My two cents on the cross control problem. The Calquin is over 1 meter shorter in length, has the same span, and a greatly enlarged vertical stabilizer than the Mosquito. This would have increased the effects of adverse aileron yaw and made the fin (the original Mozzie fin) less effective. The larger fin and thus rudder would have also had a greater effect on the pressures over the upper tail plane during larger deflections (ie trying to correct for adverse aileron roll at slower speeds) causing one side of the tail plane to produce asymmetric lift. This would 1. Point the nose down slightly. 2. Cause the nose to also swing to the lifting side due to asymmetric induced drag (of the tail plane). 3. Possibly torque the rear fuselage and cause a slight rolling effect. All these effects perplexing an average pilot, and all of which would have to be anticipated quickly as these effects are axacerbating the original problem. The question is why they made their fuselage shorter than the Mosquito in the first place? Perhaps the R-1830's were a good deal lighter than were the Merlins with their cooling system, thus they had to shorten the fuselage for weight and balance. Suggest looking up Mike Arnold and his record breaking AR-5 for an explanation of his theories of interference of fuselage pressure areas and interference drag examplified in the AR-5.
Commodore Jorge Conan Doyle, Argentine nephew of Arthur Conan Doyle, was considered an eximious - if not the best - Argentine Air Force pilot of the Calquin. He was able to do aerobatics with it, including with only one engine working
To complement what was said in the video, the IAé-24 Calquin did not initially foresee the RR Merlin as a motorization, probably because they knew for sure that due to the war they could not be available at that time. The plane was designed from the beginning to carry Pratt & Whitney R-1830-65A SIC3G 1200 HP radial engines and its resemblance to the Mosquito is not accidental, in fact Argentine engineers had regularly visited the de Havilland factory where it was provided to them. some technical information. After the first flight, the specialized press and the newspapers of the moment highlighted that a second version with liquid-cooled in-line engines would begin to be designed. This version that is named in the video was the IAé-28 also known extra officially as "Super Calquin", it would have two RR Merlin 604 engines and all the modifications that the new engine and the experience in the use of the IAé-24 demonstrated, among they include the adoption of radiators on the wing leading edge, between the engines and the fuselage, reinforced landing gear, etc. The project was advancing, however, in parallel, work was being done on the IAé-30 "Ñamcú", a twin-engined "destroyer" type equipped with two RR Merlin 134-135 engines. The advanced stage of this project (which flew in July 1948) led to the cancellation of the IAé-28 and efforts to focus on this new metallic twin-engine. Its resemblance to the de Havilland Hornet was not accidental, since the visits and exchanges with the English manufacturer were maintained. In fact, the original technical information of the plane describes that the hydraulic, pneumatic and electrical systems of the IAé-30 belonged to the de Havilland Hornet, with the necessary modifications to adapt it to the Argentine model. A prototype of this aircraft was completed and two more in different stages of construction. In 1949 a two-seater version was planned, and two motorized with two RR Derwent V turbojets, one for fighter and one for bombing. It had also been planned to transfer it in flight to Farnborough and for this long-duration flight practices were carried out together with two Avro Lancastrians that would support navigation during the crossing of the Atlantic Ocean, but in the end it did not materialize. In 1951 it was assigned to active service and assigned the registration I-101 (following the Gloster Meteor ending in I-100) however it was destroyed in an accident before entering service. Another consideration about the Calquin, his bad reputation was not entirely true and the results of extensive tests carried out in 1951 demonstrate this. It should be noted that their engines were similar to those used by proven aircraft such as the DC-3/C-47, so nothing can be objected to the motorization if we take into account that for the Calquin they had to operate with a maximum weight of just over 7,000 kg, while with the DC-3 the same engines had to do so with twice the maximum weight, about 14,000 kg. Despite this, it was planned to try other engines and studies had begun for the adaptation of the P&W R-2,000 and Bristol Hercules. I also want to add that Argentina did not have any type of difficulty or refusal by England or Rolls Royce to purchase Merlin or other engines, if they were not purchased it was because those purchases were not managed, either because the projects were canceled or were not produced in series. Another thing to keep in mind is that starting in 1948, a lot of British-sourced material was incorporated. Just to name a few whose engines are related to the topic discussed in the video, 30 Avro Lincoln BMk2 were