Avro Anson Mk II

[m charters]

Peter, not being too familiar with the Anson I & II models as we have only a Mk. V with the museum, how can you with certainty say it is a Mk. I? I know the Mk I had hand cranked landing gear, but without the engines on and that close a view, the fuselage looks the same on both. Just curious?

[peter]

I was advised it was a mk1 with it having a metal nose instead of the wooden one as fitted to mk2's.

[davem]

I was always told the fixed gun position (Under cockpit) was an indicator of the MK. I Anson (Which would be also known as a MK. III if fitted with Jacobs engines) - the metal nose also is a dead giveaway.

[Mark_Pilkington]

.
I only have hands on exposure to the mark I or GR1, and the metal wings off the XIX, and although I was aware of the moulded ply fuselage of the Mark V, I had never heard of a wooden nose section?

I understood the Anson Mk II were Canadian built mark I's with Jacobs and hydraulic undercarriage, while the Mk III were UK built mark I airframes with P&W fitted in Canada? I would have thought all three used the same metal nose design?

I would have thought the engine mount/firewalls of the american engines might differ from the mark I and be identifiable in the photos?

Regards

Mark Pilkington

[Tom H]

Mark

You're pretty close, from what I know (I have a Mk 2 across from my office!)

The nose is different on the Mk 2, slightly different shop and made of molded ply.
The Jacobs engine and different cowls you've already noted
The 2 also does not have the large amounts of side glazing (windows) that the 1 did
Plus all the other North Americanized parts, instruments, brakes, electrical etc.

Tom

[davem]

Some photos I took back in the 80's of an aircraft in Alberta that show the wood nose, although I do note the fixed gun position is faired over, so this obviously was also on the Mk.II Ansons.





and the US Version...

[Mark_Pilkington]

dave,

thanks for the pics of the ply nose, its the first time I have seen that detail, understandable as a strategy to conserve strategic materials, its probably the largest single chunk of aluminium on the Anson other than the cowls, and they would have been difficult to shift over to ply construction.

btw I note neither of the wrecks posted above have turret remains in them, I was wondering if there are many surplus Armstrong Whitworth "Birdcage" Turrets in Canada surviving from these wrecks or was the Bristol turret the commonly fitted type in Canada?

Regards

Mark Pilkington

[davem]

btw I note neither of the wrecks posted above have turret remains in them, I was wondering if there are many surplus Armstrong Whitworth "Birdcage" Turrets in Canada surviving from these wrecks or was the Bristol turret the commonly fitted type in Canada?

If I understand correctly, most of the Canadian Ansons were used for pilot and navigation training. The Mk.II aircraft were not fitted with turrets during production, the hole was simply faired over. I looked at many, many airframes in western Canada during the 1980's and never once saw an airframe with a turret. The Mk.I / III aircraft certainly had them fitted in Canadian service, but I suspect by wars end the vast majoritory of these turrets had been removed.

[peter]

Have to agree with Dave. All the ansons I have seen in Canada did not have turrest fitted and the actual opening was faired over in service.

[peter]

On the topic of Ansons..
http://www.bombercommandmuseum.ca/gravitas.html

[m charters]

I saw this via another website before and although interesting IMHO, rather sad to see sitting out like that. All those pieces could be of value and sitting stored under cover would preserve them longer.

[peter]

well.....65 years outside storage a few more years wont hurt them...