WIX Archives
Re: Lancaster Squadrons in Focus
Posted by Ron Henry on Mon Nov 18, 2002 01:51:12 PM
In reply top Re: Lancaster Squadrons in Focus posted by Eddie on Mon Nov 18, 2002 10:49:17 AM
: Thanks for the review, Tony.
:
: I believe there were some rear tyres that were pneumatic -
: but I might be wrong. These weren't of the twin contact t
: ype.
:
: Personally, I'd like to see a Mk.II Lancaster, but I belie
: ve it would be quite a task to get an accurate representat
: ion - the only Lancs that would "just" need an engine chan
: ge to get them to Mk.II status would be S-Sugar and G-Geor
: ge - the rest are different with all their fitting out (eg
: the Canadian ones have the wrong turrets and electrical e
: quipment, and the B.VIIs have the wrong turrets, plus they
: have numerous detail differences).
:
: The needle blade props were a De Havilland design, and the
: paddle blade props were Hamilton Standard. The Hamilton S
: tandard props were only fitted from 1943 or early 1944, bu
: t they were more efficient and increased the performance.
I'm under the impression that DH props were a US design made under licence?
AIUI, there was a difference between US and UK prop splines.
Could it be that Lancaster Mk IIIs, with their Packard Merlins had the Hamilton Standard props?
Just today, I've contributed to a discussion, on another group, about Lancaster IIs. Was the Mk II an insurance against potential shortage of Merlins? Then, in fact, the shortage didn't materialise? BTW, a couple of months ago, I spoke to a WW2 Flt Engineer with experience of Mk I/IIIs and Mk IIs and he said that the Mk II was a fine performer - outperformed the Merlin Lancs in some respects.