|
Post by kiwi285 on Feb 11, 2018 14:44:37 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by kiwi285 on Feb 14, 2018 15:43:43 GMT 12
Some more visual progress today and it is great to see some of the members getting a chance to hang their refurbished part onto the aircraft to see how they fit. Alan has been working on the tail end of the fuse and reinstalling the arrestor hook that came with the aircraft. Unfortunately we cannot get the hook operating as part of the track that the base of the hook rides in has rotted away and we cannot get to it to add a replacement section. Still it looks good. 140218 (7) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 140218 (6) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 140218 (9) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 140218 (8) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 140218 (13) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr
|
|
|
Post by kiwi285 on Feb 14, 2018 15:49:38 GMT 12
Some of the team have started preparing to remove the R2600 engine out of 2505 and it has taken all day to remove the cowls and supporting structure from around it. By next week when I get back I would guess that the engine will be out and installed in a work stand to enable them to remove the accessories case from the rear of the main case. Then we will know the extent of the damage. 140218 (10) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 140218 (1) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 140218 (3) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 140218 (5) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Feb 15, 2018 13:46:22 GMT 12
Familiar sight there! NZ2504 having her engine removed circa 1981. mus16 by Barry Tod, on Flickr
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Feb 16, 2018 14:40:03 GMT 12
Just a thought in case whoever is working on the engine isn't familiar with radials: if they take the cylinder off either of the master rods you must make sure the rod doesn't move sideways! Because the other cylinders are attached to it, any side ways movement could cause one of the other pistons to move too low and cause a piston ring to pop out. Imagine the carnage when it tries to go back up! Usually when an engine is being stripped for overhaul the master rod (or rods) are the very last to be removed.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Feb 18, 2018 10:23:38 GMT 12
Board members will be pleased to hear that the R-2600-8s fitted to our TBFS gave a good account of themselves flying from Bougainville, and suffered very few problems. Probably because they were not stood outside for long periods in poor (humid) weather without any protection, and perhaps because they were operated at a sufficient rate as to not allow any serious internal corrosion to get a hold. Postwar they had a few issues, although this possibly caused by their generally very low rate of utilisation, which would also have been rather erratic. We certainly suffered nothing like the appalling problems as experienced by the USAAF A-20s, etc. David D
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Feb 18, 2018 13:14:12 GMT 12
Yes aircraft engines love to be used. It's when they sit for weeks that problems crop up. In fact engine manuals even point to inhibiting an engine (run with a special preservative oil and cylinders sprayed through spark plug holes with same.)if it was going to sit for as little as a week! Engine run on the ground alone weren't considered good enough to prevent corrosion.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Feb 18, 2018 13:15:07 GMT 12
To expand somewhat on my above post, I have copied a passage from the 30 SU history of late July 1944. Hope our members will find these contemporary remarks of some interest. As you can see, these Navy specification engines seemed to be giving a good account of themselves over an almost six-month period of fairly intensive operations. As the aircraft establishment of 30 SU was 18 aircraft, the figure of 3,626 flying hours would reveal an average of 201 hours per aircraft over that period. For the 5.75 months of operations, that works out at about 35 hours per aircraft per month, nothing for an airliner these days, but probably not atypical for WW2 combat aircraft in the Pacific theatre. The lack of spares in the forward area is a bit of a puzzle, and I can only presume that insufficient spares had been shipped to NZ prior to the departure of the TBFs in January 1944. When our first PV-1 (Ventura) squadrons departed for the forward area in October and November 1943, we had practically no available spares for them, so hoped that the squadrons would be able to obtain such spares from the American supply system in theatre, but found that not only did the American supply system have practically nothing, but neither did the US Navy squadrons equipped with this aircraft type. Wrecked PV-1s thus became the only source of spares until official supplies finally turned up, to everybody's relief. 23/7/44: (Piva Uncle, Bougainville) Twelve TBF's attack bivouac areas, Rorovana Bay, Bougainville - end of operational flying.
31 Squadron scheduled to return to New Zealand on 28th July, ferrying 30 SU's aircraft.
A start has been made carrying out inspections necessary before the aircraft can undertake the flight to New Zealand. Between now and 28th July, the only flying will be test flights and compass swings.
From a report of Engineering Officer, 30 SU, for period February - July 1944 (period during which unit had been under the control of No. 1 [Islands] Group]).
Number of hours flown: 3,626 hrs, 5 mins.
Major inspections (320 hour): 8
Minor inspections (40 & 80 hr): 83
Daily percentage serviceability: 91%
Airframes generally still in good condition, although some components showing signs of fatigue and wear. The hydraulic system in particular was worn, most parts being renewed regularly. Blowouts of tailwheel tyres was common - these not strong enough for this type of aircraft under "island" conditions.
