Talk:List of surviving Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses

USAF Museum

December 2007 announcement from NASM that B-17D "The Swoose" is going to be swapped with the USAFM B-17G "Sho Sho Sho Baby" sometime in 2008. The B-17F "Memphis Belle is going to take the place of Baby and the B-17D is going to the restoration shop at USAFM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.212.28.50 (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and this list still has the Belle in Memphis. The Belle's own page has her correct current location at USAFM. I'm not going to mess with it though, lest some admin jump me for a citation.67.142.130.40 (talk) 20:17, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Peer review link

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surviving aircraft...LanceBarber (talk) 04:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in process

There is a move discussion in progress on Category talk:Survivors (aircraft) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RFC bot 14:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Liberty Belle

the Liberty bell should be removed from the list as it is no longer a surviving plane, it crashed this morning in Illinois. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.71.208.163 (talk) 17:00, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

That has already been done. Liberty Belle is not the same plane as Miss Liberty Belle which is still on the list. —Diiscool (talk) 17:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I see there is still a photo which must have been what you were referring to. I will remove it now. —Diiscool (talk) 17:11, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

"Accidents and incidents"

An anon editor added a new section called "Accidents and incidents" and I reverted it. I feel like such a section is unwarranted for a list of surviving B-17 Flying Fortress airframes. According to the article, 12,731 aircraft were produced. So should we list all but the few dozen survivors in such a section in this article? No. The addition of the new section falls under WP:NOTNEWS. The plane that crashed today was removed from the list. Period.
If someone wants to start Accidents and incidents involving the B-17 Flying Fortress, then go ahead. —Diiscool (talk) 20:53, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I have begun same. Mark Sublette (talk) 00:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette (talk) 00:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Evergreen's B-17

Evergreen international isn't flyable. She's on display, but per the docents she has a wing spar crack (there are airworthiness directives requiring inspection for this issue every year on B-17's.) and is unlikely to ever fly again.--Chico129 (talk) 16:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of surviving Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090512173732/http://www.azcaf.org/pages/aircraft_bios/B-17G_FlyFort.html to http://www.azcaf.org/pages/aircraft_bios/B-17G_FlyFort.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:22, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on List of surviving Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071016231424/http://collingsfoundation.org/tour_b-17g.htm to http://www.collingsfoundation.org/tour_b-17g.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004215217/http://lsfm.org/index.html to http://lsfm.org/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150509225453/http://sasmuseum.web01.bosmallbusiness.com/aircraft/b-17g-flying-fortress/ to http://sasmuseum.web01.bosmallbusiness.com/aircraft/b-17g-flying-fortress/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120917005301/http://www.hill.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=5649 to http://www.hill.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=5649
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141012072145/http://afarmamentmuseum.com/outside.shtml to http://www.afarmamentmuseum.com/outside.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151121184001/http://www.museumofaviation.org/B17.php to http://www.museumofaviation.org/B17.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120619082327/http://mightyeighth.org/support-the-museum/b17-restoration-project/ to http://mightyeighth.org/support-the-museum/b17-restoration-project/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070821082055/http://members.cox.net/b17brian/b17/index.htm to http://members.cox.net/b17brian/b17/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080523124049/http://www.b17flyinglegend.com/survivors/ to http://www.b17flyinglegend.com/survivors/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081113033835/http://www.b-17-flying-fortress.fr/USCG.html to http://b-17-flying-fortress.fr/USCG.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:59, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of surviving Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141008165121/http://www.marchfield.org/aircraft-exhibits/b-17-exhibit to http://www.marchfield.org/aircraft-exhibits/b-17-exhibit/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:08, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Collings Foundation B-17

Crashed at Bradley International, Hartford CT, this morning. Fatalities involved (quantity not yet reported); airport closed due to fire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.255.165.198 (talk) 17:07, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

• https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vintage-b-17-plane-crashes-erupts-flames-bradley-international-airport-n1061161
• https://www.wfsb.com/news/b--wwii-plane-crash-at-bradley-airport-was-deadly/article_d514bd24-e51d-11e9-b6ac-47e02ec67428.html

