Ditching

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

Thanks for the informative information. Regarding the B-17 verses B-24 survival percentages, the larger B-17 wing enabled a longer float time and probably survived the impact better than the Davis Wing on the B-24.
 
Thanks for the informative information. Regarding the B-17 verses B-24 survival percentages, the larger B-17 wing enabled a longer float time and probably survived the impact better than the Davis Wing on the B-24.
But with respect Bill, the B 24 was used extensively on maritime missions ASW and ditching in the mid Atlantic was a different proposition to the North Sea, the statistics are very limited.
 
But with respect Bill, the B 24 was used extensively on maritime missions ASW and ditching in the mid Atlantic was a different proposition to the North Sea, the statistics are very limited.
I base my opinion on two factors. The B-24 Davis Wing was long, narrow and attached to the frame of the aircraft. The B-17 wing was wide and extended through the frame of the aircraft.
 
I base my opinion on two factors. The B-24 Davis Wing was long, narrow and attached to the frame of the aircraft. The B-17 wing was wide and extended through the frame of the aircraft.
I would say being low winged would be an advantage when ditching compared to a B 24, I was just saying that the planes had different roles and theatres in some respects so the bare statistics may not tell the whole story.
 

Users who are viewing this thread