Hydro Junkie

I was thinking Stuka, Chipmunk and the Arado AR-196

Hydro Junkie

After looking around for a bit, I found something that should be fairly easy.
Once again, I'm looking for an aircraft:
1) This aircraft was developed by a well known manufacturer
2) This aircraft was used for a relatively short term when compared to others of the same type
3) This aircraft was a relatively simple design but used features pioneered by other manufacturers
Good Luck

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

Yep not many residences in the NW that have AC.
My wife had here God parents visit during "that week" and we all roasted on Whidbey Island.
Sparky

Hydro Junkie

I see no guesses, time for more clues.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1) This aircraft was developed by a well known manufacturer
2) This aircraft was used for a relatively short term when compared to others of the same type
3) This aircraft was a relatively simple design but used features pioneered by other manufacturers
4) This aircraft was based on the design of a previous "iconic" aircraft
5) This aircraft shared an issue with another "iconic" aircraft of the era, the engine the aircraft was designed around was never able to reach it's designed performance
6) Unlike the "iconic" aircraft from the previous clue, the subject aircraft was produced in sufficient quantity to equip several squadrons, one being very well known
7) Even though this aircraft was well liked by both ground and air crews, it was soon phased out in favor of another "iconic" aircraft
Good Luck

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

How about the Nieuport 28? Thanks; Ernie P.


Answer: The Nieuport 28



The Nieuport 28 C.1, a French biplane fighter aircraft flown during World War I, was built by Nieuport and designed by Gustave Delage. Owing its lineage to the successful line of sesquiplane fighters that included the Nieuport 17, the Nieuport 28 continued a similar design philosophy of a lightweight and highly maneuverable aircraft.



By the time the Nieuport 28 was available, the SPAD XIII had been chosen to equip the escadrilles de chasse of the Aιronautique Militaire for 1918, and this fighter was also the first choice for the projected American "pursuit" squadrons.[2] In the event, a shortage of SPADs led to Nieuport 28s being issued to four American squadrons between March and August 1918, becoming the first aircraft to see operational service with an American fighter squadron.



Nieuport 28s saw considerable post-war service: in particular 50 were "returned" to America, and as well as army and naval service these found civilian use, especially in Hollywood films.

Background and origins

By the middle of 1917, it was obvious that the Nieuport 17 and its immediate developments, such as the Nieuport 24bis, could provide only moderate performance gains over the standard model, so that they were unable to deal with the latest German fighters. In fact, the Nieuport 17 line was already being supplanted in French service by the SPAD S.VII,[3] as quickly as supplies of the Hispano-Suiza engine would allow. It had become increasingly apparent that the basic sesquiplane "v-strut" layout was approaching the limits of its development.[4]



The Nieuport 28 design advanced the concept of the lightly built, highly maneuverable rotary engined fighter typified by the Nieuport 17 to the more demanding conditions of the times. Bowers refers to it as being "an excellent example of the step-by-step evolution of a single basic design to its point of ultimate development and then its transition into a new model to meet changing requirements".

Prototypes

During 1917 the Nieuport company experimented with a number of new designs - including monoplanes, biplanes and triplanes. None of these types achieved production status and thus never received an official military designation, but the results of tests provided information later used in future Nieuport fighters, including the 28.



Several prototypes of the new fighter were constructed. Three different dihedral settings for the top wing were tried, including a completely flat wing, and one with marked dihedral that rested very close to the top of the front fuselage. Production aircraft featured an intermediate configuration, which involved a slight dihedral in the upper wing and taller cabane struts, providing room to accommodate a second machine gun, mounted under the wing's center section.



Additional prototypes based on the design of the N28 were built to test various features of the Nieuport 29, including its wooden monocoque fuselage, and alternate engine installations, such as the 300 hp Hispano-Suiza 8Fb, 170 hp Le Rhτne 9R, 275 hp Lorraine-Dietrich 8Bd, and 200 hp Clerget 11E.