216.255.165.198 (talk) 17:17, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Extra surviving aircraft

There's at least one airworthy B-17 not on this list. The Movie Memphis Belle lives at and operates from the National Warplane Museum in Geneseo, NY USA. She's the "actress" who played the lead role in the movie Memphis Belle starring Matthew Modine. (Sorry I can't recall the year right now.) I know this from personal experience as well as reviewing the Wikipedia page for the National Warplane Museum. DaddyWarlock (talk) 06:17, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

DaddyWarlock That B-17 is on the list. The aircraft is S/N 44-83546, a B-17G that has been restored as a B-17F. - ZLEA _T\^C 14:10, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

The number of the airworthy planes

This article lists it as 9, whereas the current one puts it at 10. Is 9 correct?--Adûnâi (talk) 05:21, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Adûnâi The article lists the following aircraft as airworthy:

• 44-8543 Madras Maiden
• 44-8846 Pink Lady (on display in airworthy condition)
• 44-83514 Sentimental Journey
• 44-83546 Memphis Belle
• 44-83563 Fuddy Duddy
• 44-83872 Texas Raiders
• 44-85718 Thunderbird
• 44-85740 Aluminum Overcast
• 44-85784 Sally B/Memphis Belle
• 44-85829 Yankee Lady

As you can see, the article lists 10 aircraft as airworthy. - ZLEA _T\^C 14:02, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Number as of November 2022

To avoid any confusion, the list of airworthy B-17s after the November 2022 crash is as follows:

• 44-8543 Madras Maiden
• 44-8846 Pink Lady (on display in airworthy condition)
• 44-83514 Sentimental Journey
• 44-83546 Memphis Belle
• 44-83563 Fuddy Duddy
• 44-85718 Thunderbird
• 44-85740 Aluminum Overcast
• 44-85784 Sally B/Memphis Belle
• 44-85829 Yankee Lady

- ZLEA _T\^C 01:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Revisiting airworthy count

The number of airworthy planes, as noted in the lead, was adjusted from 9 to 4 by Zyates87 on 23 November. Looking at the nine that were listed above, their latest Status (what's listed in the column) is:

• 44-8543 Madras Maiden Ye Olde Pub Y airworthy
• 44-8846 Pink Lady N static display, yet its description states "One of the two only airworthy examples in Europe."
• 44-83514 Sentimental Journey Y airworthy
• 44-83546 (movie) Memphis Belle airworthy but "Currently undergoing deep maintenance"
• 44-83563 Fuddy Duddy airworthy but "Hasn't been flown since 2014"
• 44-85718 Thunderbird N long-term maintenance and "undergoing 'extensive rebuild' in Oregon"
• 44-85740 Aluminum Overcast N long-term maintenance and "undergoing wing repairs in Florida"
• 44-85784 Sally B/Memphis Belle Y airworthy
• 44-85829 Yankee Lady Y airworthy

The four with a green checkmark are the currently "airworthy" ones, but it seems the number can very arguably be 6 rather than 4.

What definition of "airworthy" is being used? For example, while Fuddy Duddy hasn't been flown since 2014... does that make it un-airworthy? It may simply reflect a decision by the operator not to fly it, for any number of reasons. What if it had last been flown [pick some number] months ago?

A count of 4 appears to be based on "they are actively being flown by their operators" (or if other criteria were used, clarification welcome). Which I can support, but "airworthy" wording seems problematic without more context or some adjustment to the "Status" column.

Suggestions and comments welcome! Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:51, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dmoore5556!

Regarding long-term maintenance, these aircraft can be out of the air for several months if not years under such conditions.

Regarding Pink Lady, I may have missed the citation in this article to its current airworthiness. This aircraft last flew in March 2010.

Perhaps, to clarify this (as with Fuddy Duddy), an accepted standard for airworthiness could be created for Wikipedians to refer too?

