Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: B-17 Nine-O-Nine crashes in Connecticut

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Wannanup WA
    Posts
    1,477
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Jars View Post
    Yes, there are plenty of armchair experts over there. So many, that after almost 2 decades of membership I haven’t been over there for about 3 years. It’s really a waste of space.
    Hmm, they are not all "over there"!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Hills.
    Posts
    15,793
    Total Downloaded
    0
    ​JayTee

    Nullus Anxietus

    ​Getting involved in discussions is the best way to learn.

    2000 D2 TD5 Auto: Tins
    1994 D1 300TDi Manual: Dave
    1980 SIII Petrol Tray: Doris
    OKApotamus #74
    Nanocom, D2 TD5 only.

  3. #13
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is online now RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    28,805
    Total Downloaded
    0
    From this it seems that N04 was shut down and feathered, but for some non-obvious reason, the plane was not performing as well as it should have on three engines, resulting in undershooting the runway. Not suggested in this account, but I wonder if the propeller damage to No3 was the result of impact on the approach lighting.

    With only 1 and 2 providing thrust and trying to drag it onto the runway, a right swing is not surprising, but the question remains - why low and slow?
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Hills.
    Posts
    15,793
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    From this it seems that N04 was shut down and feathered, but for some non-obvious reason, the plane was not performing as well as it should have on three engines, resulting in undershooting the runway.

    "Not suggested in this account, but I wonder if the propeller damage to No3 was the result of impact on the approach lighting. "

    That was my take, based only on this report, which seems to say that the tip of No3 was found 700 metres back.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    With only 1 and 2 providing thrust and trying to drag it onto the runway, a right swing is not surprising, but the question remains - why low and slow?


    Low and slow, no flaps ( sure, I get the drag thing, but lift is important too ). Tipping we won't know for more than a year.
    ​JayTee

    Nullus Anxietus

    ​Getting involved in discussions is the best way to learn.

    2000 D2 TD5 Auto: Tins
    1994 D1 300TDi Manual: Dave
    1980 SIII Petrol Tray: Doris
    OKApotamus #74
    Nanocom, D2 TD5 only.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    507
    Total Downloaded
    0
    You have to think about the one or more engines inoperative performance certification for the type. Transport category aeroplanes MUST perform to a certain standard. In Australia, CAO 20.7.1B is the governing document. I don’t know what the equivalent FAR is.

    There’s a chance that the B17, being a military aircraft, was not (and didn’t need to be) certified to perform following an engine failure. I don’t know.

    Back in the 80’s a Super Kingair crashed into the sea wall at the end of RWY34 Sydney during an air-return on one engine. It was found that the company (Advance Airlines) was doing unauthorised and incorrectly executed reduced-power takeoffs. When conducted correctly, you will get the required climb performance should an engine fail at V1.

    This mob was using an unapproved technique, and when the engine quit, the aircraft failed to perform (not unexpected, in hindsight). The long-short of it is that maximum continuous power was not set on the good engine, the aircraft did not perform as required, and it hit the sea wall, killing all on board. The irony is that they crashed only a few feet below the top of the wall. Had the correct procedure been followed, over 10 people would be still around today.

    So what does this have to do with the B17, you ask? It didn’t seem to perform too well on 3 engines, and crashed short of the runway on return, just like the Kingair, so is there a parallel?

    The aircraft had 3 zero hour (rebuilt) engines. I have 3 questions:
    1. Was normal takeoff power used, or did the crew ‘baby’ the engines (less power) because they were freshly rebuilt?
    2. If the crew did use less than takeoff power, did they set max continuous power on the 3 new engines following the failure of #4?
    3. Were the 3 rebuilt engines defective in some way, and not capable of delivering the required power?

    Just a few factors that *might* have contributed to the prang...

  6. #16
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is online now RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    28,805
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Yes, that would be the sort of thing I would be thinking of.

    Worth noting though that the B17 is a 1930s design (1935 first flight), and I would be very surprised if engine out performance was even considered in its specifications. It had four of the most powerful available engines, simply to provide enough power to meet the speed, range and payload specified, although Boeing claimed it was the first combat aircraft that could continue its mission after one engine failed. This would have been a result of the total power needed to meet the specifications, rather than a design issue.

    Not really relevant, but the prototype was destroyed when it crashed on its second evaluation flight - taking off with control locks in place will do that!

    As more powerful engines became available, these were fitted - but MTOW went up along with the increased power, and also defensive armament and hence parasitic drag was also increased. By modern standards these are very 'dirty' aircraft.
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    brighton, brisbane
    Posts
    33,853
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Well this is a video of the aircraft a month before the crash. I sincerely none in the video were involved in the crash.


    YouTube
    I’m pretty sure the dinosaurs died out when they stopped gathering food and started having meetings to discuss gathering food

    A bookshop is one of the only pieces of evidence we have that people are still thinking

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!