B17 crashes in Connecticut | Page 2 | FerrariChat

B17 crashes in Connecticut

Discussion in 'Aviation Chat' started by GuyIncognito, Oct 2, 2019.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. INRange

    INRange F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 27, 2014
    9,997
    Virginia/Florida/Caymans
    Full Name:
    JD
    Bob Parks probably has some thoughts. Those radial engines are black science to me. If you have ever seen the Start sequence process.....it is amazing that they worked. So many little things that could go wrong from the fuel pumps, mixture settings to the magnetos. Allegedly they struggled to get off the ground and then the engine gave up. While those planes could fly and land on two engines.....getting off the ground required four engines.

    They probably knew they had a problem at takeoff but didn't have the runway to shut it down. That plane needed 4,000 feet of runway to take off. I haven't been able to tell which runway they took off on. Bradley has three runways: 9,510' 6,847' and 4,269'.

    The other odd thing is that one of pilots said: "You got No. 4 engine. We'd like to return, and blow it out," I have no clue what that means.



    http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/B-17/B-17G_Standard_Aircraft_Characteristics.pdf
     
  2. jcurry

    jcurry Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    21,369
    In the past
    Full Name:
    Jim
    In my short time in the left seat I did some shallow turns. What was immediately apparent was the high rudder forces required to return to S&L flight. I asked the pilots about this and they stated that even though the later models (such as 909) had rudder trim in the event of an engine out it was still an exercise in 1-legged squat from both pilots to keep it S&L. Losing an outboard engine (#4) would be worst case. I am sure they had their hands full.
     
    afterburner and INRange like this.
  3. jcurry

    jcurry Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    21,369
    In the past
    Full Name:
    Jim
    Those specs are likely at combat load, so probably very conservative for this aircraft yesterday.
     
  4. INRange

    INRange F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 27, 2014
    9,997
    Virginia/Florida/Caymans
    Full Name:
    JD
    I thought so too but the spec sheet pdf says otherwise. Check out the column for Ferry mode and nominal take off speeds. BHP for the engines was 1200 each at 2500 rpm.....that doesn't leave much "oh crap" room for a plane that weighs 35,972 pounds empty.
     
  5. jcurry

    jcurry Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    21,369
    In the past
    Full Name:
    Jim
    Ferry Wt is shown as 96% of max wt.

    re HP
    take-off power loading (14.1) is no different than a light single engine airplane
     
  6. Ferrari27

    Ferrari27 Formula Junior

    Jul 5, 2010
    866
    Word for word from another internet source:

    The aircraft had received clearance for departure from runway 06 at 09:45 hours local time. After takeoff the aircraft made a right-hand turn. At 09:50 the aircraft contacted the Bradley Tower controller for permission to land on runway 06. This was approved. The aircraft crashed as it attempted to land on runway 06. The aircraft came to rest in an airport de-icing fluid farm located 1100 feet to the east of the threshold of runway 06.
     
  7. Wade

    Wade Three Time F1 World Champ
    Owner

    Mar 31, 2006
    32,793
    East Central, FL
    Full Name:
    Wade O.
  8. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    I read somewhere that the airplane had landed but the pilot lost directional control and swerved off the runway to the right and into the building. With number four out and possibly other engines having trouble it adds up that swerved to the right. I have a feeling that number 4 wasn't the only problem with the airplane. If two engines failed on the starboard wing, the crew would have a helluva task to keep the airplane straight, especially at low speed. The B-24 and B-17 did not have adequate rudder trim tabs and they required the legs of both pilots to maintain directional control in an engine out situation. The B-24 was the worst according to my friends that flew both types. I also saw it at Langley when new pilots were being checked out. The B-17 was a 1934 design that carried over early aileron design and they were "rudder airplanes" and many times to bring a wing up, you did it with rudder. DC-3 the same. I flew right seat in a Salair DC-3 for two hours and the rudder is big for a good reason. Delightful to fly, though.
     
    INRange, technom3 and jcurry like this.
  9. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    Please don't take me as an expurt on radial engines. I did learn to run some of them but the old mechanics were the real experts. Lately I have wondered about engine starts on recent videos are always so difficult. The only time that we had problems was in the winter when they didn't want to wake up and they spit and farted and popped but usually got running. Lots of prime and good procedures usually did it. I remember that cranking them up was no big thing BUT you had well trained and experienced mechanics working on them and the engines weren't sitting for a long time in a 24/7 operation. When there was a problem or they sensed that the engine was tired, it was yanked and replaced. Even the engines on B-17's returning from Europe were usually smooth runners even though the nacelles were caked with carbon from running at high boost too long. It was easy to spot "a vet".
     
    INRange and technom3 like this.
  10. technom3

    technom3 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 29, 2007
    14,721
    Phoenix AZ
    Full Name:
    Justin

    All speculation here and those with experience please chime in...

    But if you have a multi engine plane with only the outter most engine running you have to throw in a serious amount of rudder... in this plane probably both pilots pushing with all of their might for several minutes...

