What Cockpit? MK VI

[the incivil beast]

You might be right to a certain extent but the aircraft is not american and a bit older.

[windriver]

French? Emeraude.

[the incivil beast]

Oui monsiuer, it is indeed the CP-30 Emeraude, whose design led to the CAP family. The one pictured has a C- registration, hence the american-looking dashboard :)

Claude Piel's biography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Piel)

windriver a le controle

[windriver]

Merci mille fois... Voici aujourd'hui avion cocpit défi.

http://www.content-delivery.co.uk/2505.jpg

[Kitbag]

Just to make it easy for those like me who can only manage Franglais for 2 weeks a year Babelfish translates

Voici aujourd'hui avion cocpit défi.

as
Here today plane cocpit challenge


:\

Not related to the Short Sturgeon is it?

[windriver]

Re the translation... I typed "Here is today's cockpit challenge." into Google translate and that was what it came up with...
who am I to argue.:)

Sorry... not the Sturgeon or relative even.

[Kitbag]

After posting I checked re the Sturgeon (I also read the instruction book after breaking things) so no surprise there.

There is a distinctly Gallic look though to the aircraft now I look at it again and I don't think it's just your French translation.

[windriver]

Non ... not French sorry

[Kitbag]

rien, obtenu le faux encore

[MReyn24050]

Good challenge :ok:.Please check PM
Mel

[India Four Two]

Inverted, inline engines - Walter?

[windriver]

Yes to the inverted, inline engines, but not Walter.

[evansb]

Is it the Reid and Sigrist RS.1 Snargasher?

[windriver]

Well done evansvb :ok:

The challenge photo comes from a copy of Flight May 1939 and refers to it as the Reid And Sigrist Twin Engined Three Seater (Trainer)

No mention of Snargasher in the article... but it's such a great name I hope it's the same thing.

http://www.content-delivery.co.uk/rands.jpg


BTW... Mel sent me this....

"According to a short item in the September 1976 issue of Air International
the name "snargasher" was applied to the R.S.1 by the factory workers during its construction and had no meaning other than as a "family joke".


You have control

[MReyn24050]

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Cockpit%20quiz/ReisSigristRS1Snargasher.jpg
A J Jackson in his book "British Civil Aircraft 1919-1973 Vol III lists the aircraft as the Reid and Gigrist R.S.1 Snargasher.
Mel

[evansb]

Thanks windriver. Here is one that is not on the list:


http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/interior.jpg
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/PortCockpitDoor.jpg

[Fitter2]

O.K., an airship. Zeppelin, 1920s?

[evansb]

Sorry, it is not an airship/zeppelin.

[kms901]

Sikorsky LeGrand?

[evansb]

Not a Sikorsky. Pre-1920s.

[ozbeowulf]

The Lawson C-2 circa 1919

[evansb]

ozbeowulf is correct:ok: Well done:D Some consider his design as the world's first airliner. It was probably the first airliner in the western hemisphere. General Dolittle asked if he could use the Lawson C-2 to bomb a naval vessel for a demonstration of air power. You have control.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/lawson_airliner_1919.jpg

[ozbeowulf]

I was surprised not find this one on the list, but I doubt it will last long...

http://xs121.xs.to/xs121/07473/wotzit_1.jpg (http://xs.to)

[Kitbag]

Siebel 204? or the Czech variant Aero 45.

[India Four Two]

I think it is too big for an Aero 45 and the instruments look American to me.

I42

[ozbeowulf]

It is an American aircraft.

[Kitbag]

Bell YFM-1 Airacuda?

[ozbeowulf]

Not the Airacuda. This aircraft came along a bit later.

If it helps, the aircraft was a military variant of a civilian design by a well-known manufacturer.

[MReyn24050]

Welcome to the thread. Great challenge :ok:Please check PM

[Kitbag]

Beech AT11 Kansan?

[ozbeowulf]

Well done, Kitbag! It is the Beech AT-11 Kansan with one of the two (or three?) instrument panel configurations it used in its WWII role as bombardier and navigator trainer.

You have control.

(Australian and British sleep cycles don't coordinate too well. You posted the answer 15 minutes after I went to bed last night. Sorry about the delay.)

Cheers,

Glenn

[MReyn24050]

Good Challenge:ok:. Here is the panel of another Beech At-11 which is currently up for sale in the USA.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Cockpit%20quiz/73652679.jpg
Mel

[Kitbag]

TVM Ozbeowulf, enjoyed hunting that one down.

This isn't on the list either, but probably won't take long:

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/WC21.jpg

[windriver]

It has the looks of a Piper about it and plenty of circuit breakers.
Early Navajo?

[stevef]

Looks very much like a BN2 Islander to me.

[Kitbag]

stevef has it:D

This Islander ZK-FXE in fact, living in New Zealand. I hadn't realised that over 1250 had been built, many of which are still in service and even some older relics are being recovered, refurbished and re certificated so good is it at what it does. Also many seem to end up in exotic locations.
http://www.kiwiaircraftimages.com/images/main/98_si/SI98ISL3.JPG

[stevef]

Seems to be a bit of damage to the Islander's right wing, just outboard of the fuel tank sump!

Anyway, open floor - I can't get my 'next cockpit' image to work for some reason. :^-(

[MReyn24050]

To keep the thread moving here is the next challenge:-
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Cockpit%20quiz/Cockpitquiz293.jpg

[Kitbag]

Seems to be a bit of damage to the Islander's right wing, just outboard of the fuel tank sump!



I didn't notice that till you pointed it out stevef. The site where that pic comes from features several views of FXE including one in flight on a whale watching tour. The photos were all taken on the same day. I guess it may be an optical illusion, there are some puddles on the ground perhaps it is nothing more than a reflection.

Seeing as Mel hasn't even pretended his next one is easy I'm outta here!:eek:

[windriver]

Not easy,rubbish! I recognised it straight away. It's a decompression chamber.

In the unlikely event I guessed wrong I'm currently looking at German aircraft of the twenties.

[MReyn24050]

Kitbag sorry to hear that.
windriver. Sorry it is neither a decompression chamber nor a German aircraft. The years are close though.
Mel

[Akubra]

"decompression chamber" :ok:

Probably A bit late in the manufacture date, but is it possibly a Latécoère 15?

[MReyn24050]

Sorry Akubra. This aircraft was a few years earlier than the Latécoère 15 and it was also not from France.
Mel

[seacue]

I'm still convinced that it's an instrument of torture deep in a Carpathian castle.

[windriver]

Verne-Wells Mk1 ?...:sad:

May we assume it's a twin engined aircraft...
Eastern European perhaps?

[evansb]

Tarrant Tabor?

[MReyn24050]

seacue: I'm still convinced that it's an instrument of torture deep in a Carpathian castle.
windriver: Verne-Wells Mk1 ? May we assume it's a twin engined aircraft. Eastern European perhaps?
evansb: Tarrant Tabor
Certainly looks like a torture chamber I agree :)
verne-Wells Mk1 :) Must admit it looks like something from either "1000 Leagues under the sea" or from "War of the worlds". It was however a twin engined aircraft but not from Eastern Europe.
Not the Tarrant Tabor - this aircraft was not a bomber.
Mel

[ozbeowulf]

A wild guess, but is it a Bristol T.T.A. fighter circa 1916?

[MReyn24050]

ozbeowulf. This aircraft was not a Bristol aircraft but she was British.
Mel

[ozbeowulf]

Hmm... the Blackburn Kangaroo, perhaps?

[windriver]

Handley Page W8 ?

[MReyn24050]

ozbeowulf and windriver. Sorry not the Blackburn Kangaroo nor the Handley Page W8. This aircraft was not as large as the Blackburn or the Handley Page. I should add as well that it was far from being successful.
Mel

[Kitbag]

At the risk etc...


de Havilland 10 Amiens?

[MReyn24050]

kitbag. This bird was about the same size as the de Havilland 10 Amiens. A further clue being that the aircraft featured in my challenge did not go into production.

[windriver]

How about the Beardmore Inverness ? (With sails!)

[MReyn24050]

Not the Beardmore Inverness, however they did have something in common, and it wasn't the sails, but were powered by the same make of engines.
Mel

[windriver]

Armstrong Whitworth Awana

[MReyn24050]

windriver
Not the Armstrong Whitworth Awana although it did had the same engines as the challenge aircraft but she was a very much larger aircraft, in fact the Awana was larger than the Blackburn Kangaroo and the Handley Page W8. The Awana also flew 4 years after the challenge aircraft.
To recap the challenge aircraft was a British aircraft built late 1910s but not built by:-
Armstrong Whitworth
Beardmore
Blackburn
Bristol
de Havilland
Handley Page
or Tarrant
She was a twin engined aircraft but did not go into production.
Mel

[evansb]

Boulton and Paul's P.8 Atlantic?

[MReyn24050]

evansb steals the thunder again.:ok: It is indeed the cockpit of the Boulton and Paul's P.8 Atlantic.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/BoultonPaulP8Atlantic.jpg
The Boulton and Paul P.8 was built from the outset as a contestant for the Daily Mail prize for the first nonstop transatlantic crossing.Only two prototypes were built.Unfortunately the first P.8 crashed on its first flight after an engine cut-out. The second P.8 was finally completed as an airliner prototype and test bed but no orders were received for it.
Bri, you have control.

[evansb]

Thanks Mel, that was an enjoyable challenge. Here is the next cockpit:
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/3995134.jpg

[windriver]

Enjoyed the last challenge.. well done to evansvb
This one looks like a helicopter? Brantly B.2B perhaps.

[evansb]

Not a helicopter.

[windriver]

Whoops! (Thinking aloud, not fishing yet) Looks like it's got 2 sets of engine instruments and only basic flight instruments.

What I would like to know though... are the 'chess pawns' on the plank part of the aircraft structure or the building in which the aircraft is housed?

[evansb]

Yes, it is a twin-engine aircraft. The 'chess pawns' are ventilators on an adjacent building.

[ozbeowulf]

The Sukhoi SU-12?

[evansb]

Sorry, this craft is not from Russia. It was built in the late 1950s.

[windriver]

Did this aircraft operate in the AOP/Spotter role?

[evansb]

The few examples that were built didn't get much beyond the experimental and assesment phase, but AOP/spotting was not a primary role intended for this craft.

[ozbeowulf]

Excellent challenge, evansb...

Except for the two engines...or, at least, two magneto switches... I'd wonder if this was the Bell XV-3 or the Transcendental Model 1-G, but I may be looking in the wrong category.

I understand this aircraft is not a helicopter, but was it an experiment in the VTOL/Tilt Wing field?

