T17 nose section on the move.

[Doctor Cruces]

Sitting in my front room in a small Norfolk village and I glance up and see a Canberra T17 nose section going past on a towed trailer!! My wife asked me if I needed to go and lie down (not having seen it from where she was sitting) as I have been overdoing it lately, but I did wonder where it was going and from where.
Doc C

[Brewster Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Doctor Cruces

Sitting in my front room in a small Norfolk village and I glance up and see a Canberra T17 nose section going past on a towed trailer!! My wife asked me if I needed to go and lie down (not having seen it from where she was sitting) as I have been overdoing it lately, but I did wonder where it was going and from where.
Doc C

Maybe from the Norwich Air Musuem? They have or had one..

[OUAQUKGF Ops]

Doc Apparently there is a Canberra T17 nose section (W111) with a private collector at a place called Witherton - Norfolk. Well I've never heard of Witherton have you ? Perhaps it is a misprint for Wiveton or Winterton ?

[chevvron]

T17 WK111 listed as stored at Witherton Norfolk or another T17 WJ633 on display at the City of Norwich Aviation Museum.
These two along with 5 other T17s appear to be nose sections plus one whole airframe (WH740) on display at East Midlands.

[Pypard]

Canberra nose then. That would help.

[DaveReidUK]

The best thing you can do with a Canberra T.17 is to cut that awful nose off.

[Pypard]

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

The best thing you can do with a Canberra T.17 is to cut that awful nose off.

It's in the eye of the beholder: I used to rather like the Canberra T.17 for its neatly-faired nose radomes.

[gravedigger666]

I think wifey is correct, go have a lie down...

[DuncanDoenitz]

As some bloke once said; "It's like a monstrous carbuncle on the face of a well loved and elegant friend".

[chevvron]

I understand that Canberras were built so that the nose section, forward from the cockpit, could be removed and re-installed.
So at Farnborough (so the story goes and correct me if I'm wrong) they wanted to create a one off 4 seat Canberra using a T4 (2 seat) nose but retaining the 2 navigators seats for 'trials' purposes.
So they removed the nose section and after suitable mods, mated it up to the remaining fuselage, only to discover that this had been a Shorts built Canberra and the nose section was of Warton/Samlesbury manufacture and so a slightly different diameter and the two parts didn't fit!

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by chevvron

I understand that Canberras were built so that the nose section, forward from the cockpit, could be removed and re-installed.
So at Farnborough (so the story goes and correct me if I'm wrong) they wanted to create a one off 4 seat Canberra using a T4 (2 seat) nose but retaining the 2 seat navigators position for 'trials' purposes.
So they removed the nose section and after suitable mods, mated it up to the remaining fuselage, only to discover that this had been a Shorts built Canberra and the nose section was of Warton/Samlesbury manufacture and so a slightly different diameter and the two parts didn't fit!

If the the Shorts-built Canberras were anything like the Skyvan, which was practically hand-built, their dimensions probably varied slightly between any two airframes on the production line.

[DuncanDoenitz]

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

If the the Shorts-built Canberras were anything like the Skyvan, which was practically hand-built, their dimensions probably varied slightly between any two airframes on the production line.

Doesn't surprise me; Tucano was similar. As a member of the RAF's engineering development team I made a liaison visit to the factory about halfway through the production run and found that they still did not have many of the jigs fully commissioned.

Example; forward fuselage frames, longerons and stringers fully jigged, but no accommodation for aligning the pre-cut skin panel. Quote; "We line the skin panel up by eye, inspector says "ok", and we start drilling". Consequently, no two aircraft had the internals in exactly the same place when we opened an access panel.

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

If the the Shorts-built Canberras were anything like the Skyvan, which was practically hand-built, their dimensions probably varied slightly between any two airframes on the production line.

Tucanos likewise
Deleted 'cos Duncan beat me to it!
Mind you had I built a 'run' of Airfix kits, I bet they would have been the same for me at least!

[Krystal n chips]

Originally Posted by chevvron

I understand that Canberras were built so that the nose section, forward from the cockpit, could be removed and re-installed.
So at Farnborough (so the story goes and correct me if I'm wrong) they wanted to create a one off 4 seat Canberra using a T4 (2 seat) nose but retaining the 2 navigators seats for 'trials' purposes.
So they removed the nose section and after suitable mods, mated it up to the remaining fuselage, only to discover that this had been a Shorts built Canberra and the nose section was of Warton/Samlesbury manufacture and so a slightly different diameter and the two parts didn't fit!

The Canberra nose section did indeed simply and literally, bolt on / off the main fuselage.

Removed / refitted a couple of 7 Sqns Target Towers at St Mawgan to gain access to the tank bays for corrosion inspections.

[longer ron]

I.C.Y. (interchangeability) did not exist with British Aircraft in the 1940's/50's - one would be lucky indeed if a (say) Airframe Panel from one a/c would even roughly fit another a/c - which is of course why all panels were clearly marked with the a/c serial number.
I worked on B2 and T4's 1972-77 and it certainly made life a little more interesting if we were to (say) fit a Shorts built Aileron to an EE built wing (or vice versa) - it could certainly make setting up/adjusting the aileron nose gaps er interesting - generally I really did like working on the old canberra and enjoyed a great flight in a T4 with one of the nicest 'trappers' you could meet .
Of course I was a liney/rectification bod which was probably nicer than (say) doing corrosion control etc.
By the time of the Tucano build it was really unforgiveable not to have I.C.Y on the airframe - as others on this page will attest to - it was not just panels on the Tuc - there were some fairly bad inconsistencies on the Tuc airframes

[Quietplease]

I thought Shorts Canberras had round head rivets and shiplap panels.

[Jhieminga]

Interchangeability on the VC10: https://vc10.net/Memories/testing_ea...rchangeability