Recognise This Aircraft #3?

[red750]

This one is a mouthful!

 

[ATTACH=full]1453[/ATTACH]

 

.

 

[ATTACH]18294[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

[mnewbery]

Myasishchev M-55? If it is, this thing will go as high as a U2 and then some. I can see why the image has the name edited out now

 

 

[willedoo]

Well, it's a Mystic, I'm just trying to figure out whether it's a Mystic-A or a Mystic-B ( Myasishchev M-17 'Stratosfera', or M-55 'Geophysica'). I'd guess by the paintjob, it's a M-55.

 

It can be pronounced different ways, probably the more common is Mya -shee - chev.

 

Cheers, Willie.

 

 

[mnewbery]

I think all the Geophysica M-55's are NATO reporting name Mystic-B and should all be owned by a company in Ireland? Did the image have Geophysica on it orginally?

 

 

[red750]

It's one of those, Willie. ;)

 

 

[mnewbery]

Paint scheme suggests m-55 but I've yet to find a definitive M-17 image to compare it with - The only way to figure out what it actually is - measure its length or have a look at the pilots operating handbook (in Russian) :p.

 

This is claimed to be an M-55.

 

[ATTACH]1454[/ATTACH]

 

Source: http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_m55_en.php

 

[ATTACH]18295[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

[willedoo]

I think all the Geophysica M-55's are NATO reporting name Mystic-B and should all be owned by a company in Ireland? Did the image have Geophysica on it orginally?

Yes, that's right, the M-55's are Mystic-B's and the M-17's are the Mystic-A's. I think there were only two M-17 prototypes built. The M-55 is supposed to have a longer jetpipe and shorter intakes, and a re-profiled longer nose plus an undernose FLIR turret. The photo posted above is an M-55 as far as I can see. It has 'Geophysica' in Cryllic written on it, some other photos have it in English, maybe for the benefit of airshows.

Most photos seem to be of 55204 or 55203, both M-55's I think.

 

Cheers, Willie.

 

 

[red750]

Hi mnewbery,

 

Here is the unretouched image.

 

 

.

 

 

[red750]

Maybe these are too easy with a photo. Try this without a photo.

 

What aircraft was designed to meet a US Military requirement, I won't say which service, and worked fine in the scale test model, but was canned because the full size aircraft couldn't get off the ground?

 

 

[willedoo]

There's a few photos on Airliners of RF-55204.

 

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=RF-55204

 

Also found a photo of an old M-17 in Aeroflot markings. The smaller nose is evident, as well as the longer intakes closer to the cockpit & lack of a FLIR.

 

[ATTACH=full]1455[/ATTACH]

 

Cheers, Willie.

 

[ATTACH]18296[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

[mnewbery]

worked fine in the scale test model

Not the Zeppelin ZMC-2 then. It actually flew.

[willedoo]

Maybe these are too easy with a photo. Try this without a photo.What aircraft was designed to meet a US Military requirement, I won't say which service, and worked fine in the scale test model, but was canned because the full size aircraft couldn't get off the ground?

Looking for a hint here, Peter. Was it round and made in Canada?

 

Cheers, Willie.

 

 

[mnewbery]

Avro Canada VZ-9 Avrocar

 

Maximum speed: 300 mph (483 km/h; 261 kn) (estimated), 35 mph (56 km/h) (actual)

:eek:

[red750]

Sorry, I omitted a critical piece of information, which I don't recall seeing in the info I looked at yesterday, and now cannot find again. Further research points out that the aircraft was intended as a VTOL machine which looked fine on paper but in reality could only lift 75% of its weight in vertical flight. .

 

 

[red750]

No response? The aircraft is the Rockwell XVF-12a. See the Wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_XFV-12

 

[ATTACH=full]1484[/ATTACH]

 

.

 

[ATTACH]18308[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

[siznaudin]

Oh dear oh dear - that would have cost the long suffering American taxpayers a packet.:rolleyes: