Sally B technical problem?

Hmmm.. do you know something we don’t ZRX.? If not i’m sure we will all know the truth when Elly and co get to the bottom of it.

I’ve come across that problem twice before & I could see how someone could miss one of those plastic plugs/caps.

That’s assuming they didn’t get a duff engine from the O/H shop. I’m not sure how much a fresh 1820 goes for these days, but the 2 1340’s I’ve changed in the past 2 months were around $35K (exchange, depending on damage to core etc) or about $43K outright buy with no exchange. The cause of those 2 swaps were one grenaded the blower section (but the crank was unharmed) & the other was just flat knackered @2300 hours.
The SallyB site says they received 360K from the sale of the land donation last year so they should be able to buy an engine from a reputable O/H shop.
The 2 1340’s I just hung were both Covingtons. I’ve been hearing good things recently about Anderson motors & bad things about Precision. Another name in the ring now is Nixon as he bought out Aircraft Cylinder in Sunland & moved the entire operation up to Tehachapi, so now we have Vintage Radials next to Vintage V12’s 🙂

I have every respect for the B17 Team and their engineers, its bad luck nothing more,

I have a feeling that Sally B isn’t operated on good/bad luck. I know none of the aircraft I work on operate on that principle… & as I said before 3 engines is WAY beyond bad luck.

Firstly, there can be no comparison between the Vulcan and Sally B. Sally B has operated successfully for many, many years, and this is the important bit, operated as a flying Memorial to the many thousands of men of the United States Army Air Force who died in the cause of the liberation of Europe. It’s a sad fact that Sally B’s problems would be resolved at a fraction of the costs incurred in the restoration and ongoing maintenance of the Vulcan.

I can’t comment on Sally B’s mechanical problems because of the simple fact that I’m not party to that information and I strongly suspect that even if I were I wouldn’t understand it. Some 88,000 USAAF airmen died during World War Two, IIRC somewhere around 50,000 in Europe alone. I know which aircraft has the greatest personal resonance for me.

Someone mentioned marketing? I suppose the big difference in approach is VTTS’s shotgun approach of give us more money or we scrap 558.

One final thought for the Vulcan fans. If the posting seen this morning on a thread about 558 is correct, then it appears the Vulcan is no more serviceable than Sally B today.

Regards,

kev35

I had always favoured the Lanc to the B17, but at the 60’th anniversary of the dams raid, the Lanc was a “no show” apparently it was too windy; Sally B however flew, and I was greatly impressed with the teams dedication, and so became a supporter, as a fringe benefit you can actually clamber aboard this A/C for free.

Tango Charlie,it is bad luck for the operators of this A/C, especially as they need the airshow (and public appearance) revenue to keep her flying, but sadly if it were just bad luck, it would be like having a stone chip in exactly the same place on the windscreen three times over, having barely got out of your drive.

Bad Luck ????

Look at Sally B’s overall record, years flown, shows attended both here and abroad, total these together, and divide by engine issues- think that says it all.

I drive on average 900-1100 miles per week all across the UK looking after customers from my various companies. In the last three years i have had one windscreen replaced (large M6 flying stone) sorry failed to get its reg! This year already i have two new screens, within three weeks of each other and only this week collected another big chip that will likely result in a further replacement. Bad luck or poor maintenance?? I have every respect for the B17 Team and their engineers, its bad luck nothing more, the pendulum will swing and we will see her go into a prolonged period of reliable serviceability.

It cannot help having to work in all weathers outside keeping her in fine fettle, is it not time that a fund raising effort was started to build a hanger for her at Duxford. I see a nice new hanger complete with visitors room and her history from build date to present displayed on a wall, with an elevated walk way around the hanger allowing visitors to see her from above both during maintenance and in the winter when dormant. erhaps all these so clled B17 “Experts” would like to think about this and put some money towards this, i am no expert on B17 matters and would happily make a contribution to a very worth while cause.

Just to emphasise the difficulty of keeping these aircraft in the air, bear in mind that the BBMF Lancaster has “gone tech” a couple of times this year and I would imagine they have more resources than the Sally B operation. Good luck to both of them says I.

