|
| Most famous of all Avro military aircraft and without doubt the most successful heavy night bomber to be deployed over Europe during World War II. The Avro 683 evolved almost accidentally as a result of recurrent failure of the insufficiently developed Rolls-Royce Vulture engines installed in the twin-engined Avro Manchester.
Owing to delays in the full development of the Vulture engine, the decision was taken in mid-1940 to design a new version of the Manchester with four Rolls-Royce Merlin engines. The first conversion made use of about 75 per cent of the Manchester's parts and assemblies, the principal change being the provision of a new centre-section of the wing with mountings for Merlin engines. This aeroplane became the first prototype of the Lancaster. A second prototype fitted with Merlins and significantly modified in detail was designed, built and flown in just eight months. The first production Lancaster I flew just over five months later, its power plant comprising similar 954kW Rolls-Royce Merlin XX in-line liquid-cooled engines, each driving a three-blade constant-speed and fully feathering propeller. Because of the possibility of some interruption in Merlin production, the Lancaster II was built with 1,229.5kW Bristol Hercules VI radial engines. These fears did not materialise, with the result that only 300 Lancaster IIs were built.
First operational RAF squadron to be equipped with Lancasters was No 44, which used them operationally for the first time on 3 March 1942 - laying mines in the Heligoland Bight. Defended by ten machine-guns and carrying a maximum bomb load of 6,350kg, the Lancaster was - and soon proved itself to be - a formidable weapon in the hands of the RAF, which had, by mid-1942, learned a great deal about night bombing operations over Europe. By comparison with contemporary four-engined bombers it was statistically the most effective, dropping 132 tons of bombs for each aircraft lost on operations; the corresponding figure for the Halifax and Stirling were 56 and 41 tons respectively. The Lancaster was so right, from the beginning, that there were very few changes in airframe design during its wartime service.
Improved power plants, however, provided steadily improving performance: the Lancaster VII, for example, with 1,207kW Merlin 24 engines, had a maximum take-off weight of 30,844kg by comparison with the 22,680kg of the early Lancaster I. Bomb load changed considerably, the cavernous bomb bay being designed originally to carry bombs of up to 1800kg, with a total bomb load of 6,350kg; it was modified progressively to carry the 9,980kg Grand Slam bomb.
The Lancaster will be remembered for its part in two spectacular operations: the breaching of
the Mohne and Eder dams on the night of 16-17 May 1943 by No 617 Squadron (led by Wing Cdr Guy Gibson); and the sinking of the German battleship Tirpitz. Its contribution to victory in World War II is best measured, however, by the total of 608,612 tons of bombs delivered, which represented two-thirds of the total bomb load dropped by the RAF from the time of its entry into service. A total of 7,366 Lancasters were built (including Mk X in Canada) and the type remained in front-line service with the RAF until 1954. Canada had some photo-reconnaissance Lancasters in service in 1964.
| CREW | 7 |
| ENGINE | 4 x RR "Merlin" 24, 1075kW |
| WEIGHTS |
| Take-off weight | 30844-31750 kg | 68000 - 69997 lb |
| Empty weight | 16738 kg | 36901 lb |
| DIMENSIONS |
| Wingspan | 31.1 m | 102 ft 0 in |
| Length | 21.2 m | 70 ft 7 in |
| Height | 6.1 m | 20 ft 0 in |
| Wing area | 120.5 m2 | 1297.05 sq ft |
| PERFORMANCE |
| Max. speed | 462 km/h | 287 mph |
| Cruise speed | 390 km/h | 242 mph |
| Ceiling | 7470 m | 24500 ft |
| Range w/max.fuel | 3600 km | 2237 miles |
| Range w/max payload | 1800 km | 1118 miles |
| ARMAMENT | 8 x 7.7mm machine-guns, 6340kg of bombs |
 | A three-view drawing (664 x 646) |
| jack, e-mail, 11.12.2010 15:21 In 1954 I was a USAF aircraft commander flying the SA-16 Albatross in Air Rescue Service stationed in Sidi Slimane, Morocco. We were dispatched on a ememrgemcy rescue mission to St. Mawgan (spelling?) While we were there we witnessed a dramatic ceremony honoring the Lancaster bombers. My (fading) menory says it was a retirement ceremony of some sort having to do with the Lancs. Maybe the base was closing, or maybe a unit was being disbanded. Very dramatic and moving. Anyone remember what the ceremony was about? reply | | Robert Gosnell, e-mail, 11.12.2010 03:11 Back in the early 1950s, I photographed an RCAF Lancaster at the Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Municipal Airport. The Lanc had been flown in to have an avionics upgrade performed by Collins Radio Company. Most unfortunately, the Lanc crashed and burned at the airport on its departure and was completely destroyed. I do not remember if there was loss of life. reply | | B.O.B, 19.11.2010 20:40 To me this aircraft is the destroyer of the nazis the aircraft of heroes. The luftwaffe sowed the wind and Germany reaped the wirlwind. reply | | a.casais, e-mail, 10.11.2010 14:31 To me this aircraft, is just a coward donkee killing machine, GOD BLESS DRESDE. London did not have so much punishment than the german city had and is not the main city either a military target. reply | |
| | Johan Runfeldt, 10.10.2010 11:33 Carl, most of the Dambuster mission was flown at normal altitudes, but for the spinning bomb to work properly it had to be dropped from sixty feet, not hundred. The tolerances in drop-height was so tight that the crews couldn't trust their ordinary altimeters, but had to mount oblique searchlights in the outer wings, triangulating the correct height.
Also concerning the Dambuster raid, I was shocked starting my own military service, to learn that the release of natural powers is, according to the Geneva Convention, a War Crime. Imagine Guy Gibson in front of a Nazi court, saying: "I only followed orders." reply | | Gawen Taylor, e-mail, 12.05.2010 18:37 This is a request regarding my granddad Kenneth Taylor who as far as I was aware worked with AVro for many years, at the Chadderton plant. If anyone knows of a way for me to find out more of what he did (I know he was a Chief Flight Test Engineer) I would be most grateful? reply | | carl wollaston, e-mail, 09.05.2010 01:02 during the Dambuster mission, I can't believe that the lancasters had to fly at an altitude of only 100 FEET.that is so low that to me that seems a bit desperate not to be detected by german radar.I mean, I know they did not want to be detected, but still, it was at night, and would it really be so bad if they were seen? They lost alot of bombers just because of the fact(s)that the pilots weren't really ready to deal with
A)nightfighting
and
B) flying at such a low altitude
Imean c'mon, people! reply | | "Ski", e-mail, 31.01.2010 03:12 Back in the late '90s, was on a job in Canada near Hamilton, Ontario and to kill a weekend we went to the Canadian Heritage warplane museum at Hamilton. A great collection! Was surprised when we saw the Lancaster on exhibit and it had real exhaust soot! Hey, this thing flys!
We viewed a little intro explaining the museum and I was blown away. Mr. Jock, I envy you in flying that great old bird. I worked on recip engine aircraft in the USAF as a crew chief during Viet Nam. Hit air shows when I can, love seeing B-17, B-25,P-51,and was lucky to see a restored
P-40 fly. reply | | David Burns, e-mail, 10.12.2009 23:09 I was in Sharjah, U.A.E., with the British Army in 1968 and had the luck to get on an 8 hour recconassaince mission flying in the Persian Gulf. It was one of the best experiences I have had. I have flown on many military and civilian aircraft, but the Lanc was by far my favorite. reply | | paul scott, e-mail, 20.08.2009 14:51 Although an outstanding aircraft, again, the Air ministry sent too many men to their deaths, with the 'pea-shooter' armament, the .303 on all turrets and the same for the other bombers. Inadequately armed, what's the point? No underbelly turret either apart from the BMK2 which was dropped in any case for being 'too heavy'. Sure, all these refinements would probably mean lesser bombload or range, but if you're putting hitting power in fighters with 20mm cannon to fire at enemy fighters, then what gain with a bomber with rifle-calibre ammo when it has to defend itself from fighters? Senseless. The learned too late and far with the soon-to-be obsolete Lincoln. An wonderful aircraft nonetheless. reply | | Leo Rudnicki, e-mail, 20.06.2009 