Wreckage Of Lancaster ED908 (60-Z)

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Air Ministry,

Many thanks for the details from the Bomber Command War Diaries - I have a copy of the 2011 reprint – a good idea to include some extracts on the thread. As you say, there are a number of more generalised entries. There seems to have been a concerted effort against Flying-Bomb sites from 31 July to 6 August 1944.

My research to date has revealed the following:

6 July: night-time attack marked by Mosquitos of 105 Sqn: bombed by 550 Sqn: photographs taken indicate that bombing was from between 17,000 and 18,000ft (although the leader seems to have come down to 11,500ft for some closer photos) and that it overshot the target by about half-a-mile to a mile. If bombing accurately followed the TIs, they could have been close to where the casings have now been found. Details of the sortie are scant in the ORB, but a small number of 1,000MC bombs were hung up and jettisoned.

20 July: daylight attack by 156/582 Sqns. 582 Sqn bomb loads (except ED908) were almost entirely 500lb GP and GPLD, and bombing was from 15,000 to 16,000ft, but all except ED908, which flew on to attack the target after being hit by flak, fell short on the involuntary early release by the deputy-leader on being hit by the same burst of flak as the leader.

23 July: daylight attack by 156 Sqn from between 16,000 and 17,000ft with a mixture of 500lb GPLD and 500lb MC TD 0.25.

25/26 July: night-time - marked by 105 Sqn Mosquitos and by two Lancaster of 405 (RCAF) Sqn - bomber force not researched.

31 July/1 August: night-time - marked by 105 Sqn Mosquitos and by two Lancasters of 156 Sqn – bomber force not researched. The 156 Sqn ORB shows that the two Lancasters each carried 4 x TI Green LB 874; 4 x TI Green 874; 9 x 500 MC TD.025; and 1 x 500 GPLD. They were acting as Master Bomber and Deputy. The marking was from 12,000ft and 14,000ft. “Red TIs were down on the ground in good concentration at 2347 hrs. Our green TI’s fell right on the reds. At 2348 hrs we instructed Main Force to bomb the centre of reds and greens and when the green could no longer be seen we instructed them to bomb the centre of the ring of reds. The ring was about 350yds in diameter. Bombing was concentrated around the TIs. We ceased broadcasting at 2353hrs ..... One photo attempted.” The red TIs were presumably dropped by the Pathfinder Mosquitos and the Main Force seems not to have been drawn from the Pathfinder squadrons – seemingly quite a large operation.

9/10 August: night-time – marked by 105 Sqn Mosquitos and by two Lancasters of 405 (RCAF) Sqn – bomber force not researched.

The target had proved to be a significant challenge, but the launch ramp was presumably finally put out of action with what was the last of the three night-time raids in late July/early August. There would have been plenty of Target Indicators dropped!

I have found a reference to the tactics adopted for Oboe-leader sorties in the RAF Little Staughton ORB on 15 July 1944 which is interesting – this is also the source for the statement that ED908 was the only aircraft of its type then in use. Obviously these tactics were only suitable in daylight.

“A slightly different technique was to be used in this recently-developed type of attack ..... first, a formation of 6 a/c in pairs (in echelon to port) followed by a crocodile of 10 in pairs. As before a/c in the formation were to bomb immediately on seeing the leader do so, with the difference on this occasion that those who were more than 100 yds behind were to bomb on seeing the leader fire a smoke puff. The reserve Mosquito was to fly behind in case of failure of special equipment in the leading Oboe Lancaster.”

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

I have heard from France as follows:

La première est complètement vide , mais le petit morceaux de fer, sur la photo que vous avez reçu était à l’intérieur , dans la partie haute de l’objet ! La deuxième semble avoir une paroi à l’intérieur.
Pensez que l’objet a passé 68 ans sur place et qu’il est très oxydé! Le diamètre peut varié de quelques centimètres !
Tous les bombardements sur la forêt du Croc ont été réalisés par la R.A.F , l’objet n’est pas américains!

My attempted translation is:

The first is completely empty, but the small pieces of iron, on the photo which you received, were inside, in the upper part of the object! The second appears to have a wall on the inside.
Remember that the object has spent 68 years there and that it is very rusty! The diameter may vary by a few centimetres!
All bombing on the Forêt du Croc was carried out by the RAF, the object is not American!

A closer look at the second object also shows a lug, but the aperture at the top is still filled by some metal, which could create the appearance of a solid wall when viewed from the other side.

All this would seem to confirm that what have been found are Target Indicator casings.

Many thanks for your help on this one, Air Ministry – do you agree with this conclusion?

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 1,911

Based on the info we have, my answer has to be Peut-être!

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

I note your caution! Laurent has just told me that the two objects were found about 200 metres apart, which would make sense if they were target indicator casings. Their mangled condition certainly suggests that they fell from the sky!

