uncljoe

My Feedback: (8)

Great question there Al

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

In retrospect, I should perhaps have hung back and let Top_Gunn's question run a bit longer. The hint about the comet was a giveaway, since it allowed the dates to be narrowed down quite a bit. I had already been thinking about one of the "Jules Verne" type balloon/flying machine designs prior to that, but that narrowed it down sufficiently to nail it. Great question, there. Let's see if I can do an equally good job. Thanks; Ernie P.

Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.

RickC2

quick guess

ilyushin Sturmovik?

RickC2

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

No, not the flying tank, RickC2; but not a bad guess. So, here's an extra clue to reward your attempt to solve the puzzle. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.
3. This aircraft’s genesis began with the attempt, by several nations, to solve the same problem. Each nation eventually sought a solution which melded best with their tactical doctrines and the distinct characteristics of each army.

Hydro Junkie

A blimp, for lack of a better term? Talk about reaching on that one. His idea was only 100 years ahead of the tech to make it work. Even 50 years later, in the US Civil War, the few balloons that were used were tethered and filled with hot air

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

No, Sir; not the Type B, Limp or any such inflatible. But here's a morning clue to aid your search. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.
3. This aircraft’s genesis began with the attempt, by several nations, to solve the same problem. Each nation eventually sought a solution which melded best with their tactical doctrines and the distinct characteristics of each army.
4. And, of course, some nations sought a solution that was perhaps less technical and a bit more “brute force”. Such was the case in this instance.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.
3. This aircraft’s genesis began with the attempt, by several nations, to solve the same problem. Each nation eventually sought a solution which melded best with their tactical doctrines and the distinct characteristics of each army.
4. And, of course, some nations sought a solution that was perhaps less technical and a bit more “brute force”. Such was the case in this instance.
5. The designer was asked to design an aircraft to fulfill a specific mission.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

A morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.
3. This aircraft’s genesis began with the attempt, by several nations, to solve the same problem. Each nation eventually sought a solution which melded best with their tactical doctrines and the distinct characteristics of each army.
4. And, of course, some nations sought a solution that was perhaps less technical and a bit more “brute force”. Such was the case in this instance.
5. The designer was asked to design an aircraft to fulfill a specific mission.
6. He decided to try a radical approach to accomplishing that mission.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Afternoon clue. At least one participant has figured it out. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.
3. This aircraft’s genesis began with the attempt, by several nations, to solve the same problem. Each nation eventually sought a solution which melded best with their tactical doctrines and the distinct characteristics of each army.
4. And, of course, some nations sought a solution that was perhaps less technical and a bit more “brute force”. Such was the case in this instance.
5. The designer was asked to design an aircraft to fulfill a specific mission.
6. He decided to try a radical approach to accomplishing that mission.
7. A prototype was built and tested, but it proved to be unworkable on its one and only flight.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.
3. This aircraft’s genesis began with the attempt, by several nations, to solve the same problem. Each nation eventually sought a solution which melded best with their tactical doctrines and the distinct characteristics of each army.
4. And, of course, some nations sought a solution that was perhaps less technical and a bit more “brute force”. Such was the case in this instance.
5. The designer was asked to design an aircraft to fulfill a specific mission.
6. He decided to try a radical approach to accomplishing that mission.
7. A prototype was built and tested, but it proved to be unworkable on its one and only flight.
8. Despite being flown by one of the best pilots in the world, the test was aborted.

proptop

My Feedback: (8)

Antonov A-40?

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

That would be the one, proptop. Congratulations; and you are now up. As I said, this one was a real tank; the Soviet T-60 tank, in fact. Rather than use gliders to transport tanks into the battlefield, the Soviets wanted to put wings on the tank and glide it, complete with crew, directly into the fight. There, the tank crew would jettison the wings and tail assembly and off they would go. Unfortunately, it didn't work out very well. JohnnyS had figured this one out, but he didn't want to take the lead. So, it's over to you, proptop; take it away. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. A large, heavy or heavily armed aircraft is sometimes referred to as a “tank”. This warbird would certainly qualify.
2. It carried a crew of two.
3. This aircraft’s genesis began with the attempt, by several nations, to solve the same problem. Each nation eventually sought a solution which melded best with their tactical doctrines and the distinct characteristics of each army.
4. And, of course, some nations sought a solution that was perhaps less technical and a bit more “brute force”. Such was the case in this instance.
5. The designer was asked to design an aircraft to fulfill a specific mission.
6. He decided to try a radical approach to accomplishing that mission.
7. A prototype was built and tested, but it proved to be unworkable on its one and only flight.
8. Despite being flown by one of the best pilots in the world, the test was aborted.
9. The basic problem was excessive drag; caused by the unorthodox shape.
10. The excessive drag prevented the aircraft from achieving even the minimum acceptable speed.
11. Although the aircraft did exhibit very pleasant flight characteristics.
12. The motto of the Zen Shooting Team; “Be the bullet” would seem to apply.

Answer: The Soviet A-40 Flying Tank

The Antonov A-40 Krylya Tanka (Russian: крылья танка, meaning "tank wings") was a Soviet attempt to allow a tank to glide onto a battlefield after being towed aloft by an airplane, to support airborne forces or partisans. A prototype was built and tested in 1942, but was found to be unworkable. This vehicle is sometimes called the A-40T or KT.

