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

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

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

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Old 05-20-2020, 07:44 PM
  #18526  
stang151
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Beaumont, CA
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I've been reading a book by Dana Bell on the colors and markings of the F4U-1 and there are several different patterns for the three color scheme just for the Corsair ,
depending on the date, factory (Vought, Goodyear, or Brewster), and it seems the whim of who was painting them at the time. So it seems that their is no right way and unless you have detailed color photos and a serial no. who can call you on it.
OK Back to the quiz.

Looking for a warbird,


1. Built as an improvement of an earlier plane, bigger, faster, and of course heaver.

2. Built by a division of the manufacturer of the "stars".

3. One glance and a knowledgeable observer would know it's origin.

4. Used by several countries.

5. In it's first use in combat, by an alley, it was found wanting. It was pulled from the front line and assigned a more mundane if. not much needed role, at which it excelled.

6. Two of the home country's services ordered it but with different engines. one with slightly less power than which it was designed for.

7. As they came off the production line most were endorsed by a somewhat famous mouse and his pals.

8. Had a wing planform that some say, Bruce Wayne would approve of.

9. This was the result of the large effective landing flap system.

10.Though not as nimble as the fighters it would come across, it's crews knew it had an ace in the hole, speed.

11. This high top speed ,( 322 M.P.H) was the result of the larger engines (4000 combined hp.) usually found on the home country's fighters.

12. The armament wasn't too bad either , later models could bring to bear 7 guns to the front and 3 to the rear..

Last edited by stang151; 05-20-2020 at 07:49 PM.
Old 05-20-2020, 08:31 PM
  #18527  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by stang151 View Post
I've been reading a book by Dana Bell on the colors and markings of the F4U-1 and there are several different patterns for the three color scheme just for the Corsair ,
depending on the date, factory (Vought, Goodyear, or Brewster), and it seems the whim of who was painting them at the time. So it seems that their is no right way and unless you have detailed color photos and a serial no. who can call you on it.
OK Back to the quiz.

Looking for a warbird,


1. Built as an improvement of an earlier plane, bigger, faster, and of course heaver.

2. Built by a division of the manufacturer of the "stars".

3. One glance and a knowledgeable observer would know it's origin.

4. Used by several countries.

5. In it's first use in combat, by an alley, it was found wanting. It was pulled from the front line and assigned a more mundane if. not much needed role, at which it excelled.

6. Two of the home country's services ordered it but with different engines. one with slightly less power than which it was designed for.

7. As they came off the production line most were endorsed by a somewhat famous mouse and his pals.

8. Had a wing planform that some say, Bruce Wayne would approve of.

9. This was the result of the large effective landing flap system.

10.Though not as nimble as the fighters it would come across, it's crews knew it had an ace in the hole, speed.

11. This high top speed ,( 322 M.P.H) was the result of the larger engines (4000 combined hp.) usually found on the home country's fighters.

12. The armament wasn't too bad either , later models could bring to bear 7 guns to the front and 3 to the rear..
I had a sudden thought. How about the Lockheed Ventura? Thanks; Ernie P.

Answer: Lockheed Ventura





The Lockheed Ventura is a twin-engine medium bomber and patrol bomber of World War II.



The Ventura first entered combat in Europe as a bomber with the RAF in late 1942. Designated PV-1 by the United States Navy (US Navy), it entered combat in 1943 in the Pacific. The bomber was also used by the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF), which designated it the Lockheed B-34 (Lexington) and B-37 as a trainer. British Commonwealth forces also used it in several guises, including antishipping and antisubmarine search and attack.



The Ventura was developed from the Lockheed Model 18 Lodestar transport, as a replacement for the Lockheed Hudson bombers then in service with the Royal Air Force. Used in daylight attacks against occupied Europe, they proved to have weaknesses and were removed from bomber duty and some used for patrols by Coastal Command.



After USAAF monopolization of land-based bombers was removed, the US Navy ordered a revised design which entered service as the PV-2 Harpoon for anti-submarine work.




Civil conversions







Howard 350 executive conversion of the PV-1



Ex-military PV-1 Venturas from Canada and South Africa were converted by Howard Aero in San Antonio, Texas, in the 1950s and 1960s as high-speed executive transports. The earliest conversions, called Super Venturas, incorporated a 48 in (122 cm) fuselage stretch, extra fuel tankage, large picture windows, luxury interiors, and weapons bays transformed into baggage compartments. The landing gear was swapped for the heavier-duty units from the PV-2. Later conversions, of which eighteen were completed in the 1960s,[1] were called Howard 350s.[2]



At least nineteen PV-1s were further modified, including cabin pressurization under the designation Howard 500.[3] A final PV-1 modification by Howard was the Eldorado 700, with longer wings, a pointed nose, and streamlined engine cowlings.



A notable crash of a civilian version occurred on December 17, 1954, killing four, including Fred Miller, president of the Miller Brewing Company and grandson of founder Frederick Miller. The company plane was bound for Winnipeg, Manitoba, but had trouble with both engines and crashed shortly after takeoff from Mitchell Field in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.[4][5] Also killed were his oldest son, 20-year-old Fred, Jr., and the two company pilots, Joseph and Paul Laird.[6][7]



Oakland Airmotive (later Bay Aviation Services, based in Oakland, California) also offered a PV-2 executive aircraft conversion dubbed Centaurus starting in 1958.[8] The cost of the conversion was $155,000 in addition to the airframe
Old 05-21-2020, 08:52 AM
  #18528  
stang151
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Beaumont, CA
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Yes Ernie, it is indeed the Lockheed/ Vega PV-1Ventura. It's hard coming up with clues to stump you guys and I knew that I would not be able to for long.

Looking for a warbird,


1. Built as an improvement of an earlier plane, bigger, faster, and of course heaver. A. The Hudson

2. Built by a division of the manufacturer of the "stars". A. Vega ,a div. of Lockheed

3. One glance and a knowledgeable observer would know it's origin. A. Twin engines/twin tails. Electra, Lodestar, Hudson, PV-1, PV-2

4. Used by several countries. A. Brits, Australia , Canada, New Zealand, ect.

5. In it's first use in combat, by an alley, it was found wanting. It was pulled from the front line and assigned a more mundane if. not much needed role, at which it excelled. A. The Brits. used it in daylight raids over France, with no fighter cover. Not a good idea.

6. Two of the home country's services ordered it but with different engines. one with slightly less power than which it was designed for. A. The U.S. Army wanted the Wright R2600 rather than the more powerfull P&W R2800 .

7. As they came off the production line most were endorsed by a somewhat famous mouse and his pals. A. Walt Disney's artist painted the mouse and his pals on the side of many PV-1s as they came of the line.

8. Had a wing planform that some say, Bruce Wayne would approve of. A. Kinda looks like a bat wing.

9. This was the result of the large effective landing flap system. A. Fowler flap tracks

10.Though not as nimble as the fighters it would come across, it's crews knew it had an ace in the hole, speed.

11. This high top speed ,( 322 M.P.H) was the result of the larger engines (4000 combined hp.) usually found on the home country's fighters. Gotta love those P&W R2800s

12. The armament wasn't too bad either , later models could bring to bear 7 guns to the front and 3 to the rear.
All yours Ernie
Old 05-21-2020, 09:34 AM
  #18529  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by stang151 View Post
Yes Ernie, it is indeed the Lockheed/ Vega PV-1Ventura. It's hard coming up with clues to stump you guys and I knew that I would not be able to for long.

Looking for a warbird,


1. Built as an improvement of an earlier plane, bigger, faster, and of course heaver. A. The Hudson

2. Built by a division of the manufacturer of the "stars". A. Vega ,a div. of Lockheed

3. One glance and a knowledgeable observer would know it's origin. A. Twin engines/twin tails. Electra, Lodestar, Hudson, PV-1, PV-2

4. Used by several countries. A. Brits, Australia , Canada, New Zealand, ect.

5. In it's first use in combat, by an alley, it was found wanting. It was pulled from the front line and assigned a more mundane if. not much needed role, at which it excelled. A. The Brits. used it in daylight raids over France, with no fighter cover. Not a good idea.

