View allAll Photos Tagged Background
Nhanh chóng hoàn thành bài thuyết trình với bộ Background Powerpoint đẹp này. Bạn có thể tải về miễn phí tại Slidemall.com
Some background:
The Brewster Buffalo was an American fighter aircraft which saw limited service early in World War II. It was one of the first U.S. WWII Monoplanes with an arrestor hook and other modifications for aircraft carriers. It usually had an open canopy. Though the Buffalo won a competition against the Grumman F4F Wildcat in 1939 to become the US Navy's first monoplane fighter aircraft, it turned out to be a big disappointment. Several nations, including Finland, Belgium, Britain and the Netherlands, ordered the Buffalo to bolster their struggling air arms, but of all the users, only the Finns seemed to find their Buffalos effective, flying them in combat with excellent results.
When World War II began in the Pacific in December 1941, Buffalos operated by both British Commonwealth (B-339E) and Dutch (B-339D) air forces in South East Asia suffered severe losses in combat against the Japanese Navy's Mitsubishi A6M Zero and the Japanese Army's Nakajima Ki-43 "Oscar". The Militaire Luchtvaart van het Koninklijk Nederlands-Indisch Leger ("Military Air Service of the Royal Netherlands East Indian Army", ML-KNIL) had ordered 144 Brewster B-339C and 339D models, the former with rebuilt Wright G-105 engines supplied by the Dutch and the latter with new 1,200 hp (895 kW) Wright R-1820-40 engines Brewster purchased from Wright. At the outbreak of war, only 71 had arrived in the Dutch East Indies, and not all were in service. A small number served briefly at Singapore before being withdrawn for the defense of Java.
As the Brewster B-339 aircraft used by the ML-KNIL were lighter than the modified B-339E Brewster Mark Is used by British, Australian, and New Zealand air forces, they were able at times to successfully engage the Japanese Army Ki-43 "Oscar", although both the "Oscar" and the Japanese Navy's A6M Zero still out-climbed and out-turned the B-339 at combat altitudes (the Zero was faster as well). Brewster Buffalos of the ML-KNIL, apart from their role as fighters, were also used as dive bombers against Japanese troopships. Although reinforced by British Commonwealth Brewster Mk I (B-339E) aircraft retreating from Malaya, the Dutch squadrons faced superior numbers in the air, and were too few in number to stem the advance of Japanese ground forces.
In a major engagement above Semplak on 19 February 1942, eight Dutch Brewster fighters intercepted a formation of about 35 Japanese bombers with an escort of about 20 Zeros. The Brewster pilots destroyed 11 Japanese aircraft and lost four Brewsters; two Dutch pilots died. The Brewsters flew their last sortie on 7 March. Altogether, 17 ML-KNIL pilots were killed, and 30 aircraft shot down; 15 were destroyed on the ground, and several were lost to misadventure. Dutch pilots claimed 55 enemy aircraft destroyed. Two Dutch pilots, Jacob van Helsdingen and August Deibel, scored highest with the Buffalo with three victories each. Following the surrender of the Netherlands East Indies on 8 March 1942, 17 ML-KNIL Buffalos were transferred to the USAAF and RAAF in Australia.
The kit and its assembly
No whif this time! To be honest, I like the wacky Brewster Buffalo, and I had one on my agenda for a long time - uncertain which nationality it should have, though. When I snooped around I came across the recent Buffalo replica for the Long Island museum, which sports ML-KNIL colours, and that made the decision, since it offered colour pictures (chech airliners.net) of a probably authentic livery of one of such machines.
The kit is the simple and vintage Matchbox kit - I did not want to spend a fortune on a 4" model. The kit ain't bad, but has several wrong details, e. g. the landing flaps are wrong, the pitot is missing, and the degree of surface details is rather low and a wild mix of rised and recessed panel lines. As a funny coincidence, the original Matchbox kit even allows to build a Dutch plane (B-398), with triangular, orange national markings. The paint scheme is correct, but the colours, lent from RAF planes (Dark Green and Dark Earth with grey undersides) is IMHO totally wrong, see below. I went for something different, though, a plane with an original ML-KNIL camouflage.
Using pictures and profiles I slightly pimped the small kit, e .g. through lowered flaps (which are too big...), an open canopy, some cockpit details like a different pilot, a dashboard and an aiming sight, some cables in the open landing gear wells, plus two wing hardpoints with a 100 lbs. bomb each. Nothing outrageous, just cosmetics.
Painting
"B-395/E" belonged to pilot Sgt.I.P.Adam, based at Andir, Java, March 1942. It wore the typical Oudeblad/Jongblad/Silver paint scheme of the conflict theatre and carried the Dutch flag markings used after February 24th, 1942. It was finally captured by Japanese forces in March 1942 at Andir.
At first glance, the paint scheme looks familiar - like the typical RAF Dark Earth/Dark Green from above, and actually some ML-KNIL Buffalos flew in this fashion, with undersides partly painted half black/Sky Type 'S'.
But upon closer look, B-395's upper scheme consists of two green tones, with silver undersides. A similar scheme was used on many other ML-KNIL planes (e .g. P-36, Curtiss-Wright CW-21) and also on RAAF Spitfires in that region.
For the lighter 'Oudeblad' ("old leaves") tone I used Olive Drab from Humbrol (155), which is rather brown-ish, for Jongblad ("young leaves") I used Bronze Green from Humbrol (75) as basic tone. 155 seems to be a perfect choice, and it was shaded with Humbrol 26 (Khaki Drab). For the darker 'Jongblad', FS 34092 is often recommended (as well as for RAAF "Foliage Green") - but I found this modern FS tone to be much too bluish and light. Hence, and after consulting pictures of the Buffalo replica at airliners.net, I settled for the darker Bronze Green, setting some shades with RAF Dark Green (Testors 2060) and Marine Green (Humbrol 105).
The lower sides were painted with Aluminum from Humbrol (56), with some shading with Aluminum Metallizer and Gun Metal (Humbrol 53).
The kit was considerably weathered through a black ink wash, dry brushing on all surfaces with lighter/bleached tones of the camouflage colours, some emphasized panel lines, plus some soot stains around the guns and the exhaust.
Decals were puzzled together according to pictures and sketches of B-395 I found; the national insignia flags come from an RS Models Fokker XXIII, the registration numbers and the white ID stripe were improvised with material from various aftermarket sheets from TL Modellbau.
So, finally, a literally tiny project with exotic appeal, built in less than three days from sprues to pictures - nothing fancy, but finally a Buffalo for the collcetion. ^^
Two friendly horses I met somewhere in Dutchess County, NY. They were standing way over in a corner below the hill in the background, and when I stopped to take their picture, they immediately came over to visit. I imagine they thought I had a treat.
Fantasy Unicorn Wallpapers HD Backgrounds
Fantasy Unicorn Wallpapers HD Backgrounds, 1920 x 1080, 686 KB, wall.alphacoders.com/by_sub_category.php?id=167186
Background painting for Paulette's class. Used stencil for decorative swirl pattern. Again used the "koosh" ball for the "chicken scratching".