[Edited to remove erroneous "Model 200" reference and to add the Transcendental example]

[evansb]

This version had two Lycoming engines, but it was found to be under-powered, so a single French built Turbomeca turbine was installed. You could say it is a VTOL, but not a tilt-wing. Although not a helicopter, it was built by a helicopter company, but not Bell.

[ozbeowulf]

Got it! The Piasecki PA-59K AirGeep.

http://xs121.xs.to/xs121/07470/Geepfrst.gif (http://xs.to)

[evansb]

ozbeowulf is correct:ok: Well done:D The AirGeep was one of several flying platforms developed during the 1950s. Although not a success, the idea has died hard. You have control.

[ozbeowulf]

That was a great challenge, Evansb!

Let's see how long this one lasts....

Note: Ignore the superfluous wires and struts seen through the windscreen. They do not belong to this aircraft.

url=http://xs.to]http://xs321.xs.to/xs321/07470/wotzit_2.jpg[/url]

[windriver]

Don't know what this is.. but it looks like a civilian "working" aircraft circa 1960..... Crop sprayer perhaps?

[ozbeowulf]

"Working", yes, but more utilitarian than a crop duster. Also, this aircraft's cockpit differed significantly from the civilian version.

[Kitbag]

Just some thoughts...

Cockpit colour indicated US mil, ac is single piston engine, interesting control column lock so I guess this one is probably in a museum. From Ozbeowulfs comments there is a civilian variant but the cockpit layout is quite different.

Very, very longshot here... QU 22 Pave Eagle?

[ozbeowulf]

Not the Beech Pave Eagle, Kitbag, but you're on the right track, i.e., this aircraft was a military version of a standard model from a major manufacturer. It had an unusual military designation.

A bit of background to keep things fair. I found this photo and attached info on a website with an excellent pedigree, but I have also seen inflight photos of this aircraft with two side-by-side crew seats, not the single crew position shown.

In any case, the structure surrounding the central instrument panels appears to be the same as the civilian version, which I have flown. This is certainly not the only civilian aircraft to be adopted by the military and retro-fitted with a single central pilot's seat. I don't know, but I suspect this mod involved only some of the several dozen -A, -B and -C military variants.

General hints: Think 1950s, US Air Force, and an engine with an odd number of cylinders.

[Edited to confirm Kitbag's assessment as a US military aircraft]

[MReyn24050]

As you say the military layout is vastly different to the civil version. I also think this the screen framework doesn't even match the more common.miltary version. Please check PMs.
Mel

[Kitbag]

I'll go for the Cessna LC126 assuming a radial engine.

[MReyn24050]

kitbag
ozbeowulf's challenge photograph comes from the National Museum of the USA website - Media associated with the Cessna LC-126. However, I am not too sure about it's authenticity as I have never seen a L-126 aircraft with a central windsceen panel. I think this may well a one off.
Mel

[ozbeowulf]

Well done, Kitbag. You have control.

Mel, Kitbag, Windriver, et al...

The photo came from the USAF Museum website.

See http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/photos/index.asp?galleryID=2283&page=2

and select the photo in the lower right corner.

See also: http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=370

I hope this challenge was not misleading and assure you it was posted in good faith. I just wish I could find another, similar, photo to confirm or repudiate the USAF Museum's identification.

Glenn

[MReyn24050]

Glenn
Thanks for your PM, I agree with you the aircraft windscreen was most probably modified to remove the central windscreen post for the single pilot conversion. Looking at a LC-126 undergoing restoration I agree the structure shown in your photograph matched that of the aircraft being restored. I found the attached photograph of N195SE which is a L-126C now in civvy colours. I would be interested to know how many single pilot LC126s were built.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Cockpit%20quiz/N195SEMartinLintonsLC-126C.jpg
Yours was an interesting challenge which got the old grey matter working. :ok:

[evansb]

The Airforce museum has made an error in the caption of the photograph.
It is a Grumman OA-12 (J2F Duck). The Air Force museum have made errors before, and I have e-mailed them to correct their mistakes.
There is just no way the photo on thread #325 is a Cessna 195 (LC-126).
Here is the USAF museum's Grumman OA-12. Note the fenestration.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/050322-F-1234P-019.jpg

[Kitbag]

I have to say my guess, and that is what it was, was based purely on the use the ac had been put to rather than anything else. Looking at the museums external pic of the LC126 it does seem a little unlikely from here. If evansbe is right, and looking at a different source I suspect he is, he better get posting a new challenge :D

[evansb]

Here is the next 'What cockpit?':

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/4012173.jpg

[Kitbag]

Bell XV3a?

[evansb]

Kitbag is spot on in one:D. Well done. The Bell tilt-rotor XV-3 it is. You have control.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/xv-3.jpg

[Kitbag]

Amazing to think that that tilt rotor technology demonstrator of the late 40's (I think) is only now maturing into a usable aircraft.

Anyway, my last few attempts have been guesses but I am sure someone knows what this one is:

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/WC22.jpg

Apologies for the poor quality but that just adds to the fun doesn't it?:8

[old,not bold]

No idea really, but something says very bare...

Kamikaze aircraft? No idea what type

[Kitbag]

Being very literal, no it's not a suicide plane, though maybe you have to wonder a bit about those who were destined to drive it. Actually, from the privileged position of knowing what it is I thought it was quite well equipped!

[MReyn24050]

Brave aircrew indeed. Please check PMs

[wz662]

Me 163 Komet

[Kitbag]

Soz, not the Me163- but not far off

[Fitter2]

Haven't we had the Natter already?

[Kitbag]

F2

According to Mels list we haven't had the Bachem Natter, and that situation hasn't changed yet

[evansb]

Mig I-270?

[Kitbag]

Very close indeed, but not quite. Looking for something between the Me and the MiG?

[the incivil beast]

Junkers Ju-248 aka Me-263, then ?

[evansb]

Is it the ignominious Messerschmitt Me.263 'Rocket Interceptor'?
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/side.jpg

[MReyn24050]

the incivil beast: Junkers Ju-248 aka Me-263

I think the incivil beast has something there. As the following link states.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/Flugzeuge/J%25E4ger/Ju248/Cockpit/cockpitju248.htm&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=6&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3DMe%2B263%2Bcockpit%26start%3D20%26hl%3Den%26rls %3DRNWE,RNWE:2004-29,RNWE:en%26sa%3DN

[windriver]

This thread never ceases to entertain. :ok::ok:

[ozbeowulf]

Profound apologies to all for my naivete in believing the USAF museum photo id when I posted the "LC-126" challenge.

I suppose the near-identical fuselage curves and the way Cessna modified the 170 to produce the single crew seat L-19 helped me delude myself. Also, because I knew the LC-126 was suspended from the museum ceiling, I ignored the Duck's cabane struts and wires, too. In the end, the only accurate clue I gave concerned the radial engine. Very embarrassing.

Evansb did a perfect job in correctly identifying the cockpit, despite the barriers I inadvertently erected. An difficult task extremely well done!

Glenn

[evansb]

My photo of the Me.263 Rocket cockpit is quite old, (see below), which may explain my hesitance in submitting an entry into this thread. http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/panel-1.gif

[evansb]

The incivil beast beat me to it. :ok:Perhaps. It was edited two minutes after I posted my response. You are correct, regardless, and I have dominated this thread lately, so it is your control. Well done:D

[ozbeowulf]

[Edited: Text removed because it no longer makes sense since an earlier post has been edited.]

[Kitbag]

The incivil beast and evansbe are both correct. For those who are wondering about the designations, the aircraft was a more refined development of the famous Me 163. It featured a retractrable undercarriage, pressurised cockpit and a dual chamber rocket motor giving increased endurance, armament was similar to the Komet. Because development progress was slow the whole project was handed over to Junkers who further refined the design, hence their designation. As the end of the war approached responsibility for it reverted to Messerschmitt. The V1 made several unpowered flights before it was captured by the Americans who gave it to the Russians and hence the MiG bureau who then developed the I270 from it. Confused?

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/me263-1.jpg

[the incivil beast]

I posted the Ju-248 first and having investigated a little further, I edited it a bit later to add the Me-263 denomination, without seeing evansb's post before I submited the edit.

evansb, thanks for your gentlemanhood, anyway :ok:

Here is the next whatcockpit (an easy one, I guess)

http://www.marc-till.com/tmp/cockpit12.jpg

[oncemorealoft]

Is it the Rutan Varieze?

[the incivil beast]

Told you it was easy, very easy indeed !

oncemorealoft has control

[Fitter2]

Very easy?? (Or Vari eze if you can only spell American?)

Edited to say you got in while I was double checking for Vari or Long!

[the incivil beast]

Sorry, Fitter2, oncemorealoft beat you by one page :)

[oncemorealoft]

Fitter 2, if you have a picture to hand please take the lead as I have nothing to hand.

[MReyn24050]

Just a brief insight, as I understand it, as to how this aircraft became to be known as the Ju 248 as well as the Me 263.
Having demonstrated with the Me.163B Komets "V6" "V18" that the twin chambered motor was a workable design, the new interceptor was pushed forward. As Messerschmitt were fully committed with the production of the Me 262 the RLM passed the work to Junkers under Professor Heinrich Hertel.
The Technical Department of the RLM were pushing for the completion of the project, so there was a limit to the alterations which could be undertaken.
One of the most distinctive features of the new Junkers design was to install a pressurised cabin, cut down the aft fuselage decking and retain the high visibility teardrop canopy for all round vision. The fuselage was now built in three sections, the forward unit carrying the pressurised cabin, pilot armour and retractable, nosewheel for the tricycle undercarriage.
The centre section carried the fuel tanks, armament and main wheel wells, with the aft section was removeable for servicing the engine and combustion chambers. Walterwerke had taken the lessons learned from the HWK 109-509.B and had produced the final version of their twin chambered design, the HWK 109-509.C.
Hertel's reworking led to Junkers redesignating the new aircraft as the Junkers Ju.248.
As the aircraft neared the start of production the RLM decided that the production type number revert to Messerschmitt's and so the new type was known as the Messerschmitt Me.263, maintaining its lineage from the Messerschmitt stable.
Mel

[ozbeowulf]

BD-5, me thinks...

Edit 45 seconds, later - Well, this will teach me to check for a new page before posting, won't it!

[Fitter2]

Sorry for delay - went off in a huff having been beaten by 2 minutes (and one page) and did some real work.

Surprisingly this isn't on the list, I believe.


http://i15.tinypic.com/6lsyyig.jpg

[MReyn24050]

As you say it is surprising it has not appeared before. Please check PMs

[windriver]

Just a guess... AH-64 Apache?

[Fitter2]

Not rotary, and somewhat larger.

[Kitbag]

Possibly C17?

[Fitter2]

Well, the C-17 Globemaster III is definitely non-rotary and larger.

http://i15.tinypic.com/6qbk7tf.jpg

Kitbag has control.

[Kitbag]

Err yeah it certainly is!

Anyway, this'll be quite easy I think (no really, I'm not Mel:}!). Surprisingly not in the list either

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/WC23.jpg

[MReyn24050]

An easy one? By no means. Check PMs.
Mel

[wz662]

Rats you would post the only cockpit I've got. :{

Type claimed an aviation first for this class of aircraft

[Kitbag]

See? said it was easy. wz662 care to put everyone else out of my misery?
If its late I know Mel knows so if he wouldn't mind confirming I can go to bed safe in the knowledge that the show goes on.

:ok:

[MReyn24050]

No problem kitbag
Mel

[ozbeowulf]

While the thread is quiet (everybody has to sleep sometime) I'd like to share this with you. It's NOT a challenge. It couldn't be because there is no specific aircraft associated with this cockpit.... as far as I know, anyway.

http://xs321.xs.to/xs321/07483/uav.jpg (http://xs.to)

In November, 2006, Raytheon unveiled what it calls its Universal Control System (UCS) - a first of its kind unmanned aerial system (UAS) "cockpit". Each operator sits in a small workstation.

http://xs321.xs.to/xs321/07483/uav_wide.jpg (http://xs.to)

As a retired pilot, I have mixed feelings, but on the good side, it would make engine fires awfully boring.

Glenn

[MReyn24050]

Not takers for kitbag's challenge other than wz662?
Type claimed an aviation first for this class of aircraft

The glasshouse cockpit structure was typical for this nations aircraft.

[windriver]

OK I`ll bite... German... late 30's early 40's?

What's the purpose of the "black circle" assembly/display?

[Kitbag]

Right sort of timeframe. I cannot imagine the purpose of that black circle, it may be an optical illusion, in that I would expect it to be clear.

[MReyn24050]

I cannot imagine the purpose of that black circle, it may be an optical illusion, in that I would expect it to be clear.

As you say "an optical illusion" as I think it was a clear vision panel.

[evansb]

Focke Wulf Fw.191?

[Kitbag]

Evansbe, no, this aircraft performed a very different role than bombing

[Kitbag]

I checked an alternate reference this evening when I got home regarding the 'black circle'. In one photo it is a clear panel, but in a couple of others it is a typical Germanic defensive gun mount for a 7.9mm weapon. Not sure that is any help, but I like to keep the record straight.

[windriver]

How about the Siebel Si 204

[Kitbag]

You seem to be flying a bit of a kite there Windriver. This type was very different to conventional aircraft, and was even built after the war, so useful was it. Also achieved many world records that stood for a long time.

[wz662]

I have an orignal copy of the report about this aircraft from the Airborne Forces Experimental Establishment RAF Beaulieu. This may or may not be a clue. :oh:

[evansb]

The Focke Achgelis Fa 223 Drache.

[Kitbag]

You got it evansbe, it is the Focke Achgelis FA223 Drache (Paper) Kite, an allusion to its frontal view apparently :D

Just to illustrate the point about the different circular panel see below:
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/Fa223V14wartime.jpg
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/Fa223V16.jpg
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/Fa223wn51.jpg
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/FA223V14postwar.jpg
Examples were built or assembled post war by SNCASE in France were the designer Heinrich Focke worked and Avia in Czechoslvakia. First helicopter to cross the English Channel, held helicopter records for speed, climb rate and ceiling for a considerable time after the war.

You have control

[evansb]

Thanks Kitbag. That was a very good challenge with some history thrown in for good measure:ok: Here is the next cockpit:

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/4012151.jpg

[Kitbag]

First (and probably only) thoughts: large biplane bomber type, looking at glazing below and forward of pilots position it puts me in mind of those Amiot designs of the 30's, however this is much earlier- late WWI? and possibly Russian. Is that a handbrake on the right, or a throttle for a single engine? And what is happening between the pilots? Looks like a very strange game of dominoes to me.

[old,not bold]

Is what seems to be a lack of any flight instrumentation a clue?

[windriver]

Kite warning... Looks like something from circa 1920... twin engined. Ignoring the unknown 'dominoes' the pedestal layout seems to be quite advanced for the time. I'm quite confident it's unpressurised:8

Was it a factory mock up prepared for display at an exhibition perhaps?

[evansb]

The aircraft flew in the early 1920s. Not military. No actual glazing for the pilots, as they wore goggles. The console pedestal displays early use of electric switches to the engineers. I cannot explain the absence of flight instruments.

[Kitbag]

Possibly a Caproni Ca.60 Noviplano?

[evansb]

Kitbag is correct.:ok: Well done. The giant Caproni Ca.60 Transaero Noviplano, eight engine flying boat flew only once, in 1921, and crashed, killing the test pilot. A truly awesome aeroplane from a design and engineering standpoint. The crew comprised 2 pilots and 6 engineers. YouTube has a video of the aircraft taken prior to its maiden flight, posted by Bomberguy. Search 'Count Gianni Caproni'. You have control.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/ca60.gif

[Kitbag]

Fantastic bit of kit, thought designers had got away from multiplane layouts by 1917ish.

Afraid I have nothing available right now so open house:ok:

[ozbeowulf]

Okay, try this one....

