Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz
08-31-2015, 04:33 PM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK....last clue for now......The warbird I am was developed specifically for and during the Vietnam war.....but it was used well after that.....
CB
08-31-2015, 05:05 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Just a guess: How about the OA-4M version of the Douglas Skyhawk, which was a modified version the trainer version, which in turn came from the original Skyhawk? The side view looks right for Esmeralda's friend and Igor, and there were 23 of them. I think some may still be in service in Argentina, or maybe Brazil. I have no idea of what the front porch clue might mean, though.
08-31-2015, 05:13 PM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a guess: How about the OA-4M version of the Douglas Skyhawk, which was a modified version the trainer version, which in turn came from the original Skyhawk? The side view looks right for Esmeralda's friend and Igor, and there were 23 of them. I think some may still be in service in Argentina, or maybe Brazil. I have no idea of what the front porch clue might mean, though.
Engine also used in GAM-77/AGM 28 Hounddog. Hounddogs were strictly Nuclear with a W-28 warhead.....mostly configured for a 1.45MT yield. All were converted TA-4F's with the P6 engine instead of the P408 that we had in our Super "F"s and the A-4M.....the "Hotdog" is the thing at the top of the fin....it contained Radar warning receivers and the "Hump" contained the KY gear and the ALQ 126.......a huge piece of equipment that never worked.......at least it didn't in any of the A4's I worked on......6312 A-4 Comm/nav....
CB
Last edited by castlebravo; 08-31-2015 at 05:21 PM.
08-31-2015, 05:32 PM
DIng Ding Ding....
Engine also used in GAM-77/AGM 28 Hounddog. Hounddogs were strictly Nuclear with a W-28 warhead.....mostly configured for a 1.45MT yield. All were converted TA-4F's with the P6 engine instead of the P408 that we had in our Super "F"s and the A-4M.....the "Hotdog" is the thing at the top of the fin....it contained Radar warning receivers and the "Hump" contained the KY gear and the ALQ 126.......a huge piece of equipment that never worked.......at least it didn't in any of the A4's I worked on......6312 A-4 Comm/nav....
CB
Engine also used in GAM-77/AGM 28 Hounddog. Hounddogs were strictly Nuclear with a W-28 warhead.....mostly configured for a 1.45MT yield. All were converted TA-4F's with the P6 engine instead of the P408 that we had in our Super "F"s and the A-4M.....the "Hotdog" is the thing at the top of the fin....it contained Radar warning receivers and the "Hump" contained the KY gear and the ALQ 126.......a huge piece of equipment that never worked.......at least it didn't in any of the A4's I worked on......6312 A-4 Comm/nav....
CB
Applications
- AGM-28 Hound Dog <--The J52-P3 was super sonic because of the Spike Inlet system of the Hound Dog MSL
- Dassault Super Mystere
- Douglas A-4 Skyhawk
- Grumman A-6 Intruder
- Lockheed Martin A-4AR Fightinghawk
- Northrop Grumman EA-6B Prowler
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_J52#Applications
Last edited by HoundDog; 08-31-2015 at 05:37 PM.
08-31-2015, 05:41 PM
My Feedback: (6)
So is Argentina still using some of the OA-4Ms? I did some looking but couldn't really tell.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
09-01-2015, 04:18 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Morning clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
09-01-2015, 08:09 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Noon clues.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
09-01-2015, 09:59 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Another clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aricraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aricraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
09-02-2015, 05:03 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Morning clue, plus a clue that may help in research.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
Last edited by Top_Gunn; 09-02-2015 at 05:15 AM. Reason: Add a clue
09-02-2015, 11:12 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Another clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
09-02-2015, 04:01 PM
My Feedback: (6)
And yet another clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
09-02-2015, 05:44 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Tonight's clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
09-03-2015, 07:27 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Late morning clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
09-03-2015, 08:04 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Early afternoon clue..
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. It's designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See question 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
09-03-2015, 01:05 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Late afternoon clue. After this one, the clues will start to make it a lot easier, so if you want a gold star for your correct answer, today's the last chance
.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
.This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
Last edited by Top_Gunn; 09-03-2015 at 01:08 PM.
09-04-2015, 04:09 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Morning clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
09-04-2015, 09:12 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Afternoon clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia.
09-04-2015, 12:42 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Late afternoon clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia
17. Unlike any man-carrying aircraft before it, this one was supposed to have a propulsion system and directional control. The means by which these goals were to have been achieved would almost certainly have failed, even if the design's other problems had been overcome.
09-04-2015, 04:49 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Evening clue.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia
17. Unlike any man-carrying aircraft before it, this one was supposed to have a propulsion system and directional control. The means by which these goals were to have been achieved would almost certainly have failed, even if the design's other problems had been overcome.
18. The ruler who rejected its designer's proposal (clue 3) was Napoleon.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia
17. Unlike any man-carrying aircraft before it, this one was supposed to have a propulsion system and directional control. The means by which these goals were to have been achieved would almost certainly have failed, even if the design's other problems had been overcome.
18. The ruler who rejected its designer's proposal (clue 3) was Napoleon.
09-04-2015, 08:58 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Well, this one can't possibly go more than another few hours. If no one else bites soon, I may step in. I'm trying to be nice, but it is so tempting at times. Top_Gunn; excellent crafting of the question and clues. Thanks; Ernie P.
09-05-2015, 04:10 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Morning clue, which I hope will be the last one!.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia
17. Unlike any man-carrying aircraft before it, this one was supposed to have a propulsion system and directional control. The means by which these goals were to have been achieved would almost certainly have failed, even if the design's other problems had been overcome.
18. The ruler who rejected its designer's proposal (clue 3) was Napoleon.
19. The ruler who agreed to have it built was Alexander I.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia
17. Unlike any man-carrying aircraft before it, this one was supposed to have a propulsion system and directional control. The means by which these goals were to have been achieved would almost certainly have failed, even if the design's other problems had been overcome.
18. The ruler who rejected its designer's proposal (clue 3) was Napoleon.
19. The ruler who agreed to have it built was Alexander I.
09-05-2015, 11:23 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Morning clue, which I hope will be the last one!.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia
17. Unlike any man-carrying aircraft before it, this one was supposed to have a propulsion system and directional control. The means by which these goals were to have been achieved would almost certainly have failed, even if the design's other problems had been overcome.
18. The ruler who rejected its designer's proposal (clue 3) was Napoleon.
19. The ruler who agreed to have it built was Alexander I.
This one is a little strange. But it was a real warbird, or at least it was supposed to be,
1. Only one built.
2. It is not clear whether it ever flew. Some sources said it didn't; others say it did, but very poorly.
3. Its designer offered to build it for a country which was not his own. The offer was rejected, somewhat impolitely, on the ground that the proposal was a crackpot idea.
4. So the designer offered it to another country, which accepted.
5. It is mentioned a couple of times, briefly and with some scorn, in a very famous novel.
6. Another aircraft of the same general sort had been used previously in one military role. This one was intended for a different role.
7. Its designer claimed that it would be invulnerable to enemy fire. While this may seem to support the notion that he was a crackpot, it was not quite so outlandish as it would be today.
8. The designer does not have his own Wikipedia page in English, though he and the aircraft are discussed in Wikipedia. He does have his own Wikipedia page in German.
9. (See clue 8). Probably because he was German.
10. He also invented a musical instrument. That invention worked.
11. The other aircraft mentioned in clue 6 was unarmed and was used for observation.
12. This one was supposed to be used to attack armies.
13. According to one source, it was supposed to have a crew of 50, but could only get off the ground with two.
14. It was built in a year in which a spectacular comet, though probably not the one you're thinking of, could be seen over Europe.
15. The country referred to in clue 3 was France.
16. The country referred to in clue 4 was Russia
17. Unlike any man-carrying aircraft before it, this one was supposed to have a propulsion system and directional control. The means by which these goals were to have been achieved would almost certainly have failed, even if the design's other problems had been overcome.
