General Aircraft
This forum is for general aircraft modelling discussions.
This forum is for general aircraft modelling discussions.
Hosted by Jim Starkweather
Aircraft 'JEOPARDY' trivia knowledge exchange
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:23 AM UTC
I guess it was the P-38 without counter-rotating propellers...
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:32 AM UTC
... and no Turbocharger for the engines!
The plane was demanded during operation overlord because of it's appearance! No german plane nearly looked like the P-38. So no mistake was possible with friendly fire (and there was a lot at that time!)
Jean-Luc
The plane was demanded during operation overlord because of it's appearance! No german plane nearly looked like the P-38. So no mistake was possible with friendly fire (and there was a lot at that time!)
Jean-Luc
Defcon1
Joined: May 03, 2005
KitMaker: 174 posts
AeroScale: 132 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:33 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextI guess it was the P-38 without counter-rotating propellers...
verrrrrrrrrry close
You're one step ahead of defcon, since you realized it was a 2-parter.
Hint for the second part:
This feature was essential for high-altitude performance.
Tom
Was it the lack of turbosupercharger? Didn't I get the correct name for RAF P-38s?
CRS
Joined: July 08, 2003
KitMaker: 1,936 posts
AeroScale: 1,168 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:36 AM UTC
P-51, initally both the number of guns and powerplant were at issue, Allison engine had poor high altitude performance, ergo MERLIN powered Mustangs.
Defcon1
Joined: May 03, 2005
KitMaker: 174 posts
AeroScale: 132 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
P-51, initally both the number of guns and powerplant were at issue, Allison engine had poor high altitude performance, ego MERLIN powered Mustangs.
Mustang I's was still accepted by the RAF even with poor high altitude performance but Model 322 Lightning I's was cancelled.
Cheers,
David
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:48 AM UTC
As I already asked a question not long ago, maybe defcon1 could continue with the trivia 
CRS
Joined: July 08, 2003
KitMaker: 1,936 posts
AeroScale: 1,168 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:49 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Sorry CRS:
Def and Ted both already figured this one out!
Well as a MODERATOR, I could have deleted their posts and tried again. :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
Defcon1
Joined: May 03, 2005
KitMaker: 174 posts
AeroScale: 132 posts
Posted: Monday, May 16, 2005 - 08:52 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Sorry CRS:
Def and Ted both already figured this one out!
Your aircraft designation was indeed correct, def, but since it was generally known as the P-38 (initially the YP-38) and ted (Jean-Luc) baaaaaaaaarely beat you to the punch, it looks like he gets the next go, unless he chooses to defer.
Tom
Hi Tom,
That's not fair. I got the correct name and Ted got the correct reason why it has poor high altitude performance. I think we both have half credit. It should be a tie. You should ask another question. Just my opinion.
Cheers,
David.
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 03:40 AM UTC
Hello,
It seems to have been the Spad XII with a 37 mm cannon... and both Georges Guynemer and René Fonk achieved a few victories with it during WWI
Jean-Luc
It seems to have been the Spad XII with a 37 mm cannon... and both Georges Guynemer and René Fonk achieved a few victories with it during WWI
Jean-Luc
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 03:55 AM UTC
If you want to learn more about the first "moteur-canon", try this:
http://www.theaerodrome.com/aircraft/france/spad_xii.html
Jean-Luc
http://www.theaerodrome.com/aircraft/france/spad_xii.html
Jean-Luc
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 07:23 AM UTC
Hey Tim Toylar! My name is Jean-Luc not Jean-Loc! :-)
Ok, here is the next one:
During the last month of World War II, the germans worked on many "Zecret Weaponz" to win the war. Fortunatly no one really worked.
Among these weapons were various aircrafts. One of them really was a "Frankenstein" plane!
The questions are:
1 - What is the name of this aircraft?
2 - Why can it be called "Frankenstein" plane?
Jean-Luuuuuuuc...
Ok, here is the next one:
During the last month of World War II, the germans worked on many "Zecret Weaponz" to win the war. Fortunatly no one really worked.
Among these weapons were various aircrafts. One of them really was a "Frankenstein" plane!
The questions are:
1 - What is the name of this aircraft?
2 - Why can it be called "Frankenstein" plane?
Jean-Luuuuuuuc...
Merlin
Senior Editor
#017
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 08:13 AM UTC
Hi there
As Tom says, the Germans were past masters at building on existing designs, but I wonder if you mean the Ju 287?
The first prototype was build from a converted He 177 fuselage, with a fin and rudder from a Ju 188, plus a fixed landing gear made from B-24 components. That sounds suitably "Frankenstein-ish".
But in a way, it did work - because the Soviets continued the development after the War.
All the best
Rowan
As Tom says, the Germans were past masters at building on existing designs, but I wonder if you mean the Ju 287?
The first prototype was build from a converted He 177 fuselage, with a fin and rudder from a Ju 188, plus a fixed landing gear made from B-24 components. That sounds suitably "Frankenstein-ish".
But in a way, it did work - because the Soviets continued the development after the War.All the best
Rowan
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 08:19 AM UTC
John Luck is good, sounds american
The planes you named were not the right answer Tom, altough you were not far away!
The "Frankenstein" (unofficial name of course) indeed was a "mix" of various planes!!! It first flew august 16th 1944...
Bravo Rowan! A ton tour! (your turn)
John Lu... aaaarr Jean-Luc
The planes you named were not the right answer Tom, altough you were not far away!
The "Frankenstein" (unofficial name of course) indeed was a "mix" of various planes!!! It first flew august 16th 1944...
Bravo Rowan! A ton tour! (your turn)
John Lu... aaaarr Jean-Luc
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 08:20 AM UTC
The Ju 287 is the right answer!
Merlin
Senior Editor#017
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 08:35 AM UTC
C'est a moi encore?
Sorry for the bad French Jean Luc! - I'll go and try to find a question.
Sorry for the bad French Jean Luc! - I'll go and try to find a question.
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 08:40 AM UTC
Sorry but you misunderstood me Tom! as I said "Fortunatly no one really worked" I meant the "Zecret Weaponz" not the Ju 287 "Frankenstein" 
By the way, your French is good! How about an entire question in the "langue de Molière"?
By the way, your French is good! How about an entire question in the "langue de Molière"?
Merlin
Senior Editor#017
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 09:00 AM UTC
Ah non! Ca serait trop dificile!
Right, that's quite enough digging back into high-school French - well, if you want a question before midnight anyway!
OK - this is really from memory (ALWAYS a bad idea!).
After the "Dambuster" raids, a "30 year" ban was placed on the release of any detailed information about the "bouncing bomb" technology. When did the first accurate plans of the bomb appear? - I'm not worried about the precise date...
Right, that's quite enough digging back into high-school French - well, if you want a question before midnight anyway!
OK - this is really from memory (ALWAYS a bad idea!).After the "Dambuster" raids, a "30 year" ban was placed on the release of any detailed information about the "bouncing bomb" technology. When did the first accurate plans of the bomb appear? - I'm not worried about the precise date...
TedMamere
Joined: May 15, 2005
KitMaker: 5,653 posts
AeroScale: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 09:23 AM UTC
I found this:
The patent for the bomb was filed in August 1942 which was supplemented by a second filing in July 1943. It was not published until September 1963 as GB937959
Is this the right date Rowan?
Joh.. Jean-Luc
The patent for the bomb was filed in August 1942 which was supplemented by a second filing in July 1943. It was not published until September 1963 as GB937959
Is this the right date Rowan?
Joh.. Jean-Luc
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 AeroScale and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.