Aircraft Trivia Quiz

Jaypack55 wrote:

Okay, here's my question: What was the most-produced series of fighter aircraft in history? Here's a hint: it was in WWII, towards the right.

Bf109

Jaypack55 wrote:

Okay, here's my question: What was the most-produced series of fighter aircraft in history? Here's a hint: it was in WWII, towards the right.

 Towards the right?  Not quite sure what you mean by that.  I believe the Me-109 was the most produced.  By series, do you mean something like the Yak series?

Bill 

Okay, here's my question:

What was the most-produced series of fighter aircraft in history?

Here's a hint: it was in WWII, towards the right.

Go figure! One question I actually knew and Jaypack beat me to it!

Jaypack55 wrote:

I'd have to guess either the PB4Y-1 (liberator) or -2 (Privateer)

You got it Jaypack

You go next!

Tom

Well, OK, sort of along these same lines:

Which U.S. Navy patrol plane produced the most gunnery aces with air-to-air shoot downs of WWII in the Pacific Theater of operation?

Hint:

The correct answer involves a varient of a recently above mentioned aircraft.

Tom

Tom is the big winner!  My reference is Lloyd Jones's "U S Bombers".  The XB-41 never got past one prototype, modified from B-24D 41-11822. 

Over to you, Tom.

jeaton01 wrote:

Everyone is going the right direction.  The YB-40 was used by the 8th AF in Europe, and the reason it failed was that it couldn't keep up with the bombers once they had dropped the bombs, and was then not able to defend itself against fighter attack once it became a "straggler" on the way home.  The other aircraft was not used operationally but it was built and tested.

I think osher brushed on one which was the XB-41,a one-off that was a long-range escort version of the B-24D Liberator. It was designed to fill a similar requirement as was the Boeing YB-40, namely, to provide escort for bombers penetrating German airspace.

Wouldn't that qualify as one?

Tom

I believe the XB-40 was actually used operationally in the Med at least once- if I recollect correctly when the drawback of it's reduced speed was discovered it was then used to "hunt" ex-Allied aircraft being used by the italians to shadow bomber streams (specifically at least one P-38 ) by posing as a "straggler" on the return flight. I don't believe it was ever used operationally by the 8Th airforce in the ETO.

Cheers, Keith

osher wrote:

Was one of them B-24s converted into a seriously mean looking machine, which I believe flew a missions?

 I don't know about a heavily armed B-24, but there was the XB-40, which was a heavily armed B-17.  I forgot about that one.  It was too heavy and couldn't keep up with the bomber stream.  One feature from it was retained, which was the chin turret which ended up on the B-17G.

 Bill

jeaton01 wrote:

There were two attempts at escorts for 8th Air Force bombers that did not work out though some of one of these types of aircraft did fly some missions.  Name both aircraft by their proper designations and why they failed to meet the requirement.

Not sure I completely understand the question.  Initially, the 8th AF had Spitfires (4th FG) and P-38s.  The turbos on the P-38 did not do well in cold and damp conditions.  It could handle hot and damp or cold and dry, but cold and damp caused the oil in the turbos to jellify.  The P-38s had the range to escort the heavies, but too many mechanical problems.

 The Spitfire didn't have the range of course.  RAF Spitfires did often cover the heavies on the first leg outbound and last leg inbound.

The P-47 was the first good escort fighter the 8th had.  It had better range than the Spitfire, but not enough to escort the bombers all the way to target deep in Germany.  As far as they could go, they were very effective.  The 56th FG ended up the top scoring FG and was the only 8th AF group not to convert to P-51s by the end of the war.

Those are the only escort fighters I can think of before the P-51 came along.  There may have been something more obscure, but I've never heard of it.

 Bill

Was one of them B-24s converted into a seriously mean looking machine, which I believe flew a missions?

Thanks for cutting me some slack on the Chennault question, Hudskit!

 The next question then is:

There were two attempts at escorts for 8th Air Force bombers that did not work out though some of one of these types of aircraft did fly some missions.  Name both aircraft by their proper designations and why they failed to meet the requirement.

hudskit wrote:

Sure thing- the aircraft I had in mind was the Blackburn Lincock- a small single bay biplane fighter that while very nimble and very manuverable but simply wasn't quite "good" enough for production. A single demonstrator aircraft was flown at the chicago air races one year (perhaps 1928?) with a very sexy set of single helmets over each individual radial cylinder. I believe 3 of the other series demonstrators were purchased by the Chinese for use against the Japanese- but being a fairly "hot" aircraft they were wrecked instead by their chinese pilots.

Thank you for sharing-that is a funny story

  Tom

Close enough to be a winner! He was presented with a curtiss H-75H- which was a very simplified version of the export series hawk H-75- utilizing fixed landing gear and a single row (in-house) wright cyclone radial instead of the US army specified Pratt/whitney twin wasp.

Another correct answer would have been the Boeing Model 100- an export version of the P-12B- that he alledgedly used to shoot down 7 or so japanese aircraft over Nanking before it was rendered unservicable due to a lack of spares.

The baton passes on...

Regards to all,

Keith

Sure thing- the aircraft I had in mind was the Blackburn Lincock- a small single bay biplane fighter that while very nimble and very manuverable but simply wasn't quite "good" enough for production. A single demonstrator aircraft was flown at the chicago air races one year (perhaps 1928?) with a very sexy set of single helmets over each individual radial cylinder. I believe 3 of the other series demonstrators were purchased by the Chinese for use against the Japanese- but being a fairly "hot" aircraft they were wrecked instead by their chinese pilots.

On a more conventional note- what aircraft was purchased by the chinese govt for General Claire Chennault as a personal aircraft?

hudskit wrote:

Absolutely true for production fighters , but this was a series of prototype aircraft and a generation "younger" so to speak. 6 aircraft produced only- of three different "series" - and performed at the Chicago air races one year as an acrobatic exhibition aircraft... It is indeed a toughie... feel free to skip right by this one and keep the room moving along... Cheers, Keith

If you want us to skip this one, I would apperciate knowing which aircraft you had in mind anyway.

On the other hand, you can answer the question yourself if we can't without loosing your turn, and "switch the question" to one that might be more conventional if you wish.

Tom

Absolutely true for production fighters , but this was a series of prototype aircraft and a generation "younger" so to speak. 6 aircraft produced only- of three different "series" - and performed at the Chicago air races one year as an acrobatic exhibition aircraft...

It is indeed a toughie... feel free to skip right by this one and keep the room moving along...

Cheers, Keith

According to my sources, the only *British*...

 fighter type to serve with the Chinese Air Force between 1937 and 1945 was the "Gloster Gladiator Mk.I"

  Tom

Thanks- I'll give it a try. Please let me know if this is too obscure-but this aircraft is a personal favorite of mine...

IT is a between wars ( late 1920's / early 30's ) british fighter prototype that flew  at a US air race, of which six total were made of the three different versions and finally fought ( I think 3 planes in all )  with the Chinese air force against the Japanese during that lengthy conflict.

Good luck all, Keith

For those who are interested; I have found some more info on the Dornier 24ATT.

http://www.do-24.com/do24.htm

It would probably need a whole new kit rather than a conversion set to make this plane in kit form.

hudskit wrote:

To venture a guess- you would be referring to the Dornier 24- which was purchased and used by the Dutch in the east indies- and was recently (as in the 90's) rebuilt (one aircraft) by claude dorniers grandson with a sexy new wing, retractable landing gear and other cool toys- and flew cross atlantic and landed in New York harbour I believe. regards, Keith

 We have a winner!

Your turn

Bill 

To venture a guess- you would be referring to the Dornier 24- which was purchased and used by the Dutch in the east indies- and was recently (as in the 90's) rebuilt (one aircraft) by claude dorniers grandson with a sexy new wing, retractable landing gear and other cool toys- and flew cross atlantic and landed in New York harbour I believe.

regards, Keith