[ARC5] Lady Be Good - more.

[Lenox Carruth]

It does.  

The ditching problem with the B-24 was with water landings.  The roller bomb
bay doors collapsed with the water pressure and quickly filled the aft
fuselage with water sinking the plane.  Although, the B-24 was equipped with
two life rafts and a "Gibson Girl."

Comparatively low horsepower?  Compared with the B-17 that had four Wright
1820 1,200 horsepower engines, the B-24 had four Pratt & Whitney 1830 1,200
horsepower engines.

I would be willing to bet that the skin strength of the B-24 was no
different than that of the B-17 or B-29.

Note that the Lady Be Good survived the landing quite well even though it
landed without anyone aboard!

Lenox



-----Original Message-----
From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of jcoward5452 at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
To: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org; Arc5 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARC5] Lady Be Good - more.



I thought the wing pased through the fuselage as one piece.
Jay





-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Hanz <aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org>
To: Arc5 <Arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sun, May 1, 2011 2:14 pm
Subject: Re: [ARC5] Lady Be Good - more.


Anyone who has had a chance to touch the side of a B-24 or its PB4Y-* 
rethren know the fuselage is a *huge* mass with paper thin aluminum 
kin.  Combine that lack of fuselage strength with comparatively low 
orsepower and a Davis wing that had very poor low speed characteristics 
nd was basically tacked onto the sides rather than having a central 
ing spar, and you had an uncomfortable feeling anytime you took one 
p.  Yes, there are huge supporters of the aircraft who will cry foul 
ith such an assessment, but those who were skeptical its flyability in 
unusual" flight attitudes are probably in the majority.  An old friend 
n B-29s actually refused a trip back to the states in one at war's end 
ecause of its reputation in the Pacific...and was relieved that he did 
o when the aircraft he was supposed to be on crashed on takeoff.  Yup, 
nly a single data point, but it was evidently a common perception in 
he Pacific Theater.
   - Mike
On 5/1/2011 3:09 PM, Michael A. Bittner wrote:
 "Was the B-24 so dangerous in a water landing that no one could have gotten

ut of it?"

 A veteran of the Polesti raid was on the Military Channel the other night.
He 
ndicated that the B-24 had very bad ditching characterisitcs.

 Mike, W6MAB
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Kenneth G. Gordon
    To: Arc5 at mailman.qth.net
    Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 11:59 AM
    Subject: [ARC5] Lady Be Good - more.


    One thing that has always bothered me about the LBG incident was why did
    they all bail out?

    Was the B-24 so dangerous in a water landing that no one could have
gotten
    out of it?

    When found, three of the props were feathered, indicating, obviously,
that
    they were very dangerously low on fuel.

 ______________________________________________________________
 ARC5 mailing list
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net

 This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
 Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


______________________________________________________________
RC5 mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
ARC5 mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html