SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Aircraft Trivia Quiz

720031 views
7409 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Thursday, June 30, 2011 9:44 PM

a red canoe, the worlds first Airborne life presever....

  • Member since
    March, 2010
  • From: New Zealand
Posted by Scorpiomikey on Thursday, June 30, 2011 9:57 PM

Perfect, over to you jafa

"I am a leaf on the wind, watch how i soar"

Recite the litanies, fire up the Gellar field, a poo storm is coming Hmm 

My signature

Check out my blog here.

  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Friday, July 01, 2011 7:38 AM

ok here goes my first attempt so be a lil gentle

What am I?

I am an iconic symbol of air power, my prototype was built in a neutral country and  was powered by a powerplant manufactured by a past and future enemy, I saw active service in many theatres.

for bonus points what was the power plant and where was the prototype built.

Kia Kaha

Jafa

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, July 03, 2011 3:56 PM

I'm thinking 109 with the RR Kestrel, but as far as I know it wasn't built in a neutral country - although the final versions were made in Spain.........................

  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Sunday, July 03, 2011 8:37 PM

nope similar time frame and similar engine manufacturer but not what I am thinking of and this prototype was built in a neutral country.

  • Member since
    March, 2010
  • From: New Zealand
Posted by Scorpiomikey on Sunday, July 03, 2011 9:48 PM

Ok so this is a stab in the dark.

JU-52. Originally made for civillian use and flew with swissair.

Early models flew with the bristol pegasus engine (Alpha Romeo R.C range.)

Also flew with Armstrong Siddeley Leopard and Rolls-Royce Buzzard Engines in Canada.

"I am a leaf on the wind, watch how i soar"

Recite the litanies, fire up the Gellar field, a poo storm is coming Hmm 

My signature

Check out my blog here.

  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Sunday, July 03, 2011 11:46 PM

It's amazing the number of German aircraft that used British/american engines during the 30's it seems.

The JU 52 does not appear to meet the prototype part of the question.

How ever I am looking for a purpose built warplane, the prototype was built in a neutral country and powered with a engine from the afore mentioned past and future enemy.

To add a clue over 100 appear to have been built as carrier borne aircraft.

Kia Kaha

Jafa

 

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Monday, July 04, 2011 4:25 AM

Ju-87?

RR Kestrel / Sweden

  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Monday, July 04, 2011 2:51 PM

Yes Junkers JU87 prototype was built in Sweden power by Rolls Royce Kestrel engine. 120 built as a naval version for the aircraft carrier Graf Zepplin. tese had folding wings, arrestor hooks and additonal floation to keep them afloat for 3 days.

The Stuka is credited for the sinking of the most ships of any aircraft so if the carrier had been launched with Stukas (and BF109's) it could have been deadly for the supply convoy's

over to you Milairjunkie

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Monday, July 04, 2011 4:47 PM

Didn't know about the Swedish thing until I read a bit further....................

OK,

To my knowledge, only four production aircraft have ever featured the correct equipment to allow a specific operation to be carried out (if required) in a specific flight regime. Many aircraft have the same equipment, but can’t use it in the flight regime that the four in question can.

 

All these aircraft first flew between the late 60s & early 80s, two were delta & two were swing wing, two have retired & two are still operational. All production models of these aircraft used the same type of powerplant in the same configuration. One example of each of the two retired aircraft can be found in close proximity to each other.

 

The equipment in question is common in both military & civilian fields.

 

Name the equipment / feature & the four aircraft in question.

 

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 2:22 PM

Any takers?

More info?

  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 2:43 PM

More info would be good...

My first thought is the Dump and Burn, a number of Civilian and Military Aircraft can dump fuel, but I only know of one or two that can dump and then ignite it.

The F111 does, and I think one of the Soviets does.

 

Kia Kaha

Kiwi

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 2:57 PM

It's the two Delta planes that have retired & which examples of are now in close proximity.

Regimes (bands of speed): General, Subsonic, Supersonic & Hypersonic.

  • Member since
    March, 2010
  • From: New Zealand
Posted by Scorpiomikey on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:27 PM

Hmm, not sure how this works, but how about.

Saab 35.

Saab 37.

Tu-160

Panavia Tornado ADV.

All capable of mach 2+

All except the Tu-160 are capable of high speed aerobatics.

"I am a leaf on the wind, watch how i soar"

Recite the litanies, fire up the Gellar field, a poo storm is coming Hmm 

My signature

Check out my blog here.

  • Member since
    April, 2009
Posted by gmat on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:32 PM

My guess would be the Concorde and Tu-144 for the delta aircraft and the B-1B and TU-160 for the swing wing. The common feature might be the variable intake ramps for the engines during supersonic speeds. If so, the production B-1B has fixed intake ramps to improve its stealth characteristics. 

Examples of the Concorde and the TU-144 are at  the Auto & Technik Museum  at Sinsheim.

Best wishes,

Grant

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:42 PM

The Draken was earlier than any of the four in question, it doesn't have quite the same type of engine, nor does it have enough of them. It also isn't capable of carrying the correct equipment for the task

The Viggen is likewise short on engines & can't carry the equipment for the task, although the engine type is correct.

One of the other two is correct & it's got nothing to do with aerobatics, as aerobatics would cause a serious problem with the specific operation / task mentioned!  

