🙂 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-13471334
” There are believed to be only 13 B-17 Flying Fortresses remaining, three of which are airworthy.”
🙂 There’s more than that isn’t there ?
By: Bomberboy - 16th June 2011 at 15:45
No, that’s why I asked a question and not made a statement!;)
Unfortunately, the way you scribed it, it read more like a statement rather than an actual question, even though it had a question mark on the end but now you have clarified it for me….thanks.
Actually I remembered the Ils after I posted, I kind of knew Spit and 190 levels were close to B-24, but genuinely surprised that 109 production was as high as that!
The B-24 is generally regarded as the most highly produced US type.
Sounds much better.
JDK makes a good case for the survival ratio, but thought that Libs were as populor for fire bombing use post-war?
I’m guessing that the other thing which influences B-24 survival numbers is the types’ use through more theatres and roles than the B-17 and thus higher likelyhood to loss through enemy action and accidents?
The privateer was indeed used for water bombing as was the 17, but i don’t think 24’s were used for the role? I am willing to be educated here.
Although the discussion revolves around the poor survival ratio of the 24, does that not surely make those of the 190, 109 and IL2 far worse?
Bomberboy
By: pagen01 - 16th June 2011 at 15:31
Are you sure about this? So where do Spits and ME 109’s fare in this statement you have made?
No, that’s why I asked a question and not made a statement!;)
Actually I remembered the Ils after I posted, I kind of knew Spit and 190 levels were close to B-24, but genuinely surprised that 109 production was as high as that!
The B-24 is generally regarded as the most highly produced US type.
JDK makes a good case for the survival ratio, but thought that Libs were as populor for fire bombing use post-war?
I’m guessing that the other thing which influences B-24 survival numbers is the types’ use through more theatres and roles than the B-17 and thus higher likelyhood to loss through enemy action and accidents?
By: JDK - 16th June 2011 at 15:06
The critical factor is survival isn’t numbers built (regard that as ‘cost of entry’) but a secondary role to bridge between primary use and preservation. This is usually obvious in significance when you count up how the survivors survived. The majority of surviving B-24s were used by the Indians for maritime reconnaissance, without which, etc, but they only got to preservation at a last gasp. B-17s were being used for mapping (by the IGN, the French) and firebombing (in the US) into the preservation era.
(Incidentally you could include one Privateer in the numbers – but it’s preserved as / in firebombing colours.)
By: Sky High - 16th June 2011 at 14:43
That is right – followed by the B17.
By: AdlerTag - 16th June 2011 at 14:35
If I remember rightly, the B24 is the most numerous heavy bomber in history, rather than the most produced military aircraft.
By: Sky High - 16th June 2011 at 14:31
By my reckoning – rounded numbers:
IL2 36,000
109 34,000
Spitfire 20,000
190 20,000
B24 18,000
By: Bomberboy - 16th June 2011 at 14:25
Which kind of begs the question of how come there are far more B-17s about than B-24s?
A question I have been asking for many many years and I can only put it down to looks.
The 17 is much more aesthetically pleasing than a 24 with an arguably more memorable name. (bit like spits & hurri’s).
highest production of run of any military aircraft?
Are you sure about this? So where do Spits and ME 109’s fare in this statement you have made?
I believed that these were in the 20,000’s or so?
Bomberboy
By: pagen01 - 16th June 2011 at 13:59
Which kind of begs the question of how come there are far more B-17s about than B-24s?
18,482* B-24s were built (highest production of run of any military aircraft?) against 12,731* B-17s, you would think the balance would be slightly different.
*Wiki figures
By: Jester1979 - 16th June 2011 at 12:47
With at least two more B-17s I can think of being restored to airworthy condition
By: JDK - 16th June 2011 at 12:43
By my calculation there are now just 11 airworthy B-17s worldwide.
And now that would be 10 with the tragic hull loss of the Liberty Bell. (Let’s hope she’s back.)
But to put it in perspective, there are two times more B-17Gs airworthy than all the other airworthy surviving W.W.II four engined bombers put together!
(That’s two currently flying B-24s and two currently flying Lancasters, and a single B-29, if my fingers are up to the counting.)
By: Jester1979 - 16th June 2011 at 12:14
Glad Pink Lady is being kept undercover. Maybe they could offer taxi rides like Just Jane at East Kirkby
By: MK959 - 16th June 2011 at 12:05
What is the latest on Pink Lady ?
The only B-17 to see active service I believe ?
A new hangar is currently under construction to house her (photo by Frédérick Vandentorren): http://www.pbase.com/vdtpictures/image/135197071/original.jpg
By: Sky High - 16th June 2011 at 11:41
Still grounded as mentioned above due to insurance and other costs which were unsustainable.
By: AlanR - 16th June 2011 at 11:27
What is the latest on Pink Lady ?
The only B-17 to see active service I believe ?
Sign In
May 23, 2011 at 1:18 pm