Rolls Lancs vs Packard

[fishplanebeer]

In anticipation of a reply from Avro I browsed through the Aerodata International No.10 on the Lancaster and it confirms a few interesting details, assuming it is accurate.

 

i) When the B.III was first introduced it was flown alongside B.I's in the squadrons as well as being operated side by side in the HCU's and Lancaster Finishing Schools.

 

ii) There were 'conversions' of B.I's to B.III's, and vice versa, usually when engines were changed during major overhauls.

 

iii) Some aircraft flew with a mixture of RR  and Packard engines so becoming hybrids.

 

iv) The HCU's preferred B.I's as the RR engines didn't overheat as quickly so were more suited to the successive take-offs and landings.

 

Interesting stuff but a definitive reply from Avro is still needed to verify this information.

 

Regards

Colin.

 

 

[wmcgill]

3 minutes ago, fishplanebeer said:

In anticipation of a reply from Avro I browsed through the Aerodata International No.10 on the Lancaster and it confirms a few interesting details, assuming it is accurate.

 

i) When the B.III was first introduced it was flown alongside B.I's in the squadrons as well as being operated side by side in the HCU's and Lancaster Finishing Schools.

 

ii) There were 'conversions' of B.I's to B.III's, and vice versa, usually when engines were changed during major overhauls.

 

iii) Some aircraft flew with a mixture of RR  and Packard engines so becoming hybrids.

 

iv) The HCU's preferred B.I's as the RR engines didn't overheat as quickly so were more suited to the successive take-offs and landings.

 

Interesting stuff but a definitive reply from Avro is still needed to verify this information.

 

Regards

Colin.

 

 

i) is entirely believable.

 

ii) needs to be backed up by some documentary proof. Not just the fact that some batches of aircraft ordered as Mk.I (or Mk.III) were completed as the other type.

 

iii) needs to be backed up by some documentary proof if available. But knowing how talented and adaptable mechanics can be it wouldn't surprise me. Even if the internal electrics were not modified to fully suit the new installation.

[fishplanebeer]

Although by no means proof, as reciting an error doesn't turn it into the truth, the Gerald Scarborough book on the Lancaster 'Classic Aircraft No.6' also refers to B.I's and III's being changed due an engine swap which suggest there may be some truth in this. Or is it just an enduring myth?

 

As such I await a reply from Avro with interest.

 

Regards

Colin.

[Max Headroom]

46 minutes ago, fishplanebeer said:

Although by no means proof, as reciting an error doesn't turn it into the truth, the Gerald Scarborough book on the Lancaster 'Classic Aircraft No.6' also refers to B.I's and III's being changed due an engine swap which suggest there may be some truth in this. Or is it just an enduring myth?

 

As such I await a reply from Avro with interest.

 

Regards

Colin.

Just a thought (with absolutely no evidence to back it up with), in theory would it be possible for a MK.I to go into a major repair,  be broken down into its major sections and be re-assembled with the back end and serial of a MK.III and so changing mark?

 

Trevor

[wmcgill]

3 hours ago, Max Headroom said:

Just a thought (with absolutely no evidence to back it up with), in theory would it be possible for a MK.I to go into a major repair,  be broken down into its major sections and be re-assembled with the back end and serial of a MK.III and so changing mark?

 

Trevor

Theoretically yes.

 

Just like you could theoretically stick a Lancaster Mk.I nose section on to Manchester rear end (and wings) and change it into a Manchester. But no one is seriously suggesting any Lancasters were converted to Manchesters.

Edited May 26, 2022 by wmcgill
clarified Manchester statement.

[fishplanebeer]

Trevor,

 

 

The evidence I've been able to dig out so far suggests that it was the nose section which retained the aircrafts' identity when it went in for a major overhaul, as in when the fuselage was broken down into its 5 major structures (nose, front centre, centre, rear centre and rear). When an aircraft was sent to Bracebridge Heath for a re-build repair due to major battle damage they sent the log book to Langar so that it could then be matched or assigned to the aircraft again even though by this time the repair may have included very little of the original airframe. As such it is quite possible that the log book could be a B.III and the aircraft it was then re-assigned to could have been rebuilt as a B.I which adds further to the possible permutations.

 

I just hope Avro can shed some light on this to clarify things.

 

Regards

Colin.

Edited May 25, 2022 by fishplanebeer

[fishplanebeer]

Although the very early Lancasters would have started life on the production line as Manchesters it is extremely unlikely that components were ever swapped between the two during their respective service lives. I can't say it never happened but as the Manchester was effectively relegated to minor duties due to its ongoing issues, and the excellent performance of the Lancaster made it totally redundant, they would have probably have been consigned to scrap or used for ground instruction when they became u/s. 

 

Whereas the possibility of there being some degree of interchange between two basically identical aircraft (B.I and B.III) would make sense from both an operational and a serviceability perspective, even if the Packard engines had slightly different servicing requirements for ground crew.

 

As I say I look forward to hearing back from Avro as presumably within the bowels of their archive there will be some evidence/instructions which either say 'yes' or 'no' in terms of possible engine swaps between the two or aircraft having a hybrid combination.

 

Regards

Colin.

[Max Headroom]

11 hours ago, fishplanebeer said:

I've dropped the Avro Heritage Museum the question so will see what they are able to come back with.

 

Regards

Colin.

Many years ago when editing an amateur aviation magazine, if doing an article on Avro, it was standard practice to send BAe copies of historical photos, because “theirs had been destroyed in a fire”. A quick google found that Chadderton did indeed have a series of catastrophic fires

 

https://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/67077/fire-left-scene-of-devastation

 

It’s only a hunch, but I wouldn’t be surprised if some/most/all of the records  may have been destroyed?

 

Trevor

[SafetyDad]

Troy's 'Key Aero' link above describes how Warbird and Racing restorers in the US prefer a mix of RR and Packard components in the same engine as providing the best possible racing powerplant. This suggests that the engines are broadly compatible in terms of fit and tolerance, but that they do differ (perhaps in cooling capabilities as mentioned above by Colin? - That would make sense). The links are worth reading - they highlight differing wartime access to specialist alloys, acceptance of fit tolerances and explore the very interesting debate about handbuilt vs mass production engines.

 

The conclusions are more complex than you might imagine.

 

Oh, and the Lancaster at War describes how one unit only had one toolkit for the Packards - it was kept in the Head Fitters office and only allowed out with chosen personnel! Standard RAF issue tools at the time are compared to this kit and the results are not positive! 

 

SD