Fatal B-17 crash (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

Mark VII -> Fatal B-17 crash (10/2/2019 6:39:22 PM)

Sad

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vintage-b-17-plane-crashes-erupts-flames-bradley-international-airport-n1061161

https://www.wfsb.com/news/deaths-reported-in-fiery-b--at-bradley-airport/article_d514bd24-e51d-11e9-b6ac-47e02ec67428.html



btd64 -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/2/2019 6:48:19 PM)

I read about this a few hours ago. Real sad. I've seen the B-17 that crashed before. In the air. Was a piece of art....GP



Mark VII -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/2/2019 6:53:07 PM)

She was the Nine-0-Nine.

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/collings-foundation-b-17-flying-fortress-crashes/



BillBrown -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/2/2019 7:05:42 PM)

My grandfather on my fathers side might have worked on the construction of that aircraft.



Barb -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/2/2019 7:16:56 PM)

Am vary sad to hear the news... [sm=sad-1361.gif]



Panther Bait -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/2/2019 8:07:04 PM)

Very sad to hear. My heart goes out to the families of the victims.



fcooke -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/2/2019 9:39:33 PM)

Very sad......and a really crap piece of reporting. Sorry - 'but were there any people on board'? Are you effing kidding me?

Rant off.

My heartfelt sympathies to those on board and all who cared for them.



Footslogger -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/3/2019 1:44:54 AM)

Update:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/7-dead-7-injured-in-crash-of-world-war-ii-bomber-at-conn-airport/ar-AAIbsMc?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Engine Trouble?

What is your theory?



Denniss -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/3/2019 2:41:49 PM)

Even with 3 engines running and its rather light load a B-17 should stay in the air or be capable of a controlled landing. With 1 engine out and others making strange noises - who knows what happened. Could be anything from human error to bad/wrong fuel.
Really sad this old bird going down did cost so many lives.



fcooke -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/4/2019 9:10:05 AM)

A 17 could fly on two engines. Maybe even one for short distances. It sounds like the pilot was very calm. I'm not familiar with the phrase 'blow out an engine' Sounds like some kind of purge. So maybe it was bad fuel if the other three engines sounded off and not running effectively. (though I'm not sure how many observers would know what a B-17 should sound like - they are pretty loud normally). I'm not a fuel guy, does anyone know if good old 90-100 octane fuel is normally available at airports? Not sure what the current crop of prop Cessnas, etc use.

My favorite type of plane, have always wanted to take a flight in one. Even though they are old I always figured with 4 engines one was pretty safe.

Feel bad for all the victims and hope the ones still with us pull through.

Regards,
Frank



LeeChard -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/4/2019 2:23:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Very sad......and a really crap piece of reporting. Sorry - 'but were there any people on board'? Are you effing kidding me?

Rant off.

My heartfelt sympathies to those on board and all who cared for them.

I'm not sure there is anything we could call a journalist anymore [:(]



Footslogger -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/4/2019 2:43:32 PM)

Update:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/b-17-plane-crash-at-bradley-airport-are-old-bombers-safe-to-fly/ar-AAIguoF?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=iehp






Panther Bait -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/4/2019 5:31:17 PM)

There is a big difference between losing one (or two) engines "in flight" as in at altitude and with airspeed, and losing an engine (or God forbid two) on takeoff when airspeed is low and there is little to no altitude available to maneuver/recover.

B-29s could probably fly safely with 3 engines even at combat load, but how many crashed on takeoff at Tinian?



Denniss -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/4/2019 5:45:57 PM)

There's a major difference between wartime load (lots of bombs, fuel, guns with ammo, armor) vs light load in demo flights today



PaxMondo -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/5/2019 12:17:15 AM)

i'll watching the ntsb site for details. but even the prelim won't come out a month or two. the final will be 2 years or more ...



GaryChildress -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/5/2019 2:26:43 AM)

Very sad, both the loss in life and the loss of a beautiful vintage aircraft in flying condition. My condolences to the family and loved ones. [:(]



geofflambert -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/5/2019 2:30:20 AM)

Maybe somebody put unleaded avgas in by mistake.



GaryChildress -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/5/2019 2:45:02 AM)

I wonder if the plane appeared in any movies about WW2 (Memphis Belle for example)?



JeffroK -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/5/2019 4:06:13 AM)

As painted;
(From the amazing work of Joe Baugher)

4231909 delivered Cheyenne Jan 3, 1944, to Kearney Jan 12, 1944, to Romulus Jan 24, 1944, to Grenier Jan 29, 1944. Assigned to 329th BS, 91st BG at Bassingbourne Feb 24, 1944. Named *Nine-O-Nine*, carried out 140 combat missions between 3/44 and 4/45 without crew fatality or injury. Returned to USA Jun 11, 1945, to RFC at Kingman Dec 7, 1945 and scrapped at Kingman.

The actual aircraft;
Douglas/Long Beach B-17G-95-DL Fortress
4483785 converted to TB-17G and then SB-17G and then back to TB-17G. Sold on commercial market and operated by CIA front Intermountain Aviation as N809Z. Used to drop and retrieve two American men and equipment from drifting abandoned Soviet ice station. Appeared in movie *Thunderball* with Fulton skyhook system installed. Registered to Evergreen Vintage Aircraft of Oregon as N207EV by 1993. Put on inside display at the Evergreen AirVenture Museum in McMinnville, OR. Museum was renamed in 1997 as the Captain Michael King Smith Evergreen Aviation Education Center.



fcooke -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/5/2019 7:04:07 AM)

Rant on

Seems Ms Homendy has already made up her mind. Which is great for an investigator (rolls eyes). Might as well ban all commercial Boeings and Airbuses as well, since we sadly occasionally lose them as well. And all motor vehicles, since accidents with them kill and maim far more people than planes every year. Oh yeah - I got run over by a bike (non-motorized - a push bike in European terms) a couple of years ago which sent me to the ER for stitches and a concussion - let's get rid of them as well. And falling trees take out quite few people every year - chop em all down.

And the idiot politician - apologies to any useful politicians out there - needs to do a little fact checking. Last time I checked a B-17G has self sealing fuel tanks.

Rant off.



Gridley380 -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/7/2019 12:48:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Rant on

Seems Ms Homendy has already made up her mind. Which is great for an investigator (rolls eyes). Might as well ban all commercial Boeings and Airbuses as well, since we sadly occasionally lose them as well. And all motor vehicles, since accidents with them kill and maim far more people than planes every year. Oh yeah - I got run over by a bike (non-motorized - a push bike in European terms) a couple of years ago which sent me to the ER for stitches and a concussion - let's get rid of them as well. And falling trees take out quite few people every year - chop em all down.

And the idiot politician - apologies to any useful politicians out there - needs to do a little fact checking. Last time I checked a B-17G has self sealing fuel tanks.

Rant off.


(shrug) The FAA had no real reason to ground the 737 MAX fleet, but they did. It is hardly a stretch from there.



Barb -> RE: Fatal B-17 crash (10/8/2019 8:00:02 AM)

Very sad to loose the plane and people. [sm=sign0063.gif]

IMHO - the FAA will be probably looking into the why engine No.4 quit, and whether the pilots did everything possible to land safely.

The obvious course of the flight events was - Engine quit, feathered, turned correctly "not into dead engine", In combat conditions they would have salvo their unarmed bombs to lighten the ship (not really doable with passengers, right?), unfortunately they did not have the altitude, thus were short, hit the "end of runway" posts, touched down short of the runway, but were dragged into right side by the dead engine. Unfortunately the De-icing plant was in the way.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.640625