Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz
04-13-2020, 02:12 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Sir; you are correct, it has to be the Pfalz D.XII. The Pfalz D.XII was a great plane, easily comparable with anything the Allies put into the field. In fact, it might have been the best fighter Germany produced in WWI; had it not been for the Fokker D.VII. Most people at the time think the D.VII was the better airplane; but that by no means indicates the D.XII wasn't a great plane. It seems a bit strange the Fokker is so well known; but a plane that was only a bit behind could be almost unknown today. I originally figured this would be solved by the time I got the first ten or so clues posted; and was surprised it took so long for someone to solve it.
The Pfalz D.XII was. essentially, the Pfalz D.III with wings patterned after the SPAD 13 wing. It was fast (although the Fokker often had a better engine and was, therefore, faster), and was great in a dive. I have an idea the pilots who flew the Pfalz simply required time to learn how to use it's advantages against the Allies. And once they did, as has been documented, their scores started to mount. I wonder how many aircraft were simply dismissed out of hand, when using their strong points might have made them real winners? Kind of like the F4F against the Zero; If you tried to maneuver with the Zero, you were going to get shot up. But, if you used "boom and zoom" tactics, kept the speed above 250 mph and refused to dogfight, the F4F could defeat the Zero. Okay, enough philosophizing. Top_Gunn; you're up. Take it away. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.
2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.
3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.
4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.
5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.
6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.
7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.
8. And, they made their voices heard.
9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.
10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.
11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.
12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.
13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.
14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.
15. And could at least match it in level flight.
16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.
17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.
18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.
19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.
20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.
21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.
22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.
23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.
24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.
25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.
26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.
27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.
28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.
29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.
30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.
31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.
32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.
33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.
34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.
35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.
36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.
37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.
38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.
39. Unlike its predecessor, by the same manufacturer, this aircraft used a conventional front mounted radiator.
40. And, again unlike its predecessor, it used two bay wings.
41. The first 200 or so examples produced had a different layout of the tail surfaces; much sharper and more rectangular than the final version, which was much larger and smoother.
42. The earlier aircraft referenced in (39) also featured rather smooth and contoured tail surfaces.
43. The “favored aircraft” is generally considered to be iconic.
44. While our subject aircraft is apparently even lesser known than I would have thought.
45. Our subject aircraft dry weight was less than 100 pounds heavier than our favored aircraft.
46. And actually may have been a pound or two lighter when fully loaded.
47. Top speed was about the same.
48. But then again, they both used the same engine; although our favored aircraft was sometimes also equipped with more powerful engines, apparently not available to our subject aircraft.
49. Wingspans were only a few inches different; with our subject aircraft being perhaps four or so inches longer.
50. In fuselage lengths, our favored aircraft was about two feet longer.
51. Our subject aircraft seemed to have a slightly better rate of climb when both planes were equipped with the same engine.
52. And our subject aircraft could dive harder, safely.
53. And, of course, both were equipped with two machine guns.
54. Both machine guns being the same type.
55. Two of our subject aircraft were used as props in a famous movie.
56. And both would up in museums in the United States.
57. Interestingly enough, the wing struts on the two planes are quite similar.
58.
Answer: The Pfalz D.XII
The Pfalz D.XII was a German fighter aircraft built by Pfalz Flugzeugwerke. Designed by Rudolph Gehringer as a successor to the Pfalz D.III, the D.XII entered service in significant numbers near the end of the First World War. It was the last Pfalz aircraft to see widespread service. Though the D.XII was an effective fighter aircraft, it was overshadowed by the highly successful Fokker D.VII.
Design and development
In early 1918, the Idflieg (Inspektion der Fliegertruppen) distributed to German aircraft manufacturers a detailed engineering report on the SPAD S.VII, whose wing structure Idflieg considered to be well-designed. Pfalz accordingly produced several Pfalz D.III-derived prototypes with SPAD-type wings. These developed into the Pfalz D.XII. The new aircraft was powered by the 180 hp Mercedes D.IIIaό engine and continued the use of LFG-Roland's patented Wickelrumpf plywood-skinned monocoque fuselage construction. Unlike the earlier aircraft, the D.XII used a two-bay wing cellule. Furthermore, the flush wing radiator was replaced with a car-type radiator mounted in front of the engine.
The prototype D.XII first flew in March 1918. Subsequently, Idflieg issued a production order for 50 aircraft. Pfalz entered several D.XII prototypes in the second fighter competition at Adlershof in May/June 1918. Only Ernst Udet and Hans Weiss favored the D.XII over the Fokker D.VII, but Udet's opinion carried such weight that Pfalz received substantial production orders for the D.XII. The aircraft passed its Typenprόfung (official type test) on 19 June 1918.
