Collings B-17 Crash: 909

[Dennis56]

This subject seems to have kind of dropped from the news. There are a few things I still find disturbing, and a few things I have kind of looked into myself. Most disturbing was some buffoon commenting somewhere that "the engine fire = pilot distraction = pilot error. What a D--------. I have to figure with all the hours logged, the pilot (I don't remember his name) was doing EVERYTHING possible to save lives and plane. I was alway taught no matter what happens...CONTINUE TO FLY THE PLANE.
The second disturbing thing was the mention about "twenty something bomber crashes causing twenty something fatalities since 1982", yet I have yet to see this list (I am very curious about this). This list would hopefully include fatal fire bomber crashes? Hopefully it would include the foolish and fatal crash of A Harpoon that claimed 7 lives in one crash. I'd really like to see that list.
Nowo my concern: From the little I have researched, The B-17 fuel shut off system is one solenoid per engine that, if it fails, fails in the open position. I understand the reasoning behind this, but given 2 losses now due to engine fires, maybe a secondary system could or should be fitted (I'm not trying to armchair quarterback, but food for thought)
The other thing seems to be that B-17s were / are fitted with engine fire suppression systems, but only for the engine (?????) My thoughts and questions. Dennis

[terveurn]

The second disturbing thing was the mention about "twenty something bomber crashes causing twenty something fatalities since 1982", yet I have yet to see this list (I am very curious about this). This list would hopefully include fatal fire bomber crashes? Hopefully it would include the foolish and fatal crash of A Harpoon that claimed 7 lives in one crash. I'd really like to see that list.

A lot of what was posted by the NTSB Gal is incorrect and she has a definite agenda to try and ground as many private aircraft as possible (such as Europe did with high gasoline prices, high insurance charges and closing airports for noise violations). Jennifer is a political appointee and her field of expertise is pipes and lubricants.

From the NTSB own web site:

15 reportable aviation accidents regarding B-17's

Last fatal accident was in 12 July 1973 (Air Tanker)

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.avia ... 79dee028b5

Dennis -- if you want to preuse the NTSB's own database, the link is here

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/Index.aspx

[Dennis56]

Jennifer is a political appointee and her field of expertise is pipes and lubricants.

Oops! My bad. And here I thought she was an experienced, professional crash investigator. Another puppet of the political system that wants to protect us from ourselves. Probably took offense to the (replica) machine guns. Dennis

[terveurn]

[/quote]
Oops! My bad. And here I thought she was an experienced, professional crash investigator. Another puppet of the political system that wants to protect us from ourselves. Probably took offense to the (replica) machine guns. Dennis
[/quote]

I have great respect for the NTSB field investigators, but like the rest of the federal government, you have political appointees that do not know what they are doing. Found it fascinating that almost the same time, you had the Connecticut Representative talking about grounding all the warbirds (almost scripted)

Were the machine guns on 909 replicas' ?? I know at bomber camp the .50's are live.

[Dennis56]

Had never heard of "Bomber camp" before. Did a search. Interesting, but way out of my budget range. Are they actual functional .50s or Propane conversions? Propane "simu-fire" is still pretty impressive. Live, full auto ?????? I can see the "peace children" getting pretty upset about something like that. I do remember something many years back about somebody with lots of $$$$$ wanting to rearm a flying P-51. I can only guess (and shudder) at the "Imperial entanglements" that would involve.
I do recall way back (late 90s?) that the left waist .50n on 909 was a replica. IIRC, I opened the top cover and it was solid underneath where the rounds would feed into the receiver. Dennis

[terveurn]

Dennis

P-51 restoration with Live .50's

https://youtu.be/niJ82YCiuYU

P-40 restoration - Live .50's

https://youtu.be/sTYGDVrZQPI

https://youtu.be/UVOfjU1A-mE

Bomber Camp - live .50's

https://youtu.be/Gcb5PETou9g

Bomber Camp - bomb (s) dropping

https://youtu.be/PGqB60wfGjk

https://youtu.be/nfWVa92Gstg

[Dennis56]

That was some interesting watching. I started with the P-40 (Mustangs really don't do much for me - except Allison Mustangs). I had forgotten about New Zealand and their gun wielding warbirds. The Mustang videos shows that the ME-109 would probably have been going home and the mustang going down. He missed by a country mile, but then the guns were probably not aimed correctly. Not far from me is what used to be Brooksville AAF. It's a civilian airport now, but off to one corner is where they used to aim and test fire the guns in their fighters.
The bomber cam video was very interesting. They were firing those .50s over a lot of open real estate. Is that a regular target range? Or do they have a way to clear a LOT of area? Dennis

[terveurn]

Still trying to find removal photos and current wreck photos.

