Warbird Information Exchange

It seems like there are a few B-24D noses around but with no fuselage, engines, wings, etc. to call there own.

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/b24regis ... 40557.html

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/b24regis ... 40461.html

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/b24regis ... weeks.html

My question is, couldn’t somebody come along and scrape up a Privateer fuselage, engines, and the other basic components, along with one of these noses, and slowly put together a complete B-24D?

I know there is alot more to it but just wondering if anybody else thought about this.

Chris

Great minds...

I asked a similar question a while ago... here's the responses I got:

http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... =b24+pb4y2

As to what happened to some of the rest of the B-24s, the story that always seems to pop up is that when they were recovered (by Tallichet?) the fuselages were heavily damaged in transit and were eventually scrapped, with only the noses being saved. Someone out there on WIX knows more, I'm sure.

I'm a huge B-24 fan, and would love to see more of them in the air- despite the often mentioned financial and logistical challenges. You and I can just keep dreaming.

kevin

_________________
FOUND the elusive DT-built B-24! Woo-hoo!!!

Haha yea.

Nothing would ever get done without that first initial dream. Especially in our hobby, dreaming is a major factor in my opinion!

The 2 ex Tallichet B-24 nose sections are also listed in the B-24 survivor section of the lastest Warbird Digest. Reading through it last night I was struck with the same question.
Does anyone know where these 2 B-24's were recovered from?
I'd imagine breaking them down for rail transit was quite a story...

While on the subject of my favorite bomber, what is the story of this nose?

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/b24regis ... 02369.html

And this body?

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/b24regis ... 49001.html

And ths one in general?

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/b24regis ... china.html

Canada, and though damaged, scrapped back then, but I'm sure in this day and age probably means they were restorable. Sad.

John

Ya really wanna know? It's a little convoluted...

The nose section of 40-2369 is stored in Mesa, Arizona, pending additional restoration for eventual display. It's on odd survivor's tale... "69" was indeed one of the early "A" block Liberators. During its service with Army Air Forces - not long after it rolled off of the production line - "69" suffered a nose gear failure as identified on the aircraft history card as supplied by USAF back in the 1990s to a group of Liberator fans (myself included) chasing info on this one. The extent of the nose gear failure is unknown - whether this was a landing accident or ramp mishap nobody seems sure. But it appears it was extensive enough that the military consulted factory tech reps to look into the matter.

The airplane was sent back to CVAC, San Diego, Calif., for re-work. While it was there, the "A" model had been improved upon with the removal of the separate flight engineer's station, making this relatively new airplane somewhat obsolete. The greenhouse nose was removed and replaced with a hard shell cargo nose, as was the armaments package, and while at CVAC the airplane was reconfigured to a transport ship. This resulted in the reclassification of this airplane by the military as a "RB" - "Restricted Bomber."

The airplane was still a military ship and was assigned to Air Transport Command. Whilst with ATC, it was assigned again for use by Consairway, which was a contract airline operated exclusively by Consolidated-Vultee employees flying for ATC. For the duration of the war old "69" was a regular runner of mail, parts, medical supplies, and personnel from what is now Travis AFB in California to Hickham, Hawaii and then on through the SWP into Australia and back again.

A little bit of information about the wartime service of this airplane can be read in a book called "Flying, Dying and Fornicating" (yup, this really is the title) by a former Consairways captain (William Beeman) who at 20 years of age was the youngest pilot with this airline regularly flying the SWP route. She carried no nose art, but old "69" was nicknamed "Our Kissin' Cousin'" by Consairway crews with a rather naughty reference about a sexual act as hinted at by the aircraft serial number. Probably enough said about THAT on this message board...

Shortly after VJ Day 40-2369 logged her final flight to Storage Depot 41, Kingman, Arizona. She'd surpassed over 10,000 flight hours during her years of service with USAAC, USAAF and ATC through Consairway (not too shabby for an "A" model Libby, eh Gary Austin?). Noted aircraft hsitorian Bill Larkins photographed this ship - along with many others - during his now famous photo trip through Kingman in February 1947. His photo shows her still wearing the ATC markings and the little cargo door opened on the nose of the ship. Her blades are gone. She was scrapped shortly thereafter.

It appears someone thought about - or possibly had - purchased a low-time Liberator and had contemplated about removing turrets and making a sleek cargo plane (such as one could out of a military surplus B-24). Before 40-2369 was fed into the smelters, someone used an axe to beat the nose section off of the airframe, just a little bit behind of the nosewheel bay near what would have been the navigator's section. This is the "nose section" that survived.

