Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fast response deserves another clue again not the aircraft I'm looking for:
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
Last edited by SimonCraig1; 02-28-2017 at 02:52 PM.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
[h=4]Ju 88R[edit][/h]
Ju 88 R-1 night fighter captured by British forces at Copenhagen-Kastrup airfield, May 1945.
The Ju 88R series night fighters were basically versions of the Ju 88 C-6, powered by unitized BMW 801 radial engines. The R-1 had 1,560 PS BMW 801L engines and the R-2 had 1,700 PS BMW 801 G-2 engines.
One of the first aircraft from the R-1 series that went into service (Werknummer 360043) was involved in one of the most significant defections from the Luftwaffe. On 9 May 1943, this night fighter (D5+EV), which was stationed with 10./NJG 3 in Aalborg Denmark, flew to the RAF Station at Dyce (now Aberdeen Airport) with its entire crew and complete electronic equipment on board. The fact that Spitfire Vb fighters No.165 (Ceylon) Squadron escorted it towards the end of its flight could indicate that its arrival had been expected. It was immediately transferred to Farnborough Airfield, received RAF markings and serial (PJ876), and was tested in great detail.[SUP][24][/SUP] The preserved aircraft is on exhibit at the RAF Museum, as one of the first two intact Ju 88s in aviation museums (see Survivors below). The Luftwaffe only learned of this defection the following month when members of the crew, pilot Oberleutnant Heinrich Schmitt (son of the then secretary to the ministry for foreign affairs Gustav Stresemann) and Oberfeldwebel Paul Rosenberger made broadcasts on British radio.[SUP][25][/SUP] [SUP][N 2][/SUP] The third crew-member, Erich Kantwill, refused to co-operate with the British and was treated as a normal prisoner-of-war.
Senior Member
I think this one fits the description. the only one I know of with two or four engines,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_234
Arado Ar 234
Maybe?
Paul
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_234
Arado Ar 234
Maybe?
Paul
Last edited by pd1; 03-01-2017 at 03:37 AM.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again good guesses but not the right aircraft, he clue(s) today will probably get there... Paul the victims were two or four motor, the aircraft, all variants, only had one configuration.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
Last edited by SimonCraig1; 03-01-2017 at 09:30 AM.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace
Last edited by SimonCraig1; 03-02-2017 at 10:42 AM.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace.
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace.
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Extremely good guesses but again not the answers I'm looking for.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace. (two clues here)
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
11. While not Me 163's rockets were involved.
12. While not suicide missions, pilots probably though their chances we very slim, fortunately this was disproven by events.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace. (two clues here)
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
11. While not Me 163's rockets were involved.
12. While not suicide missions, pilots probably though their chances we very slim, fortunately this was disproven by events.
My Feedback: (6)
I was thinking airplane rammers and the other is the Arado bomber. The AR 234 had many engines though.
Perhaps the Japs did the airplane ramming on an organized basis.
Sparky
Perhaps the Japs did the airplane ramming on an organized basis.
Sparky
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Sonderkommando "Elbe" was the name of a World War IILuftwaffe task forceassigned to bring down heavybombers by ramming aircraft intothem mid-air. The tactic aimed to cause losses sufficient to halt or at leastreduce the westernAllies' bombingof Germany.[SUP][1][/SUP]
The pilots were expected to parachute out eitherjust before or after they had collided with their target. The chances of a SonderkommandoElbe pilot surviving such a practice were low, at a time when the Luftwaffewas lacking sufficient numbers of well-trained pilots.
Sonderkommando literally means "specialcommand", and the Elbe is one of the mainrivers in Germany.
[IMG]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.jpg[/IMG]
A 1944 drawing byHelmuthEllgaard illustrating "ramming"
The aircraft of choice for thismission was usually a later G-version (Gustav) of the MesserschmittBf 109, stripped of armor and armament. The heavilystripped-down planes had one synchronized machine gun (usually a single MG 131 in the upperengine cowling) instead of up to four automatic weapons (usually including apair of 20mm or 30mm underwing-mountautocannon) on fullyequipped Bf 109G interceptors, and were only allotted 60 rounds each, anormally insufficient amount for bomber-interception missions. To accomplishtheir mission, Sonderkommando Elbe pilots would typically aim to ram one of threesensitive areas on the bombers: the empennage with itsrelatively delicate control surfaces, the engine nacelles whichwere connected to the highly explosive fuel system, or the cockpit itself. One ofthe most famous reports of cockpit ramming was against a ConsolidatedB-24 Liberatorheavy bomber, nicknamed"Palace of Dallas", along with another bomber that the Germanplane careened into after slicing the cockpit of the Palace of Dallas.[SUP][2][/SUP]
Adding to the last-ditch natureof this task force, the only mission was flown on 7 April 1945 by a sortie of180 Bf 109s. While only 15 Allied bombers were attacked in this manner, eightwere successfully destroyed.
[h=3]Successfulmissions[edit][/h]Rank / Name / Former Unit e/aUnit Status
- Uffz. Heinrich Rosner, (ex-III/JG.102), two B-24 Liberators of the 389th Bomb Group; the first B-24 rammed was lead bomber 44-49533 "Palace of Dallas"; Rosner's aircraft then careened into an unidentified second B-24, possibly the deputy lead bomber;[SUP][6][/SUP] Survived
- Obfw. Werner Linder, (ex-EJG.1), 1 B-17 Flying Fortress 388th Bomb Group,[SUP][7][/SUP] KIA
- Fhr. Eberhard Prock, 1 B-17 452nd Bomb Group,[SUP][8][/SUP] KIA, Shot while descending in his parachute.
