Cool story ! My dad flew this jet back then and had a similar problem with the front landing gear. It was showing it was still up. After a visual from the tower the gear was in fact down and they landed safely. Proud of my late Dad !! This was one of many planes he flew in the USAF.
My father was the NAV on the crew that went to Boeing to pick up the first B-47B. His name was Edward A. Timmins. When he was grounded at age 50, He was the oldest guy and longest flying guy in SAC in 1965. He flew in B-29s, 36s, RB-45C, 47s then 52s.
My father also a NAV spoke of your father often. But I'll be dammed if I can remember much of what he said, maybe my brothers do. Dad flew B-17 and B-47, was offered to fly newer bombers, and one time he was asked to serve at the Pentagon, but declined and retired in '64. While at Wichita flying and testing B-47s he wrote an electronics maintenance manual. And we lost several friends from accidents during the testing. Then from Wichita to Lake Charles then Lockbourned where he retired.
Great show. Kids today will never know the hilarity of a films sound going wacky or the film actually melting if there is a projector malfunction. Sometimes the film would actually catch fire from the intense heat put out by a projectors lamp! "FOCUS"....
I worked on the B-47 from 59 to 63 it had such a high stall speed we called them the widow maker. I was in the 40th Field Maintenance sqd. at Forbes Air Base at Topeka, Kansas
U.S.A.F. ‘1505’ uniform. Very smart Summer Uniform,especially the Security Police ‘Full Dress’ variant! From back in the day when U.S. Airmen looked like they were in the Military! P.S. I know I’m a Dinosaur,but the Pyjamas they wear now just look soft and silly!
Because you think military bearing and appearance is important for military personnel does not make you a dinosaur. I wasn't the Navy's greatest sailor, but I always wore my uniform with pride and kept my military bearing while on duty. I share your opinion on today's baggy pajamas they wear today. Yesterday's look was much more classy.
Reminded me of other B-52 incidents like the vertical tail being sheared off and a BUFF out over the Bahama islands and the crews networked with their base, Boeing and other manufacturers for hours till they finally landed.
Wow, this is more interior footage of the B-47 than you can find anywhere else! Great view of an aviation classic! And the story itself is a preview of Apollo 13 ...
Yes it is kind of astonishing to see the interior of the aircraft -- quite a bit more haphazard layout than you'd imagine from the streamlined exterior isn't it?
I have to admit, it strikes me as kind of roomy and accessible, and a pretty logical layout if you know what-all systems and crew stations are included. I've seen (for a few minutes at a time) the insides of Boeings from several B-17s through a B-29 and several B-52s-but never a B-47. Based on that film the B-47 makes sense for its time: much more complicated than a B-29, much less than a B-52.
The March Air Force Base Museum in Riverside, CA used to have a forward fuselage and cockpit section of a B-47 on display. They had stairs and a platform next to it so you could look down into the cockpit. They had lights on in the Bombardiers compartment so you could see down past the Pilots seat into it. Signs said it was used in the movie, “Strategic Air Command”, to film the B-47 pilot scenes with Jimmy Stewart.
What a great and heroic landing. Amazing they could restore her to full duty. I believe the B-47 was the first bomber to have both fwd and rear steerable main gear. This meant they could land sideways into a strong side wind. It was also incorporated into the B-52 design.
I’ve read that was a classified feature on the B-52, I’m sure they knew the Communist would figure it out but guess they didn’t want to help them anymore than possible.
@@sonnyburnett8725 I believe the gear on the B-52 was tied into the compass system so they stayed true to the runway heading even if the aircraft did not.
I was watching 'The Atomic Cafe' UA-cam channel and they did a video on the B-47 & my God ! I'm surprised the wings didn't snap off when they made those Bank turns! Seriously this thing was a Widowmaker !
Anyone notice the B-47 in the opening shots has no drop tanks yet they are on the plane after landing? Flew the bird from 1959 to 1965 and I think we may have shut down an engine and had an outrigger tire blow on T.O. in all those years. Good plane along as you flew in within design limits but so was everything else I flew in my 6,000 hours. C.W. Wachsmuth, Lt. Col. USAF (Ret)
Lots of incidents like these back in the hey day of military flight. Everything was a controlled chaotic experiment. The aerospace industry was still figuring it out
I have never heard of this TV program. I just shared this with a retired SP/LE that was stationed at SAC HQ. I was stationed at March AFB Riverside California (SAC) from 1982-90. I got there just as the 22nd Bomb Wing transitioned to the 22nd Air Refueling Wing. We went from B-52Ds and KC-135As to KC-10A/B and KC-135As. My shop was an old B-47 maintenance hanger Building 1221. I was with the 22nd Field Maintenance Squadron, 22nd Aerospace Ground Equipment Flight (AGE). My shop was right next to the Fire Dept and we could hear all the calls that came in. The March Field Air Museum has a B-47, KC-97, and the last B-52D left at the base due to a cracked wing. USAF (AGE) Retired.
reguarding miss Monroe trip to 45th div.stage performance in 40 degrees temp waveing to us.from the open door of a H19 chopper it was a thrilling sight her .
