Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Warbirds and Warplanes
Reload this Page >

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Notices
RC Warbirds and Warplanes Discuss rc warbirds and warplanes in this forum.

Knowledge Quiz for Warbird wiz

Old 05-14-2022, 08:02 PM
  #20701  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Sunday's clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.

Old 05-16-2022, 07:04 AM
  #20702  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.
Old 05-16-2022, 10:15 AM
  #20703  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.
Old 05-16-2022, 01:26 PM
  #20704  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.
Old 05-17-2022, 03:22 AM
  #20705  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.
Old 05-17-2022, 11:11 AM
  #20706  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.
Old 05-17-2022, 01:50 PM
  #20707  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.
Old 05-17-2022, 02:35 PM
  #20708  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,045
Received 116 Likes on 110 Posts
Default

One thing is obvious, the subject wasn't built by Grumman. Their planes, of that era, were all extremely heavy and durable when compared to other manufacturers products.
Old 05-17-2022, 05:01 PM
  #20709  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,045
Received 116 Likes on 110 Posts
Default

I found a few that might qualify:
Albatros D.1
Boeing F2B
Euler D.1
Grumman F2F(I know, I said it couldn't be a Grumman in my previous post but, as I stated in this post, it might qualify)
Old 05-17-2022, 07:50 PM
  #20710  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
I found a few that might qualify:
Albatros D.1
Boeing F2B
Euler D.1
Grumman F2F(I know, I said it couldn't be a Grumman in my previous post but, as I stated in this post, it might qualify)
None of the above, HJ. You might want to look at clues 4 and 5 again. But here's a bonus clue to get you on the right track. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a full flying vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.

Old 05-19-2022, 05:36 AM
  #20711  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Sorry about yesterday, guys. I had internet access problems which are now, at least temporarily, fixed. Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.
Old 05-19-2022, 09:35 AM
  #20712  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.



32. Our subject plane was supposedly capable of hitting 123 MPH.
Old 05-19-2022, 01:03 PM
  #20713  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.



32. Our subject plane was supposedly capable of hitting 123 MPH.



33. But probably not with the engines actually used.
Old 05-19-2022, 07:42 PM
  #20714  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Morning clue. Tomorrow will be a bit busy, so I'll drop the morning clue a bit early. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.



32. Our subject plane was supposedly capable of hitting 123 MPH.



33. But probably not with the engines actually used.



34. Which only produced 110 horsepower.
Old 05-20-2022, 11:17 AM
  #20715  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Afternoon and evening clues, Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.



32. Our subject plane was supposedly capable of hitting 123 MPH.



33. But probably not with the engines actually used.



34. Which only produced 110 horsepower.



35. Although, with the very light weight, even those anemic engines could carry the plane to an altitude of nearly 20,000 feet.



36. However, the engine problem had an underlying element.
Old 05-21-2022, 12:38 AM
  #20716  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Guys; today will be a very long day, so here's Saturdays clues for you. There's a bunch of them, because it looks as though I'm going to have to make a trip out of town. I need this quiz solved today, tomorrow at the latest. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.



32. Our subject plane was supposedly capable of hitting 123 MPH.



33. But probably not with the engines actually used.



34. Which only produced 110 horsepower.



35. Although, with the very light weight, even those anemic engines could carry the plane to an altitude of nearly 20,000 feet.



36. However, the engine problem had an underlying element.



37. The simple fact was the power produced by the engine, no matter the manufacturer, was only one element of a larger problem.



38. The larger problem was that no engine of that type was of much use at the time.



39. This was because the engines all used the same type of oil, which was in very short supply.



40. And the substitutes used were rather poor substitutes.



41. Resulting in engine lives being very short.



42. And reliability was poor.



43. Engines had to be rebuilt after only six or seven hours of use.
Old 05-21-2022, 05:52 PM
  #20717  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

No guesses? It's always slow on weekends; that's why I normally do one clue on weekends and three on week days. I still need this solved, so here's a bunch more clues. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.



