View allAll Photos Tagged Capable

The Toyota 2000GT is a limited-production, front-engine, rear-wheel drive, two-seat, hardtop coupé grand tourer designed by Toyota in collaboration with Yamaha. First displayed to the public at the Tokyo Motor Show in 1965, the 2000GT was manufactured under contract by Yamaha between 1967 and 1970. In Japan, it was exclusive to Toyota's Japanese retail sales channel called Toyota Store.

 

The 2000GT revolutionized the automotive world's view of Japan. The 2000GT demonstrated that Japanese auto manufacturers could produce a sports car to rival those of Europe, in contrast to Japan's image at the time as a producer of imitative and stodgily practical vehicles. Reviewing a pre-production 2000GT in 1967, Road & Track magazine summed up the car as "one of the most exciting and enjoyable cars we've driven", and compared it favorably to the Porsche 911. Today, the 2000GT is seen as the first seriously collectible Japanese car and the first "Japanese supercar". Examples of the 2000GT have sold at auction for as much as US $1,200,000.[2 Much of the work was done by Yamaha, which in addition to its wide product range of the time also did much work for other Japanese manufacturers. Many credit the German-American designer Albrecht Goertz, a protégé of Raymond Loewy, as inspiration for the car, who had previously worked with Nissan to create the Silvia. He had gone to Yamaha in Japan in the early 1960s to modernize Nissan's two-seater sports car called the Fairlady. A prototype was built, but Nissan decided not to pursue the project with Yamaha. Yamaha also contracted for Toyota, then perceived as the most conservative of the Japanese car manufacturers. Wishing to improve their image, Toyota accepted the proposal, but employed a design from their own designer Satoru Nozaki.

Styling

Toyota 2000GT from rear

Toyota 2000GT dashboard

 

The 2000GT design is widely considered a classic in its own right. Its smoothly flowing "coke bottle styling" bodywork was executed in aluminium and featured pop-up headlights, as well as large plexiglas covered driving lamps on either side of the grille similar to those on the Toyota Sports 800. The design scarcely featured bumpers at all, and the plexiglas driving lamp covers in particular are rather easily damaged. The car was extremely low, just 45.7 in (116 cm) to the highest point of the roof. In 1969, the front was modified slightly, making the driving lamps smaller and changing the shape of the turn signals. The rear turn signals were enlarged at the same time, and some alterations were made to modernise the interior. The last few vehicles were fitted with air conditioning and had automatic transmission as an option. These cars had an additional scoop fitted underneath the grille to supply air to the A/C unit. Two custom open-top models were built for the James Bond film You Only Live Twice, but a factory-produced convertible was never offered during the car's production run.

 

The interior offered comfortable, if cramped, accommodation and luxury touches like a rosewood-veneer dashboard and an auto-seeking radio tuner. At the time, Road & Track felt that the interior was up to par for a "luxurious GT", calling it an impressive car "in which to sit or ride - or simply admire."

Technical details

The 3M DOHC 2.0 liter inline six

The 2M SOHC 2.3 liter inline six

 

The engine was a 2.0 L (121 in³) straight-6 (the 3M) based on the engine in the top-of-the-line Toyota Crown sedan. It was transformed by Yamaha with a new double overhead camshaft head into a 112 kW (150 hp) sports car engine. Carburation was through three two-barrel Solex 40 PHH units. Nine special MF-12 models were also built with the larger but SOHC 2.3 L 2M engine. The car was available with three different final drives. Fitted with a 4.375 ratio axle, the car was said[by whom?] to be capable of reaching 135 mph (217 km/h) and achieve 7.59 L/100 km (31 mpg-US; 37 mpg-imp).[3]

 

The engine was longitudinally mounted and drove the rear wheels through a five-speed manual transmission. A limited slip differential was fitted, and in a first for a Japanese car, all-round power-assisted disc brakes. The atypical emergency brake gripped the rear disc directly.

Production

 

Only 351 (regular production cars) of the 2000GT were built, figures comparable to elite Italian supercar production of the day. According to Toyota and Yamaha data, there were 233 MF10s, 109 MF10Ls, and nine MF12Ls. All were actually built by Yamaha; it took two years for production vehicles to emerge. In America, the 2000GT sold for about $6,800, much more than contemporary Porsches and Jaguars. It is believed that no profit was made on the cars despite their high price; they were more concept cars and a demonstration of ability than a true production vehicle. About 60 cars reached North America and the others were similarly thinly spread worldwide. Most 2000GTs were painted either red or white.

Racing

 

Toyota entered the 2000GT in competition at home, coming third in the 1966 Japanese Grand Prix and winning the Fuji 24-Hour Race in 1967. In addition, the car set several FIA world records for speed and endurance in a 72-hour test. Unfortunately, the record car was destroyed in a pace car accident and eventually scrapped. These records shortly prompted Porsche to prepare a 911R especially to beat this record.

 

Carroll Shelby would also enter a pair of 2000GTs to compete in the SCCA production car races competing in the CP category. Initially Shelby built three cars, including one spare. Although performing well, 1968 was the only season the car competed in the US. Toyota took back one of the cars and rebuilt it into a replica of their record car, which still resides in Japan. The two remaining Shelby cars still reside in the United States.

2000GT Open-Top, the “Bond Model”

2000GT used in the James Bond film, You Only Live Twice

 

The 2000GT made its most famous screen appearance in the 1967 James Bond movie You Only Live Twice, most of which was filmed in Japan. Even though the car was never commercially available as a convertible, two were made specially for the film. However, they did not have roofs, just an upholstered hump at the rear of the cabin to simulate a folded top, and therefore were not fully functioning convertibles. Prior to the decision to make fully roofless cars, building the car as a targa was tried, allegedly due to Sean Connery's height not allowing him to fit into the ultra-low coupé version. This retained the hatchback of the original car, but eliminated the rear side windows. However, when the Targa was completed, Connery's head stuck out of the top to such an extent that it was decided it looked too ridiculous and that roofless versions would have to be made if the car was to be featured in the film. Toyota were able to create a convertible version in a mere two weeks after being notified of this shortcoming. The car was mainly driven by his girlfriend Aki (Akiko Wakabayashi) in the film.[4]

Today

 

Although not quite as well known to the general public as later Japanese sports cars like the Nissan Z, the 2000GT is regarded by many collectors as possibly the first highly collectible Japanese car. As of 2010, good examples can reach very high auction prices, though parts availability is a problem. Some combination of interesting provenance (particularly the first and second owners) and cosmetic perfection seems to be the formula for the highest auction values.

The Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus), also known as the common peafowl, and blue peafowl, is a peafowl species native to the Indian subcontinent. It has been introduced to many other countries. Male peafowl are referred to as peacocks, and female peafowl are referred to as peahens, although both sexes are often referred to colloquially as a "peacock".

 

Indian peafowl display a marked form of sexual dimorphism. The peacock is brightly coloured, with a predominantly blue fan-like crest of spatula-tipped wire-like feathers and is best known for the long train made up of elongated upper-tail covert feathers which bear colourful eyespots. These stiff feathers are raised into a fan and quivered in a display during courtship. Despite the length and size of these covert feathers, peacocks are still capable of flight. Peahens lack the train, have a white face and iridescent green lower neck, and dull brown plumage. The Indian peafowl lives mainly on the ground in open forest or on land under cultivation where they forage for berries, grains but also prey on snakes, lizards, and small rodents. Their loud calls make them easy to detect, and in forest areas often indicate the presence of a predator such as a tiger. They forage on the ground in small groups and usually try to escape on foot through undergrowth and avoid flying, though they fly into tall trees to roost.

 

The function of the peacock's elaborate train has been debated for over a century. In the 19th century, Charles Darwin found it a puzzle, hard to explain through ordinary natural selection. His later explanation, sexual selection, is widely but not universally accepted. In the 20th century, Amotz Zahavi argued that the train was a handicap, and that males were honestly signalling their fitness in proportion to the splendour of their trains. Despite extensive study, opinions remain divided on the mechanisms involved.

 

The bird is celebrated in Hindu and Greek mythology, and is the national bird of India. The Indian peafowl is listed as of Least Concern on the IUCN Red List.

 

Taxonomy and naming

Carl Linnaeus in his work Systema Naturae in 1758 assigned to the Indian peafowl the technical name of Pavo cristatus (means "crested peafowl" in classical Latin).

 

The earliest usage of the word in written English is from around 1300 and spelling variants include pecok, pekok, pecokk, peacocke, peacock, pyckock, poucock, pocok, pokok, pokokke, and poocok among others. The current spelling was established in the late 17th century. Chaucer (1343–1400) used the word to refer to a proud and ostentatious person in his simile "proud a pekok" in Troilus and Criseyde (Book I, line 210).

 

The Sanskrit, later Pali, and modern Hindi term for the animal is maur. It is debated that the nomenclature of the Maurya Empire, whose first emperor Chandragupta Maurya was raised and influenced by peacock farmers was named after the terminology.

 

The Greek word for peacock was taos and was related to the Persian "tavus" (as in Takht-i-Tâvus for the famed Peacock Throne). The Ancient Hebrew word tuki (plural tukkiyim) has been said to have been derived from the Tamil tokei but sometimes traced to the Egyptian tekh. In modern Hebrew the word for peacock is "tavas". In Sanskrit, the peacock is known as Mayura and is associated with the killing of snakes.

 

Description

 

Male neck detail

Peacocks are a larger sized bird with a length from bill to tail of 100 to 115 cm (39 to 45 in) and to the end of a fully grown train as much as 195 to 225 cm (77 to 89 in) and weigh 4–6 kg (8.8–13.2 lb). The females, or peahens, are smaller at around 95 cm (37 in) in length and weigh 2.75–4 kg (6.1–8.8 lb). Indian peafowl are among the largest and heaviest representatives of the Phasianidae. So far as is known, only the wild turkey grows notably heavier. The green peafowl is slightly lighter in body mass despite the male having a longer train on average than the male of the Indian species. Their size, colour and shape of crest make them unmistakable within their native distribution range. The male is metallic blue on the crown, the feathers of the head being short and curled. The fan-shaped crest on the head is made of feathers with bare black shafts and tipped with bluish-green webbing. A white stripe above the eye and a crescent shaped white patch below the eye are formed by bare white skin. The sides of the head have iridescent greenish blue feathers. The back has scaly bronze-green feathers with black and copper markings. The scapular and the wings are buff and barred in black, the primaries are chestnut and the secondaries are black. The tail is dark brown and the "train" is made up of elongated upper tail coverts (more than 200 feathers, the actual tail has only 20 feathers) and nearly all of these feathers end with an elaborate eye-spot. A few of the outer feathers lack the spot and end in a crescent shaped black tip. The underside is dark glossy green shading into blackish under the tail. The thighs are buff coloured. The male has a spur on the leg above the hind toe.

 

The adult peahen has a rufous-brown head with a crest as in the male but the tips are chestnut edged with green. The upper body is brownish with pale mottling. The primaries, secondaries and tail are dark brown. The lower neck is metallic green and the breast feathers are dark brown glossed with green. The remaining underparts are whitish. Downy young are pale buff with a dark brown mark on the nape that connects with the eyes. Young males look like the females but the wings are chestnut coloured.

 

The most common calls are a loud pia-ow or may-awe. The frequency of calling increases before the Monsoon season and may be delivered in alarm or when disturbed by loud noises. In forests, their calls often indicate the presence of a predators such as the tiger. They also make many other calls such as a rapid series of ka-aan..ka-aan or a rapid kok-kok. They often emit an explosive low-pitched honk! when agitated.

 

Mutations and hybrids

This leucistic mutation is commonly mistaken for an albino.

There are several colour mutations of Indian peafowl. These very rarely occur in the wild, but selective breeding has made them common in captivity. The black-shouldered or Japanned mutation was initially considered as a subspecies of the Indian peafowl (P. c. nigripennis) (or even a separate species (P. nigripennis)) and was a topic of some interest during Darwin's time. Others had doubts about its taxonomic status, but the English naturalist and biologist Charles Darwin (1809–1882) presented firm evidence for it being a variety under domestication, which treatment is now well established and accepted. It being a colour variation rather than a wild species was important for Darwin to prove, as otherwise it could undermine his theory of slow modification by natural selection in the wild. It is, however, only a case of genetic variation within the population. In this mutation, the adult male is melanistic with black wings. Young birds with the nigripennis mutation are creamy white with fulvous-tipped wings. The gene produces melanism in the male and in the peahen it produces a dilution of colour with creamy white and brown markings. Other forms include the pied and white mutations, all of which are the result of allelic variation at specific loci.

 

Crosses between a male green peafowl (Pavo muticus) and a female Indian peafowl (P. cristatus) produce a stable hybrid called a "Spalding", named after Mrs. Keith Spalding, a bird fancier in California. There can be problems if birds of unknown pedigree are released into the wild, as the viability of such hybrids and their offspring is often reduced (see Haldane's rule and outbreeding depression).

 

Distribution and habitat

The Indian peafowl is a resident breeder across the Indian subcontinent and inhabits the drier lowland areas of Sri Lanka. In the Indian subcontinent, it is found mainly below an elevation of 1,800 m (5,900 ft) and in rare cases seen at about 2,000 m (6,600 ft). It is found in moist and dry-deciduous forests, but can adapt to live in cultivated regions and around human habitations and is usually found where water is available. In many parts of northern India, they are protected by religious practices and will forage around villages and towns for scraps. Some have suggested that the peacock was introduced into Europe by Alexander the Great, while others say the bird had reached Athens by 450 BCE and may have been introduced even earlier. It has since been introduced in many other parts of the world and has become feral in some areas.

 

The Indian peafowl has been introduced to the United States, the United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, France, Mexico, Honduras, Costa Rica, Colombia, Guyana, Suriname, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, South Africa, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy, Madagascar, Mauritius, Réunion, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Australia, New Zealand, Croatia and the island of Lokrum.

 

Genome sequencing

The first whole-genome sequencing of Indian peafowl identified a total of 15,970 protein-coding sequences, along with 213 tRNAs, 236 snoRNAs, and 540 miRNAs. The peacock genome was found to have less repetitive DNA (8.62%) than that of the chicken genome (9.45%). PSMC analysis suggested that the peacock suffered at least two bottlenecks (around four million years ago and again 450,000 years ago), which resulted in a severe reduction in its effective population size.

 

Behaviour and ecology

Peafowl are best known for the male's extravagant display feathers which, despite actually growing from their back, are thought of as a tail. The "train" is in reality made up of the enormously elongated upper tail coverts. The tail itself is brown and short as in the peahen. The colours result not from any green or blue pigments but from the micro-structure of the feathers and the resulting optical phenomena. The long train feathers (and tarsal spurs) of the male develop only after the second year of life. Fully developed trains are found in birds older than four years. In northern India, these begin to develop each February and are moulted at the end of August. The moult of the flight feathers may be spread out across the year.

 

Peafowl forage on the ground in small groups, known as musters, that usually have a cock and 3 to 5 hens. After the breeding season, the flocks tend to be made up only of females and young. They are found in the open early in the mornings and tend to stay in cover during the heat of the day. They are fond of dust-bathing and at dusk, groups walk in single file to a favourite waterhole to drink. When disturbed, they usually escape by running and rarely take to flight.

 

Peafowl produce loud calls especially in the breeding season. They may call at night when alarmed and neighbouring birds may call in a relay like series. Nearly seven different call variants have been identified in the peacocks apart from six alarm calls that are commonly produced by both sexes.

 

Peafowl roost in groups during the night on tall trees but may sometimes make use of rocks, buildings or pylons. In the Gir forest, they chose tall trees in steep river banks. Birds arrive at dusk and call frequently before taking their position on the roost trees. Due to this habit of congregating at the roost, many population studies are made at these sites. The population structure is not well understood. In a study in northern India (Jodhpur), the number of males was 170–210 for 100 females but a study involving evening counts at the roost site in southern India (Injar) suggested a ratio of 47 males for 100 females.

 

Sexual selection

The colours of the peacock and the contrast with the much duller peahen were a puzzle to early thinkers. Charles Darwin wrote to Asa Gray that the "sight of a feather in a peacock's tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!" as he failed to see an adaptive advantage for the extravagant tail which seemed only to be an encumbrance. Darwin developed a second principle of sexual selection to resolve the problem, though in the prevailing intellectual trends of Victorian Britain, the theory failed to gain widespread attention.

 

The American artist Abbott Handerson Thayer tried to show, from his own imagination, the value of the eyespots as disruptive camouflage in a 1907 painting. He used the painting in his 1909 book Concealing-Coloration in the Animal Kingdom, denying the possibility of sexual selection and arguing that essentially all forms of animal colouration had evolved as camouflage. He was roundly criticised in a lengthy paper by Theodore Roosevelt, who wrote that Thayer had only managed to paint the peacock's plumage as camouflage by sleight of hand, "with the blue sky showing through the leaves in just sufficient quantity here and there to warrant the author-artists explaining that the wonderful blue hues of the peacock's neck are obliterative because they make it fade into the sky."

 

In the 1970s a possible resolution to the apparent contradiction between natural selection and sexual selection was proposed. Amotz Zahavi argued that peacocks honestly signalled the handicap of having a large and costly train. However, the mechanism may be less straightforward than it seems – the cost could arise from depression of the immune system by the hormones that enhance feather development.

  

Male courting female

The ornate train is believed to be the result of sexual selection by the females. Males use their ornate trains in a courtship display: they raise the feathers into a fan and quiver them. However, recent studies have failed to find a relation between the number of displayed eyespots and mating success. Marion Petrie tested whether or not these displays signaled a male's genetic quality by studying a feral population of peafowl in Whipsnade Wildlife Park in southern England. She showed that the number of eyespots in the train predicted a male's mating success, and this success could be manipulated by cutting the eyespots off some of the male's ornate feathers.

 

Although the removal of eyespots makes males less successful in mating, eyespot removal substantially changes the appearance of male peafowls. It is likely that females mistake these males for sub-adults, or perceive that the males are physically damaged. Moreover, in a feral peafowl population, there is little variation in the number of eyespots in adult males. It is rare for adult males to lose a significant number of eyespots. Therefore, females' selection might depend on other sexual traits of males' trains. The quality of train is an honest signal of the condition of males; peahens do select males on the basis of their plumage. A recent study on a natural population of Indian peafowls in the Shivalik area of India has proposed a "high maintenance handicap" theory. It states that only the fittest males can afford the time and energy to maintain a long tail. Therefore, the long train is an indicator of good body condition, which results in greater mating success. While train length seems to correlate positively with MHC diversity in males, females do not appear to use train length to choose males. A study in Japan also suggests that peahens do not choose peacocks based on their ornamental plumage, including train length, number of eyespots and train symmetry. Another study in France brings up two possible explanations for the conflicting results that exist. The first explanation is that there might be a genetic variation of the trait of interest under different geographical areas due to a founder effect and/or a genetic drift. The second explanation suggests that "the cost of trait expression may vary with environmental conditions," so that a trait that is indicative of a particular quality may not work in another environment.

 

Fisher's runaway model proposes positive feedback between female preference for elaborate trains and the elaborate train itself. This model assumes that the male train is a relatively recent evolutionary adaptation. However, a molecular phylogeny study on peacock-pheasants shows the opposite; the most recently evolved species is actually the least ornamented one. This finding suggests a chase-away sexual selection, in which "females evolve resistance to male ploys". A study in Japan goes on to conclude that the "peacocks' train is an obsolete signal for which female preference has already been lost or weakened".

 

However, some disagreement has arisen in recent years concerning whether or not female peafowl do indeed select males with more ornamented trains. In contrast to Petrie's findings, a seven-year Japanese study of free-ranging peafowl came to the conclusion that female peafowl do not select mates solely on the basis of their trains. Mariko Takahashi found no evidence that peahens expressed any preference for peacocks with more elaborate trains (such as trains having more ocelli), a more symmetrical arrangement, or a greater length. Takahashi determined that the peacock's train was not the universal target of female mate choice, showed little variance across male populations, and, based on physiological data collected from this group of peafowl, do not correlate to male physical conditions. Adeline Loyau and her colleagues responded to Takahashi's study by voicing concern that alternative explanations for these results had been overlooked, and that these might be essential for the understanding of the complexity of mate choice. They concluded that female choice might indeed vary in different ecological conditions.

 

A 2013 study that tracked the eye movements of peahens responding to male displays found that they looked in the direction of the upper train of feathers only when at long distances and that they looked only at the lower feathers when males displayed close to them. The rattling of the tail and the shaking of the wings helped in keeping the attention of females.

 

Breeding

Peacocks are polygamous, and the breeding season is spread out but appears to be dependent on the rains. Peafowls usually reach sexual maturity at the age of 2 to 3 years old. Several males may congregate at a lek site and these males are often closely related. Males at leks appear to maintain small territories next to each other and they allow females to visit them and make no attempt to guard harems. Females do not appear to favour specific males. The males display in courtship by raising the upper-tail coverts into an arched fan. The wings are held half open and drooped and it periodically vibrates the long feathers, producing a ruffling sound. The cock faces the hen initially and struts and prances around and sometimes turns around to display the tail. Males may also freeze over food to invite a female in a form of courtship feeding. Males may display even in the absence of females. When a male is displaying, females do not appear to show any interest and usually continue their foraging.

 

The peak season in southern India is April to May, January to March in Sri Lanka and June in northern India. The nest is a shallow scrape in the ground lined with leaves, sticks and other debris. Nests are sometimes placed on buildings and, in earlier times, have been recorded using the disused nest platforms of the white-rumped vultures. The clutch consists of 4–8 fawn to buff white eggs which are incubated only by the female. The eggs take about 28 days to hatch. The chicks are nidifugous and follow the mother around after hatching. Downy young may sometimes climb on their mothers' back and the female may carry them in flight to a safe tree branch. An unusual instance of a male incubating a clutch of eggs has been reported.

 

Feeding

Peafowl are omnivorous and eat seeds, insects (including termites), worms, fruits, small mammals, frogs, and reptiles (such as lizards). They feed on small snakes but keep their distance from larger ones. In the Gir forest of Gujarat, a large percentage of their food is made up of the fallen berries of Zizyphus. They also feed on tree and flower buds, petals, grain, and grass and bamboo shoots. Around cultivated areas, peafowl feed on a wide range of crops such as groundnut, tomato, paddy, chili and even bananas. Around human habitations, they feed on a variety of food scraps and even human excreta. In the countryside, it is particularly partial to crops and garden plants.

 

Mortality factors

Large animals such as leopards, dholes, golden jackals, and tigers can ambush adult peafowls. However, only leopards regularly prey upon peafowls as adult peafowls are difficult to catch since they can usually escape ground predators by flying into trees. They are also sometimes hunted by large birds of prey such as the changeable hawk-eagle and rock eagle-owl. Chicks are somewhat more prone to predation than adult birds. Adults living near human habitations are sometimes hunted by domestic dogs or by humans in some areas (southern Tamil Nadu) for folk remedies involving the use of "peacock oil".

 

Foraging in groups provides some safety as there are more eyes to look out for predators. They also roost on high tree tops to avoid terrestrial predators, especially leopards.

 

In captivity, birds have been known to live for 23 years but it is estimated that they live for only about 15 years in the wild.

 

Conservation and status

Indian peafowl are widely distributed in the wild across South Asia and protected both culturally in many areas and by law in India. Conservative estimates of the population put them at more than 100,000. Illegal poaching for meat, however, continues and declines have been noted in parts of India. Peafowl breed readily in captivity and as free-ranging ornamental fowl. Zoos, parks, bird-fanciers and dealers across the world maintain breeding populations that do not need to be augmented by the capture of wild birds.

 

Poaching of peacocks for their meat and feathers and accidental poisoning by feeding on pesticide treated seeds are known threats to wild birds. Methods to identify if feathers have been plucked or have been shed naturally have been developed, as Indian law allows only the collection of feathers that have been shed.

 

In parts of India, the birds can be a nuisance to agriculture as they damage crops. Its adverse effects on crops, however, seem to be offset by the beneficial role it plays by consuming prodigious quantities of pests such as grasshoppers. They can also be a problem in gardens and homes where they damage plants, attack their reflections (thereby breaking glass and mirrors), perch and scratch cars or leave their droppings. Many cities where they have been introduced and gone feral have peafowl management programmes. These include educating citizens on how to prevent the birds from causing damage while treating the birds humanely.

 

In culture

Prominent in many cultures, the peacock has been used in numerous iconic representations, including being designated the national bird of India in 1963. The peacock, known as mayura in Sanskrit, has enjoyed a fabled place in India since and is frequently depicted in temple art, mythology, poetry, folk music and traditions. A Sanskrit derivation of mayura is from the root mi for kill and said to mean "killer of snakes". It is also likely that the Sanskrit term is a borrowing from Proto-Dravidian *mayVr (whence the Tamil word for peacock மயில் (mayil)) or a regional Wanderwort. Many Hindu deities are associated with the bird, Krishna is often depicted with a feather in his headband, while worshippers of Shiva associate the bird as the steed of the God of war, Kartikeya (also known as Skanda or Murugan). A story in the Uttara Ramayana describes the head of the Devas, Indra, who unable to defeat Ravana, sheltered under the wing of peacock and later blessed it with a "thousand eyes" and fearlessness from serpents. Another story has Indra who after being cursed with a thousand ulcers was transformed into a peacock with a thousand eyes and this curse was removed by Vishnu.

 

In Buddhist philosophy, the peacock represents wisdom. Peacock feathers are used in many rituals and ornamentation. Peacock motifs are widespread in Indian temple architecture, old coinage, textiles and continue to be used in many modern items of art and utility. A folk belief found in many parts of India is that the peacock does not copulate with the peahen but that she is impregnated by other means. The stories vary and include the idea that the peacock looks at its ugly feet and cries whereupon the tears are fed on by the peahen causing it to be orally impregnated while other variants incorporate sperm transfer from beak to beak. Similar ideas have also been ascribed to Indian crow species. In Greek mythology the origin of the peacock's plumage is explained in the tale of Hera and Argus. The main figure of the Yazidi religion Yezidism, Melek Taus, is most commonly depicted as a peacock. Peacock motifs are widely used even today such as in the logos of the US NBC and the PTV television networks and the Sri Lankan Airlines.

 

These birds were often kept in menageries and as ornaments in large gardens and estates. In medieval times, knights in Europe took a "Vow of the Peacock" and decorated their helmets with its plumes. In several Robin Hood stories, the titular archer uses arrows fletched with peacock feathers. Feathers were buried with Viking warriors and the flesh of the bird was said to cure snake venom and many other maladies. Numerous uses in Ayurveda have been documented. Peafowl were said to keep an area free of snakes. In 1526, the legal issue as to whether peacocks were wild or domestic fowl was thought sufficiently important for Cardinal Wolsey to summon all the English judges to give their opinion, which was that they are domestic fowl.

 

In Anglo-Indian usage of the 1850s, to peacock meant making visits to ladies and gentlemen in the morning. In the 1890s, the term "peacocking" in Australia referred to the practice of buying up the best pieces of land ("picking the eyes") so as to render the surrounding lands valueless. The English word "peacock" has come to be used to describe a man who is very proud or gives a lot of attention to his clothing.

 

Main article: Di Goldene Pave

A golden peacock (in Yiddish, Di Goldene Pave) is considered by some as a symbol of Ashkenazi Jewish culture, and is the subject of several folktales and songs in Yiddish. Peacocks are frequently used in European heraldry. Heraldic peacocks are most often depicted as facing the viewer and with their tails displayed. In this pose, the peacock is referred to as being "in his pride". Peacock tails, in isolation from the rest of the bird, are rare in British heraldry, but see frequent use in German systems.

 

The American television network NBC uses a stylized peacock as a legacy of its early introduction of color television, alluding to the brilliant color of a peacock, and continues to promote the bird as a trademark of its broadcasting and streaming services.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

Operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Iran's small Bell AH-1J fleet has seen a fair share of indigenous modernization in recent years. In 1971, Iran purchased 202 examples of an improved AH-1J, named "AH-1J International", from the United States. This improved Cobra featured an uprated P&WC T400-WV-402 engine and a stronger drivetrain, so that it would have a better performance under “hot & high” conditions. Recoil damping gear was fitted to the 20 mm M197 gun turret, and the gunner was given a stabilized sight and a stabilized seat, too. Of the AH-1Js delivered to the Shah's Imperial Iranian Army Aviation, 62 were TOW-capable.

Iranian AH-1Js participated in the Iran–Iraq War—which saw the most intensive use of helicopters in any conventional war. Iranian AH-1Js (particularly the TOW-capable ones) were "exceptionally effective" in anti-armor warfare, inflicting heavy losses on Iraqi armored and vehicle formations. In operations over the barren terrain in Khuzestan and later in southern Iraq, beside the standard tactics, Iranian pilots developed special, effective tactics, often in the same manner as the Soviets did with their Mi-24s. Due to the post-Revolution weapons sanctions, Iranians had to make do with what was at hand: lacking other guided ordnance they equipped the AH-1Js with AGM-65 Maverick missiles and used them with some success in several operations. About half of the AH-1Js were lost during the conflict to combat, accidents, and simple wear and tear –the rest of the fleet was kept operational and busy during the following years.

 

However, time and use took their toll on the Iranian Cobras, for which no replacement could be found. In 2001, Brigadier General Ahmad Kazemi, the then-commander in chief of the IRGC Air Force (from 2009, it became known as the IRGC Aerospace Force, or IRGCASF), requested Ali Khamenei, leader of the Islamic Republic, to permit the IRGC to procure two former army AH-1J Cobra helicopters that had been restored by the Iranian Helicopters Support and Renewal Company (IHSRC, called ‘Panha’ in Iran). They belonged to the Iranian Army Aviation Force (IRIAA, as it was then known), which lacked the funds to pay for the necessary restoration and renewal of parts and fuselage sections.

The first of these refurbished AH-1Js was a TOW Cobra capable of using the Iranian-made clone of the BGM-71A TOW anti-tank missile, the “Towfan”, while the second helicopter was a Non-TOW version capable of using only the 2¾-inch Hydra unguided rockets. They entered IRGCAF service at Fat'h helicopter base, Karaj, to the west of Tehran, in 2001. This marked the start of an ongoing but slow modernization program for the remaining Iranian Cobra fleet.

 

IHSRC also worked on the restoration of two more battle-damaged AH-1J TOW Cobras, in a project known as “Panha-2091”. The front sections of their fuselages had been destroyed by cannon rounds from Iraqi tanks during the Iran-Iraq war and the extensive restoration work required manufacture of new fuselage panels and structural parts. Panha engineers also co-operated with their colleagues from IAMI (Iranian Aircraft Manufacturing Industries, also known as HESA in Iran) and designed a new canopy for the helicopters equipped with a flat, bulletproof windshield instead of the former oval, non-bulletproof version. Under a project named HESA-2091, both helicopters were thoroughly modernized and equipped with multifunction displays and a new weapon control system with a head-up display for the pilot. Internal avionics were revamped with the addition of a GPS system in the nose, and a warning radar with four antennae providing 360 degrees coverage was integrated, too. Design and production of the new digital systems and their components was carried out by the Iranian Electronics Industries Company (IEI) with the assistance of Isfahan University of Technology and a Chinese-connected company, Safa Electronic Component Industries. Installation was performed by IAMI in Shahin-Shahr.

 

These two helicopters were ultimately named ‘Tiztak-2091’ and became prototypes for a larger modernization project for 102 remaining AH-1J Cobra attack helicopters for the Iranian Army Aviation Force. However, in total, the cost of this bold conversion projects exceeded the whole IRIAA budget for 2001, and this resulted in the cancellation of the wider modernization program just a year later. Step forward the IRGC which procured the two Tiztak-2091 prototypes alongside four more former IRIAA AH-1J Non-TOW Cobra helicopters from the Iranian Defence Ministry. These were revamped and delivered to frontline units between 2003 and 2005. However, further conversions have only be done sparingly since then, due to the lack of funds and material.

Despite these limitations, the IAAF immediately began working on upgrade projects to further increase combat capability of the small but busy fleet of Cobra helicopters. The Tiztak helicopters had been equipped with new targeting/surveillance turrets instead of their M-65 Telescopic Sight Units under a IAMI project named Towfan-2 back in 2012. The first helicopters were equipped with the Oqab EO/IR targeting turret produced by IOI (Iranian Optics Industries) in 2012, while others received an RU-290 thermal camera, a product of Rayan Roshd-Afzar.

 

After the formation of the Army Aviation Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGCAA) on February 23, 2016, the IRGCASF helicopter base at Fat’h was transferred to the IRGCGF (IRGC Ground Force), of which the IRGCAA was now a part. IRGCAA today operates more than 80 helicopters including nine Bell AH-1J International Cobras, with three examples modernized by Iranian Aircraft Manufacturing Industries (IAMI). IRGCAA had also been trying to equip its small fleet of AH-1Js with a new air-to-surface missile and an anti-tank missile, the Qaem-114 (outwardly almost identical to the American AGM-119 Hellfire), but this did not proceed beyond prototype stage.

 

Despite the active Iranian AH-1J fleet’s relatively small size after 2001, the Cobras were extremely active during counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency operations in the southeast and northwest of Iran. Both the IAAF and now the IRGCAA had always had two fire support teams, each formed with two to three AH-1Js in Orumiyeh and Zahedan, to be used against the PKK/PJAK and Jaish ul-Adl terrorist groups. The fire-support team at the IRGCGF Hamzeh Garrison in the northwest of Iran had two Bell 214A utility helicopters for SAR operations to accompany the Cobras while the team in Zahedan International Airport had two to three Mi-171Sh helicopters; usually, one armed with B8M1 rocket pods as a heavy fire support gunship.

The most notable use of the AH-1Js in combat by the IRGC took place in spring and summer 2008 when two AH-1Js stationed in Zahedan were extensively used in close-air-support missions during a counter-terrorism operation by IRGC Ground Forces against the Jondollah group (later to be rebranded as Jaish ul-Adl after being listed as a terrorist organization by the US State Department). After the arrest and execution of its leader, Abdolmalek Reigi by Iran, the group stopped its activities in 2009. It resumed again a few years later resulting in the launch of new anti-terror operations involving the AH-1Js in 2013, which continued periodically until 2020.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 53 ft 5 in (16.28 m) with both rotors turning

45 ft 9 in (14 m) for fuselage only

Width: 10 ft 9 in (3.28 m) for stub wings only

Height: 13 ft 5 in (4.09 m)

Main rotor diameter: 43 ft 11 in (13.39 m)

Main rotor area: 1,514.97 sq ft (140.745 m²)

Empty weight: 2,802 kg (6,177 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 4,530 kg (9,987 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× P&W Canada T400-CP-400 (PT6T-3 Twin-Pac) turboshaft engines, coupled to produce 1,530 shp

(1,140 kW; de-rated from 1,800 shp (1,342 kW) for drivetrain limitations)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 236 km/h (147 mph, 127 kn)

Range: 600 km (370 mi, 320 nmi)

Service ceiling: 10,500 ft (3,200 m)

Rate of climb: 1,090 ft/min (5.5 m/s)

 

Armament:

1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M197 3-barreled Gatling cannon in M97 chin turret with 750 rounds

4× hardpoints under the sub wings for 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 40 or Hydra 70 rockets in 7 or 19 rounds

pods; up to 16 5” (127 mm) Zuni rockets in 4-round LAU-10D/A launchers, up to eight Toophan

ATGM in a dual or quad launcher on each wing, AIM-9 Sidewinder or Misagh-2 anti-aircraft

missiles (1 mounted on each hardpoint)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is the counterpart to another modified Fujimi AH-1 model, actually a kit bashing of the AH-1S and the AH-1J model to produce something that comes close to the real IAMI HESA-2091 helicopter, an upgraded/re-built AH-1J International of the Iranian Army Air Force. The “leftover” parts were used to create an (Indonesian) AH-1G – even though the HESA-2091 was the “core project”.

 

To create this Iranian variant, the AH-1J was taken as the basis and the nose as well as the flat-window canopy from the AH-1S were transplanted. While the nose with the TOW sensor turret was just an optional part that fits naturally on the fuselage (even though not without some PSR), the clear parts was more challenging, because the flat canopy is shorter than the original. In this case I had to fill some triangular gaps between the hood and the engine section, and this was done with 1.5 mm styrene sheet wedges and some more PSR to blend the parts that were not meant to be combined into each other.

The cockpit was taken OOB, together with the pilot figures that come with the kit. I also retained the original all-metal main rotor because the Iranian Cobras AFAIK were never upgraded with composite material blades?

 

To set the HESA-2091 further apart from the original AH-1J I changed the sensor turret in the nose and scratched a ball-shaped fairing that resembles the indigenous RU-290 thermal camera – it’s actually the ball joint from a classic clear Matchbox kit display, with a base scratched from 0.5mm styrene sheet. The “ball” turned out to be a bit too large, but the overall look is O.K., since I wanted a non-TOW AH-1J. For a “different-than-a-stock-AH-1J” look A small radome for a missile guidance antenna was added to the nose above the sensor turret, too. Another personal addition are the small end plates on the stabilizers – inspired by similar installations on Bell’s early twin-engine AH-1s, even though these later disappeared and were technically replaced by a ventral fin extension and a longer fuselage; the Iranian AH-1Js retained the short, original fuselage of the single-engine Cobra variants, though. The end plates were cut from leftover rotor blades from the scrap box, IIRC they belong to a Matchbox Dauphin 2.

 

Being part of the historical Zahedan fire support team I gave the Cobra an armament consisting of a nineteen round 70mm Hydra unguided missile pods (OOB), a pair of AGM-65 Maverick missiles (an ordnance actually deployed by Iranian Cobras), together with their respective launch rails, and I added launch tubes for indigenous Misagh-2 anti-aircraft missiles (which are actually MANPADS) to the stub wings’ tips as a self-defense measure. These were scratched from 2mm styrene rods.

  

Painting and markings:

Finding a suitable paint scheme was not easy. A conservative choice would have been an early mid-stone/earth scheme or a tri-color scheme consisting of sand, earth and dark green. However, while doing WWW research I came across some more exotic and contemporary specimen, carrying a kind of leopard-esque mottle scheme or even a “high resolution” fractal/digital cammo consisting of three shades of beige/brown/grey – even though I am not certain if the latter was a “real” camouflage for operational helicopters or just a “show and shine” propaganda livery?

 

Re-creating the latter from scratch would have been prohibitively complex, because the pixelized mottles were really fine, maybe just 2” wide each in real life. But I used this scheme as an inspiration for a simplified variant, also kept in three shades of brown, even though the result was a kind of compromise due to the limited material options to create it.

The base became an overall coat with Tamiya XF-57 (Buff), plus very light grey (RAL 7035; Humbrol 196) undersides. A light black ink washing was applied, and panels were post-shaded to create a more vivid surface.

Then came the pixelized mottles in two contrast colors: first came a layer in RAL 1015 (Hellelfenbein/Light Ivory) and then a second in RAL 8011 (Nussbraun/Nut Brown) in a 1:1 ratio, slightly overlapping and letting the Buff base shine through. These mottles were not painted but rather created with square bits from generic decal stripe material in various widths from TL Modellbau. While not as sophisticated as the original camouflage, effect and look are quite similar, and add to the unique look of this HESA-2091(-ish) model. And even though I was sceptical, esp. because of the reddish Nussbraun, the blurring effect of the scheme is surprisingly good – esp. when you put the model in front of a dry mountain background! I’ll keep the concept in the back of my head for further what-if models. All those single pixels were a lot of work, but the result looks really good.

 

Another detail from many real late Iranian Cobras was taken over, too: a black tail rotor drive shaft cover that extends up onto the fin’s leading edge – probably a measure to hide exhaust soot stains on the tail boom? A black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen, too, and the rotor blades became medium grey (Humbrol 165, Medium Sea Grey) except for the main rotor blades’ undersides, which became black. The cockpit interior was uniformly painted in a very dark grey (Revell 06, Anthracite) and the pilots received khaki jumpsuits and modern grey and olive drab “bone domes”.

 

The decals were puzzled together from various sources. The Iranian roundels came from a Begemot MiG-29 sheet, registration numbers and fin flashes from an Iranian F-5. The IAAF abbreviation was created with single black 4 mm letters.

Graphite was used to weather the model, esp. the area on top of the tail boom, and the model was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish overall.

  

An exotic model – the Iranian home-brew HESA-2091 looks familiar, but it’s a unique combination of classic Cobra elements. More spectacular is the pixelated paint scheme, and the attempt to generate it with the help of square decal bits worked (and looks) better than expected! This might also work well in grey as a winter camouflage? Hmmm….

The Republic Aviation F-105 was a supersonic fighter-bomber capable of Mach-2 speeds. The aircraft was initially an internal Republic project designed to replace the RF-84F Thunderflash. The U.S. Air Force awarded Republic with a contract for 199 aircraft in September of 1952, but later downgraded the order in size. Near the end of 1953, the entire program was canceled by the Air Force due to a number of delays and uncertainties regarding the aircraft. In 1954, it placed another order, and the YF-105A prototype first flew in October of 1955. The first production F-105B was accepted by the Air Force in May of 1957.

 

In June 1957 Republic Aviation requested that the F-105 be named Thunderchief, continuing the sequence of the company's Thunder-named aircraft such as the P-47 Thunderbolt, F-84 Thunderjet, and F-84F Thunderstreak.

 

The F-105 was the largest single-seat, single-engine combat aircraft in history, weighing in at about 50,000 pounds. One of its nicknames was "Thud". The Mach-2 capable F-105 also conducted most of the strike bombing missions during the early years of the Vietnam War. Over 20,000 Thunderchief sorties were flown during the war, with 382 F-105 aircraft lost.

 

Six airshows by the USAF Thunderbirds demonstration team were flown in 1964 using the F-105. Following this brief use of the F-105, the Thunderbirds transitioned back to the F-100 Super Sabre.

 

The last F-105 ended service in February, 1984. Today, about ninety F-105 Thunderchiefs have survived and are on display at various locations around the United States like this one at the Pearl Harbor Aviation Museum in Honolulu, Hawaii. Others are also on display in the United Kingdom, Germany, France and Mexico.

 

-- Technical Information (or Nerdy Stuff) --

‧ Camera - Nikon D7200 (handheld)

‧ Lens – Nikkor 18-300mm Zoom

‧ ISO – 1250

‧ Aperture – f/3.5

‧ Exposure – 1/800 second

‧ Focal Length – 18mm

 

The original RAW file was processed with Adobe Camera Raw and final adjustments were made with Photoshop CS6.

 

"For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future." ~Jeremiah 29:11

 

The best way to view my photostream is through Flickriver with the following link: www.flickriver.com/photos/photojourney57/

An original mockup for the Class 325 postal units from around 1994, I once encountered this before at the National Railway Museum in York, but apparently it's here at the Nene Valley Railway now.

 

The Class 325's are yet another one of those Greek tragedies of the British railway scene. These specially built, 100mph units were very capable machines, but sadly the powers that be quickly pulled the rug out from under them, and what would have been the primary motive power for mail traffic across the UK's electric railway network is now only just starting to make a comeback.

 

The origins of the Class 325 go back to the early 1990's. At the time British Rail's parcels and mail arm, Rail Express Systems, was in the process of phasing out the traditional Travelling Post Office as computer sorting removed the need for sorting by-hand aboard the trains. At the same time RES desired a fleet of units that would be much more flexible, efficient and cost effective than the ageing fleet of Class 86 electrics, Class 47 diesels and MkI based coaching stock of the 1960's that it was using presently.

 

Previously, Royal Mail had trialed reusing former London commuter EMU's and re-purposing them as parcels units. Initially, Class 307's built in the 1950's were used on services out of London Liverpool Street, these being designated Class 300. However, these units weren't particularly reliable, and their age meant that they were only a few years away from being life-expired. In 1994, Rail Express Systems placed an order for a set of 100mph electric multiple units to be built on the underpinnings of the Class 319 dual-voltage Thameslink units used in London. Originally, this class was designated Class 350, but was eventually changed to Class 325.

 

Construction of these units was done by ABB at their Derby works between 1995 and 1996, with 16 of these trains eventually built. The construction of the Class 325's coincided with a major refurbishment of the mail-on-rail system, with new distribution centres and sorting offices constructed at major railway locations, this project being dubbed Railnet. For the Class 325's, these included Railnet terminals at Shieldmuir near Glasgow (to serve the lowlands of Scotland), Warrington (to serve North West England), Low Fell near Newcastle, and Willesden in North London. Additional Railnet terminals off the Class 325's network included Tonbridge, Bristol Parkway, Doncaster and Stafford. Willesden Railnet terminal is by far the largest, a 7 platform station under a huge barrel roof which is essentially another London terminus just with no passengers, built at a cost of £30m.

 

The Class 325's eventually began operations after a short period of trials in 1995. The units are fitted with large round oleo buffers, and have no gangways between carriages. Each set is made up of four cars, with roller doors in place of sliding ones and no windows. Each car has two roller shutter sliding doors on each side and is designed to hold up to 12 tonnes. They have a pantograph to pick up power from the 25 kV AC overhead lines, and also a shoe to pick up power off the 750 V DC third rail. They cannot work in multiple with any other multiple unit stock, but are fitted with drop-head buck-eye coupling and can therefore be hauled by locomotives. The units were built in such a way that they could easily be converted for passenger use if no longer required for mail services, and cab fronts designed to look similar to the then recently built Networker Class 165/166 and 365/465 commuter units.

 

Based at Crewe International Electric Maintenance Depot, the Class 325's effects on the mail services up the West and East Coast Mainlines were profound, with turnaround times and flexibility when it came to shunting being among its many advantages. They were also much more reliable than Class 86's or 47's, and could easily be put to work on the 3rd Rail Southern Region without the need for diesels or locomotive changes.

 

However, their tenure on mail services was seriously short lived, as in 2003, Royal Mail decided to cease the Mail Train contract with freight operator EWS after 166 years of operation. The last mail services under the original Victorian contract ended on January 9th, 2004, and the Class 325's, along with the hundreds of carriages of stock and locomotives, entered storage at various locations across the network, while the millions of pounds of infrastructure and the Railnet buildings fell silent after less than 10 years of operation.

 

The Class 325's were thankfully not out of action for long though, as at Christmas 2004, in light of heavy demand and congestion on the roads in bad weather, Royal Mail reluctantly awarded GBRf the contract to run a limited number of Class 325's on services between London and Glasgow over the winter period. GBRf however were not cleared to use the Class 325's on their own, and thus instead chose to drag the units using Class 86's and 87's. After a traction reshuffle the Class 325s resumed service with their power cars and without locomotive haulage.

 

Eventually, GBRf lost the contract in 2010 to EWS's successor, DB Schenker, who now operate both Royal Mail services but the continued maintenance of the Class 325 stock. On an average weekday there are 15 diagrammed services out of Willesden Railnet, 5 to and from Warrington, 3 to Shieldmuir and 3 to Low Fell. Today, 15 out of the original 16 units remain in service, 325010 being scrapped in 2012 after years of neglect in storage.

 

Sadly, like many pieces of the Mail Train puzzle, so many were wasted after less than 10 years of operation, infrastructure built to last for 100 years demolished after no time at all. At least the Class 325's have found their way back into work, doing a job that makes eminent sense over the road haulage alternative Royal Mail hoped would be the better option over the mail train. Instead the Class 325's are proof as to why mail-by-rail is the superior option, no traffic jams, no slippery roads, no 60mph speed limiter on the lorries, just 100mph haulage of your valuables and parcels up and down the country all the way!

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.

 

The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The basic VF-1 was built and deployed in four minor variants (designated A, J, and S single-seater and the D two-seater/trainer) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie exoskeleton with enhanced protection and integrated missile launchers, the so-called FAST (“Fuel And Sensor Tray”) packs that created the fully space-capable "Super" Valkyries and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Super Valkyrie”.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several original variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68), even though these machines were frequently updated and modified during their career, leading to a wide range of sub-variants and different standards.

 

Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design. One of these post-war designs became the VF-1EX, a replica variant of the VF-1J with up-to-date avionics and instrumentation. It was only built in small numbers in the late 2040s and was a dedicated variant for advanced training with dissimilar mock aerial and ground fighting.

 

The only operator of this type was Xaos (sometimes spelled as Chaos), a private and independent military and civilian contractor. Xaos was originally a fold navigation business that began venturing into fold wave communication and information, expanding rapidly during the 2050s and entering new business fields like flight tests and providing aggressor aircraft for military training. They were almost entirely independent from the New United Nations Spacy (NUNS) and was led by the mysterious Lady M. During the Vár Syndrome outbreak, Echo Squadron and Delta Flight and the tactical sound unit Thrones and Walküre were formed to counteract its effects in the Brísingr Globular Cluster.

 

The VF-1EX was restricted to its primary objective and never saw real combat. The replica unit retained the overall basic performance of the original VF-1 Valkyrie, the specifications being more than sufficient for training and mock combat. The only difference was the addition of the contemporary military EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system for the pilot as an emergency standard, an exoskeleton unit with personal inner-wear, two variable geometry wings, two hybrid jet/rocket engines, mechanical hardware for the head, torso, arms and legs. This feature gave the VF-1EX its new designation.

Furthermore, the VF-1EX was also outfitted with other electronic contingency functions like AI-assisted flight and remote override controls. Some of these features could be disabled according to necessity or pilot preferences. The gun pod unit was retained but was usually only loaded with paintball rounds for mock combat. For the same purpose, one of the original Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head unit" was replaced by a long-range laser target designator. AMM-1 missiles with dummy warheads or other training ordnance could be added to the wing hardpoints, but the VF-1EX was never seen being equipped this way - it remained an agile dogfighter.

  

General characteristics:

All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid. 3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; EG-01M/MP EX-Gear system; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system.

 

Accommodation:

Single pilot in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

 

Dimensions:

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard take-off mass: 18.5 metric tons

MTOW: 37.0 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2);

4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles

 

Performance:

Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h

Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87

g limit: in space +7

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard TOW 2.49; maximum TOW 1.24

 

Transformation:

Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.

Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.

 

Armament:

1x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon in the "head" unit, firing 6,000 pulses per minute

1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rpm

4x underwing hardpoints for a wide variety of ordnance

  

The kit and its assembly:

The VF-1EX Valkyrie is a Variable Fighter introduced in the Macross Δ television series, and it's, as described above, a replica training variant that resembles outwardly the VF-1J. There's even a Hasegawa 1:72 kit from 2016 of this obscure variant.

However, what I tried to recreate is a virtual (and purely fictional/non-canonical) VF-1EX, re-skinned by someone called David L. on the basis of a virtual VF-1S 3D model with a 2 m wing span (sounds like ~1:8 scale) for the Phoenix R/C simulator software. Check this for reference: www.supermotoxl.com/projects-articles/ready-to-drive-fly-...). How bizarre can things be/become? And how sick is a hardware model of it, though...?

 

I found the complex livery very attractive and had the plan to build a 1:100 model for some years now. But it took this long to gather enough mojo to tackle this project, due to the tricolor paint scheme's complex nature...

The "canvas" for this stunt is a vintage Arii 1:100 VF-1 kit, built OOB except for some standard mods. The kit was actually a VF-1A, but I had a spare VF-1J head unit in store as a suitable replacement. Externally, some dorsal blade aerials and vanes on the nose were added, the attachment points under the wings for the pylons were PSRed away. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit because this model would be displayed in flight. As a consequence, the ventral gun pod received an adapter at its tail and I added one of my home-brew wire displays, created on the basis of the kit's OOB plastic base.

  

Painting and markings:

As mentioned above, this VF-1 is based on a re-skinned virtual R/C model, and its creator apparently took inspiration from a canonical VF fighter, namely a VF-31C "Siegfried", and specifically the "Mirage Farina Jenius Custom" version from the Macross Δ series that plays around 2051. Screenshots from the demo flight video under the link above provided various perspectives as painting reference, but the actual implementation on the tiny model caused serious headaches.

The VF-1's shapes are rather round and curvy, the model's jagged surface and small size prohibited masking. The kit is IMHO also best built and painted in single sub-assemblies, but upon closer inspection the screenshots revealed some marking inconsistencies (apparently edited from various videos?), and certain areas were left uncertain, e .g. the inside of the legs or the whole belly area. Therefore, this model is just a personal interpretation of the design, and as such I also deviated in the markings.

 

The paints became Humbrol 20 (Crimson) and 58 (Magenta), plus Revell 301 (Semi-gloss White), and they were applied with brushes. To replicate the edgy and rather fragmented pattern I initially laid down the two reds in a rather rough and thin fashion and painted the white dorsal and ventral areas. Once thoroughly dry, the white edges were quasi-masked with white decal material, either with stripes of various widths or tailored from sheet material, e. g. for the "wedges" on the wings and fins and the dorsal "swallow tail". This went more smoothly than expected, with a very convincing and clean result that i'd never had achieved with brushes alone, even with masking attempts, which would probably have led to chaos and too much paint on the model.

 

Other details like the grey leading edges or the air intakes were created with grey and black decal material, too.

No weathering was done, since the aircraft would be clean and in pristine condition, but I used a soft pencil to emphasize the engraved panel lines, esp. on white background. The gun pod became grey and the exhausts, painted in Revell 91 (Iron), were treated with graphite for a darker shade and a more metallic look.

 

Stencils came from the kit's OOB sheet, but only a few, since there was already a lot "going on" on the VF-1's hull. The flash-shaped Xaos insignia and the NUNS markings on legs and wings were printed at home - as well as the small black vernier thrusters all around the hull, for a uniform look. The USN style Modex and the small letter code on the fins came from an Colorado Decals F-5 sheet, for an aggressor aircraft.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed overall with semi-gloss acrlyic varnish (which turned out glossier than expected...) and position lights etc. added with translucent paint on top of a silver base.

  

Well, while the VF-1 was built OOB with no major mods and just some cosmetical upgrades, the paint scheme and its finish were more demanding - and I am happy that the "decal masking" trick worked so fine. The paint scheme surely is attractive, even though it IMHO does not really takes the VF-1's lines into account. Nevertheless, I am certain that there are not many models that are actually based on a virtual 1:8 scale 3D model of an iconic SF fighter, so that this VF-1EX might be unique.

 

The red fox is one of the most widespread carnivores in the world, capable of thriving in extreme environments which include the Arctic’s frozen tundra and the scorching deserts of the Middle East. In the United Kingdom, red fox populations are estimated to be between 350,000 and 400,000 individuals, occupying farmlands, woodlands, and cities.

 

The red fox’s ability to survive in such varied conditions comes from its versatile hunting strategies. Unlike many predators that rely on a single method, foxes use different techniques depending on their environment. In rural areas, they hunt in fields and woodlands, using cover to ambush small mammals and birds. In colder regions like the Arctic, foxes scavenge from larger predators, such as wolves and polar bears, taking advantage of leftover kills.

 

In urban environments, foxes display an impressive ability to hunt small rodents and insects while also scavenging human food. In this respect, few wild predators have adapted as effectively to urban life as the red fox.

 

The red fox also has a well-earned reputation for being cunning and resourceful, particularly when it comes to raiding chicken coops. Farmers have struggled for centuries to keep foxes away from their livestock, yet foxes continue to find ways in. They can dig under fences, climb over barriers, or squeeze through small gaps to reach their prey. If a coop is poorly secured, a fox will exploit weak points, using its sharp claws to pry open doors or slip through narrow spaces. Foxes can also learn to lift simple latches, both through trial and error and simple observation.

 

Foxes have also been observed to plan and execute their attacks strategically. A fox may spend days watching a farm, learning the farmer’s routines and identifying the best time to strike. They typically hunt at night, using the cover of darkness to remain undetected. If a farmer reinforces a coop, a fox may simply find another weak spot or dig a tunnel beneath the enclosure, proving its persistence and problem-solving skills.

 

Once inside, foxes are known to kill multiple chickens at once, even if they only take one away. This behaviour, known as "surplus killing," is not mindless slaughter but rather an instinct to store extra food for later. Foxes often bury uneaten prey nearby, returning when food becomes scarce.

 

I encountered this beautiful prowling through a local meadow during the golden hours just before sunset. While I will never know for sure why she was smirking, I can easily imagine it had to do with an unwitting chicken or a vole.

 

If we can...this is a place we always like to see, in Nova Scotia....on the LaHave River, Lunenburg County...Here is some info from Wikipedia :

 

" LaHave was the capital of Acadia from 1632, when Isaac de Razilly settled on a point of land at the mouth of the LaHave River, until his sudden death in 1636. Razilly established a colony of 300 and built Fort Sainte-Marie de Grace. Razilly reported that the fort was capable of standing against all enemy action, and that he had the military supplies necessary to withstand a six month siege. There was also a chapel, a store and houses for the workmen in the village. Within twelve months of Razilly's arrival, La Have was a thriving trading post, the centre for a small farming community in the area, and a major port of call for the large fishing fleet. At one point there were five hundred transient fishermen in the settlement.[2] (The site of the fort was designated a National Historic Site in the 1920s.) Upon de Razilly's death, the new Governor Charles de Menou d'Aulnay moved the Acadians from LaHave to Port Royal, Nova Scotia.

In 1652, LaHave was still a trading post and was raided by Emmanuel Le Borgne.

 

Ship building

 

It was, at one time, the economic centre of fishing, trade and shipbuilding for the surrounding area. The many vessels built in the area include a famous clipper, the barque Stag.

In 1874 LaHave Light Station was built and assisted ships navigating into the LaHave River until the 1950s, when a new lightkeeper's house was built to replace the aging light station. The light was decommissioned in the 1960s and replaced by a mechanical light on the opposite side of the river. In 1969, the Lunenburg County Historical Society was established to manage this historic site and turned the vacant lightkeeper's house into a community museum and gift shop.[4] In 2006, the society completed a Renaissance Project, which included the construction and attachment of a new building resembling the original 1874 LaHave Light Station, to the lightkeeper's house. The new museum is heated and cooled by a geothermal system, one of the first museums in Canada to utilize this technology. The Museum hosts many community events during the year, including the Acadian Mi'kmaq Festival, the LaHave River Folk Festival and a wide range of artistic exhibits.

 

Lahave River cable ferry : ( not working when we were there...annual maintenance....)

 

Since the late 19th century, LaHave has been connected to East LaHave, located on the opposite side of the LaHave river, via a cable ferry.

Today LaHave is home to a 12 car cable ferry that crosses the Lahave River from Lahave to East Lahave. The Ferry is Operated by The Province of Nova Scotia and costs $5.25 for a one-way ticket. The trip lasts about five minutes one way.

  

A volunteer Lahave and District Fire Department provides fire and first responder service to LaHave and the surrounding areas. A federal post office, Saint James Anglican Church and LaHave Seafoods are all located in LaHave.

A longstanding turn of the 20th century riverside chandlery landmark, has in recent years become the Lahave Bakery, which operates as a year-round bakery and cafe. The bakery houses a Craft Co-Op during the summer, where local artists sell their crafts. It is also home to a small custom manufacturer, Homegrown Skateboards.

 

The Typhoon FGR.Mk 4 is a highly capable and extremely agile fourth-generation multi-role combat aircraft, capable of being deployed for the full spectrum of air operations, including air policing, peace support and high-intensity conflict. Initially deployed in the air-to-air role as the Typhoon F.Mk 2, the aircraft now has a potent, precision multi-role capability as the FGR4. The pilot performs many essential functions through the aircraft’s hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) interface which, combined with an advanced cockpit and the Helmet Equipment Assembly (HEA), renders Typhoon superbly equipped for all aspects of air operations.

 

Although Typhoon has flown precision attack missions in all its combat deployments to date, its most essential role remains the provision of quick reaction alert (QRA) for UK and Falkland Islands airspace. Detachments have also reinforced NATO air defence in the Baltic and Black Sea regions.

 

With its multi-role capability and variety of weapons, the Typhoon FGR4 is capable of engaging numerous target types. In the air-to-air role it employs the infraredguided Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM) and radar-guided, beyond visual range Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM). These weapons, used in conjunction with the jet’s ECR-90 Captor radar and PIRATE electro-optical targeting system, combine with the Typhoon’s superior performance and manoeuvrability to make it a formidable platform.

 

For ground-attack and close air support (CAS) missions, Typhoon is compatible with the GPS/laser-guided Enhanced Paveway II and Paveway IV weapons, usually in conjunction with the Litening III targeting pod. Its regular configuration for the armed reconnaissance and CAS roles includes Litening III, Paveway IV and the internal 27mm gun.

 

Paveway IV offers cockpit-programmable impact angle, impact direction and fuse delay features for precisely tailored target effects. The 27mm gun is ideally suited to providing warning shots or for accurate attacks against targets including light vehicles and personnel.

“You are capable of more than you know.

Choose a goal that seems right for you and strive to be the best,

however hard the path.

Aim high. Behave honorably.

Prepare to be alone at times,

and to endure failure.

Persist! The world needs all you can give.”

 

~ Edward O. Wilson

 

Village Shot @ Narayanapura - Bangalore

 

Exposure 0.004 sec (1/250)

Aperture f/5.6

Focal Length 300 mm

ISO Speed 200

White Balance Manual

 

"The Badger gives the Oktober Guard a small but capable IFV - lightweight enough to be amphibious and airmobile, but armed and armored well enough to stick around in a firefight and turn the tide against infantry and soft skinned vehicles with its 30 mm autocannon and coaxial machine gun. It also carries what appears to be a tube launched antitank missile, but until this has been confirmed, it remains possible that this is a SAM for self defense against low flying aircraft. A larger heavier IFV design would provide better firepower, survivability, and troop capacity, but the Badger can be dropped by parachute - an essential benefit for a special forces fighting vehicle."

 

Ever since I started my fledgling Oktober Guard faction, I've wanted to build them a BMP or BMD of some kind - a light tracked, amphibious IFV. For this kind of vehicle I usually prefer a manned turret, but making the turret on this one remote allowed me to keep it small and compact which is a characteristic feature of the various BMPs. This one has space for two crew members and space in the back for five dismounts.

 

I'm still figuring out how I feel about this camo scheme, but with three small vehicles in matching livery, I do have a new faction, and that's always fun and exciting!

 

The combat-proven F-16 has proven itself as the world’s most capable 4th Generation multi-role fighter, serving as the workhorse of the fighter fleet for 28 customers around the world.

 

The F-16A, a single-seat model, first flew in December 1976. The first operational F-16A was delivered in January 1979 to the 388th Tactical Fighter Wing at Hill Air Force Base, Utah.

 

All F-16s delivered since November 1981 have built-in structural and wiring provisions and systems architecture that permit expansion of the multirole flexibility to perform precision strike, night attack, and beyond-visual-range interception missions. This improvement program led to the F-16C and F-16D aircraft, which are the single- and two-place counterparts to the F-16A/B, and incorporate the latest cockpit control and display technology. All active units and many Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units have converted to the F-16C/D.

 

U.S. Air Force F-16 multirole fighters were deployed to the Persian Gulf in 1991 in support of Operation Desert Storm; where more sorties were flown than with any other aircraft. These fighters were used to attack airfields, military production facilities, Scud missiles sites and a variety of other targets.

 

During Operation Allied Force, U.S. Air Force F-16 multirole fighters flew a variety of missions to include; suppression of enemy air defense, offensive counter air, defensive counter air, close air support and forward air controller missions. Mission results were outstanding as these fighters destroyed radar sites, vehicles, tanks, MiGs and buildings.

 

Since Sept. 11, 2001, the F-16 has been a major component of the combat forces committed to the war on terrorism flying thousands of sorties in support of operations Noble Eagle (Homeland Defense), Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Iraqi Freedom.

 

The F-16s are an integral part of the Pacific Air Forces power projection based at Osan Air Base Korea and Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska.