Hi there, after reading yet another thread that seems to have got silly again I thought I would post my thoughts.
There is no comparison between the Vulcan and Sally B. They are two completey different operations.
Yes in the past we have had calls from the Sally B camp saying that if funds are not found then she may be grounded the following season, maybe not as dramatic as the “if we dont have the money by next week she will be scraped” approach from the Vulcan team.
And as regards the engine failures i think that anyone would/should be questioning the companies who refurbish/rebuild the engines and the guys that are fitting them.
The problem we have is that as a charitable trust and also a much loved feature of the airshow season for many years we seem to not be able to voice any worries or criticise it in any way. If it was a commercial concern then heads would be rolling by now due to lost revenue.
I am not in anyway mechanically minded but I would have thought that leaving bolts floating about within outlet pipes and badly manufactured bearings are pretty major issues which need to be addressed.
And just before anyone shoots me down in flames due to the comments made above both myself and my 11 year old son both missed seeing Sally B at Biggin the other weekend and that I for one have the greatest admiration for anyone who helps keep the great variety of aircraft that we see week in week out during the summer months. I have been going to airshows for many years (i think the first one I went to was at rochester well over 30 years ago). I think that anyone who spends the many hours required to keep aircraft like Sally B in the air should be given a medal from people who man the supporters stalls right the way up to the engineers who really get their hands mucky but that dosent mean that we as members of a public forum cannot ask questions as to whats gone wrong.
I hope that I have not upset anyone with the comments made and yes if I had the time and lived close enough to any of the groups who look after vintage aircraft then I would happily volunter.

Firstly, there can be no comparison between the Vulcan and Sally B. Sally B has operated successfully for many, many years, and this is the important bit, operated as a flying Memorial to the many thousands of men of the United States Army Air Force who died in the cause of the liberation of Europe. It’s a sad fact that Sally B’s problems would be resolved at a fraction of the costs incurred in the restoration and ongoing maintenance of the Vulcan.

I can’t comment on Sally B’s mechanical problems because of the simple fact that I’m not party to that information and I strongly suspect that even if I were I wouldn’t understand it. Some 88,000 USAAF airmen died during World War Two, IIRC somewhere around 50,000 in Europe alone. I know which aircraft has the greatest personal resonance for me.

Someone mentioned marketing? I suppose the big difference in approach is VTTS’s shotgun approach of give us more money or we scrap 558.

One final thought for the Vulcan fans. If the posting seen this morning on a thread about 558 is correct, then it appears the Vulcan is no more serviceable than Sally B today.

Regards,

kev35

My money is on a wayward protective cap left in an oil line or fitting….

Hmmm.. do you know something we don’t ZRX.? If not i’m sure we will all know the truth when Elly and co get to the bottom of it.

My money is on a wayward protective cap left in an oil line or fitting….

Pretty sure I saw some fresh 1820’s sat at Sun Air last month.

The only reason I mentioned the Vulcan because there is unlimited amount pumped into it, and I personally (sorry my personal opinion) think that it would be better spent on more practical/worthwhile causes like Sally B (that was my link). Long -term Sally B is the more important and more practical aircraft to support.

Well I am glad that you dont talk for all of us. I am sorry that Sally B is having so much trouble but I would not change the way things have went for the Vulcan.

As we keep reminding ourselves usually when talking about Legends and TFC. We must remember that these aircraft are someone elses train set and that we must be grateful that they have brought them out to play.

Sally B on one hand is loved beyond belief and I am sure it is this love (and a wad of cash) that keeps her going and she will fly again I am sure of it.

The Vulcan on the other hand is loved as much as Sally and the public keep getting asked to help her out with cash. They manage it every time so far. Well done stop moaning about it. It is done,History,past tense. Nothing we can do now will stop the Vulcan flying the cash has been thrown at it we cannot get it back nor would I want to. none or very little of the cash that the Vulcan has would have ever reach Sally B simply because of the way the 2 aircraft are marketed. Totally different in every respect.

Personally I love them both and may the both share many happy skies together.

The end.

Where were the 3 fragged engines sourced? old time O/H’s in a can or more recently by one of the radial shops? & if so, which one?

In theory you’re right Mike, but…

I think it was Stanley Hooker recalled Whittle saying to Lord Hives how simple the turbojet was. Hives’ response was “don’t worry, we’ll soon change that” or similar.

Given time to have a good look at a large radial and all the associated pipery, I could probably come up with a fair guess about what a good number of them do. Having seen a picture of a Vulcan Olympus somewhere recently, a very old engine design liberally festooned with pipes, I haven’t a clue what any of them are for.

Good evening gentlemen,

I thought it is time to address my new fan-club!

The only reason I mentioned te Vulcan because there is unlimited amount pumped into it, and I personally (sorry my personal opinion) think that it would be better spent on more practical/worthwhile causes like Sally B (that was my link). Long -term Sally B is the more important and more practical aircraft to support.

Back to Sally B, I have a lot of respect for those people and wish them well, and will support them. But I think losing three engines (unless the last one is OK?) is NOT normal!

But please don’t try to convince me that the systems on a Vulcan are simpler than on a B-17.

Bye

I am no expert on these motors, but I have never heard of any other B-17 operator to have such problems, I think they better have a serious look at their maintenance/technical approach. This is a joke.

