B-25 "Old Glory" down in accident. No fatalities. 2020

[Kyleb]

The question was asked about high density altitudes and the B-25. Any airplane is effected by DA. Some handle it better than others. The B-25 is in the better column. The B-25 engines are supercharged.

A few years ago, Tom Reilly told me he was working on a proposal to use a B-25 for some government project (maybe in the testing or equipment calibration arena) that required high altitude loiter capability of several hours. IIRC, the designated altitude was 30,000'+ (specifically, I remember 34K'). I mentioned my surprise that the -25 could handle that and he indicated it wasn't a major problem.

[mike furline]

The question was asked about high density altitudes and the B-25. Any airplane is effected by DA. Some handle it better than others. The B-25 is in the better column. The B-25 engines are supercharged.

A few years ago, Tom Reilly told me he was working on a proposal to use a B-25 for some government project (maybe in the testing or equipment calibration arena) that required high altitude loiter capability of several hours. IIRC, the designated altitude was 30,000'+ (specifically, I remember 34K'). I mentioned my surprise that the -25 could handle that and he indicated it wasn't a major problem.

As we stray way-off topic....
I get that civilian B-25's are lighter than combat aircraft, but 10,000 ft above service ceiling is quite a bit.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ ... ummary.pdf

[Kyleb]

The question was asked about high density altitudes and the B-25. Any airplane is effected by DA. Some handle it better than others. The B-25 is in the better column. The B-25 engines are supercharged.

A few years ago, Tom Reilly told me he was working on a proposal to use a B-25 for some government project (maybe in the testing or equipment calibration arena) that required high altitude loiter capability of several hours. IIRC, the designated altitude was 30,000'+ (specifically, I remember 34K'). I mentioned my surprise that the -25 could handle that and he indicated it wasn't a major problem.

I get that civilian B-25's are lighter than combat aircraft, but 10,000 ft above service ceiling is quite a bit.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ ... ummary.pdf

I know. But....

[phil65]

The Black Book....

Phil

[phil65]

New news ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT_IMnPTUAU

Phil

[Fearless Tower]

Well, so much for the mag switch theory. Very unfortunate.

[OD/NG]

Final NTSB report is out:

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/ ... 101996/pdf

[quemerford]

Strange sentence, "The pilot, copilot, and passenger did not visually verify the fuel levels in all four main fuel tanks before the accident flight". Whilst I'm sure it's true, it also seems strange to include the passenger.

[CAPFlyer]

The passenger was the airplane's mechanic/crew chief/flight engineer. Since those positions aren't "official" on a B-25, the NTSB lists him as a passenger since that's officially what he was, but Page 3 of the report clarifies the situation.

[quemerford]

The passenger was the airplane's mechanic/crew chief/flight engineer. Since those positions aren't "official" on a B-25, the NTSB lists him as a passenger since that's officially what he was, but Page 3 of the report clarifies the situation.

Ah OK - missed that bit

Many thanks

[Lon Moer]

Well, that's unfortunate information.
This B-25 had previously been crashed requiring a total restoration from running out of gas on a flight from Stockton CA to Reno NV back in 1987. Another case where they intended to arrive dry because they were going to get filled at the show.
And Taigh Ramey was a part of the recovery effort at that time....http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=29431&start=15

[sandiego89]

Ouch, it appears that the fuel exhaustion speculation from soon after the accident was spot on. Sometimes the simplest explanation is often the most likely. The perceived or actual pressure resulting in the "rushed" routine (top of page 4) bit hard.

[Dan Jones]

Can anyone speak to the accuracy of a B-25's fuel gauges, generally speaking? I've flown some airplanes with lousy fuel gauges but we always had a way to either stick it or drip it and even then operated on the side of caution using "fat" burn numbers.

[JimH]

Can anyone speak to the accuracy of a B-25's fuel gauges, generally speaking? I've flown some airplanes with lousy fuel gauges but we always had a way to either stick it or drip it and even then operated on the side of caution using "fat" burn numbers.

I can say, in all the years I flew Tondelayo, or any of the bombers for that matter...the fuel gauge was not on my list of things to check, it's like any other airplane, don't trust them. Every flight, and I mean every flight the tanks were stuck and the daily form(s) filled out and updated. The only fuel gauges I really trusted were in the Mustang, and even then I never exceeded an hour out of each wing while giving flight experiences. Doing multiple takeoffs and landings in anything also ramps up your fuel burn considerably.

jim

[JohnB]

Now that the "fat lady has sung" (the NTSB report issued), what's the status of the airframe?
Repairable?
Repairable for static (I would think someone would welcome a static B-25)?
Parts?
Scrap?