Kermit's B-24 and B-26

[Boeing666]

Several years ago a P-47 owner here in Tennessee really liked the B-24 and mentioned he would like to buy one. There simply weren't any available 15 years ago so he bought a Skyraider to add to his collection. Excluding national museums, they aren't out there.

Yes B-24s are very hard to come by. Yankee Air Museum at Willow Run Michigan would love to get a flying example or even a static example and it isn't easy. I personally wish that Kermit would sell his (or donate) it to the Yankee Air Museum because they would work to restore it to get it in the air. Not sure if LB-30s were built at Willow Run also like the B-24 was, but if any place should have a flying example of the B-24 it should be the Yankee Air Museum.

Kermit doesn't seem interested now in restoring the B-24 or B-26 it seems as I follow both his personal FB page and his Fantasy of Flight page and he never even mentions either aircraft. His projects seem to go in phases. Last year it was his Howard Hughes Sikorsky S-43 and his Gee Bee Z racer he was going to work on. After a couple years we are seeing his interest return to his Lockheed Vega as the Kimballs finished the wings on it. He's been talking about his Spitfire lately and his Mosquito. Last year it was that Albatross biplane. Haven't heard anything else about his Seversky P-35 recently. He seems to jump from project to project a lot. He got that L-1 flying, which is really nice.

I really don't see him getting any of his heavy bombers up and flying anytime soon, at least until he opens "Act III" of his Fantasy of Flight (if it opens). He doesn't have any other pilots employed with him at this moment that I am aware of so he is concentrating more on smaller aircraft that he can fly himself.

[Fouga23]

As B-17's get build from wrecks and scratch even, What makes the B-24 different?

[JohnTerrell]

Not sure if LB-30s were built at Willow Run also like the B-24 was...

No, there weren't any LB-30's produced at the Ford plant, as the LB-30 designation was only applied to a small number of the very early production B-24's built by Consolidated for export - "LB-30" simply being a different designation applied to the first production models of the YB-24 and B-24A, which were initially to be built for the French, but following the collapse of France were redirected to the British (LB-30 vs. B-24 is like the designation Hawk-75 vs. P-36 or the P-322 vs. P-38 Lightning).

The CAF's Liberator was one of those which were built to B-24A/LB-30B/Liberator I standard (all pretty much the same thing, however you want to call it), fully armed and with bomb bays. It was completed/first flown in early May 1941, but it never left the US. Under USAAC Ferry Command, it was sent to New Mexico to train RAF pilots (still in its bomber configuration, and painted in full RAF camo/roundels). It was heavily damaged in a landing accident in late July 1941, and given the amount of work that Consolidated would be tasked with repairing it, Consolidated decided to take the opportunity to rebuild it as an experimental transport. Following the repairs and modifications, it didn't fly again until almost exactly a year later, and would be put to work by Consolidated through the rest of the war (despite still being owned by the British Air Command, though Consolidated covered all of the costs). Although it was never classified as a C-87, it paved the way to the production of the C-87 variants, having proved the viability of such an aircraft.

[Boeing666]

Not sure if LB-30s were built at Willow Run also like the B-24 was...

No, there weren't any LB-30's produced at the Ford plant, as the LB-30 designation was only applied to a small number of the very early production B-24's built by Consolidated for export - "LB-30" simply being a different designation applied to the first production models of the YB-24 and B-24A, which were initially to be built for the French, but following the collapse of France were redirected to the British (LB-30 vs. B-24 is like the designation Hawk-75 vs. P-36 or the P-322 vs. P-38 Lightning).

The CAF's Liberator was one of those which were built to B-24A/LB-30B/Liberator I standard (all pretty much the same thing, however you want to call it), fully armed and with bomb bays. It was completed/first flown in early May 1941, but it never left the US. Under USAAC Ferry Command, it was sent to New Mexico to train RAF pilots (still in its bomber configuration, and painted in full RAF camo/roundels). It was heavily damaged in a landing accident in late July 1941, and given the amount of work that Consolidated would be tasked with repairing it, Consolidated decided to take the opportunity to rebuild it as an experimental transport. Following the repairs and modifications, it didn't fly again until almost exactly a year later, and would be put to work by Consolidated through the rest of the war (despite still being owned by the British Air Command, though Consolidated covered all of the costs). Although it was never classified as a C-87, it paved the way to the production of the C-87 variants, having proved the viability of such an aircraft.

Cool thanks for the info and the clarification.

[Boeing666]

As B-17's get build from wrecks and scratch even, What makes the B-24 different?

All the flying examples that I am aware of were not rebuilt from wrecks. None of the 9 examples that fly ever saw any combat and were surplus that didn't leave the US mainland. Some went to the Coast Guard for a while post war and a lot of them actually were Fire bombers used to fight fires. The only one really built out of a "wreck" was the Liberty Belle N390TH, which got hit by a tornado in Connecticut in the 80s I believe. It was restored to a flying warbird for about 7 years before it made an emergency landing in a field in Illinois and got burned pretty bad. Supposedly that one will be rebuilt (or will go to another frame) as there were still a lot of useable parts not consumed by fire including a couple engines I believe.

