Collings Foundation B-17 down in Connecticut

[Pags]

When these sort of rare high value warbirds are flown as part of an appearance schedule around the country or for living history flights generating revenue, you end up with the same pressures you have in any flying ENTERPRISE ( as opposed to private collections or occasional demo flights at home base by museums ). Meeting schedule, mission completion, satisfied customers, $$$, all put pressure on MX, OPS and crews. The Living History Flight exemptions are great. Thank you FAA. Being able to generate any money that helps offset the cost of these aircraft is beneficial to historical preservation. But just like at an airline or a squadron, leadership must be sure to insulate maintainers and crews from the pressure to save money, or make a mission, whether a loop around the city with pax or a multicity tour. Airbase AZ lost a one of a kind Spanish built He111 back in 2003 while departing Cheyenne WY on the way to it's next appearance in Montana.

@nittany03 : wink hit it. There are still pressures in any flying organization. Plus, it's not like there's an IETMS or a stock of spares around for a B-17. I imagine a good deal of the maintenance is artisan type maintenance and that they don't have the same type of reach back to the OEMs and their engineering staff that any modern aircraft. Essentially, they're making it up as they go along and hoping it works out. I also assume a lot of the flight procedures are more word of mouth than the rigor that goes into a NATOPS.

 

[Jim123]

It's more than just a punchline, it's a universal truth that money is what makes airplanes fly.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any warbirds that are rare besides rare to be flying, like A6Ms and FW-190s. Rare aircraft are in museums.

Not sure how accurate Wikipedia is in this case but I saw two P-39’s flying formation in Addison, and supposedly there are four in flying condition and about 20 total.

 

[jmcquate]

Not sure how accurate Wikipedia is in this case but I saw two P-39’s flying formation in Addison, and supposedly there are four in flying condition and about 20 total.

39s or 63s? I would consider 20 a pretty good number and there's probably a few more stashed away somewhere in Russia, but I get your point.

 

[nittany03]

@nittany03 : wink hit it. There are still pressures in any flying organization. Plus, it's not like there's an IETMS or a stock of spares around for a B-17. I imagine a good deal of the maintenance is artisan type maintenance and that they don't have the same type of reach back to the OEMs and their engineering staff that any modern aircraft. Essentially, they're making it up as they go along and hoping it works out. I also assume a lot of the flight procedures are more word of mouth than the rigor that goes into a NATOPS.

I understand that, but deliberately dicking with the mags isn't artisan maintenance; it's maintenance malpractice. My only point is that there's pressure to let the public see the Mona Lisa, too, and it needs funds for its upkeep. But it's done with the understanding of its rarity and that its loss would be incalculable. I think the Collings Foundation lost the bubble on that, and it's a shame.

 

[wink]

@nittany03 : wink hit it. There are still pressures in any flying organization. Plus, it's not like there's an IETMS or a stock of spares around for a B-17. I imagine a good deal of the maintenance is artisan type maintenance and that they don't have the same type of reach back to the OEMs and their engineering staff that any modern aircraft. Essentially, they're making it up as they go along and hoping it works out. I also assume a lot of the flight procedures are more word of mouth than the rigor that goes into a NATOPS.

There is truth in this. The US Army 1960's vintage helicopters my AAHF Chapter restores and operates is done precisely by Army instruction and procedure. We have all the manuals. Every task is printed out from the computer and handed to the team lead. Flight training is the same. You just don't have that kind of detailed reference for most WW II aircraft. And it isn't because the manuals aren't there. Have you seen an aircraft operating manual from 1942? Today's Cessna 182 manual is much larger and more detailed than a single engine fighter of WW II. That was just the state of aviation at the time. Now, with all that said, for a flying Experiment/Exhibition aircraft, which most these aircraft are, or in the Living History Flight program, you must submit an operating manual, maintenance manual and maintenance schedule to the FAA. So, there ARE formal procedures, though they may be a mix of contemporary, original military or manufacturer, witchcraft and magic. If done right, these procedures and techniques can be the culmination of 60-75 years of experience by hundreds of professionals. Deviate from them at great risk.

 

[VMO4]

Artisan maintenance is one thing, but the recent factual report shows 909 took off with the timing on both mags on #3 so far advanced the detonation was robbing the engine of most of its power, and #4 had one completely dead mag, and another that was barely sending sufficient spark to the plugs, either due to an improper p lead connection, and/or improper gap in the points. Its one thing to fly your own airplane that way, it is borderline criminal to charge passengers and then fly the airplane that way.