Avro Manchester, Lancaster, Lancastrian, Lincoln, Shackleton

[kitnut617]

Will the contra-props from a Shack fit on the front of the Lanc nacelles? Or would I be better off taking the whole nacelle and grafting it onto the Lanc wing?

There were a few of the Revell re-issue Frog Shacks in a model shop at home last time.

Just saying, is all....

Cheers

Tony

Tony, this is an Airfix Lancaster wing over a Frog/Modelcraft/Novo Shackleton wing:



The photo doesn't really show it properly but the nacelles are actually space the same distance apart, but the Shack has a shorter inner wing though ( I have added an extra 14mm to the wing root here) as well as the longer outer tips, this shows the Aeroclub Shack MR.2 wing tip conversion being added.

[kitnut617]

The turbo-prop idea is very feasable, I just read last night in one of the latest Air-Britain quarterlies I get, an article by Derek King on AW 650 Argosys.  I was fascinated to know that the first ten Argosys used a modified Shackleton wing.  These mods were to the inner nacelles for the mounting of the Dart engines and for the attachment of the tail booms and a different spacing of the outer nacelles but the wing was a Shackleton wing.  The only other thing that I can see different is the wing tips were squared off, probably by shortening judging by the width of the wing tip.

So turbo-props on a Lanc is a very good option.

[McGreig]

As for a multi engined type using Sabres.  Not a good idea, because the engine was very temperamental and had close tolerances.  Four per aircraft? Flying 12 hour missions across Europe and back, fighting bad weather, flak and nightfighters?  You're going to have a lot out of commission pretty quickly.

A Centaurus Manchester is a no go, because the Lanaster prototypes had flown whilst the engine was still under development.  And you cannot advance it's development for the reasons stated above.

Aren't we being just a wee bit dogmatic here?

My understanding is that the Sabre's problems were due to poor management and quality control issues at Napier, which were resolved after the company was taken over by English Electric. The engine was fundamentally sound.

And it's far from my specialist subject, but all the histories of the Manchester that I've read refer to the proposed MkII which was to be powered by either two Sabres or two Centaurus.

So there doesn't seem to be any reason not to whiff a multi engine type with Sabres or a Centaurus Manchester. And it's a whiff - - -

[kitnut617]

As for a multi engined type using Sabres.  Not a good idea, because the engine was very temperamental and had close tolerances.  Four per aircraft? Flying 12 hour missions across Europe and back, fighting bad weather, flak and nightfighters?  You're going to have a lot out of commission pretty quickly.

A Centaurus Manchester is a no go, because the Lanaster prototypes had flown whilst the engine was still under development.  And you cannot advance it's development for the reasons stated above.

Aren't we being just a wee bit dogmatic here?

My understanding is that the Sabre's problems were due to poor management and quality control issues at Napier, which were resolved after the company was taken over by English Electric. The engine was fundamentally sound.

And it's far from my specialist subject, but all the histories of the Manchester that I've read refer to the proposed MkII which was to be powered by either two Sabres or two Centaurus.

So there doesn't seem to be any reason not to whiff a multi engine type with Sabres or a Centaurus Manchester. And it's a whiff - - -

In my Avro Nottingham thread ( http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...showtopic=16956 ) my backstory is that it was a parallel development of the Lincoln and was to be powered by either Sabre Mk.VII' (GR.I) or RR Eagle' (GR.II)  I did some dimension checks to see if either engine would go inside the Shackleton nacelles and found either one fitted inside without adding additional bulges, it was just the length of the nacelle that had to be accomodated plus a relocation of the radiators which I've done Mosquito style between the two nacelles.  This was an actual proposal much later than my timeline on the Shackleton MR.4 which was to be powered by Nomads or combination of Nomads and Griffons or a version of the R-3350 radial similar to the Canadair Argus arrangement.

[simmie]

In my Avro putnam is lists the Manchester Mk.2 A and B as being Sabre and Centaurus powered.  Both based on the Mk.1A

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Another potential WHIF would be to consider the Lancaster for the missions that were performed by the USAAF B-24 Liberators and US Navy Liberators and Privateers in the VPB Squadrons.  Painted in a gloss dark blue overall and flying long patrols in the Pacific or the gray and white camouflage as used in the South and Central Atlantic patrol areas.  Plenty of room on board for all of the electronic bells and whistles and a large bomb bay for bombs or additional fuel tanks to extend range. 

This could also be carried over to a Lancaster "Dumbo" equipped with the life boat as deployed on the SB-17 and SB-29 for SAR missions. 

[GTX]

A slightly different Lanc:



Regards,

Greg

[GTX]

Interesting one posted over on Secret Projects by bluedonkey99:



Regards,

Greg

[ChernayaAkula]

^  Wow! Outstanding! 

Is this one related to the Lanc or Shack in some way?

[ChernayaAkula]

Thanks for the heads-up! I guess the wings, engines and end plates somehow reminded me of the Shackleton. A cool design, that's for sure. The two flying there at high altitude look mightily impressive.

[jcf]

SARO S.42 Lancaster based flying boat.

Jon

[kitnut617]

^  Wow! Outstanding! 

Is this one related to the Lanc or Shack in some way?

The dimensions for this make it close to being the same as a B-36 -- I've been giving this some thought on how to make one.  The fuselage is about the same size as a B-52's   

[Mossie]

I remember Thorvic fondling somebody elses purchase (he does that!) of a Tamiya 1/48 Lanc & musing that it might be the basis for a Vickers Type C.  We may be off subject but we've come back around again!

Some nice CGI pics of the Vickers Type C bomber here:
http://www.xplanes3d.com/Projects%20Pages/Vickers_C/Vickers_C_01.html

[kitnut617]

Nice link Simon,  The Type 'C' was supposed to be able to carry four Grand Slams and also take it to the height Barnes Wallis designed them to be dropped at, around 35,000 feet.

[kitnut617]

The planform reminds me a bit of the B-29. For the slab-sided version shown on Buttler's cover, maybe a combo of Superfortress, Shack, and Lincoln?

Think twice as big apophenia: