Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Perttime;
Like RCKen, I am recovering from the flu and decided to give this one a pass. You included comment, below, was hilarious! Personally, I would have thought the sound of panicked screaming coming through the headphones would have been sufficient to alert the pilot; but a sharp retort never hurts to ensure the point is made. Thanks; Ernie P.
"The type's secondary task of ground attack swapped the crew's roles somewhat, with the pilot now handling much of the work and the observer reduced to calling out speed and altitude - particularly in dive attacks, when the pilot's attention was on the gunsight. The pilot's right thigh was within reach of the observer, and a jab with a suitably pointy object was a useful backup to ensure a dive was pulled out of in time! "
Like RCKen, I am recovering from the flu and decided to give this one a pass. You included comment, below, was hilarious! Personally, I would have thought the sound of panicked screaming coming through the headphones would have been sufficient to alert the pilot; but a sharp retort never hurts to ensure the point is made. Thanks; Ernie P.
"The type's secondary task of ground attack swapped the crew's roles somewhat, with the pilot now handling much of the work and the observer reduced to calling out speed and altitude - particularly in dive attacks, when the pilot's attention was on the gunsight. The pilot's right thigh was within reach of the observer, and a jab with a suitably pointy object was a useful backup to ensure a dive was pulled out of in time! "
My Feedback: (6)
For all you warbird enthusiasts: If you have never been to the U.S.A.F. Museum in Dayton Ohio, YOU NEED TO GO! I went two weekend's ago and it was awesome. You can't see it all in one day, and you wouldn't want to!
My wife's never been in a plane, but I got her to be my gunner in the F-15 simulator. She got 5 bogies and even enjoyed being upside down for half the flight!
My wife's never been in a plane, but I got her to be my gunner in the F-15 simulator. She got 5 bogies and even enjoyed being upside down for half the flight!
My Feedback: (6)
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron,
OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I admit I chased my tail a few times on this question. Most of the clues kept taking me to the Buccaneer, except for the crash that killed 31 people. So, thats what I used to solve this puzzle. Well done !
I should have a new question tomorrow.
Zip
I should have a new question tomorrow.
Zip
My Feedback: (2)
I remember an aviation accident at an airshow years ago where the pilot was trying to 'throw a boom' at the crowd. The idea was to fly towards the crowds then turn abruptly as he was about to go supersonic, thus tossing the sound waves of the boom at the crowd to throw in a little bit of spice and excitement to the airshow. I wonder if this was that same accident??
Bob
Bob
My Feedback: (6)
Since we aren't allowed to go supersonic unless in a corridor in the middle of nowhere above 40,000' in the US the best we can do at an airshow is the, "Sneak attack".
The main show is performed in front of the crowd while one of the wingman detaches and maneuvers around to behind the crowd line and just as the main performers are at the peak of what ever maneuver they are doing the wing man comes in from behind
usually in the 500 knot range with engines at idle to reduce anyone hearing the plane rapidly approaching then rams the turbines to full power about 1-2 seconds prior to crossing the crowd line at minimum altitude allowed. I think when I did it was 200' AGL.
Maybe a wee bit lower
Then snap on a 5.5 G turn to exit the line.
The sonic overpressure would usually would start a cacophony of car alarms in the parking lot as I was flying the loudest airplane in the world.
since the Concorde has been retired.
Throwing a sonic boom doesn't sound plausible but I would have to do the math and I lost my slide rule some where
Sparky
PS How can the Brits build both the most beautiful airplanes in the world as well as the ugliest?
The main show is performed in front of the crowd while one of the wingman detaches and maneuvers around to behind the crowd line and just as the main performers are at the peak of what ever maneuver they are doing the wing man comes in from behind
usually in the 500 knot range with engines at idle to reduce anyone hearing the plane rapidly approaching then rams the turbines to full power about 1-2 seconds prior to crossing the crowd line at minimum altitude allowed. I think when I did it was 200' AGL.
Maybe a wee bit lower
Then snap on a 5.5 G turn to exit the line.
The sonic overpressure would usually would start a cacophony of car alarms in the parking lot as I was flying the loudest airplane in the world.
since the Concorde has been retired.
Throwing a sonic boom doesn't sound plausible but I would have to do the math and I lost my slide rule some where
Sparky
PS How can the Brits build both the most beautiful airplanes in the world as well as the ugliest?
RCU Forum Manager/Admin
My Feedback: (9)
When I was in the National Guard in Colorado back in the late 80's they asked for volunteers to be rope guards for the airshow at the airport in Grand Junction. The bad part was that I had to spend 3 hot days on the asphalt in my Class B uniform. But the payoff was that I had 3 full days (including practices) of watching the Blue Angels performs. It was worth every drop of sweat on my t-shirt!!!!
Ken
Ken
My Feedback: (6)
"PS How can the Brits build both the most beautiful airplanes in the world as well as the ugliest?"
I don't think the Brits have the monopoly on that! Case in pt;
P-51....beautiful, almost anything from Douglas...well....
I don't think the Brits have the monopoly on that! Case in pt;
P-51....beautiful, almost anything from Douglas...well....
My Feedback: (6)
"PS How can the Brits build both the most beautiful airplanes in the world as well as the ugliest?"
I don't think the Brits have the monopoly on that! Case in pt;
P-51....beautiful, almost anything from Douglas...well....
I don't think the Brits have the monopoly on that! Case in pt;
P-51....beautiful, almost anything from Douglas...well....
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron,
OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok Guys and gals , here we go!
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
My Feedback: (6)
What would be the previous war to an A-10? If that's not it, hmmm.... he said "engines", so that rules out most WWII fighters, but not all. Doesn't say if jet or piston engine...... Extra armor, could imply attack aircraft, but could it be a bomber instead?
He doesn't say what country,so.....until we get more clues,if it's not the A-10, I'm gonna go with the B-25.
He doesn't say what country,so.....until we get more clues,if it's not the A-10, I'm gonna go with the B-25.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Well, the Hs 129 shouldn't be left out, with the Spanish Civil War being the "previous war" to WWII. Thanks; Ernie P.
The Henschel Hs 129 was a World War II ground-attack aircraft fielded by the German Luftwaffe. Its nickname, the Panzerknacker (tank cracker), is a deliberate pun—in German, it also means "safe cracker".[SUP][citation needed][/SUP] In combat service the Hs 129 lacked a sufficient chance to prove itself; the aircraft was produced in relatively small numbers and deployed during a time when the Luftwaffe was unable to protect them from attack. Rudolf-Heinz Ruffer scored a large number of his 80 Soviet tank kills in the Hs 129.
By the mid-1930s, the German military, as well as its counterparts in other countries, had come to see the main role of ground attack aircraft as the interdiction of logistics and materiel, a task in which targets were often poorly protected, less likely to offer strong, well-coordinated resistance. For high-value, well-protected tactical targets, dive bombers had become the conventional solution. However, the experience of the German Kondor Legion, during the Spanish Civil War (1936–39) turned this idea on its head. Even though it was equipped with types unsuited to the role, such as the Henschel Hs 123 and cannon-armed versions of the Heinkel He 112, the Kondor Legion proved that ground attack aircraft were a very effective weapon. This led to support within the Luftwaffe for the creation of an aircraft dedicated to this role, and the Reichsluftministerium (RLM; "Reich Air Ministry") requested tenders for a specialized ground attack aircraft.
It was anticipated that the main source of damage to such an aircraft would be small arms fire from the ground, meaning that the plane had to be well-armored around its cockpit and engines. Similar protection was also needed in the canopy, in the form of 75 mm (2.95 in) thick armored glass. The aircraft was expected to be attacking in low-level, head-on strafing runs, so the cockpit had to be located as close as possible to the nose, in order to maximize the visibility of its targets. Another, non-technical requirement, severely hampered the designs: the RLM insisted that the new design be powered by engines that were not being used in other designs, so that the type would not interfere with production of established types deemed essential to the war effort.
Only four companies were asked to submit tenders, three submissions followed and only two of these were considered worthy of consideration: one derived from an existing Focke-Wulf reconnaissance type, the Fw 189, and Henschel's all-new Hs 129.
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron,
OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great answers, but alas, all wrong.
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
3. The aircraft was used to inspire the pilots that flew it.
4. It's designer went on to build iconic warbirds , for another manufacturer.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
3. The aircraft was used to inspire the pilots that flew it.
4. It's designer went on to build iconic warbirds , for another manufacturer.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
My Feedback: (6)
B-17 was used for Pr and war bond tours, most notably the Memphis Belle. But the B-17 is not really credited to a single designer. The P-38 however, is mainly attributed to Kelly Johnson, was one of the first planes to use stainless steel, and did have it's armor, weaponry, and fuel tanks upgraded , so I'm going with the P-38.
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Akron,
OH
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the P-38!
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
3. The aircraft was used to inspire the pilots that flew it.
4. It's designer went on to build iconic warbirds , for another manufacturer.
5. Two main variants built.
6. The contracted number of aircraft to be built was cut in half of the original order.
7. It's first flight was from an airfield located in Dayton Ohio that you may have heard of.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
3. The aircraft was used to inspire the pilots that flew it.
4. It's designer went on to build iconic warbirds , for another manufacturer.
5. Two main variants built.
6. The contracted number of aircraft to be built was cut in half of the original order.
7. It's first flight was from an airfield located in Dayton Ohio that you may have heard of.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Not the P-38!
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
3. The aircraft was used to inspire the pilots that flew it.
4. It's designer went on to build iconic warbirds , for another manufacturer.
5. Two main variants built.
6. The contracted number of aircraft to be built was cut in half of the original order.
7. It's first flight was from an airfield located in Dayton Ohio that you may have heard of.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
1. This aircraft was designed and built due to experiences in the previous war.
2. It was built with extra armor around the cockpit and the engines.
3. The aircraft was used to inspire the pilots that flew it.
4. It's designer went on to build iconic warbirds , for another manufacturer.
5. Two main variants built.
6. The contracted number of aircraft to be built was cut in half of the original order.
7. It's first flight was from an airfield located in Dayton Ohio that you may have heard of.
Ok, that's the start!
Thanks!
Zip
Okay; I'll take a shot, based upon the first four clues. How about the Boeing GA-1? A five ton armored triplane, intended for ground attacks, it was certainly an... interesting... aircraft. Designed by Isaac Machlin Laddon, who later designed flying boats, for the USAAC. Thanks; Ernie P.
Answer: Boeing GA-1 (Model 10)
The Boeing GA-1 (company designation Model 10) was an armored triplane. Designed in 1919, it was powered by a pair of modified Liberty engines driving pusher propellers. The first of the Engineering Division's heavily armored GAX series (ground attack, experimental) aircraft, the ponderous airplane was intended to strafe ground troops while remaining immune to attack from the ground as well as from other enemy aircraft. It was so well armored that its five-ton weight proved excessive.
Soon after the end of World War I, the US Army sought to explore highly armored and armed specialist ground-attack aircraft. This was a pet project of General William Mitchell. The Army Air Service Engineering Division issued requests for proposals to U.S. aircraft producers on 15 October 1919. There were no designs offered, so the Engineering Division ordered one of its engineers, Isaac M. Laddon, to attempt what the aviation industry clearly considered impossible. His design, designated GAX, first flew at McCook Field on 26 May 1920. The GAX was McCook Field Project P129 and wore AAS serial number 63272.
Aerodynamic cleanliness was sacrificed to fields of fire for its eight machine guns. The sturdy structure was able to carry a heavy load of ammunition along with about 2,200 lb (998 kg) of armor plate. The result was an angular machine of wire-braced wooden construction with plywood and fabric covering. A rectangular-section fuselage carried the forward gunner in an open nose position, the pilot in a semi-enclosed cockpit with armored shutters for forward vision, and the rear gunner in an open dorsal position. The engines were carried in mid-wing nacelles.
As designed, the armament was comprehensive. The pilot was in control of a 37 mm cannon, four fixed Lewis guns fired forward and down, and a machine gun fired forward and upward over the wings. A further two Lewis guns fired to the rear and downwards (through a fuselage tunnel) and a single machine gun up and over the wings. A gunner's position was in the nose. The armor covered the front half of the fuselage and the engine housings.
The top wing was of larger span than the lower ones; the middle and top wings carried ailerons. Span decreased from 65 ft 6 in to 58 ft 6 in between the top and lower wings.
On 7 June 1920, Boeing was awarded a contract for 20 production models designated GA-1. Before the first was delivered in May 1921, the order had been reduced to ten. The production aircraft wore Boeing constructors' numbers 200-209 and AAC serial numbers 64146-64155. Number 64146 was evaluated at McCook as project P187. The follow-on GA-2 was flown at McCook field in December 1921 with orders to construct two more aircraft.
The GA-1 were sent to Kelly Field, Texas, in early 1923 for service tests with the only US aerial attack formation, the 3rd Attack Group. These tests showed the aircraft to be unacceptable. They had poor visibility and performance, particularly in rate of climb, maneuverability, and range. The aircraft suffered from noise and vibrations caused by the 3/16-inch (4.75mm)-thick armor. Takeoff runs were very long by the standards of the day. The GA-1s were extremely unpopular with the pilots conducting the evaluation.
As a result, in 1925 the entire country's attack air force (3rd Attack Group that is, as differentiated from the bomber force) consisted of fourteen Airco DH-4 machines, inadequate even for training, let alone for combat.
It was rumored that the GA-1s survived until surveyed on 14 January 1926, so that Kelly Field pilots could be threatened with being forced to fly them for disciplinary infractions. All were scrapped in April 1926.
Isaac Machlin Laddon (25 December 1894 – 14 January 1976) was an American aeronautical engineer and designer.
He was born in Garfield, New Jersey.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Thank you, Sir. Great question; I hope mine compares favorably. Thanks; Ernie P.
Question: What warbird do I describe?
Clues:
- At the time of its introduction, this aircraft could claim to be the world’s most advanced of its type; whatever that statement might mean.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Great answer, and correct; but not the correct answer I'm looking for. Maybe this will help. Thanks; Ernie P.
Question: What warbird do I describe?
Clues:
- At the time of its introduction, this aircraft could claim to be the world’s most advanced of its type; whatever that statement might mean.
- Developed as a collaboration between several companies.