The years from 1947 into the 1960s and how it survived and who had it are sketchy. It is believed this was part of a collection of Liberator stuff owned by Bob Bean and stored at the Blythe airport in California. The nose was then acquired sometime in the 1960s by Sergio Tommasoni, one of the founders of the aerial application firm T & G Aviation of Chandler, Arizona. Serge found it and many other Liberator parts at a scrapyard in Tucson, Arizona. T & G at one time had two PB4Y-2 "Privateers" that were aerial applicators, and this nose section was held in the boneyard in the event one of the -4Y's sufffered a nose gear failure and the mechanics needed to graft on a new nose section. They never did. The firm lost a -4Y in a firefighting accident in the early 1970s and finally sold their remaining PB4Y-2 to Lone Star Flight Museum, Galveston, Texas, in 1990-91. The faded serial number on this nose section was (and still is) visible and this information was used to search for some of the military history on the aircraft.

The nose section was saved from scrapping again in the early 1990s and acquired by a rather eccentric, oddball and unusually foul-tempered afficionado of distressed WWII aircraft and moved to Mesa, Arizona, who has aquired a "D" model greenhouse and related bits and pieces for this nose section and is returning it to pre-war "A" configuration.

This is what I know about the 24s in daves backyard. These were somewhat intact airplanes when dave found them in canada.The wings were cut inboard of the outboard attach points and at the time early 70s was deemed by the guys who worked for dave as junk.I worked there in the late 80s and early 90s and both noses were there and most of the bombay bulkheads and doors. I thought then they could be rebuilt because of all the goodies laying around the backyard.The guy i worked under said i was crazy and that you cant rebuild anything torn up that bad.Some people in positions of power at daves at the time just had no vision.Mike Kelner sure has it and a bunch of people looked at that bird before he got it and said it was junk and those same people sing another tune today.

_________________
Hang The Expense

Thanks Hang, I knew you would know and was hoping you would post on this thread.

John

I think the "attitude" to the condition of these aircraft in the 1970's is no different to crashed mustangs etc at the time, and may have also been expressed in terms of being beyond airworthy restoration? the attitude to restore aircraft to static display was (and is someways still is) less a interest to private individuals and owners.

At the same time the Indian B-24s were still or recently available most in ferryable condition which would have further reduced the apparant worth of these airframes.

Like all things, these airframes would now be considered valuable acquisitions for most collections and well worth the effort to restore.

As referred to above, there are still a number of viable wrecks in Canada, Indonesia and PNG that should be supported for recovery and restoration, as well as two kits sets already in the hands of organisations, not counting the likely recovery of "Lady Be Good" which will no doubt only ever be presented as a wreck regardless of its eventual location?

The B-24 is poorly represented in preservation given its contribution in WW2, but that is true of Halifax's Stirlings or even Lancasters, any effort to restore the existing recoveries or to achieve recovery of remaining viable wrecks should be encouraged.

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

The LADY BE GOOD is not a viable alternative. Politics puts it out of the system for ever and from the pictures I've seen of it, there is virtually nothing left after they recovered it from the desert.

The problem with the noses that are out there is that they are posessed (consider that a term far beyond OWNED) by entities that are not going to give them up. For the cost and hassle, maybe building 2 B-24s out of Privateers may not be a bad idea and just skipping the "nose" acquisition. (Of course there are some serious $$$$$ problems in doing that; which is offset by the fact that there are some people out there with SERIOUS $$$ that could go into the project)

There is another B-24 nose at the 8th AF Museum at Savanah GA. It looks pretty good. The coolest thing they have there is a ME-163 that is unrestored and inside.

Mark H

Here's one of the Tallichet B-24 noses at Chino in 1983:



(the Hudson nose is still at Chino in the same condition!)

_________________

All right, Mister Dorfmann, start pullin'!
Pilot: "Flap switch works hard in down position."
Mechanic: "Flap switch checked OK. Pilot needs more P.T." - Flight report, TB-17G 42-102875 (Hobbs AAF)

Not what I heard from a respected aviation historian that inspected the aircraft recently.

There's a long road yet, and it'll never be restored to airworthy, but a static display (and most likely as a complete, one hopes, wreck) is 'probable' in due course.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

I heard something about that the other day as well. I can't remember where it was that I saw that.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director

JDK

Thats good to hear, there have been rumblings out some plans in that direction and I would hope that it is preserved as a wreck and perhaps able to be recreated into a desert setting.

Its provenance is now as the wreck and the history that goes with that, rather than as just a B24 to be restored.

I do however support the recovery and static restoration of other B24 wrecks, other than LBG, by competent and capable institutions if they exist.


I know some had a similar view to Swampghost and even leaving it in situ to slowly rot away, where as my attitude to Swampghost differs to LBG and I support restoration of the B17 versus conservation for the B24 despite their relative surviving numbers perhaps arguing for the reverse.

Hopefully you can enlighten us further or re-post here when some more details are available on LBG's future?


regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"