Aircraft Trivia Quiz

Sea Fury and Sea Hawk

http://www.vectorsite.net/avsehawk.html

the Hawker Fury was copied from the Ta 152 a high performance version of the Fw 190 Butcher Bird.

navypitsnipe wrote:

Sea Fury and Sea Hawk

Correct!  Well done!

The Sea Fury was developed out of the prototype Fury, that the RAF didn't adopt.  It's family tree starts with the Hawker Tornado, a fighter using the Rolls-Royce Vulture engine (a double Merlin).  Ironically, like my previous question, the genus of the family starts with a Vulture.  The prototype Tornado was an excellent fighter, even loaded up, faster than anything else.  Hawkers geared up for mass production, only for the Vulture project to be cancelled.  The airframe needed to be re-designed, and so came along the Tempest and Typhoon (which I still get mixed up!), using other large engines.

From 1941 to around 1943 the Focke-Wulf 190 was the scourge of the RAF, and could defeat the Spitfire making hit and run attacks across France.  Finally, in 1943 an FW-190A crashed in England, allowing the engineers to see exactly what was defeating them.  One of the major areas was the close coupled engine shroud, with low drag.  The Germans could do this because they had solved the problem of engine heating.  Ideas gleaned from this example FW were passed to the aircraft designers.

At Hawkers Sidney (later, Sir Sidney) Camm took these ideas and incorporated them into a new design, based on the Tornado family design.  The result was the Fury, and later the Sea Fury.

However, just a year later, whilst still developing the Fury, Hawkers also looked to the new jet age, and set about using the new Fury design as the basis for a new jet fighter.  The result was the Hawk, which was rejected by the RAF before a prototype was built, but was redesigned for the Navy.  Having a cockpit far forward was perfect for carrier operations, and so one of the most successful postwar British aircraft was built.  Of course, by now the Sea Hawk had little connection to the Tornado, but the family line was still there!

Over to you navypitsnipe!

well now that i finally managed to get one here's my question. What is the only plane in Air racing History to be forced into retirement? (even though the owner claims he decided to retire it). I'm looking for the plane, the class, the pilot and the reason for retirement

clue: 1990's

next clue: the name was recently reused to name a sport class air racer

clue: Reno Air Races

unfortunately i can't really give more clues than that without giving away one of the answers. so if i don't have a responce by sunday night i'll post the answers then.

Nemesis? It's the only one I know!

ok you got the plane. now the other 3

navypitsnipe wrote:

ok you got the plane. now the other 3

  I could Google 2 of the answers I guess, but as for why...  Still, this has been interesting for me, as before this question I knew nothing about the Reno races, and now I know next to nothing!

ok here are the answers.

1. the plane: Nemesis

2. the pilot: Jon Sharp

3. the class: Formula 1 Class

4. the reason: not the most obvious but after winning, domintating rather, the formula 1 class by winning 9 stright years they pretty much said enough is enough.

osher, take it away

Thanks Navy, OK, here's my question, which, when you think about it, is actually quite obvious!

Which twin engine production German fighter, had the serious proposal to replace one of it's DB603 with a turbojet?  As far as I know, the proposal never reached prototype stage.  However, this was a realistic proposition.

my guess is the DO-335, since it's be weird to have a jet on one wing and a prop on the other...

Jaypack55 wrote:

my guess is the DO-335, since it's be weird to have a jet on one wing and a prop on the other...

We have a winner!  Over to you Jay

OK, here's the story: A pilot is shot down over Germany and bails out. His squadron mate sees his predicament and watches his leader's parachute until it lands. He then lands his aircraft in the field where his leader landed, throws out his parachute, puts the downed pilot in the pilot's seat, climbs in and flies the plane back to England sitting on the other's lap. Name the two pilots involved, the type of aircraft they were flying, and the downed pilot's aircraft's name/noseart. Good luck!

bump

OK, here's a hint: The aircraft was American, and ICM recently put out an injection-molded kit with the markings of the downed aircraft.

Okay, maybe my question was too hard. I'll narrow it down a bit. The aircraft were P-51s, and the downed pilot was a fairly well-known ace flying his aircraft named "[blank] II" . His next aircraft was named "[blank] III" (the ICM kit's markings), and included 2 parachutes on the nose art to commemorate(?) his two previous bailouts.

Jaypack55 wrote:

Okay, maybe my question was too hard. I'll narrow it down a bit. The aircraft were P-51s, and the downed pilot was a fairly well-known ace flying his aircraft named "[blank] II" . His next aircraft was named "[blank] III" (the ICM kit's markings), and included 2 parachutes on the nose art to commemorate(?) his two previous bailouts.

Since no one else has nibbled this one, my guess is the:

 Ridge Runner III as Flown by Maj. Pierce 'Mac' McKennon.?

Tom T

well, since no one else has guessed, I'll say close enough. The two pilots were Pierce McKennon and George Green, and he was flying "Ridge Runner II". Next question is all yours Tom!

Thank you Jay.

I kinda got to liking the "mystery aircraft thing" so here is my attempt at it:

Two major countries, not yet at war with each other, yet both anticipating the eventual conflict, with a large body of water separating them, before the declared state of war between them developed long-range stratigic bombers, with the thought of each one bombing the other.

This takes an ironic twist on both sides, since "Country A", the eventual victor, continues it's development of it's bomber, and uses it extensively, but against a different foe entirely the the one origionally intended.

Country "B", the conquered, has its long-range strategic bomber developments stymied due to more immediate concerns with defense. In this country, officially the projects were scrapped, but in fact one in particular soldiered on, but was eventually targeted and destroyed and its' potential threat ended by "Country A's" forces as "Country B" was overwhelmed. The interesting twist in this country's developments is that a major conquerer of them captured and later utilized their developed technology in their major stratigic bomber program, in effect keeping "Country B's" basic designs alive longer then the "Country A's" bomber.

Name the countries and the bombers.

Hints:

1. Both of these developments were in the late '30's/early 40's.
2. With one in particular, both of these aircraft in fact greatly resembled each other, which seems to demonstrate the effectiveness of each country's spy networks.
3. Both of these aircraft were made by a major aircraft manufacturer of each country.
4. As well as soldiering on to fight in a subsequent conflict, the bomber from Country A, also was directly copied (so-called "reverse-engineering") by the same power that freely utilized Country B's other technology, as well as others.
5. Don't let this throw you, but in fact in a previously similarly-worded question regarding the development of a two-prop/four-prop, four-engine design, Country B did in fact develop a four-prop design of it's two-prop/four-engined bomber based on it's two-prop four-engined design under this general stratigic program!
6. Also, Country B developed a very advanced special-purpose interceptor in anticipation of Country's A's development, based on their very successful fighter-bomber design.

Options:

Although there is only one obvious answer to "Country A's" bomber, there can be more then one correct answer to "Country B's" varients, since due to internal politics and wrangling, in fact they had a harder time settling on a single project.

Other trivia:

Under the Country B's program, the turbo-prop engine, the swept wing as well as the counter-rotating prop developments were first introduced for bombing aircraft.

If this one is too complex, I can "switch the question" if need be.

Tom

Would it be the B-17 and the Handley-Page Victor, which utilised the information from a few German jet bombers?  I was thinking of the B-47, but the Victor lasted until the 1990's.  If so, then it was the Junkers Ju-90, the so called Urals bomber, which was the grandfather of the later Junkers bombers.  Working from memory here, the Urals bombers was not so much stopped, as placed in limbo, as events over-took it, however, some development continued.

A very good guess, but the two planes you named were not developed by adversaries, in anticipation of war with each other, each bomber project initially developed with bombing the other accross an ocean, Country A bombing Country B, and vice versa.

You are on the right track with the B-17, inasmuch as Country A's bomber is made by the same manufacturer as the B-17, and of course, therefore is the one and the same country.

For your information, the B-17 was initially developed mainly for the aerial defense of the American continent against enemy warships in mind, not as an offensive stratigic bombing weapon which was why up it was not until the B-17F model, the B-24 had a longer range for the same payload and was perferred for longer range targets. It was the British Bomber Command and the Eithth Air Force that specified the changes to the B-17 for stratigic bombing purposes as the war progressed.

To further clarify, Country A's prototype was developed in 1939, Country B's principal project in 1940, first flown in 1942, which was made by their leading fighter manufacturer.

Try again

Tom

 

 

Well, in that case, hmmm, the American aircraft would be the B-36 Peacemaker and the Messerschmitt or Focke Wolfe Amerika bomber?  I'm not trying to spread my answers for the Amerika bomber, but I believe several German companies had Amerika bombers (also Arado and Junkers, which of course, had the Ju-90 which was supposed to be developed into the Urals bomber - on reflection, I think all German aicraft companies which built bombers, also built fighters, certainly BF/ME, FW, AR, HS, HE, DO all did).  The B-36 dates back to just before WWII for the Americans, so could have flown in 1942, but an Amerika bomber in 1939?  Well, an adapted FW-200 would do the trick). Arado developed a jet powered Amerika bomber (released by Revell as a kit, as the Ar-555).  I'm guessing that the Russians used some captured German technology to develop something or another?

Actuall, Osher, you are corrrect.

As I mentioned before, there can be more then one right answer for "Country B", so in mentining more then one project, you are definarely right on.

