Jump to content


Photo

Aviation History in Control Wheels; Yokes


  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#76 dave peifer

dave peifer
  • Members
    • Member ID: 22,060
  • 901 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:pa

Posted 09 September 2019 - 02:58 PM

thanks swifter,b-17 flying fortress,are the bakelite,plastic.looks like your post 1st page,post no.1..........dave


Edited by dave peifer, 09 September 2019 - 03:02 PM.


#77 Swifter

Swifter
  • Members
    • Member ID: 162,703
  • 114 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lovely Iowa !

Posted 09 September 2019 - 09:27 PM

Dave:

 

Decided to respond to your question comprehensively.  Two different caps were used on the B-17F (one aluminum and one galvanized steel) and three (possibly four) different plastic 2-piece caps were used B-17G models.  None of the caps were made of Bakelite.

 

Most of the comments that follow apply to the plastic caps used on the B-17 as well as similar caps used on the B-29, B-50 and C/KC-97’s produced from WWII through about 1955.  These caps were originally made with a black plastic base with Boeing part number 6-14657 in raised relief on back.  A separate, clear plastic insert that was (usually) engraved, was pressed into the base.  With the exception of the Boeing totem cap (which was not engraved), the engraved designs were painted silver as was a ring around the outer edge of the insert.  After that, the backside of the insert was painted black (sometimes flat black…sometimes semi-gloss) and pressed into the base.  For the Boeing totem cap the totem logo was either screen painted in silver, or a silver decal was applied to the backside of the insert.  It’s difficult to tell which of these was done.  After application the backside was painted black and pressed into the base.   

 

One good way to tell if a plastic B-17 cap is original, is the coloration of the center plastic insert.  The kind of plastic used 75 years ago turned yellow over time when exposed to light and the elements, as most of these caps were.  That makes the original silver paint appear to look like it has a gold hue.  The more yellowed the plastic insert is, the stronger the gold hue of the engraved markings.  Reproduction caps will have no trace of this, the engraved markings look like they’re silver.  Also, specific to the B-17, the repop caps I’ve seen do not have the Boeing part number in raised relief on back. 

 

Another way to tell if a cap is real is its condition.  Real ones are 65-75 years old and are often beat up and scratched up.  Also, certain B-17 caps have not been reproduced—to my knowledge.  Specifically, the Lockheed and Douglas caps applied to B-17s produced under license by those two companies.  So if you find a Boeing cap with a Lockheed or Douglas logo in the upper left corner, it’s a decent bet that you have the genuine item.

 

In the photo of B-17 caps, the galvanized steel version is missing. The plastic Boeing totem (also called the Boeing “Bug”) cap may not have been used during WWII in B-17s….or B-29s for that matter.  The jury is still out on that one. 

 

Note:  In recent years some very nicely executed reproductions of certain Boeing caps have been produced. 

 

Attached Images

  • B17 Caps.JPG
  • B17b3.jpg


#78 dave peifer

dave peifer
  • Members
    • Member ID: 22,060
  • 901 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:pa

Posted 12 September 2019 - 09:46 AM

thanks swifter,i really appreciate your time,thats as good an explanation you could hope for...…………..dave



#79 Swifter

Swifter
  • Members
    • Member ID: 162,703
  • 114 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lovely Iowa !

Posted 12 September 2019 - 08:18 PM

My pleasure Dave. 

 

For others who have an interest--The aluminum cap is acid-etched such that the totem logo is in raised relief.  The designs in the center inserts of the three lower caps are all engraved.  



#80 bobatl

bobatl
  • Members
    • Member ID: 54,142
  • 197 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 25 September 2019 - 01:56 PM

 

Hi bobatl:  Thanks for the recollections.  If nothing else, at least there is a consensus on what TA/TF stands for.  The inference I get out of the various posts above is that my wheel had the TA/TF function that it would (likely) have come from an earlier aircraft.  The photo below is of the data plate on back of the wheel.   I have some experience with gov't contracting.  The "09" in the contract number means the wheel was acquired with FY2009 funding....so it's only about 10 years old now.  Wierd.  Anyway, glad I got the wheel. 

 

Thanks for that tidbit on the hub cover decals too ! attachicon.gif4.jpg

 

Photo of control wheel in first C-5B in 1985. When TA/TF was removed, a notation was made in the flight manual referring to the Time Compliance Technical Order. For the C-5B, all TCTO's were reviewed to see what drawing revisions would be required to build to the configuration of the last C-5A plus all TCTO's. Changing the control wheel would have cost money so they wouldn't have done that unless directed to do so by the Air Force. It's also easier to only keep one configuration spare part in stock. Or the way things work in the real world, you're cannibalizing parts off other aircraft, so not having multiple configurations meant that your hangar queen C-5A could be parked and most parts could be used on all C-5A/B's.
 

Attached Images

  • LAC0085-002.jpg


#81 Swifter

Swifter
  • Members
    • Member ID: 162,703
  • 114 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lovely Iowa !

Posted 26 September 2019 - 06:18 PM

Bobatl:  Thanks for tying in on what the "dash 1" said relative to what was done with TCTOs to figure out what drawing revisions were needed as different models of an aircraft were introduced over time.  Agreed too--unnecessary configuration changes were avoided.  Helps logistics, lowers cost.  And it's not difficult to "inop" a switch or, if needed, change it's function and relabel. 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users