Vintage Backgrounds Wallpaper Cool Desktop
Vintage Backgrounds Wallpaper Cool Desktop, 1200 x 933, 348.09 KB,
Source: livinghistories.newcastle.edu.au/nodes/view/35720
This photograph was taken by a member of the University of Newcastle's former Medical Communication Unit. The original slide is held in Cultural Collections, Auchmuty Library, the University of Newcastle, Australia.
This image can be used for study and personal research purposes. If you wish to reproduce this image for any other purpose you must obtain permission by contacting Cultural Collections
Please contact us if you are the subject of the image, or know the subject of the image, and have cultural or other reservations about the image being displayed on this website and would like to discuss this with us.
If you have any information about this photograph, please contact us or leave a comment.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Fokker D.VII was a German World War I fighter aircraft designed by Reinhold Platz of the Fokker-Flugzeugwerke. Late in 1917, Fokker built the experimental V 11 biplane, fitted with the standard Mercedes D.IIIa engine. In January 1918, IdFlieg held a fighter competition at Adlershof, and for the first time, front line pilots participated in the evaluation and selection of new fighters. Fokker submitted the V 11 along with several other prototypes. Manfred von Richthofen flew the V 11 and found it tricky, unpleasant and directionally unstable in a dive. On short notice, Platz reacted and lengthened the rear fuselage by one structural bay and added a triangular fin in front of the rudder. Richthofen tested the modified V 11 and praised it as the best aircraft of the competition. It offered excellent performance from the outdated Mercedes engine, yet was safe and easy to fly. Richthofen's recommendation virtually decided the competition but he was not alone in recommending it. Fokker immediately received a provisional order for 400 production aircraft, which were named D.VII by IdFlieg.
Fokker's factory was not up to the task of meeting all D.VII production orders and IdFlieg directed Albatros and AEG to build the D.VII under license, though AEG did not ultimately produce any aircraft. Because the Fokker factory did not use detailed plans as part of its production process, Fokker simply sent a D.VII airframe for Albatros to copy. Albatros paid Fokker a five percent royalty for every D.VII they built under license. Albatros Flugzeugwerke and its subsidiary, Ostdeutsche Albatros Werke (OAW), built the D.VII at factories in Johannisthal [Fokker D.VII (Alb)] and Schneidemühl [Fokker D.VII (OAW)] respectively. Corresponding aircraft markings included the type designation and factory suffix, immediately before the individual serial number.
Some parts were not interchangeable between aircraft produced at different factories, even between Albatros and OAW. Each manufacturer tended to differ in both nose paint styles and the patterning and layout of their engine compartment cooling louvers on the sides of the nose. OAW produced examples were delivered with distinctive mauve and green splotches on the cowling. All D.VIIs were produced with either the five-color (“Fünffarbig”) or, less often, the four-color (“Vierfarbig”) lozenge camouflage covering, except for early Fokker-produced D.VIIs, which had a streaked green fuselage. However, these factory camouflage finishes were often overpainted in the field with colorful paint schemes or insignia for the Jasta or for a specific pilot, making identification during aerial combat easier.
The D.VII entered squadron service with Jasta 10 in early May 1918. When the Fokker D.VII appeared on the Western Front in April 1918, Allied pilots at first underestimated the new fighter because of its squarish, ungainly appearance, but quickly revised their view. The type had many important advantages over the Albatros and Pfalz scouts. Unlike the Albatros scouts, the D.VII could dive without any fear of structural failure. The D.VII was also noted for its high manoeuvrability and ability to climb, its remarkably docile stall and reluctance to spin. It could "hang on its prop" without stalling for brief periods of time, spraying enemy aircraft from below with machine gun fire. These handling characteristics contrasted with contemporary Allied scouts such as the Camel and SPAD, which stalled sharply and spun vigorously.
Nevertheless, several aircraft suffered rib failures and fabric shedding on the upper wing. Heat from the engine sometimes ignited phosphorus ammunition until additional cooling louvers were installed on the metal sides of the engine cowling panels, and fuel tanks sometimes broke at the seams through high G loads and a twisting, wooden airframe. Aircraft built by the Fokker factory at Schwerin were noted for their lower standard of workmanship and materials. But despite some faults, the D.VII proved to be a remarkably successful design and a true fighter benchmark, leading to the familiar aphorism that it could turn a mediocre pilot into a good one and a good pilot into an ace.
In September 1918, eight D.VIIs were delivered to Bulgaria. Late in 1918, the Austro-Hungarian company Magyar Általános Gépgyár (MÁG, Hungarian General Machine Company) commenced licensed production of the D.VII with Austro-Daimler engines. Production continued after the end of the war, with as many as 50 aircraft completed.
Richthofen died days before the D.VII began to reach the Jagdstaffeln and never flew it in combat. Other pilots, including Erich Löwenhardt and Hermann Göring, quickly racked up victories and generally lauded the design. Aircraft availability was limited at first, but by July there were 407 in service. Larger numbers became available by August, by which point D.VIIs had achieved 565 victories. The D.VII eventually equipped 46 Jagdstaffeln. When the war ended in November, 775 D.VII aircraft were in service, and they were outfitted with various, ever more powerful engines, but the aircraft remained outwardly virtually identical. Some late production machines had a rare BMW IIIa 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine fitted. It had a continuous output of 137.95 kW (185 hp), but also an emergency rating of 180 kW (240 hp) at low level that gave the aircraft a top speed in level flight of 200 km/h (124 mph; 108 kn) and a phenomenal rate of climb (four times as good at low altitude as the early machines and still twice as good at higher altitudes), even though at the risk of engine damage.
After the war, the Allies confiscated large numbers of D.VII aircraft after the Armistice. The United States Army and Navy evaluated no less than 142 captured examples and used them in what would today be called “aggressor” units for dissimilar air combat in training and for the development of indigenous military aircraft. Several of these aircraft were re-engined with American-built Liberty L-6 motors, which were very similar in appearance to the D.VII's original German power plants and hard to tell apart. France, Great Britain and Canada also received numbers of war prizes, but these aircraft did not enter active service. Other countries used the D.VII operationally, though: the Polish deployed approximately 50 aircraft during the Polish-Soviet War, using them mainly for ground attack missions; the Hungarian Soviet Republic used a number of D.VIIs, both built by MAG and ex-German aircraft in the Hungarian-Romanian War of 1919; the Dutch, Swiss, and Belgian air forces also operated the D.VII. The aircraft proved still so popular that Fokker completed and sold a large number of D.VII airframes that he had smuggled into the Netherlands after the Armistice. As late as 1929, the Alfred Comte company manufactured eight new D.VII airframes under license for the Swiss Fliegertruppe.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 6.95 m (22 ft 10 in)
Wingspan: 8.9 m (29 ft 2 in)
Height: 2.75 m (9 ft 0 in)
Wing area: 20.5 m² (221 sq ft)
Empty weight: 670 kg (1,477 lb)
Gross weight: 906 kg (1,997 lb)
Powerplant:
1 × 137.95 kW (185 hp) BMW IIIa 6-cyl. water-cooled in-line piston engine with a 180 kW (240 hp)
emergency only rating at low level, driving a wooden 2-bladed fixed-pitch propeller
Performance:
Maximum speed: 189 km/h (117 mph, 102 kn) at normal power
200 km/h (124 mph; 108 kn) at emergency power
Range: 266 km (165 mi, 144 nmi)
Service ceiling: 6,000 m (20,000 ft)
Rate of climb: up to 9.52 metres per second (1,874 ft/min) at emergency rating
Time to altitude:
1,000 m (3,281 ft) in 1 minutes 40 seconds
2,000 m (6,562 ft) in 4 minutes 5 seconds
3,000 m (9,843 ft) in 13 minutes 49 seconds
4,000 m (13,123 ft) in 10 minutes 15 seconds
5,000 m (16,404 ft) 14 minutes 0 seconds
6,000 m (19,685 ft) 18 minutes 45 seconds
Armament:
2× synchronized 7.92 mm (0.312 in) LMG 08/15 "Spandau" machine guns,
firing through the propeller disc
The kit and its assembly:
My fifth submission for the “Captured” group build at whatifmodellers.com, and a very simple one, since the kit was built OOB. Inspiration came from a profile of a captured Albatros D.III in USAAC markings, unfortunately without further explanation. However, the aircraft sported a garish paint scheme, including bright green and even pink, so that I assumed that it would be not only WWI booty, but also in some operational use, since the paint scheme/camouflage did not look like a German pattern, but rather like an American design, similar to the aircraft operated by the American Expeditionary Force (AEF) in continental Europe, just with bright colors.
When I checked options for a different aircraft to apply this idea to, I came across the common Fokker D.VII and the fact that a lot of these aircraft had been captured and tested/flown by the USAAC – and then the weird scheme started to make sense, and this what-if model was born.
The D.VII kit is the ESCI offering, which was released in 1983 but is actually a mold from 1968. I thought I gave it a chance, instead of the Revell kit, which dates back to 1963 and is rumored to be not a pleasant build. The bet and newest one in 1:72 is probably the Eduard kit, which also has the benefit of offering optional parts for various production versions.
As a small biplane model, the ESCI kit is a simple, straightforward affair, and no major conversions were made, I just added a pilot figure, because the ESCI kit lacks one as well as any interior detail except for a kind of tub that it molded into the fuselage halves. IIRC, the figure I used comes from a Revell biplane, and I had to chop the legs off to make it fit into the D.VII’s tight cockpit. However, this solution had the benefit that I did not have to worry about any interior details.
Another weak point of the ESCI kit is that it lacks some finer details like the boarding ladder or handles at the tail. These were scratched with thin wire. Overall fit is also not the best – PSR on the fuselage halves, and on some visible ejection markers (e.g. under the single-part wings) and sinkholes. Esp. the integral cockpit tub with its rather massive walls left visible dents in the flanks that had to be filled! On the other side, the fabric structure on the wings and the fuselage is nicely reproduced, and the cowling is apparently from a late production D.VII with additional/bigger air scoops, so I decided that my model would also be one of the final machines with the uprated BMW engine.
A problem that cannot be blamed on the mold but rather the specific 2nd hand kit I bought is that the stabilizer was missing – it had probably detached from the sprue long ago, and slipped through the box lid, gone and eaten by some carpet monster… ☹ I had to improvise and decided to cut a replacement stabilizer from 1mm styrene sheet. I used the painting instructions (which are almost 1:72 scale) as benchmark and tailored a piece of sheet into shape, sanding away the edges for some light curvature and also added some shallow grooves to mimic the rib structure. Not perfect, but I also did not want to spend too much time on this. As a bonus, though, I added the (tiny) rudder levers of the tail surfaces and the ailerons, which originally are also not part of the ESCI mold. These were later, after painting, outfitted with wires during the final rigging process with heated sprue material – thankfully the D.VII does not require too many strings, just some wires between the landing gear struts and on the tail.
Painting and markings:
The funnier part, with many, really bright colors united in a tiny space – almost like an anime movie prop! I stuck to the original Albatros benchmark and applied scheme, colors and markings truthfully to the D.VII. Paints/tones became, as a guesstimate, Humbrol 155 (Olive Drab), 7 (Light Buff), 47 (Sea Blue) and a mix of 200 (Pink) with a little 68 (Purple), maybe at a 5:1 ratio, for a deeper tone. The contrast between the colors is pretty strong and aircraft looks very individual!
The wing struts were painted in black, the interior in a light olive drab tone. The engine was painted with Revell 99 (Aluminum) and treated with grinded graphite for a more metallic look, and the propeller was painted with a streaky wet-in-wet mix of Humbrol 71 and 113.
The roundels come from a Hobby Boss F4F, and since they have a rather odd style with a kind of dark blue border, they suit the model pretty well, because these roundels were introduced around 1920, so that deviations from the later, “classic” look appear plausible. The tactical code comes from an RAF Gloster Gladiator and the BuNo on the fin were created from a post-war Spitfire code.
A light black ink washing was applied, and some light post-shading was done, in order to emphasize edges and the boxy form of the aircraft with its fabric-covered surfaces. After the decals had been applied, I also added an overall light dry-brushing with khaki drill (Humbrol 72) and light grey (Revell 75). Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri), final bits were assembled and the rigging was added.
A simple build, but a very colorful one – hard to believe that there were aircraft in real life that actually looked this way! But the small D.VII now really stands out among “seriously” camouflaged biplanes in my collection, a very picturesque model. BTW, I am also surprised how effective the camouflage is, at least in the air - despite the garish colors!
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some Background:
During the 1950s, Hindustan Aircraft Limited (HAL) had developed and produced several types of trainer aircraft, such as the HAL HT-2. However, elements within the firm were eager to expand into the then-new realm of supersonic fighter aircraft. Around the same time, the Indian government was in the process of formulating a new Air Staff Requirement for a Mach 2-capable combat aircraft to equip the Indian Air Force (IAF). However, as HAL lacked the necessary experience in both developing and manufacturing frontline combat fighters, it was clear that external guidance would be invaluable; this assistance was embodied by Kurt Tank.
In 1956, HAL formally began design work on the supersonic fighter project. The Indian government, led by Jawaharlal Nehru, authorized the development of the aircraft, stating that it would aid in the development of a modern aircraft industry in India. The first phase of the project sought to develop an airframe suitable for travelling at supersonic speeds, and able to effectively perform combat missions as a fighter aircraft, while the second phase sought to domestically design and produce an engine capable of propelling the aircraft. Early on, there was an explicit adherence to satisfying the IAF's requirements for a capable fighter bomber; attributes such as a twin-engine configuration and a speed of Mach 1.4 to 1.5 were quickly emphasized, and this led to the HF-24 Marut.
On 24 June 1961, the first prototype Marut conducted its maiden flight. It was powered by the same Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 turbojets that had powered the Folland Gnat, also being manufactured by HAL at that time. On 1 April 1967, the first production Marut was delivered to the IAF. While originally intended only as an interim measure during testing, HAL decided to power production Maruts with a pair of unreheated Orpheus 703s, meaning the aircraft could not attain supersonic speed. Although originally conceived to operate around Mach 2 the Marut in fact was barely capable of reaching Mach 1 due to the lack of suitably powerful engines.
