Dug up a prop in my yard. Please help identify.

[Airrays]

Hello. I was doing some clearing on my property in Canada BC and found this very interesting propeller. I'd love to narrow down its origin.

It has a bent tip but I believe it's 72inchs

 

[Snautzer01]

Think its this one

Hamilton Standard prop id help

I found a prop that I need help identifying. HSP 26. MFG 513761 Tc464b31TD

ww2aircraft.net

 

[Wurger]

It's the 75" Hamilton Standard 6501A-0. It was used for many aircraft including the F4U Corsair and F6F Hellcat. Usually confused with the 6507A-0 that was identical but made of different alloy. The 6501A-0 was made of the HS-26 (HSP-26) alloy while the 6507A-0 of the AMS-4130 one. According to the list of the props, governors and blades from 1963 the prop blade type was used for the Douglas C-54 Skymaster aircraft series with the R-2000 engine and prop assy/hub blade 23E50-473 or 505.

 

[SaparotRob]

Usually confused with the 6507A-0 that was identical but made of different alloy.

I can't tell you how many times I made the same mistake.

 

[special ed]

Keep digging - perhaps the rest of the plane is there - then we'll know for sure.

 

[Michael Hope]

As previously stated, this a Hamilton Standard 6501A-0 blade. The pitch setting painted on the blade are "Low 22' High 49". With this pitch setting it would be used on a single engine aircraft, and not on the DC-4/C-54.

 

[Engineman]

That is quite a nice blade. Is there some back story with the location? I don't find many blades laying around!

Eng

 

[Wurger]

As previously stated, this a Hamilton Standard 6501A-0 blade. The pitch setting painted on the blade are "Low 22' High 49". With this pitch setting it would be used on a single engine aircraft, and not on the DC-4/C-54.

I agree. Most of the blades used for the F4U Corsair and F6F Hellcat were of the 24/65 or 26/65. However I found the shots ... believing the captions it seems that the Grumman TBM-3E Avenger had the blade type for its prop. The planes were also transferred to the Royal Canadian Navy. A couple of the TBM-3Es of the different museums have the DWG 6501A-0 and R6501A-0 and 6507A-0 blades of the same angle range for their 13 foot 1 inch diameter unit.

the source:

View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/drobnikm/40028573860/in/photostream/

CAF Rocky Mountain Wing – TBM Avenger Update

Back in February, we reported on progress which the Commemorative Air Force's Rocky Mountain Wing has made with the effort to return their TBM-3E Avenger (Bu.53

vintageaviationnews.com

http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/miles_lumbard/tbm-3e_avenger/

View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/yesiwood/28103168574/

 

[Airrays]

It's the 75" Hamilton Standard 6501A-0. It was used for many aircraft including the F4U Corsair and F6F Hellcat. Usually confused with the 6507A-0 that was identical but made of different alloy. The 6501A-0 was made of the HS-26 (HSP-26) alloy while the 6507A-0 of the AMS-4130 one. According to the list of the props, governors and blades from 1963 the prop blade type was used for the Douglas C-54 Skymaster aircraft series with the R-2000 engine and prop assy/hub blade 23E50-473 or 505.

Great to know thank you!

 

[Airrays]

That is quite a nice blade. Is there some back story with the location? I don't find many blades laying around!

Eng

My wife and I borrowed a mini excavator and are doing blown down tree cleanup on our 6 acre property in central bc Canada and found it. I contacted the past owner who was unsure about it.

 

[Airrays]

It's the 75" Hamilton Standard 6501A-0. It was used for many aircraft including the F4U Corsair and F6F Hellcat. Usually confused with the 6507A-0 that was identical but made of different alloy. The 6501A-0 was made of the HS-26 (HSP-26) alloy while the 6507A-0 of the AMS-4130 one. According to the list of the props, governors and blades from 1963 the prop blade type was used for the Douglas C-54 Skymaster aircraft series with the R-2000 engine and prop assy/hub blade 23E50-473 or 505.

Very interesting. Is it possible to find out exactly what plane it came off of and the crash incident? Is there any other place I could contact?

 

[Wurger]

I think it is very possible there could be the carsh. The easiest way to find out is to talk to the older residents/natives at the vicinity. Also you may visit the local library where newspapers from 50'-60' could be kept. IMHO the prop blade was used just at that time.

 

[Michael Hope]

The TBF/TBM were used for spraying for spruce bud worm in eastern Canada, and possibly other places in Canada, and also possibly as water/retardant bombers. The damage to blade IMHO would possible be from a landing accident, nose over or no gear, as opposed to a crash/smash up. To bend the tip around like that takes multiple times of the blade hitting the ground, as opposed to a sudden stoppage of a crash.
The blade in the images has the gear segment removed, item 16. The propeller assembly would have to be taken apart to release the blade from the propeller hub and spider.

 

[Airrays]

The TBF/TBM were used for spraying for spruce bud worm in eastern Canada, and possibly other places in Canada, and also possibly as water/retardant bombers. The damage to blade IMHO would possible be from a landing accident, nose over or no gear, as opposed to a crash/smash up. To bend the tip around like that takes multiple times of the blade hitting the ground, as opposed to a sudden stoppage of a crash.
The blade in the images has the gear segment removed, item 16. The propeller assembly would have to be taken apart to release the blade from the propeller hub and spider.
View attachment 801141
View attachment 801140

Thanks for pointing out the way the tip probably was bent. That makes sense. I have been doing a lot of research and working with ChatGPT to come to this possible conclusion.

The combination of the bent propeller tip, the scraping patterns, and the context of the propeller's use strongly suggests that it could have come from an aircraft involved in a carrier-based landing accident. Here's why this makes it more likely that the propeller could be from a naval aircraft like the F4U Corsair or F6F Hellcat:

1. Scraping and Bent Tip: The image shows broad, smooth scraping on the tip, which is more consistent with contact against a metal surface, such as the deck of an aircraft carrier. Carrier landings are much shorter and harsher than typical runway landings, making propeller strikes more common. The bent tip further supports the idea of a hard landing where the nose dipped slightly and caused the propeller to make contact with the deck.
2. Naval Aircraft Use: Planes like the F4U Corsair and F6F Hellcat were specifically designed for carrier-based operations. They had to endure the challenging conditions of landing on moving, sometimes pitching decks. Propeller damage from carrier landings was not uncommon, especially during combat or in adverse sea conditions.
3. Common Propeller Use: The Hamilton Standard 6501A-0 propeller was widely used on these naval aircraft, both of which played key roles in naval aviation during World War II. If your propeller has been identified as part of the Hamilton Standard system, it is highly likely that it came from one of these aircraft.

Conclusion:

The evidence strongly supports the theory that the propeller was involved in a carrier landing incident. The bent tip and scraping patterns align with the types of damage naval aircraft might experience on carriers. Given the known use of Hamilton Standard propellers on aircraft like the Corsair and Hellcat, it is very possible that this propeller was originally mounted on one of those iconic planes.

 

[Wurger]

Thanks for pointing out the way the tip probably was bent. That makes sense. I have been doing a lot of research and working with ChatGPT to come to this possible conclusion.

The combination of the bent propeller tip, the scraping patterns, and the context of the propeller's use strongly suggests that it could have come from an aircraft involved in a carrier-based landing accident. Here's why this makes it more likely that the propeller could be from a naval aircraft like the F4U Corsair or F6F Hellcat:

1. Scraping and Bent Tip: The image shows broad, smooth scraping on the tip, which is more consistent with contact against a metal surface, such as the deck of an aircraft carrier. Carrier landings are much shorter and harsher than typical runway landings, making propeller strikes more common. The bent tip further supports the idea of a hard landing where the nose dipped slightly and caused the propeller to make contact with the deck.
2. Naval Aircraft Use: Planes like the F4U Corsair and F6F Hellcat were specifically designed for carrier-based operations. They had to endure the challenging conditions of landing on moving, sometimes pitching decks. Propeller damage from carrier landings was not uncommon, especially during combat or in adverse sea conditions.
3. Common Propeller Use: The Hamilton Standard 6501A-0 propeller was widely used on these naval aircraft, both of which played key roles in naval aviation during World War II. If your propeller has been identified as part of the Hamilton Standard system, it is highly likely that it came from one of these aircraft.

Conclusion:

The evidence strongly supports the theory that the propeller was involved in a carrier landing incident. The bent tip and scraping patterns align with the types of damage naval aircraft might experience on carriers. Given the known use of Hamilton Standard propellers on aircraft like the Corsair and Hellcat, it is very possible that this propeller was originally mounted on one of those iconic planes.

Sounds good. But just a note ... although the prop blade was used for the Corsair and Hellcat its pitch setting was differents. Most of pics shows the angle of the blade of 24/65 or 26/65 range. Your one is for the 22/49 range what can be found printed on the front surafce of the prop balde.. The only aircraft I could find with the prop blade type is the Grumman TBM-3E Avenger also used for the carrier-based operations. To sum up because of the blade pitch settings I would say the one is from the aircraft type but not of the Corsair or Hellcat fighter machines.

 

[Airrays]

Ok that's good to know to narrow it down.

 

[Crimea_River]

One would have to wonder how the prop of a carrier based aircraft would make it to central BC so I think that the other options mentioned would be more plausible.

 

[Wurger]

One would have to wonder how the prop of a carrier based aircraft would make it to central BC so I think that the other options mentioned would be more plausible.

Also true Andy. But ...

Skyway Air Services in Langley, BC, bought 18 TBM-3s from the RCN through Crown Assets in 1958 and 1960, and two 40-foot trailer loads of spare parts in 1960. In 1958, six aircraft were "tanked" and converted to into sprayer/bombers at the Fairey Aviation facilities in British Columbia. These were 600 CF-IMJ, which crashed in 1958 in New Brunswick, 601 CF-IMI, 602 CF-IMK, 603 CF-IML, 604 CF-IMM and 605 CF-IMN. ... Skyway Air Services was awarded contracts in 1957 and 1960 to conduct aerial spraying against the western black-headed budworm in British Columbia.

the source: CF-KCJ / Skyway/Conair #607 / Bu# 53559

Also with the link above ...

Conair Aviation Ltd., Abbotsford, BC.

1969 – Crashed Sumas, Washington, 9 May 1969. A summary of the NTSB accident report can be found at Aerial Visuals: "Summarized NTSB narrative from report number SEA69D0264: There were no fatalities. Incident occurred at 15:00 hours. The damage was substantial. This was a local flight from Abbotsford, BC, Canada. The engine failed or malfunctioned while turning around. Collided with trees while on final approach to land. There was complete power loss in the failure of one engine. The emergency circumstances included; forced off-airport landing on land. Report remarks include: Practice spraying mission…"
According to the Department of Transport accident card below, the pilot suffered facial lacerations, and the damage to the TBM was substantial.

CF-KCJ Skyway #607 in Cartierville, Quebec, 1961, still with its target-tug stripes. [Larry Milberry]

So a couple of the kites the RCN had though ... 98 according to the net sources ... and not necessarily based on an aircraft carrier.

the source:Canadian Warplanes 5: General Motors (Grumman) TBM-3E Avenger, RCN

 

[Crimea_River]

Yep, I take your point. The RCN indeed flew Avengers in the early 50s but I was referring to the question of such aircraft actually flying over central British Columbia while based on a carrier. Not many Russian subs there.

I like the theory of civilian tankers which would almost certainly have been used in that locale.

 

[Wurger]