Hydro Junkie

It's obvious the subject, and the "preferred" aircraft, are from WWI. I don't have a clue beyond that. Leave it to Ernie to have some of the most "cryptic" clues around

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Cryptic? Me? Well, how about I award a bonus clue to make up for my lack of clarity? Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

OFF TOPIC!

Do any of you armchair aviation historians have a copy of: The Silver Spitfire: The Legendary WII RAF Fighter in His Own Words by Tom Neil? He is quite the colorful character!

Here is a cut/paste of a book synopsis:
"A brilliantly vivid Second World War memoir by one of 'the Few' Spitfire fighter pilots. Following the D-Day landings, Battle of Britain hero Tom Neil was assigned as an RAF liaison to an American fighter squadron. As the Allies pushed east, Neil commandeered an abandoned Spitfire as his own personal aeroplane. Erasing any evidence of its provenance and stripping it down to bare metal, it became the RAF's only silver Spitfire. Alongside his US comrades, he took the silver Spitfire into battle until, with the war's end, he was forced to make a difficult decision. Faced with too many questions about the mysterious rogue fighter, he contemplated increasingly desperate measures to offload it, including bailing out mid-Channel. He eventually left the Spitfire at Worthy Down, never to be seen again. THE SILVER SPITFIRE is the first-hand, gripping story of Neil's heroic experience as an RAF fighter pilot and his reminiscences with his very own personal Spitfire. "

You can read about him here but you won't read about the the Silver Spitfire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Neil

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Thanks for mentioning the book. I'll see if I can find an electronic copy; it sounds like good reading. And there's nothing off topic about tipping us to a good source of information. And here's a very revealing afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

I wonder where the silver Spitfire disappeard to? I'll bet she got scrapped or broken up for parts rather than the CO of the field he dumped it on having to explain the lack of paint.

Still haven't figured this quiz.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

By now you should be well on your way to solving this. Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.

Hydro Junkie

How about the Sopwith Pup?
Just a random guess but, what the heck, why not

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Not the Pup, Sir; but here's a bonus clue to reward your efforts. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.



37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.



37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.



38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Happy Easter everyone!

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Afternoon clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.



37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.



38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.



39. Unlike its predecessor, by the same manufacturer, this aircraft used a conventional front mounted radiator.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.



37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.



38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.



39. Unlike its predecessor, by the same manufacturer, this aircraft used a conventional front mounted radiator.



40. And, again unlike its predecessor, it used two bay wings.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Ok someone guess this thing and put it out of my misery!

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Why don't you solve it, Mike? I'll even give you a bonus clue to help you along. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.



37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.



38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.



39. Unlike its predecessor, by the same manufacturer, this aircraft used a conventional front mounted radiator.



40. And, again unlike its predecessor, it used two bay wings.



41. The first 200 or so examples produced had a different layout of the tail surfaces; much sharper and more rectangular than the final version, which was much larger and smoother.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

I was thinking it might be the Nieuport 27 I know the pilots didn't like it but they loved the Nieuport 28.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sir; not the Nieuport 27. But I will award a bonus clue for your effort, along with an afternoon clue. Keep trying. Hint: When you find the right answer, you will almost certainly say "Okay; that fits. And it should have been pretty obvious". Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.



37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.



38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.



39. Unlike its predecessor, by the same manufacturer, this aircraft used a conventional front mounted radiator.



40. And, again unlike its predecessor, it used two bay wings.



41. The first 200 or so examples produced had a different layout of the tail surfaces; much sharper and more rectangular than the final version, which was much larger and smoother.



42. The earlier aircraft referenced in (39) also featured rather smooth and contoured tail surfaces.



43. The “favored aircraft” is generally considered to be iconic.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Guys; take a careful and thoughtful look at these first several clues. Hint: If our subject aircraft was "probably superior" to any enemy aircraft, and the other aircraft with which it was compared was even better, then how would the "preferred aircraft" stack up against any enemy aircraft? It would have to be clearly superior, correct? And how many aircraft throughout the war could be considered to be clearly superior to all others available at the time? Over the course of the war, probably no more than a double handful of aircraft could match that description. Finding the "preferred aircraft" should lead pretty quickly to our subject aircraft. Second and third hints: I'm NOT talking about the Albatros D.V as compared to the Pfalz D.III. Or the Sopwith Camel as compared to the Se 5a. Thanks; Ernie P.