32. Our subject plane was supposedly capable of hitting 123 MPH.



33. But probably not with the engines actually used.



34. Which only produced 110 horsepower.



35. Although, with the very light weight, even those anemic engines could carry the plane to an altitude of nearly 20,000 feet.



36. However, the engine problem had an underlying element.



37. The simple fact was the power produced by the engine, no matter the manufacturer, was only one element of a larger problem.



38. The larger problem was that no engine of that type was of much use at the time.



39. This was because the engines all used the same type of oil, which was in very short supply.



40. And the substitutes used were rather poor substitutes.



41. Resulting in engine lives being very short.



42. And reliability was poor.



43. Engines had to be rebuilt after only six or seven hours of use.



44. Assuming, of course, the engines, and planes, made it back home at all.



45. The engines referred to were, of course, rotary engines.



46. Which all used castor oil.



47. Which was in very short supply.
Old 05-22-2022, 08:35 AM
  #20718  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnnyS View Post
Fokker Triplane?
Guys; I'm going to be unavailable for the next week or so. Rather than letting things go idle while I'm unable to keep my question going, I'm going to declare JohnnyS the winner, since he actually had my subject plane bracketed (or at least one side of the bracket) 'way back two weeks ago. My subject is the Fokker D.VI. The D.VI used the fuselage of the previous Fokker design, the famous Fokker Dr.I Fokker triplane. And it used the shortened wings of the next Fokker design, the famed Fokker D.VII, to create a small biplane, powered by the 110 HP Oberursel UR.II rotary engine. Despite the anemic rotary engine, the D.VI was an excellent performer, mainly because the plane itself was small and very light, with an excellent design. It was fast (considering the underpowered engine), climbed well, and was very maneuverable. The flaw was the need for Castor oil to lubricate the rotary engine. The British blockade was crippling Germany in many ways, not least in food shortages, metals unavailable in Germany, and the need for Castor oil. As a result, the Germans has developed ersatz (substitute) oils which simply didn't work very well. Rotary engines failed on a regular basis and needed to be rebuilt after as little as six hours of use. If you will recall, Richthofen had grounded the Fokker triplanes at one point because the engines were so unreliable. How many German aces died because the Dr.I engines failed during a dogfight?

Thus, the Fokker D.VI was an excellent little aircraft, a great flying plane, but useless without the necessary lubricant. And, with the even more powerful rotary engines which had been designed, it would have been even better. But the engine designers weren't too excited about developing new rotary engines when they knew they couldn't be used without Castor oil. So, the excellent Fokker D.VI went by the wayside, doomed by the British blockade. and henceforth, all German successful planes had to use inline engines, which were always in short supply, because the Germans were so short on the metals necessary for their manufacture.

Fokker combined the Fokker Dr.I fuselage, and the then under design Fokker D.VII wings, to create a great little biplane which was simply useless to the Germans. JohnnyS was on the right path when he guessed the Fokker triplane early on, but he failed to follow the clues to its successor, the failed D.VI. Nevertheless, he came closer than anyone else, so I'm declaring him the winner. Take it away, JohnnyS. Make it a good one. And I'll be back in a week or so. Thanks; Ernie P.

What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft, like the subject of the preceding question, used an all moving vertical stabilizer; often called a “full flying” vertical tail surface



2. It also used a full flying horizontal tail surface.



3. Although the horizontal surface did have a small, and short, leading edge which was stationary.



4. It used the same basic fuselage as a preceding design by the same designer and company.



5. It used a shortened version of the wing to be utilized by the next design by the same designer and company.



6. It was deemed to be the best of the aircraft utilizing the type of engine it used, at a competition to select the next generation of fighter aircraft.



7. And it was then put into production.



8. But less than 60 aircraft were produced.



9. Mainly because of issues dealing with the engine.



10. Two of our subject aircraft were entered in the competition.



11. One (the first) used a common engine, much in use at the time.



12. The other (the second) used a new, not yet in full production, engine which was significantly more powerful.



13. During the competition, the first aircraft was fitted with another engine; an even more powerful new engine; again, not yet in production.



14. The pilots flying the competitors liked our subject aircraft.



15. It was very maneuverable, and handled easily.



16. It was, simply, a great aircraft with no vices or weaknesses.



17. And it was, therefore, ordered to go into production immediately.



18. However, both of the new engines had issues.



19. And all the production versions of our subject aircraft had to be fitted with the older, less powerful engine mentioned in clue 11.



20. So, production was ordered to be halted until the newer engines were available.



21. Thus, the low production numbers mentioned in clue 8.



22. Before the needed engines became available, a new aircraft was produced, by the same designer and manufacturer, which used a different type of engine, and which was highly regarded.



23. So, our subject aircraft was relegated to the sidelines of military aircraft history.



24. It was generally held to be a great aircraft in all regards, other than outright speed.



25. Which was the problem with using the less powerful engine.



26. This was a single seat fighter.



27. Length was a bit over 20 feet.



28. Wingspan was just over 25 feet.



29. The plane was very light.



30. Empty weight was less than 900 pounds.



31. And loaded weight was less than 1,300 pounds.



32. Our subject plane was supposedly capable of hitting 123 MPH.



33. But probably not with the engines actually used.



34. Which only produced 110 horsepower.



35. Although, with the very light weight, even those anemic engines could carry the plane to an altitude of nearly 20,000 feet.



36. However, the engine problem had an underlying element.



37. The simple fact was the power produced by the engine, no matter the manufacturer, was only one element of a larger problem.



38. The larger problem was that no engine of that type was of much use at the time.



39. This was because the engines all used the same type of oil, which was in very short supply.



40. And the substitutes used were rather poor substitutes.



41. Resulting in engine lives being very short.



42. And reliability was poor.



43. Engines had to be rebuilt after only six or seven hours of use.



44. Assuming, of course, the engines, and planes, made it back home at all.



45. The engines referred to were, of course, rotary engines.



46. Which all used castor oil.



47. Which was in very short supply.



48. Particularly in blockaded Germany and the Central Powers.





Answer: The Fokker D.VI





The Fokker D.VI was a German fighter aircraft built in limited numbers at the end of World War I. The D.VI served in the German and Austro-Hungarian air services.

Design and development



In late 1917, Fokker-Flugzeugwerke built two small biplane prototypes designated V.13. These aircraft combined a set of scaled-down D.VII wings with a fuselage and empennage closely mirroring those of the earlier Dr.I. The first prototype utilized an 82 kW (110 hp) Oberursel Ur.II rotary engine, while the second featured a 119 kW (160 hp) Siemens-Halske Sh.III bi-rotary engine.



Fokker submitted both prototypes at the Adlershof fighter trials in late January 1918. At that time, Fokker reengined the first prototype with the 108 kW (145 hp) Oberursel Ur.III. Pilots found the V.13s to be maneuverable and easy to fly. Idflieg issued a production contract after the V.13s were ultimately judged to be the best rotary powered entries of the competition.

Operational history



The new aircraft, designated D.VI, passed its Typenprfung (official type test) on 15 March 1918.[5] The production aircraft utilized the Oberursel Ur.II, which was the only readily available German rotary engine. Idflieg authorized low level production pending availability of the more powerful Goebel Goe.III. Deliveries commenced in April and ceased in August, after only 59 aircraft had been completed. Seven aircraft were delivered to the Austro-Hungarian Air Service (Luftfahrtruppen).



In service, the D.VI was hampered by the low power of the Oberursel Ur.II. Moreover, the lack of castor oil and the poor quality of "Voltol," an ersatz lubricant, severely reduced engine life and reliability. The D.VI remained in frontline service until September 1918, and continued to serve in training and home defense units until the Armistice.

Variants

V.13/1 : First prototype, powered by a 108 kW (145 hp) Oberursel Ur.III rotary engine

V.13/2 : Second prototype, powered by a 119 kW (160 hp) Siemens-Halske Sh.III rotary engine

Operators



[img]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif[/img]

Austria-Hungary

Luftfahrtruppen



[img]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.gif[/img]German Empire

Luftstreitkrfte



[img]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image003.gif[/img]Kingdom of Hungary

Royal Hungarian Air Force - Postwar.



[img]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image004.gif[/img]Romania

Romanian Air Corps - 6 captured during the war of 1919.[7]

Specifications





General characteristics



Crew: one pilot



Length: 6.25 m (20 ft 6 in)



Wingspan: 7.66 m (25 ft 1 in)



Height: 2.55 m (8 ft 4 in)



Wing area: 17.7 m2 (190 sq ft)



Empty weight: 393 kg (866 lb)



Gross weight: 585 kg (1,290 lb)



Powerplant: 1 Oberursel Ur.II , 82 kW (110 hp)



Performance



Maximum speed: 197 km/h (123 mph, 107 kn)



Range: 300 km (186 mi, 162 nmi)



Endurance: 1 hours 30 minutes



Service ceiling: 6,000 m (19,680 ft)



Armament



2 7.92 mm (.312 in) LMG 08/15 "Spandau" machine guns





Fokker D.VI

[img]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image005.jpg[/img]

Role

Fighter

Manufacturer

Fokker-Flugzeugwerke

Designer

Reinhold Platz

Primary user

Luftstreitkrfte

Number built

59





[img]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image006.jpg[/img]

Fokker D.VI





[img]file:///C:/Users/Ernie/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image007.jpg[/img]

Fokker D.VI Baubeschreibung general arrangement drawing, as submitted to (and required by) IdFlieg

General characteristics







Last edited by Ernie P.; 05-22-2022 at 08:38 AM.
Old 05-26-2022, 03:26 PM
  #20719  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 802
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Oh, poo. I don't have a quiz ready. I'll get one up ASAP.

I didn't think I could win: I got as far as the Dr.1, but of course it didn't fit all the clues.
Old 05-26-2022, 03:33 PM
  #20720  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 802
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Okay, I have a quiz.

1. This aircraft was the first supersonic warbird developed in the nation that developed it.
2. It was developed from a trainer aircraft.
3. Single seat aircraft
4. Two engines.
Old 05-27-2022, 06:40 PM
  #20721  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 802
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

New clues:

1. This aircraft was the first supersonic warbird developed in the nation that developed it.
2. It was developed from a trainer aircraft.
3. Single seat aircraft
4. Two engines.
5. Service ceiling of 50,000 feet.
6. Only used by one nation.
Old 05-28-2022, 09:51 AM
  #20722  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 802
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

New clues:

1. This aircraft was the first supersonic warbird developed in the nation that developed it.
2. It was developed from a trainer aircraft.
3. Single seat aircraft
4. Two engines.
5. Service ceiling of 50,000 feet.
6. Only used by one nation.
7. Designed for missions including: close air support, ground-attack and anti-shipping.
8. Had a radar system similar to the system used in RAF F-4M Phantom II fighters.
Old 05-29-2022, 11:59 AM
  #20723  
JohnnyS
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 802
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

New clues:

1. This aircraft was the first supersonic warbird developed in the nation that developed it.
2. It was developed from a trainer aircraft.
3. Single seat aircraft
4. Two engines.
5. Service ceiling of 50,000 feet.
6. Only used by one nation.
7. Designed for missions including: close air support, ground-attack and anti-shipping.
8. Had a radar system similar to the system used in RAF F-4M Phantom II fighters.
9. It was in service from 1978 to 2006.
10. It was a development of a trainer aircraft.
Old 05-29-2022, 12:07 PM
  #20724  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,045
Received 116 Likes on 110 Posts
Default

Johnny, did you intend to repeat clue 2 at clue 10? They both say "It was a development of a trainer aircraft".
Old 05-29-2022, 09:30 PM
  #20725  
Ernie P.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bealeton, VA
Posts: 6,943
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JohnnyS View Post
New clues:

