Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz
11-20-2019, 10:12 PM
Nope...
Next clue will be a bit of a story, well...just because...(trying to deal with concussions, this is sort of theraputic)
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question is manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
Next clue will be a bit of a story, well...just because...(trying to deal with concussions, this is sort of theraputic)
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question is manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
Last edited by proptop; 11-21-2019 at 03:05 AM.
11-21-2019, 03:15 AM
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
Last edited by proptop; 11-21-2019 at 03:27 AM.
11-21-2019, 12:20 PM
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
11-22-2019, 09:17 AM
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10 Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10 Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
11-22-2019, 01:26 PM
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
11-22-2019, 01:52 PM
Just wanted to say that I'm glad that this thread is still going!
It's nice to be able tp pop in here after being "away" (mentally) and pick it back up again...
It really is a form of therapy...helps the cognitive juices to flow, one might say...? (for want of a better term)
Thank you all!
It's nice to be able tp pop in here after being "away" (mentally) and pick it back up again...
It really is a form of therapy...helps the cognitive juices to flow, one might say...? (for want of a better term)
Thank you all!
11-23-2019, 03:24 PM
FWIW While reminiscing with with my friend about the "Shakey Jake" 7 cylinder Jacobs R-755...I recalled that it had an automotive style distributor with a battery style of ignition...not a magneto...but I digress...just found that interesting.
One of the potential problems with chosing a low production, "obscure" subject is that there typically is not a whole lot of information about it / them...but let's continue, until I run outa clues anyway...lol..
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
One of the potential problems with chosing a low production, "obscure" subject is that there typically is not a whole lot of information about it / them...but let's continue, until I run outa clues anyway...lol..
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
11-23-2019, 11:41 PM
Maybe all the cave Bears are busy prepping for hibernation and their Thanksgiving feast? 
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
15) Minor confusion....another source list the IJAAF not the Navy...which would make more sense...
16) Canada expressed interest, briefly, to use as an advanced trainer, but didn't follow through...
17) Despite it's nice flying characteristics, and good performance it got no contracts...
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
15) Minor confusion....another source list the IJAAF not the Navy...which would make more sense...
16) Canada expressed interest, briefly, to use as an advanced trainer, but didn't follow through...
17) Despite it's nice flying characteristics, and good performance it got no contracts...
11-25-2019, 08:28 AM
I hope someone answers this one soon, cuz I is runnin outa clues...(some might say I've been clueless for years, but that's another story)
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
15) Minor confusion....another source list the IJAAF not the Navy...which would make more sense...
16) Canada expressed interest, briefly, to use as an advanced trainer, but didn't follow through...
17) Despite it's nice flying characteristics, and good performance it got no contracts...
18) re-phrasing clue #5...think BREXIT...if that helps...
19) only a handful were built...
20) one of the "adversarial" countrys was mentioned in clue #14 and 15
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
15) Minor confusion....another source list the IJAAF not the Navy...which would make more sense...
16) Canada expressed interest, briefly, to use as an advanced trainer, but didn't follow through...
17) Despite it's nice flying characteristics, and good performance it got no contracts...
18) re-phrasing clue #5...think BREXIT...if that helps...
19) only a handful were built...
20) one of the "adversarial" countrys was mentioned in clue #14 and 15
11-25-2019, 11:56 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
I hope someone answers this one soon, cuz I is runnin outa clues...(some might say I've been clueless for years, but that's another story)
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
15) Minor confusion....another source list the IJAAF not the Navy...which would make more sense...
16) Canada expressed interest, briefly, to use as an advanced trainer, but didn't follow through...
17) Despite it's nice flying characteristics, and good performance it got no contracts...
18) re-phrasing clue #5...think BREXIT...if that helps...
19) only a handful were built...
20) one of the "adversarial" countrys was mentioned in clue #14 and 15
1) Single engine
2) Between the wars time frame
3) A "Private Venture" design
4) I was inspired to use this aircraft for our quiz, after a friend had asked me about the "Shakey Jake" engine that we had worked on (many moons ago) while going to A&P / AMT school. I found, while looking at the Wiki page for it, that there was a link to the engine used on our quiz aircraft. They are of a similar configuration...the number of cylinders, physical dimensions, etc.