The IAF were reluctant to procure a fighter aircraft only marginally superior to its existing fleet of British-built Hawker Hunters. However, in 1961, the Indian Government decided to procure the Marut, nevertheless, but only 147 aircraft, including 18 two-seat trainers, were completed out of a planned 214. Just after the decision to build the lukewarm Marut, the development of a more advanced aircraft with the desired supersonic performance was initiated.
This enterprise started star-crossed, though: after the Indian Government conducted its first nuclear tests at Pokhran, international pressure prevented the import of better engines of Western origin, or at times, even spares for the Orpheus engines, so that the Marut never realized its full potential due to insufficient power, and it was relatively obsolescent by the time it reached production.
Due to these restrictions India looked for other sources for supersonic aircraft and eventually settled upon the MiG-21 F-13 from the Soviet Union, which entered service in 1964. While fast and agile, the Fishbed was only a short-range daylight interceptor. It lacked proper range for escort missions and air space patrols, and it had no radar that enabled it to conduct all-weather interceptions. To fill this operational gap, the new indigenous HF-26 project was launched around the same time.
For the nascent Indian aircraft industry, HF-26 had a demanding requirements specification: the aircraft was to achieve Mach 2 top speed at high altitude and carry a radar with a guided missile armament that allowed interceptions in any weather, day and night. The powerplant question was left open, but it was clear from the start that a Soviet engine would be needed, since an indigenous development of a suitable powerplant would take much too long and block vital resources, and western alternatives were out of reach. The mission profile and the performance requirements quickly defined the planned aircraft’s layout: To fit a radar, the air intakes with movable ramps to feed the engines were placed on the fuselage flanks. To make sure the aircraft would fulfill its high-performance demands, it was right from the outset powered by two engines, and it was decided to give it delta wings, a popular design among high-speed aircraft of the time – exemplified by the highly successful Dassault Mirage III (which was to be delivered to Pakistan in 1967). With two engines, the HF-26 would be a heavier aircraft than the Mirage III, though, and it was planned to operate the aircraft from semi-prepared airfields, so that it would receive a robust landing gear with low-pressure tires and a brake parachute.
In 1962 India was able to negotiate the delivery of Tumansky RD-9 turbojet engines from the Soviet Union, even though no afterburner was part of the deal – this had to be indigenously developed by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). However, this meant that the afterburner could be tailored to the HF-26, and this task would provide HAL with valuable engineering experience, too.
Now knowing the powerplant, HAL created a single-seater airframe around it, a rather robust design that superficially reminded of the French Mirage III, but there were fundamental differences. The HF-26 had boxy air intakes with movable ramps to control the airflow to the two engines and a relatively wide fuselage to hold them and most of the fuel in tanks between the air ducts behind the cockpit. The aircraft had a single swept fin and a rather small mid-positioned delta-wing with a 60° sweep. The pilot sat under a tight canopy that offered - similar to the Mirage III - only limited all-round vision.
The HF-26's conical nose radome covered an antenna for a ‘Garud’ interception radar – which was in fact a downgraded Soviet ‘Oryol' (Eagle; NATO reporting name 'Skip Spin') system that guided the HF-26’s main armament, a pair of semi-active radar homing (SARH) ‚Saanp’ missiles.
The Saanp missile was developed specifically for the HF-26 in India but used many components of Soviet origin, too, so that they were compatible with the radar. In performance, the Saanp was comparable with the French Matra R.530 air-to-air missile, even though the aerodynamic layout was reversed, with steering fins at the front end, right behind the SARH seaker head - overall the missile reminded of an enlarged AIM-4 Falcon. The missile weighed 180 kg and had a length of 3.5 m. Power came from a two-stage solid rocket that offered a maximum thrust of 80 kN for 2.7 s during the launch phase plus 6.5 s cruise. Maximum speed was Mach 2.7 and operational range was 1.5 to 20 km (0.9 to 12.5 miles). Two of these missiles could be carried on the main wing hardpoints in front of the landing gear wells. Alternatively, infrared-guided R-3 (AA-2 ‘Atoll’) short-range AAMs could be carried by the HF-26, too, and typically two of these were carried on the outer underwing hardpoints, which were plumbed to accept drop tanks (typically supersonic PTB-490s that were carried by the IAF's MiG-21s, too) . Initially, no internal gun was envisioned, as the HF-26 was supposed to be a pure high-speed/high-altitude interceptor that would not engage in dogfights. Two more hardpoints under the fuselage were plumbed, too, for a total of six external stations.
Due to its wing planform, the HF-26 was soon aptly called “Teer” (= Arrow), and with Soviet help the first prototype was rolled out in early 1964 and presented to the public. The first flight, however, would take place almost a year later in January 1965, due to many technical problems, and these were soon complemented by aerodynamic problems. The original delta-winged HF-26 had poor take-off and landing characteristics, and directional stability was weak, too. While a second prototype was under construction in April 1965 the first aircraft was lost after it had entered a spin from which the pilot could not escape – the aircraft crashed and its pilot was killed during the attempt to eject.
After this loss HAL investigated an enlarged fin and a modified wing design with deeper wingtips with lower sweep, which increased wing area and improved low speed handling, too. Furthermore, the fuselage shape had to be modified, too, to reduce supersonic drag, and a more pronounced area ruling was introduced. The indigenous afterburner for the RD-9 engines was unstable and troublesome, too.
It took until 1968 and three more flying prototypes (plus two static airframes) to refine the Teer for serial production service introduction. In this highly modified form, the aircraft was re-designated HF-26M and the first machines were delivered to IAF No. 3 Squadron in late 1969. However, it would take several months until a fully operational status could be achieved. By that time, it was already clear that the Teer, much like the HF-24 Marut before, could not live up to its expectations and was at the brink of becoming obsolete as it entered service. The RD-9 was not a modern engine anymore, and despite its indigenous afterburner – which turned out not only to be chronically unreliable but also to be very thirsty when engaged – the Teer had a disappointing performance: The fighter only achieved a top speed of Mach 1.6 at full power, and with full external load it hardly broke the wall of sound in level flight. Its main armament, the Saanp AAM, also turned out to be unreliable even under ideal conditions.
However, the HF-26M came just in time to take part in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and was, despite its weaknesses, extensively used – even though not necessarily in its intended role. High-flying slow bombers were not fielded during the conflict, and the Teer remained, despite its on-board radar, heavily dependent on ground control interception (GCI) to vector its pilot onto targets coming in at medium and even low altitude. The HF-26M had no capability against low-flying aircraft either, so that pilots had to engage incoming, low-flying enemy aircraft after visual identification – a task the IAF’s nimble MiG-21s were much better suited for. Escorts and air cover missions for fighter-bombers were flown, too, but the HF-26M’s limited range only made it a suitable companion for the equally short-legged Su-7s. The IAF Canberras were frequently deployed on longer range missions, but the HF-26Ms simply could not follow them all the time; for a sufficient range the Teer had to carry four drop tanks, what increased drag and only left the outer pair of underwing hardpoints (which were not plumbed) free for a pair of AA-2 missiles. With the imminent danger of aerial close range combat, though, During the conflict with Pakistan, most HF-26M's were retrofitted with rear-view mirrors in their canopies to improve the pilot's field of view, and a passive IR sensor was added in a small fairing under the nose to improve the aircraft's all-weather capabilities and avoid active radar emissions that would warn potential prey too early.
