'Quiz' Draws Mail | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Airborne On ANN

Oshkosh Day One

Oshkosh Day Two

Oshkosh Day Three

Airborne 07.21.16

Airborne 07.22.16

Airborne Hi-Def On YouTube

Oshkosh Day One

Oshkosh Day Two

Oshkosh Day Three

Airborne 07.21.16

Airborne 07.22.16

Tweet Us The Coolest Things You See @OSH16!
#OSH16Coolest!

It's Alive!: AirVenture 2016 Innovation Preview on Vimeo!

It's Alive!: AirVenture 2016 Innovation Preview on YouTube!

 

Tue, Sep 02, 2003

'Quiz' Draws Mail

Our little weekend quiz drew a number of responses from readers, including the well-written note below.

I'm sure you figured you'd get email from some jackass about the answers to the quiz being wrong. Well, I guess I'm that jackass... sort of...
 
The Me 264
[above] was not the only bomber capable of hitting New York from Occupied Europe. The Junkers Ju 390 was in competition against the Me 264 and was chosen over the Me 264 due to the high order of commonality between the Ju 390 and the Ju 290 already in production.

In January of 1944 the Ju 390 took of from Mont de Marson in France and flew within 12 miles of the US coast north of New York. It returned successfully to its base after the 32+ hour mission.
 
The Me 264 was the more-advanced aircraft -- better performance and grater range -- but it never actually flew a test mission to the US. It is the one known as the "Amerika-Bomber," and it had a 45-hour endurance. If Germany had picked the best aircraft for the role... it just would not have been Germany.
 
So I feel either the Me 264 or Ju 390
[below] would be correct answers with the bottom line being that Germany never had a "fully operational" aircraft capable of hitting the US.
 
References:
 
Green, William.
Warplanes of the Third Reich. Doubleday, 1970.
Smith, J.R. and A.L. Kay.
German Aircraft of the Second World War. Putman Aeronautical Books, 1972.
 
Keep it up --Bill Pearce

[While we're at it, while we gave the correct answer to one question, we answered incorrectly. Here's what we mean:

Question: Which branch of the American military had a higher combat death rate in World War II, The Air Corps or the Marine Corps?

Answer: More US servicemen died in the Air Corps than the Marine Corps. While completing the required 30 missions your chance of being killed was 71%.

Note: the rate was higher in the Air Corps (the correct answer to the question); the Marines lost more men (the way we phrased the answer was incorrect) --ed.]


Advertisement

More News

Airborne 07.26.16-Oshkosh Day 2: Solar Impulse, Sun Flyer, Stemme S-12

Also: AEA $$Giveaway$$, LAM Aviation, Able Flight, Jack Pelton On Aero-Medical Reform We start our report this morning with something that has very little to do with the EAA AirVen>[...]

ONE Aviation Provides Singular Support For Coverage of AirVenture 2016!

ONE Aviation: Let’s Fly Together ONE Aviation delivers innovative access to general aviation by bringing together a line of products suited to the missions and budgets of ind>[...]

It's ALIVE! 2016 AirVenture Innovation Preview Program Debuting RIGHT NOW!

Get The EARLY Inside Details On THE Most Exciting NEW Innovations And Product Announcements From OSHKOSH... The staff of EAA and the Aero-News Network are pleased to announce that >[...]

Only Sporty's!!! Sporty's Pilot Shop Helps ANN Cover Oshkosh 2016!

Sporty's Pilot Shop Is A Pivotal GA Resource! Sporty’s Pilot Shop was founded over 50 years ago by a flight instructor, and ever since has been for pilots and by pilots. Hal >[...]

Aspen Avionics, True Innovators, Present OSH2016 Special Event Coverage!

OSH2016 Sponsor: Always-Innovative Aspen Avionics Based in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Aspen Avionics specializes in bringing the most advanced display and sensor technology from the >[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2016 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC