Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Adrian? Thanks; Ernie P.

adavis

Which warbird?

• Twin engine
• Single seat
• Believed to be responsible for the death of a very famous pilot.

=Adrian=

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

P-59 Aircomet
Killed one the WW2 aces I forget which one. According to Winkel Brown the British test pilot the reason that they were having reliability issues with the engine vs the british engine they were copying the MFG did several modifications to the engine that screwed it up.
Sparky

Hydro Junkie

I can't find anywhere that a P-59 Airacomet crashed. I did find a P-80 crashing just after take off in , killing the pilot who had tried to bail out at low altitude. That pilot was 40 kill P-38 ace Richard Bong

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

Yep thats the one I was thinking of....

adavis

No correct answers yet - Another clue...


Which warbird?

• Twin engine
• Single seat
• Believed to be responsible for the death of a very famous pilot.
• In service for more than 30 years.

=Adrian=

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

P-38 St Exuburey
Sparky

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sparky; I have no idea if your answer is correct. For some reason, when I first saw the question, I thought about the death of Geoffrey de Haviland (Son of the founder) in the Dh 106 Swallow in 1946. I wasted some time there, and suddenly thought about the P-38. But I forgot all about St. Exuburey and couldn't find a link to another famous aviator death. When I finally remembered St. Exuburey, I couldn't make the clue about being in service for more than 30 years fit. I think the service life of the P-38 was less than 25 years. I guess we'll see if Adrian agrees with your answer, but I spent most of my thinking time chasing in the wrong direction. Maybe I'm just a bit slow right now, but this has been a tough one for me. I hope you nailed it, because I'm lost right now. Thanks; Ernie P.

adavis

Not P38...

Which warbird?

• Twin engine
• Single seat
• Believed to be responsible for the death of a very famous pilot.
• In service for more than 30 years.
• Not exported, but served with more than one nation.

=Adrian=

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

I'd thought of Saint-Exupery too, but then, although he was killed while flying a P-38, it didn't seem quite right to say the P-38 was responsible for his death. Then I thought about Yamamoto, but his Wikipedia page doesn't say anything about his ever having been a pilot (unlike Halsey, Nimitz, and King, all of whom went through pilot training so they could command carrier operations, although none of them ever flew in combat (if at all) after qualifying). So I too have absolutely no idea about where to start. Today's clue seems to be a strong hint about something. Darned if I know what, though.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Al; I went through the same thing with Yamamoto. I just couldn't make it work. And there's no record of who flew his plane, although there were unfounded stories 50+ years ago that it was Nishizawa. If a plane wasn't exported, it could only be flown by other nations if those planes were (1) Produced under license, or (2) Captured. Thanks; Ernie P.

Hydro Junkie

I too, was thinking the P-38, but with Major Thomas McGuire in the cockpit. He went down over Negros Philippines on January 7, 1945. Depending on the source, some say he was shot down while others say he saw another American plane being attacked and tried to save that pilot. As the story goes, he tried to maneuver into position to attack the Japanese fighter that was attacking the other American plane but, in his haste, forgot to jettison his external tanks and spun into the jungle below, killing him on impact. The only pilot to have more kills than McGuire was fellow P-38 ace Major Richard Bong, who had 40. He was killed one day short of 7 months later while trying to bail out of a malfunctioning P-80 Shooting Star at low altitude. He died on impact with the ground when his parachute failed to open quickly enough

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

I haven't a clue either guys. I think we should give Adrian major kudos for coming up with such a great quiz and stumping us so far! Well done Adrian!

adavis

Which warbird?

• Twin engine
• Single seat
• Believed to be responsible for the death of a very famous pilot.
• In service for more than 30 years.
• Not exported, but served with more than one nation.
• Famous pilot referred to above was not in the subject aircraft when he died.

=Adrian=

adavis

Which warbird?

• Twin engine
• Single seat
• Believed to be responsible for the death of a very famous pilot.
• In service for more than 30 years.
• Not exported, but served with more than one nation.
• Famous pilot referred to above was not in the subject aircraft when he died.
• Involved in a number of high profile incidents involving civilian aircraft.
  

=Adrian=

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Okay; if you guys won't do it... Sir; how about the Su-15? Thanks; Ernie P.

