A new B17 being restored?

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by syscom3, Sep 21, 2013.

  1. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
  2. Capt. Vick

    Capt. Vick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Messages:
    7,912
    Likes Received:
    639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Long Island, New York
    Good for them! I think I heard about these guys when the one landed in a field after an engine fire and burned to the ground. somehow the news crew followed up that story with a piece on these guys if I am remembering things correctly. Are they near each other?
     
  3. pattle

    pattle Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2013
    Messages:
    692
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    18
    So why were so many USAAF planes flown back to America at great risk and expense rather than being scrapped on site in which ever country they were in at wars end when it was clear they were no longer needed? I know many B26's were disposed of in Britain but from what I have heard B17's and B24's were mostly flown back across the Atlantic, I assume the fighters were scrapped in Britain rather than being shipped back?
    To add a little to this I am aware that for some time after the end of the war in both the UK and USA aircraft were virtually going straight from the production lines to the scrap yards and that these planes were often sold on condition that they were scrapped and not put into civilian use due to fears of ex military planes flooding the market and killing off the civilian aircraft industry.
    I have also heard stories of the USAAF burying their bomb stocks at airfields before abandoning them.
     
  4. javlin

    javlin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    4,771
    Likes Received:
    264
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Occupation:
    Mgr
    Location:
    MS
    My father was a radio operator on a B-17 and said something of that story with P-51s going for next to nothing but was that all part of the lore at the times :dontknow:
     
  5. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,779
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    It is actually quite true, sometimes the planes went for less than the price of the fuel in the tanks. The problem was what did you do with it after the the first tank of fuel was used up?

    few people could afford to buy the fuel for a fighter plane just to go joy riding. Surplus C-47s, C-46s killed the market for some post war airliners, even an AT-6 was going to burn a lot more fuel than a 4-5 seat cabin monoplane with a 200-300hp engine. Surplus trainers hurt the market for new light planes, not surplus fighters.
     
  6. gumbyk

    gumbyk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,627
    Likes Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    Aviation QMS/SMS consultant
    Location:
    Blenheim
    P-40's and P-51's were going for about 50 pounds here in NZ post war.

    Apparently the Lockheed Hudson at the NZ Airforce Museum spent some of its life being used as a chicken coop, because it was cheaper for farmers to buy these aircraft than to build one!
     
Loading...

Share This Page