• 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

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

The Ongoing Mystery Aircraft Thread Part Deux.

Hi Kevin :encouragement:
Maybe the reason is that it is the QR-14! :very_drunk:
I understand that this unique twin was a pre-war C.A.T. design, not entirely completed during the war and then after 1945 finished by a company named Marinavia.
May I invite you, sir!
 
Moses special- A sleek twin boom pusher.

35002vc.jpg
 
Think you're right, Walter. That photo looks awfully airbrushed to me -this must be the MoseCraft Special, running on mescal........
 
Walter has obviously sniffed this one out!

This is the second version with the tricycle gear. Powered with a Continental C-85.
 
Hi Kevin :encouragement:
Donot know what is worse (or nicer?) mescal or sniffing. I deny everything :dizzy:!
The LIT (Lawrence Institute of Technology) Special (or Chappy) was a Formula One (Goodyear) racer. N138C and race #29.
Original gear consisted of twin main wheels under the fuselage and small outrigger wheels under the tail fins.
If I understand well, the aircraft could still survice in the LIT in Detroit, Mich. (anyone can confirm?)
 
Hmm - just shows the true value of an Aerofiles search ! '1pCmwM' indeed ! If that contraption is mid-winged, then I am FuManChu........
 
I have emailed Aerofiles over the years to offer up minor corrections but have never heard back from them. To be fair, they probably get swamped with all kinds of chaff on a daily basis!

One of us needs to get on the staff over there some day.:encouragement:
 
Mike, TBH I would have classified it as a mid wing design, marginal admittedly, but there is fuselage above the wing, & also it looks as if the engine is in line with the wing. Sorry to be a pain(e).:running:

Mind you I did not know you could search aerofiles like that - interesting - still learning!:dizzy:
Keith
 
Well we'll have to agree to differ, Keith ! Aerofiles has a few bugs - but it only serves to remind us what a terrific source it is - without it and AviaFrance, we would be much poorer....

I'm sure someone would have organised a similar resource over here - the main problem being the draconian copyright laws. Post the wrong photo and someone will soon be demanding thousands of pounds - it happened to the guy who organises, out of the goodness of his heart, our village historical website.

Incidentally, Kevin, where is 'over there' ???
 
Mike, Now thats what I would call a High wing design, the pilot cannot see the top surface of the wing from the cockpit when flying it!!!....Sorry I shall now go back to sleep for a while! Interesting photo of the Mid wing job though with twin tandem main wheels.
Keith
 
Had not expected that a little difference makes it look so much different Not a one-off, but series produced (around 66/67 built). The subtle difference apparently makes it difficult to recognize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top