Short Stirling & RAF Bomber Command Forum

Okay chaps .... photocopying and scanning seem to be the best option.... but it will need a bit of photoshopping and messing about with... if I can't get it right I will post up all of the A4 scans and let someone else have a go ... ( again please no photobucket )

The largest sheet is twice the size of A3 and looks to me to be a plan view of the Stirling and it is labelled

CONDUIT LAYOUT FOR GENERAL SERVICES SHORT STIRLING AIRCRAFT (TO MOD 501) Traced G.L.B. 23.6.43

This is the one that I have had to photocopy in about 9 sections.(Have now put up a photo of the whole sheet... but still have the photocopied sheets for greater clarity)
Another is called...

UNDERCARRIAGE LOCK AND SWITCH MECHANISM.

Should be able to upload tmrrw.
Hope they will be of interest
Gary

Hope these are of interest.... please PM if you want a better pixel size.
Cheers Gary

CONDUIT LAYOUT FOR GENERAL SERVICES SHORT STIRLING AIRCRAFT (TO MOD 501) Traced G.L.B. 23.6.43

And associated data sheets

Not sure what this is.... and the other diagrams are listed in the main booklet I have already posted up ... but here is the front cover and contents.

Would love a copy if possible Ludford

Ditto please

John

Great thread, Gary, these really bring the idea of the Stirling to life

cheers,

Richard

Fascinating - thank you. I am reminded of being told by someone who "was there" that if German fighters for example aimed at the roundel on the side of the aircraft then the whole of the electrics could be put out and the aircraft would cease to function! Is this likely to be true??

Hi Halifax1

The Stirling had a single 24V supply for the vast majority of its electrical systems. Short out any of the main +ve bus conductors with any of the negative conductors and the whole lot will fail. However the thing you use to short them together would need to carry the entire 120A short circuit current of the aircrafts two generators and the 200 odd amp supply from the batteries. That would only be possible with a very substantial piece of metal - anything smaller would quickly melt (ie act like a fuse). A 120A fusing would be a mass of sparks - this explains why you see electrical systems taking explosive damage sparking like fireworks, it also explains why high current fuses are filled with sand to contain the explosive nature of the fusing action. Also you would have to lodge this 'short' (bullet/cannon shell) exactly between two such conductors and have it jam in place or damage wiring/junction boxes such that something bent out of shape enough to touch together.

A short could however take out the 60A fuses from the generator - but the crew would have had spares. A lead acid battery can tolerate shorts for quite a long time.

In a modern installation the wiring protected by a fuse is normally capable of taking more current that the fuse itself guarenteeing that it would be the fuse that goes with no damage to the wiring.

The chances of a total short actually happening seems remote and as you can see from the circuit diagram of the whole aircraft above there is very little in the way of wiring/junction boxes that pass down past the roundel making the likelihood even less of such a thing happening. Hitting the aircraft where all the junction boxes are would be more likely to take out the electrical systems.

You would need to be one dumb designer to run the main power and return wires together - but that is no guarentee that they didn't of course! Modern day aircraft have dual and completely seperate electrical supply systems such that either one will run the aircraft normally.

If Gary does get around to releasing the drawings you could assess the likelihood of the Roundel theory more scientifically.



Cheers
James

Hi Halifax and Gary

Only 4 or so years since this thread was active so why not restart it??

Gary - did you ever get your document copied? I would like a copy if possible please as it turns out that pretty much every issue of AP 1660 is different so there may be useful data on it.

Halifax - I now have a copy of an RAF document from 1940 which is requesting that the hydraulic feeds to the rear gun are duplicated and run separately to avoid the chances of both being hit by fire from the enemy - I can't recall if it mentions the enemy concentrating fire on the roundel but it looks as if your reports have some backing. I can't recall but I think that figures were raised to show it wasn't really an issue and the changes were never made. If you like I can copy you with the memo or if anyone else is interested I can put it up here.

Cheers
James