An innovative design overtaken by world events....

http://xs121.xs.to/xs121/07484/wotzit_3.jpg (http://xs.to)

[MReyn24050]

stealth aircraft? Sorry the image is still not visible.
Mel

[Kitbag]

Aurora? :E

[ozbeowulf]

Not Aurora or any other stealth aircraft.

This aircraft's job description was much more mundane, though it did attract military interest.

Designed by engineers formerly employed by a major (at the time) light aircraft manufacturer, this bird utilised three of the latest design concepts when it first flew.

Edit: A few clues, because that photo doesn't give away much. (Best I could do, though; it's a frame from a video clip. I'll post the link to the clip eventually.)

Think late 1930s, a somewhat unusual configuration, and excellent visibility for the aircrew.

[Kitbag]

All the glazing makes it look vaguely helicopter-ish a bit like the Sikorsky R5, but it isn't that, pilot appears to be Australian or American. Appears to have control wheels rather than columns. I suspect it is late 30's early 40's, abandoned due to WWII? Convinced its rotary, but can't pin it down.

[ozbeowulf]

Despite appearances, Kitbag, it's not a rotary-wing aircraft.
Also not Australian.

You're quite correct re late 1930s and "abandoned due to WWII."

[Kitbag]

Not Mr Abrams Explorer? Layout like an Edgely Optica but flown by Flash Gordon!

[ozbeowulf]

Well done, Kitbag!:ok: It is the Abrams Explorer. You have control.

http://xs121.xs.to/xs121/07485/abrams_3.jpg (http://xs.to)

Although the designers of the Explorer did not invent tricycle landing gear, twin booms or cabin pressurisation, the Abrams company successfully used all three on this 1937 aircraft.

The Explorer was doing government survey flights when WWII began. Although the Abrams could top 200 mph, the US Army decided to use faster, more survivable, fighter aircraft instead. Only one Explorer was built; it is now owned by the Smithsonian.

There is a short, but interesting, video clip at... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsaAeLaNr60&feature=related

Glenn

[Kitbag]

Sadly my fund of suitable cockpit photos is still empty, although I have great hopes of a recent investment.

However as before - open house gents

Just a note added to say I liked the video of the Abrams, especially the clipped commentary Fantastic:ok:

[Kitbag]

On the other hand, just came across this little beaut:)

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa154/Kitweston/WC24.jpg

[evansb]

Beauty! Check your PM.

[Kitbag]

PM checked. Turn about. Your move.

[evansb]

Ahh...well, I would prefer some other ppruner identify the cockpit outside of a PM, but if you are really giving me control without identifying
the cockpit, hmm..let me think about this until I have at least 6 hours rest, thanks.

[ozbeowulf]

Congrats to evansb for identifying the mystery cockpit, but I'm baffled. I haven't even worked out how the pilot saw out of the aircraft.

Someone please tell all. :O

Glenn

[the incivil beast]

I haven't even worked out how the pilot saw out of the aircraft.If you look closely, it looks like the central part of the "ceiling" is actually some thin tarpaulin and that the real winscreen is behind it

[seacue]

What is the machine with the mystery cockpit - for us unwashed?

[Fitter2]

The fenestration looks rather like a Wittman Tailwind, but the panel looks rather older and European (French?)

[old,not bold]

Reminds me of a crop-sprayer I once had some fun in.....but that doesn't account for the dual rudder pedals, if that's what they are.

[evansb]

It is a 1929 St. Louis C2-110 Super Cardinal. Only 6 were built. It is powered by a 100-hp Kinner radial engine. Open house.

[Fitter2]

Well, that fell into the 'not in a million years' category. This, however, is a 'just to keep the game going', as my sister used to say before cleaning me out at Monopoly.


http://i2.tinypic.com/8atw8ex.jpg

[windriver]

Looks like the pilot really wanted to make sure he never got lost!...

Where to start? Having confused a Buccaneer with a Javelin on another thread I have no more face to lose...

Is the disconnected monocycle "thingy" in the top left of the picture of any relevance to the subject aircraft.

So for starters is this some sort of US "record breaker" type aircraft?

[ozbeowulf]

Lot of "where am I?" gadgets, but no engine instruments, and what looks like a speedbrake handle on the left. A sailplane set up for distance events, me thinks.

[Fitter2]

Lots of 'where am I' indeed (there actually 4 independant GPS visible, and another one out of sight), but there is an engine instrument/control bottom left. Given the duplicated sensitive VSIs, a sailplane would be a good start.

[the incivil beast]

Definitely a glider, as indicated by the yellow tow release handle and the wings of the one in front.

Back seat of an open-class two seater. As the ASH-25 is out because of the split canopy, one would say Schemp-Hirth Nimbus 4D

Is the disconnected monocycle "thingy" in the top left of the picture of any relevance to the subject aircraft.It's a trolley wheel used for ground handling

[larssnowpharter]

Perhaps the Duo Discus turbo.

[Fitter2]

Incivil Beast is correct - the rear cockpit of a Nimbus 4DM. The flap handle on the left ruled out the DuoDiscus, although the cockpit differences from a 3D are quite small (the handling is another matter).

Beast has control.
.

[larssnowpharter]

Even if one got the ident wrong, one wishes to put on record that one did one's 500 km in wood and fabric with a map and a compass and NOT 4 GPS thingies!!!!!:eek:

[ozbeowulf]

I feel your pain, Lars...

The most sophisticated sailplane I ever flew was a 1-32, which dates me with the dinosaurs, too. No electrics at all, let alone GPS.