I'd rather get things right for the article than the other option so I'm very grateful for your advice. Zyates87 (talk) 04:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

The generally accepted definition for an airworthy aircraft when referring to survivors is an aircraft with a valid airworthiness certificate. Exceptions include crashed/destroyed aircraft awaiting or undergoing extensive restoration or pending cancellation, or other aircraft which obviously aren't physically airworthy.

• 41-9210 N Registered with the FAA as N12355, but restoration is not complete.
• 42-29782 Boeing Bee Y Registered with the FAA as N17W, kept in airworthy condition but not flown since 1998.
• 44-8543 Ye Olde Pub Y Registered with the FAA as N3701G.
• 44-8846 Pink Lady N I can't find F-AZDX on any European registry database, so I assume it has expired or was canceled.
• 44-83514 Sentimental Journey Y Registered with the FAA as N9323Z.
• 44-83525 Suzy Q N Registered with the FAA as N83525, but disassembled in storage, apparently awaiting restoration.
• 44-83546 The Movie Memphis Belle Y Registered with the FAA as N3703G, undergoing maintenance.
• 44-83563 Fuddy Duddy Y Registered with the FAA as N9563Z, kept in airworthy condition but not flown since 2014.
• 44-83684 Piccadilly Lilly II N Registered with the FAA as N3713G, but restoration is not complete.
• 44-83785 Shady Lady N Registered with the FAA as N207EV, but restoration is not complete.
• 44-83872 Texas Raiders N Registered with the FAA as N7227C, but no longer exists and is awaiting registration cancellation.
• 44-85718 Thunderbird N Registered with the FAA as N900RW, but undergoing extensive rebuild.
• 44-85734 Liberty Belle N Registered with the FAA as N390TH, but restoration is not complete.
• 44-85740 Aluminum Overcast Y Registered with the FAA as N5017N, undergoing routine maintenance and repairs.
• 44-85778 Miss Angela Y Registered with the FAA as N3509G, status is unclear. Latest in-flight photo I could find was 2004.
• 44-85784 Sally B/Memphis Belle Y Registered with the CAA as G-BEDF.
• 44-85813 Champaign Lady Y Registered with the FAA as N3154S, but restoration is not complete.
• 44-85829 Yankee Lady Y Registered with the FAA as N3193G.

- ZLEA _T\^C 05:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

ZLEA, thanks much for the detailed summary; very helpful. One approach could be to list (in the table) the 10 with check marks (both green and amber) as "airworthy", adding "but not flown since XXX" for the three with amber check marks. And in the lead, explain: "Of those registered with national transportation agencies (such as the FAA), 10 are airworthy, although three have not been flown for more than five years." Dmoore5556 (talk) 05:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I've just updated the article with regards to airworthy count. After looking at the status of Champaign Lady (see here) I believe it is clearly not airworthy, so it is not listed it as airworthy in the article (the above green-check looks to be an editing error; compare with others who are also noted as "but restoration is not complete"). Open to discussion, especially if anyone has a more recent update. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2022

Please change the number of airworthy B-17's from "9" to "8" 2001:569:7BD2:4A00:56E:7622:3DDA:2BA7 (talk) 05:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: See the previous discussion. BilCat (talk) 08:42, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

List suggestion

We could simplify "Geographic location" to "Location" and "Institutional location" to "Owner". Is there a reason not to? PRRfan (talk) 15:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

"Institutional location" is wordy but I wouldn't change it to "Owner". The museum (for static displays) or commonly known operator (for airworthy planes) can be a different entity than the actual owner. Texas Raiders comes to mind, as it was operated by the Commemorative Air Force, but a separate legal entity (American Airpower Heritage Flying Museum) holds title to their planes. I've also seen museum websites include a note "on display courtesy of X". Dmoore5556 (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. Maybe "Location" and "Institution"? Or even "Location", "Institution", and a new column for "Owner"? Or I could try to mock up a table that has "Location" as a two-column-wide label over sortable "City" and "Institution" columns. PRRfan (talk) 19:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

I think "Location" and "Institution" would work fine. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Great, thanks; I've made the change. Thanks for your fine work on this page. PRRfan (talk) 03:50, 1 December 2022 (UTC)