incorporated; 15 Avro Lancaster BMkI, that meant a number of 180 RR Merlin engines in the bombers, plus some new ones for replacement, added to the test stands installed by Rolls Royce and full repair capability and inspections at all levels... too 100 Gloster Meteor FMk4 were incorporated which meant that the planes alone had 200 RR Derwent V turbojets, to which were added new engines for replacement, a large number of spare parts and the materials and licenses to manufacture them in series at the Instituto Aerotécnico (Derwent V and Nene II), where the Pulqui I, Pulqui II and other prototypes carried both the Derwent V and the Nene II, plus other projects that would see the light of day on the design tables that contemplated the use of the most modern RR Avon, such as the IA-36 Condor transport plane (design by Kurt Tank) or the IA-48 (design by Reimar Horten), and others... Definitely England was the first interested in making all these projects prosper and in selling all kinds of materials that many nationally designed aircraft models used to have: engines, systems, ejectable seats, brakes, tires, etc. I forgot to mention that the Calquin never carried 20mm guns. The armed versions carried two types of 12.7mm machine guns. Long-barreled Brownings and short-barreled "DL" Nationals
This wasn't actually their first indigenous combat type, there was the FMA AeMB.2 that came earlier, and it looks fascinating: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMA_AeMB.2
It makes me so happy to see some consideration for the aircrafts of my country! Really good work, here theese thing are obscure and no one talks about it
I really like the aircraft of nations with minor industries, the way they used what they had is really interesting to me. The wack Mosquito is one cool plane for sure
They were pretty innovative, so .......... You have to wonder why, once they had folk like Kurt Tank on board, they didn't nip off the Twin Wasps & bung on a couple of jet motors to their Calquin.
Another good 'un, Ed. And good call to use captions for the alternate specs. I'm sure it was annoying having to spit out both versions of every measurement.
Agree about the treatment for units of measure, and I just wonder whether you are tasking a leaf out of the Rex's Hangar handbook? He vocalises imperial/US units for those nations where imperial/US units are the norm (or were the norm when the aircraft was designed/built/flown), and metric units for those nations where metric is the norm.
Agreed! more than 30 aircraft were written off in accidents, 30 crew members were kiled,many others were stricken off after accidents. The aircraft was unstable in all three axis, in other words, longitudinally stable.
It always happened all around the world at all times; when you develope an aircraft for achieving some predetermined performances, given by design, they need to be provided with the proper engines; if you can't have those engines and got to use some inferior ones, the performance always will be problematic; i think it´s nothing wrong with the design; they just have failed at getting the engines that the project demanded.
It looks too short which probably doesn't help it's handling. Also would radials have more torque and/or more spinning mass than Inline engines and cause further issues?
No. I suspect you are confusing radial engines with rotary engines, First World War style, in which the prop is bolted to the crank-case and all the cylinders whirl around with the prop while the crankshaft stays still. Radial engines of the R-1830 configuration (and all the other WW2 / post-WW2 radials) are stationary. and don't have the rotary engine's troublesome whirling masses. Torque to the prop is determined by the combination of BHP and gearing, which can be pretty much anything the designer selects depending on the power loading size of prop they want - it's not a factor relating to the layout of the cylinders
I think that at the very least, a version with a stretched fuselage and R-2800 engines would have been closer to the Mosquito in performance and handling.
FWIW, "calquin" would sound more like "call keen" in Spanish. Also, did the Northrup or Martins in their inventory come equipped with Twin Wasps? It immediately struck me while watching that the reason behind their choice of engines may have been due to reuse (cannibalization) of their outgoing aircraft and existing spares inventory....
Most Calquins were made after the end of WW2 using surplus engines. Argentina bought very cheaply hundreds of surplus R-2800 Twin Wasp (with props included) from B-24 Liberator spare stocks.
Yet a another "what if?", in this case the obvious question revolving around what might have happened if they had a proper engine, and some outside help to tweak those handling issues away..
What happened with the music? Did the German/Italian engineers try to mount a 75mm cannon on some of these post WW2 aircraft? Make some more videos about these post WW2 aircraft please that would be most interesting.Thank you for a great video.
@@marcelofolcia2561 From any country if there are any left unmentioned. There were several videos about aircraft designed by Herr Tank from Egypt India and Argentina.
7:34 - "... rendered the idea moot". That's the US meaning of "moot", i.e. no longer relevant, rather than the British meaning "an important point that has yet to be decided".
I never thought there was a US/GB dichotomy on such an everyday word. It seems to be used here in proper context - no one knows if a Merlin equipped plane would have been a good step forward as it never flew, so it is a point yet to be decided. As Ed is English, seems to work for him, and for me too.
@@Simon_Nonymous yes - both usages refer to a matter that's undecided, but in US use it means an issue that's no longer relevant (as here - it would be nice to know if it would have been a good performer if fitted with Merlins, but the world has moved on) whereas in Britain a moot point is one on which a decision hangs
in Spanish, when you see a syllable like "que" or "qui", the U is silent, so you have to pronounce it "keh" and "kih", the same with "gue" and "gui", pronounced "geh" and "gih", with the G sounding as in GAME.
Nice one - it would be great if someone who was qualified could opine on why a plane such as this was a bugger to fly - was it really just underpowered, was it the airframe where the wings look quite small compared to a Mosquito, was it in fact just as good/bad as a Mosquito, or was it just pilot training?
Fue diseñado para equipar los RR Merlin, al no poder adquirirse estos se uso el PW 1830, cambiando su centro de gravedad, y otros delicados comportamientos de vuelo...
Where did they get the Wasp engines of the US wasn't willing to sell war components to Argentina? Sourced from old aircraft, or did that engine have enough commercial use in Argentina that it could be sold to them?
You could not throw a stick without hitting a pile of cheap second-hand or surplus military stock P&W R-1830 in the early post-war years. It was the C-47 engine, the most-produced aero engine of all time with more than 173,000 units built. They had been stockpiled in their tens of thousands, most of which at the end of the war were surplused into the global general civilian market. They were _everywhere_
Imagine what the unfortunate Argentine pilots would be saying during WWII as they engaged with enemy fighters that subsequently shot down their sluggish Argentine fighters, "¡Ay carramba!" "¡Que porquerria tenemos!"
Couldn't you hypothetically have a Right Wing Fascist...? And there have been plenty in history, by the way... besides... boxing in massive groups of people in such fashion subtracts from the details of each member edit: the wikipedia on fascism literally opens with "Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the good of the nation, and strong regimentation of society and the economy[2][3] that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe."
@@kalui96 Thank you for your reply. What Right Wing Fascists have there been please? Franco was called a Fascist (he did have them in his party, as they were anti Communist), but he wasn't one. What doesn't help is that the Franco's forces used the right wing salute. The term Fascist comes from Mussolini's original party, which was based on trade unions & left wing views, involving the State in many, if not all parts of the economy. It did not have a racial theory, & indeed Mussolini for around 26 years had a Jewish mistress, & there were 10,000 Italian Jews in the Fascist party. Right Wing by definition should mean free market & lack of state interference in the markets. Fighting Left Wing opponents doesn't mean that you are right wing. However, the irony is both left & right wings use 'corporations' to control markets, workers & have monolithic economies. There are so many 'isms' & 'ists' though, many are similar. What hasn't helped is that post war, Nazis have been called Fascists, & anyone who was in the Axis camp in WW2 just gets called the same term. Even the British BBC keeps mixing up Nazis & Fascists, they are not the same. I'm not saying Fascist is a good form of Government, but just we should get the terms right.
Facists have a tendency to have left-wing policies but authoritarian structures. The Nazi party was after all officially the "National Socialist German Workers’ Party"
My two cents on the cross control problem. The Calquin is over 1 meter shorter in length, has the same span, and a greatly enlarged vertical stabilizer than the Mosquito. This would have increased the effects of adverse aileron yaw and made the fin (the original Mozzie fin) less effective. The larger fin and thus rudder would have also had a greater effect on the pressures over the upper tail plane during larger deflections (ie trying to correct for adverse aileron roll at slower speeds) causing one side of the tail plane to produce asymmetric lift. This would 1. Point the nose down slightly. 2. Cause the nose to also swing to the lifting side due to asymmetric induced drag (of the tail plane). 3. Possibly torque the rear fuselage and cause a slight rolling effect. All these effects perplexing an average pilot, and all of which would have to be anticipated quickly as these effects are axacerbating the original problem. The question is why they made their fuselage shorter than the Mosquito in the first place? Perhaps the R-1830's were a good deal lighter than were the Merlins with their cooling system, thus they had to shorten the fuselage for weight and balance. Suggest looking up Mike Arnold and his record breaking AR-5 for an explanation of his theories of interference of fuselage pressure areas and interference drag examplified in the AR-5.
corrrrrrr!