Engines - for two tours of operations, these are remarkably trouble free. Lack of compression in a few instances necessitated cylinder changes, and five new engines were installed.
Instruments gave no trouble, but electrical gear adversely affected by the continual rain.
Lack of spares has been a continual source of trouble - without the aid of the American TBF squadrons, who had their own stocks of spares, the serviceability could not have been maintained.
820 tons of bombs were dropped in the two tours, and 510,000 rounds of ammo fired.
3,851 (presume U.S.) gallons of diesel oil used on garden spraying (all by 31 Squadron)
During the last few weeks of second (31 Squadron) tour, the wing gun-mounting trunnion channel brackets began to fatigue crack. Since these guns are fired under conditions of steep dive (so-called glide bombing), it is considered these breakages were due more to wear than to structural failure.
Operation of turrets was good, except for frequent failures of gun-slot follower strips and the gear box hand elevator yokes.
Operation of the electrical equipment quite satisfactory, well suited to TBF. However the weather caused many problems of leaky insulation, short circuits and losses generally.
The intercom system spoilt by the inferior windings of the transformer of the unit itself.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi285 on Feb 21, 2018 14:35:57 GMT 12
A couple of photos from today. Dave is making steady progress on the port centre section and it is looking smart and also a lot stronger with each day. Lance is getting the cockpit frames put together and cleco'd into place to test for fit. We are going forward with the starboard tail plane. Because the skins were not damaged on the top surface we have decided to put them back on now that the ribs have been repaired. This has been a lot quicker than manufacturing a new skin and trying to drill it off. 210218 (6) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 210218 (5) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 210218 (7) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr Several of the team have been looking at refurbishing one of the hydraulic accumulators and we need a diaphragm for this item. It was manufactured by Interstate Accumulators in the US and wonder if anyone has had experience of finding or manufacturing a replacement. The accumulator is 2800 mm diameter at the flange with 40 holes around the circumference. It operates at 1700 psi (about 117.2 bar) 210218 (8) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 210218 (10) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr 210218 (3) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 21, 2018 15:09:50 GMT 12
Great progress!
|
|
|
Post by shorty on Feb 21, 2018 15:57:55 GMT 12
Seems to be an awful lot of "pop" rivets being used rather than solid ones?
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Feb 21, 2018 16:01:24 GMT 12
Hard case selection of tools. Snaphead must be biting his tongue.
*** EDIT **** Shorty just beat me to it.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi285 on Feb 21, 2018 16:25:56 GMT 12
The engine of 2505 isn't out yet as the boys are manufacturing a stand to hold the engine on its nose so that they can work on the back of the case. Most of the cylinders are off now. 210218 (2) by Mike Feisst, on Flickr
|
|
|
Post by kiwi285 on Feb 21, 2018 16:28:44 GMT 12
Seems to be an awful lot of "pop" rivets being used rather than solid ones? But at least they are all countersunk. If someone wants to come along and show us how to drive solids into both surfaces we will be interested to learn how.
|
|
|
Post by shorty on Feb 21, 2018 18:24:57 GMT 12
I used to do that for a living but it's a long commute from Dunedin to Tauranga, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 21, 2018 20:32:19 GMT 12
Is there any videos on Youtube showing how to do it, perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Feb 21, 2018 21:52:04 GMT 12
They are doing museum display repairs and not airframe repairs. If the work was being done to AC43-13-1B/2B or manufacturer's schemes it would cost a fortune and take months if not years. It is just something we don't get to see so often, well not in an aircraft hangar anyway.
The closest I have come to this is the BDR manuals for military aircraft. Battle Damage Repair when you need the machine flying again in hours and it is not expected to last a couple of missions, if that.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Feb 21, 2018 23:00:02 GMT 12
Are the "pop" rivets in question the ones that were used to hold the original Goodyear de-icing boots in place on the leading edges of wing and tail surfaces? Or rather the rivets that were used to fill the holes which were made for the pop rivets that originally held on the rubber bits (subsequently removed). David D
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Feb 22, 2018 5:58:34 GMT 12
Re the hydraulic accumulator. NZ2504 has one out of a Citreon car.Snap head will know as he was involved in fixing it. Was it the whole accumulator or just the rubber diaphragm Pete?
|
|
|
Post by tbf25o4 on Feb 22, 2018 8:32:32 GMT 12
looking at the photo of the accumulator from 05, the one we had in 04 was slightly different in shape as I recall. A later mod perhaps?
|
|