It wasn't there back in 1970/71. There was a large notice board in the hangar detailing the history of that particular Lancaster. There was a large fuel tank installed in the front section of the bomb bay.Where's the mid upper turret?
Friday the Thirteenth ! I think the centre section and wings were from a Handley Page Hastings . It is a good museum to visit .My Dad was RAF Ground Crew during the war - I don;t think he ever worked on Lancs - mostly on Stirling then Halifax
If anyone is interested they have a Halifax in the Yorkshite Ait Museum near York - they do a few guided tours in normal years - I intend to go along when all this virus stuff calms down
I think there is one at East Yorkshire Air Museum. They also had some of the objects used in the Dam Buster raid.I wonder if anyone remembers what a Tallboy was?
I used to prefer the Lancaster over the Halifax until I read up about the Halifax . Handley Page were a very good company in designing aircraft. They adopted the idea of four engines instead of the 2 I'll fated Rolls Royce Vulture engines of the Avro Manchester .I wish someone would rebuild a Halifax (and a Beaufighter). Apart from being able to carry bigger bombs, I don't see what the Lancaster had over the Halifax. The Halifax did not share a design flaw of the Lancaster: escape hatches too small for big men with parachutes to bale out of.
Obviously I'm biased, but with the exception of the Pathfinders and the two precision squadrons, 9 and 617, bomber command couldn't hit a target for toffee. They switched fairly early on to area bombing of entire cities and often got that wrong as well.I had the privilege of going in to the forward gun turret of a Lancaster, static on the ground obviously. It left me in even greater awe of those that had to sit there under fire. My great uncle was a gunner in a bomber that had a turret on the underbelly, where the only access was from outside. If the wheels failed, they were doomed.
There was an interesting documentary where they got modern bomber crews to try and drop a flour bomb on a target in Belgium after a UK take off. They ended up with masses of respect for the WWII crews.
Obviously I'm biased, but with the exception of the Pathfinders and the two precision squadrons, 9 and 617, bomber command couldn't hit a target for toffee. They switched fairly early on to area bombing of entire cities and often got that wrong as well.
I know, it's just a chance to big up my grandmother (Pathfinders) and grandfather (9sqdn). Just going up in the things would have been enough of an ordeal, nevermind navigating to and hitting a target under fire. I think both my grandparents were about twenty years old in 1943ish, so less than half my age now. Makes me think of what I was doing at that age. When I was twenty I was not flying heavy bombers over hostile territory.I accept your argument on the precision, but the programme covered a whole range of the requirements, including age, training, experience and the equipment available, navigating by landmarks etc.. Obviously they couldn't recreate the additional element of doing it underfire.
The walk around museums was revealing looking at the ages of those involved, and comparing them to youths I knew that were the same age.
Ah, the big argument of the war.I accept your argument on the precision...
I know where there's one....it's at 42m depth about 1km from St Julian's in Malta. Lovely dive!One of my favourite quirky aircraft is the Beaufighter. Stirling did a good job early on too. I seem to remember reading there are none of those left at all.