Laurent has been very busy over the last few days - he has found a second propeller base pitch gear some distance away from the first, and several other pieces including the tip of a propeller blade.

Hopefully, more to follow in due course!

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Target Indicator Casings

Air Ministry,

With acknowledgements as indicated for the diagram (always much easier to find once one knows what one is looking for!!), I am now convinced that we have two Target Indicator casings.

The reason that the casing seems to be shorter than expected may be twofold: first that the last part of its length is the tail plate (see the diagram) which has become detached; and secondly I have found a reference to the diameter being approximately 12 inches, and the length with tail attached being approximately 62 inches – if the tail is about 27 inches, then the main casing would be 35 inches, or about 89 cm. This is pretty close to our 80 cm if allowance is made for the detached tail plate. The dimensions of the first piece on the left (which is slightly squashed) seem then to fit the diagram.

The flash hole is clearly visible on the small item at the foot of our first piece, and the transit plug is clearly visible on the close-up of the second. Both pieces have single suspension lugs.

Are we of like mind?

Attachments

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Target Indicator Casings

Attached is a better diagram - my previous posting showed a skymarker. This is a British 250lb TI. The same identifying features appear: the suspension lug; the transit plug; the flash hole; and the tail plate which can be seen to be slightly smaller than the main casing as illustrated on the left of the diagram. What we have is the main casing without the tail plate.

Attachments

Member for

15 years 10 months

Posts: 582

Are you ordinance diagrams from the Internet? Would be great if you could post a link please as I'd found some previously and have lost them now.

Thanks

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Target Indicator Casings

A Happy New Year to all who are following this thread. I am not sure whether the absence of confirmation from Air Ministry and austernj673 mean acquiescence, or not, to my conclusion that the objects found are 250lb Target Indicator (or Skymarker) casings. As far as I can see there is no difference in the TI and Skymarker casings, but the Skymarkers have a weighted nose.

To round off this particular issue I attach an aerial view of the target. Photographs taken on 6 July 1944 are superimposed on the landscape in a “patchwork quilt” fashion, probably in the same way that the intelligence people must have put them together in wartime. The attack was in an East-South-East direction from left to right across the picture (much the same as on 20 July). The first photo was taken by the leader at 11,500ft, 800yds beyond the aiming point. At that height bombs would take about 27 seconds to fall to earth (time=√(2 x height)/32.2). At an assumed speed of about 140knots (or about 2 miles a minute), it would have taken about 27 seconds to fly 800 yards. The bombs seen exploding to the north of the target must therefore be those dropped from the leader’s aircraft. Also seen at the bottom left are what seem to be flares (or Skymarkers) dropping. The road through the forest can just about be seen on either side of what I assume is cloud obscuring the V1 site. The second (small square) picture is part of one also taken from this aircraft.

The third (sepia) photo was taken from 18,000ft at the aiming point. I don’t know whether the bright splodges of light in the middle are bombs exploding or photo flash flares. The fourth (black and white) photo was taken from 17,000ft and shows some of the roads beyond the forest clearly through the illuminated cloud. This would suggest bombing overshot the target.

The point at which the Target Indicator casings were found in the forest is marked in a yellow circle. This is an area in which they might reasonably be expected to have been found.

I rest my case!

Attachments

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 1,911

Hi Bobkat,

Still at the Peut-être stage but warming to the idea.

The photo of the nose of the mystery casing in your post No. 106 is intriguing in that it might well show a transit plug. That being the case, it ought to indicate a bomb casing Mk IC or III, as these were modified for tail fuzing. All the other variants were nose fuzed only (and hence would have been dropped with a fuze in place of the transit plug).

The difference between a Mk IC and Mk III (briefly) is that the former has a thicker casing and dispenses with the nose weight. Therefore, the presence of a nose weight inside the steel cap of the body might indicate it is a Mk. III body with a casing of thinner steel.

I'm still uncertain about the overall length of the casing. If it is indeed a T.I. casing without the tail plate, there ought to be three small holes around the open end - these are where the three brass rivets held the plate to the main casing. If Laurent could find evidence of these it might be further proof?

The diagram in your No. 107 shows the location of the rivets.

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

TI Casing

Air Ministry, I have had a look at the narrative accompanying my copy of the TI diagram. As you say, assuming that we are looking at a TI 250lb casing with a tail fuze, the choice is between a Mk IC with a thick-gauge steel body, or a Mk III with a thinner body and weighted steel nose - do you have any more information about the thickness of the two casings? I have not managed to find anything.

I note also that the rivets holding the tail in place would shear when the bomb functions, and the tail plate would be forced off, so we would expect to find the casing without it. I cannot see any holes near the base on the photographs we have, but the rust from 68 years under the ground could well mean that the rivet holes are no longer readily visible.

