Aviation trivia quiz, round 2

[pigsty]

@JosephLalor has got it.  The original P-82 had Merlin engines, but for full-scale production they went to a new version of the V-1710, and that meant a lower top speed.  The earlier version was used for training instead of combat.

[JosephLalor]

Thanks Seán.  Here goes.

 

Either name of two aircraft, which connects Vickers at Brooklands with Dublin and possibly Co. Meath in Ireland.  

[Robert Shedd]

Vickers Viscount? 🤔. 

 

[JosephLalor]

Thanks Robert, but not the Viscount I'm afraid.  Two Vickers aircraft types, different names, named after the same person.

Edited December 7, 2024 by JosephLalor

[Paul821]

36 minutes ago, JosephLalor said:

Thanks Robert, but not the Viscount I'm afraid.  Two Vickers aircraft types, different names, named after the same person.

That gives it away - Wellesley and Wellington.

 

Arthur Wellesley born in Dublin then enobled as Duke of Wellington.

[JosephLalor]

1 hour ago, Paul821 said:

That gives it away - Wellesley and Wellington.

 

Arthur Wellesley born in Dublin then enobled as Duke of Wellington.

Bang on, Paul, Wellesley/Wellington it is. 

 

He was baptised in Dublin at St Peter's Church at Aungier St, but where we was actually born appears to be a matter of conjecture.  Suggestions include Merrion St in Dublin and Dangan Castle, near Summerhill in Co Meath.  His baptismal font was donated to St Nahi's church in the Dublin suburb of Dundrum.

 

[Paul821]

After some thought I have no question that meets the two criteria of not being too cryptic and that you cannot answer it via Google. Therefore it's open question time.

[pigsty]

Then I'll hop back in.

 

What pre-war aircraft was a sesquiplane when it was a prototype, but went into service as a monoplane?  Extra points for explaining why.

[GiampieroSilvestri]

The Potez 28 from 1926?It was built as biplane with Renault engine and as monoplane with Farman engine.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

Edited December 9, 2024 by GiampieroSilvestri

[pigsty]

Not really.  There were only two Potez 28, so the monoplane didn't go into service any more than the prototype had.

[GiampieroSilvestri]

The Nieuport Delage NiD 42 prototype was a monoplane later modified into a biplane.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

[Jure Miljevic]

Tupolev I-4? Started as a proper sesquiplane, although some time into production the lower wings were reduced to mere stubs and later removed altogether.

The reason for shortening the wing was due to the type's conversion into parasit fighter for the first Zveno composite with TB-1 heavy bomber:

I am away from my books but I think the reason for turning the plane into a pure parasol was that shortening of the wings did not affect the plane's performance.

Bought I-3 and I-4 Nakotne kits some thirty years ago. I am quite happy with the former, but on the latter corrugated skin is very much oversized, so I gave it away. Pitty, a proper kit of I-4 would make a very interesting model. Cheers

Jure

[pigsty]

Neither of those.  @GiampieroSilvestri, that's the wrong way round.  @Jure Miljevic, the one I'm looking for was a sesquiplane only as a prototype - the change wasn't part-way through its service life.

[GiampieroSilvestri]

Is it a fighter aircraft?

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

[pigsty]

No, not a fighter.

[GiampieroSilvestri]

Does it have fixed landing gear?

 

Giampiero

[pigsty]

Yes it does.

[GiampieroSilvestri]

So it is a parasol wing aircraft with fixed landing gear of the thirties?I thought the Westland Lysander but the prototype was not a biplane.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

Edited December 11, 2024 by GiampieroSilvestri

[Jure Miljevic]

Vickers type 253 perhaps? Not a proper sesquiplane, but Vickers Wellesley was basically a monoplane version of this type. Cheers

Jure

[pigsty]

Yes it is.  That doesn't narrow it down much, though, does it?

[Jure Miljevic]

No, and the wingspan of the lower wing is not that much shorter either. What was the reason for switching to monoplane configuration? Cheers

Jure

[GiampieroSilvestri]

10 minutes ago, Jure Miljevic said:

No, and the wingspan of the lower wing is not that much shorter either. What was the reason for switching to monoplane configuration? Cheers

Jure

From its the construction the Vickers type 253 had not much in common with the Wellesley other than it was built to the same specification.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

[pigsty]

Sorry, bit of confusion there - my post and @Jure Miljevic's must have arrived together.  @GiampieroSilvestri is right, it's a parasol monoplane with fixed undercarriage from the 30s.  The Vickers types mentioned were related only in that the same factory made them and the same contract covered them, so they're well off.

 

Clue: its wing was also swept, a bit like the Tiger Moth's.

[GiampieroSilvestri]

The Heinkel He 46?

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

[pigsty]

The Heinkel He 46 indeed.  They removed the lower wing to make the downward view easier - it was for army co-operation - but apparently felt they couldn't remove the interplane struts, so they just extended them all the way to the sides of the fuselage.  Most ungainly.

 

@GiampieroSilvestri, you have control, over.