Phil Winks Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 not a brilliant photo but go on see if you think its what I thought it was a clue is it 1st flew on the 25 may 1948 and its specs arePurpose: Single Seat Long Range FighterCrew: 1Wingspan: 36 feetLength: 36 feetWing area: 23 sq. feetTakeoff weight: 10,764 lbsEngine: Rolls Royce Griffon 61 V12; 2,035 HP at 7,000 ft.Max. speed: 320 KTS (593 km/h) TAS at MSLCeiling: 39,000 feetRange: 2,206 NMs (4089 kms) with aux. external fuel at 5000 FTArmament: 6 x 12.5 mm MG, 10 rockets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Sayle Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Looks like a CA-15 Kangaroo to me CheersAndy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Parker Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Yes it's a CA-15 Kangaroo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ashby - Moderator Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 MB-5? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 9, 2009 Author Share Posted January 9, 2009 bet andy and brian googled the photo file name lol come on be honest did you not think it was a p51 unfortunately they are right unless I'm mistaken 1st flew a while before the p51 the give away is the fuse is much bigger in section and the scoop is further forward a tad and has an exit ventMade by the "commonwealth aircraft corporation" in austrailia just look at the specs though thats one hell of a top speed for the time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 9, 2009 Author Share Posted January 9, 2009 Time to admit one error in my original post the CA-15 Kangaroo did succede not preceede the p51bet if I'd posted this pic of a 1/6th model of it more would've got it wronghave a look you'll have to scroll 3/4 of the way down the page for the 1st photo of the model Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris C Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 post another one please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 I'll have a troll through 2morrow for another lookalike if thats what u want if its another pic of the kangaroo just google "CA-15" there's loads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 Here's a lookalike that good old eric pointed out to me uncanny resemblance the japanese zero and the american t6-g harvard texana quick look at the specs 1st the texanGeneral characteristicsCrew: two (student and instructor) Length: 29 ft (8.84 m) Wingspan: 42 ft (12.81 m) Height: 11 ft 8 in (3.57 m) Wing area: 253.7 ft² (23.6 m²) Empty weight: 4,158 lb (1,886 kg) Loaded weight: 5,617 lb (2,548 kg) Powerplant: 1× Pratt & Whitney R-1340-AN-1 Wasp radial engine, 600 hp (450 kW) Then the ZeroGeneral characteristicsCrew: 1 Length: 9.06 m (29 ft 9 in) Wingspan: 12.0 m (39 ft 4 in) Height: 3.05 m (10 ft 0 in) Wing area: 22.44 m² (241.5 ft²) Empty weight: 1,680 kg (3,704 lb) Loaded weight: 2,410 kg (5,313 lb) Max takeoff weight: kg (lb) Powerplant: 1× Nakajima Sakae 12 radial engine, 709 kW (950 hp) And you can see the zero was slightly smaller but mainly much more powerfull 950hp over 600hp in the texan. the zero's top speed was 331mph and the texan a much more sedate (as befitting a trainer) 208mph the take off weight differs a little but this is a lovely example of how two very similar airframes can be made very different in performance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris C Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 a chipmunk would go in the catagory i think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris C Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 see pretty similar although the pic isn't from the angle unfortunatly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 You've got a point there Chris although because its not a radial engine the cowl does give it away a bitoops sorry Eric still I was right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris C Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 another one please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Mullins Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Well, I've got a hard one for you lot! This was taken at Shoreham Airshow 2007, the same year as that awful hurricane crash, very sad. Anyway here it is:Have fun guessing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 Hmm a small tail dragging twin with a low tail plane and I believe inverted 4 or 6cyl inline power plants driving two bladed props. It should stand out a mile but I have to admit its got me beat Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Chaddock Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 The Miles Gemini had twin fins!Those cowlings look a bit "fat" for an inline engine and the air intake is central so an inverted air cooled V? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris C Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 way over my headits definitely civilian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 18, 2009 Author Share Posted January 18, 2009 Right lets have another go this is the 3rd time I've tried to post this. keeps timing out on me and the 1st time was at 5 O'Clock on the change over day so it didn't stick Any way the plane is a PHILLIPS ST2 SUPERTWIN here's a photo of the one you photographed ben taken on the same day looks good for an electric model don't you think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 18, 2009 Author Share Posted January 18, 2009 Just as an experiment I'm going to try posting a thumbnail instead of the pic see what that does not wanting to post at min try again later Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Winks Posted January 18, 2009 Author Share Posted January 18, 2009 ok here goes lets try a thumb nail again It just won't post with a thumb inserted keeps giving me the Internet explorer cannot display the page notice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy watson Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 DeHaviland Comet? A contender for my first multiengine build! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Mullins Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 Phil was right andy! Although It does look uncannily like a DH88 Comet. I think this one would be a great electric build, im sure there arn't many models of it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Mackey Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.