Battle Damaged Boeings

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:00 pm

That picture of the crew standing by the damaged tail made me think of the Memphis Belle documentary line, "these guys flew home on their luck."

CrewDawg · **Posted:** Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:28 pm

I can guess what the pilot is saying to the Crew Chief..."Wasn't there a prop there when we took off?" and the Crew Chief's response "Yes, know go back and get it!" :lol:

[quote="Jack Cook"]

This one is begging for a photo caption contest!

Holedigger · **Posted:** Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:32 pm

"I'm pretty dang sure I told you to tighten the nuts on that thing before we took off!"

hercules130 · **Posted:** Sun Dec 27, 2009 10:09 pm

"Nows a heckauva time to get the job guide out Sgt!"

In all seriousness I used to look at those photos when I was young and think man the 17 was one tough tough bird, now all I see is young men wiped out. Thanks for all you did gentlemen, we owe you the world.

WarbirdRadio · **Posted:** Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:03 am

Thanks for posting the pics!

Matt Jolley

Django · **Posted:** Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:44 pm

Great photos.

Hey Jack, have any B-29 shots like that?

k5083 · **Posted:** Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:45 pm

tom d. friedman wrote:

those pics are a testimonial to u.s. expertise & quality in manufactoring & design.

Yes, with one-third the payload of the equally well manufactured and designed Lancaster.

Oops, did I say that out loud?

August

ZRX61 · **Joined:** Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:16 am **Posts:** 2309

k5083 wrote:

tom d. friedman wrote:

those pics are a testimonial to u.s. expertise & quality in manufactoring & design.

Yes, with one-third the payload of the equally well manufactured and designed Lancaster.

Oops, did I say that out loud?

August

You mean the B17 wasn't designed as a "4 engined medium"? :wink:

Holedigger · **Posted:** Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:39 am

While digging through a book (yes an actual book) the other day, I came across a set of stats that left me scratch my head. The B-24 apparently had a lower lose rate per sorti than the B-17 in the ETO. They listed the lose rate of 1.61%/sorti for the fort and 1.60%/sorti for the Lib. Statistically, that is just a hair lower loss rate. So, does that debunk the Lib vs Fort myth as the Fort being the one to bring them home? Another interesting bit in those stats were that Fort gunners claimed nearly three times the number of enemy aircraft destroyed as the Liberator crews?! Was there some great difference in the target type that Forts were sent after as opposed to the Lib's target list. Just pondering the numbers and thinkin' (dangerous thing to do this early in the AM!)

ZRX61 · **Joined:** Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:16 am **Posts:** 2309

Sticking with battle damage.. but changing the manufacturer to Repulic for a second: Years ago I saw a pic of a P47 somewhere in the UK with a rather precise looking hole in the end of one prop blade from an 88 shell.

Warbird Information Exchange

Battle Damaged Boeings

Who is online