The other Jawa blaster (the one not made from an Enfield.)

[mugatu]

I too think bwingpilot is correct. Here are a few vintage aircraft venturis, each between 9.5 inches and 10.5 inches in length:

A.

B.

C.

Although these appear to be close, I am suspicious because I think I detect a band around the circumference of the venturi on the actual prop, right where the two tapers meet. It is either a band or beading from welding, which if that is the case, the blaster barrel is probably not the type of venturi pictured here in my post. It's hard for me to tell as my eyes are getting blurry. LOL

 

[OdiWan72]

The bendix venturi seems to be the closest match so far, but it´s too long

Markus

 

[mugatu]

I wrote to the trigger guy. His listing says he swapped this one out for one made to be used with an MG-34. I asked for a pic of that one too, and the dimensions for this one, and if there is a size/shape difference between the two. No response yet.

 

[OdiWan72]

I wrote to the trigger guy. His listing says he swapped this one out for one made to be used with an MG-34. I asked for a pic of that one too, and the dimensions for this one, and if there is a size/shape difference between the two. No response yet.

thx :thumbsup

I got some answers reg. the dimensions of the coupling you posted in the meantime, but something is wrong so I double checked with the seller and am waiting for his new reply ...

Markus

 

[switchblade_slinger]

I was always under the impression that the 'business end' was an after market Volkswagen 'stinger' type tail pipe. The ones that stuck straight up from the back end of modded dune buggies in the '70s and '80s.

 

[mugatu]

Okay, I have been looking at these images all day (and night), and I have come to the conclusion that the entire barrel all the way back to the Aeroquip receiver part is one solid cast piece, save for possibly that large black collar at the very read of this solid piece that I am talking about. I am making this conclusion based on this image:



I have changed the image to black & white to enhance the mold separation line that runs down the entire piece. It could be that LFL added this for weathering, but I think that may be going overboard as the blaster lacks nothing by not having this poured casting "tell" mark.

What does that mean? I think it probably means that this piece is not a Venturi that sits open and free out in the air. To me, this seems like a Venturi for restricting fluid.

I don't know...I could be making too generous of a leap here. What do you guys think?

 

[OdiWan72]

Thanks Andy for that enhanced image and more importantly THANK YOU for the time and efforts you put into researching that piece (don´t you have any other things to do? :lol)

Another tell for the whole section in front of the AE coupling being a cast part could be the uneven surface structure. It also explains, why a small section of the "cones" flange broke off on the jawa blaster instead of simply being bent/ dented, just like it would be of a machined item and/ or folded sheet metal.

Waiting for some question to get answered by an expert I contacted yesterday.
The seller of the modern coupling never got back to me, after I sent him a send message with a few addtl. questions...WTF?!

Markus

 

[mugatu]

Markus,

Thats what the trigger guy did with me. I may have been overbearing to him though with my many questions. He was a man of few words. Nothing wrong with that but I'm pretty sure that out of the salvo of questions I sent his way, he never answered any of them. He did give me info on where he bought the MG mount conversion from though.

 

[OdiWan72]

Well....I always combine(d) the questions I adressed with my interest to PURCHASE, so I expect(ed) some kind of reaction from a business man :confused

I didn´t give up up as of yet. Maybe we´re just too impatient

Markus

 

[OdiWan72]

Some more info -directly from aeroquip eaton- reg. the differences between the old and new coupling:

"...The AE94185P is a Male Bulkhead QD that comes with a lanyard attached Cap. It has a “special” end configuration specifically for a customer. This is most likely NOT a QD that would fit a “normal” application.

The AE96996P is also a Male Bulkhead QD that comes with a lanyard attached cap. It is for Phosphate Ester Base Fluids (Skydrol). 600 PSIG operating pressure. Has a standard Flareless MS33514 end. The Reference Coupled dimension would be 5.18 +/- .044 inches.

Dimensionally, these two QD’s are different with respect to the different style male ends...."

So I read, that ONLY the male ends are different, correct???
Unfortunately, they are unable to send any drawings unless an NDA is set up and signed by both Eaton Corp. and me ("my company").

Hoping for some addtl. input after the easter holidays...

Markus

 

[mugatu]

I have also contacted an airliner salvage and parts company asking for these parts as related to an Airbus A300. Still waiting to hear back from them as well. Anyone here live in California, near Mojave?

 

[scottjua]

Oh fantastic. Like I need another real parts prop to obsess over.

Damn you guys.

 

[OdiWan72]

I have also contacted an airliner salvage and parts company asking for these parts as related to an Airbus A300. Still waiting to hear back from them as well. Anyone here live in California, near Mojave?