Design

The Nieuport 28's design featured several improvements over the 27, including the adoption of a more powerful engine, a twin-machine gun armament, and a new wing structure.[10] For the first time, a production Nieuport fighter was fitted with conventional two-spar wings, top and bottom, in place of the sesquiplane "v-strut" layout of the earlier Nieuports.[11] Both wings featured elliptical wingtips, instead of the angular raked tips common to Nieuport's earlier works. The upper wing was built in two sections, joined together over the fuselage center-line. The leading edge of both wings was a plywood structure, which proved to be structurally weak in later service. Ailerons, which were controlled via an arrangement of torque tubes, were fitted to the lower wings only.[10]



In order to provide a more streamlined profile, the fuselage was longer and slimmer, so narrow that its twin Vickers machine guns were offset to port, one between the cabane struts and one just outboard of them. The design of the tail unit closely followed that of the Nieuport 27.

Operational history

By early 1918, when the first production examples of the Nieuport 28 became available, the SPAD S.XIII was already firmly established as the standard French fighter, and the Nieuport 28 was "surplus" from the French point of view.[14] On the other hand, the United States Army Air Service was desperately short of fighters to equip its projected "pursuit" (fighter) squadrons. Since the SPAD S.XIIIs the Americans actually wanted were initially unavailable due to engine shortages, the Nieuport was offered to the American Expeditionary Force (AEF) as an interim alternative.[15][16]



A total of 297 Nieuport 28s were purchased by the Americans (none of our sources make it clear if this refers only to the initial order or includes Nieuport 28A trainers accepted from the late 1918 contract). The 94th and 95th Aero Squadron received the initial allotments, starting in March 1918. In all, four AEF pursuit squadrons: the 27th, 94th, 95th and 147th Aero Squadrons, flew Nieuport 28s operationally for various periods between March and August 1918.



The factory delivered the Nieuport 28s to the Americans in mid-February 1918 without armament.[20] At the time, the AEF had no spare Vickers machine guns to supply to the squadrons, so that the first flights were unarmed training flights for pilots to familiarize themselves with the handling and performance of the new type. When deliveries of Vickers guns to the American squadrons finally started in mid-March, and until sufficient guns had been received for all of the fighters to be fully equipped, some aircraft were flown on patrol with only one machine gun fitted.[21][20]



On 14 April 1918, the second armed patrol of an AEF fighter unit resulted in two victories when Lieutenants Alan Winslow and Douglas Campbell (the first American-trained ace) of the 94th Aero Squadron each downed an enemy aircraft over their own airfield at Gengoult.[22][23] Several well-known World War I American fighter pilots, including the 26-victory ace, Captain Eddie Rickenbacker, began their operational careers on the Nieuport 28.[24] Quentin Roosevelt (the son of former U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt) was shot down and killed flying the type.[25]



The 94th and 95th had the task of dealing with the type's teething troubles.[18] Initially undercarriages failed on landing – this was corrected by using heavier bracing wire. The Nieuport 28's 160 hp Gnome 9N rotary engine and fuel system proved to be unreliable and prone to fires.[26] Field improvements to fuel lines, and increased familiarity of the American pilots (and their ground crews) with the requirements of monosoupape engines reduced these problems, but the definitive solution adopted was simply not completely filling the reserve fuel tank, a move which came at the expense of range. More seriously, a structural problem emerged – during a sharp pull out from a steep dive, the plywood leading edge of the top wing could break away, taking the fabric with it.[27] On the whole, although the pilots of the 94th and the 95th appreciated the maneuverability and good handling of the Nieuport, and were reasonably happy with its general performance, their confidence in the fighter's structural integrity was shaken.



The 27th and 147th Aero Squadrons arrived at the front three months later, starting combat operations on 2 June 1918.[30] In July 1918, the 94th and 95th Aero Squadrons received their first SPAD XIIIs and some of their surviving Nieuport 28s were then transferred to the 27th and 147th Aero Squadrons. By the end of August 1918, all four American squadrons were fully outfitted with SPAD XIIIs. The pilots of the 94th and 95th Aero Squadrons welcomed the SPADs, although the 27th and 147th Aero Squadrons were much less enthusiastic about the change. The Nieuport 28 certainly possessed superior maneuverability to its SPAD replacement.



