B17 crash at Bradley
It's time to stop flying the public in these old machines. As wonderful as they are, they are not safe for the transport of passengers. If you want to risk your life, go ahead. The risks when flying on one are worse than flying on a modern passenger plane and the public may not know that.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Paisley, Florida USA
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regards,
Grog
Moderator
I speculate that more than just fouled plugs or an straight forward engine shutdown are involved. Shutting down and securing one of four engines should not rattle experienced pilots. If an outboard engine were to have been on fire, and would not feather, the sense of urgency to get on the ground, coupled with a plane with lots of drag from the stopped prop would challenge most pilots, and turn an event from bad to worse. I have empathy for pilots watching the ground come up at them, and being unable to arrest a descent.
N4790P
It's time to stop flying the public in these old machines. As wonderful as they are, they are not safe for the transport of passengers. If you want to risk your life, go ahead. The risks when flying on one are worse than flying on a modern passenger plane and the public may not know that.
I clearly understood the risks involved and these risks were again clearly spelt out before the flight.
Passengers on these flights are not typical naive pax but are fully aware of the risks.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: United states
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listening to the tower conversation with the B-17 (N90312CF), the pilot reported: " garbled ... number four engine. We'd like to return and blow it out". This sounds like there was a fire involved, but that should not have caused a control problem with the airplane unless the fire was well advanced. As to my speculation, well here goes. There may have been a massive oil leak in the No.4 engine resulting in rapid loss of engine oil pressure and ability to feather the propeller. The leaking oil may have caught fire. Inability to feather an outboard engine (in this case, no.4) would cause serious control problems. End of speculation.
Nine-O-Nine was a beautiful airplane, and its loss was a disaster. The loss of lives aboard was a tragedy. God bless.
Grog
Nine-O-Nine was a beautiful airplane, and its loss was a disaster. The loss of lives aboard was a tragedy. God bless.
Grog
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: United states
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly as it should have been with the number 4 engine not producing power. The crew had compensated correctly with trim for the loss of the engine power with LH rudder trim to reduce rudder forces; making control of the aircraft more manageable.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Complete loss of oil would not be a problem due to a broken line or an engine problem as the oil tank has a stand pipe of a few gallons of oil which is only available to the feather motor for feathering. All aircraft with the big round engines have this safety feature incorporated into the design and we regiously check the feathering system before every flight.
Last edited by Airbubba; 3rd Oct 2019 at 01:53.
Longtimelurker
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: killington Vt
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NTSB Member Jennifer Homendy gives her initial brief in the first 12 minutes of this clip. As usual, not a lot of detail in this first on-scene presser.
https://youtu.be/HZOSVXOwOgU
https://youtu.be/HZOSVXOwOgU
It's time to stop flying the public in these old machines. As wonderful as they are, they are not safe for the transport of passengers. If you want to risk your life, go ahead. The risks when flying on one are worse than flying on a modern passenger plane and the public may not know that.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Actually at about 3:15 in the video she said that the plane impacted the instrument landing system stanchions. I presume she means the localizer antenna poles for runway 24.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listening to the ATC communication posted by Airbubba. When asked “why do you want to return?” it sounds very much to me like “fire (pause) number 4 engine. We’d like to return to the field and blow it out.” Also I’m surprised this hasn’t been mentioned yet, but looking at Google Maps satellite view of KBDL and figuring out from the news clips where it came to rest, that seems a long way off to the right of the runway, and very near the beginning. (We know they were using 6)
——————-
Ok disregard - I hadn’t seen the bit about hitting the stanchion when I typed that.
——————-
Ok disregard - I hadn’t seen the bit about hitting the stanchion when I typed that.
Longtimelurker
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: killington Vt
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I presume you are right but it will be interesting to find out why they landed / impacted short of the R/W. Should be able to fly on 3 engines .
Last edited by filejw; 3rd Oct 2019 at 03:08.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RIP to all who perished. This aircraft regularly flies overhead as it performs the circuit to KMHT often with a 51 or 24 in loose formation. It occasionally does a fly-by over KBED on way south and north - a regular in the NE US. Very sad.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It's time to stop flying the public in these old machines. As wonderful as they are, they are not safe for the transport of passengers. If you want to risk your life, go ahead. The risks when flying on one are worse than flying on a modern passenger plane and the public may not know that.
Are these warbirds in the experimental category? Is there a B-17 type rating even though there was never a civilian version (e.g. the C-130 and the L-382)? Are these rides Part 91? Or are they something else since money changes hands? Are they like the shoe selfie helo rides or are they more regulated?
I'm guessing that there is no requirement for a CVR or FDR even though the plane carries 10 paying pax, has four engines and weighs over 40,000 pounds.
I’ll speculate that if there was a fire, the tower would have seen the smoke inflight and rolled the trucks. It seems that there wasn’t any sense of urgency on the pilots or ATC’s part so perhaps the inflight fire scenario may not have occurred.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This aircraft is a regular at my airport. I've never felt the urge to pay the $ for a ride (though if the Canadian Lanc were to come here I would reconsider. Had a PBY blow an engine on a low fly-by many years ago. Landed safely and had a bucket out front collecting $28K for a new engine. But, I'll ask a simple question. These aircraft are complex. The crews who flew them during their operational time frame knew them inside out (at least the ones that survived). I'm not sure you retain proficiency part-time anymore.
T
In the previously linked radio exchanges between first responders... “District 5.. three and myself heard that plane go overhead and it didn’t sound good”
EAOA
Mjb
EAOA
Mjb
My only connection to 9-0-9 is that I used her markings on a model many moons ago.
Not that that amounts to a hill of beans - the human losses take priority, as will the search to find what broke.
Damn....
Not that that amounts to a hill of beans - the human losses take priority, as will the search to find what broke.
Damn....