Ah, well, we can look at it this way: The old memories come free with the other pleasures of being an old foop!

Cheers,

Glenn

[MReyn24050]

To keep the thread going here is the next one.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Cockpit%20quiz/Cockpitquiz298.jpg
Mel

[the incivil beast]

Sorry, have been away and busy for all the day.

Handley-Page 0/400 per chance ?

[MReyn24050]

the incivil beast. :uhoh: I do apologise for jumping in, I just looked back and noticed that by rights it is your throw. If you wish I will remove my photograph. It is not the Handley-Page 0/400 by the way.
Mel

[the incivil beast]

No problem, leave it where it is, the show must go on.

If you don't mind, I'll just slip my pic in before the next winner's.

Looks rather like a post WWI transport, Farman F-60 Goliath ?

[evansb]

An "Aero-Limousine" built by the Grahame-White Aviation Company of Hendon, England.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/Grahame_White_hendon.jpg

[MReyn24050]

evansb has it once again :ok:. It is the Grahame-White Aero-Limousine.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Grahame-WhiteAero-Limousine.jpg
You have control

[evansb]

Thanks Mel! A great challenge! I understand it was designated the model E-8, and was the last Grahame-White aircraft built. Breguet, Salmson and Westland have also produced models named "Limousine". Here is the next 'What cockpit?'
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/6754609.jpg

[con-pilot]

Piper Cherokee 235? Or a Cherokee 6.

[windriver]

If not the Cherokee 6... a Commanche perhaps.

[evansb]

Sorry gents, she is not American made. There is an obscure American connection to the aircraft, however.

[con-pilot]

Sorry, I should have looked closer at the rudder peddles, not Piper.

[MReyn24050]

That looks like an Italian job to me i.e.SIAI-Marchetti S-205-20R perhaps?

[evansb]

Mel, you are spot on as usual:ok: The SIAI Marchetti S-205 first flew in 1964, and production continued until 1975, initially. Production was resumed in Italy from 1977 until 1980. Power ranged from 180-hp to 300-hp. WACO Aircraft in the United States assembled a 4-place version called the S-220 Sirius, and a 5-place version called the S-220-5 Vela, and may have been the last aircraft built by WACO. You have control.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/Siai-Marchetti205.jpg

[MReyn24050]

Thanks for that Bri. The floor is really the incivil beast's as I jumped in before he had a chance to post after winning control by getting fitter2's challange at Post #422.
Mel

[the incivil beast]

I'm currently away from my home computer, on which I have a pic ready to post. If you can wait until this evening, that is.

Otherwise, I don't mind Mel posting an easy :E one to keep the thread running ...

[MReyn24050]

I am sure that we can wait for your post, it will give us something to look forward too :ok:
Mel

[the incivil beast]

Thanks for you patience gentlemen :ok:

Here is the next "what cockpit"

http://www.marc-till.com/tmp/cockpit13.jpg

[CoodaShooda]

Eagle 150?

[the incivil beast]

Sorry, no.

Although ...

[ozbeowulf]

Bit of a guess, but perhaps it is the Eagle 150's prototype, the Eagle XTS?

[CoodaShooda]

Or the Eagle 150B? :E

Sure looks like a canard there.

[the incivil beast]

It's not the Eagle (any version) but they are somehow related

[ozbeowulf]

Quickie Q2?

[the incivil beast]

Not a Quickie, but you are looking in the right direction.

[evansb]

The Dragonfly.

[the incivil beast]

The Dragonfly it is indeed

http://photos.imageevent.com/qdf_files/dragonflyphotosandmovies/websize/CFEXC.jpg

It is one of the two-seater derivatives of the Rutan Quickie

You have control

[evansb]

Thank you. Here is the next 'What cockpit?'
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/cadillac.jpg

[ICT_SLB]

De-Havilland dash-7? Open house if I'm right as I don't have any of my slides converted over.

[evansb]

ICT_SLB is correct.:ok: As he said, open house.

[ozbeowulf]

Okay, try this challenge....

http://xs122.xs.to/xs122/07494/wotzit_4.jpg (http://xs.to)

[Kitbag]

Blimey, gotta be worth a 'Golden Mel'. Can't decide whether its rotary wing or a pod and boom with pusher engine at the back of the pod. The wings seem to be missing. Either way looking at the rest of the structure it seems quite flimsy. 2? blokes in the front maybe.

[ozbeowulf]

It was definitely an obscure aircraft built and tested almost 50 years ago. It was designed as an executive aircraft, but was not a rotary-wing. There were two models tested. This picture shows the first model. The second model had a longer nose, among other things. Despite flight and wind-tunnel testing, neither model went into production.

Kitbag is correct about a pusher prop at the rear of the fuselage (which had, in an earlier life, been a basic light aircraft in its own right).

Because the wings are missing in this picture, it seems fair to briefly describe them. Let's just say the wings were unusually shaped and fitted with specialised high-lift devices.

[Edit to respond to Kitbag's estimate of crew]
Only two seats in this prototype but production models would have been more commodious.

[Kitbag]

Ozbeowulf

Please check pms

[windriver]

Is it Lycoming engined?

[ozbeowulf]

Yes, it is, Windriver. An O-540 Lycoming six, to be precise.
And a busy Lycoming it was, too, in this particular application.

[MReyn24050]

Would this be the Vanguard Omniplane?