 

-- Technical Information (or Nerdy Stuff) --

‧ Camera - Nikon D7200 (handheld)

‧ Lens – Nikkor 18-300mm Zoom

‧ ISO – 1250

‧ Aperture – f/7.1

‧ Exposure – 1/200 second

‧ Focal Length – 18mm

 

The original RAW file was processed with Adobe Camera Raw and final adjustments were made with Photoshop CS6.

 

"For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future." ~Jeremiah 29:11

 

The best way to view my photostream is through Flickriver with the following link: www.flickriver.com/photos/photojourney57/

Mad Max: Fury Road Cosplay

Article copied in full from The Garage magazine dated 8th July 2020, with thanks.......

 

For six years, he was a man with a mission: to recreate Talisman, a Fowler B6 Big Lion Road Locomotive, the ‘King of the Road’ of its era, capable of hauling loads in excess of 100 tonnes.

 

Now Alex’s journey to re-create Talisman has been captured in a mini-series of films to be shared on Facebook and YouTube in June called “How to Build a Steam Engine with Morris Lubricants”.

 

Shrewsbury-based Morris Lubricants, one of Europe’s top independent oil blenders and the company’s brand ambassador Guy Martin supported the mammoth task taken on by Alex, 39, who lives at Bouth, near Ulverston in the Lake District, and his small team of enthusiasts.

 

Only five Fowler B6 Locos were ever made, of which Talisman was one, and the last time one of these steam engines was built was in 1931. Included in the loads Talisman hauled around the country were huge Lancashire boilers.

 

“I had always wanted a Fowler road loco, but it had been impossible to find the exact one that I wanted, so my wife said: ‘Why don’t you make one?’,” explained Alex, who has been fascinated by steam engines since childhood.

 

He grew up idolising Fred Dibnah, the late steeplejack and television personality who had a passion for steam and mechanical engineering. It was fitting that Fred’s sons, Jack ad Roger, were part of the Talisman project team.

 

The story began when Alex bought the company name of John Fowler & Co (Leeds) Ltd, leading manufacturers of steam engines throughout the 1800s and 1900s, who built the original Talisman. The firm supplied its engines to the famous road haulage company Norman E Box, Manchester.

 

Having acquired the original drawings of Talisman, Alex got the project off the ground with funding from Morris Lubricants, who supported him throughout.

 

The ambitious project was given a massive boost in 2017 when Alex tracked down and bought a collection of the original Talisman parts from the family of a late collector in the New Forest.

 

“The paper trail revealed that the original Talisman had been involved in an accident and broke its crank while owned by Pickfords,” explained Alex. “It’s fantastic that we were able to buy these parts, which are a direct connection to the original Talisman.

 

“In terms of the project, it probably didn’t save us much time because we still had to clean the parts and make good what was worn out. But it was a massive boost and also quite intimidating to have had an original part to work to.”

 

Because the new engine has some original parts, the DVLA agreed to let Alex register it as Talisman after his painstaking detective work.

 

Following investment of around £250,000 and years of hard work and challenges recreating the vast majority of Talisman from scratch, Alex unveiled the impressive finished product at Shrewsbury Steam Rally last August to rave reviews and TV coverage.

 

“The new Talisman exactly matches the original engine, but we have used modern technology to build it, such as laser cutting and 3D moulding,” he explained. “The next generation is not going to be building steam engines; they will be restoring i-pads.

 

“Give it another 100 years and people are going to be talking about the Talisman as we talk about Stevenson and Brunel. I am a greater believer in Great Britain and keeping the traditional skills alive. We have built something that is going to be here for years and generations to come.”

 

The new engine weighs 20 tonnes, has back wheels seven feet high, has a nominal 10 horse engine (not to be confused with brake horse power), the equivalent of a very large, modern lorry, a top speed of 20mph on the road and a boiler pressure of 200 PSI. Unusually for locomotives of the time, it is fully sprung.

 

Future plans include demonstrating the steam engine’s capabilities by pulling a 100-tonne load, just like the original Talisman and a promotional tour in association with Morris Lubricants.

 

“We are proud to be associated with Morris Lubricants, a British company with such history and style and their support comes from the heart,” said Alex. “It’s a perfect match and the company genuinely believes this was a great thing to do.

 

“Because the owners are steam enthusiasts, the company was quick to provide extra funding when I found the original Talisman parts. The support from Morris has been fantastic because they have been in business for 150 years and produce high quality products, including oil for steam engines.”

 

Guy Martin enjoyed contributing to the Talisman build and was very enthusiastic about project. “When I saw the engine for the first time, I thought it was cracking,” he said. “Then I thought who younger than me or Alex is doing this type of thing.

 

“If we don’t do it, the next generation will be resurrecting spectrums rather than buggering around with steam engines.”

 

Morris Lubricants’ executive chairman Andrew Goddard said: “It was a massive undertaking to recreate what in the steam world is a legendary engine but, knowing Alex and the high standard of his work, I was in no doubt that Talisman would be spot on.

 

“As a company with a heritage in steam, we are very proud to be associated with this venture and have some exciting plans to promote Talisman when the Coronavirus pandemic has cleared.”

 

Members of the Goddard family are keen steam enthusiasts themselves, owning two Burrell traction engines and a Sentinel steam waggon. Andrew’s brother, Edward, is Shrewsbury Steam Rally chairman and their parents, David and Diana, are directors of Morris Lubricants.

 

Morris Lubricants has been manufacturing lubricants in Shrewsbury since 1869 and is new recognised as one of Europe’s leading oil blenders and marketers, with a reputation for quality and service.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

After the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) started a major procurement program to take over most basic duties the Royal Air Force formerly had taken over in Northern Britain. This procurement was preceded by a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, which had stated that an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

 

Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”. The latter would not only have to take over transport duties for the army, there was also a dire need to quickly replace the former Royal Air Force’s Search and Rescue (SAR) capabilities and duties in the North with domestic resources, after this role was handed over to civilian contractor Bristow Helicopters and the RAF’s SAR units had been disbanded.

 

This led to the procurement of six AS365 Dauphin helicopters as an initial measure to keep up basic SAR capabilities, with the prospects of procuring more to become independent from the Bristow Helicopters contract. These aircraft were similar to the Eurocopter SA 366 MH-65 “Dolphin” for the United States Coast Guard but differed in many ways from them and also from any other navalized SA365 variant.

For the RoScAC’s SAR squadron, the SA 365 was taken as a starting point, but the helicopter was heavily modified and locally re-christened “Leumadair” (= Dolphin).

 

The most obvious new feature of the unique Scottish rescue variant was a fixed landing gear with the main wheels on short “stub wings” for a wider stance, stabilizing the helicopter during shipboard landings and in case of an emergency water landing - the helicopter was not able to perform water landings, even though inflatable emergency landing floats were typically fitted. Another obvious difference to other military Dauphin versions was the thimble radome on the nose for an RDR-1600 search and weather radar which is capable of detecting small targets at sea as far as 25 nautical miles away. This layout was chosen to provide the pilots with a better field of view directrly ahead of the helicopter. Additionally, an electro-optical sensor turret with an integrated FLIR sensor was mounted in a fully rotatable turret under the nose, giving the helicopter full all-weather capabilities. Less obvious were a digital glass cockpit and a computerized flight management system, which integrated state-of-the-art communications and navigation equipment. This system provided automatic flight control, and at the pilot's direction, the system would bring the aircraft to a stable hover 50 feet (15 m) above a selected object, an important safety feature in darkness or inclement weather. Selected search patterns could be flown automatically, freeing the pilot and copilot to concentrate on sighting & searching the object.

To improve performance and safety margin, more powerful Turbomeca Arriel 2C2-CG engines were used. Seventy-five percent of the structure—including rotor head, rotor blades and fuselage—consisted of corrosion-resistant composite materials. The rotor blades themselves were new, too, with BERP “paddles”at their tips, a new aerofoil and increased blade twist for increased lifting-capability and maximum speed, to compensate for the fixed landing gear and other external equipment that increased drag. To prevent leading edge erosion the blade used a rubber-based tape rather than the polyurethane used on earlier helicopters.

 

The “Leumadair HR.1”, so its official designation, became operational in mid-2019. Despite being owned by the government, the helicopters received civil registrations (SC-LEA - -LEF) and were dispersed along the Scottish coastline. They normally carried a crew of four: Pilot, Copilot, Flight Mechanic and Rescue Swimmer, even though regular flight patrols were only excuted with a crew of three. The Leumadair HR.1 was used by the RoScAC primarily for search and rescue missions, but also for homeland security patrols, cargo, drug interdiction, ice breaking, and pollution control. While the helicopters operated unarmed, they could be outfitted with manually operated light or medium machine guns in their doors.

However, the small fleet of only six helicopters was far from being enough to cover the Scottish coast and the many islands up north, so that the government prolonged the contract with Bristow Helicopters in late 2019 for two more years, and the procurement of further Leumadair HR.1 helicopters was decided in early 2020. Twelve more helicopters were ordered en suite and were expected to arrive in late 2021.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 pilots and 2 crew

Length: 12,06 m (39 ft 2 1/2 in)

Height: 4 m (13 ft 1 in)

Main rotor diameter: 12,10 m (39 ft 7 1/2 in)

Main rotor area: 38.54 m² (414.8 sq ft)

Empty weight: 3,128 kg (6,896 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 4,300 kg (9,480 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Turbomeca Arriel 2C2-CG turboshaft engines, 636 kW (853 hp) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 330 km/h (210 mph, 180 kn)

Cruise speed: 240 km/h (150 mph, 130 kn)

Range: 658 km (409 mi, 355 nmi)

Service ceiling: 5,486 m (17,999 ft)

 

Armament:

None installed, but provisions for a 7.62 mm M240 machine gun or a Barrett M107 0.50 in (12.7

mm) caliber precision rifle in each side door

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another chapter in my fictional alternative reality in which Scotland became an independent Republic and separated from the UK in 2017. Beyond basic aircraft for the RoScAC’s aerial defense duties I felt that maritime rescue would be another vital task for the nascent air force – and the situation that Great Britain had outsourced the SAR job to a private company called for a new solution for the independent Scotland. This led to the consideration of a relatively cheap maritime helicopter, and my choice fell on the SA365 ‘Daupin’, which has been adapted to such duties in various variants.

 

As a starting point there’s the Matchbox SA365 kit from 1983, which is a typical offer from the company: a solid kit, with mixed weak spots and nice details (e. g. the cockpit with a decent dashboard and steering columns/pedals for the crew). Revell has re-boxed this kit in 2002 as an USCG HH-65A ‘Dolphin’, but it’s technically only a painting option and the kit lacks any optional parts to actually build this type of helicopter in an authentic fashion - there are some subtle differences, and creating a convincing HH-65 from it would take a LOT of effort. Actually, it's a real scam from Revell to market the Matchbox Dauphin as a HH-65!

 

However, it was my starting basis, and for a modernized/navalized/military version of the SA365 I made some changes. For instance, I gave the helicopter a fixed landing gear, with main wheels stub wings taken from a Pavla resin upgrade/conversion set for a Lynx HAS.2, which also comes with better wheels than the Matchbox kit. The Dauphin’s landing gear wells were filled with 2C putty and in the same process took the stub wings. The front landing gear well was filled with putty, too, and a adapter to hold the front twin wheel strut was embedded. Lots of lead were hidden under the cockpit floor to ensure that this model would not becaome a tail sitter.

A thimble radome was integrated into the nose with some PSR – I opted for this layout because the fixed landing gear would block 360° radar coverage under the fuselage, and there’s not too much ground clearance or space above then cabin for a radome. Putting it on top of the rotor would have been the only other option, but I found this rather awkward. As a side benefit, the new nose changes the helicopter’s silhouette well and adds to a purposeful look.

 

The rotor blades were replaced with resin BERP blades, taken from another Pavla Lynx conversion set (for the Hobby Boss kit). Because their attachment points were very different from the Matchbox Dauphin rotor’s construction, I had to improvise a little. A rather subtle change, but the result looks very plausible and works well. Other external extras are two inflatable floating devices along the lower fuselage from a Mistercraft ASW AB 212 (UH-1) kit, the winch at port side was scratched with a piece from the aforementioned BK 117 and styrene bits. Some blade antennae were added and a sensor turret was scratched and placed in front of the front wheels. Additional air scoops for the gearbox were added, too. Inside, I added two (Matchbox) pilot figures to the cockpit, plus a third seat for a medic/observer, a storage/equipment box and a stretcher from a Revell BK 117 rescue helicopter kit. This kit also donated some small details like the rear-view mirror for the pilot and the wire-cutters - not a typical detail for a helicopter operating over the open sea, but you never know...

 

The only other adition is a technical one: I integrated a vertical styrene pipe behind the cabin as a display holder adapter for the traditional hoto shooting's in-flight scenes.

  

Painting and markings:

It took some time to settle upon a design. I wanted something bright – initially I thought about Scottish colors (white and blue), but that was not garish enough, even with some dayglo additions. The typical all-yellow RAF SAR livery was also ruled out. In the end I decided to apply a more or less uniform livery in a very bright red: Humbrol 238, which is, probably due to trademark issues, marketed as “Arrow Red (= Red Arrows)” and effectively an almost fluorescent pinkish orange-red! Only the black anti-glare panel in front of the windscreen, the radome and the white interior of the fenestron tail rotor were painted, too, the rest was created with white decal stripes and evolved gradually. Things started with a white 2mm cheatline, then came the horizontal stripes on the tail, and taking this "theme" further I added something similar to the flanks as a high contrast base for the national markings. These were improvised, too, with a 6mm blue disc and single 1.5 mm bars to create a Scottish flag. The stancils were taken from the OOB decal sheet. The interior became medium grey, the crew received bright orange jumpsuits and white "bone domes".

 

No black ink washing or post-panel-shading was done, since the Dauphin has almost no surface details to emphasize, and I wanted a new and clean look. Besides, with wll the white trim, there was already a lot going on on the hull, so that I kept things "as they were". Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of semi-gloss acrylic varnish for a light shine, except for the rotor blades and the anti-glare panel, which became matt.

  

Quite a tricky project. While the Matchbox Dauphin is not a complex kit you need patience and have to stick to the assembly order to put the hull together. PSR is needed, esp. around the engine section and for the underside. On the other side, despite being a simple model, you get a nice Dauphin from the kit - but NOT a HH-65, sorry. My fictional conversion is certainly not better, but the bright result with its modifications looks good and quite convincing, though.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X was strictly a jet aircraft, built to demonstrate that a jet fighter with the features necessary to convert to Battroid mode was aerodynamically feasible. After the VF-X's testing was finished, an advanced concept atmospheric-only prototype, the VF-0 Phoenix, was flight-tested from 2005 to 2007 and briefly served as an active-duty fighter from 2007 to the VF-1's rollout in late 2008, while the bugs were being worked out of the full-up VF-1 prototype (VF-X-1).

 

The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.

 

The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.

 

The basic VF-1 was deployed in four minor variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie, FAST Pack "Super" Valkyrie and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S for additional firepower.

The FAST Pack system was designed to enhance the VF-1 Valkyrie variable fighter, and the initial V1.0 came in the form of conformal pallets that could be attached to the fighter’s leg flanks for additional fuel – primarily for Long Range Interdiction tasks in atmospheric environment. Later FAST Packs were designed for space operations.

 

The following FAST Pack 2.0 system featured two 120.000 kg class P&W+EF-2001 booster thrusters (mounted on the dorsal section of the VF-1) and two CTB-04 conformal propellant/coolant tanks (mounted on the leg/engines), since the VF-1's internal tanks could not carry enough propellant to achieve a stable orbit from Earth bases and needed the help of a booster pack to reach Low Earth Orbit. Anyway, the FAST Pack 2.0 wasn't adapted for atmospheric use, due to its impact on a Valkyrie's aerodynamics and its weight; as such, it needed to be discarded before atmospheric entry.

Included in the FAST Pack boosters and conformal tanks were six high-maneuverability vernier thrusters and two low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles in two dorsal-mounted NP-BP-01, as well as ten more high-maneuverability vernier thrusters and two low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles in the two leg/engine-mounted NP-FB-01 systems.