Twelve of the Army Nieuports were transferred to the U.S. Navy to be flown from launching platforms mounted above the forward turrets of eight battleships, in the manner of the Sopwith Camel 2F.1s embarked at this time by the British Grand Fleet. In Royal Navy fashion, they were fitted with hydrovanes as a means of mitigating the dangers of "ditching" at the end of a mission, and flotation gear, inflated using compressed air, to facilitate salvage of the aircraft.[35]

Nieuport 28A

During late 1918, about the time that the type was withdrawn from front line use, the United States Army placed an order for an additional 600 improved Nieuport 28s, which were given the American designation 28A. Although these were mainly intended as advanced trainers, early problems with the SPAD S.XIII in American service meant that the possibility of re-introducing the Nieuport fighters into the operational squadrons was not discounted, and provision was made for the installation of twin M1917/M1918 Marlin guns, mounted side by side under the center section.



The Nieuport 28A was to feature an improved upper wing leading edge structure and a redesigned fuel system, correcting faults in the initial production batch. As the Nieuport company were preoccupied with later types, production was undertaken by Liorι et Olivier who had built 170 Nieuport 28As and parts for another 100 by the end of the war, when the remainder of the order was cancelled.



General characteristics

·

· Crew: 1

·

· Length: 6.5 m (21 ft 4 in)

·

· Wingspan: 8.16 m (26 ft 9 in)

·

· Height: 2.5 m (8 ft 2 in)

·

· Wing area: 15.8 m2 (170 sq ft)

·

· Empty weight: 475 kg (1,047 lb)

·

· Gross weight: 560 kg (1,235 lb)

·

· Powerplant: 1 Χ Gnome Monosoupape 9N 9-cylinder air-cooled rotary piston engine, 102 kW (137 hp)

·

· Propellers: 2-bladed fixed-pitch propeller



Performance

·

· Maximum speed: 198 km/h (123 mph, 107 kn) at 2,000 m (6,562 ft)

·

· Range: 349 km (217 mi, 188 nmi)

·

· Service ceiling: 5,300 m (17,400 ft)

·

· Time to altitude: 3,000 m (9,843 ft) in 11 minutes 30 seconds

·

· Wing loading: 37.9 kg/m2 (7.8 lb/sq ft)

·

· Power/mass: 0.15 kW/kg (0.091 hp/lb)



Armament

·

· Guns: 2 Χ .303 in Vickers machine guns

Hydro Junkie

Not the Nieuport 28, but I will give you a bonus pair of clues for the attempt.
I'm looking for an aircraft:
1) This aircraft was developed by a well known manufacturer
2) This aircraft was used for a relatively short term when compared to others of the same type
3) This aircraft was a relatively simple design but used features pioneered by other manufacturers
4) This aircraft was based on the design of a previous "iconic" aircraft
5) This aircraft shared an issue with another "iconic" aircraft of the era, the engine the aircraft was designed around was never able to reach it's designed performance
6) Unlike the "iconic" aircraft from the previous clue, the subject aircraft was produced in sufficient quantity to equip several squadrons, one being very well known
7) Even though this aircraft was well liked by both ground and air crews, it was soon phased out in favor of another "iconic" aircraft
8) This aircraft shared the same basic armaments as the "iconic" aircraft that replaced it
9) This aircraft was "outclassed" in every aspect, except range, by the aircraft from clues 7 and 8
Good Luck

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

F-11 Tigercat

Hydro Junkie

Now how did you get that?

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Now that's a very good question. I was surprised my guess of the Nieuport 28 was incorrect. Thanks; Ernie P.

Hydro Junkie

I figured the only clue that MIGHT have pointed to the answer was about the squadrons the plane was assigned to and even that could have gone to four or five different ones as well.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

That clue may be the one that made me think of the Nieuport 28 and the Hat In The Ring squadron. I'm not sure exactly what made me think of the Nieuport, but that may well be it. Now exactly why that might have led Elmshoot to the Tigercat is beyond me, though. Whatever, it was an inspired guess. Thanks; Ernie P.

