Author Topic: AVRO Lancaster, Manchester, Lincoln and Shackleton (and derivatives) Ideas and Inspiration  (Read 25085 times)

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Hi folks,

A thread dedicated to your AVRO Lancaster, Manchester and Lincoln (and derivatives - e.g. Shackleton) Ideas and Inspiration.

To start with, I am sure many of you have read/heard that the AVRO Manchester originally had provision catapult assisted takeoff.  But have you ever seen what this might have looked like?  Well look below:



regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline raafif

  • Is formally accused of doing nasty things to DC-3s...and officially our first whiffing zombie
  • Whiffing Insane
« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 06:23:40 AM by raafif »

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, a derivative of the Lincoln analogous to the Lancastrian derivative of the Lancaster.  For cargo-hauling or tanker ops, it'd be a nice move.  You could also add the "Tiger Force" saddle tanks if you needed yet more fuel storage capacity.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Supposedly the AVRO Manchester was designed to be able to carry two 18 in (457 mm) torpedoes internally.  Has anyone seen a photo with this fit?

More importantly, how about an AVRO Manchester or better yet a Lancaster in Coastal Command garb in a low level torpedo run...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Maverick

  • Suffers from 'Fat Fingers' and accidentally locks his own thread...
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • The profile machine!
    • My Photobucket Thread
I did a run of Manchesters in 08 & 11 including Coastal Command schemes, Highball bombers & gunships.

Regards,

John
Regards,

John

Offline sequoiaranger

  • Gone but not forgotten. He already has a team of angels working up his bench in the sky!
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • E Pluribus Unum (modeling style)
To fight the last war more effectively, and to control the airspace over the trenches, the Avro Avatar was developed. The four-gun turret below would be able to shoot down into the trenches as the four-gun turret above defended against enemy aircraft. The "Defiant" idea was also envisioned, whereas the Avatar would fly between enemy two bombers, raking them both broadside. Someone got the idea that such an Avatar, or especially a trio of them, could bank in a circle and spray bullets inward and downward---the first "gunship" was invented! When Britain was threatened by Sealion Invasion, the Invasion Defence Command (you can only see the "ID_", not the "C" of the special markings) commandeered every Avatar for strafing the beaches, including a New Zealander squadron (subject of the model).

For this ostensibly 1/72 aircraft, FROG's 1/96 Lancaster (actually two of them) formed the basis . Wellesley engine, B-24 ball turret, Halifax top turret, and other "subtle" modifications.

My mind is like a compost heap--fertile AND rotten!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
How about all the Manchesters get re-engined with better engines?  Maybe RR Rriffon or Bristol Centaurus or PW R2800...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
How about all the Manchesters get re-engined with better engines?  Maybe RR Rriffon or Bristol Centaurus or PW R2800...

I'm actually going a bit further ahead than that Greg, I'm thinking a Manchester with two RR Eagle 24 cylinder 'H' configuration engines, Lincoln outer wings and lengthen rear fuselage.  I've even got all the parts to do a 'Twin' Manchester version of it which will be started sometime this year (had something posted over on the other forum and I'm calling it an Avro Chadderton), this will have three engines and main gear though.

The idea it would be an alternative to the Avro Nottingham ---
« Last Edit: March 08, 2012, 03:44:05 AM by kitnut617 »

Offline Maverick

  • Suffers from 'Fat Fingers' and accidentally locks his own thread...
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • The profile machine!
    • My Photobucket Thread
How about all the Manchesters get re-engined with better engines?  Maybe RR Rriffon or Bristol Centaurus or PW R2800...

Amongst the Manchesters I did, there were Centaurus and Sabre powered versions.

Regards,

John
Regards,

John

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!

Drawing A.1481 29 April 1937, 2 Hercules.


4 Hercules proposal from the same period.


Proposal for Centaurus engined Manchester II, one airframe had Centaurus installed by Bristol, but never flew.
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline apophenia

  • Suffered two full days of rapid-fire hallucinations and yet had not a single usuable whif concept in the lot !?!
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Great stuff Jon, thanks! I had no ideal that the Manchester II had actually been built.

kit': Love the Nottingham  :)
Under investigation by the Committee of State Sanctioned Modelling, Alternative History and Tractor Carburettor Production for decadent counterrevolutionary behaviour.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Great stuff Jon, thanks! I had no ideal that the Manchester II had actually been built.

kit': Love the Nottingham  :)

Wot he said...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Just for argument's sake, how would the Manchester have looked and faired with two W3420's installed?  I'm thinking that they would've made a distinct difference (I can also see RR doing everything they could to prevent such).

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Avro Avatar - another cool concept and bash build - gets five smileys -  :) :) :) :) :)

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Just for argument's sake, how would the Manchester have looked and faired with two W3420's installed?  I'm thinking that they would've made a distinct difference (I can also see RR doing everything they could to prevent such).

Had to go look that one up Evan ---  :-[

I think that would be an excellent choice   :) , although all the engines planned for the Manchester were supposed to be around 2000 hp, I think they found it wasn't enough power for a large twin engined aircraft.  Hence my thoughts of going to the 3500-4000 hp Eagle.  On my Twin-Manchester I'm thinking three of these with 16 foot contra-props and the Nottingham is powered by four of them with Wyvern contra-props.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 10:27:30 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
On my Twin-Manchester I'm thinking three of these with 16 foot contra-props and the Nottingham is powered by four of them with Wyvern contra-props.


Hmmm...a Manchester powered by two Armstrong Siddeley Pythons....mmmm

These might help give an idea of what such a creature may have looked like:





Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Another option is to turn some of the various jet testbed Lancs into operational bombers...say, they had jets added to give that extra boost in over target speed maybe:




All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline sequoiaranger

  • Gone but not forgotten. He already has a team of angels working up his bench in the sky!
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • E Pluribus Unum (modeling style)
Yeah, maybe have a jet/flamethrower set in a moveable nozzle to thwart those "Schrage Muzik" Ju-88's lurking below you!!
My mind is like a compost heap--fertile AND rotten!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
I've got one of those Python FTB's on the go too, just have to dig it out of the project box and get on with it sometime.

Oddly, I thought I posted this here some time ago

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
Twin 4360s on a post war Canadian Lanc.   
kwyxdxLg5T

Offline apophenia

  • Suffered two full days of rapid-fire hallucinations and yet had not a single usuable whif concept in the lot !?!
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Just for argument's sake, how would the Manchester have looked and faired with two W3420's installed?  I'm thinking that they would've made a distinct difference (I can also see RR doing everything they could to prevent such).

I had a bash but don't think it really works. One issue is the props lining up with the cockpit side windows ... and no room to move the engines aft. Probably the R-2600 was the best bet for the times.

BTW: image modified from one by Terry Hadler for Profile Aircraft No.260
Under investigation by the Committee of State Sanctioned Modelling, Alternative History and Tractor Carburettor Production for decadent counterrevolutionary behaviour.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
No, props in the plane of the cockpit are not a good idea, as the Black Widow proved with every gear-up landing they made.  Ah, well, it was a nice idea.  A pusher-prop version perhaps?

Offline apophenia

  • Suffered two full days of rapid-fire hallucinations and yet had not a single usuable whif concept in the lot !?!
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Yes, excellent example. One possibility would be lengthened engine bearers matched with an extended rear fuselage (à la Lincoln) for balance.
Under investigation by the Committee of State Sanctioned Modelling, Alternative History and Tractor Carburettor Production for decadent counterrevolutionary behaviour.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Another problem with the W3420 when compared to the Vulture is weight:
3275 lbs vs. approximately 1800. So for an aggregate improvement of around 900 hp at max output,
base airframe weight increases by almost 3000 pounds. The 3420 is also much larger dimensionally.

The Sabre was looked at early on, but was ruled out just as quickly due to its teething problems
and supply bottlenecks.

Two-stage or turbo-supercharged R-2800s along with the high-output Hercules models, including the turbo versions
are also other possibilities to look into.

R-3350 is out due to its own development and production problems.
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline apophenia

  • Suffered two full days of rapid-fire hallucinations and yet had not a single usuable whif concept in the lot !?!
  • Patterns? What patterns?
The Lanc itself just looks better and better doesn't it  ;D
Under investigation by the Committee of State Sanctioned Modelling, Alternative History and Tractor Carburettor Production for decadent counterrevolutionary behaviour.

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Jet in tail or jets under wings, cool stuff.  8)
After seeing pictures - first thing came to my bashing mind was F-16 intake scoop on rear fuselage top with F100 or F110 or similar in tail.
Then it joins the 400+ MPH club.

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
kwyxdxLg5T

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
4 3350's to avoid the Merlin fee and designed to deliver plenty of Napalm across the pond 1967.

4 Allison V-1710's for US and Canadian coastal patrol, both oceans but principally the Atlantic theater.
kwyxdxLg5T

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Vietnam?

Maybe some RAAF Lincoln Mk31s operating in an air sea rescue role with underbelly lifeboat?
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Late one night a Lancaster and a B-17 got down and dirty...

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Alvis 3.1

  • Self acknowledged "Bad Influence"…but probably less attractive than Pink
  • The high priest of whiffing

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
To fight the last war more effectively, and to control the airspace over the trenches, the Avro Avatar was developed. The four-gun turret below would be able to shoot down into the trenches as the four-gun turret above defended against enemy aircraft. The "Defiant" idea was also envisioned, whereas the Avatar would fly between enemy two bombers, raking them both broadside. Someone got the idea that such an Avatar, or especially a trio of them, could bank in a circle and spray bullets inward and downward---the first "gunship" was invented! When Britain was threatened by Sealion Invasion, the Invasion Defence Command (you can only see the "ID_", not the "C" of the special markings) commandeered every Avatar for strafing the beaches, including a New Zealander squadron (subject of the model).

For this ostensibly 1/72 aircraft, FROG's 1/96 Lancaster (actually two of them) formed the basis . Wellesley engine, B-24 ball turret, Halifax top turret, and other "subtle" modifications.




Nice and creative model.
 :-* :-* :-* :icon_alabanza:
Underpowered maybe.

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
Speaking about FROG's 1/96 Lancaster, can any of you suggest me which engine can be/look if I scalorame one of those 1/96 nacelles to 1/72?
This is to say a 75% of a RR Merlin in each dimension.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Speaking about FROG's 1/96 Lancaster, can any of you suggest me which engine can be/look if I scalorame one of those 1/96 nacelles to 1/72?
This is to say a 75% of a RR Merlin in each dimension.

Anything powered by a RR Kestral Carlos, which seems to be about .8 smaller than a Merlin

Offline sequoiaranger

  • Gone but not forgotten. He already has a team of angels working up his bench in the sky!
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • E Pluribus Unum (modeling style)
>Underpowered maybe.<

No "maybe"--DEFINITELY!! But, "underpowered" only if trying to compete with fighter aircraft or fast bombers. This Avatar is a dowdy aircraft meant for "buzzard"-like cruising whilst raining down little .303 pellets of lead on hapless troops below. The only way it could be "Defiant-like" to rake a bomber formation would be diving from great height to gain the requisite speed (and indeed, in the more complete backstory, this happens).

BTW, ysi_maniac....I *THINK* I have the spare 1/96 "Merlins" from the Avatar build---are you interested?
My mind is like a compost heap--fertile AND rotten!

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
BTW, ysi_maniac....I *THINK* I have the spare 1/96 "Merlins" from the Avatar build---are you interested?
Thanks a lot for your offer. But I already have that 1/96 Lancaster.

Possible receptor of those Kestrels: 2 for a Westland whirlwind, 2 for DeHavilland Comet.
Afterwards, scaloramed Lancaster can be equipped with a pair of radials.
THINKING

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
In terms of external dimensions the Kestrel and Merlin series are actually pretty close, the big difference is in cubic
displacement and weight.

Kestrel(unsupercharged):
Length 66.72"; width 24.4"; height 39.4"; weight 840 lbs.
Displacement 1,296 cu in.

Kestrel(supercharged):
Length 69.82"; width 24.4"; height 37.53"; weight 950 - 970 lbs.
Displacement 1,296 cu in.

Merlin (single-speed supercharger):
Length 69"; width 29.8"; height 41.2"; weight 1,375 lbs.
Displacement 1,637 cu in.

Merlin (two-speed supercharger):
Length 71"; width 29.8"; height 43.0"; weight 1,450 lbs.
Displacement 1,637 cu in.

Merlin (two-speed, two-stage supercharger):
Length 88.7"; width 30.7"; height 40.0"; weight 1,550 - 1,750 lbs.
Displacement 1,637 cu in.

All figures are from British Piston Aero-engines and Their Aircraft by Alec Lumsden,
and reflect the basic dimensions of each family. The actual dimensions, particularly
length, varied by specific engine sub-type.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2012, 01:24:54 AM by jcf »
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
I was picking dimensions off wikipedia Jon, and they were as follows

Kestral        Merlin      Size Difference (Kestral size divided by Merlin size)
L 74.61       L 88.7        .8 (roughly)
W 24.41     W 30.8       .79
H 35.63      H 40           .89

Which could be interpreted as being .8 smaller for the Kestral which is close to Carlos' 75% smaller engines (72 divided by 96)

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Hi Robert,
the Merlin dimensions on wikipedia are for the two-speed, two-stage supercharger family i.e. Merlin 60, Packard V-1650 and related types.

The Lancaster used Merlin XX-series engines in the two-speed supercharger Merlin family.
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline tc2324

  • Just slightly on the edge of madness......!
USAAF Lanc....



.....  and a KG200 `captured` one.......



Whiffing is for Life...., not just for Christmas!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
    • SketchUp 3D Warehouse - My Digital Models
Ted Taylor (Ted's Modelworks) has been building a 1/32nd scale model of Lancaster B.Mk.I 'S for Sugar' from a kit offered by Hachette Part works that is quite impressive.  The build so far is divided into part one and part two and I am impressed with the amount of detail crammed into this model that for all intents and purposes is built like the real aircraft.

Click on image to go to Ted's main page


(Image source: Ted Taylor/Ted's Modelworks)

Link to Hatchette Parts Works Lancaster Bomber kit page at Hatchette Part Works. 
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
Were there any airliner derivative of Shackleton?

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
The build so far is divided into part one and part two and I am impressed with the amount of detail crammed into this model that for all intents and purposes is built like the real aircraft.


Unfortunately there won't be a Part 3 or any other parts as Ted died last month, sad to say.
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
 :( Sad to know, really! :(

Offline apophenia

  • Suffered two full days of rapid-fire hallucinations and yet had not a single usuable whif concept in the lot !?!
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Were there any airliner derivative of Shackleton?

The Shackleton and Avro Tudor airliners are intimately linked. Maybe proposed Tudor follow-on projects would qualify?
Under investigation by the Committee of State Sanctioned Modelling, Alternative History and Tractor Carburettor Production for decadent counterrevolutionary behaviour.

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
Proposed Mk 4 http://avroshackleton.com/mark4.html

My proposal is more based in Mk 4 than in Avro Tudor

« Last Edit: November 29, 2013, 01:24:17 PM by ysi_maniac »

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
My proposal is more based in Mk 4 than in Avro Tudor

With Napier Nomad or Wight Turbo Cyclone engines?

That's a cracking model in the top link you posted, and he's right about the serial no. he chose, it's in the middle of a 'black out block' for Gnat T1s!  :)
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
A model I've been planning for quite a while now too Kit.  A few years ago Hannants had a sale of just 'bagged' Shackletons, GBP8.00 each (no decals or instructions).  I bought six or seven of them.  You need two just for the fuselage and I'm swiping the engines from a Constellation for it, although I've been trying to find pictures of the Nomad installation as I wouldn't ming doing it that way.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Proposed Mk 4 http://avroshackleton.com/mark4.html

My proposal is more based in Mk 4 than in Avro Tudor



The MR.4 Carlos, was to have Avro Vulcan main gear (which can also be found on the Short Belfast)  ---- your's would look neat if it had the 'eight' wheel truck instead of the double wheels.

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
.....I've been trying to find pictures of the Nomad installation as I wouldn't ming doing it that way.


Napier only flew one aircraft with the Nomad, a Lincoln according to some sources, but others say a Shackleton Mk 1. The only pic I've ever seen of the installation was in the nose of a Lincoln, see below, which I found on a CAR Forum, for goodness sake. It's not all that indicative of how it would have looked in a Shackleton though.

I'm not sure about that captioning either as the Nomad I used a contra-prop and the Nomad II used standard props.

Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Yes I found numerous pics of the FTB Kit, but apparently there is one or two of the Shackleton installation.  Someone posted a pic of it but do you think I can find it again --

EDIT: a bit later --

Found this, just had to juggle the search phrase ---  In that Shackleton website, it says that the MR.4 would have had leading edge radiators between the inner & outer nacelle (which is where I got the idea for my Nottingham [bottom pic]), so the Nomad nacelle would possible be quite stream-lined with a large air intake under it for the exhaust turbine (sort of thinking like an early P-38 in style).

EDIT: even later --

If you look carefully at the Nomad installation, you can see a portion of the leading edge radiator ---
« Last Edit: November 30, 2013, 02:08:33 AM by kitnut617 »

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
I'd not seen that pic of the Shackleton installation before Robert, well done. It looks remarkably simple for a VERY complex engine.

I'd have loved to have heard a Nomad I in flight, better still four of them. It'd have had a deep rumble like a sawn off Deltic engine, overlayed with a turbine howl as well! TU-95s eat your heart out!  :)
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Of interest too, is the overhead engine hanger bracket --

I have a feeling the nacelle could have looked like this below but without the exhaust shrouds --


« Last Edit: November 30, 2013, 02:26:14 AM by kitnut617 »

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
No, I was wrong, according to this (see Nomad II), the cowlings were fitted very tightly around the engine and had blisters over the cylinder heads ---

http://avroshackleton.com/nomad.html

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
I'm tempted to build up a radial Lancaster in USAF SEA nighttime markings some day.
kwyxdxLg5T

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
No, I was wrong, according to this (see Nomad II), the cowlings were fitted very tightly around the engine and had blisters over the cylinder heads ---

http://avroshackleton.com/nomad.html


VEEERY interesting!  :)

I see the FTB Nomad I Lincoln flew at Farnborough in '51, but I was there and I can't remember it. Maybe that was one of the years we went on the Saturday and they sometimes limited the displays on the public days compared to the weekdays. 4 x Merlins + 1 x Nomad would have sounded superb!
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
It looks to me like a simple circular cowl with cutouts for the exhausts, with an annular intake behind the spinner would work quite well as a representative Nomad installation.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
It looks to me like a simple circular cowl with cutouts for the exhausts, with an annular intake behind the spinner would work quite well as a representative Nomad installation.

The exhaust manifolds were plumbed straight into the exhaust turbine situated under the engine which was actually part of the engine Brian, they wouldn't have to have any cutouts -- see my post in Reply #56.  In my Nottingham, the engines are RR H24 cylinder Eagles, the Nomad is similar in layout.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2013, 11:49:51 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
How about an operational version of something like these ....to give more over target speed perhaps?


All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
More re the Nomad fit for the Shackleton:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Slightly larger pics of proposed Shack' variant with R3350s:


All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
More re the Nomad fit for the Shackleton:




What's interesting is something I discovered while planning and researching the De Havilland DH.101 build I'm doing (albeit very slowly), DH was told they wouldn't be getting the motors they had designed the aircraft around, and this happens to coincide with the time that English Electric bought out Napier, lock, stock & barrel.  So really this Nomad is an EE design.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2013, 04:13:27 AM by kitnut617 »

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
Erm, in the same fashion that an MD97 is a Boeing design perhaps? All the Nomad engineering work was done at Napier's Luton site and EE was effectively a holding company at the time.
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Not really Kit, EE started building aircraft in 1922, during the war and before they bought out Napier in 1942, they had built 770 Hampdens and hundreds of Halifaxes

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
I'm not saying they didn't, I'm saying that the Nomad was pure Napier engineering. In the same way the Deltic engine owed nothing to English Electric's input in the railway field.
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
It looks to me like a simple circular cowl with cutouts for the exhausts, with an annular intake behind the spinner would work quite well as a representative Nomad installation.

The exhaust manifolds were plumbed straight into the exhaust turbine situated under the engine which was actually part of the engine Brian, they wouldn't have to have any cutouts -- see my post in Reply #56.  In my Nottingham, the engines are RR H24 cylinder Eagles, the Nomad is similar in layout.

So, just a simple circular cowl with an annular intake...

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
It looks to me like a simple circular cowl with cutouts for the exhausts, with an annular intake behind the spinner would work quite well as a representative Nomad installation.

The exhaust manifolds were plumbed straight into the exhaust turbine situated under the engine which was actually part of the engine Brian, they wouldn't have to have any cutouts -- see my post in Reply #56.  In my Nottingham, the engines are RR H24 cylinder Eagles, the Nomad is similar in layout.

So, just a simple circular cowl with an annular intake...

That's my take too, I'll just copy the Nottingham' nacelle shape but taper the front down so I can use a smaller diameter spinner, more like the Shackleton spinner to the Wyvern ones I used on the Nottingham. I think it would need a slight bulge under the nacelle where the rear end of the exhaust turbine lies with the exhaust exiting at the end of it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Guys, you aren't basing your assessments upon this pic are you:



Because, as clearly stated above, that is a R3350 powered variant.

With respect to the Nomad powered variant, perhaps one can derive something from looking at the lines (engine wise) of the Lincoln powered testbed:




All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Another basis for a jet boosted Lanc/Linc...

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
Interesting Nomad Lincoln pics there.

It looks like the exhaust duct was baised to starboard on the 3rd pic down, and also that only the diesel bit was running at the time. The rear prop was driven by the diesel, the front prop by the turbine if that doesn't make any sense.

The cowling on the Lincoln would hardly be typical of the Shackleton MR4 installation though, part perhaps from the prop and the deep belly underneath, the turbine bit of the Nomad I being underneath the diesel bit.

Noteworthy that it's flying ONLY on the Nomad in the 4th pic, but then it was supposed to have the about twice the power of a Griffon I guess.
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues

The cowling on the Lincoln would hardly be typical of the Shackleton MR4 installation though,



I agree, hence why I only said "...perhaps one can derive something from looking at the lines (engine wise) ...", specifically by looking at this photo:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
BTW, if you look closely you will see two intakes (one on either side) of the Lincoln nose.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
I think that is because of the under-engine frame support Greg, it sort of blocks the direct line to the intake of the compressor.  On the Shackleton set-up, they went with a 'hanger-type' frame so you wouldn't need the bifucal intake of the FTB.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Fair point.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
BTW, if you look closely you will see two intakes (one on either side) of the Lincoln nose.

Those look bizarre, very small for the horsepower and remarkably crude! An annular intake surrounding the prop would have made much more sense I'd have thought.
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline Queeg

  • Master armour builder
  • Lost but now foun .... nope - still lost!
My take on a modifed Lanc ....... I'm almost tempted to try and build this for my '46 British.


Offline PR19_Kit

  • Likes to brag about how long his...wings are.
  • Made it at last!
How about adding 4 x Griffons, just to ensure it stays airborne?
Regards
Kit

--------------------------
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings

Offline Queeg

  • Master armour builder
  • Lost but now foun .... nope - still lost!
How about adding 4 x Griffons, just to ensure it stays airborne?

