ClintonB Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 That could be just drunk contractors😄 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 This is more of a general knowledge question. Which is the odd one out in the following list. Wabco Euclid Caterpillar Terex Scania LeTorneau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litespeed Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Euclid The rest make diesel equipment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onetrack Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Scania. They have never manufactured anything but trucks. All the others are all earthmoving, construction and mining equipment manufacturers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Probably both answers true. The one I was looking for is that Caterpillar is the only one still making trucks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 hour ago, pmccarthy said: Probably both answers true. The one I was looking for is that Caterpillar is the only one still making trucks. I'm assuming you mean dump trucks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Scania still make road trucks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 I meant mining dump trucks but I see that the Scania G series is used in mining so I was wrong about that. Now owned 100% by VW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onetrack Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) The problem lies in the number of company names listed that no longer exist in their original form. WABCO was owned by the Westinghouse Air Brake Co, who bought the LeTourneau earthmover manufacturing operation in 1953. All the Le Tourneau equipment was initially renamed Le-Tourneau-Westinghouse, then it was renamed WABCO equipment in 1968. What happened in 1968, was the U.S. company American Standard purchased the parent company, Westinghouse Air Brake Co, so American Standard placed the LeTourneau-Westinghouse brand under a subsidiary named The Industrial & Construction Products Division of American Standard. American Standard renamed the LeT-W operations, WABCO Equipment - and Wabco Australia operated as a separate entity. In 1983, American Standards construction equipment operations fell away to disastrous levels of sales due to the worldwide recession of the early 1980's. A-S closed several manufacturing plants in the U.S., and the final straw was when Komatsu Japan did a "commodity swap" deal with Russia, exchanging 222 x 120-ton Komatsu dump trucks for supplies of Russian coal, thus wrecking any chance of WABCO surviving. A-S sold the WABCO manufacturing operations to Dresser Inc of the U.S. in 1984 - but not the WABCO name. The company WABCO Australia was dissolved, and all WABCO equipment was renamed Dresser. The Euclid and Terex companies are tied together in a book-filling array of mergers, takeovers, buyouts and name changes that would test anyones memory. Perhaps the site below is the best source for outlining the Euclid-Terex ownership/operations wrangling. https://www.constructionequipment.com/topical/historical-equipment/article/10748337/the-tangled-web-of-euclid-and-terex-truck-history Caterpillar still operates the same as it always has - perhaps the greatest change at Caterpillar was in 1986, when it changed its name (and direction) from the Caterpillar Tractor Co (and which manufactured 98% of it's named products), to Caterpillar Inc. Caterpillar Inc. set out on an acquisition trail and built itself up on the basis of buying established manufacturers and often renaming them as Caterpillar products, or at best, Caterpillar subsidiaries. Caterpillar now own a vast array of manufacturing names and products, from energy generation to ships engines to even the smallest item of construction equipment. They also sell a vast array of "branded" merchandise. Scania have never deviated from truck and bus and engine manufacturing, apart from the period between 1969 and 1995, when they merged with Saab. In 1995, a demerger occurred between Scania and Saab and the company went back to the simple Scania AB name. Both Volvo and MAN made aborted takeover attempts for Scania, in 1999 and 2007 respectively. Both takeovers were cruelled by the EU as being monopolistic. VW sneakily acquired shareholdings in Scania by purchasing, first, Volvos shares, then another major shareholders shares, over the period from 2000 to 2008, when Scania then became a division of VW. Edited January 26 by onetrack 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted January 26 Author Share Posted January 26 You'll all know this - Which Cessna became a Beechcraft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 12 hours ago, red750 said: You'll all know this - Which Cessna became a Beechcraft? Here's one. But "beach" has an "a". 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onetrack Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 I believe it was the Denali? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 Correct onetrack. The Beechcraft Denali, also known as the Model 220 and previously the Cessna Denali and Textron "Single Engine Turboprop" (SETP), is an American single engine turboprop aircraft under development by Textron Aviation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Why did you think WE would ALL know that?. This site is not frequented by millionaires. Perhaps I'm wrong there. Anyone who owns a house is a millionaire. Thats inflation for you.. Money becomes worthless. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 I thought we were aviation enthusiasts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 What military jet had a periscope? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 RED, there's a big variation in which sector of aviation we operate and where our primary interest is Executive pressurised turbo prop is not a priority for the likes of us relatively impoverished financially stressed, addicted participants. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onetrack Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 I thought I was a millionaire once, but a rotten bank made sure I was only a thousandaire. But it's nice to look at the big boys toys and wonder what it would like to have hundreds of billions to play with. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 OK Nev, by your reasoning, I can't afford to flit around the world so I'm not allowed to be interested in A380's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 (edited) These days It would certainly help you to know what plane you'd fly in and who made it these days. OWNING a Plane is a giant step for the ordinary person. . Flying in them ( BIG ones in RPT) is cheaper than any other form of travel. So your analogy doesn't fit. Nev Edited January 27 by facthunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 OK. I'll change the first line of the post we are discussing. "Maybe you'll know the answer to this one if you have any interest in aviation." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill with that one.. Discussing is OK. Cheap and safe is our aim here. The rest is secondary. To build more and get younger people in would be the aim.. LONG TERM. . It's a matter of balance. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 re the periscope question. I thought willidoo may have had the answer. The aircraft I refer to is the MiG 29 trainer. The rear instructors seat is set too low for him to see over the students head for a view of the runway. So there is a pop-up mirror, which reflects onto a second mirror at instrument panel level, so he can see the runway. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 1 hour ago, red750 said: re the periscope question. I thought willidoo may have had the answer. The aircraft I refer to is the MiG 29 trainer. I should know that, but I didn't off the top of my head. I've got a reprint of the Luftwaffe flight manual written in English that covers the MiG-29UB trainer and the single seat versions as well. Might be time to re-read it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 The old UTI MiG-15 trainer had better vision for the instructor, as they can get a reasonable view either side of the student. They used the UTI MiG-15 for a lot of years as the 17 and 19 never had two seat trainer versions. The next two seat trainers were the Mig-21U and then the MiG-29UB. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now