Bomb Bay Doors for Diamond Lil?

[mike furline]

A couple of early B-24's........

Dated June 6, 1942. Damaged LB-30 (may be Kodiak, AK). Photo contains LB-30, B-18, P-39 and F4F.



Simply marked "B-24 Liberator(converted to Transport)". Looks like the British fin flashes have been over painted on the tail.

[Brad]

Minor correction Brad- all B-24s built for and delivered to the British received an LB-30 designation, all the way past the LB-30 Liberator VIII now known as "Witchcraft".

I was alluding to the fact that the British recieved a couple of models of the B-24, not just the "A" designated as LB-30.

[CAPFlyer]

Ahh, my apologies. Misunderstood.

[maxum96]

A couple of early B-24's........

San Diego. The sawtooth roofed buildings in the background are still there.

[Pogo]

Brad, thanks a million - I always savor DL/927 discussions. Such a perfectly wonderful warbird - the more you know about it, the more astounding it becomes. My own personal favorite daydream for that bird is a properly short B-24 A nose, more than bomb bay.

[pontiac58]

I personally don't get the whole, it needs to have a bomb bay put back in her. She is what she is, and has been bomb bay less, for way more time then she had a bomb bay. She has a really neat history, let her have her belly so she can tell the story of what she was and is.

[JFS61]

If the main purpose of 927 is giving rides, reinstalling the bomb doors and the racks (thus removing the seating in the process) is going to put a major crimp in that.

If you going to take it to that level, then while you're at, go ahead, re-route the control cables, and install an fully accurate B-24A cockpit and nose section. No more of this halfway stuff.

[CAPFlyer]

While doing the bomb bays is fairly doable with money to offset the time, doing the nose really isn't. It would require significant reworking and creation of structure to fix, including redoing the entire cockpit window area as they were part of what was replaced during the war when they put the R3Y nose on. Additionally, that change was done for safety of flight reasons more than anything. The short-nose B-24 was known for being pretty sensitive in longitude and a narrow CG envelope. That is why the nose was extended with the B-24D (the first full production model). It didn't fully fix the problem, but it made it much more manageable. Gary was pretty clear that while he wanted to put the gun ring in and put the doors back on eventually, the nose and cockpit windows were staying because they were safety improvements.

[Pogo]

She is what she is, and has been bomb bay less, for way more time then she had a bomb bay. She has a really neat history...

^^^ Yep!

[Pogmusic]

Yep! A B24ALB30C87

[Brad]

Yep! A B24ALB30C87

Diamond Lil was never a C-87. She was the prototype for the prototype C-87. C-87s, except for the prototype were purpose built from the factory as C-87s.

[Mark Sampson]

'Diamond Lil' was the first WWII aircraft I ever saw up close. She and 'FIFI' staged through Rochester, in the fall of 1983, and I went out to the airport to take a look. Of course I was quite impressed- even though I didn't know her history. By the next year I was attending the (then-new) airshow at Geneseo, and it's been downhill from there.
Given Diamond Lil's history, It makes no sense to try and turn her into something she never was. I understand the desire to have a flying B-24D, but please, not on this airframe.

[Brad]

I understand the desire to have a flying B-24D, but please, not on this airframe.

There is no plan or desire to turn Diamond Lil into a B-24D. She is not and never was one. The desire is to someday put her back in true, or as close as possible, B-24A configuration. That is the configuration she would have been in with the US had the airplane not been sold to the British. The A & D are totally different airplanes. The nose glass makes people think they are the same. But they aren’t.

Equally challenging and expensive would be to put Lil back into the LB-30 configuration that she was in when accepted by the British. That is essentially, as I said earlier, a B-24A with British standard bomb shackles, radios, weapons, Sperry bombsight and British markings over the US markings.

[Brad]

If the main purpose of 927 is giving rides, reinstalling the bomb doors and the racks (thus removing the seating in the process) is going to put a major crimp in that.

It wouldn’t hamper the ride program. The seats would be relocated and the show would go on. Pretty much the way the Collings Foundation does with their B-24.

[Brad]

I personally don't get the whole, it needs to have a bomb bay put back in her. She is what she is, and has been bomb bay less, for way more time then she had a bomb bay. She has a really neat history, let her have her belly so she can tell the story of what she was and is.

She had a very plush executive interior far longer than she had a bomb bay or military cargo configuration. Even longer than that, she had a couple of different civilian versions of military paint jobs with varying degrees of executive interior and semi military/civilian interior. The intent and very long term plan is to put her back, as close as possible, to the condition she would have been in had she gone to the Americans when delivered as a fully configured bomber, instead of going to the British, as a fully configured bomber.