6. Two of the home country's services ordered it but with different engines. one with slightly less power than which it was designed for. A. The U.S. Army wanted the Wright R2600 rather than the more powerfull P&W R2800 .

7. As they came off the production line most were endorsed by a somewhat famous mouse and his pals. A. Walt Disney's artist painted the mouse and his pals on the side of many PV-1s as they came of the line.

8. Had a wing planform that some say, Bruce Wayne would approve of. A. Kinda looks like a bat wing.

9. This was the result of the large effective landing flap system. A. Fowler flap tracks

10.Though not as nimble as the fighters it would come across, it's crews knew it had an ace in the hole, speed.

11. This high top speed ,( 322 M.P.H) was the result of the larger engines (4000 combined hp.) usually found on the home country's fighters. Gotta love those P&W R2800s

12. The armament wasn't too bad either , later models could bring to bear 7 guns to the front and 3 to the rear.
All yours Ernie
Thank you, Sir. I think you had a good candidate to keep us guessing for a while, but I got to thinking that you must be talking about a fast bomber. Your clue about an ally using it first in combat narrowed it down a lot. The Boston didn't qualify as "fast", so that left the Ventura. I checked a few other clues against the data and they fit, so I figured I had a good candidate and tried it. Without clue (5) I would have still been searching. I have a somewhat unusual candidate in mind for my next question, I just have to figure out some clues. I should have something up this evening. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 05-21-2020, 02:04 PM
  #18530  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This one won't go very long, because not much information is available, but I think it will be fun. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.

Old 05-22-2020, 01:08 AM
  #18531  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.

Old 05-22-2020, 09:17 AM
  #18532  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.
Old 05-22-2020, 12:30 PM
  #18533  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

A couple of evening clues. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nation’s armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.







Old 05-22-2020, 03:18 PM
  #18534  
stang151
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Beaumont, CA
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The Taube?
Old 05-22-2020, 08:13 PM
  #18535  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by stang151 View Post
The Taube?
Not the Taube, my friend; but I can see how you thought that. Here's a bonus clue to help you narrow things down a bit. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nationís armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.



6. And used for much the same purposes.
Old 05-23-2020, 02:48 AM
  #18536  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nation’s armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.



6. And used for much the same purposes.



7. Our subject aircraft was used in a variety of roles, as were most similar aircraft.



8. Its payload was small; only a few hundred pounds.
Old 05-23-2020, 04:58 PM
  #18537  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sorry, Guys; I spent the day at the flying field and the late afternoon and evening working in the garden. So I'll toss in a bonus clue with the afternoon and evening clues. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nation’s armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.



6. And used for much the same purposes.



7. Our subject aircraft was used in a variety of roles, as were most similar aircraft.



8. Its payload was small; only a few hundred pounds.



9. Crew of two.



10. Single radial engine.



11. Some variants were equipped with arrestor hooks.
Old 05-23-2020, 05:53 PM
  #18538  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 8,279
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 21 Posts
Default

How about the Storch?
Old 05-23-2020, 07:41 PM
  #18539  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
How about the Storch?
A great, though incorrect, answer, Sir. So I'll award you a bonus clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nationís armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.



6. And used for much the same purposes.



7. Our subject aircraft was used in a variety of roles, as were most similar aircraft.



8. Its payload was small; only a few hundred pounds.



9. Crew of two.



10. Single radial engine.



11. Some variants were equipped with arrestor hooks.
Old 05-24-2020, 01:55 PM
  #18540  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Only one clue today. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nation’s armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.



