Control Line: Navy Carrier
MYSTERY PLANE. Because of the time required for editing, compiling, and printing Model Aviation each month, my columns must be in the mail before the issue with the preceding column is distributed. Thus, although I can't announce a winner for the February Mystery Airplane Contest, I will identify the airplane as the Northrop XFT-2. This airplane is a modification of the original XFT-1 experimental fighter monoplane which first flew in 1933. Based on the Northrop Gamma transport and the Lockheed Vega which John Northrop designed, the XFT-1 was fast-but not as maneuverable as its biplane predecessors. In addition, the large fairings on its fixed landing gear caused maintenance problems and a bad tendency to spin. So, the XFT-1 went back to the factory to get a new engine and cowl, new wheel fairings, a larger rudder, and a new designation-XFT-2. The modifications did little to improve the handling, and the Navy grounded the airplane. The only prototype crashed when a Northrop pilot attempted an unauthorized ferry flight back to the Northrop factory.
Control Line: Navy Carrier
I RECEIVED quite a few responses to the Mystery Plane Contest from the February issue. The first reader to correctly identify the Northrop XFT-2 was Gary Hull. Others with the right answer were Steve Adams, Frank Beatty, Read Schuster, Joe Wagner, Ron Boggis, Frank Stetson, Jerry Greaves, Alvin Westerland III, Mike Himmerich, Ed Bearns, Joe Dzialo, and Tom Cassidy. Numerous others were very close with their XFT-1 identification. I enjoyed getting your letters with comments about the column. I try to answer questions in a timely manner, but volume of mail and my work schedule often cause delays. Please be patient. (A return envelope helps.)
Control Line: Navy Carrier
JUNE'S Mystery Aircraft was correctly identified by Frederick C. Maier as the Mitsubishi A5M3. The A5 series (Allied code name Claude) was the Japanese Navy's first monoplane fighter and first flew in 1935. The more common forms had a radial engine, which made the nose rather short for our purposes. The A5M3 was an experimental version with a longer nose to accommodate a 690 hp Hispano-Suiza in-line engine. The radiator was mounted under the fuselage. In this configuration, it makes a very graceful airplane, not unlike the Supermarine Seafire (navalized Spitfire). This month's Mystery Plane may be a little harder to identify. Once again, a year's membership in the Navy Carrier Society to the first reader to correctly identify this carrier aircraft. Good luck!
Control Line: Navy Carrier
THE RESPONSE to the August mystery plane contest has been a little slower than usual. I can't announce a winner yet, because I haven't received any entries, right or wrong, as this is being written. The winner's name will appear in my next column. The aircraft was a trainer for the French navy built by the Morane-Saulnier factory following WW II. The aircraft shown is the carrier-equipped variant of four very similar trainers. It is well-proportioned for the CL Carrier events. Its designation-the Morane-Saulnier M.S. 474. This month's mystery aircraft is a little older. Although it doesn't look much like its contemporary naval combat aircraft, it nevertheless qualifies for our event. Send your entries to me at the address shown at the end of the column. A year's membership in the Navy Carrier Society to the winner!
AMA Nats 1983: CL Navy Carrier
AFTER many years in other ports, the USS Smallfry was once again docked on the East Coast. The facilities this year were outstanding, with large practice areas, smooth flying circles, and enthusiastic support from the Air Force and the community. The Carrier circles were located right by the entry gate and spectator parking areas, thus ensuring plenty of spectators throughout the competition. There were 41 models processed for Class I and II, and 31 for Profile. The Junior participation was particularly encouraging, with three entries processed in each of the Scale classes, and six fliers in Profile. The number of contestants provided good competition without putting an undue strain on the officials. A single deck could be used each day with few delays and very little waiting for a flight.