On the other hand, the actual bomber I had in mind was the B-29, which initially was developed with the idea of bombing Germany in mind, but with refeuling in England. But the B-36 is a correct answer also, since it was more specially developed with the thought in mind that England could lose the war, and the U.S. was to wage a trans-Atlantic bombing war dierctly from a U.S. base, non-stop.

Your up next

Tom

T_Terrific wrote:

Osher, you are up next Tom

During the Israeli War Independance in 1948-1949 there were several Spitfire on Spitfire fights. Two of them involved the RAF:

1. Name the oposing airforce & result in the first one
2. Name the opposing airforce & result in the second one.
3. In the second one, Spitfires of one mark thrashed the Spitfires of the other mark, why?
4. A curious and unique Spitfire grew out of the first encounter.  What am I referring to?

Clues:
1. It's not obvious, and was due to a lack of intelligence
2. It was due to a navigational error
3. Surprise played a major part
4. 3 into 1 can go!

Clues:
1. The first one involved the RAF, and an Arab country
2. The second one didn't
3. The Mk.18 and the Mk.9 were the two marks involved
4. This famous Spitfire had a unique colour, and is preserved in this scheme.  It was flown by ex-RAF pilot, and future President of Israel, Ezer Weizman.

I guess I made it too difficult or too specialised.  So, here's the answer, and a new question:

1. Egypt and the RAF - the Egyptians didn't realise that after the formation of Israel, the RAF left a squadron behind to oversee the British ships leaving Haifa port.  As such, they attacked the airbase Ramat David.  The result was 2 RAF Spitfires destroyed, and 1 Egyptian Spitfire.

2. Israel and the RAF - an Egyptian column crossed the Egyptian border to enter Israel.  Four RAF Mk.18 Spitfires shadowing them accidently crossed too.  They were then jumped by 2 IAF Mk.9 Spitfires.  Two of the RAF Spitfires were downed, but both pilots managed to bail out successfully.

3. The RAF pilots were not expecting to be attacked.  As such, the IAF pilots had complete surprise.  Whilst the Mk.18 is much faster, the Mk.9 was able to out manouvre the later Spitfires, and, as such, once close up, had the advantage.

4. The 3 downed Spitfires, plus rubbish left behind by the RAF at various bases (armed forces are notorious for just dumping unwanted stuff), enabled the Israelis to make 1 Spitfire, a PR.9.  This was painted black, with a red flash, and is known as the Black Spitfire.

OK, so, here's the new question:

What allied aircraft took part in the last official combat action of WWII?  For a bonus, name the date, and the opposition?

I do not know if this is the one you are thinking of, but in his biographical book "Samauri", Saburo Sakai asserted he and a fellow flier, being aware of the impending surrender to the allies,  decided as a "hoot" to take out a B-29 shortly before the official cessation of hostilities.

 

I do not recall which interceptors they were flying, but I believe it was the Kawanishi N1K2-J Shiden-kai (violet lightning) model 21 fighter (named "George" by U.S. Intellegence) essentially a Japanese version of our P-47 rather then the Zero.

 

Also, frequently the B-32 Dominator was mistaken for the B-29 by the Japanese, so in fact it could have been one of those they shot down instead.

 

OK?

 

Tom

 

 

Close, so close...but hey, close enough!  It was infact a B-32, was August 18th, 3 days after the Japanese surrender (don't ask me why it's still counted, but I guess the military have their reasons).  14 Japanese fighters attacked, a mixture of Zero and Tojo aircraft.  One American died, Sgt. Marchione, who was also the last allied soldier to die in combat.  Apparently 2 Zeros and a Tojo were destroyed, and it was after this that the Americans cut the propellers off Japanese aircraft.

Thank you Osher 

I did recall the incident you referred to, but I defered to the Saboru Sakai's account since my focus was your phrase "last official combat action of WWII", meaning to me that post-surrender actions were "unofficial", since they were not supposed to be sanctioned by either side.

It is also possible that our friend Mr Sakai could have had "convenient amnesia" and in fact this could have been the same incident he was part of, only not willing to admit engaging in hostile acts after the official surrender signing. You see, his book Samauri was carefully edited and co-authored by Martin Cadin, and some of his "historic accounts" (refer to the book "The Ragged Rugged Warriors")have been proven to be completely fictitious, so we may never truly know. Revisionist history does wonders to make heroes out of villians, and vice-versa.

Now this should be an easy one:

There was a very prominant Japanese fighter that was given an Italian-sounding allied code-name, since our people felt that it was a copy of an Italian fighter, but in fact, it appears to have been designed by a German aircraft designer who worked for this Japanese manufacturer for a while early in WWII.

Name and claim it .

Bonus points for naming the German designer as well

Good Luck

Tom