@@annpeerkat2020 ?
@@Deviation4360 I'm a bit in awe after reading your comprehensive answer.
@@annpeerkat2020 I think I had too much caffeine, but I hope the comment makes sense 😋
Commodore Jorge Conan Doyle, Argentine nephew of Arthur Conan Doyle, was considered an eximious - if not the best - Argentine Air Force pilot of the Calquin.
He was able to do aerobatics with it, including with only one engine working
I can't help feeling a little sad each time I hear there are no surviving examples of whatever airplane you're discussing. Thanks! Love your channel.
That’s why I’m working on a time machine. Go back, buy some post WWII bone yard planes and away we go!
My thought precisely
To complement what was said in the video, the IAé-24 Calquin did not initially foresee the RR Merlin as a motorization, probably because they knew for sure that due to the war they could not be available at that time. The plane was designed from the beginning to carry Pratt & Whitney R-1830-65A SIC3G 1200 HP radial engines and its resemblance to the Mosquito is not accidental, in fact Argentine engineers had regularly visited the de Havilland factory where it was provided to them. some technical information.
After the first flight, the specialized press and the newspapers of the moment highlighted that a second version with liquid-cooled in-line engines would begin to be designed. This version that is named in the video was the IAé-28 also known extra officially as "Super Calquin", it would have two RR Merlin 604 engines and all the modifications that the new engine and the experience in the use of the IAé-24 demonstrated, among they include the adoption of radiators on the wing leading edge, between the engines and the fuselage, reinforced landing gear, etc.
The project was advancing, however, in parallel, work was being done on the IAé-30 "Ñamcú", a twin-engined "destroyer" type equipped with two RR Merlin 134-135 engines. The advanced stage of this project (which flew in July 1948) led to the cancellation of the IAé-28 and efforts to focus on this new metallic twin-engine. Its resemblance to the de Havilland Hornet was not accidental, since the visits and exchanges with the English manufacturer were maintained. In fact, the original technical information of the plane describes that the hydraulic, pneumatic and electrical systems of the IAé-30 belonged to the de Havilland Hornet, with the necessary modifications to adapt it to the Argentine model. A prototype of this aircraft was completed and two more in different stages of construction.
In 1949 a two-seater version was planned, and two motorized with two RR Derwent V turbojets, one for fighter and one for bombing. It had also been planned to transfer it in flight to Farnborough and for this long-duration flight practices were carried out together with two Avro Lancastrians that would support navigation during the crossing of the Atlantic Ocean, but in the end it did not materialize. In 1951 it was assigned to active service and assigned the registration I-101 (following the Gloster Meteor ending in I-100) however it was destroyed in an accident before entering service.
Another consideration about the Calquin, his bad reputation was not entirely true and the results of extensive tests carried out in 1951 demonstrate this. It should be noted that their engines were similar to those used by proven aircraft such as the DC-3/C-47, so nothing can be objected to the motorization if we take into account that for the Calquin they had to operate with a maximum weight of just over 7,000 kg, while with the DC-3 the same engines had to do so with twice the maximum weight, about 14,000 kg. Despite this, it was planned to try other engines and studies had begun for the adaptation of the P&W R-2,000 and Bristol Hercules.
I also want to add that Argentina did not have any type of difficulty or refusal by England or Rolls Royce to purchase Merlin or other engines, if they were not purchased it was because those purchases were not managed, either because the projects were canceled or were not produced in series. Another thing to keep in mind is that starting in 1948, a lot of British-sourced material was incorporated. Just to name a few whose engines are related to the topic discussed in the video, 30 Avro Lincoln BMk2 were incorporated; 15 Avro Lancaster BMkI, that meant a number of 180 RR Merlin engines in the bombers, plus some new ones for replacement, added to the test stands installed by Rolls Royce and full repair capability and inspections at all levels... too 100 Gloster Meteor FMk4 were incorporated which meant that the planes alone had 200 RR Derwent V turbojets, to which were added new engines for replacement, a large number of spare parts and the materials and licenses to manufacture them in series at the Instituto Aerotécnico (Derwent V and Nene II), where the Pulqui I, Pulqui II and other prototypes carried both the Derwent V and the Nene II, plus other projects that would see the light of day on the design tables that contemplated the use of the most modern RR Avon, such as the IA-36 Condor transport plane (design by Kurt Tank) or the IA-48 (design by Reimar Horten), and others...