[Randy Wilson]

Just to add a bit to John's excellent info. This is from General Dynamics Aircraft and their Predecessors by John Wegg, page 83.

"Meanwhile, in April 1940, the French Purchasing Commission had ordered 175 of an export version, the LB-30MF (Mission Francais), the designation arrived at by using the next number in CAC's "Land Bomber" project series. When Britain took over 135 aircraft on 17 June, the name Liberator, already assigned by Consolidated, was used together with the designation LB-30."

There is more info regarding how the RAF took delivery of 26 early B-24s in exchange for the same number of LB-30s and some B-24As were converted to LB-30Bs for RAF Coastal Command. Hope that helps.

Randy

[Fouga23]

Boeing666, there's also a C variant being scratchbuilt.

[Boeing666]

Boeing666, there's also a C variant being scratchbuilt.

Who is doing the C variant? and if it is being scratchbuilt it would just be a replica like those fiberglass replicas that they have at the Proud Bird restaurant at LAX.

Oldest variant I am aware of in existence is a D variant (40-3097) the Swoose that is being restored at Wright Patt, but it won't fly.

[JimH]

While the B-24 fuselage is pretty straight forward, the wing is a fairly complex structure. Years ago Tom Reilly proposed converting a PB4Y in to a B-24...I remember seeing a 4Y fuse he had acquired but obviously that project never went further. You also have to ask, is there demand for one? While many prominent owners want one for their collection, airshows weren't beating down our doors at Collings for appearances. Then there is the operational costs...200 gallons of gas an hour, 1830's that cost $70-80,000 each, probably more now, and spare parts. Electric prop governors are unobtanium and are B-24 gold. And brakes...there are no brake pucks out there. While we all would like to see more examples flying they just aren't out there.

We were graciously given a tour of Kermits place a couple years ago and climbing around the B-24 was a highlight. The guys working the shop say they could have it airworthy quickly but it was not on the list. The airplane needs a lot work. The Indians overhauled B-24s to a very high standard. Pretty good story here..

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Aircr ... 7-B24.html

We always thought if Kermit had a ride program in place at "Fantasy of Flight", Act 1 would have probably not closed. What better Fantasy of Flight could you have to be able to go to Florida and fly in just about anything you want? It would blow the Harry Potter ride, or anything else Mouse related out of the water. Alas, that is not his mission. As a friend once said "I've never seen a trailer hitch on a hearse".

Here are some photos inside the FoF B-24








Jim

[JimH]

Boeing666, there's also a C variant being scratchbuilt.

Who is doing the C variant? and if it is being scratchbuilt it would just be a replica like those fiberglass replicas that they have at the Proud Bird restaurant at LAX.

Oldest variant I am aware of in existence is a D variant (40-3097) the Swoose that is being restored at Wright Patt, but it won't fly.

It's a replica/reproduction but being built as a flying example. The Aerovintage forum is updated once in a while but progress is being made.

http://www.aerovintage.com/forum/viewfo ... 83c07c0050

Jim

Last edited by JimH on Wed Aug 10, 2016 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Jack]

The B-26 last flew 5/2/99 and the B-25 on 3/21/03 according to my logs.
Last flight of the B-24 was Oct/Nov 95 LAL-FA08, I was on it but not flying so I don't have it logged.
I left Weeks Aircraft in 07, the B-25 may have flown since then but not the Marauder.

[peter]

The 24 is definitely looking a bit tired inside......

[Boeing666]

Boeing666, there's also a C variant being scratchbuilt.

Who is doing the C variant? and if it is being scratchbuilt it would just be a replica like those fiberglass replicas that they have at the Proud Bird restaurant at LAX.

Oldest variant I am aware of in existence is a D variant (40-3097) the Swoose that is being restored at Wright Patt, but it won't fly.

It's a replica but being built as a flying example. The Aerovintage forum is updated once in a while but progress is being made.

http://www.aerovintage.com/forum/viewfo ... 83c07c0050

Jim

ah, no wonder I couldn't find anything on about it as being an actual B-17C since it is just a replica. Unfortunately replicas don't win you awards at Osh Kosh though. I still think it would be cool to see replica or not though since they can get everything as close to the real thing as possible.

[JohnTerrell]

"Reproduction" or "new-build" are better terms, I feel, since it is being built to the original design drawings. I always hate the use of the word "replica" when it comes to projects like these, as "replica" would indicate that it is not true to original form (i.e., a different scale, or a diversion from the original aircraft design/specifications). To clarify, a Titan 51 is a replica, and a Flugwerk Fw 190 is a replica, where as I would say the majority of the P-51B/C's flying today are "reproductions" or "new-builds", as are some of the Spitfires emerging over the past several years (hardly any original parts/sheet metal, but all built to original specifications - and now, more often than not, more authentically-accurate than the more originally-produced examples flying).

[Tim Savage]

I haven't seen Kermit mention anything about his A-26 for a long time. I am afraid it is on the backburner again. A lot of his projects end up on the backburner unfortunately. Plus he has been busy writing books as of recently.

Kermit's A-26 is under active restoration at Aero Trader with a goal to wrapping up the long restoration. There were a number of folks working on it when I saw it in May.