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 10-14-2021, 01:34 PM
  #20026  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,606
Likes: 0
Received 92 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

You should know I'm in by now. The problem is we would probably need at least a dozen active participants to make the thread viable
Old 10-14-2021, 06:53 PM
  #20027  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
You should know I'm in by now. The problem is we would probably need at least a dozen active participants to make the thread viable

Yeah, a dozen would be nice. I'd be willing to go ahead with ten. But we are now three. And all of us are among the small handful I referenced before. Thanks; Ernie P.




PLEASE VOTE

WANT TO CONTINUE AND WILL PARTICIPATE:
Ernie P
FlyerInOKC
Hydro Junkie
Old 10-15-2021, 09:22 AM
  #20028  
Smiley Jack
My Feedback: (27)
 
Smiley Jack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 28
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default knowledge quiz

I go to this first thing every am I really enjoy the quiz some times I get the right airplane I do not post questions do not time I do hope the quiz keeps going Smiley Jack
Old 10-15-2021, 01:23 PM
  #20029  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 780
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'd like to see it continue, but my current work commitments make it very difficult to promise to contribute consistently.
Old 10-16-2021, 03:09 AM
  #20030  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Smiley Jack View Post
I go to this first thing every am I really enjoy the quiz some times I get the right airplane I do not post questions do not time I do hope the quiz keeps going Smiley Jack
Sir; noted. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 10-16-2021, 03:10 AM
  #20031  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnnyS View Post
I'd like to see it continue, but my current work commitments make it very difficult to promise to contribute consistently.
Johnny; noted. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 10-17-2021, 05:15 PM
  #20032  
Top_Gunn
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Granger, IN
Posts: 2,241
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Well, if people keep posting quizzes I'll try to answer some from time to time. But it's not something I'd like to do very often. For one thing, I'm about out of quiz topics. I know you can simply pick a reasonably obscure (or obscurable, if that's a word) airplane and use that, but I find it more fun if it's something I already know about and think would be a good topic.
Old 10-17-2021, 07:54 PM
  #20033  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Top_Gunn View Post
Well, if people keep posting quizzes I'll try to answer some from time to time. But it's not something I'd like to do very often. For one thing, I'm about out of quiz topics. I know you can simply pick a reasonably obscure (or obscurable, if that's a word) airplane and use that, but I find it more fun if it's something I already know about and think would be a good topic.
Thanks, Al. If we had a few more people willing to participate, once in a while would be enough. Thanks; Ernie P.




PLEASE VOTE

WANT TO CONTINUE AND WILL PARTICIPATE:
Ernie P
FlyerInOKC
Hydro Junkie
Al Gunn
Old 10-18-2021, 06:41 PM
  #20034  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ernie P. View Post
Thanks, Al. If we had a few more people willing to participate, once in a while would be enough. Thanks; Ernie P.




PLEASE VOTE

WANT TO CONTINUE AND WILL PARTICIPATE:
Ernie P
FlyerInOKC
Hydro Junkie
Al Gunn
Guys; in five days of voting, we don't have enough people willing to participate and voting to continue the quiz to make me use all the fingers on one hand. I see no practical way forward. Obviously, I can't declare the thread dead, especially if some one asks a question and some one else responds, but I guess I'm done unless something miraculous happens.

It's been fun and I enjoyed it. Thanks to you all and the very best to all of you. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 10-18-2021, 07:02 PM
  #20035  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,606
Likes: 0
Received 92 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

Unfortunately, I have to agree. With that said, I would like to ask a favor or those that have been participants in the quiz:
Keep in touch here in the thread. There are some that I never see posting anywhere else and would request that they drop in from time to time and let the rest of us know how they are doing. Sorry if that sounds a bit "sentimental" as it's not meant that way. This had just been one of the few threads I could go to in the aircraft forum where I didn't have to deal with unneeded drama and/or squabbling and, for that, I thank you all.
Old 10-18-2021, 07:27 PM
  #20036  
FlyerInOKC
My Feedback: (6)
 
FlyerInOKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 13,074
Received 112 Likes on 106 Posts
Default

Ernie, I have an idea, what do you say we go on a 30 day or so hiatus and then we will give it another go? Hydro you pipe in too along with anyone else who thinks they might be willing to participate. I will remind all I got the last one so I would post the next quiz. Thoughts?