And I did the same here in europe. Thanks for your suggestion Andy

Markus

 

[mugatu]

Still no word from the salvage parts company. They must be making so much money that they don't have time to bother with formal inquiries...
I did track down this though. This is the largest image file I could find:



It it is a tail rotor pitch control tube for a Bell helicopter. I have seen several that could also be the main rotor mast pitch control tube on perhaps a smaller helicopter as well. This one is close, depending on size. Does anyone know of any helicopters being acquired by LFL for the prop guys to work from during the OT?

I now find it likely that the front portion of this tube (on the blaster) may in fact be the same whole piece as the forked section by the blaster's trigger. If it is the pitch control tube for the main rotor mast, it would likely call for a thicker more robust part, so perhaps the tail rotor is more likely. I would say we would still be looking for a relatively small helicopter.



Do do you see the part? This is the tail rotor version from an unknown type of helicopter. Again, I apologize for the image size...may be hard to see or pick out. Each tail rotor would have two.

What do you guys think? Any helicopter pilots out there? Too bad Harrison Ford isn't on these boards...he'd know for sure!

 

[OdiWan72]

hmmmmm.....interesting!

Markus

 

[mugatu]

Still no response from the Mojave recovery air parts supply crew. I have contacted them again, but to no avail yet.

Meanwhile, I have found an image/info resource online with much better much bigger pics of several commercial and military helicopters, focusing on their main mast rotors and tail rotors: http://www.b-domke.de/AviationImages/Rotorhead.html

I have looked through most of the images there and have zeroed in on the Bell make. Many of the Bell helicopters seem to have very similar parts in use, from model to model. This makes sense. However, just like cars from the same manufacturer, each model takes that part and varies it just a little bit. I have found this image of a tail rotor for a Bell 205 helicopter:



And below, I have cropped it to give a closer up view of the specific TYPE of piece that I am talking about. I know this is not THE piece as the shapes are little different.



Note however, the U-joint yoke piece on the left end, and the short flat "tube" making up the center, and finally the closed "O" pivot ring on the end to the right. Now look at the Jawa blaster:



The specific shapes are not the same but are close. And as I said, there are variations in size and in shape (somewhat) from Bell model to Bell model. The biggest reason that I believe it be from a Bell helicopter is that they seem to be consistent with having an arc to the flange cut of the U-joint yoke. Most of the other helicopter brands appear to have just folded the steel there (oddly enough, in my last photo example, the arc cut is not employed lol).

What do you guys think? Good theory? Crap theory?

Lastly, I had originally thought that the wooden stock was fabricated for this, due to its odd shape and size, however, I also came across the accessory stock attachment for the MG-34 for when the MG was used in the same sense as a BAR, or at least on a short bipod, as opposed to the full AA setup. It is short and odd shaped. Not exact, but closer than I would've thought anything real would be!



This is obviously not not the right stock, but I was thinking before that the Jawa stock was a canoe paddle! Maybe there is a real stock out there?

 

[jhusel]

The stock looks SIMILAR to the STG44 stock

View attachment 462131

 

[bwingpilot]

Lastly, I had originally thought that the wooden stock was fabricated for this, due to its odd shape and size, however, I also came across the accessory stock attachment for the MG-34 for when the MG was used in the same sense as a BAR, or at least on a short bipod, as opposed to the full AA setup. It is short and odd shaped. Not exact, but closer than I would've thought anything real would be!

View attachment 462128

This is obviously not not the right stock, but I was thinking before that the Jawa stock was a canoe paddle! Maybe there is a real stock out there?

I'm 99% sure that the stock was from a reused/modified tusken raider "jezail" rifle.

 

[Wavey]

You are along the right lines on the rod/fork idea mugatu so just getting the correct size will help to pin-point where abouts on an aircraft/chopper the part is used. So far, in all my searches of ANH parts all the aviation parts come from planes dating from the late 1930s to mid 1970s - I've not seen any specific helicopter parts but I'm hoping I'm wrong there though as some greeblies have been far too difficult to ID, so that means I'm looking in the wrong places lol.

So, upping the size of the fork and rod idea and going by plane parts, we maybe looking at (another) rudder pedal or control column strut. I was messing about with that idea and put a quick pic together to see if there's any significant points of interest between the prop part and a strut I have. While scaling the pics to match a few areas between the parts seem to fall into place.



Obviously the strut I have is the wrong shape but the proportions and actual usage may be similar. I'll measure it up later, see if that helps. The two rudder pedal struts in the pic are from (top) a Jet Provost and (below) a Hawker Hunter.

 

[mugatu]

Wavey, yes this is very very good work with the pics for comparing. I wish we had the overall accurate dimensions on the overall Jawa blaster to chop up the measurements for each solitary blaster piece. If we get the correct measurements on the Eaton half coupling, we should be able to scale everything very accurately. I'm going to write to the guy with the website of all of the Bell helicopters and ask him if he recognizes that strut arm control tube, but having the dimensions for him should make his job much easier.

This whole mystery is just fascinating!