There is a Vulcan flying (although I personally think it is a waste of money) but a B-17 can’t be kept in the air? That is fairly simple technology. What are they doing? Bearing failures, are these old inhibited engines? Storage oil can have an impact on bearing coatings. What is going on????

This plane is far more important than this Vulcan, which apart from cool looks, achieved very little!

Sorry, feel better now, but please guys get your act together!

Good luck!

There’s a world of difference in the engines though and believe it or not the Turbine engine is far simpler. Basically it is a blow lamp with a fan at each end , the one at the back drives the one at the front. A gas turbine is a constant motion in one direction wheras a piston engine has the pistons going up, stop, down, stop etc. All that stopping and starting does the moving parts no good at all. So in that respect a parrafin burnere is far easier to look after unless you suffer wet/hot starts. Quite what the effect of a wet start is I have no idea but a hot start usually fries the tail pipe and turbines.

it seems Sally B is copping all the bad luck lately!

i have absolutely no doubt that there is no chance of a lack of attention to detail or expertise being the issue here, simple fact is that the new engine just turned out to be a lemon and would have shat itself no matter to which aircraft it was installed, a very rare happening these days but still happens nonetheless.

One of the reasons that news like this has stopped filtering down to the forums is that as soon as it pops up, we get a host of people with no knowledge of the problem or the industry putting their oar in, and telling them where they went wrong.

If this forum is to continue as a good source of information in the future, we must embrace the operators, and be sympathetic to their problems.

Unless you are posting with specific knowledge of the problem, please be somewhat circumspect, and avoid posting opinion based on little or no knowledge of the issues.
Bruce

Wot he said.

I too saw the trail from the No1 engine, but it was black smoke which with my considerable knowledge and experience with internal combustion engines meant a fuel problem rather than an oil problem ie; the engine was running too rich.

Springbok, you mentioned about how the complex Vulcan is flying but how a ‘mere simple, basic technology’ B-17 was not, so please let me take you back to last year, the Vulcans’ first.
Did they or did they not have to ground the bomber temporarily at Brize I think it was, to ahem, change an engine because one was making metal?
In your infinate wisdom and clearly expert knowledge that you are keen to share with us, on the basis that they had spent millions on the aircraft, with a full time engineering crew behind it how would this have been possible and what would you have prescribed for them as the solution?

By good fortune, the Vulcan had not one, but four zero timed engines in store which has meant their flying programme of X years has now effectively been cut, but meant that they had the spares readily available for use.

Things happen regardless sometimes of how much and how long something is attended to, so cut some slack on the B-17 team then please, or alternativey, come up with the goods so that we can all praise you for your generosity.

Bomberboy

To lose one parent, may be regarded as a misfortune, to lose both, looks like carelessness…. sorry have I strayed off topic?

One of the reasons that news like this has stopped filtering down to the forums is that as soon as it pops up, we get a host of people with no knowledge of the problem or the industry putting their oar in, and telling them where they went wrong.

If this forum is to continue as a good source of information in the future, we must embrace the operators, and be sympathetic to their problems.

Unless you are posting with specific knowledge of the problem, please be somewhat circumspect, and avoid posting opinion based on little or no knowledge of the issues.

Bruce

There is a Vulcan flying (although I personally think it is a waste of money) but a B-17 can’t be kept in the air?

This plane is far more important than this Vulcan, which apart from cool looks, achieved very little!

…and what on earth has Sally B’s engine problems got to do with the Vulcan?? There are numerous B17’s still flying, but as far as i’m aware only one V bomber.
B17’s fly as a tribute to there crews of WW2, the Vulcan flies as a tribute to those who helped stop WW3.. so lets stop knocking it and enjoy it while we can.!:mad:

The B-17 is the most common active four engine bomber. Not much competition, sure, but I don’t think there’s a period since W.W.II when there haven’t been multiples of the type active somewhere.

Jut asking a question: How many other B-17 operators have had significant engine problems – grounding their aircraft in the last, say, decade?

I’m sure no-one here would suggest the Sally B team are deliberately ‘failing’ their aircraft, that’d be silly, and of course the team have my sympathy and best wishes. But equally it would be odd not to be taking a hard look at the bigger picture. I’m sure they are.

Just my 2d.

I assume you’re an expert on B17s and know better than a team who have kept one in the air for 30+ years. I look forward to seeing your B17 at legends.

Elly and her team do a fantastic job and I’m proud to support them as a member.

Peter

3 engine failures in how many hours? It has hardly flown at all since the first one went bang so the other 2 failures must be fairly low hours.

& yes, they *did* a fantastic job up until that first one fragged itself, but 3 failures is WAY beyond bad luck.

The first was the wayward nut that looked like it was wedged in the oil screen, but what caused the second? I’m not even going to guess at the third.