Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
B17 crashed
Page <prev 2 of 2
Oct 4, 2019 14:45:58   #
charles tabb Loc: Richmond VA.
 
WF2B wrote:
Just saw that the Collings B17 crashed at Bradley Field in Hartford CT. Check your local news media for details. It is a sad day for the families of the victims and also for those of us who love the WW II planes.
Bud


Can someone set me straight?
My brother flew tail gunner in a B-17, so I was told.
His pictures of the plane were of a two engine bomber, that did have a tail gunner.
It was obvious to me that it didn't have 4 engines.

What was it?

Reply
Oct 4, 2019 15:24:13   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
charles tabb wrote:
Can someone set me straight?
My brother flew tail gunner in a B-17, so I was told.
His pictures of the plane were of a two engine bomber, that did have a tail gunner.
It was obvious to me that it didn't have 4 engines.

What was it?


B17 is a 4 engine bomber.
B25 is a twin engine with a tail gunner so this is the possible type.

B17
B17...
(Download)

B25
B25...

Reply
Oct 4, 2019 22:29:34   #
Swede Loc: Trail, BC Canada
 
WF2B wrote:
Just saw that the Collings B17 crashed at Bradley Field in Hartford CT. Check your local news media for details. It is a sad day for the families of the victims and also for those of us who love the WW II planes.
Bud


Which was more important.

Google search:

https://www.google.com/search?q=b17+losses+ww2&rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA850CA850&oq=b17+loses&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l5.15979j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8


"In the air force over a half of losses were non-combat losses." United States: Total losses were nearly 95,000, including 52,951 operational losses (38,418 in Europe and 14,533 in the Pacific)."

If these #"s are correct? Maybe the plane wasn't that good- Just the US had the capability to make lots of them, and a crew of 10, well lots of them also.

Guaranteed this was a tragedy for the families of those you died, but it is minuscule to the 195,000 other families who had no choice.

Was this really a good plane- or was there just lots of them.

One more thing, the younger generations don't care! Sad but true

This crew died doing what they loved!

Not what was asked of them.

Very big difference in my book,

Swede

Reply
 
 
Oct 5, 2019 05:20:52   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
Swede wrote:
Which was more important.

Google search:

https://www.google.com/search?q=b17+losses+ww2&rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA850CA850&oq=b17+loses&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l5.15979j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8


"In the air force over a half of losses were non-combat losses." United States: Total losses were nearly 95,000, including 52,951 operational losses (38,418 in Europe and 14,533 in the Pacific)."

If these #"s are correct? Maybe the plane wasn't that good- Just the US had the capability to make lots of them, and a crew of 10, well lots of them also.

Guaranteed this was a tragedy for the families of those you died, but it is minuscule to the 195,000 other families who had no choice.

Was this really a good plane- or was there just lots of them.

One more thing, the younger generations don't care! Sad but true

This crew died doing what they loved!

Not what was asked of them.

Very big difference in my book,

Swede
Which was more important. br br Google search: b... (show quote)


The plane was excellent. Most pilots were 19-21 years old and by the end of their tour had only 250 hours in type. When you consider trying to take off with a fully loaded plane in poor conditions frequently and 5 hours time I am surprised that there were not more accidents.

Reply
Oct 6, 2019 07:28:46   #
Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
This was an excellent flying machine. A true testament of our country's overall ability to protect and defend itself in times of war. Those who were flight crews (air and ground) were chosen to be in that effort. The aircrafts that have been written about (B17 & B25) were of a study construction. These planes were designed to have different capabilities in air supremacy. They are not just planes. We need to thank our servicemen and servicewomen who protect us each day even if they don't know us and we don't know them. As a person learning to be a pilot, I would like to suggest to all, learn how to sit at the flight deck and pilot a plane. It is a sobering experience and a true testament of your character. By the way, it is easier to pilot a plane than to drive a car. If you don't believe me, look up flight schools in your area. (I think the most dangerous part of flying is getting to the airport.)
As for the loss of life, this is sad and we must give umbrage to these gems of humanity and the machines that were built. You can read more about planes from Jane's Encyclopedia of Aviation. If you are in New York City, visit the USS Intrepid. This is a wonderful place to "feel" the magic of flight. Also don't forget that in Washington DC, is the Sea and Space Museum. Head down to Cape Canaveral and see the marvels of our attempts to go beyond our atmosphere onto new worlds. All of which, is our future to be amazed at or to be "poo-poo-ed" about.
Now, that I have typed a piece of my mind, let's stop being so critical of each other. Let's get back to what we do best. Let's be photographers.

