Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz
10-27-2015, 10:51 AM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Sekhet, not the aircraft I'm thinking of.
The AC in question was a modification to a well known airframe making it an entirely different airplane.
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
CB
The AC in question was a modification to a well known airframe making it an entirely different airplane.
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
CB
10-28-2015, 08:35 AM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AC in question was a modification to a well known airframe making it an entirely different airplane.
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
CB
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
CB
10-28-2015, 01:15 PM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AC in question was a modification to a well known airframe making it an entirely different airplane.
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
It is a single seat aircraft
CB
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
It is a single seat aircraft
CB
10-29-2015, 08:47 AM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AC in question was a modification to a well known airframe making it an entirely different airplane.
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
It is a single seat aircraft
One of the previous guess's was very close....
CB
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
It is a single seat aircraft
One of the previous guess's was very close....
CB
10-29-2015, 10:36 AM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the P/F-82.....This next clue should get it for you'all....
The AC in question was a modification to a well known airframe making it an entirely different airplane.
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
It is a single seat aircraft
One of the previous guess's was very close....
The "well Known aircraft" that this AC was derived from often had an interesting feature painted on it....
CB
The AC in question was a modification to a well known airframe making it an entirely different airplane.
It had two engines
The engines were designed by one country but manufactured by another
In the only pictures I've seen...the aircraft is painted Olive Drab
It is a single seat aircraft
One of the previous guess's was very close....
The "well Known aircraft" that this AC was derived from often had an interesting feature painted on it....
CB
10-29-2015, 10:50 AM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hillsboro,
OR
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats the airplane! I've found very little info on it other than a few pictures......dont even know if the prototype flew......but they got pictures so I guess it counts! Your contest now Andy
P.S.......Its official name is the Twin P-40.....It had Packard Merlins....
CB
P.S.......Its official name is the Twin P-40.....It had Packard Merlins....
CB
10-29-2015, 11:32 AM
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Location: FL
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the Crusader, a quick search yields the RF8 carried 4 cameras, otherwise I may have been forced to give it to you. Nevertheless, good job not going for the obvious with the high altitude high performance clue.
Guess the airplane that was:
A high level, high performance, unarmed manned reconnaissance aircraft which carried a total of three cameras.
The airplane was not painted black.
Guess the airplane that was:
A high level, high performance, unarmed manned reconnaissance aircraft which carried a total of three cameras.
The airplane was not painted black.
Last edited by Andy_S; 10-29-2015 at 11:32 AM. Reason: 4, not 8 cameras
10-29-2015, 01:23 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Location: FL
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the A-5.
Guess the airplane that was:
A high level, high performance, unarmed manned reconnaissance aircraft which carried a total of three cameras.
The airplane was not painted black.
Was powered by the Griffon engine.
Guess the airplane that was:
A high level, high performance, unarmed manned reconnaissance aircraft which carried a total of three cameras.
The airplane was not painted black.
Was powered by the Griffon engine.
10-29-2015, 02:17 PM
1. Conceived in the mid-50's.
2. Placed alongside a modern warbird, it still appears viable.
3. It pioneered systems still in use today.
4. Like many of it's contemporaries, it was difficult to maintain and required a high level of pilot skill, especially in the landing phase.
2. Placed alongside a modern warbird, it still appears viable.
3. It pioneered systems still in use today.
4. Like many of it's contemporaries, it was difficult to maintain and required a high level of pilot skill, especially in the landing phase.
10-29-2015, 02:24 PM
1. Conceived in the mid-50's.
2. Placed alongside a modern warbird, it still appears viable.
3. It pioneered systems still in use today.
4. Like many of it's contemporaries, it was difficult to maintain and required a high level of pilot skill, especially in the landing phase.
2. Placed alongside a modern warbird, it still appears viable.
3. It pioneered systems still in use today.
4. Like many of it's contemporaries, it was difficult to maintain and required a high level of pilot skill, especially in the landing phase.
10-29-2015, 02:28 PM
1. Conceived in the mid-50's.
2. Placed alongside a modern warbird, it still appears viable.
3. It pioneered systems still in use today.
4. Like many of it's contemporaries, it was difficult to maintain and required a high level of pilot skill, especially in the landing phase.
5. It lacked ailerons.
6. It failed in it's intended role.
2. Placed alongside a modern warbird, it still appears viable.
3. It pioneered systems still in use today.
4. Like many of it's contemporaries, it was difficult to maintain and required a high level of pilot skill, especially in the landing phase.
5. It lacked ailerons.
6. It failed in it's intended role.