I noticed that the prop on the engine that the NTSB was examining appeared to be feathered. So, there was a problem early enough to take some remedial action.
There isn't much of a hydraulic system on the B-17. From what I remember, just the brakes. The rest is electrical.
The list I saw (after this accident). 46 survivors 1 D model 4 E models 3 F models 38 G models 9 are presently airworthy - all G models 4 others are being restored to airworthiness Others are display or storage presently They are in 4 countries (US, England, France Brazil) One of the E models is a cargo version.
The E model cargo is being restored to airworthiness Another E model was sold new to an airline and used as such.
This website has a list as well, and apparently it was updated recently because 44-83575 isn't included (i.e. no longer surviving). https://www.airplanesofthepast.com/b17-flying-fortress-surviving-aircraft.htm
The PIC on this flight had over 4,000 hours in B-17s (mostly this one) including several engine failures in the past. And the airplane was very well maintained. So it will be interesting to see what the cause was, but sometimes it's just not your day.
It shows that the Collings Foundation has another B-17G, 44-83785, that is "under restoration to airworthiness", so hopefully they won't be out of the B-17 business for too long.
I got to thinking about the availability of R1820 parts and good mechanics to keep them in shape. During the war, they never tried to keep a troublesome or high time engine on the airplane. There were plenty of them to cycle through the repair depots and a lot of guys that knew how to work on them. They were a good engine then, too. Then came the R3350.
I'm still waiting my chance to ride. B-17 flight I can afford, restored Concorde I cannot (if it ever happens - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34301689).
Somehow, there seem to be enough parts to service all the primary WW2 engines. There are enough aircraft flying each type to apparently make them worthwhile. R-1820s are flying on FM-2s, HU-16s, T-28s and probably even some DC-3s. I suspect some parts are being made new.
Again, I incorrectly described the turbocharger location. All of the B-17 turbos were underneath the nacelles but the exhaust pipe on number two and three were on the SIDES of the nacelle. We could see the exhaust pipes on 1 and 4 but not usually on 2 or 3 if the airplane was right above. I apologize for being so confusing at times. What I see isn't always translated properly. The visions and sounds are still clear to me, however. I can't believe what Langley Field looks like now compared to what it was when I was there. It's nothing but a huge bare patch of concrete with no airplanes on it. When I was there it was a sea of aluminum and people.
Bob, I think that's a consequence of fewer manufacturers building fewer aircraft types that stay in service much longer, so less testing is needed. In the WW2 era, an aircraft took less than 5 years to go from state-of-the-art to obsolete. Today the aircraft are being designed and built to stay in front-line service for 25 years or longer. (Consider the B-52: still a front-line bomber, 57 years after the last one left the production line!)
Worth reading. https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-how-people-are-talking-about-the-b-17-crash-at-bradley-airport/?fbclid=IwAR0WY3SGmY5WNx64QIhQSOc-5HIsrIPoKbYwUzqhDmeGIvX0LY8y7XSJm3M#.XZeVriVMGaM
That is a nice article, and totally in keeping with what I've heard about Mac from people who flew with him. Nothing but great things. I did't realize he was probably the highest time B-17 pilot ever, though. Remarkable.
In the NTSB press conference video (Post # 39 @ 16.00 minutes) Jennifer Homendy said the pilot had over 7300 hours in the B-17. Wow, such a loss. RIP to all, including this B-17. I know it's weird, but I always felt that an aircraft has an entity of its own (not to the level of a "being" of course). Especially historic aircraft and those that I've had personal contact with.
This last June I tried like hell to get my wife to ride in the B17 Yankee Lady at the Reading Air Show because her dad was a B17 pilot and near the end of the day she was wavering ... Don't think so now
The news media is homing in on the age of the airplane as being a problem. The age of the airplane isn't the problem. It is the age of the last maintenance on the airframe and engines.
Anyone know what the recommended Time Between Overhauls is for the Wright 1820 Cyclone engine? They said number 4 had gone 870 hours since the last OH.