Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

I have real concerns about allowing those planes to continue flying with passengers. My concern is regarding maintenance of the engines. OEM parts for those engines have not been made in a long, long time. I guess that it is possible to scavenge  older engines for parts, but how safe is it to use old parts to replace old parts?  I do not think that those planes are safe. 

 

They just fabricate new parts - there are very talented aircraft restoration organizations that can do this.  For example, Paul Allen’s Flying Heritage Collection in Seattle is backed by some awesome ex-Boeing machinists.  The guys that rebuild and fix these planes know what they are doing.   There always risks if something new breaking on a 75 year old airplane, but that shouldn’t prevent these old birds from flying.   My unsolicited $0.02. 

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I have real concerns about allowing those planes to continue flying with passengers. My concern is regarding maintenance of the engines. OEM parts for those engines have not been made in a long, long time. I guess that it is possible to scavenge  older engines for parts, but how safe is it to use old parts to replace old parts?  I do not think that those planes are safe. 

 

 

based on what?  

 

 

I agree with both of you. The few remaining, intact, air worthy B-17's  need to be saved for future generations. 

 

saved how? by not flying them? 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

By flying them around the country they are bringing the museums to the people.   Even to many people who wouldn't otherwise even go to a museum to see one. 

 

How many museums let you crawl through the aircraft on display? 

 

The term Living History Flight Experiences mean just that, it's living a semblance of history. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to my brother-in-law, who is a PI attorney, this is what is going to happen. The families of the people that were injured and killed are going to hire personal injury attorneys. The company that owned the B-17 and that ran the flight tours is going to be sued for negligence. The waivers of liability that the passengers signed do not absolve the tour company from negligence. I would also guess that insurance companies do not cover negligence. In the event that the tour company is found guilty of negligence they are screwed, which is unfortunate because I am sure that they feel that they are doing a good thing.

Edited by Johnny_K
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

By flying them around the country they are bringing the museums to the people.   Even to many people who wouldn't otherwise even go to a museum to see one. 

 

How many museums let you crawl through the aircraft on display? 

 

The term Living History Flight Experiences mean just that, it's living a semblance of history. 

Letting people crawl through an old airplane is a safe thing to do. I did that a few years ago and I had a great experience. It gave me a whole different opinion of the brave young men that fought in those planes. However, flying passengers in a 77 year old airplane is a whole different thing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Just my opinion, and I am standing by it.

I respect that opinion but don't agree with the stance. No offense, I just think that those that choose to spend their time and resources to fly them, and those that are wanting to risk flying in them, should be allowed to do so as long as they are held to the same standards as any other aircraft. And honestly I'd be willing to bet that these warbirds are kept up and worked over much more rigorously than your average small airport shuttle flight aircraft that are flown every day with thousands of passengers. And has been stated, most of the engines have been rebuilt to very good condition. Likely better condition than they were when they were having to be piecemealed together on the airfields during war. Accidents happen. Sad accidents. But unless there was clear negligence of totally letting the planes become unsafe I see no reason to stop them from flying. Just my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

According to my brother-in-law, who is a PI attorney, this is what is going to happen. The families of the people that were injured and killed are going to hire personal injury attorneys. The company that owned the B-17 and that ran the flight tours is going to be sued for negligence. The waivers of liability that the passengers signed do not absolve the tour company from negligence. I would also guess that insurance companies do not cover negligence. In the event that the tour company is found guilty of negligence they are screwed, which is unfortunate because I am sure that they feel that they are doing a good thing.

 

The owners of the plane, Collings Foundation, have Very Deep Pockets, which means PI lawyers are probably lining up to file suits.

 

https://www.collingsfoundation.org/aircrafts/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...