The Ongoing Mystery Aircraft Thread Part Deux. - Page 646

Thread: The Ongoing Mystery Aircraft Thread Part Deux.

  1. #16126
    Thanks Carlo - let's see if we can rouse those twin-boom pusher enthusiasts from their Sunday snooze....
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails urmtumtum.jpg  

  2. #16127
    R.A.E. Zephyr?

  3. #16128
    Senior Administrator huub vink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Noordwijk, The Netherlands (EHVB)
    Age
    65
    Posts
    10,267
    Quote Originally Posted by pomme homme View Post
    R.A.E. Zephyr?
    You are 100% correct!

  4. #16129
    Mike is right, indeed - another Douglas-engined machine -

    Huub, nice to see a rare and exotic visitor to these parts ! You are most welcome - especially for that delightful avatar !

  5. #16130
    Thank you, Mike.

    Might I offer two for the price of one?

    Firstly, I think that I know the artist responsible for Huub's 'attractive' avatar. Would anyone like to let me know what aeroplane he part owns and flies?

    And secondly, for those of you whose aviation library is too conventional to include the works of this artist, here's an interesting parasol wing monoplane that, as far as I can see, hasn't hitherto graced this forum.


  6. #16131
    It seems that we are in a time warp, the third Douglas-engined aircraft in less than 36 hours

    This is the Camsell Monoplane from 1939

  7. #16132
    Groundoug Day?

    Indeed it is the deliciously illegal Camsell Monoplane - although I have her as dating from 1937 - which flew sans registration, sans CofA but, apparently, surprisingly well!

    So have a schnapps, Robert, but don't take a double as you didn't tell me that Romain Hugault co-owns and flies a J-3 Cub!

  8. #16133
    Thanks, Mike, I really love the comics from Charles M. Schulz or Hergé but Romain Hugault is not my field of knowledge.

    Here is an aircraft definetly without a Douglas in the front row.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails SOH-45.jpg  

  9. #16134
    The Hispano Suiza E-30, later renamed Hispano E-30
    _
    gX

  10. #16135
    Quote Originally Posted by lefty View Post
    (Having difficulty tracking down that insignia - if anyone can provide a better illustration I'd be grateful)
    I think I solved the riddle en passant.

    It's the Spanish roundel! Some black and white films "see" yellow as black. Therefore, there is almost no gray-scale difference between red and yellow on such photos, see here.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Hispano E-30.jpg  
    _
    gX

  11. #16136
    Absolutely correct!

    It seems that my source was the same as your photo.


    I think, after this mystery a tasty Rioja will be an adequate reward
    Hope, you like red wine, Uli.

  12. #16137
    Correct, but I had too much Rioja last night

    Time for a "new" copter, perhaps?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails n5n5n5.jpg  
    _
    gX

  13. #16138
    You Gents have been busy this morning!


    That a Merckle SM-67 Uli?

    http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contri...dijk/12046.jpg

  14. #16139
    Yes it's the third prototype of the Merckle SM-67.

    Over to Texas
    _
    gX

  15. #16140
    Thanks, and here is one that has not appeared before.


  16. #16141
    Quote Originally Posted by giruXX View Post
    Yes it's the third prototype of the Merckle SM-67.
    According to Hubschraubermuseum Bückeburg, D-9506 is the SM-67 V2. Doesn't that make it the 2nd proto?

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubsch...B%C3%BCckeburg

  17. #16142
    SOH-CM-2020
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Netherlands
    Age
    80
    Posts
    2,143
    Blog Entries
    1
    Hi dan_pub
    AFAIK the SM-67 in the Bueckeburg Museum is V3, the one with the enclosed cabin. V2 was the static airframe and parts of that one were used to make the V3 complete for static display.
    V1 (Artouste II-B engine) was damaged beyond repair in an aciddent, V2 was a static airframe and V3 (more powerful Artouste II-C engine) had a fully enclosed cabin . It was also damaged in a hard landing, but repaired although it may not have flown again.
    Hope someone can confirm this.

  18. #16143
    Two of the trainer parasol were built and came in a variety of flavors. Wheel pants/no pants, and a couple of different engines with and without cowling. This was the inline variant.

  19. #16144
    Er, the wing looks as though it is attached to the fuselage. That's not my definition of a parasol......

  20. #16145
    Agreed, but I was going by the definition provided by the gaggle of folks at wiki. Seems to be a pylon of sorts?

    "A parasol wing aircraft is essentially a biplane without the lower pair of wings. The parasol wing is not directly attached to the fuselage, but is held above it, supported either by cabine struts or by a single pylon. Additional bracing may be provided by struts extending from the fuselage sides"

  21. #16146
    Quote Originally Posted by giruXX View Post
    Yes it's the third prototype of the Merckle SM-67.
    I wanted to say that my picture shows the third prototype.
    _
    gX

  22. #16147
    SOH-CM-2023
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Chacombe, not far from Silverstone
    Age
    85
    Posts
    1,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Moses03 View Post
    Agreed, but I was going by the definition provided by the gaggle of folks at wiki. Seems to be a pylon of sorts?

    "A parasol wing aircraft is essentially a biplane without the lower pair of wings. The parasol wing is not directly attached to the fuselage, but is held above it, supported either by cabine struts or by a single pylon. Additional bracing may be provided by struts extending from the fuselage sides"
    Two spring to mind...Catalina & Comper Swift?
    Keith

  23. #16148
    By that definition I would say so Keith, especially with the PBY. The Comper I think of as more of a shoulder wing. A fine line there I guess.

    Back to the mystery- the engine is a Cirrus-Hermes and was flown in the mid 1930's.

  24. #16149
    Quote Originally Posted by wout View Post
    AFAIK the SM-67 in the Bueckeburg Museum is V3, the one with the enclosed cabin. V2 was the static airframe
    That settles it, then. The photo is not of a static airframe.
    Thanks a lot.

  25. #16150
    I'm kicking myself - Moses' machine is the Renard R-33.(OO-ANV) (Described in Jane's as a 'high-wing braced monoplane') Maybe if I hadn't been convinced it was American.....

    And, in my photo it does look like a sort of parasol......I just feel there should be fresh air between wing and fuselage. As for the Catalina - naaaahh !

    Incidentally, can anyone tell me why Belgian registrations begin with O or OO ? Surely they must have had first shot at B ? And why O ?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails papapap.jpg  

Similar Threads

  1. Auster Aiglet Part Deux
    By T6flyer in forum FS 2002/2004 General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 24th, 2009, 11:59
  2. The Now Ongoing Car ID Thread
    By EasyEd in forum Racer's Paddock
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: May 4th, 2009, 22:02
  3. Airacobra Mania (part deux)
    By Sopwith Chameleon in forum CFS2 General Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: November 8th, 2008, 04:15
  4. Heath and Hall part Deux OT
    By michael davies in forum FSX General Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: October 17th, 2008, 10:39
  5. RAID trouble part deux.......
    By Scratch in forum FSX Guides
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 14th, 2008, 14:57

Members who have read this thread: 96

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •