avatar_kitnut617

Avro Chadderton Mk. B.I (Special) - A revisit to the RAF Pacific Operations

Started by kitnut617, July 09, 2008, 05:22:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

kitnut617

Hi Guys,

I've got a new project I'm thinking about, I was going to hang on and announce it later after I finish the EH-101 AEW I'm building - but (always one of those  <_<)  Tophe has forced my hand.  Ever since I finished the Nottingham and after I had posted some pics of it on the ATF forum, someone there mentioned I should do a Twin Lanc, and I've been giving it a lot of thought ever since, but after seeing Tophe' latest twin profiles I saw that he was getting very close to what I had in mind.    I've now got all the bits gathered to start it but it won't be for a while yet, but to give you an idea where I'm going with this, here's the backstory to my project:



In early 1944, Chadwick had been to a meeting at Kingston to discuss the new Air Ministry requirements for the Pacific theatre, where the A.M. needed new bombers and fighters to deal with the huge distances involved with operations there. 

Everyone there came to the conclusion that new designs would take a minimum three years to develop as the A.M. wanted a very heavy, very long range bomber.  While at the meeting he met up with other people in the industry, like the people from RR, where they showed him details of the new engines they were working on, one being the 24 cylinder H engine (later known as the Eagle) which was already putting out decent hp.  So with this knowledge Chadwick saw an in-trim solution which could produce a bomber as the A.M. needed, much sooner.  His idea was to step back and produce a better Manchester only using these new Eagle engines and the wing he was designing for the Lancaster Mk.IV & V (later renamed Lincolns). He figured he could add large drop tanks where the outer engines had been which almost doubles the fuel load and range.  While this did increase the range the bomb load was still the same, so his solution to double the bomb load was to use two fuselages joined by a new center wing section that was wide enough for a sixteen foot contra-propeller (fortunately the Manchester/Lancaster/Lincoln inner wings were all the same, with the different outer wings for the three aircraft joining just outside the inner nacelles and could accommodate a sixteen foot diameter prop). The gem to the idea was being able to use existing production jigs and to not disrupt current production of Lancasters.

The preliminary design was put to the Air Ministry, who were suitable impressed to give the go ahead for one prototype, on the condition it didn't interrupt the production of Lancasters.  After the contract was awarded, Chadwick went back to his office and refined the design and the resulting package then went to the drafting office.

The appearance of the aircraft changed dramatically with the two fuselages spaced approximately 18 feet across the facing sides, which used two modified inner wing sections from the Manchester/Lancaster attached to a common engine nacelle in the center.  This nacelle housed one strengthened Lancaster undercarriage leg and wheel. Both rear and forward fuselages were lengthened and had a new inner parallel leading/trailing edge tail horizontal surface between the two, this had a fin & rudder mounted at the center.  The outer tail surfaces remained as in any production Lancaster.  For the outside main wings the inner section remained the same as a Lancaster with the outer panels being a new design Chadwick was designing for the Lancaster Mk.IV.  These were of extended length with more pointed wing tips with the main difference being there was no outer engine nacelle, their place being taken by a large droppable fuel tank.  The inner nacelles were retained and had strengthened Lancaster undercarriage & wheels and all three nacelles had the new Rolls Royce 24 cylinder 'H' configured engine of 4000 hp, each driving two 16 foot diameter, three blade contra-rotating propellers, mounted in new, longer cowlings.  The radiators were mounted in the leading edge of the wings between the nacelles and the fuselages, Mosquito style, which had the extra effect of increasing wing area.

The cockpit and bomb aimer' position was located in the left fuselage with the right fuselage being built completely faired in from nose to tail.  Defensive armament was heavy, two .5 Brownings in two remote nose turrets, two more in each manned tail turret and on the left fuselage, one manned dorsal turret with 20mm cannon, and on the right fuselage, two manned dorsal turrets with 20mm cannon, one being in where the former cockpit was.  Also one ventral remote turret with 20mm cannon positioned under the nose in the former bomb aimer' position.  The bombing radar was positioned under the left fuselage' nose.  Bomb load was to be varied but with the ultimate capability of carrying the new deep penetration bombs, either four of the 10,000lb Tallboys or two of the even newer 22,000lb Grand Slams.

The changes that were made were enough for the aircraft to be designated a new name and Chadderton Mk.1 (Special) was selected.




The donor kits being used will be two 1/72 RoG Lancasters (new tool), Paragon Designs drop tanks (either 1/32 100 Gal or 1/48 200 Gal. Mosquito tanks, haven't decided yet) 1/72 Tallboy bombs and shackles (times four) Grand Slam bomb bay fairings, Lanc' B.II nacelle transitions to round cowlings,  Aeroclub Shackleton turrets and some props, Flightpath Lincoln conversion.  Haven't decided on what decals yet or camo but will be Pacific theatre (maybe light grey over black scheme)

Cheers,
Robert
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

Gary

Ohhhhhh my. Now that is gutsy! I'm looking forward to in progress shots to learn how you do this. :bow:
Getting back into modeling

John Howling Mouse

Quote from: Gary on July 10, 2008, 04:26:01 AM
Ohhhhhh my. Now that is gutsy! I'm looking forward to in progress shots to learn how you do this. :bow:

Ditto...very much ditto here.
Styrene in my blood and an impressive void in my cranium.

kitnut617

Here's the parts, I have to find where I put my props though  :rolleyes:  Special thanks to Neil at Paragon and Pete at Aeroclub for letting me buy just certain bits from their sets.
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

Muddyboots

Who cares who wins......as long as theres a piss up after!

Taiidantomcat

"Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gaultier

"My model is right! It's the real world that's wrong!" -global warming scientist

An armor guy, who builds airplanes almost exclusively, that he converts to space fighters-- all while admiring ship models.

tanktastic43

Oh yes, this could be something very, VERY special. Good luck.  :thumbsup:

PR19_Kit

Kitnut,

Quote from: kitnut617 on December 05, 2008, 06:57:42 AM
Yes got some of those already and some for a Britannia which are about the same diameter but turn the other way (IIRC).

How do the they match up? Could you make a contra-prop pair with the front half Beverley and the back half Britt?

I just LOVE the idea of the Chadderton BTW, just the sort of off-the-wall thinking this place exists for. How is the build going, or are you still negotiating a World Bank loan to pay for it?  :lol:

My Twin Spitfire F32 would make an excellent escort fighter for it of course.
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

sequoiaranger

...but delicious!

I'll keep an eye on this one. Let us know how it progresses!
My mind is like a compost heap: both "fertile" and "rotten"!

kitnut617

Quote from: PR19_Kit on December 05, 2008, 07:22:50 AM
Kitnut,

Quote from: kitnut617 on December 05, 2008, 06:57:42 AM
Yes got some of those already and some for a Britannia which are about the same diameter but turn the other way (IIRC).

How do the they match up? Could you make a contra-prop pair with the front half Beverley and the back half Britt?

I just LOVE the idea of the Chadderton BTW, just the sort of off-the-wall thinking this place exists for. How is the build going, or are you still negotiating a World Bank loan to pay for it?  :lol:

My Twin Spitfire F32 would make an excellent escort fighter for it of course.

Hmm!  got them in a box somewhere but they're playing 'hide-n-seek' at the moment.  The Beverley props look like a Tempest prop, the Britannia props have very wide square tips, the plan is to re-profile them to match the Beverley props.  But I might just try the 're-twist' method you describe.  Both props have cast in spinners, the Beverley' being the larger of the two, but my idea is that the contra props will be two 3-bladed ones and use some left over Shackleton spinners.  I'm thinking of using the Shackleton kit' prop shafts but chopping the blades off and putting these longer blades on and re-use the Shackleton spinners.

A couple of your Twin Spits for escort would be just what I'm thinking   :thumbsup:  I've not started chopping plastic yet but will in the near future as my other two projects are nearly finished (EH-101 AEW Petrel and CH-151 Thunderbird)
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

ChernayaAkula

That's a pretty ambitious project!  :thumbsup: And the result should be pretty kick-@$$, too!  :wacko:
Cheers,
Moritz


Must, then, my projects bend to the iron yoke of a mechanical system? Is my soaring spirit to be chained down to the snail's pace of matter?

PR19_Kit

Kitnut,

Sounds about right to me, that's the technique I used on the Osprey, by inserting the blades in the Pogo hub. Mucho filler needed in my case, but you may be lucky with the Shack spinners. I'll watch with great interest.
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

kitnut617

Thanks guys for your comments, I'll get my butt in gear and do some bashing
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

ChernayaAkula

Cheers,
Moritz


Must, then, my projects bend to the iron yoke of a mechanical system? Is my soaring spirit to be chained down to the snail's pace of matter?

kitnut617

erm! in a word --- no.  :banghead:  It's a case of other projects getting started and ---RW. 

If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike