RC Warbirds and Warplanes Discuss rc warbirds and warplanes in this forum.

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Old 03-28-2012, 07:49 AM
  #6701
perttime
 
perttime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Tampere, FINLAND
Posts: 1,630
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

I thought that was a pretty tough one

Looking at it from the balloon buster angle, I went through Willy Coppens and a few others but did not find the Fox connection from internet sources.

3136, what put you on the track?
perttime is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2012, 12:49 PM
  #6702
3136
 
3136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Victoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 969
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

G'day Perttime,
I remembered about a Belgian fellow claiming a 109 kill in a biplane but took a while to work out what actual plane it was.

JohnnyS, that was a good one mate, unfortunately I can't serve up the next question as I'm getting married in two days and if no one gets it before then, you will all be waiting too long.
So, JohnnyS can you take my place and do another question?
3136 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2012, 04:32 PM
  #6703
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 585
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

3136,

I've been married for 13 years: If you do it right it gets better every year! "Happy Wife -> Happy Life"!!!

OK, I will ask a few questions for you.

1. The installed weapons were reverse-engineered from a sample brought back from the Middle East.

2. The designer had previously worked for Heinkel as well as for two Japanese aircraft firms.

3. It was designed with an emphasis on maneuverability.

4. Although designed as a fighter it was most successful as a close-support attack aircraft, either attacking directly or by marking targets for larger aircraft.

5. It was also used to assist with air sea rescue operations.
JohnnyS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 05:13 PM
  #6704
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


Quote:
ORIGINAL: JohnnyS

3136,

I've been married for 13 years: If you do it right it gets better every year! ''Happy Wife -> Happy Life''!!!

OK, I will ask a few questions for you.

1. The installed weapons were reverse-engineered from a sample brought back from the Middle East.

2. The designer had previously worked for Heinkel as well as for two Japanese aircraft firms.

3. It was designed with an emphasis on maneuverability.

4. Although designed as a fighter it was most successful as a close-support attack aircraft, either attacking directly or by marking targets for larger aircraft.

5. It was also used to assist with air sea rescue operations.
Congratulations on the 13 years. I hope you enjoy many more. And it sounds as though you are describing the CAC Boomerang fighter. Thanks; Ernie P.


The CAC Boomerang was a World War II fighter aircraft designed and manufactured in Australia between 1942 and 1945. The Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation gave Boomerangs the model numbers CA-12, CA-13, CA-14 and CA-19.

The Wirraway trainer provided a starting point for the Boomerang's airframe. CAC general manager (and former chief designer) Lawrence Wackett and chief designer Fred David began detailed design work at the CAC factory in Fishermans Bend, Melbourne on 21 December 1941. David was a Jewish refugee from Austria, who had worked on aircraft designs for Heinkel in pre-Nazi Germany, as well as for Mitsubishi and Aichi in Japan. As a result, he had a comprehensive knowledge of advanced contemporary fighter designs, including the Heinkel He 112 and A6M Zero.

The RAAF ordered 105 CA-12 (Mark I) Boomerangs on 2 February 1942, before the prototype first flew on 29 May 1942.
The Boomerang was a small fighter, designed with an emphasis on manoeuvrability. It had an overall length of just 7.7 metres (25.5 ft) and an 11 m (36 ft) wingspan. Although the original intention had been to use as many Wirraway components as possible, the final design was quite different, with shorter wings, a shorter, wood-sheathed, aluminium-framed fuselage, increased strength for combat stresses and a new centre section.

Test flights found that the CA-12 handled well. It was very well-armed, with two 20 mm cannon and four .303 calibre (7.7 mm) machine guns, all mounted in the short, thick wings. The Boomerang was also generously equipped with armour plating to protect the pilot. However, general performance was mediocre. Although lively at low level, performance fell away rapidly over 15,000 ft (4,600 m), and at the maximum speed of 265 knots (490 km/h) was not sufficient to make it an effective counter to the Zero. In addition, the best European fighters were reaching almost 350 knots (650 km/h), and even relatively sluggish fighters like the Wildcat and the Kittyhawk were much faster than the Boomerang.

As a result, by early 1942 the CA-14 variant was being designed, around the U.S.-built, 1,700 hp (1,268 kW) Wright Cyclone R-2600 engine, to address the CA-12's deficiencies in speed, climb and ceiling.[2] However, the 145 Cyclones ordered were not delivered as scheduled, and in mid-1942 Wackett authorised use of the 1,850 hp (1,380 kW) Pratt & Whitney R-2800, which could also be obtained from the CAC factory in Lidcombe.

However, the significantly greater weight of this powerplant led to an unacceptable risk of undercarriage failure. CAC eventually returned to the Twin Wasp, to which was added a General Electric B-2 turbo-supercharger mounted inside the rear part of the fuselage, new propellor gear, a geared cooling fan (influenced by reports on Focke-Wulfs captured in Europe) and a larger, squared-off tailfin and rudder.

By July 1943, the significantly re-worked CA-14 prototype, now known as the CA-14A, had a top speed which was 25–30% better than the CA-12, and an operational ceiling which was 4,000 ft (1,200 m) higher. Overall, it compared favourably with the Spitfire Vc and early model Thunderbolts and Mustangs. By this time, however, British-built Spitfires had filled the interceptor role and Mustangs had been ordered, to fill the bomber escort, air superiority and close air support roles. In addition, work had begun on the all-new CA-15, also known as the Kangaroo. Consequently, production Boomerangs were never fitted with superchargers.

Boomerangs underwent various improvements and modifications, which were grouped under three CAC designations: CA-12, CA-13 and CA-19. A total of 250 aircraft of these marques were built: 105 CA-12s, (RAAF serial numbers A46-1/105), 95 CA-13s (A46-106/200) and 49 CA-19s (A46-201/249). The CA-13 and CA-19 are sometimes known collectively as the Boomerang Mark II.

The sole CA-14A was used for research by No. 1 Aircraft Performance Unit RAAF, and was also seconded to the Bureau of Meteorology for a period after the war ended.

Following the devastating first air raids on Darwin on 19 February 1942, the need for interceptors became more pressing. Despite the Boomerang's astonishingly short development phase — especially since the Australian aviation industry had never built fighters before, let alone designed them — by the time the Boomerang entered service, sufficient Curtiss P-40 Kittyhawks had arrived from the United States. In January 1943, these were replaced in the air defence role over Darwin by No. 1 (Fighter) Wing RAAF, which had returned from Europe, equipped with the Spitfire Mk Vc.
Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 12:17 AM
  #6705
G T
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: darwin, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 108
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

i think you may have it there Ernie,,
very good info on the Booma to
G T is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 02:24 AM
  #6706
3136
 
3136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Victoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 969
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Ernie P,
yes you do have it, I gave JohnnyS the plane to do the question on, and that was it.
I didn't think anyone would get it that fast though, as it's a pretty obscure aircraft, such a pity they never made them with the turbocharger[]
I saw one flying at the tyabb airshow a couple of weeks ago and it looked fantastic, he really threw it around.
http://www.dropbears.com/f/felix_noble/boomerang.htm
http://ww2db.com/aircraft_spec.php?a...t_model_id=218
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircr...ircraft_id=609
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC_Boomerang

(Thanks to JohnnyS for doing it for me, it looks like it went off a lot sooner than Iexpected)
3136 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 02:20 PM
  #6707
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


Quote:
ORIGINAL: 3136

Ernie P,
yes you do have it, I gave JohnnyS the plane to do the question on, and that was it.
I didn't think anyone would get it that fast though, as it's a pretty obscure aircraft, such a pity they never made them with the turbocharger[]
I saw one flying at the tyabb airshow a couple of weeks ago and it looked fantastic, he really threw it around.
http://www.dropbears.com/f/felix_noble/boomerang.htm
http://ww2db.com/aircraft_spec.php?a...t_model_id=218
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircr...ircraft_id=609
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC_Boomerang

(Thanks to JohnnyS for doing it for me, it looks like it went off a lot sooner than I expected)
Actually, the second clue was all that was necessary. I don't know if you know it, but Fred David was actually classified as an enemy combattant at the time, so he's lucky he got to work on the Boomerang instead of being tossed in jail. I'll post my question shortly. Thanks; Ernie P.

2. The designer had previously worked for Heinkel as well as for two Japanese aircraft firms.
Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 05:24 PM
  #6708
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

I trust this will amuse. Thanks; Ernie P.


What advanced warbird do I describe?


Clues:

(1) At the time its specifications were decided, it was to be the most ambitious high performance aircraft ever designed.
Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 10:53 PM
  #6709
perttime
 
perttime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Tampere, FINLAND
Posts: 1,630
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Sopwith Triplane?
perttime is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2012, 01:08 AM
  #6710
3136
 
3136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Victoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 969
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Blackbird?
3136 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2012, 04:24 AM
  #6711
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

No correct answers thus far. Thanks; Ernie P.


What advanced warbird do I describe?


Clues:

(1) At the time its specifications were decided, it was to be the most ambitious high performance aircraft ever designed.

(2) It was never put into production, but the decision was purely political. The aircraft design was complete.
Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2012, 05:00 AM
  #6712
deatonbt
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hermitage, TN
Posts: 416
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

CL-1200 Lancer
deatonbt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2012, 03:25 PM
  #6713
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


Quote:
ORIGINAL: deatonbt

CL-1200 Lancer
Good guess, deatonbt; but not the one we seek. JohnnyS has it figured out, but he can't field a question right now and wants to let some one else lead for a while. Maybe this will help. Thanks; Ernie P.



What advanced warbird do I describe?


Clues:

(1) At the time its specifications were decided, it was to be the most ambitious high performance aircraft ever designed.

(2) It was never put into production, but the decision was purely political. The aircraft design was complete.

(3) Its mission was originally to have been strategic reconnaissance.

Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2012, 06:22 PM
  #6714
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Late night clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What advanced warbird do I describe?


Clues:

(1) At the time its specifications were decided, it was to be the most ambitious high performance aircraft ever designed.

(2) It was never put into production, but the decision was purely political. The aircraft design was complete.

(3) Its mission was originally to have been strategic reconnaissance.

(4) Then, it was decided to build in a bomber role.

Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 01:07 AM
  #6715
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

An early morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What advanced warbird do I describe?


Clues:

(1) At the time its specifications were decided, it was to be the most ambitious high performance aircraft ever designed.

(2) It was never put into production, but the decision was purely political. The aircraft design was complete.

(3) Its mission was originally to have been strategic reconnaissance.

(4) Then, it was decided to build in a bomber role.

(5) It was to maintain a cruise speed of mach 2 +.

Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 01:48 AM
  #6716
uncljoe
 
uncljoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,085
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

B 70 Valkyrie
Semper Fi
uncljoe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 12:02 PM
  #6717
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Quote:
ORIGINAL: uncljoe

B 70 Valkyne
Semper Fi
Right concept, but the wrong plane, uncljoe. This plane was even more ambitious in its concept. This may help. Thanks; Ernie P.


What advanced warbird do I describe?


Clues:

(1) At the time its specifications were decided, it was to be the most ambitious high performance aircraft ever designed.

(2) It was never put into production, but the decision was purely political. The aircraft design was complete.

(3) Its mission was originally to have been strategic reconnaissance.

(4) Then, it was decided to build in a bomber role.

(5) It was to maintain a cruise speed of mach 2 +.

(6) And was designed to hit mach 3.

Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 01:08 PM
  #6718
drifter
 
drifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 526
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Avro 730
drifter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 02:13 PM
  #6719
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Quote:
ORIGINAL: drifter

Avro 730
You got it, drifter; and you are up, Sir. What, may I ask, was the give away clue for you? I've been told that if you google "most ambitious high performance aircraft", the first thing to pop up is the Avro 730. It was purely unintentional on my part; I was paraphrasing. The Avro 730 was a very ambitious project for the early 1950s; and it would have been one heck of a warbird. Well; you are up, drifter; what is your question for us? Thanks; Ernie P.


What advanced warbird do I describe?


Clues:

(1) At the time its specifications were decided, it was to be the most ambitious high performance aircraft ever designed.

(2) It was never put into production, but the decision was purely political. The aircraft design was complete.

(3) Its mission was originally to have been strategic reconnaissance.

(4) Then, it was decided to build in a bomber role.

(5) It was to maintain a cruise speed of mach 2 +.

(6) And was designed to hit mach 3.

(7) The first prototype was under construction when the program was cancelled.

(8) Lessons learned in the design of this aircraft influenced the design of a later noted passenger aircraft.

(9) The program was cancelled because it was feared new missile technology might obsolete manned bombers.

(10) It didn’t have a cockpit. Side windows and a front facing periscope were to provide visibility for the pilot.

(11) It was to be a canard design.

(12) Two engine pods each were to contain four engines.

(13) The specifications were drawn up in 1954, and the program cancelled in 1957

(14) It was to have flown in 1959.


Answer: The Avro 730

The Avro 730 was a planned Mach 3 reconnaissance aircraft and bomber for the Royal Air Force. If it had proceeded into service, the aircraft would have replaced the V bombers as the primary delivery system for Britain's nuclear deterrent. It was cancelled in 1957 along with other development on manned aircraft as part of the 1957 Defense White Paper.


During the early Cold War, the RAF bomber fleet of V bombers was given the nuclear deterrent role for Britain. The need for a very-long range supersonic strategic reconnaissance aircraft to support the V bombers both pre- and post-bombing was identified; an Operational Requirement, OR.330, for such an aircraft was identified and a specification was drawn up in 1954 for an aircraft that would be capable of entering the Soviet Union and avoiding air defenses. The aircraft envisaged would have to be capable of maintaining Mach 2.5 at 60,000 ft (18,300 m), with the ability to reach Mach 3, and operate at a maximum range of 5,754 mi (9,260 km). At that point in time, it was the most ambitious high-performance aircraft internationally to date.

There were three major submissions from the aircraft manufacturers: the Handley Page HP.100, Vickers SP4, and the Avro Type 730. All were futuristic delta or needle shapes in appearance employing multiple engines, 12 on the HP.100, 16 mounted horizontally at the rear of the Vickers. Avro were given a contract in mid-1955 to develop their submission aircraft. As an aid to development, the Bristol Type 188 aircraft was built to test the wing shape and later the effects of prolonged supersonic flight on metal. Up to 10 prototypes of the aircraft were proposed, necessitated in part due to the change to incorporate a bombing capability into the aircraft.

The first prototype was to have been designated Avro 731, a three-eighths scale test aircraft, it had been scheduled to fly in 1959. The prototype was under construction when the minister, Duncan Sandys, announced the decision to cancel its development. It had been suspected that by the time the aircraft came into service a decade later, it would have been already vulnerable to Soviet advances in anti aircraft missile technology. The Bristol 188 project continued despite the cancellation of the 730. Aspects and influences of the Avro 730 had encouraged studies at the Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough, into supersonic transport aircraft, which in turn would eventually contribute to the development effort behind Concorde.

The Avro 730 was a tail-first aircraft, an approach which greatly reduced trim-drag while increasing lift at slower speeds. The aircraft had a long, thin fuselage with a high fineness ratio; a small tapered almost-rectangular wing was mounted centrally on the fuselage. Four Armstrong-Siddeley P.156 engines were carried, two each mounted over-under in pods at the extreme tips of the wings. No conventional canopy was fitted in order to maintain the fineness ratio, the cockpit featured only two small windows facing to the side, and used a retractable periscope for viewing during take-off and landing. A crew of three would be carried: pilot, navigator and radar operator.

This initial version was intended strictly for the reconnaissance role, using its "Red Drover" sideways-looking radar to find targets for attack by the V bomber force that would follow. As development progressed it became clear that the radar would not need as big an antenna as initially believed, freeing up considerable internal room. In response, the RAF started concentrating on the secondary bombing role carrying both the radar and also including a long bomb bay for either a weapon or additional fuel. A high-speed bomber requirement was also being studied at the time, OR.336, so the two projects were combined into the new RB.156 requirement. This led to a fairly major redesign.

Although the new version looked much like the original, it was larger overall and featured a new wing planform. In order to increase wing area extra "winglettes" were added outside of the engine pods and the entire planform was re-shaped to be more of a classic delta wing. The wing inside the engine pods, about ⅔ of the overall span, was swept at about 45°, the smaller area outside was more highly swept at about 60°. The forward sweep on the trailing edge was removed. The engine pods were now specified to carry four Armstrong-Siddeley P.176 engines each, for a total of eight. The pods were circular at the front and mounted a single large shock cone, and grew progressively more "square" to the rear, where they ended flush with the rear of the wing. The rest of the layout was generally the same as the earlier version, with the rectangular canards, "hidden" cockpit and large cropped-delta vertical fin at the extreme rear.

The new version also had reduction in crew to two members. The bomb bay was narrow but very long at 50 ft (15 m), and was intended to be armed with a nuclear-tipped stand-off missile. A suitable warhead started development as Blue Rosette.

General characteristics
Crew: 2
Length: 163 ft 6 in (49.8 m)
Wingspan: 59 ft 9 in (18.2 m)
Height: ()
Wing area: 2,000 ft² (185.8 m²)
Loaded weight: up to 220,000 lb ()
Powerplant: 8 × Armstrong Siddeley P.176 turbojets, 9,700 lbf (43.2 kN) each
Performance
Maximum speed: Mach 3 (1,990 mph, 3,200 km/h)
Cruise speed: Mach 2.5 (1,650 mph, 2,660 km/h)
Range: 5,754 mi (5,000 nmi, 9,260 km)
Service ceiling: 66,400 ft ()

Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 02:56 PM
  #6720
drifter
 
drifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 526
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

I googled "mach 2 mach 3 bomber". After the Valkyrie the Avro came up.

I'll yield to anyone who has a good question.
drifter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 11:14 PM
  #6721
Ernie P.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 4,018
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


Quote:
ORIGINAL: drifter

I googled ''mach 2 mach 3 bomber''. After the Valkyrie the Avro came up.

I'll yield to anyone who has a good question.
The floor is open to any one who wants to ask a question. First come, first served. Thanks; Ernie P.
Ernie P. is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2012, 03:28 PM
  #6722
Mein Duff
 
Mein Duff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 1,020
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Here's a softball..
Who was the last pilot to shoot down a B-29?
Mein Duff is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2012, 07:12 PM
  #6723
Mein Duff
 
Mein Duff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 1,020
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Here's a softball..
Who was the last pilot to shoot down a B-29?

1-Tip : he was also a member of the so called "Clean -Up Crew"
Mein Duff is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 03:27 PM
  #6724
Mein Duff
 
Mein Duff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 1,020
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Here's a softball..
Who was the last pilot to shoot down a B-29?

1-Tip : he was also a member of the so called "Clean -Up Crew"

2-Tip : Was blinded in one eye during the war
Mein Duff is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 06:01 PM
  #6725
mobyal
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Lexington, VA
Posts: 1,556
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Mein Duff

Here's a softball..
Who was the last pilot to shoot down a B-29?

1-Tip : he was also a member of the so called ''Clean -Up Crew''

2-Tip : Was blinded in one eye during the war

Saburo Saiki (sp?) He wasa blinded in one eye relatively early in the war, and after he returned to service flew off Iwo and mainland Japan in the closing stages of the war.
But I'd always thought that a Black Widow shot own the last B-29, which had been abandoned by its crew and was flying around. The crew was assigned to shoot it down before it hit something important. Don't know the name of the pilot though.
(How's the foregoing for two WAGs? LOL)
mobyal is offline  
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:47 AM.