About 1957 at Lake Charles AFB. Dad, the Bombardier/Navigator on a B-47, was due land with a large flight of B-47s coming back from a mission. We lived just a couple blocks off the Air Base and near the Gate, in a little housing area and a street named Gelpi Dr., and that small house is still there in 2021. We were all anticipating the B-47s landing when we heard a loud explosion and running out front observed a large plume of black smoke at the end of the runway. We could hear all the sirens and see the flames. We all just watched and prayed, waiting for some word, hoping no one died and that it wasn't Dad's B-47. It seemed like we waited many hours, then we breathed easy when we found out it wasn't Dad's plane but it was very sad to find out that all members of the crew perished.
2 B47s blew up in the Tulsa area, one near 27th and Memorial, on the landing approach, the other north of Tulsa near Skiatook, both planes suffered the same issues, a break in the Fuselage at the fuel transfer tube, filling the Fuselage with jet fuel, my Father was a B planner at Douglas aircraft and designed the foot controls, I don't believe any B47s survived
Beautiful bird indeed. The grandaddy of today airliners, with those pylon suspended engines and slender swept wings. The bubble canopy may be uncomfortable on the long bomber runs, B 52s designs did it better on this topic (Gen. Le May courtesy)
one question from all the programs I have seen on the program called "Flight" did they have a lot of trouble with the B-47's ? was these just small glitches that happens in all planes?
I wore one... they are custom molded (the liner inside the helmet) to your head, padded, expertly crafted. You could wear one for hours, no problems physically, sometimes, people would get claustrophobic The "generic" helmets they'd give to one-time joy-riders created horrible hot spots that hurt after 1/2 hour.
KurtB I'll vouch for that! I have a lot of time in the back seat of a T-33, being flown out to fix a jet that was broken out in the field. The only thing more uncomfortable than the helmet was the damn seat pack parachute that you had to sit on. Ow.
@@b1bmsgt - Wish I had a hop in a T-33. Yes, the generic helmets were torture devices. Never sat on a chute, all mine were backpack or in the seat, ACES-II. The "custom poured" helmets we wore were perfect; light, no hot spots, no issues at all. Cheers!
"Guest Performers: Ross Elliott, Terry Frost, David R. Cross, Don Nagel, Ed Nelson, Bill Erwin, Irene Vernon, Anne Anderson, Jimmy Murphy, Max Mellinger, Norman Alden, James Parnell. "-🤔🖥🛩✈🛬🛫🇺🇲☕🌐..
should have tried a touch and go on the 3 gear they had...I've seen that done in cases like this and many times the shock of doing so will dislodge the stuck gear. That or landing on the 3 holding the nose up as log as possible till slowed, then try to gently let it down drag. At least this would keep the belly tank from dragging.
Corny but entertaining:-) I read somewhere ages ago that the rear gear truck & outriggers could be lowered individually to assist with drag then the nose would be dropped for Ldg??
Wait a minute General! That B-47 made a belly landing and was returned to service?! Are there ANY USAF Airframe and Powerplant Technicians who believe that whopper?! That Stratojet shown never flew even as much as an inch again afterward, i betcha. The engines were so brand new and infamously inefficient that the extreme measure of aerial refueling had to be developed, routinized and normalized to make the intended intercontinental flights with B-47's under anticipated combat conditions feasible at all. The pinlines on the top of B-47's wings weren't decorative, but walkways for refueling groundcrew, the structure of the craft was so radically lightweight it was fragile to any other force application except the huge forces it was designed for: high altitude, high speed flight, but nothing else, not even a heavy flightboot. So after bellylanding with such a precariously flown aircraft (contraption), it could hardly ever again be trusted AGAIN as airworthy, much less, missionworthy or even just safe, 70 years ago. But too, I realize Americans were in the height of the Cold War then, terrified all the time for the first time in history of an instaneous end of the whole world, with no precedent to guide our strategy of peaceful deterrence, except such jingoist supterfuge to 'Carry On', nothing to see here, show's over, move along, . . .
Gear up landing Guam 1962 .53-4303 RBI’s -47h. Flew again 3days later. One time flight.return to full service 1963. I know as l was the crew chief on board.
@@donfoster3153 Gear up landing, Lockbourne AFB 1964 B-47, no information available to me now, nor needed, on the aircraft's further history, but as I remember, it was a mess. That day, my Dad was a SAC Senior Command pilot stationed near Columbus, OH returning (deadheading) in the Stratojet from an earlier deployment flight to be back home with me, Mom and 4.5 kids. My school bus stop, in the afternoon, was also a drop point for the city's afternoon newspaper. That day, I got off the bus to find my Dad's happiest smile on the front page. He was sorta messy too; soaked with sweat head to toe. Front main gear jammed. They came in on foam. The incident was numerous but not because of any mechanical or negative reasons but because they were flying these aircraft 24/7/365, so much so, the numerous opportunities anything like this to happen at all were correspondingly more numerous. Later I read of many other such accounts, his story is identical to a published short story I later read in elementary school, the title of which escapes me, but names the pilot as "Obie" in the title. They didn't jettison the canopy, but in the (entirely true) story, this was the ONLY thing they did differently. In the couple of times I remember Dad talked to me or us about it, he mentioned manually trying to deploy the stuck gear, being available for that task, cranking with all his speed and might until the aluminum, emergency crank handle broke. Everyone got an AF Commendation medal for their picture perfect performance.
Someone correct me If I am wrong, but in this film they talk about getting up to high altitude so they will not burn as much fuel while staying basically in a "holding pattern". I get the fact that jets are more efficient at high altitudes when you consider the distance traveled vs fuel burn. That being said it would seem that in a holding pattern scenario where distance traveled does not mean anything, when all you want to do is hold an INDICATED airspeed, that being at 30,000 ft or 3,000 ft will not make any significant difference in fuel burn.
Consider yourself corrected. Less dense air means the engine must be "leaned out" to maintain correct burning chemistry; that means less fuel flow. It's a bit more complicated than that, and I understand your reasoning, but when it's all said and done, you get more DURATION in a jet when you go high, even if you do have to sacrifice some fuel to get up there.
"Let's go up and refuel." in a damaged plane "Let's go up and refuel again behind a prop KC and try not to stall and bring us both down." in a damaged plane Don't get me wrong, it's a great story. Good editing on the exterior shots: Nose wheel out? Don't show the nose. Thanks Periscope, always good stuff and I hope your business model is working.
Damaged airplane???? No. MALFUNCTIONING airplane. A gear that won't come down hardly qualifies as "damaged", and does NOT pose a risk to flight or refueling. You guy CLEARLY aren't pilots. So your criticism ain't worth squat.
This is a mismatch and the C-97 which is actually a surpersized B-29 has difficulty keeping up with the B-47 and go figure this one right here.Now...Both types are in the AZ boneyard and will never fly again but we have a C-97 flying on one of the UA-cam channels if you can find it.
Why lower the U/C, at cruising altitude and speed ??? No can do !! ( Note the Nav/bomb. leaving his seat, needed Ox.!!!) And explaining EVERYTHING by the phone to the wife !!!! How naive, and how times have changed !!!!!!!
Did there exist 1 reasonable Pilot opposing against the trend of old times being and staying non smoker ? As smoker you can only reach a blood saturation on sea altitude with oxygen, which has a nonsmoker in 2000 meters above sea level ! So every nonsmoker has much better oxygen saturation in his blood then every smoker ! Whas this not known in ww2 times ?
You look up the B47 in Wikipedia and there is a section named Accidents and incidents. this incident is not mentioned. Two other items pop up though. There are a great deal of accidents with this aircraft. and each accident ended with the 4 man crew...not 3 but 4 man crew dying. with a great deal of planes hitting mountains.....check it out. I myself am a Tupolev fan.The aircraft he created were functional and beautiful. Dont get me wrong I love America. But look at the tu 114 and tu116 look at the tu160 and the awesome tu144. no wonder the tu 104 was the first successful jet in commercial service. 2 years before the Boeing 707.
Ae Falzon Boeing B-47s "Stratojet", do HAVE a 3, (three) man crew, exept some special mod. that have a special module of ECM installed in the bomb bay, with the respective extra crew .
