HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

What year was it Built in Rochester Wisconsin at Fox River airport. 96C

Sekhet

My Feedback: (1)

It's a 2005 Citabria High Country Explorer, 7GCBC. I bought it used last year and to be honest I'm not sure where it was built.
I assume it was built in Rochester, WI since that is where their HQ is at.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sekhet; BINGO! Most people don't think of the Citabria as being a warbird, but it did serve in at least one foreign air force. You are up, Sir. Good job! Thanks; Ernie P.

Question: What warbird do I describe?

Clues:

1. Yet another example of a civilian aircraft pressed into military service.
2. First produced in the mid 1960’s.
3. A derivative aircraft is still in production.
4. The derivative is essentially the same aircraft, upgraded with a more powerful engine, and a few mods to expand the flight envelope.
5. Utilized as military observation aircraft.
6. Primary use was always aerobatics and training.
7. Other uses utilize its STOL capabilities.

Answer: The Champion Aircraft Citabria

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americ...mpion_Citabria

[TABLE="width: 315"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Role
[/TD]
[TD]Light utility aircraft and sports plane
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Designer
[/TD]
[TD]Champion Aircraft
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]First flight
[/TD]
[TD]1964
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Introduction
[/TD]
[TD]1964
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Status
[/TD]
[TD]In Production[SUP][1][/SUP]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Number built
[/TD]
[TD]over 5238
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[h=2]Production history[/h]
The Citabria was designed and initially produced by Champion Aircraft Corporation, and was a derivative of designs the company had been building since acquiring the 7-series Champ from Aeronca in 1954. The model 7ECA Citabria entered production at Champion in 1964. The 7GCAA and 7GCBC variants, added in 1965, were joined by the 7KCAB in 1968.

In 1970, Champion was acquired by Bellanca Aircraft Corporation, which continued production of all of the Champion-designed variants. Bellanca introduced two designs with close connections to the Citabria: The 8KCAB Decathlon and the 8GCBC Scout. Production at Bellanca ended in 1980 and the company's assets were liquidated in 1982.

The Citabria designs passed through the hands of a number of companies through the 1980s, including a Champion Aircraft Company which was no relation to the Champion Aircraft of the 1960s. In that period, only one Citabria model was built—a 7GCBC marketed as "Citabria 150S." American Champion Aircraft Corporation acquired the Citabria, Decathlon, and Scout designs in 1989 and returned the 7ECA, 7GCAA, and 7GCBC models to production over a period of years.

[h=2]Design[/h]
The Citabria traces its lineage back to the Champ. The most noticeable external changes to the design are the Citabria's squared-off rudder surface, wing tips, and rear windows. Like the Champ, the Citabria features tandem seating. The fuselage and tail surfaces are constructed of welded metal tubing. The outer shape of the fuselage is created by a combination of wooden formers and longerons, covered with fabric. The cross-section of the metal fuselage truss is triangular, a design feature which can be traced all the way back to the earliest Aeronca C-2 design of the late 1920s.

1980-built Bellanca 7ECA Citabria

The strut-braced wings of the Citabria are, like the fuselage and tail surfaces, fabric covered, utilizing aluminum ribs. Most Citabrias were built with wooden spars. American Champion has been using aluminum spars in the aircraft it has produced and has, as well, made the aluminum-spar wings available for retrofit installation on older aircraft.

The landing gear of the Citabria is in a conventional arrangement. The main gear legs of most Citabrias are made of spring steel, though American Champion began to use aluminum gear legs in 2004. Early Citabrias were fitted with steel tube main gear which use an oleo strut for shock absorption. All of the variants are discussed in more detail below.

[h=2]Operational history[/h]
A Champion 7GCAA Citabria towing a Schweizer SGS 1-34 sailplane

When the Citabria was introduced, it was the only airplane being commercially produced in the United States which was certified for aerobatics. Citabrias were also popular as trainers—because of their conventional gear and their aerobatic capabilities—and as personal aircraft. They were also found in utility roles such as bush flying—thanks to their short take off and landing ability, agriculture, pipeline patrol, and as glider towplanes. Though variants of the design, and other better-suited designs have largely taken over the Citabria's utility roles, Citabrias remain popular as trainers, glider towplanes, and for personal use.

[h=2]Military operators[/h]The 7GCBC Citabria was used as an observation aircraft by the Turkish Army. One of these aircraft is displayed at the Rahmi M Koη Museum in Istanbul.
Turkey

• Turkish Army

Tonga

• Tongan Maritime Force

The 8KCAB Decathlon and Super Decathlon are two-seat fixed conventional gear light airplanes designed for flight training and personal use and capable of sustaining aerobatic stresses between +6g and -5g. The Decathlon entered production in the United States in 1970 as a more powerful and stronger complement to the Citabria line of aircraft.
The Decathlon was designed by the Champion Aircraft Corporation, and is a derivative of the 7-series Citabrias. While the Citabria designs remain successful, and the introduction of the 7KCAB variant of the Citabria had added limited inverted flight capability, the Citabrias are not capable of “outside” maneuvers, those requiring significant negative-g loads. Pilots wanted an aircraft capable of more maneuvers, and Champion introduced the 8KCAB Decathlon in response to this demand.

[h=2]Production history[/h]The Decathlon entered production at Champion in 1972, immediately before the company was acquired by Bellanca Aircraft Corporation, so only a handful were produced by Champion. Bellanca continued production of the Decathlon throughout the 1970s, moving to the Super Decathlon variant during 1976. Bellanca built over 600 of the 8KCAB design before production of the aircraft was interrupted when the company's assets were liquidated in 1981.
The Decathlon design passed through the hands of a number of companies through the 1980s, including a Champion Aircraft Company which was no relation to the Champion Aircraft of the 1960s, but no Decathlons were built in that period. American Champion Aircraft Corporation acquired the Decathlon design, along with the 8GCBC Scout and the group of Citabria and Champ variants, in 1990, bringing the Super Decathlon version back into production that same year. It is still being produced.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Thats the place. Jerry Milhoff used to or Does own the factory, used to rent a
Money 201 N201LU If I remember correctly.Enjoy the ride all of a sudden it's nothing but memories.

Sekhet

My Feedback: (1)

OK,following Ernie’s line,

Question:What warbird do I describe?

1. Still yet another example of a civilian aircraft pressed into military service.
2. Twin engine
3. At least two countries use/used it as a military bird

Sekhet

My Feedback: (1)

OK,following Ernie’s line,

Question:What warbird do I describe?

1. Still yet another example of a civilian aircraft pressed into military service.
2. Twin engine
3. At least two countries use/used it as a military bird
4. First produced in the mid 1960’s

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

DC-9 Nightingale as Medivac and just all around trash hauler

Sekhet

My Feedback: (1)

Good guess but not the bird I'm looking for.

Question:What warbird do I describe?


1. Still yet another example of a civilian aircraft pressed into military service.
2. Twin engine
3. At least two countries use/used it as a military bird
4. First produced in the mid 1960’s
5. Still in production by a different manufacturer than the original.

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

Twin Otter

Sekhet

My Feedback: (1)

Ding Ding Ding! We Have a winner! your up!

De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter (UV-18) or (CC-138)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Hav...C-6_Twin_Otter

Question:What warbird do I describe?

1. Still yet another example of a civilian aircraft pressed into military service.
2. Twin engine
3. At least two countries use/used it as a military bird
4. First produced in the mid 1960’s
5. Still in production by a different manufacturer than the original.
6. One military role is search and rescue
7. Non-retractable gear
8. Another military role is utility transport
9. Turboprop
10. “Wings of Blue”
11. One military user has replaced it with the Short C-23 Sherpa
12. STOL

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

This is my forst time be gentle with me....
1. Originally designed with vectored thrust.

Hydro Junkie

F15

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

HJ, Nope not the F-15 I dont believe that the Eagle was designed off the drawing board with Vectored thrust, BICBW (but I could be wrong)

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

This is my first time be gentle with me....
1. Originally designed with vectored thrust.
2. Test flight were promising but the plane was under powered and had an engine upgrade as well as deleting the thrust vectoring.

perttime

Not Akron-class airships, then...

rcguy59

My Feedback: (8)

A-6 Intruder.