Ahhh don't underestimate the mighty Merlin. The 66 put out around 1600hp, the last Merlins design for the Sea Hornet were pushing 2000hp.
In comparison the the Cyclone and the Twin-Wasp of the Fortress and Liberator maxed at around 1200hp.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Take the same fuselage but lose the guns and turrets and H2S radar but add in refuelling hose...result:  AAR Lanc!
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Queeg

  • Master armour builder
  • Lost but now foun .... nope - still lost!
Take the same fuselage but lose the guns and turrets and H2S radar but add in refuelling hose...result:  AAR Lanc!

Yeah, that'd be interesting! Maybe some Spits or Mossies with some sort of fueling probe ...... wonder how that would look/work.
It'd also look good in a Maritime scheme ....... or maybe it could carry a Tallboy internally? Modified airlaunched Bloodhound even ....

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Take the same fuselage but lose the guns and turrets and H2S radar but add in refuelling hose...result:  AAR Lanc!

Yeah, that'd be interesting! Maybe some Spits or Mossies with some sort of fueling probe ...... wonder how that would look/work.
It'd also look good in a Maritime scheme ....... or maybe it could carry a Tallboy internally? Modified airlaunched Bloodhound even ....

The Lanc' did carry the Tallboy internally ---

I think if I was going to do something like your profile, I would go half above the wing (level with the top of the original canopy) and half below it (smooth out the bottom of a bulged bomb bay)  then maybe you could carry a Grand Slam internally
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 11:57:54 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Maybe he was thinking about the Grand Slam?

Cheers,

Logan

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Beat me by a millisecond Logan   ;D

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Take the same fuselage but lose the guns and turrets and H2S radar but add in refuelling hose...result:  AAR Lanc!

Or keep the nose & tail turrets in case (Gods forbid!) your flying fuel tank ran into fighters. :o

:)

Guy
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Queeg

  • Master armour builder
  • Lost but now foun .... nope - still lost!
The Lanc' did carry the Tallboy internally ---

I think if I was going to do something like your profile, I would go half above the wing (level with the top of the original canopy) and half below it (smooth out the bottom of a bulged bomb bay)  then maybe you could carry a Grand Slam internally

Yeah I knew it was one of them and took a stab, should've looked it up obviously .........

I might try a mid or high wing to see what it looks like. The low wing looks racy imo, about as racy as a thing this size can be, sort of Orion precursor but without the sleek looks.  I thought tricycle undercarriage too .......

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
I might try a mid or high wing to see what it looks like. The low wing looks racy imo, about as racy as a thing this size can be, sort of Orion precursor but without the sleek looks.  I thought tricycle undercarriage too .......

That's called a Shackleton  ----    ;)

check out reply #9 in this thread --

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
GAF built Lincolns but flew US built Liberators during the war, why not GAF or DAP as it was then, building Lancasters during the war, as Canada did, then follow the with Lincolns and then Shackletons? 

There could even be a bomber version of the Shackleton that GAF builds from the late 40s before building the MPA Shackleton instead of the Lincoln Mk31.  Both could be built in improved versions through the 50s for the bomber and into the 60s for the MPA incorporating advanced compound engines then turboprops as well as improved weapons, systems, sensors etc.  The bomber would eventually be replaced early 60s with V Bombers while the MPA would be replaced with a jet MPA in the 70s or even the 80s.  There could be a multitude of special variants, AEW, ESM, even attack versions developed for COIN in the maritime and littoral environment during the Malayan Emergency and Indonesian Confrontation but then successfully employed over Vietnam.

The Canberra would still have entered service but as a replacement for the Mosquito, Beaufighter and Beaufort while the Lincoln, Shackleton and Shackleton like bomber would have been replacements for the wartime heavies and Sunderlands, i.e. a larger more diverse RAAF. ;)

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
What about an AVRO Lancastrian or York with the wings and engines of an AVRO Lincoln or Shackleton ...possibly even going to the tricycle undercarriage of later Shack's?
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Why not and then get GAF to build that as well for RAAF transport sqns as well as QANTAS and ANA

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
What about an AVRO Lancastrian or York with the wings and engines of an AVRO Lincoln or Shackleton ...possibly even going to the tricycle undercarriage of later Shack's?

Isn't that essentially what an AVRO Tudor is?

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Partially...except the Tudors for the most part had RR Merlins
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Does anyone produce a kit or conversion of the York, Lancastrian or Tudor in 1/48?
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
The wing of the Tudor is a Shackleton wing, and a Shackleton wing is not like a Lincoln wing. It just looks similar.  The Lincoln wing originates from the Manchester wing. This had the engine nacelle spaced from the fuselage so a 16 foot prop could be installed on the Vulture engines (they never got the engine developed far enough to do this so the biggest prop diameter used was about 14 feet). When the Manchester was redesigned to except four Merlins, this inner wing was left as it was and it followed suit on the Lincoln. Even though the outer wing was progressively lengthened, the wing tip height to the ground remained the same which led to the dihedral angle being reduced from Lancaster to Lincoln. This dihedral starts just outboard of the inner nacelles.

The Shackelton wing was designed for 12'-6" /13'-0" diameter props from the start which reduced the distance between the engine nacelle and the fuselage side and the dihedral starts on the center line of the inner nacelles. However, the Shackleton's fuselage is 8 feet wide compared to the Manchester/Lancaster/Lincoln 6 foot wide fuselage. This makes the overall span of the Lincoln and Shackleton wings about the same.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2014, 11:22:37 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
One I wasn't aware of but which fits the bill:  Avro 695 Lincolnian

« Last Edit: September 18, 2014, 09:04:19 AM by GTX_Admin »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
You could also do that to a Shackleton, and as it's got a wider fuselage (and later tri-gear) would make more sense

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Agreed.  Maybe even have a small rearward dropping ramp for a freighter version.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
I've thought about sticking Shackleton wings/tail on a York and making it tri-gear, plus re-profiling the lower fuselage at the rear to accept a ramp

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
I wonder how well a Shackleton wing would go on a Sunderland-esque flying boat hull?

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
I wonder how well a Shackleton wing would go on a Sunderland-esque flying boat hull?

That would be Shetland-size then ---

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
I knew I'd seen a picture.  Not an AVRo design but a Saro one, the P.104 was recce and ASW flying boat project,intended for R2/48 Specification:





Roughly similar wing to a Shack, I believe.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 04:59:48 PM by Rickshaw »

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
I'll start with:

1. Replace Griffons with R-3350s. Flown by the USN as the PA-1S
2. Replace twin tails with a large single fin
3. Tanker version with drogues

Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline tsrjoe

  • Has been volunteered... for something...
Turboprops and a nice smart colour scheme like the early Nimrods :)

Offline upnorth

  • Distorting a reality near you.
  • Reinvented Austria and the Stuka....Now what?

1. Replace Griffons with R-3350s. Flown by the USN as the PA-1S


I think you might be laying the foundation of a firekiller conversion for the North American market with that, especially if you're going with a tricycle landing gear variant.

Pickled Wings, A Blog for Preserved Aircraft:
http://pickledwings.wordpress.com/

Beyond Prague, Traveling the Rest of the Czech Republic:
http://beyondprague.wordpress.com/

Offline mrvr6

  • Accidentally created a Tejas….
swept wing turboprop?

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
I'll start with:

1. Replace Griffons with R-3350s. Flown by the USN as the PA-1S
2. Replace twin tails with a large single fin
3. Tanker version with drogues

Errr…check out Reply #63 on Pg 5 of this thread.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
And speaking of which…

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Something interesting I came across in Stewart Wilsons Lincoln, Canberra and F-111 in RAAF Service, was that Lawrence Wackett was a member of the group assigned to tour and report on the best options for a new combat aircraft to be manufactured in Australia from 1944/45.  Apart from identifying the Liberator as the best option for the RAAF, but pointless to produce locally due to production rates in the US, Wacket suggested a version of the Lancaster with two stage supercharged Merlins and.50 defensive guns would be a suitable type for the RAAF, this is basically what the Lincoln was.

What was really interesting was his follow up suggestion, that after 100 two stage Merlin Lancasters were built, production should switch to a higher powered version using a license manufactured version of the Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp.  Now just imagine that a late war RAAF Lancaster III with three or four twin .50" cal turrets and four massive Double Wasp radials, that would be an interesting wiff build.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
I have something similar planned...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
It was interesting that Wackett basically pre-empted the Lancaster IV / Lincoln and also was pretty spot on about US built Liberators being suitable for the RAAF.  They had initially been sent to look at twin engined medium bombers but determined that there were no new ones available with all existing types actually being attack aircraft rather than bombers with the Beaufighter, Mosquito and, potentially, CA-11 covering that range of missions quite adequately.  Still the A-26C (later B-26) would probably have served quite well.

Apparently up to twenty four Tudors were meant to be built locally as well as the Lincolns with 12 Tudor IIs actually being ordered.  It is interesting that the government of the day were under the impression that the Lancaster  / Lincoln was equivalent or superior to the B-29 were Wackett was more pragmatic in that he believed Australian industry at that point would not have been capable of fabricating its pressurized fuselage.

The post war plan for the RAAF was quite interesting, 16 squadrons, made up of 3 heavy bomber, 2 long range fighter, 1 heavy bomber / reconnaissance, 1 tactical reconnaissance, 4 interceptor (citizen), 1 target towing, 1 survey, 1 search and rescue, and 2 transport.  The Lancaster / Lincoln, Tudor, or York and possibly Shackleton could have covered off 6, possibly 7 (including SAR) of the squadrons for quite a substantial production run. It would be interesting to know what the RAAFs thoughts were for the different squadrons. i.e. was the Mustang the long range fighter (is this what the DH Seahornet was evaluated for?) or the interceptor (perhaps this was initially the Spitfire) and where did the Mosquito and Beaufighter fit in all this?
« Last Edit: December 31, 2014, 02:12:56 PM by Volkodav »

Offline kengeorge

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Tiger Force.
 
Apologies as it's a bit of a bump.
Here I am asking a question, regarding the RAF's Tiger Force.
I've trawled Google & Wiki for answers, & understandably it's all a bit vague.
So the questions are these-
Does anyone know where the force may have been based, as in islands?
Who could be the CO?
If anyone could point me in the right direction, as in books or websites or answers, I would be grateful.

Also something has me foncused, 'Range vs Radius of action' what is the difference?
Avro Lancaster I Range: 2,530 mi (2,200 nmi, 4,073 km) with 14,000lb bomb-load? If correct, then radius of action is-1,265 mi (1,100 nmi, 2,036.5 km). Is that right?

Ken.


Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Nope, most published numbers just give a max range, and sometimes that is a ferry range number i.e. just fuel
and crew point-to-point. This is also true of max speed and max altitude numbers, they are often what the
airframe is theoretically capable of in clean configuration.

You have to dig to find 'combat load/range/radius' numbers.

B.Mk.I (range)
2,530 miles with 7,000 lbs
1,730 miles with 12,000 lbs
1,550 miles with 22,000 lbs

Here is a telling statistic for the Manchester:
1,630 miles with 8,000 lbs and 1,160 gallons of fuel
1,200 miles with 10,350 lbs and 882 gallons of fuel

The book Halifax by Merrick is nice in that has appendix of the load statistics for the
various marks of the Halibag, and you can really see the tradeoffs of load versus performance.
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
There was an article in Air Britain's Aeromilitaria about Tiger Force (it was the bases for my Avro Nottingham project) not long ago, and at the beginning it was a force made up of RAF and RCAF squadrons. Later Australia and New Zealand were to join the force.  The article says that even before the European phase of the war was over, RCAF squadrons were being sent back to Canada to work-up on the Pacific phase and that the plan was to use the Lancaster Mk.IV (which ended up being called Lincolns). Victory Aircraft were just gearing up to produce the Lincoln when the war ended and that the force was to gather on the west coast (in British Columbia). Where they would have operated from wasn't mentioned, but as there was a considerable RCAF presence in the Eleutian Islands, it would make more sense that was where they would have been based and attack Japan from the North. The British side of the Force would have come through China I think (via Burma/India) as my Dad who was with 617 Sqn at the end of the war was in what is called Bangladesh now, at a base called Digri IIRC just after the war had ended ( the atomic bomb attacks putting an end to Tiger Force).
« Last Edit: March 27, 2015, 04:46:48 AM by kitnut617 »

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
swept wing turboprop?