Hydro Junkie

I know how it led to the Tiger. The Blue Angels, "a well known squadron", flew Tigers until they transitioned to Skyhawks in 1970 or so. Then again, the Thunderbirds flew the F-100 Super Sabre during the same time frame, later transitioning to F-4 Phantoms. At the same time, a Canadian officer, without authorization, started training instructor pilots in precision flying using the CT-114 Tutor trainer, eventually becoming the Snowbirds, the name given to the 431 Air Demonstration Squadron when it was officially activated in 1978. I know France has it's own demo squadron, as does at least one other country.

Hydro Junkie

Just to clarify things, Elmshoot, you do know you got the correct answer, don't you? If not, sorry for the confusion

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

I know the French have the Patrouille Acrobatique de France (although I seem to recall another, shorter, name used for them), and the Brits have the Red arrows. I think there is/was a Belgian team as well. I saw the French and British teams, together with the Blue Angels, at an American RAF base in England, back in the early 1970s. It was quite a show. Thanks; Ernie P.

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

Nope, I had no idea I got it right. I just thought the discussion was going on about how I deciphered the F-11. But the Blue's were worth a shot.
Sparky

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

I might suggest that you would get a LOT more interest if you moved this quiz over to RC Scale builder .com.
It costs $20 a year to be a subscriber but a 6 pack of beer is over $10 now.
I know the website host pretty well and he would love to have such knowledgeable people as you guys over there.
Sparky

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

FYI, I'm running this quiz in parallel over on RCSB.com
https://www.rcscalebuilder.com/forum...448&PN=1&TPN=1

1. This plane was first flown shortly before the war it flew in.
2. Crew was more than One.
3. More than 500 built
4. Apparently never used in its designed role because it was under powered.

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

My quiz over on RCSB was solved on the first guess with the first 4 clues! Come on over and join a more active crowd. If it doesn't work out over there Ill be back.

Sparky

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Not interested. I don't have a need to pay for something and then see ads.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sorry, Sparky; but I won't be following you. At least not right away. None of you are captives here on RCUniverse, and you are all free to do as you like, of course. But, for more than ten years, and more than 926,000 views, RCUniverse has given us a home for this thread; and I for one appreciate that courtesy. I simply wouldn't feel right in turning away from the people who have hosted us for those many years.

If all, or even most, of you move away, I will miss you and it will probably be the end of the biggest continuous thread ever seen here; or probably anywhere else, for that matter. But for now, I will continue here. As long as we have a following large enough to keep things moving along, I will continue. If it ends, so be it. But it won't be because I abandoned the friends I have made here. I have learned from you all and I hope all of you have learned something from me. Thanks for being my friends; Ernie P.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Very well said, Ernie. There doesn't seem to be any advantage in having the same quiz running on two sites. Now that Sparky has made the RCSB people aware of the quiz here, maybe some of them will join us here, which would give us more participation and wouldn't seem to be any sort of hardship for them.

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

Yes you pay for the web site....
It is for modelers who build and fly fantastic scale models....sometimes museum pieces. It's not just for airplane junkies. I doubt you have ever looked at the site since it doesn't have advertisements that pop up at random points or need to be navigated through.
I have no allegiance to keeping a thread alive for X number of years or pages it's just vapor anyway.
You can log on and see how things are going, get a basic membership, you get several posts before you must start to pay.
Sparky

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

I have been lurking over there since June 2010 there was just not enough different to make it worth it to me to pay to join so I could post. I have membership in 4 or 5 other forums and none of them charge me.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sparky; you correctly answered the last question and you are up. From your statements, I gather you will not be posting a question here or taking the lead on the next round. Is that correct? Thanks; Ernie P.

Hydro Junkie

I won't be going over their either. I'm already a member of two forums and don't see the benefit of going into a third, especially one that, unless I'm wrong, is basically for those that build scale aircraft. I build scale hydroplanes, but not aircraft so, for me anyway, there wouldn't be enough of a benefit to have a membership