My sister got on a 4 engine plane in the south Pacific in 62 maybe.
The plane got just about half way to Hawaii and lost both engines
on one side.

They turned around and came back home. Let everyone go home when
a phone number was available. Six hours later every one loaded up
and flew to Hawaii and from there to Oakland. Tough trip. Just under
24 hours one way. 11 1/2 and 11. Boeing had to make a long range jet
to get anyone out or back faster. 727 Long. We had a 0.7 mile long runway.

Martin

On 6/22/2015 7:56 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 23:12:36 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 21:29:44 -0500, "David R. Birch"
wrote:

On 6/21/2015 8:09 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

This afternoon I was listening to the crew of a machine of similar
complexity, the B-29 bomber "Fifi". They had removed the turbos and
replaced the direct mechanical injection with carbs to cut down the
enormous maintenance, since they don't need the original high
performance.
http://www.aviation-history.com/engines/r3350.htm

-jsw

When the Soviets built the Tu-4, based on interned B-29 they studied,
they're tech was not up to replicating the Wright R-3350, so they
installed a carbureted radial which meant the Tu-4 had much less range.

When my Dad flew B-29 missions out of Tinian, they never flew with all
new or rebuilt engines, at least 2 were engines that had already proved
they were reliable.

David
Nothing like experience to instill confidence. An "experienced" engine
statistically has a lower chance of failure than a freshly rebuilt
one.

Indeed. Could you imagine the conditions their old wrenches
experienced on a Pacific island back then? Heat, humidity, blowing
dust, etc. I doubt we newer wrenches would have liked them at all,
and I applaud the job they did.

--
Find out what people will submit to, and you have found out the
exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them.
--Frederick Douglass