Landing a B17 Flying Fortress in poor visibility

[Centaurus]

I have no idea how many Pprune readers on this forum browse the Aviation History and Nostalgia forum, here:

http://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/414877-landing-navigation-aids-bad-weather-england-during-usaf-ops-ww2.html

But the original question on the Aviation History Forum concerned how USAF B17 Flying Fortress bombers in 1944 were able to land in bad visibility after returning from bombing raids over Occupied Europe.

As a young lad in those days I watched some of these aircraft flying low overhead my house with obvious damage from anti-aircraft fire and German fighter attacks. I used to ride my bike to an emergency landing field where these aircraft belly-landed. My interest as a pilot in later years persuaded me to find out how they located their home bases when the weather was bad - typical English mist and fog. Turns out they flew the early ILS and other approaches like the VAR using the twin needle ILS type instrument.

The cockpit photo of a B17 is really first class.

Recommend you have a look at Aviation History and Nostalgia Forum; especially for PPL and CPL student pilots eager to learn about instrument flying all those years ago

[ZappBrannigan]

The disturbing thing is - if you look at that cockpit photo and picture squeezing a Garmin 430 in the middle there somewhere... doesn't look too different from what I'm getting paid to fly now, staring at the same ILS needles :}

[knox]

Yeah those needles have been around for a while now.
Something to do with blue and yellow lobes 90hz and 150hz.

See here Instrument landing system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_landing_system)

Knox.

[dudduddud]

Slightly off-topic but reading about WW2 flight really puts the 'Heroic Single Engine Approach' and the 'Heroic Ditch in a River' in perspective.

[frigatebird]

Yes, read that. Didn't realise they had the crossbeam for glideslope back then, thought it was mainly dots and dashes for track guidance, and perhaps a radar distance callout from a groundstation to calculate a slope. Then getting visual with the trenches filled with burning fuel either side of the fogged-in runway.
After DR'ing to Islands with mainly broken NDB's, thought the arrival of Omega/VLF in the late Seventy's was the greatest thing at the time.
There was a professor at James Cook University who was going to develop a cheap receiver for light aircraft, and I communicated with him at the time (early 80's), as the LRN-70 we had cost about $60,000 U.S., but it came to nothing as the Americans were working on the replacement GPS system, and the rest is 'history'.

[Fly-by-Desire]

But I wonder how many where actualy working when they got back! Those guys seemed to have good day if they got back with at least half the engines still turning! :bored:

[Metro man]

Back then the level of safety provided on an instrument approach would have been no where near that of today. A certain percentage of loss of aircraft was expected on every mission, provided it stayed below this level it was acceptable.

A system which enabled an aircraft to have a better chance of landing back at base instead of crashing in a field would have been welcome even if not 100% safe.

The benefits we enjoy today of being able to confidently fly an ILS approach are thanks to the war time pioneers.

[Brian Abraham]

A certain percentage of loss of aircraft was expected on every mission
To put those losses into perspective just finished reading a book on the 8th Air Force and it was stated that the life of a B-17 in that group was eight missions - lost on operations, unrepairable, accidents etc.

[ZEEBEE]

But I wonder how many where actualy working when they got back! Those guys seemed to have good day if they got back with at least half the engines still turning!

We tend to forget in these days of transistors and microchips that the receivers in these old machines were literally rack mounted monstrosities containing vacuum tubes drawing heaps of current.

They almost needed all the engines turning just to power the electronics!

Along with large resistors and capacitors that could leak electrolyte through altitude changes, it was a miracle that half the gear worked in ideal conditions let alone after flak bursts and peripheral damage from shell impacts.

It would be interesting to know just what the dispatch reliability of these machines actually were.

[Biggles78]

Those guys WERE/ARE Heroes. Hero, it is a word that is bandied about so much now it has almost lost it's meaning. Swimming heroes, footy heroes, send a herogramme to the athletes at the Olympics. :yuk::yuk::yuk: Now we have another pseudo hero sailing back into Sydney Harbour after her heroic adventure around the 7 seas. :ugh:

I think even Sully might agree that he wasn't a hero. He just displayed an incredible amount of skill for an event he trained his whole life for but hoped would never happen. He, and others like him, deserve all the accolades they get and more but unless he had dived back into a sinking cabin to rescue a trapped passenger and put his life in danger in the process I personally do not believe the word hero should be applied.

Sorry, got carried away with my rant and may have strayed too far off topic. Apologies to the Forum Mod for the increased workload if this post needs to be deleted.

The real heroes march on ANZAC Day every year. :D :D :D :D :D