Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: 41magsnub on June 13, 2011, 01:37:40 PM
-
http://www.suntimes.com/5936097-417/world-war-ii-bomber-plane-crashes-in-cornfield-near-oswego.html (http://www.suntimes.com/5936097-417/world-war-ii-bomber-plane-crashes-in-cornfield-near-oswego.html)
Looks like everyone made it out okay. It really sucks when a classic warbird goes down, it's not like new ones are being made. Few details, but the fire makes it sound like it will be a total loss.
-
Oh, fudge!
The crew was light by three - obviously not carrying gunners. (duh!)
RIP, old warhorse. Hope they do not just cut her up and tow to a scrap yard. What an ignomious end to have to suffer.
I know the story was written by repotologist as opposed to journalists, but I do wish they had given a tail number. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_by_tail_number http://www.7thbg.org/ACListing17.htm http://warbird-central.com/?tag=b-17-flying-fortress http://www.taphilo.com/history/8thaf/8thAFUnitMarkings.shtml
stay safe.
-
It was the Liberty Belle...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Belle_%28B-17%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Belle_%28B-17%29)
-
Check the pics; not much left but the wings. Reminds me of that pic from Hickam field after Pearl Harbor. RIP, old girl. :'(
-
I drive past this airport to get to my shooting club. I've seen her parked there many times. It is truly sad.
-
Sad day for American history. Last I knew Red Bull actually owns one of them. It used to be the Fairfax Ghost. Never saw combat because it was one of the last ones built.
-
This really does break my heart. I hope they can salvage as much of the engines and avionics as possible. I would still like to save up for the $400 rides for the B-17 that comes often to Connecticut.
-
They'll probably restore it, if they can get the money to do so. Which means, for most warbirds, scratch building a new one from plans and reusing the one wing skin panel that was partially salvagable.
'Course that'll take 15 years.
-
Now that's a headline I hoped to never read...
-
Tough end for a WWII veteran.
<snif>
Wasn't that also the plane which had the record for bombing missions and toured the US for the War Bond effort?(Finally read 41magsnub's link. TNX)
I too, was planning on taking a $400 flight on one of the last Liberators flying. Beautiful to see that thing floating along looking so slow and lumbering with that dull throaty roar of props and exhaust.
However, at my age...
... do they have a bathroom on those things?
-
Wasn't that also the plane which had the record for bombing missions and toured the US for the War Bond effort?
No. The aircraft later christened the Liberty Belle, along with most (if not all) other currently airworthy B-17s never saw combat. The airframe, however, did serve as a P&W testbed postwar, including having a turboprop engine installed in the nose.
You're thinking of the Memphis Belle, of which there are two nowadays...the original (under restoration), and the one converted to resemble a B-17F and repainted as the Memphis Belle (stylized for the movie and then redone accurately later).
It's sad to note that the original Liberty Belle was also lost due to fire...
-
^ Ah, thanks. I struck out my question.
-
However, at my age...
... do they have a bathroom on those things?
Yes, but at your age straddling the bomb bay doors may not be fun. =D
stay safe.
-
My heart sank when I first saw the headline. I was afraid it might be Sentimental Journey, the aircraft I crewed back in the 80's. Found out it was Liberty Bell when I read the story. She was a beautiful girl. I'm really glad everyone got out okay. I wonder if they had installed the fire system on their bird? We had in SJ back when I was crew, but we really held no illusions as to its effectiveness. It's a good thing they were still early in their flight and fairly low when the fire broke out.
Looking at the pictures, the poor girl is beyond salvage. Except for small fittings and such, there is nothing useful left. And the romantic notion of building one from scratch is just that, a romantic notion.
However, at my age...
.... do they have a bathroom on those things?
In the SJ, the original pee tube was still there. The funnel was on the wall adjacent to the belly turret, and its exhaust tube ran down the left side of the aircraft toward the tail, exiting somewhere past the tail wheel. Folks touring the airplane would ask what the funnel was for and we would tell them it was the emergency inflight tail wheel inflation device. "You blow into this funnel here..." Invariably someone would want to try it out. >:D
-
Thats a shame.
We've got a squadron of warbirds at Galveston, including a B17 and a B25. http://www.lsfm.org/ They fly in about once a week and do touch and gos, since you can pay to ride around in them.
-
The article mentioned that there are 100 B-17 airframes in existence. Anyone know where they are and what condition they're in? Could one or more of them be restored to replace this one?
-
The article mentioned that there are 100 B-17 airframes in existence. Anyone know where they are and what condition they're in? Could one or more of them be restored to replace this one?
I don't think the # is that high. Wiki says 51 airframes.
Some are in restoration to airworthiness, others are in restoration for static display.
-
I don't think the # is that high.
Some are in restoration to airworthiness, others are in restoration for static display.
When you consider there were originally 12,731 manufactured, including the Model 299 prototype, a hundred or so left is nothing. They're essentially gone.
-
When you consider there were originally 12,731 manufactured, including the Model 299 prototype, a hundred or so left is nothing. They're essentially gone.
You ain't got to tell me. And the airframes aren't all complete airframes, either...some are bits and pieces.
It's a flat out miracle that there are as many flying today as there are. The B-24 is an even rarer bird, despite being produced in higher numbers.
And the romantic notion of building one from scratch is just that, a romantic notion.
Well, it's doable...but highly unlikely to happen (I'd say the cost of doing so would make the cost of a compelete restoration of an airframe that is in poor condition look laughable in comparison).
-
One less war bird in the world. :'(
-
The article mentioned that there are 100 B-17 airframes in existence. Anyone know where they are and what condition they're in? Could one or more of them be restored to replace this one?
There is one flying out of Galveston, TX. They fly it alot, too.
-
Saw additional photos today. She landed completely intact, landing gear extended. Then the fire from the No. 1 engine consumed her.
-
LINK (http://www.libertyfoundation.org/index.html) to statement from the Liberty Foundation Chief Pilot and an excerpt:
Unlike the sensational photos that you have all seen of the completely burned B-17 on the news, you will see from photos taken by our crew that our Liberty Belle was undamaged by the forced landing and at the time of landing, the wing fire damage was relatively small. The crew actually unloaded bags, then had the horrible task of watching the aircraft slowly burn while waiting for the fire trucks to arrive. There were high hopes that the fire would be extinguished quickly and the damage would be repairable. Those hopes were diminished as the fire trucks deemed the field too soft to cross due to the area’s recent rainfall. So while standing by our burning B-17 and watching the fire trucks parked at the field’s edge, they sadly watched the wing fire spread to the aircraft’s fuel cells and of course, you all have seen the end result. There is no doubt that had the fire equipment been able to reach our aircraft, the fire would have been quickly extinguished and our Liberty Belle would have been repaired to continue her worthwhile mission.
That must've been frustrating and heart-breaking to watch.
-
So they couldn't even TRY? WTF? mother *expletive deleted*ers!
-
The Aurora Municipal Airport (http://www.auroraairport.com/airport.htm) is a good sized GA airport located in the Village of Sugar Grove. The Village of Sugar Grove is run by a bunch of 'tards. That's probably the nicest way I can put it.
The airport and the Aurora Sportsmen's Club were built/started before the ever was a village of Sugar Grove. Since the incorporation of the village and rapid residential development with the housing bubble, people were shocked, shocked I tell you to discover that an Airport and a Gun Club were in their backyards.
The 'tards were able to force annex and make the gun club move. However, they are not able to force annex and close the airport. Since the airport is 1) Bigger then 40 acres, 2) Owned by the City of Aurora and 3) The FAA told the 'tards to go pound sand.
SG thought that the building boom would go on forever and WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over build and bought Municipal "Toys". They are up to their eyeballs in muni bond debt. They have a huge Municpal Building and Fire Department, a $8 million dollar Library (http://www.sugargrove.lib.il.us/site/) that due to funding is only open 5 days a week and some of those days are only for a few hours. The running joke is that "the one book is checked out, and besides someone has already colored all the pictures."
Though the population is about 9,000, the kids are bused to a neighboring school districts because they didn't build schools before the built the "Imperial Palace" errr Municipal Building.
So it comes as no surprise that the SGFD was afraid to get their fancy toys muddy.
-
We could have probably put the fire out with one of our wildland engines =(
-
So they couldn't even TRY? WTF? MOTHER*expletive deleted*ERS!
So the B17 bomber doesn't have room to carry a couple of large commercial ABC extinguishers on a test flight after a fuel leak repair? I can't really blame the fire crew for not wanting to get their trucks and people (which might at any time become critical to saving someone's life) stuck in the mud trying to help these bozos.
-
So the B17 bomber doesn't have room to carry a couple of large commercial ABC extinguishers on a test flight after a fuel leak repair? I can't really blame the fire crew for not wanting to get their trucks and people (which might at any time become critical to saving someone's life) stuck in the mud trying to help these bozos.
;/
-
Fuel leak repair? According to whom?
-
Fuel leak repair? According to whom?
Looks like the chief pilot's statement doesn't specify the repair, but this was still a ferry flight just after some unscheduled "maintenance." ("Maintenance" is the stuff you do regularly before something breaks; anything unscheduled is called a "repair.") I know I take extra precautions the first time out in any vehicle that has just been worked on.
Edit to add: Oil leak. When flammable liquids are leaking on hot stuff, sensible people carry a couple of dry chem extinguishers.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-vet-turned-down-trip-on-plane-i-was-lucky-this-morning-20110613,0,4273112.story
The pair had originally been scheduled to ride in the B-17 "Liberty Belle” with a handful of other veterans last Friday, Weinstein said. But the flight was postponed due to a “minor oil leak,” Weinstein said.
-
Oil leak
Radial engines leak oil like crazy.
