Caudron and Vickers

[Dbahnson]

Thank you indeed Pierre-Michel, your analysis and comments have help me immensely to find out more about my prop and you have been immensely more helpful than Dbanson which on the other end I have found quite hostile. I get it, Dbanson, you don’t like them and that is perfectly fine with me. I have been flying for over 35 years, I am just an airline pilot who collect all form of aviation art and was seeking expert information from this website.


Cordiallement,

Edouard Gasquet

Yikes! I'm sorry my comments seemed offensive to you, although I'm not sure why they were taken that way. Please keep in mind that my goal in having this forum is to provide information, both to the person posting the questions and to all the people that search the forum for answers to their own questions, many of which revolve around valuation of propellers. Bob Gardner and I shared a common belief that over-valued propellers are a problem for buyers, who frequently compared an altered propeller to one in original condition. Take a look at eBay to see what I mean.

I've been a pilot for almost 50 years, although my career was as an orthopedic surgeon. I started collecting propellers at about that same time, and run this website and forum strictly as a hobby and free of charge and free of advertising and/or clickbait. People like pmdec and Bob Gardner and others have been immensely helpful in their participation in our goal of collecting information that is otherwise very difficult to find.

Again, my apologies.

Dave

[Gasqclark]

Not a problem at all Dave, I didn’t take offense at your comments, I was simply disappointed because I didn’t find them particularly helpful in stark contrast to your contribution to the various other topics that I have read in this forum. So what, the hub had been cut off on one prop which wasn’t immediately obvious to me even though I suspected something and that the other has had been repainted which I really thought it hadn’t until I read the explanations from Pierre-Michel ! I have many French antique furniture which are also well over 100 years old and which have been re-upholstered several time through their life .

The thing is that I am really pleased with them and until a couple of weeks ago, I didn’t know anything about WW1 propellers. From what I gather, there are only a few people left who can share and transmit that knowledge and I would certainly love to be able to buy the books written by Bob Gardner. Of course, I would have preferred if my propellers were more original but they are still beautiful in my eyes and and will stay with me. I am not sure what my wife will do with them when I am not around as she didn’t show the same enthusiasm when I brought back those 2.6m pieces of wood.

So thank you Dave for running this forum and I am happy to learn more about my propellers good or bad !

[Dbahnson]

Thanks for responding, and I appreciate your comments.

There are two main compelling properties of wooden propellers, in my opinion One is the "art" of their elegant shape, which can be appreciated even with refinishing and alterations. The other is their "value" as collectibles. For me over the years the value has supported the art, and I've reduced my personal collection to about twenty props (from about 100 of them over the years) which I appreciate for their form, knowing that their value will remain high as the years go by, and my heirs can decide what part of those properties they want to retain.

[pmdec]

Some years ago, Bob Gardner told me that Dave was a "very good person" and a compassionate one and all I have seen him writing goes in this direction. He know very well the propellers and when he sees if somebody here who will be disappointed when he will learn the truth about what is shown, he prefers, at first, emitting doubt, at least telling the minimum.

You came here telling you were "very fortunate to have been able to buy two propellers almost completely untouched" but for people who have seen some propellers, at first look they were not: One stripped from its varnish and its hub "destroyed", the other shining from a new paint... So, he just show you the "problems" with the Vickers, and tells nothing about the French one...

Me too I saw that the paint of the Gremont was way too shiny to be old, even if it has been very well preserved. Shiny paint and yellowing of the decal: Impossible! And to remove the last doubt, I have the chance to see the paint above the decal on your pic.
Of my around hundred props, only one has its original varnish "brand new". It have been wrapped in tissue and in a box for a century: Crated in a French aerial base in Africa by someone who came back to France for WW1, and kept there until the grandson look at what was in the crate (story verified!).

But you were right on one point: Gremont serial CT (not GT) was approved for Caudron G4. In my list, it was for G4 using 80HP Le Rhone, but my list is from October 1917 and later Caudron G4s were fitted with 100 HP engine. So it is for what you thought!

The marking "C G - 4 - 100 HP - A" reads Caudron G4 100 HP" with the "A" perhaps the first lettre of "At" meaning Acajou tiama, an acajou specie approved in France for WW1 propellers.
"CT-5028" have to be after the word SERIE : all Gremont propellers use one, two or three letters for their design (serial) and 5028 is not the prop number but a batch number.
The prop number has to be stamped under "SERIE CT-5028" after a "N" (for numero) and could give a more precise dating than "between late 1917 and 1919".

If you bought them as "propellers in original state" from a professional, I think you can ask for a rebate... Half the price would be honest.

Regards,
PM

[JR44]

Deleted

[Gasqclark]

Thank you both and I am only too aware how little I know about the subject. The fact that those propellers had both blades relatively intact made me wrongly believe that they were untouched and I realised now how foolish that statement was among experts like yourselves ! I blame my own excitement, as Dave said, the art form, the shape and the incredible tactile nature of the object combine the physics make them so interesting. I am very happy, I certainly wasn’t looking and in fact the story is a little sad. I bought them from a cafe/restaurant which was forced to close by the airfield’s owner and I didn’t pay very much at all for them. I was more interested at first in one of their paintings (a subject I am a little more familiar…).
So their values are not important to me, I am keeping them. In case of the Gremont, I am so grateful that thanks to this forum, Pierre-Michel could establish that it was made for Caudron G4 with the later 100hp engine.

I am back to work this week painting white lines in the sky across the Atlantic in my B787 but on my return, I will try to see if I can get read those serial number under the paint, perhaps by using a little bit of talc powder.

[Mtskull]

The marking "C G - 4 - 100 HP - A" reads Caudron G4 100 HP" with the "A" perhaps the first lettre of "At" meaning Acajou tiama, an acajou specie approved in France for WW1 propellers.

Another possibility is that the “A” stands for Anzani. Some Caudron G.4 aircraft were fitted with Anzani engines.

[pmdec]

Another possibility is that the “A” stands for Anzani. Some Caudron G.4 aircraft were fitted with Anzani engines.

Hi,

You are probably right, even if the Gremont serial approved for Anzani 100 HP were the CP and the CP' witn a pitch of 1.50 meter vs 1.90 for the CT.

Another detail is that wood marking is normally perpendicular to other markings and on the aircraft-engine side. Look at the third pic of my post on 03-04-2023, 11:21 AM : on the right of the markings SOP[WITH] / Cl[erget] 130 there is Nf for Noyer de France (French Walnut) written from bottom to top.

So, 100 HP Az could be what is stamped, and then the prop was for a G4 fitted with Anzani engines. From memory, I have seen only ONE pic of such a Caudron with contra-rotative Anzani. If you find one, it would be interesting.

Regards,
PM