Mon Apr 06, 2009 7:17 pm
ww2John wrote:I love the 20AF control wheel cap on the pilot's yoke of the B29.
Never seen one of dem before!
Thanks for some detail shots - clear as you always do.
Actually it's just a patch that they had attatched to it. Still looks neat though!
Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:36 pm
Great shots, I especially like the door which ID's the building. I was just up in Seattle on Saturday and I always look down there off I-5 and wonder which building they're in. I spent some time in the 17 back in 2003 during a public event at Renton but haven't seen the 29 since she was sitting in the MoF parking lot. I also saw her at Lowry AFB back in the day, never realizing that she'd be restored eventually!
Wed Apr 08, 2009 4:18 pm
The second picture of the bomb bay, is that the main wing centre section and it goes through the fuselage? Sorry if that's a rookie question but that's why I come here 
Wed Apr 08, 2009 4:25 pm
Are these owned by Boeing themselves? What are the plans for them? Museum or flying?
Wed Apr 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Lightjug wrote:The second picture of the bomb bay, is that the main wing centre section and it goes through the fuselage? Sorry if that's a rookie question but that's why I come here
That is the main wing box.
I come here to learn about these things as well.
Wed Apr 08, 2009 5:10 pm
Fouga23 wrote:Are these owned by Boeing themselves? What are the plans for them? Museum or flying?
That i'm aware of they both belong to the Museum Of Flight. The B-17 is flyable but will not likely fly again. They will hopefully be on display at the museum at some point.
Wed Apr 08, 2009 5:57 pm
Magazines articles a few years ago stated that the B-29 would be made "taxi-able." I doubt this is still the case. I was under the impression that the previous owner of the B-17 stipulated that it was never to fly again (could be wrong). It looks like they are doing a fantastic job with both planes.
Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:05 pm
Is this the B-29 that used to be at Lowry in Denver? T square 54? Sure looks a lot better than when it was out here if it is...
Mark
Mark
Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:58 pm
corsair166b wrote:Is this the B-29 that used to be at Lowry in Denver? T square 54? Sure looks a lot better than when it was out here if it is...
Mark
I thought I heard it was in CO for awhile
Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:50 pm
corsair166b wrote:Is this the B-29 that used to be at Lowry in Denver? T square 54? Sure looks a lot better than when it was out here if it is...
Mark
Yup, that is the same one.
It does look better!
Thu Apr 09, 2009 2:41 am
I'm surprized none of the modellers have commented on the different colors and shades of green paint inside these two aircraft. Since they are being restored @ their home, by the home team, the colors are as accurate as they can get.
Also no one has asked about the plywood sheets in the center wing torque box on the '29. The fuel was held in 'bulet proof' bladders laced into the bays, this practice was used up until the very last 727-100 rolled out the doors. 27-200's and 37's were/are fuel tight without bladders.
Also no one has asked about the plywood sheets in the center wing torque box on the '29. The fuel was held in 'bulet proof' bladders laced into the bays, this practice was used up until the very last 727-100 rolled out the doors. 27-200's and 37's were/are fuel tight without bladders.
Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:30 am
I was gonna comment on the inaccurate colors in the B-17, but figured I'd get flamed as a geek.
I understand of course that for flying aircraft paint is usually necessary for preservation and maintenance, so I don't ususally complain too much about colors on "working" warbirds. But for a B-17 touted as the most comprehensive and accurate restoration ever, I have to say I'm a bit disappointed.
SN
I understand of course that for flying aircraft paint is usually necessary for preservation and maintenance, so I don't ususally complain too much about colors on "working" warbirds. But for a B-17 touted as the most comprehensive and accurate restoration ever, I have to say I'm a bit disappointed.
SN
Thu Apr 09, 2009 8:53 am
Steve Nelson wrote:But for a B-17 touted as the most comprehensive and accurate restoration ever, I have to say I'm a bit disappointed.
Let's say you're right - that doesn't make you a bad guy or the plane worthless. Even the Smithsonian goes to great lengths to document what pieces on their plane may not be exactly correct or original.
I didn't "study" the pix but I thought the B-17 looked pretty good. Educate us so we know - what's not accurate?
Ken
Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:21 am
First off it is a great restoration. It was pretty rough when it got to the MOF. The outside colors are accurate although there it has a gloss or semi gloss finish. I can get over that. The O.D. doesn't come down far enough over the gray. I am not sure how they got that wrong, but it is. That still doesn't mean that it isn't a beautiful restoration. On the interior, F models were painted a different shade of green in the forward areas, and left bare metal in the rear. I am sure that this was painted for preservation sake. Remember that this was restored a few years ago. There is technology and research out there now that would allow different step to be taken. The plane looks just beautiful though. The MOF should be proud to have a rare F model in it's collection. Not a G hacked up to look like an F.
I never bought into the whole taking short cuts because it is static, or overlooking something because it flies. Either you are restoring a B-17 or not. Static or flying it should be as close to original as possible. With all equipment and systems in place.
Even with a few errors that they have, the MOF B-17 looks awesome.
I never bought into the whole taking short cuts because it is static, or overlooking something because it flies. Either you are restoring a B-17 or not. Static or flying it should be as close to original as possible. With all equipment and systems in place.
Even with a few errors that they have, the MOF B-17 looks awesome.
Thu Apr 09, 2009 1:39 pm
Future plans for B17 & B29...
I was told by MOF crew working on those restorations a few years back that both a/c would be displayed inside a new museum building once it is built. I assume that is still the plan and am thankful they are both inside and not stored in their parking lot, like the B29 was prior to the current restoration work start.
I was told by MOF crew working on those restorations a few years back that both a/c would be displayed inside a new museum building once it is built. I assume that is still the plan and am thankful they are both inside and not stored in their parking lot, like the B29 was prior to the current restoration work start.