"Aluminum Overcast" damaged by gear collapse

The B-17 bomber owned by the Experimental Aircraft Assn. was damaged
yesterday at Van Nuys airport when its main gear collaped.

From the videos on TV, you could see its tail wheel firmly on the
ground, when the main gear retracted, and the aircraft dropped onto the
runway. The crew must had had that sinking feeling about then. It slid
perhaps 50 feet or so on its belly.

The media seems to like to say it made a belly landing, or a rough
landing, but it was apparent that it had already landed, and was simply
completing the rollout, and was preparing to turn off when it happened.

Anyway, here's a link to their web site, where they have a short
description of the incident:

http://www.b17.org/

And a typical media story:

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1...129868,00.html

I couldn't find the video clip, but I assume it will appear online
sometime today.

I hope they can get it flying again soon.

James Robinson wrote:

The B-17 bomber owned by the Experimental Aircraft Assn. was damaged
yesterday at Van Nuys airport when its main gear collaped.

From the videos on TV, you could see its tail wheel firmly on the
ground, when the main gear retracted, and the aircraft dropped onto the
runway. The crew must had had that sinking feeling about then. It slid
perhaps 50 feet or so on its belly.

The media seems to like to say it made a belly landing, or a rough
landing, but it was apparent that it had already landed, and was simply
completing the rollout, and was preparing to turn off when it happened.

Sad to hear. I hope they get it flying again soon - but most of all I
hope the do plan to keep it flying (as opposed to removing it from flying
status, as happened to a notable B-17 around here). Yes, these planes are
valuable treasures, but some of them need to keep flying.

David Herman
Boeing Field (BFI), Seattle, WA
N6170T 1965 Cessna 150E
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Visit the Pacific Northwest Flying forum:
http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/pnwflying

On Thu, 06 May 2004 13:42:11 -0700, David H wrote:

Sad to hear. I hope they get it flying again soon - but most of all I
hope the do plan to keep it flying (as opposed to removing it from flying
status, as happened to a notable B-17 around here). Yes, these planes are
valuable treasures, but some of them need to keep flying.

David Herman
Boeing Field (BFI), Seattle, WA
N6170T 1965 Cessna 150E
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Visit the Pacific Northwest Flying forum:
http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/pnwflying

I know that the airplane's name "Aluminum Overcast" is meant to imply
a large airplane, but during WWII, it meant something entirely
different. The fighter pilots had be carefull about flying underneath
the bomber formations because there was considerable danger from being
hit by falling parts from all the bombers being blown apart. They
called it the "aluminum overcast."

Corky Scott

I know that the airplane's name "Aluminum Overcast" is meant to imply
a large airplane, but during WWII, it meant something entirely
different. The fighter pilots had be carefull about flying underneath
the bomber formations because there was considerable danger from being
hit by falling parts from all the bombers being blown apart. They
called it the "aluminum overcast."

Corky Scott









The first time I saw a B-24 in the air, I got 'target' fixation. The big
silvery beast was so awesome in appearance, I forgot about the closure rate
(albeit slow) when joining up on the wing. I had to shove my nose down to
avoid co-mingling aluminum parts. I just kept thinking "Wow, all that aluminum
would make a lot of pots and pans".
VL

This is THE Aluminum Overcast:
http://www.fairwings.net/modules.php...p=getit&lid=87

HECTOP
PP-ASEL-IA
http://www.maxho.com
maxho_at_maxho.com



"James Robinson" wrote in message
...
The B-17 bomber owned by the Experimental Aircraft Assn. was damaged
yesterday at Van Nuys airport when its main gear collaped.

From the videos on TV, you could see its tail wheel firmly on the
ground, when the main gear retracted, and the aircraft dropped onto the
runway. The crew must had had that sinking feeling about then. It slid
perhaps 50 feet or so on its belly.

The media seems to like to say it made a belly landing, or a rough
landing, but it was apparent that it had already landed, and was simply
completing the rollout, and was preparing to turn off when it happened.

Anyway, here's a link to their web site, where they have a short
description of the incident:

http://www.b17.org/

And a typical media story:

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1...129868,00.html

I couldn't find the video clip, but I assume it will appear online
sometime today.

I hope they can get it flying again soon.

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...
The B-17 bomber owned by the Experimental Aircraft Assn. was damaged
yesterday at Van Nuys airport when its main gear collaped.

Didn't Nine-O-Nine have a landing gear collapse at Van Nuys a few years ago?

I remember getting their newsletter about it but a websearch brings up
mainly the original WWII plane.

-c

Didn't Nine-O-Nine have a landing gear collapse at Van Nuys a few years ago?


9-0-9 had a long landing incident in PA where it went off the end of the
runway. Its repairs took more than a year.
VL

James Robinson wrote in message ...
The B-17 bomber owned by the Experimental Aircraft Assn. was damaged
yesterday at Van Nuys airport when its main gear collaped.







Am I the only one who finds it a bit "suspicious" that both main gear
collapsed on this bird? If I recall correctly, they are two
independant systems. The common link would be in the cockpit... right
next to the flaps switch. Anyone else think that perhaps the gear
were inadvertantly retracted (pilot attempting to retract flaps)
rather than a mechanical failure...???

-Pat

Pat ) wrote:

Anyone else think that perhaps the gear
were inadvertantly retracted (pilot attempting to retract flaps)
rather than a mechanical failure...???

As someone who has just started flying a retractable gear aircraft, I admit
that I thought that, too, since grabbing the correct handle is always on my
mind. But, since my speculation tends to be incorrect, I quickly thought
of something else.

--
Peter

"Peter R." wrote in message

As someone who has just started flying a retractable gear aircraft, I
admit
that I thought that, too, since grabbing the correct handle is always on
my
mind. But, since my speculation tends to be incorrect, I quickly thought
of something else.

I strongly doubt that's what happened, but the LG switch on a B-17 leaves
room for that possibility. Used to volunteer with the bird that's at
Evergreen in McMinnville now and out at the hangar we'd turn on the master
switch to open the bomb bay when veterans were coming through, and the chief
mechanic warned us repeatedly not to hit the landing gear switch because it
was live.

-c