Definitely England was the first interested in making all these projects prosper and in selling all kinds of materials that many nationally designed aircraft models used to have: engines, systems, ejectable seats, brakes, tires, etc.
I forgot to mention that the Calquin never carried 20mm guns. The armed versions carried two types of 12.7mm machine guns. Long-barreled Brownings and short-barreled "DL" Nationals
This wasn't actually their first indigenous combat type, there was the FMA AeMB.2 that came earlier, and it looks fascinating:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMA_AeMB.2
Good catch!
As always, thank you. I love to hear about aircraft like this. So much was done by countries and industries that have just faded away.
Thanks for sharing! It whas a remarcable achievement for argentine aeronautic industry, so sad we scrapped all examples.
"The Argentinean is an Italian who speaks Spanish, thinks in French and would like to be English." Jorge Luis Borges
Definition of the word ‘Ego’: That little bit of Argentinian in all of us. (South American humour:)
Fantastic!So true!!!
Not sure if that mean they are international or just very confused.
@Aqua Fyre Stop kidding, the Argies, fought like ww2 Italians. 🤣
@@aussiviking604 now now ladies.
It makes me so happy to see some consideration for the aircrafts of my country! Really good work, here theese thing are obscure and no one talks about it
Cool! One of the best moments of the week! Thank you!!!
It's rather fitting that the aircraft designed to replace the aircraft that looks like a Mosquito looks like a Hornet.
Diseñado por ingenieros italianos, incluso se propusieron modelos con turbinas (todavia inexistentes en el pais)
@@marcelofolcia2561 more like a FW 187 Falke
I really like the aircraft of nations with minor industries, the way they used what they had is really interesting to me.
The wack Mosquito is one cool plane for sure
They were pretty innovative, so ..........
You have to wonder why, once they had folk like Kurt Tank on board, they didn't nip off the Twin Wasps & bung on a couple of jet motors to their Calquin.
@@babboon5764 good idea, but no reaction prop. Great Britain no "regalaba" sus jets Derwent (sorry mi traduction)
@@babboon5764huh lol? He built them a plane and they just bought sabres or something. Guess Kurt Tank wasn’t god after all :/
It's like a Beaufighter met a Mosquito and this was the result.
Absolutely
Another good 'un, Ed. And good call to use captions for the alternate specs. I'm sure it was annoying having to spit out both versions of every measurement.
Agree about the treatment for units of measure, and I just wonder whether you are tasking a leaf out of the Rex's Hangar handbook? He vocalises imperial/US units for those nations where imperial/US units are the norm (or were the norm when the aircraft was designed/built/flown), and metric units for those nations where metric is the norm.
Mosquito meets Beaufighter
Looks like someone got the Mosquito and the Beaufighter mixed up
Excellent video (as usual)
The Calquin is one of those rarities: An aircraft that looks right, which isn't.
Se lo apodo (adjetivo) "Flor de Nardo", especie autóctona de un camposanto..(cementery)
Agreed! more than 30 aircraft were written off in accidents, 30 crew members were kiled,many others were stricken off after accidents. The aircraft was unstable in all three axis, in other words, longitudinally stable.
It always happened all around the world at all times; when you develope an aircraft for achieving some predetermined performances, given by design, they need to be provided with the proper engines; if you can't have those engines and got to use some inferior ones, the performance always will be problematic; i think it´s nothing wrong with the design; they just have failed at getting the engines that the project demanded.
It looks too short which probably doesn't help it's handling.
Also would radials have more torque and/or more spinning mass than Inline engines and cause further issues?
