The official aviation quiz topic!

[Advisor]

Thomascookie has the right answer. So it's your turn

Thomascookie seems to be missing

& MD-11 is on a holiday for 3 days So i guess, realplaneshaveprops can take charge and start asking

[realplaneshaveprops]

So i guess, realplaneshaveprops can take charge and start asking

How many SR-71's were originally build and how many have crashed?
Bonus points for the person who also can give the serial numbers!

Koen

[Rago]

There were :

13 A-12 (5 w/o)
3 YF-12A (2 w/o)
2 M-21 (1 w/o)
33 SR-71A/B/C (12 w/o)

Makes a total of 51 with 20 w/o in accidents

Serialnumbers on request!

[Rago]

Serials, and regi's of crashed planes

A-12 :
60-6926 (123)
60-6928 (125)
60-6929 (126)
60-6932 (129)
60-6939 (133)

YF-12A :
60-6934 (1001)
60-6936 (1003)

M-21 :
60-6941 (135)

SR-71A :
64-17950 (2001)
64-17952 (2003)
64-17953 (2004)
64-17954 (2005)
64-17965 (2016)
64-17966 (2017)
64-17969 (2020)
64-17970 (2021)
64-17974 (2025)
64-17977 (2028)
64-17978 (2029)

SR-71B :
64-17957 (2008)

[realplaneshaveprops]

I only count 31 SR-71A/B's ("950" - "980") originally build (YF-12's not counted).

There is only one SR-71C ("981") build in replacement for the crashed SR-71B "957"). This aircraft (981) was the front of the static test model + the rear of YF-12A ("934").

The crashed aircrafts are 952, 950, 966, 965, 957, 977, 954, 953, 970, 978 and 974.

SR-71A's 950 - 955 (aircrafts used in test program)
SR-71B's 956 and 957
SR-71A's 958 - 980
SR-71C 981

SR-71C http://www.ab2m.net/pics/sr71/17981/17981_001.jpg.html

[realplaneshaveprops]

Rago, next question comes from you

Koen

[Rago]

My count is based on the data at :

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/%7Epettypi/elevon ... ckbrd.html

[Rago]

Give 10 key differences between the Russian build "Buran" and the NASA build "Space-Shuttle"

[realplaneshaveprops]

Try:

1. Thrust: Space Shuttle: rocket engines shuttle + SRB's
Buran: Energia rocket +SRB's

2. Space Shuttle: every launch new tank
Buran: Energia rocket is fully reusable

3. Space Shuttle: liquid propellant + solid propellant
Buran: Energia liquid propellant

4. Buran: ejection seats for crew

5. Space Shuttle: rocket engines for higher orbits
Buran: Energia can take the Buran to any altitude

6. Space Shuttle: glider landing
Buran: jet engines for assisted landing

7. Energia can lift heavy loads, more then the Space Shuttle

8. Larger cargo bay then the Space Shuttle

9. Space Shuttle needs crew to land
Buran can fly without crew (automission)

10. Buran-Energia was in many ways an improvement on the US Shuttle system, with a much more flexible design, even if sadly, it is not the system that is currently in operation.

11. Space Shuttle: operational
Buran: not operational

Koen

[Rago]

1. OK
2. nope
3. OK
4. wasn't looking for that one
5. as 4
6. nope
7. OK
8. OK
9. OK
10. as 4
11. not a structural or technical difference so Nope

Good try, but keep on trying...

[Advisor]

Rago is back with a bang

[Rago]

Rago is back with a bang

It's not that difficult Advisor! Try a google-search...

[Rago]

com'on girls!!! No ideas? Were are the experts? You're disappointing me!

[Advisor]

Rago is back with a bang

It's not that difficult Advisor! Try a google-search...

I did a google search and all i could gather was either water or planes that slipped the tarmac. Sorry not to be able to fulfill your aspirations of being the leaders, but then have hands full and head reeling from what is happening around. Hope am excused.

[Rago]

Ok, looks like you girls are letting me down...

Try a search on "buran". The magic 10 are "somewhere" mentionned (word by word).

Don't know who's the quismaster who decides about a replacement question, but will post a new question at his demand if this should be necessary.

[Rago]

... Sorry not to be able to fulfill your aspirations of being the leaders,... Hope am excused.

Don't feel sorry Advisor! Who are we to judge You? so you don't have to excuse

[HorsePower]

Hi Rago, nice to see you again !

I tried to answer your question, unfortunately the best site on the web concerning Buran (www.buran.ru) mentions only 5 differences...

Here they are:

The main differences between the space aeroplane Buran and Suttle-orbiter are follows:
- the automatic landing of Buran from orbit onto airdrome;

- the absence ot the main rocket engine on the orbital aeroplane. The main engine was placed onto a central block of a carrier-rocket ENERGIA which is able to launch into an orbit 120 tonns of payload against 30 tonns for Space Shuttle;

- the hight lift-drag ratio of the space aeroplane Buran is 6.5 against 5.5 for Space Shuttle;

- the space aeroplane Buran returned 20 tonns of payloads against 15 tonns for Space Shuttle orbiter from an orbit to an aerodrome;

- the cutting lay-out pattern of thermoprotection tiles of Buran is optimal and longitudinal slits of tile belts are orthogonal to the flow line. Sharp angles of tiles are absent. The tile belts of the Buran fuselage and fin have an optimal position.

Comparison of reusable space systems

Space shuttle

Energiya-Buran

Regards

Seb.

[sn26567]

Rago, I think you should consider accepting the previous responses of either realplanes-etc. or HorsePower. A question that needs 10 answers is way too much.

[Rago]

Rago, I think you should consider accepting the previous responses of either realplanes-etc. or HorsePower. A question that needs 10 answers is way too much.

You're right sn! I was planning to give the green light to Horsepower, as he gave five good ones (100%) , and realplanes-etc gave "only" 5 good ones out of 11 tries. (<50%)

So HorsePower ... go for it!!! :thumbsup2:

[Avro]

Could you maybe tell us the 10 differences But before another question is being asked. ?

Chris