2 LW fighters drop-tank in a french barn

[DB601E]

Salut,

in wich region/departement the drop was was found?

Greetings

Lino

[Granville]

Adriano, que voulez vous exactement, d'autres photos ?

There were found East of France in Champagne area.

Nobody can explains me the steel tank ? late war or economy "ersatz" ?

[DB601E]

Salut Granville,

thanks for area info and for sharing the nice pics.
I'm sorry, i have no information at hand concerning the use of Alloy/steel tanks.
The ones i know from my region in bavaria have been steel ones.

Greetings

Lino

[RolandF]

Hi all,

the "steel" are in fact zinc-coated steelplates thickness est. 0.7mmm.
Most of the zinc-plating seems to be covered with a rust film coming from places where the zinc has weathered off.
A late tnk to save stretegic materials IMO, though a bit heavier.
Just watch: the method to join the segments is different to the one applied with the aluminium tank. The segments are joined with a lock seam

Regards

Roland

[ouidjat]

Yeah Roland,

As you said " the "steel" is Zinc-coated steel-plates..." Humm, SO it's steel without zinc or not and since it's zinc-coated we can call it Galvanized Steel, can't we?
Left the fact with 0.7mm thick it's quite heavy, for sure. As you said too the assembly is different but I guess - I'm quite sure - it's thinner than the "normal" alloy hence thinner assembly joints (bending strengh capacity is different).
Last, pipe positioning is the same but the four plots are "mirror" positionned, one being in parallel with fuse axis the other perpendicular, and the contrary in bottom position. The "mirror image" of that disposition appearing on the other tank (whatever the first you are considering)
That disposition being planned to avoid lateral and front/back tank mouvement during evolutions.
This is interesting cause it means that the anchoring devices on tank racks had the capacity to be put right in place in those fences whatever their positionning (since the two little pipes are in the same position on both tanks).

Well, that's what I see on those pictures. Someone to comment/confirm?

Chears, Franck.

[Granville]

Originally Posted by ouidjat

Yeah Roland,


Last, pipe positioning is the same but the four plots are "mirror" positionned, one being in parallel with fuse axis the other perpendicular, and the contrary in bottom position. The "mirror image" of that disposition appearing on the other tank (whatever the first you are considering)
That disposition being planned to avoid lateral and front/back tank mouvement during evolutions.
This is interesting cause it means that the anchoring devices on tank racks had the capacity to be put right in place in those fences whatever their positionning (since the two little pipes are in the same position on both tanks).

Well, that's what I see on those pictures. Someone to comment/confirm?

Chears, Franck.

Hi Frank,
About the "mirror image" of the supports on the both tanks, is it possible that this can be a way to make difference with each octane fuels ?
If the plane engine must use this grade of octane, you can't install this type ot tank because of the supports positions ? This is a "poka-yoke" for those who works in Industry.
Just an idea of a Sunday morning....

An other pic of the alloy tank tail : heavy canvas with thin cardboard painted in blue , which use ? maybe for aerodynamics ?

[ouidjat]

Bonjour, Oui bien sûr.

I just took a technical point of view. Your's is available too: Is it possible that one Octane degree was more agressive than another one hence justified a different metal? I doubt, but why not.

Continuing my thoughts:
The tank was tightly secured on one point only: This being situated on central brace top and permiting a quick and easy release.
Four inversed "T" peaces of metal where introduced one by one in the four slots we are taking about to avoid pitch-roll-yoke etc movements and firmly maintained in place by a strong spring (One "T", one spring) always in compression, of course. This design helped to release the tank Of course.
I suppose those "T" had the capacity to turn around it's vertical axis when free, hence the difference between the two tanks.