Yeah, never mind that 16 out of 37 Tu-104's CRASHED. So it may have been the "first successful" commercial jet, because that's because the Russkis kept flying them, while the Brits took the deHavilland Comet --the real "first" commercial jet" --out of service after a fatal design defect was discovered. And Yes, Tupolev built really great aircraft, but primitive Russian avionics, lousy manufacturing (wonder why the latest Su's aren't being produced in quantity?), aviation infrastructure, and refusal by the big wigs to address demonstrably poor performance issues, all have made Russian aviation a big joke.
Ae Falzon the TU-144 was a death trap. It’s demo model broke up in mid air at the Paris air show. Aeroflot wanted nothing to do with the plane and would only fly it on cargo runs until ordered to fly passengers and that only lasted a few months. When NASA leased one for high altitude super sonic tests the engineers said that it was so loud on the inside they had to communicate on headsets only and they also said that the damn thing jumped around and rattled like it was going to fall apart. You obviously don’t know a damn thing about airplanes.
Anyone else realize how hilarious, even stupid this stuff really was, and still is? What a waste of taxpayer dollars, CYA pesos, or casino profits, whatever. And as for those 'tech' issues here, video quality and otherwise, not buying it. But note those 'contrails' shown here are just unburned fuel, not 'water vapor.' Goodness, gracious me, great balls of fire (or deceit). Your choice.
What we have all realized is how hilarious, even stupid, your inane comment actually is. You're obviously entitled to your opinion on the military and their spending but keep in mind that they're the ones who preserve your right to make such idiotic statements. Sorry the 60 year old video isn't up to your high standards. Finally, you have absolutely zero grasp on the concepts of physics, meteorology or flight. The contrails are unburned fuel? Hilarious. 2 points, if they are unburned fuel why do they only appear at high altitude? If the plane was losing that much fuel you know it would only have a range of about a hundred miles, maybe.
Sorry to contradict you, contrails ARE water vapor. The products of combustion of hydrocarbons are water and carbon dioxide. In the proper conditions, the water, which comes out as a vapor (even in your car, unless it is a Tesla) can condense into trails.
William Larson better than wasting money on social program failures. Most technology that we enjoy now came from these military technologies perfected in the past.
![[UA] NAVI vs MOUZ | BO5 | IEM Rio 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CMBYk0cbGoA/mqdefault.jpg)
Cool story ! My dad flew this jet back then and had a similar problem with the front landing gear. It was showing it was still up. After a visual from the tower the gear was in fact down and they landed safely. Proud of my late Dad !! This was one of many planes he flew in the USAF.
My dad flew GI Joe kites.
My father was the NAV on the crew that went to Boeing to pick up the first B-47B. His name was Edward A. Timmins. When he was grounded at age 50, He was the oldest guy and longest flying guy in SAC in 1965. He flew in B-29s, 36s, RB-45C, 47s then 52s.
My father also a NAV spoke of your father often. But I'll be dammed if I can remember much of what he said, maybe my brothers do. Dad flew B-17 and B-47, was offered to fly newer bombers, and one time he was asked to serve at the Pentagon, but declined and retired in '64. While at Wichita flying and testing B-47s he wrote an electronics maintenance manual. And we lost several friends from accidents during the testing. Then from Wichita to Lake Charles then Lockbourned where he retired.
Dude starts the show with tmac smoke...I love the 1950s. Greatest Generation!
I would've loved to have been a kid growing up in 50s America and watching this stuff evolve before my eyes. What a time.
Awesome. I flew on both the B-47E & KC-97G, fortunately never had a problem other than rapid decompression once.
I never heard of this series before. Thanks for sharing it with us!
Great show. Kids today will never know the hilarity of a films sound going wacky or the film actually melting if there is a projector malfunction. Sometimes the film would actually catch fire from the intense heat put out by a projectors lamp! "FOCUS"....
Crew ingenuity saved the plane and their lives. Good episode. Never saw this show before. Thanks for sharing.
Karma
I worked on the B-47 from 59 to 63 it had such a high stall speed we called them the widow maker. I was in the 40th Field Maintenance sqd. at Forbes Air Base at Topeka, Kansas
Thanks for your service to our great nation.
i was doing the same at Hunter AFB in 60 and 61, being part of SAC was a great experience
U.S.A.F. ‘1505’ uniform. Very smart Summer Uniform,especially the Security Police ‘Full Dress’ variant! From back in the day when U.S. Airmen looked like they were in the Military! P.S. I know I’m a Dinosaur,but the Pyjamas they wear now just look soft and silly!
