B17 crash at Bradley
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Apple Maggot Quarantine Area
Age: 47
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft in the aerial photo with the deflected trim tab has all four engines running. It is not a photo of the aircraft on the day of the accident. You can tell that it was not taken in Hartford, CT due to the terrain and vegetation. There are no mountains or sagebrush in Hartford.
Moderator
I have deleted the political posts referring to what B-17's did during the war years. That history is not relevant to this sad event. Let's keep the discussion to the present time events please....
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Can any of the former B17 crewmewbers here confirm that with two engines out a Fort will not accelerate (much less climb) if the airspeed is below 115-120 MPH? Not suggesting that was an issue here, but it would be a seldom seen gotcha. I read such was the case years ago when I was flying a C-45 and wondered if the Twin Beech had a similar surprise. It didn't, because that drag hole occurred near or below Vmc, apparently. (Anyway, a Beech 18 definitely wouldn't climb with two engnes out.)
2. Also, does anyone have a handle on the performance curves for these birds with the turbochargerers uninstalled? Used to be, according the Dash One, you'd push the balls to the wall, and then adjust MP with the turbo wheel to 47.5" MP for54,000 max gross takeoff. So at a typical 45-47,000 pounds ride gross would a conservative 41" without a turbo be equivalent?
2. Also, does anyone have a handle on the performance curves for these birds with the turbochargerers uninstalled? Used to be, according the Dash One, you'd push the balls to the wall, and then adjust MP with the turbo wheel to 47.5" MP for54,000 max gross takeoff. So at a typical 45-47,000 pounds ride gross would a conservative 41" without a turbo be equivalent?
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was aghast when NTSB guy said, "I'm not sure, but I think 100LL is approved for reciprocating engines blah blah blah." What cave has he lived in for the last 30 years?
What about it? Not sure about the dash number of the 1820 on B-17s. Many of them were certified on 91/98. The current blue 100LL is still 100/130 octane just without the lead. Tetraethyl lead is a lubricant added to the fuel. The fleet of R1820s, R1830s and R2800s in the US has been running on 100LL for decades. We were limited to a few less inches of MAP and lost 100 HP using 100/130 or 100LL in a 2800 instead of 108/135. In the 1820-80 series engines, which were a later variant than what’s on a B-17 I seem to recall it was 50 less HP a side.
Last edited by MarkerInbound; 4th Oct 2019 at 01:17.
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Most locked down city in the world
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One question that should of been asked at the NTSB presser, The engine in suspect could you determine
wether the prop was in the full fine or the feathered position? Very simply question ( but the reporters probably
don't know much about aircraft systems so it was never asked.)
wether the prop was in the full fine or the feathered position? Very simply question ( but the reporters probably
don't know much about aircraft systems so it was never asked.)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The flight engineer title came from the State Police casualty list. Ms. Homendy referred to him as a loadmaster in the latest NTSB briefing. Some early news reports referred to the third crewmember as a steward.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Dr. Bower is an aeronautical engineer, not a pilot. It's been a long time since I've flown a piston plane, I would double check before I gave a definitive answer about 100LL as well. Seems like years ago when I pumped gas red was 80/87 octane, green was 100/130. Or, was it the other way around, I never could remember...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The B-17 didn't require a flight engineer but its civilian derivative the 307 Stratoliner did I believe.
Last year at an airshow my wife wanted to buy me a ride on one of these warbirds but I declined. Early in my aviation career I was nearly killed by a P-51 that cartwheeled on landing in a crosswind. I was standing on the ramp and the prop broke off and went in front of me, the fuselage slid behind me inverted and started to burn. We were unable to rescue the two occupants. The backseater was a spectator who came out to the airport and was offered a free ride by the owner. I would have taken the ride if it was offered to me that day.
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.
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.
Both the B-17 & B-24 HAD a flight engineer. Maybe they didn't REQUIRE an FE, but the Army Air Corps sure put one on as a required crewmember.
More details from the news..
The FE survived. If he remembers the minutes leading up to the accident no doubt his statements will shed light for the investigators to determine probable cause and contributing factors that led to the undershoot and loss of control after striking the (guessing) localizer equipment.
I'm also guessing that "Uttering Phraseology not approved by the PPrune R/T Posse" won't be among the findings in their report.
The Connecticut Air National Guard says an airman who was aboard a B-17 bomber that crashed in Connecticut opened a hatch that allowed some passengers to escape a fire.
The Guard said Thursday the airman has training and experience in handling emergencies on aircraft.
After the crash Wednesday morning at Hartford’s Bradley International Airport, he used flame-retardant flight gloves he had brought with him to open the hatch.
The airman suffered injuries and has been recovering at home since his release from a hospital Wednesday evening.
The airman is currently command chief for the 103rd Airlift Wing. His name was not released.
The Guard said Thursday the airman has training and experience in handling emergencies on aircraft.
After the crash Wednesday morning at Hartford’s Bradley International Airport, he used flame-retardant flight gloves he had brought with him to open the hatch.
The airman suffered injuries and has been recovering at home since his release from a hospital Wednesday evening.
The airman is currently command chief for the 103rd Airlift Wing. His name was not released.
I'm also guessing that "Uttering Phraseology not approved by the PPrune R/T Posse" won't be among the findings in their report.
In a plane like the B-17 the flight engineer is critical. I was wondering about the statement that there was only three crew.