Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

HJ; it was a bit long, but well worth viewing. Thanks for pointing it out. The main thing I came away with was the remarkably close performance of the German and U.S. Navy planes. And, of course, the maneuverability of the F4U. Strange I have never come across that info before. Thanks; Ernie P.

Hydro Junkie

It is long, very techie but, as you said, worth it.
That was where I got some of my clues for my quiz. I was, needless to say, very surprised that a large plane, like the Corsair, could outperform the best the Axis had but never got the chance to take on the German Luftwaffe. It would have been an interesting contest, 100 or so 109s and 190s against the B-17s escorted by Corsairs. You really want to make it interesting, add some "C" models into the mix with their quad 20mm cannon. The Corsair's speed advantage alone would make it an interesting contest

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

But don't let us forget: The Hellcat and Corsair didn't have the range to do escort, make it to the target areas and back, and have fuel for combat. That too was pointed out in the video. Thanks; Ernie P.

Hydro Junkie

But, at the same time, neither did the Mustang. For the Mustang,or any other fighter for that matter, to go to Berlin and back escorting a bombing raid, it had to use drop tanks, something the Corsair could also be equipped with. Just for sake of argument, a flight from the Cranfield Airport, a few miles northeast of Bletchley Park, to the rail yards of Friedrichstadt, just west of Dresden Germany, is only 618.3 miles Not counting combat time, the Corsair only needed 232 miles of fuel to make it round trip, albeit with dry tanks at touchdown. I've found references to ranges of 1300 to 1500 miles with drop tanks so, while it is possible, it would be pushing it

JohnnyS

There's a really interesting video here:
The author tries to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the "armoured" (R*N) versus the "unarmoured" (USN) carriers. It really comes down to a complex argument including strategic capabilities, operational issues and many different requirements.

I suspect that the tremendous effort the USN put into effective damage control and mitigation had a lot to do with their eventual success in the Pacific.

JohnnyS

OK, let's do a new quiz, as no-one has taken up the baton.

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.

Hydro Junkie

I think the big difference is that the British, other than while chasing the Bismarck, were not using their carriers in a "blue water" environment. Most of their operations were within range of land based bombers, thus always under the threat of being hit. The Americans, on the other hand, were operating at range where planes, pilots, parts and supplies had to be taken along or done without. That said, by the time the Essex class was coming on line, Hellcats and Corsairs were also being deployed. This, along with the steadily declining quality of Japanese aircrews, meant the American carriers weren't in nearly the danger their British sisters were. Had the Germans or Italians attacked the Wasp during its ferry runs to Malta, it's deployed Wildcats may not have been able to prevent her from being hit by bombs and, with the proficiency Stuka pilots showed at hitting their targets, the Wasp may have never got out of the Med to meet her fate at the hands of a Japanese submarine off of the Solomon Islands a few weeks later

Hydro Junkie

Beaufort

JohnnyS

Not the Beaufort, no.

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.

Hydro Junkie

It had a lot to do with it, yes. But when you compare ship design, that had almost as much to do with it. When you look at what happened to the carriers that were sunk from the beginning of the war until the end of 1942, it tells a very interesting story:

• Glorious-sunk by gunfire from Scharnhorst & Gneisenau
• Courageous-hit by two torpedoes from U-29, sank in 20 minutes
• Ark Royal -hit by torpedo from U-81, sank the next morning due to flooding off Gibraltar
• Hermes-sunk by aircraft bombs from Kido Butai off Columbo Ceylon
• Shoho-sunk by thirteen aircraft bombs and seven torpedoes from Lexington and Yorktown
• Lexington-hit by two aircraft bombs and two torpedoes from Shokaku/Zuikaku, exploded later due to fuel fumes from a cracked avgas tank, was scuttled by five torpedoes from USS Phelps
• Akagi-hit by one aircraft bomb with two damaging near misses from Enterprise, scuttled by a torpedo each from Arashi, Hagikaze, Maikaze and Nowaki
• Kaga-hit by at least five aircraft bombs from Enterprise, scuttled by two torpedoes from Hagikaze
• Soryu-hit by three aircraft bombs from Yorktown, scuttled by torpedo(es) from Isokaze
• Hiryu-hit by four aircraft bombs from composite Enterprise/Yorktown strike, scuttled by a torpedo from Makigumo
• Yorktown-hit by aircraft bomb from Shokaku/Zuikaku at Coral Sea, had emergency repairs at Pearl Harbor, hit by three aircraft bombs and two torpedoes by Hiryu, sunk by two torpedoes from I-168 two days later north of Miday
• Wasp-hit by three torpedoes from I-19, scuttled by torpedoes from USS Lansdowne northeast of the Solomon Islands
• Hornet-hit by three aircraft bombs and two torpedos from Shokaku/Zuikaku, a third torpedo from Shokaku/Zuikau, nine torpedoes(many being duds) and 400 5" shells from USS Mustin and USS Anderson in a failed scuttling, finally sunk by four torpedoes from Japanese destroyers Makigumo and Akigumo off Santa Cruz Islands

What can be determined from the above, and other sources, is:

• the three oldest British carriers had no chance due to bad luck or failure to be aware of possible dangers. Glorious should have been able to escape and, had she had up patrol planes, she probably would have due to the warning she would have gotten
• Ark Royal sank due to sloppy crew performance. The crew left hatches and plates off/open that allowed water to flood the center of the ship. Had everything been closed up and a damage control team left on board, she would have made it to Gibraltar. The U-81's single torpedo shouldn't have been enough to sink her
• Shoho didn't stand a chance
• Lexington should have survived and made it back to port. Faulty/lack of ventilation let gas fumes spread throughout the ship, creating a bomb waiting to go off. This was due, more so than anything else, to the enclosed hanger design. Unlike the later Yorktown and Essex classes, there wasn't anyplace to vent the fumes to get them out of the ship, except the AA gun positions and flight deck
• Akagi and Hiryu both should have survived Midway. Sloppy weapon management and overconfidence doomed the Akagi while Hiryu didn't need to be hit at all. Had her commanders done what they should have, Hiryu would have been beyond the range of the planes on Enterprise and Hornet and safe from attack. That said, lack of firefighting equipment and training prevented the crews from effectively fighting the fires that should not have been fatal
• Yorktown's crew had done everything right. Doors and hatches closed, fuel system shut down and it showed. The three bomb hits did some damage but nothing that would be fatal. The two torpedoes that hit the port side disabled the ship's generator and caused a 26 degree list, disturbing but nothing fatal. The salvage team made one mistake, leaving too many doors open on June 5th. When the two torpedoes from the I-168 hit, they couldn't get to all of them and, like Ark Royal, she flooded enough to sink, Had I-168 not been in the area, Yorktown would have made it to Pearl Harbor
• Wasp had no chance. She was smaller and lighter than the other carriers in the Pacific. Only the Ranger was smaller and she was pulled out of combat before the end of the war. Due to the smaller size and displacement, the Wasp had no anti-torpedo protection, something that would doom her in the South Pacific. Unlike the larger carriers, the Wasp fuel storage areas and machinery spaces were exposed to the side of the ship. When the three torpedoes hit, power was lost and fuel ignited.
• Hornet showed the same toughness as Yorktown. After being hit by the initial attack, the crew was making headway into getting underway until the third torpedo hit, destroying most of the electrical repair work already completed. Unlike Yorktown, however, Hornet ran out of time. She was scuttled to prevent capture. Like Yorktown, Hornet would have made it to port, possibly under her own power.

Now, let's compare the Akagi and the USS Franklin:

• Both were hit with 1000lb bombs(Franklin took two 550lb, Akagi took a single 1000lb)
• Both had loaded strike planes in the hanger, Franklin had most of hers on deck
• Both had unsecured fuel systems for refueling aircraft

But what was different?
Franklin had a crew that had firefighting and DC training, Akagi had a small team and some officers with training.
Franklin had an open hanger bay allowing other ships to spray water into the hanger deck to help fight fires, Akagi had an enclosed hanger.
Franklin had the latest in DC and firefighting gear, Akagi didn't
Franklin made it home, Akagi didn't

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.
9. Other roles that variants of the aircraft performed included "radiation intelligence aircraft", ECM, and long range interceptor.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sir; you have an unanswered PM. Thanks; Ernie P.

