Aircraft Trivia Quiz

Me-323 and...... bigger is better??? hehe just a stab in the dark here!!

No, you would need to move on over a decade.

F104 zero/zero launches.

The F-104 is the correct A/C, but something specific happened to the Luftwaffe that involved the F-104, the incident in question cause the Luftwaffe to make a specific change in policy which stands to this day.

The incident in question did not involve the dubious safety record of the F-104 with the Luftwaffe, although it did involve an accident.

How about the F-104s were originally fitted with an ejection seat that did not function well at low altitude, which was their primary operational envelope. I would presume the policy was changed requiring a Zero/Zero type bang seat.

No, this incident has nothing to do with the high loss rate of the F-104 with the Luftwaffe, their tasking of the F-104, or its original downwards firing seats.

A similar accident happened with some T-38's, although the cause was not the same.

i dont know what the incident was, but im gonna guess that the directive put in place was for all pilots to spend time training with other airforces

Original fatigue calculations had not taken into account the high number of g-forces loading cycles that the German F-104 fleet was experiencing, and many airframes were returned for depot maintenance where their wings were replaced, while other aircraft were simply retired. Towards the end of Luftwaffe service, some aircraft were modified to carry a black box  which could give an indication of what might have caused the accident?  Just a guess...

I am going to give this to KitBuilder, as he got the aircraft in question.

I shouldn't have done the two-parter, my mistake. The incident was the loss of 4 German F-104's during practice for the types introduction to service display, it is thought that the lead pilot suffered from a loss of spatial awareness while in low cloud. A similar (although not the same) accident happened to the Thunderbirds in the "Diamond crash", where 4 T-38's were lost. Following the incident the Luftwaffe banned formation aerobatics from the service.

The T-38 had a nasty habit of the landing gear coming out when it was involved in high G forces when in a dog fight to train other forces in DAC.  It was replaced by the F-5 and the much better F-5E.

I've seen a well flown F-104 beat a poorly flown F-15 in AC so my guess the the Germans had a mod-kit installed on their jets by the mid-70s that solved the unwanted gear deployment.  The F-104 was a thorny aircraft in the landing or take off cycle. 

 If the Germans banned their jets from DAC in '76 to '82 that would have been news to the fighter pilots of Spang', Bitburg, and a half a dozen other bases. 

Anyway, the guess is wheel deployment in high G DAC. 

<i> A similar accident happened to the Thunderbirds in the "Diamond crash, where 4 T-38s were lost </i>

The preliminary reports on the T-38 crash was an manfunctioning stabulator on the lead aircraft caused the loop to be wide.  The other aircraft followed the lead aircraft into the deck.

Are you saying the Luftwaffe told their pilots not to follow others so closely in formation or the root cause of the accident was the lead pilots lack of awareness in his altitude?

Wow...  Ask a trivia question about an aircraft and you get every recall, service bulletin, kink, abnomalie (<--spelling), anything that can and has gone wrong with it. lol.  Very interesting though, you can learn something new everyday.

Gunner59

<i> A similar accident happened to the Thunderbirds in the "Diamond crash, where 4 T-38s were lost </i>

The preliminary reports on the T-38 crash was an manfunctioning stabulator on the lead aircraft caused the loop to be wide.  The other aircraft followed the lead aircraft into the deck.

Are you saying the Luftwaffe told their pilots not to follow others so closely in formation or the root cause of the accident was the lead pilots lack of awareness in his altitude?

 

I forgot to mention the policy change (Homer Duuuuh), Luftwaffe formation aerobatic teams were banned immediatley after the crash, & still remain banned.

& yes, it would seem that the lead's loss of awareness cost all four aircraft, as the other three followed their lead.

I'm in my computer mode and am requesting clarification of the answer.

Please ignore the prior Luftwaffe side note. 

Am I to understand the lead T-38 of the Thunderbirds crashed and the blame was switched by the USAF to pilot error rather than the initial (and fairly subsequent) blame being placed on incorrect ground crew maintenance on the rear stabulator?

This graceful, if dumpy, British machine first flew in 1947 and was displayed at Farnborough where the announcer was so taken by it, that he not only described its display routine, but its take off from Farnborough's runway, too.

This description was pure fiction as the aircraft in question didn't and couldn't possibly have taken off as described.

Name her.

D.H 106 Comet? It 1947 it was a prototype?

Gunner59

Am I to understand the lead T-38 of the Thunderbirds crashed and the blame was switched by the USAF to pilot error rather than the initial (and fairly subsequent) blame being placed on incorrect ground crew maintenance on the rear stabulator?

I am not expressing any sort of opinion on what did or did not cause the "Diamon Crash", only stating that the circumstances of both crashes were similar in that the whole team followed their lead to there demise.

Somebody make an executive decision as to the answer and lets get this moss ridden log rolling again!!!!

OK, executive decision, everybodys right, now somebody post another question.

If nobody minds... Kit Builder and take over if he returns...  Until then.  Named "fork-tailed devil" by the Luftwaffe and "two planes, one pilot" by the Japanese, this unique aircraft was used in a number of different roles including dive bombing, level bombing, ground strafing, photo recon missions, and extensively as a long-range escort fighter when equipped with drop tanks under its wings.

P-38 lightning?

Yes I know, that was easy.

lol its all good. needed an easy one to get the ball rolling (or log)

Worlds largest water bomber

Martin Mars?

While that is the largest operation propeller driven water bomber. there are 2 that are bigger

B747 & DC-10/MD-11 family

There is another that is classed as bigger (even though it has a slightly smaller wingspan than the mars)

Sorry about that. I had some family stuff to deal with.

The answer to my earlier question is, the Shorts SR/A1.

How about the Ilyushin IL-76TD?

Yup, IL-76 it is. it carries 11,000Gallons (42,000 Litres) of water or fire retardant. Its not used very often because its not very good in hilly country and apparently drops too much water. while this sounds silly. if your fighting fires in mountainous regions you cant have too much water or fire retardant ploughing down the hill or the whole area will collapse. 

Anyway enough of my rubbish, over to you congo