# Battle Damaged B-17s



## Gnomey (Jan 4, 2005)

Here is a good website on battle-damaged B-17s. http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/contents.htm
It is amazing how much damage some of them took and still flew  .

Here are some examples:


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 4, 2005)

Udet needs to take a look at that site as it merely serves to prove my point from the "best bomber" thread.


----------



## evangilder (Jan 5, 2005)

You may want to check out the story of the "All American". It was involved in a mid-air collision with an FW-190 that almost cut the B-17 in 2. She made it home and the airframe collapsed soon after landing. I wouldn't call it a normal occurrence, but it was amazing!


----------



## plan_D (Jan 5, 2005)

I've seen them before but they never fail to amaze me. Those B-17s certainly could take a kicking. I've seen this picture of a waist gunner with a big hole in his FlaK jacket which was caused by a deflected 20mm round that had ricocheted through the fuselage of the -17, luckily he got it in the chest and nowhere else.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 5, 2005)

It's unbelievable what some of those Forts took!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 5, 2005)

but allot of them still went down..................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 5, 2005)

Its still unbelieveable, I cant see lancs taking that much damage and surviving...


----------



## wmaxt (Jan 5, 2005)

I heard (I only heard it once so I may be off a little) that tha original 'Memphis Bell' had

9 Engine replacements
2 wing replacements
1 complete eppenage replacement
1ea rudder and elevator replacement 
minor stuff every mission

for 25 missions! This level of maintenance was "normal"  

One of the reasons the Movie was over the top is that they tried to illistrate too much of this.


----------



## plan_D (Jan 6, 2005)

So, in fact, the Memphis Belle wasn't the original Memphis Belle - at all.


----------



## evangilder (Jan 6, 2005)

I really don't think that ANY surviving fortresses were all factory original parts when they returned. I would be real surprised if there were. Like the new sig, plan_d.


----------



## plan_D (Jan 6, 2005)

So, the Memphis Belle never finished 25 missions. It just kept leaving bits all over Europe. I would be surprised if any actually made it unscathed. I doubt that's possible, with all the FlaK. 

And thank ya, better if it was a 11 Sqn. Lightning but hey - got to make do.


----------



## evangilder (Jan 6, 2005)

Well, I guess you could say MOST of the Memphis Belle made it through. It was usually more about the crew making it through than the airplane. There are probably very few, if any airplane from the war on any side that made it through without having something replaced. Combat has a tendency to be a little hard on the equipment.


----------



## plan_D (Jan 6, 2005)

Yeah, better the equipment gets it tough and lose bits here and there than losing people.


----------



## evangilder (Jan 6, 2005)

Agreed, you can always make new parts. The B-17s may have had to be scrapped after making it back, but the crews could get another plane to fly more missions.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 6, 2005)

evangilder said:


> You may want to check out the story of the "All American". It was involved in a mid-air collision with an FW-190 that almost cut the B-17 in 2. She made it home and the airframe collapsed soon after landing. I wouldn't call it a normal occurrence, but it was amazing!



Question - what happened to the Tail Guner in all of this?


----------



## evangilder (Jan 6, 2005)

I don't have the full story, but I do have the following:
_A mid-air collision on February 1, 1943 between a B-17 and a German fighter over the Tunis dock area became the subject of one of the most famous photographs of World War II. An enemy fighter attacking a 97th Bomb Group formation went out of control, probably with a wounded or dead pilot. It crashed into the lead aircraft of the flight, ripped a wing off the Fortress, and caused it to crash. The enemy fighter then continued its crashing descent into the rear of the fuselage of a Fortress named All American, piloted by Lt. Kendrick R. Bragg, of the 414th Bomb Squadron. When it struck, the fighter broke apart, but left some pieces in the B-17. The left horizontal stabilizer of the Fortress and left elevator were completely torn away. The vertical fin and the rudder had been damaged, the fuselage had been cut approximately two-thirds through, the control cables were severed, and the electrical and oxygen systems were damaged. Although the tail swayed in the breeze, one elevator cable still worked, and the aircraft still flew-miraculously! The aircraft was brought in for an emergency landing and when the ambulance pulled alongside, it was waved off for not a single member of the crew had been injured. No one could believe that the aircraft could still fly in such a condition. The Fortress sat placidly until three men climbed aboard through the door in the fuselage, at which time the rear collapsed. The rugged old bird had done its job. _

I will see what else I can find out about that crew and mission.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 6, 2005)

Thanks, thats amazing. I think the Tail and Waist gunners were extremely lucky...


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 6, 2005)

Ball turret gunners would probably agree with that.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

the stirling could take allot of punishment as well, one came back with a telegraph pole stuck in her once


----------



## evangilder (Jan 6, 2005)

The question is why would an airplane that big be flying low enough to get a telegraph pole stuck in her? Foolhardy to be flying a combat mission that low with a plane that big.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 6, 2005)

Unless the Germans fired it from a flak cannon.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

british bombers tend to be quite manouverable, the lanc was proberly the most manouverable 4 engined heavy of the war, they could sometimes outmanouver an attacking fighter, she could even barrel role and one NF pilot said he saw one go into a loop-the-loop..................


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 6, 2005)

I'm definitely gonna ask my grandfather about _that_!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

he flew lancs??


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 6, 2005)

Yep.


----------



## evangilder (Jan 6, 2005)

A Lancaster outmanuever a fighter? Sorry I will never buy that. I don't care how "manueverable it is, it is still a big honking plane with 4 engines. Something that big does not manuever quickly.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

1) i'm talking about the Ju-88, she wasn't shockingly manouverable.........
2) are you familiar with the corkscrew manouver??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 6, 2005)

It only takes a pilot with a bit of skill to outdo the corkscrew...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

no it doesn't, even by day it was an extremely difficult manouver to follow, and there's not way to counter it unless you're a crack shot.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 6, 2005)

It wouldnt be able to do it with 10,000lbs of bombs though...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

even fully bombed up she could...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 6, 2005)

Not so well though, no way.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

not as well but enough to suprise NFs and avoid getting shot down............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 6, 2005)

.....if theyre lucky...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2005)

it wasn't luck it was skill.............


----------



## Erich (Jan 6, 2005)

ah my young apprentices..........

correct, it was a skillful pilot that could corkscrew and evade a skilled German nf crew. there are enough nf accts that lost lancs and halibags on clear nights and more so when they zoomed up into the clouds.

Peter Spoden has told me about 3 different incidents when he flew his Ju 88G-6 that they would get behind and slightly above a Lanc and let the Lanc crews go through the corkscrew and when they came up and out of it he would fire.........


----------



## Erich (Jan 6, 2005)

as a side note go take a peek at the gun camera footage thread again and check the hits on the B-17's in the 3 films.........yes they B-17 and the B-24 could take a lot of damage and somehow make it back. Not every film individually shows a shoot down in those clips

if you chaps have ever been in the fuselage of a B-17/B-24 or any RAF 4 enigne heavy then you know there is not much room. with 2cm and 3cm rounds going through and tearing things apart it is a wonder that more crews were not killed and more a/c did not come back.

Erich ~


----------



## evangilder (Jan 6, 2005)

Manuevering to lose a nightfighter (getting out of his sight) versus having the fighter manuvering with you by day are very different though. It does look like Peter Spoden, and I am assuming other night fighter pilots, knew how to counter that manuever. 

But you are right, the quarters are cramped in all of the heavies (B-17, B-24, Lanc). Good point about the luck/divine intervention that kept some of those crewmen from being killed. It really is amazing.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 7, 2005)

thig is about countering the corkscrew, manouverability of the atticking fighter has little to do with it, the lanc isn't outmanouvering the fighter, it's making it very difiicult to get a good aim, and if you put a "drop" in there as well, you've got a chance................


----------



## Erich (Jan 7, 2005)

all German nf pilots in time learned how to take advantage of a corkscrewing RAF heavy; it was just that some German nf pilots were better shots than others..........


----------



## rebel8303 (Jan 9, 2005)

I had never imagined something like that 
A bomber bombing a bomber?
What kind of accident is this??


----------



## rebel8303 (Jan 9, 2005)

Ooops I posted them the wrong way the last one is the first


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 9, 2005)

I've seen that footage before. Someone either jumped the gun, or was out of formation, or both.
Shitt y thing!


----------



## Medvedya (Jan 9, 2005)

You're probably right about jumping the gun - creepback was a pretty common occurance. Can't really blame the crews for being eager to unload and get the Hell away though.

Here's a quote from Wireless Operator W 'Bill' Wareham's story of flying Lancasters in 467 Squadron, RAF Waddington.


http://www.wartimememories.co.uk/airfields/waddington.html

_.....You did have a 'creepback', because what used to happen was that obviously you wanted to get rid of your bombs, because it was quite a frightening few minutes, where your bomb doors were open and the aircraft was very vulnerable. You were making these corrections and the aircraft was going at a minimum speed, with the open doors adding to the drag. Everyone is getting at the bomb aimer to get rid of the bombs. Some bomb aimers, and ours, would at times, instead of getting to the centre, drop their bombs on certain fires that had been created by people that had gone before you. So you did tend to get this 'creepback'. I think it was fear, as much as anything and wanting to get the job done._


----------



## Erich (Jan 9, 2005)

A Br 21 that came through the opposite side and blew this side out and slightly upward...........and yet the craft made it back


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 10, 2005)

Nice pic...what plane is it?


----------



## Erich (Jan 10, 2005)

good morning or good afternoon depending where you live....

a B-17 but not sure the bomb group


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 10, 2005)

Good evening where I live 

Ah right thanks...why couldnt I see that?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 10, 2005)

you had your eyes closed??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 10, 2005)

Its one theory but unfeasible nonetheless...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 11, 2005)

how is it unfeasible?? it's very possible, you didn't see it, because you had your eyes closed................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 11, 2005)

But i knew there was a plane there in the first place otherwise I wouldnt have asked the question...therefore unfeasible...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2005)

that's a very good point.........

you're still stupid for not knowing what it was


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 13, 2005)

Me thinks you'd have had a similar problem...when its a close up of a very undetailed part of a plane which would be hard to tell in the first place, its made harder with a huge hole in the side...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2005)

in this istance i knew what it was..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 13, 2005)

Sure, I bet you dont even know what the plane in my siggy is


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2005)

well it's a whild stab in the dark, but a FW-190??


----------



## plan_D (Jan 13, 2005)

Whild? What are you drinking then, orange juice?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2005)

sorry, been a bit heavy on the actimel tonight


----------



## plan_D (Jan 13, 2005)

So, whild is that LIKE wild but MUCH wilder...like instead of Rolf Harris in the morning hair...it's Jodie Marsh sloshed off her face at a strippers party...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 14, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> sorry, been a bit heavy on the actimel tonight



Damn I thought I warned you off that shit...


----------



## Medvedya (Jan 14, 2005)

Those adverts are the most irritating on the planet........dah dah dah dahhhh! Grrrrr! Where's the remote!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 14, 2005)

B&Q adverts are worse...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 14, 2005)

i agreebut there's these adverts on pirate FM that's worse............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 14, 2005)

Hell yeah...

"Robin Lloyds! The endowment people...  "


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 14, 2005)

it gets worse...........


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 14, 2005)

I'll ask the obvious question that all ignorant North Americans are dying to ask.  
What is actimel?


----------



## evangilder (Jan 14, 2005)

From the UK Guardian:
_Actimel is one of those health drinks favoured by women whose busy lifestyles and morbid calorie-counting means they have neither the time nor the inclination to actually eat. It is not this, though, that should bother us. Rather it's the sinister and worryingly timely surveillance-society plot. A grinning glassy-eyed girl bursts into a pharmacy and says that she's been drinking the stuff for some time now and it has had no discernible effects. The pharmacist, a deeply sinister woman in horn-rimmed spectacles and a white coat reminiscent of animal labs, then plays footage of Actimel-girl running marathons, leap-frogging parking meters, wrestling with traffic and generally behaving in ways that would reliably see most of us confined to some fairly secure accommodation._

Looks like some kind of energy drink?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 14, 2005)

Yep, it tastes ing, NEVER drink it.


----------

