Read the forum code of contact
By: 6th July 2014 at 12:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Thanks for those.
That final one is an awful moment. If the assembly ship is on finals, then the other B24 must have crashed on take off.
Moggy
By: 6th July 2014 at 18:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I would suggest from the fire's intensity that the burning aircraft had just crashed and was a returning aircraft that came down short of the runway.
By: 6th July 2014 at 19:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-We can probably never know for certain, but why would the assembly ship be airborne if that was the case?
Once the stream had set off for the target the assembly ship's work is over.
Moggy
By: 6th July 2014 at 19:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I see your point.
By: 6th July 2014 at 20:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-The photograph is printed on the back cover of "Assembly Ships of the Mighty Eighth". Simply captioned "Ball of Fire of the 93rd BG landing at Hardwick. In the foreground, the wreckage of a 93rd BG B-24 in flames after crashing during take-off". The crashed B-24 is not identified.
By: 6th July 2014 at 21:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Was the B24 more prone to crashing on takeoff than the B17?
In `Target Berlin` by Ethell and Price that mission also saw the loss of a B24 during takeoff.
I've not heard any mention of B17 losses during takeoff in any of the books I have read.
By: 6th July 2014 at 22:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Can't see why it would be. The tricycle u/c should make all ground handling easier.
Moggy
By: 6th July 2014 at 22:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Was the B24 more prone to crashing on takeoff than the B17?
Perhaps it has to do with the high aspect ratio wing?
It might be more prone to stalling than the B-17 wing.
Anyone have take off and stall figures for both types?
There is one well-known case of a B-17 crashing on takeoff...the loss of the Model 299 at Wright Field...attributed to forgotten elevator locks.
Can't see why it would be. The tricycle u/c should make all ground handling easier. Moggy
Tricycle gear would only prevent ground loops, not what I'd consider a crash on takeoff...
By: 6th July 2014 at 22:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-The B24 could have turned back with a problem after takeoff and just not made it : (
The B24 did have a slightly weak nose u/c leg and also was definitely more difficult to fly than the B17 in all flight regimes - higher wing loading etc etc
By: 6th July 2014 at 23:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Tricycle gear would only prevent ground loops, not what I'd consider a crash on takeoff...
You might like to consider swings on take-off. They are not unknown and claimed a lot of victims during WW2.
But really I know as little as everybody else, other than that googling "B17 crash on take off" gets you many results.
Moggy
By: 25th August 2014 at 11:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-
I've not heard any mention of B17 losses during takeoff in any of the books I have read.
... I'd imagine that there were a fair few weather related crashes on take-off during the poor winter of 1944 - a 390th BG B-17 crashed on 27 December 1944 attempting to get airborne from Framlingham/Parham - came down alongside the main Parham-Framlingham road, the explosion damaged every house in the village. although there was no loss of life on the ground (visited the excellent Framlingham tower museum last week. This incident is also cited in Parker " To win the winter sky ")
the pics at the OP's original link are from Peter Bodle's book of the same title
Posts: 485
By: Richard gray - 6th July 2014 at 12:37
Some great pictures here.
http://www.edp24.co.uk/norfolk-life/yank_bomber_boys_in_norfolk_1_3671442?storyId=1.3671443.1404639158