Aviation trivia quiz.

a reply to: spy66

It wasn't used to find the answer, it was used to verify an answer given, as I had the same answer as he did.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66

It wasn't used to find the answer, it was used to verify an answer given, as I had the same answer as he did.

By NASA it was Called the DA-1. And it was used to test something correct

a reply to: spy66

The NASA aircraft was the AD-1, and it had an oblique wing design. The Snecma aircraft crashed on an early test flight when it stalled.

a reply to: spy66

Umm, yes I am:

Here's the wiki page:
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Here's a Google image search:
images search

Here's another page:
www.airspacemag.com...

Here's a YouTube video:
m.youtube.com...

Yes he is. Absolutely 100%. The question posed was 'what is it and who made it', not 'from which country did the original concept come from'. Trying to say it's German is as accurate as saying the F-86, B-47 and Gloster Javelin were all also German. Tsk.

Ok next one.

The Russian Mig-25 was their answer to the F15 Eagle.It was like the F15 in many ways with one unusual (for the 1970s) exception,what was this and why did they use it?

a reply to: Imagewerx

You got the order backwards, the F15 was built because the USAF saw satellite/aerial footage of the Mig-25 and immediately noted its giant wings and control surfaces, thinking it was a supermaneuverable dogfighter to top the Mig-17 and Mig-21. We essentially copied it, and the F-15 was born

In reality, it had huge wings and control surfaces because it was horrifically heavy, using large amounts of stainless steel and titanium (the key design detail separating it from the F-15) in its construction for heat management at mach 3+ in its planned role as a high-altitude XB-70/SR-71 interceptor. In terms of "maneuverability", it was an F-106 on steroids.

If the Mig-25 copied anything, it was the CF-105 Arrow and the cancelled F-108 Rapier.

a reply to: Barnalby

My apologies for the wrong chronology,I haven't read this story for about 30 years.The important difference I'm after is NOT mechanical or aerodynamic.

I remember reading a while back that most of the avionics used vacuum tube technology instead of solid-state avionics, the reason being that vacuum tubes were more robust and could withstand an EMP pulse from a nuclear weapon. Is that what you were looking for? (It was unusual for the time, because vacuum tubes would have been rather old-school by then).

originally posted by: JJRichey
I remember reading a while back that most of the avionics used vacuum tube technology instead of solid-state avionics, the reason being that vacuum tubes were more robust and could withstand an EMP pulse from a nuclear weapon. Is that what you were looking for? (It was unusual for the time, because vacuum tubes would have been rather old-school by then).

You da man JJ,the main reason was that they were impervious to an EMP blast. Although my recollection of electronic equipment from that era was that vacuum tubes were a LOT less robust than transistors,simply because they were made from glass and had delicate filaments and electrodes inside of them.My dad had an early model radio control system that used miniature vacuum tubes (we called them valves over here) that although tougher than their bigger brothers still needed to be treated with care.A rough landing or boat hitting something solid on the lake was enough to render them useless,transistors in the same situation would just carry on regardless.

Here's a slightly oblique one. What do the Gloster Aircraft and Lockheed companies have in common? (Apart from making planes)

originally posted by: waynos
Here's a slightly oblique one. What do the Gloster Aircraft and Lockheed companies have in common? (Apart from making planes)

They made the first combat jets for their respective countries. And maybe they got the most German technologists from Operation Paperclip after WW2.

a reply to: Semicollegiate

You can have a bonus point for the combat jets (P-80 and Meteor for anyone who doesn't know) but I did say apart from making planes. the question refers to the companies themselves, rather than their products. It's a slightly unusual fact that they have in common. As I mentioned, it is a little oblique.

Clue - this is something that both companies did in the same year and for the same reason.

a reply to: waynos

Both companies built and tested aircraft that had the primary pilot in a prone position to mitigate G-loads on the body.

a reply to: waynos
They both changed the spelling of the company name because no one could pronounce them correctly. Gloucestershire and Loughead.

originally posted by: Stngray
a reply to: waynos
They both changed the spelling of the company name because no one could pronounce them correctly. Gloucestershire and Loughead.

I guess it's lucky they didn't start making aircraft in Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch.

Did you see the video of the weatherman pronouncing that correctly? Pretty cool.

Hi all, thought I'd chime in. Reading with interest. Thought I'd post a pic and see who can identify the WW2 pilot, aircraft and his reason for being relatively famous in some parts.



Kind regards,

Bally.

a reply to: bally001

The aircraft is a P-40 and by judging by the background fauna I'm guessing it's in SE Asia. So most likely a member of the Flying Tigers but I'm not sure which one without Google's help.

a reply to: Sammamishman

If you had to pick a famous AVG pilot, who would you pick? Just guess. Don't be sheepish...