BBMF Lancaster emergency landing : everyone is safe

Rod Schneider · **Posted:** Fri May 08, 2015 10:19 am

daviemax wrote:

To those who did not like my post:

I am a certificated private pilot. I am very well aware of the risks associated with flying, and specifically of fire in flight.

I am also an historian, and I have researched many cases where B-17s flew very long distances while enduring a fire in flight. A good example is that of VB-17G 44-6975 which suffered a severe fire behind the firewall on number 4 engine but flew many miles until landing safely at Wright on 14 January 1954.

I certainly wasn't aboard Liberty Belle but I doubt those writing these posts were either. The purpose of my original post was not to criticize the decision of Belle's PIC. It was to point out the alternative, which I have every right to do.

I was not on Liberty Belle, either, but I WAS in the T-6 that was following them and I (and the T-6 pilot) saw the fire and could see how fast it was growing. It was absolutely the correct decision NOT to try and reach the airport. Even in the short time from seeing the fire until the wheels were stopped on the ground, there were significant control issues beginning to occur. I am 100% sure that there would have been a terrific tragedy if the flight had been extended. Anyone else offering opinions really doesn't have a clue.........

peter · **Posted:** Fri May 08, 2015 10:21 am

Well said Rod, they might the right decision to get her down when they did IMHO...

JohnH · **Posted:** Sat May 09, 2015 1:56 am

Criticizing the Liberty Belle crew for making the correct decision takes the cake as the dumbest thing I've ever seen on this forum. :axe:

Mike · **Joined:** Tue May 04, 2004 8:54 am **Posts:** 3331

A bullet was dodged this week. The Lancaster flew across the North Sea to Holland and back for a flypast on Saturday. When the engine fire happened a few days later they were on a local flight, within sight of home base. I'll very happily take that piece of luck, and hope to see the Lancaster restored to full health again soon.

avenger2504 · **Posted:** Sat May 09, 2015 4:57 pm

Looks like the firewall did it's job! Glad to see her safely on the ground and a safe crew.

Forgotten Field · **Posted:** Sat May 09, 2015 8:30 pm

Great job BBMF!

For the... uhhh... experts here, this is another example of why you should put it down ASAP when you have fire. Fire suppression? They were over the everglades, which is well known for its fire suppression capabilities as well as alligators.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ValuJet_Flight_592

b29driver · **Posted:** Sun May 10, 2015 9:24 am

Several years ago FIFI had an engine fire. Had it not happened in the traffic pattern at Tulsa we would probably be without her.

I was supposed to fly nonstop to the east coast on the next flight.

mlenoch · **Posted:** Sun May 10, 2015 10:00 am

My interest is in knowing the decisions the pilot in command made.
My interest lies in knowing what I can apply to my warbird operations.
However, this site has 'driven away' many warbird operators because of the very forceful opinions regarding those decisions.
Thus, I am dismayed at the loss of my opportunity to further my warbird operational knowledge base.
(But fear not ye readers, warbird operator peers can be just as rude, crude, opinionated and downright debasing. This is a known and common human trait.)

VL

Matt Gunsch · **Posted:** Sun May 10, 2015 11:05 am

daviemax wrote:

To those who did not like my post:

I am a certificated private pilot. I am very well aware of the risks associated with flying, and specifically of fire in flight.

I am also an historian, and I have researched many cases where B-17s flew very long distances while enduring a fire in flight. A good example is that of VB-17G 44-6975 which suffered a severe fire behind the firewall on number 4 engine but flew many miles until landing safely at Wright on 14 January 1954.

I certainly wasn't aboard Liberty Belle but I doubt those writing these posts were either. The purpose of my original post was not to criticize the decision of Belle's PIC. It was to point out the alternative, which I have every right to do.

Wow, a private pilot, does that make you a expert, and you have studied B-17s ? How many have you worked on ? Restored ? Crewed ?
Oh, and how many have you studied that had the original tanks removed and replaced with fabricated metal tanks ?

