manufacturers rather than true "blackout block" reasons. You can now google for images of all 247. 

Built between March and June 43 is going some. The last craft completed, EE202 was lost in Oct 43, so I think that photos will be hard to come by. 

 

[keithjs]

Thanks for your help everyone. It would appear the final decision is mine then... I think I'll leave them clear and it'll be easy to overspray if conclusive evidence turns up...

[fishplanebeer]

Just a thought on this.

 

When Lancs went in for major servicing/overhaul after 500 flying hours or for damage repair they were split into the major components so it was very unlikely that the aircraft would emerge with the same ones upon re-assembly and I think that only the nose section (D1) which would carry any personal insignia, would retain its original identity (see page 115 of 'Lancaster At War Volume 1 by Garbett & Goulding). As such a Lanc could go in with windows and emerge without them, and vice versa.

 

In theory (I think) a Lanc B1 could also emerge as a Lanc BIII if the engines were Packards and not its original RR examples, given that all the airframe mods were made on the production line irrespective of the ultimate source of its engines so were not specific to either a BI or BIII. Not entirely sure about this however so happy to stand corrected.

 

Regards

Colin.

[woody37]

3 minutes ago, fishplanebeer said:

Just a thought on this.

 

When Lancs went in for major servicing/overhaul after 500 flying hours or for damage repair they were split into the major components so it was very unlikely that the aircraft would emerge with the same ones upon re-assembly and I think that only the nose section (D1) which would carry any personal insignia, would retain its original identity (see page 115 of 'Lancaster At War Volume 1 by Garbett & Goulding). As such a Lanc could go in with windows and emerge without them, and vice versa.

 

In theory (I think) a Lanc B1 could also emerge as a Lanc BIII if the engines were Packards and not its original RR examples, given that all the airframe mods were made on the production line irrespective of the ultimate source of its engines so were not specific to either a BI or BIII. Not entirely sure about this however so happy to stand corrected.

 

Regards

Colin.

A good example of this is R5868. It started with windows but doesn't have them now so the rear end was either swapped at some point or the window panels plated over which I can't see being likely.

[wmcgill]

The Wingleader Avro Lancaster Mk.I/III Early Production Batches 1941-1943 book answers all the window (and turret colour) questions. Unfortunately I don't have my copy at hand to be able to help. Maybe someone else does? 

 

https://www.wingleader.co.uk/shop/lancasterearlywpa5

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

The details.  Avro built, 620 Lancasters between ED303 to EE202, initially mark I, then a mixture of I and III, then III.  ED362 first mark III in batch, ED782 last mark I in batch. EE176 delivered 8 June 1943, Taken on Charge 11 June 1943. 

 

ED303 to ED334, ED347 to ED396, ED408 to ED453, ED467 to ED504, ED520 to ED569, ED583 to ED631, ED645 to ED668, ED688 to EDED737, ED749 to ED786, ED799 to ED842, ED856 to ED888, ED904 to ED953, ED967 to ED999, EE105 to EE150, EE166 to EE202.

 

Avro,
Order B69274/40 requisition LA 1/E1/41 for 588 mark I (L, R, W and ED serials) and 482 mark III (ED and EE serials)
Order 2010 requisition LA 1/E11/42 for 53 mark I (LM and ME Serials) and 497 mark III (LM and ME serials)
Order 1807 requisition LA 5/E11/41 for 256 mark I (PB and PD serials) and 1,793 mark III (JA, JB, ND, NE, PA, PB, RE, SW and TX serials)

 

Metropolitan Vickers
Order 69275/40 requisition 2/E1/41 for 269 I (W and DV serials) and 131 mark III (W and DV serials)
Order 982866/40 requisition 2/E1/41 for 57 mark I (R serials)
Order 2221 requisition 2/E11/41 for 623 mark I (ME, PD, SW, RA and TW serials)

 

Armstrong Whitworth
Order 239/SAS/C4(c) requisition 3/E1/41 for 917 mark I (LL, LM, NF, NG, RF, SW and TW serials), 300 mark II (DS and LL Serials) and 112 mark III (RF and SW serials)

 

Vickers Armstrong
Order 2791 requisition LA 1/E11/43 for 235 mark I (PA serials) (Built at Chester)
Order 1336 requisition 4/E1/41 for 300 mark I (NK and PP serials) (Built at Castle Bromwich)

 

Austin
Order 2827 requisition 6/E11/42 for 150 mark I (NN and NX serials) and 180 mark VII (NX and RT serials)

 

[T-21]

I have looked into the deletion of windows. I agree that when they were sent for major repair there was a fuselage part swap out. Checking my research shows that production windows were deleted from around serial LM360  onwards. This I stress is not definitive.

[Seahawk]

On 5/18/2021 at 6:29 AM, T-21 said:

Checking my research shows that production windows were deleted from around serial LM360  onwards. This I stress is not definitive.

 

Nor was there necessarily a clean cutover point.  In his Lancaster Squadrons in Focus, @Mark Postlethwaite  records LM360 as "one of the last aircraft delivered with side windows" (p.42) (though without a photo to back that up).  But elsewhere in the same book LL966 (absolutely, incontrovertibly) and LM287 (90% certain) don't have them (both p.121).  LM384 (p.119) and LM418 (p.117) don't (at least 90% certain).

[Mark Postlethwaite]

Bill Reid VC's Lancaster LM360 had windows, just Google the serial number and you'll find photos of it the morning after it crash landed.  The reason LM287 doesn't is that the LL740 -LM756 batch was delivered out of sequence with LM301 the first to be delivered in November 1942.  As we point out in our Wingleader Photo Archive book on the Lancaster, nearly all mods and deletions were introduced at a certain time and not at a certain serial number.  In early 1943 there were four different batches of Lancasters being built, including some W serialled Lancs, so don't try to identify window deletion by serial numbers!