6. And used for much the same purposes.



7. Our subject aircraft was used in a variety of roles, as were most similar aircraft.



8. Its payload was small; only a few hundred pounds.



9. Crew of two.



10. Single radial engine.



11. Some variants were equipped with arrestor hooks.



12. Armament was light; a single .303 machine gun.
Old 05-24-2020, 05:20 PM
  #18541  
stang151
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Beaumont, CA
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Morane-Saulnier MS.500 Criquet series. I know it's not much more than a French Storch but it's the only thing I could find.
Old 05-24-2020, 06:40 PM
  #18542  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by stang151 View Post
Morane-Saulnier MS.500 Criquet series. I know it's not much more than a French Storch but it's the only thing I could find.
Sir; that's an excellent answer, but not quite as close as Hydro Junkie; although you were both about equidistant from the answer. Actually you, in one sense, can claim to be a couple of inches closer, but his answer is closer to the right answer. Interesting, no? But you too earn a bonus clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nationís armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.



6. And used for much the same purposes.



7. Our subject aircraft was used in a variety of roles, as were most similar aircraft.



8. Its payload was small; only a few hundred pounds.



9. Crew of two.



10. Single radial engine.



11. Some variants were equipped with arrestor hooks.



12. Armament was light; a single .303 machine gun.



13. It used Fowler flaps.




Old 05-24-2020, 09:02 PM
  #18543  
elmshoot
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nashville, IN,
Posts: 1,532
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

How about this one?
Well I'm sure the answer was in there!
Now that was funny, sorry for the long read

Last edited by elmshoot; 05-25-2020 at 04:40 AM. Reason: Removed about 400lines of code
Old 05-24-2020, 09:45 PM
  #18544  
stang151
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Beaumont, CA
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Wow ,that's just what I was thinking.
Old 05-25-2020, 05:28 AM
  #18545  
Top_Gunn
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Granger, IN
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Kokusai Ki-76 "Stella"? Designed to resemble the Storch but not a copy, radial engine, Fowler flaps.
Old 05-25-2020, 06:32 AM
  #18546  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Top_Gunn View Post
Kokusai Ki-76 "Stella"? Designed to resemble the Storch but not a copy, radial engine, Fowler flaps.
Bingo! Good job, Top_Gunn! The Stella was somewhat of a copy of the Storch; at least to the extent that the Japanese had a Storch that was used as a comparison when the Ki-76 was being developed. I figured both stang151 and Elmshoot had read up on the Storch; and the MS.500 was mentioned in the Storch Wikipedia entry. At the bottom of the Storch page, is a section of "comparable aircraft", and the Stella is listed there. So, both of them were very close to the correct answer when they were reading up on the Storch. But, the Storch was much closer to being the correct answer, as it was the aircraft used as a measurement. Now how many Army aircraft have operated off a carrier as a routine thing? For that matter, how many armies had their own carrier? Okay, Top_Gunn; you have the lead. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This Army aircraft was not a direct copy, but was in most respects very similar to an aircraft operated by an ally.



2. Certainly, it was directly compared to the other aircraft during testing and acceptance.



3. And it looked much like the other aircraft.



4. And it flew much the same.



5. Almost all nation’s armies had aircraft that were quite similar in their flight characteristics.



6. And used for much the same purposes.



7. Our subject aircraft was used in a variety of roles, as were most similar aircraft.



8. Its payload was small; only a few hundred pounds.



9. Crew of two.



10. Single radial engine.



11. Some variants were equipped with arrestor hooks.



12. Armament was light; a single .303 machine gun.



13. It used Fowler flaps.



14. It first flew in 1941.



15. And was put in production in late 1942.



16. Its service record was excellent in all its roles.



17. It was very slow, however.



18. But that wasn’t considered to be a handicap in its intended roles.



19. It sometimes carried depth charges.



20. And operated from a carrier.



21. It served until the end of the war.



22. And was later flown by at least one foreign country.



23. It was a high wing monoplane.



24. Maximum speed was a bit over 100 mph.

















Answer: The Kokusai Ki-76





The Kokusai Ki-76, or Liaison Aircraft Type 3 (in Japanese: 三式指揮連絡機), was a Japanese high-wing monoplane artillery spotter and liaison aircraft that served in World War II. The Allied reporting name was "Stella".