The lack of an internal gun turned out to be another great weakness of the Teer, and this was only lightly mended through the use of external gun pods. Two of these cigar-shaped pods that resembled the Soviet UPK-23 pod could be carried on the two ventral pylons, and each contained a 23 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L autocannon of Soviet origin with 200 rounds. Technically these pods were very similar to the conformal GP-9 pods carried by the IAF MiG-21FLs. While the gun pods considerably improved the HF-26M’s firepower and versatility, the pods were draggy, blocked valuable hardpoints (from extra fuel) and their recoil tended to damage the pylons as well as the underlying aircraft structure, so that they were only commissioned to be used in an emergency.
However, beyond air-to-air weapons, the HF-26M could also carry ordnance of up to 1.000 kg (2.207 lb) on the ventral and inner wing hardpoints and up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) on the other pair of wing hardpoints, including iron bombs and/or unguided missile pods. However, the limited field of view from the cockpit over the radome as well as the relatively high wing loading did not recommend the aircraft for ground attack missions – even though these frequently happened during the conflict with Pakistan. For these tactical missions, many HF-26Ms lost their original overall natural metal finish and instead received camouflage paint schemes on squadron level, resulting in individual and sometimes even spectacular liveries. Most notable examples were the Teer fighters of No. 1 Squadron (The Tigers), which sported various camouflage adaptations of the unit’s eponym.
Despite its many deficiencies, the HF-26M became heavily involved in the Indo-Pakistan conflict. As the Indian Army tightened its grip in East Pakistan, the Indian Air Force continued with its attacks against Pakistan as the campaign developed into a series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar, and close-support attacks by fighter jets, with night attacks against airfields and strategic targets by Canberras and An-12s, while Pakistan responded with similar night attacks with its B-57s and C-130s.
The PAF deployed its F-6s mainly on defensive combat air patrol missions over their own bases, leaving the PAF unable to conduct effective offensive operations. Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against PAF forward air bases in Pakistan until the end of the war, and interdiction and close-support operations were maintained. One of the most successful air raids by India into West Pakistan happened on 8 December 1971, when Indian Hunter aircraft from the Pathankot-based 20 Squadron, attacked the Pakistani base in Murid and destroyed 5 F-86 aircraft on the ground.
The PAF played a more limited role in the operations, even though they were reinforced by Mirages from an unidentified Middle Eastern ally (whose identity remains unknown). The IAF was able to conduct a wide range of missions – troop support; air combat; deep penetration strikes; para-dropping behind enemy lines; feints to draw enemy fighters away from the actual target; bombing and reconnaissance. India flew 1,978 sorties in the East and about 4,000 in Pakistan, while the PAF flew about 30 and 2,840 at the respective fronts. More than 80 percent of IAF sorties were close-support and interdiction and about 45 IAF aircraft were lost, including three HF-26Ms. Pakistan lost 60 to 75 aircraft, not including any F-86s, Mirage IIIs, or the six Jordanian F-104s which failed to return to their donors. The imbalance in air losses was explained by the IAF's considerably higher sortie rate and its emphasis on ground-attack missions. The PAF, which was solely focused on air combat, was reluctant to oppose these massive attacks and rather took refuge at Iranian air bases or in concrete bunkers, refusing to offer fights and respective losses.
After the war, the HF-26M was officially regarded as outdated, and as license production of the improved MiG-21FL (designated HAL Type 77 and nicknamed “Trishul” = Trident) and later of the MiG-21M (HAL Type 88) was organized in India, the aircraft were quickly retired from frontline units. They kept on serving into the Eighties, though, but now restricted to their original interceptor role. Beyond the upgrades from the Indo-Pakistani War, only a few upgrades were made. For instance, the new R-60 AAM was introduced to the HF-26M and around 1978 small (but fixed) canards were retrofitted to the air intakes behind the cockpit that improved the Teer’s poor slow speed control and high landing speed as well as the aircraft’s overall maneuverability.
A radar upgrade, together with the introduction of better air-to-ai missiles with a higher range and look down/shoot down capability was considered but never carried out. Furthermore, the idea of a true HF-26 2nd generation variant, powered by a pair of Tumansky R-11F-300 afterburner jet engines (from the license-built MiG-21FLs), was dropped, too – even though this powerplant eventually promised to fulfill the Teer’s design promise of Mach 2 top speed. A total of only 82 HF-26s (including thirteen two-seat trainers with a lengthened fuselage and reduced fuel capacity, plus eight prototypes) were built. The last aircraft were retired from IAF service in 1988 and replaced with Mirage 2000 fighters procured from France that were armed with the Matra Super 530 AAM.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 14.97 m (49 ft ½ in)
Wingspan: 9.43 m (30 ft 11 in)
Height: 4.03 m (13 ft 2½ in)
Wing area: 30.6 m² (285 sq ft)
Empty weight: 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)
Gross weight: 10,954 kg (24,149 lb) with full internal fuel
Max takeoff weight: 15,700 kg (34,613 lb) with external stores
Powerplant:
2× Tumansky RD-9 afterburning turbojet engines; 29 kN (6,600 lbf) dry thrust each
and 36.78 kN (8,270 lbf) with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,700 km/h (1,056 mph; 917 kn; Mach 1.6) at 11,000 m (36,000 ft)
1,350 km/h (840 mph, 730 kn; Mach 1.1) at sea level
Combat range: 725 km (450 mi, 391 nmi) with internal fuel only
Ferry range: 1,700 km (1,100 mi, 920 nmi) with four drop tanks
Service ceiling: 18,100 m (59,400 ft)
g limits: +6.5
Time to altitude: 9,145 m (30,003 ft) in 1 minute 30 seconds
Wing loading: 555 kg/m² (114 lb/sq ft)
Armament
6× hardpoints (four underwing and two under the fuselage) for a total of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb);
Typical interceptor payload:
- two IR-guided R-3 or R-60 air-to-air-missiles or
two PTB-490 drop tanks on the outer underwing stations
- two semi-active radar-guided ‚Saanp’ air-to-air missiles or two more R-3 or R-60 AAMs
on inner underwing stations
- two 500 l drop tanks or two gun pods with a 23 mm GSh-23L autocannon and 200 RPG
each under the fuselage
The kit and its assembly:
This whiffy delta-wing fighter was inspired when I recently sliced up a PM Model Su-15 kit for my side-by-side-engine BAC Lightning build. At an early stage of the conversion, I held the Su-15 fuselage with its molded delta wings in my hand and wondered if a shortened tail section (as well as a shorter overall fuselage to keep proportions balanced) could make a delta-wing jet fighter from the Flagon base? Only a hardware experiment could yield an answer, and since the Su-15’s overall outlines look a bit retro I settled at an early stage on India as potential designer and operator, as “the thing the HF-24 Marut never was”.