[ozbeowulf]

Congratulations, Mel! :ok:

It is the Vanguard Omniplane 2C. You have control.

http://xs122.xs.to/xs122/07494/omniplane.jpg (http://xs.to)

More and better pictures at this french site....

http://xplanes.free.fr/omni/omni-2.html

Background into at...
http://www.vstol.org/wheel/VSTOLWheel/VanguardOmniplane.htm

You guys are too good. I'm gonna cut back on the clues next time. :O

Glenn

[MReyn24050]

Thanks ozbeowulf. It was the details concerning the engine and the reference to the specialised lift devices that led me to it.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Cockpit%20quiz/Cockpitquiz296.jpg

[evansb]

Is it a sesquiplane?

[MReyn24050]

No she was not a sesquiplane but was a monoplane.
Mel

[windriver]

Early 20's - civil - single engine
Fokker F-2 perhaps?

[MReyn24050]

windriver This aircraft was late 20's - It was a civil aircraft - and had a single engine. It was not a Fokker aircraft, it was however a european aircraft.
Mel

[ozbeowulf]

From out here on the wobbly end of this limb, it looks like it might be a Potez 32.

[MReyn24050]

ozbeowulf. Not the Potez 32 I am afraid, this aircraft was note from France.
Mel

[evansb]

Koolhoven FK.41?

[MReyn24050]

Not the Koolhoven FK.41 Bri. This aircraft was not Dutch.
Here is a photograph of the challenge aircraft's front cockpit the one shown at Post#464 is of the rear cockpit.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Cockpitquiz295.jpg

[evansb]

Breda Ba 15.

[MReyn24050]

Bri has it again it is indeed the Breda Ba.15:ok::D
Ba.15-light aircraft, developed by the Italian company Breda. The first flight of the prototype aircraft took place in 1928. The first aircraft was followed by a more successful version of the aircraft-Ba.15S. She was produced with several engines - Colombo S.63 output of 118 hp, Walter Mars 140 hp, Walter Venus 110 hp Isotta-Fraschini. Asso 80Ri 105 л.с. Asso 80Ri 105 hp. The Ba.15H was a Ba.15 with floats
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c67/sabamel/Aircraft/Breda15.jpg
You have control

[evansb]

Thanks Mel. Great challenge. That one had me puzzled as I initially overlooked the photo I have of a Breda 15 , the step-down nose version. The unusual pilot seating of the early Ba.15 would account for the elaborate windscreen perspex. Here is the next cockpit:
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/6785970.jpg

[ICT_SLB]

Ercoupe? The early variant that tried to have controls as close to a car as possible. In unlikely event I got it right (Bri doesn't choose easy ones) it's open house as I'm off to an Xmas Party.:ok:

[evansb]

Not an Ercoupe, but not far off.

[ozbeowulf]

The General Skyfarer G1-180 designed by Otto Koppen?

[Planegill]

Looks like it might be the Stearman-Hammond Y monoplane?

[evansb]

Planegill is correct:ok::D The Stearman-Hammond Y-1S (Y-150) was a result of a U.S. Department of Commerce design specification for a safe spin-proof airplane for the private flyer. You have control.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/y1s-1.jpg

[MReyn24050]

http://www.geocities.com/artificer356/Whatcockpitlist9thDec2007.htm?20079

[Planegill]

Hi cockpit enthusiasts. Your next challenge:

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii154/planegill/Test1.jpg

[India Four Two]

The Stearman-Hammond Y-1S (Y-150) was a result of a U.S. Department of Commerce design specification ...They obviously included "ugly" in the spec.

[pigboat]

Hmmm...something from the 'four is too many and two not enough' school of aircraft design. Is it Italian?

[Planegill]

Not Italian, but from the Continent

[Akubra]

Maybe the French S.P.C.A. (Societe Provencale Constructions Aeronautiques) 90 perhaps?

[Planegill]

Sorry, not the SPCA 90, but you have the right nationality.

[evansb]

Is it the Penhoet 360 T5?

[Planegill]

Sorry, not the Penhoet.

[larssnowpharter]

Possibly the Dewoitine 332?

[Planegill]

No it is not a Dewoitine

[ozbeowulf]

The Bernard 60T?

[Planegill]

No sorry, not a Bernard. Logging off now as its dark down under. Check guesses in the morning.

[Kitbag]

There can only be a few French tri-motors left, so I'll go for the wrong one= Bregeut 393T, then Mel can give us the right answer:}

[MReyn24050]

Well kitbag I do not know about giving the right answer but I would say that from the cockpit window arrangement and it being a tri-motor I would say it could be the Bloch MB300.The control yokes are similar to the those on the Bloch 220.
Mel

[Kitbag]

My alternative trimotor was actually the Bloch MB120, but a closer look at the screen arrangement as you suggest show that you are (probably) right- again!.

Only 04:45 in Oz, the suspense is killing me;)

[Planegill]

Sorry, not a Bloch or a Breguet. I have to admit this is probably a bit obscure, as I can't find any evidence that more than the prototype was built. (It doesn't rate a mention in John Stroud's Putnam book.) The photo comes from a company brochure dated 1932.

[MReyn24050]

Couzinet 33 'Biarritz' or Latécoère 35 perhaps?

[dash7fan]

Couzinet 70 "Arc en ciel"?

[the incivil beast]

Le Dyle et Bacalan D.B.70, per chance ?

[Planegill]

Not a Couzinet or a DB70. Although the model is not well-known, the company certainly is, producing a wide range of private and up-to-airliner size aircraft before the war.