1/100 Tu-20 wings !
And,,, letz not forget the Stirling when UK bomber kitbashing.

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album


Source: Deviant Art: KirovRampager
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline KiwiZac

  • Who said Kiwis can't fly...though this one can organise for a kit of the Fletcher FU24 to be produced!
  • The Modeller Formerly Known As K5054NZ
There's a lot of chatter among Kiwi enthusiasts about the Hercules and Orion possibly being replaced (moreso the Orion). Relevant to this thread is this post by one of the Wings Over New Zealand forum members:

Quote
I remember the talk of a search for a suitable aircraft while I was at school, before I joined the BES in '64, there was talk of trying to find a flying boat as well as the C-130, I think even the Shackelton was mentioned. A maritime Herc today would be a different bird than 50 years ago.

An RNZAF Shackleton, replacing the Sunderland instead of the Orion. I really, really like this idea, even though the type would be considered obsolete by 1966 (real-world Orion acquisition). Maybe we buy them ten years earlier, and they end up in Orion-style white-over-grey later on...

I was already going to buy at least one Airfix Shack. Make that two.

Anyone have any thoughts on this idea?
"He's more real-world now than whif..."

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
There's a lot of chatter among Kiwi enthusiasts about the Hercules and Orion possibly being replaced (moreso the Orion). Relevant to this thread is this post by one of the Wings Over New Zealand forum members:

Quote
I remember the talk of a search for a suitable aircraft while I was at school, before I joined the BES in '64, there was talk of trying to find a flying boat as well as the C-130, I think even the Shackelton was mentioned. A maritime Herc today would be a different bird than 50 years ago.


An RNZAF Shackleton, replacing the Sunderland instead of the Orion. I really, really like this idea, even though the type would be considered obsolete by 1966 (real-world Orion acquisition). Maybe we buy them ten years earlier, and they end up in Orion-style white-over-grey later on...

I was already going to buy at least one Airfix Shack. Make that two.

Anyone have any thoughts on this idea?


Personally I think the Shack would have been a retrograde step.  Re the flying boat option see answer here:  http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=1926.new#new
« Last Edit: December 04, 2015, 02:54:20 AM by GTX_Admin »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline KiwiZac

  • Who said Kiwis can't fly...though this one can organise for a kit of the Fletcher FU24 to be produced!
  • The Modeller Formerly Known As K5054NZ
YOU'RE a retrograde step! *runs to bedroom and slams door*

The SAAF machines weren't delivered until 1957 so, timewise, I think it works. The Shin-Meiwa idea is a cool one, though...
"He's more real-world now than whif..."

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
YOU'RE a retrograde step! *runs to bedroom and slams door*
;D
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Neither Schack nor Shin Meiwa for the Kiwis, go for a Double-Mamba powered Superfreighter derived
patrol aircraft.
;D  :icon_fsm:
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Or zero lifed, re-engined turbo Sunderlands...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Or zero lifed, re-engined turbo Sunderlands...

It would probably be cheaper to design and build a new aircraft.  ;D
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Bah!! Reality. ;)
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Or zero lifed, re-engined turbo Sunderlands...

Yeah!


Offline KiwiZac

  • Who said Kiwis can't fly...though this one can organise for a kit of the Fletcher FU24 to be produced!
  • The Modeller Formerly Known As K5054NZ
I saw that build and thought it could be fun...
"He's more real-world now than whif..."

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Seafords?

Maybe Shorts could have completed the planned thirty instead of only eight with NZ acquiring a number for a good price.

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Lanc painted with four sharkmouths (Canadian, I believe):



From here: https://twitter.com/KifaTwentyfour/status/783970575689670660
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
It is the CWH Mynarski Lancaster. They will add temporary markings via decals to recognize other A/C and airmen.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2016, 10:59:03 PM by The Big Gimper »
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Does anyone know if any squadron's Lancasters besides those of 617 Squadron were fitted out to carry Tallboy bombs?  Gregory Benford's The Berlin Project has an RAF Lancaster so fitted out, and with a mixed RAF - USAAF crew, dropping a "Little Boy" on Berlin early on the morning of June 6, 1944.  They miss the "amateur painter" but severe enough other connections that the landings and initial moves inland go quite successfully; then things get nasty.

I ask because the US bomb was designed for the same shackles and spacing (found that out at Silver Hill when we visited the Enola gay restoration) as Tallboy.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2017, 09:56:17 AM by elmayerle »

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Does anyone know if any squadron's Lancasters besides those of 617 Squadron were fitted out to carry Tallboy bombs?  Gregory Benford's The Berlin Project has an RAF Lancaster so fitted out, and with a mixed RAF - USAAF crew, dropping a "Little Boy" on Berlin early on the morning of June 6, 1944.  They miss the "amateur painter" but severe enough other connections that the landings and initial moves inland go quite successfully; then things get nasty.

I ask because the US bomb was designed for the same shackles and spacing (found that out at Silver Hill when we visited the Enola gay restoration) as Tallboy.

9 Squadron was also equipped to carry Tallboys.   An aircraft from 9 Squadron is attributed with the sinking of the Tirpitz in Norway.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Does anyone know if any squadron's Lancasters besides those of 617 Squadron were fitted out to carry Tallboy bombs?  Gregory Benford's The Berlin Project has an RAF Lancaster so fitted out, and with a mixed RAF - USAAF crew, dropping a "Little Boy" on Berlin early on the morning of June 6, 1944.  They miss the "amateur painter" but severe enough other connections that the landings and initial moves inland go quite successfully; then things get nasty.

I ask because the US bomb was designed for the same shackles and spacing (found that out at Silver Hill when we visited the Enola gay restoration) as Tallboy.