No. I suspect you are confusing radial engines with rotary engines, First World War style, in which the prop is bolted to the crank-case and all the cylinders whirl around with the prop while the crankshaft stays still. Radial engines of the R-1830 configuration (and all the other WW2 / post-WW2 radials) are stationary. and don't have the rotary engine's troublesome whirling masses. Torque to the prop is determined by the combination of BHP and gearing, which can be pretty much anything the designer selects depending on the power loading size of prop they want - it's not a factor relating to the layout of the cylinders
@@harryspeakup8452 doh! Of course, cheers 👍
Muito interessante! Gratidão pelo vídeo e pelas informações! 🌟
I think that at the very least, a version with a stretched fuselage and R-2800 engines would have been closer to the Mosquito in performance and handling.
At about 07:34 in this video: That aircraft reminds me of the _Pucará._
Never knew about this. Great video!
FWIW, "calquin" would sound more like "call keen" in Spanish. Also, did the Northrup or Martins in their inventory come equipped with Twin Wasps? It immediately struck me while watching that the reason behind their choice of engines may have been due to reuse (cannibalization) of their outgoing aircraft and existing spares inventory....
Most Calquins were made after the end of WW2 using surplus engines.
Argentina bought very cheaply hundreds of surplus R-2800 Twin Wasp (with props included) from B-24 Liberator spare stocks.
Thank you
The I.Ae 30 looks like a cross between a Gloster Meteor and a De Havilland Hornet..
Yet a another "what if?", in this case the obvious question revolving around what might have happened if they had a proper engine, and some outside help to tweak those handling issues away..
Fascinating!
If you don't want to sell, just make it expensive...
Something I've learned as well ;-D
Minor correction. The Calquin is pronounced Kal-Keen, not Kal queen. Q followed by U in Spanish is silent before E and I.
An interesting video.
Thanks
Nice video
Why is there a picture of a twin engine Mosquito on this video?
Great video about the Sturmovik though.
Personally I have a soft spot for the underdog.
@Aqua Fyre Surely Dachshunds?
Which is fine as long as you don't have to fly one, or even worse take 1 in to combat against other aircraft that out class you. :)
What happened with the music? Did the German/Italian engineers try to mount a 75mm cannon on some of these post WW2 aircraft? Make some more videos about these post WW2 aircraft please that would be most interesting.Thank you for a great video.
¿En que país? No en la R.Argentina que yo sepa...
@@marcelofolcia2561 From any country if there are any left unmentioned. There were several videos about aircraft designed by Herr Tank from Egypt India and Argentina.
IA30… looks like an Argentine whirlwind
More like a de Havilland Hornet
After seeing so many videos starring Aerosucre, it's refreshing to see any latin American country with an organization called FAA.
amazing that none survive. Their first ever indigenous fighter design, scrapped for the sake of some wood.
Venganza política fue...aparte tuvo una "alta tasa de desgaste"...
7:34 - "... rendered the idea moot". That's the US meaning of "moot", i.e. no longer relevant, rather than the British meaning "an important point that has yet to be decided".
I never thought there was a US/GB dichotomy on such an everyday word. It seems to be used here in proper context - no one knows if a Merlin equipped plane would have been a good step forward as it never flew, so it is a point yet to be decided. As Ed is English, seems to work for him, and for me too.
@@Simon_Nonymous yes - both usages refer to a matter that's undecided, but in US use it means an issue that's no longer relevant (as here - it would be nice to know if it would have been a good performer if fitted with Merlins, but the world has moved on) whereas in Britain a moot point is one on which a decision hangs
@@Nastyswimmer what a fascinating language we share - thank you explaining!
Ironic that the I.A e 30 looks like a knock off of the DHav. Hornet too :D
What an interesting aircraft. But I think it looks like the love child of a mosquito and beaufighter. A Beauquito? Mosfighter?
So that’s why the pucara looks like a descendant of a 262.
Triangular fuselage low wing underslung engines and high tail
Well, I can think of a few other reasons
more a desendant of the hs 129. it was the basis of the desing
in Spanish, when you see a syllable like "que" or "qui", the U is silent, so you have to pronounce it "keh" and "kih", the same with "gue" and "gui", pronounced "geh" and "gih", with the G sounding as in GAME.
Ooo, does this mean that the Tank and Horten designed jets are coming soon?