Mike
Old 10-18-2021, 07:45 PM
  #20037  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,606
Likes: 0
Received 92 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

Two words:
I'M GAME
Old 10-19-2021, 06:09 AM
  #20038  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FlyerInOKC View Post
Ernie, I have an idea, what do you say we go on a 30 day or so hiatus and then we will give it another go? Hydro you pipe in too along with anyone else who thinks they might be willing to participate. I will remind all I got the last one so I would post the next quiz. Thoughts?

Mike
Mike; I'd certainly be willing to try it. Go ahead whenever you're ready and I'll try to solve it. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 10-19-2021, 06:17 AM
  #20039  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Unfortunately, I have to agree. With that said, I would like to ask a favor or those that have been participants in the quiz:
Keep in touch here in the thread. There are some that I never see posting anywhere else and would request that they drop in from time to time and let the rest of us know how they are doing. Sorry if that sounds a bit "sentimental" as it's not meant that way. This had just been one of the few threads I could go to in the aircraft forum where I didn't have to deal with unneeded drama and/or squabbling and, for that, I thank you all.
HJ; I, for one, would hate to lose contact with the friends I have made through this forum. Good idea. And, as a thought, I want to post a photo I found a few years back. I tried to turn this photo into a question, but finally decided it would be unfair to ask a question with so few available clues and no way for participants to research it. But it makes for an interesting example of what early pioneers of aerial combat were willing to try. Thanks; Ernie P.


The early pioneers tried a lot of interesting things, but this just looks insane. Ernie P.
Old 10-19-2021, 07:28 AM
  #20040  
FlyerInOKC
My Feedback: (6)
 
FlyerInOKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 13,074
Received 112 Likes on 106 Posts
Default

Wow! 10 Mausers firing at once, the only limitation was the range on what looks to be a 9mm bore.

Ernie, let me know when you want to start back up after the hiatus.

Mike
Old 10-19-2021, 09:15 AM
  #20041  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FlyerInOKC View Post
Wow! 10 Mausers firing at once, the only limitation was the range on what looks to be a 9mm bore.

Ernie, let me know when you want to start back up after the hiatus.

Mike
Mike; the Mauser pistol was not a 9mm. although many of them were (much) later re-bored to accept the 9mm Parabellum cartridge. The Mauser originally was chambered for the 7.63x25mm Mauser cartridge; that is, it's a .30 caliber. The cartridge was the fastest velocity (around 1,450 FPS) pistol round in it's day; right up until the advent of the .357 Magnum round. Thanks; Ernie P.



The 7.63×25mm Mauser (.30 Mauser Automatic) round was the original cartridge for the Mauser C96 service pistol. This cartridge headspaces on the shoulder of the case.[1] It later served as the basis for the 7.62mm Tokarev cartridge commonly used in Soviet and Eastern Bloc weapons.This cartridge was based on the 7.65mm Borchardt of 1893, the most successful semi-automatic pistol cartridge in production at the time, due to its use in the Borchardt C-93 pistol. The 7.63mm Mauser is sometimes confused with the later 7.65mm Parabellum (.30 Parabellum), also a bottlenecked pistol cartridge used in the Luger Parabellum. It has been manufactured from the 1890s until the present by various ammunition manufacturers.


Firearms chambered for the 7.63mm Mauser cartridge include the pistol for which it was designed, the Mauser C96 in all variants and copies, the Astra Model 900 and variants, the Schwarzlose Model 1898, the 1911-pattern Star models A and M,[2] and a handful of pre-World War II submachine guns such as the Swiss Bergmann M/20 exported to China and Japan[3] and SIG's unique MKMO.


