B-17 Lost at CT Airport

[Industrial Toys]

I was watching an NTSB briefing about the crash and got to thinking. Commercial pilots have simulator training. They have taken off loosing and engine. In private service, a pilot could have a million hours of smooth sailing flying which would not prepare him for certain failures.

 

[Diggin It]

Enlighten me.

Sully: Hudson river plane crash investigators object to their portrayal | Film | The Guardian

 

[fried1765]

I was watching an NTSB briefing about the crash and got to thinking. Commercial pilots have simulator training. They have taken off loosing and engine. In private service, a pilot could have a million hours of smooth sailing flying which would not prepare him for certain failures.

Your statement is not accurate.

Before the days of simulators for commercial (airline) pilots, all pilot training was done in actual airplanes, because there were no options.
I spent many hours being trained flying actual large transport type aircraft.
We did the same practice engine failures, and other practice emergencies
The training was essentially the same in a real airplane, as it is today in a simulator.
A simulator is simply exponentially cheaper to operate, and a vastly more efficient use of time and of manpower.

It seems that you are stuck on the B-17 crash being caused by something the pilots did, or did not do.
I prefer to believe, until proven otherwise, that something other than pilot malfeasance was the cause of the crash.

 

[Industrial Toys]

It can't be as accurate and valuable an excercise outside of a simulator where there is no danger. Isn't it more a case of pretend this, now what would you do? I don't think anyone is going to kill two engines on a four engine prop plane midway through takeoff as an excercise.

 

[fried1765]

It can't be as accurate and valuable an excercise outside of a simulator where there is no danger. Isn't it more a case of pretend this, now what would you do? I don't think anyone is going to kill two engines on a four engine prop plane midway through takeoff as an excercise.

Why would anyone practice loosing two engines "midway through takeoff"?
Depending on the particular aircraft performance statistics (primarily weight), you have an extremely high probability of crashing, no matter what you do.
There is no good reason to practice crashing in a simulator,.... except just for fun.!

 

[Industrial Toys]

I didn't know that failure under those circumstances was quite so gloomy. May be what happend to the B-17.

There must certainly be failures practiced in a simulator that would not be chanced in real life. That was my point.

 

[MossRoad]

Anyone know how the PIC managed to log 7,000+ hours in one of these??

He was 75 years old and had been with the company that owned that plane for 20 years. If you ever go to some of these events, like they have held here in South Bend, IN many times over the years, they'll sometimes come in for air shows a week or two ahead of the show, and take people for rides all week long. 10-20 half-hour flights a week is 5-10 hours of flying time. That ads up over years and years and years.

When I worked at the airport here in SB, we had several air shows, and history events. One company, the Confederate Air force (now called the Commemorative Air Force) brought in a B-17 and a B-29 and they stayed here for a month, giving many flights in the B-17.

Another time, someone came for an air show and brought a B-17(can't recall which company). After the air show, it had mechanical troubles and could not take off. It stayed here in SB for a month for repairs. When the repairs were completed, they wanted to take it for a test flight and offered me a free ride. I offered the ride to my foreman, who was about 10 years older than me, because, well, only one of us could go and he was older (I'm a good guy). So he goes up, they fly around, and upon landing, they smacked the tailwheel so hard it collapsed up into the fuselage! Scared the bajeebers out of him! The plane had to sit here in SB for a couple months for repairs after that.

 

[MossRoad]

I didn't know that failure under those circumstances was quite so gloomy. ...

We used to hangar a certain twin engine business turbo-prop that was grossly underpowered. If it was loaded anywhere near capacity, and lost an engine on takeoff, they called it a negative rate-of-climb. You'd have zippo altitude and airspeed to return to the field, so they just kept that in mind and always looked for open fields, roads, etc... BEFORE they took off!

 

[fried1765]

We used to hangar a certain twin engine business turbo-prop that was grossly underpowered. If it was loaded anywhere near capacity, and lost an engine on takeoff, they called it a negative rate-of-climb. You'd have zippo altitude and airspeed to return to the field, so they just kept that in mind and always looked for open fields, roads, etc... BEFORE they took off!

As is the case with many light twin aircraft, the 2nd engine purpose is often described as being necessary to carry you to the scene of the crash.

 

[bcp]

Many years ago I read that the chance of a fatal crash was higher in a light twin with one engine failure that in a single with one engine failure.

Bruce