Sheffield Park gardens in West Sussex were designed by Capability Brown, still regarded as our greatest landscape designer. The gardens are just awesome in the autumn and reflect just how great a vision Brown had.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

After the success of the Soviet Union’s first carrier ship, the Moskva Class (Projekt 1123, also called „Кондор“/„Kondor“) cruisers in the mid 1960s, the country became more ambitious. This resulted in Project 1153 Orel (Russian: Орёл, Eagle), a planned 1970s-era Soviet program to give the Soviet Navy a true blue water aviation capability. Project Orel would have resulted in a program very similar to the aircraft carriers available to the U.S. Navy. The ship would have been about 75-80,000 tons displacement, with a nuclear power plant and carried about 70 aircraft launched via steam catapults – the first Soviet aircraft carrier that would be able to deploy fixed-wing aircraft.

Beyond this core capability, the Orel carrier was designed with a large offensive capability with the ship mounts including 24 vertical launch tubes for anti-ship cruise missiles. In the USSR it was actually classified as the "large cruiser with aircraft armament".

 

Anyway, the carrier needed appropriate aircraft, and in order to develop a the aircraft major design bureaus were asked to submit ideas and proposals in 1959. OKB Yakovlev and MiG responded. While Yakovlev concentrated on the Yak-36 VTOL design that could also be deployed aboard of smaller ships without catapult and arrester equipment, Mikoyan-Gurevich looked at navalized variants of existing or projected aircraft.

 

While land-based fighters went through a remarkable performance improvement during the 60ies, OKB MiG considered a robust aircraft with proven systems and – foremost – two engines to be the best start for the Soviet Union’s first naval fighter. “Learning by doing”, the gathered experience would then be used in a dedicated new design that would be ready in the mid 70ies when Project 1153 was ready for service, too.

 

Internally designated “I-SK” or “SK-01” (Samolyot Korabelniy = carrier-borne aircraft), the naval fighter was based on the MiG-19 (NATO: Farmer), which had been in production in the USSR since 1954.

Faster and more modern types like the MiG-21 were rejected for a naval conversion because of their poor take-off performance, uncertain aerodynamics in the naval environment and lack of ruggedness. The MiG-19 also offered the benefit of relatively compact dimensions, as well as a structure that would carry the desired two engines.

 

Several innovations had to be addresses:

- A new wing for improved low speed handling

- Improvement of the landing gear and internal structures for carrier operations

- Development of a wing folding mechanism

- Integration of arrester hook and catapult launch devices into the structure

- Protection of structure, engine and equipment from the aggressive naval environment

- Improvement of the pilot’s field of view for carrier landings

- Improved avionics, esp. for navigation

 

Work on the SK-01 started in 1960, and by 1962 a heavily redesigned MiG-19 was ready as a mock-up for inspection and further approval. The “new” aircraft shared the outlines with the land-based MiG-19, but the nose section was completely new and shared a certain similarity to the experimental “Aircraft SN”, a MiG-17 derivative with side air intakes and a solid nose that carried a. Unlike the latter, the cockpit had been moved forward, which offered, together with an enlarged canopy and a short nose, an excellent field of view for the pilot.

On the SK-01 the air intakes with short splitter plates were re-located to the fuselage flanks underneath the cockpit. In order to avoid gun smoke ingestion problems (and the lack of space in the nose for any equipment except for a small SRD-3 Grad gun ranging radar, coupled with an ASP-5N computing gun-sight), the SK-01’s internal armament, a pair of NR-30 cannon, was placed in the wing roots.

 

The wing itself was another major modification, it featured a reduced sweep of only 33° at ¼ chord angle (compared to the MiG-19’s original 55°). Four wing hardpoints, outside of the landing gear wells, could carry a modest ordnance payload, including rocket and gun pods, unguided missiles, iron bombs and up to four Vympel K-13 AAMs.

Outside of these pylons, the wings featured a folding mechanism that allowed the wing span to be reduced from 10 m to 6.5 m for stowage. The fin remained unchanged, but the stabilizers had a reduced sweep, too.

 

The single ventral fin of the MiG-19 gave way to a fairing for a massive, semi-retractable arrester hook, flanked by a pair of smaller fins. The landing gear was beefed up, too, with a stronger suspension. Catapult launch from deck was to be realized through expandable cables that were attached onto massive hooks under the fuselage.

 

The SK-01 received a “thumbs up” in March 1962 and three prototypes, powered by special Sorokin R3M-28 engines, derivatives of the MiG-19's RB-9 that were adapted to the naval environment, were created and tested until 1965, when the type – now designated MiG-SK – went through State Acceptance Trials, including simulated landing tests on an “unsinkalble carrier” dummy, a modified part of the runway at Air Base at the Western coast of the Caspian Sea. Not only flight tests were conducted at Kaspiysk, but also different layouts for landing cables were tested and optimized as well. Furthermore, on a special platform at the coast, an experimental steam catapult went through trials, even though no aircraft starts were made from it – but weights hauled out into the sea.

 

Anyway, the flight tests and the landing performance on the simulated carrier deck were successful, and while the MiG-SK (the machine differed from the MiG-19 so much that it was not recognized as an official MiG-19 variant) was not an outstanding combat aircraft, rather a technology carrier with field use capabilities.

The MiG-SK’s performance was good enough to earn OKB MiG an initial production run of 20 aircraft, primarily intended for training and development units, since the whole infrastructure and procedures for naval aviation from a carrier had to be developed from scratch. These machines were built at slow pace until 1968 and trials were carried out in the vicinity of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea.

 

The MiG-SK successfully remained hidden from the public, since the Soviet Navy did not want to give away its plans for a CTOL carrier. Spy flights of balloons and aircraft recognized the MiG-SK, but the type was mistaken as MiG-17 fighters. Consequently, no NATO codename was ever allocated.

 

Alas, the future of the Soviet, carrier-borne fixed wing aircraft was not bright: Laid down in in 1970, the Kiev-class aircraft carriers (also known as Project 1143 or as the Krechyet (Gyrfalcon) class) were the first class of fixed-wing aircraft carriers to be built in the Soviet Union, and they entered service, together with the Yak-38 (Forger) VTOL fighter, in 1973. This weapon system already offered a combat performance similar to the MiG-SK, and the VTOL concept rendered the need for catapult launch and deck landing capability obsolete.

 

OKB MiG still tried to lobby for a CTOL aircraft (in the meantime, the swing-wing MiG-23 was on the drawing board, as well as a projected, navalized multi-purpose derivative, the MiG-23K), but to no avail.

Furthermore, carrier Project 1153 was cancelled in October 1978 as being too expensive, and a program for a smaller ship called Project 11435, more V/STOL-aircraft-oriented, was developed instead; in its initial stage, a version of 65,000 tons and 52 aircraft was proposed, but eventually an even smaller ship was built in the form of the Kuznetsov-class aircraft carriers in 1985, outfitted with a 12-degree ski-jump bow flight deck instead of using complex aircraft catapults. This CTOL carrier was finally equipped with navalized Su-33, MiG-29 and Su-25 aircraft – and the MiG-SK paved the early way to these shipboard fighters, especially the MiG-29K.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: One

Length: 13.28 m (43 ft 6 in)

Wingspan: 10.39 m (34 ft)

Height: 3.9 m (12 ft 10 in)

Wing area: 22.6 m² (242.5 ft²)

Empty weight: 5.172 kg (11,392 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 7,560 kg (16,632 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Sorokin R3M-28 turbojets afterburning turbojets, rated at 33.8 kN (7,605 lbf) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,145 km/h (618 knots, 711 mph) at 3,000 m (10,000 ft)

Range: 2,060 km (1,111 nmi, 1,280 mi) with drop tanks

Service ceiling: 17,500 m (57,400 ft)

Rate of climb: 180 m/s (35,425 ft/min)

Wing loading: 302.4 kg/m² (61.6 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.86

 

Armament:

2x 30 mm NR-30 cannons in the wing roots with 75 RPG

4x underwing pylons, with a maximum load of 1.000 kg (2.205 lb)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This kitbash creation was spawned by thoughts concerning the Soviet Naval Aviation and its lack of CTOL aircraft carriers until the 1980ies and kicked-off by a CG rendition of a navalized MiG-17 from fellow member SPINNERS at whatifmodelers.com, posted a couple of months ago. I liked this idea, and at first I wanted to convert a MiG-17 with a solid nose as a dedicated carrier aircraft. But the more I thought about it and did historic research, the less probable this concept appeared to me: the MiG-17 was simply too old to match Soviet plans for a carrier ship, at least with the real world as reference.

 

A plausible alternative was the MiG-19, esp. with its twin-engine layout, even though the highly swept wings and the associated high start and landing speeds would be rather inappropriate for a shipborne fighter. Anyway, a MiG-21 was even less suitable, and I eventually took the Farmer as conversion basis, since it would also fit into the historic time frame between the late 60ies and the mid-70ies.

 

In this case, the basis is a Plastyk MiG-19 kit, one of the many Eastern European re-incarnations of the vintage KP kit. This cheap re-issue became a positive surprise, because any former raised panel and rivet details have disappeared and were replaced with sound, recessed engravings. The kit is still a bit clumsy, the walls are very thick (esp. the canopy – maybe 2mm!), but IMHO it’s a considerable improvement with acceptable fit, even though there are some sink holes and some nasty surprises (in my case, for instance, the stabilizer fins would not match with the rear fuselage at all, and you basically need putty everywhere).

 

Not much from the Plastyk kit was taken over, though: only the fuselage’s rear two-thirds were used, some landing gear parts as well as fin and the horizontal stabilizers. The latter were heavily modified and reduced in sweep in order to match new wings from a Hobby Boss MiG-15 (the parts were cut into three pieces each and then set back together again).

 

Furthermore, the complete front section from a Novo Supermarine Attacker was transplanted, because its short nose and the high cockpit are perfect parts for a carrier aircraft. The Attacker’s front end, including the air intakes, fits almost perfectly onto the round MiG-19 forward fuselage, only little body work was necessary. A complete cockpit tub and a new seat were implanted, as well as a front landing gear well and walls inside of the (otherwise empty) air intakes. The jet exhausts were drilled open, too, and afterburner dummies added. Simple jobs.

 

On the other side, the wings were trickier than expected. The MiG-19 kit comes with voluminous and massive wing root fairings, probably aerodynamic bodies for some area-ruling. I decided to keep them, but this caused some unexpected troubles…

The MiG-15 wings’ position, considerably further back due to the reduced sweep angle, was deduced from the relative MiG-19’s landing gear position. A lot of sculpting and body work followed, and after the wings were finally in place I recognized that the aforementioned, thick wing root fairings had reduced the wing sweep – basically not a bad thing, but with the inconvenient side effect that the original wing MiG-15 fences were not parallel to the fuselage anymore, looking rather awkward! What to do? Grrrr…. I could not leave it that way, so I scraped them away and replaced with them with four scratched substitutes (from styrene profiles), moving the outer pair towards the wing folding mechanism.

 

Under the wings, four new pylons were added (two from an IAI Kfir, two from a Su-22) and the ordnance gathered from the scrap box – bombs and rocket pods formerly belonged to a Kangnam/Revell Yak-38.

The landing gear was raised by ~2mm for a higher stance on the ground. The original, thick central fin was reduced in length, so that it could become a plausible attachment point for an arrester hook (also from the spares box), and a pair of splayed stabilizer fins was added as a compensation. Finally, some of the OOB air scoops were placed all round the hull and some pitots, antennae and a gun camera fairing added.

  

Painting and markings:

This whif was to look naval at first sight, so I referred to the early Yak-38 VTOL aircraft and their rather minimalistic paint scheme in an overall dull blue. The green underside, seen on many service aircraft, was AFAIK a (later) protective coating – an obsolete detail for a CTOL aircraft.

 

Hence, all upper surfaces and the fuselage were painted in a uniform “Field Blue” (Tamiya XF-50). It’s a bit dark, but I have used this unique, petrol blue tone many moons ago on a real world Kangnam Forger where it looks pretty good, and in this case the surface was furthermore shaded with Humbrol 96 and 126 after a black in wash.

For some contrast I painted the undersides of the wings and stabilizers as well as a fuselage section between the wings in a pale grey (Humbrol 167), seen on one of the Yak-38 prototypes. Not very obvious, but at least the aircraft did not end up in a boring, uniform color.

 

The interior was painted in blue-gray (PRU Blue, shaded with Humbrol 87) while the landing gear wells became Aluminum (Humbrol 56). The wheel discs became bright green, just in order to keep in style and as a colorful contrast, and some di-electric panels and covers became very light grey or bright green. For some color contrast, the anti-flutter weight tips on the stabilizers as well as the pylons’ front ends were painted bright red.

 

The markings/decals reflect the early Soviet Navy style, with simple Red Stars, large yellow tactical codes and some high contrast warning stencils, taken from the remains of a Yak-38 sheet (American Revell re-release of the Kangnam kit).

Finally, after some soot stains with graphite around the gun muzzles and the air bleed doors, the kit was sealed with a coat of semi-matt acrylic varnish and some matt accents (anti-glare panel, radomes).

  

A simple idea that turned out to be more complex than expected, due to the wing fence troubles. But I am happy that the Attacker nose could be so easily transplanted, it changes the MiG-19’s look considerably, as well as the wings with (much) less sweep angle.

The aircraft looks familiar, but you only recognize at second glance that it is more than just a MiG-19 with a solid nose. The thing looks pretty retro, reminds me a bit of the Supermarine Scimitar (dunno?), and IMHO it appears more Chinese than Soviet (maybe because the layout reminds a lot of the Q-5 fighter bomber)? It could even, with appropriate markings, be a Luft ’46 design?

8.14.2012

 

On Fear

Our positive capability.

by Mary Ruefle

 

I suppose, as a poet, among my fears can be counted the deep-seated uneasiness that one day it will be revealed that I consecrated my life to an imbecility. Part of what I mean—what I think I mean—by “imbecility” is something intrinsically unnecessary and superfluous and thereby unintentionally cruel. It was a Master who advised that we speak little, better still say nothing, unless we are quite sure that what we wish to say is true, kind, and helpful. But how can a poet, whose role is to speak, adhere to this advice? How can anyone whose role is to facilitate language speak little or say nothing?

 

I don’t know if other poets have this fear, but if they do not, I reason it will only increase the anguish of the outcome if it one day passes into being. To pass into being—now there’s a fear no one ever had. No one ever feared being born, even when all those responsible for the event were fraught with fear for the unborn. And if I may segue to a child at the age of four, I recall watching her beingapproached by a dog that was, well, much larger than the girl herself. The girl’s face was astonishing to watch. It was completely elastic and changed from an expression of wonder and glee: Please come to me doggie and we shall play oh what happiness to be approached by you—to—in less than ten seconds—an expression of sheer terror: Fear! fear! doggie will eat me up and mommie is far away. As the dog slowly crossed the room, in what could not have been more than two minutes, the girl’s face changed expressions so many times I gave up counting. As she oscillated between feeling secure and insecure, it struck me that her face would probably continue to change, albeit at a slower rate, every time she was approached by a dog for the next couple of years, one day coming to rest on that expression that was likely to signify forever after how this human being felt about dogs.

 

But something seemed to be missing from my neat little formula; surely the dog’s face was important, too? This dog was eager and friendly, if a bit clumsy, but what if the next dog took a good-sized chunk out of the child’s face? I asked the poet Tony Hoagland what he thought about fear. He said fear was the ghost of an experience: we fear the recurrence of a pain we once felt, and in this way fear is like a hangover. The memory of our pain is a pain unto itself, and thus feeds our fear like a foyer with mirrors on both sides. And then he quoted Auden: “And ghosts must do again/What gives them pain.” It is interesting to note that this idea—fear’s being the ghost of pain, or imaginary pain—figures in psychological torture by the cia; in fact, their experiments with pain found that imaginary pain was more effective than physical pain—poets, take note—and thus psychological torture more effective than physical torture. Here is an excerpt from their Exploitation Training Manual, written in 1983:

 

The threat of coercion usually weakens or destroys resistance more effectively than coercion itself. The threat to inflict pain, for example, can trigger fears more damaging than the immediate sensation of pain.

 

Although I have never been bitten by a dog, I am scared to death of them, as I am of all living creatures, including myself and my own fragmentation in the long hall of mirrors. James Ward, a British psychologist, broke with religion as a young man in 1872 but found himself a bundle of reflexes over which he had no choice and no control. He said: “I have no dread of God, no fear of the Devil, no fear of man, but my head swims as I write it—I fear myself.” What do I mean by fear? Why I mean that thing that drives you to write—but let us step out of the foyer, and back onto the street, back down the road, and make our approach somewhat more slowly.

 

Sometime after I had already written the pages you are about to sit through, I realized I had been using the wrong word throughout. Dread is a more accurate version of what I am thinking about, and I have Julian of Norwich, a fifteenth-century anchorite, to thank for pointing this out. In her Revelations of Divine Love, the account of a vision she had during an illness in her thirty-first year, she says, “I believe dread can take four forms.” In a nutshell, the first of these forms is what I will describe as the unconscious emotion fear—your very first response to the smell of smoke, the sound of thunder, the sight of flames, the slap. The second form of dread is the anticipatory dread of pain, either physical, emotional, spiritual, or psychological, and that, folks, covers nine-tenths of the world’s surface. The third form of dread is doubt, or despair. And the fourth form of dread is “born of reverence,” the holy dread with which we face that which we love most, or that which loves us the most.

 

Dread. I like it better than the word fear because fear, like the unconscious emotion which is one of its forms, has only the word ear inside of it, telling an animal to listen, while dread has the word read inside of it, telling us to read carefully and find the dead, who are also there. But I have not used the word dread in what follows. I have used the word fear. And fear is an older word—it can be found in Old English, while dread enters the language in Middle English.

 

Neurobiologists have distinguished emotions from feelings, though I am afraid our language has for so long used the two terms as equivalent currency that it is a hopeless task to expect any listener to hear one word and not think of the other. Emotions are hardwired, biological functions of the nervous system such as fear, terror, sexual attraction, and hunger-impelled action (also called “feeding behaviors”). They are each purely physical reactions over which one has no control, and they are common to all animals with a central nervous system. The emotion of fear is what drives all animals away from life-threatening situations, and that is not the kind of fear I have in mind. Feelings, on the other hand, are more complicated and involve cognitive reactions that combine, or can be combined, with emotions, memories, experience, and intelligence. That is the kind of fear I have in mind—the feeling of fear that involves an intelligent, cognitive reaction. Fear that requires self-consciousness.

 

(Don’t be alarmed, scientists are not studying feelings, they are only studying emotions, divorced from cognition, as they travel in recognizable systems throughout the brain and the body.)

 

At this juncture it might be instructive of me to look up at you and say, “Try putting less emotion, and more feeling, into your poems.” The fact that neurobiologists have publicly announced the separation of emotion from feeling should be heartening news to poets everywhere, for it implies that to have feelings is on par with highly sophisticated cognitive systems. Feelings are not subpar. On the other hand, lest we forget, let me repeat: to be more emotional and less cognitive is to be less evolved than the species is able to be. It is to be like a four-year-old child. Feelings seem to represent a place where emotions combine with intelligence and experience to create a highly personal thought process that results in an individual’s worldview.

 

And that is where I want to take up our fear again. I asked a doctor about fear. The doctor said, “The only way to overcome fear is to do what you are trained to do. Fear is overcome by procedure. For example, if I don’t successfully insert an emergency trach—a hole in the throat—someone will die from lack of oxygen. So I mechanically do what I have been trained to do. Someone is there, periodically calling out the oxygen saturation—95, 90, 88, 83, 79—and the lower it gets the more of an emergency it becomes. And the funny thing is, I ask for the count. It is part of the procedure, but I work as if I am not listening—procedural concentration is all.”

 

I asked a pilot about fear. The pilot said, “The only way to overcome fear is to do what you are trained to do. Fear is overcome by procedure. For example, I was flying a test jet alone at thirty thousand feet and there was a leak in my oxygen mask I didn’t know about. I temporarily lost consciousness, and when I came to I was at fifteen thousand feet heading straight for the ground, nose down, completely out of control—and I was still groggy, still fighting for consciousness. Cut the throttle and punch the dive brakes. Cut the throttle and punch the dive brakes. Cut the throttle and punch the dive brakes. Those were the only thoughts I had, and I continued to have them until I leveled out at five thousand feet.” Then the doctor and the pilot, who were in the same room with me, looked at me and said, “So, have you ever had any poetry emergencies?”

 

I was a fool on a fool’s errand. Out of the fear of being a fool, I wanted to tell them that the fear they were trained to overcome was an emotion and not a feeling; after all, these were both life-threatening situations and their reactions were pure instinct, albeit professional ones. But I have professional instincts as well, professional instincts I employ while writing a poem. I was hopelessly confused and felt my sense of self-worth losing altitude; in situations like this I pick up the phone and call my friend, the German philosopher. “Reinhard,” I shouted into the phone, “What do you think about fear?” “Yikes!” he shouted back, “I am afraid of dogs.” At last, a friend. And then he quoted Nietzsche: “The degree of fearfulness is one measure of intelligence.” It was better than I had hoped. Cut the throttle and punch the dive brakes. “Fear is to recognize ourselves.” As far back as I could remember, every minute of my life had been an emergency in which I was paralyzed with fear. Feelings of fear, being at least in part cognitive, and therefore thoughts, often constitute knowledge. For instance, the knowledge that one is going to die. This is a fear one can have while lying in a hammock on a beautiful day. And it can lead to an emergency of feeling that often results in a poem. “Thank you,” I said, before hanging up, and then I heard my friend Reinhard say, “Faulkner, however, said that for a writer, the basest of all things is to be afraid.” My mind quickly came to the conclusion Faulkner was drunk at the time. But perhaps he was thinking about writer’s block, the inability of a writer to do that which is most natural to him: to encounter fear, to face fear; a fear of being alone with fear...

 

Roethke: “Fear was my father, Father Fear./His look drained the stones.”

 

Auden: “Fear gave his watch no look.”

 

Neruda: “When I was a young poet I was full of fear like a real rat in a corner.”

 

And what are we to make of Wordsworth, “Fostered alike by beauty and by fear”?

 

Or Milton’s “equal poise of hope and fear”? Or Blake’s “fearful symmetry”?

 

Which is more inexpressible, the beautiful or the terrifying? Gerard Manley Hopkins, in his last, troubled sonnets, cries out, “O which one? is it each one?” Lorca says,

 

The poet who embarks on the creation of the poem (as I know by experience), begins with the aimless sensation of a hunter about to embark on a night hunt through the remotest of forests. Unaccountable dread stirs in his heart.

 

And Edmond Jabès, in The Book of Questions: “If you bend over your page...and do not suddenly tremble with fear, throw away your pen. Your writing would have little value.”

 

And George Oppen, who said, “Great artists are those, in the end, who do not have a failure of nerve.” Afraid, yes, but there they are, having locked themselves alone in a room with fear. Or as someone else might put it: “Blank pages—shoot-out at the O.K. Corral.”

 

I think it is time to list some concrete fears:

 

fear of death

of illness

of pain

of suffering

of despair

of not understanding

of disturbance or reversal of powers

of being unloved

of the unknown or strange

of destruction

of humiliation

of degradation

of poverty

of hunger

of aging

of unworthiness

of transgression

of punishment

of making a mistake

of loss of dignity

of failure

of oblivion

of outliving the mind

of eating an anchovy

 

These are not simian fears. These are human fears.

 

Barry Lopez, in his study of the Arctic called Arctic Dreams, makes this interesting observation:

 

Eskimos do not maintain this intimacy with nature without paying a certain price. When I have thought about the ways in which they differ from people in my own culture, I have realized that they are more afraid than we are. On a day-to-day basis, they have more fear. Not of being dumped into cold water from an umiak, not a debilitating fear. They are afraid because they accept fully what is violent and tragic in nature. It is a fear tied to their knowledge that sudden, cataclysmic events are as much a part of life, of really living, as are the moments when one pauses to look at something beautiful. A Central Eskimo shaman named Aua, queried by Knud Rasmussen about Eskimo beliefs, answered, “We do not believe. We fear.”

 

Lopez goes on to chastise those who think hunting peoples such as the Eskimos are living in perfect harmony with nature. Nervous awe and apprehension are born out of proximity and attention. The greater the intimacy between these cultures and nature, the greater the tension. The industrial world destroys nature not because it doesn’t love it but because it is not afraid of it. You can in your own minds recall the long Judeo-Christian tradition of fearing God. Or you can perhaps remember having read The Wind in the Willows as a child, or to a child, and encountering that magnificent, odd, and out-of-place chapter entitled “The Piper at the Gates of Dawn” where Mole and Rat go in search of Otter’s lost son and find, on the very edge of dawn, Nature personified in the august presence of a terrifying and benevolent satyr, half man, half animal:

 

“Rat!” he found breath to whisper, shaking. “Are you afraid?”

“Afraid?” murmured the Rat, his eyes shining with unutterable love. “Afraid! Of Him? O, never, never! And yet—and yet—O, Mole, I am afraid!”

Then the two animals, crouching to the earth, bowed their heads and did worship.

 

Fear is the greatest motivator of all time. Conflict born of fear is behind our every action, driving us forward like the cogs of a clock. Fear is desire’s dark dress, its doppelgänger. “Love and dread are brothers,” says Julian of Norwich. As desire is wanting and fear is not-wanting, they become inexorably linked; just as desire can be destructive (the desire for power), fear can be constructive (fear of hurting another); fear of poverty becomes desire for wealth. Collective actions are not exempt from these double powers; consider this succinct and frightening sentence written by John Berger:

 

Everywhere these days more and more people knock their heads against the fact that the future of our planet and what it will offer or deny to its inhabitants, is being decided by boards of men who control more money than all the governments in the world, who never stand for election, and whose sole criterion for every decision they take is whether or not it increases or is prone to increase Profit.

 

But has it ever been any different? Races everywhere have always been at the mercy of collective desire and collective fear, sometimes their own, sometimes others’.

The impulse toward order is born of fear and desire, and the impulse toward chaos is born of the same. The British psychoanalyst D.W. Winnicott believed artists were people driven by the tension between the desire to communicate and the desire to hide.

 

Think of the simplest caricature of a poet, the kind that might be used as a generic figure in a cartoon. Which comes to mind, the forlorn, melancholy, sadly loitering one, suicidal in blue breeches, or the happy eater and drinker, the smeller of roses, the carouser, the gusto-bearing, sun-loving one? In Epicurean atomic theory, “the world functions because from the outset there is a lack of balance.” The French novelist Georges Perec, devoted to mathematical literary forms—he wrote a novel without the letter e in it—speaks of anti-constraints within a system of restraints. He quotes the painter Paul Klee: “Genius is ‘an error in the system.’” (Those of you who have heard lectures on the sonnet may recall that this is often, precisely, the point.) The world functions because of fear, because of the error, the anti-constraint, the anti-perfect, the anti-balance. We stumble. We fall.

 

We fail. And so desire to progress, to become better poets, to eradicate a disease, to become better people, to perfect that which is perpetually imperfect. The biblical “fall” is just such an anti-constraint. The apple was fear. (And remember, fear is knowledge, according to Nietzsche.) The apple set the world in motion by forcing Adam and Eve to migrate out of the Perfect. “Fear is to recognize ourselves,” said the philosopher. One of the fears a young writer has is not being able to write as well as he or she wants to, the fear of not being able to sound like X or Y, a favorite author. But out of fear, hopefully, is born a young writer’s voice: “But now,” says Kierkegaard,

 

to strive to become what one already is: who would take the pains to waste his time on such a task, involving the greatest imaginable degree of resignation?...But for this very reason alone it is a very difficult task...precisely because every human being has a strong natural bent and passion to become something more and different.

 

It is very easy to read those words, and very hard to enact them. Elsewhere Kierkegaard says, “What is education? I should suppose that education was the curriculum one had to run through in order to catch up with oneself.”

There are poets who are resigned to not being able to save the world, who barely have enough time to catch up with themselves and the attendant mystery of their fear and being. I suppose Szymborska was one of them. Here is her compatriot Miłosz describing her:

 

In Szymborska we are divided not into the flesh and a surviving oeuvre...but into “the flesh and a broken whisper”; poetry is no more than a broken whisper, quickly dying laughter.... When it is not the perfection of a work that is important but expression itself, “a broken whisper,” everything becomes, as it has been called, écriture.... To talk about anything, just to talk, becomes an operation in itself, a means of assuaging fear.

 

Much as I am sympathetic to the theory of écriture, I find it—confusing. For why is it meaningless to write with no other function than to assuage fear? Doesn’t that function in itself have a meaning? And why fear the dismantling of language’s semantic function, its being representational of meaning, when that is but one more fear that will drive those in opposition to écriture to write? And certainly this “theory” is no theory at all but a centuries-old practice: “He seemed to be depressed, for he went on writing” reads a twelfth-century Japanese text. Or take Rilke: “I have taken action against fear. I sat up the whole night and wrote; and now I am as thoroughly tired as after a long walk in the fields at Ulsgaard.” Even a bitter poem is a small act of affirmation, and I wonder if we can’t say the same thing about a meaningless poem (if such a thing exists). But Miłosz, who would most certainly disagree, is, to his immortal credit, a knight of faith, and I am but a knight of resignation. Like Kierkegaard: “As far as I am concerned, I am able to describe most excellently the movements of faith; but I cannot make them myself.” The Danish philosopher’s famous essay Fear and Trembling is a rumination on the biblical story of Abraham and Isaac. God asked Abraham to kill Isaac, Abraham’s long-awaited and cherished son, and in the essay Kierkegaard grapples with how an act of murder can become a pleasing, good, and holy act in the eyes of God. It takes faith, a faith Kierkegaard minutely examines and describes, but one that he cannot in the end claim for himself, as devout as he is. He remains what he dubs a knight of resignation, a state that, for all it is worth, is still a state of sin. To be sure, I am “using” Miłosz here for my own purposes. He knows perfectly well he is not a saint. In an interview he has stated—and proved—that he is a man of contradiction. In other words, an ordinary man. But I admire his insistence on an objective reality, his faith in a world and an order that does not exist exclusively in the mind. And he is quite provocative at the end of his essay “The Sand in the Hourglass”:

 

If in our moments of happiness, mastery, ecstasy, we say Yes to heaven and to earth, and all we need is misfortune, sickness, the decline of physical powers to start screaming No, this means that all our judgments can be refuted tomorrow and that it is easy to mistake our life for the world. It is not obvious, however, why weakness—whether of a particular person or of an entire historical era—should be privileged and why the old nihilist from Beckett’s Krapp’s Last Tape should be closer to the truth than he himself was when he was twenty years old.

 

Miłosz closes his essay with an astonishing and succinct remark of Simone Weil’s: “‘I am suffering.’ It is better to say this than to say, ‘This landscape is ugly.’”

 

Fear belongs to man, not to the world. The world feels no fear, at any time, in any place. We are “an unhappy people in a happy world”—Wallace Stevens’s last stance. Feelings of fear—personal, cognitive fear—allow us to feel anguish while lying in a hammock on a beautiful day, allow us to feel as if our life were threatened when the sky is blue and the meadow at peace. Raymond Queneau:

 

The poet is never “inspired, if by inspiration we mean...a function of the poet’s mood, the temperature, the political situation, subjective accidents, or the subconscious.

The poet is never inspired because he is the master of what others assume to be inspiration.... He’s never inspired because he’s always inspired, because the powers of poetry are always at his disposal, obedient to his will, receptive to his guidance.

 

And I want to say the poet is never afraid because he is unceasingly afraid, and therefore cannot become that which he already is, though of course, Mr. Kierkegaard reminds us, he must; you might say fear is the poet’s procedure, that which he has been trained to concentrate on.

 

What an odd thing to say; what a terrible thing to say. Surely someone is saying to himself, “Gee whiz, hasn’t she ever heard of negative capability?” As a matter of fact, I have; those words have become like a sickness unto death for me. As often as I have used them myself, I wish there were a moratorium on them for a decade, so overused are they, so bandied about that they have come to mean just about anything one wants them to, especially a bebop version of Be Here Now, or a diffusive religious awe in which the poet wanders, forever in a stupor. As with most famous sayings, we are given only a fragment of the paragraph from which it comes. “Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact reason”: the letter was written by John Keats on a Sunday, late in December of 1817, from Hampstead, and addressed to his brothers George and Tom. The year 1817 is, relatively speaking, quite early in Keats’s career, though only four years before his death; the letter was written before George left for America, before Tom died, before John met Fanny Brawne, before he was sick, and before he had written what are considered his finest poems. One of the things you have to remember about Keats is that his development as a poet was telescoped into an intensely short period of time in which he passed through as many stages as another poet may experience in a life three times as long. Although the letter in its entirety is too long to quote here, you’ll have to trust me when I say that only the last quarter of it puts his definition of negative capability into context. Here is that context:

 

Several things dovetailed in my mind, at once it struck me, what quality went to form a Man of Achievement especially in Literature which Shakespeare possessed so enormously—I mean Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. This pursued through Volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration.

 

The passage is a bit like the us Constitution. By that I mean that it may be interpreted to suit the purposes of a great many people who are at odds with one another. For instance, nothing prevents someone from saying that the essential definition means: once depressed, stay depressed. Of the passage relating to Coleridge there is no doubt: all you have to know is that Coleridge was the great intellectual among the Romantics, the great thinker. But an interesting and further complicating key is provided by the phrase “isolated verisimilitude.” Verisimilitude means “having the appearance of a truth; probable,” so that Keats is saying something like this: “Coleridge would pass over a probability that someone else would accept as the truth because Coleridge is not content with appearance or probability.” If we add to this the idea of isolating, which implies distinction or differentiation, we can’t help but think that Keats has searched the penetralium of mystery at least long enough to isolate a probable truth that is, unto him, sufficient. And this is a far cry from the non-isolating attitude that most of us associate with negative capability. Following this, Keats does a remarkable thing—he sums up something he has not even elaborated on. He says, “This pursued through Volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration.” What does this mean? For where was there ever any mention of Beauty in the original definition? And do you see how this last bit could be used as a defense by the most archly formal poet or by his worst nemesis? And if I presume to understand negative capability, am I then incapable of it, since it is the capability of being in the presence of an uncertainty without reaching to understand it? And finally, we always intimately connect John Keats with negative capability as if he possessed it himself, as if he were speaking of himself, when he was not thinking or speaking of himself at all but of Shakespeare—and who among us amounts to squat compared to Him—of whom we can be as uncertain as we like without reaching after facts, because there are none? Shakespeare’s reputation as a god is enhanced tenfold by the mysterious circumstances of his being. As is always the case, the unknown raises the stakes and the stature and the flag of the formidable before which we bow and do worship in unaccountable dread. Keats sought to understand much in his life; his poems and letters are full of urgent searching, of the kinds of questions that arise in the minds of passionate youth. He says in another letter:

 

You tell me never to despair—I wish it was as easy for me to observe the saying—truth is I have a horrid Morbidity of Temperament which has shown itself at intervals—it is I have no doubt the greatest Enemy and stumbling block I have to fear—I may even say that it is likely to be the cause of my disappointment.

 

One has only to look at the opening lines of a majority of his poems to see him in a state of uncertainty, mystery, doubt—that is, fear:

 

“When I have fears that I may cease to be”

“Glory and loveliness have Pass’d away”

“My spirit is too weak—mortality”

“O thou whose face hath felt the Winter’s wind”

“In a drear-nighted December”

“Deep in the shady sadness of a vale”

“If by dull rhymes our English must be chain’d”

“O what can ail thee, knight at arms”

“Why did I laugh tonight?”

“My heart aches, and a drowsy numbness pains”

 

The suffering in these poems remains intact; it is neither resolved nor negated. What happens for the most part is, the poems dissolve, finally, into the cream of the physical world. If negative capability works at all, it works in reverse, a kind of negative negative capability—which would make it positive—where very real anxiety and irritability over mystery and doubt enable the poet—no, propel him—into the world of the eye, the pure perceptual habit that checks all cognitive drives, not before they’ve begun but after they’ve begun, and done their damage. In the words of a painter, the abstract expressionist Pat Adams—

 

That marveling rush of wonder at sheer multiplicity and differentiation of stuff when surfaces of heightened materiality, of encrusted and layered imprinting are generated to entangle our attention and delay cognition

 

—until it seems that perpetual fear is a propellant into the innocent, fearless, and vulnerable world of the senses. So that the poet paralyzed with fear lying in a hammock on a beautiful day—unhappy man in a happy world—does not suffer any less when he looks around him; he does not cease to suffer, he only ceases to try to understand.

 

It was the last nostalgia: that he

Should understand. That he might suffer or that

He might die was the innocence of living, if life

Itself was innocent.

 

—From Esthétique du Mal, by Wallace Stevens

 

We do not know the etymology of the word fear. That is, the makers of dictionaries are unsure of it. But there is a good chance that it is related to the word fare in its oldest sense, which is to pass through, to go through, as in, How did you fare at the dentist’s? or Fare-thee-well or, He fared in this life like one whose name was writ in water.

 

Keats died at an age when no one should have to die. I wonder if the young are less afraid of dying, or more afraid of dying, than the old. I am no longer young. I am old enough to understand and know that it is not death I am afraid of, it’s dying. Dying is the act, most often painful, that leads to death, while death itself is as painless as the feeling you had before you were born—no feeling at all, you didn’t care one way or another (feeling is caring one way or another). But what do I know? Blessed Brother André, currently under investigation for sainthood, said, “If we knew the value of suffering, we would ask for it.” Though others can, I cannot fathom that remark, let alone embrace it. Nor am I a Buddhist, one who believes suffering is based on ignorance, and that ignorance can be eradicated; actually, I do believe that suffering is based on ignorance (if the Third Reich had not been ignorant, millions would not have had to perish), but I don’t believe ignorance can be eradicated. Actually, I do believe ignorance can be eradicated, but in the way of a weed—it will only pop up again someplace else. When Brother André asks us to embrace suffering, is he saying, “If we knew the value of ignorance, we would ask for it?” Should we finally and willingly cease to understand? I have often said I would rather wonder than know. Is that a youthful stance, a Keatsian stance? Is that—could it be—negative capability? Should one mature beyond it? I don’t know. Rilke advises the young to “live the questions now,” because the answers can only be revealed in time, the extension of which they do not possess. Much like Keats himself says, in a letter, that certain lessons can only be learned on the touchstone of the heart, that is, through direct experience.

 

What has life taught me? I am much less afraid than I ever was in my youth—of everything. That is a fact. At the same time, I feel more afraid than ever. And the two, I can assure you, are not opposed but inextricably linked. I am more or less the same age Emily Dickinson was when she died. Here is what she thought: “Had we the first intimation of the Definition of Life, the calmest of us would be Lunatics!” The calm lunatic—now that is something to aspire to.

 

Almost makes me want to take up golf

 

From 1066 the estate was inherited in a direct line of descent for 515 years until it had to be sold to the Crown in 1581 to pay the outstanding debts of Henry Hastings, the 3rd Earl of Huntingdon, whose father Francis, the Commander in Chief of Henry VIII’s army, had rebuilt the Manor House (part of which can still be seen today) in 1555.

 

John Penn (1760 - 1834) a scholar, poet and prolific patron of architecture was responsible for most of what can still be seen at the Club today. Penn spent a large proportion of the compensation (£130,000) he was given by the new United States Government for his family's 26 million acres in Pennsylvania on building the new Mansion, landscape and monuments.

 

The Mansion was designed by James Wyatt, architect to George III, who worked on the development of the house and monuments from 1790 to 1813. The historic parkland is the product of two geniuses of the eighteenth century, ‘Capability’ Brown and Humphry Repton, who designed the landscape we see today in 1792.

 

The estate was used as a private residence until 1908 when ‘Pa’ Lane Jackson, founder of the Corinthian Sporting Club, purchased the estate, turning it into Britain's finest country club. H. S. Colt (who also designed Pinevalley, Wentworth, Sunningdale, Muirfield and Royal Portrush) was engaged to design the golf course.

Stowe Landscape Gardens, Buckinghamshire, designed by Capability Brown. Pentax 67II, 75mm lens, polariser, 81 warm up and tripod. Velvia 100 film.

Scanned from a 120 film slide.

The reflection makes it look very wonky, it's not really; because all the water would run out.

Naval Services Culinary Arts Team, (NSCAT), took part in exercise Joint Caterer at the Defence Capability Centre, Shrivenham, defending the tri-service title. Picture: LA(Phot) Paul Hall

 

On the 14th October 2015 the Naval Services Culinary Arts Team, (NSCAT), took part in Exercise Joint Caterer at the Defence Capability Centre, Shrivenham., defending the tri-service title.

 

Exercise Joint Caterer is aimed at providing Caterers, Chefs and Stewards a competition that further develops their culinary skills and builds team spirit for the ultimate benefit of the Armed Forces as a whole.

FX150286

  

Consent forms completed

Ugbrooke House

 

Ugbrooke House is a stately home in the parish of Chudleigh, Devon, England, situated in a valley between Exeter and Newton Abbot.

 

It dates back over 900 years, having featured in the Domesday Book. Before the Reformation the land belonged to the Church and the house was occupied by Precentors to the Bishop of Exeter. It has been the seat of the Clifford family for over four hundred years, and the owners have held the title Baron Clifford of Chudleigh since 1672.

 

The 9th Baron Clifford was an aide-de-camp to Edward VII and entertained royalty, both Edward VII and George V, at Ugbrooke Park.

 

The house, now a Grade I listed building, was remodelled by Robert Adam, while the grounds were redesigned by Capability Brown in 1761.The grounds featured what were possibly the earliest plantings of the European White Elm Ulmus laevis in the UK.The gardens are now Grade II* listed in the National Register of Historic Parks and Gardens.[4] The house and gardens are open to the public for a limited number of days each summer.

  

Baron Clifford of Chudleigh

 

Baron Clifford of Chudleigh, of Chudleigh in the County of Devon, is a title in the Peerage of England. It was created in 1672 for Thomas Clifford. The title was created as "Clifford of Chudleigh" rather than simply "Clifford" to differentiate it from several other Clifford Baronies previously created for members of this ancient family, including the Barony of de Clifford (1299), which is extant but now held by a branch line of the Russell family, having inherited through several female lines.

 

Baron Clifford of Chudleigh is the major surviving male representative of the ancient Norman family which later took the name de Clifford which arrived in England during the Norman Conquest of 1066, feudal barons of Clifford, first seated in England at Clifford Castle in Herefordshire, created Baron de Clifford by writ in 1299. The family seat is Ugbrooke Park, near Chudleigh, Devon.

 

Notable members of this branch of the Clifford family include antiquarian Arthur Clifford (grandson of the 3rd Baron), Victoria Cross recipient Sir Henry Hugh Clifford (son of the 7th Baron), Catholic clergyman William Clifford (son of the 7th Baron) and colonial administrators Sir Bede Clifford (son of the 10th Baron) and Sir Hugh Clifford (grandson of the 7th Baron). The family is also related to the notable recusant Weld family, of Lulworth Castle, through the 7th Baron's marriage to the daughter of Cardinal Thomas Weld.

 

Barons Clifford of Chudleigh (1672)

 

Thomas Clifford, 1st Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1630–1673)

Hugh Clifford, 2nd Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1663–1730)

Hugh Clifford, 3rd Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1700–1732)

Hugh Clifford, 4th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1726–1783)

Hugh Edward Henry Clifford, 5th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1756–1793)

Charles Clifford, 6th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1759–1831)

Hugh Charles Clifford, 7th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1790–1858)

Charles Hugh Clifford, 8th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1819–1880)

Lewis Henry Hugh Clifford, 9th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1851–1916)

William Hugh Clifford, 10th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1858–1943)

Charles Oswald Hugh Clifford, 11th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1887–1962)

Lewis Joseph Hugh Clifford, 12th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1889–1964)

Lewis Hugh Clifford, 13th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (1916–1988)

Thomas Hugh Clifford, 14th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh (b. 1948)

The heir apparent is the present holder's son Hon. Alexander Thomas Hugh Clifford (b. 1985)

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SAC 01 NATO Strategic Airlift Capability Boeing C-17A Globemaster III - cn F-207 landing @TRD/ENVA 10.02.16 NATO Cold Response Exercise 2016

When the 1st Duke of Marlborough and his architect, John Vanbrugh, surveyed Queen Anne's gift of Woodstock Park, they saw an awkward valley of marshland. Vanbrugh reimagined this marsh as ornamental water - crossed by the “finest bridge in Europe”.

 

The Duke duly approved Vanbrugh’s design, and building of The Grand Bridge began in 1708.

 

The main arch was eventually keyed in 1710, measuring 31 metres (101ft) wide and containing more than 30 rooms. Yet the bridge never quite scaled the heights of Vanbrugh’s intentions, as the arcaded superstructure that was planned to crown the bridge was never completed.

 

Still, it proved a stunning addition to Blenheim Palace – particularly when Capability Brown built a dam and cascade near Bladon, allowing the River Glyme to flow through the lower parts of the bridge.

 

The resulting ‘natural’ lakes on either side gave purpose to Vanbrugh’s heroic structure, prompting Sir Sacheverell Sitwell to remark: “The lake at Blenheim is the one great argument of the landscape gardener. There is nothing finer in Europe”.

Broadway Tower is a folly on Broadway Hill, near the village of Broadway, in the English county of Worcestershire, at the second-highest point of the Cotswolds (after Cleeve Hill). Broadway Tower's base is 1,024 feet (312 metres) above sea level. The tower itself stands 65 feet (20 metres) high.

 

The "Saxon" tower was the brainchild of Capability Brown and designed by James Wyatt in 1794 in the form of a castle, and built for Lady Coventry in 1798–99. The tower was built on a "beacon" hill, where beacons were lit on special occasions. Lady Coventry wondered whether a beacon on this hill could be seen from her house in Worcester — about 22 miles (35 km) away — and sponsored the construction of the folly to find out. Indeed, the beacon could be seen clearly.

 

Over the years, the tower was home to the printing press of Sir Thomas Phillipps, and served as a country retreat for artists including William Morris and Edward Burne-Jones who rented it together in the 1880s. William Morris was so inspired by Broadway Tower and other ancient buildings that he founded the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings in 1877.

 

Today, the tower is a tourist attraction and the centre of a country park with various exhibitions open to the public at a fee, as well as a gift shop and restaurant. The place is on the Cotswold Way and can be reached by following the Cotswold Way from the A44 road at Fish Hill, or by a steep climb out of Broadway village.

 

Near the tower is a memorial to the crew of an A.W.38 Whitley bomber that crashed there during a training mission in June 1943.

Stowe Landscape Gardens, Buckinghamshire, designed by Capability Brown. Pentax 67II, 75mm lens, polariser, 81 warm up and tripod. Velvia 100 film.

Scanned from a 120 film slide.

Went to Gatton Park today but this time the privately owned part not belonging to the National Trust. The Royal Alexandra and Albert School own it but on the first Sunday of each month from May to September it opens it's grounds to the public for the princely sum of £4. Worth every penny! The grounds were originally designed by Capability Brown.

 

This is the view from the rear of Gatton Hall which was once owned by the Colman family (Colman's Mustard), purchased in 1888 by Sir Jeremiah Colman as the family home.

Listing Text

NORTH CRAY ROAD

1.

5005

(west side)

North Cray

TQ 47 SE 4/14 Five Arch Bridge

II

2.

250 yds north-north-west of Church of St James. Circa 1781. Much rebuilt

5-arched footbridge, incorporating weir on north side. Round arches, graded

in size ; curved parapet with ends curving outwards. Now largely of yellow

brick, but with red brick on each side; courses of flint below stone band;

stone parapet much replaced in cement. The bridge linked the 2 former estates

of North Cray Place and Foots Cray Place, as part of Lancelot Brown's landscaping

of both parks. (See Dorothy Stroud's 'Lancelot Brown').

+++ 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 Imperial Japanese Army Air Force's fighter force, especially the Nakajima Ki-43, had been underestimated in its capability, numbers and the strategy of its commanders. Within a few months, Japanese forces had conquered vast areas of the Pacific and South East Asia. During these campaigns, the ill-prepared Allied air forces in the Pacific suffered devastating losses.

 

Because of political and cultural ties between the United Kingdom and Australia, British manufacturers were the main source of RAAF aircraft. However, the British aircraft industry had long been hard-pressed to meet the needs of the RAF. Although United States companies had enormous aircraft manufacturing capacity, their output was now intended first and foremost for US air units. Even if aircraft built overseas did become available, they would be shipped long distances in wartime conditions, with consequent delays and losses. As a consequence, CAC came into its own with the development of the Boomerang fighter, which was not operational before late 1942.

 

Following the outbreak of war with Japan, 51 Hurricane Mk IIs were sent as a stop-gap in crates to Singapore, with 24 pilots, the nucleus of five squadrons. They arrived on 3 January 1942, by which time the Allied fighter squadrons in Singapore, flying Brewster Buffalos, had been overwhelmed in the Malayan campaign. Even though the Hurricanes were a significant progress, they suffered in performance.

 

Because of inadequate early warning systems, Japanese air raids were able to destroy 30 Hurricanes on the ground in Sumatra, most of them in one raid on 7 February. After Japanese landings in Singapore, on 10 February, only 18 serviceable Hurricanes remained out of the original 99. After Java was invaded, some of the pilots were evacuated by sea to Australia. 31 Hurricane airframes, which had been on the wayby ship, not been assembled and lacked Merlin engines, were directed to Australia in the wake of events.

 

From these unfinished machines, the Hurricane Mk. VI was quickly devised: the airframes were mated with P&W Twin Wasp engines, which were produced under license at the CAC plant in Lidcombe, Sydney, for the RAAF's Boomerang and Bristol Beaufort. It was clear from the start that these Twin Wasp-powered machines would rather be stop-gaps and no true fighters, rather fighter bombers and more suited for the ground attack role. Hence, like the latest fighters at the time, planning for the Mk. VI included automatic cannons. As no such weapons were manufactured locally, a British-made Hispano-Suiza 20 mm which an Australian airman had collected as a souvenir in the Middle East was reverse engineered – and four of them replaced the eight and partly twelve 0.303 machine guns of the original Mk. IIB machines. Additionally, the pilot received extra armor plating, and the wings were reinforced for external ordnance.

 

The RAAF Mk. VI Hurricanes carried A60-02 through -32 registrations. As a side note, A60-01 was a single Hurricane Mk.I serialled V-7476. This aircraft served with No.2 and 3 Communications Flights RAAF and was used on occasion for experimental work at RAAF Base Laverton on the outskirts of Melbourne. The aircraft was scrapped in 1945.

The Hurricane Mk. VIs actively took part in Pacific operations with RAAF’s No. 4 Squadron and No. 5 Squadron, being joined by Boomerangs in early 1943. They were operated in New Guinea and during the Solomon Islands Campaign as well as the Borneo Campaign, mostly in the close support role and with marked success.

 

Flying in pairs (one to observe the ground, the other to observe the air around them), their tasks included bombing, strafing, close infantry support and artillery spotting. When attacking larger enemy formations, the Hurricanes often operated in conjunction with the smaller and much more agile Boomerang fighter. In this role, a Boomerang would get in close to confirm the identity of the target and mark it with a 20 lb (9 kg) smoke bomb with the "cooperating" Hurricane, Beaufort or Havoc delivering the major ordnance in a quick run and from a safer distance. The partnership between RAAF planes and Royal New Zealand Air Force Corsair fighter bombers during the Bougainville Campaign was said to be particularly effective.

 

The Australian Hurricane Mk. VIs soldiered on until early 1945, when they were finally retired. The Twin Wasp engines were used for spares, all airframes were scrapped, no plane survived the war.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 32 ft 3 in (9.84 m)

Wingspan: 40 ft 0 in (12.19 m)

Height: 13 ft 1½ in (4.0 m)

Wing area: 257.5 ft² (23.92 m²)

Empty weight: 5,745 lb (2,605 kg)

Loaded weight: 7,670 lb (3,480 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 8,710 lb (3,950 kg)

 

Maximum speed: 331 mph (531 km/h)

Range: 650 mi (1.045 km)

Service ceiling: 36,000 ft (10,970 m)

Rate of climb: 2,303 ft/min (11.7 m/s)

Wing loading: 29.8 lb/ft² (121.9 kg/m²)

Power/mass: 0.15 hp/lb (0.25 kW/kg)

 

Engine: 1× Pratt & Whitney R-1830 Twin Wasp radial engine, 1,200 hp (895 kW)

 

Armament: 4× 20 mm (0.787 in) Hispano or CAC cannons; 2x 45-gallon (205 l) drop tanks or 2× 250 or 500 lb (110 or 230 kg) bombs

 

The kit and its assembly

The Hurricane Mk. VI is a whif, even though with little effort but a good story behind it. The original idea to mate a Hurricane with a radial engine came when I found a drawing of a Russian Hurricane, mated with a Schwezow ASch-82 engine. It looked… interesting. Not certain if this had been done for sure, but a great inspiration.

While browsing through the scrap heap I later found a Twin Wasp engine – that fueled the idea of a respective conversion. The Russian option was dead, but when I checked contemporary planes I came across the small Boomerang, and the historical facts were perfect for an obscure Australian Hurricane variant.

 

The rest was quickly done: the basic kit is a Hurricane Mk. IIC (Trop) from Hobby Boss, the Twin Wasp comes from a wrecked Matchbox PB4Y Privateer. The original Merlin was simply cut away and replaced by the "new" and relatively small radial engine. A surprisingly easy task, even though I had to widen the area in front of the cockpit by about 1mm to each side. With some putty and a new exhaust pipe with flame dampers, the surgical part was quickly done. A pilot was added, too, in order to distract from the rather bleak cockpit.

 

To make the plane look more interesting and suitable for a display on the ground, the flaps were lowered (scratch-built) and vertical and horizontal stabilizer were moved away from OOB neutral position. Additionally, the cooler under the fuselage was omitted, what creates together with the radial engine a very different side view. This "Aussie'cane" looks stout but disturbingly realistic, like a Boomerang’s big brother!

 

Only other changes/additions are a pilot figure and two wing hardpoints, holding bombs. The rest is OOB.

  

Painting

I have always been a fan of all-green RAAF WWII planes, so I chose such a simple livery. Inspiration came from real-life 4. Squadron Boomerangs, so I adopted the “QE” code and tried to mimic the overall look.

Interior surfaces were kept in Humbrol 78 ('Cockpit Green', dry-painted with light grey). The plane was painted with “Foilage Green” on all outer surfaces - a tone which seems to be heavily debated. Most sources claim FS 34092 (Humbrol 149) as a nowaday's replacement, but to me, this color is just too green and blue-ish. IMHO, “Foilage Green” has a rather yellow-ish hue - Humbrol 75 ("Bronze Green") would be better, if it wasn't too dark.

 

After some trials I settled for Humbrol 105 ("Army Green"). I think it is a sound compromise. It resembles FS 34096, but is (much) less grey-ish and offers that yellow hue I was looking for. Heavy weathering was done, esp. at the panel lines with dry-painted FS 34096 (Testors) and some panels "bleached" with Humbrol 86 ("Light live Green"). After deacls had been applied, some dry brushing with olive drab and light grey added to the worn and faded look, as well as flaked paint around the engine and the wings' leading egdes and soot stains at exhausts and guns. I wanted to emphasize the harsh climate conditions and duties of this fictional machine.

 

Only other colors are typical white quick recognition markings on tail and wings, painted with a mix of Humbrol 130 and 196 for a very light grey, with some white dry painting on th eleading edges.For a final clear coat, I used a matte varnish which still has a light gloss to it - “Foilage Green” and RAAF finishes were AFAIK supposed to be semi-matte and of higher quality that USAF paintjobs.

 

Markings come mostly from the scrap box. The RAAF insignia were taken from a Vultee Vengeance aftermarket sheet by Kanga Decals, which also provided the mid sea grey codes. The Australian registration numbers were improvised with single white letters from TL Modellbau decal sheets.

 

All in all I am happy with the result - a simple measure, a good story and even a very simple livery that allows room for imagination and painting effects. A nice lil' whif, the "Aussie'cane" Mk. VI.

The National Trust Property ,Croome has a landscaped park designed by Lancelot 'Capability' Brown. View towards church. Taken with 10-20mm

Temple Newsam (historically Temple Newsham), (grid reference SE357322) is a Tudor-Jacobean house in Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, with grounds landscaped by Capability Brown.

 

The estate lends its name to the Temple Newsam ward of Leeds City Council, in which it is situated, and lies to the east of the city, just south of Halton Moor, Halton, Whitkirk and Colton. It is one of nine sites in the Leeds Museums & Galleries group.

 

The house is a Grade I listed building, defined as a "building of outstanding or national architectural or historic interest". The stables are Grade II* listed ("particularly significant buildings of more than local interest"), and ten separate features of the estate are Grade II listed ("buildings of special architectural or historic interest"), including the Sphinx Gates and the Barn.[1] Temple Newsam House is one of Leeds Museums and Galleries sites.[2] It is also part of the research group, Yorkshire Country House Partnership.[3]

 

History

1066 to 1520

In the Domesday Book of 1086 the manor is listed as Neuhusam (meaning new houses) and was held by Ilbert de Lacy and his sons.[4] Before the Norman Conquest of 1066 it had been held by Dunstan and Glunier, Anglo-Saxon thanes.[4] In about 1155, Henry de Lacy gave it to the Knights Templar, who built Temple Newsam Preceptory on a site near the present house.[5] The Templars farmed the estate very efficiently, with 1100 animals.[6] In 1307 the Templars were suppressed, and Edward II granted the manor to Sir Robert Holland who held it until 1323 when he was deprived of his estates.[6] The Templars tried to retake the estate but they were forced to surrender and in 1327 it was granted to Mary de St Pol, the Countess of Pembroke, who held the manor for 50 years.[6] In 1377 by royal decree the estate reverted to Philip Darcy, 4th Baron Darcy de Knayth (1341–1398).[6] It then passed through several members of the Darcy family, until it was inherited by the 21-year old Thomas, Lord Darcy in 1488.[7] Between 1500 and 1520 a Tudor manor house, known as Temple Newsam House, was built on the site.[8] It has also been spelled "Newsham" in the past.[9]

 

An oil on panel painting by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries

An oil on panel painting from 1563 by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries which may reflect Temple Newsam's Great Chamber

1500 to 1650

In 1537 Thomas, Lord Darcy was executed for the part he played in the Pilgrimage of Grace and the property was seized by the Crown.[7] In 1544 Henry VIII gave it to his niece Lady Margaret Douglas (Countess of Lennox), and she lived there with her husband Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox.[7] Their son Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, who was born in the house in 1545 and educated there, married Mary, Queen of Scots, by whom he was the father of King James VI of Scotland and I of England.[10] A portrait of Henry and his brother was probably intended to represent the interior of Temple Newsam despite being based on a print of an ideal interior.[11] Following the marriage in 1565, Temple Newsam was seized by Queen Elizabeth I and was managed by an agent.[12]

 

In 1609 King James I, successor to Elizabeth, granted the estate to his Franco-Scottish second cousin Ludovic Stewart, 2nd Duke of Lennox (1574–1624), who was a favourite of the King and given many titles and estates, including farmland and coalmines in the local area.[13] Despite his opportunities, Ludovic was in constant debt and he mortgaged the estate in 1614 for the sum of £9,000 (around £860,000 in today's money).[14] In 1622 Lennox began the sale of the estate to Sir Arthur Ingram (c. 1565 – 1642), a Yorkshire-born London merchant, civil servant, investor in colonial ventures and arms dealer, for £12,000, which he paid in two instalments, the last in July 1624, after Lennox's death.[14] During the next 20 years the mansion was rebuilt, incorporating some of the previous house in the west wing.[8] The north and south wings were rebuilt and the east wing was demolished after a bad fire in 1635.[15] Arthur's son, also called Arthur, inherited the estate with its debts and continued the building and renovation work.[16] Six months after Charles I was beheaded in 1649, Arthur Ingram the younger was declared delinquent and he compounded his estates and retired to Temple Newsam.[17]

 

1650 to 1900

After the death of Arthur the younger's eldest son, Thomas, in 1660, Temple Newsam was inherited by Arthur's second son, Henry Ingram, 1st Viscount of Irvine (created a peer of Scotland as Baron Ingram and Viscount of Irvine in 1661 - although the family used the English form "Irwin").[18] In 1661, Henry married Lady Essex Montagu, daughter of Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester, a favourite of Charles II.[18] The estate then passed through Henry's two sons and five grandsons, the last being Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine.[18] The 4th Viscount brought back paintings from his Grand Tour of 1704-7.[19] Extant receipts from 1692 show women as well as men were employed to work the estate in haymaking.[20] In 1712, William Etty designed a new approach to the house, with a bridge and ponds.[21][22] In 1714, Temple Newsam was inherited by Rich Ingram, the 5th Viscount, and his wife Ann who spent a vast fortune furnishing the house and creating the East Avenue.[19] Between 1738 and 1746, Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine remodelled the west and north wings of the house, creating new bedrooms and dressing rooms and the picture gallery.[23] A painting in Leeds City Art Gallery by Philippe Mercier of c. 1745 shows Henry and his wife standing in front of Temple Newsam House.[24]

 

A coloured engraving made in 1699 by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff showing an aerial view of the house and estate at Temple Newsam

1699 Engraving by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff

In the 1760s, Charles Ingram, 9th Viscount of Irvine, employed Capability Brown to re-landscape the park on the insistence of his wife, Frances Shepheard, daughter of Samuel Shepheard.[25] Reflecting her interest in pastoral landscape design, Frances is depicted as a shepherdess in a portrait by Benjamin Wilson at Temple Newsam.[25] Both Frances and Charles were actively involved in the design and implementation.[26] Some aspects of Brown's plan depicted in paintings by James Chapman and Michael Angelo Rooker were never completed such as a large lake near the house.[26] Extant financial records show that in 1759 women as well as men were employed as garden labourers.[20] After Charles died in 1778, Frances rebuilt the south wing in 1796; she lived at Temple Newsam until her death in 1807.[27] Charles and Frances's eldest daughter Isabella Ingram, (Marchioness of Hertford) (d.1834) who inherited Temple Newsam, was the mistress of the Prince of Wales (later King George IV) from 1806 to 1819. In 1806, George visited Temple Newsam and presented Isabella with Chinese wallpaper, which she hung in the small Drawing Room next to the Great Hall in around 1820, embellished with cut out birds from Audubon's The Birds of America (now worth £7.5 million).[28] Lady Hertford inherited the house in 1807; after her husband died in 1822 she spent the season in London, and the rest of the time at Temple Newsam where she involved herself in charitable works including distributing food and clothing to the local people.[29] She allowed the servants to hold an annual supper and ball at Temple Newsam.[29] Reports of poachers were made during 1826 and 1827.[30] During the last years of Isabella's life, the canal, railway and roads encroached on the estate as well as coal mining; and she dealt with the companies setting these up.[29] In 1820 the novelist Sir Walter Scott published Ivanhoe featuring a Templar preceptory named Temple Stowe, believed to have been modelled on Temple Newsam; the name is preserved in local road names such as Templestowe Crescent.[31] At her death in 1834, Isabella left Temple Newsam to her widowed sister, Frances Ingram Shepheard, wife of Lord William Gordon, who died in 1841.[32]

  

Temple Newsam House from Morris's Country Seats (1880)

In 1841 the estate was inherited by Hugo Charles Meynell Ingram (d. 1869), son of Elizabeth Ingram, sister of Frances Ingram (Lady Gordon), who made no alterations to the estate.[33] In 1868, the Prince of Wales stayed at Temple Newsam during his visit to Leeds to open the Fine Art Exhibition in the New Infirmary; temporary triumphal arches were erected on the estate.[34] Following Hugo Charles's death, his son Hugo Meynell-Ingram (d.1871) inherited Temple Newsam; two years later, at his death, his wife Emily Meynell Ingram (d.1904) inherited the estate.[33] Emily spent a large part of her widowhood at Temple Newsam; she developed it considerably by replacing the sash windows and remodelling the dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room.[33] Emily bequeathed Temple Newsam to her nephew Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax.[8]

 

20th century

In 1909, 610 acres (2.5 km2) of the estate at Knostrop were compulsorily purchased by Leeds Corporation to build a sewage plant.[35] During the First World War (1914–17) the south wing of the house was turned into a hospital by Edward Wood and his wife Dorothy. Edward Wood fought in France as part of the Yorkshire Hussars, whilst Dorothy oversaw the running of the hospital as part of the Mayors War Committee.[36] In 1922 Edward Wood sold the park and house to Leeds Corporation for a nominal sum, placing covenants over them to ensure their preservation for the future.[35]

 

On 19 October 1923, Temple Newsam was opened to the public along with a golf course.[37] In the Derby Daily Telegraph newspaper, Temple Newsam was compared to Hampton Court.[37] Despite many people visiting the house and using the golf course, the Corporation lost money during the first decade mostly due to poor farming practices.[37] In July 1932, the Great Yorkshire Show was held at Temple Newsam and was a great success.[37] Preparations for war were made as early as April 1939, and in August, small items were being packed up for storage.[37] In September 1939, Temple Newsam was closed to the public and items were moved there for storage from Leeds City Art Gallery.[37] It was decided that objects would be displayed, and the house was officially reopened in November 1939, when it was again likened to Hampton Court in the press.[37]

 

Architecture

Photograph of entrance porch of Temple Newsam House, Leeds, showing at top the word 'FATHER', below a mullioned window, below a raised portico with coat of arms above a doorway flanked by two Ionic columns on each side.

Entrance Porch 17th century

Photograph of the west front of Temple Newsam

Centre of Temple Newsam west front

Remains of the early 16th century house were retained in the new building, including the brickwork and bay windows in the centre of the west front.[38] The plan of the new house was a conservative E-shape.[38] The Long Gallery and entrance hall in the south wing followed Elizabethan and early Jacobean styles.[38] The entrance porch has Classical columns but they are of Flemish design, rather than following correct Italian design.[38] There are Tudor doorways and timberwork in the cellars, which are largely Tudor in date.[39] Tudor features have also been discovered beneath later layers of decoration, including Lord Darcy's crest scratched into the plaster in the Blue Damask room.[40] An inventory of 1565 indicates that the hall, great chamber (later the dining room), gallery and chapel (later the kitchen) were probably where they are now.[40] There is a Tudor doorway in the north wing which was probably the entrance to the original chapel.[41]

 

In the 17th century, the south and north wings were rebuilt and the east wing demolished, replaced by a low wall with an arched gateway, giving the house a fashionable 'half-H' appearance.[39] It is possible that the man who made plans for the alteration was Bernard Dinninghof of York.[41] There is also some resemblance to designs by Inigo Jones.[42] Round the top of the house, letters appear in a balustrade, declaring the piety and loyalty of Sir Arthur Ingram: 'ALL GLORY AND PRAISE BE GIVEN TO GOD THE FATHER THE SON AND HOLY GHOST ON HIGH PEACE ON EARTH GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN HONOUR AND TRUE ALLEGIANCE TO OUR GRACIOUS KING LOVING AFFECTION AMONGST HIS SUBJECTS HEALTH AND PLENTY BE WITHIN THIS HOUSE.'[38] The chapel in the north wing retains some 17th century features, such as armorial stained glass, probably by Henry Gyles and a carved wooden pulpit by Thomas Ventris, made around 1636, with geometric patterns, pilasters and friezes.[38] The walls had panels of Old Testament figures, painted by John Carleton.[38] An inventory dated 1667 records that the House had 66 rooms and 11 outhouses.[39] An engraving by Kip and Knyff dated 1699 is an accurate representation of the house, showing the varying height of the house and some buildings that were later demolished, including the arched gateway flanked by two small lodges and a detached garden building dating from the mid 1670s.[23]

 

Photograph of stone and brick Sphinx gate piers at Temple Newsam, c. 1760 by Lancelot Brown based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick

Sphinx gate piers, c. 1760

Photograph of the mid-18th century stable block at Temple Newsam showing the pediment

Stable Block at Temple Newsam, added by Henry, 7th Lord Irwin

In 1718, the steward of Temple Newsam suggested an underground service passage to link the north and south wings to the 5th Viscount, who agreed.[43] This tunnel linked the original kitchens in the south wing to the rest of the house.[44] In 1738, Henry, 7th Viscount Irwin wrote to his mother describing the neglected state of the house with windows coming away and cracked brickwork.[23] The house was almost entirely remodelled by Henry.[38] He wanted to follow Palladian design and used craftsmen from York to do so.[45] He widened the gallery, improved the ceiling and windows and created additional rooms.[23] The gallery, completed around 1746, has fine Rococo carvings with overmantle paintings of classical scenes by Antonio Joli.[19] There are also elaborate gilded Rococo ornamental candle holders.[19] The gallery ceiling has detailed stucco work including a medallion of King George I.[19] The ceilings in the new Saloon and Library, made from the old Long Gallery, were decorated by Thomas Perritt and Joseph Rose.[45] The doorcases are elaborately carved, probably by Richard Fisher.[45] Two chimney pieces in the Saloon were based on designs by William Kent.[45] The distinctive sphinx gate piers by Lancelot Brown constructed in 1768 were based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick.[45][1] The main rooms in the west wing were redecorated and the windows were replaced with sliding sash windows.[45] A large pedimented stable block was built to the north of the house, in 1742 and probably designed by Daniel Garratt, also in the Palladian style.[45][46] A painting by Mercier of around 1749, also shows a planned block to the south and a low wall connecting the north and south wings which were never completed.[23][21]

 

In 1796, Frances Shepheard employed a Mr Johnson to alter and reface the south wing in a style which tried to copy that of Sir Arthur Ingram's original house.[45] Her approach was a departure from the designs for the wing commissioned by her dead husband from John Carr and Robert Adam, as well as the landscaping by Capability Brown who was also consulted about rebuilding the south wing.[45] The wing was made two storeys high throughout with a suite of reception rooms on the ground floor with state bedchambers above.[27] In the 1790s, the kitchens were moved to the north wing and the original kitchen became a brushing room where servants brushed down nobles returning from hunting parties.[44]

 

At the end of the 19th century, Emily Meynell Ingram replaced the sash windows with stone mullions and leaded lights and rebuilt the north porch adding the Meynell Ingram coat of arms over the doorway.[27] She redecorated several rooms and had the great oak staircase installed.[27] The dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room were remodelled in Elizabethan style.[33] In 1877, Emily converted the library at the east end of the gallery into a chapel.[47]

 

Coalmining on the estate

Estate records show the existence of coal pits in and around the park in the seventeenth century and Bell Wood to the south of the house would have had bell pits for coal extraction. A colliery at Halton village was leased to a number of different individuals from 1660 through to at least the 1790s. The leases generally required the leaseholder to supply coals to Temple Newsam house.[48]

 

In 1815, William Fenton, one of the 'Coal Kings' of Yorkshire,[49] began the sinking of a mine shaft on the estate at Thorpe Stapleton. The colliery was named Waterloo to commemorate the famous battle of that year.[50] Waterloo Colliery was operated as a royalty concession with contracted 'rents' for coal extracted going to the Temple Newsam landowner. Fenton also had a village built for his workers on land between the River Aire and the Aire and Calder navigation. The village was initially called Newmarket but then became Irwin Square on ordnance survey maps[51] and Ingram Place on census lists, but it was commonly simply known as Waterloo. The Yorkshire, Lancashire and England cricketer Albert Ward was born here in 1865. The village had two rows of cottages and a school building. It was connected to the colliery by a wooden footbridge over the river.[52] Deep coal mining on the estate ended with the closure of the Temple Pit of Waterloo Main Colliery in 1968.

  

Temple Newsam House

Opencast mining on the estate began in May 1942. Seven sites were exploited to the south of the house almost entirely destroying Capability Brown's landscape. One site reached within 330 feet (100 m) of the South Terrace. It continued at the Gamblethorpe site as far as Dawson's Wood, in full view of the house, until 1987.[53] No trace of the opencast remains now as the parkland was re-landscaped.

 

In 2019 there was a temporary exhibition about coal mining at Temple Newsam which was called 'Blot on the Landscape'.[54]

 

House and estate today

The house and estate are owned by Leeds City Council and open to the public. The house has undergone substantial restoration to its exterior. There is an established programme of restoring rooms back to known previous configurations, reversing the numerous intrusive installations and modifications that took place during the building's "art museum" phase.

 

The wider estate is made up of woods (the second largest part of the Forest of Leeds).[55] There are sporting facilities for football, golf, running, cycling, horse-riding and orienteering. There is an innovative children's playground opened in 2011 which caters for both disabled and able-bodied children.[56] Pegasus Wood, to the south of the house, commemorates veterans of the Normandy Landing at Pegasus Bridge in 1944.[57]

 

Photograph of brick barn at the Home Farm, Temple Newsam

Great Barn, Home Farm, Temple Newsam

The Home Farm, open to the public, has a barn built in 1694 and is the largest working rare breeds farm in Europe, and only one of 16 nationally approved by the Rare Breeds Survival Trust. Breeds include Gloucester, Kerry, Irish Moiled, Red Poll, White Park, British White, Beef Shorthorn, Vaynol and Belted Galloway cattle; Kerry Hill; Whitefaced Woodland and Portland sheep, and Golden Guernsey goats.[58] The farm was targeted by arsonists twice in 2011 with damage caused to buildings, and some animals killed.[59]

 

There are extensive gardens, with a celebrated rhododendron walk and six national plant collections: Aster novi-belgii (Michaelmas daisies), Phlox paniculata, Delphinium elatum (Cultivars), Solenostemon scutellarioides (sys. Coleus blumei), Primula auricula and Chrysanthemum (Charm and Cascade cultivars).[60] Within the Walled Garden there are 800 yards of herbaceous borders.[61]

 

Collections

There are substantial holdings of fine and decorative art which are designated by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) as being of national significance.[62]

 

Of most significant historical and cultural interest is the Chippendale Society collection of Chippendale works that are on permanent loan.[63] In his book "Britain's Best Museums and Galleries", Mark Fisher (a former DCMS minister) gave the museum an excellent review. When interviewed on Front Row, Radio 4, November 2004 Fisher placed Temple Newsam House in the top three non-national museums in the country, along with Birmingham's Barber Institute and the Dulwich Picture Gallery.[64]

Temple Newsam (historically Temple Newsham), (grid reference SE357322) is a Tudor-Jacobean house in Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, with grounds landscaped by Capability Brown.

 

The estate lends its name to the Temple Newsam ward of Leeds City Council, in which it is situated, and lies to the east of the city, just south of Halton Moor, Halton, Whitkirk and Colton. It is one of nine sites in the Leeds Museums & Galleries group.

 

The house is a Grade I listed building, defined as a "building of outstanding or national architectural or historic interest". The stables are Grade II* listed ("particularly significant buildings of more than local interest"), and ten separate features of the estate are Grade II listed ("buildings of special architectural or historic interest"), including the Sphinx Gates and the Barn.[1] Temple Newsam House is one of Leeds Museums and Galleries sites.[2] It is also part of the research group, Yorkshire Country House Partnership.[3]

 

History

1066 to 1520

In the Domesday Book of 1086 the manor is listed as Neuhusam (meaning new houses) and was held by Ilbert de Lacy and his sons.[4] Before the Norman Conquest of 1066 it had been held by Dunstan and Glunier, Anglo-Saxon thanes.[4] In about 1155, Henry de Lacy gave it to the Knights Templar, who built Temple Newsam Preceptory on a site near the present house.[5] The Templars farmed the estate very efficiently, with 1100 animals.[6] In 1307 the Templars were suppressed, and Edward II granted the manor to Sir Robert Holland who held it until 1323 when he was deprived of his estates.[6] The Templars tried to retake the estate but they were forced to surrender and in 1327 it was granted to Mary de St Pol, the Countess of Pembroke, who held the manor for 50 years.[6] In 1377 by royal decree the estate reverted to Philip Darcy, 4th Baron Darcy de Knayth (1341–1398).[6] It then passed through several members of the Darcy family, until it was inherited by the 21-year old Thomas, Lord Darcy in 1488.[7] Between 1500 and 1520 a Tudor manor house, known as Temple Newsam House, was built on the site.[8] It has also been spelled "Newsham" in the past.[9]

 

An oil on panel painting by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries

An oil on panel painting from 1563 by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries which may reflect Temple Newsam's Great Chamber

1500 to 1650

In 1537 Thomas, Lord Darcy was executed for the part he played in the Pilgrimage of Grace and the property was seized by the Crown.[7] In 1544 Henry VIII gave it to his niece Lady Margaret Douglas (Countess of Lennox), and she lived there with her husband Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox.[7] Their son Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, who was born in the house in 1545 and educated there, married Mary, Queen of Scots, by whom he was the father of King James VI of Scotland and I of England.[10] A portrait of Henry and his brother was probably intended to represent the interior of Temple Newsam despite being based on a print of an ideal interior.[11] Following the marriage in 1565, Temple Newsam was seized by Queen Elizabeth I and was managed by an agent.[12]

 

In 1609 King James I, successor to Elizabeth, granted the estate to his Franco-Scottish second cousin Ludovic Stewart, 2nd Duke of Lennox (1574–1624), who was a favourite of the King and given many titles and estates, including farmland and coalmines in the local area.[13] Despite his opportunities, Ludovic was in constant debt and he mortgaged the estate in 1614 for the sum of £9,000 (around £860,000 in today's money).[14] In 1622 Lennox began the sale of the estate to Sir Arthur Ingram (c. 1565 – 1642), a Yorkshire-born London merchant, civil servant, investor in colonial ventures and arms dealer, for £12,000, which he paid in two instalments, the last in July 1624, after Lennox's death.[14] During the next 20 years the mansion was rebuilt, incorporating some of the previous house in the west wing.[8] The north and south wings were rebuilt and the east wing was demolished after a bad fire in 1635.[15] Arthur's son, also called Arthur, inherited the estate with its debts and continued the building and renovation work.[16] Six months after Charles I was beheaded in 1649, Arthur Ingram the younger was declared delinquent and he compounded his estates and retired to Temple Newsam.[17]

 

1650 to 1900

After the death of Arthur the younger's eldest son, Thomas, in 1660, Temple Newsam was inherited by Arthur's second son, Henry Ingram, 1st Viscount of Irvine (created a peer of Scotland as Baron Ingram and Viscount of Irvine in 1661 - although the family used the English form "Irwin").[18] In 1661, Henry married Lady Essex Montagu, daughter of Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester, a favourite of Charles II.[18] The estate then passed through Henry's two sons and five grandsons, the last being Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine.[18] The 4th Viscount brought back paintings from his Grand Tour of 1704-7.[19] Extant receipts from 1692 show women as well as men were employed to work the estate in haymaking.[20] In 1712, William Etty designed a new approach to the house, with a bridge and ponds.[21][22] In 1714, Temple Newsam was inherited by Rich Ingram, the 5th Viscount, and his wife Ann who spent a vast fortune furnishing the house and creating the East Avenue.[19] Between 1738 and 1746, Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine remodelled the west and north wings of the house, creating new bedrooms and dressing rooms and the picture gallery.[23] A painting in Leeds City Art Gallery by Philippe Mercier of c. 1745 shows Henry and his wife standing in front of Temple Newsam House.[24]

 

A coloured engraving made in 1699 by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff showing an aerial view of the house and estate at Temple Newsam

1699 Engraving by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff

In the 1760s, Charles Ingram, 9th Viscount of Irvine, employed Capability Brown to re-landscape the park on the insistence of his wife, Frances Shepheard, daughter of Samuel Shepheard.[25] Reflecting her interest in pastoral landscape design, Frances is depicted as a shepherdess in a portrait by Benjamin Wilson at Temple Newsam.[25] Both Frances and Charles were actively involved in the design and implementation.[26] Some aspects of Brown's plan depicted in paintings by James Chapman and Michael Angelo Rooker were never completed such as a large lake near the house.[26] Extant financial records show that in 1759 women as well as men were employed as garden labourers.[20] After Charles died in 1778, Frances rebuilt the south wing in 1796; she lived at Temple Newsam until her death in 1807.[27] Charles and Frances's eldest daughter Isabella Ingram, (Marchioness of Hertford) (d.1834) who inherited Temple Newsam, was the mistress of the Prince of Wales (later King George IV) from 1806 to 1819. In 1806, George visited Temple Newsam and presented Isabella with Chinese wallpaper, which she hung in the small Drawing Room next to the Great Hall in around 1820, embellished with cut out birds from Audubon's The Birds of America (now worth £7.5 million).[28] Lady Hertford inherited the house in 1807; after her husband died in 1822 she spent the season in London, and the rest of the time at Temple Newsam where she involved herself in charitable works including distributing food and clothing to the local people.[29] She allowed the servants to hold an annual supper and ball at Temple Newsam.[29] Reports of poachers were made during 1826 and 1827.[30] During the last years of Isabella's life, the canal, railway and roads encroached on the estate as well as coal mining; and she dealt with the companies setting these up.[29] In 1820 the novelist Sir Walter Scott published Ivanhoe featuring a Templar preceptory named Temple Stowe, believed to have been modelled on Temple Newsam; the name is preserved in local road names such as Templestowe Crescent.[31] At her death in 1834, Isabella left Temple Newsam to her widowed sister, Frances Ingram Shepheard, wife of Lord William Gordon, who died in 1841.[32]

  

Temple Newsam House from Morris's Country Seats (1880)

In 1841 the estate was inherited by Hugo Charles Meynell Ingram (d. 1869), son of Elizabeth Ingram, sister of Frances Ingram (Lady Gordon), who made no alterations to the estate.[33] In 1868, the Prince of Wales stayed at Temple Newsam during his visit to Leeds to open the Fine Art Exhibition in the New Infirmary; temporary triumphal arches were erected on the estate.[34] Following Hugo Charles's death, his son Hugo Meynell-Ingram (d.1871) inherited Temple Newsam; two years later, at his death, his wife Emily Meynell Ingram (d.1904) inherited the estate.[33] Emily spent a large part of her widowhood at Temple Newsam; she developed it considerably by replacing the sash windows and remodelling the dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room.[33] Emily bequeathed Temple Newsam to her nephew Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax.[8]

 

20th century

In 1909, 610 acres (2.5 km2) of the estate at Knostrop were compulsorily purchased by Leeds Corporation to build a sewage plant.[35] During the First World War (1914–17) the south wing of the house was turned into a hospital by Edward Wood and his wife Dorothy. Edward Wood fought in France as part of the Yorkshire Hussars, whilst Dorothy oversaw the running of the hospital as part of the Mayors War Committee.[36] In 1922 Edward Wood sold the park and house to Leeds Corporation for a nominal sum, placing covenants over them to ensure their preservation for the future.[35]

 

On 19 October 1923, Temple Newsam was opened to the public along with a golf course.[37] In the Derby Daily Telegraph newspaper, Temple Newsam was compared to Hampton Court.[37] Despite many people visiting the house and using the golf course, the Corporation lost money during the first decade mostly due to poor farming practices.[37] In July 1932, the Great Yorkshire Show was held at Temple Newsam and was a great success.[37] Preparations for war were made as early as April 1939, and in August, small items were being packed up for storage.[37] In September 1939, Temple Newsam was closed to the public and items were moved there for storage from Leeds City Art Gallery.[37] It was decided that objects would be displayed, and the house was officially reopened in November 1939, when it was again likened to Hampton Court in the press.[37]

 

Architecture

Photograph of entrance porch of Temple Newsam House, Leeds, showing at top the word 'FATHER', below a mullioned window, below a raised portico with coat of arms above a doorway flanked by two Ionic columns on each side.

Entrance Porch 17th century

Photograph of the west front of Temple Newsam

Centre of Temple Newsam west front

Remains of the early 16th century house were retained in the new building, including the brickwork and bay windows in the centre of the west front.[38] The plan of the new house was a conservative E-shape.[38] The Long Gallery and entrance hall in the south wing followed Elizabethan and early Jacobean styles.[38] The entrance porch has Classical columns but they are of Flemish design, rather than following correct Italian design.[38] There are Tudor doorways and timberwork in the cellars, which are largely Tudor in date.[39] Tudor features have also been discovered beneath later layers of decoration, including Lord Darcy's crest scratched into the plaster in the Blue Damask room.[40] An inventory of 1565 indicates that the hall, great chamber (later the dining room), gallery and chapel (later the kitchen) were probably where they are now.[40] There is a Tudor doorway in the north wing which was probably the entrance to the original chapel.[41]

 

In the 17th century, the south and north wings were rebuilt and the east wing demolished, replaced by a low wall with an arched gateway, giving the house a fashionable 'half-H' appearance.[39] It is possible that the man who made plans for the alteration was Bernard Dinninghof of York.[41] There is also some resemblance to designs by Inigo Jones.[42] Round the top of the house, letters appear in a balustrade, declaring the piety and loyalty of Sir Arthur Ingram: 'ALL GLORY AND PRAISE BE GIVEN TO GOD THE FATHER THE SON AND HOLY GHOST ON HIGH PEACE ON EARTH GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN HONOUR AND TRUE ALLEGIANCE TO OUR GRACIOUS KING LOVING AFFECTION AMONGST HIS SUBJECTS HEALTH AND PLENTY BE WITHIN THIS HOUSE.'[38] The chapel in the north wing retains some 17th century features, such as armorial stained glass, probably by Henry Gyles and a carved wooden pulpit by Thomas Ventris, made around 1636, with geometric patterns, pilasters and friezes.[38] The walls had panels of Old Testament figures, painted by John Carleton.[38] An inventory dated 1667 records that the House had 66 rooms and 11 outhouses.[39] An engraving by Kip and Knyff dated 1699 is an accurate representation of the house, showing the varying height of the house and some buildings that were later demolished, including the arched gateway flanked by two small lodges and a detached garden building dating from the mid 1670s.[23]

 

Photograph of stone and brick Sphinx gate piers at Temple Newsam, c. 1760 by Lancelot Brown based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick

Sphinx gate piers, c. 1760

Photograph of the mid-18th century stable block at Temple Newsam showing the pediment

Stable Block at Temple Newsam, added by Henry, 7th Lord Irwin

In 1718, the steward of Temple Newsam suggested an underground service passage to link the north and south wings to the 5th Viscount, who agreed.[43] This tunnel linked the original kitchens in the south wing to the rest of the house.[44] In 1738, Henry, 7th Viscount Irwin wrote to his mother describing the neglected state of the house with windows coming away and cracked brickwork.[23] The house was almost entirely remodelled by Henry.[38] He wanted to follow Palladian design and used craftsmen from York to do so.[45] He widened the gallery, improved the ceiling and windows and created additional rooms.[23] The gallery, completed around 1746, has fine Rococo carvings with overmantle paintings of classical scenes by Antonio Joli.[19] There are also elaborate gilded Rococo ornamental candle holders.[19] The gallery ceiling has detailed stucco work including a medallion of King George I.[19] The ceilings in the new Saloon and Library, made from the old Long Gallery, were decorated by Thomas Perritt and Joseph Rose.[45] The doorcases are elaborately carved, probably by Richard Fisher.[45] Two chimney pieces in the Saloon were based on designs by William Kent.[45] The distinctive sphinx gate piers by Lancelot Brown constructed in 1768 were based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick.[45][1] The main rooms in the west wing were redecorated and the windows were replaced with sliding sash windows.[45] A large pedimented stable block was built to the north of the house, in 1742 and probably designed by Daniel Garratt, also in the Palladian style.[45][46] A painting by Mercier of around 1749, also shows a planned block to the south and a low wall connecting the north and south wings which were never completed.[23][21]

 

In 1796, Frances Shepheard employed a Mr Johnson to alter and reface the south wing in a style which tried to copy that of Sir Arthur Ingram's original house.[45] Her approach was a departure from the designs for the wing commissioned by her dead husband from John Carr and Robert Adam, as well as the landscaping by Capability Brown who was also consulted about rebuilding the south wing.[45] The wing was made two storeys high throughout with a suite of reception rooms on the ground floor with state bedchambers above.[27] In the 1790s, the kitchens were moved to the north wing and the original kitchen became a brushing room where servants brushed down nobles returning from hunting parties.[44]

 

At the end of the 19th century, Emily Meynell Ingram replaced the sash windows with stone mullions and leaded lights and rebuilt the north porch adding the Meynell Ingram coat of arms over the doorway.[27] She redecorated several rooms and had the great oak staircase installed.[27] The dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room were remodelled in Elizabethan style.[33] In 1877, Emily converted the library at the east end of the gallery into a chapel.[47]

 

Coalmining on the estate

Estate records show the existence of coal pits in and around the park in the seventeenth century and Bell Wood to the south of the house would have had bell pits for coal extraction. A colliery at Halton village was leased to a number of different individuals from 1660 through to at least the 1790s. The leases generally required the leaseholder to supply coals to Temple Newsam house.[48]

 

In 1815, William Fenton, one of the 'Coal Kings' of Yorkshire,[49] began the sinking of a mine shaft on the estate at Thorpe Stapleton. The colliery was named Waterloo to commemorate the famous battle of that year.[50] Waterloo Colliery was operated as a royalty concession with contracted 'rents' for coal extracted going to the Temple Newsam landowner. Fenton also had a village built for his workers on land between the River Aire and the Aire and Calder navigation. The village was initially called Newmarket but then became Irwin Square on ordnance survey maps[51] and Ingram Place on census lists, but it was commonly simply known as Waterloo. The Yorkshire, Lancashire and England cricketer Albert Ward was born here in 1865. The village had two rows of cottages and a school building. It was connected to the colliery by a wooden footbridge over the river.[52] Deep coal mining on the estate ended with the closure of the Temple Pit of Waterloo Main Colliery in 1968.