5) Our aircraft in question was manuf. by a fairly well known company that (perhaps for the time being anyway) is part of the EU...
6)Just wanted to clarify that the Jacobs engine was not the one used on our aircraft in question, but was inspiration after following a link.
7) One prototype was of wooden construction...and one of metal...
8) The wooden fuselage was moulded, and nicely streamlined...looks almost racer-like IMO.
9) The county of origin is not listed as an "operator" of the aircraft, however, 2 later to be adversarial (to put it mildly) countries are listed as operators.
10) Single seat, however Piaggio liscense built a 2 seat version prototype...only one built.
11) Biplane...
12) Constant chord, equal span wings...ailerons on both wings...
13) Armament listed as 2 x .303 machine guns...
14) 2 were ordered and tested by the IJNAF in 1930
15) Minor confusion....another source list the IJAAF not the Navy...which would make more sense...
16) Canada expressed interest, briefly, to use as an advanced trainer, but didn't follow through...
17) Despite it's nice flying characteristics, and good performance it got no contracts...
18) re-phrasing clue #5...think BREXIT...if that helps...
19) only a handful were built...
20) one of the "adversarial" countrys was mentioned in clue #14 and 15
Hey guys; I am back (although I'll be back in the woods for a couple of days next weekend) from slaying the fatted beast. Looking over the posted clues, I'm guessing the Blackburn F.2 Lincock. Thanks; Ernie P.
Answer: The Blackburn F.2 Lincock
The Blackburn F.2 Lincock was a British single-seat lightweight fighter produced by Blackburn Aircraft Limited.
Design and development
The final version was the Lincock III of which five were produced, two were delivered to China, two to Japan and one retained as a demonstrator. Interest from Italy resulted in Piaggio acquiring a licence to produce a two-seat version as an aerobatic trainer, though only one Piaggio P.11 was built.
Variants
Lincock I
Wooden-construction prototype, one built.
Lincock II
Metal-construction prototype, one built.
Lincock III
Production version, five built.
Piaggio P.11
two-seat aerobatic trainer, one built in Italy.
Specifications (Lincock III) Data from Blackburn Aircraft since 1909
General characteristics· · Crew: one · · Length: 19 ft 6 in (5.94 m) · · Wingspan: 22 ft 6 in (6.86 m) · · Height: 7 ft 4 in (2.24 m) · · Wing area: 170 ft² (15.79 m²) · · Empty weight: 1,326 lb (601 kg) · · Max. takeoff weight: 2,082 lb (944 kg) · · Powerplant: 1 Χ Armstrong Siddeley Lynx Major seven-cylinder air cooled radial engine, 270 hp (201 kw)
Performance· · Maximum speed: 164 mph (143 knots, 264 km/h) at sea level · · Range: 380 mi (330 nmi, 612 km) · · Service ceiling: 23,000 ft (7,010 m) · · Rate of climb: 1,660 ft/m (8.4 m/s)
Armament· Guns: 2 Χ forward-firing .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers machine guns.
11-25-2019, 02:46 PM
Ah yes...Ernie finds it...the Blackburn Lincock...
Definitely qualifies as "obscure"...
Looks like it would make a nice model...
Thanks Ernie...it is your turn sir...
I mighta come up with one more clue??? (maybe)
Definitely qualifies as "obscure"...
Looks like it would make a nice model...
Thanks Ernie...it is your turn sir...
I mighta come up with one more clue??? (maybe)
Last edited by proptop; 11-25-2019 at 05:00 PM.
