Fri Jul 10, 2015 8:49 am
Matt Gunsch wrote:I love all these monday morning quarterbacks who were not there, or have no idea what was going on, woulda, shoulda coulda all you want, you were not there, you did not make the call.
Fri Jul 10, 2015 9:11 am
Chuck Giese wrote:Man, the negativity and blame-laying....
In that imgur sequence (sequence, not movie) the caption on the 5th picture says that something snapped and the plane dropped back into the water. What broke? Odds are not the lifting equipment, if you assume that they are pros and lives depend on their equipment.
Other randomness:
- Lifting points on PBY-5A rated at 21,000 lbs. (Comment from friend who flew them)
- PBY-5A Empty Weight 20,910 lbs (Wikipedia, may not be accurate)
- This was a Super, so it will weigh more than a PBY-5A (Comment from friend who flew them)
- 70+ year old airframe.
- Recovery equipment, operators and supervision is all on the clock. At what point does the recovery cost more than the current value of the airplane?
This is getting to be as much fun as debunking a Liberty Belle thread
At this point, I'll wait for one of the principles to make a statement (probably not on WIX), or the NTSB report. Granted the blame game is fun, but I'll leave with my favorite quote from the Kee Bird thread.Matt Gunsch wrote:I love all these monday morning quarterbacks who were not there, or have no idea what was going on, woulda, shoulda coulda all you want, you were not there, you did not make the call.
Fri Jul 10, 2015 10:42 am
Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:13 am
Sat Jul 11, 2015 10:35 am
Chuck Giese wrote:Nothing against conversation - most of this thread has been interesting and informative. I'm not happy about how this turned out for the PBY, but without knowing the details, I'm not willing to level blame on the recovery efforts.
I've been on the periphery of the Liberty Belle discussions, and watched the venom come out (firefighters anyone?). Too many judgments are made online with no direct information to back them up. Speculation is fine, I did it myself. I just started with the assumption that the salvors were competent, experienced, and did things right. Sometimes the circumstances give you no good choices, and you're left picking the best of a bunch of bad ones.
Sat Jul 11, 2015 1:59 pm
Sat Jul 11, 2015 5:32 pm
Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:11 pm
Chuck Giese wrote:A more complex question is: how do you lift a 22,000 lb. airplane (plus the weight of fuel, oil, and whatever sand washed in) with attach points rated at 21,000 lbs. Lifting a 70 year old airplane, you would probably want a 5 -10% margin, so your main lift cable is kept to 19,000 lbs. How do you lift the remaining weight? Again, I'm assuming that the salvors read, understood and implemented the hoisting procedures from the manual. My assumption is that the straps were lifting the remaining 4,000 or 5,000 lbs in a coordinated lift with the main lifting points.
Sat Jul 11, 2015 9:38 pm
Sun Jul 12, 2015 10:59 am
shrike wrote:Chuck Giese wrote:A more complex question is: how do you lift a 22,000 lb. airplane (plus the weight of fuel, oil, and whatever sand washed in) with attach points rated at 21,000 lbs. Lifting a 70 year old airplane, you would probably want a 5 -10% margin, so your main lift cable is kept to 19,000 lbs. How do you lift the remaining weight? Again, I'm assuming that the salvors read, understood and implemented the hoisting procedures from the manual. My assumption is that the straps were lifting the remaining 4,000 or 5,000 lbs in a coordinated lift with the main lifting points.
I think it's just as likely that the original attach points were designed with just such a margin of error from the beginning. The wing spars have to be able to carry several times the weight of the airplane.
Sun Jul 12, 2015 3:17 pm
Sun Jul 12, 2015 3:39 pm
mjanovec wrote:One thing that must be considered was the weight of the airplane that was partially full of water. The water inside the fuselage could have easily been too much for the airframe if there was an attempt to lift it without first emptying out all of the water...or lifting too fast without allowing time for the water to naturally drain out.
Chuck Giese wrote:Other randomness:
- Lifting points on PBY-5A rated at 21,000 lbs. (Comment from friend who flew them)
- PBY-5A Empty Weight 20,910 lbs (Wikipedia, may not be accurate)
- This was a Super, so it will weigh more than a PBY-5A (Comment from friend who flew them)
Sun Jul 12, 2015 3:45 pm
Sun Jul 12, 2015 5:27 pm
CAPFlyer wrote:Chuck, per http://pbycatalina.com/pby-6a/ -
Empty weight - 21,480 (combat loadout), 21,150 (ferry configuration)
MTOW - 36,400 (combat loadout), 35,160 (ferry configuration)
Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:29 am
Chuck Giese wrote:if anything went wrong you would be crucified on WIX.