Difficulties with the radiator, which used vertical tubes rather than the more common honeycomb structure, delayed initial deliveries of the D.XII until June. The first 200 production examples could be distinguished by their rectangular fin and rudder. Subsequent aircraft featured a larger, rounded rudder profile.
Operational use
The D.XII began reaching the Jagdstaffeln, primarily Bavarian units, in July 1918. Most units operated the D.XII in conjunction with other fighter types, but units in quieter sectors of the front were completely equipped with the D.XII.
While the D.XII was a marked improvement over the obsolescent Albatros D.Va and Pfalz D.IIIa, it nevertheless found little favor with German pilots, who strongly preferred the Fokker D.VII. Leutnant Rudolf Stark, commander of Jasta 35, wrote:
“
No one wanted to fly those Pfalzs except under compulsion, and those who had to made as much fuss as they could about practicing on them.
Later their pilots got on very well with them. They flew quite decently and could always keep pace with the Fokkers; in fact they dived even faster. But they were heavy for turns and fighting purposes, in which respect they were not to be compared with the Fokkers. The Fokker was a bloodstock animal that answered to the slightest movement of the hand and could almost guess the rider's will in advance. The Pfalz was a clumsy cart-horse that went heavy in the reins and obeyed nothing but the most brutal force.
Those who flew the Pfalzs did so because there were no other machines for them. But they always gazed enviously at the Fokkers and prayed for the quick chance of an exchange.
”
Thanks to its sturdy wing and thin airfoil section, the D.XII maintained the excellent high-speed dive characteristics of the earlier Pfalz D.III. Like most contemporary fighters, however, the D.XII had an abrupt stall and a pronounced tendency to spin. Furthermore, pilots consistently criticized the D.XII for its long takeoff run, heavy controls, and "clumsy" handling qualities in the air. Rate of roll, in particular, appears to have been deficient. Landings were difficult because the D.XII tended to float above the ground and the landing gear was weak. Ground crews disliked the extensive wire bracing of the two-bay wings, which required more maintenance than the Fokker D.VII's semi-cantilever wings. Evaluations of captured aircraft by Allied pilots were similarly unfavorable.
Between 750 and 800 D.XII scouts were completed by the Armistice. A substantial number, perhaps as many as 175, were surrendered to the Allies. Of these, a few were shipped to the United States and Canada for evaluation.
Specifications (D.XII)
General characteristics
· Crew: 1
·
· Length: 6.35 m (20 ft 10 in)
·
· Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)
·
· Height: 2.7 m (8 ft 10 in)
·
· Wing area: 21.7 m2 (234 sq ft)
·
· Empty weight: 716 kg (1,579 lb)
·
· Gross weight: 897 kg (1,978 lb)
·
· Powerplant: 1 Χ Mercedes D.IIIa 6-cyl water-cooled in-line piston engine, 130 kW (180 hp)
·
Performance
· Maximum speed: 170 km/h (110 mph, 92 kn)
·
· Endurance: 2½ hours (420 km)
·
· Service ceiling: 5,600 m (18,500 ft)
·
· Rate of climb: 4.09 m/s (805 ft/min)
·
· Time to altitude:
·
o 1,000 m (3,281 ft) in 3 minutes 24 seconds
o
o 5,000 m (16,404 ft) in 29 minutes 54 seconds
o
Armament
· Guns: 2 Χ 7.92 mm (0.312 in) LMG 08/15 machine guns
D.VII:
General characteristics
· Crew: 1
· Length: 6.954 m (22 ft 10 in)
· Wingspan: 8.9 m (29 ft 2 in)
· Height: 2.75 m (9 ft 0 in)
· Wing area: 20.5 m2 (221 sq ft)
· Empty weight: 670 kg (1,477 lb)
· Gross weight: 906 kg (1,997 lb)
· Powerplant: 1 Χ Mercedes D.III 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine, 120 kW (160 hp)
or 1 Χ 130.5 kW (175 hp) Mercedes D.IIIa 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine
or 1 Χ 137.95 kW (185 hp) BMW IIIa 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine (180 kW (240 hp) rating at low level, emergency only, risk of engine damage.)