Several Soviet pistol and submachine gun developments of the late 1920s were designed to use the 7.63mm Mauser cartridge. The Mauser cartridge thus became the basis for the 7.62mm Tokarev as officially adopted by the Soviet Union. Although the case dimensions of the two cartridges are nearly identical, the 7.62mm Tokarev has a stronger powder charge and is generally not suited for use in Mauser C96 pistols or other firearms chambered for 7.63mm Mauser. However, the slightly less powerful 7.63mm Mauser could be used safely in firearms chambered for the more powerful 7.62mm Tokarev. This became important later during World War II on the Eastern Front when the Germans began using captured 7.62×25mm weapons, notably the PPSh-41 and PPS, and fed them with 7.63mm Mauser rounds.[4] During the Finnish-Soviet Winter War and World War II, the cartridge was issued by Finnish and German forces for use in captured Soviet submachine guns, due to its inherent substitutability for the Soviet 7.62×25mm round. According to Finnish military archives, the Finnish Army ordered one million rounds of 7.63mm Mauser from FN for this purpose.[5]


Contemporary usage[edit]


Some 7.63mm Mauser ammunition is still manufactured by Fiocchi, Sellier & Bellot, and Prvi Partizan. Reloadable boxer-primed cartridge cases can be formed from 9mm Winchester Magnum by simply resizing and trimming. Alternately, they can be formed from 5.56mm NATO with the additional step of inside neck-reaming. These cases bulge slightly on firing, and proper Mauser stripper clips are squeezed in a vise in order to secure an adequate grip on the smaller rims. For the Mauser, the use of .311" or .312" bullets produce the best accuracy - the Hornady 85 grain .311" XTP being a particularly good choice, but Tokarev TT-33 and Czech CZ-52 pistols have tighter barrels and chambers and function better with .310" bullets of the sort intended for the 7.65mm Luger and .30 Carbine rounds.


Old 11-14-2021, 09:21 AM
  #20042  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

All;

I keep thinking about a question I never asked; primarily because it was, essentially, unanswerable. The question would have been centered around an advanced training class for pilots who were to fly the (then) new P-38 in combat. The class was, if I remember correctly, flying the P-38, familiarizing themselves with the plane before heading to Europe, in late 1941 or early 1942. The class was conducted in California, at a USAAF training base. The key point is that a very high number of pilots in the class were lost to fatal crashes in which the P-38 entered an uncontrollable dive, from which the plane could not recover. The cause was eventually traced to a bolt, fixed nut arrangement which was used to limit the maximum deflection (throw) of the elevator. It turned out the adjustable bolts were vibrating loose, allowing the elevator to deflect too far when entering the dive. Once in the dive, the down elevator controls simply couldn't be corrected because of aerodynamic forces and the plane would simply continue in the irreversible dive, into the ground. A few pilots survived by bailing out, but many (nearly half I believe) were lost. The problem was corrected by adding a locking nut to the bolt/fixed nut arrangement.

Why didn't I ask the question? Because the only reference I ever found to the problem was in a single book I was reading, a section referring to the remembrances of one of the pilots in the class. The subject of the book was the high loss rate of American pilots in training classes conducted early in WWII, or in the months leading up to our participation in WWII. I simply couldn't find another reference to the incidents. Unless you had read that particular book, you wouldn't be able to find the answer. It might have made a very valuable and interesting question, but how could anyone find the answer? Over time, I tried to research the issue, but couldn't find anything to confirm it. And, eventually, I lost track of the book itself. So, I never asked the question.

Have any of you ever come across anything about this specific problem with the early P-38's? Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 11-14-2021, 11:00 AM
  #20043  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 780
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Wasn't this the compressibility problem?

"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning#High-speed_compressibility_problems"
Old 11-14-2021, 11:19 AM
  #20044  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnnyS View Post
Wasn't this the compressibility problem?