  

Temple Newsam House

Opencast mining on the estate began in May 1942. Seven sites were exploited to the south of the house almost entirely destroying Capability Brown's landscape. One site reached within 330 feet (100 m) of the South Terrace. It continued at the Gamblethorpe site as far as Dawson's Wood, in full view of the house, until 1987.[53] No trace of the opencast remains now as the parkland was re-landscaped.

 

In 2019 there was a temporary exhibition about coal mining at Temple Newsam which was called 'Blot on the Landscape'.[54]

 

House and estate today

The house and estate are owned by Leeds City Council and open to the public. The house has undergone substantial restoration to its exterior. There is an established programme of restoring rooms back to known previous configurations, reversing the numerous intrusive installations and modifications that took place during the building's "art museum" phase.

 

The wider estate is made up of woods (the second largest part of the Forest of Leeds).[55] There are sporting facilities for football, golf, running, cycling, horse-riding and orienteering. There is an innovative children's playground opened in 2011 which caters for both disabled and able-bodied children.[56] Pegasus Wood, to the south of the house, commemorates veterans of the Normandy Landing at Pegasus Bridge in 1944.[57]

 

Photograph of brick barn at the Home Farm, Temple Newsam

Great Barn, Home Farm, Temple Newsam

The Home Farm, open to the public, has a barn built in 1694 and is the largest working rare breeds farm in Europe, and only one of 16 nationally approved by the Rare Breeds Survival Trust. Breeds include Gloucester, Kerry, Irish Moiled, Red Poll, White Park, British White, Beef Shorthorn, Vaynol and Belted Galloway cattle; Kerry Hill; Whitefaced Woodland and Portland sheep, and Golden Guernsey goats.[58] The farm was targeted by arsonists twice in 2011 with damage caused to buildings, and some animals killed.[59]

 

There are extensive gardens, with a celebrated rhododendron walk and six national plant collections: Aster novi-belgii (Michaelmas daisies), Phlox paniculata, Delphinium elatum (Cultivars), Solenostemon scutellarioides (sys. Coleus blumei), Primula auricula and Chrysanthemum (Charm and Cascade cultivars).[60] Within the Walled Garden there are 800 yards of herbaceous borders.[61]

 

Collections

There are substantial holdings of fine and decorative art which are designated by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) as being of national significance.[62]

 

Of most significant historical and cultural interest is the Chippendale Society collection of Chippendale works that are on permanent loan.[63] In his book "Britain's Best Museums and Galleries", Mark Fisher (a former DCMS minister) gave the museum an excellent review. When interviewed on Front Row, Radio 4, November 2004 Fisher placed Temple Newsam House in the top three non-national museums in the country, along with Birmingham's Barber Institute and the Dulwich Picture Gallery.[64]

A visit to Charlecote Park for an afternoon visit to this National Trust property in Warwickshire. Near Stratford-upon-Avon. A deer park with a country house in the middle of it.

  

Charlecote Park (grid reference SP263564) is a grand 16th-century country house, surrounded by its own deer park, on the banks of the River Avon near Wellesbourne, about 4 miles (6 km) east of Stratford-upon-Avon and 5.5 miles (9 km) south of Warwick, Warwickshire, England. It has been administered by the National Trust since 1946 and is open to the public. It is a Grade I listed building.

 

The Lucy family owned the land since 1247. Charlecote Park was built in 1558 by Sir Thomas Lucy, and Queen Elizabeth I stayed in the room that is now the drawing room. Although the general outline of the Elizabethan house remains, nowadays it is in fact mostly Victorian. Successive generations of the Lucy family had modified Charlecote Park over the centuries, but in 1823, George Hammond Lucy (High Sheriff of Warwickshire in 1831) inherited the house and set about recreating the house in its original style.

 

Charlecote Park covers 185 acres (75 ha), backing on to the River Avon. William Shakespeare has been alleged to have poached rabbits and deer in the park as a young man and been brought before magistrates as a result.

 

From 1605 to 1640 the house was organised by Sir Thomas Lucy. He had twelve children with Lady Alice Lucy who ran the house after he died. She was known for her piety and distributing alms to the poor each Christmas. Her eldest three sons inherited the house in turn and it then fell to her grandchild Sir Davenport Lucy.

 

In the Tudor great hall, the 1680 painting Charlecote Park by Sir Godfrey Kneller, is said to be one of the earliest depictions of a black presence in the West Midlands (excluding Roman legionnaires). The painting, of Captain Thomas Lucy, shows a black boy in the background dressed in a blue livery coat and red stockings and wearing a gleaming, metal collar around his neck. The National Trust's Charlecote brochure describes the boy as a "black page boy". In 1735 a black child called Philip Lucy was baptised at Charlecote.

 

The lands immediately adjoining the house were further landscaped by Capability Brown in about 1760. This resulted in Charlecote becoming a hostelry destination for notable tourists to Stratford from the late 17th to mid-18th century, including Washington Irving (1818), Sir Walter Scott (1828) and Nathaniel Hawthorn (c 1850).

 

Charlecote was inherited in 1823 by George Hammond Lucy (d 1845), who married Mary Elizabeth Williams of Bodelwyddan Castle, from who's extensive diaries the current "behind the scenes of Victorian Charlecote" are based upon. GH Lucy's second son Henry inherited the estate from his elder brother in 1847. After the deaths of both Mary Elizabeth and Henry in 1890, the house was rented out by Henry's eldest daughter and heiress, Ada Christina (d 1943). She had married Sir Henry Ramsay-Fairfax, (d 1944), a line of the Fairfax Baronets, who on marriage assumed the name Fairfax-Lucy.

 

From this point onwards, the family began selling off parts of the outlying estate to fund their extensive lifestyle, and post-World War II in 1946, Sir Montgomerie Fairfax-Lucy, who had inherited the residual estate from his mother Ada, presented Charlecote to the National Trust in-lieu of death duties. Sir Montgomerie was succeeded in 1965 by his brother, Sir Brian, whose wife, Lady Alice, researched the history of Charlecote, and assisted the National Trust with the restoration of the house.

  

Charlecote Park House is a Grade I Listed Building

 

Charlecote Park

  

Listing Text

  

CHARLECOTE

 

SP2556 CHARLECOTE PARK

1901-1/10/19 Charlecote Park

06/02/52

(Formerly Listed as:

Charlecote Park House)

 

GV I

 

Formerly known as: Charlecote Hall.

Country house. Begun 1558; extended C19. Partly restored and

extended, including east range, 1829-34 by CS Smith;

north-east wing rebuilt and south wing extended 1847-67 by

John Gibson. For George and Mary Elizabeth Lucy.

MATERIALS: brick, that remaining from original building has

diapering in vitrified headers, but much has been replaced in

C19; ashlar dressings; tile roof with brick stacks with

octagonal ashlar shafts and caps.

PLAN: U-plan facing east, with later west range and south

wing.

EXTERIOR: east entrance front of 2 storeys with attic;

3-window range with long gabled projecting wings. Ashlar

plinth, continuous drip courses and coped gables with finials,

sections of strapwork balustrading between gables; quoins.

2-storey ashlar porch has round-headed entrance with flanking

pairs of Ionic pilasters and entablature, round-headed

entrance has panelled jambs, impost course and arch with lion

mask to key and 2 voussoirs, strapwork spandrels and stained

glass to fanlight over paired 4-panel doors; first floor has

Arms of Elizabeth I below projecting ovolo-moulded

cross-mullion window, with flanking pairs of Composite

detached columns; top balustrade with symmetrical balusters

supports Catherine wheel and heraldic beasts holding spears;

original diapered brick to returns.

3-light mullioned and transomed window to each floor to left,

that to first floor with strapwork apron. Large canted bay

window to right of 1:3:1 transomed lights with pierced

rosettes to parapet modelled on that to gatehouse (qv) and

flanked by cross-mullioned windows, all with moulded reveals

and small-paned sashes; C19 gables have 3-light

ovolo-mullioned windows with leaded glazing.

Wings similar, with 2 gables to 5-window inner returns,

ovolo-moulded cross-mullioned windows. Wing to south has much

diaper brickwork and stair window with strapwork apron.

East gable ends have 2-storey canted bay windows dated 1852 to

strapwork panels with Lucy Arms between 1:3:1-light transomed

windows; 3-light attic windows, that to north has patch of

reconstructed diaper brickwork to left.

Octagonal stair turrets to outer angles with 2-light windows,

top entablatures and ogival caps with wind vanes, that to

south mostly original, that to north with round-headed

entrance with enriched key block over studded plank door.

North side has turret to each end, that to west is wholly C19;

3 gables with external stacks with clustered shafts between;

cross-mullioned windows and 3-light transomed stair window on

strapwork apron; 2-light single-chamfered mullioned windows to

turrets.

Single-storey east range of blue brick has 2 bay windows with

octagonal pinnacles with pepper-pot finials and arcaded

balustrades over 1:4:1-light transomed windows; central panel

with Lucy Arms in strapwork setting has date 1833; coped

parapet with 3 gables with lights; returns similar with

3-light transomed windows.

Range behind has 3 renewed central gables and 2 lateral stacks

each with 6 shafts; gable to each end, that to south over

Tudor-arched verandah with arcaded balustrade to central arch

and above, entrance behind arch to left with half-glazed door,

blocked arch to right; first floor with cross-mullioned window

and blocked window, turret to right is wholly C19. South

return has cross-mullioned window to each floor and external

stack with clustered shafts.

South-west wing of 2 storeys; west side is a 7-window range;

recessed block to north end has window to each floor, the next

4 windows between octagonal pinnacles; gabled end breaks

forward under gable with turret to angle; rosette balustrade;

stacks have diagonal brick shafts, gable has lozenge with Lucy

Arms impaling Williams Arms (for Mary Elizabeth Lucy).

Cross-mullioned windows, but 2 southern ground-floor windows

are 3-light and transomed.

South end 4-window range between turrets has cross-mullioned

windows, but each end of first floor has bracketed oriel with

strapwork apron with Lucy/Williams Arms in lozenge and dated

1866, rosette balustrade with to each end a gable with 2-light

single-chamfered mullioned window with label, and 3 similar

windows to each turret, one to each floor.

East side has 3-window range with recessed range to right.

South end has Tudor-arched entrance and 3-light transomed

window, cross-mullioned window and 3-light transomed window to

first floor and gable with lozenge to south end; gable to

full-height kitchen to north has octagonal pinnacles flanking

4-light transomed window and gable above with square panel

with Lucy/Williams Arms to shield; recessed part to north has

loggia with entrance and flanking windows, to left a

single-storey re-entrant block with cross-mullioned windows;

first floor has 5 small sashed windows. South side of

south-east wing has varied brickwork with mullioned and

transomed windows, 2 external stacks and 2 gables with 3-light

windows.

INTERIOR: great hall remodelled by Willement with wood-grained

plaster ceiling with 4-centred ribs and Tudor rose bosses;

armorial glass attributed to Eiffler, restored and extended by

Willement; wainscoting and panelled doors; ashlar fireplace

with paired reeded pilasters and strapwork to entablature, and

fire-dogs; white and pink marble floor, Italian, 1845.

Dining room and library in west wing have rich wood panelling

by JM Willcox of Warwick and strapwork cornices, and strapwork

ceilings with pendants; wallpaper by Willement; dining room

has richly carved buffet, 1858, by Willcox and simple coloured

marble fireplace, the latter with bookshelves and fireplace

with paired pilasters and motto to frieze of fireplace, paired

columns and strapwork frieze to overmantel with armorial

bearings; painted arabesques to shutter backs.

Main staircase, c1700, but probably extensively reconstructed

in C19, open-well with cut string, 3 twisted balusters to a

tread, carved tread ends and ramped handrail;

bolection-moulded panelling in 2 heights, the upper panels and

panelled ceiling probably C19.

Morning room to south of hall has Willement decoration: white

marble Tudor-arched fireplace with cusped panels; plaster

ceiling with bands.

Ebony bedroom, originally billiard room, and drawing room to

north-east wing have 1856 scheme with cornices and

Jacobean-style plaster ceilings; white marble C18-style

fireplaces, that to Ebony Bedroom with Italian inserts with

Lucy crest. Drawing room has gilded and painted cornice and

ceiling, and large pier glasses.

Rooms to first floor originally guest bedrooms: doors with

egg-and-dart and eared architraves; C18-style fireplaces, that

to end room, originally Ebony Bedroom, has wood Rococo-style

fireplace with Chinoiserie panel; 1950s stair to attic.

South-east wing has c1700 stair, probably altered in C19, with

symmetrical balusters with acanthus, closed string; first

floor has wall and ceiling paintings: land and sea battle

scenes painted on canvas, male and female grisaille busts.

First floor has to west the Green Room, with Willement

wallpaper and simple Tudor-arched fireplace with

wallpaper-covered chimney board; adjacent room has marble

fireplace.

Death Room and its dressing room to east end have wallpaper of

gold motifs on white, painted 6-panel doors and architraves,

papier-mache ceilings; bedroom has fireplace with marble

architrave. Adjacent room has bolection-moulded panelling with

c1700 Dutch embossed leather. Stair to attic has c1700

balusters with club-form on acorn. Attics over great hall and

north-east and south-east wings have lime-ash floors and

servants' rooms, each with small annex and corner fireplace;

some bells.

South wing has kitchen with high ceiling and 2

segmental-arched recesses for C19 ranges; Tudor-arched recess

with latticed chamber for smoked meats over door.

Servants' hall has dark marble bolection-moulded fireplace and

cornice; scullery has bread oven, small range, pump and former

south window retaining glass.

First floor has to south end a pair of rooms added for Mary

Elizabeth Lucy in her widowhood; bedroom to east with deep

coved cornice and Adam-style fireplace, sitting room to west

similar, with gold on white wallpaper, white marble fireplace

with painted glass armorial panels and 1830s-40s carpet; door

to spiral timber turret staircase.

Nursery has fireplace with faceted panels and C19 Delft tiles;

probably 1920s wallpaper.

Other rooms with similar fireplaces and coloured glazed tiles.

While dating back to the C16, the house is one of the best

examples of the early C19 Elizabethan Revival style. Property

of National Trust.

(The Buildings of England: Pevsner, N & Wedgwood, A:

Warwickshire: Harmondsworth: 1966-: 227-9; The National Trust

Guide to Charlecote Park: 1991-; Wainwright C: The Romantic

Interior).

 

Listing NGR: SP2590656425

 

This text is from the original listing, and may not necessarily reflect the current setting of the building.

  

A look around the inside of the house / hall.

 

Downstairs rooms.

  

The Library

A visit to Charlecote Park for an afternoon visit to this National Trust property in Warwickshire. Near Stratford-upon-Avon. A deer park with a country house in the middle of it.

  

Charlecote Park (grid reference SP263564) is a grand 16th-century country house, surrounded by its own deer park, on the banks of the River Avon near Wellesbourne, about 4 miles (6 km) east of Stratford-upon-Avon and 5.5 miles (9 km) south of Warwick, Warwickshire, England. It has been administered by the National Trust since 1946 and is open to the public. It is a Grade I listed building.

 

The Lucy family owned the land since 1247. Charlecote Park was built in 1558 by Sir Thomas Lucy, and Queen Elizabeth I stayed in the room that is now the drawing room. Although the general outline of the Elizabethan house remains, nowadays it is in fact mostly Victorian. Successive generations of the Lucy family had modified Charlecote Park over the centuries, but in 1823, George Hammond Lucy (High Sheriff of Warwickshire in 1831) inherited the house and set about recreating the house in its original style.

 

Charlecote Park covers 185 acres (75 ha), backing on to the River Avon. William Shakespeare has been alleged to have poached rabbits and deer in the park as a young man and been brought before magistrates as a result.

 

From 1605 to 1640 the house was organised by Sir Thomas Lucy. He had twelve children with Lady Alice Lucy who ran the house after he died. She was known for her piety and distributing alms to the poor each Christmas. Her eldest three sons inherited the house in turn and it then fell to her grandchild Sir Davenport Lucy.

 

In the Tudor great hall, the 1680 painting Charlecote Park by Sir Godfrey Kneller, is said to be one of the earliest depictions of a black presence in the West Midlands (excluding Roman legionnaires). The painting, of Captain Thomas Lucy, shows a black boy in the background dressed in a blue livery coat and red stockings and wearing a gleaming, metal collar around his neck. The National Trust's Charlecote brochure describes the boy as a "black page boy". In 1735 a black child called Philip Lucy was baptised at Charlecote.

 

The lands immediately adjoining the house were further landscaped by Capability Brown in about 1760. This resulted in Charlecote becoming a hostelry destination for notable tourists to Stratford from the late 17th to mid-18th century, including Washington Irving (1818), Sir Walter Scott (1828) and Nathaniel Hawthorn (c 1850).

 

Charlecote was inherited in 1823 by George Hammond Lucy (d 1845), who married Mary Elizabeth Williams of Bodelwyddan Castle, from who's extensive diaries the current "behind the scenes of Victorian Charlecote" are based upon. GH Lucy's second son Henry inherited the estate from his elder brother in 1847. After the deaths of both Mary Elizabeth and Henry in 1890, the house was rented out by Henry's eldest daughter and heiress, Ada Christina (d 1943). She had married Sir Henry Ramsay-Fairfax, (d 1944), a line of the Fairfax Baronets, who on marriage assumed the name Fairfax-Lucy.

 

From this point onwards, the family began selling off parts of the outlying estate to fund their extensive lifestyle, and post-World War II in 1946, Sir Montgomerie Fairfax-Lucy, who had inherited the residual estate from his mother Ada, presented Charlecote to the National Trust in-lieu of death duties. Sir Montgomerie was succeeded in 1965 by his brother, Sir Brian, whose wife, Lady Alice, researched the history of Charlecote, and assisted the National Trust with the restoration of the house.

  

Charlecote Park House is a Grade I Listed Building

 

Charlecote Park

  

Listing Text

  

CHARLECOTE

 

SP2556 CHARLECOTE PARK

1901-1/10/19 Charlecote Park

06/02/52

(Formerly Listed as:

Charlecote Park House)

 

GV I

 

Formerly known as: Charlecote Hall.

Country house. Begun 1558; extended C19. Partly restored and

extended, including east range, 1829-34 by CS Smith;

north-east wing rebuilt and south wing extended 1847-67 by

John Gibson. For George and Mary Elizabeth Lucy.

MATERIALS: brick, that remaining from original building has

diapering in vitrified headers, but much has been replaced in

C19; ashlar dressings; tile roof with brick stacks with

octagonal ashlar shafts and caps.

PLAN: U-plan facing east, with later west range and south

wing.

EXTERIOR: east entrance front of 2 storeys with attic;

3-window range with long gabled projecting wings. Ashlar

plinth, continuous drip courses and coped gables with finials,

sections of strapwork balustrading between gables; quoins.

2-storey ashlar porch has round-headed entrance with flanking

pairs of Ionic pilasters and entablature, round-headed

entrance has panelled jambs, impost course and arch with lion

mask to key and 2 voussoirs, strapwork spandrels and stained

glass to fanlight over paired 4-panel doors; first floor has

Arms of Elizabeth I below projecting ovolo-moulded

cross-mullion window, with flanking pairs of Composite

detached columns; top balustrade with symmetrical balusters

supports Catherine wheel and heraldic beasts holding spears;

original diapered brick to returns.

3-light mullioned and transomed window to each floor to left,

that to first floor with strapwork apron. Large canted bay

window to right of 1:3:1 transomed lights with pierced

rosettes to parapet modelled on that to gatehouse (qv) and

flanked by cross-mullioned windows, all with moulded reveals

and small-paned sashes; C19 gables have 3-light

ovolo-mullioned windows with leaded glazing.

Wings similar, with 2 gables to 5-window inner returns,

ovolo-moulded cross-mullioned windows. Wing to south has much

diaper brickwork and stair window with strapwork apron.

East gable ends have 2-storey canted bay windows dated 1852 to

strapwork panels with Lucy Arms between 1:3:1-light transomed

windows; 3-light attic windows, that to north has patch of

reconstructed diaper brickwork to left.

Octagonal stair turrets to outer angles with 2-light windows,

top entablatures and ogival caps with wind vanes, that to

south mostly original, that to north with round-headed

entrance with enriched key block over studded plank door.

North side has turret to each end, that to west is wholly C19;

3 gables with external stacks with clustered shafts between;

cross-mullioned windows and 3-light transomed stair window on

strapwork apron; 2-light single-chamfered mullioned windows to

turrets.

Single-storey east range of blue brick has 2 bay windows with

octagonal pinnacles with pepper-pot finials and arcaded

balustrades over 1:4:1-light transomed windows; central panel

with Lucy Arms in strapwork setting has date 1833; coped

parapet with 3 gables with lights; returns similar with

3-light transomed windows.

Range behind has 3 renewed central gables and 2 lateral stacks

each with 6 shafts; gable to each end, that to south over

Tudor-arched verandah with arcaded balustrade to central arch

and above, entrance behind arch to left with half-glazed door,

blocked arch to right; first floor with cross-mullioned window

and blocked window, turret to right is wholly C19. South

return has cross-mullioned window to each floor and external

stack with clustered shafts.

South-west wing of 2 storeys; west side is a 7-window range;

recessed block to north end has window to each floor, the next

4 windows between octagonal pinnacles; gabled end breaks

forward under gable with turret to angle; rosette balustrade;

stacks have diagonal brick shafts, gable has lozenge with Lucy

Arms impaling Williams Arms (for Mary Elizabeth Lucy).

Cross-mullioned windows, but 2 southern ground-floor windows

are 3-light and transomed.

South end 4-window range between turrets has cross-mullioned

windows, but each end of first floor has bracketed oriel with

strapwork apron with Lucy/Williams Arms in lozenge and dated

1866, rosette balustrade with to each end a gable with 2-light

single-chamfered mullioned window with label, and 3 similar

windows to each turret, one to each floor.

East side has 3-window range with recessed range to right.

South end has Tudor-arched entrance and 3-light transomed

window, cross-mullioned window and 3-light transomed window to

first floor and gable with lozenge to south end; gable to

full-height kitchen to north has octagonal pinnacles flanking

4-light transomed window and gable above with square panel

with Lucy/Williams Arms to shield; recessed part to north has

loggia with entrance and flanking windows, to left a

single-storey re-entrant block with cross-mullioned windows;

first floor has 5 small sashed windows. South side of

south-east wing has varied brickwork with mullioned and

transomed windows, 2 external stacks and 2 gables with 3-light

windows.

INTERIOR: great hall remodelled by Willement with wood-grained

plaster ceiling with 4-centred ribs and Tudor rose bosses;

armorial glass attributed to Eiffler, restored and extended by

Willement; wainscoting and panelled doors; ashlar fireplace

with paired reeded pilasters and strapwork to entablature, and

fire-dogs; white and pink marble floor, Italian, 1845.

Dining room and library in west wing have rich wood panelling

by JM Willcox of Warwick and strapwork cornices, and strapwork

ceilings with pendants; wallpaper by Willement; dining room

has richly carved buffet, 1858, by Willcox and simple coloured

marble fireplace, the latter with bookshelves and fireplace

with paired pilasters and motto to frieze of fireplace, paired

columns and strapwork frieze to overmantel with armorial

bearings; painted arabesques to shutter backs.

Main staircase, c1700, but probably extensively reconstructed

in C19, open-well with cut string, 3 twisted balusters to a

tread, carved tread ends and ramped handrail;

bolection-moulded panelling in 2 heights, the upper panels and

panelled ceiling probably C19.

Morning room to south of hall has Willement decoration: white

marble Tudor-arched fireplace with cusped panels; plaster

ceiling with bands.

Ebony bedroom, originally billiard room, and drawing room to

north-east wing have 1856 scheme with cornices and

Jacobean-style plaster ceilings; white marble C18-style

fireplaces, that to Ebony Bedroom with Italian inserts with

Lucy crest. Drawing room has gilded and painted cornice and

ceiling, and large pier glasses.

Rooms to first floor originally guest bedrooms: doors with

egg-and-dart and eared architraves; C18-style fireplaces, that

to end room, originally Ebony Bedroom, has wood Rococo-style

fireplace with Chinoiserie panel; 1950s stair to attic.

South-east wing has c1700 stair, probably altered in C19, with

symmetrical balusters with acanthus, closed string; first

floor has wall and ceiling paintings: land and sea battle

scenes painted on canvas, male and female grisaille busts.

First floor has to west the Green Room, with Willement

wallpaper and simple Tudor-arched fireplace with

wallpaper-covered chimney board; adjacent room has marble

fireplace.

Death Room and its dressing room to east end have wallpaper of

gold motifs on white, painted 6-panel doors and architraves,

papier-mache ceilings; bedroom has fireplace with marble

architrave. Adjacent room has bolection-moulded panelling with

c1700 Dutch embossed leather. Stair to attic has c1700

balusters with club-form on acorn. Attics over great hall and

north-east and south-east wings have lime-ash floors and

servants' rooms, each with small annex and corner fireplace;

some bells.

South wing has kitchen with high ceiling and 2

segmental-arched recesses for C19 ranges; Tudor-arched recess

with latticed chamber for smoked meats over door.

Servants' hall has dark marble bolection-moulded fireplace and

cornice; scullery has bread oven, small range, pump and former

south window retaining glass.

First floor has to south end a pair of rooms added for Mary

Elizabeth Lucy in her widowhood; bedroom to east with deep

coved cornice and Adam-style fireplace, sitting room to west

similar, with gold on white wallpaper, white marble fireplace

with painted glass armorial panels and 1830s-40s carpet; door

to spiral timber turret staircase.

Nursery has fireplace with faceted panels and C19 Delft tiles;

probably 1920s wallpaper.

Other rooms with similar fireplaces and coloured glazed tiles.

While dating back to the C16, the house is one of the best

examples of the early C19 Elizabethan Revival style. Property

of National Trust.

(The Buildings of England: Pevsner, N & Wedgwood, A:

Warwickshire: Harmondsworth: 1966-: 227-9; The National Trust

Guide to Charlecote Park: 1991-; Wainwright C: The Romantic

Interior).

 

Listing NGR: SP2590656425

 

This text is from the original listing, and may not necessarily reflect the current setting of the building.

  

A look around the inside of the house / hall.

 

Downstairs rooms.

  

Parlour

  

Portrait of Queen Mary I

Temple Newsam (historically Temple Newsham), (grid reference SE357322) is a Tudor-Jacobean house in Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, with grounds landscaped by Capability Brown.

 

The estate lends its name to the Temple Newsam ward of Leeds City Council, in which it is situated, and lies to the east of the city, just south of Halton Moor, Halton, Whitkirk and Colton. It is one of nine sites in the Leeds Museums & Galleries group.

 

The house is a Grade I listed building, defined as a "building of outstanding or national architectural or historic interest". The stables are Grade II* listed ("particularly significant buildings of more than local interest"), and ten separate features of the estate are Grade II listed ("buildings of special architectural or historic interest"), including the Sphinx Gates and the Barn.[1] Temple Newsam House is one of Leeds Museums and Galleries sites.[2] It is also part of the research group, Yorkshire Country House Partnership.[3]

 

History

1066 to 1520

In the Domesday Book of 1086 the manor is listed as Neuhusam (meaning new houses) and was held by Ilbert de Lacy and his sons.[4] Before the Norman Conquest of 1066 it had been held by Dunstan and Glunier, Anglo-Saxon thanes.[4] In about 1155, Henry de Lacy gave it to the Knights Templar, who built Temple Newsam Preceptory on a site near the present house.[5] The Templars farmed the estate very efficiently, with 1100 animals.[6] In 1307 the Templars were suppressed, and Edward II granted the manor to Sir Robert Holland who held it until 1323 when he was deprived of his estates.[6] The Templars tried to retake the estate but they were forced to surrender and in 1327 it was granted to Mary de St Pol, the Countess of Pembroke, who held the manor for 50 years.[6] In 1377 by royal decree the estate reverted to Philip Darcy, 4th Baron Darcy de Knayth (1341–1398).[6] It then passed through several members of the Darcy family, until it was inherited by the 21-year old Thomas, Lord Darcy in 1488.[7] Between 1500 and 1520 a Tudor manor house, known as Temple Newsam House, was built on the site.[8] It has also been spelled "Newsham" in the past.[9]

 

An oil on panel painting by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries

An oil on panel painting from 1563 by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries which may reflect Temple Newsam's Great Chamber

1500 to 1650

In 1537 Thomas, Lord Darcy was executed for the part he played in the Pilgrimage of Grace and the property was seized by the Crown.[7] In 1544 Henry VIII gave it to his niece Lady Margaret Douglas (Countess of Lennox), and she lived there with her husband Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox.[7] Their son Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, who was born in the house in 1545 and educated there, married Mary, Queen of Scots, by whom he was the father of King James VI of Scotland and I of England.[10] A portrait of Henry and his brother was probably intended to represent the interior of Temple Newsam despite being based on a print of an ideal interior.[11] Following the marriage in 1565, Temple Newsam was seized by Queen Elizabeth I and was managed by an agent.[12]

 

In 1609 King James I, successor to Elizabeth, granted the estate to his Franco-Scottish second cousin Ludovic Stewart, 2nd Duke of Lennox (1574–1624), who was a favourite of the King and given many titles and estates, including farmland and coalmines in the local area.[13] Despite his opportunities, Ludovic was in constant debt and he mortgaged the estate in 1614 for the sum of £9,000 (around £860,000 in today's money).[14] In 1622 Lennox began the sale of the estate to Sir Arthur Ingram (c. 1565 – 1642), a Yorkshire-born London merchant, civil servant, investor in colonial ventures and arms dealer, for £12,000, which he paid in two instalments, the last in July 1624, after Lennox's death.[14] During the next 20 years the mansion was rebuilt, incorporating some of the previous house in the west wing.[8] The north and south wings were rebuilt and the east wing was demolished after a bad fire in 1635.[15] Arthur's son, also called Arthur, inherited the estate with its debts and continued the building and renovation work.[16] Six months after Charles I was beheaded in 1649, Arthur Ingram the younger was declared delinquent and he compounded his estates and retired to Temple Newsam.[17]

 

1650 to 1900

After the death of Arthur the younger's eldest son, Thomas, in 1660, Temple Newsam was inherited by Arthur's second son, Henry Ingram, 1st Viscount of Irvine (created a peer of Scotland as Baron Ingram and Viscount of Irvine in 1661 - although the family used the English form "Irwin").[18] In 1661, Henry married Lady Essex Montagu, daughter of Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester, a favourite of Charles II.[18] The estate then passed through Henry's two sons and five grandsons, the last being Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine.[18] The 4th Viscount brought back paintings from his Grand Tour of 1704-7.[19] Extant receipts from 1692 show women as well as men were employed to work the estate in haymaking.[20] In 1712, William Etty designed a new approach to the house, with a bridge and ponds.[21][22] In 1714, Temple Newsam was inherited by Rich Ingram, the 5th Viscount, and his wife Ann who spent a vast fortune furnishing the house and creating the East Avenue.[19] Between 1738 and 1746, Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine remodelled the west and north wings of the house, creating new bedrooms and dressing rooms and the picture gallery.[23] A painting in Leeds City Art Gallery by Philippe Mercier of c. 1745 shows Henry and his wife standing in front of Temple Newsam House.[24]

 

A coloured engraving made in 1699 by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff showing an aerial view of the house and estate at Temple Newsam

1699 Engraving by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff

In the 1760s, Charles Ingram, 9th Viscount of Irvine, employed Capability Brown to re-landscape the park on the insistence of his wife, Frances Shepheard, daughter of Samuel Shepheard.[25] Reflecting her interest in pastoral landscape design, Frances is depicted as a shepherdess in a portrait by Benjamin Wilson at Temple Newsam.[25] Both Frances and Charles were actively involved in the design and implementation.[26] Some aspects of Brown's plan depicted in paintings by James Chapman and Michael Angelo Rooker were never completed such as a large lake near the house.[26] Extant financial records show that in 1759 women as well as men were employed as garden labourers.[20] After Charles died in 1778, Frances rebuilt the south wing in 1796; she lived at Temple Newsam until her death in 1807.[27] Charles and Frances's eldest daughter Isabella Ingram, (Marchioness of Hertford) (d.1834) who inherited Temple Newsam, was the mistress of the Prince of Wales (later King George IV) from 1806 to 1819. In 1806, George visited Temple Newsam and presented Isabella with Chinese wallpaper, which she hung in the small Drawing Room next to the Great Hall in around 1820, embellished with cut out birds from Audubon's The Birds of America (now worth £7.5 million).[28] Lady Hertford inherited the house in 1807; after her husband died in 1822 she spent the season in London, and the rest of the time at Temple Newsam where she involved herself in charitable works including distributing food and clothing to the local people.[29] She allowed the servants to hold an annual supper and ball at Temple Newsam.[29] Reports of poachers were made during 1826 and 1827.[30] During the last years of Isabella's life, the canal, railway and roads encroached on the estate as well as coal mining; and she dealt with the companies setting these up.[29] In 1820 the novelist Sir Walter Scott published Ivanhoe featuring a Templar preceptory named Temple Stowe, believed to have been modelled on Temple Newsam; the name is preserved in local road names such as Templestowe Crescent.[31] At her death in 1834, Isabella left Temple Newsam to her widowed sister, Frances Ingram Shepheard, wife of Lord William Gordon, who died in 1841.[32]

  

Temple Newsam House from Morris's Country Seats (1880)

In 1841 the estate was inherited by Hugo Charles Meynell Ingram (d. 1869), son of Elizabeth Ingram, sister of Frances Ingram (Lady Gordon), who made no alterations to the estate.[33] In 1868, the Prince of Wales stayed at Temple Newsam during his visit to Leeds to open the Fine Art Exhibition in the New Infirmary; temporary triumphal arches were erected on the estate.[34] Following Hugo Charles's death, his son Hugo Meynell-Ingram (d.1871) inherited Temple Newsam; two years later, at his death, his wife Emily Meynell Ingram (d.1904) inherited the estate.[33] Emily spent a large part of her widowhood at Temple Newsam; she developed it considerably by replacing the sash windows and remodelling the dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room.[33] Emily bequeathed Temple Newsam to her nephew Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax.[8]

 

20th century

In 1909, 610 acres (2.5 km2) of the estate at Knostrop were compulsorily purchased by Leeds Corporation to build a sewage plant.[35] During the First World War (1914–17) the south wing of the house was turned into a hospital by Edward Wood and his wife Dorothy. Edward Wood fought in France as part of the Yorkshire Hussars, whilst Dorothy oversaw the running of the hospital as part of the Mayors War Committee.[36] In 1922 Edward Wood sold the park and house to Leeds Corporation for a nominal sum, placing covenants over them to ensure their preservation for the future.[35]

 

On 19 October 1923, Temple Newsam was opened to the public along with a golf course.[37] In the Derby Daily Telegraph newspaper, Temple Newsam was compared to Hampton Court.[37] Despite many people visiting the house and using the golf course, the Corporation lost money during the first decade mostly due to poor farming practices.[37] In July 1932, the Great Yorkshire Show was held at Temple Newsam and was a great success.[37] Preparations for war were made as early as April 1939, and in August, small items were being packed up for storage.[37] In September 1939, Temple Newsam was closed to the public and items were moved there for storage from Leeds City Art Gallery.[37] It was decided that objects would be displayed, and the house was officially reopened in November 1939, when it was again likened to Hampton Court in the press.[37]

 

Architecture

Photograph of entrance porch of Temple Newsam House, Leeds, showing at top the word 'FATHER', below a mullioned window, below a raised portico with coat of arms above a doorway flanked by two Ionic columns on each side.

Entrance Porch 17th century

Photograph of the west front of Temple Newsam

Centre of Temple Newsam west front

Remains of the early 16th century house were retained in the new building, including the brickwork and bay windows in the centre of the west front.[38] The plan of the new house was a conservative E-shape.[38] The Long Gallery and entrance hall in the south wing followed Elizabethan and early Jacobean styles.[38] The entrance porch has Classical columns but they are of Flemish design, rather than following correct Italian design.[38] There are Tudor doorways and timberwork in the cellars, which are largely Tudor in date.[39] Tudor features have also been discovered beneath later layers of decoration, including Lord Darcy's crest scratched into the plaster in the Blue Damask room.[40] An inventory of 1565 indicates that the hall, great chamber (later the dining room), gallery and chapel (later the kitchen) were probably where they are now.[40] There is a Tudor doorway in the north wing which was probably the entrance to the original chapel.[41]

 

In the 17th century, the south and north wings were rebuilt and the east wing demolished, replaced by a low wall with an arched gateway, giving the house a fashionable 'half-H' appearance.[39] It is possible that the man who made plans for the alteration was Bernard Dinninghof of York.[41] There is also some resemblance to designs by Inigo Jones.[42] Round the top of the house, letters appear in a balustrade, declaring the piety and loyalty of Sir Arthur Ingram: 'ALL GLORY AND PRAISE BE GIVEN TO GOD THE FATHER THE SON AND HOLY GHOST ON HIGH PEACE ON EARTH GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN HONOUR AND TRUE ALLEGIANCE TO OUR GRACIOUS KING LOVING AFFECTION AMONGST HIS SUBJECTS HEALTH AND PLENTY BE WITHIN THIS HOUSE.'[38] The chapel in the north wing retains some 17th century features, such as armorial stained glass, probably by Henry Gyles and a carved wooden pulpit by Thomas Ventris, made around 1636, with geometric patterns, pilasters and friezes.[38] The walls had panels of Old Testament figures, painted by John Carleton.[38] An inventory dated 1667 records that the House had 66 rooms and 11 outhouses.[39] An engraving by Kip and Knyff dated 1699 is an accurate representation of the house, showing the varying height of the house and some buildings that were later demolished, including the arched gateway flanked by two small lodges and a detached garden building dating from the mid 1670s.[23]

 

Photograph of stone and brick Sphinx gate piers at Temple Newsam, c. 1760 by Lancelot Brown based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick

Sphinx gate piers, c. 1760

Photograph of the mid-18th century stable block at Temple Newsam showing the pediment

Stable Block at Temple Newsam, added by Henry, 7th Lord Irwin

In 1718, the steward of Temple Newsam suggested an underground service passage to link the north and south wings to the 5th Viscount, who agreed.[43] This tunnel linked the original kitchens in the south wing to the rest of the house.[44] In 1738, Henry, 7th Viscount Irwin wrote to his mother describing the neglected state of the house with windows coming away and cracked brickwork.[23] The house was almost entirely remodelled by Henry.[38] He wanted to follow Palladian design and used craftsmen from York to do so.[45] He widened the gallery, improved the ceiling and windows and created additional rooms.[23] The gallery, completed around 1746, has fine Rococo carvings with overmantle paintings of classical scenes by Antonio Joli.[19] There are also elaborate gilded Rococo ornamental candle holders.[19] The gallery ceiling has detailed stucco work including a medallion of King George I.[19] The ceilings in the new Saloon and Library, made from the old Long Gallery, were decorated by Thomas Perritt and Joseph Rose.[45] The doorcases are elaborately carved, probably by Richard Fisher.[45] Two chimney pieces in the Saloon were based on designs by William Kent.[45] The distinctive sphinx gate piers by Lancelot Brown constructed in 1768 were based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick.[45][1] The main rooms in the west wing were redecorated and the windows were replaced with sliding sash windows.[45] A large pedimented stable block was built to the north of the house, in 1742 and probably designed by Daniel Garratt, also in the Palladian style.[45][46] A painting by Mercier of around 1749, also shows a planned block to the south and a low wall connecting the north and south wings which were never completed.[23][21]

 

In 1796, Frances Shepheard employed a Mr Johnson to alter and reface the south wing in a style which tried to copy that of Sir Arthur Ingram's original house.[45] Her approach was a departure from the designs for the wing commissioned by her dead husband from John Carr and Robert Adam, as well as the landscaping by Capability Brown who was also consulted about rebuilding the south wing.[45] The wing was made two storeys high throughout with a suite of reception rooms on the ground floor with state bedchambers above.[27] In the 1790s, the kitchens were moved to the north wing and the original kitchen became a brushing room where servants brushed down nobles returning from hunting parties.[44]

 

At the end of the 19th century, Emily Meynell Ingram replaced the sash windows with stone mullions and leaded lights and rebuilt the north porch adding the Meynell Ingram coat of arms over the doorway.[27] She redecorated several rooms and had the great oak staircase installed.[27] The dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room were remodelled in Elizabethan style.[33] In 1877, Emily converted the library at the east end of the gallery into a chapel.[47]

 

Coalmining on the estate

Estate records show the existence of coal pits in and around the park in the seventeenth century and Bell Wood to the south of the house would have had bell pits for coal extraction. A colliery at Halton village was leased to a number of different individuals from 1660 through to at least the 1790s. The leases generally required the leaseholder to supply coals to Temple Newsam house.[48]

 

In 1815, William Fenton, one of the 'Coal Kings' of Yorkshire,[49] began the sinking of a mine shaft on the estate at Thorpe Stapleton. The colliery was named Waterloo to commemorate the famous battle of that year.[50] Waterloo Colliery was operated as a royalty concession with contracted 'rents' for coal extracted going to the Temple Newsam landowner. Fenton also had a village built for his workers on land between the River Aire and the Aire and Calder navigation. The village was initially called Newmarket but then became Irwin Square on ordnance survey maps[51] and Ingram Place on census lists, but it was commonly simply known as Waterloo. The Yorkshire, Lancashire and England cricketer Albert Ward was born here in 1865. The village had two rows of cottages and a school building. It was connected to the colliery by a wooden footbridge over the river.[52] Deep coal mining on the estate ended with the closure of the Temple Pit of Waterloo Main Colliery in 1968.

  

Temple Newsam House

Opencast mining on the estate began in May 1942. Seven sites were exploited to the south of the house almost entirely destroying Capability Brown's landscape. One site reached within 330 feet (100 m) of the South Terrace. It continued at the Gamblethorpe site as far as Dawson's Wood, in full view of the house, until 1987.[53] No trace of the opencast remains now as the parkland was re-landscaped.

 

In 2019 there was a temporary exhibition about coal mining at Temple Newsam which was called 'Blot on the Landscape'.[54]

 

House and estate today

The house and estate are owned by Leeds City Council and open to the public. The house has undergone substantial restoration to its exterior. There is an established programme of restoring rooms back to known previous configurations, reversing the numerous intrusive installations and modifications that took place during the building's "art museum" phase.

 

The wider estate is made up of woods (the second largest part of the Forest of Leeds).[55] There are sporting facilities for football, golf, running, cycling, horse-riding and orienteering. There is an innovative children's playground opened in 2011 which caters for both disabled and able-bodied children.[56] Pegasus Wood, to the south of the house, commemorates veterans of the Normandy Landing at Pegasus Bridge in 1944.[57]

 

Photograph of brick barn at the Home Farm, Temple Newsam

Great Barn, Home Farm, Temple Newsam

The Home Farm, open to the public, has a barn built in 1694 and is the largest working rare breeds farm in Europe, and only one of 16 nationally approved by the Rare Breeds Survival Trust. Breeds include Gloucester, Kerry, Irish Moiled, Red Poll, White Park, British White, Beef Shorthorn, Vaynol and Belted Galloway cattle; Kerry Hill; Whitefaced Woodland and Portland sheep, and Golden Guernsey goats.[58] The farm was targeted by arsonists twice in 2011 with damage caused to buildings, and some animals killed.[59]

 

There are extensive gardens, with a celebrated rhododendron walk and six national plant collections: Aster novi-belgii (Michaelmas daisies), Phlox paniculata, Delphinium elatum (Cultivars), Solenostemon scutellarioides (sys. Coleus blumei), Primula auricula and Chrysanthemum (Charm and Cascade cultivars).[60] Within the Walled Garden there are 800 yards of herbaceous borders.[61]

 

Collections

There are substantial holdings of fine and decorative art which are designated by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) as being of national significance.[62]

 

Of most significant historical and cultural interest is the Chippendale Society collection of Chippendale works that are on permanent loan.[63] In his book "Britain's Best Museums and Galleries", Mark Fisher (a former DCMS minister) gave the museum an excellent review. When interviewed on Front Row, Radio 4, November 2004 Fisher placed Temple Newsam House in the top three non-national museums in the country, along with Birmingham's Barber Institute and the Dulwich Picture Gallery.[64]

Temple Newsam (historically Temple Newsham), (grid reference SE357322) is a Tudor-Jacobean house in Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, with grounds landscaped by Capability Brown.

 

The estate lends its name to the Temple Newsam ward of Leeds City Council, in which it is situated, and lies to the east of the city, just south of Halton Moor, Halton, Whitkirk and Colton. It is one of nine sites in the Leeds Museums & Galleries group.

 

The house is a Grade I listed building, defined as a "building of outstanding or national architectural or historic interest". The stables are Grade II* listed ("particularly significant buildings of more than local interest"), and ten separate features of the estate are Grade II listed ("buildings of special architectural or historic interest"), including the Sphinx Gates and the Barn.[1] Temple Newsam House is one of Leeds Museums and Galleries sites.[2] It is also part of the research group, Yorkshire Country House Partnership.[3]

 

History

1066 to 1520

In the Domesday Book of 1086 the manor is listed as Neuhusam (meaning new houses) and was held by Ilbert de Lacy and his sons.[4] Before the Norman Conquest of 1066 it had been held by Dunstan and Glunier, Anglo-Saxon thanes.[4] In about 1155, Henry de Lacy gave it to the Knights Templar, who built Temple Newsam Preceptory on a site near the present house.[5] The Templars farmed the estate very efficiently, with 1100 animals.[6] In 1307 the Templars were suppressed, and Edward II granted the manor to Sir Robert Holland who held it until 1323 when he was deprived of his estates.[6] The Templars tried to retake the estate but they were forced to surrender and in 1327 it was granted to Mary de St Pol, the Countess of Pembroke, who held the manor for 50 years.[6] In 1377 by royal decree the estate reverted to Philip Darcy, 4th Baron Darcy de Knayth (1341–1398).[6] It then passed through several members of the Darcy family, until it was inherited by the 21-year old Thomas, Lord Darcy in 1488.[7] Between 1500 and 1520 a Tudor manor house, known as Temple Newsam House, was built on the site.[8] It has also been spelled "Newsham" in the past.[9]

 

An oil on panel painting by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries

An oil on panel painting from 1563 by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries which may reflect Temple Newsam's Great Chamber

1500 to 1650

In 1537 Thomas, Lord Darcy was executed for the part he played in the Pilgrimage of Grace and the property was seized by the Crown.[7] In 1544 Henry VIII gave it to his niece Lady Margaret Douglas (Countess of Lennox), and she lived there with her husband Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox.[7] Their son Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, who was born in the house in 1545 and educated there, married Mary, Queen of Scots, by whom he was the father of King James VI of Scotland and I of England.[10] A portrait of Henry and his brother was probably intended to represent the interior of Temple Newsam despite being based on a print of an ideal interior.[11] Following the marriage in 1565, Temple Newsam was seized by Queen Elizabeth I and was managed by an agent.[12]

 

In 1609 King James I, successor to Elizabeth, granted the estate to his Franco-Scottish second cousin Ludovic Stewart, 2nd Duke of Lennox (1574–1624), who was a favourite of the King and given many titles and estates, including farmland and coalmines in the local area.[13] Despite his opportunities, Ludovic was in constant debt and he mortgaged the estate in 1614 for the sum of £9,000 (around £860,000 in today's money).[14] In 1622 Lennox began the sale of the estate to Sir Arthur Ingram (c. 1565 – 1642), a Yorkshire-born London merchant, civil servant, investor in colonial ventures and arms dealer, for £12,000, which he paid in two instalments, the last in July 1624, after Lennox's death.[14] During the next 20 years the mansion was rebuilt, incorporating some of the previous house in the west wing.[8] The north and south wings were rebuilt and the east wing was demolished after a bad fire in 1635.[15] Arthur's son, also called Arthur, inherited the estate with its debts and continued the building and renovation work.[16] Six months after Charles I was beheaded in 1649, Arthur Ingram the younger was declared delinquent and he compounded his estates and retired to Temple Newsam.[17]

 

1650 to 1900

After the death of Arthur the younger's eldest son, Thomas, in 1660, Temple Newsam was inherited by Arthur's second son, Henry Ingram, 1st Viscount of Irvine (created a peer of Scotland as Baron Ingram and Viscount of Irvine in 1661 - although the family used the English form "Irwin").[18] In 1661, Henry married Lady Essex Montagu, daughter of Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester, a favourite of Charles II.[18] The estate then passed through Henry's two sons and five grandsons, the last being Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine.[18] The 4th Viscount brought back paintings from his Grand Tour of 1704-7.[19] Extant receipts from 1692 show women as well as men were employed to work the estate in haymaking.[20] In 1712, William Etty designed a new approach to the house, with a bridge and ponds.[21][22] In 1714, Temple Newsam was inherited by Rich Ingram, the 5th Viscount, and his wife Ann who spent a vast fortune furnishing the house and creating the East Avenue.[19] Between 1738 and 1746, Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine remodelled the west and north wings of the house, creating new bedrooms and dressing rooms and the picture gallery.[23] A painting in Leeds City Art Gallery by Philippe Mercier of c. 1745 shows Henry and his wife standing in front of Temple Newsam House.[24]

 

A coloured engraving made in 1699 by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff showing an aerial view of the house and estate at Temple Newsam

1699 Engraving by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff

In the 1760s, Charles Ingram, 9th Viscount of Irvine, employed Capability Brown to re-landscape the park on the insistence of his wife, Frances Shepheard, daughter of Samuel Shepheard.[25] Reflecting her interest in pastoral landscape design, Frances is depicted as a shepherdess in a portrait by Benjamin Wilson at Temple Newsam.[25] Both Frances and Charles were actively involved in the design and implementation.[26] Some aspects of Brown's plan depicted in paintings by James Chapman and Michael Angelo Rooker were never completed such as a large lake near the house.[26] Extant financial records show that in 1759 women as well as men were employed as garden labourers.[20] After Charles died in 1778, Frances rebuilt the south wing in 1796; she lived at Temple Newsam until her death in 1807.[27] Charles and Frances's eldest daughter Isabella Ingram, (Marchioness of Hertford) (d.1834) who inherited Temple Newsam, was the mistress of the Prince of Wales (later King George IV) from 1806 to 1819. In 1806, George visited Temple Newsam and presented Isabella with Chinese wallpaper, which she hung in the small Drawing Room next to the Great Hall in around 1820, embellished with cut out birds from Audubon's The Birds of America (now worth £7.5 million).[28] Lady Hertford inherited the house in 1807; after her husband died in 1822 she spent the season in London, and the rest of the time at Temple Newsam where she involved herself in charitable works including distributing food and clothing to the local people.[29] She allowed the servants to hold an annual supper and ball at Temple Newsam.[29] Reports of poachers were made during 1826 and 1827.[30] During the last years of Isabella's life, the canal, railway and roads encroached on the estate as well as coal mining; and she dealt with the companies setting these up.[29] In 1820 the novelist Sir Walter Scott published Ivanhoe featuring a Templar preceptory named Temple Stowe, believed to have been modelled on Temple Newsam; the name is preserved in local road names such as Templestowe Crescent.[31] At her death in 1834, Isabella left Temple Newsam to her widowed sister, Frances Ingram Shepheard, wife of Lord William Gordon, who died in 1841.[32]

  

Temple Newsam House from Morris's Country Seats (1880)

In 1841 the estate was inherited by Hugo Charles Meynell Ingram (d. 1869), son of Elizabeth Ingram, sister of Frances Ingram (Lady Gordon), who made no alterations to the estate.[33] In 1868, the Prince of Wales stayed at Temple Newsam during his visit to Leeds to open the Fine Art Exhibition in the New Infirmary; temporary triumphal arches were erected on the estate.[34] Following Hugo Charles's death, his son Hugo Meynell-Ingram (d.1871) inherited Temple Newsam; two years later, at his death, his wife Emily Meynell Ingram (d.1904) inherited the estate.[33] Emily spent a large part of her widowhood at Temple Newsam; she developed it considerably by replacing the sash windows and remodelling the dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room.[33] Emily bequeathed Temple Newsam to her nephew Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax.[8]

 

20th century

In 1909, 610 acres (2.5 km2) of the estate at Knostrop were compulsorily purchased by Leeds Corporation to build a sewage plant.[35] During the First World War (1914–17) the south wing of the house was turned into a hospital by Edward Wood and his wife Dorothy. Edward Wood fought in France as part of the Yorkshire Hussars, whilst Dorothy oversaw the running of the hospital as part of the Mayors War Committee.[36] In 1922 Edward Wood sold the park and house to Leeds Corporation for a nominal sum, placing covenants over them to ensure their preservation for the future.[35]

 

On 19 October 1923, Temple Newsam was opened to the public along with a golf course.[37] In the Derby Daily Telegraph newspaper, Temple Newsam was compared to Hampton Court.[37] Despite many people visiting the house and using the golf course, the Corporation lost money during the first decade mostly due to poor farming practices.[37] In July 1932, the Great Yorkshire Show was held at Temple Newsam and was a great success.[37] Preparations for war were made as early as April 1939, and in August, small items were being packed up for storage.[37] In September 1939, Temple Newsam was closed to the public and items were moved there for storage from Leeds City Art Gallery.[37] It was decided that objects would be displayed, and the house was officially reopened in November 1939, when it was again likened to Hampton Court in the press.[37]

 

Architecture

Photograph of entrance porch of Temple Newsam House, Leeds, showing at top the word 'FATHER', below a mullioned window, below a raised portico with coat of arms above a doorway flanked by two Ionic columns on each side.

Entrance Porch 17th century

Photograph of the west front of Temple Newsam

Centre of Temple Newsam west front

Remains of the early 16th century house were retained in the new building, including the brickwork and bay windows in the centre of the west front.[38] The plan of the new house was a conservative E-shape.[38] The Long Gallery and entrance hall in the south wing followed Elizabethan and early Jacobean styles.[38] The entrance porch has Classical columns but they are of Flemish design, rather than following correct Italian design.[38] There are Tudor doorways and timberwork in the cellars, which are largely Tudor in date.[39] Tudor features have also been discovered beneath later layers of decoration, including Lord Darcy's crest scratched into the plaster in the Blue Damask room.[40] An inventory of 1565 indicates that the hall, great chamber (later the dining room), gallery and chapel (later the kitchen) were probably where they are now.[40] There is a Tudor doorway in the north wing which was probably the entrance to the original chapel.[41]

 

In the 17th century, the south and north wings were rebuilt and the east wing demolished, replaced by a low wall with an arched gateway, giving the house a fashionable 'half-H' appearance.[39] It is possible that the man who made plans for the alteration was Bernard Dinninghof of York.[41] There is also some resemblance to designs by Inigo Jones.[42] Round the top of the house, letters appear in a balustrade, declaring the piety and loyalty of Sir Arthur Ingram: 'ALL GLORY AND PRAISE BE GIVEN TO GOD THE FATHER THE SON AND HOLY GHOST ON HIGH PEACE ON EARTH GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN HONOUR AND TRUE ALLEGIANCE TO OUR GRACIOUS KING LOVING AFFECTION AMONGST HIS SUBJECTS HEALTH AND PLENTY BE WITHIN THIS HOUSE.'[38] The chapel in the north wing retains some 17th century features, such as armorial stained glass, probably by Henry Gyles and a carved wooden pulpit by Thomas Ventris, made around 1636, with geometric patterns, pilasters and friezes.[38] The walls had panels of Old Testament figures, painted by John Carleton.[38] An inventory dated 1667 records that the House had 66 rooms and 11 outhouses.[39] An engraving by Kip and Knyff dated 1699 is an accurate representation of the house, showing the varying height of the house and some buildings that were later demolished, including the arched gateway flanked by two small lodges and a detached garden building dating from the mid 1670s.[23]

 

Photograph of stone and brick Sphinx gate piers at Temple Newsam, c. 1760 by Lancelot Brown based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick

Sphinx gate piers, c. 1760

Photograph of the mid-18th century stable block at Temple Newsam showing the pediment

Stable Block at Temple Newsam, added by Henry, 7th Lord Irwin

In 1718, the steward of Temple Newsam suggested an underground service passage to link the north and south wings to the 5th Viscount, who agreed.[43] This tunnel linked the original kitchens in the south wing to the rest of the house.[44] In 1738, Henry, 7th Viscount Irwin wrote to his mother describing the neglected state of the house with windows coming away and cracked brickwork.[23] The house was almost entirely remodelled by Henry.[38] He wanted to follow Palladian design and used craftsmen from York to do so.[45] He widened the gallery, improved the ceiling and windows and created additional rooms.[23] The gallery, completed around 1746, has fine Rococo carvings with overmantle paintings of classical scenes by Antonio Joli.[19] There are also elaborate gilded Rococo ornamental candle holders.[19] The gallery ceiling has detailed stucco work including a medallion of King George I.[19] The ceilings in the new Saloon and Library, made from the old Long Gallery, were decorated by Thomas Perritt and Joseph Rose.[45] The doorcases are elaborately carved, probably by Richard Fisher.[45] Two chimney pieces in the Saloon were based on designs by William Kent.[45] The distinctive sphinx gate piers by Lancelot Brown constructed in 1768 were based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick.[45][1] The main rooms in the west wing were redecorated and the windows were replaced with sliding sash windows.[45] A large pedimented stable block was built to the north of the house, in 1742 and probably designed by Daniel Garratt, also in the Palladian style.[45][46] A painting by Mercier of around 1749, also shows a planned block to the south and a low wall connecting the north and south wings which were never completed.[23][21]

 

In 1796, Frances Shepheard employed a Mr Johnson to alter and reface the south wing in a style which tried to copy that of Sir Arthur Ingram's original house.[45] Her approach was a departure from the designs for the wing commissioned by her dead husband from John Carr and Robert Adam, as well as the landscaping by Capability Brown who was also consulted about rebuilding the south wing.[45] The wing was made two storeys high throughout with a suite of reception rooms on the ground floor with state bedchambers above.[27] In the 1790s, the kitchens were moved to the north wing and the original kitchen became a brushing room where servants brushed down nobles returning from hunting parties.[44]

 

At the end of the 19th century, Emily Meynell Ingram replaced the sash windows with stone mullions and leaded lights and rebuilt the north porch adding the Meynell Ingram coat of arms over the doorway.[27] She redecorated several rooms and had the great oak staircase installed.[27] The dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room were remodelled in Elizabethan style.[33] In 1877, Emily converted the library at the east end of the gallery into a chapel.[47]

 

Coalmining on the estate

Estate records show the existence of coal pits in and around the park in the seventeenth century and Bell Wood to the south of the house would have had bell pits for coal extraction. A colliery at Halton village was leased to a number of different individuals from 1660 through to at least the 1790s. The leases generally required the leaseholder to supply coals to Temple Newsam house.[48]

 

In 1815, William Fenton, one of the 'Coal Kings' of Yorkshire,[49] began the sinking of a mine shaft on the estate at Thorpe Stapleton. The colliery was named Waterloo to commemorate the famous battle of that year.[50] Waterloo Colliery was operated as a royalty concession with contracted 'rents' for coal extracted going to the Temple Newsam landowner. Fenton also had a village built for his workers on land between the River Aire and the Aire and Calder navigation. The village was initially called Newmarket but then became Irwin Square on ordnance survey maps[51] and Ingram Place on census lists, but it was commonly simply known as Waterloo. The Yorkshire, Lancashire and England cricketer Albert Ward was born here in 1865. The village had two rows of cottages and a school building. It was connected to the colliery by a wooden footbridge over the river.[52] Deep coal mining on the estate ended with the closure of the Temple Pit of Waterloo Main Colliery in 1968.

  

Temple Newsam House

Opencast mining on the estate began in May 1942. Seven sites were exploited to the south of the house almost entirely destroying Capability Brown's landscape. One site reached within 330 feet (100 m) of the South Terrace. It continued at the Gamblethorpe site as far as Dawson's Wood, in full view of the house, until 1987.[53] No trace of the opencast remains now as the parkland was re-landscaped.

 

In 2019 there was a temporary exhibition about coal mining at Temple Newsam which was called 'Blot on the Landscape'.[54]

 

House and estate today

The house and estate are owned by Leeds City Council and open to the public. The house has undergone substantial restoration to its exterior. There is an established programme of restoring rooms back to known previous configurations, reversing the numerous intrusive installations and modifications that took place during the building's "art museum" phase.

 

The wider estate is made up of woods (the second largest part of the Forest of Leeds).[55] There are sporting facilities for football, golf, running, cycling, horse-riding and orienteering. There is an innovative children's playground opened in 2011 which caters for both disabled and able-bodied children.[56] Pegasus Wood, to the south of the house, commemorates veterans of the Normandy Landing at Pegasus Bridge in 1944.[57]

 

Photograph of brick barn at the Home Farm, Temple Newsam

Great Barn, Home Farm, Temple Newsam

The Home Farm, open to the public, has a barn built in 1694 and is the largest working rare breeds farm in Europe, and only one of 16 nationally approved by the Rare Breeds Survival Trust. Breeds include Gloucester, Kerry, Irish Moiled, Red Poll, White Park, British White, Beef Shorthorn, Vaynol and Belted Galloway cattle; Kerry Hill; Whitefaced Woodland and Portland sheep, and Golden Guernsey goats.[58] The farm was targeted by arsonists twice in 2011 with damage caused to buildings, and some animals killed.[59]

 

There are extensive gardens, with a celebrated rhododendron walk and six national plant collections: Aster novi-belgii (Michaelmas daisies), Phlox paniculata, Delphinium elatum (Cultivars), Solenostemon scutellarioides (sys. Coleus blumei), Primula auricula and Chrysanthemum (Charm and Cascade cultivars).[60] Within the Walled Garden there are 800 yards of herbaceous borders.[61]

 

Collections

There are substantial holdings of fine and decorative art which are designated by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) as being of national significance.[62]

 

Of most significant historical and cultural interest is the Chippendale Society collection of Chippendale works that are on permanent loan.[63] In his book "Britain's Best Museums and Galleries", Mark Fisher (a former DCMS minister) gave the museum an excellent review. When interviewed on Front Row, Radio 4, November 2004 Fisher placed Temple Newsam House in the top three non-national museums in the country, along with Birmingham's Barber Institute and the Dulwich Picture Gallery.[64]

Temple Newsam (historically Temple Newsham), (grid reference SE357322) is a Tudor-Jacobean house in Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, with grounds landscaped by Capability Brown.

 

The estate lends its name to the Temple Newsam ward of Leeds City Council, in which it is situated, and lies to the east of the city, just south of Halton Moor, Halton, Whitkirk and Colton. It is one of nine sites in the Leeds Museums & Galleries group.

 

The house is a Grade I listed building, defined as a "building of outstanding or national architectural or historic interest". The stables are Grade II* listed ("particularly significant buildings of more than local interest"), and ten separate features of the estate are Grade II listed ("buildings of special architectural or historic interest"), including the Sphinx Gates and the Barn.[1] Temple Newsam House is one of Leeds Museums and Galleries sites.[2] It is also part of the research group, Yorkshire Country House Partnership.[3]

 

History

1066 to 1520

In the Domesday Book of 1086 the manor is listed as Neuhusam (meaning new houses) and was held by Ilbert de Lacy and his sons.[4] Before the Norman Conquest of 1066 it had been held by Dunstan and Glunier, Anglo-Saxon thanes.[4] In about 1155, Henry de Lacy gave it to the Knights Templar, who built Temple Newsam Preceptory on a site near the present house.[5] The Templars farmed the estate very efficiently, with 1100 animals.[6] In 1307 the Templars were suppressed, and Edward II granted the manor to Sir Robert Holland who held it until 1323 when he was deprived of his estates.[6] The Templars tried to retake the estate but they were forced to surrender and in 1327 it was granted to Mary de St Pol, the Countess of Pembroke, who held the manor for 50 years.[6] In 1377 by royal decree the estate reverted to Philip Darcy, 4th Baron Darcy de Knayth (1341–1398).[6] It then passed through several members of the Darcy family, until it was inherited by the 21-year old Thomas, Lord Darcy in 1488.[7] Between 1500 and 1520 a Tudor manor house, known as Temple Newsam House, was built on the site.[8] It has also been spelled "Newsham" in the past.[9]

 

An oil on panel painting by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries

An oil on panel painting from 1563 by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries which may reflect Temple Newsam's Great Chamber

1500 to 1650

In 1537 Thomas, Lord Darcy was executed for the part he played in the Pilgrimage of Grace and the property was seized by the Crown.[7] In 1544 Henry VIII gave it to his niece Lady Margaret Douglas (Countess of Lennox), and she lived there with her husband Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox.[7] Their son Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, who was born in the house in 1545 and educated there, married Mary, Queen of Scots, by whom he was the father of King James VI of Scotland and I of England.[10] A portrait of Henry and his brother was probably intended to represent the interior of Temple Newsam despite being based on a print of an ideal interior.[11] Following the marriage in 1565, Temple Newsam was seized by Queen Elizabeth I and was managed by an agent.[12]

 

In 1609 King James I, successor to Elizabeth, granted the estate to his Franco-Scottish second cousin Ludovic Stewart, 2nd Duke of Lennox (1574–1624), who was a favourite of the King and given many titles and estates, including farmland and coalmines in the local area.[13] Despite his opportunities, Ludovic was in constant debt and he mortgaged the estate in 1614 for the sum of £9,000 (around £860,000 in today's money).[14] In 1622 Lennox began the sale of the estate to Sir Arthur Ingram (c. 1565 – 1642), a Yorkshire-born London merchant, civil servant, investor in colonial ventures and arms dealer, for £12,000, which he paid in two instalments, the last in July 1624, after Lennox's death.[14] During the next 20 years the mansion was rebuilt, incorporating some of the previous house in the west wing.[8] The north and south wings were rebuilt and the east wing was demolished after a bad fire in 1635.[15] Arthur's son, also called Arthur, inherited the estate with its debts and continued the building and renovation work.[16] Six months after Charles I was beheaded in 1649, Arthur Ingram the younger was declared delinquent and he compounded his estates and retired to Temple Newsam.[17]

 

1650 to 1900

After the death of Arthur the younger's eldest son, Thomas, in 1660, Temple Newsam was inherited by Arthur's second son, Henry Ingram, 1st Viscount of Irvine (created a peer of Scotland as Baron Ingram and Viscount of Irvine in 1661 - although the family used the English form "Irwin").[18] In 1661, Henry married Lady Essex Montagu, daughter of Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester, a favourite of Charles II.[18] The estate then passed through Henry's two sons and five grandsons, the last being Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine.[18] The 4th Viscount brought back paintings from his Grand Tour of 1704-7.[19] Extant receipts from 1692 show women as well as men were employed to work the estate in haymaking.[20] In 1712, William Etty designed a new approach to the house, with a bridge and ponds.[21][22] In 1714, Temple Newsam was inherited by Rich Ingram, the 5th Viscount, and his wife Ann who spent a vast fortune furnishing the house and creating the East Avenue.[19] Between 1738 and 1746, Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine remodelled the west and north wings of the house, creating new bedrooms and dressing rooms and the picture gallery.[23] A painting in Leeds City Art Gallery by Philippe Mercier of c. 1745 shows Henry and his wife standing in front of Temple Newsam House.[24]

 

A coloured engraving made in 1699 by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff showing an aerial view of the house and estate at Temple Newsam

1699 Engraving by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff

In the 1760s, Charles Ingram, 9th Viscount of Irvine, employed Capability Brown to re-landscape the park on the insistence of his wife, Frances Shepheard, daughter of Samuel Shepheard.[25] Reflecting her interest in pastoral landscape design, Frances is depicted as a shepherdess in a portrait by Benjamin Wilson at Temple Newsam.[25] Both Frances and Charles were actively involved in the design and implementation.[26] Some aspects of Brown's plan depicted in paintings by James Chapman and Michael Angelo Rooker were never completed such as a large lake near the house.[26] Extant financial records show that in 1759 women as well as men were employed as garden labourers.[20] After Charles died in 1778, Frances rebuilt the south wing in 1796; she lived at Temple Newsam until her death in 1807.[27] Charles and Frances's eldest daughter Isabella Ingram, (Marchioness of Hertford) (d.1834) who inherited Temple Newsam, was the mistress of the Prince of Wales (later King George IV) from 1806 to 1819. In 1806, George visited Temple Newsam and presented Isabella with Chinese wallpaper, which she hung in the small Drawing Room next to the Great Hall in around 1820, embellished with cut out birds from Audubon's The Birds of America (now worth £7.5 million).[28] Lady Hertford inherited the house in 1807; after her husband died in 1822 she spent the season in London, and the rest of the time at Temple Newsam where she involved herself in charitable works including distributing food and clothing to the local people.[29] She allowed the servants to hold an annual supper and ball at Temple Newsam.[29] Reports of poachers were made during 1826 and 1827.[30] During the last years of Isabella's life, the canal, railway and roads encroached on the estate as well as coal mining; and she dealt with the companies setting these up.[29] In 1820 the novelist Sir Walter Scott published Ivanhoe featuring a Templar preceptory named Temple Stowe, believed to have been modelled on Temple Newsam; the name is preserved in local road names such as Templestowe Crescent.[31] At her death in 1834, Isabella left Temple Newsam to her widowed sister, Frances Ingram Shepheard, wife of Lord William Gordon, who died in 1841.[32]

  

Temple Newsam House from Morris's Country Seats (1880)

In 1841 the estate was inherited by Hugo Charles Meynell Ingram (d. 1869), son of Elizabeth Ingram, sister of Frances Ingram (Lady Gordon), who made no alterations to the estate.[33] In 1868, the Prince of Wales stayed at Temple Newsam during his visit to Leeds to open the Fine Art Exhibition in the New Infirmary; temporary triumphal arches were erected on the estate.[34] Following Hugo Charles's death, his son Hugo Meynell-Ingram (d.1871) inherited Temple Newsam; two years later, at his death, his wife Emily Meynell Ingram (d.1904) inherited the estate.[33] Emily spent a large part of her widowhood at Temple Newsam; she developed it considerably by replacing the sash windows and remodelling the dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room.[33] Emily bequeathed Temple Newsam to her nephew Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax.[8]

 

20th century

In 1909, 610 acres (2.5 km2) of the estate at Knostrop were compulsorily purchased by Leeds Corporation to build a sewage plant.[35] During the First World War (1914–17) the south wing of the house was turned into a hospital by Edward Wood and his wife Dorothy. Edward Wood fought in France as part of the Yorkshire Hussars, whilst Dorothy oversaw the running of the hospital as part of the Mayors War Committee.[36] In 1922 Edward Wood sold the park and house to Leeds Corporation for a nominal sum, placing covenants over them to ensure their preservation for the future.[35]

 

On 19 October 1923, Temple Newsam was opened to the public along with a golf course.[37] In the Derby Daily Telegraph newspaper, Temple Newsam was compared to Hampton Court.[37] Despite many people visiting the house and using the golf course, the Corporation lost money during the first decade mostly due to poor farming practices.[37] In July 1932, the Great Yorkshire Show was held at Temple Newsam and was a great success.[37] Preparations for war were made as early as April 1939, and in August, small items were being packed up for storage.[37] In September 1939, Temple Newsam was closed to the public and items were moved there for storage from Leeds City Art Gallery.[37] It was decided that objects would be displayed, and the house was officially reopened in November 1939, when it was again likened to Hampton Court in the press.[37]

 

Architecture

Photograph of entrance porch of Temple Newsam House, Leeds, showing at top the word 'FATHER', below a mullioned window, below a raised portico with coat of arms above a doorway flanked by two Ionic columns on each side.

Entrance Porch 17th century

Photograph of the west front of Temple Newsam

Centre of Temple Newsam west front

Remains of the early 16th century house were retained in the new building, including the brickwork and bay windows in the centre of the west front.[38] The plan of the new house was a conservative E-shape.[38] The Long Gallery and entrance hall in the south wing followed Elizabethan and early Jacobean styles.[38] The entrance porch has Classical columns but they are of Flemish design, rather than following correct Italian design.[38] There are Tudor doorways and timberwork in the cellars, which are largely Tudor in date.[39] Tudor features have also been discovered beneath later layers of decoration, including Lord Darcy's crest scratched into the plaster in the Blue Damask room.[40] An inventory of 1565 indicates that the hall, great chamber (later the dining room), gallery and chapel (later the kitchen) were probably where they are now.[40] There is a Tudor doorway in the north wing which was probably the entrance to the original chapel.[41]

 

In the 17th century, the south and north wings were rebuilt and the east wing demolished, replaced by a low wall with an arched gateway, giving the house a fashionable 'half-H' appearance.[39] It is possible that the man who made plans for the alteration was Bernard Dinninghof of York.[41] There is also some resemblance to designs by Inigo Jones.[42] Round the top of the house, letters appear in a balustrade, declaring the piety and loyalty of Sir Arthur Ingram: 'ALL GLORY AND PRAISE BE GIVEN TO GOD THE FATHER THE SON AND HOLY GHOST ON HIGH PEACE ON EARTH GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN HONOUR AND TRUE ALLEGIANCE TO OUR GRACIOUS KING LOVING AFFECTION AMONGST HIS SUBJECTS HEALTH AND PLENTY BE WITHIN THIS HOUSE.'[38] The chapel in the north wing retains some 17th century features, such as armorial stained glass, probably by Henry Gyles and a carved wooden pulpit by Thomas Ventris, made around 1636, with geometric patterns, pilasters and friezes.[38] The walls had panels of Old Testament figures, painted by John Carleton.[38] An inventory dated 1667 records that the House had 66 rooms and 11 outhouses.[39] An engraving by Kip and Knyff dated 1699 is an accurate representation of the house, showing the varying height of the house and some buildings that were later demolished, including the arched gateway flanked by two small lodges and a detached garden building dating from the mid 1670s.[23]

 

Photograph of stone and brick Sphinx gate piers at Temple Newsam, c. 1760 by Lancelot Brown based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick

Sphinx gate piers, c. 1760

Photograph of the mid-18th century stable block at Temple Newsam showing the pediment

Stable Block at Temple Newsam, added by Henry, 7th Lord Irwin

In 1718, the steward of Temple Newsam suggested an underground service passage to link the north and south wings to the 5th Viscount, who agreed.[43] This tunnel linked the original kitchens in the south wing to the rest of the house.[44] In 1738, Henry, 7th Viscount Irwin wrote to his mother describing the neglected state of the house with windows coming away and cracked brickwork.[23] The house was almost entirely remodelled by Henry.[38] He wanted to follow Palladian design and used craftsmen from York to do so.[45] He widened the gallery, improved the ceiling and windows and created additional rooms.[23] The gallery, completed around 1746, has fine Rococo carvings with overmantle paintings of classical scenes by Antonio Joli.[19] There are also elaborate gilded Rococo ornamental candle holders.[19] The gallery ceiling has detailed stucco work including a medallion of King George I.[19] The ceilings in the new Saloon and Library, made from the old Long Gallery, were decorated by Thomas Perritt and Joseph Rose.[45] The doorcases are elaborately carved, probably by Richard Fisher.[45] Two chimney pieces in the Saloon were based on designs by William Kent.[45] The distinctive sphinx gate piers by Lancelot Brown constructed in 1768 were based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick.[45][1] The main rooms in the west wing were redecorated and the windows were replaced with sliding sash windows.[45] A large pedimented stable block was built to the north of the house, in 1742 and probably designed by Daniel Garratt, also in the Palladian style.[45][46] A painting by Mercier of around 1749, also shows a planned block to the south and a low wall connecting the north and south wings which were never completed.[23][21]

 

In 1796, Frances Shepheard employed a Mr Johnson to alter and reface the south wing in a style which tried to copy that of Sir Arthur Ingram's original house.[45] Her approach was a departure from the designs for the wing commissioned by her dead husband from John Carr and Robert Adam, as well as the landscaping by Capability Brown who was also consulted about rebuilding the south wing.[45] The wing was made two storeys high throughout with a suite of reception rooms on the ground floor with state bedchambers above.[27] In the 1790s, the kitchens were moved to the north wing and the original kitchen became a brushing room where servants brushed down nobles returning from hunting parties.[44]

 

At the end of the 19th century, Emily Meynell Ingram replaced the sash windows with stone mullions and leaded lights and rebuilt the north porch adding the Meynell Ingram coat of arms over the doorway.[27] She redecorated several rooms and had the great oak staircase installed.[27] The dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room were remodelled in Elizabethan style.[33] In 1877, Emily converted the library at the east end of the gallery into a chapel.[47]

 

Coalmining on the estate

Estate records show the existence of coal pits in and around the park in the seventeenth century and Bell Wood to the south of the house would have had bell pits for coal extraction. A colliery at Halton village was leased to a number of different individuals from 1660 through to at least the 1790s. The leases generally required the leaseholder to supply coals to Temple Newsam house.[48]

 

In 1815, William Fenton, one of the 'Coal Kings' of Yorkshire,[49] began the sinking of a mine shaft on the estate at Thorpe Stapleton. The colliery was named Waterloo to commemorate the famous battle of that year.[50] Waterloo Colliery was operated as a royalty concession with contracted 'rents' for coal extracted going to the Temple Newsam landowner. Fenton also had a village built for his workers on land between the River Aire and the Aire and Calder navigation. The village was initially called Newmarket but then became Irwin Square on ordnance survey maps[51] and Ingram Place on census lists, but it was commonly simply known as Waterloo. The Yorkshire, Lancashire and England cricketer Albert Ward was born here in 1865. The village had two rows of cottages and a school building. It was connected to the colliery by a wooden footbridge over the river.[52] Deep coal mining on the estate ended with the closure of the Temple Pit of Waterloo Main Colliery in 1968.

  

Temple Newsam House

Opencast mining on the estate began in May 1942. Seven sites were exploited to the south of the house almost entirely destroying Capability Brown's landscape. One site reached within 330 feet (100 m) of the South Terrace. It continued at the Gamblethorpe site as far as Dawson's Wood, in full view of the house, until 1987.[53] No trace of the opencast remains now as the parkland was re-landscaped.

 

In 2019 there was a temporary exhibition about coal mining at Temple Newsam which was called 'Blot on the Landscape'.[54]

 

House and estate today

The house and estate are owned by Leeds City Council and open to the public. The house has undergone substantial restoration to its exterior. There is an established programme of restoring rooms back to known previous configurations, reversing the numerous intrusive installations and modifications that took place during the building's "art museum" phase.

 

The wider estate is made up of woods (the second largest part of the Forest of Leeds).[55] There are sporting facilities for football, golf, running, cycling, horse-riding and orienteering. There is an innovative children's playground opened in 2011 which caters for both disabled and able-bodied children.[56] Pegasus Wood, to the south of the house, commemorates veterans of the Normandy Landing at Pegasus Bridge in 1944.[57]

 

Photograph of brick barn at the Home Farm, Temple Newsam

Great Barn, Home Farm, Temple Newsam

The Home Farm, open to the public, has a barn built in 1694 and is the largest working rare breeds farm in Europe, and only one of 16 nationally approved by the Rare Breeds Survival Trust. Breeds include Gloucester, Kerry, Irish Moiled, Red Poll, White Park, British White, Beef Shorthorn, Vaynol and Belted Galloway cattle; Kerry Hill; Whitefaced Woodland and Portland sheep, and Golden Guernsey goats.[58] The farm was targeted by arsonists twice in 2011 with damage caused to buildings, and some animals killed.[59]

 

There are extensive gardens, with a celebrated rhododendron walk and six national plant collections: Aster novi-belgii (Michaelmas daisies), Phlox paniculata, Delphinium elatum (Cultivars), Solenostemon scutellarioides (sys. Coleus blumei), Primula auricula and Chrysanthemum (Charm and Cascade cultivars).[60] Within the Walled Garden there are 800 yards of herbaceous borders.[61]

 

Collections

There are substantial holdings of fine and decorative art which are designated by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) as being of national significance.[62]

 

Of most significant historical and cultural interest is the Chippendale Society collection of Chippendale works that are on permanent loan.[63] In his book "Britain's Best Museums and Galleries", Mark Fisher (a former DCMS minister) gave the museum an excellent review. When interviewed on Front Row, Radio 4, November 2004 Fisher placed Temple Newsam House in the top three non-national museums in the country, along with Birmingham's Barber Institute and the Dulwich Picture Gallery.[64]

Temple Newsam (historically Temple Newsham), (grid reference SE357322) is a Tudor-Jacobean house in Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, with grounds landscaped by Capability Brown.

 

The estate lends its name to the Temple Newsam ward of Leeds City Council, in which it is situated, and lies to the east of the city, just south of Halton Moor, Halton, Whitkirk and Colton. It is one of nine sites in the Leeds Museums & Galleries group.