Happy Shooting!

Reply
Oct 6, 2019 07:31:46   #
Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
My typo and I despise auto correct. In Washington DC it is the "Air and Space Museum." That too is a part of the Smithsonian Institution.

Reply
Oct 6, 2019 07:33:47   #
Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
Architect1776 wrote:
The plane was excellent. Most pilots were 19-21 years old and by the end of their tour had only 250 hours in type. When you consider trying to take off with a fully loaded plane in poor conditions frequently and 5 hours time I am surprised that there were not more accidents.


Sir, I wish to thank you for your service!

Reply
 
 
Oct 6, 2019 07:35:49   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
Scruples wrote:
This was an excellent flying machine. A true testament of our country's overall ability to protect and defend itself in times of war. Those who were flight crews (air and ground) were chosen to be in that effort. The aircrafts that have been written about (B17 & B25) were of a study construction. These planes were designed to have different capabilities in air supremacy. They are not just planes. We need to thank our servicemen and servicewomen who protect us each day even if they don't know us and we don't know them. As a person learning to be a pilot, I would like to suggest to all, learn how to sit at the flight deck and pilot a plane. It is a sobering experience and a true testament of your character. By the way, it is easier to pilot a plane than to drive a car. If you don't believe me, look up flight schools in your area. (I think the most dangerous part of flying is getting to the airport.)
As for the loss of life, this is sad and we must give umbrage to these gems of humanity and the machines that were built. You can read more about planes from Jane's Encyclopedia of Aviation. If you are in New York City, visit the USS Intrepid. This is a wonderful place to "feel" the magic of flight. Also don't forget that in Washington DC, is the Sea and Space Museum. Head down to Cape Canaveral and see the marvels of our attempts to go beyond our atmosphere onto new worlds. All of which, is our future to be amazed at or to be "poo-poo-ed" about.
Now, that I have typed a piece of my mind, let's stop being so critical of each other. Let's get back to what we do best. Let's be photographers.

Happy Shooting!
This was an excellent flying machine. A true test... (show quote)


Agree with the valor for what was done.
PS I do believe hitting the runway at 85-90 mph in a cross wind is a bit more difficult than driving. Definitely a bit more at risk.

Reply
Oct 6, 2019 07:36:21   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
Scruples wrote:
Sir, I wish to thank you for your service!


Thank you.

Reply
Oct 6, 2019 08:22:20   #
Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
Architect1776 wrote:
Agree with the valor for what was done.
PS I do believe hitting the runway at 85-90 mph in a cross wind is a bit more difficult than driving. Definitely a bit more at risk.


Well on my first attempt in a Piper Cherokee I landed it on a pencil line stick and rudder with one hit on the Tarmac. Definitely a huge rush!

Reply
Oct 6, 2019 08:38:16   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
Scruples wrote:
Well on my first attempt in a Piper Cherokee I landed it on a pencil line stick and rudder with one hit on the Tarmac. Definitely a huge rush!


My test ride the FAA tester wanted a soft field landing, there was a strong cross wind. I lined up and could not hold it and called and did a go around. I passed and the FAA tester said he would have failed me if I had continued to try this type of landing in such unsafe conditions.
My first solo was like yours perfect. Also a Cherokee.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.