· Propellers: 2-bladed fixed-pitch propeller
Performance
· Maximum speed: 189 km/h (117 mph, 102 kn)
with BMW IIIa engine - 200 km/h (124 mph; 108 kn)
· Range: 266 km (165 mi, 144 nmi)
· Service ceiling: 6,000 m (20,000 ft)
· Rate of climb: 3.92 m/s (772 ft/min)
with BMW IIIa engine – 9.52 metres per second (1,874 ft/min)
· Time to altitude:[16]
1,000 m (3,281 ft) in 4 minutes 15 seconds (1 minutes 40 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
2,000 m (6,562 ft) in 8 minutes 18 seconds (4 minutes 5 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
3,000 m (9,843 ft) in 13 minutes 49 seconds (7 minutes 0 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
4,000 m (13,123 ft) in 22 minutes 48 seconds (10 minutes 15 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
5,000 m (16,404 ft) in 38 minutes 5 seconds (14 minutes 0 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
6,000 m (19,685 ft) (18 minutes 45 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
Armament
· Guns: 2 Χ 7.92 mm (0.312 in) LMG 08/15 "Spandau" machine guns]]
The Pfalz D.XII was. essentially, the Pfalz D.III with wings patterned after the SPAD 13 wing. It was fast (although the Fokker often had a better engine and was, therefore, faster), and was great in a dive. I have an idea the pilots who flew the Pfalz simply required time to learn how to use it's advantages against the Allies. And once they did, as has been documented, their scores started to mount. I wonder how many aircraft were simply dismissed out of hand, when using their strong points might have made them real winners? Kind of like the F4F against the Zero; If you tried to maneuver with the Zero, you were going to get shot up. But, if you used "boom and zoom" tactics, kept the speed above 250 mph and refused to dogfight, the F4F could defeat the Zero. Okay, enough philosophizing. Top_Gunn; you're up. Take it away. Thanks; Ernie P.
What warbird do I describe?
1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.
2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.
3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.
4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.
5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.
6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.
7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.
8. And, they made their voices heard.
9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.
10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.
11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.
12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.
13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.
14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.
15. And could at least match it in level flight.
16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.
17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.
18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.
19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.
20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.
21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.
22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.
23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.
24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.
25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.
26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.
27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.
28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.
29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.
30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.
31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.
32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.
33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.
34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.
35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.
36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.
37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.
38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.
39. Unlike its predecessor, by the same manufacturer, this aircraft used a conventional front mounted radiator.
40. And, again unlike its predecessor, it used two bay wings.
41. The first 200 or so examples produced had a different layout of the tail surfaces; much sharper and more rectangular than the final version, which was much larger and smoother.
42. The earlier aircraft referenced in (39) also featured rather smooth and contoured tail surfaces.
43. The “favored aircraft” is generally considered to be iconic.
44. While our subject aircraft is apparently even lesser known than I would have thought.
45. Our subject aircraft dry weight was less than 100 pounds heavier than our favored aircraft.
46. And actually may have been a pound or two lighter when fully loaded.
47. Top speed was about the same.
48. But then again, they both used the same engine; although our favored aircraft was sometimes also equipped with more powerful engines, apparently not available to our subject aircraft.
49. Wingspans were only a few inches different; with our subject aircraft being perhaps four or so inches longer.
50. In fuselage lengths, our favored aircraft was about two feet longer.
51. Our subject aircraft seemed to have a slightly better rate of climb when both planes were equipped with the same engine.
52. And our subject aircraft could dive harder, safely.
53. And, of course, both were equipped with two machine guns.
54. Both machine guns being the same type.
55. Two of our subject aircraft were used as props in a famous movie.
56. And both would up in museums in the United States.
57. Interestingly enough, the wing struts on the two planes are quite similar.
58.
Answer: The Pfalz D.XII
The Pfalz D.XII was a German fighter aircraft built by Pfalz Flugzeugwerke. Designed by Rudolph Gehringer as a successor to the Pfalz D.III, the D.XII entered service in significant numbers near the end of the First World War. It was the last Pfalz aircraft to see widespread service. Though the D.XII was an effective fighter aircraft, it was overshadowed by the highly successful Fokker D.VII.
Design and development
In early 1918, the Idflieg (Inspektion der Fliegertruppen) distributed to German aircraft manufacturers a detailed engineering report on the SPAD S.VII, whose wing structure Idflieg considered to be well-designed. Pfalz accordingly produced several Pfalz D.III-derived prototypes with SPAD-type wings. These developed into the Pfalz D.XII. The new aircraft was powered by the 180 hp Mercedes D.IIIaό engine and continued the use of LFG-Roland's patented Wickelrumpf plywood-skinned monocoque fuselage construction. Unlike the earlier aircraft, the D.XII used a two-bay wing cellule. Furthermore, the flush wing radiator was replaced with a car-type radiator mounted in front of the engine.