Hydro Junkie

I doubt it was the Intruder. The way the engines and exhaust were mounted had the exhaust pointed downward so the blast would clear the side mounted speed brakes that were aft of the wings.
How about the Flanker?

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

You guys know me too well. The winner is the Intruder.
Believe it or not the original Intruder flew with tilting tail pipes, they found that it only slowed the approach speed by about 4 knots and the weight and complexity wasn't justified. The full span flaps and slats was a much bigger contributor to a slow approach speed. The remaining vestiges of the tilting tailpipes are still present in both the Intruder and Prowler. If you can see a picture of the throttle Quadrant the left engines throttle has a rounded top with serrated edges. It was intended that it would be a rotating knob that could be twisted to change the angle of the tail pipes.
I had a few more really obscure clues and red herrings to add to the list. I thought the engine change would get you off on the wrong track. At least I got a fellow sailor right HJ?
J-52 P6 changed to the J-52 P8
Sparky

rcguy59

My Feedback: (8)

I always liked the A-6. They were a common sight where I live, but we always heard them first. I'll see if I can come up with a good one for you guys.

grbaker

My Feedback: (29)

I did not know the A-6 was designed with vectored thrust until I researched it for this thread several months back. So this one's been covered at least twice now.

Hydro Junkie

You have to remember, I was a Prowler "Tweet" and not an Intruder "One Wire". Besides, the Prowler never had that option and, with it's pair of P408s, it was the fastest aircraft in the airwing without using an afterburner. The "Cat" drivers hated to admit that they had to go to a stage one to keep up with the Prowler when it went to full throttle

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

Sorry for the repeat, I didn't know that since I haven't reviewed all 481 pages.
Concerning the vectored thrust, we had a picture of the prototype A-6 with the tailpipe down hanging on the wall VA-128, the West coast RAG.
No Ailerons on either airplane we had Flaperons for roll control.
I flew both planes they had no maximum airspeed without anything on the wings. Know as LBA (Limited by Airframe). The A-6 Intruder would not go supersonic no matter what you did, straight down at full throttle it would get transonic but not punch through. On the other hand the EA-6B Prowler would go supersonic about 60 degrees nose down at 40.000 feet full power. Some planes had a wicked Mach tuck, while others were fairly benign as you transitioned to supersonic flight for about 10-15 seconds. I guess I have maybe 2 minutes of supersonic flight. Almost go a ride on the Concorde so it would have been all for naught.
I was told the Prowler is the loudest airplane in the world but from empirical listening at Whidbey last June it seems the Growler is louder when in burner.

Hydro Junkie

That's the only reason a Growler is louder than the twin J-52s. The J-52 is an axial flow low bypass turbojet where the GE F414-GE-400 is a high bypass turbofan. The AB has nothing to muffle it so you get the roar of raw burning fuel along with the turbine whine. You want loud, hang out between the bow cats with an F-14 at stage 5 and a Prowler at full throttle. That is deafening, even through a cranial's mouse ears. You want quiet, stand out on the flightline at Paine Field and listen to one of the modern Boeing jets spool up. You wouldn't know it's running without walking behind an engine if you had a Growler or one of the A-6 family near by. Then again, you can have just as much noise from an early 737 or either version of the 727 as they both used the civilian version, the JT8D Turbofan. I bet you never expected to open up this can of worms, did you

JohnnyS

Oya, the 737-200 is a LOUD bird. I used to work in a hangar at YYZ that was 4-500 yards away from runway 24 (Now 24R as the hangar was pulled down to build 24L, known to air france as "runway MERDE!!")

When a 737-200 was starting takeoff roll, my windows would be rattling like the end of the world. But when a 747-400 was spooling up, it was so quiet I could only hear it if I was outside.

We used to watch the Concorde land on old 24, and that was neat!

perttime

I wouldn't worry about that. If I'm asking a question, I'll search the thread and see if my subject was the correct answer within a couple of years. If not...