Aircraft Trivia Quiz

 I was thinking that too, Tom, but in an earlier post Bill gave an added hint that it was not US built.

John 

T_Terrific wrote:

Hey Bill, I would guess the either the Curtiss II or III (the III simply being the retractible gear version of the II), which were both exported and used in China, both of which were based on the same airframe, that of the P-1B Hawk which first flew in 1926. Even if this is not the one you had in mind, I do believe it does qualify. For a reference see:  http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/hawk_china.htm Tom

T_Terrific wrote:

Hey Bill, I would guess the either the Curtiss II or III (the III simply being the retractible gear version of the II), which were both exported and used in China, both of which were based on the same airframe, that of the P-1B Hawk which first flew in 1926. Even if this is not the one you had in mind, I do believe it does qualify. For a reference see:  http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/hawk_china.htm Tom

 People are coming up with some interesting aircraft I hadn't thought of.  I checked the link you gave and the Hawks were all out of frontline service by 1938.  This plane saw combat after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the British, the Autralians, and the Dutch.   The original question did mention December 1941.

 Bill

espins1 wrote:

Very tough, yet very fascinating question!  It wouldn't be the Heinkel He-50 would it?  These flew with the Chinese Airforce starting in 1931 and were still in Service on the Eastern Front as late as 1944.

 Another one I hadn't thought of.  I was thinking of a plane that only saw combat in one theater, against Japan.

 Bill

Perhaps the Westland Wallace?  Many were rebuilt Wapitis, and it was the first airplane to fly above Mt. Everest.  Another nasty question would be who was next and in what, but I will put that one to rest by saying it was Robert L. Scott in a Republic P-43, as related in God is My Copilot.

John

The Vickers Vildebeast, first flown 1928, used by the RAF as a torpedo bomber against the Japanese post Pearl Harbour.  Also, the Hawk II/III was used against the Japs in their 1941/1942 invasion of Siam by the Thai airforce.

Hmm, the Potez 25, used by the French in Indo-China, and hence against the Japs, from 1926 to 1945?

osher wrote:

The Vickers Vildebeast, first flown 1928, used by the RAF as a torpedo bomber against the Japanese post Pearl Harbour.  Also, the Hawk II/III was used against the Japs in 1942 by the Thai airforce. Hmm, the Potez 25, used by the French in Indo-China, and hence against the Japs, from 1926 to 1945?

As atated in the original post, this aircfart first flew in 1926.  I find a lot of references to Ethiopian Potez's and their use in Indochina, but very little about their use in China.

I'll give a hint:  The maker of this aircraft was much better known for it's World War I aircraft than it is for it's World War II aircraft.  

rabbiteatsnake wrote:

U.S. and german a/c used both nitrous oxide and methenol water injection.  1. Wich is considered a power booster. and 2. what is the other mix used for.

Well here's another close guess.  This one didn't fly until 1927, but was used against Japan in 1942, and it also was rebuilt to a new standard T.IVA in 1936.

Fokker T.IV

http://avia.russian.ee/air/holland/fokker_t-4.html

John

jeaton01 wrote:

Well here's another close guess.  This one didn't fly until 1927, but was used against Japan in 1942, and it also was rebuilt to a new standard T.IVA in 1936. Fokker T.IV http://avia.russian.ee/air/holland/fokker_t-4.html John

 That's it .  The source I used said first flight was 1926.  http://www.dutch-aviation.nl/index5/Military/index5-1%20T4.html

I think the T.IV also is in the running for the ugliest plane of World War II.  You're the winner.

Bill 

I would say that compared to almost ANY French between the wars bomber the T.IV would be the most "stimulating" girl on the beach.  But alas, at any normal beach I fear you are correct! 

 Next question:

How did the version of the B-24 that DID NOT have deicing boots get rid of ice on its leading edges?

This was not an experimental system.  A famous aviation author would know the answer, if he were still with us.

However, Scott is on the right track.  I don't want to make this too obscure by misleading anyone.

There was a production type that had a system not using boots, but it was not electric.  Remember there were variants of the B-24 airframe that were not bombers.

John 

How do I say this.  I can't find the reference I need to qoute to provide the answer to my question.  I went from memory from a book by Ernest Gann, who relates flying the C-87 during the early war years in the North Atlantic, in both Fate is The Hunter and A Hostage to Fortune.  There are references to how poorly the Davis wing handled ice, but I can't find the reference to the wing de-ice system, which I clearly recall as being engine exhaust being ducted into the wing leading edges.  Perhaps this is a false memory?  I am chagrined, to say the least, and hope none here knows of a way to toss stones through the Internet!

I have to award the correct answer to someone to get the ball rolling again, and since Scott (espins1) was the first to mention thermal deicing he can ask the next question. 

Sorry, guys.

John

No worries John, happens to the best of us. 

Sorry I'm slow to respond, I'm down in Las Vegas this week teaching.  I told my wife that what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.  I wouldn't want her to know about all the TV watching and book reading I do in the hotel room..... LOL 

Ok, here's a trivia question:

What airplane crash landed while setting a cross country speed record (from Los Angeles to New York) as a publicity stunt.... that unfortunately resulted in development program being delayed by 2 years?

Semmern wrote:

P-38?

I'm looking for the exact, specific model (there are actually 2 designations for it depending on how you look at it.)

Yup just looked it up in the Squadron book, shoulda known this one, its my favorite plane :( but ya it is definatly the xp-38

osher wrote:

The XP-38

That is correct.  There was only one XP-38 that was built (it was originally called the Lockhead Model 22).  It debuted in December of 1938.  General Henry "Hap" Arnold insisted they use the XP-38 for a cross country publicity run to set a cross country record, against the pleadings of Lockhead as it only had 15 hours of flying time at that point.  It completed the flight in 7 hours and 22 minutes (which included to refueling stops), but due to a mixup when they reached their destination, it had to be crash landed and was destroyed.  This set the program back by 2 years.

Ok Osher, you're up!

This British aircraft was in so many ways the 'almost' aircraft. It almost carried out offensive missions in the war, it almost won one of the largest prizes going, it almost was the first to have a gunner in a rear position.  Actually, that's ironic, because when the prototype crashed in Golders Green (north London),only the rear gunner survived.  However, it does have one, possibly unique, accolade.  Only one of these aircraft ever carried out a raid.  A single aircraft, a single raid, but, amazing, this one raid stopped a war.

What's the aircraft?

espins1 wrote:

Is it the Handley Page 0/400?

Vickers Vimy?

Only non-combat bomber I can think of.