Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Warbirds and Warplanes
Reload this Page >

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

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

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:18 PM
  #9576  
zippome
Senior Member
 
zippome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Ok guys, here goes... I hope this hasnt been done .....

1. Twin engined .
2. Monoplane.
3. Built due to political necessity.
4. Several designs were studied based on current designs from other nations.

Ok, that should start the ball rolling..
Thanks,
Zip
Old 04-02-2014, 05:58 PM
  #9577  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 7,086
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by zippome
Sorry Ernie! I meant to post last night but I ended up helping a buddy move. His divorce reminds me of the old joke. Q." Why is divorce so expensive?" A. "Because its worth it!"

Thanks, Zip. As to the reason divorce is so expensive: Same as everything else; supply and demand. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 04-03-2014, 06:07 PM
  #9578  
zippome
Senior Member
 
zippome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

1. Twin engined .
2. Monoplane.
3. Built due to political necessity.
4. Several designs were studied based on current designs from other nations.
5. Over 130 built.
6. There are reasons that this aircraft looks "familiar".

Ok, that should start the ball rolling..
Thanks,
Zip
Old 04-06-2014, 04:53 AM
  #9579  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 7,086
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Zip;

Time for a new clue, Sir. A minimum of one clue each 24 hours. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 04-06-2014, 11:36 AM
  #9580  
MJD
My Feedback: (1)
 
MJD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orangeville, ON, CANADA
Posts: 8,658
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

My first inclination in the search engine will be Chinese or other nation DC-3 clone..
Old 04-06-2014, 12:46 PM
  #9581  
zippome
Senior Member
 
zippome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

1. Twin engined .
2. Monoplane.
3. Built due to political necessity.
4. Several designs were studied based on current designs from other nations.
5. Over 130 built.
6. There are reasons that this aircraft looks "familiar".
7. The engines used are an unusual design for their type.
8. The engines were later used by another aviation manufacturer to power an early version of a new type of weapon.

Ok, sorry about the delay.!
I'm having a hard time wording these questions in a way that wont give it away too easily..
Thanks!
Zip
Old 04-07-2014, 05:08 PM
  #9582  
zippome
Senior Member
 
zippome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Only 1 guess so far?
Hmmmm...

1. Twin engined .
2. Monoplane.
3. Built due to political necessity.
4. Several designs were studied based on current designs from other nations.
5. Over 130 built.
6. There are reasons that this aircraft looks "familiar".
7. The engines used are an unusual design for their type.
8. The engines were later used by another aviation manufacturer to power an early version of a new type of weapon.
9. The first 2 versions have 1 official name, the next 2 versions are known by a totally different name.
10. The number of aircraft produced was about half of what was originally ordered when the aircraft that was originally desired was made available.

O.k. guys.... how about some guesses!
Thanks!
Zip
Old 04-08-2014, 06:35 PM
  #9583  
zippome
Senior Member
 
zippome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Only 1 guess so far?
Hmmmm...

1. Twin engined .
2. Monoplane.
3. Built due to political necessity.
4. Several designs were studied based on current designs from other nations.
5. Over 130 built.
6. There are reasons that this aircraft looks "familiar".
7. The engines used are an unusual design for their type.
8. The engines were later used by another aviation manufacturer to power an early version of a new type of weapon.
9. The first 2 versions have 1 official name, the next 2 versions are known by a totally different name.
10. The number of aircraft produced was about half of what was originally ordered when the aircraft that was originally desired was made available.
11. The first time I saw its designation I did a double take.
12. Max speed 1.8 mach.


O.k. guys.... how about some guesses!
Thanks!
Zip
Old 04-08-2014, 07:16 PM
  #9584  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Typhoon FGR4 ?
Old 04-08-2014, 07:46 PM
  #9585  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Aidc f-ck-1
Old 04-09-2014, 08:45 AM
  #9586  
zippome
Senior Member
 
zippome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

That's it!
Brn2fly got it!
You're up!
Old 04-09-2014, 08:49 AM
  #9587  
zippome
Senior Member
 
zippome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hope this works, but I'm at work doing this on my semi-smart phone.http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDC_F-CK-1_Ching-kuo
Old 04-09-2014, 08:54 AM
  #9588  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Kool, I found the info on a different website. I'll have my first clue up in an hour or two.
Old 04-09-2014, 01:26 PM
  #9589  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Ok here goes.

Clues:
1. This aircraft was flown by at least 5 military organizations.
Old 04-09-2014, 03:54 PM
  #9590  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Clues:
1. This aircraft is flown by at least 5 military organizations.
2. The only difference between the aircraft that the above military organizations use are the engines.

Last edited by brn2fly; 04-09-2014 at 07:29 PM.
Old 04-09-2014, 07:34 PM
  #9591  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Clues:
1. This aircraft is flown by at least 5 military organizations.
2. The only difference between the aircraft that the above military organizations use are the engines.
3. There are two "visually" different engine types used on this aircraft.
4. The first two aircraft of this type were converted civilian aircraft. All the rest were purpose built.
Old 04-11-2014, 07:12 AM
  #9592  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 810
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Kc-135?
Old 04-11-2014, 07:56 AM
  #9593  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Good guess, however the KC-135 was never a civilian production aircraft. New clue:

1. This aircraft is flown by at least 5 military organizations.
2. The only difference between the aircraft that the above military organizations use are the engines.
3. There are two "visually" different engine types used on this aircraft.
4. The first two aircraft of this type were converted civilian aircraft. All the rest were purpose built.
5. Less than 100 were made.
Old 04-11-2014, 01:20 PM
  #9594  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 7,086
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by brn2fly
Good guess, however the KC-135 was never a civilian production aircraft. New clue:

1. This aircraft is flown by at least 5 military organizations.
2. The only difference between the aircraft that the above military organizations use are the engines.
3. There are two "visually" different engine types used on this aircraft.
4. The first two aircraft of this type were converted civilian aircraft. All the rest were purpose built.
5. Less than 100 were made.

How about the Short C-23 Sherpa? Thanks; Ernie P.


The Short C-23 Sherpa is a small military transport aircraft built by Short Brothers. The C-23A and C-23B variants are variants of the Short 330 and the C-23B+ and C-23C are variants of the Short 360.

The Short 330 was developed by Short Brothers of Belfast from Short's earlier Short Skyvan STOL utility transport. The 330 had a longer wingspan and fuselage than the Skyvan, while retaining the Skyvan's square shaped fuselage cross section, allowing it to carry up to 30 passengers while retaining good short field characteristics. The 330 entered commercial service in 1976.

In addition to the passenger aircraft, Shorts also planned two freight versions. The first of these, the Short 330-UTT (for Utility Tactical Transport) was a military transport version fitted with a strengthened cabin floor, and paratroop doors, which was sold in small numbers, primarily to Thailand, who purchased four. The Short Sherpa (not to be confused with the earlier Short SB.4 Sherpa experimental aircraft) was a freighter fitted with a full width rear cargo door/ramp. This version first flew on 23 December 1982, with the first order for 18 aircraft being placed by the United States Air Force in March 1983. These aircraft were assigned to Military Airlift Command (MAC) for the European Distribution System Aircraft (EDSA) role, flying cargo and personnel between US Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) air bases.

In U.S. military service, the Short 330 was designated the C-23A Sherpa. The C-23B Sherpa was similar to the C-23A, but with cabin windows. The C-23B+ and C-23C Short 360 derivatives were created by replacing the rear fuselage of Short 360s obtained on the second-hand market with the twin tail and rear loading ramp of the Short Sherpa.

The C-23 was produced at the Short Brothers' facility in Belfast, Northern Ireland for the U.S. Dept. of Defense.

The C-23A Sherpa entered USAF service in 1985 and continuing in use in the EDSA role until 1990, when the EDSA role was disbanded. Six aircraft were passed to the United States Army, where they were used to support the Army National Guard, joining 10 new build C-23B Sherpa aircraft. Other variants are C-23B+ and C-23C. The C-23 replaced the UV-18 Twin Otter in U.S. service. The C-23 was the only cargo plane operated by the U.S Army.

During Iraq War, 2003–present, the C-23 has served the Army's intra-theater needs of cargo and personnel transport. It provided an economic alternative for transporting some 20 people or 3 pallets of cargo when speed is not critical.

On 13 June 2007, the Alenia C-27J was selected to replace the C-23 in US Army service. A total of 43 C-23s were in service with the US Army as of November 2008. The C-23 Sherpa was retired from the Army National Guard in January 2014. As part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, 8 C-23s may be transferred to the State of Alaska to operate from short rural runways for search-and-rescue and medium-lift missions.

Operators:
United States Air Force
United States Army
Army National Guard
Era Alaska
NASA

Military Operators
United States
United States Air Force (C-23)
United States Army (C-23)
Former Military Operators
Tanzania
Tanzanian Air Force (former UAEAF 330-UTT)
Thailand
Royal Thai Air Force
Royal Thai Army (Short 330-UTT)
Royal Thai Police
Thai Border Patrol Police (Short 330-UTT)
United Arab Emirates
United Arab Emirates Air Force (Short 330-UTT)
Venezuela
Venezuelan Air Force (Short 330)
Old 04-11-2014, 02:26 PM
  #9595  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Thank you Ernie P but that is not what I'm looking for. Another clue:

1. This aircraft is flown by at least 5 military organizations.
2. The only difference between the aircraft that the above military organizations use are the engines.
3. There are two "visually" different engine types used on this aircraft.
4. The first two aircraft of this type were converted civilian aircraft. All the rest were purpose built.
5. Less than 100 were made.
6. There have been three hull loses.
Old 04-12-2014, 05:00 AM
  #9596  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Another clue:
1. This aircraft is flown by at least 5 military organizations.
2. The only difference between the aircraft that the above military organizations use are the engines.
3. There are two "visually" different engine types used on this aircraft.
4. The first two aircraft of this type were converted civilian aircraft. All the rest were purpose built.
5. Less than 100 were made.
6. There have been three hull loses.
7. Of the three hull loses, only one had fatalities.
Old 04-12-2014, 11:42 AM
  #9597  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 810
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

E-3 Sentry?
Old 04-14-2014, 01:40 AM
  #9598  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 7,086
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

brn2fly;

We're waiting on your response and/or next clue. Although I do think JohnnyS has it. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 04-14-2014, 08:35 AM
  #9599  
brn2fly
My Feedback: (190)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hobe Sound, FL
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sorry, I had drill this weekend. JonnyS is correct. I flew the E-3 for about 7 years. Great airplane! So JonnyS you are up!
Old 04-14-2014, 08:44 AM
  #9600  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 810
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default



Somehow I knew it had something to do with the Boeing 707...

OK, here's a new one. Hopefully it's weird enough:

1. It was an interceptor design, that reached as far as concept stage and wind tunnel testing but no further.

2. It had ailerons that also acted as combined rudders and elevators.


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.