A CATALINA CRASHED IN CROTIA ?

[gilles collaveri]

Does this work for you ?



https://www.flickr.com/welcome/494301442/b46e40ea01/


GC

[gilles collaveri]

Hy Guys salut Adriano & Chris,

More pictures just received: here they are.

Will these confirm that we face a Catalina part ?

I have been asking more information about the marking and wait for the answer. I share it with you when I got more news.

Cheers

Gilles

[RSwank]

Here is a link to the 13th page of a series of photos of a PBY walkaround.

http://www.net-maquettes.com/picture..._id=13#afg-170

Look at the 9th picture, which shows a closeup of the blister. Note the edge of the blister shows two distinct rows of rivets. Your part seems to show three distinct rows of rivets where the supposed blister would be. Also, note that about 3 or 4 inches down from the blister edge is a flange that appears to run completely around the blister. Your part does not show the flange.


The 11th photo on this next link shows the "flange" more clearly but the two rows of rivets are rather dark in the photo.

http://www.net-maquettes.com/picture...e_id=9#afg-170

[RSwank]

This is a photo of the blister on the PBY (OA-10) Vickers Canadian built plane. The plane is now based as Duxford, but I don't think the blister installation is at all original so this probably does not help us at all.

http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/...5_44_of_87.jpg


Here is the history of the plane and you can see at one point the original blisters were removed and the blister area was filled in.

https://www.catalina.org.uk/our-catalina-g-pbya/


The 7th and 8th photos down the right side of this link show the blister area on a PBY in the National Aviation Museum in Florida.

http://ru-aviation.livejournal.com/1736093.html


Note again only two rows of rivets. The 8th photo shows the back of the blister and you can see how the flange goes around the bottom of the blister and ends at the back. But another flange appears to go over top so we should see it on both the top and bottom of the blister.

[gilles collaveri]

thanks Robert for all this rich information. I don't feel competent enough to judge weather it is a Catalina or not. Anybody around, do you have an opinion ?

More data just arrived:

- Location : it is near Garmenjak Island in Croatia

- P285: here is the marking.

Any comments, guys ?

GC

[gilles collaveri]

Dear all,

I come back on this "catalina": here are two more pictures of parts in the sea.

can this help identify ?

The "P285" marking (see previous post) does not a ring a bell to anyone ?

GC

[RSwank]

I think it would be more useful if you could get very precise measurements of the size of the nut and the diameter of the bolt hole that is in the picture posted at #10. Does it appear that those items are "exact" in inches or centimeters. Also measure the width and depth of the brackets in both inches and centimeters. If the bracket width was exactly 2 inches, or 2.25 inches, for example, it might suggest an allied plane (maybe a "catalina"). If the width is exactly 5 cm then probably not. I think P285 is just a part number.

[gilles collaveri]

OK RSwank, I shall try to ask for this (it is not very easy since I ask to someone who asks to somebody else in Croatia)

but thanks a lot for the idea. I keep you posted;

GC

[Thierry69]

Hello Gilles, hello everyone,

I send clues that I could observe directly on this piece of aircraft wreck, or on the pictures I made or the pictures that Jona sent to me:

1) traces of paint
- yellow / sand color on the concave surface (probably outer surface)
- black color on the convex part (probably inside the fuselage)
- black color on the small sheet inside the circle: this sheet look like the top of a dashboard. Black paint is used to avoid reflections on the canopy

2) shape and thickness of the rivets
- some rivets are rounded and have a good aerodynamic profile
- some rivets have an angled edge
- all the rivets have a thick of 1 to 1.5 mm above the surface, which surprised me for an aircraft fuselage.
That surprised me to the point of thinking at one time that it was not a plane wreck.

3) thickness of the sheets
I handled this piece and I remembered being surprised by the thickness of the aluminum sheets:
- the plates of what could be the fuselage were about 2mm thick,
- while the small black sheet metal (dashboard) measured 1mm maximum

4) 2 kinds of cables
- a first type of cable containing at least 2 metal wires
This type of cable was surrounded by a large thickness of rubber
- a second type of cable is surrounded by a wire mesh and could be a hydraulic connector used in landing gear or flap controls …

[Alex Smart]

Hello,
From the AAIR site it would seem that 28? was a Consolidated part number
So 285 would fit.
And also "P" would be something to do with fuel ?
So P285 - perhaps fuel tank ?
Otherwise ?
The Lug's puzzle me though, you might see those on a ship, but I would not expect to find them on an aircraft ?
Alex