Our turn to be the old guys.
Because you think military bearing and appearance is important for military personnel does not make you a dinosaur. I wasn't the Navy's greatest sailor, but I always wore my uniform with pride and kept my military bearing while on duty. I share your opinion on today's baggy pajamas they wear today. Yesterday's look was much more classy.
you had me worried when I saw final in the header. Thank you again for your time well spent! Sir!
LOVE THE “Deuce” pitchout at the beginning!
I was only 3 when this show aired. That's why I loved the golden age of tv. I was way too young to understand these classic shows.
Reminded me of other B-52 incidents like the vertical tail being sheared off and a BUFF out over the Bahama islands and the crews networked with their base, Boeing and other manufacturers for hours till they finally landed.
Wow, this is more interior footage of the B-47 than you can find anywhere else! Great view of an aviation classic! And the story itself is a preview of Apollo 13 ...
Yes it is kind of astonishing to see the interior of the aircraft -- quite a bit more haphazard layout than you'd imagine from the streamlined exterior isn't it?
I have to admit, it strikes me as kind of roomy and accessible, and a pretty logical layout if you know what-all systems and crew stations are included. I've seen (for a few minutes at a time) the insides of Boeings from several B-17s through a B-29 and several B-52s-but never a B-47. Based on that film the B-47 makes sense for its time: much more complicated than a B-29, much less than a B-52.
The March Air Force Base Museum in Riverside, CA used to have a forward fuselage and cockpit section of a B-47 on display. They had stairs and a platform next to it so you could look down into the cockpit. They had lights on in the Bombardiers compartment so you could see down past the Pilots seat into it. Signs said it was used in the movie, “Strategic Air Command”, to film the B-47 pilot scenes with Jimmy Stewart.
Yes, and it was still there the last time I was there several months ago. Pretty good mock up too.
I agree, we sure did not see as much of the interior of the B-47 with Jimmy Stewart in the film Strategic Air Command.
What a great and heroic landing. Amazing they could restore her to full duty.
I believe the B-47 was the first bomber to have both fwd and rear steerable main gear.
This meant they could land sideways into a strong side wind. It was also incorporated into the
B-52 design.
The B-47 didn't have steerable rear main gear and could not crab.
I’ve read that was a classified feature on the B-52, I’m sure they knew the Communist would figure it out but guess they didn’t want to help them anymore than possible.
@@sonnyburnett8725 I believe the gear on the B-52 was tied into the compass system so they stayed true to the runway heading even if the aircraft did not.
@@davenone7312 There was no connection to the compass system. The crew just put in the correction they felt necessary and maintained heading manually.
No CGI crap in this movie, like Hollywood puts out now. That footage was a real B-47 doing a belly landing.
I was watching 'The Atomic Cafe' UA-cam channel and they did a video on the B-47 & my God !
I'm surprised the wings didn't snap off when they made those Bank turns! Seriously this thing was a Widowmaker !
Now THIS is reality TV that was really real!
Fay has such a lovely voice. A lot of ladies spoke like her "back in the day"
"Ten minutes of nine."
@@roninscholar4515 A quarter of five. My grandma used to tell time like that. It was swell!
No Karen's back then
Anyone notice the B-47 in the opening shots has no drop tanks yet they are on the plane after landing? Flew the bird from 1959 to 1965 and I think we may have shut down an engine and had an outrigger tire blow on T.O. in all those years. Good plane along as you flew in within design limits but so was everything else I flew in my 6,000 hours.
C.W. Wachsmuth, Lt. Col. USAF (Ret)
Lots of incidents like these back in the hey day of military flight. Everything was a controlled chaotic experiment. The aerospace industry was still figuring it out
Excellent landing!
I have never heard of this TV program. I just shared this with a retired SP/LE that was stationed at SAC HQ. I was stationed at March AFB Riverside California (SAC) from 1982-90. I got there just as the 22nd Bomb Wing transitioned to the 22nd Air Refueling Wing. We went from B-52Ds and KC-135As to KC-10A/B and KC-135As. My shop was an old B-47 maintenance hanger Building 1221. I was with the 22nd Field Maintenance Squadron, 22nd Aerospace Ground Equipment Flight (AGE). My shop was right next to the Fire Dept and we could hear all the calls that came in. The March Field Air Museum has a B-47, KC-97, and the last B-52D left at the base due to a cracked wing. USAF (AGE) Retired.