While the accident photos are interesting, these really does not indicate what remains / condition.

While Liberty Belle burned, essentially her tail and wings were essentially rebuildable.

From the crash photos, for 909, left outboard and inboard seriously damaged but rebuildable ( ? ), tail (minus left stabilizer) rebuildable, right outboard - no photos, right inboard completely burned, but some ribs might be usable for patterns. Three of the engines visible in photos all ripped from their mounts and burned.

So, essentially much less then Liberty Belle, but I have seen much less used to build new structures. The big question is how much care was taken to preserve this wreckage when it was moved (I did not like seeing a dump truck & backhoe near the wreck)

[suzyQ194]

NTSB Preliminary Report:

https://fox61.com/2019/10/15/ntsb-relea ... -17-crash/

[terveurn]

Well it looks like they hauled the wreckage away in a dumpster

So much for that rebuild

https://fox61.com/2019/10/04/ntsb-begin ... -location/

[Dennis56]

Well, lets see. They noted that some propeller blades had separated from the propellers. No crap Sherlock, It crashed. What did you want them to do. Now a problem would be if they had separated BEFORE the crash, but that does not help the sensationalization . They mentioned that Propeller blades were feathered. Again, I saw that on the first batch of pictures. I said "bet that's #4" (although you might not always shut down and feather on an engine fire). They had mentioned that they had found the #4 engine.
As to hauling it off "to a secure location to continue the investigation"... Well wadding the parts up in a dumpster and then dumping them out on the floor really helps determine if a part was at fault or not doesn't it. "This could be the cause, I't bent" Actuality: They are protecting us from ourselves. Every part they destroy is one more part that CAN'T be used to put another "death trap" in the air.
Now compare this investigation to a recent excavation of a 70 year old Spitfire crash where the parts were painstakingly recovered and reassembled on an outline of a Spitfire, cleaned and CAREFULLY examined to see exactly what happened - SEVENTY YEARS AFTER it crashed. Oh, and this in 3 days by self funded archaeologists. Dennis

[terveurn]

Been in contact with several other B-17 historians and my opinion has not changed from day one:

As I initially thought when I first heard this accident, pretty sure it is going to find the primary cause was pilot error (with mechanical failure the secondary) - the emergency got away from the pilot and he got behind the curve and landed short.

The report in many respects, does not make sense (logically not mechanically) ....

Why did the pilot with 22,000 hrs land with no flaps ?

Why if #4 engine had failed (and feathered) due to mag failure was #3 engine in the process of being feathered.

Did they feather the wrong engine initially (ie #3 instead of 4) and finding the error, feather #4 and #3 was in the process of unfeathering when they crashed ?

* * *

Usually when there is an accident, the operator is involved in removing the wreckage (with oversight with FAA & NTSB as well as other agencies). Just wondering how much input the Collings Foundation had with moving this ship.

or the possibility is this truck is hauling away what's left of the deicing station -- unless they crushed-up the wing and tail.

[Dennis56]

Many questions remain. Possibility of pilot error is disappointing, although "wrong engine" thing is plausible. I certainly hope you are correct in your theory about the dumpster being full of other debris. I believe that even with the fire damage, the remains of the plane are still worth a lot of money towards the restoration of another B-17 and that if the "Bad guys" made a "power decision" resulting in further loss, that someone will go after them for it.
I hadn't seen or heard anything about # 3 being in a partial feather mode. Were there witness statements? Normally, cockpit controls might tell a lot about what was happening, but it appears the cockpit took a considerable impact, then the fire. Dennis

[terveurn]

909's engines and props

909 propeller blades.JPG

[05564]

First of all my thoughts and prayers go out to the families of all the victims and survivors. I did see one other report about the ages of the pilot and co-pilot,(75 an 71), being called to attention. This caught my attention also. Now along with the reports about the engines being as they were, it does appear pilot error could have had something to do with this terrible tragedy.