cammerjeff
Staff Sergeant
I do not see any signs of Geodetic construction? I would think that a Wellington in that condition would show signs of the fabric covering and Geodetic frame?
Lancaster wing?
- Thread starter paul s.
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Also true. However the Wellington wing leaging edge was covered with a plate. So the geodetic structure may not be seen if the fabric wasn't torn. The pic quality and angle the image was taken with makes the ID almost impossible IMHO. The wheel is the key I would say. Although the oleo shape may indicate the Wellington , the mount of the wheel axle to it reminds the Lancaster one though.
My first thought was Halifax based on the casing aft of the oleo, the Hali had that big alloy casing, which surrounded the oleos inside. There aren't too many images of Halis without it, but I found one of a B.V with the casing removed showing the bare oleos and I've seen images of Halis under construction without the casing fitted. The curved hoop aft of the leg looks suspiciously like the wheel guard attached to the lower oleo at the hub, although not all Halis had them and I suspect they were removed.
It is difficult to see what's going on here, there's the two openings for the nacelles, which rule out Wellington for a start, and the fact that the Wellington's wing was fabric covered and there's no sign of geodetic structure or torn fabric anywhere, but there's something folded over in the foreground, the outboard nacelle?
It is difficult to see what's going on here, there's the two openings for the nacelles, which rule out Wellington for a start, and the fact that the Wellington's wing was fabric covered and there's no sign of geodetic structure or torn fabric anywhere, but there's something folded over in the foreground, the outboard nacelle?
Last edited:
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
The shape and size of the landing gear casing certainly suggest a Halifax, as does the visible airfoil of the remaining wing sections.
special ed
1st Sergeant
- 4,857
- May 13, 2018
The Sterling tire always looked to me as oversize for the diameter of the hub, therefore my guess is Sterling. However, if no Sterling was lost that date or that location, then I'm wrong.
fubar57
General
Imma thinking Stirling as well. One loss on that date
I'm not convinced by the Stirling to be frank, the absense of struttery puts paid to it. There's simply not the amount of leg there to be Stirling. The Stirling's entire undercarriage was mounted on a massive cradle to increase the wings' angle of incidence and this is completely missing in this image, which, even in this state it wouldn't be considering it was attached to the wing and folded upwards into the nacelle.
There's also intakes on the Stirling's wing leading edge between the nacelles and these are missing in the photo. I don't think it's a Stirling.
There's also intakes on the Stirling's wing leading edge between the nacelles and these are missing in the photo. I don't think it's a Stirling.
Last edited:
special ed
1st Sergeant
- 4,857
- May 13, 2018
Sterling L/G from the internet
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
The type of gear looks like Messier to me, which was one type used on the Halifax. The distinctive feature of the Halifax Messier gear was a large magnesium alloy casting for the main yoke/strut with the compression oleo cylinders sunk into a pocket in ends of the casting. It looks to me that the casting has fractured in 2 places, near the top, and around the oleo pocket - allowing the oleo to sit at an odd angle. Could be wrong.
Last edited:
Been doing a bit of digging and have come up with this, as the more I look into this, the more I'm convinced it is a Halifax. The picture posted by Thomas above certainly helps. I believe it's an inverted Halifax centre section.
Crashed Bomber
I hope the original poster has no objection to me doing this. If you do, let me know and I'll delete it.
I hope the original poster has no objection to me doing this. If you do, let me know and I'll delete it.
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
I think you are correct. I would add to your points the distance between the bottom of the fuselage and the wing roots matches the Halifax but does not match a Lancaster.
- Thread starter
- #33
OK this may help. here are three more pics ( that is all there is at the moment) of the same aircraft. two of the other wing section and then the cockpit resting on the right side with the bomb bay showing. Reports and dates differ by a week and may well be inaccurate so I can only establish what came down when and where by identifying the plane.
Location is beyond doubt but the person who took the pictures may have gotten the date wrong.
Location is beyond doubt but the person who took the pictures may have gotten the date wrong.
Attachments
- Thread starter
- #34
No, no issue with that. just trying to solve this riddle. If the date on the original photo is correct (1. august 1942) and it is indeed a Halifax we're looking at here then it must be
W1109 LQ-S a Halifax2 shot down after a raid on Düsseldorf but wrongly reported regarding its crash site.
fubar57
General
What is the location of the crash? These are the ones I have on the Wellingtons....
20km S. Monchengladbach
2km S. Berg
2km SW. Oploo
SE of Tolz/1km SW. Loop-op-Zand
Huldenberg
3km SE. Helden N Stokkem
12km SW. Venlo
1km SW. Ahlhom
18km S. Weert
20km S. Monchengladbach
2km S. Berg
2km SW. Oploo
SE of Tolz/1km SW. Loop-op-Zand
Huldenberg
3km SE. Helden N Stokkem
12km SW. Venlo
1km SW. Ahlhom
18km S. Weert
- Thread starter
- #36
fubar57
General
Dang....missed a bunch of posts when I "Marked forums read". One Halifax lost Aug. 1. No location, shot down by Oblt. Heinrich zu Sayn-Wittgenstien of NJG.2
IMHO the enlarged shot of the wheel shows that it was the Halifax. The alloy casing of the Halifax oleos can be seen.
Thanks Paul, Those other pics don't help all that much except the one of the wing, that's more like a Halifax aileron in that the trim tab protrudes beyond the trailing edge and the location is at the inboard end of the aileron, whereas the Lancaster's was set toward the aileron's mid point. I'd ignore the slight taper in the aileron toward the camera, that's damage received from the impact. The panel lines also don't match those on a Lancaster's wing underside. Lancasters had a teardrop fairing outboard of both engine nacelles, which is missing from the image.
- Thread starter
- #40