Six more hours That plane was a handful to fly from what I heard
Wow, open cockpit B-47 action! Too much!
reguarding miss Monroe trip to 45th div.stage performance in 40
degrees temp waveing to us.from
the open door of a H19 chopper it was a thrilling sight her .
About 1957 at Lake Charles AFB. Dad, the Bombardier/Navigator on a B-47, was due land with a large flight of B-47s coming back from a mission. We lived just a couple blocks off the Air Base and near the Gate, in a little housing area and a street named Gelpi Dr., and that small house is still there in 2021. We were all anticipating the B-47s landing when we heard a loud explosion and running out front observed a large plume of black smoke at the end of the runway. We could hear all the sirens and see the flames. We all just watched and prayed, waiting for some word, hoping no one died and that it wasn't Dad's B-47. It seemed like we waited many hours, then we breathed easy when we found out it wasn't Dad's plane but it was very sad to find out that all members of the crew perished.
2 B47s blew up in the Tulsa area, one near 27th and Memorial, on the landing approach, the other north of Tulsa near Skiatook, both planes suffered the same issues, a break in the Fuselage at the fuel transfer tube, filling the Fuselage with jet fuel, my Father was a B planner at Douglas aircraft and designed the foot controls, I don't believe any B47s survived
For the record: I F*CKING hate intra-video commercials. Stop that, UA-cam.
Get "Ad Block". It's free.
Well, we can keep him up indefinitely if we have to.... "Be gentle, Sallie's a little new at this... .
" alright Chuck, start pumping!
Sally says to Fay "Why I've never saw a B 47 crash before, lets watch!" So off they went in their Plymouth Cranbrooke
Good story.
I will say one thing for the captain flying that B-47 he has a set of nuts the size of basketballs to be the first to try a wheels up.
No, he was just afraid to jump out of the plane, LOL.
My father was an air force pilot and he always said that in an emergency landing, wheels up was safer.
Beautiful bird indeed. The grandaddy of today airliners, with those pylon suspended engines and slender swept wings. The bubble canopy may be uncomfortable on the long bomber runs, B 52s designs did it better on this topic (Gen. Le May courtesy)
....picture and sound quality begin to improve about a minute and a half into the show.
That'll buff right out.
Az Ex ...Seinfeld episode reference
one question from all the programs I have seen on the program called "Flight" did they have a lot of trouble with the B-47's ? was these just small glitches that happens in all planes?
The rear and bogies was a standard high-drag configuration for steep descents
Did they always fly in loafers? I would have thought they would have been issued flight boots.
Ed Nelson I recognized, but a couple of the others weren't using their normal stage names I think.
Anyone ever wonder how that flight gear must have felt like, the oxygen mask the helmet??
I wore one... they are custom molded (the liner inside the helmet) to your head, padded, expertly crafted. You could wear one for hours, no problems physically, sometimes, people would get claustrophobic The "generic" helmets they'd give to one-time joy-riders created horrible hot spots that hurt after 1/2 hour.
KurtB I'll vouch for that! I have a lot of time in the back seat of a T-33, being flown out to fix a jet that was broken out in the field. The only thing more uncomfortable than the helmet was the damn seat pack parachute that you had to sit on. Ow.
@@b1bmsgt - Wish I had a hop in a T-33. Yes, the generic helmets were torture devices. Never sat on a chute, all mine were backpack or in the seat, ACES-II. The "custom poured" helmets we wore were perfect; light, no hot spots, no issues at all. Cheers!
"Guest Performers:
Ross Elliott,
Terry Frost,
David R. Cross,
Don Nagel,
Ed Nelson,
Bill Erwin,
Irene Vernon,
Anne Anderson,
Jimmy Murphy,
Max Mellinger,
Norman Alden,
James Parnell. "-🤔🖥🛩✈🛬🛫🇺🇲☕🌐..
"paint scrapes and a few dent's"...haha I don't believe it
The video keeps interrupting the ads......
For you six with a Thumbs Down,well it is the USA BUT SHAME ON YOU.
We can buy this tv series in CD Video?..where?
Bet those relief tubes were full...
With a 10 HR. flight and how.
22:45 is this actual footage of the gears up landing?
should have tried a touch and go on the 3 gear they had...I've seen that done in cases like this and many times the shock of doing so will dislodge the stuck gear. That or landing on the 3 holding the nose up as log as possible till slowed, then try to gently let it down drag. At least this would keep the belly tank from dragging.
Choo 1982 ah another armchair pilot tells us how it should be done.