- Fw. Reinhold Hedwig, 1 B-17 452nd Bomb Group,[SUP][9][/SUP] KIA, Shot down by 339 Fighter Group P-51.
- Uffz. Werner Zell, 1 B-17 100th Bomb Group.[SUP][10][/SUP]
- Uffz. Werner Zell, 1 B-17 452nd Bomb Group,[SUP][11][/SUP] WIA Shot down by P-51.
- Ogfr. Horst Siedel, 1 B-17 452nd Bomb Group,[SUP][12][/SUP] KIA
- Lt. Hans Nagel, (ex-IV/JG.102), 1 B-17 490th Bomb Group,[SUP][13][/SUP] KIA, Shot it down by conventional armament, damaged a second B-17 by ramming.
- Fritz Marktschaftel
- Uffz. Klaus Hahn, 1 B-17 487th Bomb Group,[SUP][14][/SUP] WIA - Left arm by 4 P-51Ds fire.
- Heinrich Henkel, 1 B-24 "Sacktime" 467th Bomb Group,[SUP][15][/SUP] WIA by P-51s, Survived.
- Unknown Bf 109 pilot, 1 B-17 100th Bomb Group,[SUP][16][/SUP] KIA
- Unknown Bf 109 pilot, 1 B-17 490th Bomb Group,[SUP][17][/SUP] KIA
(WIA - wounded in action / KIA -killed in action)
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orangeville, ON, CANADA
Posts: 8,658
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
It's a mysterious one.. I also keep thinking of remote piloting and stick time.. but at a loss. Good question, people are going "arrrrgghhh!!!' wracking their brains for ideas.. well I am..
I am sure a bunch of us will do the usual "duh of course!!!" when we hear the answer. The answer is always obvious once you know it!
I am sure a bunch of us will do the usual "duh of course!!!" when we hear the answer. The answer is always obvious once you know it!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hilo,
HI
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good to hear your enjoying the ride!
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace. (two clues here)
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
11. While not Me 163's rockets were involved.
12. While not suicide missions, pilots probably though their chances we very slim, fortunately this was disproven by events.
13. Visible and considered a success as a deterrent, dummy implementations were made to fool enemy attackers.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace. (two clues here)
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
11. While not Me 163's rockets were involved.
12. While not suicide missions, pilots probably though their chances we very slim, fortunately this was disproven by events.
13. Visible and considered a success as a deterrent, dummy implementations were made to fool enemy attackers.
My Feedback: (6)
How about the Sea Hurricanes. Launched from ships but unable to land, so the pilots bailed out and were usually picked up. Never knew much abvout them until this quiz came along (if I'm right).
Last edited by Top_Gunn; 03-03-2017 at 01:29 PM.
My Feedback: (8)
I'm starting to think about something during during the Korean war / police action...Russians attacking B-29's...and such?
Just a hunch...not sure where to look for more info just yet...just another WAG right now...
Just a hunch...not sure where to look for more info just yet...just another WAG right now...
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Good to hear your enjoying the ride!
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace. (two clues here)
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
11. While not Me 163's rockets were involved.
12. While not suicide missions, pilots probably though their chances we very slim, fortunately this was disproven by events.
13. Visible and considered a success as a deterrent, dummy implementations were made to fool enemy attackers.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1. With no fighter opposition, it had an enviable sortie/kill ratio against slower targets.
2. From its first sortie until it's last, almost two years later, one of the aircraft's pilots was killed.
3. It was a variant of a very well known aircraft.
4. The pilots were all volunteers for the mission the variant was developed for.
5. All the victims were two or four engined aircraft.
6. The type of mission resulted in frequent pilot rotation to ensure stick time was kept up.
7. It was a single engine monoplane
8. Despite #2, all but one of the aircraft that sortied were destroyed during their mission.
9. It was seen as a stop gap measure to a particular menace. (two clues here)
10. The aircraft that survived landed at an allied aerodrome.
11. While not Me 163's rockets were involved.
12. While not suicide missions, pilots probably though their chances we very slim, fortunately this was disproven by events.
13. Visible and considered a success as a deterrent, dummy implementations were made to fool enemy attackers.
Just to cover the bases, how about the Fw 190 and Bf 109 fighters equipped with under wing rockets launchers? Thanks; Ernie P.
Fw 190 A-3/U2 — The A-3/U2 (W.Nr 130386) had RZ 6573 mm (2.87 in) rocket launcher racks under the wings with threerockets per wing. There were also a small number of U7 aircraft tested ashigh-altitude fighters armed with only two 20 mm MG 151 cannon, but withreduced overall weight.
The Werfer-Granate21 rocket launcher, also known as the BR 21 (the "BR"standing for Bordrakete) in official Luftwaffe manuals, was a weaponused by the German Luftwaffe during World War II and wasthe first on-board rocket placed into service by the Luftwaffe, firstintroduced in mid 1943. The weapon was developed by Rheinmetall-Borsig under theleadership of Dipl.-Ing. RudolfNebel, who hadpioneered German use of wing-mounted offensiverocketry in World War I with the Luftstreitkräfte.
[h=2]Aircraftarmed with the Wfr. Gr. 21[edit][/h]Underwing mount (singly, oneunder each wing)
- Focke-Wulf Fw 190 A-7 and newer: as Rüstsatz 6 (/R6) modification
- Messerschmitt Bf 109G: as BR21 modification
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orangeville, ON, CANADA
Posts: 8,658
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I'll bet you'll need a new question soon.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
You know, that fits all the clues! I was too fixated on German planes for some reason. Thanks; Ernie P.