• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

The Ongoing Mystery Aircraft Thread Part Deux.

Thanks G.

Here is an easier one. Please proceed if you know it. Will be out of pocket until midday tomorrow.

2zzoz2b.jpg
 
Here is a nice single engine low wing monoplane tourer to start the week.

(And why did men wear their pants pulled up so high back in the day?)

6o0txg.jpg
 
Moses03 said:
Here is a nice single engine low wing monoplane tourer to start the week.

(And why did men wear their pants pulled up so high back in the day?)

6o0txg.jpg
Click to expand...
This is the Lab oratorio Artigianale Aeronautico Nuvoli 5-Aq...and by the way italians love to wear fairly long pants (unlike the short ones worn in the US)
Cheers
BG
Compliments for the very nice pic!
 
Spot on BG! :very_drunk: Thought this one might last a round or two. Nope.

Rough translation:
Nuvoli # 5-Aq experimental vehicle for training at high altitude (Aq), built at the request of the Ministry of Aviation (MM298). It disposed of metal trim, cowl NACA type Magni engine, and motor Fiat A.70 with stranded wire. This was the last aircraft built in 1938 , from Workroom Aeronautics, because the holder had to work full time in the role of official military.


Over to you-
 
Moses03 said:
Spot on BG! :very_drunk: Thought this one might last a round or two. Nope.

Rough translation:
Nuvoli # 5-Aq experimental vehicle for training at high altitude (Aq), built at the request of the Ministry of Aviation (MM298). It disposed of metal trim, cowl NACA type Magni engine, and motor Fiat A.70 with stranded wire. This was the last aircraft built in 1938 , from Workroom Aeronautics, because the holder had to work full time in the role of official military.


Over to you-
Click to expand...
Thanks Moses....I won't be able to submit a new entry till late Tomorrow morning...if someone would like to step in please feel free to do so!
Cheers
BG
 
Hello everybody ! Having got back (just) from Madeira, am off to London in the morning for the Chelsea Flower Show. Seems like you fellows have been busy - sorry I missed a few floaters!

Can't post anything just now, but someone please explain to me what a 'motor Fiat A70 with stranded wire' is ??
 
Moses03 said:
Welcome back Mike.

You know how those translators can bungle up things!

Maybe BG can translate for us as the text was lifted from this page.

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuvoli_N.5
Click to expand...

Sorry Moses but I'm having rather hectic days...I'll try nevertheless to help you out by translating the passage concerning the "Nuvoli 5-Aq": "experimental altitude trainer built upon request of the Ministry of Aeronautics. It sported metallic spatted wheels, NACA engine cowling Magni type and a FIAT A70 engine with metallic propeller. This was the last Aircraft built in 1938 by the Laboratorio Artigianale Aeronautico (roughly translated aeronautical workshop) inasmuch as his managing director was enrolled full time in the military as officer of the "Genio Militare" ( I don't know the exact translation but this is a corps that builds Bailey bridges and such like amenities)"

I'm not a great translator but this is hundred times better than anything produced by a computer. By the way Aq means Alta quota (high altitude)

Cheers
BG
At long last here's my easy mystery

4lg68o.jpg
 
Gentleman....I'm curious as to how the number of wing bays are determined when Warren struts are employed. As with the Fiat BR.3 above I would say 4 bays....correct? I'm also questioning this....if you have an unequal span biplane with top wing longer than the bottom, and you have one or two standard bays present with additional angled struts (connected to the standard vertical struts on the bottom wing), would this triangular bay at the tips be considered a proper wing bay or not?
I've been working on a aircraft database for the past 6 years and have started entering more in-depth data (34 characteristics total ) for the 51,000+ aircraft I've managed to enter thus far....yes, i've lost my marbles :dizzy:. Only about 2,200 models completed and I'm starting to run into more and more models I'm not sure how to classify (i.e. Wing bays, strut arrangements, etc.)

Thanks in advance for the input!

Cheers,
John
 
The database is quite the undertaking John. Something I can't quite seem to get motivated to do! Good luck with that.:encouragement:


DHC2Pilot said:
Gentleman....I'm curious as to how the number of wing bays are determined when Warren struts are employed. As with the Fiat BR.3 above I would say 4 bays....correct? I'm also questioning this....if you have an unequal span biplane with top wing longer than the bottom, and you have one or two standard bays present with additional angled struts (connected to the standard vertical struts on the bottom wing), would this triangular bay at the tips be considered a proper wing bay or not?
Click to expand...

No means an expert here, but I would agree with the 4 bays.

On the triangular portion at the tip, even though it is enclosed, doesn't there have to be a section of wing top and bottom to be a bay?

Like this I presume?
33oifz9.jpg


Again, not sure at all.
 
Your example is spot on Kevin....I too am unsure as to the exact definition of a 'bay', however I am in agreement with your assessment that there should be a section of wing both top and bottom to be considered as one. Then again that would conflict with our determination regarding the Warren configuration on the BR.3. Its stuff like this that keeps me up at night....lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top