00:49 Lancs carried a De Havilland 3 bladed prop (no. 5140) Hydramatic or on Packards, a Nash-Kelvinator, both 12 feet in diameter reply | | David Croft, e-mail, 19.06.2009 21:52 Have had a 3 bladed propellor dragged up from the seabed...radius from a tip to the centre line is 6' (72"), diam 12'. Originall the best contender was a 253 Sqn Hurricane which came down off Spurn Head but the prop diameter rules out this identification. Among several a /c types that crashed in WW II near Spurn Point the Lancaster ids a contender, hence my needing to know the propellor diameter. Anyone able to help? reply | | Gerd Henken, e-mail, 08.06.2009 17:50 Hello. I come from Germany and we found in the moorland a RR " Merlin" engine of a Lancaster bomber. Unfortunately the engine was so far destroyed with the salvage work, which it, although it is still very well received, cannot be restored. We want to issue the engine. My question: does someone have copies of the structural drawings of the bomber or the engine? We would issue these gladly also. Thank you in advance. (You excuse my bad English. But it already is over 20 years ago, which were I at school) reply | | steve bell, e-mail, 04.06.2009 11:15 Can anyone tell me what the take off speed of the Lancaster Bomber? Thanks Steve reply | |
| | Jock Williams, e-mail, 19.04.2009 23:01 I was lucky enough to fly the Lancaster for several years with the Canadian Warplane Heritage in Hamilton Ontario Canada -a superb flying museum.
My father, an RCAF flight surgeon in WW2 had flown the "Lanc" and I only wish he had lived long enough for us to "compare notes".
While we flew our Lanc with no bombload and pretty much minimum fuel -it was obvious that in its day it must have been quite a performer.
From engine start to takeoff to landing to taxi-in you had to be on your toes -but the plane had no vices whatsoever and the roar of those four Merlins was absolute heaven!
At our low weights the action in the event of an engine failure was to reduce power on the matching engine on the opposite side and turn it into a "twin" -and in the event of a failure of one on takeoff all that was required was to keep the ball in the centre, trim -and then carry out the drill at a leisurely rate. No panic! I am sure it was quite different at night with a full bombload!
I will never be prouder of anything than of having flown the Lanc! It puts you in awfully distinguished company!
Jock Williams Yogi 13 reply | | leo rudnicki, e-mail, 19.04.2009 06:17 Also, it is strange that Lancasters got Hercules fitted against a shortage of Merlins and Beaufighters got Merlins against a shortage of Hercules. I still prefer the Mossie even tho' it only carried 4,ooo pounds, a cookie. reply | | leo rudnicki, e-mail, 19.04.2009 06:09 One of two flying examples, the Mynarski Lancaster' is based at the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum at Mount Hope Airport, near Hamilton. And it did have an amazing war record, but it also was destroyed en masse during raids on Nuremburg and the Berlin campaign. The Monica RWR and H2S radar acted as homing devices drawing German night fighters even when their radars were spoofed. The bottom half had no defence or visibility. the proposed ventral gun position only used a periscope and was almost never installed. It's place was taken by the H2S ground-mapping radar which drew fighters equipped with Schrage Musik cannons firing almost vertically up into the belly-Bombbay-fuel tanks, usually causing a big blast, with only rare survivers. Since nobody survived, nobody reported how they were decimated. What a deadly game! reply | | Rui Martins, e-mail, 29.02.2008 16:48 The Avro Lancaster is my favourite bomber. I prefer this bomber to B-2! reply | | niall mcl, e-mail, 09.11.2007 05:14 The Lancaster represented the greatest addition to combat during WWII. This and the spitfire accounted for the considerable advantage the British had during the war. Let it not be understated that these aircraft were made great because of the Rolls Royce engine that made both of these aircraft AND the P-51D Mustang the outstanding aircraft we all remember today. reply | | chris roberts, e-mail, 12.09.2007 17:49 great aircraft reply |
|
Do you have any comments?
|
| 
COMPANY
PROFILE
All the World's Rotorcraft
|