Granting the VF-1 a significantly increased weapons payload as well as greater fuel and thrust, Shinnakasu Heavy Industry's FAST Pack system 2.0 was in every way a major success in space combat. The first VF-1 equipped with FAST Packs was deployed in January 2010 for an interception mission.

Following first operational deployment and its effectiveness, the FAST Pack system was embraced enthusiastically by the U.N. Spacy and found wide use. By February 2010, there were already over 300+ so-called "Super Valkyries" stationed onboard the SDF-1 Macross alone.

 

The FAST Pack went through constant further development, including upgraded versions for late production and updated VF-1s (V3.0 and V4.0). Another addition to the early V2.0 variant of 2010 was the so-called “S-FAST Pack”. The S-FAST pack was originally developed at the Apollo lunar base, for the locally based VF-1 interceptor squadrons that were tasked with the defense of this important production and habitat site on the Moon, but it also found its way to other orbital stations and carriers.

 

Officially designated FAST Pack V2.1, the S-FAST Pack consisted of the standard pair of dorsal rocket boosters plus the pallets with additional maneuvering jets, sensors and weapons. The S-FAST pack added another pair of P&W+EF-2001 boosters under the inner wings, having the duty to give to fighter the power necessary to exit easily from the gravity of moons or little planets without atmosphere, and improve acceleration during combat situations. Range was also further extended, together with additional life support systems for prolonged deep space operations, or the case of emergency.

 

In order to accept the S-FAST pack and exploit its potential, the VF-1’s wings and inner wing attachment points had to be strengthened due to the additional load and propulsion. The use of the S-FAST pack also precluded the fighter from transforming into Battroid or Gerwalk mode – the underwing packs had to be jettisoned beforehand. The other standard FAST Pack 2.0 elements could still be carried, though.

 

The modfied Valkyries capable of accepting the S-FAST Pack received an additional “S” to their type designation – more than 100 VF-1s were converted or built in this deep space configuration until late 2011. Initial deployment of the S-FAST Pack was conducted through SVF-24 “Moon Shadows” in early 2010, a unit that was quickly disbanded, though, but re-formed as SVF-124 “Moon Shooters”, tasked with the defense of the lunar Apollo Base and several special missions.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would eventually be replaced as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III in 2020, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.

 

The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68)

 

However, the fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction!

 

General characteristics:

All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid,

used by U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force

 

Accommodation:

Pilot only in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

Dimensions:

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons;

Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons;

MTOW: 37.0 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2)

4 x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

18 x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles

 

The S-FAST Pack added 4x P&W+EF-2001 booster thrusters with 120.000 kg each, plus a total of 28x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters

 

Performance:

Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h

Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87

g limit: in space +7

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24

 

Design Features:

3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system

 

Transformation:

Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.

Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.

 

Armament:

2x internal Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon, firing 6,000 pulses per minute

1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min

 

4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, including

12x AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles (3/point), or

12x MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (3/point), or

6x RMS-1 large anti-ship reaction missiles (2/outboard point, 1/inboard point), or

4x UUM-7 micro-missile pods (1/point) each carrying 15 x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles,

or a combination of above load-outs

 

The optional Shinnakasu Heavy Industry S-FAST Pack 2.1 augmentative space weapon system added:

6x micro-missiles in two NP-AR-01 micro-missile launcher pods (mounted rear-ward under center ventral section in Fighter mode or on lower arm sections in GERWALK/Battroid mode)

4x12 micro missiles in four HMMP-02 micro-missile launchers, one inside each booster pod

 

The kit and its assembly:

This VF-1 is another contribution to the “Old Kit” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, running in late 2016. I am not certain about the moulds’ inception date, but since it is an ARII incarnation of this type of kit and even moulded in the early pastel green styrene, I’d think that it was produced in 1982 or 83.

 

Anyway, I love the Macross VF-1, IMHO a design masterpiece created by Shoji Kawamori and one of my favorite mecha designs ever, because it was created as a late 70ies style jet fighter that could transform into a robot in a secondary role. As a simple, purposeful military vehicle. And not like a flashy robot toy.

 

Effectively, this Super Valkyrie is a highly modified OOB kit with many donation parts, and this kit is a bit special, for several reasons. There are several 1:100 OOB kits with FAST Packs from ARII/Bandai available (and still around today), but these are normally only Battroids or Gerwalks with additional parts for the FAST kit conversion. The kit I used here is different: it is, after maybe 25 years of searching and building these kits, the #70 from the original production run. It is (so far!) the only Fighter mode kit with the additional FAST Pack parts! Must be rare, and I have never seen it in catalogues?

 

Until today, I converted my Super or Strike Valkyries from Gerwalk kits, a task that needs some improvisation esp. around the folded arms between the legs, and there’s no OOB option for an extended landing gear. The latter made this Fighter mode kit very attractive, even though the actual kit is pretty disappointing, and AFAIK this kit variant is only available as a VF-1S.

 

With the Super Valkyrie fighter kit you receive basically a Gerwalk with a standard fighter cockpit (which includes a front wheel well and an extended front wheel leg), plus extra parts. The leg/engine-mounted NP-FB-01 systems are less bulbous than the parts on the Gerwalk or Battroid kit, and the OOB dorsally mounted NP-BP-01 boosters are TINY, maybe 1:120 or even 1:144! WTF?

 

Further confusion: the kit includes a set of lower arm parts with integrated rocket launchers, but these are not necessary at all for the Fighter build?! As a kind of compensation there’s a new and exclusive element that simulates the folded arms under the ‘fuselage’ and which, as an added value, properly holds the hand gun under the fuselage. As a quirky flaw, though, the hand gun itself comes in the extended form for the Battroid/Gerwalk mode. For the fighter in flight mode, it has to be modified, but that’s easily done.

 

Anyway, with the potential option to build a Super Valkyrie with an extended landing gear, this was my route to go with this vintage kit. The Super Valkyrie already looks bulky with the FAST Pack added, but then I recently found the S-FAST Pack option with two more boosters under the wings – total overkill, but unique. And I had a spare pair of booster bulks in the stash (w/o their nozzles, though), as well as a complete pair of additional bigger standard FAST boosters that could replace the ridiculous OOB parts…

 

Building such a Super/Strike Valkyrie means building separate components, with a marriage of parts as one of the final steps. Consequently, cockpit, central fuselage with the wings and the air intakes, the folded stabilizer pack, the folded arms element with the handgun, the two legs and the four boosters plus other ordnance had to be built and painted separately.

 

Here and there, details were changed or added, e. g. a different head (a ‘J’ head for the flight leader’s aircraft with two instead of the rare, OOB ‘S’ variant with four laser cannon), covers for the main landing gear (the latter does not come with wells at all, but I did not scratch them since they are hardly recognizable when the kit is sitting on the ground), the typical blade aerials under the cockpit and the feet had to be modified internally to become truly ‘open’ jet exhausts.

 

The wing-mounted boosters received new nozzles and their front end was re-sculpted with 2C putty into a square shape, according to reference sketches. Not 100% exact, but the rest of the VF-1 isn’t either.

 

This VF-1 was also supposed to carry external ordnance and my first choice were four wing-mounted RMS-1 Anti-Ship Reaction Warheads, scratched from four 1.000 lb NATO bombs. But, once finished, I was not happy with them. So I looked for another option, and in a source book I found several laser-guided bombs and missiles, also for orbital use, and from this inspiration comes the final ordnance: four rocket-propelled kinetic impact projectiles. These are actually 1:72 JASDF LGB’s from a Hasegawa weapon set, sans aerodynamic steering surfaces and with rocket boosters added to the tail. Also not perfect, but their white color and sleek shape is a good counterpart to the FAST elements.

 

Experience from many former builds of this mecha kit family helped a lot, since the #70 kit is very basic and nothing really fits well. Even though there are not many major seams or large elements, PSR work was considerable. This is not a pleasant build, rather a fight with a lot of compromises and semi-accuracies.

Seriously, if you want a decent 1:100 VF-1, I’d rather recommend the much more modern WAVE kits (including more realistic proportions).

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme for this Super Valkyrie was settled upon before I considered the S-FAST Pack addition: U.N. Spacy’s SVF-124 is authentic, as well as its unique camouflage paint scheme.

The latter is a special scheme for the lunar environment where the unit was originally formed and based, with all-black undersides, a high, wavy waterline and a light grey upper surface, plus some medium grey trim and a few colorful US Navy style markings and codes.

 

My core reference is a ‘naked’ bread-and-butter VF-1A of SVF-124 in Fighter mode, depicted as a profile in a VF-1 source book from SoftBank Publishing. The colors for the FAST Pack elements are guesstimates and personal interpretations, though, since I could not find any reference for their look in this unit.

As a side note, another, later SVF-124 aircraft in a similar design is included as an option in a limited edition 1:72 VF-22S kit from Hasegawa, which is backed by CG pics in a VF-22 source book from Softbank, too.

Furthermore, SVF-124 finds mention in a Japanese modeler magazine, where the aforementioned VF-22S kit was presented in 2008. So there must be something behind the ‘Moon Shooters’ squadron.

 

According to the Hasegawa VF-22S’s painting instructions, the underside becomes black and the upper surfaces are to be painted with FS36270 (with some darker fields on the VF-22, though, similar to the USAF F-15 counter-shaded air superiority scheme, just a tad darker).

Due to the 1:100 scale tininess of my VF-1, I alternatively went for Revell 75 (RAL 7039), which is lighter and also has a brownish hue, so that the resulting aircraft would not look too cold and murky, and not resemble an USAF aircraft.

 

All FAST Pack elements were painted in a uniform dark grey (Humbrol 32), while some subtle decorative trim on the upper surfaces, e.g. the canopy frame, an anti-glare panel and a stripe behind the cockpit and decoration trim on the wings’ upper surfaces, was added with Revell 77 (RAL 7012). Overall, colors are rather dull, but IMHO very effective in the “landscape” this machine is supposed to operate, and the few colorful markings stand out even more!

 

The cockpit interior was painted in a bluish grey, with reddish brown seat cushions (late 70ies style!), and the landing gear became all white. For some added detail I painted the wings’ leading edges in a mustard tone (Humbrol 225, Mid Stone).

 

The kit received some weathering (black ink wash, drybrushing on panels) and extra treatment of the panel lines – even though the FAST Pack elements hide a lot of surface or obscure view.

 

More color and individuality came with the markings. The standard decals like stencils or the U.N. Spacy insignia come from the kit’s and some other VF-1s’ OOB sheets.

Based on the SVF-124 VF-1 profile and taking the basic design a bit further, I used dull red USAF 45° digits for the 2nd flight leader’s “200” modex and the Apollo Base’s code “MA” on the dorsal boosters. Some discreet red trim was also applied to the FAST Packs – but only a little.

 

Since all of SVF-124’s aircraft are rumored to carry personal markings, including nose art and similar decorations, I tried to give this VF-1JS a personal note: the pin-up badges on the dorsal boosters come from a Peddinghouse decal sheet for Allied WWII tanks, placed on a silver roundel base. Unfortunately (and not visible before I applied them) the pin-up decal was not printed on a white basis, so that the contrast on the silver is not very strong, but I left it that way. Additionally, the tagline “You’re a$$ next, Jerry” (which IS printed in opaque white…?) was added next to the artwork – but it’s so tiny that you have to get really close to decipher it at all…

 

Finally, after some soot stains around the exhausts and some vernier nozzels with graphite, the kit received a coat of matt acrylic varnish.

 

Building this vintage VF-1 kit took a while and a lot of effort, but I like the result: with the S-FAST Pack, the elegant VF-1 turned into a massive space fighter hulk! The normal Super Valkyries already look very compact and purposeful, but this here is truly menacing. Especially when standing on its own feet/landing gear, with its nose-down stance and the small, original wheels, this thing reminds of a Space Shuttle that had just landed.

 

Good that I recently built a simple VF-1 fighter as a warm-up session. ARII’s kit #70 is not a pleasant build, rather a fight with the elements and coupled with a lot of compromises – if you want a Super Valkyrie Fighter in 1:100, the much more modern WAVE kit is IMHO the better option (and actually not much more pricey than this vintage collector’s item). But for the vintage feeling, this exotic model kit was just the right ticket, and it turned, despite many weaknesses and rather corny details, into an impressive fighter. Esp. the lunar camouflage scheme looks odd, but very unique and purposeful.

 

Anyway, with so many inherent flaws of the ARII kit, my former method of converting a pure (and much more common) Gerwalk kit into a space-capable VF-1 fighter is not less challenging and complicated than trying to fix this OOB option into a decent model. :-/

Capable of carrying four soldiers, and powered by a 212hp hybrid/electric diesel engine, the Humvee can rightly still be labeled as the workhorse of the American military, even though it has mostly been relegated to support functions due to its age.

Very capable small Nikon body. My wife took many great photos with this prior to upgrading.

At the beginning of the Vietnam War, there was little interest in a dedicated counterinsurgency (COIN) aircraft. The USAF was too committed to an all-jet, nuclear-capable force, while the US Army was satisfied with its helicopter fleet; the Navy concentrated on its carriers, and while the Marines were mildly interested, they lacked funding.

 

Vietnam was to change that. Horrendous losses among US Army UH-1s was to lead to a rethinking of helicopter doctrine, and pointed up the lack of a dedicated COIN aircraft. The USAF found itself depending on World War II-era A-26K Invaders, former US Navy A-1 Skyraiders, and converted trainers like the T-28 Trojan. The USAF also found itself in the market for a better forward air control (FAC) aircraft, due to the high loss rate of its O-1 Birddogs and O-2 Skymasters. Finally, the US Navy needed something to better cover its Mobile River Force units in the Mekong Delta, which could not always depend on USAF air support. In 1963, all three services issued a requirement for a new light design capable of performing as both a COIN and FAC aircraft. North American's NA-300 was selected in 1964 and designated OV-10A Bronco.

 

The OV-10 design drew heavily on independent research done at the China Lake research establishment, which in turn was inspired by the World War II P-38 Lightning fighter. The P-38 used a central "gondola" fuselage to concentrate all of its firepower along the centerline, which made for better accuracy; the OV-10 would do the same. As in the P-38, the engines were contained in twin booms that stretched back to the tail. The Bronco's four machine gun armament was placed in sponsons on either side of the fuselage, while ordnance was carried beneath the sponsons. To satisfy the USAF's requirements for a FAC aircraft, the two-man crew flew underneath a large, spacious canopy that gave them superb visibility. Because the Marines wanted an aircraft that could carry a Recon team, the fuselage was extended and, if the rear seat was removed, five paratroopers could be squeezed into the back, or two stretchers.

 

When the OV-10 arrived in Vietnam in 1968, there was a fear that the Bronco would be the jack of all trades and master of none. In fact, it proved to be excellent in all of its roles. As a FAC, it was a huge improvement over the slower O-1 and O-2; as a COIN aircraft, it was also a good aircraft, though it could not carry the same amount of ordnance as an A-1. The Navy equipped one squadron with OV-10As as VAL-4--nicknamed the "Black Ponies" for their dark green camouflage--and these were used extensively over the Mekong Delta. There were problems with the design: the airframe was actually too heavy for the engines, which left it underpowered, and ditching was invariably fatal for the pilot, as his seat tended to hurl forward into the instrument panel. Nonetheless, the Bronco turned in a sterling performance in Southeast Asia.

 

Though the Navy transferred its surviving Black Ponies to the Marines after the end of American involvement in Vietnam, the USAF and Marines would keep theirs for the next 20 years. For the 1970s and 1980s, the OV-10 replaced all other FAC designs in USAF service, aside from a handful of OA-37B Dragonfly squadrons. The Marines also kept their OV-10s and further refined the design by adding all-weather capability in the long-nosed OV-10D variant.

 

By the First Gulf War in 1991, the OV-10 was starting to show its age. The USAF began retiring its fleet even before Desert Storm; the Bronco was considered to be too slow to survive a modern air defense environment. Though the Marines used some of their OV-10Ds, the loss of two aircraft also led the USMC to retire their Broncos after war's end. Both services chose jets as replacements--the USAF with modified OA-10A Thunderbolt IIs, and the Marines with two-seat all-weather F/A-18Ds.