 

The house is a Grade I listed building, defined as a "building of outstanding or national architectural or historic interest". The stables are Grade II* listed ("particularly significant buildings of more than local interest"), and ten separate features of the estate are Grade II listed ("buildings of special architectural or historic interest"), including the Sphinx Gates and the Barn.[1] Temple Newsam House is one of Leeds Museums and Galleries sites.[2] It is also part of the research group, Yorkshire Country House Partnership.[3]

 

History

1066 to 1520

In the Domesday Book of 1086 the manor is listed as Neuhusam (meaning new houses) and was held by Ilbert de Lacy and his sons.[4] Before the Norman Conquest of 1066 it had been held by Dunstan and Glunier, Anglo-Saxon thanes.[4] In about 1155, Henry de Lacy gave it to the Knights Templar, who built Temple Newsam Preceptory on a site near the present house.[5] The Templars farmed the estate very efficiently, with 1100 animals.[6] In 1307 the Templars were suppressed, and Edward II granted the manor to Sir Robert Holland who held it until 1323 when he was deprived of his estates.[6] The Templars tried to retake the estate but they were forced to surrender and in 1327 it was granted to Mary de St Pol, the Countess of Pembroke, who held the manor for 50 years.[6] In 1377 by royal decree the estate reverted to Philip Darcy, 4th Baron Darcy de Knayth (1341–1398).[6] It then passed through several members of the Darcy family, until it was inherited by the 21-year old Thomas, Lord Darcy in 1488.[7] Between 1500 and 1520 a Tudor manor house, known as Temple Newsam House, was built on the site.[8] It has also been spelled "Newsham" in the past.[9]

 

An oil on panel painting by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries

An oil on panel painting from 1563 by Hans Eworth of Henry Stuart and his brother Charles Stuart in a grand interior based on a print by Hans Vreedman de Vries which may reflect Temple Newsam's Great Chamber

1500 to 1650

In 1537 Thomas, Lord Darcy was executed for the part he played in the Pilgrimage of Grace and the property was seized by the Crown.[7] In 1544 Henry VIII gave it to his niece Lady Margaret Douglas (Countess of Lennox), and she lived there with her husband Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox.[7] Their son Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, who was born in the house in 1545 and educated there, married Mary, Queen of Scots, by whom he was the father of King James VI of Scotland and I of England.[10] A portrait of Henry and his brother was probably intended to represent the interior of Temple Newsam despite being based on a print of an ideal interior.[11] Following the marriage in 1565, Temple Newsam was seized by Queen Elizabeth I and was managed by an agent.[12]

 

In 1609 King James I, successor to Elizabeth, granted the estate to his Franco-Scottish second cousin Ludovic Stewart, 2nd Duke of Lennox (1574–1624), who was a favourite of the King and given many titles and estates, including farmland and coalmines in the local area.[13] Despite his opportunities, Ludovic was in constant debt and he mortgaged the estate in 1614 for the sum of £9,000 (around £860,000 in today's money).[14] In 1622 Lennox began the sale of the estate to Sir Arthur Ingram (c. 1565 – 1642), a Yorkshire-born London merchant, civil servant, investor in colonial ventures and arms dealer, for £12,000, which he paid in two instalments, the last in July 1624, after Lennox's death.[14] During the next 20 years the mansion was rebuilt, incorporating some of the previous house in the west wing.[8] The north and south wings were rebuilt and the east wing was demolished after a bad fire in 1635.[15] Arthur's son, also called Arthur, inherited the estate with its debts and continued the building and renovation work.[16] Six months after Charles I was beheaded in 1649, Arthur Ingram the younger was declared delinquent and he compounded his estates and retired to Temple Newsam.[17]

 

1650 to 1900

After the death of Arthur the younger's eldest son, Thomas, in 1660, Temple Newsam was inherited by Arthur's second son, Henry Ingram, 1st Viscount of Irvine (created a peer of Scotland as Baron Ingram and Viscount of Irvine in 1661 - although the family used the English form "Irwin").[18] In 1661, Henry married Lady Essex Montagu, daughter of Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester, a favourite of Charles II.[18] The estate then passed through Henry's two sons and five grandsons, the last being Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine.[18] The 4th Viscount brought back paintings from his Grand Tour of 1704-7.[19] Extant receipts from 1692 show women as well as men were employed to work the estate in haymaking.[20] In 1712, William Etty designed a new approach to the house, with a bridge and ponds.[21][22] In 1714, Temple Newsam was inherited by Rich Ingram, the 5th Viscount, and his wife Ann who spent a vast fortune furnishing the house and creating the East Avenue.[19] Between 1738 and 1746, Henry Ingram, 7th Viscount of Irvine remodelled the west and north wings of the house, creating new bedrooms and dressing rooms and the picture gallery.[23] A painting in Leeds City Art Gallery by Philippe Mercier of c. 1745 shows Henry and his wife standing in front of Temple Newsam House.[24]

 

A coloured engraving made in 1699 by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff showing an aerial view of the house and estate at Temple Newsam

1699 Engraving by J Kip after a drawing by Leonard Knyff

In the 1760s, Charles Ingram, 9th Viscount of Irvine, employed Capability Brown to re-landscape the park on the insistence of his wife, Frances Shepheard, daughter of Samuel Shepheard.[25] Reflecting her interest in pastoral landscape design, Frances is depicted as a shepherdess in a portrait by Benjamin Wilson at Temple Newsam.[25] Both Frances and Charles were actively involved in the design and implementation.[26] Some aspects of Brown's plan depicted in paintings by James Chapman and Michael Angelo Rooker were never completed such as a large lake near the house.[26] Extant financial records show that in 1759 women as well as men were employed as garden labourers.[20] After Charles died in 1778, Frances rebuilt the south wing in 1796; she lived at Temple Newsam until her death in 1807.[27] Charles and Frances's eldest daughter Isabella Ingram, (Marchioness of Hertford) (d.1834) who inherited Temple Newsam, was the mistress of the Prince of Wales (later King George IV) from 1806 to 1819. In 1806, George visited Temple Newsam and presented Isabella with Chinese wallpaper, which she hung in the small Drawing Room next to the Great Hall in around 1820, embellished with cut out birds from Audubon's The Birds of America (now worth £7.5 million).[28] Lady Hertford inherited the house in 1807; after her husband died in 1822 she spent the season in London, and the rest of the time at Temple Newsam where she involved herself in charitable works including distributing food and clothing to the local people.[29] She allowed the servants to hold an annual supper and ball at Temple Newsam.[29] Reports of poachers were made during 1826 and 1827.[30] During the last years of Isabella's life, the canal, railway and roads encroached on the estate as well as coal mining; and she dealt with the companies setting these up.[29] In 1820 the novelist Sir Walter Scott published Ivanhoe featuring a Templar preceptory named Temple Stowe, believed to have been modelled on Temple Newsam; the name is preserved in local road names such as Templestowe Crescent.[31] At her death in 1834, Isabella left Temple Newsam to her widowed sister, Frances Ingram Shepheard, wife of Lord William Gordon, who died in 1841.[32]

  

Temple Newsam House from Morris's Country Seats (1880)

In 1841 the estate was inherited by Hugo Charles Meynell Ingram (d. 1869), son of Elizabeth Ingram, sister of Frances Ingram (Lady Gordon), who made no alterations to the estate.[33] In 1868, the Prince of Wales stayed at Temple Newsam during his visit to Leeds to open the Fine Art Exhibition in the New Infirmary; temporary triumphal arches were erected on the estate.[34] Following Hugo Charles's death, his son Hugo Meynell-Ingram (d.1871) inherited Temple Newsam; two years later, at his death, his wife Emily Meynell Ingram (d.1904) inherited the estate.[33] Emily spent a large part of her widowhood at Temple Newsam; she developed it considerably by replacing the sash windows and remodelling the dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room.[33] Emily bequeathed Temple Newsam to her nephew Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax.[8]

 

20th century

In 1909, 610 acres (2.5 km2) of the estate at Knostrop were compulsorily purchased by Leeds Corporation to build a sewage plant.[35] During the First World War (1914–17) the south wing of the house was turned into a hospital by Edward Wood and his wife Dorothy. Edward Wood fought in France as part of the Yorkshire Hussars, whilst Dorothy oversaw the running of the hospital as part of the Mayors War Committee.[36] In 1922 Edward Wood sold the park and house to Leeds Corporation for a nominal sum, placing covenants over them to ensure their preservation for the future.[35]

 

On 19 October 1923, Temple Newsam was opened to the public along with a golf course.[37] In the Derby Daily Telegraph newspaper, Temple Newsam was compared to Hampton Court.[37] Despite many people visiting the house and using the golf course, the Corporation lost money during the first decade mostly due to poor farming practices.[37] In July 1932, the Great Yorkshire Show was held at Temple Newsam and was a great success.[37] Preparations for war were made as early as April 1939, and in August, small items were being packed up for storage.[37] In September 1939, Temple Newsam was closed to the public and items were moved there for storage from Leeds City Art Gallery.[37] It was decided that objects would be displayed, and the house was officially reopened in November 1939, when it was again likened to Hampton Court in the press.[37]

 

Architecture

Photograph of entrance porch of Temple Newsam House, Leeds, showing at top the word 'FATHER', below a mullioned window, below a raised portico with coat of arms above a doorway flanked by two Ionic columns on each side.

Entrance Porch 17th century

Photograph of the west front of Temple Newsam

Centre of Temple Newsam west front

Remains of the early 16th century house were retained in the new building, including the brickwork and bay windows in the centre of the west front.[38] The plan of the new house was a conservative E-shape.[38] The Long Gallery and entrance hall in the south wing followed Elizabethan and early Jacobean styles.[38] The entrance porch has Classical columns but they are of Flemish design, rather than following correct Italian design.[38] There are Tudor doorways and timberwork in the cellars, which are largely Tudor in date.[39] Tudor features have also been discovered beneath later layers of decoration, including Lord Darcy's crest scratched into the plaster in the Blue Damask room.[40] An inventory of 1565 indicates that the hall, great chamber (later the dining room), gallery and chapel (later the kitchen) were probably where they are now.[40] There is a Tudor doorway in the north wing which was probably the entrance to the original chapel.[41]

 

In the 17th century, the south and north wings were rebuilt and the east wing demolished, replaced by a low wall with an arched gateway, giving the house a fashionable 'half-H' appearance.[39] It is possible that the man who made plans for the alteration was Bernard Dinninghof of York.[41] There is also some resemblance to designs by Inigo Jones.[42] Round the top of the house, letters appear in a balustrade, declaring the piety and loyalty of Sir Arthur Ingram: 'ALL GLORY AND PRAISE BE GIVEN TO GOD THE FATHER THE SON AND HOLY GHOST ON HIGH PEACE ON EARTH GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN HONOUR AND TRUE ALLEGIANCE TO OUR GRACIOUS KING LOVING AFFECTION AMONGST HIS SUBJECTS HEALTH AND PLENTY BE WITHIN THIS HOUSE.'[38] The chapel in the north wing retains some 17th century features, such as armorial stained glass, probably by Henry Gyles and a carved wooden pulpit by Thomas Ventris, made around 1636, with geometric patterns, pilasters and friezes.[38] The walls had panels of Old Testament figures, painted by John Carleton.[38] An inventory dated 1667 records that the House had 66 rooms and 11 outhouses.[39] An engraving by Kip and Knyff dated 1699 is an accurate representation of the house, showing the varying height of the house and some buildings that were later demolished, including the arched gateway flanked by two small lodges and a detached garden building dating from the mid 1670s.[23]

 

Photograph of stone and brick Sphinx gate piers at Temple Newsam, c. 1760 by Lancelot Brown based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick

Sphinx gate piers, c. 1760

Photograph of the mid-18th century stable block at Temple Newsam showing the pediment

Stable Block at Temple Newsam, added by Henry, 7th Lord Irwin

In 1718, the steward of Temple Newsam suggested an underground service passage to link the north and south wings to the 5th Viscount, who agreed.[43] This tunnel linked the original kitchens in the south wing to the rest of the house.[44] In 1738, Henry, 7th Viscount Irwin wrote to his mother describing the neglected state of the house with windows coming away and cracked brickwork.[23] The house was almost entirely remodelled by Henry.[38] He wanted to follow Palladian design and used craftsmen from York to do so.[45] He widened the gallery, improved the ceiling and windows and created additional rooms.[23] The gallery, completed around 1746, has fine Rococo carvings with overmantle paintings of classical scenes by Antonio Joli.[19] There are also elaborate gilded Rococo ornamental candle holders.[19] The gallery ceiling has detailed stucco work including a medallion of King George I.[19] The ceilings in the new Saloon and Library, made from the old Long Gallery, were decorated by Thomas Perritt and Joseph Rose.[45] The doorcases are elaborately carved, probably by Richard Fisher.[45] Two chimney pieces in the Saloon were based on designs by William Kent.[45] The distinctive sphinx gate piers by Lancelot Brown constructed in 1768 were based on designs published by Lord Burlington in 1738 and used at Chiswick.[45][1] The main rooms in the west wing were redecorated and the windows were replaced with sliding sash windows.[45] A large pedimented stable block was built to the north of the house, in 1742 and probably designed by Daniel Garratt, also in the Palladian style.[45][46] A painting by Mercier of around 1749, also shows a planned block to the south and a low wall connecting the north and south wings which were never completed.[23][21]

 

In 1796, Frances Shepheard employed a Mr Johnson to alter and reface the south wing in a style which tried to copy that of Sir Arthur Ingram's original house.[45] Her approach was a departure from the designs for the wing commissioned by her dead husband from John Carr and Robert Adam, as well as the landscaping by Capability Brown who was also consulted about rebuilding the south wing.[45] The wing was made two storeys high throughout with a suite of reception rooms on the ground floor with state bedchambers above.[27] In the 1790s, the kitchens were moved to the north wing and the original kitchen became a brushing room where servants brushed down nobles returning from hunting parties.[44]

 

At the end of the 19th century, Emily Meynell Ingram replaced the sash windows with stone mullions and leaded lights and rebuilt the north porch adding the Meynell Ingram coat of arms over the doorway.[27] She redecorated several rooms and had the great oak staircase installed.[27] The dining room, great staircase and Lord Darnley's room were remodelled in Elizabethan style.[33] In 1877, Emily converted the library at the east end of the gallery into a chapel.[47]

 

Coalmining on the estate

Estate records show the existence of coal pits in and around the park in the seventeenth century and Bell Wood to the south of the house would have had bell pits for coal extraction. A colliery at Halton village was leased to a number of different individuals from 1660 through to at least the 1790s. The leases generally required the leaseholder to supply coals to Temple Newsam house.[48]

 

In 1815, William Fenton, one of the 'Coal Kings' of Yorkshire,[49] began the sinking of a mine shaft on the estate at Thorpe Stapleton. The colliery was named Waterloo to commemorate the famous battle of that year.[50] Waterloo Colliery was operated as a royalty concession with contracted 'rents' for coal extracted going to the Temple Newsam landowner. Fenton also had a village built for his workers on land between the River Aire and the Aire and Calder navigation. The village was initially called Newmarket but then became Irwin Square on ordnance survey maps[51] and Ingram Place on census lists, but it was commonly simply known as Waterloo. The Yorkshire, Lancashire and England cricketer Albert Ward was born here in 1865. The village had two rows of cottages and a school building. It was connected to the colliery by a wooden footbridge over the river.[52] Deep coal mining on the estate ended with the closure of the Temple Pit of Waterloo Main Colliery in 1968.

  

Temple Newsam House

Opencast mining on the estate began in May 1942. Seven sites were exploited to the south of the house almost entirely destroying Capability Brown's landscape. One site reached within 330 feet (100 m) of the South Terrace. It continued at the Gamblethorpe site as far as Dawson's Wood, in full view of the house, until 1987.[53] No trace of the opencast remains now as the parkland was re-landscaped.

 

In 2019 there was a temporary exhibition about coal mining at Temple Newsam which was called 'Blot on the Landscape'.[54]

 

House and estate today

The house and estate are owned by Leeds City Council and open to the public. The house has undergone substantial restoration to its exterior. There is an established programme of restoring rooms back to known previous configurations, reversing the numerous intrusive installations and modifications that took place during the building's "art museum" phase.

 

The wider estate is made up of woods (the second largest part of the Forest of Leeds).[55] There are sporting facilities for football, golf, running, cycling, horse-riding and orienteering. There is an innovative children's playground opened in 2011 which caters for both disabled and able-bodied children.[56] Pegasus Wood, to the south of the house, commemorates veterans of the Normandy Landing at Pegasus Bridge in 1944.[57]

 

Photograph of brick barn at the Home Farm, Temple Newsam

Great Barn, Home Farm, Temple Newsam

The Home Farm, open to the public, has a barn built in 1694 and is the largest working rare breeds farm in Europe, and only one of 16 nationally approved by the Rare Breeds Survival Trust. Breeds include Gloucester, Kerry, Irish Moiled, Red Poll, White Park, British White, Beef Shorthorn, Vaynol and Belted Galloway cattle; Kerry Hill; Whitefaced Woodland and Portland sheep, and Golden Guernsey goats.[58] The farm was targeted by arsonists twice in 2011 with damage caused to buildings, and some animals killed.[59]

 

There are extensive gardens, with a celebrated rhododendron walk and six national plant collections: Aster novi-belgii (Michaelmas daisies), Phlox paniculata, Delphinium elatum (Cultivars), Solenostemon scutellarioides (sys. Coleus blumei), Primula auricula and Chrysanthemum (Charm and Cascade cultivars).[60] Within the Walled Garden there are 800 yards of herbaceous borders.[61]

 

Collections

There are substantial holdings of fine and decorative art which are designated by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) as being of national significance.[62]

 

Of most significant historical and cultural interest is the Chippendale Society collection of Chippendale works that are on permanent loan.[63] In his book "Britain's Best Museums and Galleries", Mark Fisher (a former DCMS minister) gave the museum an excellent review. When interviewed on Front Row, Radio 4, November 2004 Fisher placed Temple Newsam House in the top three non-national museums in the country, along with Birmingham's Barber Institute and the Dulwich Picture Gallery.[64]

M74 Greenhillstairs 13/06/2017

From the sand dunes of Essaouira to the peaks of the Atlas Mountains, the all-new Range Rover demonstrates its full breadth of capability in Morocco.

From the sand dunes of Essaouira to the peaks of the Atlas Mountains, the all-new Range Rover demonstrates its full breadth of capability in Morocco.

A visit to Charlecote Park for an afternoon visit to this National Trust property in Warwickshire. Near Stratford-upon-Avon. A deer park with a country house in the middle of it.

  

Charlecote Park (grid reference SP263564) is a grand 16th-century country house, surrounded by its own deer park, on the banks of the River Avon near Wellesbourne, about 4 miles (6 km) east of Stratford-upon-Avon and 5.5 miles (9 km) south of Warwick, Warwickshire, England. It has been administered by the National Trust since 1946 and is open to the public. It is a Grade I listed building.

 

The Lucy family owned the land since 1247. Charlecote Park was built in 1558 by Sir Thomas Lucy, and Queen Elizabeth I stayed in the room that is now the drawing room. Although the general outline of the Elizabethan house remains, nowadays it is in fact mostly Victorian. Successive generations of the Lucy family had modified Charlecote Park over the centuries, but in 1823, George Hammond Lucy (High Sheriff of Warwickshire in 1831) inherited the house and set about recreating the house in its original style.

 

Charlecote Park covers 185 acres (75 ha), backing on to the River Avon. William Shakespeare has been alleged to have poached rabbits and deer in the park as a young man and been brought before magistrates as a result.

 

From 1605 to 1640 the house was organised by Sir Thomas Lucy. He had twelve children with Lady Alice Lucy who ran the house after he died. She was known for her piety and distributing alms to the poor each Christmas. Her eldest three sons inherited the house in turn and it then fell to her grandchild Sir Davenport Lucy.

 

In the Tudor great hall, the 1680 painting Charlecote Park by Sir Godfrey Kneller, is said to be one of the earliest depictions of a black presence in the West Midlands (excluding Roman legionnaires). The painting, of Captain Thomas Lucy, shows a black boy in the background dressed in a blue livery coat and red stockings and wearing a gleaming, metal collar around his neck. The National Trust's Charlecote brochure describes the boy as a "black page boy". In 1735 a black child called Philip Lucy was baptised at Charlecote.

 

The lands immediately adjoining the house were further landscaped by Capability Brown in about 1760. This resulted in Charlecote becoming a hostelry destination for notable tourists to Stratford from the late 17th to mid-18th century, including Washington Irving (1818), Sir Walter Scott (1828) and Nathaniel Hawthorn (c 1850).

 

Charlecote was inherited in 1823 by George Hammond Lucy (d 1845), who married Mary Elizabeth Williams of Bodelwyddan Castle, from who's extensive diaries the current "behind the scenes of Victorian Charlecote" are based upon. GH Lucy's second son Henry inherited the estate from his elder brother in 1847. After the deaths of both Mary Elizabeth and Henry in 1890, the house was rented out by Henry's eldest daughter and heiress, Ada Christina (d 1943). She had married Sir Henry Ramsay-Fairfax, (d 1944), a line of the Fairfax Baronets, who on marriage assumed the name Fairfax-Lucy.

 

From this point onwards, the family began selling off parts of the outlying estate to fund their extensive lifestyle, and post-World War II in 1946, Sir Montgomerie Fairfax-Lucy, who had inherited the residual estate from his mother Ada, presented Charlecote to the National Trust in-lieu of death duties. Sir Montgomerie was succeeded in 1965 by his brother, Sir Brian, whose wife, Lady Alice, researched the history of Charlecote, and assisted the National Trust with the restoration of the house.

  

Charlecote Park House is a Grade I Listed Building

 

Charlecote Park

  

Listing Text

  

CHARLECOTE

 

SP2556 CHARLECOTE PARK

1901-1/10/19 Charlecote Park

06/02/52

(Formerly Listed as:

Charlecote Park House)

 

GV I

 

Formerly known as: Charlecote Hall.

Country house. Begun 1558; extended C19. Partly restored and

extended, including east range, 1829-34 by CS Smith;

north-east wing rebuilt and south wing extended 1847-67 by

John Gibson. For George and Mary Elizabeth Lucy.

MATERIALS: brick, that remaining from original building has

diapering in vitrified headers, but much has been replaced in

C19; ashlar dressings; tile roof with brick stacks with

octagonal ashlar shafts and caps.

PLAN: U-plan facing east, with later west range and south

wing.

EXTERIOR: east entrance front of 2 storeys with attic;

3-window range with long gabled projecting wings. Ashlar

plinth, continuous drip courses and coped gables with finials,

sections of strapwork balustrading between gables; quoins.

2-storey ashlar porch has round-headed entrance with flanking

pairs of Ionic pilasters and entablature, round-headed

entrance has panelled jambs, impost course and arch with lion

mask to key and 2 voussoirs, strapwork spandrels and stained

glass to fanlight over paired 4-panel doors; first floor has

Arms of Elizabeth I below projecting ovolo-moulded

cross-mullion window, with flanking pairs of Composite

detached columns; top balustrade with symmetrical balusters

supports Catherine wheel and heraldic beasts holding spears;

original diapered brick to returns.

3-light mullioned and transomed window to each floor to left,

that to first floor with strapwork apron. Large canted bay

window to right of 1:3:1 transomed lights with pierced

rosettes to parapet modelled on that to gatehouse (qv) and

flanked by cross-mullioned windows, all with moulded reveals

and small-paned sashes; C19 gables have 3-light

ovolo-mullioned windows with leaded glazing.

Wings similar, with 2 gables to 5-window inner returns,

ovolo-moulded cross-mullioned windows. Wing to south has much

diaper brickwork and stair window with strapwork apron.

East gable ends have 2-storey canted bay windows dated 1852 to

strapwork panels with Lucy Arms between 1:3:1-light transomed

windows; 3-light attic windows, that to north has patch of

reconstructed diaper brickwork to left.

Octagonal stair turrets to outer angles with 2-light windows,

top entablatures and ogival caps with wind vanes, that to

south mostly original, that to north with round-headed

entrance with enriched key block over studded plank door.

North side has turret to each end, that to west is wholly C19;

3 gables with external stacks with clustered shafts between;

cross-mullioned windows and 3-light transomed stair window on

strapwork apron; 2-light single-chamfered mullioned windows to

turrets.

Single-storey east range of blue brick has 2 bay windows with

octagonal pinnacles with pepper-pot finials and arcaded

balustrades over 1:4:1-light transomed windows; central panel

with Lucy Arms in strapwork setting has date 1833; coped

parapet with 3 gables with lights; returns similar with

3-light transomed windows.

Range behind has 3 renewed central gables and 2 lateral stacks

each with 6 shafts; gable to each end, that to south over

Tudor-arched verandah with arcaded balustrade to central arch

and above, entrance behind arch to left with half-glazed door,

blocked arch to right; first floor with cross-mullioned window

and blocked window, turret to right is wholly C19. South

return has cross-mullioned window to each floor and external

stack with clustered shafts.

South-west wing of 2 storeys; west side is a 7-window range;

recessed block to north end has window to each floor, the next

4 windows between octagonal pinnacles; gabled end breaks

forward under gable with turret to angle; rosette balustrade;

stacks have diagonal brick shafts, gable has lozenge with Lucy

Arms impaling Williams Arms (for Mary Elizabeth Lucy).

Cross-mullioned windows, but 2 southern ground-floor windows

are 3-light and transomed.

South end 4-window range between turrets has cross-mullioned

windows, but each end of first floor has bracketed oriel with

strapwork apron with Lucy/Williams Arms in lozenge and dated

1866, rosette balustrade with to each end a gable with 2-light

single-chamfered mullioned window with label, and 3 similar

windows to each turret, one to each floor.

East side has 3-window range with recessed range to right.

South end has Tudor-arched entrance and 3-light transomed

window, cross-mullioned window and 3-light transomed window to

first floor and gable with lozenge to south end; gable to

full-height kitchen to north has octagonal pinnacles flanking

4-light transomed window and gable above with square panel

with Lucy/Williams Arms to shield; recessed part to north has

loggia with entrance and flanking windows, to left a

single-storey re-entrant block with cross-mullioned windows;

first floor has 5 small sashed windows. South side of

south-east wing has varied brickwork with mullioned and

transomed windows, 2 external stacks and 2 gables with 3-light

windows.

INTERIOR: great hall remodelled by Willement with wood-grained

plaster ceiling with 4-centred ribs and Tudor rose bosses;

armorial glass attributed to Eiffler, restored and extended by

Willement; wainscoting and panelled doors; ashlar fireplace

with paired reeded pilasters and strapwork to entablature, and

fire-dogs; white and pink marble floor, Italian, 1845.

Dining room and library in west wing have rich wood panelling

by JM Willcox of Warwick and strapwork cornices, and strapwork

ceilings with pendants; wallpaper by Willement; dining room

has richly carved buffet, 1858, by Willcox and simple coloured

marble fireplace, the latter with bookshelves and fireplace

with paired pilasters and motto to frieze of fireplace, paired

columns and strapwork frieze to overmantel with armorial

bearings; painted arabesques to shutter backs.

Main staircase, c1700, but probably extensively reconstructed

in C19, open-well with cut string, 3 twisted balusters to a

tread, carved tread ends and ramped handrail;

bolection-moulded panelling in 2 heights, the upper panels and

panelled ceiling probably C19.

Morning room to south of hall has Willement decoration: white

marble Tudor-arched fireplace with cusped panels; plaster

ceiling with bands.

Ebony bedroom, originally billiard room, and drawing room to

north-east wing have 1856 scheme with cornices and

Jacobean-style plaster ceilings; white marble C18-style

fireplaces, that to Ebony Bedroom with Italian inserts with

Lucy crest. Drawing room has gilded and painted cornice and

ceiling, and large pier glasses.

Rooms to first floor originally guest bedrooms: doors with

egg-and-dart and eared architraves; C18-style fireplaces, that

to end room, originally Ebony Bedroom, has wood Rococo-style

fireplace with Chinoiserie panel; 1950s stair to attic.

South-east wing has c1700 stair, probably altered in C19, with

symmetrical balusters with acanthus, closed string; first

floor has wall and ceiling paintings: land and sea battle

scenes painted on canvas, male and female grisaille busts.

First floor has to west the Green Room, with Willement

wallpaper and simple Tudor-arched fireplace with

wallpaper-covered chimney board; adjacent room has marble

fireplace.

Death Room and its dressing room to east end have wallpaper of

gold motifs on white, painted 6-panel doors and architraves,

papier-mache ceilings; bedroom has fireplace with marble

architrave. Adjacent room has bolection-moulded panelling with

c1700 Dutch embossed leather. Stair to attic has c1700

balusters with club-form on acorn. Attics over great hall and

north-east and south-east wings have lime-ash floors and

servants' rooms, each with small annex and corner fireplace;

some bells.

South wing has kitchen with high ceiling and 2

segmental-arched recesses for C19 ranges; Tudor-arched recess

with latticed chamber for smoked meats over door.

Servants' hall has dark marble bolection-moulded fireplace and

cornice; scullery has bread oven, small range, pump and former

south window retaining glass.

First floor has to south end a pair of rooms added for Mary

Elizabeth Lucy in her widowhood; bedroom to east with deep

coved cornice and Adam-style fireplace, sitting room to west

similar, with gold on white wallpaper, white marble fireplace

with painted glass armorial panels and 1830s-40s carpet; door

to spiral timber turret staircase.

Nursery has fireplace with faceted panels and C19 Delft tiles;

probably 1920s wallpaper.

Other rooms with similar fireplaces and coloured glazed tiles.

While dating back to the C16, the house is one of the best

examples of the early C19 Elizabethan Revival style. Property

of National Trust.

(The Buildings of England: Pevsner, N & Wedgwood, A:

Warwickshire: Harmondsworth: 1966-: 227-9; The National Trust

Guide to Charlecote Park: 1991-; Wainwright C: The Romantic

Interior).

 

Listing NGR: SP2590656425

 

This text is from the original listing, and may not necessarily reflect the current setting of the building.

  

A look around the inside of the house / hall.

 

Downstairs rooms.

  

Parlour

A visit to Charlecote Park for an afternoon visit to this National Trust property in Warwickshire. Near Stratford-upon-Avon. A deer park with a country house in the middle of it.

  

Charlecote Park (grid reference SP263564) is a grand 16th-century country house, surrounded by its own deer park, on the banks of the River Avon near Wellesbourne, about 4 miles (6 km) east of Stratford-upon-Avon and 5.5 miles (9 km) south of Warwick, Warwickshire, England. It has been administered by the National Trust since 1946 and is open to the public. It is a Grade I listed building.

 

The Lucy family owned the land since 1247. Charlecote Park was built in 1558 by Sir Thomas Lucy, and Queen Elizabeth I stayed in the room that is now the drawing room. Although the general outline of the Elizabethan house remains, nowadays it is in fact mostly Victorian. Successive generations of the Lucy family had modified Charlecote Park over the centuries, but in 1823, George Hammond Lucy (High Sheriff of Warwickshire in 1831) inherited the house and set about recreating the house in its original style.

 

Charlecote Park covers 185 acres (75 ha), backing on to the River Avon. William Shakespeare has been alleged to have poached rabbits and deer in the park as a young man and been brought before magistrates as a result.

 

From 1605 to 1640 the house was organised by Sir Thomas Lucy. He had twelve children with Lady Alice Lucy who ran the house after he died. She was known for her piety and distributing alms to the poor each Christmas. Her eldest three sons inherited the house in turn and it then fell to her grandchild Sir Davenport Lucy.

 

In the Tudor great hall, the 1680 painting Charlecote Park by Sir Godfrey Kneller, is said to be one of the earliest depictions of a black presence in the West Midlands (excluding Roman legionnaires). The painting, of Captain Thomas Lucy, shows a black boy in the background dressed in a blue livery coat and red stockings and wearing a gleaming, metal collar around his neck. The National Trust's Charlecote brochure describes the boy as a "black page boy". In 1735 a black child called Philip Lucy was baptised at Charlecote.

 

The lands immediately adjoining the house were further landscaped by Capability Brown in about 1760. This resulted in Charlecote becoming a hostelry destination for notable tourists to Stratford from the late 17th to mid-18th century, including Washington Irving (1818), Sir Walter Scott (1828) and Nathaniel Hawthorn (c 1850).

 

Charlecote was inherited in 1823 by George Hammond Lucy (d 1845), who married Mary Elizabeth Williams of Bodelwyddan Castle, from who's extensive diaries the current "behind the scenes of Victorian Charlecote" are based upon. GH Lucy's second son Henry inherited the estate from his elder brother in 1847. After the deaths of both Mary Elizabeth and Henry in 1890, the house was rented out by Henry's eldest daughter and heiress, Ada Christina (d 1943). She had married Sir Henry Ramsay-Fairfax, (d 1944), a line of the Fairfax Baronets, who on marriage assumed the name Fairfax-Lucy.

 

From this point onwards, the family began selling off parts of the outlying estate to fund their extensive lifestyle, and post-World War II in 1946, Sir Montgomerie Fairfax-Lucy, who had inherited the residual estate from his mother Ada, presented Charlecote to the National Trust in-lieu of death duties. Sir Montgomerie was succeeded in 1965 by his brother, Sir Brian, whose wife, Lady Alice, researched the history of Charlecote, and assisted the National Trust with the restoration of the house.

  

Charlecote Park House is a Grade I Listed Building

 

Charlecote Park

  

Listing Text

  

CHARLECOTE

 

SP2556 CHARLECOTE PARK

1901-1/10/19 Charlecote Park

06/02/52

(Formerly Listed as:

Charlecote Park House)

 

GV I

 

Formerly known as: Charlecote Hall.

Country house. Begun 1558; extended C19. Partly restored and

extended, including east range, 1829-34 by CS Smith;

north-east wing rebuilt and south wing extended 1847-67 by

John Gibson. For George and Mary Elizabeth Lucy.

MATERIALS: brick, that remaining from original building has

diapering in vitrified headers, but much has been replaced in

C19; ashlar dressings; tile roof with brick stacks with

octagonal ashlar shafts and caps.

PLAN: U-plan facing east, with later west range and south

wing.

EXTERIOR: east entrance front of 2 storeys with attic;

3-window range with long gabled projecting wings. Ashlar

plinth, continuous drip courses and coped gables with finials,

sections of strapwork balustrading between gables; quoins.

2-storey ashlar porch has round-headed entrance with flanking

pairs of Ionic pilasters and entablature, round-headed

entrance has panelled jambs, impost course and arch with lion

mask to key and 2 voussoirs, strapwork spandrels and stained

glass to fanlight over paired 4-panel doors; first floor has

Arms of Elizabeth I below projecting ovolo-moulded

cross-mullion window, with flanking pairs of Composite

detached columns; top balustrade with symmetrical balusters

supports Catherine wheel and heraldic beasts holding spears;

original diapered brick to returns.

3-light mullioned and transomed window to each floor to left,

that to first floor with strapwork apron. Large canted bay

window to right of 1:3:1 transomed lights with pierced

rosettes to parapet modelled on that to gatehouse (qv) and

flanked by cross-mullioned windows, all with moulded reveals

and small-paned sashes; C19 gables have 3-light

ovolo-mullioned windows with leaded glazing.

Wings similar, with 2 gables to 5-window inner returns,

ovolo-moulded cross-mullioned windows. Wing to south has much

diaper brickwork and stair window with strapwork apron.

East gable ends have 2-storey canted bay windows dated 1852 to

strapwork panels with Lucy Arms between 1:3:1-light transomed

windows; 3-light attic windows, that to north has patch of

reconstructed diaper brickwork to left.

Octagonal stair turrets to outer angles with 2-light windows,

top entablatures and ogival caps with wind vanes, that to

south mostly original, that to north with round-headed

entrance with enriched key block over studded plank door.

North side has turret to each end, that to west is wholly C19;

3 gables with external stacks with clustered shafts between;

cross-mullioned windows and 3-light transomed stair window on

strapwork apron; 2-light single-chamfered mullioned windows to

turrets.

Single-storey east range of blue brick has 2 bay windows with

octagonal pinnacles with pepper-pot finials and arcaded

balustrades over 1:4:1-light transomed windows; central panel

with Lucy Arms in strapwork setting has date 1833; coped

parapet with 3 gables with lights; returns similar with

3-light transomed windows.

Range behind has 3 renewed central gables and 2 lateral stacks

each with 6 shafts; gable to each end, that to south over

Tudor-arched verandah with arcaded balustrade to central arch

and above, entrance behind arch to left with half-glazed door,

blocked arch to right; first floor with cross-mullioned window

and blocked window, turret to right is wholly C19. South

return has cross-mullioned window to each floor and external

stack with clustered shafts.

South-west wing of 2 storeys; west side is a 7-window range;

recessed block to north end has window to each floor, the next

4 windows between octagonal pinnacles; gabled end breaks

forward under gable with turret to angle; rosette balustrade;

stacks have diagonal brick shafts, gable has lozenge with Lucy

Arms impaling Williams Arms (for Mary Elizabeth Lucy).

Cross-mullioned windows, but 2 southern ground-floor windows

are 3-light and transomed.

South end 4-window range between turrets has cross-mullioned

windows, but each end of first floor has bracketed oriel with

strapwork apron with Lucy/Williams Arms in lozenge and dated

1866, rosette balustrade with to each end a gable with 2-light

single-chamfered mullioned window with label, and 3 similar

windows to each turret, one to each floor.

East side has 3-window range with recessed range to right.

South end has Tudor-arched entrance and 3-light transomed

window, cross-mullioned window and 3-light transomed window to

first floor and gable with lozenge to south end; gable to

full-height kitchen to north has octagonal pinnacles flanking

4-light transomed window and gable above with square panel

with Lucy/Williams Arms to shield; recessed part to north has

loggia with entrance and flanking windows, to left a

single-storey re-entrant block with cross-mullioned windows;

first floor has 5 small sashed windows. South side of

south-east wing has varied brickwork with mullioned and

transomed windows, 2 external stacks and 2 gables with 3-light

windows.

INTERIOR: great hall remodelled by Willement with wood-grained

plaster ceiling with 4-centred ribs and Tudor rose bosses;

armorial glass attributed to Eiffler, restored and extended by

Willement; wainscoting and panelled doors; ashlar fireplace

with paired reeded pilasters and strapwork to entablature, and

fire-dogs; white and pink marble floor, Italian, 1845.

Dining room and library in west wing have rich wood panelling

by JM Willcox of Warwick and strapwork cornices, and strapwork

ceilings with pendants; wallpaper by Willement; dining room

has richly carved buffet, 1858, by Willcox and simple coloured

marble fireplace, the latter with bookshelves and fireplace

with paired pilasters and motto to frieze of fireplace, paired

columns and strapwork frieze to overmantel with armorial

bearings; painted arabesques to shutter backs.

Main staircase, c1700, but probably extensively reconstructed

in C19, open-well with cut string, 3 twisted balusters to a

tread, carved tread ends and ramped handrail;

bolection-moulded panelling in 2 heights, the upper panels and

panelled ceiling probably C19.

Morning room to south of hall has Willement decoration: white

marble Tudor-arched fireplace with cusped panels; plaster

ceiling with bands.

Ebony bedroom, originally billiard room, and drawing room to

north-east wing have 1856 scheme with cornices and

Jacobean-style plaster ceilings; white marble C18-style

fireplaces, that to Ebony Bedroom with Italian inserts with

Lucy crest. Drawing room has gilded and painted cornice and

ceiling, and large pier glasses.

Rooms to first floor originally guest bedrooms: doors with

egg-and-dart and eared architraves; C18-style fireplaces, that

to end room, originally Ebony Bedroom, has wood Rococo-style

fireplace with Chinoiserie panel; 1950s stair to attic.

South-east wing has c1700 stair, probably altered in C19, with

symmetrical balusters with acanthus, closed string; first

floor has wall and ceiling paintings: land and sea battle

scenes painted on canvas, male and female grisaille busts.

First floor has to west the Green Room, with Willement

wallpaper and simple Tudor-arched fireplace with

wallpaper-covered chimney board; adjacent room has marble

fireplace.

Death Room and its dressing room to east end have wallpaper of

gold motifs on white, painted 6-panel doors and architraves,

papier-mache ceilings; bedroom has fireplace with marble

architrave. Adjacent room has bolection-moulded panelling with

c1700 Dutch embossed leather. Stair to attic has c1700

balusters with club-form on acorn. Attics over great hall and

north-east and south-east wings have lime-ash floors and

servants' rooms, each with small annex and corner fireplace;

some bells.

South wing has kitchen with high ceiling and 2

segmental-arched recesses for C19 ranges; Tudor-arched recess

with latticed chamber for smoked meats over door.

Servants' hall has dark marble bolection-moulded fireplace and

cornice; scullery has bread oven, small range, pump and former

south window retaining glass.

First floor has to south end a pair of rooms added for Mary

Elizabeth Lucy in her widowhood; bedroom to east with deep

coved cornice and Adam-style fireplace, sitting room to west

similar, with gold on white wallpaper, white marble fireplace

with painted glass armorial panels and 1830s-40s carpet; door

to spiral timber turret staircase.

Nursery has fireplace with faceted panels and C19 Delft tiles;

probably 1920s wallpaper.

Other rooms with similar fireplaces and coloured glazed tiles.

While dating back to the C16, the house is one of the best

examples of the early C19 Elizabethan Revival style. Property

of National Trust.

(The Buildings of England: Pevsner, N & Wedgwood, A:

Warwickshire: Harmondsworth: 1966-: 227-9; The National Trust

Guide to Charlecote Park: 1991-; Wainwright C: The Romantic

Interior).

 

Listing NGR: SP2590656425

 

This text is from the original listing, and may not necessarily reflect the current setting of the building.

  

Seen from the courtyard beyond the Gatehouse (on the Main Drive).

 

Went straight into the house.

  

stained glass window

Croome Court is a mid 18th century Neo-Palladian mansion surrounded by an extensive landscaped parkland at Croome D'Abitot, near Pershore in south Worcestershire. The mansion and park were designed by Lancelot "Capability" Brown for George Coventry, 6th Earl of Coventry, and was Brown's first landscape design and first major architectural project. Some of the internal rooms of the mansion were designed by Robert Adam.

 

The mansion house is owned by Croome Heritage Trust, and is leased to the National Trust who operate it, along with the surrounding parkland, as a tourist attraction. The National Trust own the surrounding parkland, which is also open to the public.

 

Location[edit]

Croome Court is located near to Croome D'Abitot, in Worcestershire,[1] near Pirton, Worcestershire.[2] The wider estate was established on lands that were once part of the royal forest of Horewell.[3] Traces of these older landscapes, such as unimproved commons and ancient woodlands, can be found across the former Croome Estate.[4]

 

House[edit]

 

Croome Court South Portico

History[edit]

The foundations and core of Croome Court, including the central chimney stack structure, date back to the early 1640s.[5] Substantial changes to this early house were made by Gilbert Coventry, 4th Earl of Coventry.[6]

 

In 1751, George Coventry, the 6th Earl, inherited the estate, along with the existing Jacobean house. He commissioned Lancelot "Capability" Brown, with the assistance of Sanderson Miller, to redesign the house and estate.[7][1] It was Brown's "first flight into the realms of architecture" and a "rare example of his architectural work",[8] and it is an important and seminal work.[9] It was built between 1751 and 1752, and it and Hagley Hall are considered to be the finest examples of Neo-Palladian architecture in Worcestershire. Notable Neo-Palladian features incorporated into Croome Court include the plain exterior and the corner towers with pyramidal roofs (a feature first used by Inigo Jones in the design of Wilton House in Wiltshire).[1] Robert Adam worked on the interior of the building from 1760 onwards.[10]

 

The house has been visited by George III,[2][11] as well as Queen Victoria[7] during summers when she was a child, and George V (then Duke of York).[11]

 

A jam factory was built by the 9th Earl of Coventry, near to Pershore railway station, in about 1880, to provide a market for Vale of Evesham fruit growers in times of surplus. Although the Croome connection with jam making had ceased, during the First World War, the building was leased by the Croome Estate Trust to the Huddersfield Fruit Preserving Company as a pulping station.[12]

 

The First World War deeply affected Croome, with many local casualties, although the house was not requisitioned for the war effort. This is possibly because it was the home of the Lord Lieutenant of the County, who needed a residence for his many official engagements.[13]

 

During the Second World War Croome Court was requisitioned by the Ministry of Works and leased for a year to the Dutch Government as a possible refuge for Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands; to escape the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands. However, evidence shows that they stayed two weeks at the most, perhaps because of the noise and fear created by the proximity of Defford Aerodrome. They later emigrated to Canada.[14]

 

In 1948 the Croome Estate Trust sold the Court, along with 38 acres (15 ha) of land, to the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham, and the mansion became St Joseph's Special School, which was run by nuns[15] from 1950[11] until 1979.[15]

 

The house was listed on 11 August 1952; it is currently Grade I listed.[10]

 

In 1979 the hall was taken over by the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (Hare Krishna movement), who used it as their UK headquarters and a training college[16] called Chaitanya College,[15] run by 25 members of the movement.[16] During their tenure they repainted the Dining Room.[17] In 1984 they had to leave the estate for financial reasons. They held a festival at the hall in 2011.[16]

 

From 1984 onwards various owners tried to use the property as a training centre; apartments; a restaurant and conference centre; and a hotel and golf course,[15] before once more becoming a private family home,[2][15] with outbuildings converted to private houses.[15]

 

The house was purchased by the Croome Heritage Trust, a registered charity,[18] in October 2007,[19] and it is now managed by the National Trust as a tourist attraction. It opened to the public in September 2009, at which point six of the rooms had restored, costing £400,000, including the Saloon. It was estimated that another £4 million[2][20] to £4.8 million would be needed to restore the entire building. Fundraising activities for the restoration included a 2011 raffle for a Morgan sports car organised by Lord and Lady Flight. After the restoration is complete, a 999-year lease on the building will be granted to the National Trust.[21] An oral history project to record recollections about Croome was funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund.[15] As of 2009, the service wing was empty and in need of substantial repair.[22]

 

Exterior[edit]

The mansion is faced with Bath stone,[7] limestone ashlar, and has both north and south facing fronts. It has a basement and two stories, with three stories in the end pavilions. A slate roof, with pyramid roofs over the corner towers, tops the building, along with three pair-linked chimneys along the axis of the house.[10]

 

Both fronts have 11 bays, split into three central sets of three each, and one additional bay each side. The north face has a pedimented centre, with two balustraded staircases leading to a Roman Doric doorcase. The south face has a projecting Ionic tetrastyle portico and Venetian windows. It has a broad staircase, with cast stone sphinxes on each side, leading to a south door topped with a cornice on consoles. The wings have modillion cornice and balustrade.[10]

 

A two-story L-shaped service wing is attached to the east side of the mansion. It is made of red brick and stone, with slate roofs.[10] It was designed by Capability Brown in 1751-2.[22] On the far side of the service wing, a wall connects it to a stable court.[10]

 

Interior[edit]

The interior of the house was designed partially by Capability Brown, with plasterwork by G. Vassalli, and partially by Robert Adam, with plasterwork by J. Rose Jr. It has a central spine corridor. A stone staircase, with iron balusters, is at the east end.[10]

 

The entrance hall is on the north side of the building, and has four fluted Doric columns, along with moulded doorcases. To the east of the entrance hall is the dining room, which has a plaster ceiling and cornice, while to the west is a billiard room, featuring fielded panelling, a plaster cornice, and a rococo fireplace. The three rooms were probably decorated around 1758-59 by Capability Brown.[10] The dining room was vibrantly repainted by the Hare Krishnas in the 1970s-80s.[17]

 

The central room on the south side is a saloon, probably by Brown and Vassalli. It has an elaborate ceiling, with three panels, deep coving, and a cornice, along with two Ionic fireplaces, and Palladian doorcases.[10] George III was entertained by George Coventry, the 6th Earl, in the house's Saloon.[2] A drawing room is to the west of the saloon, and features rococo plasterwork and a marble fireplace.[10]

 

To the east of the saloon is the Tapestry Room.[10] This was designed in 1763-71, based on a design by Robert Adam, and contained tapestries and furniture covers possibly designed by Jacques Germain Soufflot, and made by Manufacture Nationale des Gobelins.[23] Around 1902 the ninth Earl sold the tapestries and seating to a Parisian dealer. In 1949 the Samuel H. Kress Foundation purchased the ceiling, floor, mantlepiece, chair rails, doors and the door surrounds, which were donated to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, in 1958. In 1959 the Kress Foundation also helped the Metropolitan Museum acquire the chair and sofa frames, which they recovered using the original tapestry seats.[7][23] A copy of the ceiling was installed in place of the original.[10] As of 2016, the room is displayed as it would have looked after the tapestries had been sold, with a jug and ewer on display as the only original decoration of the room that remains in it. The adjacent library room is used to explain what happened to the tapestry room;[17] the former library was designed by Adam, and was dismantled except for the marble fireplace.[10]

 

At the west side of the building is a long gallery,[10] which was designed by Robert Adam and installed between 1761 and 1766. It is the best preserved of the original interior (little of the rest has survived in situ).[1] It has an octagonal panelled ceiling, and plaster reliefs of griffins. A half-hexagonal bay faces the garden. The room also contains a marble caryatid fireplace designed by J Wilton.[10] As of 2016, modern sculptures are displayed in empty niches along the Long Gallery

 

wikipedia

PHILIPPINE SEA (June 16, 2022) Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Benfold (DDG 65) launches a Standard Missile (SM) 6 during the coordinated multi-domain, multi-axis, long-range maritime strikes against EX-USS Vandegrift as part of Valiant Shield 2022 (VS 22). Exercises such as Valiant Shield allows the Indo-Pacific Command Joint Task Force the opportunity to integrate forces from all branches of service to conduct long-range, precise, lethal, and overwhelming multi-axis, multi-domain effects that demonstrate the strength and versatility of the Joint Task Force and our commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific. Benfold is assigned to Commander, Task Force (CTF) 71/Destroyer Squadron (DESRON) 15, Navy’s largest forward-deployed DESRON and U.S. 7th Fleet’s principal surface force and is on routine deployment as part of Carrier Strike Group (CSG) 5. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Arthur Rosen)

Michael J Fisher, Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol speaks at a ceremony to commemorate the production, handover and acceptance of the first group of Mobile Surveillance Capability vehicles for enhanced situational awareness along our Nation's borders with Office of Border Patrol and the FLIR company. photo by James Tourtellotte

An illumination round fired from 2nd Battalion, 218th Field Artillery's M119 Howitzer sets with the sun July 27, 2018 during a field training exercise known as eXportable Combat Training Capability (XCTC) at Fort Irwin, California. The exercise is an instrumented brigade field training exercise designed to certify platoon proficiency across the brigade in coordination with First Army. “This exercise keeps our units trained and ready for federal missions and builds upon the brigade’s training from last year’s Warfighter Exercise,” said Col. Eric Riley, commander of the 41st IBCT. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Tyler Meister, 115th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment)

A visit to Berrington Hall near Leominster in Herefordshire.The dome was being restored so part of the building was under scaffolding inside and out (including up the main staircase).

  

Berrington Hall is a country house located about 3 miles (4.8 km) north of Leominster, Herefordshire, England. During the 20th century it was the seat of the Cawley family.

 

It is a neoclassical country house building that Henry Holland designed in 1778-81 for Thomas Harley. It has a somewhat austere exterior, but the interiors are subtle and delicate. Berrington Hall is home to the Elmar Digby furniture collection, paintings by, amongst others, Thomas Luny (1759–1837), and the Charles Paget Wade costume collection from Snowshill, which can be viewed by appointment. The 'below stairs' areas and servants' quarters that are open to the public include a Victorian laundry and Georgian dairy. Berrington has been in the care of the National Trust since 1957 and is, along with its gardens, open to the public.

 

Berrington features Capability Brown's last landscape design. A notable feature is the ha-ha wall, which was subject to extensive renovation in the late 20th century by local craftsmen. Berrington Pool, a lake and island, is a Site of Special Scientific Interest.

  

Berrington had been in the possession of the Cornewall family since 1386, but was sold in 1775 to Thomas Harley, a banker and government contractor who in 1767 had been Lord Mayor of London. He commissioned the rebuilding in 1778-1781 of the present Berrington Hall in place of the previous old house. He made it available to his daughter Anne and her new husband George Rodney, the son of Admiral Rodney. After Harley's death the house descended in the Rodney family for 95 years.

 

In 1901 the Manchester businessman Frederick Cawley MP, later Baron Cawley, purchased the estate. In 1957 the 3rd Lord Cawley transferred it to the Treasury, which passed in on to the National Trust. Lady Crawley was allowed to remain in occupation until her death in 1978.

 

It was classified as a Grade I listed building in 1959.

  

Grade I Listed Building

 

Berrington Hall and Adjoining Outbuildings

  

Listing Text

 

EYE, MORETON &

SO 56 SW ASHTON CP

 

7/2 Berrington Hall and

adjoining outbuildings

11.6.59

GV I

Country house. 1778 - 1781 by Henry Holland for Thomas Harley. Alterations

of c1890 - 1900 involved the addition of a tower at the rear of the house,

this was removed in 1968 and the pediment to this face was reinstated. Set

in parkland laid out by Capability Brown. Brick core, faced with sandstone

ashlar with dressings of the same material, hipped Welsh slate roofs.

Rectangular plan main house with central entrance and stairwell, axial

stacks. Main entrance faces south-west, quadrant walls connect the main

block with the three outbuildings which form a courtyard to the rear (these

adjoining walls have been altered and one has been removed). Main house:

two storeys, attics and basements, south-west entrance front: seven bays

with plinth, dentilled cornice, blocking course and balustraded parapet,

steps up to central projecting tetrastyle Ionic portico; frieze is decorated

only to central part by a floral type design which replaces the original one

of putti, ox heads and garlands, pediment has a lunette window. Dormer windows

to attics with glazing bar sash windows, glazing bar sash windows to first

floor with semi-circular heads and decorative glazing to those flanking the

portico. Square-headed glazing bar sash windows to ground floor, the semi-

circular headed basement windows have rusticated surrounds. Central tall

and narrow semi-circular headed doorway with panelled door has keystone

depicting Roman head flanked by narrow side lights with reliefs depicting

urns above. The north-west front is of five bays with a pediment over the

central three bays. The north-east front to the courtyard entrance is of

2:3:2 bays with central pedimented slightly forward break, semi-circular

headed glazing bar sash windows to upper floor, square-headed windows to

ground floor with central three openings set in semi-circular headed surrounds,

right-hand opening now forms a doorway and has a six-panelled door. The out-

buildings enclosing the courtyard are of two storeys. The range to the north-

east is of nine bays with central pedimented archway flanked by pairs of Doric

pilasters, clock face in pediment, string course to flanking bays with 6-pane

square-headed windows to upper floor and semi-circular headed windows with

decorative glazing to ground floor. The ranges enclosing the courtyard to

the north-west and south-east are also of nine bays, each with similar windows

to the upper and lower floors, the central window to each range having a moulded

architrave, semi-circular headed window and doorway openings to ground floors.

To the outer walls of these flanking ranges (ie facing the gardens) are central

niches with coffered semi-domes with ball cresting above. The south-western

ends of both ranges have a blank semi-circular headed arch flanked by oculi.

Interior: the main house retains many of its original features on both main

floors, with decorative surrounds to doorways, decorative plastered ceilings

and marble fireplaces. The entrance hall has trophies in roundels above the

doors and a central circular ceiling panel is carried to the corners on spandrels,

pedimented surround to doorway opposite the entrance; polychrome marble patterned

floor. The Drawing Room retains original elaborate pelmets above the three

windows, marble fireplace with caryatids and griffon frieze. Delicately patterned

ceiling with painted roundels depicting scenes and characters from classical

mythology and with putti and sea horses; entwined roundels to outer border

which flank central theme. The boudoir has an alcove with segmental arch and

a screen of two blue scagliola columns. The Dining Room has a good marble

fireplace with carved panels to the jambs, decorative plastered and painted

ceiling with central painted roundel and swagged and wreathed plastered

surround. Pedimented bookcases to the library with continuous "greekkey"

type frieze. Decorative painted panels to ceiling depicting authors from

Chaucer to Addison. Central staircase hall is lit by delicately iron ribbed

glass domed lantern, opposite the staircase is a coffered archway; staircase

and landings carried on screens of scagliola columns, decorative dolphin

frieze to the entablature. The staircase has bronze lyre-shaped balustrading.

The outbuilding to the north-west formed the laundry and retains many of its

fittings. A tiled dairy has been restored in the south-east range and the

north-east range contains part stabling. (National Trust, 1986, Berrington Hall:

BoE, p 72).

  

Listing NGR: SO5093063660

 

This text is from the original listing, and may not necessarily reflect the current setting of the building.

  

Walking round the path to the entrance to the hall.

A visit to Charlecote Park for an afternoon visit to this National Trust property in Warwickshire. Near Stratford-upon-Avon. A deer park with a country house in the middle of it.

  

Charlecote Park (grid reference SP263564) is a grand 16th-century country house, surrounded by its own deer park, on the banks of the River Avon near Wellesbourne, about 4 miles (6 km) east of Stratford-upon-Avon and 5.5 miles (9 km) south of Warwick, Warwickshire, England. It has been administered by the National Trust since 1946 and is open to the public. It is a Grade I listed building.

 

The Lucy family owned the land since 1247. Charlecote Park was built in 1558 by Sir Thomas Lucy, and Queen Elizabeth I stayed in the room that is now the drawing room. Although the general outline of the Elizabethan house remains, nowadays it is in fact mostly Victorian. Successive generations of the Lucy family had modified Charlecote Park over the centuries, but in 1823, George Hammond Lucy (High Sheriff of Warwickshire in 1831) inherited the house and set about recreating the house in its original style.

 

Charlecote Park covers 185 acres (75 ha), backing on to the River Avon. William Shakespeare has been alleged to have poached rabbits and deer in the park as a young man and been brought before magistrates as a result.

 

From 1605 to 1640 the house was organised by Sir Thomas Lucy. He had twelve children with Lady Alice Lucy who ran the house after he died. She was known for her piety and distributing alms to the poor each Christmas. Her eldest three sons inherited the house in turn and it then fell to her grandchild Sir Davenport Lucy.

 

In the Tudor great hall, the 1680 painting Charlecote Park by Sir Godfrey Kneller, is said to be one of the earliest depictions of a black presence in the West Midlands (excluding Roman legionnaires). The painting, of Captain Thomas Lucy, shows a black boy in the background dressed in a blue livery coat and red stockings and wearing a gleaming, metal collar around his neck. The National Trust's Charlecote brochure describes the boy as a "black page boy". In 1735 a black child called Philip Lucy was baptised at Charlecote.

 

The lands immediately adjoining the house were further landscaped by Capability Brown in about 1760. This resulted in Charlecote becoming a hostelry destination for notable tourists to Stratford from the late 17th to mid-18th century, including Washington Irving (1818), Sir Walter Scott (1828) and Nathaniel Hawthorn (c 1850).

 

Charlecote was inherited in 1823 by George Hammond Lucy (d 1845), who married Mary Elizabeth Williams of Bodelwyddan Castle, from who's extensive diaries the current "behind the scenes of Victorian Charlecote" are based upon. GH Lucy's second son Henry inherited the estate from his elder brother in 1847. After the deaths of both Mary Elizabeth and Henry in 1890, the house was rented out by Henry's eldest daughter and heiress, Ada Christina (d 1943). She had married Sir Henry Ramsay-Fairfax, (d 1944), a line of the Fairfax Baronets, who on marriage assumed the name Fairfax-Lucy.

 

From this point onwards, the family began selling off parts of the outlying estate to fund their extensive lifestyle, and post-World War II in 1946, Sir Montgomerie Fairfax-Lucy, who had inherited the residual estate from his mother Ada, presented Charlecote to the National Trust in-lieu of death duties. Sir Montgomerie was succeeded in 1965 by his brother, Sir Brian, whose wife, Lady Alice, researched the history of Charlecote, and assisted the National Trust with the restoration of the house.

  

Charlecote Park House is a Grade I Listed Building

 

Charlecote Park

  

Listing Text

  

CHARLECOTE

 

SP2556 CHARLECOTE PARK

1901-1/10/19 Charlecote Park

06/02/52

(Formerly Listed as:

Charlecote Park House)

 

GV I

 

Formerly known as: Charlecote Hall.

Country house. Begun 1558; extended C19. Partly restored and

extended, including east range, 1829-34 by CS Smith;

north-east wing rebuilt and south wing extended 1847-67 by

John Gibson. For George and Mary Elizabeth Lucy.

MATERIALS: brick, that remaining from original building has

diapering in vitrified headers, but much has been replaced in

C19; ashlar dressings; tile roof with brick stacks with

octagonal ashlar shafts and caps.

PLAN: U-plan facing east, with later west range and south

wing.

EXTERIOR: east entrance front of 2 storeys with attic;

3-window range with long gabled projecting wings. Ashlar

plinth, continuous drip courses and coped gables with finials,

sections of strapwork balustrading between gables; quoins.

2-storey ashlar porch has round-headed entrance with flanking

pairs of Ionic pilasters and entablature, round-headed

entrance has panelled jambs, impost course and arch with lion

mask to key and 2 voussoirs, strapwork spandrels and stained

glass to fanlight over paired 4-panel doors; first floor has

Arms of Elizabeth I below projecting ovolo-moulded

cross-mullion window, with flanking pairs of Composite

detached columns; top balustrade with symmetrical balusters

supports Catherine wheel and heraldic beasts holding spears;

original diapered brick to returns.

3-light mullioned and transomed window to each floor to left,

that to first floor with strapwork apron. Large canted bay

window to right of 1:3:1 transomed lights with pierced

rosettes to parapet modelled on that to gatehouse (qv) and

flanked by cross-mullioned windows, all with moulded reveals

and small-paned sashes; C19 gables have 3-light

ovolo-mullioned windows with leaded glazing.

Wings similar, with 2 gables to 5-window inner returns,

ovolo-moulded cross-mullioned windows. Wing to south has much

diaper brickwork and stair window with strapwork apron.

East gable ends have 2-storey canted bay windows dated 1852 to

strapwork panels with Lucy Arms between 1:3:1-light transomed

windows; 3-light attic windows, that to north has patch of

reconstructed diaper brickwork to left.

Octagonal stair turrets to outer angles with 2-light windows,

top entablatures and ogival caps with wind vanes, that to

south mostly original, that to north with round-headed

entrance with enriched key block over studded plank door.

North side has turret to each end, that to west is wholly C19;

3 gables with external stacks with clustered shafts between;

cross-mullioned windows and 3-light transomed stair window on

strapwork apron; 2-light single-chamfered mullioned windows to

turrets.

Single-storey east range of blue brick has 2 bay windows with

octagonal pinnacles with pepper-pot finials and arcaded

balustrades over 1:4:1-light transomed windows; central panel

with Lucy Arms in strapwork setting has date 1833; coped

parapet with 3 gables with lights; returns similar with

3-light transomed windows.

Range behind has 3 renewed central gables and 2 lateral stacks

each with 6 shafts; gable to each end, that to south over

Tudor-arched verandah with arcaded balustrade to central arch

and above, entrance behind arch to left with half-glazed door,

blocked arch to right; first floor with cross-mullioned window

and blocked window, turret to right is wholly C19. South

return has cross-mullioned window to each floor and external

stack with clustered shafts.

South-west wing of 2 storeys; west side is a 7-window range;

recessed block to north end has window to each floor, the next

4 windows between octagonal pinnacles; gabled end breaks

forward under gable with turret to angle; rosette balustrade;

stacks have diagonal brick shafts, gable has lozenge with Lucy

Arms impaling Williams Arms (for Mary Elizabeth Lucy).

Cross-mullioned windows, but 2 southern ground-floor windows

are 3-light and transomed.

South end 4-window range between turrets has cross-mullioned

windows, but each end of first floor has bracketed oriel with

strapwork apron with Lucy/Williams Arms in lozenge and dated

1866, rosette balustrade with to each end a gable with 2-light

single-chamfered mullioned window with label, and 3 similar

windows to each turret, one to each floor.

East side has 3-window range with recessed range to right.

South end has Tudor-arched entrance and 3-light transomed

window, cross-mullioned window and 3-light transomed window to

first floor and gable with lozenge to south end; gable to

full-height kitchen to north has octagonal pinnacles flanking

4-light transomed window and gable above with square panel

with Lucy/Williams Arms to shield; recessed part to north has

loggia with entrance and flanking windows, to left a

single-storey re-entrant block with cross-mullioned windows;

first floor has 5 small sashed windows. South side of

south-east wing has varied brickwork with mullioned and

transomed windows, 2 external stacks and 2 gables with 3-light

windows.

INTERIOR: great hall remodelled by Willement with wood-grained

plaster ceiling with 4-centred ribs and Tudor rose bosses;

armorial glass attributed to Eiffler, restored and extended by

Willement; wainscoting and panelled doors; ashlar fireplace

with paired reeded pilasters and strapwork to entablature, and

fire-dogs; white and pink marble floor, Italian, 1845.

Dining room and library in west wing have rich wood panelling

by JM Willcox of Warwick and strapwork cornices, and strapwork

ceilings with pendants; wallpaper by Willement; dining room

has richly carved buffet, 1858, by Willcox and simple coloured

marble fireplace, the latter with bookshelves and fireplace

with paired pilasters and motto to frieze of fireplace, paired

columns and strapwork frieze to overmantel with armorial

bearings; painted arabesques to shutter backs.

Main staircase, c1700, but probably extensively reconstructed

in C19, open-well with cut string, 3 twisted balusters to a

tread, carved tread ends and ramped handrail;

bolection-moulded panelling in 2 heights, the upper panels and

panelled ceiling probably C19.

Morning room to south of hall has Willement decoration: white

marble Tudor-arched fireplace with cusped panels; plaster

ceiling with bands.

Ebony bedroom, originally billiard room, and drawing room to

north-east wing have 1856 scheme with cornices and

Jacobean-style plaster ceilings; white marble C18-style

fireplaces, that to Ebony Bedroom with Italian inserts with

Lucy crest. Drawing room has gilded and painted cornice and

ceiling, and large pier glasses.

Rooms to first floor originally guest bedrooms: doors with

egg-and-dart and eared architraves; C18-style fireplaces, that

to end room, originally Ebony Bedroom, has wood Rococo-style

fireplace with Chinoiserie panel; 1950s stair to attic.

South-east wing has c1700 stair, probably altered in C19, with

symmetrical balusters with acanthus, closed string; first

floor has wall and ceiling paintings: land and sea battle

scenes painted on canvas, male and female grisaille busts.

First floor has to west the Green Room, with Willement

wallpaper and simple Tudor-arched fireplace with

wallpaper-covered chimney board; adjacent room has marble

fireplace.

Death Room and its dressing room to east end have wallpaper of

gold motifs on white, painted 6-panel doors and architraves,

papier-mache ceilings; bedroom has fireplace with marble

architrave. Adjacent room has bolection-moulded panelling with

c1700 Dutch embossed leather. Stair to attic has c1700

balusters with club-form on acorn. Attics over great hall and

north-east and south-east wings have lime-ash floors and

servants' rooms, each with small annex and corner fireplace;

some bells.

South wing has kitchen with high ceiling and 2

segmental-arched recesses for C19 ranges; Tudor-arched recess

with latticed chamber for smoked meats over door.

Servants' hall has dark marble bolection-moulded fireplace and

cornice; scullery has bread oven, small range, pump and former

south window retaining glass.

First floor has to south end a pair of rooms added for Mary

Elizabeth Lucy in her widowhood; bedroom to east with deep

coved cornice and Adam-style fireplace, sitting room to west

similar, with gold on white wallpaper, white marble fireplace

with painted glass armorial panels and 1830s-40s carpet; door

to spiral timber turret staircase.

Nursery has fireplace with faceted panels and C19 Delft tiles;

probably 1920s wallpaper.

Other rooms with similar fireplaces and coloured glazed tiles.

While dating back to the C16, the house is one of the best

examples of the early C19 Elizabethan Revival style. Property

of National Trust.

(The Buildings of England: Pevsner, N & Wedgwood, A:

Warwickshire: Harmondsworth: 1966-: 227-9; The National Trust

Guide to Charlecote Park: 1991-; Wainwright C: The Romantic

Interior).

 

Listing NGR: SP2590656425

 

This text is from the original listing, and may not necessarily reflect the current setting of the building.

  

From the garden that is the Parterre.

In June 1938, Lockheed began design work on an airliner to satisfy a Transcontinental Western & Air (later Trans-World Airlines) (TWA), requirement for a non-stop transcontinental airliner with a 3,500-mile range and 6,000 lb. payload capability. Construction of a prototype began in 1940. The U.S. was soon involved in the Second World War and all transport production was directed to military needs and consequently the prototype first flew on January 9, 1943, as a military aircraft. Hydraulic-powered controls were used, full feathering and reversing propellers were also installed. First known by its civil designator as Model 049, it soon became better known during wartime by its military designation, the C-69 Constellation. Improvements were steadily made, beginning with the L-649, which was the first Constellation built as a commercial type and the L-749 which was the long-range version of the 649.

  

The next stage in development led to the L-1049 Super Constellation. The first prototype Super Constellation was a "stretched" version of the original Model 049 (C-69), modified by lengthening the fuselage from 95’ 2" to 113’ 7", adding more fuel capacity, more powerful engines, higher gross weight, and increasing its tourist-class seating from 69 to 92. These L-1049 aircraft were powered by four 2700 hp Wright engines. The prototype aircraft was first flown on October 13, 1950. The production version of the Model L-1049, of which fourteen were built for Eastern Airlines, and ten for TWA, ended up with a strengthened fuselage, stiffened outer wing panels and rectangular windows instead of the Constellation’s round ones. This production version was first flown on July 14, 1951, and the type entered service on December 7, 1951, with Eastern Airlines (EAL). The last Model 1049 produced was delivered in September 1952. Passenger accommodations on the 1049 varied - 88 for Eastern; 65 over water or 75 domestic for TWA, with adaptation to 102 in high density configuration. The flight crew consisted of three, with two cabin attendants.

  

The Model 1049 was followed by an A version (military WV-2, WV-3, and RC-121D) the B version (USN R7V-1, USAF RC-121C, the presidential VC-121E), and the C version, the first commercial transport certificated with turbo-compound engines. These Double Cyclone Wright engines had three "blow-down" turbines, which converted the heat energy of exhaust gases into additional power, with a 20% reduction in fuel consumption.

  

The engine produced 3,250 h.p. for take-off for which the aircraft weight had been increased to 133,000 lb. The Model 1049C, Turbo-Cyclone-powered Super Constellation began flight trials on February 17, 1953. A convertible model, the 1049D was built for Seaboard and Western Airlines in 1954. They were fitted with reinforced flooring and they had main deck cargo loading doors on the part side of the fuselage, fore and aft of the wings. They could carry either 18 tons of freight or up to 104 passengers. Maximum take—off weight was 135,400 lb. A Model 1049E was delivered between May 1954 and April 1955 which was identical to the 1049C but with the increased take-off and landing weight of the 1049D. Next on the model list was the Model 1049F, which was Lockheed’s designation for 33 C-121C cargo/personnel transports built for the USAF and fitted with stronger landing gear. The F was followed by a "G" model which was determined to be the most successful version of the Super Constellation. It was powered by 3,400 h.p. engines, it had longer range than the E, and the maximum take-off weight was increased to 137,500 lb. with some models modified to 140,000 lb. Often known as Super Gs, 42 of these aircraft were delivered to domestic carriers (20 to TWA, 10 to EAL, and 4 to NW), and 50 to foreign carriers. The final version to the Super Constellation was the Model 1049H, a combination of Model 1049D, and the convertible and improved Model 1049G.

  

The Super Constellation and its derivatives represent, along with the Douglas DC-7, the ultimate step in the development of longer range, more capacity and more powerful piston-engined aircraft to meet the needs of both commercial and military aviation. Eastern Air Lines, the first airline to order Super Constellations, introduced the type on its New York-Miami route on December 15, 1951. It was able to take advantage of the 1049s additional capacity to absorb an increased holiday seasonal demand. A decade later on April 30, 1961, Eastern inaugurated its revolutionary air shuttle, no-reservation service, Washington-New York-Boston with Super Constellations. Incidentally, as it turns out, the last use of the Super Constellations by a major U.S. domestic airline was a backup for the shuttle until February 1968.

  

TWA, a co-sponsor with EAL on the design of the Super Constellation, first used the Model 1049 on its domestic network in September 1952, and when it received the higher performance "C" version, it began scheduled non-stop transcontinental service on October 19, 1953, a first for the industry. On its trans-Atlantic routes, TWA made use of its early Super Constellation models, but on November 1, 1955, it could offer improved service, using its newer Model l049Gs which enabled it to operate non-stop most of the time, at least in the eastbound direction.

  

Over the Atlantic and other long distance routes, the Super Constellation was also operated by several former Constellation operators, until Lockheed was again challenged by Douglas and its DC-7C, the first aircraft capable of flying non-stop in both directions over the North Atlantic. To compete, Lockheed responded by mating the Super Constellation’s fuselage and tail surfaces with an entirely new wing, resulting in a major redesign. The outcome, the Model 1649A Starliner, which entered service on June 1, 1957, it was the most attractive of the Constellation series, but its success was short lived for in six months it was overtaken in 1958 by the faster, turbine-powered (Bristol Britannia) and jet aircraft (the Boeing 707-120) which finally made all propeller-driven aircraft obsolescent in October 1958. A total of 44 Lockheed L-1649As were built, 29 went to TWA, 10 to Air France, 4 to Lufthansa.

  

When the age of piston-powered passenger transport aircraft was coming to a close, Lockheed offered to carriers a convertible Model 1049H, suggesting that when they were no longer competitive in the passenger market they could convert to carrying cargo. This second hand market did materialize briefly with the H model but the market for 1049s soon dried up as they were becoming too expensive to operate and maintain. The engines were giving problems not only in the Lockheed Super Connies, but also in the Douglas DC-7s, and the aircraft were becoming known as the "world’s best trimotors." A total of 579 Super Constellations were built but by the end of 1980 only four Super Constellations remained in airline service..

  

The Museum’s Lockheed C-121C (1049F-55-96), with former Air Force serial number 54-177, and now registered N-1104W, is one of the thirty-three C-l2lCs delivered to the USAF and the Atlantic Division of the Military Air Transport Service at Charleston AFB, South Carolina. This airplane arrived there in March 1956 and was assigned to the 1608th Air Transport Wing. Its original configuration was that of an over-water cargo/passenger transport, having eight crew members and accommodations for up to 80 passengers.

  

While with the 1608th ATW, the "Super Connies" flew throughout the Caribbean, made crossings of the North and South Atlantic to Europe, the Mediterranean, the Middle East and as far east as India. They participated in the Hungarian airlift during 1956-57, carrying refugees from Eastern Europe to the U.S. and flew troops to Lebanon during the crisis there in 1958. In general, this "Connie" and others of the unit flew a variety of transport missions including cargo, passenger, medical evacuation, and humanitarian support.

  

On October 30, 1962, the Museum’s C-121C left the regular USAF and was transferred to the 183rd Air Transport Squadron of the Mississippi Air National Guard. This unit was re-designated the 183rd Military Airlift Squadron as of January 1, 1966. While with the 183rd, it flew transport, evacuation, and support missions across the North Atlantic. It remained with the Guard unit until April 19, 1967, at which time it was transferred to the West Virginia ANG and the 167th Military Airlift Squadron. This and other C-l2lCs of this unit flew across the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, the Caribbean, and to South America, taking part in operation "Creek Guardlift" in Europe from June 1971 to March 1972.

  

This Super Constellation served with the 167th until 1972 and was again transferred, this time to the 193rd Tactical Electronic Warfare (TEW) Squadron, Pennsylvania ANG, at Olmstead AFB, Middletown, Pennsylvania. This squadron had one other C-121, an electronic countermeasure configured aircraft. Together they took part in many exercises and training missions such as "Reforger VI," "Flintlock" and "Northern Merger" in 1974. While operating out of Ramey AFB in Puerto Rico, they took part in "Gallant Shield" and "Solid Shield," both in 1975.

  

This "Connie" remained with the 193rd and operations with the ANG until November 1977, when it was retired after 21½ years of military service, thousands of flying hours, and countless ocean crossings, which for propeller driven aircraft were long endurance flights often exceeding 12 or 14 hours. When taken out of service, it was transferred to the Military Aircraft Storage and Disposition Center (MASDC), at Davis Monthan AFB, Arizona, for storage. It remained there until August 1981, at which time it was sold at auction to Ascher Ward of Classic Air Inc., and flown to Van Nuys Airport, California, where the new company was forming. As a civil aircraft in a hoped-for new career, it was assigned FAA registration number Nll04W. It retained its 193rd TEW paint scheme of a royal blue cheat-line outlined in gold, with a white cabin roof and empennage, and pale blue under surfaces. It carried its small serial number on the left side under the stabilizer and a U.S. flag on the center fin.

  

The newly formed company Classic Air Inc., which intended to operate two or three passenger—carrying "Connies" between Los Angeles and Reno, Nevada, failed to receive FAA approval and the airplanes remained dormant. At this time the National Air and Space Museum was seeking a Super Constellation. Mr. Darryl Greenameyer soon became a party to this transaction as he had acquired two of the Constellations from Air Classics. He negotiated a trade with NASM a C-121C, NllO4W in exchange for two Grumman HU-16 Albatrosses drawn from the remaining holdings of spare Albatross belonging to the Smithsonian, and which had been used in support of one Albatross that was operated by the Museum of Natural History.

Joint capability demonstration.

 

Trident Juncture 2018 is NATO’s largest exercise in many years, bringing together around 50,000 personnel from all 29 Allies, plus partners Finland and Sweden. Around 65 vessels, 250 aircraft and 10,000 vehicles will participate.

Alaska Army National Guard Soldiers with Avalanche Company, 1-297th Infantry Battalion, practice squad and platoon situational training exercises (STX) at Alcantra armory in Wasilla, Alaska, March 11, 2022. An STX is a short, scenario-driven, mission-oriented exercise designed to train one collective task or a group of related tasks or battle drills. For the A-Co. Soldiers, the STX allows for evaluation of basic Soldier skills and leadership competencies to determine proficiency and certify the platoon to conduct live-fire exercises. It also reinforces previous training that the Soldiers have completed by bringing the entire platoon together to further prepare the unit for live-fire training. The infantrymen are preparing to participate in the Army National Guard’s eXportable Combat Training Capability (XCTC) program, which is a brigade field training exercise similar to a Combat Training Center. They will participate in an XCTC rotation at Camp Roberts, California, July 2022. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Spc. Grace Nechanicky)

Pasted from Wikipedia: Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey

 

• • • • •

 

The Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey is a multi-mission, military, tiltrotor aircraft with both a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), and short takeoff and landing (STOL) capability. It is designed to combine the functionality of a conventional helicopter with the long-range, high-speed cruise performance of a turboprop aircraft.

 

The V-22 originated from the U.S. Department of Defense Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program started in 1981. It was developed jointly by the Bell Helicopter, and Boeing Helicopters team, known as Bell Boeing, which produce the aircraft.[4] The V-22 first flew in 1989, and began years of flight testing and design alterations.

 

The United States Marine Corps began crew training for the Osprey in 2000, and fielded it in 2007. The Osprey's other operator, the U.S. Air Force fielded their version of the tiltrotor in 2009. Since entering service with the U.S. Marine Corps and Air Force, the Osprey has been deployed for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

Contents

 

• 1 Development

•• 1.1 Early development

•• 1.2 Flight testing and design changes

•• 1.3 Controversy

•• 1.4 Recent development

• 2 Design

• 3 Operational history

•• 3.1 US Marine Corps

•• 3.2 US Air Force

•• 3.3 Potential operators

• 4 Variants

• 5 Operators

• 6 Notable accidents

• 7 Specifications (MV-22B)

• 8 Notable appearances in media

• 9 See also

• 10 References

• 11 External links

 

Development

 

Early development

 

The failure of the Iran hostage rescue mission in 1980 demonstrated to the United States military a need[5] for "a new type of aircraft, that could not only take off and land vertically but also could carry combat troops, and do so at speed."[6] The U.S. Department of Defense began the Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program in 1981, under U.S. Army leadership. Later the U.S. Navy/Marine Corps took the lead.[7][8] The JVX combined requirements from the Marine Corps, Air Force, Army and Navy.[9][10] A request for proposals (RFP) was issued in December 1982 for JVX preliminary design work. Interest in the program was expressed by Aérospatiale, Bell Helicopter, Boeing Vertol, Grumman, Lockheed, and Westland. The DoD pushed for contractors to form teams. Bell partnered with Boeing Vertol. The Bell Boeing team submitted a proposal for a enlarged version of the Bell XV-15 prototype on 17 February 1983. This was the only proposal received and a preliminary design contract was awarded on 26 April 1983.[11][12]

 

The JVX aircraft was designated V-22 Osprey on 15 January 1985; by March that same year the first six prototypes were being produced, and Boeing Vertol was expanded to deal with the project workload.[13][14] Work has been split evenly between Bell and Boeing. Bell Helicopter manufactures and integrates the wing, nacelles, rotors, drive system, tail surfaces, and aft ramp, as well as integrates the Rolls-Royce engines and performs final assembly. Boeing Helicopters manufactures and integrates the fuselage, cockpit, avionics, and flight controls.[4][15] The USMC variant of the Osprey received the MV-22 designation and the Air Force variant received CV-22; reversed from normal procedure to prevent Marine Ospreys from having a conflicting designation with aircraft carriers (CV).[16] Full-scale development of the V-22 tilt-rotor aircraft began in 1986.[2] On 3 May 1986 the Bell-Boeing partnership was awarded a $1.714 billion contract for V-22 aircraft by the Navy, thus at this point the project had acquisition plans with all four arms of the U.S. military.[17]

 

The first V-22 was rolled out with significant media attention in May 1988.[18][19] However the project suffered several political blows. Firstly in the same year, the Army left the program, citing a need to focus its budget on more immediate aviation programs.[20] The project also faced considerable dialogue in the Senate, surviving two votes that both could have resulted in cancellation.[21][22] Despite the Senate's decision, the Department of Defense instructed the Navy not to spend more money on the Osprey.[23] At the same time, the Bush administration sought the cancellation of the project.[23]

 

Flight testing and design changes

 

The first of six MV-22 prototypes first flew on 19 March 1989 in the helicopter mode,[24] and on 14 September 1989 as a fixed-wing plane.[25] The third and fourth prototypes successfully completed the Osprey's first Sea Trials on the USS Wasp in December 1990.[26] However, the fourth and fifth prototypes crashed in 1991-92.[27] Flight tests were resumed in August 1993 after changes were incorporated in the prototypes.[2] From October 1992 until April 1993, Bell and Boeing redesigned the V-22 to reduce empty weight, simplify manufacture and reduce production costs. This redesigned version became the B-model.[28]

 

Flight testing of four full-scale development V-22s began in early 1997 when the first pre-production V-22 was delivered to the Naval Air Warfare Test Center, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. The first EMD flight took place on 5 February 1997. The first of four low rate initial production aircraft, ordered on 28 April 1997, was delivered on 27 May 1999. Osprey number 10 completed the program's second Sea Trials, this time from the USS Saipan in January 1999.[2] During external load testing in April 1999, Boeing used a V-22 to lift and transport the M777 howitzer.[29] In 2000, Boeing announced that the V-22 would be fitted with a nose-mounted GAU-19 Gatling gun,[30] but the GAU-19 gun was later canceled.[31]

 

In 2000, there were two further fatal crashes, killing a total of 19 Marines, and the production was again halted while the cause of these crashes was investigated and various parts were redesigned.[32] The V-22 completed its final operational evaluation in June 2005. The evaluation was deemed successful; events included long range deployments, high altitude, desert and shipboard operations. The problems identified in various accidents had been addressed.[33]

 

Controversy

 

The V-22's development process has been long and controversial, partly due to its large cost increases.[34] When the development budget, first planned for $2.5 billion in 1986, increased to a projected $30 billion in 1988, then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney tried to zero out its funding. He was eventually overruled by Congress.[32] As of 2008, $27 billion have been spent on the Osprey program and another $27.2 billion will be required to complete planned production numbers by the end of the program.[2]

 

The V-22 squadron's former commander at Marine Corps Air Station New River, Lt. Colonel Odin Lieberman, was relieved of duty in 2001 after allegations that he instructed his unit that they needed to falsify maintenance records to make the plane appear more reliable.[2][35] Three officers were later implicated in the falsification scandal.[34]

 

The aircraft is incapable of autorotation, and is therefore unable to land safely in helicopter mode if both engines fail. A director of the Pentagon's testing office in 2005 said that if the Osprey loses power while flying like a helicopter below 1,600 feet (490 m), emergency landings "are not likely to be survivable". But Captain Justin (Moon) McKinney, a V-22 pilot, says that this will not be a problem, "We can turn it into a plane and glide it down, just like a C-130".[31] A complete loss of power would require the failure of both engines, as a drive shaft connects the nacelles through the wing; one engine can power both proprotors.[36] While vortex ring state (VRS) contributed to a deadly V-22 accident, the aircraft is less susceptible to the condition than conventional helicopters and recovers more quickly.[5] The Marines now train new pilots in the recognition of and recovery from VRS and have instituted operational envelope limits and instrumentation to help pilots avoid VRS conditions.[32][37]

 

It was planned in 2000 to equip all V-22s with a nose-mounted Gatling gun, to provide "the V-22 with a strong defensive firepower capability to greatly increase the aircraft's survivability in hostile actions."[30] The nose gun project was canceled however, leading to criticism by retired Marine Corps Commandant General James L. Jones, who is not satisfied with the current V-22 armament.[31] A belly-mounted turret was later installed on some of the first V-22s sent to the War in Afghanistan in 2009.[38]

 

With the first combat deployment of the MV-22 in October 2007, Time Magazine ran an article condemning the aircraft as unsafe, overpriced, and completely inadequate.[31] The Marine Corps, however, responded with the assertion that much of the article's data were dated, obsolete, inaccurate, and reflected expectations that ran too high for any new field of aircraft.[39]

 

Recent development

 

On 28 September 2005, the Pentagon formally approved full-rate production for the V-22.[40] The plan is to boost production from 11 a year to between 24 and 48 a year by 2012. Of the 458 total planned, 360 are for the Marine Corps, 48 for the Navy, and 50 for the Air Force at an average cost of $110 million per aircraft, including development costs.[2] The V-22 had an incremental flyaway cost of $70 million per aircraft in 2007,[3] but the Navy hopes to shave about $10 million off that cost after a five-year production contract starts in 2008.[41]

 

The Bell-Boeing Joint Project Office in Amarillo, Texas will design a new integrated avionics processor to resolve electronics obsolescence issues and add new network capabilities.[42]

 

Design

 

The Osprey is the world's first production tiltrotor aircraft, with one three-bladed proprotor, turboprop engine, and transmission nacelle mounted on each wingtip. It is classified as a powered lift aircraft by the Federal Aviation Administration.[43] For takeoff and landing, it typically operates as a helicopter with the nacelles vertical (rotors horizontal). Once airborne, the nacelles rotate forward 90° in as little as 12 seconds for horizontal flight, converting the V-22 to a more fuel-efficient, higher-speed turboprop airplane. STOL rolling-takeoff and landing capability is achieved by having the nacelles tilted forward up to 45°. For compact storage and transport, the V-22's wing rotates to align, front-to-back, with the fuselage. The proprotors can also fold in a sequence taking 90 seconds.[44]

 

Most Osprey missions will use fixed wing flight 75 percent or more of the time, reducing wear and tear on the aircraft and reducing operational costs.[45] This fixed wing flight is higher than typical helicopter missions allowing longer range line-of-sight communications and so improved command and control.[2] Boeing has stated the V-22 design loses 10% of its vertical lift over a Tiltwing design when operating in helicopter mode because of airflow resistance due to the wings, but that the Tiltrotor design has better short takeoff and landing performance.[46]

 

The V-22 is equipped with a glass cockpit, which incorporates four Multi-function displays (MFDs) and one shared Central Display Unit (CDU), allowing the pilots to display a variety of images including: digimaps centered or decentered on current position, FLIR imagery, primary flight instruments, navigation (TACAN, VOR, ILS, GPS, INS), and system status. The flight director panel of the Cockpit Management System (CMS) allows for fully-coupled (aka: autopilot) functions which will take the aircraft from forward flight into a 50-foot hover with no pilot interaction other than programming the system.[47] The glass cockpit of the canceled CH-46X was derived from the V-22.[48]

 

The V-22 is a fly-by-wire aircraft with triple-redundant flight control systems.[49] With the nacelles pointing straight up in conversion mode at 90° the flight computers command the aircraft to fly like a helicopter, with cyclic forces being applied to a conventional swashplate at the rotor hub. With the nacelles in airplane mode (0°) the flaperons, rudder, and elevator fly the aircraft like an airplane. This is a gradual transition and occurs over the rotation range of the nacelles. The lower the nacelles, the greater effect of the airplane-mode control surfaces.[50] The nacelles can rotate past vertical to 97.5° for rearward flight.[51][52]

 

The Osprey can be armed with one M240 7.62x51mm NATO (.308 in caliber) or M2 .50 in caliber (12.7 mm) machine gun on the loading ramp, that can be fired rearward when the ramp is lowered. A GAU-19 three-barrel .50 in gatling gun mounted below the V-22's nose has also been studied for future upgrade.[31][53] BAE Systems developed a remotely operated turreted weapons system for the V-22,[54] which was installed on half of the first V-22s deployed to Afghanistan in 2009.[38] The 7.62 mm belly gun turret is remotely operated by a gunner inside the aircraft, who acquires targets with a separate pod using color television and forward looking infrared imagery.