The prototype D.XII first flew in March 1918. Subsequently, Idflieg issued a production order for 50 aircraft. Pfalz entered several D.XII prototypes in the second fighter competition at Adlershof in May/June 1918. Only Ernst Udet and Hans Weiss favored the D.XII over the Fokker D.VII, but Udet's opinion carried such weight that Pfalz received substantial production orders for the D.XII. The aircraft passed its Typenprόfung (official type test) on 19 June 1918.
Difficulties with the radiator, which used vertical tubes rather than the more common honeycomb structure, delayed initial deliveries of the D.XII until June. The first 200 production examples could be distinguished by their rectangular fin and rudder. Subsequent aircraft featured a larger, rounded rudder profile.
Operational use
The D.XII began reaching the Jagdstaffeln, primarily Bavarian units, in July 1918. Most units operated the D.XII in conjunction with other fighter types, but units in quieter sectors of the front were completely equipped with the D.XII.
While the D.XII was a marked improvement over the obsolescent Albatros D.Va and Pfalz D.IIIa, it nevertheless found little favor with German pilots, who strongly preferred the Fokker D.VII. Leutnant Rudolf Stark, commander of Jasta 35, wrote:
“
No one wanted to fly those Pfalzs except under compulsion, and those who had to made as much fuss as they could about practicing on them.
Later their pilots got on very well with them. They flew quite decently and could always keep pace with the Fokkers; in fact they dived even faster. But they were heavy for turns and fighting purposes, in which respect they were not to be compared with the Fokkers. The Fokker was a bloodstock animal that answered to the slightest movement of the hand and could almost guess the rider's will in advance. The Pfalz was a clumsy cart-horse that went heavy in the reins and obeyed nothing but the most brutal force.
Those who flew the Pfalzs did so because there were no other machines for them. But they always gazed enviously at the Fokkers and prayed for the quick chance of an exchange.
”
Thanks to its sturdy wing and thin airfoil section, the D.XII maintained the excellent high-speed dive characteristics of the earlier Pfalz D.III. Like most contemporary fighters, however, the D.XII had an abrupt stall and a pronounced tendency to spin. Furthermore, pilots consistently criticized the D.XII for its long takeoff run, heavy controls, and "clumsy" handling qualities in the air. Rate of roll, in particular, appears to have been deficient. Landings were difficult because the D.XII tended to float above the ground and the landing gear was weak. Ground crews disliked the extensive wire bracing of the two-bay wings, which required more maintenance than the Fokker D.VII's semi-cantilever wings. Evaluations of captured aircraft by Allied pilots were similarly unfavorable.
Between 750 and 800 D.XII scouts were completed by the Armistice. A substantial number, perhaps as many as 175, were surrendered to the Allies. Of these, a few were shipped to the United States and Canada for evaluation.
Specifications (D.XII)
General characteristics
· Crew: 1
·
· Length: 6.35 m (20 ft 10 in)
·
· Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)
·
· Height: 2.7 m (8 ft 10 in)
·
· Wing area: 21.7 m2 (234 sq ft)
·
· Empty weight: 716 kg (1,579 lb)
·
· Gross weight: 897 kg (1,978 lb)
·
· Powerplant: 1 Χ Mercedes D.IIIa 6-cyl water-cooled in-line piston engine, 130 kW (180 hp)
·
Performance
· Maximum speed: 170 km/h (110 mph, 92 kn)
·
· Endurance: 2½ hours (420 km)
·
· Service ceiling: 5,600 m (18,500 ft)
·
· Rate of climb: 4.09 m/s (805 ft/min)
·
· Time to altitude:
·
o 1,000 m (3,281 ft) in 3 minutes 24 seconds
o
o 5,000 m (16,404 ft) in 29 minutes 54 seconds
o
Armament
· Guns: 2 Χ 7.92 mm (0.312 in) LMG 08/15 machine guns
D.VII:
General characteristics
· Crew: 1
· Length: 6.954 m (22 ft 10 in)
· Wingspan: 8.9 m (29 ft 2 in)
· Height: 2.75 m (9 ft 0 in)
· Wing area: 20.5 m2 (221 sq ft)
· Empty weight: 670 kg (1,477 lb)
· Gross weight: 906 kg (1,997 lb)
· Powerplant: 1 Χ Mercedes D.III 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine, 120 kW (160 hp)
or 1 Χ 130.5 kW (175 hp) Mercedes D.IIIa 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine
or 1 Χ 137.95 kW (185 hp) BMW IIIa 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine (180 kW (240 hp) rating at low level, emergency only, risk of engine damage.)
· Propellers: 2-bladed fixed-pitch propeller
Performance
· Maximum speed: 189 km/h (117 mph, 102 kn)
with BMW IIIa engine - 200 km/h (124 mph; 108 kn)
· Range: 266 km (165 mi, 144 nmi)
· Service ceiling: 6,000 m (20,000 ft)
· Rate of climb: 3.92 m/s (772 ft/min)
with BMW IIIa engine – 9.52 metres per second (1,874 ft/min)
· Time to altitude:[16]
1,000 m (3,281 ft) in 4 minutes 15 seconds (1 minutes 40 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
2,000 m (6,562 ft) in 8 minutes 18 seconds (4 minutes 5 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
3,000 m (9,843 ft) in 13 minutes 49 seconds (7 minutes 0 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
4,000 m (13,123 ft) in 22 minutes 48 seconds (10 minutes 15 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
5,000 m (16,404 ft) in 38 minutes 5 seconds (14 minutes 0 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
6,000 m (19,685 ft) (18 minutes 45 seconds w/ BMW IIIa)
Armament
· Guns: 2 Χ 7.92 mm (0.312 in) LMG 08/15 "Spandau" machine guns]]
Last edited by Ernie P.; 04-13-2020 at 02:14 PM.
04-14-2020, 04:42 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low.wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
1. It was a low.wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
04-14-2020, 02:59 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Answer: The Curtiss P-36 Hawk
The Curtiss P-36 Hawk, also known as the Curtiss Hawk Model 75, is an American-designed and built fighter aircraft of the 1930s and 40s. A contemporary of both the Hawker Hurricane and Messerschmitt Bf 109, it was one of the first of a new generation of combat aircrafta sleek monoplane design making extensive use of metal in its construction and powered by a powerful radial engine.
Perhaps best known as the predecessor of the Curtiss P-40 Warhawk, the P-36 saw little combat with the United States Army Air Forces during World War II. It was nevertheless the fighter used most extensively and successfully by the French Armee de l'air during the Battle of France. The P-36 was also ordered by the governments of the Netherlands and Norway, but did not arrive in time to see action before both were occupied by Nazi Germany. The type was also manufactured under license in China, for the Republic of China Air Force, as well as in British India, for the Royal Air Force (RAF) and Royal Indian Air Force (RIAF).
Axis and co-belligerent air forces also made significant use of captured P-36s. Following the fall of France and Norway in 1940, several dozen P-36s were seized by Germany and transferred to Finland; these aircraft saw extensive action with the Ilmavoimat (Finnish Air Force) against the Soviet Air Forces. The P-36 was also used by Vichy French air forces in several minor conflicts; in one of these, the Franco-Thai War of 194041, P-36s were used by both sides.
From mid-1940, some P-36s en route for France and the Netherlands were diverted to Allied air forces in other parts of the world. The Hawks ordered by the Netherlands were diverted to the Dutch East Indies and later saw action against Japanese forces. French orders were taken up by British Commonwealth air forces, and saw combat with both the South African Air Force (SAAF) against Italian forces in East Africa, and with the RAF over Burma. Within the Commonwealth, the type was usually referred to as the Curtiss Mohawk.
With around 1,000 aircraft built by Curtiss itself, the P-36 was a major commercial success for the company. It also became the basis not only of the P-40, but two other, unsuccessful prototypes: the P-37 and the XP-42.
04-14-2020, 04:23 PM
My Feedback: (6)
The P-36 fits all the clues so far, but it's not the plane I have in mind. Here's your bonus clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low.wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low.wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
04-14-2020, 06:27 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
The P-36 fits all the clues so far, but it's not the plane I have in mind. Here's your bonus clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low.wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low.wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
Answer: The Seversky P-35
The Seversky P-35 is an American fighter aircraft built by the Seversky Aircraft Company in the late 1930s. A contemporary of the Hawker Hurricane and Messerschmitt Bf 109, the P-35 was the first single-seat fighter in United States Army Air Corps to feature all-metal construction, retractable landing gear, and an enclosed cockpit.
Design and development
The origins of the P-35 can be traced back to the Seversky SEV-3 three-seat amphibian, designed by Alexander Kartveli, Seversky's chief designer and Seversky's first aircraft. The SEV-3 first flew in June 1933 and was developed into the Seversky BT-8 basic trainer, 30 of which were ordered by the United States Army Air Corps (USAAC) in 1935. This proved grossly underpowered and was quickly replaced by the North American BT-9.
