Grissom B-17 conversion to B-17F "Old Bill"

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Sat Jul 17, 2010 7:56 am

That won't be a problem what so ever. Trust me.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:40 pm

So what would you guys think about restoring back to it's drone controller configuration? DO you think that would have an impact on people visiting the aircraft.

Jesse C. · **Posted:** Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:01 pm

It would be cool to see one back into a scheme other than a WWII bird, but, folks do like it when they look like porcupines with guns sticking out of every window.

Only the true bird conosieur will appreciate its drone scheme. Just please, not cutesy art work.

Django · **Posted:** Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:21 pm

I would think not.

kalamazookid · **Posted:** Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:26 pm

I don't think the average visitor would care about seeing a drone. A drone B-17 might be interesting for us hardcore enthusiasts, but as far as the general public is concerned, it's a footnote historically.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:36 pm

I really appreciate everyone's input. We are trying to explore all of our options for the aircraft, and want to make sure that the hard core warbird guys have a say. We also want to bring attention to the museum as well. Thank you all and please keep it coming.

hercules130 · **Posted:** Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:57 pm

mustangdriver wrote:

So what would you guys think about restoring back to it's drone controller configuration? DO you think that would have an impact on people visiting the aircraft.

Just drove down to see her and the rest of your fine collection, a rebuild to drone controller config would bring me running back (that and the 89!) but I am weird. Best of luck no matter what happens you guys have a great museum and a great group of volunteers.

Thanks again for a great visit.

Gary

6trn4brn · **Posted:** Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:27 pm

Hi Chris...man, it sure warms my cold heart to see all of the effort you and others are doing to get the old Bell in a new livery and under a roof, no matter what scheme you guys go with. am sure John Crume is smiling down on ya! Have you had a chance to meet his widow Marion yet? Great lady and she has some great pics of the work John and the fellas from Delco did back in the day to try and bring the old Bell to some sort of displayable condition. If you see her sometime and think of it, tell her Darrell (formerly from Warsaw) said Hi for me, would you please?

As far as I can remember, the plane Rollie was shot down in was called simply the Williamson crew, I don't know that the plane was in Europe long enough to have had a name.

Very cool to see that Stoney's old mount (Passionate Paulette) might come indoors as well!

Simply outstanding Chris! Outfreakinstanding!

Ken · **Posted:** Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:47 pm

Ken wrote:

Go hog wild getting her looking exactly as she did during Crossroads. What an important part of this nation's aeronautical and strategic history - and you guys have an integral piece! Devote an area to all of that history. Show the advent of remote control and link it to the Predator UAVs that are so key on today's battlefield. On the other side, have some large posterboards that depict the B-17 fleet history. Will her building be large enough for visitors to walk on both sides of the airplane? I hesitate to say this, but an argument could be made (assuming she had no chin turret during the tests) to mask the airplane down the centerline and replicate a B-17F (or G depending on the nose & tail details) scheme on one side and have her natural metal Crossroads markings on the other. Ensure the diplay explains this completely. What I propose isn't any more labor intensive, just research intensive to get the details right. You end up with the illusion of having 2 B-17s on display.

I may be the rebel here, but I think a well executed UAV/drone display indoors would be a hit with the "joystick generation". I already PM'd Chris ... I spoke to a credible contact in the UAV world on this topic and may have found a means to get a retired Predator (or similar) donated to Grissom to become part of the overall display, should they choose that route. Painting one side of the bird to look like a wartime bird is not mandatory, but a compromise suggestion to satisfy those that want to see .50 cals protruding. Crowds might be drawn to that idea as well, such as the B-24 at Pima. I tend to agree with Django (again), I am disappointed to see other airplanes marked incorrectly; I can't now say it's okay to make this G look like an F or a G it never was.

