B-29 - Frozen in time
Discussion
don't know if this is a repost or not but i thought i would share just in case,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1u4YBwjQTds
it's about a B-29 that had an emergency landing 50 years ago in the arctic somewhere and got left, until someone decided to stick new engines in it and fly it back, always seemed doomed to me but hay-ho
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1u4YBwjQTds
it's about a B-29 that had an emergency landing 50 years ago in the arctic somewhere and got left, until someone decided to stick new engines in it and fly it back, always seemed doomed to me but hay-ho
I watched that a couple of years ago on the Discovery channel iirc. Cringeworthy & obvious to anyone that they would, eventually, f
k it up!
When you see the speed that they move the plane across the ice to the 'runway' it looks like an accident waiting to happen.
More care should have been taken although personally I think that the plane should have been left where it was.
I wonder what the families of the original crew thought when they heard what those buffoons had done..........

When you see the speed that they move the plane across the ice to the 'runway' it looks like an accident waiting to happen.
More care should have been taken although personally I think that the plane should have been left where it was.
I wonder what the families of the original crew thought when they heard what those buffoons had done..........
fatboy69 said:
I wonder what the families of the original crew thought when they heard what those buffoons had done...
Why would they care? The crew were rescued, so it's not like the aircraft was a war grave or anything?I'm not sure I'd call Darryl Greenamyer a 'buffoon'.
Edited by TheLastPost on Saturday 30th March 10:24
What strange comments. Did anyone watching for the first time honestly think to themselves "Wow, I hope the APU fuel tank in the rear fuseage doesn't come loose"?
Where is the precedent for simultaneously restoring to airworthy condition (and then successfully recovering it by flying it away) an aircraft of this size and complexity from one of the most remote and inhospitable places on the planet?
Seems a bit silly to criticise the attempt; after all they came very close to pulling it off. Luckily the APU tank mountings failed when they did.
Where is the precedent for simultaneously restoring to airworthy condition (and then successfully recovering it by flying it away) an aircraft of this size and complexity from one of the most remote and inhospitable places on the planet?
Seems a bit silly to criticise the attempt; after all they came very close to pulling it off. Luckily the APU tank mountings failed when they did.
TheLastPost said:
fatboy69 said:
I wonder what the families of the original crew thought when they heard what those buffoons had done...
Why would they care? The crew were rescued, so it's not like the aircraft was a war grave or anything?I'm not sure I'd call Darryl Greenamyer a 'buffoon'.
Edited by TheLastPost on Saturday 30th March 10:24
TheLastPost said:
Why would they care? The crew were rescued, so it's not like the aircraft was a war grave or anything?
Imagine your father or grandfather had served on, say, a Lancaster. Miraculously it is found intact - I think you would be (or should be) slightly irked if someone accidentally burned it to a crisp.What bugged me was not so much that the fire started - after all accidents happen - but that they were unable to deal with it.
Simpo Two said:
TheLastPost said:
Why would they care? The crew were rescued, so it's not like the aircraft was a war grave or anything?
Imagine your father or grandfather had served on, say, a Lancaster. Miraculously it is found intact - I think you would be (or should be) slightly irked if someone accidentally burned it to a crisp.What bugged me was not so much that the fire started - after all accidents happen - but that they were unable to deal with it.
You could say it could have been left for a "better" recovery attempt, but which "unknown unknown" might also have scuppered that attempt?
Simpo Two said:
Imagine your father or grandfather had served on, say, a Lancaster. Miraculously it is found intact - I think you would be (or should be) slightly irked if someone accidentally burned it to a crisp.

I'd be slightly disappointed that a fine and historic piece of engineering, with links to my family, was destroyed rather than recovered to be put on public display, but that disappointment would be tempered by the fact that it was just bad luck for a team who had gone to a lot of trouble and expense in an attempt to prevent it mouldering away in the Arctic forever.
I don't think I'd be wailing and tearing my hair out, or anything.
My father spent most of his career working in a power station (Skelton Grange, near Leeds). We all went down to watch when they blew up the cooling towers as part of the demolition. I don't recall anybody being particularly distraught.
Eric Mc said:
Back in the 1960s a C-47 was successfully recovered having spent the winter encased in snow and ice. Admittedly, it was only flown out after a year of being abandoned on the ice but it was successfully done.
Unless that aircraft also caught fire, but was saved because someone had the foresight to import full fire fighting equipment prior to the attempted recovery and/or undertake exhaustive checks of every single component prior to engine start, I'd suggest that has fairly limited relevance, beyond being evidence that this type of recovery was viable?Personally, I'd have thought it would have been safer to dismantle the aircraft in-situ and fly the sections out for rebuild at a properly equipped engineering facility, but then I'm in no position to second-guess a guy who has test-piloted the Blackbird, set several air speed records and rebuilt a Starfighter from junk (and had access to the sort of engineering contacts that go along with this experience). Presumably there were good logistical or financial reasons that they chose the route they did.
He who never made a mistake never made anything.
They did the best they could, tried to achieve something which was difficult and very nearly pulled it off. Had that single component not failed then they might have been able to fly it back and we would all be lauding them as fantastic mavericks who saved an old warbird from certain 'death'. As it was they spent a lot of time and money on restoring it only for the plan to go wrong at the end.
They did the best they could, tried to achieve something which was difficult and very nearly pulled it off. Had that single component not failed then they might have been able to fly it back and we would all be lauding them as fantastic mavericks who saved an old warbird from certain 'death'. As it was they spent a lot of time and money on restoring it only for the plan to go wrong at the end.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff