The Ongoing Mystery Aircraft Thread Part Deux.

[DHC2Pilot]

Hmmm, I have it as the Skylark 446. Typo? Either way goes to you

http://www.aahs-online.org/WhatIsIt_Past_Quizzes.htm

[srgalahad]

.. and therein lies the root (route? rout?) of the problem..

The United Nations Committee For Aircraft Designations is not in agreement (surprised?), so I will call it the
Skycraft Industries Skylark 447 (some say it is the Skylark Aircraft Model 447)
The UNCFAD does agree on one thing, however. Its American!

Whereas my sources refer to it as the:
United Nations Designations For Aircraft Committee
UNDeFAirCo

Rob

[lefty]

Blimey ! Never heard of UNCFAD before - sounds like a wonderful vehicle for some men in suits awarding themselves huge salaries for doing , er, exactly what ? And why ? Does it still exist ?

[wout]

Lefty, UNCFAD was indeed created to find an extremely good paying home for failed politicians and....no qualifications or skills are needed. Members only must be able to change opinions/and or views at least as fast as the weather changes.
Moses03, you are correct. The FAA register calls this twin tail as the Skycraft Industries 446 and the registration (N25607) was canceled only last October. I understand that during the late-1960 plans existed to re-engine the 446 with a Garrett AiResearch turbine, but this never took place., Then around 1999 a company named Square One Aviation (Mr. Elmer Ward) owned the 446 and planned to install a Continental IO-550. Seems this also never took place and I wonder what happened to the remains.
BTW, I have seen this aircraft seen described as product of Skycrafters Industries, Inc, and of Skylark Manufacturing Company, Inc and of Skylark Industries, Inc an d the story goes several versions were planned as 445, 446 and 447 differing in engine.
Sorry, no vacancies in UNCFAD.

Next one should be easy

[Moses03]

On the Skycraft-

Some of you might have come across this from a google search. It's the original sales brochure:

http://www.cfiamerica.com/skycraft-447.html

The plane was put up for auction on Ebay last year. I had a picture of the fuselage in it's current state but have since lost it. Not sure if it sold or who owns it now. Would be an interesting restoration.

[lefty]

When Wout, with a twirl of his black moustache and a sadistic leer, says 'this one should be easy' you know it's a stinker.....

However, having been chastised for moaning about small aircraft, I have taken it to heart and decided to have a go at this one.

After losing a whole night's sleep eliminating the other 847 designs that all look similar to this one, I have decided it is a product of the Muegyetemi Sportrepulo Egyesulet. The M.19, to be precise. (HA-NAA ?)

[wout]

Now Lefty, don`t be too modest, If you put some time in it you can perform miracles.
I would have accepted the Rubis M-19 also and yes it is HA-NAA
You have unanimously been appointed as volunteer for the next one.

Moses03, thanks for the info on the Skylark. Hopefully someone will appreciate the historic value of such a one-of.

[lefty]

Thanks Wout. Let's see if I can get my own back with a , er.... light aircraft !

[wout]

No takers?
The Gaucher RG-75 (RG-75T) ?

[lefty]

Gaucher ? Known to most as the S.E.C.A.T. RG-75, I think.

Wout, I would most appreciate an insight into this from an acknowledged expert ! (as well as a new mystery)

[wout]

Hi Lefty,
I would have preferred that you had just said, Gaucher RG-75 correct and let me post a new one.
Now you challenge me in explaining why I call it the Gaucher RG-75 instead of SECAT S.5. I am not an aviation historian, but I will try. The designation RG... comes from Mr. Rémy Gaucher who got involved with the SECAT designs after WW2.
Before WW2 SECAT brought out the S-4 Mouette (which I understand was a single-seater) and it may have been registered as F-W 134 in the prototype series (don`t ask me why). although I also saw this aircraft described as the S-6 Mouette no. 01.
When the post-war F-P.... series started there was an S-4 registered F-PAAM and quoted as no. 002 and maybe this was in fact the 01 after rebuilt/restoration. F-PAAM is also reported as RG-60 (for Rémy Gaucher 60hp?)
I understand that the S-5 (a two-seater) appeared AFTER the war and that in fact two were built. The first one was F-WCDS (F-BCDS) and is quoted as no. 01 and this aircraft is described as a SECAT S-5. It later went to the F-P... register as F-PIIC still as SECAT S.5. The second examples was F-WBBT and I have a picture (the same one you posted?) where it clearly says SECAT RG-75T on the tail. (Rémy Gaucher 75hp).
To make things easy, there also is a Chatelain AC-4 of 1948 by Mr. Armand Chatelain which is reported as replica of the SECAT S-6 Mouette. The accompanying pictures in the article show one as F-W 134 (this would indicate it is the original) and on the second picture shows an aircraft without registration visible, so that maybe the true AC-4 which possibly never had an F-P... registration. I donot discount the possibility that the AC-4 was in fact a rebuilt of the S-6.
Are you still with me?
Of course all comments, remarks and/or insults from fellow forumers are welcome.

New one will follow to-morrow.

[wout]

A light airplane of a different kind

[Moses03]

This is one of the three manned prototypes of the Raduga KS-1 Kometa. First flight, Jan 1951. Raduga was the missile develpment branch of MiG hence the scaled down looking MiG 15. Later unmanned cruise missile versions were launched from Tu-4s (in background) & Tu-16s and surface to air.

Feeling good about this one so moving along here as I will be away until late in the day tomorrow. A nice little floater-

[lefty]

Before tackling Moses' floater, let me just thank Wout for his erudite explanation - exactly what I wanted ! Literature on this period is scarce indeed, and the vagaries of French designations a constant source of bewilderment when relying solely on Janes, which I have long realised is not always as accurate as one might imagine. Lord knows where you get all this material - the Wout archives must be substantial indeed.

[Moses03]

Eighteen years after building this flying boat, the company submitted two designs to the military. One of them a float plane...