True to the initial idea, work started on the tail, and I chopped off the fuselage behind the wings’ trailing edge. Some PSR was necessary to blend the separate exhaust section into the fuselage, which had to be reduced in depth through wedges that I cut out under the wings trailing edge, plus some good amount of glue and sheer force the bend the section a bit upwards. The PM Model's jet exhausts were drilled open, and I added afterburner dummies inside - anything would look better than the bleak vertical walls inside after only 2-3 mm! The original fin was omitted, because it was a bit too large for the new, smaller aircraft and its shape reminded a lot of the Suchoj heavy fighter family. It was replaced with a Mirage III/V fin, left over from a (crappy!) Pioneer 2 IAI Nesher kit.
Once the rear section was complete, I had to adjust the front end - and here the kitbashing started. First, I chopped off the cockpit section in front of the molded air intake - the Su-15’s long radome and the cockpit on top of the fuselage did not work anymore. As a remedy I remembered another Su-15 conversion I did a (long) while ago: I created a model of a planned ground attack derivative, the T-58Sh, and, as a part of the extensive body work, I transplanted the slanted nose from an academy MiG-27 between the air intakes – a stunt that was relatively easy and which appreciably lowered the cockpit position. For the HF-26M I did something similar, I just transplanted a cockpit from a Hasegawa/Academy MiG-23 with its ogival radome that size-wise better matched with the rest of the leftover Su-15 airframe.
The MiG-23 cockpit matched perfectly with the Su-15's front end, just the spinal area behind the cockpit had to be raised/re-sculpted to blend the parts smoothly together. For a different look from the Su-15 ancestry I also transplanted the front sections of the MiG-23 air intakes with their shorter ramps. Some mods had to be made to the Su-15 intake stubs, but the MiG-23 intakes were an almost perfect fit in size and shape and easy to integrate into the modified front hill. The result looks very natural!
However, when the fuselage was complete, I found that the nose appeared to be a bit too long, leaving the whole new hull with the wings somewhat off balance. As a remedy I decided at a rather late stage to shorten the nose and took out a 6 mm section in front of the cockpit - a stunt I had not planned, but sometimes you can judge things only after certain work stages. Some serious PSR was necessary to re-adjust the conical nose shape, which now looked more Mirage III-ish than planned!
The cockpit was taken mostly OOB, I just replaced the ejection seat and gave it a trigger handle made from thin wire. With the basic airframe complete it was time for details. The PM Model Su-15s massive and rather crude main landing gear was replaced with something more delicate from the scrap box, even though I retained the main wheels. The front landing gear was taken wholesale from the MiG-23, but had to be shortened for a proper stance.
A display holder adapter was integrated into the belly for the flight scenes, hidden well between the ventral ordnance.
The hardpoints, including missile launch rails, came from the MiG-23; the pylons had to be adjusted to match the Su-15's wing profile shape, the Anab missiles lost their tail sections to create the fictional Indian 'Saanp' AAMs. The R-3s on the outer stations were left over from a MP MiG-21. The ventral pylons belong to Academy MiG-23/27s, one came from the donor kit, the other was found in the spares box. The PTB-490 drop tanks also came from a KP MiG-21 (or one of its many reincarnations, not certain).
Painting and markings:
The paint scheme for this fictional aircraft was largely inspired by a picture of a whiffy and very attractive Saab 37 Viggen (an 1:72 Airfix kit) in IAF colors, apparently a model from a contest. BTW, India actually considered buying the Viggen for its Air Force!
IAF aircraft were and are known for their exotic and sometimes gawdy paint schemes, and with IAF MiG-21 “C 992” there’s even a very popular (yet obscure) aircraft that sported literal tiger stripes. The IAF Viggen model was surely inspired by this real aircraft, and I adopted something similar for my HF-26M.
IAF 1 Squadron was therefore settled, and for the paint scheme I opted for a "stripish" scheme, but not as "tigeresque" as "C 992". I found a suitable benchmark in a recent Libyian MiG-21, which carried a very disruptive two-tone grey scheme. I adapted this pattern to the HA-26M airframe and replaced its colors, similar to the IAF Viggen model, which became a greenish sand tone (a mix of Humbrol 121 with some 159; I later found out that I could have used Humbrol 83 from the beginning, though...) and a very dark olive drab (Humbrol 66, which looks like a dull dark brown in contrast with the sand tone), with bluish grey (Humbrol 247) undersides. With the large delta wings, this turned out to look very good and even effective!
For that special "Indian touch" I gave the aircraft a high-contrast fin in a design that I had seen on a real camouflaged IAF MiG-21bis: an overall dark green base with a broad, red vertical stripe which was also the shield for the fin flash and the aircraft's tactical code (on the original bare metal). The fin was first painted in green (Humbrol 2), the red stripe was created with orange-red decal sheet material. Similar material was also used to create the bare metal field for the tactical code, the yellow bars on the splitter plates and for the thin white canopy sealing.
After basic painting was done the model received an overall black ink washing, post-panel shading and extensive dry-brushing with aluminum and iron for a rather worn look.
The missiles became classic white, while the drop tanks, as a contrast to the camouflaged belly, were left in bare metal.
Decals/markings came primarily from a Begemot MiG-25 kit, the tactical codes on the fin and under the wings originally belong to an RAF post-WWII Spitfire, just the first serial letter was omitted. Stencils are few and they came from various sources. A compromise is the unit badge on the fin: I needed a tiger motif, and the only suitable option I found was the tiger head emblem on a white disc from RAF No. 74 Squadron, from the Matchbox BAC Lightning F.6&F.2A kit. It fits stylistically well, though. ;-)
Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (except for the black radome, which became a bit glossy) and finally assembled.
A spontaneous build, and the last one that I completed in 2022. However, despite a vague design plan the model evolved as it grew. Bashing the primitive PM Model Su-15 with the Academy MiG-23 parts was easier than expected, though, and the resulting fictional aircraft looks sturdy but quite believable - even though it appears to me like the unexpected child of a Mirage III/F-4 Phantom II intercourse, or like a juvenile CF-105 Arrow, just with mid-wings? Nevertheless, the disruptive paint scheme suits the delta wing fighter well, and the green/red fin is a striking contrast - it's a colorful model, but not garish.
- dyed silk from a scarf, commercially dyed silk ribbon, organza, novelty yarn and wool roving on Kunin felt and Peltex
Background services with identitypi.com provides accurate information like public records, criminal background check,instant people search and background check for employment verification.
This image looks static, but if you follow this link it will lead you to the customizable looping full HD background video that can be used as a background for your presentation, church projections and other projects: placdarms.lv/freebies/diagonal-lines-background/
Background info for the “EXpelled Exposed!” set has been moved here.
Creationism evolves into "intelligent" design!
original source unknown; used in a YouTube video
Sample Blue Background graphic available for download at dryicons.com/free-graphics/preview/sample-blue-background/ in EPS (vector) format.
View similar vector graphics at DryIcons Graphics.
Free to use for any reason bokeh backgrounds. Check out TheWriteMoms.com for more free stuff and to sign up for emails of new stuff.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Tornado ADV had its origins in an RAF Air Staff Requirement 395 (or ASR.395), which called for a long-range interceptor to replace the Lightning F6 and Phantom FGR2. The requirement for a modern interceptor was driven by the threat posed by the large Soviet long-range bomber fleet, in particular the supersonic Tupolev Tu-22M. From the beginning of the Tornado IDS's development in 1968, the possibility of a variant dedicated to air defence had been quietly considered; several American aircraft had been evaluated, but found to be unsuitable. However, the concept proved unattractive to the other European partners on the Tornado project, thus the UK elected to proceed in its development alone. On 4 March 1976, the development of the Tornado ADV was formally approved.
