One of the few remaining B-17's Nine-O-Nine went down today.

 I am a member of the Collings Foundation group, I might have even posted about it before here.  I have been on Nine-O-Nine multiple times, it is an amazing experience.  Unfortunately the aircraft was manned with a full passenger load and 3 crew.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/10/02/world-war-ii-era...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vintage-b-17-plane-crashes-erupts-flames...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/02/us/connecticut-plane-crash-trnd/index.html

I would imagine these old gals are just slow to respond to the controls, and over-controlling is easily done.

If you go and look at some of the old vintage videos of WW2, you can see where some of them crashed upon landing, after having suffered damage to components and systems in battle.

We have some old aircraft up here, they are a thing to behold, considering the process that went into building them.

When I retired, I was given a book, with all the aircraft, and the pioneers who built them, William E. Boeing, James S. McDonnel, James H. Kindelberger, Donald W. Douglas, Howard R. Hughes Jr.

Pretty special stuff.....

Sorry for your lost Egore.

That aircraft since it was on a local sightseeing flight would have been very light. Fuel for maybe 2hrs.

No bombs, 4500lbs. No ammunition for the multiple 50 caliber guns. No 50 caliber guns. And no fuel to go from England to Berlin and back. The people on board represented a very small load.

I cannot understand that it could not climb even with an engine out.
The NTSB will get to the bottom of it but there will be a reason that it didn't climb. Possibly misfueling? :'(

 The NTSB already checked the fuel and the FAA confirmed it was appropriate, its in the press release.  Wouldn't the wrong fuel effect all engines and not just one?

 Typically you can smell the difference, especially in that open-air plane.

Yes it was the departure airport.  They called in trouble with an engine and attempted to land.

I don't think climbing was the issue....
He knew he had a big enough problem to abort his flight, and had elevation to return safely, it was upon landing it seems that control was lost....yes?
Did he come up short?

Am I missing something?

The question is why. The captain had reportedly 7000 hours in that type of aircraft, which is an enormous number. I flew for almost 50 years and can't even come close to that number in any single type.

However, after takeoff pilots always go for altitude unless something prevents it. Altitude represents safety, in other words- options. Hitting the approach equipment was certainly not intended. My guess is that the crew were struggling to maintain altitude and failed.

The big question is why. :'(

 One thing bout these planes if you have never seen them operate is they crawl out of the sky in comparison to modern aircraft.  The airspeed I assume was rather low limiting options even further.  Comments always heard in the observing crowd is how they look like they are moving in slow motion, or shouldn't be able to lift an aircraft that size at that speed etc.    

 Its not known yet how much impacting the instrument system posts took part in the overall outcome but eventually the NTSB may figure it out.