Aircraft Trivia Quiz

WELL DONE Scorp! You have the floor.

Cheers, Richie

It is indeed a strange story! Ok for the next question, go for a relatively easy one:

What airplane was also known as 'The flying dump truck'?

Cheers, Richie

bondoman wrote:

?????????It's my turn thank you very much. The engine that was specified originally for the aircraft that became the Stuka was unique to it's manufacturer in what way, and who was the manufacturer?

Since Junkers could not produce the needed engine in time, an imported Rolls Royce Kestrel engine was fitted. It was Rolls Royce's first cast block engine.

Cheers, Richie

T_Terrific wrote:

mojodoctor wrote: And as for the other issue, I have always thought it was expected to use all of our resources (whether book, internet, or old dude next door) to answer these qestions for our reliance upon our memory may just leave us a bit short. More than a bit for some of us!   Anything goes, as far as I understand what the original intent for these Trivia Quizes was, ... uh, ... intended. Does that make sense?   Never mind, it's ice cream time! My  If I were to totally rely on memory alone I do not know whether I could ever answer the amount of questions here that I have, much less come up with the few that I have. In fact, my position is that making it a question anyone can look up the answer to is ultimately more fair and encourages acedemic skill then guessing from memory alone. Not only should we seek to expand our data base on aircraft information, but we should in fact be encouraging both the model builder to expand access to the kit manufacturers as well as the book publishers. Personally, I feel anyone who takes the time and effort to research the right answer deserves the next turn, provided he/she is not intent on "hijacking" the forum. The only thing I would object to is using an obscure source of questionable authorship (as book publishishers are notoriously neglegent in certifying the accuracy of the information any author submits), whether it be a book that is not commonly available nor a recognized reliable source, or say a website where some jerk is putting out bad information from questionable sources. This is in the same spirit that I prefer to keep my subjects for the topical question I posit within both the kit builder's rhelm as well as the information. OK? Tom

?????????It's my turn thank you very much.

The engine that was specified originally for the aircraft that became the Stuka was unique to it's manufacturer in what way, and who was the manufacturer?

Cessna it is!

The more I thought about that one the more I thought it wouldn't work very well. Thanks for ending it soon Richie.

"Since November 2007 the company has been involved in a public controversy regarding the contracting of production of the Cessna 162 SkyCatcher to the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation of the People's Republic of China."

Is it Cessna?

Cheers, Richie

Hmmm, is Boeing doing that too?

I was wondering if I should be more specific, but didn't want to give away too much. This aircraft manufacturer builds (among other aircraft) very popular small, private planes which is the subject of my question.

Make more sense?

Boeing

I'll toss another out there if noone minds!

Which well known (over 80 years old) American aircraft manufacturer contracted out the production of one of it's airplanes to a company in China within the last year?

mojodoctor wrote:

And as for the other issue, I have always thought it was expected to use all of our resources (whether book, internet, or old dude next door) to answer these qestions for our reliance upon our memory may just leave us a bit short. More than a bit for some of us!   Anything goes, as far as I understand what the original intent for these Trivia Quizes was, ... uh, ... intended. Does that make sense?   Never mind, it's ice cream time!

My 

If I were to totally rely on memory alone I do not know whether I could ever answer the amount of questions here that I have, much less come up with the few that I have.

In fact, my position is that making it a question anyone can look up the answer to is ultimately more fair and encourages acedemic skill then guessing from memory alone.

Not only should we seek to expand our data base on aircraft information, but we should in fact be encouraging both the model builder to expand access to the kit manufacturers as well as the book publishers.

Personally, I feel anyone who takes the time and effort to research the right answer deserves the next turn, provided he/she is not intent on "hijacking" the forum.

The only thing I would object to is using an obscure source of questionable authorship (as book publishishers are notoriously neglegent in certifying the accuracy of the information any author submits), whether it be a book that is not commonly available nor a recognized reliable source, or say a website where some jerk is putting out bad information from questionable sources.

This is in the same spirit that I prefer to keep my subjects for the topical question I posit within both the kit builder's rhelm as well as the information.

OK?

Tom

And as for the other issue, I have always thought it was expected to use all of our resources (whether book, internet, or old dude next door) to answer these qestions for our reliance upon our memory may just leave us a bit short. More than a bit for some of us!

Anything goes, as far as I understand what the original intent for these Trivia Quizes was, ... uh, ... intended. Does that make sense?

Never mind, it's ice cream time!

You got it Bondoman!

Tuscar Metals, Inc. rebuilt the original Management and Research Inc,. Model H-70 after it crashed January 27, 1938. It was finally destroyed in August 1945.

Too bad. Kind of a cool looking bird, eh?

Osher

If you found it and you had to Google, then answer the question. I may be new ( joined in 2003) and only have a few post's, but in this day in time, we have so much information avaliable to us, should we not use it? Yes we would like to have the basic knowledge to be able to answer these questions from the Mk I brain Pan but sometimes we can't. If the internet was not avaliable to us, would we be having this forum? 

Mike 

Chaps, the answer can be googled!  Not going to answer this one, as I had to google it, but, reading the history of tail-less aircraft, I found the self-same picture!  Just to show I did find it: It was re-built, and then destroyed in August 1945...

Quite facinating the history of tail-less flight.  I had a hunch (wrongly) it was a Miles Aircraft aircraft, but, no, it isn't.

Not a French plane either.

This one is red, white and blue not blue, white and red.

It looks sort of similar to the Satre S.E. 2100. So maybe something french?

http://www.twitt.org/satre.htm 

Yeah.......Dad gum it, I figured you did. But looking at that picture and baseing it on the time frame I think it is, everybody and their half-brother was working on a tailless design. Back to the books! 

Mike 

MQM107 wrote:

Did you blank out the NX #?

Of course I did Mike. Didn't want to make it too easy!

Matt 

Did you blank out the NX #? 

Mike 

osher wrote:

Is it a Northrop?

Nope, not a Northrop.

Another try?

Ooops!

Sorry 'bout that guys. The last few days have been, .... uh, eventful to say the least and I've been busy. It also appears that I shut off the "notify" button by mistake. Hmmm, I'd better not bo so 'eventful' while I'm typing, eh?

This airplane may be known by two different manufacturer's names, so either will do.

Hello........ Matt or you out there? You got it, your up on plate.

Mike 

MOJO

You are dead nuts on. It was Mr Weisskofp (Germany spelling) that I had in mind. I had to drag this one out from a report I had to do in High School, and believe me that was some time ago. There was reports that he actually got it to turn on one of the flights that lasted over 7 miles (reportedly).

Over to MOJO

Mike