B17 crashed

[Bryan21cag]

All these years later and she still brought her crew down in one piece before she gave up the ghost. RIP Belle.

[Skoshi Tiger]

What a sad loss. All praise to the command crew who brought her down.

I think it is a bit premature to be allocating blame at this stage. There will be a full FAA investigation which will have all the facts.

A shatter fuel line could stem from a speck of carbon trapped in the material 70 years go when it was manufactured. Who Knows? Best ones to find out are the official investigators.

Cheers!

[swiss]

Probably was the auxiliary PSU....

didn't know B-17s came with a Power Steering Unit ;0)

joking aside, what makes you think so?

[swiss]

Kee Bird rings a bell?

Originally Posted by swiss

Kee Bird rings a bell?

Mmmh it's a gross comparison. First of all that was a B-29, which was tentatively salvaged in a borderline criminal way (and a man died for the appalling salvaging conditions); second thing, the fire spread in the tail section from a leaking fuel tank of an improvised APU installed by the team in an improbable place, nothing to do with the plane itself.

Again in this case my wild guess again is that something outside the reach of the CO2 extinguisher in the engine bay 2 failed: electric pump, supercharger or some other ancillary.

Bear in mind that the fire was apparently only spotted by a P-40 pilot flying formation with the B-17, so they had no sign on board, and it wasn't an explosive fire, so I would rule out the vapour build up in the wing box due to a leaking fuel line (another problem with B-17s).

I'm sure they'll come out with a report at some point, the FAA is always quite zealous when it comes to warbirds and safety.

[swiss]

it was just a sarcastic joke, bro.

Originally Posted by swiss

it was just a sarcastic joke, bro.

sorry bro, sometimes sarcasm gets lost in forums

[kimosabi]

I think V-tech kicked in on that engine first. Never mess with V-tech yo.

[Trumper]

Originally Posted by Viking

US Liberty Bell crashed and burned! Sounds as something from the economy pages today.

But seriusly if we continue to fly the relics they will all be gone in a few years as the are not up to standards and will fail in one way or other sooner or later.
Keep them on the ground.

How many people would,ve seen her if she had stayed in a building compared to how many saw her not only across the USA but also in Europe.I was lucky enough to see her fly at Duxford in England,thousands saw her over here in that short space of time.
In a museum she would have been collecting dust and meaning nothing to those who had never seen or heard one in flight.
She could still be rebuilt and put back into a museum so no loss there really.
If they hadn't rebuilt her to fly she may not have survived anyway.
In the UK we have Mary Alice B17 static at Duxford,that is now being stripped down to her bare bones for "conservation" ,she has been sitting in a museum gathering dust and slowly disintegrating for years.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-13471334
And they damaged her getting her out
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...ght=mary+alice
I think i would rather see them kept in flying condition and looked after.
Oh don't forget museums burn down,get flooded out and hit by tornados as well.