"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning#High-speed_compressibility_problems"
JohnnyS; no. This was not the same as the "compressibility" problem. There was a bolt stop arrangement to prevent the elevator from being "over controlled" and going to far in a downward (dive) direction. Once in the "too far" downward position, it was possible for the elevator to be "locked" by aerodynamic pressures as the speed built up, so the bolt stop was used to keep the elevator from going too far in the downward position. But, vibration would cause the bolt to move against the fixed nut stop and the elevator could then be moved too far in the downward position. A simple addition of a "locking nut" fixed the problem. But before they discovered the problem, several crashes resulted in the loss of nearly half the class of pilots. It has been estimated that the losses in training of USAAF pilots during the early war period exceeded the losses in combat. What a terrible cost to the US. This issue was only one of the contributing factors to that overall number. Apparently, increasing the number of USAAF pilots and crewmembers a hundred fold in a short period of time wasn't an easy task. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 11-14-2021, 09:43 PM
  #20045  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,606
Likes: 0
Received 92 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

I remember reading somewhere that Charles Lindbergh had to teach EXPERIENCED pilots how to fly the P-38 in a way that would get the maximum range and performance from the aircraft. Since Lindbergh was a USAAF officer, that's something that is plausible but I've never found any confirming information about it
Old 11-15-2021, 04:30 AM
  #20046  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
I remember reading somewhere that Charles Lindbergh had to teach EXPERIENCED pilots how to fly the P-38 in a way that would get the maximum range and performance from the aircraft. Since Lindbergh was a USAAF officer, that's something that is plausible but I've never found any confirming information about it
HJ; my info is Lindbergh was NOT a USAAF officer, but simply a civilian adviser. There's plenty of info out there telling how Lindbergh taught the USAAF plots flying the P-38 how to get the best range out of the plane by using throttle settings. Lindbergh also showed the pilots how to use the plane to best advantage in combat. In fact, Lindbergh supposedly shot down at least one Japanese plane in combat, but was told not to do it again. According to the rumors, McGuire treated Lindbergh very badly, using him to run simple errands; but Lindbergh put up with it. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 11-15-2021, 04:50 AM
  #20047  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
I remember reading somewhere that Charles Lindbergh had to teach EXPERIENCED pilots how to fly the P-38 in a way that would get the maximum range and performance from the aircraft. Since Lindbergh was a USAAF officer, that's something that is plausible but I've never found any confirming information about it
Here you go, HJ. There's a lot of info confirming Lindbergh's role with the P-38, as well as his work with the F4U. Thanks; Ernie P.


While with the 475th, he took part in a number combat missions. On 28 July 1944, Lindbergh shot down a Mitsubishi Ki-51 "Sonia" flown by the veteran commander of the 73rd Independent Flying Chutai of the Imperial Japanese Army Captain Saburo Shimada. In an extended, twisting dogfight in which many of the participants ran out of ammunition, Shimada turned his aircraft directly toward Lindbergh, who was just approaching the combat area. Lindbergh fired in a defensive reaction brought on by Shimada's apparent head-on ramming attack. Hit by cannon and machine-gun fire, the "Sonia's" propeller visibly slowed, but Shimada held his course. Lindbergh pulled up at the last moment to avoid collision as the damaged "Sonia" went into a steep dive, hit the ocean, and sank. The unofficial kill was not entered in the 475th's war record. On 12 August 1944, Lindbergh left Hollandia to return to the United States.
Old 11-15-2021, 08:18 AM
  #20048  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,606
Likes: 0
Received 92 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

Actually, he was an active duty USAAF pilot prior to WWII. He was banned from reenlisting after the US entered the war due to his prewar anti-involvement activities
Old 11-15-2021, 09:37 AM
  #20049  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,645
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Actually, he was an active duty USAAF pilot prior to WWII. He was banned from reenlisting after the US entered the war due to his prewar anti-involvement activities
Okay, HJ; I misunderstood your original statement. I knew he was concerned the US would lose out to Germany in a war, more than anything else. Thanks; Ernie P.
Old 11-15-2021, 10:54 AM
  #20050  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,606
Likes: 0
Received 92 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

You weren't wrong, Ernie. If anyone was, it was me and my misinterpreting one of the posts I saw. It had him listed as an USAAC pilot and officer, I just didn't see where it said anywhere that it was between the wars and not during the second.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.