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.
9. Other roles that variants of the aircraft performed included "radiation intelligence aircraft", ECM, and long range interceptor.
10. There was also a reconnaissance version and a chemical warfare version of this aircraft.
11. The two crew who died in the 1966 incident were each posthumously awarded the "Order of the Red Banner" for their heroic sacrifice.

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.
9. Other roles that variants of the aircraft performed included "radiation intelligence aircraft", ECM, and long range interceptor.
10. There was also a reconnaissance version and a chemical warfare version of this aircraft.
11. The two crew who died in the 1966 incident were each posthumously awarded the "Order of the Red Banner" for their heroic sacrifice.
12. Produced initially as a tactical bomber, it was misunderstood as in clue #1.
13. It had a large mid-mounted wing, swept at 45 degrees.

Guys, come on! I KNOW one of you must have figured it out! Let's have some guesses!

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Tupolev Tu-16?

JohnnyS

Not the Badger, no. The Tupolev T-16 was a "strategic bomber" while our subject airplane was initially designed as a "tactical bomber".

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.
9. Other roles that variants of the aircraft performed included "radiation intelligence aircraft", ECM, and long range interceptor.
10. There was also a reconnaissance version and a chemical warfare version of this aircraft.
11. The two crew who died in the 1966 incident were each posthumously awarded the "Order of the Red Banner" for their heroic sacrifice.
12. Produced initially as a tactical bomber, it was misunderstood as in clue #1.
13. It had a large mid-mounted wing, swept at 45 degrees.
14. A total of 183 were built as a specific version to be a "dedicated tactical reconnaissance" aircraft.
15. Another 183 were built as a dual control trainer, with a second cockpit in the nose for student pilots.

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.
9. Other roles that variants of the aircraft performed included "radiation intelligence aircraft", ECM, and long range interceptor.
10. There was also a reconnaissance version and a chemical warfare version of this aircraft.
11. The two crew who died in the 1966 incident were each posthumously awarded the "Order of the Red Banner" for their heroic sacrifice.
12. Produced initially as a tactical bomber, it was misunderstood as in clue #1.
13. It had a large mid-mounted wing, swept at 45 degrees.
14. A total of 183 were built as a specific version to be a "dedicated tactical reconnaissance" aircraft.
15. Another 183 were built as a dual control trainer, with a second cockpit in the nose for student pilots.
16. Service ceiling was just short of 55,000 feet.
17. Empty weight was just short of 11 tons. Max takeoff weight was about double that.

Let's have some more guesses!

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.
9. Other roles that variants of the aircraft performed included "radiation intelligence aircraft", ECM, and long range interceptor.
10. There was also a reconnaissance version and a chemical warfare version of this aircraft.
11. The two crew who died in the 1966 incident were each posthumously awarded the "Order of the Red Banner" for their heroic sacrifice.
12. Produced initially as a tactical bomber, it was misunderstood as in clue #1.
13. It had a large mid-mounted wing, swept at 45 degrees.
14. A total of 183 were built as a specific version to be a "dedicated tactical reconnaissance" aircraft.
15. Another 183 were built as a dual control trainer, with a second cockpit in the nose for student pilots.
16. Service ceiling was just short of 55,000 feet.
17. Empty weight was just short of 11 tons. Max takeoff weight was about double that.
18. First entered service in 1960.
19. It had bicycle-type main landing gear supplemented by outrigger wheels in fairings near the wingtips.

JohnnyS

1. When first seen by the potential opposition, it was thought to be a fighter. Later on, it was realized that it should have been classified as a bomber. In truth, it was deployed in many different roles during its service life.
2. Crew of 2.
3. Two engines.
4. Over 1,000 built including all variants.
5. It was primarily subsonic, but could exceed Mach 1 at high altitude.
6. In service for 32 years.
7. Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings.
8. The aircraft is known for an incident in 1966 where the crew behaved heroically.
9. Other roles that variants of the aircraft performed included "radiation intelligence aircraft", ECM, and long range interceptor.
10. There was also a reconnaissance version and a chemical warfare version of this aircraft.
11. The two crew who died in the 1966 incident were each posthumously awarded the "Order of the Red Banner" for their heroic sacrifice.
12. Produced initially as a tactical bomber, it was misunderstood as in clue #1.
13. It had a large mid-mounted wing, swept at 45 degrees.
14. A total of 183 were built as a specific version to be a "dedicated tactical reconnaissance" aircraft.
15. Another 183 were built as a dual control trainer, with a second cockpit in the nose for student pilots.
16. Service ceiling was just short of 55,000 feet.
17. Empty weight was just short of 11 tons. Max takeoff weight was about double that.
18. First entered service in 1960.
19. It had bicycle-type main landing gear supplemented by outrigger wheels in fairings near the wingtips.
20. One aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era was the B-66 Destroyer although the B-66 was quite a bit slower.

JohnnyS

OK, friends. That's the last clue I will give. I know at least one person has solved it: If no-one wants to take up the torch I will leave it here.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Johnny; you have a PM. Thanks; Ernie P.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

How about the Yak 28? An interesting plane, it served for quite a while. Thanks; Ernie P.


Answer: Yakovlev Yak-28 (Brewer)



The Yakovlev Yak-28 (Russian: Яковлев Як-28) is a swept wing, turbojet-powered combat aircraft used by the Soviet Union. Produced initially as a tactical bomber, it was also manufactured in reconnaissance, electronic warfare, interceptor, and trainer versions, known by the NATO reporting names Brewer, Firebar, and Maestro respectively. Based on the Yak-129 prototype first flown on 5 March 1958, it began to enter service in 1960.



The Yak-28 was first seen by the West at the Tushino air show in 1961. Western analysts initially believed it to be a fighter rather than an attack aircraft—and a continuation of the Yak-25M—and it was designated "Flashlight". After its actual role was realized, the Yak-28 bomber series was redesignated "Brewer".



The Yak-28 had a large mid-mounted wing, swept at 45 degrees. The tailplane set halfway up the vertical fin (with cutouts to allow rudder movement). Slats were fitted on the leading edges and slotted flaps were mounted on the trailing edges of the wings. The two Tumansky R-11 turbojet engines, initially with 57 kN (12,795 lbf) thrust each, were mounted in pods, similar to the previous Yak-25. The wing-mounted engines and bicycle-type main landing gear (supplemented by outrigger wheels in fairings near the wingtips) were widely spaced, allowing most of the fuselage to be used for fuel and equipment. It was primarily subsonic, although Mach 1 could be exceeded at high altitude.



Total production of all Yak-28s was 1,180.



The aircraft is perhaps best known for the heroic actions of Captain Boris Kapustin and Lieutenant Yuri Yanov after the Yak-28 they were piloting suffered a catastrophic engine malfunction on 6 April 1966. They were ordered to divert to attempt a landing in Soviet zone of Germany, but lost control of the aircraft and strayed into the airspace of West Berlin. The crew managed to avoid a housing estate but crashed into Lake Stößensee without ejecting. Their bodies, along with the wreckage, were raised from the lake by Royal Navy divers (flown in from Portsmouth) and salvage specialists, who also retrieved important top secret material from the plane. This included the engines, which were taken to RAF Gatow to be inspected by RAF and American engineers. The bodies of the two pilots were returned to the USSR with full military honors from both Soviet and British armed service members, and they were both posthumously awarded the Order of the Red Banner. The first engine was recovered on 18 April 1966 and the second a week later; both engines were returned to the Soviets on 2 May 1966.[3]



The Yak-28P was withdrawn in the early 1980s, but trainer and other versions remained in service until after the fall of the Soviet Union, flying until at least 1992. The reconnaissance and ECM aircraft were eventually replaced by variants of the Sukhoi Su-24.

JohnnyS

And we have a winner! Ernie rarely misses and he hasn't missed this time. Well done, sir!

Please take it away Ernie, and thanks very much for solving this little quiz!