Corny but entertaining:-) I read somewhere ages ago that the rear gear truck & outriggers could be lowered individually to assist with drag then the nose would be dropped for Ldg??
guessing it gave to much info to the " other side " ...
Wait a minute General! That B-47 made a belly landing and was returned to service?! Are there ANY USAF Airframe and Powerplant Technicians who believe that whopper?! That Stratojet shown never flew even as much as an inch again afterward, i betcha.
The engines were so brand new and infamously inefficient that the extreme measure of aerial refueling had to be developed, routinized and normalized to make the intended intercontinental flights with B-47's under anticipated combat conditions feasible at all. The pinlines on the top of B-47's wings weren't decorative, but walkways for refueling groundcrew, the structure of the craft was so radically lightweight it was fragile to any other force application except the huge forces it was designed for: high altitude, high speed flight, but nothing else, not even a heavy flightboot.
So after bellylanding with such a precariously flown aircraft (contraption), it could hardly ever again be trusted AGAIN as airworthy, much less, missionworthy or even just safe, 70 years ago.
But too, I realize Americans were in the height of the Cold War then, terrified all the time for the first time in history of an instaneous end of the whole world, with no precedent to guide our strategy of peaceful deterrence, except such jingoist supterfuge to 'Carry On', nothing to see here, show's over, move along, . . .
Gear up landing Guam 1962 .53-4303 RBI’s -47h. Flew again 3days later. One time flight.return to full service 1963. I know as l was the crew chief on board.
@@donfoster3153 Gear up landing, Lockbourne AFB 1964 B-47, no information available to me now, nor needed, on the aircraft's further history, but as I remember, it was a mess. That day, my Dad was a SAC Senior Command pilot stationed near Columbus, OH returning (deadheading) in the Stratojet from an earlier deployment flight to be back home with me, Mom and 4.5 kids. My school bus stop, in the afternoon, was also a drop point for the city's afternoon newspaper. That day, I got off the bus to find my Dad's happiest smile on the front page. He was sorta messy too; soaked with sweat head to toe.
Front main gear jammed. They came in on foam. The incident was numerous but not because of any mechanical or negative reasons but because they were flying these aircraft 24/7/365, so much so, the numerous opportunities anything like this to happen at all were correspondingly more numerous.
Later I read of many other such accounts, his story is identical to a published short story I later read in elementary school, the title of which escapes me, but names the pilot as "Obie" in the title. They didn't jettison the canopy, but in the (entirely true) story, this was the ONLY thing they did differently. In the couple of times I remember Dad talked to me or us about it, he mentioned manually trying to deploy the stuck gear, being available for that task, cranking with all his speed and might until the aluminum, emergency crank handle broke. Everyone got an AF Commendation medal for their picture perfect performance.
Aircraft was 53-4302 not 4303
Aircraft was 53-4302 not 4303
She remained a useful instrument of flight, to wit: one arcraft; namely a Boeing B-47 ergh ergh ergh
09:41, "that's 40,000" as in dollars?? Hope the crew have master card
Someone correct me If I am wrong, but in this film they talk about getting up to high altitude so they will not burn as much fuel while staying basically in a "holding pattern". I get the fact that jets are more efficient at high altitudes when you consider the distance traveled vs fuel burn. That being said it would seem that in a holding pattern scenario where distance traveled does not mean anything, when all you want to do is hold an INDICATED airspeed, that being at 30,000 ft or 3,000 ft will not make any significant difference in fuel burn.
Consider yourself corrected. Less dense air means the engine must be "leaned out" to maintain correct burning chemistry; that means less fuel flow. It's a bit more complicated than that, and I understand your reasoning, but when it's all said and done, you get more DURATION in a jet when you go high, even if you do have to sacrifice some fuel to get up there.
That is a good concise simple answer to something I have wondered about. Are you a pilot?
You didn't shave !
😂😂😂😂
They couldn't get foam till the morning!?!..so what did they do if something bad happened at night? Hilarious!
Sorry the crew is more valuable then the plane. Bail out and dumpster the damn thing.
Thermal in Southern California to Mather in Northern California? That's a long way in a damaged plane.
"Let's go up and refuel." in a damaged plane
"Let's go up and refuel again behind a prop KC and try not to stall and bring us both down." in a damaged plane
Don't get me wrong, it's a great story. Good editing on the exterior shots: Nose wheel out? Don't show the nose.
Thanks Periscope, always good stuff and I hope your business model is working.
