That's simply a great design. And so are these Stearmans. I know the B-17 has lots of rabid fans, but the amount of time and attention that went into the fundamental design was fairly minimal. Nobody in 1935 ever imagined we'd still be trying to fly around in these. And I still say, the way the product was put into such massive production emphasized readiness for war and not longevity. And Toto's Dad is right, when things go wrong and you lose power, you're in desperate trouble. If the men who did the preliminary design engineering on the B-17 could speak to us today, they would tell us "Look, we took it as a given that a certain number of these things would crash and everyone on board would probably die. But if we didn't move forward and get these planes into service, many more people would die and they'd be our citizenry. We did the best we could with the limited resources we had." IMO there was no amount of inspections, maintenance, etc. that the Collins people could have done that would make a B-17 anything close to the level of reliability and safety of American or Swedish planes constructed after say, 1980. In other words, if you applied the same metrics of the B-17 to the 737 Max models, those wouldn't be grounded at all. None of these 737s. Even if 8 of them had gone down, all on board lost, that was the calculation we were willing to make - and find acceptable.