Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 343 of 423 FirstFirst ... 243293333341342343344345353393 ... LastLast
Results 8,551 to 8,575 of 10570

  1. #8551
    Burt Reynolds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Corvallis, OR
    Posts
    53
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Convair F-102?
    Oregon RC Aircraft Buy/Sell/Trade
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/764344763587229/

  2. #8552
    catboater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kirkland, WA
    Posts
    469
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


    ORIGINAL: jeffEE

    I always thought it was an RC B-24 he was killed in. I guess I will have to up-date my brain on that one.
    You're right. It was a B-24 and not a B-17
    Fly em\'\' on Sunday. Fix em\'\' on Monday.
    Spitfire Brotherhood 131

  3. #8553

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Bealeton, VA
    Posts
    3,026
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    (1) This aircraft had its genesis in a WWII research program.

    (2) After the research program was cancelled, it was decided one of the research aircraft should serve as a prototype military fighter aircraft.

    (3) The result was a very, very fast operational fighter; one which continued in active service for decades.

    (4) The first prototypes, intended to prove the very controversial design concept would actually perform as indicated, flew in the mid 1950’s.

    (5) It flew at Mach 2 before 1960.

  4. #8554

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Nebo, NC
    Posts
    30
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    F104?

  5. #8555
    The Raven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    962
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    B-58 Hustler, or one of it's variants?

  6. #8556

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    North Eastham, MA
    Posts
    80
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    F106 ?

  7. #8557

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Bealeton, VA
    Posts
    3,026
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    No correct answers thus far, so here's another clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    (1) This aircraft had its genesis in a WWII research program.

    (2) After the research program was cancelled, it was decided one of the research aircraft should serve as a prototype military fighter aircraft.

    (3) The result was a very, very fast operational fighter; one which continued in active service for decades.

    (4) The first prototypes, intended to prove the very controversial design concept would actually perform as indicated, flew in the mid 1950’s.

    (5) It flew at Mach 2 before 1960.

    (6) It was able to cruise at supersonic speed.

  8. #8558
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    English Electric Lightning
    Gary Baker

  9. #8559

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississauga, ON, CANADA
    Posts
    46
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    F-4 Phantom

  10. #8560
    uncljoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,782

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    AVRO CANADA CF 105 ARROW
    Look towards the Horizon......your death awaits you there So Enjoy today ,,,,,,

  11. #8561

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Bealeton, VA
    Posts
    3,026
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


    ORIGINAL: grbaker

    English Electric Lightning

    Indeed, Sir!! I had a hunch the clue about supercruising would be giving away too much for this crowd of experts. You are up, Sir! What is your question for us?

    For many years, the English Electric Lightning could outfly just about anything else in the air; certainly it had the legs of any of the fighter aircraft in service at the time. What it didn't have was a good avionics package; or a government willing to spend the money to develop such a package. Thanks; Ernie P.


    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    (1) This aircraft had its genesis in a WWII research program.

    (2) After the research program was cancelled, it was decided one of the research aircraft should serve as a prototype military fighter aircraft.

    (3) The result was a very, very fast operational fighter; one which continued in active service for decades.

    (4) The first prototypes, intended to prove the very controversial design concept would actually perform as indicated, flew in the mid 1950’s.

    (5) It flew at Mach 2 before 1960.

    (6) It was able to cruise at supersonic speed.

    (7) This aircraft was the first production aircraft to feature a number of innovations now considered standard on modern jet aircraft.

    (8) It featured twin engines, though the arrangement was novel, perhaps unique.

    (9) Although it carried twin engines, the frontal area was very low.

    (10) This aircraft intercepted a U-2, at an altitude which had previously beem thought safe, or “intercept proof” for U-2 operations.

    (11) The aircraft was considered to be very easy to handle, yet it featured outstanding maneuverability.

    (12) The fuselage was very tightly packed; perhaps too much so.

    (13) Right to the end of its active service life, this aircraft’s outright performance continued to at least match, or actually out perform the aircraft which replaced it.

    (14) The downfall, or failing, of this aircraft was in its avionics packages. Money was never allocated to improving its electronics; and it eventually fell behind what was required in the modern aerial battlefield.

    (15) Nevertheless, it could still at least match any aircraft flying.

    Answer: The English Electric Lightning

    The English Electric Lightning is a supersonic jet fighter aircraft of the Cold War era, noted for its great speed. It is the only all-British Mach 2 fighter aircraft and was the first aircraft in the world capable of supercruise. The Lightning was renowned for its capabilities as an interceptor; pilots commonly described it as "being saddled to a skyrocket". Following English Electric's integration into the unified British Aircraft Corporation, the aircraft was marketed as the BAC Lightning.

    The Lightning was prominently used by the Royal Air Force RAF and the Royal Saudi Air Force. The aircraft was a regular performer at airshows, it is one of the highest-performance aircraft ever used in formation aerobatics. Following retirement in the late 1980s, many of the remaining aircraft became museum exhibits; until 2010, three examples were kept flying at "Thunder City" in Cape Town, South Africa. In September 2008, the Institution of Mechanical Engineers conferred on the Lightning its "Engineering Heritage Award" at a ceremony at BAE Systems' site at Warton Aerodrome.


    The specification for the aircraft followed the cancellation of the Air Ministry's 1942 E.24/43 supersonic research aircraft specification which had resulted in the Miles M.52 programme. It was soon realised that the aircraft should be regarded as a prototype fighter to satisfy the British Air Ministry's 1949 specification F23/49 rather than being a pure research aircraft. The Lightning design shared a number of innovations first planned for the Miles M.52 including the shock cone and all-moving tailplane or stabilator. The prototypes, known as P.1, were built to Ministry of Supply Operational Requirement ER.103 of 1947 for a transonic research aircraft. The first of the two P.1s WG760 flew for the first time from RAF Boscombe Down on 4 August 1954.

    The P.1's chief designer was W.E.W "Teddy" Petter, formerly chief designer at Westland Aircraft. The design was controversial, and the Short SB5 was built to test wing sweep and tailplane combinations. The original combination was proved correct. The forerunner of the Lightning series was the P.1A and P.1B flying "proof-of-concept" aircraft. Looking very much like the production series, the prototypes were distinguished by the rounded-triangular intakes, short fins and lack of radar or operational equipment. Initial prototypes were powered by un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojets, although the Rolls-Royce Avon was used in subsequent aircraft. On 25 November 1958, the P.1B became the first British aircraft to fly at Mach 2. The second P.1A, WG763 was fitted with two 30mm ADEN cannons, however it was not possible to equip heavy underwing stores. Due to the limited internal space of the fuselage the fuel capacity was relatively small, giving the prototypes an extremely limited endurance, additionally the tyres would rapidly wear out.


    The first operational Lightning, designated the F.1, was designed as a point defence interceptor to defend mainland Britain from bomber attack. To best perform this intercept mission, emphasis was placed on rate-of-climb, acceleration, and speed, rather than range and combat endurance. It was equipped with two 30 mm ADEN cannon in front of the cockpit windscreen and an interchangeable fuselage weapon pack containing either an additional two ADEN cannon, 48, two inch air-to-air rockets, or two de Havilland Firestreak air-to-air missiles, a heavy fit optimized for attack of large aircraft. The Ferranti AI.23 radar (immediate predecessor of the AI.24 Foxhunter) supported autonomous search, automatic target tracking, and ranging for all weapons, while the pilot attack sight provided gyroscopically derived lead angle and backup stadiametric ranging for gun firing. The radar and gunsight were collectively designated the AIRPASS: Airborne Interception Radar and Pilot Attack Sight System.

    The next two Lightning variants, the F.1A and F.2, saw steady but relatively minor refinement of the basic design, and the next variant, the F.3, was a major departure. The F.3 had higher thrust Avon 301R engines, a larger, squared-off fin and strengthened intake bullet allowing a service clearance to Mach 2.0 (the F.1, F.1A and F.2 were limited to Mach 1.7), the A.I.23B radar and Red Top missile offering a limited forward hemisphere attack capability—and most notoriously—deletion of the nose cannon. The new engines and fin made the F.3 the highest performance Lightning yet, but with an even higher fuel consumption and resulting shorter range. The next variant, the F.6, was already in development, but there was a need for an interim solution to partially address the F.3’s shortcomings. The F.3A was that interim solution.

    The F.3A introduced two improvements: a new, non-jettisonable, 610 gal (2,770 l) ventral fuel tank, and a new, kinked, conically cambered wing leading edge, incorporating a slightly larger leading edge fuel tank, raising the total usable internal fuel to 716 gal (3,250 l). The conically cambered wing noticeably improved maneuverability, especially at higher altitudes, and the ventral tank nearly doubled available fuel. The increased fuel was very welcome, but the lack of cannon armament was felt to be a deficiency. It was thought that cannon were desirable to fire warning shots in the intercept mission.

    The F.6 was the ultimate Lightning version to see British service. Originally, it was nearly identical to the F.3A with the exception that it had provisions to carry 260 gal (1,180 l) ferry tanks on pylons over the wings. These tanks were jettisonable in an emergency, and gave the F.6 a substantially improved deployment capability. There remained one glaring shortcoming: the lack of cannon. This was finally rectified in the form of a modified ventral tank with two ADEN cannon mounted in the front. The addition of the cannon and their ammunition decreased the tank's fuel capacity from 610 gal to 535 gal (2,430 l), but the cannon made the F.6 a “real fighter” again.

    The final British Lightning was the F.2A. This was an F.2 upgraded with the cambered wing, the squared fin, and the 610 gal ventral. The F.2A retained the A.I.23 and Firestreak missile, the nose cannon, and the earlier Avon 211R engines. Although the F.2A lacked the thrust of the later Lightnings, it had the longest tactical range of all Lightning variants, and was used for low-altitude interception over Germany.

    There were several unique and distinctive features in the design of the Lightning; principally the use of stacked and staggered engines, a notched delta wing, and a low-mounted tailplane. The vertically stacked, longitudinally staggered engines was the solution devised by Petter to the conflicting requirements of minimizing frontal area, providing undisturbed engine airflow across a wide speed range, and packaging two engines to provide sufficient thrust to meet performance goals. The configuration allowed the twin engines to be fed by a single nose inlet, with the flow split vertically aft of the cockpit, and the nozzles tightly stacked, effectively tucking one engine behind the cockpit. The result was a low frontal area, an efficient inlet, and excellent single-engine handling. Unfortunately, this stacked configuration led to complicated maintenance procedure, and the recurring problem of fluid leakage from the upper engine being a fire hazard.

    The fuselage was tightly packed, leaving no room for fuel tankage or main landing gear. While the notched delta wing lacked the volume of a standard delta wing, each wing contained a fairly conventional three-section main fuel tank and leading-edge tank, holding 312 imp gal (1,420 l); the wing flap also contained a 33 imp gal (150 l) fuel tank and an additional 5 imp gal (23 l) was contained in a fuel recuperator, bringing the aircraft's total internal fuel capacity to 700 imp gal (3,200 l). The main landing gear was sandwiched outboard of the main tanks and aft of the leading edge tanks, with the flap fuel tanks behind. The long main gear legs retracted toward the wingtip, necessitating an exceptionally thin main tyre inflated to the high pressure of 330–350 psi (23–24 bar).

    A conformal ventral store was added to the design to house, alternatively, a fuel tank or a rocket engine. The rocket engine, a Napier Double Scorpion motor, also contained a reserve of 200 imp gal (910 l) of high-test peroxide (HTP) to drive the rocket’s turbopump and act as an oxidizer. Fuel for the rocket would have been drawn from the Lightning’s internal tankage. The rocket engine was intended to boost the Lightning’s performance against a supersonic, high altitude bomber threat, but this threat never emerged, thus the Lightning’s basic performance was deemed sufficient and the rocket engine option was cancelled in 1958. The ventral store saw wide use as an extra fuel tank, initially this was jettisonable and held 250 gal (247 gal usable, 1,120 l). Later ventral tanks were non-jettisonable.
    Despite its acceleration, altitude and top speed, the Lightning found itself outclassed by newer fighters in terms of radar, avionics, weapons load, range, and air-to-air capability. More of a problem was the obsolete avionics and weapons fit. The radar had a short range and no track-while scan capability; it could only detect targets in a fairly narrow (40 degree) arc. While an automatic collision course attack system was developed and successfully demonstrated by English Electric, it was not adopted owing to cost concerns. Plans to supplement or replace the obsolete Red Top and Firestreak missiles with modern AIM-9L Sidewinder missiles never came to fruition because of lack of funding,

    Early models of the Lightning the F.1, F.1A, and F.2, had a rated top speed of Mach 1.7 at 36,000 ft in an ICAO standard atmosphere, and 650 Knots Indicated airspeed (KIAS) at lower altitudes. Later models, the F.2A, F.3, F.3A, F.6, and F.53, had a rated top speed of Mach 2.0 at 36,000 ft, and speeds up to 700 KIAS for “operational necessity only.” A Lightning fitted with Avon 200-series engines, a ventral tank and two Firestreak missiles typically ran out of excess thrust at Mach 1.9 on a Standard Day; while a Lightning powered by the Avon 300-series engines, a ventral tank and two Red Top missiles ran out of excess thrust at Mach 2.0. As speed increased, the Lightning's directional stability decreased; there were potentially hazardous consequences in the form of vertical fin failure if yaw was not rapidly counteracted by correct rudder use. Stability was protected by imposed Mach limits during missile launches; later Lightning variants featured a larger vertical fin which gave a greater stability margin during high speed flight.

    The Lightning possessed a remarkable climb rate. It was famous for its ability to rapidly rotate from takeoff to climb almost vertically from the runway, though this did not yield the best time to altitude. The Lightning's trademark tail-stand manoeuvre exchanged airspeed for altitude; it could slow to near-stall speeds before commencing level flight. The Lightning’s optimum climb profile required the use of afterburners during takeoff. Immediately after takeoff, the nose would be lowered for rapid acceleration to 430 KIAS before initiating a climb, stabilising at 450 KIAS. This would yield a constant climb rate of approximately 20,000 ft/min. Around 13,000 ft the Lightning would reach Mach 0.87 and maintain this speed until reaching the tropopause, 36,000 ft. on a standard day. If climbing further, pilots would accelerate to supersonic speed at the tropopause before resuming the climb.

    A Lightning flying at optimum climb profile would reach 36,000 ft in under three minutes. The official ceiling was kept as a secret, although low security RAF documents usually stated 60,000+ ft (18 000+ m). In September 1962 Fighter Command organised several supersonic interception trials on Lockheed U-2As at heights of around 60,000-65,000 ft, which were temporarily based at RAF Upper Heyford to monitor Soviet nuclear tests. For the trials operations were carried out by the AFDS temporarily moved to RAF Middleton St George. Energy climb techniques and flight profiles were developed to put the Lightning into a suitable attack position. To avoid risking the U-2, the Lightning could not be permitted to close any closer than 5,000 ft and definitely could not be allowed to fly in front of the U-2. For the actual intercepts, four Lightning F1As were used on eighteen solo sorties. The sorties proved that, under GCI, successful intercepts could be made at up to 65,000 ft. Carried out against the backdrop of the Cuban missile crisis, the flight targets were deliberately not listed in the pilot log books. RAF Lightning pilot and Chief Examiner Brian Carroll reported taking a Lightning F.53 up to 87,300 feet (26 600 m) over Saudi Arabia at which level "Earth curvature was visible and the sky was quite dark", noting that control-wise "[it was] on a knife edge".

    In 1984, during a major NATO exercise, Flt Lt Mike Hale intercepted a U-2 at a height which they had previously considered safe from interception (thought to be 66,000 feet). Records show that Hale also climbed to 88,000 ft (26,800 m) in his Lightning F.3 XR749. This was not sustained level flight, but in a ballistic climb or a zoom climb, in which the pilot takes the aircraft to top speed and then puts the aircraft into a climb, trading speed for altitude. Hale also participated in time-to-height and acceleration trials against Lockheed F-104 Starfighters from Aalborg. He reports that the Lightnings won all races easily with the exception of the low-level supersonic acceleration, which was a "dead heat".

    Carroll compared the Lightning and the F-15C Eagle, having flown both aircraft, stating that: "Acceleration in both was impressive, you have all seen the Lightning leap away once brakes are released, the Eagle was almost as good, and climb speed was rapidly achieved. Takeoff roll is between 2,000 and 3,000 ft [600 to 900 m], depending upon military or maximum afterburner-powered takeoff. The Lightning was quicker off the ground, reaching 50 ft [15 m] height in a horizontal distance of 1,630 feet [500m]". Chief Test Pilot for the Lightning Roland Beamont, who also flew most of the "Century series" US aircraft, stated his opinion that nothing at that time had the inherent stability, control and docile handling characteristics of the Lightning throughout the full flight envelope. The turn performance and buffet boundaries of the Lightning were well in advance of anything known to him.

  12. #8562

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Toronto, ON, CANADA
    Posts
    398
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    And for a bit of fun:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnGXerN0tlo

    Beats the heck out of garden gnomes. The reaction of SWMBO at the end is priceless...

  13. #8563
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    This probably won't last long, but I'll give it a go.

    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring
    Gary Baker

  14. #8564

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Bealeton, VA
    Posts
    3,026
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


    ORIGINAL: JohnnyS

    And for a bit of fun:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnGXerN0tlo

    Beats the heck out of garden gnomes. The reaction of SWMBO at the end is priceless...

    And to think my wife complains about all the RC planes hanging in the basement. Thanks; Ernie P.

  15. #8565

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Toronto, ON, CANADA
    Posts
    398
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


  16. #8566
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring

    2) Thrust vectoring was removed before production
    Gary Baker

  17. #8567
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Morning clue added.

    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring

    2) Thrust vectoring was removed before production

    3) Equipped to launch/deliver nuclear weapons
    Gary Baker

  18. #8568
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz


    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring

    2) Thrust vectoring was removed before production

    3) Equipped to launch/deliver nuclear weapons

    4) Less than 700 produced
    Gary Baker

  19. #8569
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring

    2) Thrust vectoring was removed before production

    3) Equipped to launch/deliver nuclear weapons

    4) Less than 700 produced

    5) In service for over 30 years
    Gary Baker

  20. #8570
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    WOW. Kinda feel like I'm playing by myself.........or is it playing with myself...........hope I don't go blind.[X(]

    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring

    2) Thrust vectoring was removed before production

    3) Equipped to launch/deliver nuclear weapons

    4) Less than 700 produced

    5) In service for over 30 years

    6) Extremely sophisticated avionics for it’s time
    Gary Baker

  21. #8571

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    North Eastham, MA
    Posts
    80
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Thrust vectoring is a stumper.

  22. #8572

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    North Eastham, MA
    Posts
    80
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    SU 27 ??????

  23. #8573
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring

    2) Thrust vectoring was removed before it went in production

    3) Equipped to launch/deliver nuclear weapons

    4) Less than 700 produced

    5) In service for over 30 years

    6) Extremely sophisticated avionics for it’s time
    Gary Baker

  24. #8574
    grbaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    La Porte TX
    Posts
    3,234
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Question: What warbird do I describe?

    Clues:

    1) Originally designed with thrust vectoring

    2) Thrust vectoring was removed before it went in production

    3) Equipped to launch/deliver nuclear weapons

    4) Less than 700 produced

    5) In service for over 30 years

    6) Extremely sophisticated avionics for it’s time

    7) Unusual cockpit arrangement
    Gary Baker

  25. #8575

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Toronto, ON, CANADA
    Posts
    398
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

    Found it!

    Grumman A-6 Intruder

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_A-6_Intruder

    "The jet nozzles were originally designed to swivel downwards for shorter takeoffs and landings. This feature was initially included on prototype aircraft, but was removed from the design during flight testing. "


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:48 AM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.