18. The ruler who rejected its designer's proposal (clue 3) was Napoleon.
19. The ruler who agreed to have it built was Alexander I.
Okay.... I can't stands it no more! I was trying to hang back, but... I'm thinking the infamous "Air Bout". Thanks; Ernie P.
In 1811 Franz Leppich went to Napoleon and claimed that he could build a hydrogen balloon that would enable the French to attack from the air. Napoleon then ordered that he be removed from French Territory. In 1812 the secret service from Russia got Leppich Passports with the name Schmidt and then he and a secret undercover person went to Moscow to Count Rostopchin. Near Moscow a "Werft" was set up and with about 50 other German-speaking mechanics, and he started to build "air bouts".
When the balloon was finally tried out, they worked but were unable to move against the wind . Leppich did final work after the burning of Moscow, on this about a year longer near St. Petersburg and then he left for Germany again. There he worked on the subject up to 1817. In 1818 he received a patent in his and his brothers name in Vienna for making nails with a punch.
In Tolstoy's novel, War and Peace, Count Pyótr Kiríllovich Bezúkhov (Pierre) makes an excursion to see this balloon though he does not see it. Tolstoy also includes a letter from the sovereign Emperor Alexander I to Count Rostopchin concerning the balloon.
09-05-2015, 12:59 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Yes, indeed! Over to you, Ernie.
The most detailed account I've been able to find online is the German-Language Wikipedia article on Franz Leppich. If you don't read German, and you use the Chrome browser, you can get a clumsy and somewhat inaccurate machine translation into English. The balloon's propulsion and steering was supposed to be done with gigantic oars, pulled by the crew (Wikipedia says 50; some other sources say 40). There"s also a drawing: the balloon portion looks like half of a stretched-out pear, with an open wooden structure underneath. It was to have a net over it, attached to a wooden "belt" around the bottom of the balloon, with the structure to hold the crew and weapons hanging below it. The oars surely wouldn't have worked, but the internal combustion engine hadn't been invented yet. One English-language source speculates that Leppich was just in it for the money, but this seems very unlikely, as he worked hard on this for years, in three countries. His ideas were well ahead of their time: this would have been the first airship with a rigid structure, the first one that was not a sphere (I think), and the first one that could be propelled and steered. He originally planned it as a transport, but Emperors were more attracted to a project that could supposedly rain fire on enemy armies. The early part of the construction took place near Moscow, and as the French army (more than half of which was soldiers who were not French) approached and the Russian army, which had taken heavy casualties at Borodino, withdrew, some Muscovites hoped that the balloon would save their city. Tolstoy"s characters don"t take that seriously. The project was moved to a site near St. Petersburg. In 1814, the financing stopped and Leppich gave up and went back to Germany.
The most detailed account I've been able to find online is the German-Language Wikipedia article on Franz Leppich. If you don't read German, and you use the Chrome browser, you can get a clumsy and somewhat inaccurate machine translation into English. The balloon's propulsion and steering was supposed to be done with gigantic oars, pulled by the crew (Wikipedia says 50; some other sources say 40). There"s also a drawing: the balloon portion looks like half of a stretched-out pear, with an open wooden structure underneath. It was to have a net over it, attached to a wooden "belt" around the bottom of the balloon, with the structure to hold the crew and weapons hanging below it. The oars surely wouldn't have worked, but the internal combustion engine hadn't been invented yet. One English-language source speculates that Leppich was just in it for the money, but this seems very unlikely, as he worked hard on this for years, in three countries. His ideas were well ahead of their time: this would have been the first airship with a rigid structure, the first one that was not a sphere (I think), and the first one that could be propelled and steered. He originally planned it as a transport, but Emperors were more attracted to a project that could supposedly rain fire on enemy armies. The early part of the construction took place near Moscow, and as the French army (more than half of which was soldiers who were not French) approached and the Russian army, which had taken heavy casualties at Borodino, withdrew, some Muscovites hoped that the balloon would save their city. Tolstoy"s characters don"t take that seriously. The project was moved to a site near St. Petersburg. In 1814, the financing stopped and Leppich gave up and went back to Germany.