SPANNERmkV wrote:
Top Turret? That subject has been known to give some GCWers Tourettes Syndrome. There are those that say we should not put it in because it restricts the Flight Engineers movement and we could put two more jumpseats in that area. CAN YOU SAY WARBIRD RIDES?
and more revenue?
I'll chime in on this one, for what it's worth.
I've been aboard B-17s with and without the top turret assembly installed, and I've crewed
Chuckie a number of times on local flights and air show outings. I, too, have mixed feelings about having the turret installed. So, I guess I'll commence to arguing with myself about it.
With the turret in place, movement is rather restricted on the flight deck. I've been aboard two B-17s with a complete top turret installed, and flown on one of those. Aboard that ship, two of the "Flight Experience Guests" (they're
NOT passengers, 'cuz that ain't legal!
) ride on the flight deck for takeoff and landing. They sit on the floor, facing aft, squeezed in between the flight crew's seats and the turret base, with the flight engineer standing up between them. I've hunkered down there myself for landing. It was very uncomfortable, and obviously there's no interesting view for the Guests, who not only can't see outside the airplane but can't even watch the flight crew do their jobs (which is something that's very interesting to most Guests). On that particular ship, having the turret installed did not limit the number of Guests that could fly. Having the turret installed really adds to the airplane's wartime authenticity. I'm a big fan of authenticity in a restoration when it's possible and practical. I must say that it was really cool for me and the other Guests to be able to stand up in that cramped turret and imagine what it might have been like for the gunner as he was taking aim at a gaggle of incoming Bf-109s!
There are certainly advantages to not having the top turret installed. As most of you know, we don't have a top turret installed on
Chuckie (we have an exterior-only replica, which looks pretty darned good from the outside). Instead, we have two military aircraft seats installed behind the pilot and copilot, facing forward, which means that our flight engineer and the "observer" have real seats to sit on for takeoff and landing, and they have a "view". It's much more comfortable for both of them, and it makes for a better experience for the Guest, who made a multi-hundred-dollar cash donation to our Museum prior to flying with us. If you've ever been aboard any B-17, you know that space is at a premium. It's not easy for the Guests or the crew to move around in the flight deck with the turret assembly taking up so much room. We often have Guests ask where the top turret is or where it should be, but I don't recall anyone complaining because we don't have one. In fact, I've had a few Guests tell me they're glad it isn't there, because it would restrict movement in the airplane. The extra weight has already been mentioned by someone else. Extra weight means extra fuel consumption. Those big ol' Studebakers are plenty thirsty without lugging a few hundred extra pounds aloft. We do have a partial top turret assembly in storage. It needs a lot of work and lacks a lot of parts (and it's NOT for sale). There has occasionally been discussion about trying to restore it and install it on the airplane. Whenever the topic comes up, the general concensus is to leave it out, for the very reasons I've just mentioned.
So... with a tip o' the hat to Howie Mandel... Turret, or No Turret?
What a quandary! Dang, I was hoping that I'd end up on one side of the fence or the other, but that apparently isn't going to happen.
Maybe someone else can come up with the definitive answer? Maybe not.
In either case -- turret or not -- please support the few remaining flyable B-17s! Help keep them operational so that future generations can see and appreciate them the way we do.
Cheers!