In 1976, British Aerospace was contracted to provide three prototype aircraft. The first prototype was rolled out at Warton on 9 August 1979, before making its maiden flight on 27 October 1979. During the flight testing, the ADV demonstrated noticeably superior supersonic acceleration to the IDS, even while carrying a full weapons loadout.
The Tornado ADV's differences compared to the IDS include a greater sweep angle on the wing gloves, and the deletion of their kruger flaps, deletion of the port cannon, a longer radome for the Foxhunter radar, slightly longer airbrakes and a fuselage stretch of 1.36 m to allow the carriage of four Skyflash semi-active radar homing missiles. The stretch was applied to the Tornado front fuselage being built by the UK, with a plug being added immediately behind the cockpit, which had the unexpected benefit of reducing drag and making space for an additional fuel tank (Tank '0') carrying 200 imperial gallons (909 l; 240 U.S. gal) of fuel. The artificial feel of the flight controls was lighter on the ADV than on the IDS. Various internal avionics, pilot displays, guidance systems and software also differed; including an automatic wing sweep selector not fitted to the strike aircraft.
Production of the Tornado ADV was performed between 1980 and 1993, the last such aircraft being delivered that same year. A total of 165 Tornado ADVs were ordered by Britain, the majority being the Tornado F3. However, the Tornado ADV’s replacement, the aircraft that is known today as the Eurofighter Typhoon, met several delays – primarily of political nature. Even though the first production contract was already signed on 30 January 1998 between Eurofighter GmbH, Eurojet and NETMA for the procurement of a total of 232 for the UK, the development and eventually the delivery of the new aircraft was a protracted affair. It actually took until 9 August 2007, when the UK's Ministry of Defence reported that No. 11 Squadron RAF, which stood up as a Typhoon squadron on 29 March 2007, had received its first two multi-role Typhoons. Until then, the Tornado F.3 had become more and more obsolete, since the type was only suited to a limited kind of missions, and it became obvious that the Tornado ADV would have to be kept in service for several years in order to keep Great Britain’s aerial defence up.
In order to bridge the Typhoon service gap, two update programs had already been launched by the MoD in 2004, which led to the Tornado F.5 and F.6 versions. These were both modified F.3 airframes, catering to different, more specialized roles. The F.5 had a further extended fuselage and modified wings, so that it could operate more effectively in the long range fighter patrol role over the North Sea and the Northern Atlantic. On the other side, the F.6 was tailored to the mainland interceptor role at low and medium altitudes and featured new engines for a better performance in QRA duties. Both fighter variants shared improved avionics and weapons that had already been developed for the Eurofighter Typhoon, or were still under development.
The Tornado F.6’s new engines were a pair of Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofans, which offered 30% more dry and 20% more afterburner thrust than the F.3’s original Turbo-Union RB199-34R turbofans. These more modern and fuel-efficient engines allowed prolonged supercruise, and range as well as top speed were improved, too. Furthermore, there was the (theoretical) option to combine the new engine with vectored thrust nozzles, even though this would most probably not take place since the Tornado ADV had never been designed as a true dogfighter, even though it was, for an aircraft of its size, quite an agile aircraft.
However, the integration of the EJ200 into the existing airframe called for major modifications that affected the aircraft’s structure. The tail section had to be modified in order to carry the EJ200’s different afterburner section. Its bigger diameter and longer nozzle precluded the use of the original thrust reverser. This unique feature was retained, though, so that the mechanism had to be modified: the standard deflectors, which used to extend backwards behind the nozzles, now opened inwards into the airflow before the exhaust.
Since the new engines had a considerably higher airflow rate, the air intakes with the respective ducts had to be enlarged and adapted, too. Several layouts were tested, including two dorsal auxiliary air intakes to the original, wedge-shaped orifices, but eventually the whole intake arrangement with horizontal ramps was changed into tall side intakes with vertical splitter plates, reminiscent of the F-4 Phantom. Even though this meant a thorough redesign of the fuselage section under the wing sweep mechanism and a reduction of tank “0”’s volume, the new arrangement improved the aircraft’s aerodynamics further and slightly enlarged the wing area, which resulted in a minor net increase of range.
The F.3’s GEC-Marconi/Ferranti AI.24 Foxhunter radar was retained, but an infrared search and track (IRST) sensor, the Passive Infra-Red Airborne Track Equipment (PIRATE), was mounted in a semispherical housing on the port side of the fuselage in front of the windscreen and linked to the pilot’s helmet-mounted display. By supercooling the sensor, the system was able to detect even small variations in temperature at a long range, and it allowed the detection of both hot exhaust plumes of jet engines and surface heating caused by friction.
PIRATE operated in two IR bands and could be used together with the radar in an air-to-air role, adding visual input to the radar’s readings. Beyond that, PIRATE could also function as an independent infrared search and track system, providing passive target detection and tracking, and the system was also able to provide navigation and landing aid.
In an optional air-to-surface role, PIRATE can also perform target identification and acquisition, up to 200 targets could be simultaneously tracked. Although no definitive ranges had been released, an upper limit of 80 nm has been hinted at; a more typical figure would be 30 to 50 nm.
The Tornado F.3’s Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon was retained and the F.6 was from the start outfitted with the AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile, with the outlook to switch as soon as possible to the new, ram jet-driven Meteor AAM with higher speed and range. Meteor had been under development since 1994 and was to be carried by the Eurofighter Typhoon as its primary mid-range weapon. With a range of 100+ km (63 mi, 60 km no-escape zone) and a top speed of more than Mach 4, Meteor, with its throttleable ducted rocket engine, offered a considerably improvement above AMRAAM. However, it took until 2016 that Meteor became fully operational and was rolled out to operational RAF fighter units.
A total of 36 Tornado F.3 airframes with relatively low flying hours were brought to F.6 standard in the course of 2006-8 and gradually replaced older F.3s in RAF fighter units until 2009. The Tornado F.3 itself was retired in March 2011 when No. 111 Squadron RAF, located at RAF Leuchars, was disbanded. Both the F.5 and F.6 will at least keep on serving until the Eurofighter Typhoon is in full service, probably until 2020.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 18.68 m (61 ft 3½ in)
Wingspan: 13.91 m (45 ft 7½ in) at 25° wing position
8.60 m (28 ft 2½ in) at 67° wing position
Height: 5.95 m (19 ft 6½ in)
Wing area: 27.55 m² (295.5 sq ft)
Empty weight: 14,750 kg (32,490 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 28,450 kg (62,655 lb)
Powerplant:
2× Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofans with 60 kN (13,500 lbf) dry thrust and
90 kN (20,230 lbf) thrust with afterburner each
Performance:
Maximum speed: Mach 2.3 (2,500 km/h, 1,550 mph) at 9,000 m (30,000 ft)
921 mph (800 knots, 1,482 km/h) indicated airspeed limit near sea level
Combat radius: more than 1,990 km (1.100 nmi, 1,236 mi) subsonic,
more than 556 km (300 nmi, 345 mi) supersonic
Ferry range: 4,265 km (2,300 nmi, 2,650 mi) with four external tanks
Endurance: 2 hr combat air patrol at 560-740 km (300-400 nmi, 345-460 mi) from base
Service ceiling: 15,240 m (50,000 ft)
Armament:
1× 27 mm (1.063 in) Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon with 180 RPG under starboard fuselage side
A total of 10 hardpoints (4× semi-recessed under-fuselage, 2× under-fuselage, 4× swivelling
under-wing) holding up to 9000 kg (19,800 lb) of payload; the two inner wing pylons have shoulder
launch rails for 2× Short-Range AAM (SRAAM) each (AIM-9 Sidewinder or AIM-132 ASRAAM)
4× MBDO Meteor or AIM-120 AMRAAM, mounted under the fuselage
The kit and its assembly:
The eight entry for the RAF Centenary Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and after 100 years of RAF what-if models we have now arrived at the present. This modified Tornado ADV was spawned through the discussions surrounding another modeler’s build of a modified F.3 (and examples of other Tornado conversions, e. g. with fixed wings or twin fins), and I spontaneously wondered what a change of the air intakes would do to the aircraft’s overall impression? Most conversions I have seen so far retain this original detail. An idea was born, and a pair of leftover Academy MiG-23 air intakes, complete with splitter plates, were the suitable conversion basis.
The basic kit is the Italeri Tornado ADV, even though in a later Revell re-boxing. It’s IMHO the kit with the best price-performance ration, and it goes together well. The kit was mostly built OOB, with some cosmetic additions. The biggest changes came through the integration of the completely different air intakes. These were finished at first and, using them as templates, openings were cut into the lower fuselage flanks in front of the landing gear well. Since the MiG-23 intakes have a relatively short upper side, styrene sheet fillers had to be added and blended with the rest of the fuselage via PSR. The gap between the wing root gloves and the intakes had to be bridged, too, with 2C putty. Messier affair than it sounds, but it went well.
In order to make the engine change plausible I modified the Tornado exhaust and added a pair of orifices from an F-18 – they look very similar to those on the Eurofighter Typhoon, and their diameter is perfect for this change. This and the different air intakes stretch the Tonka visually, it looks IMHO even more slender than the F.3.
Another issue was the canopy: the 2nd hand kit came without clear parts, but I was lucky to still have a Tornado F.3 canopy in the spares box – but only the windscreen from a Tornado IDS, which does not fit well onto the ADV variant. A 2mm gap at the front end had to be bridged, and the angles on the side as well as the internal space to the HUD does not match too well. But, somehow, I got it into place, even though it looks a bit shaggy.
The IRST in front of the windscreen is a piece of clear styrene sprue (instead of an opaque piece, painted glossy black), placed on a black background. The depth effect is very good!
More changes pertained to the ordnance: the complete weaponry was exchanged. The OOB Sidewinders were replaced with specimen from a Hasegawa F-4 Phantom (these look just better than the AIM-9 that come with the kit), and I originally planned to mount four AIM-120 from the same source under the fuselage – until I found a Revell Eurofighter kit in my stash that came with four Meteor AAMs, a suitable and more modern as well as British alternative!
All in all, just subtle modifications.
Painting and markings:
Well, the RAF was the creative direction, so I stuck to a classic/conservative livery. However, I did not want a 100% copy of the typical “real world” RAF Tornado F.3, so I sought inspiration in earlier low-visibility schemes. Esp. the Phantom and the Lightning carried in their late days a wide variety of grey-in-grey schemes, and one of the most interesting of them (IMHO) was carried by XS 933: like some other Lightnings, the upper surfaces were painted in Dark Sea Grey (instead of the standard Medium Sea Grey), a considerably murkier tone, but XS933 had a mid-height waterline. I found that scheme to be quite plausible for an aircraft that would mostly operate above open water and in heavier weather, so I adapted it to the Tonka. The fact that XS 933 was operated by RAF 5 Squadron, the same unit as my build depicts with its markings, is just a weird coincidence!
An alternative would have been the same colors, but with a low waterline (e.g. like Lightning XR728) – but I rejected this, because the result would have looked IMHO much too similar to the late Tornado GR.4 fighter bombers, or like a Royal Navy aircraft.
Since the upper color would be wrapped around the wings’ leading edges, I used the lower wing leading edge level as reference for the high waterline on the forward fuselage, Behind the wings’ trailing edge I lowered the waterline down to the stabilizers’ level.
All upper surfaces, including the tall fin, were painted with Tamiya XF-54, a relatively light interpretation of RAF Dark Sea Grey (because I did not want a harsh contrast with the lower colors), while the fuselage undersides and flanks were painted in Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165). The same tone was also used for the underwing pylons and the “Hindenburger” drop tanks. The undersides of the wings and the stabilizers were painted in Camouflage Grey (formerly known as Barley Grey, Humbrol 167).
Disaster struck when I applied the Tamiya paint, though. I am not certain why (age of the paint, I guess), but the finish developed a kind of “pigment pelt” which turned out to be VERY sensitive to touch. Even the slightest handling would leave dark, shiny spots!
My initial attempt was to hide most of this problem under post-shading (with Humbrol 126, FS 36270), but that turned the Tonka visually into a Tiger Meet participant – the whole thing looked as if it wore low-viz stripes! Aaargh!
In a desperate move (since more and more paint piled up on the upper surfaces, and I did not want to strip the kit off of all paint right now) I applied another thin coat of highly diluted XF-54 on top of the tiger stripe mess, and that toned everything done enough to call it a day. While the finish is not perfect and still quite shaggy (even streaky here and there…), it looks O.K., just like a worn and bleached Dark Sea Grey.
A little more rescue came with the decals. The markings are naturally low-viz variants and the RAF 5 Sq. markings come from an Xtradecal BAC Lightning sheet (so they differ from the markings applied to the real world Tornado F.3s of this unit). The zillion of stencils come from the OOB sheet, but the walking area warnings came from a Model Decal Tornado F.3 sheet (OOB, Revell only provides you a bunch of generic, thin white lines, printed on a single carrier film, and tells you “Good luck”! WTF?). Took a whole afternoon to apply them, but I used as many of them as possible in order to hide the paint finish problems… Some things, like the tactical letter code or the red bar under the fuselage roundel, had to be improvised.
With many troubles involved (the paint job, but furthermore the wing pylons as well as one stabilizer broke off during the building and painting process…), I must say that the modified Tonka turned out better than expected while I was still working on it. In the end, I am happy with it – it’s very subtle, I wonder how many people actually notice the change of air intakes and jet exhausts, and the Meteor AAMs are, while not overtly visible, a nice update, too.
The paint scheme looks basically also good (if you overlook the not-so-good finish due to the problems with the Tamiya paint), and the darker tones suit the Tonka well, as well as the fake RAF 5 Squadron markings.
Background formatted for the iPhone. Created from original photo here - www.flickr.com/photos/tomgehrke/5149515141/