If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
"atis118" wrote in message
After about 10 minutes I was cleared to land on the the other runway and rolled past the B-17. I hope they can fix her up, she is even more beautiful in person then on video. A B-17 itself going to be taken out by something as simple as a gear-up landing; the issue will probably be whether they can afford to do so, and whether they can insure it afterward. Sad. Hell of a ride for the passengers. I was in the tail of the Evergreen B-17 a few years ago when Portland tower cleared a commuter jet to land at the perpendicular runway (28L). We came in over the river and the pilot tried to throttle up and go around, but the ol' bird wasn't going to do it. We cleared the intersection and then he locked the brakes. The left main seized up and the airplane careened nearly off the side of the runway, the tail feeling as if was going to come around, as the back filled with smoke from the rear tire. I was raised by a B-17 vet, which made it strange. The pilot--a 747 captain--wrestled the old hoss back onto the centerline and brought it in none worse for the wear. Got the whole thing on video from the tail gunner's position somewhere. -c |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
"William W. Plummer" wrote in message Are there not "squat" switches that prevent the gear from being raised if the plan is on the ground? Not on a B-17. -c |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
"Dale" wrote in message news:me- Again, no "over center" lock. Yes, you can retract the gear on the ground. On the B-17 I flew there was a "weight on wheels" switch to prevent this but this was an add-on and might not be on all B-17s flying today. The B-17 I was most recently involved with didn't have such a switch and the engineer gave us specific warning not to bump the landing gear switch, ever. (The master had to be on, but for safety we always assumed it was.) -c |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Rick Durden wrote: CAF is already saying the copilot pulled the gear up when he went for the flaps, despite being told to keep his hands off the flap switch until off the runway. As of today, EAA still denies this. They state that videos indicate that the gear was not completely down when the plane landed. George Patterson I childproofed my house, but they *still* get in. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"G.R. Patterson III" wrote: As of today, EAA still denies this. They state that videos indicate that the gear was not completely down when the plane landed. I guess that's possible. Would have to be a real good quality video since you'd have to be able to see if the scissor is overcenter. And, if they weren't down and locked the crew either wasn't doing their job or their procedures were bad. You can look at the gear from the cockpit and tell if it is locked down. That was our procedure on gear extension...a visual check that the gear was down and locked. And again, might odd that both gear suffered the same failure at the same time since they are separate systems....only common thing being the switch in the cockpit. And just because one gear fails there is no reason for the "good" gear to collapse....lots of cases of B-17s landing with only one gear down. -- Dale L. Falk There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing around with airplanes. http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Dale wrote: And again, might odd that both gear suffered the same failure at the same time since they are separate systems....only common thing being the switch in the cockpit. Only thing I can think of is that both motors quit prematurely. George Patterson I childproofed my house, but they *still* get in. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message . Only thing I can think of is that both motors quit prematurely. Noticed that it looks like the ball turret remained intact. That's very interesting. My father's crew had a close call coming back from Gdynia, Poland in 1943 straight out of every B-17 movie made afterward; mains blown out by flak, ball turret jammed, plane coming home low on fuel and they had crossed the Wash before they managed to get the guy out; as soon as they landed, wheels up, the PAO had them formed up in front of an undamaged airplane for a photo. Interesting to know that Fred Holt might have survived anyway. -c |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
gatt wrote: Interesting to know that Fred Holt might have survived anyway. Key word is "might". With "Aluminum Overcast", the gear collapse happened when the plane was traveling at most 30 mph. I'd say there would probably be a big difference if that turret hits the runway at about 90. George Patterson I childproofed my house, but they *still* get in. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
EAA's B-17 "Aluminum Overcast" Gear collapse at Van Nuys airport | BlakeleyTB | Home Built | 4 | May 8th 04 06:15 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 1 | November 24th 03 02:46 PM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 2 | November 24th 03 05:23 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 24th 03 03:52 AM |
Aluminum vs Fiberglass landing gear - Pro's and cons. | Bart D. Hull | Home Built | 0 | November 22nd 03 06:24 AM |