 

OV-10s were also a mild export success, going to seven other countries, mainly in the COIN role. Most have since been retired in favor of newer designs, though the Philippines still has a large and active OV-10 force. The type enjoyed a brief renaissance in 2015 when two former Marine OV-10Ds were taken up by the USAF for use against ISIS forces in Iraq, to see if the design was still viable. Though the OV-10s performed well, the USAF is not likely to put it back into production. 360 were built, and at least 25 are on display in museums aside from the aircraft that are still operational.

 

Dad took this picture of this rather anonymous OV-10A in 1980, at the Sembach airshow; this aircraft was assigned to the base's 601st Tactical Air Control Wing. By 1980, the USAF Bronco fleet had switched to Europe One camouflage, which suited the aircraft better over the forests of Europe (or Korea) more than the overall gray of the Vietnam era. It also provided commonality with the A-10s forward based at Sembach.

 

As usual, we got there a bit early, which gave Dad some unimpeded shots of the 601st OV-10s. Note the ladder: the crew opened the canopy up once the airshow formally started, and let kids sit in the aircraft, where we could play with the stick and the instruments a little. Dad later got a picture of me in the cockpit of this aircraft, holding on for dear life as the kid behind me tried to slam the stick into my knees. Needless to say, this sort of thing would never be allowed at airshows today.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.

 

The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.

 

The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.

 

The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.

Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.

 

The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.

 

At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.

 

The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.

One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.

All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.

The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.

 

The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.

 

Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.

 

For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)

Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)

Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)

Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)

Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)

Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)

Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,

5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight

Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks

Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)

Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)

Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)

Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.48

 

Armament:

No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…

2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks

or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…

2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)

machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each

  

The kit and its assembly:

This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.

 

I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.

 

The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?

 

The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.

  

Painting and markings:

This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.

 

Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.

 

The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.

 

The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.

After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Lockheed XFV (sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Salmon", even though this was actually the name of one of its test pilots and not an official designation) was an American experimental tailsitter prototype aircraft built by Lockheed in the early 1950s to demonstrate the operation of a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter for protecting convoys.

 

The Lockheed XFV originated as a result of a proposal issued by the U.S. Navy in 1948 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aboard platforms mounted on the afterdecks of conventional ships. Both Convair and Lockheed competed for the contract, but in 1950 the requirement was revised with a call for a research aircraft capable of eventually evolving into a VTOL ship-based convoy escort fighter. On 19 April 1951, two prototypes were ordered from Lockheed under the designation XFO-1 (company designation was Model 081-40-01). Soon after the contract was awarded, the project designation changed to XFV-1 when the Navy's code for Lockheed was changed from O to V.

 

The XFV was powered by a 5,332 hp (3,976 kW) Allison YT40-A-6 turboprop engine, composed of two Allison T38 power sections driving three-bladed contra-rotating propellers via a common gearbox. The aircraft had no landing gear, just small castoring wheels at the tips of the tail surfaces which were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. The wings were diamond-shaped and relatively thin, with straight and sharp leading edges – somewhat foretelling the design of Lockheed’s Mach-2-capable F-104 Starfighter.

 

To begin flight testing, a temporary non-retractable undercarriage with long braced V-legs was attached to the fuselage, and fixed tail wheels attached to the lower pair of fins. In this form, the aircraft was trucked to Edwards AFB in November 1953 for ground testing and taxiing trials. During one of these tests, at a time when the aft section of the large spinner had not yet been fitted, Lockheed chief test pilot Herman "Fish" Salmon managed to taxi the aircraft past the liftoff speed, and the aircraft made a brief hop on 22 December 1953. The official first flight took place on 16 June 1954.

Full VTOL testing at Edwards AFB was delayed pending the availability of the 7,100 shp Allison T54, which was earmarked to replace the T40 and power eventual serial production aircraft. But the T54 faced severe development delays, esp. its gearbox. Another problem that arose with the new engine was that the propeller blade tips would reach supersonic speed and therefore compressibility problems.

After the brief unintentional hop, the prototype aircraft made a total of 32 flights. The XFV-1 was able to make a few transitions in flight from the conventional to the vertical flight mode and back, and had briefly held in hover at altitude, but the T40 output was simply not enough to ensure proper and secure VTOL operations. Performance remained limited by the confines of the flight test regime. Another issue that arose through the advancements of jet engine designs was the realization that the XFV's top speed would be eclipsed by contemporary fighters. Additionally, the purely manual handling of the aircraft esp. during landing was very demanding - the XFV could only be controlled by highly experienced pilots.

 

Both Navy and the Marines Corps were still interested in the concept, though, so that, in early 1955, the decision was made to build a limited pre-production series of the aircraft, the FV-2, for operational field tests and evaluation. The FV-2 was the proposed production version (Model 181-43-02), primarily conceived and optimized as a night/all-weather interceptor for point defense, and officially baptized “Solstice”. The FV-2 was powered by the T54-A-16 turboprop, which had eventually overcome its teething troubles and offered a combined power output equivalent of 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) from the propellers and the twin-engines’ residual thrust. Outwardly the different engine was recognizable through two separate circular exhausts which were introduced instead of the XFV’s single shallow ventral opening. The gearbox had been beefed up, too, with additional oil coolers in small ventral fairings behind the contraprops and the propeller blades were aerodynamically improved to better cope with the higher power output and rotation speed. Additionally, an automatic pitch control system was introduced to alleviate the pilot from the delicate control burdens during hover and flight mode transition.

 

Compared with the XFV, the FV-2 incorporated 150 lb (68 kg) of cockpit armor, along with a 1.5 in (38 mm) bullet-proof windscreen. A Sperry Corporation AN/APS-19 type radar was added in the fixed forward part of the nose spinner under an opaque perspex radome. The AN/APS-19 was primarily a target detection radar with only a limited tracking capability, and it had been introduced with the McDonnell F2H-2N. The radar had a theoretical maximum detection range of 60 km, but in real life air targets could only be detected at much shorter distances. At long ranges the radar was mainly used for navigation and to detect land masses or large ships.

Like the older AN/APS-6, the AN/APS-19 operated in a "Spiral Scan" search pattern. In a spiral scan the radar dish spins rapidly, scanning the area in front of the aircraft following a spiral path. As a result, however targets were not updated on every pass as the radar was pointing at a different angle on each pass. This also made the radar prone to ground clutter effects, which created "pulses" on the radar display. The AN/APS-19 was able to lock onto and track targets within a narrow cone, out to a maximum range of about 1 mile (1.5 km), but to do so the radar had to cease scanning.

 

The FV-2’s standard armament consisted of four Mk. 11 20 mm cannon fitted in pairs in the two detachable wingtip pods, with 250 rounds each, which fired outside of the wide propeller disc. Alternatively, forty-eight 2¾ in (70 mm) folding-fin rockets could be fitted in similar pods, which could be fired in salvoes against both air and ground targets. Instead of offensive armament, 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks for ferry flights could be mounted onto the wing tips.

 

Until June 1956 a total of eleven FV-2s were built and delivered. With US Navy Air Development Squadron 8 (also known as VX-8) at NAS Atlantic City, a dedicated evaluation and maintenance unit for the FV-2 and the operations of VTOL aircraft in general was formed. VX-2 operated closely with its sister unit VX-3 (located at the same base) and operated the FV-2s alongside contemporary types like the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar, which at that time went through carrier-qualification aboard the USS Midway. The Cougars were soon joined by the new, supersonic F-8U-1 Crusaders, which arrived in December 1956. The advent of this supersonic navy jet type rendered the FV-2’s archaic technology and its performance more and more questionable, even though the VTOL concept’s potential and the institutions’ interest in it kept the test unit alive.

 

The FV-2s were in the following years put through a series of thorough field tests and frequently deployed to land bases all across the USA and abroad. Additionally, operational tests were also conducted on board of various ship types, ranging from carriers with wide flight decks to modified merchant ships with improvised landing platforms. The FV-2s also took part in US Navy and USMC maneuvers, and when not deployed elsewhere the training with new pilots at NAS Atlantic City continued.

 

During these tests, the demanding handling characteristics of the tailsitter concept in general and the FV-2 in specific were frequently confirmed. Once in flight, however, the FV-2 handled well and was a serious and agile dogfighter – but jet aircraft could easily avoid and outrun it.

Other operational problems soon became apparent, too: while the idea of a VTOL aircraft that was independent from runways or flight bases was highly attractive, the FV-2’s tailsitter concept required a complex and bulky maintenance infrastructure, with many ladders, working platforms and cranes. On the ground, the FV-2 could not move on its own and had to be pushed or towed. However, due to the aircraft’s high center of gravity it had to be handled with great care – two FV-2s were seriously damaged after they toppled over, one at NAS Atlantic City on the ground (it could be repaired and brought back into service), the other aboard a ship at heavy sea, where the aircraft totally got out of control on deck and fell into the sea as a total loss.

To make matters even worse, fundamental operational tasks like refueling, re-arming the aircraft between sorties or even just boarding it were a complicated and slow task, so that the aircraft’s theoretical conceptual benefits were countered by its cumbersome handling.

 

FV-2 operations furthermore revealed, despite the considerably increased power output of the T54 twin engine that more than compensated for the aircraft’s raised weight, only a marginal improvement of the aircraft’s performance; the FV-2 had simply reached the limits of propeller-driven aircraft. Just the rate of climb was markedly improved, and the extra power made the FV-2’s handling safer than the XFV’s, even though this advancement was only relative because the aircraft’s hazardous handling during transition and landing as well as other conceptual problems prevailed and could not be overcome. The FV-2’s range was also very limited, esp. when it did not carry the fuel tanks on the wing tips, so that the aircraft’s potential service spectrum remained very limited.

 

Six of the eleven FV-2s that were produced were lost in various accidents within only three years, five pilots were killed. The T54 engine remained unreliable, and the propeller control system which used 25 vacuum tubes was far from reliable, too. Due to the many problems, the FV-2s were grounded in 1959, and when VX-8 was disestablished on 1 March 1960, the whole project was cancelled and all remaining aircraft except for one airframe were scrapped. As of today, Bu.No. 53-3537 resides disassembled in storage at the National Museum of the United States Navy in the former Breech Mechanism Shop of the old Naval Gun Factory on the grounds of the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., United States, where it waits for restoration and eventual public presentation.

 

As a historic side note, the FV-2’s detachable wing tip gun pods had a longer and more successful service life: they were the basis for the Mk.4 HIPEG (High Performance External Gun) gun pods. This weapon system’s main purpose became strafing ground targets, and it received a different attachment system for underwing hardpoints and a bigger ammunition supply (750 RPG instead of just 250 on the FV-2). Approximately 1.200 Mk. 4 twin gun pods were manufactured by Hughes Tool Company, later Hughes Helicopter, in Culver City, California. While the system was tested and certified for use on the A-4, the A-6, the A-7, the F-4, and the OV-10, it only saw extended use on the A-4, the F-4, and the OV-10, esp. in Vietnam where the Mk. 4 pod was used extensively for close air support missions.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/Height: 36 ft 10.25 in (11.23 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10.1 in (9.4 m)

Wing area: 246 sq ft (22.85 m²)

Empty weight: 12,388 lb (5,624 kg)

Gross weight: 17,533 lb (7,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,159 lb (8,244 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison T54-A-16 turboprop with 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) output equivalent,

driving a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 mph (941 km/h, 509 kn

Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn)

Range: 500 mi (800 km, 430 nmi) with internal fuel

800 mi (1,300 km, 700 nmi) with ferry wing tip tanks

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 12,750 ft/min (75.0 m/s)

Wing loading: 73.7 lb/sq ft (360 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (.79 in) Mk. 11 machine cannon with a total of 1.000 rounds, or

48× 2.75 in (70 mm) rockets in wingtip pods, or

a pair of 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks on the wing tips

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers-com, and a really nice what-if aircraft that perfectly fits into the time frame. I had this Pegasus kit in The Stash™ for quite a while and the plan to build an operational USN or USMC aircraft from it in the typical all-dark-blue livery from the early Fifties, and the group build was a good occasion to realize it.

 

The Pegasus kit was released in 1992, the only other option to build the XFV in 1:72 is a Valom kit which, as a bonus, features the aircraft’s fixed landing gear that was used during flight trials. The Pegasus offering is technically simple and robust, but it is nothing for those who are faint at heart. The warning that the kit requires an experienced builder is not to be underestimated, because the IP kit from the UK comes with white metal parts and no visual instructions, just a verbal description of the building steps. The IP parts (including the canopy, which is one piece, quite thick but also clear) and the decals look good, though.

 

The IP parts feature flash and uneven seam lines, sprue attachment points are quite thick. The grey IP material had on my specimen different grades of hard-/brittleness, the white metal parts (some of the propeller blades) were bent and had to be re-aligned. No IP parts would fit well (there are no locator pins or other physical aids), the cockpit tub was a mess to assemble and fit into the fuselage. PSR on any seam all around the hull. But even though this sound horrible, the kit goes together relatively easy – thanks to its simplicity.

 

I made some mods and upgrades, though. One of them was an internal axis construction made from styrene tubes that allow the two propeller discs to move separately (OOB, you just stack and glue the discs onto each other into a rigid nose cone), while the propeller tip with its radome remained fixed – just as in real life. However, due to the parts’ size and resistance against each other, the props could not move as freely as originally intended.

Separate parts for the air intakes as well as the wings and tail surfaces could be mounted with less problems than expected, even though - again – PSR was necessary to hide the seams.

  

Painting and markings:

As already mentioned, the livery would be rather conservative, because I wanted the aircraft to carry the uniform USN scheme in all-over FS 35042 with white markings, which was dropped in 1955, though. The XFV or a potential serial production derivative would just fit into this time frame, and might have carried the classic all-blue livery for a couple of years more, especially when operated by an evaluation unit. Its unit, VX-8, is totally fictional, though.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Humbrol 80 (simulating bright zinc chromate primer), and to have some contrasts I added small red highlights on the fin pod tips and the gun pods' anti-flutter winglets. For some more variety the radome became earth brown with some good weathering, simulating an opaque perspex hood, and I added white (actually a very light gray) checkerboard markings on the "propeller rings", a bit inspired by the spinner markings on German WWII fighters. Subtle, but it looks good and breaks the otherwise very simple livery.

Some post-panel-shading with a lighter blue was done all over the hull, the exhaust area and the gun ports were painted with iron (Revell 91) and treated with graphite for a more metallic shine.

Silver decal stripe material was used to create the CoroGuard leading edges and the fine lines at the flaps on wings and fins - much easier than trying to solve this with paint and brush...

 

The decals were puzzled together from various dark blue USN aircraft, including a F8F, F9F and F4U sheet. The "XH" code was created with single 1cm hwite letters, the different font is not obvious, thanks to the letter combination.

Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (still shiny, but not too bright), the radome and the exhaust area were painted with matt varnsh, though.

  

A cool result, despite the rather dubious kit base. The Pegasus kit is seriously something for experienced builders, but the result looks convincing. The blue USN livery suits the XFV/FV-2 very well, it looks much more elegant than in the original NMF - even though it would, in real life, probably have received the new Gull Gray/White scheme (introduced in late 1955, IIRC, my FV-2 might have been one of the last aircraft to be painted blue). However, the blue scheme IMHO points out the aircraft's highly aerodynamic teardrop shape, esp. the flight pics make the aircraft almost look elegant!

The Ye-7R aircraft were prototypes of the MiG-21R combat-capable reconnaissance aircraft derived from the MiG-21PFS (Fishbed-D/F). These new aircraft were officially known as the MiG-21R (originally called Model 03 to confuse outsiders but officially known as Model 94R; NATO “Fishbed-H”). The first production unit rolled out in early 1966 and continued until 1971. Small changes were made throughout the production run. Early units had the R11F2S-300 turbojet, which was replaced in later aircraft by the R13-300 power plant.