As one of the V-PVO's principal interceptors, the Su-15 was involved in several attacks on foreign aircraft that inadvertently crossed into Soviet airspace:

• One such attack was in 1978, when Korean Air Lines Flight 902 veered into Soviet airspace and was attacked over Murmansk by a PVO Su-15. Although the civilian aircraft survived the missile hit, two passengers were killed, and the damaged plane subsequently made a forced landing on a frozen lake.
• In a 1981 incident, a Georgian-based Su-15 collided with an Argentine Canadair CL-44 of Transporte Aιreo Rioplatense (killing the three Argentines and one Briton aboard) which was delivering arms from Israel to Iran after it strayed into Soviet airspace. The Soviet pilot said the collision was intentional, while Western aviation experts believed it accidental.[2]
• In the Korean Air Lines Flight 007 incident in 1983, a Korean Boeing 747 was fired upon near Moneron Island, after it veered into restricted Soviet airspace, by a Su-15TM based on Sakhalin, with the 747's control surfaces having been disabled as a result of a direct hit to the aircraft's tail. The crippled airliner then crashed into the Sea of Japan off the coast of Moneron, killing all 246 passengers and 23 crew.

The Su-15 was also credited with shooting down five reconnaissance balloons sent to spy on Soviet territory in 1975.

A close supersonic fly-by of Yuri Gagarin's MiG-15 by a Su-15 led to Gagarin's death in 1968. Computer models show that the Su-15 passed "within meters" of the MiG.[3]

Although it was produced in large numbers (1,290 of all types), the Su-15, like other highly sensitive Soviet aircraft, was never exported to the Warsaw Pact or any other country due to its sophisticated systems. Some Su-15 were reported to be deployed in Egypt in 1972 but were used with Soviet crews. At one point, the Su-15 was considered for use as a strike fighter, but proved to be too specialised as an interceptor to be used in that role.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Su-15 was abruptly retired from the new Russian Air Force in 1993 to comply with the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. Most were hastily scrapped in favour of more advanced interceptors, including the Su-27 and MiG-31, but some are in reserve storage for emergency use. In Ukraine, the last Su-15s (at Kramatorsk and Belbek) were withdrawn from use in 1996.

adavis

Ernie,

Su-15 is correct.

Over to you...

=Adrian=

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Thank you, Sir. I will post something later today. That was a good question, Adrian; well done; and very well played. Thanks; Ernie P.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Good job Ernie and Adrian!

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

I trust this will amuse and entertain you. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was designed by one of the most famous aircraft designers in the world. And, in my opinion, one of the most talented.



2. Yet, this aircraft could be legitimately considered a failure.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

I'll jump in with a few blasts from the past!
Fairchild Republic T-46 also know as the Thunderpiglet!
Vought FU7 Cutlass scourge of the Navy and another member of the Ensign Eliminator club!
Yak-38 do I really need to elaborate on this one?
And just so our allies don't feel left out the de Havilland Comet! (You never said warbird.)

Hydro Junkie

I wouldn't call the Comet a failure. It's problem was square cut outs for the large windows, placing huge amounts of stress at the corners of the windows where, ultimately, the structure failed due to the pressurized fuselage. Since pressurization was a fairly new addition to airplanes, the Comet being one of the first to have it, the issues of metal fatigue and the stresses put on the structure were not known until a Comet was actually tested in a tank of water over several days, simulating the take off and landing cycles over a period that would equal several months. What was learned was applied to the then under development Boeing 707, a plane that is still flying as the C-135 and E3A AWACS today. As the Nimrod, which was very similar to Boeing's P-8 Poseidon in many ways, the Comet flew successfully for several decades without losing a plane to the pressurization issues that plagued the commercial version.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

I never said warbird? How about the clues, wherein I stated "What warbird do I describe?" in the first line of the clues. <chuckle> Never mind; I'll still toss in a couple of extra clues for your effort, FlyerInOKC. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was designed by one of the most famous aircraft designers in the world. And, in my opinion, one of the most talented.



2. Yet, this aircraft could be legitimately considered a failure.



3. It was criticized as taking far too long to develop.



4. And, it was criticized as being rather outdated by the time it was ready for service.

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

MD-11 but it never served in the military that Im aware of.




Sparky

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Ummm...… Okay; here's a bonus clue for your efforts. But.... Subject aircraft IS a warbird. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was designed by one of the most famous aircraft designers in the world. And, in my opinion, one of the most talented.



2. Yet, this aircraft could be legitimately considered a failure.



3. It was criticized as taking far too long to develop.



4. And, it was criticized as being rather outdated by the time it was ready for service.



5. And both of those criticisms were valid.