You are still uncertain about the length of the surviving casing(s) for which we have no definitive measurement without the tail plate. I have therefore taken the TI diagram which I assume should be a scale drawing. If we assume the external diameter is 12.0 inches (your post #97), then the length of the casing to the point where it reduces in width on the diagram can be calculated as 31.5 inches or 80 cm (as shown on the attached), which is precisely the figure we have from France.

It should be mentioned that even the most intact piece is mis-shapen which will cause some difficulty in obtaining an accurate measurement of what it once was. In particular, the formation of rust on the surface would increase the circumference measurement to a little beyond the 95.7cm implied by a 12 inch diameter.

So, I would ask the question, if what we have is not a TI casing, then what other objects of about this size (with a diameter of approximately 12 inches and a rounded end) have a single suspension lug, a burster container with a flash hole, and a transit plug, which is what we seem to have?

Let us await further information from France.

Attachments

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 1,911

Hi Bobkat,

I'm glad you've done the calculation of length of the TI bomb casing as it appears to be a further nudge towards positively identifying the object in France. The thought had occurred to me but I simply don't have the time (I'm supposed to be writing a book right now!).

I must admit, too, that I had not given sufficient attention to your mention of a burster container in an earlier post, i.e. the small object placed at the foot of the casing in the photos in post 106. Your enlargement of the smaller photo I took to be another casing and I got confued as to why you were labelling it as a burster hole! My comments might have been more encouraging had I read your post correctly.

Still, we've come a long way from 500lb. bomb in post 75 via Lancaster air cylinder to Target Indicator casing and I'm pretty certain now that that is what it is: I think that's good work all round, don't you?

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Air Ministry, very glad to hear we have a meeting of minds! And many thanks again for prodding me in the right direction with your mention of a TI in post #91. Without that I suspect I would still have been floundering. All in all, an excellent combined effort!

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

250lb TI Bomb casing diagrams

To add a postscript to the exchanges of the last two weeks, and with acknowledgements as previously, I attach two diagrams which appear to come from the same unknown original source. The first, on the left, shows the Mk I 250lb TI bomb (as before). The second, on the right, shows the Mk III version to which Air Ministry has referred, with its cast-iron weighted nose and tail fuze adapter. If both diagrams are scale drawings (as would be reasonably expected), then the Mk III version, with its lighter-gauge steel casing, is slightly wider in relation to its length than the Mk I version, which could explain some of the apparent slight variations in measurements which have emerged in our postings.

It is conceivable that the better preserved casing which has been found is the thicker Mk I version, and the more damaged one is the thinner Mk III version. However further speculation is unlikely to be productive – we seem to be agreed that what we have are two 250lb TI casings!!

Post-postscript: to complete the picture, I have just heard from France that there appears to be a collar on the piece to hold a tail plate, but no sign of rivet holes because of the corrosion. Très bien !!

Attachments

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Some identified items: 2 – Window (or chaff)

Somewhat later than intended, as a result of the extremely rewarding diversion to identify the unexpected find of two Target Indicator casings (my thanks again to all those involved), herewith the second instalment of occasional postings as I continue to work on the listing of the identified wreckage that has been found. This item was amongst those on the trestle table which greeted us in May last year.

T2B.
This is what I assume to be the remains of a bundle of window (or chaff). It is remarkable that it has survived, albeit now only partially intact. Part of it can just be seen at the top of photo T2 above and to the left of item 10 (post #35). As I moved it to take the photograph in close-up, the piece on the left became detached from the fragile bundle: it shows a hole at the top which can also be seen on the pieces in the rest of the bundle on the right. The length of the strips is not readily apparent because of the angle at which the bundle was bent, but what survives was certainly much shorter than that shown on the black and white picture which is included for comparison alongside: the strips found are perhaps no more than a little over twice as long as wide.

As I understand it from my own research, strips of black paper backed with aluminium foil were cut to half the wavelength of the radar they were designed to counteract, and early examples were sized 27cm x 2cm – probably as in the picture on the right? There seems to have been a variety of means of distribution adopted by the RAF and the USAAF, but the use of the flare chute was apparently one of the methods of release, and small parachutes were also used to help disperse the strips, in a similar way to the target indicator flares.

Presumably, as the war progressed, and radio/radar frequencies changed, different sizes of window would have been necessary? I therefore wonder if the piece found and pictured is of a shorter length than the early standard or, more likely, could it have simply fragmented through age, such that all that has been recovered is a small part of one end of the bundle?

If anyone has more information or thoughts about the use of window to add to my rudimentary knowledge, I would be interested to hear.