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:47 PM

gmat

My guess would be the Concorde and Tu-144 for the delta aircraft and the B-1B and TU-160 for the swing wing. The common feature might be the variable intake ramps for the engines during supersonic speeds. If so, the production B-1B has fixed intake ramps to improve its stealth characteristics. 

Examples of the Concorde and the TU-144 are at  the Auto & Technik Museum  at Sinsheim.

Best wishes,

Grant

Grant - you have all the aircraft in question nailed!

The common feature isn't anything to do with the engines (all augmented turbofan's, in paired underwing nacelles), it's nothing that fancy at all & is used in both military & civilian fields?

  • Member since
    April, 2009
Posted by gmat on Thursday, July 07, 2011 1:49 AM

Millairejunkie,

Thanks for the reply.

Grant

 

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Saturday, July 09, 2011 3:43 PM

Anyone up for the equipment/feature/capability shared between these aircraft?

  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Saturday, July 09, 2011 5:18 PM

Cannards?

 

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, July 10, 2011 6:26 AM

Jafa

Canards?

 

Nope -this equipment if far simpler than that & can be found in all sorts of places, subsonic aircraft, some buses, larger boats, motor homes, caravan's, houses, shopping malls...................

All on the forum here will most likely see the equipment several times a day, every day.

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, July 10, 2011 9:16 AM

OK, this is coming up for a week now, so;

The Tu144, Tu-160, ,B-1 & Concorde all have toilets which are capable of being used is supersonic flight "Mach Khazi's";

Tu144;

File:Tupolev Tu-144D (num 77115) on the MAKS-2009 (16).jpg

Tu-160;

Concorde;

B-1B;

Still top secret?

 

Gmat got the aircraft correct, but the week is just about up?

  • Member since
    January, 2003
  • From: Washington, DC
Posted by TomZ2 on Sunday, July 10, 2011 10:57 AM

Oh My Gawd! [dinkywongo] [whatsacominago] [tootsie-frootsie] and [insert appropriate idiomatic colloquialism] I REMEMBER when this was on a list of ‘interesting engineering problems’ being published when I was in college !!!  The only other one I can recall was formulating a heat-proof paint for commercial SSTs.

Occasional factual, grammatical, or spelling variations are inherent to this thesis and should not be considered as defects, as they enhance the individuality and character of this document.

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, July 10, 2011 11:17 AM

................The "Mach Crap" club would seem to be somewhat more exclusive than the mile high club - I would love to have the chance to try it out, preferably on the Russian pan!

The Shuttle obviously has a toilet, but it's doesn't really count.

The Su-34 can have a potty like affair fitted, but I don't get it considering the A/C's range.

The XB-70 might have had a toilet had it gone any further?

I can't think of any other aircraft that would have the performance & space to allow a "Mach Khazi" to be fitted?

  • Member since
    August, 2009
  • From: Toledo Area OH
Posted by Sparrowhyperion on Sunday, July 10, 2011 12:19 PM

Toilets?

 

Milairjunkie

 

 Jafa:

 

Canards?

 

 

 

Nope -this equipment if far simpler than that & can be found in all sorts of places, subsonic aircraft, some buses, larger boats, motor homes, caravan's, houses, shopping malls...................

All on the forum here will most likely see the equipment several times a day, every day.

In the Hangar: 1/48 Hobby Boss F/A-18D RAAF Hornet,

On the Tarmac:  F4U-1D RNZAF Corsair 1/48 Scale.

  • Member since
    August, 2009
  • From: Toledo Area OH
Posted by Sparrowhyperion on Sunday, July 10, 2011 12:20 PM

I KNEW IT!

In the Hangar: 1/48 Hobby Boss F/A-18D RAAF Hornet,

On the Tarmac:  F4U-1D RNZAF Corsair 1/48 Scale.

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, July 10, 2011 12:27 PM

I needed it;

  • Member since
    April, 2011
  • From: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted by Jafa on Sunday, July 10, 2011 2:44 PM

well that was a "crappy" question....Big Smile

  • Member since
    April, 2005
  • From: Baton Rouge, LA
Posted by T_Terrific on Thursday, July 21, 2011 11:09 AM

Hi Guys

I thought you would never wear that last question out.

And since it has been a week or so, I guess I get to posit another fun question.

OK, this aircraft inadvertantly turned out to be the prototype for WWII's most famous heavy bomber.

Although it was produced without the "X" designation, it was generally unsuccesful, but it's major problem turned out to be a major asset for it's successor: It's revised power-to-weight ratio.

ONe unusual feature that was also tried for the tirst time, was the attempt to "pre-spin" the main landing gear tires, by having the manufacturer literally mold vanes into the tires sidewalls to catch the air and spin the tire.

This "innovation" nearly caused the plane to crash on landing.

So here is the question:

  1. What was this aircraft?
  2. What was the key factor in this aircraft's failure?
  3. For a bonus, what was the unanticipated negative effect of pre-spinning the huge tires?

Tom T Cowboy

Tom TCowboy

“Failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.”-Henry Ford

"Except in the fundamentals, think and let think"- J. Wesley

"I am impatient with stupidity, my people have learned to live without it"-Klaatu: "The Day the Earth Stood Still"

"All my men believe in God, they are ordered to"-Adolph Hitler

  • Member since
    April, 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Thursday, July 21, 2011 11:20 AM

Boeing B-20?

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS

FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.