B-17 Turbo Prop (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

tf34mech

Recruit
3
0
Feb 3, 2008
I read a article in a Military Aviation magazine about a B-17 that was converted after the war to Turbo Prop engines. The guy had two he was going to convert but the first one crash if I remember right and the second was never done. I think the use was for firefighting. Does anyone having any pictures or information on this plane? Thanks
Sean
 
These two pictures came from the book B-17 by warbird tech.
 

Attachments

  • turbo prop.JPG
    turbo prop.JPG
    41.4 KB · Views: 2,366
  • b-17.JPG
    b-17.JPG
    39.5 KB · Views: 3,215
Thank you for finding these pictures. This is a very interesting aircraft. I found the magazine that the article was in. It was July 2006 issue of Fly Past. I assume that posting a scan of the article or photos would be a no no?
Sean
 
Thank you for finding these pictures. This is a very interesting aircraft. I found the magazine that the article was in. It was July 2006 issue of Fly Past. I assume that posting a scan of the article or photos would be a no no?
Sean

Posting pictures and quoting the source of the photo is fine. There are instances where you can not find the source. Usually they are posted as unknown and if a source found is usally corrected by another member.
 
Here are some pics of the July issue of Fly Past.
 

Attachments

  • b-17pg1sm.jpg
    b-17pg1sm.jpg
    66.8 KB · Views: 699
  • b17pg2asm.jpg
    b17pg2asm.jpg
    39.1 KB · Views: 600
The converted B-17F used Rolls-Royce Dart turbines same as what were on the Vickers Viscount....They had named her "The Batmobile" prior to her crash.
 
One of the Forts used for the tests is now "restored" as "Liberty Belle" and was done by Tom Riley at his former base in Kissimmee, FL. I saw the plane back in 03 when I was there and have a few pictures--I'll try to find those and post them. If I'm not mistaken, Air Classics magazine had a nice write-up not too long ago about the plane as well as the history of the 5-engine project.


Jim
 
Wow! Yeah, I guess the B-17 would have been a little "overpowered" with four turboprops; as a guess, I would say the turboprops put out about twice the SHP as the "standard" Wright Cyclones.
 
Well, at 8 lbs. / gal., Water is one of the heaviest naturally occurring "chemicals" (for lack of a better word) around.
I imagine that plane held a LOT of water, so I bet there was some internal reinforcement of the structure, when it was re-designated as a fire bomber.
At that point, it may have been found that the original powerplants were a bit...er, lacking in power, trying to take off with a full load.

...and 38 years later, Wenatchee STILL looks like that! ;)


Elvis
 
Wow! Yeah, I guess the B-17 would have been a little "overpowered" with four turboprops; as a guess, I would say the turboprops put out about twice the SHP as the "standard" Wright Cyclones.

OVERPOWERED - there's no such thing! I guess it depends on which specific model of the turboprops went in for how much shp they generated.
 
wow, that ain't somethin' you see every day. more B-17s might have been spared if they were all turboprops. then again that wasn't even invented! LOL
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back