Attachments

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

austernj673,

A little while ago (post #108) you asked for a link to the ordnance diagrams I had posted. I have since followed up a reference and come across the website below. You may have followed the same trail?

www.lexpev.nl/manuals/index.html

This is an index page with ordnance manuals from a number of countries. The only reference to copyright seems to be a request that the information is not to be used in any commercial product.

Somewhat counter-intuitively details of British Explosive Ordnance from WW2 is found not only under the heading ‘BRITISH manuals’ but also under the heading ‘US manuals’ because the US Navy Bureau of Ordnance produced a pamphlet on British ordnance in 1946 for its Bomb Disposal School under the reference OP 1665. This US pamphlet looks as if it covers most British ordnance used in WW2 – as might be expected if it was being used to for bomb disposal purposes!! Hope this will be of help.

....................

Looking through the above manual, it is apparent that the ‘standard’ Target Indicator was 61.7 inches in length, and it was only the ‘specialist’ types – Multi-flash, Spot Fire, Photoflash, Skymarker and Seamarker – which were greater in length at 67.75 inches as mentioned earlier by Air Ministry (post #97). Another little loose end tied up!!

Reverting to my last post – there have been well over 100 views, but no comments. As far as I can tell, there were two types of ‘window’ – one was released in a long strip, and the other in bundles which were often released at appropriate intervals through the flare chute, because the motorised dispensers which were intended to be used proved unreliable?

The bit of a bundle of ‘window’, which is what we think has been found amongst the wreckage, seems to have a thin wire which might at one time have run through the hole that is apparent at the end of the bundle of strips, holding them together. Presumably there must have been some mechanism whereby, once dispensed, the strips were separated from each other to fall in a cloud – perhaps this was by using a small parachute (as for flares) and allowing the wind to do the work?

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

New Finds

My efforts to stimulate a discussion on ‘window’ seem to have come to nought!!

Laurent has been busy once more. I attach photos of two new items.

32.
This item should, I hope, be capable of identification as it has Air Ministry numbered parts. It is clearly a piece connected with radio or radar equipment. The main part is numbered 10AB/288 and the connector or socket below is numbered 10H/1238. I have searched through the A.P. information I have, but it doesn’t seem to be connected with the Gee equipment, the Transmitter T1154 or Receiver R1155 – at least I can’t find these parts listed in the documentation. It is bolted to a broken piece of metal and looks as if the sockets might be something connected with an aerial. It is pictured from four angles. Does anyone have any thoughts?

33.
This appears to be either a solid bar or rod, or a hollow one with capped ends. It is also photographed end-on. Its size can be judged by the piece of parachute harness buckle alongside. Judging by where it was found, forward of the point where the main fuselage came to rest, it might have been thrown out from the front part of the aircraft, but this cannot be certain. Again, any ideas will be gratefully received.

Attachments

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Air Ministry equipment numbers

How wrong I was to assume that the existence of an Air Ministry reference number would lead to the ready identification of pieces found! However, after further research I have now established that the equipment ‘bible’ is AP 1086. It appears that I need Book 4 - Parts 1, 2 and 3. Radio, radar, telephone and telegraphic equipment. It is said that this is available at the National Archives, but I haven’t been able to locate it on the online index. The specific sections I need to identify the pieces we have found are apparently:

10AB - Miscellaneous radar equipment
10B - Radio and radar aerial and mast equipment and insulators
10H - Radio cable assemblies (connectors), disc indicating fuses, leads, plugs and sockets, holders and terminals

Does anyone have any further information about what can be found at Kew, or know how I can access these sections?

There also should, presumably, be an AP on Oboe, but I haven’t found a reference. Can anyone help please?

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 10,168

Bobkat I have AP 1234E Radio Nav aids.. Sorry nothing in there that looks like this either...

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 936

Air Ministry equipment numbers

Good to hear from you, Peter. Many thanks for trying your AP.

I have found a very comprehensive website with all the Air Ministry reference number classifications at: http://www.cpearce.orconhosting.net.nz/AM_REF_NUM_LISTING.html

There are some extracts from sections 10J and 10K-10KB, dated 1943, on www.vmars.org.uk (the Vintage and Military Amateur Radio Society) under VMARS Manuals (copyright reserved). This confirms that there are (as would be expected) numerous amendments and reissues of the basic listing.

I have now trawled through the National Archives Catalogue (in the course of being replaced by “Discovery”) and located a version of AP 1086, dated 1924, which is not likely to be very helpful. It took a bit of finding under its name “Priced Vocabulary of RAF Equipment”! This seems to be the only version available at Kew. However I have discovered that the Oboe Mk 2 ARI.5582 publication is AP 2893C.

I sense a visit to the Archives may be in the offing, unless someone comes up with a wartime version of sections 10AB, 10B or 10H of AP 1086!