Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:33 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2020 5:48 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:43 pm
Posts: 1168
Location: Marietta, GA
A26 Special K wrote:
The question was asked about high density altitudes and the B-25. Any airplane is effected by DA. Some handle it better than others. The B-25 is in the better column. The B-25 engines are supercharged.


A few years ago, Tom Reilly told me he was working on a proposal to use a B-25 for some government project (maybe in the testing or equipment calibration arena) that required high altitude loiter capability of several hours. IIRC, the designated altitude was 30,000'+ (specifically, I remember 34K'). I mentioned my surprise that the -25 could handle that and he indicated it wasn't a major problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2020 10:14 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 3:45 pm
Posts: 2522
Kyleb wrote:
A26 Special K wrote:
The question was asked about high density altitudes and the B-25. Any airplane is effected by DA. Some handle it better than others. The B-25 is in the better column. The B-25 engines are supercharged.


A few years ago, Tom Reilly told me he was working on a proposal to use a B-25 for some government project (maybe in the testing or equipment calibration arena) that required high altitude loiter capability of several hours. IIRC, the designated altitude was 30,000'+ (specifically, I remember 34K'). I mentioned my surprise that the -25 could handle that and he indicated it wasn't a major problem.


As we stray way-off topic....
I get that civilian B-25's are lighter than combat aircraft, but 10,000 ft above service ceiling is quite a bit.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ ... ummary.pdf


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2020 10:17 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:43 pm
Posts: 1168
Location: Marietta, GA
mike furline wrote:
Kyleb wrote:
A26 Special K wrote:
The question was asked about high density altitudes and the B-25. Any airplane is effected by DA. Some handle it better than others. The B-25 is in the better column. The B-25 engines are supercharged.


A few years ago, Tom Reilly told me he was working on a proposal to use a B-25 for some government project (maybe in the testing or equipment calibration arena) that required high altitude loiter capability of several hours. IIRC, the designated altitude was 30,000'+ (specifically, I remember 34K'). I mentioned my surprise that the -25 could handle that and he indicated it wasn't a major problem.


I get that civilian B-25's are lighter than combat aircraft, but 10,000 ft above service ceiling is quite a bit.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ ... ummary.pdf


I know. But....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2020 10:18 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 7:18 pm
Posts: 1933
Location: Meriden,Ct.
The Black Book.... pop2

Phil

_________________
A man's got to know his limitations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2020 3:47 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 7:18 pm
Posts: 1933
Location: Meriden,Ct.
New news ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT_IMnPTUAU

Phil

_________________
A man's got to know his limitations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2020 4:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:14 pm
Posts: 357
Well, so much for the mag switch theory. Very unfortunate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2023 1:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:36 pm
Posts: 715
Final NTSB report is out:

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/ ... 101996/pdf


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2023 8:56 am 
Online
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:19 pm
Posts: 1380
Strange sentence, "The pilot, copilot, and passenger did not visually verify the fuel levels in all four main fuel tanks before the accident flight". Whilst I'm sure it's true, it also seems strange to include the passenger.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2023 9:48 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:52 pm
Posts: 3399
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas, USA
The passenger was the airplane's mechanic/crew chief/flight engineer. Since those positions aren't "official" on a B-25, the NTSB lists him as a passenger since that's officially what he was, but Page 3 of the report clarifies the situation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2023 10:36 am 
Online
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:19 pm
Posts: 1380
CAPFlyer wrote:
The passenger was the airplane's mechanic/crew chief/flight engineer. Since those positions aren't "official" on a B-25, the NTSB lists him as a passenger since that's officially what he was, but Page 3 of the report clarifies the situation.


Ah OK - missed that bit :roll:

Many thanks :drink3:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2023 4:08 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2015 9:48 pm
Posts: 1102
Location: West Valley, Silicon Valley
Well, that's unfortunate information. :|
This B-25 had previously been crashed requiring a total restoration from running out of gas on a flight from Stockton CA to Reno NV back in 1987. Another case where they intended to arrive dry because they were going to get filled at the show.
And Taigh Ramey was a part of the recovery effort at that time....http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=29431&start=15

pop2

_________________
remember the Oogahonk!
old school enthusiast of Civiltary Warbirds and Air Racers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2023 12:03 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 12:28 pm
Posts: 1157
Ouch, it appears that the fuel exhaustion speculation from soon after the accident was spot on. Sometimes the simplest explanation is often the most likely. The perceived or actual pressure resulting in the "rushed" routine (top of page 4) bit hard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2023 12:59 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 pm
Posts: 1234
Location: Lacombe, Alberta, Canada
Can anyone speak to the accuracy of a B-25's fuel gauges, generally speaking? I've flown some airplanes with lousy fuel gauges but we always had a way to either stick it or drip it and even then operated on the side of caution using "fat" burn numbers.

_________________
Defending Stearmans on WIX since Jeff started badmouthing them back in 2005.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2023 1:51 pm 
Offline
Newly minted Mustang Pilot
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:41 pm
Posts: 1410
Location: Everywhere
Dan Jones wrote:
Can anyone speak to the accuracy of a B-25's fuel gauges, generally speaking? I've flown some airplanes with lousy fuel gauges but we always had a way to either stick it or drip it and even then operated on the side of caution using "fat" burn numbers.


I can say, in all the years I flew Tondelayo, or any of the bombers for that matter...the fuel gauge was not on my list of things to check, it's like any other airplane, don't trust them. Every flight, and I mean every flight the tanks were stuck and the daily form(s) filled out and updated. The only fuel gauges I really trusted were in the Mustang, and even then I never exceeded an hour out of each wing while giving flight experiences. Doing multiple takeoffs and landings in anything also ramps up your fuel burn considerably.

jim

_________________
www.spiritof44.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2023 2:16 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:27 am
Posts: 5230
Location: Eastern Washington
Now that the "fat lady has sung" (the NTSB report issued), what's the status of the airframe?
Repairable?
Repairable for static (I would think someone would welcome a static B-25)?
Parts?
Scrap?

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 110 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group