Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Afternoon clue. Guys, clues 6, 9, 10, 11, 19, 32, 33, and 34 (perhaps in combination) are all pretty much giveaways. Thanks; Ernie P.



What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

36. In what was the second contest held, both intended to pit all available manufacturer’s offerings in a contest with combat aces flying the aircraft, our subject aircraft was generally considered to be inferior to its main friendly rival; the clear winner of the first competition held a few months earlier.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

36. In what was the second contest held, both intended to pit all available manufacturer’s offerings in a contest with combat aces flying the aircraft, our subject aircraft was generally considered to be inferior to its main friendly rival; the clear winner of the first competition held a few months earlier.

37. The first contest was held in January, 1918.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

36. In what was the second contest held, both intended to pit all available manufacturer’s offerings in a contest with combat aces flying the aircraft, our subject aircraft was generally considered to be inferior to its main friendly rival; the clear winner of the first competition held a few months earlier.

37. The first contest was held in January, 1918.

38. The second in May/June of 1918.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

I'm starting to wonder if I'm the last man standing. Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

36. In what was the second contest held, both intended to pit all available manufacturer’s offerings in a contest with combat aces flying the aircraft, our subject aircraft was generally considered to be inferior to its main friendly rival; the clear winner of the first competition held a few months earlier.

37. The first contest was held in January, 1918.

38. The second in May/June of 1918.

39. These two contests were unique in that they were the only ones, of which I am aware, that brought together all the prospective fighter aircraft under consideration in one place; and offered current ace pilots the opportunity to fly them and decide which aircraft they wanted to take into combat.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Today's clue. Thanks; Ernie P.



What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

36. In what was the second contest held, both intended to pit all available manufacturer’s offerings in a contest with combat aces flying the aircraft, our subject aircraft was generally considered to be inferior to its main friendly rival; the clear winner of the first competition held a few months earlier.

37. The first contest was held in January, 1918.

38. The second in May/June of 1918.

39. These two contests were unique in that they were the only ones, of which I am aware, that brought together all the prospective fighter aircraft under consideration in one place; and offered current ace pilots the opportunity to fly them and decide which aircraft they wanted to take into combat.

40. The clear winner of the first contest was the Fokker D.VII.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Today's clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

36. In what was the second contest held, both intended to pit all available manufacturer’s offerings in a contest with combat aces flying the aircraft, our subject aircraft was generally considered to be inferior to its main friendly rival; the clear winner of the first competition held a few months earlier.

37. The first contest was held in January, 1918.

38. The second in May/June of 1918.

39. These two contests were unique in that they were the only ones, of which I am aware, that brought together all the prospective fighter aircraft under consideration in one place; and offered current ace pilots the opportunity to fly them and decide which aircraft they wanted to take into combat.

40. The clear winner of the first contest was the Fokker D.VII.

41. And the Fokker D.VII was still the clear winner in the second contest; although a couple of the aces evaluating the available aircraft favored our subject aircraft.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

How about the Pfalz D.XII? Wiki here, including the "cart horse" comment from a pilot who preferred the Fokker: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfalz_D.XII. I had a lot of trouble with this one, somehow getting tangled up looking at Halberstadts, Aviatiks, and the like for some reason. But the Pfalz seems to fit the clues very well.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

The Pfalz D.XII it is, Al. Good going! I don't understand how a plane as good as was the Pfalz, and with over 800 produced, is so rarely mentioned in the books. It may not have been able to match the Fokker D.VII, but it was certainly no slouch. And the wings were based on the SPAD XIII. You're up, Sir; take it away. Thanks; Ernie P.




What warbird do I describe?

1. This aircraft was unfortunate enough to come into existence at the same time as a great and iconic aircraft.

2. A great and iconic aircraft that was much more favored by the pilots of the time.

3. As such, it was definitely considered “second best” by the men who flew it.

4. It was, however, at least an equal to the enemy aircraft against which it was matched.

5. Ironically, it was designed to emulate features of a current enemy aircraft.

6. The wing design of a foreign aircraft was largely emulated, if not outright copied, in the design of our subject aircraft.

7. Our subject aircraft was very strongly constructed, but was described as being somewhat heavy on the controls.

8. When compared with the favored aircraft, the typical comparison was that of thoroughbred horses and cart horses.

9. In an open competition with other potential manufacturers, another aircraft, already in production, was the clear choice of most of the judges.

10. However, at least two evaluators, one of whom was a famous and high scoring ace, preferred our subject aircraft.

11. His influence was such that several hundred, but less than 1,000, of our subject aircraft were produced.

12. Difficulties with the radiator delayed initial deliveries of production aircraft, but not for long.

13. Our subject aircraft could match its “better” partner in speed; and even out dive it; but it didn’t handle as easily or well.

14. It was also slower in a climb.

15. And was sometimes difficult to land.

16. After the first few hundred had been produced, the shape of the rudder and vertical stabilizer were changed to a more rounded appearance.

17. Four or five aircraft survive today; all in museums of one sort or another.

18. The aircraft appeared in at least two famous movies.

19. This was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to go into widespread service.

20. Both our subject aircraft and its superior brother were biplanes.

21. Both were armed with two machine guns.

22. And both had a top speed of 100 MPH and change.

23. Which seems reasonable, as both had the same engines.

24. And both had wingspans between twenty nine (29) and thirty (30) feet.

25. Our subject aircraft was a bit heavier, at around 100 pounds more.

26. Which gave it an empty weight of a bit under 1,600 pounds.

27. Our subject aircraft had an endurance of around 2-1/2 hours.

28. Which was actually a good bit better than the “better airplane” that was favored.

29. Our subject aircraft had an excellent high speed diving speed.

30. But it also had a rather abrupt stall speed.

31. And a tendency to spin easily.

32. All in all, our subject aircraft was not a plane which made mediocre pilots appear to be good ones.

33. Our subject aircraft could not hang on its prop in combat.

34. As could its favored brother.

35. Although it was still markedly superior to every enemy plane it might have faced, barring its superior brother.

36. In what was the second contest held, both intended to pit all available manufacturer’s offerings in a contest with combat aces flying the aircraft, our subject aircraft was generally considered to be inferior to its main friendly rival; the clear winner of the first competition held a few months earlier.

37. The first contest was held in January, 1918.

38. The second in May/June of 1918.

39. These two contests were unique in that they were the only ones, of which I am aware, that brought together all the prospective fighter aircraft under consideration in one place; and offered current ace pilots the opportunity to fly them and decide which aircraft they wanted to take into combat.

40. The clear winner of the first contest was the Fokker D.VII.

41. And the Fokker D.VII was still the clear winner in the second contest; although a couple of the aces evaluating the available aircraft favored our subject aircraft.

42. Thus, the Fokker D.VII was continued to be manufactured as the main German combat fighter. But our subject aircraft was also put into large scale production.

43. Interestingly, as a result of the second round of competitions, the Fokker D.VIII was put into production, as well as the Siemens-Schuckert D.III.

44. The wings of our subject aircraft were copied from the SPAD SVII; which were considered to be well-designed, per the German Inspector of Combat Aircraft (The Idflieg).

45. The first prototype of our subject aircraft first flew in March, 1918.

46. Most of the pilots who flew it criticized its long takeoff run, heavy controls and clumsy handling.







Answer: The Pfalz D.XII

The Pfalz D.XII was a German fighter aircraft built by Pfalz Flugzeugwerke. Designed by Rudolph Gehringer as a successor to the Pfalz D.III, the D.XII entered service in significant numbers near the end of the First World War. It was the last Pfalz aircraft to see widespread service. Though the D.XII was an effective fighter aircraft, it was overshadowed by the highly successful Fokker D.VII.



Design and development

In early 1918, the Idflieg (Inspektion der Fliegertruppen) distributed to German aircraft manufacturers a detailed engineering report on the SPAD S.VII, whose wing structure Idflieg considered to be well-designed. Pfalz accordingly produced several Pfalz D.III-derived prototypes with SPAD-type wings. These developed into the Pfalz D.XII. The new aircraft was powered by the 180 hp Mercedes D.IIIaό engine and continued the use of LFG-Roland's patented Wickelrumpf plywood-skinned monocoque fuselage construction. Unlike the earlier aircraft, the D.XII used a two-bay wing cellule. Furthermore, the flush wing radiator was replaced with a car-type radiator mounted in front of the engine.

The prototype D.XII first flew in March 1918. Subsequently, Idflieg issued a production order for 50 aircraft. Pfalz entered several D.XII prototypes in the second fighter competition at Adlershof in May/June 1918. Only Ernst Udet and Hans Weiss favored the D.XII over the Fokker D.VII, but Udet's opinion carried such weight that Pfalz received substantial production orders for the D.XII. The aircraft passed its Typenprόfung (official type test) on 19 June 1918.

Difficulties with the radiator, which used vertical tubes rather than the more common honeycomb structure, delayed initial deliveries of the D.XII until June. The first 200 production examples could be distinguished by their rectangular fin and rudder. Subsequent aircraft featured a larger, rounded rudder profile.



Operational use

The D.XII began reaching the Jagdstaffeln, primarily Bavarian units, in July 1918. Most units operated the D.XII in conjunction with other fighter types, but units in quieter sectors of the front were completely equipped with the D.XII.

While the D.XII was a marked improvement over the obsolescent Albatros D.Va and Pfalz D.IIIa, it nevertheless found little favor with German pilots, who strongly preferred the Fokker D.VII. Leutnant Rudolf Stark, commander of Jasta 35, wrote: “No one wanted to fly those Pfalzs except under compulsion, and those who had to made as much fuss as they could about practicing on them.

Later their pilots got on very well with them. They flew quite decently and could always keep pace with the Fokkers; in fact they dived even faster. But they were heavy for turns and fighting purposes, in which respect they were not to be compared with the Fokkers. The Fokker was a bloodstock animal that answered to the slightest movement of the hand and could almost guess the rider's will in advance. The Pfalz was a clumsy cart-horse that went heavy in the reins and obeyed nothing but the most brutal force.

Those who flew the Pfalzs did so because there were no other machines for them. But they always gazed enviously at the Fokkers and prayed for the quick chance of an exchange.” Thanks to its sturdy wing and thin airfoil section, the D.XII maintained the excellent high-speed dive characteristics of the earlier Pfalz D.III. Like most contemporary fighters, however, the D.XII had an abrupt stall and a pronounced tendency to spin. Furthermore, pilots consistently criticized the D.XII for its long takeoff run, heavy controls, and "clumsy" handling qualities in the air. Rate of roll, in particular, appears to have been deficient. Landings were difficult because the D.XII tended to float above the ground and the landing gear was weak. Ground crews disliked the extensive wire bracing of the two-bay wings, which required more maintenance than the Fokker D.VII's semi-cantilever wings. Evaluations of captured aircraft by Allied pilots were similarly unfavorable.

Between 750 and 800 D.XII scouts were completed by the Armistice. A substantial number, perhaps as many as 175, were surrendered to the Allies. Of these, a few were shipped to the United States and Canada for evaluation.



VariantsPfalz experimental D types

During the development of the D.XII, Pfalz produced several Pfalz D.III-derived prototypes with SPAD-type wings and Windhoff "ear" radiators.Pfalz D.XIIf

The overcompressed BMW IIIa engine would have provided improved performance in the D.XIIf variant. Records show that Pfalz received 84 such engines between July and October 1918, but there is no photographic evidence of any production D.XII equipped with the BMW IIIa. In his autobiography, Anthony Fokker claimed that pilots deliberately wrecked D.XIIf aircraft so the engines could be salvaged and installed on Fokker D.VIIs.

Pfalz D.XIV

The Pfalz D.XIV was a derivative of the D.XII, utilizing the same fuselage and basic wing structure. The D.XIV differed primarily by replacing the 180 hp Mercedes D.IIIaό with the 200 hp Benz Bz.IVό, a substantially heavier engine. To cope with the increased power and weight, the D.XIV featured longer span wings and an enlarged vertical stabilizer. Enlarged ailerons were used to maintain rate of roll. A few prototypes were tested at the second Adlershof competition and a small production order ensued. Production was quickly terminated, however, and the D.XIV did not see active service. The D.XIV did not offer an appreciable increase in performance over the D.XII, and the Benz Bz.IVό engine was needed for reconnaissance aircraft.



Survivors

· In the 1920s, two D.XIIs were sold as war surplus to the Crawford Aeroplane & Supply Co. of Venice, California. Though badly deteriorated, the aircraft briefly appeared as props in the 1930 movie The Dawn Patrol. Both D.XIIs were eventually sold to private collectors. Today, one of these aircraft is now displayed at the Seattle Museum of Flight, after it was acquired from the defunct Champlin Fighter Museum, in Mesa, Arizona. The second is exhibited at the National Air and Space Museum, in Washington D.C. · A preserved D.XII aircraft is also displayed at the Musιe de l'Air et de l'Espace in Paris.

· Serial 2600/18 was one of several Pfalz D.XIIs awarded to Australia in 1919 under the terms of the Armistice. Its service history is unknown. In late 1919, the aircraft was shipped from 2nd Aircraft Salvage Depot in France to England, and subsequently to Australia. It was temporarily exhibited in Melbourne and Adelaide in 1920. In 1924, the aircraft went on display in Sydney. Serial 2600/18 was removed to storage in 2001. After an extensive restoration at the Treloar Technology Centre in Canberra, the aircraft went on display at the AWM's ANZAC Hall in 2008.



OperatorsMilitary operators

[IMG]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.png[/IMG] German Empire · Luftstreitkrδfte Poland· Polish Air Force (2 aircraft postwar)Civil operators

[IMG]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.png[/IMG] United States · Paramount Pictures property manager Louis Kinnell took one airframe to the shops of Chaffee Junior College and restored it to flying condition. This aircraft was kept at Dycer Field (Los Angeles, California) and was flown without registration for a short time in 1939.





Specifications (D.XII)



General characteristics

· Crew: 1· Length: 6.35 m (20 ft 10 in)· Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)· Height: 2.7 m (8 ft 10 in)· Wing area: 21.7 m2 (234 sq ft)· Empty weight: 716 kg (1,579 lb)· Gross weight: 897 kg (1,978 lb)· Powerplant: 1 Χ Mercedes D.IIIa 6-cyl water-cooled in-line piston engine, 130 kW (180 hp)



Performance · Maximum speed: 170 km/h (106 mph; 92 kn)· Endurance: 2½ hours (420 km)· Service ceiling: 5,600 m (18,500 ft)· Rate of climb: 4.09 m/s (805 ft/min)· Time to altitude: · 1,000 m (3,281 ft) in 3 minutes 24 seconds· 5,000 m (16,404 ft) in 29 minutes 54 seconds



Armament· Guns: 2 Χ 7.92 mm (0.312 in) LMG 08/15 machine guns

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

OK, here we go again with another "name that warbird" quiz.

1. Its name came from its supposed resemblance to what it was named for. You need some imagination to see this.

2. Served for nearly 20 years, during which time the one country that used it fought in two wars, but it was never used in combat.

3. It did once try to shoot down another aircraft (for real: not an exercise). The attempt failed, although it did a lot of damage.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Al; just to verify something: It was never used in combat but did try to shoot down (sort of indicating it carried some sort of armament) an aircraft? Thanks; Ernie P.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Yes. Unless somebody solves it early, there will be clues about armament, which was perhaps one of the most interesting features of this airplane.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Well; that should prove interesting. It carried armament, and tried to shoot down another aircraft, but was never used in combat. Hmmm..... That having been said, when I first read the clues, I thought I had an idea of what it might be. But, when I checked, I couldn't verify the info. Ah, well; I'll keep pondering. Thanks; Ernie P.

Hydro Junkie

How about the Kingfisher floatplane or the PBY Catalina flying boat? I know a Catalina got into a "dogfight" with a Japanese Mavis, the results being inconclusive

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Not the Catalina, which did all sorts of combat things, including dropping bombs. This airplane never took an active part in any war.

Today's clue, and a revision to Clue 3:

1. Its name came from its supposed resemblance to what it was named for. You need some imagination to see this.

2. Served for nearly 20 years, during which time the one country that used it fought in two wars, but it was never used in combat.

3. Two of them did once try to shoot down another aircraft (for real: not an exercise). The attempt failed, although it did a lot of damage.

4. Two engines. Early versions had a lot of engine problems, as well as other mechanical difficulties.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Today's clue:

1. Its name came from its supposed resemblance to what it was named for. You need some imagination to see this.

2. Served for nearly 20 years, during which time the one country that used it fought in two wars, but it was never used in combat.

3. Two of them did once try to shoot down another aircraft (for real: not an exercise). The attempt failed, although it did a lot of damage.

4. Two engines. Early versions had a lot of engine problems, as well as other mechanical difficulties.

5. Crew of two.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

OV-10 Bronco?

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Not the OV-10. Instead of a bonus clue, I'll clarify Clue 2.

1. Its name came from its supposed resemblance to what it was named for. You need some imagination to see this.

2. Served for nearly 20 years, during which time the one country that used it fought in two wars, but this airplane never took any active part in either of them.

3. Two of them did once try to shoot down another aircraft (for real: not an exercise). The attempt failed, although it did a lot of damage.

4. Two engines. Early versions had a lot of engine problems, as well as other mechanical difficulties.

5. Crew of two.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Today's clue:

1. Its name came from its supposed resemblance to what it was named for. You need some imagination to see this.

2. Served for nearly 20 years, during which time the one country that used it fought in two wars, but this airplane never took any active part in either of them.

3. Two of them did once try to shoot down another aircraft (for real: not an exercise). The attempt failed, although it did a lot of damage.

4. Two engines. Early versions had a lot of engine problems, as well as other mechanical difficulties.

5. Crew of two.

6. A prototype appears briefly in a motion picture which has many good color shots of interesting airplanes. If memory serves, there are no shots of it flying in that movie, but I may be wrong about this. The movie's airplane scenes make up for its imbecilic plot, terrible acting, and use of a couple of well-known airplanes to represent airplanes from a country that never flew them.