When a bullet proof tank leaks, it leaks it does not pour fuel as a metal tank will when it is ruptured.

oh, and so you know, I am a private pilot as well, I also am a A&P, and a IA, and I have crewed, worked on and helped to restore a B-17

If there is any blame to be placed in the loss of the Liberty Belle it should go to the mechanic who did the "repair" and fire dept who let it burn.

Fouga23 · **Posted:** Sun May 10, 2015 11:08 am

Matt Gunsch wrote:

and fire dept who let it burn.

I'm sure the fire dept did what they could. Wasn't the aircraft unreachable with their equipment due to the ground conditions?

maxum96 · **Posted:** Sun May 10, 2015 8:22 pm

Matt Gunsch wrote:

If there is any blame to be placed in the loss of the Liberty Belle it should go to the mechanic who did the "repair" and fire dept who let it burn.

Matt, I'm sure as you know the firefighters couldn't get to the aircraft due to the soggy field. I don't care what anyone thinks, firefighters do not want to watch things burn down. The other you thing you need to remember, once the fire gets to a certain point it doesn't matter how much water they pour on it. It's not going to go out. You know better than most a B-17 full of 100LL and motor oil is gonna burn like hell.

Chuck Giese · **Posted:** Mon May 11, 2015 6:56 am

And my favorite post from the Kee Bird thread:

Matt Gunsch wrote:

I love all these monday morning quarterbacks who were not there, or have no idea what was going on, woulda, shoulda coulda all you want, you were not there, you did not make the call.

Yep, still works.

Tim Savage · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 8:26 pm **Posts:** 630

Interestingly, I was just having this discussion a few weeks ago with one of the guys who flies my A-26. It is my opinion for my operation when my butt and my son's butt are sitting in the airplane, that if we have a fire, and we aren't right over the top an airport and the fire suppression system doesn't work, we are putting it in the closest field.

My life or my child's life isn't worth the risk to save a piece of metal.

I don't care whether airplanes being operated by the military in World War Two or 1954 flew for long distances on fire. Different mission, different times.

I am sure no one that was watching the fire stream back on Liberty Belle from the inside of the airplane were all that anxious to try to get to an airport to potentially save the airplane as the risk of their own life. And even if they had made it the airport would the outcome have been much different? The vast majority of the airports in this country have no full time CFR in place...they are relying on the local fire department who may or may not have been equipped to fight this fire...they carry minimal foam from what I understand.

It is too easy for those who don't operate these airplanes to theorize what they would or wouldn't do....based on what they have read in a book. Let me tell you, it is a lot different when you have smoke in the cockpit etc. You are looking for a place to land. Right now.

RyanShort1 · **Posted:** Mon May 11, 2015 8:06 am

Tim Savage wrote:

Interestingly, I was just having this discussion a few weeks ago with one of the guys who flies my A-26. It is my opinion for my operation when my butt and my son's butt are sitting in the airplane, that if we have a fire, and we aren't right over the top an airport and the fire suppression system doesn't work, we are putting it in the closest field.

My life or my child's life isn't worth the risk to save a piece of metal.

I don't care whether airplanes being operated by the military in World War Two or 1954 flew for long distances on fire. Different mission, different times.

I am sure no one that was watching the fire stream back on Liberty Belle from the inside of the airplane were all that anxious to try to get to an airport to potentially save the airplane as the risk of their own life. And even if they had made it the airport would the outcome have been much different? The vast majority of the airports in this country have no full time CFR in place...they are relying on the local fire department who may or may not have been equipped to fight this fire...they carry minimal foam from what I understand.

It is too easy for those who don't operate these airplanes to theorize what they would or wouldn't do....based on what they have read in a book. Let me tell you, it is a lot different when you have smoke in the cockpit etc. You are looking for a place to land. Right now.

Yep, and how were they to know that the field was too muddy for the fire trucks to get there? No one would be armchair quarterbacking this if the ground had been a tad bit harder and the fire trucks had been able to put the fire out.

happymeal · **Joined:** Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:00 am **Posts:** 215

Tim, Vlado, thank you for your contributions. The only ones I value, as far as this post has been running.

Warbird Information Exchange

BBMF Lancaster emergency landing : everyone is safe

Who is online