1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Evening clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


What warbird do I describe?



1. This aircraft was, by all accounts, a perfectly acceptable combat aircraft.



2. It was, in fact, probably superior to any enemy combat aircraft of the same type and flying at the time.



3. It was, however, always compared unfavorably to another aircraft of the time.



4. The other aircraft was flying at the same time; and flying for the same side.



5. And so our subject aircraft became the “ugly sister” to the preferred aircraft.



6. Still, significant numbers of our subject aircraft were produced; although not nearly as many as the “preferred” aircraft.



7. The pilots who flew both were almost universally adamant in their loudly voiced preference of the other aircraft.



8. And, they made their voices heard.



9. Although at least two pilots preferred our subject aircraft.



10. And, since one of the two was very well known; and part of the selection team; the authorities produced our subject aircraft. Which gave him the opportunity to fly our subject in combat.



11. However, I can find no record of this pilot actually flying our subject aircraft in combat.



12. He did, however, score a number of victories while flying the “preferred” aircraft.



13. Like everyone else, when he had a choice, he preferred to plant his backside in the other aircraft.



14. Our subject aircraft could dive even faster than the preferred aircraft.



15. And could at least match it in level flight.



16. But our subject aircraft was usually referred to as being heavy or clumsy on the controls.



17. While the preferred aircraft was light, quick and seemed to respond faster to control input.



18. And it almost seemed to anticipate control inputs.



19. The comparison of a plow horse and a race horse seems appropriate.



20. Delivery of our subject aircraft was delayed by difficulties with the cooling system.



21. Even so, from first flight to first delivery to the field was only a matter of four months or so.



22. The design of the wings was openly copied from a foreign design.



23. One noted for being very rugged, and able to dive without any fear of the wings folding up or being damaged.



24. And one specifically noted by our subject aircraft’s military air service as being well designed.



25. In fact, our subject aircraft was created, in a sense, by combining that copied wing with an earlier aircraft from the same factory as our subject. There were some changes made as testing progressed, but essentially our subject was created thusly.



26. The airfoil section was rather thin, as was the wing that was copied.



27. Our subject was criticized as having an abrupt stall, as were most planes in those days; the preferred aircraft being the exception.



28. Our subject needed a long takeoff roll, as compared to our preferred aircraft.



29. And it had a tendency to “float” when landing.



30. Which, given the landing gear was considered to be weak, created problems.



31. The ground crews disliked our subject aircraft because, when compared with the “favored” aircraft, our subject required much more maintenance.



32. Mostly because of all the bracing wires; which were missing on the preferred aircraft.



33. Some of our subject aircraft were captured, and tested, by enemy flying services.



34. The results of this foreign testing pretty much confirmed the opinions of the host nation’s flyers and ground crews.



35. And yet, there is still no doubt our subject aircraft could handle pretty much any enemy aircraft put up against it.



36. That was also noted by a number of aces who wrote about our subject.



37. In its short service life, perhaps five months or less, more than 800 of our subject aircraft were produced.



38. It was also the last aircraft of this manufacturer to see widespread service.



39. Unlike its predecessor, by the same manufacturer, this aircraft used a conventional front mounted radiator.



40. And, again unlike its predecessor, it used two bay wings.



41. The first 200 or so examples produced had a different layout of the tail surfaces; much sharper and more rectangular than the final version, which was much larger and smoother.



42. The earlier aircraft referenced in (39) also featured rather smooth and contoured tail surfaces.



43. The “favored aircraft” is generally considered to be iconic.



44. While our subject aircraft is apparently even lesser known than I would have thought.