Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Warbirds and Warplanes
Reload this Page >

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Notices
RC Warbirds and Warplanes Discuss rc warbirds and warplanes in this forum.

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Old 08-13-2018, 05:22 PM
  #16176  
elmshoot
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nashville, IN,
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Blackburn Firecrest

Old 08-13-2018, 08:25 PM
  #16177  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Not the Blackburn!


1. 150 were ordered but the orders were cancelled after only a few were built. 2 were prototypes and the remainder were production aircraft.
2. It was originally intended to be an evolutionary update to an iconic aircraft, but as time went on the number of changes became so substantial the designers decided to change the name. Strangely though, the "mark" number was carried over from the previous aircraft even though the name was changed.
3. One of the changes made to the aircraft from the original design was intended to give it the fastest roll rate of any existing aircraft of its type.
Old 08-15-2018, 07:49 AM
  #16178  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Elmshoot, you're going to kick yourself when the answer is revealed, based on your sig!

New clue:
1. 150 were ordered but the orders were cancelled after only a few were built. 2 were prototypes and the remainder were production aircraft.
2. It was originally intended to be an evolutionary update to an iconic aircraft, but as time went on the number of changes became so substantial the designers decided to change the name. Strangely though, the "mark" number was carried over from the previous aircraft even though the name was changed.
3. One of the changes made to the aircraft from the original design was intended to give it the fastest roll rate of any existing aircraft of its type.
4. One of the major changes made to the aircraft from the original design was in an iconic feature of the original that was so successful that the operators really came to desire it in all new designs during the course of the war, and looked sceptically at new designs that did not have this feature.

Last edited by JohnnyS; 08-15-2018 at 07:50 AM. Reason: :)
Old 08-15-2018, 09:14 AM
  #16179  
CF105
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I think that last post was two clues! What about the Supermarine Spiteful?
Old 08-15-2018, 02:12 PM
  #16180  
elmshoot
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nashville, IN,
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I was thinking along the spitfire linage as a possibility.
The clipped wings on later Spitfire was done to improve roll rate I believe.
Old 08-15-2018, 02:29 PM
  #16181  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

DIng Ding Ding!!! CF105, you are the WINNER!

I thought I was giving too much away, but oh well. Have fun!!


Old 08-15-2018, 07:41 PM
  #16182  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnnyS View Post
DIng Ding Ding!!! CF105, you are the WINNER!

I thought I was giving too much away, but oh well. Have fun!!
JohnnyS; I've been watching your question. I was thinking about a later prototype version of the P-38. I seem to remember something about hydraulically assisted ailerons being used on a prototype P-38 that actually gave it a roll rate faster than anything else at the time. Yeah; a P-38! Good question and I thought you handled the clues very well. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 08-15-2018, 09:16 PM
  #16183  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,940
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Ernie, are you talking about the XP-49 and later XP-58 "Chain Lightning"? Neither one got past a single prototype since, with the XP-49, the planned new engines were never produced past prototypes and it later "belly landed", badly damaging the plane. It was later used for structural testing and scrapped. The Chain Lightning was doomed from the beginning due to it's size, lack of the planned engines and overall complexity. Planned as a "bomber killer", it could fly high and, as originally planned, fast. The Pentagon then decided the plane's size would allow more and larger weapons, resulting in the dramatic slowing of the plane due to the increased weight. After the war started to favor the allies, the Pentagon decided the plane wasn't needed in the planned roll so it was redesigned as a ground support plane. It's size made it too vulnerable for such a roll and, after much debate, the project was cancelled