9 Squadron was also equipped to carry Tallboys.   An aircraft from 9 Squadron is attributed with the sinking of the Tirpitz in Norway.

In the book 'Ruin from the Air', it mentions that the USAAF contemplated using the Lancaster for the A-Bombs. The bit the killed the idea was it couldn't get high enough, something that was a problem while Lancasters were dropping Tallboys and Grand Slams. The B-29 when tested with them was able to get to the bomb's design height for maximum effect.

My Dad who served in 617 Sqn while they were using the big bombs, told me that before the Grand Slam was used operationally, they dropped the Tallboy. Once the Grand Slam was in use, the Tallboys were dropped by 9 Sqn.  They also flew in mixed formations to the various targets.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2017, 11:50:33 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Random idea:  Transport version (ala Lancastrian or York) of Manchester.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Not a Manchester transport but I've been playing with the idea of a Super York. Lincoln or Shackleton wing/engine combo, lengthened fuselage and tricycle u/c

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Something different:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kim margosein

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Kitnut, are you re-inventing the AVRO Tudor?

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Kitnut, are you re-inventing the AVRO Tudor?

Nothing of the sort, it will look like a stretched York on tri-gear

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Kitnut, are you re-inventing the AVRO Tudor?

Nothing of the sort, it will look like a stretched York on tri-gear
So, on tri-gear but still un pressurized?

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Kitnut, are you re-inventing the AVRO Tudor?

Nothing of the sort, it will look like a stretched York on tri-gear
So, on tri-gear but still un pressurized?

Yup!, basically the idea is if the York was on tri-gear, the underside of the rear fuselage could then be made to have a loading ramp. The profile of it just begs for something like this. The fuselage being stretched would then allow for more freight. I'm thinking of Shackleton style main gear, but then maybe they used a B-24 nose gear or something similar (plenty of those around at the time). What I'd do is have a new fuselage section right where the wing is that was straight, then where the curving up underside of the fuselage starts going forward and backward would then be added to the front and back of the new straight section.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 10:10:44 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Kitnut, are you re-inventing the AVRO Tudor?


Nothing of the sort, it will look like a stretched York on tri-gear

So, on tri-gear but still un pressurized?


Yup!, basically the idea is if the York was on tri-gear, the underside of the rear fuselage could then be made to have a loading ramp. The profile of it just begs for something like this. The fuselage being stretched would then allow for more freight. I'm thinking of Shackleton style main gear, but then maybe they used a B-24 nose gear or something similar (plenty of those around at the time). What I'd do is have a new fuselage section right where the wing is that was straight, then where the curving up underside of the fuselage starts going forward and backward would then be added to the front and back of the new straight section.


Spats like the Miles M.40/41.  ;D

"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
It's starting to sound like a baby Beverly.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding

Spats like the Miles M.40/41.  ;D




I haven't seen that one before Jon, that looks quite good   :)

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
Lancaster and Stirling interchange tails.


Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Interesting idea
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
Single tail Lancaster


Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Interesting idea, however it's way too small. Take a look at what was done to convert the B-24/PB4Y-1 to the PB4Y-2,
the Lancaster would require a similar approach.
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Interesting idea, however it's way too small. Take a look at what was done to convert the B-24/PB4Y-1 to the PB4Y-2,
the Lancaster would require a similar approach.

Yes it would.  Best check height of your hanger doors for tall tail clearance. 
Understand that tail height is behind why Constellation has three tails.  Read about that back when.
Wonder --- that a factor for B-52 G&H flat top tails ?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
There are claims the triple tails of the Constellation were inspired by the triple tails of its erstwhile competitor, the DC-4E.

As for the vertical tails on the B-52G/H, I think they went with a wider chord and a lower height to simplify matters as the shorter and wider tail would also be stronger.  If it allowed the aircraft into more hangers, so much the better.

Offline Alvis 3.1

  • Self acknowledged "Bad Influence"…but probably less attractive than Pink
  • The high priest of whiffing
The B-52 went to shorter, broader tails when they changed to lower altitude operations. The taller tails turned out to be vulnerable to gusting and turbulence. This is also why the F-111 went with a flatter profile tail, instead of the taller type used on the B-58.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
If doing a single tailed Lancaster, I would possibly use the Avro Tudor as a source of inspiration:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline ysi_maniac

  • I will die understanding not this world
^^^^
... but that tail is so ugly ...  :icon_crap: :icon_killbill:
« Last Edit: October 15, 2017, 09:57:29 AM by ysi_maniac »

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
Via Facebook. Avro Lancaster with guided surface to air missile PAT-1 (a Henschel Hs 293 developed in Argentina)

Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
I assume the PAT-1 is fictional?  BTW, it should probably be Air-to-Surface...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
What about a bigger brother to the Avro Lancaster B Mark II - namely a later model Lancaster or even Lincoln but with more powerful Bristol Centaurus engines?
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Well reading about how the boffins studied the German TV guided missiles, and adapted it to the Tallbot I could imagine something more along these lines

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
I assume the PAT-1 is fictional?  BTW, it should probably be Air-to-Surface...

I paste and cut what the artist provided.  ;)
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
What about a bigger brother to the Avro Lancaster B Mark II - namely a later model Lancaster or even Lincoln but with more powerful Bristol Centaurus engines?

A Shackleton ------   ???

Or a Nottingham   >:D  This has four RR Eagle H-24 cylinder engines

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
Blackbird models has in 1/72 a conversion kit for the MK.VI.  It has chin radiator so you could make a Griffon. 
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Blackbird models has in 1/72 a conversion kit for the MK.VI.  It has chin radiator so you could make a Griffon.


Or there's the North Star conversions from AiM

http://www.aim72.co.uk/page179.html

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues


+ one of these (of which I have two) less the engines




+ 4 of these:




+ some of these (or similar) - note roundel with fern frond within the inner red circle:



+ a bunch of cursing, cut fingers, loss of blood etc...

= AVRO Lincoln V (my fictional designation for proposed Bristol Centaurus) in RNZAF service during Malaysian Emergency...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!