1. This aircraft was the first supersonic warbird developed in the nation that developed it.
2. It was developed from a trainer aircraft.
3. Single seat aircraft
4. Two engines.
5. Service ceiling of 50,000 feet.
6. Only used by one nation.
7. Designed for missions including: close air support, ground-attack and anti-shipping.
8. Had a radar system similar to the system used in RAF F-4M Phantom II fighters.
9. It was in service from 1978 to 2006.
10. It was a development of a trainer aircraft.
Guys; I just arrived home a couple of hours ago. It looks like you've been having fun. Johnny; it sounds like you're talking about the Mitsubishi F-1. Thanks; Ernie P.


Answer: The Mitsubishi F-1



The Mitsubishi F-1 is a Japanese swept-wing, single-seat, twin-engine supersonic strike aircraft that was in service with the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) from 1978 to 2006. It was Japan's first domestically designed and built supersonic combat aircraft, jointly developed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Fuji Heavy Industries. It is essentially a T-2 trainer airframe modified for a dedicated anti-ship and ground attack role.



In the mid 1960s, the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) commenced studies into an advanced jet trainer which could also be modified to serve in the ground attack and anti-shipping roles. After considering license production of the T-38 Talon and SEPECAT Jaguar, Japan decided to develop its own trainer, the supersonic Mitsubishi T-2, this first flying on 20 July 1971. Cost over-runs in the T-2 program led to the proposed single seat attack version almost being abandoned, but the cancellation of the Kawasaki P-XL, the planned replacement for Japan's Kawasaki P-2J maritime patrol aircraft freed-up funds, while making it important to keep Japan's aviation industry employed, and contracts were awarded for the development of the attack version as the FS-T2kai in 1973.[1][2]



The new aircraft was a minimum change derivative of the T-2, with the rear cockpit being converted to an avionics bay by removing the rear seat, and replacing the canopy with a simple unglazed access hatch.[3] Two additional hardpoints were fitted under the wing to allow carriage of a heavier weapon load, and the avionics were improved,[4] with a new J/AWG-12 radar set, similar to the AN/AWG-12 fitted in British Royal Air Force F-4M Phantom fighter jets.[5] This set provides ranging information. Aside from the avionics changes, deletion of the rear seat, and new one-piece canopy, the only other major change from the T-2 was the strengthening of the airframe to enable it to carry a larger weapons load than the T-2. The F-1 is fitted with an internally mounted 20 mm JM61A1 Vulcan cannon with 750 rounds of ammunition. The aircraft also has seven external hardpoints for the carriage of a wide variety of stores. The fuselage hardpoint and inboard pair of underwing hardpoints are plumbed for external fuel tanks to increase the aircraft's range. The primary weapon of the F-1 is the ASM-1 and the newer ASM-2 long-range anti-ship missile. This weapon is roughly in the class of the American AGM-84 Harpoon or French AM.39 Exocet. Other weapons carried include the all-aspect short-range heat-seeking AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missile for air-to-air combat. This weapon is carried on the wingtip rails usually, but it can also be carried on the outboard underwing hardpoints for the F-1's secondary air defense role. Other air-to-ground weapons carried include rocket pods (JLAU-3/A) of 70 mm (2.75 in) size as well as bombs of 227 kg (500 lb) and 340 kg (750 lb) in size (Mk82 and M117 respectively). In addition, the Mk-82 and M117 bombs can be fitted with infrared guidance kits, turning them into precision-guided weapons that home in on heat radiation emitted from seaborne targets such as ships or other ground-based targets. When fitted with this kit, the bomb becomes known as GCS-1.



The F-1 was replaced by the F-2 (Japan/U.S. developed, based on the F-16C/D), as well as upgraded F-4EJ Kai Phantom IIs. The last six active F-1s, based at Tsuiki in Fukuoka Prefecture, were retired on 9 March 2006, having reached the 4,000 hour limit of their airframes.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.