When I looked at the plane, the way it was (torn apart), if there were maybe two more people in there, maybe we wouldn’t have gotten out
The aircraft landed COMPLETELY INTACT.
When flammable liquids are leaking on hot stuff, sensible people carry a couple of dry chem extinguishers.
I'm pretty sure the B-17 crew was carrying fire extinguishers.
-
Looks like the chief pilot's statement doesn't specify the repair..
Exactly. Those old B17s are a complex airplane, age not withstanding. All kinds of stuff breaks between and during flights even on a well maintained aircraft. That's just the way it is. Let's not cast aspersions on what I am sure is a great group of people when we really don't know what happened.
Based on the description of events by the chief pilot, my guess, and it is strictly a guess, would be it was an electrical problem. He mentioned an the crew noticing an acrid smell a few minutes into the flight. There are no power-boosted controls in a B17, and almost everything else is electrically driven, flaps and landing gear and such. The brakes are the only hydraulic system on board.
The way the fuel system is layed out, the size and routing of the fuel lines and how the boost pumps are used, were it a significant fuel leak I would bet they would have smelled fumes in the cabin and had a more serious, visible fire initially. I saw no mention of that.
I wonder if they still had the self-sealing rubberized fuel tanks in that aircraft? We still had them in SJ up through '87 when I left the group. It was a damned expensive and difficult proposition to replace them with metal tankage back then. Even moreso now I would think.
I suppose it could have been a small fuel leak, maybe around the carburetor or in a fuel line fitting. Or leaking oil or hydraulic fluid* ignited by engine heat. I'm trying to remember how the CO2 fire suppression system is laid out in the engine nacelle. The details are fuzzy after being away for twenty-plus years, but I recall discussions about it being more of a last ditch (and really the only) defense against an engine fire.
In any event, we will know the cause soon enough when the NTSB releases its report.
eta: *If it was hydraulic fluid, it would almost certainly have to be ignited by heat from the exhaust system, maybe down around the turbocharger. There are no hydraulic lines that I remember running forward of the firewall.
anudder edit fur speeling.
-
Radial engines leak oil like crazy.
Then we can apply military definitions; "normal" = leaking, "minor leak" = doesn't carry enough oil to last a long trip, "ground the plane for maintenance" = can't pour it in as fast as it's coming out. They grounded the plane over the weekend.
I'm pretty sure the B-17 crew was carrying fire extinguishers.
Then why not use them? They've already said they had time to unload gear from the plane, and that the fire was small enough at the start to have been controlled with hand extinguishers.
http://www.westseattleherald.com/2011/06/17/news/update-b-17-liberty-belle-could-have-been-saved-s
"If you look at the pictures, you see a hole in the wing about as wide as a basketball, and no damage to any of the four engines," he said. "If they'd had two or three hand-held extinguishers they may have been able to put it out. The fire had not spread to the fuel tanks yet."
(Worth noting that this twit is the same one whining because the fire department didn't rush their trucks and personnel into the mud and close to the fuel-filled burning tin can to save property. By his own admission equipment they could have and should have been carrying would have allowed the crew to deal with the problem themselves.)
Oops, this article's saying fuel leak, not oil: http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-plane-crash-in-oswego-june13,0,6580283.story
The Liberty Belle was in Aurora to give rides to war veterans, but it was grounded over the weekend for a fuel leak and maintenance.
-
Oops, this article's saying fuel leak, not oil: http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-plane-crash-in-oswego-june13,0,6580283.story
I will be reserving judgement until after the NTSB report. In my experience, reporters screw up the facts on anything aviation related every time they put pen to paper. We used to have that problem all the time when the media visited SJ.
-
I wonder if they still had the self-sealing rubberized fuel tanks in that aircraft?
If not self sealing, then likely standard rubber fuel tanks, custom made by one of the companies that does so (a pain in the ass rubber tanks are, by the way).
Based on the description of events by the chief pilot, my guess, and it is strictly a guess, would be it was an electrical problem.
That's the first thing I thought, based on the description of it starting in the wing (Cullen spotted flames coming from the left wing). The onboard fire suppression system in the engine nacelles would not have been able to do anything about it, but they activated it anyway.
Worth noting that this twit is the same one whining because the fire department didn't rush their trucks and personnel into the mud and close to the fuel-filled burning tin can to save property. By his own admission equipment they could have and should have been carrying would have allowed the crew to deal with the problem themselves.)
The crew may have tried to put it out with onboard extinguishers, we don't know. They may not have been enough.
*My father survived two engine fires in our airplane, by the way, so I have some inkling of what I'm talking about when it comes to fire and aircraft...
-
I will be reserving judgement until after the NTSB report. In my experience, reporters screw up the facts on anything aviation related every time they put pen to paper. We used to have that problem all the time when the media visited SJ.
This. One of the few .gov agencies I'd consider efficient and dare I say even good at thier jobs.