Instead of loading light tanks onto gliders, as other nations had done, Soviet airborne forces had strapped T-27 tankettes underneath heavy bombers and landed them on airfields. In the 1930s there were experimental efforts to parachute tanks or simply drop them into water. During the 1940 occupation of Bessarabia, light tanks may have been dropped from a few meters up by TB-3 bombers, which as long as the gearbox was in neutral, would allow them to roll to a stop.

The biggest problem with air-dropping vehicles is that their crews drop separately, and may be delayed or prevented from bringing them into action. Gliders allow crews to arrive at the drop zone along with their vehicles. They also minimize exposure of the valuable towing aircraft, which need not appear over the battlefield. So the Soviet Air Force ordered Oleg Antonov to design a glider for landing tanks.

Antonov was more ambitious. Instead of building a glider, he added a detachable cradle to a T-60 light tank bearing large wood and fabric biplane wings and a twin tail. Such a tank could glide into the battlefield, drop its wings, and be ready to fight within minutes.

One T-60 was converted into a glider in 1942, intended to be towed by a Petlyakov Pe-8 or a Tupolev TB-3. The tank was lightened for air use by removing its armament, ammunition and headlights, and leaving a very limited amount of fuel. Even with the modifications, the TB-3 bomber had to ditch the glider during its only flight, on September 2, 1942, to avoid crashing, due to the T-60's extreme drag (although the tank reportedly glided smoothly). The A-40 was piloted by the famous Soviet experimental glider pilot Sergei Anokhin. The T-60 landed in a field near the airdrome, and after dropping the glider wings and tail, the driver returned it to its base. Due to the lack of a sufficiently-powerful aircraft to tow it at the required 160 km/h (99 mph), the project was abandoned.[SUP][citation needed][/SUP]

The Soviet Union continued to develop methods to efficiently deploy airborne vehicles. By the mid-1970s they were able to para-drop BMD-1 fighting vehicles with their crew aboard.

General characteristics

• Crew: Two
• Capacity: 1 Χ T-60 tank
• Length: 12.06 m (39 ft 6Ύ in)
• Wingspan: 18.00 m (59 ft 0Ύ in)
• Wing area: 85.8 m[SUP]2[/SUP] (923.5 ft[SUP]2[/SUP])
• Empty weight: 2,004 kg (4,418 lb)
• Gross weight: 7,804 kg (17,205 lb)

proptop

My Feedback: (8)

After the first few clues that pic of the designer's model popped into my head...but I couldn't recall who or what country had made it...

Anyway...

I have a few new quiz ??? in mind and will have them ready later...tonight...

proptop

My Feedback: (8)

O.K....here goes...
Looking for an aircraft...

1) The first prototype was unstable...and nose heavy...not exactly what you'd call pilot friendly, especially in certain landing configurations.

Evenbigger D

My Feedback: (1)

Kaproni Bulgarski KB-11 Fazan

proptop

My Feedback: (8)

That has to be a record of some sort...or a reeeaaaalllyyyy lucky guess!?
How in the heck did you do that?

You're correct, and it's your turn now...

proptop

My Feedback: (8)

I picked what I thought would be a rather obscure aircraft...
Wasn't much available info...and was gonna be hard to come up with many clues...
Guess I don't have to worry 'bout that no mo tho...

Over to you Evenbigger D...

Evenbigger D

My Feedback: (1)

At the time of its development this was one of the fastest of its type.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Yeah; I'd like to get an answer to that one, Evenbigger D. How'd you catch on to that one so fast? Pretty impressive. Thanks; Ernie P.

Evenbigger D

My Feedback: (1)

1) At the time of its development this was one of the fastest of its type.
2) Drag reduction was paramount in the design.

Quiz within a quiz
1a) My answer to proptop's question was not a guess

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Okay; answering the quiz within a quiz only. All right, I figured it out. You googled "prototype was unstable + nose heavy + certain landing configurations" and the Fazan popped up. Thanks; Ernie P.

Evenbigger D

My Feedback: (1)

1) At the time of its development this was one of the fastest of its type.
2) Drag reduction was paramount in the design.
3) 19 were built but non survive

Quiz within a quiz
1a) My answer to proptop's question was not a guess
2a) It was not specifically Goggled however

pilotal

the northrop yb- 35/49 ?

Evenbigger D

My Feedback: (1)

Not a Northrop
1) At the time of its development this was one of the fastest of its type.
2) Drag reduction was paramount in the design.
3) 19 were built but non survive
4) Did not go into production due to "politics" the generally accepted reason but not necessarily confirmed.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

The number 19 seems to ring a bell. How about the He 100? Thanks; Ernie P.


The Heinkel He 100 was a German pre-World War II fighter aircraft design from Heinkel. Although it proved to be one of the fastest fighter aircraft in the world at the time of its development, the design was not ordered into series production. Approximately 19 prototypes and pre-production examples were built. None are known to have survived the war.
The reason for the He 100 failing to reach production status is mostly unknown. Officially, the Luftwaffe rejected the He 100 to concentrate single-seat fighter development on the Messerschmitt Bf 109. Following the adoption of the Bf 109 and Messerschmitt Bf 110 as the Luftwaffe's standard fighter types, the RLM announced a "rationalization" policy that placed fighter development at Messerschmitt and bomber development at Heinkel.
Because there are no surviving examples, and since many factory documents - including all blueprints for the He 100 - were destroyed during a bombing raid, there is limited specific information about the design and its unique systems.