The second prototype SEV-3 was completed as a two-seat fighter derivative, the SEV-2XP. It was powered by a 735 hp (548 kW) Wright R-1820 radial engine, had fixed landing gear in aerodynamic spats[5][6] and was armed with one .50 in (12.7 mm) and one .30 in (7.62 mm) forward-firing machine guns plus an additional .30 in (7.62 mm) gun for rear defense.
When the USAAC announced a competition for a new single-seat fighter in 1935, Seversky sent the SEV-2XP, confident it would win despite being a two-seater. However, the aircraft was damaged on 18 June 1935 during its transit to the fly-offs at Wright Field. To compete with the Curtiss Model 75, a single-seat aircraft with retractable undercarriage, Seversky rebuilt the aircraft into the single seat SEV-1XP, replacing the SEV-2XP's fixed landing gear with a retractable undercarriage where the mainwheels retracted backwards into the wing, and an 850 hp (634 kW) R-1820-G5 replacing the -F3 of the SEV-2XP. The SEV-1XP was delivered to Wright Field on 15 August for evaluation, which was generally successful, although the Cyclone failed to deliver its rated power and the SEV-1XP only reached 289 mph (465 km/h) rather than the 300 mph (483 km/h) predicted by Seversky.
Protests from Curtiss led to the formal flyoff between the fighters to be delayed until April 1936. The delay was used by both Seversky and Curtiss to improve their aircraft, while allowing additional fighters from Vought (the Vought V-141) and Consolidated with a single seat version of the PB-2. The SEV-1XP was re-engined again, with a two-row Pratt & Whitney R-1830-9 "Twin Wasp" replacing the Cyclone and a modified vertical stabilizer fitted, becoming the SEV-7.
The P&W also failed to deliver its rated power as it put out only 738 hp[citation needed], and top speed was again well below 300 mph. Whilst more expensive than the Curtiss and Vought designs, the Seversky was a clear winner of the Air Corps' competition, with an order for 77 P-35 fighters and spare parts equivalent to eight airplanes being placed on 16 June 1936 at a cost of $1,636,250. Modifications from SEV-1XP to production P-35 standard included partial instead of complete mainwheel fairings and seven degrees of dihedral to the outer wing panels.
The first production P-35 was delivered to the USAAC in May 1937, preceded by a company owned pre-production aircraft and demonstrator, the AP-1. Only 76 P-35s were built, delivery being completed in August 1938, with the 77th aircraft finished as the prototype XP-41. When it wanted further fighters in 1937, the Air Corps, who were unhappy with both the slow delivery of the P-35, and sale of 2PA two-seat aircraft to the Japanese Navy, ordered 210 Curtiss P-36s.
Seversky continued to develop the design with the hope of selling more aircraft both to the Air Corps and to civil and export customers. It modified the prototype SEV-1XP as a single seat racer, the S-1 entering it into the 1937 Bendix Trophy, where it finished in fourth place. The competition was won by the S-2 (registration number NR70Y), a similar aircraft built for Frank Fuller of the Fuller Paint Company. S-2 also won the Bendix Trophy in 1939 and placed second in 1938. The aircraft was used to portray the "Drake Bullet" in the 1938 film Test Pilot.
Another civil aircraft was the DS, (or Doolittle Special), a single seater for James Doolittle, employed at the time by the Shell Oil Company, while the AP-7 was another racer, powered by a 1,200 hp (895 kW) R-1830 engine and used by Jacqueline Cochran to win the 1938 Bendix Trophy race and to set a women's air speed record. Seversky entered two aircraft based on the P-35 in a 1938 competition for a new fighter for the Air Corps. One was the XP-41 (which had the company designation AP-4D, which was a P-35 with a 1,200 hp (895 kW) R-1830-9 engine fitted with a two-stage supercharger) and the AP-4, which had a turbo-supercharger mounted in the belly of a deeper fuselage. The Air Corps preferred the AP-4D, which was ordered into production as the P-43 Lancer.
Aiming to increase sales, Alexander P. de Seversky personally took a demonstrator on a tour of Europe in early 1939. As a result of this demonstration, Sweden ordered 15 EP-106 fighters on 29 June 1939, a development of the P-35 powered by a 1,050 hp (783 kW) R-1830-45, which improved performance by over 25 mph (40 km/h) and armed with two 7.9 mm (.311 in) machine guns in the cowl and two 13.2 mm (.52 in) machine guns in the wings. A second order for 45 EP-106s was placed on 11 October 1939, with a third order for 60 aircraft, placed on 6 January 1940, although by this time Seversky had been thrown out of the company bearing his name by the board of directors, with the company renaming itself Republic Aviation. The Swedish Air Force designated them J 9.
04-15-2020, 05:07 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Not the P-35. Here are today's clue and a bonus clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
04-16-2020, 04:43 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Today's clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
04-16-2020, 09:43 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Today's clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
04-17-2020, 04:24 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Today's clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
04-17-2020, 12:38 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Today's clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
Answer: The Junkers W 34
The Junkers W 34 was a German-built, single-engine, passenger and transport aircraft. Developed in the 1920s, it was taken into service in 1926. The passenger version could take a pilot and five passengers. The aircraft was developed from the Junkers W 33. Further development led to the Junkers Ju 46.
The Swedish Air Force operated three W 33/34 between 1933 and 1953 in the transport and air ambulance roles, initially with the military designation Trp 2 and Trp 2A, eventually changed to Tp 2 and Tp 2A. One of these is preserved today in civilian colors as SE-BYA.
General characteristics
· Crew: 2
· Capacity: 6 pax
· Length: 10.27 m (33 ft 8 in)
· Wingspan: 18.48 m (60 ft 8 in)
· Height: 3.53 m (11 ft 7 in)
· Wing area: 44 m2 (470 sq ft)
· Empty weight: 1,700 kg (3,748 lb)
· Gross weight: 3,200 kg (7,055 lb)
· Fuel capacity: 477 l (126 US gal; 105 imp gal)
· Powerplant: 1 Χ BMW 132A 9-cylinder air-cooled radial piston engine, 480 kW (650 hp) (660 PS)
· Propellers: 2-bladed metal fixed-pitch propeller, 3.1 m (10 ft 2 in) diameter
Performance
· Maximum speed: 265 km/h (165 mph, 143 kn) at sea level
· Cruise speed: 233 km/h (145 mph, 126 kn)
· Landing speed: 116 km/h (72 mph; 63 kn)
· Range: 900 km (560 mi, 490 nmi)
· Service ceiling: 6,300 m (20,700 ft)
· Rate of climb: 5.25 m/s (1,033 ft/min)
· Time to altitude: 1,000 m (3,300 ft) in 3 minute 12 seconds
Armament
· 2x 7.92 mm (0.312 in) machine guns (dorsal) and 1x 7.92 mm (0.312 in) machine gun (ventral)
· 6x 50 kg (110 lb) bombs (300Kg total)
04-17-2020, 04:52 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Not the Junkers W 34. Here's your bonus clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
04-18-2020, 04:36 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Today's clue.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
10. Top speed under 250 mph.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
10. Top speed under 250 mph.
04-18-2020, 03:35 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Bonus clue for Hydro's mentioning the AT-6 (even though it wasn't a guess).
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
10. Top speed under 250 mph.
11. Crew of one.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
10. Top speed under 250 mph.
11. Crew of one.
04-19-2020, 05:05 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Today's clue. Perhaps I should also mention, before the giveaway clues start, that this is not an obscure airplane.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
10. Top speed under 250 mph.
11. Crew of one.
12. I've seen conflicting reports on how it handled. However, all of them agree that landing it was difficult, perhaps because its landing speed was higher than that of the airplanes its pilots had been flying. Landing accidents were common. The mentions of other handling problems don't really say it was hard to fly; they just say that the airplanes previously flown by its pilots were easier to handle.
Looking for the name of a warbird.
1. It was a low-wing single-engine monoplane.
2. It had a couple of "firsts" for the country in which it was designed and built.
3. That country never used it in combat, but it did see some combat service in other countries.
4. Its design was based in part on that of a civilian airplane made by the same manufacturer.
5. The civilian airplane mentioned in clue 4 had a couple of features that were fairly modern for its time. Its military descendant lacked those features, however, and so it became obsolete very soon.
6. Nevertheless, it was used in combat 22 years after the first prototype first flew.
7. Armed with machine guns, and sometimes bombs.
8. It had a radial engine (the exact version varied somewhat from model to model).
9. Fewer than 200 built.
10. Top speed under 250 mph.
11. Crew of one.
12. I've seen conflicting reports on how it handled. However, all of them agree that landing it was difficult, perhaps because its landing speed was higher than that of the airplanes its pilots had been flying. Landing accidents were common. The mentions of other handling problems don't really say it was hard to fly; they just say that the airplanes previously flown by its pilots were easier to handle.
