Collings Foundation B-17G 909 Has Crashed :-( 10/2/2019

phil65 · **Posted:** Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:18 pm

https://www.wtnh.com/news/connecticut/a ... -17-crash/

Phil

Wyvernfan · **Posted:** Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:42 am

For those of us living outside the US and unable to open the link can someone tell us what the latest news is please?

Rob

phil65 · **Posted:** Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:08 am

Sorry, they are honoring the first responders.
No new news on the accident.

Phil

Wyvernfan · **Posted:** Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:16 pm

Thank you both!

Rob

6trn4brn · **Posted:** Sun Dec 15, 2019 4:12 am

Sorry to drag this post back up, but was wondering how the survivors are doing?

wolf · **Joined:** Sun Mar 01, 2020 2:18 pm **Posts:** 154

It's been 3 months, any update on the wreckage.

Late photos photo at Bradly showed a dump truck hauling out wreckage - hopefully was not full of 44-83575 and that means she was bailed and crushed

It was mentioned at the time of crash, the wreckage was supposed to have been moved to a hanger for investigation - since then, dead air

Cubs2jets · **Joined:** Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:12 am **Posts:** 312

Condolences to those who lost family and friends. I hope those injured have recovered well.

Remember. The second everything came to a stop, it belonged to the insurance company, not the Collings Foundation. I'm not sure any insurance company wants a WWI airframe back in the air carrying passengers.

C2j

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Mon Mar 02, 2020 9:13 am

Cubs2jets wrote:

Condolences to those who lost family and friends. I hope those injured have recovered well.

Remember. The second everything came to a stop, it belonged to the insurance company, not the Collings Foundation. I'm not sure any insurance company wants a WWI airframe back in the air carrying passengers.

C2j

Absolutely foolish comment

Cubs2jets · **Joined:** Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:12 am **Posts:** 312

whistlingdeath77 wrote:

Cubs2jets wrote:

Condolences to those who lost family and friends. I hope those injured have recovered well.

Remember. The second everything came to a stop, it belonged to the insurance company, not the Collings Foundation. I'm not sure any insurance company wants a WWI airframe back in the air carrying passengers.

C2j

Absolutely foolish comment

Hmmm. I count four distinct comments. To which are you referring? Surely, whistlingdeath77, you're not referring to one or two (though with your screen name, maybe you are). Statement three is a plain fact. Statement four is conjecture as to the desire of insurance companies to be willing to insure similar operations in the future with the likely payout from this unfortunate accident. Certainly not without a drastic increase of premium that will likely curtail similar activities in the future.

C2j

chainfeed · **Joined:** Mon May 21, 2018 1:44 pm **Posts:** 49

Cubs2jets wrote:

whistlingdeath77 wrote:

Cubs2jets wrote:

Condolences to those who lost family and friends. I hope those injured have recovered well.

Remember. The second everything came to a stop, it belonged to the insurance company, not the Collings Foundation. I'm not sure any insurance company wants a WWI airframe back in the air carrying passengers.

C2j

Absolutely foolish comment

Hmmm. I count four distinct comments. To which are you referring? Surely, whistlingdeath77, you're not referring to one or two (though with your screen name, maybe you are). Statement three is a plain fact. Statement four is conjecture as to the desire of insurance companies to be willing to insure similar operations in the future with the likely payout from this unfortunate accident. Certainly not without a drastic increase of premium that will likely curtail similar activities in the future.

C2j

Ummmm, clearly his post was directed at the second half of yours. It's my understanding most warbird policies are written so that in the even of a claim the owner retains ownership of whatever remains of the a/c. Also, since when is a B17 a WW1 aircraft?

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2020 8:49 am

Cubs2jets wrote:

whistlingdeath77 wrote:

Cubs2jets wrote:

Condolences to those who lost family and friends. I hope those injured have recovered well.

Remember. The second everything came to a stop, it belonged to the insurance company, not the Collings Foundation. I'm not sure any insurance company wants a WWI airframe back in the air carrying passengers.

C2j

Absolutely foolish comment

Hmmm. I count four distinct comments. To which are you referring? Surely, whistlingdeath77, you're not referring to one or two (though with your screen name, maybe you are). Statement three is a plain fact. Statement four is conjecture as to the desire of insurance companies to be willing to insure similar operations in the future with the likely payout from this unfortunate accident. Certainly not without a drastic increase of premium that will likely curtail similar activities in the future.

C2j

Ma’am, the b-17 Flying Fortress is a world war 2 aircraft, not world war 1. But that’s why we are here on this website is to learn and study some great stuff. Also, “ whistling death”,( my screen name,) would pertain to a nickname that was given to the f4u-corsair, my favorite aircraft. To even make the assumption that I want something bad to happen to any aviation group,( especially the Collings foundation,) is down right Despicable.

menards · **Joined:** Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:46 pm **Posts:** 543

chainfeed wrote:

Also, since when is a B17 a WW1 aircraft?

That was very obviously a typo.....

Xray · **Joined:** Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:25 am **Posts:** 534

Substantial update - FAA finds alot of slop in maintenance, crew management and operating procedures, and revokes Collings "living history" charter to fly paying customers.
Still no final determination of cause of the tragic crash, but this document gives a pretty good glimpse where things are heading.

Article here
https://www.courant.com/news/connecticu ... story.html

Specific FAA document here

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... 11089-1673 [must open a pdf from there]

Adam Kline · **Posted:** Sat Mar 28, 2020 8:33 am

All spark plugs were inspected and required cleaning and all electrode gaps were out of tolerance; therefore, further engine inspection indicated signs of detonation and associated damage. An inspection of engine 3 showed all spark plugs electrode gaps were out of tolerance, fouled, and revealed various signs of detonation.

This part of the inspection report is pretty damming. As a mechanic, this shows some basic lack knowledge and carelessness. Reading spark plugs is very important to engine diagnostics. Gap tolerance though it seems insignificant, shows lack of paying attention to details. Just my 2 cents.

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11324

Adam Kline wrote:

All spark plugs were inspected and required cleaning and all electrode gaps were out of tolerance; therefore, further engine inspection indicated signs of detonation and associated damage. An inspection of engine 3 showed all spark plugs electrode gaps were out of tolerance, fouled, and revealed various signs of detonation.

This part of the inspection report is pretty damming. As a mechanic, this shows some basic lack knowledge and carelessness. Reading spark plugs is very important to engine diagnostics. Gap tolerance though it seems insignificant, shows lack of paying attention to details. Just my 2 cents.

What affect do electrode gaps have on the likelihood of detonation?

#3 was found to be partially feathered. They may have poured to coals to it to try and get any thrust they could. Might that be the source of the detonation?

Warbird Information Exchange

Collings Foundation B-17G 909 Has Crashed :-( 10/2/2019

Who is online