 

U.S. Naval Air Systems Command is working on upgrades to increase the maximum speed from 250 knots (460 km/h; 290 mph) to 270 knots (500 km/h; 310 mph), increase helicopter mode altitude limit from 10,000 feet (3,000 m) to 12,000 feet (3,700 m) or 14,000 feet (4,300 m), and increase lift performance.[55]

 

Operational history

 

US Marine Corps

 

Marine Corps crew training on the Osprey has been conducted by VMMT-204 since March 2000. On 3 June 2005, the Marine Corps helicopter squadron Marine Medium Helicopter 263 (HMM-263), stood down to begin the process of transitioning to the MV-22 Osprey.[56] On 8 December 2005, Lieutenant General Amos, commander of the II MEF, accepted the delivery of the first fleet of MV-22s, delivered to HMM-263. The unit reactivated on 3 March 2006 as the first MV-22 squadron and was redesignated VMM-263. On 31 August 2006, VMM-162 (the former HMM-162) followed suit. On 23 March 2007, HMM-266 became Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 266 (VMM-266) at Marine Corps Air Station New River, North Carolina.[57]

 

The Osprey has been replacing existing CH-46 Sea Knight squadrons.[58] The MV-22 reached initial operational capability (IOC) with the U.S. Marine Corps on 13 June 2007.[1] On 10 July 2007 an MV-22 Osprey landed aboard the Royal Navy aircraft carrier, HMS Illustrious in the Atlantic Ocean. This marked the first time a V-22 had landed on any non-U.S. vessel.[59]

 

On 13 April 2007, the U.S. Marine Corps announced that it would be sending ten V-22 aircraft to Iraq, the Osprey's first combat deployment. Marine Corps Commandant, General James Conway, indicated that over 150 Marines would accompany the Osprey set for September deployment to Al-Asad Airfield.[60][61] On 17 September 2007, ten MV-22Bs of VMM-263 left for Iraq aboard the USS Wasp. The decision to use a ship rather than use the Osprey's self-deployment capability was made because of concerns over icing during the North Atlantic portion of the trip, lack of available KC-130s for mid-air refueling, and the availability of the USS Wasp.[62]

 

The Osprey has provided support in Iraq, racking up some 2,000 flight hours over three months with a mission capable availability rate of 68.1% as of late-January 2008.[63] They are primarily used in Iraq's western Anbar province for routine cargo and troop movements, and also for riskier "aero-scout" missions. General David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, used one to fly around Iraq on Christmas Day 2007 to visit troops.[64] Then-presidential candidate Barack Obama also flew in Ospreys during his high profile 2008 tour of Iraq.[65]

 

The only major problem has been obtaining the necessary spare parts to maintain the aircraft.[66] The V-22 had flown 3,000 sorties totaling 5,200 hours in Iraq as of July 2008.[67] USMC leadership expect to deploy MV-22s to Afghanistan in 2009.[66][68] General George J. Trautman, III praised the increased range of the V-22 over the legacy helicopters in Iraq and said that "it turned his battle space from the size of Texas into the size of Rhode Island."[69]

 

Naval Air Systems Command has devised a temporary fix for sailors to place portable heat shields under Osprey engines to prevent damage to the decks of some of the Navy's smaller amphibious ships, but they determined that a long term solution to the problem would require these decks be redesigned with heat resistant deck coatings, passive thermal barriers and changes in ship structure in order to operate V-22s and F-35Bs.[70]

 

A Government Accountability Office study reported that by January 2009 the Marines had 12 MV-22s operating in Iraq and they managed to successfully complete all assigned missions. The same report found that the V-22 deployments had mission capable rates averaging 57% to 68% and an overall full mission capable rate of only 6%. It also stated that the aircraft had shown weakness in situational awareness, maintenance, shipboard operations and the ability to transport troops and external cargo.[71] That study also concluded that the "deployments confirmed that the V-22’s enhanced speed and range enable personnel and internal cargo to be transported faster and farther than is possible with the legacy helicopters it is replacing".[71]

 

The MV-22 saw its first offensive combat mission, Operation Cobra's Anger on 4 December 2009. Ospreys assisted in inserting 1,000 Marines and 150 Afghan troops into the Now Zad Valley of Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan to disrupt communication and supply lines of the Taliban.[38] In January 2010 the MV-22 Osprey is being sent to Haiti as part of Operation Unified Response relief efforts after the earthquake there. This will be the first use the Marine V-22 in a humanitarian mission.[72]

 

US Air Force

 

The Air Force's first operational CV-22 Osprey was delivered to the 58th Special Operations Wing (58th SOW) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico on 20 March 2006. This and subsequent aircraft will become part of the 58th SOW's fleet of aircraft used for training pilots and crew members for special operations use.[73] On 16 November 2006, the Air Force officially accepted the CV-22 in a ceremony conducted at Hurlburt Field, Florida.[74]

 

The US Air Force's first operational deployment of the Osprey sent four CV-22s to Mali in November 2008 in support of Exercise Flintlock. The CV-22s flew nonstop from Hurlburt Field, Florida with in-flight refueling.[5] AFSOC declared that the 8th Special Operations Squadron reached Initial Operational Capability on 16 March 2009, with six of its planned nine CV-22s operational.[75]

 

In June 2009, CV-22s of the 8th Special Operations Squadron delivered 43,000 pounds (20,000 kg) of humanitarian supplies to remote villages in Honduras that were not accessible by conventional vehicles.[76] In November 2009, the 8th SO Squadron and its six CV-22s returned from a three-month deployment in Iraq.[77]

 

The first possible combat loss of an Osprey occurred on 9 April, 2010, as a CV-22 went down near Qalat, Zabul Province, Afghanistan, killing four.[78][79]

 

Potential operators

 

In 1999 the V-22 was studied for use in the United Kingdom's Royal Navy,[80] it has been raised several times as a candidate for the role of Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control (MASC).[81]

 

Israel had shown interest in the purchase of MV-22s, but no order was placed.[82][83] Flightglobal reported in late 2009 that Israel has decided to wait for the CH-53K instead.[84]

 

The V-22 Osprey is a candidate for the Norwegian All Weather Search and Rescue Helicopter (NAWSARH) that is planned to replace the Westland Sea King Mk.43B of the Royal Norwegian Air Force in 2015.[85] The other candidates for the NAWSARH contract of 10-12 helicopters are AgustaWestland AW101 Merlin, Eurocopter EC225, NHIndustries NH90 and Sikorsky S-92.[86]

 

Bell Boeing has made an unsolicited offer of the V-22 for US Army medical evacuation needs.[87] However the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency issued a report that said that a common helicopter design would be needed for both combat recovery and medical evacuation and that the V-22 would not be suitable for recovery missions because of the difficulty of hoist operations and lack of self-defense capabilities.[88]

 

The US Navy remains a potential user of the V-22, but its role and mission with the Navy remains unclear. The latest proposal is to replace the C-2 Greyhound with the V-22 in the fleet logistics role. The V-22 would have the advantage of being able to land on and support non-carriers with rapid delivery of supplies and people between the ships of a taskforce or to ships on patrol beyond helicopter range.[89] Loren B. Thompson of the Lexington Institute has suggested V-22s for use in combat search and rescue and Marine One VIP transport, which also need replacement aircraft.[90]

 

Variants

  

• V-22A 

•• Pre-production full-scale development aircraft used for flight testing. These are unofficially considered A-variants after 1993 redesign.[91]

  

• HV-22 

•• The U.S. Navy considered an HV-22 to provide combat search and rescue, delivery and retrieval of special warfare teams along with fleet logistic support transport. However, it chose the MH-60S for this role in 1992.[92]

  

• SV-22 

•• The proposed anti-submarine warfare Navy variant. The Navy studied the SV-22 in the 1980s to replace S-3 and SH-2 aircraft.[93]

  

• MV-22B 

•• Basic U.S. Marine Corps transport; original requirement for 552 (now 360). The Marine Corps is the lead service in the development of the V-22 Osprey. The Marine Corps variant, the MV-22B, is an assault transport for troops, equipment and supplies, capable of operating from ships or from expeditionary airfields ashore. It is replacing the Marine Corps' CH-46E[57] and CH-53D.[94]

  

• CV-22B 

•• Air Force variant for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). It will conduct long-range, special operations missions, and is equipped with extra fuel tanks and terrain-following radar.[95][96]

 

Operators

 

•  United States

 

• United States Air Force

 

•• 8th Special Operations Squadron (8 SOS) at Hurlburt Field, Florida

•• 71st Special Operations Squadron (71 SOS) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico

•• 20th Special Operations Squadron (20 SOS) at Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico

 

• United States Marine Corps

 

•• VMM-161

•• VMM-162

•• VMM-261

•• VMM-263

•• VMM-264

•• VMM-266

•• VMM-365

•• VMMT-204 - Training squadron

•• VMX-22 - Marine Tiltrotor Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron

 

Notable accidents

 

Main article: Accidents and incidents involving the V-22 Osprey

 

From 1991 to 2000 there were four significant crashes, and a total of 30 fatalities, during testing.[32] Since becoming operational in 2007, the V-22 has had one possible combat loss due to an unknown cause, no losses due to accidents, and seven other notable, but minor, incidents.

 

• On 11 June 1991, a mis-wired flight control system led to two minor injuries when the left nacelle struck the ground while the aircraft was hovering 15 feet (4.6 m) in the air, causing it to bounce and catch fire.[97]

 

• On 20 July 1992, a leaking gearbox led to a fire in the right nacelle, causing the aircraft to drop into the Potomac River in front of an audience of Congressmen and other government officials at Quantico, killing all seven on board and grounding the aircraft for 11 months.[98]

 

• On 8 April 2000, a V-22 loaded with Marines to simulate a rescue, attempted to land at Marana Northwest Regional Airport in Arizona, stalled when its right rotor entered vortex ring state, rolled over, crashed, and exploded, killing all 19 on board.[37]

 

• On 11 December 2000, after a catastrophic hydraulic leak and subsequent software instrument failure, a V-22 fell 1,600 feet (490 m) into a forest in Jacksonville, North Carolina, killing all four aboard. This caused the Marine Corps to ground their fleet of eight V-22s, the second grounding that year.[99][100]

 

Specifications (MV-22B)

 

Data from Boeing Integrated Defense Systems,[101] Naval Air Systems Command,[102] US Air Force CV-22 fact sheet,[95] Norton,[103] and Bell[104]

 

General characteristics

 

• Crew: Four (pilot, copilot and two flight engineers)

• Capacity: 24 troops (seated), 32 troops (floor loaded) or up to 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) of cargo (dual hook)

• Length: 57 ft 4 in (17.5 m)

• Rotor diameter: 38 ft 0 in (11.6 m)

• Wingspan: 45 ft 10 in (14 m)

• Width with rotors: 84 ft 7 in (25.8 m)

• Height: 22 ft 1 in/6.73 m; overall with nacelles vertical (17 ft 11 in/5.5 m; at top of tailfins)

• Disc area: 2,268 ft² (212 m²)

• Wing area: 301.4 ft² (28 m²)

• Empty weight: 33,140 lb (15,032 kg)

• Loaded weight: 47,500 lb (21,500 kg)

• Max takeoff weight: 60,500 lb (27,400 kg)

• Powerplant: 2× Rolls-Royce Allison T406/AE 1107C-Liberty turboshafts, 6,150 hp (4,590 kW) each

 

Performance

 

• Maximum speed: 250 knots (460 km/h, 290 mph) at sea level / 305 kn (565 km/h; 351 mph) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)[105]

• Cruise speed: 241 knots (277 mph, 446 km/h) at sea level

• Range: 879 nmi (1,011 mi, 1,627 km)

• Combat radius: 370 nmi (426 mi, 685 km)

• Ferry range: 1,940 nmi (with auxiliary internal fuel tanks)

• Service ceiling: 26,000 ft (7,925 m)

• Rate of climb: 2,320 ft/min (11.8 m/s)

• Disc loading: 20.9 lb/ft² at 47,500 lb GW (102.23 kg/m²)

• Power/mass: 0.259 hp/lb (427 W/kg)

 

Armament

 

• 1× M240 machine gun on ramp, optional

 

Notable appearances in media

 

Main article: Aircraft in fiction#V-22 Osprey

 

See also

 

• Elizabeth A. Okoreeh-Baah, USMC - first female to pilot a V-22 Osprey

 

Related development

 

• Bell XV-15[106]

• Bell/Agusta BA609

• Bell Boeing Quad TiltRotor

 

Comparable aircraft

 

• Canadair CL-84

• LTV XC-142

 

Related lists

 

• List of military aircraft of the United States

• List of VTOL aircraft

 

References

 

Bibliography

 

• Markman, Steve and Bill Holder. "Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey Tilt-Engine VTOL Transport (U.S.A.)". Straight Up: A History of Vertical Flight. Schiffer Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-7643-1204-9.

• Norton, Bill. Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, Tiltrotor Tactical Transport. Midland Publishing, 2004. ISBN 1-85780-165-2.

 

External links

 

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: V-22 Osprey

 

• Official Boeing V-22 site

• Official Bell V-22 site

• V-22 Osprey web, and www.history.navy.mil/planes/v-22.html

• CV-22 fact sheet on USAF site

• www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22.htm

• www.airforce-technology.com/projects/osprey/

• Onward and Upward

• "Flight of the Osprey", US Navy video of V-22 operations

Pasted from Wikipedia: Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey

 

• • • • •

 

The Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey is a multi-mission, military, tiltrotor aircraft with both a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), and short takeoff and landing (STOL) capability. It is designed to combine the functionality of a conventional helicopter with the long-range, high-speed cruise performance of a turboprop aircraft.

 

The V-22 originated from the U.S. Department of Defense Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program started in 1981. It was developed jointly by the Bell Helicopter, and Boeing Helicopters team, known as Bell Boeing, which produce the aircraft.[4] The V-22 first flew in 1989, and began years of flight testing and design alterations.

 

The United States Marine Corps began crew training for the Osprey in 2000, and fielded it in 2007. The Osprey's other operator, the U.S. Air Force fielded their version of the tiltrotor in 2009. Since entering service with the U.S. Marine Corps and Air Force, the Osprey has been deployed for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

Contents

 

• 1 Development

•• 1.1 Early development

•• 1.2 Flight testing and design changes

•• 1.3 Controversy

•• 1.4 Recent development

• 2 Design

• 3 Operational history

•• 3.1 US Marine Corps

•• 3.2 US Air Force

•• 3.3 Potential operators

• 4 Variants

• 5 Operators

• 6 Notable accidents

• 7 Specifications (MV-22B)

• 8 Notable appearances in media

• 9 See also

• 10 References

• 11 External links

 

Development

 

Early development

 

The failure of the Iran hostage rescue mission in 1980 demonstrated to the United States military a need[5] for "a new type of aircraft, that could not only take off and land vertically but also could carry combat troops, and do so at speed."[6] The U.S. Department of Defense began the Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program in 1981, under U.S. Army leadership. Later the U.S. Navy/Marine Corps took the lead.[7][8] The JVX combined requirements from the Marine Corps, Air Force, Army and Navy.[9][10] A request for proposals (RFP) was issued in December 1982 for JVX preliminary design work. Interest in the program was expressed by Aérospatiale, Bell Helicopter, Boeing Vertol, Grumman, Lockheed, and Westland. The DoD pushed for contractors to form teams. Bell partnered with Boeing Vertol. The Bell Boeing team submitted a proposal for a enlarged version of the Bell XV-15 prototype on 17 February 1983. This was the only proposal received and a preliminary design contract was awarded on 26 April 1983.[11][12]

 

The JVX aircraft was designated V-22 Osprey on 15 January 1985; by March that same year the first six prototypes were being produced, and Boeing Vertol was expanded to deal with the project workload.[13][14] Work has been split evenly between Bell and Boeing. Bell Helicopter manufactures and integrates the wing, nacelles, rotors, drive system, tail surfaces, and aft ramp, as well as integrates the Rolls-Royce engines and performs final assembly. Boeing Helicopters manufactures and integrates the fuselage, cockpit, avionics, and flight controls.[4][15] The USMC variant of the Osprey received the MV-22 designation and the Air Force variant received CV-22; reversed from normal procedure to prevent Marine Ospreys from having a conflicting designation with aircraft carriers (CV).[16] Full-scale development of the V-22 tilt-rotor aircraft began in 1986.[2] On 3 May 1986 the Bell-Boeing partnership was awarded a $1.714 billion contract for V-22 aircraft by the Navy, thus at this point the project had acquisition plans with all four arms of the U.S. military.[17]

 

The first V-22 was rolled out with significant media attention in May 1988.[18][19] However the project suffered several political blows. Firstly in the same year, the Army left the program, citing a need to focus its budget on more immediate aviation programs.[20] The project also faced considerable dialogue in the Senate, surviving two votes that both could have resulted in cancellation.[21][22] Despite the Senate's decision, the Department of Defense instructed the Navy not to spend more money on the Osprey.[23] At the same time, the Bush administration sought the cancellation of the project.[23]

 

Flight testing and design changes

 

The first of six MV-22 prototypes first flew on 19 March 1989 in the helicopter mode,[24] and on 14 September 1989 as a fixed-wing plane.[25] The third and fourth prototypes successfully completed the Osprey's first Sea Trials on the USS Wasp in December 1990.[26] However, the fourth and fifth prototypes crashed in 1991-92.[27] Flight tests were resumed in August 1993 after changes were incorporated in the prototypes.[2] From October 1992 until April 1993, Bell and Boeing redesigned the V-22 to reduce empty weight, simplify manufacture and reduce production costs. This redesigned version became the B-model.[28]

 

Flight testing of four full-scale development V-22s began in early 1997 when the first pre-production V-22 was delivered to the Naval Air Warfare Test Center, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. The first EMD flight took place on 5 February 1997. The first of four low rate initial production aircraft, ordered on 28 April 1997, was delivered on 27 May 1999. Osprey number 10 completed the program's second Sea Trials, this time from the USS Saipan in January 1999.[2] During external load testing in April 1999, Boeing used a V-22 to lift and transport the M777 howitzer.[29] In 2000, Boeing announced that the V-22 would be fitted with a nose-mounted GAU-19 Gatling gun,[30] but the GAU-19 gun was later canceled.[31]

 

In 2000, there were two further fatal crashes, killing a total of 19 Marines, and the production was again halted while the cause of these crashes was investigated and various parts were redesigned.[32] The V-22 completed its final operational evaluation in June 2005. The evaluation was deemed successful; events included long range deployments, high altitude, desert and shipboard operations. The problems identified in various accidents had been addressed.[33]

 

Controversy

 

The V-22's development process has been long and controversial, partly due to its large cost increases.[34] When the development budget, first planned for $2.5 billion in 1986, increased to a projected $30 billion in 1988, then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney tried to zero out its funding. He was eventually overruled by Congress.[32] As of 2008, $27 billion have been spent on the Osprey program and another $27.2 billion will be required to complete planned production numbers by the end of the program.[2]

 

The V-22 squadron's former commander at Marine Corps Air Station New River, Lt. Colonel Odin Lieberman, was relieved of duty in 2001 after allegations that he instructed his unit that they needed to falsify maintenance records to make the plane appear more reliable.[2][35] Three officers were later implicated in the falsification scandal.[34]

 

The aircraft is incapable of autorotation, and is therefore unable to land safely in helicopter mode if both engines fail. A director of the Pentagon's testing office in 2005 said that if the Osprey loses power while flying like a helicopter below 1,600 feet (490 m), emergency landings "are not likely to be survivable". But Captain Justin (Moon) McKinney, a V-22 pilot, says that this will not be a problem, "We can turn it into a plane and glide it down, just like a C-130".[31] A complete loss of power would require the failure of both engines, as a drive shaft connects the nacelles through the wing; one engine can power both proprotors.[36] While vortex ring state (VRS) contributed to a deadly V-22 accident, the aircraft is less susceptible to the condition than conventional helicopters and recovers more quickly.[5] The Marines now train new pilots in the recognition of and recovery from VRS and have instituted operational envelope limits and instrumentation to help pilots avoid VRS conditions.[32][37]

 

It was planned in 2000 to equip all V-22s with a nose-mounted Gatling gun, to provide "the V-22 with a strong defensive firepower capability to greatly increase the aircraft's survivability in hostile actions."[30] The nose gun project was canceled however, leading to criticism by retired Marine Corps Commandant General James L. Jones, who is not satisfied with the current V-22 armament.[31] A belly-mounted turret was later installed on some of the first V-22s sent to the War in Afghanistan in 2009.[38]

 

With the first combat deployment of the MV-22 in October 2007, Time Magazine ran an article condemning the aircraft as unsafe, overpriced, and completely inadequate.[31] The Marine Corps, however, responded with the assertion that much of the article's data were dated, obsolete, inaccurate, and reflected expectations that ran too high for any new field of aircraft.[39]

 

Recent development

 

On 28 September 2005, the Pentagon formally approved full-rate production for the V-22.[40] The plan is to boost production from 11 a year to between 24 and 48 a year by 2012. Of the 458 total planned, 360 are for the Marine Corps, 48 for the Navy, and 50 for the Air Force at an average cost of $110 million per aircraft, including development costs.[2] The V-22 had an incremental flyaway cost of $70 million per aircraft in 2007,[3] but the Navy hopes to shave about $10 million off that cost after a five-year production contract starts in 2008.[41]

 

The Bell-Boeing Joint Project Office in Amarillo, Texas will design a new integrated avionics processor to resolve electronics obsolescence issues and add new network capabilities.[42]

 

Design

 

The Osprey is the world's first production tiltrotor aircraft, with one three-bladed proprotor, turboprop engine, and transmission nacelle mounted on each wingtip. It is classified as a powered lift aircraft by the Federal Aviation Administration.[43] For takeoff and landing, it typically operates as a helicopter with the nacelles vertical (rotors horizontal). Once airborne, the nacelles rotate forward 90° in as little as 12 seconds for horizontal flight, converting the V-22 to a more fuel-efficient, higher-speed turboprop airplane. STOL rolling-takeoff and landing capability is achieved by having the nacelles tilted forward up to 45°. For compact storage and transport, the V-22's wing rotates to align, front-to-back, with the fuselage. The proprotors can also fold in a sequence taking 90 seconds.[44]

 

Most Osprey missions will use fixed wing flight 75 percent or more of the time, reducing wear and tear on the aircraft and reducing operational costs.[45] This fixed wing flight is higher than typical helicopter missions allowing longer range line-of-sight communications and so improved command and control.[2] Boeing has stated the V-22 design loses 10% of its vertical lift over a Tiltwing design when operating in helicopter mode because of airflow resistance due to the wings, but that the Tiltrotor design has better short takeoff and landing performance.[46]

 

The V-22 is equipped with a glass cockpit, which incorporates four Multi-function displays (MFDs) and one shared Central Display Unit (CDU), allowing the pilots to display a variety of images including: digimaps centered or decentered on current position, FLIR imagery, primary flight instruments, navigation (TACAN, VOR, ILS, GPS, INS), and system status. The flight director panel of the Cockpit Management System (CMS) allows for fully-coupled (aka: autopilot) functions which will take the aircraft from forward flight into a 50-foot hover with no pilot interaction other than programming the system.[47] The glass cockpit of the canceled CH-46X was derived from the V-22.[48]

 

The V-22 is a fly-by-wire aircraft with triple-redundant flight control systems.[49] With the nacelles pointing straight up in conversion mode at 90° the flight computers command the aircraft to fly like a helicopter, with cyclic forces being applied to a conventional swashplate at the rotor hub. With the nacelles in airplane mode (0°) the flaperons, rudder, and elevator fly the aircraft like an airplane. This is a gradual transition and occurs over the rotation range of the nacelles. The lower the nacelles, the greater effect of the airplane-mode control surfaces.[50] The nacelles can rotate past vertical to 97.5° for rearward flight.[51][52]

 

The Osprey can be armed with one M240 7.62x51mm NATO (.308 in caliber) or M2 .50 in caliber (12.7 mm) machine gun on the loading ramp, that can be fired rearward when the ramp is lowered. A GAU-19 three-barrel .50 in gatling gun mounted below the V-22's nose has also been studied for future upgrade.[31][53] BAE Systems developed a remotely operated turreted weapons system for the V-22,[54] which was installed on half of the first V-22s deployed to Afghanistan in 2009.[38] The 7.62 mm belly gun turret is remotely operated by a gunner inside the aircraft, who acquires targets with a separate pod using color television and forward looking infrared imagery.

 

U.S. Naval Air Systems Command is working on upgrades to increase the maximum speed from 250 knots (460 km/h; 290 mph) to 270 knots (500 km/h; 310 mph), increase helicopter mode altitude limit from 10,000 feet (3,000 m) to 12,000 feet (3,700 m) or 14,000 feet (4,300 m), and increase lift performance.[55]

 

Operational history

 

US Marine Corps

 

Marine Corps crew training on the Osprey has been conducted by VMMT-204 since March 2000. On 3 June 2005, the Marine Corps helicopter squadron Marine Medium Helicopter 263 (HMM-263), stood down to begin the process of transitioning to the MV-22 Osprey.[56] On 8 December 2005, Lieutenant General Amos, commander of the II MEF, accepted the delivery of the first fleet of MV-22s, delivered to HMM-263. The unit reactivated on 3 March 2006 as the first MV-22 squadron and was redesignated VMM-263. On 31 August 2006, VMM-162 (the former HMM-162) followed suit. On 23 March 2007, HMM-266 became Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 266 (VMM-266) at Marine Corps Air Station New River, North Carolina.[57]

 

The Osprey has been replacing existing CH-46 Sea Knight squadrons.[58] The MV-22 reached initial operational capability (IOC) with the U.S. Marine Corps on 13 June 2007.[1] On 10 July 2007 an MV-22 Osprey landed aboard the Royal Navy aircraft carrier, HMS Illustrious in the Atlantic Ocean. This marked the first time a V-22 had landed on any non-U.S. vessel.[59]

 

On 13 April 2007, the U.S. Marine Corps announced that it would be sending ten V-22 aircraft to Iraq, the Osprey's first combat deployment. Marine Corps Commandant, General James Conway, indicated that over 150 Marines would accompany the Osprey set for September deployment to Al-Asad Airfield.[60][61] On 17 September 2007, ten MV-22Bs of VMM-263 left for Iraq aboard the USS Wasp. The decision to use a ship rather than use the Osprey's self-deployment capability was made because of concerns over icing during the North Atlantic portion of the trip, lack of available KC-130s for mid-air refueling, and the availability of the USS Wasp.[62]

 

The Osprey has provided support in Iraq, racking up some 2,000 flight hours over three months with a mission capable availability rate of 68.1% as of late-January 2008.[63] They are primarily used in Iraq's western Anbar province for routine cargo and troop movements, and also for riskier "aero-scout" missions. General David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, used one to fly around Iraq on Christmas Day 2007 to visit troops.[64] Then-presidential candidate Barack Obama also flew in Ospreys during his high profile 2008 tour of Iraq.[65]

 

The only major problem has been obtaining the necessary spare parts to maintain the aircraft.[66] The V-22 had flown 3,000 sorties totaling 5,200 hours in Iraq as of July 2008.[67] USMC leadership expect to deploy MV-22s to Afghanistan in 2009.[66][68] General George J. Trautman, III praised the increased range of the V-22 over the legacy helicopters in Iraq and said that "it turned his battle space from the size of Texas into the size of Rhode Island."[69]

 

Naval Air Systems Command has devised a temporary fix for sailors to place portable heat shields under Osprey engines to prevent damage to the decks of some of the Navy's smaller amphibious ships, but they determined that a long term solution to the problem would require these decks be redesigned with heat resistant deck coatings, passive thermal barriers and changes in ship structure in order to operate V-22s and F-35Bs.[70]

 

A Government Accountability Office study reported that by January 2009 the Marines had 12 MV-22s operating in Iraq and they managed to successfully complete all assigned missions. The same report found that the V-22 deployments had mission capable rates averaging 57% to 68% and an overall full mission capable rate of only 6%. It also stated that the aircraft had shown weakness in situational awareness, maintenance, shipboard operations and the ability to transport troops and external cargo.[71] That study also concluded that the "deployments confirmed that the V-22’s enhanced speed and range enable personnel and internal cargo to be transported faster and farther than is possible with the legacy helicopters it is replacing".[71]

 

The MV-22 saw its first offensive combat mission, Operation Cobra's Anger on 4 December 2009. Ospreys assisted in inserting 1,000 Marines and 150 Afghan troops into the Now Zad Valley of Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan to disrupt communication and supply lines of the Taliban.[38] In January 2010 the MV-22 Osprey is being sent to Haiti as part of Operation Unified Response relief efforts after the earthquake there. This will be the first use the Marine V-22 in a humanitarian mission.[72]

 

US Air Force

 

The Air Force's first operational CV-22 Osprey was delivered to the 58th Special Operations Wing (58th SOW) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico on 20 March 2006. This and subsequent aircraft will become part of the 58th SOW's fleet of aircraft used for training pilots and crew members for special operations use.[73] On 16 November 2006, the Air Force officially accepted the CV-22 in a ceremony conducted at Hurlburt Field, Florida.[74]

 

The US Air Force's first operational deployment of the Osprey sent four CV-22s to Mali in November 2008 in support of Exercise Flintlock. The CV-22s flew nonstop from Hurlburt Field, Florida with in-flight refueling.[5] AFSOC declared that the 8th Special Operations Squadron reached Initial Operational Capability on 16 March 2009, with six of its planned nine CV-22s operational.[75]

 

In June 2009, CV-22s of the 8th Special Operations Squadron delivered 43,000 pounds (20,000 kg) of humanitarian supplies to remote villages in Honduras that were not accessible by conventional vehicles.[76] In November 2009, the 8th SO Squadron and its six CV-22s returned from a three-month deployment in Iraq.[77]

 

The first possible combat loss of an Osprey occurred on 9 April, 2010, as a CV-22 went down near Qalat, Zabul Province, Afghanistan, killing four.[78][79]

 

Potential operators

 

In 1999 the V-22 was studied for use in the United Kingdom's Royal Navy,[80] it has been raised several times as a candidate for the role of Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control (MASC).[81]

 

Israel had shown interest in the purchase of MV-22s, but no order was placed.[82][83] Flightglobal reported in late 2009 that Israel has decided to wait for the CH-53K instead.[84]

 

The V-22 Osprey is a candidate for the Norwegian All Weather Search and Rescue Helicopter (NAWSARH) that is planned to replace the Westland Sea King Mk.43B of the Royal Norwegian Air Force in 2015.[85] The other candidates for the NAWSARH contract of 10-12 helicopters are AgustaWestland AW101 Merlin, Eurocopter EC225, NHIndustries NH90 and Sikorsky S-92.[86]

 

Bell Boeing has made an unsolicited offer of the V-22 for US Army medical evacuation needs.[87] However the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency issued a report that said that a common helicopter design would be needed for both combat recovery and medical evacuation and that the V-22 would not be suitable for recovery missions because of the difficulty of hoist operations and lack of self-defense capabilities.[88]

 

The US Navy remains a potential user of the V-22, but its role and mission with the Navy remains unclear. The latest proposal is to replace the C-2 Greyhound with the V-22 in the fleet logistics role. The V-22 would have the advantage of being able to land on and support non-carriers with rapid delivery of supplies and people between the ships of a taskforce or to ships on patrol beyond helicopter range.[89] Loren B. Thompson of the Lexington Institute has suggested V-22s for use in combat search and rescue and Marine One VIP transport, which also need replacement aircraft.[90]

 

Variants

  

• V-22A 

•• Pre-production full-scale development aircraft used for flight testing. These are unofficially considered A-variants after 1993 redesign.[91]

  

• HV-22 

•• The U.S. Navy considered an HV-22 to provide combat search and rescue, delivery and retrieval of special warfare teams along with fleet logistic support transport. However, it chose the MH-60S for this role in 1992.[92]

  

• SV-22 

•• The proposed anti-submarine warfare Navy variant. The Navy studied the SV-22 in the 1980s to replace S-3 and SH-2 aircraft.[93]

  

• MV-22B 

•• Basic U.S. Marine Corps transport; original requirement for 552 (now 360). The Marine Corps is the lead service in the development of the V-22 Osprey. The Marine Corps variant, the MV-22B, is an assault transport for troops, equipment and supplies, capable of operating from ships or from expeditionary airfields ashore. It is replacing the Marine Corps' CH-46E[57] and CH-53D.[94]

  

• CV-22B 

•• Air Force variant for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). It will conduct long-range, special operations missions, and is equipped with extra fuel tanks and terrain-following radar.[95][96]

 

Operators

 

•  United States

 

• United States Air Force

 

•• 8th Special Operations Squadron (8 SOS) at Hurlburt Field, Florida

•• 71st Special Operations Squadron (71 SOS) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico

•• 20th Special Operations Squadron (20 SOS) at Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico

 

• United States Marine Corps

 

•• VMM-161

•• VMM-162

•• VMM-261

•• VMM-263

•• VMM-264

•• VMM-266

•• VMM-365

•• VMMT-204 - Training squadron

•• VMX-22 - Marine Tiltrotor Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron

 

Notable accidents

 

Main article: Accidents and incidents involving the V-22 Osprey

 

From 1991 to 2000 there were four significant crashes, and a total of 30 fatalities, during testing.[32] Since becoming operational in 2007, the V-22 has had one possible combat loss due to an unknown cause, no losses due to accidents, and seven other notable, but minor, incidents.

 

• On 11 June 1991, a mis-wired flight control system led to two minor injuries when the left nacelle struck the ground while the aircraft was hovering 15 feet (4.6 m) in the air, causing it to bounce and catch fire.[97]

 

• On 20 July 1992, a leaking gearbox led to a fire in the right nacelle, causing the aircraft to drop into the Potomac River in front of an audience of Congressmen and other government officials at Quantico, killing all seven on board and grounding the aircraft for 11 months.[98]

 

• On 8 April 2000, a V-22 loaded with Marines to simulate a rescue, attempted to land at Marana Northwest Regional Airport in Arizona, stalled when its right rotor entered vortex ring state, rolled over, crashed, and exploded, killing all 19 on board.[37]

 

• On 11 December 2000, after a catastrophic hydraulic leak and subsequent software instrument failure, a V-22 fell 1,600 feet (490 m) into a forest in Jacksonville, North Carolina, killing all four aboard. This caused the Marine Corps to ground their fleet of eight V-22s, the second grounding that year.[99][100]

 

Specifications (MV-22B)

 

Data from Boeing Integrated Defense Systems,[101] Naval Air Systems Command,[102] US Air Force CV-22 fact sheet,[95] Norton,[103] and Bell[104]

 

General characteristics

 

• Crew: Four (pilot, copilot and two flight engineers)

• Capacity: 24 troops (seated), 32 troops (floor loaded) or up to 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) of cargo (dual hook)

• Length: 57 ft 4 in (17.5 m)

• Rotor diameter: 38 ft 0 in (11.6 m)

• Wingspan: 45 ft 10 in (14 m)

• Width with rotors: 84 ft 7 in (25.8 m)

• Height: 22 ft 1 in/6.73 m; overall with nacelles vertical (17 ft 11 in/5.5 m; at top of tailfins)

• Disc area: 2,268 ft² (212 m²)

• Wing area: 301.4 ft² (28 m²)

• Empty weight: 33,140 lb (15,032 kg)

• Loaded weight: 47,500 lb (21,500 kg)

• Max takeoff weight: 60,500 lb (27,400 kg)

• Powerplant: 2× Rolls-Royce Allison T406/AE 1107C-Liberty turboshafts, 6,150 hp (4,590 kW) each

 

Performance

 

• Maximum speed: 250 knots (460 km/h, 290 mph) at sea level / 305 kn (565 km/h; 351 mph) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)[105]

• Cruise speed: 241 knots (277 mph, 446 km/h) at sea level

• Range: 879 nmi (1,011 mi, 1,627 km)

• Combat radius: 370 nmi (426 mi, 685 km)

• Ferry range: 1,940 nmi (with auxiliary internal fuel tanks)

• Service ceiling: 26,000 ft (7,925 m)

• Rate of climb: 2,320 ft/min (11.8 m/s)

• Disc loading: 20.9 lb/ft² at 47,500 lb GW (102.23 kg/m²)

• Power/mass: 0.259 hp/lb (427 W/kg)

 

Armament

 

• 1× M240 machine gun on ramp, optional

 

Notable appearances in media

 

Main article: Aircraft in fiction#V-22 Osprey

 

See also

 

• Elizabeth A. Okoreeh-Baah, USMC - first female to pilot a V-22 Osprey

 

Related development

 

• Bell XV-15[106]

• Bell/Agusta BA609

• Bell Boeing Quad TiltRotor

 

Comparable aircraft

 

• Canadair CL-84

• LTV XC-142

 

Related lists

 

• List of military aircraft of the United States

• List of VTOL aircraft

 

References

 

Bibliography

 

• Markman, Steve and Bill Holder. "Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey Tilt-Engine VTOL Transport (U.S.A.)". Straight Up: A History of Vertical Flight. Schiffer Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-7643-1204-9.

• Norton, Bill. Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, Tiltrotor Tactical Transport. Midland Publishing, 2004. ISBN 1-85780-165-2.

 

External links

 

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: V-22 Osprey

 

• Official Boeing V-22 site

• Official Bell V-22 site

• V-22 Osprey web, and www.history.navy.mil/planes/v-22.html

• CV-22 fact sheet on USAF site

• www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22.htm

• www.airforce-technology.com/projects/osprey/

• Onward and Upward

• "Flight of the Osprey", US Navy video of V-22 operations

A visit to Charlecote Park for an afternoon visit to this National Trust property in Warwickshire. Near Stratford-upon-Avon. A deer park with a country house in the middle of it.

  

Charlecote Park (grid reference SP263564) is a grand 16th-century country house, surrounded by its own deer park, on the banks of the River Avon near Wellesbourne, about 4 miles (6 km) east of Stratford-upon-Avon and 5.5 miles (9 km) south of Warwick, Warwickshire, England. It has been administered by the National Trust since 1946 and is open to the public. It is a Grade I listed building.

 

The Lucy family owned the land since 1247. Charlecote Park was built in 1558 by Sir Thomas Lucy, and Queen Elizabeth I stayed in the room that is now the drawing room. Although the general outline of the Elizabethan house remains, nowadays it is in fact mostly Victorian. Successive generations of the Lucy family had modified Charlecote Park over the centuries, but in 1823, George Hammond Lucy (High Sheriff of Warwickshire in 1831) inherited the house and set about recreating the house in its original style.

 

Charlecote Park covers 185 acres (75 ha), backing on to the River Avon. William Shakespeare has been alleged to have poached rabbits and deer in the park as a young man and been brought before magistrates as a result.

 

From 1605 to 1640 the house was organised by Sir Thomas Lucy. He had twelve children with Lady Alice Lucy who ran the house after he died. She was known for her piety and distributing alms to the poor each Christmas. Her eldest three sons inherited the house in turn and it then fell to her grandchild Sir Davenport Lucy.

 

In the Tudor great hall, the 1680 painting Charlecote Park by Sir Godfrey Kneller, is said to be one of the earliest depictions of a black presence in the West Midlands (excluding Roman legionnaires). The painting, of Captain Thomas Lucy, shows a black boy in the background dressed in a blue livery coat and red stockings and wearing a gleaming, metal collar around his neck. The National Trust's Charlecote brochure describes the boy as a "black page boy". In 1735 a black child called Philip Lucy was baptised at Charlecote.

 

The lands immediately adjoining the house were further landscaped by Capability Brown in about 1760. This resulted in Charlecote becoming a hostelry destination for notable tourists to Stratford from the late 17th to mid-18th century, including Washington Irving (1818), Sir Walter Scott (1828) and Nathaniel Hawthorn (c 1850).

 

Charlecote was inherited in 1823 by George Hammond Lucy (d 1845), who married Mary Elizabeth Williams of Bodelwyddan Castle, from who's extensive diaries the current "behind the scenes of Victorian Charlecote" are based upon. GH Lucy's second son Henry inherited the estate from his elder brother in 1847. After the deaths of both Mary Elizabeth and Henry in 1890, the house was rented out by Henry's eldest daughter and heiress, Ada Christina (d 1943). She had married Sir Henry Ramsay-Fairfax, (d 1944), a line of the Fairfax Baronets, who on marriage assumed the name Fairfax-Lucy.

 

From this point onwards, the family began selling off parts of the outlying estate to fund their extensive lifestyle, and post-World War II in 1946, Sir Montgomerie Fairfax-Lucy, who had inherited the residual estate from his mother Ada, presented Charlecote to the National Trust in-lieu of death duties. Sir Montgomerie was succeeded in 1965 by his brother, Sir Brian, whose wife, Lady Alice, researched the history of Charlecote, and assisted the National Trust with the restoration of the house.

  

Charlecote Park House is a Grade I Listed Building

 

Charlecote Park

  

Listing Text

  

CHARLECOTE

 

SP2556 CHARLECOTE PARK

1901-1/10/19 Charlecote Park

06/02/52

(Formerly Listed as:

Charlecote Park House)

 

GV I

 

Formerly known as: Charlecote Hall.

Country house. Begun 1558; extended C19. Partly restored and

extended, including east range, 1829-34 by CS Smith;

north-east wing rebuilt and south wing extended 1847-67 by

John Gibson. For George and Mary Elizabeth Lucy.

MATERIALS: brick, that remaining from original building has

diapering in vitrified headers, but much has been replaced in

C19; ashlar dressings; tile roof with brick stacks with

octagonal ashlar shafts and caps.

PLAN: U-plan facing east, with later west range and south

wing.

EXTERIOR: east entrance front of 2 storeys with attic;

3-window range with long gabled projecting wings. Ashlar

plinth, continuous drip courses and coped gables with finials,

sections of strapwork balustrading between gables; quoins.

2-storey ashlar porch has round-headed entrance with flanking

pairs of Ionic pilasters and entablature, round-headed

entrance has panelled jambs, impost course and arch with lion

mask to key and 2 voussoirs, strapwork spandrels and stained

glass to fanlight over paired 4-panel doors; first floor has

Arms of Elizabeth I below projecting ovolo-moulded

cross-mullion window, with flanking pairs of Composite

detached columns; top balustrade with symmetrical balusters

supports Catherine wheel and heraldic beasts holding spears;

original diapered brick to returns.

3-light mullioned and transomed window to each floor to left,

that to first floor with strapwork apron. Large canted bay

window to right of 1:3:1 transomed lights with pierced

rosettes to parapet modelled on that to gatehouse (qv) and

flanked by cross-mullioned windows, all with moulded reveals

and small-paned sashes; C19 gables have 3-light

ovolo-mullioned windows with leaded glazing.

Wings similar, with 2 gables to 5-window inner returns,

ovolo-moulded cross-mullioned windows. Wing to south has much

diaper brickwork and stair window with strapwork apron.

East gable ends have 2-storey canted bay windows dated 1852 to

strapwork panels with Lucy Arms between 1:3:1-light transomed

windows; 3-light attic windows, that to north has patch of

reconstructed diaper brickwork to left.

Octagonal stair turrets to outer angles with 2-light windows,

top entablatures and ogival caps with wind vanes, that to

south mostly original, that to north with round-headed

entrance with enriched key block over studded plank door.

North side has turret to each end, that to west is wholly C19;

3 gables with external stacks with clustered shafts between;

cross-mullioned windows and 3-light transomed stair window on

strapwork apron; 2-light single-chamfered mullioned windows to

turrets.

Single-storey east range of blue brick has 2 bay windows with

octagonal pinnacles with pepper-pot finials and arcaded

balustrades over 1:4:1-light transomed windows; central panel

with Lucy Arms in strapwork setting has date 1833; coped

parapet with 3 gables with lights; returns similar with

3-light transomed windows.

Range behind has 3 renewed central gables and 2 lateral stacks

each with 6 shafts; gable to each end, that to south over

Tudor-arched verandah with arcaded balustrade to central arch

and above, entrance behind arch to left with half-glazed door,

blocked arch to right; first floor with cross-mullioned window

and blocked window, turret to right is wholly C19. South

return has cross-mullioned window to each floor and external

stack with clustered shafts.

South-west wing of 2 storeys; west side is a 7-window range;

recessed block to north end has window to each floor, the next

4 windows between octagonal pinnacles; gabled end breaks

forward under gable with turret to angle; rosette balustrade;

stacks have diagonal brick shafts, gable has lozenge with Lucy

Arms impaling Williams Arms (for Mary Elizabeth Lucy).

Cross-mullioned windows, but 2 southern ground-floor windows

are 3-light and transomed.

South end 4-window range between turrets has cross-mullioned

windows, but each end of first floor has bracketed oriel with

strapwork apron with Lucy/Williams Arms in lozenge and dated

1866, rosette balustrade with to each end a gable with 2-light

single-chamfered mullioned window with label, and 3 similar

windows to each turret, one to each floor.

East side has 3-window range with recessed range to right.

South end has Tudor-arched entrance and 3-light transomed

window, cross-mullioned window and 3-light transomed window to

first floor and gable with lozenge to south end; gable to

full-height kitchen to north has octagonal pinnacles flanking

4-light transomed window and gable above with square panel

with Lucy/Williams Arms to shield; recessed part to north has

loggia with entrance and flanking windows, to left a

single-storey re-entrant block with cross-mullioned windows;

first floor has 5 small sashed windows. South side of

south-east wing has varied brickwork with mullioned and

transomed windows, 2 external stacks and 2 gables with 3-light

windows.

INTERIOR: great hall remodelled by Willement with wood-grained

plaster ceiling with 4-centred ribs and Tudor rose bosses;

armorial glass attributed to Eiffler, restored and extended by

Willement; wainscoting and panelled doors; ashlar fireplace

with paired reeded pilasters and strapwork to entablature, and

fire-dogs; white and pink marble floor, Italian, 1845.

Dining room and library in west wing have rich wood panelling

by JM Willcox of Warwick and strapwork cornices, and strapwork

ceilings with pendants; wallpaper by Willement; dining room

has richly carved buffet, 1858, by Willcox and simple coloured

marble fireplace, the latter with bookshelves and fireplace

with paired pilasters and motto to frieze of fireplace, paired

columns and strapwork frieze to overmantel with armorial

bearings; painted arabesques to shutter backs.

Main staircase, c1700, but probably extensively reconstructed

in C19, open-well with cut string, 3 twisted balusters to a

tread, carved tread ends and ramped handrail;

bolection-moulded panelling in 2 heights, the upper panels and

panelled ceiling probably C19.

Morning room to south of hall has Willement decoration: white

marble Tudor-arched fireplace with cusped panels; plaster

ceiling with bands.

Ebony bedroom, originally billiard room, and drawing room to

north-east wing have 1856 scheme with cornices and

Jacobean-style plaster ceilings; white marble C18-style

fireplaces, that to Ebony Bedroom with Italian inserts with

Lucy crest. Drawing room has gilded and painted cornice and

ceiling, and large pier glasses.

Rooms to first floor originally guest bedrooms: doors with

egg-and-dart and eared architraves; C18-style fireplaces, that

to end room, originally Ebony Bedroom, has wood Rococo-style

fireplace with Chinoiserie panel; 1950s stair to attic.

South-east wing has c1700 stair, probably altered in C19, with

symmetrical balusters with acanthus, closed string; first

floor has wall and ceiling paintings: land and sea battle

scenes painted on canvas, male and female grisaille busts.

First floor has to west the Green Room, with Willement

wallpaper and simple Tudor-arched fireplace with

wallpaper-covered chimney board; adjacent room has marble

fireplace.

Death Room and its dressing room to east end have wallpaper of

gold motifs on white, painted 6-panel doors and architraves,

papier-mache ceilings; bedroom has fireplace with marble

architrave. Adjacent room has bolection-moulded panelling with

c1700 Dutch embossed leather. Stair to attic has c1700

balusters with club-form on acorn. Attics over great hall and

north-east and south-east wings have lime-ash floors and

servants' rooms, each with small annex and corner fireplace;

some bells.

South wing has kitchen with high ceiling and 2

segmental-arched recesses for C19 ranges; Tudor-arched recess

with latticed chamber for smoked meats over door.

Servants' hall has dark marble bolection-moulded fireplace and

cornice; scullery has bread oven, small range, pump and former

south window retaining glass.

First floor has to south end a pair of rooms added for Mary

Elizabeth Lucy in her widowhood; bedroom to east with deep

coved cornice and Adam-style fireplace, sitting room to west

similar, with gold on white wallpaper, white marble fireplace

with painted glass armorial panels and 1830s-40s carpet; door

to spiral timber turret staircase.

Nursery has fireplace with faceted panels and C19 Delft tiles;

probably 1920s wallpaper.

Other rooms with similar fireplaces and coloured glazed tiles.

While dating back to the C16, the house is one of the best

examples of the early C19 Elizabethan Revival style. Property

of National Trust.

(The Buildings of England: Pevsner, N & Wedgwood, A:

Warwickshire: Harmondsworth: 1966-: 227-9; The National Trust

Guide to Charlecote Park: 1991-; Wainwright C: The Romantic

Interior).

 

Listing NGR: SP2590656425

 

This text is from the original listing, and may not necessarily reflect the current setting of the building.

  

A look around the inside of the house / hall.

  

Grand Staircase

Croome Court is a mid 18th century Neo-Palladian mansion surrounded by an extensive landscaped parkland at Croome D'Abitot, near Pershore in south Worcestershire. The mansion and park were designed by Lancelot "Capability" Brown for George Coventry, 6th Earl of Coventry, and was Brown's first landscape design and first major architectural project. Some of the internal rooms of the mansion were designed by Robert Adam.

 

The mansion house is owned by Croome Heritage Trust, and is leased to the National Trust who operate it, along with the surrounding parkland, as a tourist attraction. The National Trust own the surrounding parkland, which is also open to the public.

 

Location[edit]

Croome Court is located near to Croome D'Abitot, in Worcestershire,[1] near Pirton, Worcestershire.[2] The wider estate was established on lands that were once part of the royal forest of Horewell.[3] Traces of these older landscapes, such as unimproved commons and ancient woodlands, can be found across the former Croome Estate.[4]

 

House[edit]

 

Croome Court South Portico

History[edit]

The foundations and core of Croome Court, including the central chimney stack structure, date back to the early 1640s.[5] Substantial changes to this early house were made by Gilbert Coventry, 4th Earl of Coventry.[6]

 

In 1751, George Coventry, the 6th Earl, inherited the estate, along with the existing Jacobean house. He commissioned Lancelot "Capability" Brown, with the assistance of Sanderson Miller, to redesign the house and estate.[7][1] It was Brown's "first flight into the realms of architecture" and a "rare example of his architectural work",[8] and it is an important and seminal work.[9] It was built between 1751 and 1752, and it and Hagley Hall are considered to be the finest examples of Neo-Palladian architecture in Worcestershire. Notable Neo-Palladian features incorporated into Croome Court include the plain exterior and the corner towers with pyramidal roofs (a feature first used by Inigo Jones in the design of Wilton House in Wiltshire).[1] Robert Adam worked on the interior of the building from 1760 onwards.[10]

 

The house has been visited by George III,[2][11] as well as Queen Victoria[7] during summers when she was a child, and George V (then Duke of York).[11]

 

A jam factory was built by the 9th Earl of Coventry, near to Pershore railway station, in about 1880, to provide a market for Vale of Evesham fruit growers in times of surplus. Although the Croome connection with jam making had ceased, during the First World War, the building was leased by the Croome Estate Trust to the Huddersfield Fruit Preserving Company as a pulping station.[12]

 

The First World War deeply affected Croome, with many local casualties, although the house was not requisitioned for the war effort. This is possibly because it was the home of the Lord Lieutenant of the County, who needed a residence for his many official engagements.[13]

 

During the Second World War Croome Court was requisitioned by the Ministry of Works and leased for a year to the Dutch Government as a possible refuge for Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands; to escape the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands. However, evidence shows that they stayed two weeks at the most, perhaps because of the noise and fear created by the proximity of Defford Aerodrome. They later emigrated to Canada.[14]

 

In 1948 the Croome Estate Trust sold the Court, along with 38 acres (15 ha) of land, to the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham, and the mansion became St Joseph's Special School, which was run by nuns[15] from 1950[11] until 1979.[15]

 

The house was listed on 11 August 1952; it is currently Grade I listed.[10]

 

In 1979 the hall was taken over by the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (Hare Krishna movement), who used it as their UK headquarters and a training college[16] called Chaitanya College,[15] run by 25 members of the movement.[16] During their tenure they repainted the Dining Room.[17] In 1984 they had to leave the estate for financial reasons. They held a festival at the hall in 2011.[16]

 

From 1984 onwards various owners tried to use the property as a training centre; apartments; a restaurant and conference centre; and a hotel and golf course,[15] before once more becoming a private family home,[2][15] with outbuildings converted to private houses.[15]

 

The house was purchased by the Croome Heritage Trust, a registered charity,[18] in October 2007,[19] and it is now managed by the National Trust as a tourist attraction. It opened to the public in September 2009, at which point six of the rooms had restored, costing £400,000, including the Saloon. It was estimated that another £4 million[2][20] to £4.8 million would be needed to restore the entire building. Fundraising activities for the restoration included a 2011 raffle for a Morgan sports car organised by Lord and Lady Flight. After the restoration is complete, a 999-year lease on the building will be granted to the National Trust.[21] An oral history project to record recollections about Croome was funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund.[15] As of 2009, the service wing was empty and in need of substantial repair.[22]

 

Exterior[edit]

The mansion is faced with Bath stone,[7] limestone ashlar, and has both north and south facing fronts. It has a basement and two stories, with three stories in the end pavilions. A slate roof, with pyramid roofs over the corner towers, tops the building, along with three pair-linked chimneys along the axis of the house.[10]

 

Both fronts have 11 bays, split into three central sets of three each, and one additional bay each side. The north face has a pedimented centre, with two balustraded staircases leading to a Roman Doric doorcase. The south face has a projecting Ionic tetrastyle portico and Venetian windows. It has a broad staircase, with cast stone sphinxes on each side, leading to a south door topped with a cornice on consoles. The wings have modillion cornice and balustrade.[10]

 

A two-story L-shaped service wing is attached to the east side of the mansion. It is made of red brick and stone, with slate roofs.[10] It was designed by Capability Brown in 1751-2.[22] On the far side of the service wing, a wall connects it to a stable court.[10]

 

Interior[edit]

The interior of the house was designed partially by Capability Brown, with plasterwork by G. Vassalli, and partially by Robert Adam, with plasterwork by J. Rose Jr. It has a central spine corridor. A stone staircase, with iron balusters, is at the east end.[10]

 

The entrance hall is on the north side of the building, and has four fluted Doric columns, along with moulded doorcases. To the east of the entrance hall is the dining room, which has a plaster ceiling and cornice, while to the west is a billiard room, featuring fielded panelling, a plaster cornice, and a rococo fireplace. The three rooms were probably decorated around 1758-59 by Capability Brown.[10] The dining room was vibrantly repainted by the Hare Krishnas in the 1970s-80s.[17]

 

The central room on the south side is a saloon, probably by Brown and Vassalli. It has an elaborate ceiling, with three panels, deep coving, and a cornice, along with two Ionic fireplaces, and Palladian doorcases.[10] George III was entertained by George Coventry, the 6th Earl, in the house's Saloon.[2] A drawing room is to the west of the saloon, and features rococo plasterwork and a marble fireplace.[10]

 

To the east of the saloon is the Tapestry Room.[10] This was designed in 1763-71, based on a design by Robert Adam, and contained tapestries and furniture covers possibly designed by Jacques Germain Soufflot, and made by Manufacture Nationale des Gobelins.[23] Around 1902 the ninth Earl sold the tapestries and seating to a Parisian dealer. In 1949 the Samuel H. Kress Foundation purchased the ceiling, floor, mantlepiece, chair rails, doors and the door surrounds, which were donated to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, in 1958. In 1959 the Kress Foundation also helped the Metropolitan Museum acquire the chair and sofa frames, which they recovered using the original tapestry seats.[7][23] A copy of the ceiling was installed in place of the original.[10] As of 2016, the room is displayed as it would have looked after the tapestries had been sold, with a jug and ewer on display as the only original decoration of the room that remains in it. The adjacent library room is used to explain what happened to the tapestry room;[17] the former library was designed by Adam, and was dismantled except for the marble fireplace.[10]

 

At the west side of the building is a long gallery,[10] which was designed by Robert Adam and installed between 1761 and 1766. It is the best preserved of the original interior (little of the rest has survived in situ).[1] It has an octagonal panelled ceiling, and plaster reliefs of griffins. A half-hexagonal bay faces the garden. The room also contains a marble caryatid fireplace designed by J Wilton.[10] As of 2016, modern sculptures are displayed in empty niches along the Long Gallery

 

wikipedia

Beyond Limits, 2016, Chatsworth

I went for a walk around Petworth Park to see the deer during the rutting season, strange groaning and belching sounds echoed around the park. The clash of antlers could be heard for miles as the males showed off their virility to potential mates. This stag bellows shortly after winning a dual with a rival, then struts off to take over the harem.

 

The fallow deer (Dama dama) is a ruminant mammal belonging to the family Cervidae. This common species is native to western Eurasia, but has been introduced widely elsewhere. It often includes the rarer Persian fallow deer as a subspecies (D. d. mesopotamica), while others treat it as an entirely different species (D. mesopotamica).

 

Petworth House and Park in Petworth, West Sussex, England, has been a family home for over 800 years. The estate was a royal gift from the widow of Henry I to her brother Jocelin de Louvain, who soon after married into the renowned Percy family. As the Percy stronghold was in the north, Petworth was originally only intended for occasional use.

 

Petworth, formerly known as Leconfield, is a major country estate on the outskirts of Petworth, itself a town created to serve the house. Described by English Heritage as "the most important residence in the County of Sussex", there was a manorial house here from 1309, but the present buildings were built for the Dukes of Somerset from the late 17th century, the park being landscaped by "Capability" Brown. The house contains a fine collection of paintings and sculptures.

 

The house itself is grade I listed (List Entry Number 1225989) and the park as a historic park (1000162). Several individual features in the park are also listed.

 

It was in the late 1500s that Petworth became a permanent home to the Percys after Elizabeth I grew suspicious of their allegiance to Mary, Queen of Scots and confined the family to the south.

 

The 2nd Earl of Egremont commissioned Capability Brown to design and landscape the deer park. The park, one of Brownâs first commissions as an independent designer, consists of 700 acres of grassland and trees. It is inhabited by the largest herd of fallow deer in England. There is also a 12-hectare (30-acre) woodland garden, known as the Pleasure Ground.

 

Brown removed the formal garden and fishponds of the 1690âs and relocated 64,000 tons of soil, creating a serpentine lake. He bordered the lake with poplars, birches and willows to make the ânaturalâ view pleasing. A 1987 hurricane devastated the park, and 35,000 trees were planted to replace the losses. Gracing the 30 acres of gardens and pleasure grounds around the home are seasonal shrubs and bulbs that include lilies, primroses, and azaleas. A Doric temple and Ionic rotunda add interest in the grounds.

 

Petworth House is a late 17th-century mansion, rebuilt in 1688 by Charles Seymour, 6th Duke of Somerset, and altered in the 1870s by Anthony Salvin. The site was previously occupied by a fortified manor house founded by Henry de Percy, the 13th-century chapel and undercroft of which still survive.

 

Today's building houses an important collection of paintings and sculptures, including 19 oil paintings by J. M. W. Turner (some owned by the family, some by Tate Britain), who was a regular visitor to Petworth, paintings by Van Dyck, carvings by Grinling Gibbons and Ben Harms, classical and neoclassical sculptures (including ones by John Flaxman and John Edward Carew), and wall and ceiling paintings by Louis Laguerre. There is also a terrestrial globe by Emery Molyneux, believed to be the only one in the world in its original 1592 state.

 

For the past 250 years the house and the estate have been in the hands of the Wyndham family â currently Lord Egremont. He and his family live in the south wing, allowing much of the remainder to be open to the public.

 

The house and deer park were handed over to the nation in 1947 and are now managed by the National Trust under the name "Petworth House & Park". The Leconfield Estates continue to own much of Petworth and the surrounding area. As an insight into the lives of past estate workers the Petworth Cottage Museum has been established in High Street, Petworth, furnished as it would have been in about 1910.

 

www.nationaltrust.org.uk/petworth-house

+++ 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 Gudkov Gu-1 was a Soviet fighter aircraft produced shortly after World War II in small numbers at the start of the jet age, but work on the Gudkov Gu-1 already started in 1944. Towards the end of World War II the Soviet Union saw the need for a strategic bombing capability similar to that of the United States Army Air Forces. The Soviet VVS air arm had the locally designed Petlyakov Pe-8 four-engined heavy bomber in service at the start of the war, but only 93 had been built by the end of the war and the type had become obsolete. By that time the U.S. regularly conducted bombing raids on Japan from distant Pacific forward bases using B-29 Superfortresses, and the Soviet Air Force lacked this capability.

 

Joseph Stalin ordered the development of a comparable bomber, and the U.S. twice refused to supply the Soviet Union with B-29s under Lend Lease. However, on four occasions during 1944, individual B-29s made emergency landings in Soviet territory and one crashed after the crew bailed out. In accordance with the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact, the Soviets were neutral in the Pacific War and the bombers were therefore interned and kept by the Soviets. Despite Soviet neutrality, America demanded the return of the bombers, but the Soviets refused. Three repairable B-29s were flown to Moscow and delivered to the Tupolev OKB. One B-29 was dismantled, the second was used for flight tests and training, and the third one was left as a standard for cross-reference.

Stalin told Tupolev to clone the Superfortress in as short a time as possible. The reverse-engineering effort involved 900 factories and research institutes, who finished the design work during the first year. 105,000 drawings were made, and the American technology had to be adapted to local material and manufacturing standards – and ended in a thorough re-design of the B-29 “under the hood”. By the end of the second year, the Soviet industry was to produce 20 copies of the aircraft ready for State acceptance trials.

 

While work on what would become the Tupolev Tu-4 was on the way, the need for a long range escort fighter arose, too. Soviet officials were keen on the P-51 Mustang, but, again, the USA denied deliveries, so that an indigenous solution had to be developed. With the rising tension of international relationships, this became eventually the preferred solution, too.

 

While the design bureau Lavochkin had already started with work on the La-9 fighter (which entered service after WWII) and the jet age was about to begin, the task of designing a long range escort fighter for the Tu-4 was relegated to Mikhail I. Gudkov who had been designing early WWII fighters like the LaGG-1 and -3 together with Lavochkin. Internally, the new fighter received the project handle "DIS" (Dalnij Istrebitel' Soprovozhdenya ="long-range escort fighter").

 

In order to offer an appropriate range and performance that could engage enemy interceptors in the bombers’ target area it was soon clear that neither a pure jet nor a pure piston-engine fighter was a viable solution – a dilemma the USAAF was trying to solve towards 1945, too. The jet engine alone did not offer sufficient power, and fuel consumption was high, so that the necessary range could never be achieved with an agile fighter. Late war radials had sufficient power and offered good range, but the Soviet designers were certain that the piston engine fighter had no future – especially when fast jet fighters had to be expected over enemy territory.

 

Another problem arose through the fact that the Soviet Union did not have an indigenous jet engine at hand at all in late 1945. War booty from Germany in the form of Junkers Jumo 004 axial jet engines and blueprints of the more powerful HeS 011 were still under evaluation, and these powerplants alone did neither promise enough range nor power for a long range fighter aircraft. Even for short range fighters their performance was rather limited – even though fighters like the Yak-15 and the MiG-9 were designed around them.

 

After many layout experiments and calculation, Gudkov eventually came up with a mixed powerplant solution for the DIS project. But unlike the contemporary, relatively light I-250 (also known as MiG-13) interceptor, which added a mechanical compressor with a primitive afterburner (called VRDK) to a Klimov VK-107R inline piston engine, the DIS fighter was equipped with a powerful radial engine and carried a jet booster – similar to the US Navy’s Ryan FR-1 “Fireball”. Unlike the FR-1, though, the DIS kept a conservative tail-sitter layout and was a much bigger aircraft.

 

The choice for the main powerplant fell on the Shvetsov ASh-82TKF engine, driving a large four blade propeller. This was a boosted version of the same 18 cylinder twin row radial that powered the Tu-4, the ASh-73. The ASh-82TKF for the escort fighter project had a rating of 2,720 hp (2,030 kW) while the Tu-4's ASh-73TK had "only" a temporary 2,400 hp (1,800 kW) output during take-off. The airframe was designed around this massive and powerful engine, and the aircraft’s sheer size was also a result of the large fuel capacity which was necessary to meet the range target of at least 3.000 km (1.860 mi, 1.612 nmi).

The ASh-82TKF alone offered enough power for a decent performance, but in order to take on enemy jet fighters and lighter, more agile propeller-driven fighters, a single RD-20 axial-flow turbojet with 7.8 kN (1,754 lbf) thrust was added in the rear-fuselage. It was to add power for take-off and in combat situations only. Its fixed air intakes were placed on the fuselage flanks, right behind the cockpit, and the jet pipe was placed under the fin and the stabilizers.

 

Outwardly, Gudkov’s DIS resembled the late American P-47D or the A-1 Skyraider a lot, and the beefy aircraft was comparable in size and weight, too. But the Soviet all-metal aircraft was a completely new construction and featured relatively small and slender laminar flow wings. The wide-track landing gear retracted inwards into the inner wings while the tail wheel retracted fully into a shallow compartment under the jet pipe.

The pilot sat in a spacious cockpit under a frameless bubble canopy with very good all-round visibility and enjoyed amenities for long flights such as increased padding in the seat, armrests, and even a urinal. In addition, a full radio navigation suite was installed for the expected long range duties over long stretches of featureless landscape like the open sea.

 

Armament consisted of four 23 mm Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannons with 100 RPG in the wings, outside of the propeller arc. The guns were good for a weight of fire of 6kg (13.2 lb)/sec, a very good value. Five wet hardpoints under the fuselage, the wings outside of the landing gear well and under the wing tips could primarily carry auxiliary drop tanks or an external ordnance of up to 1.500 kg (3.300 lb).

Alternatively, iron bombs of up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) caliber could be carried on the centerline pylon, and a pair of 250 kg (550 lb) bombs under the wings, but a fighter bomber role was never seriously considered for the highly specialized and complex aircraft.

 

The first DIS prototype, still without the jet booster, flew in May 1947. The second prototype, with both engines installed, had its fuel capacity increased by an additional 275 l (73 US gal) in an additional fuel tank behind the cockpit. The aircraft was also fitted with larger tires to accommodate the increased all-up weight, esp. with all five 300 l drop tanks fitted for maximum range and endurance.

 

Flight testing continued until 1948 and the DIS concept proved to be satisfactory, even though the complicated ASh-82TKF hampered the DIS’ reliability - to the point that fitting the ASh-73TK from the Tu-4 was considered for serial production, even if this would have meant a significant reduction in performance. The RD-20 caused lots of trouble, too. Engine reliability was generally poor, and re-starting the engine in flight did not work satisfactorily – a problem that, despite several changes to the starter and ignition system, could never be fully cured. The jet engine’s placement in the tail, together with the small tail wheel, also caused problems because the pilots had to take care that the tail would not aggressively hit the ground upon landings, because the RD-20 and its attachments were easily damaged.

 

Nevertheless, the DIS basically fulfilled the requested performance specifications and was, despite many shortcomings, eventually cleared for production in mid 1948. It received the official designation Gudkov Gu-1, honoring the engineer behind the aircraft, even though the aircraft was produced by Lavochkin.

 

The first machines were delivered to VVS units in early 1949 - just in time for the Tu-4's service introduction after the Russians had toiled endlessly on solving several technical problems. In the meantime, jet fighter development had quickly progressed, even though a purely jet-powered escort fighter for the Tu-4 was still out of question. Since the Gu-1 was capricious, complex and expensive to produce, only a limited number left the factories and emphasis was put on the much simpler and more economical Lavochkin La-11 escort fighter, a lightweight evolution of the proven La-9. Both types were regarded as an interim solution until a pure jet escort fighter would be ready for service.

 

Operationally the Gu-1s remained closely allocated to the VVS’ bomber squadrons and became an integral part of them. Anyway, since the Tu-4 bomber never faced a serious combat situation, so did the Gu-1, which was to guard it on its missions. For instance, both types were not directly involved in the Korean War, and the Gu-1 was primarily concentrated at the NATO borders to Western Europe, since bomber attacks in this theatre would certainly need the heavy fighter’s protection.

 

The advent of the MiG-15 - especially the improved MiG-15bis with additional fuel capacities and drop tanks, quickly sounded the death knell for the Gu-1 and any other post-WWII piston-engine fighter in Soviet Service. As Tu-4 production ended in the Soviet Union in 1952, so did the Gu-1’s production after only about 150 aircraft. The Tu-4s and their escort fighters were withdrawn in the 1960s, being replaced by more advanced aircraft including the Tupolev Tu-16 jet bomber (starting in 1954) and the Tupolev Tu-95 turboprop bomber (starting in 1956).

 

The Gudkov Gu-1, receiving the NATO ASCC code “Flout”, remained a pure fighter. Even though it was not a success, some proposals for updates were made - but never carried out. These included pods with unguided S-5 air-to-air-rockets, to be carried on the wing hardpoints, bigger, non-droppable wing tip tanks for even more range or, alternatively, the addition of two pulsejet boosters on the wing tips.

There even was a highly modified mixed powerplant version on the drawing boards in 1952, the Gu-1M. Its standard radial powerplant for cruise flight was enhanced with a new, non-afterburning Mikulin AM-5 axial flow jet engine with 2.270 kgf/5,000 lbf/23 kN additional thrust in the rear fuselage. With this temporary booster, a top speed of up to 850 km/h was expected. But to no avail - the pure jet fighter promised a far better performance and effectiveness, and the Gu-1 remained the only aircraft to exclusively carry the Gudkov name.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 12 m (39 ft 4 in)

Wingspan: 14 m (45 ft 11 in)

Height: 4.65 m (15 ft 3 in)

Wing area: 28 m² (301.388 ft²)

Airfoil:

Empty weight: 4,637 kg (10,337 lb)

Loaded weight: 6.450 kg (14.220 lb)

Maximum take-off weight: 7,938 kg (17,500 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Shvetsov ASh-82TKF 18-cylinder air-cooled radial engine, rated at 2,720 hp (2,030 kW)

1x RD-20 axial-flow turbojet with 7.8 kN (1,754 lbf) thrust as temporary booster

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 676 km/h (420 mph) at 29,000 ft (8,839 m) with the radial only,

800 km/h (497 mph/432 kn,) with additional jet booster

Cruise speed: 440 km/h (237 kn, 273 mph)

Combat radius: 820 nmi (945 mi, 1,520 km)

Maximum range: 3.000 km (1.860 mi, 1.612 nmi) with drop tanks

Service ceiling: 14,680 m (48,170 ft)

Wing loading: 230.4 kg/m² (47.2 lb/ft²)

Power/mass: 0.28 kW/kg (0.17 hp/lb)

Climb to 5,000 m (16,400 ft): 5 min 9 sec;

Climb to 10,000 m (32,800 ft): 17 min 38 sec;

Climb to 13,000 m (42,640 ft): 21 min 03 sec

 

Armament

4× 23 mm Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannons with 100 RPG in the outer wings

Five hardpoints for an external ordnance of 1.500 kg (3.300 lb)

 

The kit and its assembly:

This whif is the incarnation of a very effective kitbashing combo that already spawned my fictional Japanese Ki-104 fighter, and it is another submission to the 2018 “Cold War” group build at whatifmodelers.com. This purely fictional Soviet escort fighter makes use of my experiences from the first build of this kind, yet with some differences.

 

The kit is a bashing of various parts and pieces:

· Fuselage, wing roots, landing gear and propeller from an Academy P-47D

· Wings from an Ark Model Supermarine Attacker (ex Novo)

· Tail fin comes from a Heller F-84G

· The stabilizers were taken from an Airfix Ki-46

· Cowling from a Matchbox F6F, mounted and blended onto the P-47 front

· Jet exhaust is the intake of a Matchbox Me 262 engine pod

 

My choice fell onto the Academy Thunderbolt because it has engraved panel lines, offers the bubble canopy as well as good fit, detail and solid material. The belly duct had simply been sliced off, and the opening later faired over with styrene sheet and putty, so that the P-47’s deep belly would not disappear.

The F6F cowling was chosen because it looks a lot like the ASh-73TK from the Tu-4. But this came at a price: the P-47 cowling is higher, tighter and has a totally different shape. It took serious body sculpting with putty to blend the parts into each other. Inside of the engine, a styrene tube was added for a metal axis that holds the uncuffed OOB P-47 four blade propeller. The P-47’s OOB cockpit tub was retained, too, just the seat received scratched armrests for a more luxurious look.

 

The Attacker wings were chosen because of their "modern" laminar profile. The Novo kit itself is horrible and primitive, but acceptable for donations. OOB, the Attacker wings had too little span for the big P-47, so I decided to mount the Thunderbolt's OOB wings and cut them at a suitable point: maybe 0.5", just outside of the large main wheel wells. The intersection with the Attacker wings is almost perfect in depth and width, relatively little putty work was necessary in order to blend the parts into each other. I just had to cut out new landing gear wells from the lower halves of the Attacker wings, and with new attachment points the P-47’s complete OOB landing gear could be used.

 

With the new wing shape, the tail surfaces had to be changed accordingly. The trapezoid stabilizers come from an Airfix Mitsubishi Ki-46, and their shape is a good match. The P-47 fin had to go, since I wanted something bigger and a different silhouette. The fuselage below was modified with a jet exhaust, too. I actually found a leftover F-84G (Heller) tail, complete with the jet pipe and the benefit that it has plausible attachment points for the stabilizers far above the jet engine in the Gu-1’s tail.

 

However, the F-84 jet pipe’s diameter turned out to be too large, so I went for a smaller but practical alternative, a Junkers Jumo 004 nacelle from a Me 262 (the ancestor of the Soviet RD-20!). Its intake section was cut off, flipped upside down, the fin was glued on top of it and then the new tail was glued to the P-47 fuselage. Some (more serious) body sculpting was necessary to create a more or less harmonious transition between the parts, but it worked.

 

The plausible placement of the air intakes and their shape was a bit of a challenge. I wanted them to be obvious, but still keep an aerodynamic look. An initial idea had been to keep the P-47’s deep belly and widen the central oil cooler intake under the nose, but I found the idea wacky and a bit pointless, since such a long air duct would not make much sense since it would waste internal space and the long duct’s additional weight would not offer any benefit?

 

Another idea were air intakes in the wing roots, but these were also turned down since the landing gear wells would be in the way, and placing the ducts above or below the wings would also make no sense. A single ventral scoop (looking like a P-51 radiator bath) or two smaller, dorsal intakes (XP-81 style) behind the cockpit were other serious candidates – but these were both rejected because I wanted to keep a clean side profile.

I eventually settled for very simple, fixed side intakes, level with the jet exhaust, somewhat inspired by the Lavochkin La-200B heavy fighter prototype. The air scoops are simply parts from an Italeri Saab 39 Gripen centerline drop tank (which has a flat, oval diameter), and their shape is IMHO a perfect match.

  

Painting and markings:

While the model itself is a wild mix of parts with lots of improvisation involved, I wanted to keep the livery rather simple. The most plausible choice would have been an NMF finish, but I rather wanted some paint – so I used Soviet La-9 and -11 as a benchmark and settled for a simple two-tone livery: uniform light grey upper and light blue lower surfaces.

 

I used RAF Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165) and Soviet Underside Blue (Humbrol 114) as basic tones, and, after a black ink wash, these were lightened up through dry-brushed post-shading. The yellow spinner and fin tip are based on typical (subtle) squadron markings of the late 40ies era.

 

The cockpit as well the engine and landing gear interior became blue-grey (Revell 57), similar to the typical La-9/11’s colors. The green wheel discs and the deep blue propeller blades are not 100% in the aircraft's time frame, but I added these details in order to enhance the Soviet touch and some color accents.

 

Tactical markings were kept simple, too. The "38" and the Red Stars come form a Mastercraft MiG-15, the Guards badge from a Begemoth MiG-25 sheet and most of the stencils were taken from a Yak-38 sheet, also from Begemoth.

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and it received some mild soot stains and chipped paint around the cockpit and on the leading edges. Some oil stains were added around the engine (with Tamiya Smoke), too.

  

A massive aircraft, and this new use of the P-47/Attacker combo results again in a plausible solution. The added jet engine might appear a bit exotic, but the mixed powerplant concept was en vogue after WWII, but only a few aircraft made it beyond the prototype stage.

While painting the model I also wondered if an all dark blue livery and some USN markings could also have made this creation the Grumman JetCat? With the tall fin, the Gu-1 could also be an F8F Bearcat on steroids? Hmmm...

Ickworth House, Horringer, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk

 

The House was built between the years of 1795 and 1829 to the designs of the Italian Architect Mario Asprucci, his most noted work being the Villa Borghese. It was this work that Frederick Hervey, the then 4th Earl of Bristol and Bishop of Derry had seen.

Asprucci’s plans were then taken up by the brothers Francis & Joseph Sandys, English architects.

The Parkland, of which there is 1,800 acres in total, was designed by Capability Brown and was Italianate in style. This style much loved by the 4th Earl.

Most of the friezes running around the rotunda were based upon John Flaxman’s illustrations of The Iliad and The Odyssey although, within the entrance portico there are some panels designed by Lady Caroline, the Earl’s Granddaughter and are based upon the Roman Olympic Games.

There are many works of art inside the house and very much well worth the visit.

 

Alaska Army National Guard Soldiers with Avalanche Company, 1-297th Infantry Battalion, practice squad and platoon situational training exercises (STX) at Alcantra armory in Wasilla, Alaska, March 11, 2022. An STX is a short, scenario-driven, mission-oriented exercise designed to train one collective task or a group of related tasks or battle drills. For the A-Co. Soldiers, the STX allows for evaluation of basic Soldier skills and leadership competencies to determine proficiency and certify the platoon to conduct live-fire exercises. It also reinforces previous training that the Soldiers have completed by bringing the entire platoon together to further prepare the unit for live-fire training. The infantrymen are preparing to participate in the Army National Guard’s eXportable Combat Training Capability (XCTC) program, which is a brigade field training exercise similar to a Combat Training Center. They will participate in an XCTC rotation at Camp Roberts, California, July 2022. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Spc. Grace Nechanicky)

+++ 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 Imperial Japanese Army Air Force's fighter force, especially the Nakajima Ki-43, had been underestimated in its capability, numbers and the strategy of its commanders. Within a few months, Japanese forces had conquered vast areas of the Pacific and South East Asia. During these campaigns, the ill-prepared Allied air forces in the Pacific suffered devastating losses.

 

Because of political and cultural ties between the United Kingdom and Australia, British manufacturers were the main source of RAAF aircraft. However, the British aircraft industry had long been hard-pressed to meet the needs of the RAF. Although United States companies had enormous aircraft manufacturing capacity, their output was now intended first and foremost for US air units. Even if aircraft built overseas did become available, they would be shipped long distances in wartime conditions, with consequent delays and losses. As a consequence, CAC came into its own with the development of the Boomerang fighter, which was not operational before late 1942.

 

Following the outbreak of war with Japan, 51 Hurricane Mk IIs were sent as a stop-gap in crates to Singapore, with 24 pilots, the nucleus of five squadrons. They arrived on 3 January 1942, by which time the Allied fighter squadrons in Singapore, flying Brewster Buffalos, had been overwhelmed in the Malayan campaign. Even though the Hurricanes were a significant progress, they suffered in performance.

 

Because of inadequate early warning systems, Japanese air raids were able to destroy 30 Hurricanes on the ground in Sumatra, most of them in one raid on 7 February. After Japanese landings in Singapore, on 10 February, only 18 serviceable Hurricanes remained out of the original 99. After Java was invaded, some of the pilots were evacuated by sea to Australia. 31 Hurricane airframes, which had been on the wayby ship, not been assembled and lacked Merlin engines, were directed to Australia in the wake of events.

 

From these unfinished machines, the Hurricane Mk. VI was quickly devised: the airframes were mated with P&W Twin Wasp engines, which were produced under license at the CAC plant in Lidcombe, Sydney, for the RAAF's Boomerang and Bristol Beaufort. It was clear from the start that these Twin Wasp-powered machines would rather be stop-gaps and no true fighters, rather fighter bombers and more suited for the ground attack role. Hence, like the latest fighters at the time, planning for the Mk. VI included automatic cannons. As no such weapons were manufactured locally, a British-made Hispano-Suiza 20 mm which an Australian airman had collected as a souvenir in the Middle East was reverse engineered – and four of them replaced the eight and partly twelve 0.303 machine guns of the original Mk. IIB machines. Additionally, the pilot received extra armor plating, and the wings were reinforced for external ordnance.

 

The RAAF Mk. VI Hurricanes carried A60-02 through -32 registrations. As a side note, A60-01 was a single Hurricane Mk.I serialled V-7476. This aircraft served with No.2 and 3 Communications Flights RAAF and was used on occasion for experimental work at RAAF Base Laverton on the outskirts of Melbourne. The aircraft was scrapped in 1945.

The Hurricane Mk. VIs actively took part in Pacific operations with RAAF’s No. 4 Squadron and No. 5 Squadron, being joined by Boomerangs in early 1943. They were operated in New Guinea and during the Solomon Islands Campaign as well as the Borneo Campaign, mostly in the close support role and with marked success.

 

Flying in pairs (one to observe the ground, the other to observe the air around them), their tasks included bombing, strafing, close infantry support and artillery spotting. When attacking larger enemy formations, the Hurricanes often operated in conjunction with the smaller and much more agile Boomerang fighter. In this role, a Boomerang would get in close to confirm the identity of the target and mark it with a 20 lb (9 kg) smoke bomb with the "cooperating" Hurricane, Beaufort or Havoc delivering the major ordnance in a quick run and from a safer distance. The partnership between RAAF planes and Royal New Zealand Air Force Corsair fighter bombers during the Bougainville Campaign was said to be particularly effective.

 

The Australian Hurricane Mk. VIs soldiered on until early 1945, when they were finally retired. The Twin Wasp engines were used for spares, all airframes were scrapped, no plane survived the war.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 32 ft 3 in (9.84 m)

Wingspan: 40 ft 0 in (12.19 m)

Height: 13 ft 1½ in (4.0 m)

Wing area: 257.5 ft² (23.92 m²)

Empty weight: 5,745 lb (2,605 kg)

Loaded weight: 7,670 lb (3,480 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 8,710 lb (3,950 kg)

 

Maximum speed: 331 mph (531 km/h)

Range: 650 mi (1.045 km)

Service ceiling: 36,000 ft (10,970 m)

Rate of climb: 2,303 ft/min (11.7 m/s)

Wing loading: 29.8 lb/ft² (121.9 kg/m²)

Power/mass: 0.15 hp/lb (0.25 kW/kg)

 

Engine: 1× Pratt & Whitney R-1830 Twin Wasp radial engine, 1,200 hp (895 kW)

 

Armament: 4× 20 mm (0.787 in) Hispano or CAC cannons; 2x 45-gallon (205 l) drop tanks or 2× 250 or 500 lb (110 or 230 kg) bombs

 

The kit and its assembly

The Hurricane Mk. VI is a whif, even though with little effort but a good story behind it. The original idea to mate a Hurricane with a radial engine came when I found a drawing of a Russian Hurricane, mated with a Schwezow ASch-82 engine. It looked… interesting. Not certain if this had been done for sure, but a great inspiration.

While browsing through the scrap heap I later found a Twin Wasp engine – that fueled the idea of a respective conversion. The Russian option was dead, but when I checked contemporary planes I came across the small Boomerang, and the historical facts were perfect for an obscure Australian Hurricane variant.

 

The rest was quickly done: the basic kit is a Hurricane Mk. IIC (Trop) from Hobby Boss, the Twin Wasp comes from a wrecked Matchbox PB4Y Privateer. The original Merlin was simply cut away and replaced by the "new" and relatively small radial engine. A surprisingly easy task, even though I had to widen the area in front of the cockpit by about 1mm to each side. With some putty and a new exhaust pipe with flame dampers, the surgical part was quickly done. A pilot was added, too, in order to distract from the rather bleak cockpit.

 

To make the plane look more interesting and suitable for a display on the ground, the flaps were lowered (scratch-built) and vertical and horizontal stabilizer were moved away from OOB neutral position. Additionally, the cooler under the fuselage was omitted, what creates together with the radial engine a very different side view. This "Aussie'cane" looks stout but disturbingly realistic, like a Boomerang’s big brother!

 

Only other changes/additions are a pilot figure and two wing hardpoints, holding bombs. The rest is OOB.

  

Painting

I have always been a fan of all-green RAAF WWII planes, so I chose such a simple livery. Inspiration came from real-life 4. Squadron Boomerangs, so I adopted the “QE” code and tried to mimic the overall look.

Interior surfaces were kept in Humbrol 78 ('Cockpit Green', dry-painted with light grey). The plane was painted with “Foilage Green” on all outer surfaces - a tone which seems to be heavily debated. Most sources claim FS 34092 (Humbrol 149) as a nowaday's replacement, but to me, this color is just too green and blue-ish. IMHO, “Foilage Green” has a rather yellow-ish hue - Humbrol 75 ("Bronze Green") would be better, if it wasn't too dark.

 

After some trials I settled for Humbrol 105 ("Army Green"). I think it is a sound compromise. It resembles FS 34096, but is (much) less grey-ish and offers that yellow hue I was looking for. Heavy weathering was done, esp. at the panel lines with dry-painted FS 34096 (Testors) and some panels "bleached" with Humbrol 86 ("Light live Green"). After deacls had been applied, some dry brushing with olive drab and light grey added to the worn and faded look, as well as flaked paint around the engine and the wings' leading egdes and soot stains at exhausts and guns. I wanted to emphasize the harsh climate conditions and duties of this fictional machine.

 

Only other colors are typical white quick recognition markings on tail and wings, painted with a mix of Humbrol 130 and 196 for a very light grey, with some white dry painting on th eleading edges.For a final clear coat, I used a matte varnish which still has a light gloss to it - “Foilage Green” and RAAF finishes were AFAIK supposed to be semi-matte and of higher quality that USAF paintjobs.

 

Markings come mostly from the scrap box. The RAAF insignia were taken from a Vultee Vengeance aftermarket sheet by Kanga Decals, which also provided the mid sea grey codes. The Australian registration numbers were improvised with single white letters from TL Modellbau decal sheets.

 

All in all I am happy with the result - a simple measure, a good story and even a very simple livery that allows room for imagination and painting effects. A nice lil' whif, the "Aussie'cane" Mk. VI.

Routed off the main through road at Barnetby with its train of loaded iron ore waggons.

 

25 7 96