04-19-2020, 07:50 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Just you!
Here's the Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-26_Peashooter
The two modern features which its civilian predecessor had but it didn't were retracts and a cantilever wing with no bracing wires. My next clue would have been about the tastefully understated color schemes the army decorated it with.
Here's the Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-26_Peashooter
The two modern features which its civilian predecessor had but it didn't were retracts and a cantilever wing with no bracing wires. My next clue would have been about the tastefully understated color schemes the army decorated it with.
04-19-2020, 12:26 PM
Most pictures you see of the P-26 are with the neutrality paint job with the yellow wings, if that's the "understated color scheme you're referring to. It was actually designed to make US aircraft highly visible. In fact, it wasn't outdone until the invasion stripes were added to allied planes in 1944 though, truth be told, the unpainted Mustangs were fairly easy to spot due to sunlight reflecting off their silver skin.
04-19-2020, 02:07 PM
My Feedback: (6)
Most pictures you see of the P-26 are with the neutrality paint job with the yellow wings, if that's the "understated color scheme you're referring to. It was actually designed to make US aircraft highly visible. In fact, it wasn't outdone until the invasion stripes were added to allied planes in 1944 though, truth be told, the unpainted Mustangs were fairly easy to spot due to sunlight reflecting off their silver skin.
04-19-2020, 07:13 PM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Just you!
Here's the Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-26_Peashooter
The two modern features which its civilian predecessor had but it didn't were retracts and a cantilever wing with no bracing wires. My next clue would have been about the tastefully understated color schemes the army decorated it with.
Here's the Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-26_Peashooter
The two modern features which its civilian predecessor had but it didn't were retracts and a cantilever wing with no bracing wires. My next clue would have been about the tastefully understated color schemes the army decorated it with.
The Boeing P-26 "Peashooter" was the first American all-metal production fighter aircraft and the first pursuit monoplane to enter squadron service with the United States Army Air Corps. Designed and built by Boeing, the prototype first flew in 1932, and the type was still in use with the U.S. Army Air Corps as late as 1941 in the Philippines. There are only two surviving Peashooters, but there are three reproductions on exhibit with two more under construction.
By December 1941, U.S. fighter strength in the Philippines included 28 P-26s, 12 of which were operational with the 6th Pursuit Squadron of the Philippine Army Air Corps. Filipino-flown P-26s claimed one Imperial Japanese Navy Mitsubishi G3M (Allied reporting name "Nell") bomber and two or three Imperial Japanese Navy Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero (Allied reporting name "Zeke") fighters before the last of the P-26s were burned by their crews to prevent capture by advancing Imperial Japanese Army forces on 24 December 1941.
04-19-2020, 09:29 PM
That was my thought too, a few flew at Pearl Harbor, along with P-36s and P-40s. Unfortunately, most only know about the P-40s getting off the ground during the attack
04-20-2020, 05:03 AM
My Feedback: (6)
Well, some P-26s did engage Japanese planes in the Philippines in 1941, but they were flown by Philippine Army pilots, I believe. There were a few P-26s in Hawaii when Pearl Harbor was attacked, but I've never seen anything about their being used in combat there. Doesn't mean they weren't of course, but if so it seems not to have gotten much mention, if any.
04-20-2020, 07:23 AM
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Well, some P-26s did engage Japanese planes in the Philippines in 1941, but they were flown by Philippine Army pilots, I believe. There were a few P-26s in Hawaii when Pearl Harbor was attacked, but I've never seen anything about their being used in combat there. Doesn't mean they weren't of course, but if so it seems not to have gotten much mention, if any.
04-20-2020, 09:02 AM
I had passed over the P-26 for the same reasons at first but after looking at Wiki and only seeing Filipino pilots mentioned engaging with them in war time I threw out the guess. Considering the timing the P-26 inventory could have already been dispersed to friendly nation units by the U.S. and replaced with P-40s in USAC units. Remember FDR's administration saw the winds of war coming in the 1930s and were looking for passive ways of support those facing the Germans and Japanese while still supporting the general public's isolationist views. Coupled along with a desire to slowly prepare the military for the coming war. Replacing the P-26 with P-40s was also a good way to create a few paying jobs in a depression era economy on the domestic front.
I have a busy day of work ahead of me so I will try to come up with a new quiz this evening. If someone already has something feel free to post it.
I have a busy day of work ahead of me so I will try to come up with a new quiz this evening. If someone already has something feel free to post it.