Aircraft Trivia Quiz

I feel like i should know it, but i just cant figure it out.

This type held its air force's unrefuelled endurance record - almost four normal working days!

I was looking at recce aircraft, but didn't consider Maritime - the Argus?

Yes, the Canadair Argus.  Taking a licence to build variants of the Britannia, Canadair got rid of the pressurised fuselage and the turboprop engines which seemed a retrograde step but the unpressurised fuselage allowed a bomb bay with access in flight and the substitution of Wright R-3350 turbo compound engines, whilst a step back in technology,  decreased fuel burn and thus extended the range/endurance.  Though turbo compound engines did give trouble Canadair's walking away from Bristol engines saved them a heap more.  

The ASW/search radar which was the prime component in the aircraft's effectiveness was first obtained from the USA but in the second variant came from the UK.

They kept away from Bristol turbo props when they revisited the airframe and keeping the Britannia fuselage, stretched it, remodelled the cockpit and, adding RR Tyne engines, presented the RCAF with the Yukon which was further developed for the civil market as the CL-44 and Cl-44D4.

This now virtually retired aircraft was very task specific but wasn't used in anger in it's intended role, it was however used in anger in a rather different theatre than was planned.

It shares an engine with one other currently active type & can start under it's own steam.

The first bit of the clue fits the AVRO Vulcan but I can't work out how the second bit fits in.

PhilB

The first bit of the clue fits the AVRO Vulcan but I can't work out how the second bit fits in.

I am going to take a wild guess and say the B-57 Canberra.

Not the B-57.

This aircraft's single design role was more specific than the B-57.

Only one other production military aircraft has used the engine fitted to this aircraft & the engine helped give this aircraft a name.

The fame was prime time International.

Sounds like the S-3 Viking to me.....shares the engine with the A-10 Warthog.  Originally designed and put into service as an ASW platform, but ended up being used in a limited offensive strike role in both Desert Storm and OIF, taking out targets like Silkworm missile sites with Maverick missiles.  It had its time inthe spotlight as Navy One when President Bush landed on the USS Abraham Lincoln in the co-pilot's seat of one. Retired from front-line service in 2009, but NASA got 4 of them, and 3 more went to Navy test squadron VX-30.  At least four of them still fly today from what I have seen.  

F-8fanatic

Sounds like the S-3 Viking to me...

Spot on, the S-3 with it's GE TF34's

Alright, this was a prototype design.  Only one ever flew, and on its one and only flight, it was forced to make an emergency landing.  This aircraft combined two uncommon design features also used on the P-39 Airacobra with an uncommon design feature of the Heinkel He-177.  A second prototype was under construction but was destroyed by a bombing attack.  On its only flight, the prototype suffered from the same problem that the Focke Wulf FW-190 did.  

Piaggio P.119?

Heinkel 119?

Not the Piaggio, good guess though.  The P.119 actually flew quite well, apart from excessive vibration when all guns were being fired.  The plane I am looking for has three basic differences from the Piaggio--

1--it shared two characteristics with the Airacobra, while the P.119 has only one.

2--there was only one P.119 ever built, whereas the one I am looking for actually had two examples built.  The second one was in finishing stages of construction when it was destroyed.

3--the P.119 flew more than once, and did not suffer the same gremlin that the FW 190 did.

Not the Heinkel either, there were 8 of those built, and some of them were flown in different test roles.  

Also, of the two guesses so far, the Heinkel is the only one that hits on the second characteristic of sharing a feature with the Heinkel 177 bomber.  

I will also say this--the aircraft I am looking for was definitely built for a military role but it was not to be a fighter.

The Yokosuka R2Y(1)?

It had a mid mounted engine driving through a shaft & tricycle landing gear like the P-39 & used a compound / coupled engine like the He-177. 

The 190 prototype suffered from heat issues & although I can't find anything definate on it I imagine that the R2Y like many coupled / compound engined aircraft had heat issues. 

yes, it is the R2Y1, and yes it did have overheating issues.  That is what caused its one and only flight to end early--overheating.

I don't know why, but it just smelled like a Japanese aircraft...

This aircraft which was built in the hundreds was the result of a committee request & it's design paved the way for a commonly used engine configuration which has now gone out of fashion with this type of aircraft. This aircraft also had unusual transparencies?

SE-210 Caravelle

I should have known better than to post anything commercial.....

Yes, the Caravelle with it's rear engine configuration & unusually shaped windows;

Not all commercial types are easy - as we might see!!

This type was first revealed as a model at an airshow on a different continent from the manufacturer's home base.   Three years elapsed before a start was made on the prototype which eventually flew after a further three years.  A year later it was the star of the show at an airshow in its home country but less than 12 months later the project was abandoned with just one aircraft built..  

A watered down version of the type is currently under consideration by new backers.

TU-144 Concordski?

No, as far as I know there is no movement to build a new version of the TU-144 though this type, whilst far slower than supersonic, at the time was the fastest in its class.  

Su-80?

There has been more than one SU80.  This type is a contemporary but somewhat bigger.

Could it be the Antonov An-225 Mriya?

Now that is getting far too large.  This type was rather ambitious in some ways for its manufacturer and what would have been a major advanced feature was abandoned when the latest plans for a relaunch were announced.  

One reason given for the planned relaunch is the ageing of a type whose manufacturer ceased business in the year after this type's prototype's first flight, the new backers seeing a ruggedness in their design not available in the current competition.

The IPTN N-250?

Now just where did you drag that out of?  Over to you.