B-17D

[aerovin2]

Shooting from the hip here, but for most work the creation of ribs, bulkheads, fittings, etc. must match the original parts exactly, usually done from drawings or other specs. They also have to have a paper trail associated with them. I know heat treating the fittings and extrusions used on the B-17E have caused numerous problems. There may be some leeway in this for an airplane to be operated on an experimental certificate. If a restoration effort is hand making bulkheads and other structure there are certain engineering standards that have to be documented and met.

I'm aware of several restorations that did not have properly engineered and/or documented construction done that had to have all the work torn out and redone to an certified airworthy standard. I know some folks, some who might take a few shortcuts here and there, get really pissed off at the FAA for requiring a minimum standard of work and process.

[Tom Crawford]

Hi Folks,
As a note concerning the B-17C/D project, I made an inquiry to Cleveland Model Company to see if perchance they had a set of scale
model plans for a C or D and the response was no, only the G.
Several years ago I was going to scatch build a balsa display model of a P-51D. When I recieved the plans from Cleveland they were of a P-51C with supplemental intruction as to how to modify them for a "D" model.
So maybe if you order the B-17G you might really get a C/D. Who knows.
Tom C.

[DIK SHEPHERD]

It's interesting that some folks think we're talking about models.

Then again, some people just don't think.

Something else to remember - FW 190s, Me 262s, Ki-43 "Oscars", A6M5 "ZEROs" and Boeing P-26s are currently being built from scratch by people with imaginations and the desire to do it.

If you feel the need to make snide remarks, write them on a sheet of paper and then use them the next time your in the bathroom.

[Tom Crawford]

Hey Dik
It wasn't meant as a snide remark. I was serious. I know no one is building a model but in your discussion you were looking for possible sources for accurate specification references with some question as to what you could still get from Boeing. It was just thought, don't discount these old model companies. They were previlaged to a lot of information a long time ago. I wasn't awhere that you had to walk on egg shells on this forum. You can take your idea to the can.....Tom

[DryMartini]

Tom,

You can get all the part drawings on microfilm from the
Smithsonian. They are $25 per roll. Only 37 rolls to buy!
I am actually suprised at the information that they archived
for wartime use. They (sometimes) include Tech Orders,
manuals, and even Boeing specs. Wonderful stuff for the
aviation archologist. I was told that sets of film were sent
overseas to repair depots. Don't know if that is true, but
it certainly does sound likely.

[aerovin2]

Dik,

I would like to be involved in a B-17D project but it does take deep pockets. Look at how long those new construction airplanes are taking and how much money is involved. For me, it seems the non-profit group would be the best way to finance it, but in these days of tight fists it would be a challenge to find an adequate funding stream. Other than someone like Kermit, or maybe Don Brooks, bankrolling the project, how else could you do it? If Kermit or Don aren't interested in putting their money into a B-17D project I don't imagine they would do it.

It would take people with excellent promotional, organizational, and fundraising skills on the front end to make a non-profit happen.

[DIK SHEPHERD]

As I see it, the only way something like this could happen is with someone who already had a big piece of airframe to start with, i.e. the Dyers Lake bird.

And, just because Mr. Brooks "Doesn't like the looks of the shark tailed B-17s" the whole warbird community will be deprived of being able to see a historic aircraft in the air.

Also, the remark attributed to Kermit Weeks about the public not knowing the difference between a B-17D and a C-54, if true, just goes to show you how some of these people look upon those of us that don't have the MONEY that they have.

Just like the old movie studios that used to throw anything out there when they did a war movie, as far as they're concerned we're all stupid hicks that don't know 'nutin. They, on the other hand, are the elite, and it only matters what they say or do that counts.

I met Kermit Weeks once, and was dully unimpressed.

[DryMartini]

Having a flying 'D' model would be cool. Personally, I want a 'C'. But I
don't see how the warbird community is being "deprived". There is one 'D'
model left in the world. Converting a 'G' nose and making a replica of
a 'D' tail does not exactly make it a real 'D' in my eyes. How much of the
Tell's Peak B-17 would actually find its way into a flying plane is up to
debate, but at least SOME parts from a 'C' would be flying again.

I've not met Don Brooks personally, but some other guys working on the
"Rat" have. Per conversations we've had, it is clear he is a down-to-earth
guy, who loves the B-17. He has reason to, as his father flew combat
in one. He has invested a lot of money into his restorations. At least
his planes fly. Having someone being belligerent about what he should
be doing with his money after what he has done "for the warbird
community"* is out of line, IMO.

* finance the first few expeditions to Greenland to find B-17E "Big Stoop", which eventually lead to the recovery of a P-38E
* Flys a C-47 with actual combat history
* Has a flying B-17G model, brought back from the brink.
* Broke through a Canadian law barrier, and recovered another partial B-17

[DIK SHEPHERD]

Let me tell you something about all this money everybody keeps talking about.

People like Weeks, Brooks, Tallichet and a dozen others wouldn't spend a dime on these old aircraft if it wasn't for the fact that they can get a big tax write-off.

They do it by creating a non-profit organization, that they're in charge of, and dumping money into it from their business operations, seldom their personal accounts, and then writing off large donations from their business taxes.

Next thing you know, other people are going around shouting their praises for these guys. I know of only one person that really deserves all the praise given to him for his efforts with these old warbirds, and that's ED MALONEY.

[Tom Crawford]

Whatever their motivation I'm just glad they motivated and in the Warbird direction. If it weren't for these people none of these 50/60 year old planes would be flying today. I'm afraid that next 10 to 15 years is going to see the end to a lot of the flying museums that we all enjoy today. The museum owners are getting older, as we all are, and regretfully the parent's of this younger generation seem to have other interests. So I, for one, am thankful that these "Money People" like Warbirds.

[DIK SHEPHERD]

Well, unless anybody has something else to talk about, I guess this conversation is over.

Good going guys.

[DIK SHEPHERD]

Ya know:

If anyone has anything additional to say about this topic, feel free to do so.

Don't just read and run.

State an opinion, make suggestions, that's what this forum is for.

And that goes for all of the topics.

[DryMartini]

Anyone have $50,000 to start the recreation of a B-17C/D model?

[DIK SHEPHERD]

$50,000.00 is nothing, but it would probably be enough to get some jigs built.

[DryMartini]

$50K can do a lot.
Material costs are proportionally low.
(4x12 sheet of .050 2024 T3 Alclad is only ~$230)
It is the labor which kills ya.