Damaged airplane???? No. MALFUNCTIONING airplane. A gear that won't come down hardly qualifies as "damaged", and does NOT pose a risk to flight or refueling. You guy CLEARLY aren't pilots. So your criticism ain't worth squat.
This is a mismatch and the C-97 which is actually a surpersized B-29 has difficulty keeping up with the B-47 and go figure this one right here.Now...Both types are in the AZ boneyard and will never fly again but we have a C-97 flying on one of the UA-cam channels if you can find it.
TheSirjohn2012 that is why Boeing designed the Dash 80. There were no jet tankers until then.
Why lower the U/C, at cruising altitude and speed ???
No can do !!
( Note the Nav/bomb. leaving his seat, needed Ox.!!!)
And explaining EVERYTHING by the phone to the wife !!!!
How naive, and how times have changed !!!!!!!
Did there exist 1 reasonable Pilot opposing against the trend of old times being and staying non smoker ? As smoker you can only reach a blood saturation on sea altitude with oxygen, which has a nonsmoker in 2000 meters above sea level ! So every nonsmoker has much better oxygen saturation in his blood then every smoker ! Whas this not known in ww2 times ?
Get me Rex Kramer!
SAC, ran on caffeine, and, nicotine.
This plane killed alot of people in peacetime by accidents. Short service life.
These older films are great unfortunately today's films are trash 🗑
Smoke that cigarette
I always wondered what fighter jocks who flew in the 1950s would think of todays planes they must wish they were born 20 years later
You look up the B47 in Wikipedia and there is a section named Accidents and incidents. this incident is not mentioned. Two other items pop up though. There are a great deal of accidents with this aircraft. and each accident ended with the 4 man crew...not 3 but 4 man crew dying. with a great deal of planes hitting mountains.....check it out. I myself am a Tupolev fan.The aircraft he created were functional and beautiful. Dont get me wrong I love America. But look at the tu 114 and tu116 look at the tu160 and the awesome tu144. no wonder the tu 104 was the first successful jet in commercial service. 2 years before the Boeing 707.
Ae Falzon
Boeing B-47s "Stratojet", do HAVE a 3, (three) man crew, exept some special mod. that have a special module of ECM installed in the bomb bay, with the respective extra crew .
Yeah, never mind that 16 out of 37 Tu-104's CRASHED. So it may have been the "first successful" commercial jet, because that's because the Russkis kept flying them, while the Brits took the deHavilland Comet --the real "first" commercial jet" --out of service after a fatal design defect was discovered. And Yes, Tupolev built really great aircraft, but primitive Russian avionics, lousy manufacturing (wonder why the latest Su's aren't being produced in quantity?), aviation infrastructure, and refusal by the big wigs to address demonstrably poor performance issues, all have made Russian aviation a big joke.
Ae Falzon the TU-144 was a death trap. It’s demo model broke up in mid air at the Paris air show. Aeroflot wanted nothing to do with the plane and would only fly it on cargo runs until ordered to fly passengers and that only lasted a few months. When NASA leased one for high altitude super sonic tests the engineers said that it was so loud on the inside they had to communicate on headsets only and they also said that the damn thing jumped around and rattled like it was going to fall apart. You obviously don’t know a damn thing about airplanes.
This could have been a cigarette commercial...
stinks
Anyone else realize how hilarious, even stupid this stuff really was, and still is? What a waste of taxpayer dollars, CYA pesos, or casino profits, whatever. And as for those 'tech' issues here, video quality and otherwise, not buying it. But note those 'contrails' shown here are just unburned fuel, not 'water vapor.' Goodness, gracious me, great balls of fire (or deceit). Your choice.
What we have all realized is how hilarious, even stupid, your inane comment actually is.
You're obviously entitled to your opinion on the military and their spending but keep in mind that they're the ones who preserve your right to make such idiotic statements.
Sorry the 60 year old video isn't up to your high standards.
Finally, you have absolutely zero grasp on the concepts of physics, meteorology or flight. The contrails are unburned fuel? Hilarious. 2 points, if they are unburned fuel why do they only appear at high altitude? If the plane was losing that much fuel you know it would only have a range of about a hundred miles, maybe.
Sorry to contradict you, contrails ARE water vapor. The products of combustion of hydrocarbons are water and carbon dioxide. In the proper conditions, the water, which comes out as a vapor (even in your car, unless it is a Tesla) can condense into trails.
William Larson better than wasting money on social program failures. Most technology that we enjoy now came from these military technologies perfected in the past.