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 08-15-2018 at 09:20 PM.
Old 08-16-2018, 01:50 AM
  #16184  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Ernie, are you talking about the XP-49 and later XP-58 "Chain Lightning"? Neither one got past a single prototype since, with the XP-49, the planned new engines were never produced past prototypes and it later "belly landed", badly damaging the plane. It was later used for structural testing and scrapped. The Chain Lightning was doomed from the beginning due to it's size, lack of the planned engines and overall complexity. Planned as a "bomber killer", it could fly high and, as originally planned, fast. The Pentagon then decided the plane's size would allow more and larger weapons, resulting in the dramatic slowing of the plane due to the increased weight. After the war started to favor the allies, the Pentagon decided the plane wasn't needed in the planned roll so it was redesigned as a ground support plane. It's size made it too vulnerable for such a roll and, after much debate, the project was cancelled
Yeah, that's probably what I was remembering. Plus maybe the cancelling of one of the later, and superior, model P-38's because they didn't want to disrupt the assembly line. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 08-16-2018, 05:05 AM
  #16185  
FlyerInOKC
My Feedback: (6)
 
FlyerInOKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 10,763
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

The XP-58 looked like the love child of a P-38 and a P-60 Black Widow.
Old 08-16-2018, 06:04 AM
  #16186  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,940
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FlyerInOKC View Post
The XP-58 looked like the love child of a P-38 and a P-60 Black Widow.
And. just like the Black Widow, it had a rear gunner. When you really think about it, the Black Widow was what the Chain Lightning wanted to be, but wasn't
Old 08-16-2018, 06:48 AM
  #16187  
CF105
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Okay, I’ve got a subject. Let’s see if I can make it more challenging than my last attempt!

1 - Single engine, tail dragger.
Old 08-16-2018, 08:33 AM
  #16188  
FlyerInOKC
My Feedback: (6)
 
FlyerInOKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 10,763
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

How about giving us another clue there isn't much there to narrow the field?
Old 08-16-2018, 02:47 PM
  #16189  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,940
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

I have to agree, that clue could be just about anything prop driven or an early ME-262, if you're talking about a combat plane.
Old 08-16-2018, 03:51 PM
  #16190  
dmcguire
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm guessing the Antonov A40

Old 08-16-2018, 07:58 PM
  #16191  
elmshoot
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nashville, IN,
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Piper Cub
Storch
Old 08-17-2018, 04:13 AM
  #16192  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Blackburn Firecrest!!!

Old 08-17-2018, 06:43 AM
  #16193  
CF105
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hey, I wanted to last beyond the first clue!

1 - Single engine, tail dragger.
2 - Built for a particular role. It was actually rejected for that purpose but accepted anyway for another job.
Old 08-18-2018, 08:51 AM
  #16194  
CF105
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Saturday & Sunday clues:

1 - Single engine, tail dragger.
2 - Built for a particular role. It was actually rejected for that purpose but accepted anyway for another job.
3 - The manufacturer is one that RC scale modellers are likely aware of, but not one of the “big” names.
4 - The plane in question contained a number departures from the company’s previous aircraft.
Old 08-18-2018, 10:54 AM
  #16195  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hawker Typhoon?
Old 08-18-2018, 06:19 PM
  #16196  
CF105
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Not the Tiffy, but here’s a bonus clue:

1 - Single engine, tail dragger.
2 - Built for a particular role. It was actually rejected for that purpose but accepted anyway for another job.
3 - The manufacturer is one that RC scale modellers are likely aware of, but not one of the “big” names.
4 - The plane in question contained a number departures from the company’s previous aircraft.
5 - The landing gear included an unusual feature.
Old 08-19-2018, 02:27 PM
  #16197  
proptop
My Feedback: (8)
 
proptop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 7,036
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Fairey Barracuda?
Old 08-20-2018, 04:44 AM
  #16198  
FlyerInOKC
My Feedback: (6)
 
FlyerInOKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 10,763
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Brewster F2A Buffalo?
Old 08-20-2018, 07:37 AM
  #16199  
CF105
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Neither the Barracuda nor the Buffalo. Today's clue:

1 - Single engine, tail dragger.
2 - Built for a particular role. It was actually rejected for that purpose but accepted anyway for another job.
3 - The manufacturer is one that RC scale modellers are likely aware of, but not one of the “big” names.
4 - The plane in question contained a number departures from the company’s previous aircraft.
5 - The landing gear included an unusual feature.
6 - Built in small numbers (barely 100) for a single service that accepted it reluctantly.
Old 08-20-2018, 01:36 PM
  #16200  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,940
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

How about the SBC Vindicator?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.