B-17 Flying Fortress, Boeing Model 298 and 299

[Daryl J.]

I'd love to Scale-o-Rama the Academy shark fin C/D model into a 1/48 single seat twin radial with fixed gear.   

[Captain Canada]

Since I bought those two Academy kits, I've been half-arsed looking into this aero. I'd like to do the SAR example up as one from Harmon Field in Newfoundland, and came across this site. It's rather dated and I'm having trouble finding where/ what is going on with her now. Interesting stuff tho, and the first I've heard of it.



http://www.nwrain.net/~newtsuit/b17labrador/history.html

[Captain Canada]

Sounds like it's owned by Don Brooks of Douglas, Georgia.

http://www.thetelegram.com/Business/2009-01-27/article-1441313/Rebuild-to-begin-soon/1

[KJ_Lesnick]

nev link

How about a stripped down B-17 - no turrets, guns or gunners.  Would be lighter, more aerodynamic and faster!  It was actually put forward by the USAAF, but the pilots wanted none of it, they felt "safer" with all those guns, even though they flew 100kts slower  

Firstly: They'd fly that much faster if they removed the weight of the guns, gunners, and the protrusions of the turrets?

Secondly: How much farther could it fly?

Thirdly: I thought at the time they were still using mph.

[Captain Canada]

A little more research reveals

B-17G 44-83790

Still not finding a lot and most of it is 2-4 years old !

[jcf]

A quick note on B-17 interior colours that may be of use to folks building a B-17.

Contrary to the instructions on the majority of B-17 kits the interior was unpainted. This includes the
aft and forward fuselage, bulkheads, bomb-bay, bomb doors, interior of engine nacelles/undercarriage
bays, interior of the cowlings and firewalls. The nose compartment and the radio operator compartment
were lined with dark green or olive green insulation blankets, but these were often removed exposing
the unpainted aluminum. The only exception was the flight deck which was painted Dull Dark Green or
Bronze Green, not green zinc chromate or interior green. Wooden decks, doors and table-tops were to
receive two coats of clear lacquer. The metal parts of interior fixtures and seating, aside from that on the
flight deck, were also unpainted per the directive, but that depended on the sub-contractor as some painted
the items before delivery. The toilet and surrounding area were to receive two coats of acid resistant paint.

These interior finish directives applied to all B-17s, from the beginning until the end of production. It was
not, as I've seen some state, a matter of interior painting being discontinued when the exterior camouflage
was discontinued.

[kerick]

Even the restored ones have a lot of green inside. But yes, I've heard the part about only the fight deck being painted several times before. It makes sense as painting would add more manufacturing steps and everything was about building as many as you can as fast as possible.

[jcf]

The order concerning paint predates the war and other USAAC types from the late '30s had similar
orders, especially multi-engine types i.e. the B-18 also had an unpainted interior. 

[Old Wombat]

One possible reason I can think of straight up; Weight.

A single coat of paint over an entire aircraft adds a significant amount of weight, which reduces its performance. I have seen the discussion re: external paint possibly having a positive impact on top speed but that doesn't apply to internal paint, which simply adds weight.

[jcf]

One possible reason I can think of straight up; Weight.

A single coat of paint over an entire aircraft adds a significant amount of weight, which reduces its performance. I have seen the discussion re: external paint possibly having a positive impact on top speed but that doesn't apply to internal paint, which simply adds weight.

It was purely a matter of cost, particularly in regards to inspections and repairs as stripping off the paint was required in order to inspect the skin for corrosion etc. The USAAC had determined that any weight saving was minor, only 25 lbs for a pursuit and about 80 lbs for a bomber.
As the all-metal aircraft in development and coming on strength were built using Alclad sheet, which was corrosion resistant due to the surface layer of pure aluminum that it had, it was determined that paint was unnecessary. The USAAC originally applied the new standards to tactical aircraft only - fighter, bomber, recce and transport. Light Blue and yellow was still to be used on primary/basic trainers, advanced trainers and amphibians. The decision was made in March 1935 but tactical aircraft wouldn't be accepted in bare metal until 1937 because they had all of that Light Blue and yellow paint to use up. The change to the Technical Orders wasn't made official until March 1938. Aluminum dope was applied to fabric covered parts and airframes.
Tactical aircraft that had originally been delivered in paint were changed to the new standards when they came into a depot for major inspection/maintenance, if they had Alclad skin it was cleaned back to bare metal, in the case that the skin wasn't Alclad the aircraft was finished in aluminum paint. As a result in squadron photos of the period aircraft from the same unit can be in both blue/yellow and aluminum.
In Sept. 1938 the Aluminum finish was extended to
Advanced Trainers, by July 1942 Aluminum finish was
the standard for all classes, but for tactical aircraft
only this would be superseded by any camouflage
requirements.