Ken

groundpounder · **Posted:** Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:13 pm

As much as i admire the enthusiasm behind this project, i think it is time to strongly consider doing something entirely different from the norm with this aircraft, if for no other reason to increase the draw of people coming to see it. A B-17 can be seen in many states of the country, and most of them look somewhat similar, if not indistinguishable to the layperson. My suggestion would be to really seriously consider making a YB-40 out of this aircraft, as in itself this particular B-17 has no real historical significance (correction on point welcome) and can easily be viewed as a blank canvas from which to work.

Certain names and nose art mean nothing to most people and the significance will be appreciated by only the educated on the matter. A YB-40 or another unique idea, the half and half replica, could be a real draw because no-one has ever seen such a rare bird. People would travel to see such a creation, i'm sure of it. There are lots of G models out there(relatively speaking), and nothing says that any of them have to stay a G model, except of course the actual combat veterans. The biggest travesty i can think of is if a half hearted attempt to make it an F model goes ahead and it still has a lot of the G parts on it, fooling only the un-educated. Not a good idea in my opinion. Just another wierd thought crossed my mind as i was typing this , and it doesnt neccessarily relate to this project, but wouldnt a combat damaged B-17 replica be something to see. Surely there must be enough castoff parts around to assemble something that could represent the horrifying reality that a lot of these fellows faced and still got home. Flame away !!!! :lol:

Ken · **Posted:** Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:06 am

groundpounder wrote:

as in itself this particular B-17 has no real historical significance (correction on point welcome)

I thought that being an original drone controller from Operation Crossroads proved it to be an important piece of history from a somewhat neglected era.

groundpounder · **Posted:** Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:39 am

That may be true, but who in the general public cares about this ? My suggestion is to create something unique with a concept that even the uninformed can find fascinating. There are lots of G-models out there... its time to go out on a limb and do something really different. :evil:

Second Air Force · **Posted:** Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:07 pm

mustangdriver wrote:

The plane only note worthy service was being a drone controller at operation crossroads. One of my ideas was to put it in that configuration. But we aren't sure people would care to see a drone controller

I vote for putting the airplane back in the Crossroads scheme and configuration. It would be not only different than usual but actually accurate to that particular airframe. Operation Crossroads was about as close to a "normal" combat assignment as could be found post-war (not including the SB-17s), especially for a Fortress.

Scott

drgondog · **Joined:** Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:50 am **Posts:** 237

I personally believe that I would like to see "OLD BILL" with the V for Victory sign and his WWI steel pot would be a great choice -- and do the mods to restore it to an F on the nose section, the tail guns and the waist.

The B-17F was the bulk of 1943 aerial bombardment in ETO and had the most experiments tried to bulk up the forward firing capability to try to blunt the head on attacks. I personally think it is the best looking of the 17s.

I also really like the suugestion to convert to the YB-40 - it was a very interesting failure at making the B-17 self supporting for deep penetrations.

Drones and Air/Sea are somewhat interesting - but about like converting a K-9 to a seeing eye dog.. the war dog was what this ship was all about in its various forms.

hang the expense · **Posted:** Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:56 pm

Steve Nelson wrote:

Normally I'm a stickler for historically accurate restorations, but in this case I think it would be cool to see her backdated. Like you say Chris, she's in rough shape and pretty well gutted right now. That particular airframe doesn't really have much history as a G, and the F is rather underrepresented.

Of course, I'm assuming that snince "Old Bill" was a contemporary of the Belle that would make it an early F. You would not only have to remove the chin turret, you'd also need to reconfigure the cheek windows (they were the "flat" style, and the guns were mounted in "mirror image" compared to the G,) remove the navigator's astrodome (and add the extra windows over the nose) and get an early-style tail gun position. To be totally accurate, you'd also need to change the waist positions to the open configuation with sliding windows. As a late G, I assume she's got staggered waist windows, so one one have to be repositioned. Sounds like quite a job, but if you've got to do a bunch of work on her anyway, why not? I can help with all the F mods because we are doing that to the lake airplane.There is a new build stinger tailgun assy headed to oshkosh for display as I write this.The windows are made and we are working on the F model nose plexi.

SN

Warbird Information Exchange

Grissom B-17 conversion to B-17F "Old Bill"

Who is online