Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz
05-24-2018, 05:53 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
A good guess, Hydro Junie; but not correct. There is nothing wrong with your thinking process; so keep trying. And here's a bonus clue to help you. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
05-24-2018, 12:01 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
05-24-2018, 03:13 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
It does kind of sound like the B-70, doesn't it? But it isn't, so keep trying. Here's another clue to aid your search. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
Last edited by Ernie P.; 05-24-2018 at 04:24 PM.
05-24-2018, 04:51 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
An evening clue to speed things along. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
05-24-2018, 06:10 PM
Actually, the B-70 was supposed to be used as a high altitude supersonic nuclear bomber to hit targets in the Soviet Union. The thought was that using high speeds and altitudes, it would be impossible to stop. That all changed when the Russians shot down a U-2 and captured its pilot, alive. The Pentagon then scrubbed the program in preference to low altitude aircraft that could use terrain to hide their approach. This was the basis of several subsequent aircraft programs, leading up to the F-111(originally designed as a fighter), B-1 and B-2
05-24-2018, 07:23 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Actually, the B-70 was supposed to be used as a high altitude supersonic nuclear bomber to hit targets in the Soviet Union. The thought was that using high speeds and altitudes, it would be impossible to stop. That all changed when the Russians shot down a U-2 and captured its pilot, alive. The Pentagon then scrubbed the program in preference to low altitude aircraft that could use terrain to hide their approach. This was the basis of several subsequent aircraft programs, leading up to the F-111(originally designed as a fighter), B-1 and B-2
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
05-25-2018, 02:12 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Welcome, Sir! A new voice and an interesting guess. The Sabre II isn't a well known plane. Interesting. But, not the plane for which we seek; so here's another clue to reward your participation. Please try again. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
05-25-2018, 09:30 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
Last edited by Ernie P.; 05-25-2018 at 09:32 AM.
05-25-2018, 03:18 PM
My Feedback: (6)
The Beechcraft XA-38 Grizzly seems to fit almost all of the clues (with the A-10 as the modern plane that reached production), but I can't find anything to fit Clue 5. And I'm not sure A-10 production went over 1000, unless you count major upgrades as additional production. Still, the XA-38 fits clues 1 to 4 and 6 very well, and it's a plane well worth looking at.
05-25-2018, 06:06 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
The Beechcraft XA-38 Grizzly seems to fit almost all of the clues (with the A-10 as the modern plane that reached production), but I can't find anything to fit Clue 5. And I'm not sure A-10 production went over 1000, unless you count major upgrades as additional production. Still, the XA-38 fits clues 1 to 4 and 6 very well, and it's a plane well worth looking at.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
05-25-2018, 07:17 PM
My Feedback: (6)
F-104 shot itself down on a strafing run in flight test.
I believe the A-10 also had a flame out from gun gasses being ingested in the engines.
Sparky
I believe the A-10 also had a flame out from gun gasses being ingested in the engines.
Sparky
05-25-2018, 08:33 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
05-26-2018, 04:23 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
A bonus clue for... for.... Today! Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
05-27-2018, 01:47 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
05-27-2018, 07:59 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Not the Avro Arrow, JohnnyS; but here's a bonus clue to thank you for your participation. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
05-28-2018, 04:02 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
17. But, in my opinion at least, never has a military aircraft looked quite so aggressive.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
17. But, in my opinion at least, never has a military aircraft looked quite so aggressive.
05-28-2018, 11:39 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
17. But, in my opinion at least, never has a military aircraft looked quite so aggressive.
18. This plane had a crew of two.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
17. But, in my opinion at least, never has a military aircraft looked quite so aggressive.
18. This plane had a crew of two.
05-28-2018, 08:08 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
17. But, in my opinion at least, never has a military aircraft looked quite so aggressive.
18. This plane had a crew of two.
19. The aircraft was ordered into production, but only five had been produced when the policy shift mentioned put an end to the program.
05-29-2018, 02:30 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
17. But, in my opinion at least, never has a military aircraft looked quite so aggressive.
18. This plane had a crew of two.
19. The aircraft was ordered into production, but only five had been produced when the policy shift mentioned put an end to the program.
20. The aircraft was heavily armored.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft never reached production.
2. But, it wasn’t because there was anything wrong with the aircraft itself.
3. Although the plane was certainly adequate for its intended mission, a policy decision made its intended mission irrelevant.
4. Nevertheless, the original mission and intention was resurrected some 20 years later.
5. And our subject aircraft was again offered to fulfill the mission.
6. Our subject aircraft was easy to fly, very maneuverable and a real handful for other contemporary aircraft to handle in mock combat.
7. However, the advance of technology resulted in a new design being chosen for the mission.
8. The aircraft which won out over our subject aircraft, 20 years later, went into production.
9. More than one thousand of that aircraft were produced; and it is well known.
10. Our subject aircraft had one serious flaw in its original design, revealed when its guns were fired.
11. The muzzle flash temporarily blinded the pilot.
12. And the gases produced by firing knocked out both engines very rapidly.
13. Even a single gun firing a few shells was sufficient to knock out the engine on that side.
14. This defect in design was corrected by moving the air intakes forward.
15. And mounting the guns on the bottom of the fuselage.
16. This resulted in a rather unusual profile. A profile which brought something unrelated to mind very quickly.
17. But, in my opinion at least, never has a military aircraft looked quite so aggressive.
18. This plane had a crew of two.
19. The aircraft was ordered into production, but only five had been produced when the policy shift mentioned put an end to the program.
20. The aircraft was heavily armored.
05-29-2018, 08:41 AM
Originally Posted by proptop 
I recall reading of the guns firing and the smoke knocking out the engines...and moving the intakes fwd...I think it was the F-89 Scorpion?
I recall reading of the guns firing and the smoke knocking out the engines...and moving the intakes fwd...I think it was the F-89 Scorpion?From what I can tell, moving the intakes forward wouldn't do any good on the F-89 anyway. The muzzles the lowest four 50 cal machine guns are actually right in front of the engines on both sides of the nose as shown in this picture:
Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 05-29-2018 at 08:44 AM.