The after Thanksgiving trivia blitz...

[jetmex]

It's been a while, so:

1. Name as many manufacturers as you can who also made the engines that powered their aircraft.

2. What is a "flying door"?

3. Name the aircraft that was referred to as "the Flying Eye".

4. NASA just retired a famous aircraft--what was the aircraft type and by which name was it was commonly called?

5. What aircraft will be replacing the answer to #4?

6. Name the last piston engine airliner to see service with a major carrier.

7. Name the last piston engine aircraft to see service with an air force or navy.

8. Describe the concept of rubber deck aircraft carriers.

9. Name the British jet fighter that used wings from a piston engine aircraft.

10. Name the largest twin engine airplane ever built.

Bonus--when and where was the first Thanksgiving in the continental United States held?

[stetto]

As to the bonus question, do you mean the one declared on Nov. 29, 1624 by William Bradford, or the one declared as "the fourth Thursday of each November" declared by FDR in 1939 and approved by Congress in 1941?

Or yet another, the Thanksgiving Proclamation of June 20, 1676 naming June 29th as the official Thanksgiving (in Mass., anyway...)

[Britbrat]

1) Armstrong-Whitworth, Avro (Can), Bristol, Caproni-Campini, Curtis, Curtis-Wright, DeHavilland (Can), DeHavilland (UK), Heinkel, Junkers, Leduc, Mitsubishi, Nakajima, Piaggio, Textron (Lycoming), Whittle, Wright

3) FW-189 "Owl"

4) Lockheed TR-1A/ER-2 -- derivatives of the U-2

6) Lockheed Constellation

7) Some are still in service -- Thailand still operates Canadair CL-215's as costal patrol & SAR aircraft.

8) The Royal Navy tested an inexpensive idea for retreiving carrier-based fighters by having them land wheels-up on a soft rubber bladder arrangement on a carrier deck. It was abandoned.

9) Supermarine E.10/44 Jet Spitefull -- became the Sea Attacker -- used laminar-flow wings from the Spitefull/Seafang -- Successor to the Spitfire

10. Boeing 777

[jetmex]

Ok Patrick, here we go:

1. A bunch of good answers, but did Lycoming build airplanes?

2. Still looking...

3. You got it--Das Fleigende Auge..,,

4. Nope.

5. See #4!

6. Give me some details, I can think of one type that was still flying in the early 80's

7. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CL-215 is a turboprop...

8, 9, and 10 ....... you got 'em!

Stetto--nice try, but no..... ;D

[Britbrat]

7) The CL-215 has piston engines (PW R-2800-CA-13). The CL-415 is the turbo prop varient.

6) I think the Connie varient that you are seeking is the L1649A.

4) Was the NASA aircraft the converted Boeing Stratocruiser rocket booster carrier? I think that it was called a "Guppy".

[Galvin]

2.) A "Flying Door" can be a type of UFO, the huge nose door on the Airbus "Beluga" large parts transporter aircraft, or a drink the Dutch are fond of.

Flying Door
4 cl. Gin
Approx. 1 cl Himbeersyrup
Lots of ice
Fill up with pineapple juice

4.) NASA just retired the last of the KC-135 'vomit comets' which were used for reduced (and zero-g) gravity research by flying a parabolic trajectory for about 25 seconds of Zero-G. Two of these planes (originally Air Force aerial tankers) were used with the first one being retired in 2000.. Among the various milestones reached in the service life of these aircraft was 'at least 285 gallons of vomit' .. although unknown how much when it was used for filming the Apollo 13 movie.

5.) NASA is replacing the KC-135's with a DC-9.

6.) Interesting note on the Supermarine Attacker. The wing was borrowed from the Spiteful design, the seaborne version of which was called the Seafang. The Seafang failed its deck trials due to too high a landing speed, a fault blamed on the design of the wing! Didn't stop Supermarine from recycling it for the Attacker however.

[Britbrat]

Actually, the Seafang did not fail its deck landing trials-- the aircraft did not offer an adequate performance advantage over the Seafire 47, & Seafang production was curtailed so that the new wing could be more profitably employed on the Attacker.

While the Spitefull/Seafang prototypes had alarming sensory feedback characteristics approaching the stall, they never actually did anything seriously wrong. In the words of Geoffrey Quill, Supermarine's chief test pilot -- "We concentrated in the ensuing months on improving performance and smoothing out its behaviour at the stall. In the latter, we succeeded to an acceptable degree as the later deck trials on the naval varient, the Seafang, were to demonstrate". The production wing had benign stall characteristics -- hence its ongoing use in the first generation jets.

One other bit of trivia re the Spitefull/Seafang wing -- it was also employed in the Supermarine SeaHawk, but with tricycle gear, unlike the tail dragger gear of the Seafang & Attacker.

[Galvin]

I also have copies of the Jeffery Quill book chapters on the Seafang and Spiteful which I used for background when making a model of the Spiteful a while back. I am looking for the other info I had that said that at the time of the Seafang deck landing trials, aside from the twitchy but benign behavior exhibited by the aircraft near the stall being considered unacceptable for the average FAA service pilot, its landing speed coming aboard was also a few knots above that which was desired. I agree that it never failed the deck landing trials per se but a lot of work was needed to bring the handlig up to service pilot requirements.

I also agree that the Spiteful/Seafang series was terminated in favor of concentrating on jet aircraft but other factors in its cancellation included the choosing of the Hawker Sea Fury and DeHavilland Sea Hornet for production as the last piston driven fighters for the Fleet Air Arm over the Supermarine design. The Air Ministry was also very keen at that time to field a jet fighter as soon as possible so any short cuts that could be taken were looked at carefully. Since the Spiteful/ Seafang laminar flow wing was already in production, (17 Spitefuls and 18 Seafangs were supposedly completed) it was decided to use it on the type 392 "Jet Spiteful" built under specification E.10/44. This later became the "Attacker". Although the Attacker was considered a good handling aircraft it had some intrinsic performance limitations and was, at best, an interim aircraft. It did indeed use the SpitefulSeafang wing until it was later replaced by a swept wing to morph the design into the "Swift".

I have to dispute that the Seafang wing was used on the Hawker Sea Hawk, however. Apart from the fact that Hawker was an entirely different company from Supermarine and a competitor for aircraft contracts, the planform of the Sea Hawk's wing is a straight taper root to tip of some 39' 8" span while that of the Seafang/Attacker is double tapered, being more tapered from mid span to tip, and 36' 6" span. Maybe there was some technology exchange between the companies but it's definitely an entirely different wing.

The Hawker Sea Hawk was a development of the Hawker P.1040 prototype that was redesigned into the navalized N.7/46 prototype for the Sea Hawk series. The P.1040 was a straight-winged aircraft and the second prototype P.1040 was modified and its development was continued into the P.1052 which added swept wings to the basic design but kept the non-swept stab. It also kept the single engine/bifurcated exhaust of the P. 1040.

Later developments would change this to a single engine with a straight through exhaust and single tailpipe as the P.1081 with swept wings and tail. Although it had little in common structurally, this was a research vehicle for and parallel development to the P.1067, the aircraft that would became the prototype of the Hunter.

[Britbrat]

My mistake -- I mispoke myself re the Seahawk -- as you point out, it was indeed a Hawker design. My understanding is that Dr. S. Goldstein was the NPL aerodynamicist collaborating with Hawker for the Seahawk wing (as he was also the NPL collaborator with S.R Hughes at Supermarine for the Spitefull wing) & that both projects were interrelated.

I was unaware that the Swift was directly descended from the Attacker -- I thought that it was an entirely different design.

[Galvin]

My copy of "The British Fighter Since 1912" says on page 331 that "While the P.1052 was providing Hawker with swept-wing experience, Supermarine evolved the Type 510 Swift VV106 as a research vehicle to specification E.41/46. Basically the machine consisted of the Attacker's fuselage to which were mated new wing and tail surfaces, all swept back at 40 degrees on the quarter chord line. A laminar-flow (H.S. A. 1) section was employed for the wings and the engine installed was the 5000 lb. s.t. Nene R.N. 2 No.24."

It originally also had the tailwheel type undercarriage but this was changed to tricycle type for the type 535 and type 541 prototypes as well as the F. Mk. 1 production versions. The aircraft was perhaps more portly than necessary, having the Attacker fuselage and the Nene centrifugial flow engine originally. The production aircraft had the 7000 lb. s.t. axial flow Avon engine fitted and, though of lesser diameter and a candidate for allowing the slimming of the fuselage, the resulting increase in internal space was used for fuel tankage. The Swifts, later prototypes included, had a much longer nose fitted than that on the Attacker.

[jetmex]

2. A flying door (to everyone I've worked with, anyway) is the landing gear door that is attached to the strut itself, usually on the main gear. It's especially appropriate to the door on the 727, the outer part of which actually resembles a wing when the gear is down.

Dave got 4 and 5.

I think I'll let #6 and #7 float along a little longer to see what pops up.

Still looking for the bonus.......

[Galvin]

After 23 years, five airlines, four corporate flying jobs, during all of which time I've been I've been associated with the 727, I've never heard the outer main gear strut door referred to as a "flying door". It has a couple of bolts holding its outer end in place that are removed to other holes for tire and brake changes and if they aren't replaced in their correct holes prior to takeoff the door will likely go flying on its own.

But even if that happens, we still don't call it a "flying door". I think it's just a local term used by your airline Jaime, if not just a maintenance term.

[Britbrat]

Back to #1) Lycoming is part of Textron, which includes, Bell & Cessna aircraft, (which use Lycoming powerplants), so I guess that I should have answered "Textron", rather than Lycoming.


Wrt. the Supermarine Swift -- it never cut it as a fighter, but it lived up to its name & was very fast in its time -- holding the world speed record for a while at 731 mph. It was fast enough to be a highly effective reconnaisance aircraft, & equipped at least 2 RAF reconnaisance squadrons into the 1960's.

[Galvin]

6.) Swissair inaugurated transatlantic service on May 2, 1947. On that date, just after midnight, DC-4-1009 HB-ILI departed Geneva with 17 passengers and a crew of eight. Unable to land at its intended destination at New York La Guardia because of poor weather, HB-ILI eventually landed at Washington National 20 hours and 55 minutes after departing Geneva.

In the summer of 1997, Swissair celebrated the Fiftieth anniversary of its first trans-Atlantic flight by operating a series of flights, including two trans-Atlantic flights, aboard a vintage Douglas DC-4 painted in its 1947 color scheme.

Eastern flew its last scheduled piston-powered revenue flights with the L-1049 Constellation in February of 1968 when they shut down their shuttle service on the east coast. But the honor of the last scheduled Connie flight in the U.S. goes to my old airline. The last scheduled Constellation airline service in the US was a Western Airlines (ex-Pacific Northern) L-749A flight from Juneau to Fairbanks, Alaska on November 26, 1968.

The final revenue passenger service on the Connie was flown by Aerovias Nacionales Quisqueyana on January 19, 1978 using two Constellations, L749A HI-207 and L049 HI-270. The flights were from Santo Domingo to San Juan and it’s ironic to note that the last flight was made using the oldest Constellation type, a L049.

I know for a fact that Aerochaga was flying a C-121 cargo Connie (my friend Ascher Ward sold it to them) into the U.S. (Miami) on revenue flights until 1993 when the FAA put a ban on any more piston-engined airliner flights from the Domnican Republic.

[GySgtUSMC]

Bonus


The Plymouth Thanksgiving traditionally regarded as the first thanksgiving took place in 1621, the fall after the Mayflower pilgrims arrived.

Since Squanto already lived in the Plymouth Colony, there would have been no point in inviting him. Samoset was no doubt long gone, returned to his tribe in southern Maine--there is no mention of Samoset in any Pilgrim writings after March 1621. Massasoit was invited (although there is no evidence to suggest Standish was the one who made the invitation, that is just more fictional writing). Massasoit brought with him ninety "men". Source: Mourt's Relation: A Journal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth (London, 1622), in a letter written by Edward Winslow: "Our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together after we had gathered the fruits of our labors . . . many of the Indians coming amongst us, and among the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five deer, which they brought to the plantation and bestowed on our governor, and upon the captain [Myles Standish] and others."

[jetmex]

Ok, still no joy on the bonus. Think southwest.

Dave, the flying door appellation may have been just within Continental, but I know at least a few mechs at American and Mexicana used the term as well, for they did our contract maintenance in South America and Mexico and were familiar with it. It was also used to a lesser extent to describe the door on the 737 as well, since both that and the 727 doors had the winglike extensions. The poor clods who left the door in the tire changing position (it was the outboard mains, which would not come off the airplane unless the door was out of the way) usually ended up with the aircraft returning with gear door warnings and red faced pilots who didn't catch it on the walkaround.

Gunny, you may have beaten me out, our Air Mic division was flying DC-6's out in the South Pacific until the early 80's, when they were replaced by 727s. I learn something new every day. BTW, I never mentioned anything about a Connie......

The military airplane I was thinking of was the Avro Shackleton, which was on active service as an ASW and AWACS platform until 1991, when it was replaced by the E-3.

[stetto]

jetmex said:

Ok, still no joy on the bonus. Think southwest.

Oh sure, you Texans at it again... Is it just me, or are Texans like those damm Russians of yore, who claimed to have invented everything... ;D

[jetmex]

Oh sure, you Texans at it again...

Damn straight! The rest of you are jealous because we DID invent everything!! ;D ;D ;D ;D

Check your history books.

[Britbrat]

Ahem, sooo --- since the CL-215's are still in service, they win ;D

[Wayne]

Yeppers...you might have to find a pic for Jetmex, though...


Found a piston engine military aircraft that was in service for 3 years after the shakleton was retired.