Design and development



In 1940, the Imperial Japanese Army Air Force ordered the Nippon Kokusai Koku Kogyo to produce an artillery spotting and liaison aircraft. The resulting Ki-76 was inspired by, and similar to, the German Fieseler Fi 156 "Storch", although not a direct copy. Like the Storch, it was a high-winged monoplane with a fixed tailwheel undercarriage. However, rather than the slotted flaps used by the German aircraft, the Ki-76 used Fowler flaps, while it was powered by Hitachi Ha-42 radial engine rather than the Argus As 10 inline engine of the Storch.



First flying in May 1941, the Ki-76 proved successful when evaluated against an example of the Fi-156, and was ordered into production as the Army Type 3 Command Liaison Plane in November 1942.

Operational history



Ki-76 on the Akitsu Maru



The Ki-76 remained in service as an artillery spotter and liaison aircraft until the end of the war. Ki-76s were also used as anti-submarine aircraft, operating from the Japanese Army's escort carrier, the Akitsu Maru, being fitted with an arrestor hook and carrying two 60 kg (132 lb) depth charges.

Operators



Japan



Imperial Japanese Army Air Force

Thailand



Royal Thai Air Force

Specifications (Ki-76)



Data from Encyclopedia of Military Aircraft, Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War



General characteristics



Crew: 2



Length: 9.65 m (31 ft 8 in)



Wingspan: 15 m (49 ft 3 in)



Height: 2.9 m (9 ft 6 in)



Wing area: 29.4 m2 (316 sq ft)



Empty weight: 1,110 kg (2,447 lb)



Gross weight: 1,530 kg (3,373 lb)



Max takeoff weight: 1,623 kg (3,578 lb)



Powerplant: 1 ◊ Hitachi Ha42 9-cylinder air-cooled radial piston engine, 231 kW (310 hp)



Propellers: 2-bladed fixed-pitch propeller



Performance



Maximum speed: 178 km/h (111 mph, 96 kn) at sea level



Range: 750 km (470 mi, 400 nmi)



Service ceiling: 5,630 m (18,470 ft)



Armament



Guns: 1◊ 7.7 mm (0.303 in) machine gun in rear cockpit



Bombs: 2◊ 60 kg (132 lb) depth charges (some variants)

Last edited by Ernie P.; 05-25-2020 at 06:35 AM.
Old 05-25-2020, 06:56 AM
  #18547  
Top_Gunn
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Granger, IN
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hydro deserves more of the credit than I do, because his Storch guess was the key. After that, it was just a matter of looking for a radial-engine Storch-like plane from Japan or Italy, and there it was. If he's willing, I'll let him do the next quiz.

Anybody know whether the Stella was as mechanically complicated and as hard to fly as the Storch? I think of the Storch as the symbol of what was wrong with German design at the time. All that effort and expense to make an airplane that had great performance figures but was complicated and hard to repair and needed a skilled pilot. Better to buy Cubs, paint them green, and have guys who had minimal pilot training fly them. And they could be repaired by pretty much any American farm boy. The Storch was great engineering but absurd economics.

Last edited by Top_Gunn; 05-25-2020 at 07:05 AM.
Old 05-25-2020, 02:19 PM
  #18548  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 8,279
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 21 Posts
Default

Al, you got it, I just pointed you in the right direction. Gee, that sounds very similar to what I do at work, point people in the right direction
I can do the next one if you would rather that be the case, I'll give you the choice on this one. Just Let me know which way we're going on this one.
Old 05-25-2020, 03:34 PM
  #18549  
Ernie P.
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Guys; I'll leave it up to you as to who is up. If it helps, I figured the Storch would be a very early guess; but the jump to the Stella would take longer. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 05-25-2020, 04:17 PM
  #18550  
Top_Gunn
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Granger, IN
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Al, you got it, I just pointed you in the right direction. Gee, that sounds very similar to what I do at work, point people in the right direction
I can do the next one if you would rather that be the case, I'll give you the choice on this one. Just Let me know which way we're going on this one.
Go ahead and take it, Hydro. I'd never have guessed the Storch on the clues that early, and from there to the Stella didn't take any knowledge on my part, just the internet. Besides, I did a quiz pretty recently. I've got what I think is an interesting subject for the next time I'm up, but no good clues yet: just clues that are either too easy or not helpful at all.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

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