Oscar Duck wrote:
The group and this aircraft have tried very hard to go to Point Cook but Defence are not interested under the current Defence management strategies for the site, in fact Iam reaching the point where I no longer have any confidence in the long term future of the site itself under the current Defence Management Strategies (thats the site - not the RAAFM), its heritage listed buildings are being permitted to rot away as we speak, public access is being further constrained each day, the announcements in September 2007 of a public and open heritage base bear no resemblence to what is being implemented, but thats all another story.
Defence's ability to look after Point Cook in the face of Defence belt tightening and huge pointy end expenditure threaten a return to the twilight zone of 1992-1998, and the B-24 may be far better off not being there.
The B24 is using a RAAF B24M fuselage that has suffered corrosion in its keel structure due to longt term water entry, and a USAF B24D wing centre-section recovered from PNG that suffered extensive lower surface corrosion due to many grass fires.
I believe there is structural skin damage inside the fuel tank bays and undercarriage bays of the Centre-Section that would require strip down and replacement rather than the current cut and removal process used to treat it.
There was also significant difficulty in mating the B24-D wing Centre-section to the B24-M fuselage, despite the expectation these were identical structures, the factory and model jigs didnt result in interchangeability.
I am not sure some of the materials used to repair/replace will be the correct spec or grade, but in anycase no certification of the materials or work has been undertaken.
The B24-D wing outers were cut off the centre-section outboard of the attach points when recovered from PNG with the intention to splice the stringers and re-fit those sections, however the group obtained good condition wing outers from a Privateer fire-bomber operator and those wing outers are being used, they are likely to be near airworthy condition.
As the last RAAF B24 survivor, the only one remaining in Australia and preserved in the Pacific or even Southern Hemisphere, it doesnt seem wise to try and fly it in any case, regardless of structural and certification issues, let alone cost, or the risk of damage.
As Albert said above, the work by Graham Hore on the turrets is amazing, he has created a CAD 3-D multilayer virtual model of the turret to allow dimensional re-construction of missing parts, and a full size rotating 3 dimensional plug to allow creation of new glazing.
The group has already restored two Ball turrets for the project, one for installation, and one for external demonstration, (and a third for return to a contributing museum as well) the demo one is fully functional.
The intent is to make the engines operational and ground run or taxi the aircraft for display. To fly the aircraft would open up other risks of damage, the cockpit skins were previously buckled when the airframe was being man-handled into position within the hangar and suffered a twist on the castering nose wheel.
It is a fantastic project, and is a brilliant achievement, regardless of being a non-flyer, -not everything needs to fly.
regards
Mark Pilkington
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