Nice one - it would be great if someone who was qualified could opine on why a plane such as this was a bugger to fly - was it really just underpowered, was it the airframe where the wings look quite small compared to a Mosquito, was it in fact just as good/bad as a Mosquito, or was it just pilot training?
Fue diseñado para equipar los RR Merlin, al no poder adquirirse estos se uso el PW 1830, cambiando su centro de gravedad, y otros delicados comportamientos de vuelo...
Clearly the Argentinians had some decent locally manufactured wood glue?
Relegated to the barbeque rather than the scrapyard.
IA 30 is a beautiful plane!
It looks like a Beau-quito.
Just imagine how good the Calquin would have been if they could get DB605 engines from Mercedes.
At 1.55 they look like a Polish bomber 'Karaś' !!
Where did they get the Wasp engines of the US wasn't willing to sell war components to Argentina? Sourced from old aircraft, or did that engine have enough commercial use in Argentina that it could be sold to them?
Possibly from the original light bombers from 1938 they were retiring?
Good question Don, Back door from US ? Brazil ? Some other country that was on the US OK list and was prepared to make some dodgy profit ?
@@glaslynx123 I'm shocked, shocked you would suggest a piece of war materiel would be sold or resold in a dodgy way to make a (big) profit. ;)
You could not throw a stick without hitting a pile of cheap second-hand or surplus military stock P&W R-1830 in the early post-war years. It was the C-47 engine, the most-produced aero engine of all time with more than 173,000 units built. They had been stockpiled in their tens of thousands, most of which at the end of the war were surplused into the global general civilian market. They were _everywhere_
there was a local production variant caled indio
With the radials, thd Calquin could be called a "Beau-Squito".
50 crew? They only built 100 of the things!!!
Sorry but I don't think much was headed to scrap
Not taking a side during WW2 and being on the other side of the world from the fighting = difficult???
No living examples. That's too bad...
Imagine what the unfortunate Argentine pilots would be saying during WWII as they engaged with enemy fighters that subsequently shot down their sluggish Argentine fighters, "¡Ay carramba!" "¡Que porquerria tenemos!"
They didn't worry about the Falklands then.
Person proposed the Brits to cancel part of their huge war debt to Argentina returning the Falklands.
Of course, the Brits did not accept. this deal.
@@Tordogor Yes there was no war debt to Argentina!!
They only needed to mate a Mossie with a Beaufighter ...........
Should they care ? who are they going to fight ? Southern Mozzy should suffice.
My brother in christ, this is Argentina we're talking about, they are on the brink of war with either Brazil or Chile every 6 months.
You hit that nail on the head. Running the radials was certainly cheaper that getting either Merlins or Allisons.
They were good at murdering students and trade unionists.
Favor,traducir al castellano.
and their trainer is clearly a T-6 copy.
:)
Fascists are Left Wing, not right wing.
Grow up.
Couldn't you hypothetically have a Right Wing Fascist...? And there have been plenty in history, by the way... besides... boxing in massive groups of people in such fashion subtracts from the details of each member
edit: the wikipedia on fascism literally opens with "Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the good of the nation, and strong regimentation of society and the economy[2][3] that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe."
@@Katy_Jones ?
@@kalui96 Thank you for your reply.
What Right Wing Fascists have there been please? Franco was called a Fascist (he did have them in his party, as they were anti Communist), but he wasn't one. What doesn't help is that the Franco's forces used the right wing salute.
The term Fascist comes from Mussolini's original party, which was based on trade unions & left wing views, involving the State in many, if not all parts of the economy. It did not have a racial theory, & indeed Mussolini for around 26 years had a Jewish mistress, & there were 10,000 Italian Jews in the Fascist party.
Right Wing by definition should mean free market & lack of state interference in the markets.
Fighting Left Wing opponents doesn't mean that you are right wing.
However, the irony is both left & right wings use 'corporations' to control markets, workers & have monolithic economies.
There are so many 'isms' & 'ists' though, many are similar.
What hasn't helped is that post war, Nazis have been called Fascists, & anyone who was in the Axis camp in WW2 just gets called the same term. Even the British BBC keeps mixing up Nazis & Fascists, they are not the same.
I'm not saying Fascist is a good form of Government, but just we should get the terms right.
Facists have a tendency to have left-wing policies but authoritarian structures.
The Nazi party was after all officially the "National Socialist German Workers’ Party"