    That engine would be on maximum duty.

    One you touch down... everything would change and if they didn't release the rudder and still had the engine cooking they would be in a serious yaw situation...

    plus you would have to have both pilots in sync for this...

    Once you were down and had the plane straight and you cut the engine it would yaw back the other way. I would imagine they would cut the engine first before touch down... but... with it being the only engine and their only prayer for a go around who knows...


    Also, Im sure they haven't been practicing single engine landings in this plane... nor is their likely a simulator for it. Another thing that will be used against demo flights for these warbirds. They will likely say that there is insufficent training and simulators available for commercial flights.
     
  11. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    You're making it sound like you think they were only landing on one engine. I think they were only landing on three.
     
  12. technom3

    technom3 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 29, 2007
    14,721
    Phoenix AZ
    Full Name:
    Justin
    j
    Yes, it was my understanding that they only had 1 engine.

    Im happy to be corrected
     
  13. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    I have been told that three engines were out. Not substantiated but I have received several comments that three were out. Fuel ?
     
  14. luvair

    luvair Formula 3
    Owner Rossa Subscribed

    Jun 4, 2005
    1,495

    Current NTSB press conference. Lots of details.

     
    Bisonte likes this.
  15. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    37,984
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    Do they even have the superchargers hooked up on these aircraft?
     
  16. Jacob Potts

    Jacob Potts Formula Junior

    Dec 11, 2008
    352
    Pueblo, CO
    Full Name:
    Jacob Potts
    Is there any video? Not for ghoulish salivating, but to see how many engines were operating, etc.
     
  17. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    From what I know, they do not have super chargers on these aircraft. They are not needed since they are essentially used for high altitude and they are very heavy and require a lot of supporting equipment. But to discount this, I recall seeing B-17's going over on take off at night with two red donuts under the number 1 and 4 nacelles and two on the sides of 2 and 3. That always indicated a B-17 . The B-24 always had 4 red donuts under the nacelles because there were no landing gear wheel wells to route the exhaust and turbo chargers to the sides. FIFI, the B-29, has no turbo chargers installed , saving about a total of 1000 pounds total for the airplane.
     
  18. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    Probably not, since nearly all their flying these days is at low level, and the superchargers would just be an unnecessary complication.
     
    Wade and JCR like this.
  19. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    37,984
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    Superchargers also add horsepower, even at sea level, so losing engines becomes even more dangerous.
     
  20. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    You are correct , Terry. I mentioned the use of them on take off in my previous post. We could see them at night. They gave the B-17 a max altitude capability of 40,000 feet if remember correctly. At combat load the B-24 struggled at 26,000 ft.
     
  21. ralphedel

    ralphedel Rookie

    Feb 15, 2009
    37
    My two sons gave me a ride on this plane for my birthday about 8 years ago when it was at Mercer County airport in Trenton, NJ. It was a great experience but before boarding the 10 of us in my group did not get any safety instructions about what to do in case of an emergency that I recall as was claimed on one news program I saw yesterday, Oct 3, 2019. The issue of safety never crossed my mind.
    I also heard that the plane had initially "touched down" on runway 6 and then suddenly veered off the runway to the right and into a building. I looked up the airport on Google Earth and thought that description of what happened seemed unlikely. A few hours ago I heard that the plane had initially touched down about 1000 feet short of the end of the runway and hit some landing lights. That seems more plausible. It should have been able to make a safe return and landing on three engines but who knows what other problems they were having. It was a tragedy for everyone involved. RIP
     
    Nurburgringer likes this.
  22. Ferrari27

    Ferrari27 Formula Junior

    Jul 5, 2010
    866
    This NTSB video of the investigation seems to confirm that the aircraft did touch down short of the runway:
     
  23. jcurry

    jcurry Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    21,369
    In the past
    Full Name:
    Jim
    Same recollection of my ride 25yrs ago.

    Ditto. Although the plane did have a partial hydraulic failure during landing rollout and we lost brakes on one side and ended up in the grass on the side of the runway. Sat for a couple minutes, they reset some breakers, and we taxied back to the ramp. Non-event and never felt apprehensive at any time. Of course I was too overwhelmed with riding in a B-17 with four big radial engines and getting 20 minutes of left seat time to think anything but positive thoughts.

    Rip to crew and passengers.
     
    Nurburgringer likes this.
  24. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    The NTSB news conference indicated that there were 16 B-17G's on the U.S. register, which presumably excludes any earlier variants registered. (I think there may be one or two F-models.) If they are registered, that implies that they are flyable or on their way to being flyable. Can anyone confirm that number?
     
  25. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    The only ex-military aircraft that I've ever flown in was a UH-1H Huey. I don't recall any particular safety instructions, but I was sitting sideways with an open door in front of me, so the escape route was obvious. The crew made sure I was strapped in tight, and I guess not messing with the harness was understood!
     

Share This Page