Aircraft Trivia Quiz

Hmmm Not the B57 Canberra?

Or maybe the Harrier?

Not the Harrier or the Canberra/B-57

The smaller aircraft was the one built in smaller numbers.  None are now in service.  The larger aircraft (which became a classic) was a development of a smaller type, built for a different purpose.  There are few, if any, of the larger aircraft still in service in the form intended though developments are in front line service.  Meanwhile the aircraft it was developed from is still in wide use in various forms.

One further clue - or complication(!).  The classic that the smaller aircraft helped develop was also withdrawn and only one flyable example exists.

I feel like this is the Kestrel/AV-8 relationship, but youve already mentioned it wasnt the harrier.

Other than the type number, the fact that they are both aircraft types and they both used the same type of powerplant t there is absolutely no relationship between these types!

Referral to the original question may help.

I'm looking for two types which share the same type number.  Both shared the same type of propulsion initially.  One was a classic, the other helped develop a classic.  The classics had very different roles.

According to the manufacturers' official records one had a production run 202 times greater than the other.

Would you ve referring to the AVRO 707 and the AVRO Vulcan bomber?  The 707/710 was designed specifically to test the design of the Vulcan.......

Brian  

Read the question and clues again guys. The two aircraft in question share the same model number, that's all. They are made by different manufacturers and are not direct lineal descendents. They share a common type of propulsion, not necessarily the same engines or the same number of engines.

I believe half the answer has been given.

Your two types are the Boeing 707 and the Avro 707.  The Avro was a single engine test aircraft, built specifically to test the thick tailless delta wing design to be used on the Avro Vulcan.  All of the data lines up as you mentioned, with regard to first flights, etc etc.  The smaller Avro led to the Avro Vulcan, one of which is still flying today.  The 707 is now almost completely extinct as a passenger aircraft--as of August 2011 there were 10 examples on record as flyable and in use worldwide.  Saha Airlines in Iran has 5 707s, and as of November 2011, two of these were still flying in service.  Of course, there are more numerous civilian cargo variants, and the KC-135's and E-3 Sentry aircraft are still flying.

Brain44 started down the right road though the AVRO 710 was a red herring as it wasn't built.

F-8fanatic has it.

Let's look at the clues again:

I'm looking for two types which share the same type number.  Both shared the same type of propulsion initially.  One was a classic, the other helped develop a classic.  The classics had very different roles.

According to the manufacturers' official records one had a production run 202 times greater than the other.

Both type numbers are 707.  Both were pure jets though the Boeing 707 later had turbo-fan (bypass)  propulsion.  The B707 is a classic, the AVRO 707 helped develop the Vulcan which is a classic.  5 Avro 707s were built, according to Boeing's official information on the 707, 1010 were built

The type which became a classic changed the world and had the classic developed from the other type been used to its full potential, it would have changed the world.

The introduction of the B707 changed air travel for ever.  Whilst the Comet had been the first jet airliner in commercial service and was the first in transAtlantic service, the B707's size and adoption by airlines around the world opened up air transport to a much wider market and reduced journey times dramatically helping to kill off long distance passenger travel by sea and make long haul transport of perishables by air practical and economical.  Had the Vulcan been used as intended as a nuclear bomber, the world would look very different.

The smaller of the two types first flew 8 years before the larger aircraft, though the manufacturer of the larger aircraft points to a development aircraft of its own which flew 5 years after the smaller type!

The AVRO707 flew in 1949, the B707 in 1957 though Boeing consistently refer to the B367-80 as the B707 prototype and that first flew in 1954.

The smaller aircraft was the one built in smaller numbers.  None are now in service.  The larger aircraft (which became a classic) was a development of a smaller type, built for a different purpose.  There are few, if any, of the larger aircraft still in service in the form intended though developments are in front line service.  Meanwhile the aircraft it was developed from is still in wide use in various forms.

One further clue - or complication(!).  The classic that the smaller aircraft helped develop was also withdrawn and only one flyable example exists.

The first AVRO707 crashed, the remaining 4 were withdrawn in the 1960s.  The B707 was developed from the B367-80/C-135/KC-135 programme.  According to a UK enthusiast who visited Iran in September last to fly on their 707s, 2 were airworthy and in service, though one was grounded during his stay. That leaves one operating as intended as a passenger airliner in revenue service though their are a handful civil executive versions around.  It seems that no civil freighters are flying but a number of air forces have passenger/freighter/tanker versions flying, plus the E-3 and E-6 versions and E-8 conversions.  There are numerous KC-135 variants in service.  The Vulcan has just one example flyable and under constant threat of grounding due to its dependence on charity funding.

Good / hard question Phil & well done F-8.

The "though developments are in front line service" bit had me looking at the KC-135, but didn't think of looking at the 707

Thanks Milairjunkie.

As this thread hasn't been picked up again, would anyone object if I raised another question?

Sorry for the delay....

There was only one of this military aircraft type at Pearl Harbor.....and it was destroyed in the attack....Name the plane and the circumstances that brought it to Pearl.

One of the USAAF's first handful of B-24A's?

It was at Hickam being prepared for a secretive photographic / reconnaissance mission to check for any possible offensive movements being carried out by the IJN.

I believe that it's thought this was possibly the first aircraft destroyed on that day?

yep, that didnt take long....there were actually two B-24As sent for this mission but the other was delayed stateside awaiting the installation of specialized equipment for the recon mission.

Cheers.

This aircraft is the largest to be produced & to serve in this particular role, in it's 25 year service it didn't do what it was ultimately designed to do, although it did have a successful "combat" outing?

The aircraft & more specifically it's role is slightly at odds with it's development history? 

Canadair Argus?

Sorry Phil not the Argus.

There are a few Maritime A/C which are larger than the Argus (Nimrod, Tu-142...).

This A/C is to it's role what the An-225 is to airlift?

Ah ha, I'm with you now - TU28/TU128.  Largest fighter and its only "combat" was shooting down NATO reconnaissance balloons.

Yes, the Tu-28/128!

Devised to fill a gap in Soviet air defences to protect from the like of the B-52 & V-Bombers it made up for the short range of then current Soviet fighters & SAM's.

It was a bomber killer which was developed from the Tu-98 bomber!

This is another tease question, you know, one that's easy - when you know the answer

This type was built in one country by two different manufacturers.  The first manufacturer designed it as a civilian aircraft.  An air corps from the country of origin bought and evaluated 2 examples for a specific, non-aggressive role prior to the original manufacturer selling the production rights to the second company.

The air corps did not proceed with a further order and no aircraft entered any other military arm.  The last aircraft built had a major material change to the rest and was meant to be the first of an improved marque.  Two previous airframes later had the same material change, a long way from home, and were re-named for the company that changed them although all through the production and changes the type kept the same type identity.

Though only 27 aircraft were produced, 9 still exist, at least 3 are airworthy though none in the country of origin.

Would this be quite a utilitarian design?

In every sense of the word - yes!

I'm thinking Edgar Percival / Lancashire Prospector E.P.9 - like a tadpole with a parasol wing flung on? 

Bang on Milairjunkie.

Edgar Percival started  a new company after he sold out to Hunting.  The E P 9 was his first new design, meant as a utility aircraft and was designed to carry anything from hay bales to livestock and oil drums.  Aimed at the "Empire" market it was seen by the British Army as having potential for replacing the Auster AOP series as an observation aircraft but the two aircraft purchased for trials didn't match their needs.

Percival sold the manufacturing licence to Samlesbury Engineering who were building truck bodies and had built buses at their Samlesbury plant adjacent to the English Electric Airfield where work was ongoing on the Canberra and Lightning.

Samlesbury set up a company called Lancashire Aircraft but only produced six which they named the Lancashire Aircraft Prospector (not as Wikipedia has it) but sold only 6.  The last was fitted with the Armstrong Siddeley Cheetah radial engine  as this was thought more reliable and rugged for the intended market.  The change didn't improve the aircraft's sales and no more were built.

In Australia, two were converted to Cheetah engines by Skyspread Ltd and were licenced as Skyspread EP 9s.

Samlesbury Engineering went on to build Donald Campbell's Bluebird high speed boat in which he was killed on Coniston Water.

Cheers.

The first aircraft to be fitted with vegetables?

thats the most random question ive heard in a while. Does vostok count? Or are we talking first aircraft to transport vegetables?

Scorpiomikey

thats the most random question ive heard in a while. Does vostok count? Or are we talking first aircraft to transport vegetables?

No, Vostok doesn't count.

The "vegetables" were a permanent fixture & originated from Germany (in a way)?

Me-262.....the fixture inside the jet engine tailpipes was known as the "zweibel", or "onion".

oooohhhhh click lol.

F-8fanatic

Me-262.....the fixture inside the jet engine tailpipes was known as the "zweibel", or "onion".

It's not what I was thinking about, but it fits the bill better than the one I had - so over to you.

I was thinking about Küchemann Carrots / Whitcomb bodies as fitted to some excess on the H.P. Victor, Convair 990 & Tu-95. I thought that the Victor was the first production aircraft to use these, but it seems that the  Tu-16 had them before.