SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Aircraft Trivia Quiz

728382 views
7409 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:51 AM

One of the bonus answers;

Both aircraft suffered from very poor approach handling on single engines?

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wherever the hunt takes me
Posted by Boba Fett on Monday, November 29, 2010 8:00 PM

I believe it was the F7 Tigercat? As for the bonus, I have no clue... both were twin-engined? Both has early engine issues?

  • Member since
    January 2009
Posted by F-8fanatic on Monday, November 29, 2010 7:18 PM

ALright....

 

This combat aircraft was originally going to be named Tomcat, but the name was not used because it was felt that such a name was too "provocative".  Of course, Grumman later took that name for the F-14.  Name the plane, and for bonus points, name three things it has in common with the F-14.

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Monday, November 22, 2010 4:56 AM

Yes indeed F-8, the Tu-134 "Crusty" - an event made even scarier by the fact that the record was acheived with a load of passengers!

The record I had in mind was the Bear's one of fastest turboprop, or was it the fastest propellor driven passenger aircraft, or was it the most powerful turboprop aircraft, or the fastest in service bomber, or the most powerfull bomber - Tupolev hold so many records......................................

Here is the Tu-134UBL, used for Tu-160 & Tu-22 crew training;

  • Member since
    January 2009
Posted by F-8fanatic on Monday, November 22, 2010 4:33 AM

The plane is the Tupolev Tu-134, a twin-jet airliner that has also been used by the Russian Air Force.  Date was December 31, 1988, and the plane landed at a speed of 258.8 mph.  At the time it had 76 passengers on board, no one was hurt.

Tupolev also holds the record for having the first commercial transport to exceed Mach 2--that being the Tu-144 SST in June 1969.

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Monday, November 22, 2010 2:55 AM

It's somewhat larger than any of those.

Some features unusual for it type were low pressure tires, a glazed nose & a braking parachute on earlier models.

  • Member since
    November 2004
  • From: Columbia Gorge
Posted by brain44 on Sunday, November 21, 2010 7:51 PM

Sounds like a B-66 / A-3 Skywarrior.....

 

Brian  Smile Burger

"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them." John Bernard Books (The Shootist)
  • Member since
    August 2009
  • From: Toledo Area OH
Posted by Sparrowhyperion on Sunday, November 21, 2010 6:07 PM

F5 Tiger?  Or a Phantom maybe.

In the Hangar: 1/48 Hobby Boss F/A-18D RAAF Hornet,

On the Tarmac:  F4U-1D RNZAF Corsair 1/48 Scale.

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, November 21, 2010 4:34 PM

OK, it's a conventional aircraft, with a low mounted, swept wing & twin engines.

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wherever the hunt takes me
Posted by Boba Fett on Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:58 PM

"successful landing" REALLY narrows the lists down...

Didn't the X-15 have a 200-250mph landing speed? That's all I can think of...

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:53 PM

Nope.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:45 PM

It's not the Israeli F-15 that lost a wing, resulting in the pilot turning the aircraft into a near-rocket, and landing at 240mph?

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:21 PM

OK,

The fastest successfully landing by a conventional aircraft?

For a bonus, what other significant speed record does the same manufacturer also hold?

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: New Zealand
Posted by Scorpiomikey on Saturday, November 20, 2010 5:18 PM

yup, got it in one, over to you

"I am a leaf on the wind, watch how i soar"

Recite the litanies, fire up the Gellar field, a poo storm is coming Hmm 

My signature

Check out my blog here.

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Scotland
Posted by Milairjunkie on Saturday, November 20, 2010 3:10 PM

The YA2F-1, the prototype of the A6 Intruder?

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: New Zealand
Posted by Scorpiomikey on Saturday, November 20, 2010 2:05 PM

Ok, The prototype of this aircraft had directional thrust vectoring to shorten takeoff runs, however the full production aircraft removed this feature. The aircraft im thinking of is american.

Whats the birdy? 

"I am a leaf on the wind, watch how i soar"

Recite the litanies, fire up the Gellar field, a poo storm is coming Hmm 

My signature

Check out my blog here.

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wherever the hunt takes me
Posted by Boba Fett on Wednesday, November 17, 2010 12:58 PM

Scorpiomikey

ME-163 komet, lost more pilots to landing and takeoff (fuel related) incidents per aircraft than any other aircraft flying.

Doesn't help the fuel they used dissolved pretty much anything it touched. 

I probably could have made the question better, but...

This is what I was looking for. The other answers may have been right, but this is the winner. The bonus answer: 16 kills. Mostly bombers, but a mosquito was also taken down.

On to Scorpiomonkey!

  • Member since
    September 2009
  • From: Frisco, TX
Posted by B17Pilot on Monday, November 15, 2010 8:52 AM

Heinkel He-162, cause the glued they used for the wood wing was poor at best and kept coming apart.

  

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • From: New Zealand
Posted by Scorpiomikey on Sunday, November 14, 2010 6:39 PM

ME-163 komet, lost more pilots to landing and takeoff (fuel related) incidents per aircraft than any other aircraft flying.

Doesn't help the fuel they used dissolved pretty much anything it touched. 

"I am a leaf on the wind, watch how i soar"

Recite the litanies, fire up the Gellar field, a poo storm is coming Hmm 

My signature

Check out my blog here.

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Nelson, BC, Canada
Posted by paul_toz on Sunday, November 14, 2010 6:30 PM

F-104?

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wherever the hunt takes me
Posted by Boba Fett on Sunday, November 14, 2010 11:55 AM

that could be right, but not what I'm looking for. I'll rephrase it

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Sunday, November 14, 2010 11:01 AM

P-61?

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wherever the hunt takes me
Posted by Boba Fett on Sunday, November 14, 2010 10:59 AM

Wow, actually got something right for once...

 

Ok, this is super-easy so let the opportunists come!

 

What combat-used aircraft (Non-piston powered, jet or rocket) is infamous for losing more craft to accidents than combat.

Bonus: How many confirmed kills did this craft score?

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2009
Posted by gmat on Sunday, November 14, 2010 8:50 AM

Before the defectors delivered their Mig-15s in 1953, ATIC recoverd portions of two crashed Mig-15s in 1951, the first was 17 Apr, 1951 and the second was 20-21 July, 1951. The first was from a crash 100 miles behind enemy lines and the second was from a crash site in shallow water off a coastal mud flats.

Here is a link to an article with further details.

http://nasicaa.org/chapter02.pdf

Best wishes,

Grant

 

  • Member since
    April 2004
Posted by rudedog72 on Sunday, November 14, 2010 2:36 AM

Correct you are Boba.  The first one was flown by Francizek Jarcki a polish pilot to a Danish airstrip in March 1953.  The offered money was $100,000 but for some reason he only got $50,000.  I guess because we didtnt get to keep it.  The aircraft was returned to poland a few weeks later after US officials went over it with a fine tooth comb. 

The Korean connection was close but not quite right.   A North Korean pilot named No Kum-Sok landed his MIG-15 at Kimpo Air Base in September of the same year.  That one we kept and evaluated, if you want to see it I beleive it is at the US Airforce Museum in Ohio.  

And now the hot potato passes to you Boba FettBig Smile

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wherever the hunt takes me
Posted by Boba Fett on Saturday, November 13, 2010 7:26 PM

Wow, something I actually know!

I believe it was a Polish air-force pilot who defected for the $100,000. I can't remember his name, but I'm sure he was the first. I believe there were other defectors as well?

  • Member since
    August 2009
  • From: Toledo Area OH
Posted by Sparrowhyperion on Saturday, November 13, 2010 2:38 PM

I believe that the defector brought over  a MIG25.  Washington was red in the face when they finally got a look at the 25.  They had poured billions into the development of the F15 and F14 to counter it, only to find it wasn't nearly as high end as they thought it was.  At least we got two of the worlds finest air superiority fighters out of it, and a huge sigh of relief at the pentagon.

 

fermis

Defected Korean???

In the Hangar: 1/48 Hobby Boss F/A-18D RAAF Hornet,

On the Tarmac:  F4U-1D RNZAF Corsair 1/48 Scale.

  • Member since
    April 2009
Posted by gmat on Saturday, November 13, 2010 2:29 PM

Skin divers are part of the answer?

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: hamburg michigan
Posted by fermis on Saturday, November 13, 2010 2:24 PM

Defected Korean???

  • Member since
    April 2004
Posted by rudedog72 on Saturday, November 13, 2010 2:05 PM

I would have posted the picture to go with, but I was having problems.

 

Ok, how about this one, its kinda easy I admti.

How did the west get its first close up look at the MIG-15?

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.