11-25-2019, 08:40 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
11-26-2019, 06:56 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
11-26-2019, 12:17 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
11-26-2019, 03:46 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
11-27-2019, 08:41 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
A morning clue and an afternoon clue. Plus, a bonus clue to get things moving. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
11-27-2019, 01:37 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
11-28-2019, 07:00 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Happy Thanksgiving to everyone. Since it is Thanksgiving, I'm going to assume you all have better things to do than conducting internet searches and simply drop a couple of clues and check back later tonight. Enjoy the day. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
11-28-2019, 06:41 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Guys; I'm going to be out of pocket (hunting) Friday and Saturday. Rather than leave things completely static for that time, I'm posting six new clues and will check in late Saturday or early Sunday. I hope the clues help and good luck in your searches. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
12. That aircraft, however, was not further developed; and only one was built.
13. Had it been accepted for service, that aircraft would have fulfilled an entirely different role than our subject aircraft.
14. But, the same role as the aircraft from which both were derived.
15. When in service with an ally, our subject aircraft was known by a different name.
16. Compared to its earlier progenitor, our subject aircraft was fitted with a revised tail and canopy.
17. And, a revised flap system.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
12. That aircraft, however, was not further developed; and only one was built.
13. Had it been accepted for service, that aircraft would have fulfilled an entirely different role than our subject aircraft.
14. But, the same role as the aircraft from which both were derived.
15. When in service with an ally, our subject aircraft was known by a different name.
16. Compared to its earlier progenitor, our subject aircraft was fitted with a revised tail and canopy.
17. And, a revised flap system.
11-30-2019, 09:58 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Hmmm..... No guesses. That probably means another, and more obvious, new clue is needed. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
12. That aircraft, however, was not further developed; and only one was built.
13. Had it been accepted for service, that aircraft would have fulfilled an entirely different role than our subject aircraft.
14. But, the same role as the aircraft from which both were derived.
15. When in service with an ally, our subject aircraft was known by a different name.
16. Compared to its earlier progenitor, our subject aircraft was fitted with a revised tail and canopy.
17. And, a revised flap system.
18. It was also fitted with semi-retractable landing gear.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
12. That aircraft, however, was not further developed; and only one was built.
13. Had it been accepted for service, that aircraft would have fulfilled an entirely different role than our subject aircraft.
14. But, the same role as the aircraft from which both were derived.
15. When in service with an ally, our subject aircraft was known by a different name.
16. Compared to its earlier progenitor, our subject aircraft was fitted with a revised tail and canopy.
17. And, a revised flap system.
18. It was also fitted with semi-retractable landing gear.
12-01-2019, 11:10 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Today's clue. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
12. That aircraft, however, was not further developed; and only one was built.
13. Had it been accepted for service, that aircraft would have fulfilled an entirely different role than our subject aircraft.
14. But, the same role as the aircraft from which both were derived.
15. When in service with an ally, our subject aircraft was known by a different name.
16. Compared to its earlier progenitor, our subject aircraft was fitted with a revised tail and canopy.
17. And, a revised flap system.
18. It was also fitted with semi-retractable landing gear.
19. Which was removed and replaced with more conventional fixed landing gear before the military would accept it.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was not produced in large numbers; although several hundred were built.
2. It served in several different air forces.
3. And it was built in a number of different variants for those several air forces.
4. And, it served in combat for several of those air forces.
5. Some were produced under license by other countries.
6. But, interestingly, it was kept out of combat by the nation that produced it.
7. The producing nation removed it from service before the end of the war in which it served.
8. But it continued in service with other nations for more than a decade longer.
9. Our subject aircraft was itself a development of an earlier model by the same builder.
10. It too was a single engine monoplane.
11. And there was another, prototype, aircraft developed in parallel with our subject aircraft.
12. That aircraft, however, was not further developed; and only one was built.
13. Had it been accepted for service, that aircraft would have fulfilled an entirely different role than our subject aircraft.
14. But, the same role as the aircraft from which both were derived.
15. When in service with an ally, our subject aircraft was known by a different name.
16. Compared to its earlier progenitor, our subject aircraft was fitted with a revised tail and canopy.
17. And, a revised flap system.
18. It was also fitted with semi-retractable landing gear.
19. Which was removed and replaced with more conventional fixed landing gear before the military would accept it.