 

The MiG-21R (“Fishbed-H”) could carry centre-line pods or wingtip antennas. PHOTINT (Photographic Intelligence) and ELINT (Electronic Intelligence) pods could be mounted on the centre-line pylon. The three different pods included a Type D daylight PHOTINT pod, a Type N night-time PHOTINT pod, Type R general-purpose ELINT pod or a Type T pod housing a TV system. Export versions of the MiG-21R (“Fishbed-H”) were known as the Model 94RA and usually delivered with the Type D (daylight) and Type R (ELINT) pods. Also, small ECM pods are fitted to the wingtips.

 

In this image, a MiG-21R (Fishbed-H) with the 111o Escuadrone, 11o Regimento de Caza of the Cuban Revolutionary Air and Air Defence Force (DAAFAR) a Type D (daylight) pod and flies through a Caribbean rainstorm on a recce mission. DAAFAR received 12 MiG-21R (Fishbed-H) in 1968 and flew with the Soviet Union in power-projection missions in Africa, especially in Angola and Ethiopia.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Lockheed XFV (sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Salmon", even though this was actually the name of one of its test pilots and not an official designation) was an American experimental tailsitter prototype aircraft built by Lockheed in the early 1950s to demonstrate the operation of a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter for protecting convoys.

 

The Lockheed XFV originated as a result of a proposal issued by the U.S. Navy in 1948 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aboard platforms mounted on the afterdecks of conventional ships. Both Convair and Lockheed competed for the contract, but in 1950 the requirement was revised with a call for a research aircraft capable of eventually evolving into a VTOL ship-based convoy escort fighter. On 19 April 1951, two prototypes were ordered from Lockheed under the designation XFO-1 (company designation was Model 081-40-01). Soon after the contract was awarded, the project designation changed to XFV-1 when the Navy's code for Lockheed was changed from O to V.

 

The XFV was powered by a 5,332 hp (3,976 kW) Allison YT40-A-6 turboprop engine, composed of two Allison T38 power sections driving three-bladed contra-rotating propellers via a common gearbox. The aircraft had no landing gear, just small castoring wheels at the tips of the tail surfaces which were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. The wings were diamond-shaped and relatively thin, with straight and sharp leading edges – somewhat foretelling the design of Lockheed’s Mach-2-capable F-104 Starfighter.

 

To begin flight testing, a temporary non-retractable undercarriage with long braced V-legs was attached to the fuselage, and fixed tail wheels attached to the lower pair of fins. In this form, the aircraft was trucked to Edwards AFB in November 1953 for ground testing and taxiing trials. During one of these tests, at a time when the aft section of the large spinner had not yet been fitted, Lockheed chief test pilot Herman "Fish" Salmon managed to taxi the aircraft past the liftoff speed, and the aircraft made a brief hop on 22 December 1953. The official first flight took place on 16 June 1954.

Full VTOL testing at Edwards AFB was delayed pending the availability of the 7,100 shp Allison T54, which was earmarked to replace the T40 and power eventual serial production aircraft. But the T54 faced severe development delays, esp. its gearbox. Another problem that arose with the new engine was that the propeller blade tips would reach supersonic speed and therefore compressibility problems.

After the brief unintentional hop, the prototype aircraft made a total of 32 flights. The XFV-1 was able to make a few transitions in flight from the conventional to the vertical flight mode and back, and had briefly held in hover at altitude, but the T40 output was simply not enough to ensure proper and secure VTOL operations. Performance remained limited by the confines of the flight test regime. Another issue that arose through the advancements of jet engine designs was the realization that the XFV's top speed would be eclipsed by contemporary fighters. Additionally, the purely manual handling of the aircraft esp. during landing was very demanding - the XFV could only be controlled by highly experienced pilots.

 

Both Navy and the Marines Corps were still interested in the concept, though, so that, in early 1955, the decision was made to build a limited pre-production series of the aircraft, the FV-2, for operational field tests and evaluation. The FV-2 was the proposed production version (Model 181-43-02), primarily conceived and optimized as a night/all-weather interceptor for point defense, and officially baptized “Solstice”. The FV-2 was powered by the T54-A-16 turboprop, which had eventually overcome its teething troubles and offered a combined power output equivalent of 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) from the propellers and the twin-engines’ residual thrust. Outwardly the different engine was recognizable through two separate circular exhausts which were introduced instead of the XFV’s single shallow ventral opening. The gearbox had been beefed up, too, with additional oil coolers in small ventral fairings behind the contraprops and the propeller blades were aerodynamically improved to better cope with the higher power output and rotation speed. Additionally, an automatic pitch control system was introduced to alleviate the pilot from the delicate control burdens during hover and flight mode transition.

 

Compared with the XFV, the FV-2 incorporated 150 lb (68 kg) of cockpit armor, along with a 1.5 in (38 mm) bullet-proof windscreen. A Sperry Corporation AN/APS-19 type radar was added in the fixed forward part of the nose spinner under an opaque perspex radome. The AN/APS-19 was primarily a target detection radar with only a limited tracking capability, and it had been introduced with the McDonnell F2H-2N. The radar had a theoretical maximum detection range of 60 km, but in real life air targets could only be detected at much shorter distances. At long ranges the radar was mainly used for navigation and to detect land masses or large ships.

Like the older AN/APS-6, the AN/APS-19 operated in a "Spiral Scan" search pattern. In a spiral scan the radar dish spins rapidly, scanning the area in front of the aircraft following a spiral path. As a result, however targets were not updated on every pass as the radar was pointing at a different angle on each pass. This also made the radar prone to ground clutter effects, which created "pulses" on the radar display. The AN/APS-19 was able to lock onto and track targets within a narrow cone, out to a maximum range of about 1 mile (1.5 km), but to do so the radar had to cease scanning.

 

The FV-2’s standard armament consisted of four Mk. 11 20 mm cannon fitted in pairs in the two detachable wingtip pods, with 250 rounds each, which fired outside of the wide propeller disc. Alternatively, forty-eight 2¾ in (70 mm) folding-fin rockets could be fitted in similar pods, which could be fired in salvoes against both air and ground targets. Instead of offensive armament, 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks for ferry flights could be mounted onto the wing tips.

 

Until June 1956 a total of eleven FV-2s were built and delivered. With US Navy Air Development Squadron 8 (also known as VX-8) at NAS Atlantic City, a dedicated evaluation and maintenance unit for the FV-2 and the operations of VTOL aircraft in general was formed. VX-2 operated closely with its sister unit VX-3 (located at the same base) and operated the FV-2s alongside contemporary types like the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar, which at that time went through carrier-qualification aboard the USS Midway. The Cougars were soon joined by the new, supersonic F-8U-1 Crusaders, which arrived in December 1956. The advent of this supersonic navy jet type rendered the FV-2’s archaic technology and its performance more and more questionable, even though the VTOL concept’s potential and the institutions’ interest in it kept the test unit alive.

 

The FV-2s were in the following years put through a series of thorough field tests and frequently deployed to land bases all across the USA and abroad. Additionally, operational tests were also conducted on board of various ship types, ranging from carriers with wide flight decks to modified merchant ships with improvised landing platforms. The FV-2s also took part in US Navy and USMC maneuvers, and when not deployed elsewhere the training with new pilots at NAS Atlantic City continued.

 

During these tests, the demanding handling characteristics of the tailsitter concept in general and the FV-2 in specific were frequently confirmed. Once in flight, however, the FV-2 handled well and was a serious and agile dogfighter – but jet aircraft could easily avoid and outrun it.

Other operational problems soon became apparent, too: while the idea of a VTOL aircraft that was independent from runways or flight bases was highly attractive, the FV-2’s tailsitter concept required a complex and bulky maintenance infrastructure, with many ladders, working platforms and cranes. On the ground, the FV-2 could not move on its own and had to be pushed or towed. However, due to the aircraft’s high center of gravity it had to be handled with great care – two FV-2s were seriously damaged after they toppled over, one at NAS Atlantic City on the ground (it could be repaired and brought back into service), the other aboard a ship at heavy sea, where the aircraft totally got out of control on deck and fell into the sea as a total loss.

To make matters even worse, fundamental operational tasks like refueling, re-arming the aircraft between sorties or even just boarding it were a complicated and slow task, so that the aircraft’s theoretical conceptual benefits were countered by its cumbersome handling.

 

FV-2 operations furthermore revealed, despite the considerably increased power output of the T54 twin engine that more than compensated for the aircraft’s raised weight, only a marginal improvement of the aircraft’s performance; the FV-2 had simply reached the limits of propeller-driven aircraft. Just the rate of climb was markedly improved, and the extra power made the FV-2’s handling safer than the XFV’s, even though this advancement was only relative because the aircraft’s hazardous handling during transition and landing as well as other conceptual problems prevailed and could not be overcome. The FV-2’s range was also very limited, esp. when it did not carry the fuel tanks on the wing tips, so that the aircraft’s potential service spectrum remained very limited.

 

Six of the eleven FV-2s that were produced were lost in various accidents within only three years, five pilots were killed. The T54 engine remained unreliable, and the propeller control system which used 25 vacuum tubes was far from reliable, too. Due to the many problems, the FV-2s were grounded in 1959, and when VX-8 was disestablished on 1 March 1960, the whole project was cancelled and all remaining aircraft except for one airframe were scrapped. As of today, Bu.No. 53-3537 resides disassembled in storage at the National Museum of the United States Navy in the former Breech Mechanism Shop of the old Naval Gun Factory on the grounds of the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., United States, where it waits for restoration and eventual public presentation.

 

As a historic side note, the FV-2’s detachable wing tip gun pods had a longer and more successful service life: they were the basis for the Mk.4 HIPEG (High Performance External Gun) gun pods. This weapon system’s main purpose became strafing ground targets, and it received a different attachment system for underwing hardpoints and a bigger ammunition supply (750 RPG instead of just 250 on the FV-2). Approximately 1.200 Mk. 4 twin gun pods were manufactured by Hughes Tool Company, later Hughes Helicopter, in Culver City, California. While the system was tested and certified for use on the A-4, the A-6, the A-7, the F-4, and the OV-10, it only saw extended use on the A-4, the F-4, and the OV-10, esp. in Vietnam where the Mk. 4 pod was used extensively for close air support missions.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/Height: 36 ft 10.25 in (11.23 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10.1 in (9.4 m)

Wing area: 246 sq ft (22.85 m²)

Empty weight: 12,388 lb (5,624 kg)

Gross weight: 17,533 lb (7,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,159 lb (8,244 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison T54-A-16 turboprop with 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) output equivalent,

driving a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 mph (941 km/h, 509 kn

Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn)

Range: 500 mi (800 km, 430 nmi) with internal fuel

800 mi (1,300 km, 700 nmi) with ferry wing tip tanks

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 12,750 ft/min (75.0 m/s)

Wing loading: 73.7 lb/sq ft (360 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (.79 in) Mk. 11 machine cannon with a total of 1.000 rounds, or

48× 2.75 in (70 mm) rockets in wingtip pods, or

a pair of 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks on the wing tips

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers-com, and a really nice what-if aircraft that perfectly fits into the time frame. I had this Pegasus kit in The Stash™ for quite a while and the plan to build an operational USN or USMC aircraft from it in the typical all-dark-blue livery from the early Fifties, and the group build was a good occasion to realize it.

 

The Pegasus kit was released in 1992, the only other option to build the XFV in 1:72 is a Valom kit which, as a bonus, features the aircraft’s fixed landing gear that was used during flight trials. The Pegasus offering is technically simple and robust, but it is nothing for those who are faint at heart. The warning that the kit requires an experienced builder is not to be underestimated, because the IP kit from the UK comes with white metal parts and no visual instructions, just a verbal description of the building steps. The IP parts (including the canopy, which is one piece, quite thick but also clear) and the decals look good, though.

 

The IP parts feature flash and uneven seam lines, sprue attachment points are quite thick. The grey IP material had on my specimen different grades of hard-/brittleness, the white metal parts (some of the propeller blades) were bent and had to be re-aligned. No IP parts would fit well (there are no locator pins or other physical aids), the cockpit tub was a mess to assemble and fit into the fuselage. PSR on any seam all around the hull. But even though this sound horrible, the kit goes together relatively easy – thanks to its simplicity.

 

I made some mods and upgrades, though. One of them was an internal axis construction made from styrene tubes that allow the two propeller discs to move separately (OOB, you just stack and glue the discs onto each other into a rigid nose cone), while the propeller tip with its radome remained fixed – just as in real life. However, due to the parts’ size and resistance against each other, the props could not move as freely as originally intended.

Separate parts for the air intakes as well as the wings and tail surfaces could be mounted with less problems than expected, even though - again – PSR was necessary to hide the seams.

  

Painting and markings:

As already mentioned, the livery would be rather conservative, because I wanted the aircraft to carry the uniform USN scheme in all-over FS 35042 with white markings, which was dropped in 1955, though. The XFV or a potential serial production derivative would just fit into this time frame, and might have carried the classic all-blue livery for a couple of years more, especially when operated by an evaluation unit. Its unit, VX-8, is totally fictional, though.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Humbrol 80 (simulating bright zinc chromate primer), and to have some contrasts I added small red highlights on the fin pod tips and the gun pods' anti-flutter winglets. For some more variety the radome became earth brown with some good weathering, simulating an opaque perspex hood, and I added white (actually a very light gray) checkerboard markings on the "propeller rings", a bit inspired by the spinner markings on German WWII fighters. Subtle, but it looks good and breaks the otherwise very simple livery.

Some post-panel-shading with a lighter blue was done all over the hull, the exhaust area and the gun ports were painted with iron (Revell 91) and treated with graphite for a more metallic shine.

Silver decal stripe material was used to create the CoroGuard leading edges and the fine lines at the flaps on wings and fins - much easier than trying to solve this with paint and brush...

 

The decals were puzzled together from various dark blue USN aircraft, including a F8F, F9F and F4U sheet. The "XH" code was created with single 1cm hwite letters, the different font is not obvious, thanks to the letter combination.

Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (still shiny, but not too bright), the radome and the exhaust area were painted with matt varnsh, though.

  

A cool result, despite the rather dubious kit base. The Pegasus kit is seriously something for experienced builders, but the result looks convincing. The blue USN livery suits the XFV/FV-2 very well, it looks much more elegant than in the original NMF - even though it would, in real life, probably have received the new Gull Gray/White scheme (introduced in late 1955, IIRC, my FV-2 might have been one of the last aircraft to be painted blue). However, the blue scheme IMHO points out the aircraft's highly aerodynamic teardrop shape, esp. the flight pics make the aircraft almost look elegant!

Some background:

The Rolls-Royce Griffon engine was designed in answer to Royal Navy specifications for an engine capable of generating good power at low altitudes. Concepts for adapting the Spitfire to take the new engine had begun as far back as October 1939; Joseph Smith felt that "The good big 'un will eventually beat the good little 'un." and Ernest Hives of Rolls-Royce thought that the Griffon would be "a second power string for the Spitfire". The first of the Griffon-engined Spitfires flew on 27 November 1941. Although the Griffon-powered Spitfires were never produced in the large numbers of the Merlin-engined variants they were an important part of the Spitfire family, and in their later versions kept the Spitfire at the forefront of piston-engined fighter development. The first Griffon-powered Spitfires suffered from poor high- altitude performance due to having only a single stage supercharged engine. By 1943, Rolls-Royce engineers had developed a new Griffon engine, the 61 series, with a two-stage supercharger. In the end it was a slightly modified engine, the 65 series, which was used in the Mk. XIV, the first Spitfire mark with a Griffon engine to enter service. The resulting aircraft provided a substantial performance increase over the Mk IX. Although initially based on the Mk VIII airframe, common improvements made in aircraft produced later included the cut-back fuselage and tear-drop canopies, and the E-Type wing with improved armament.

 

The Mk. XIV differed from its direct predecessor, the Mk XII, in that the longer, two-stage supercharged Griffon 65, producing 2,050 hp (1,528 kW), was mounted 10 inches (25.4 cm) further forward. The top section of the engine bulkhead was angled forward, creating a distinctive change of angle to the upper cowling's rear edge. A new five-bladed Rotol propeller of 10 ft 5 in (3.18 m) in diameter was used. The "fishtail" design of ejector exhaust stub gave way to ones of circular section. The increased cooling requirements of the Griffon engine meant that all radiators were much bigger, and the underwing housings were deeper than previous versions. The cowling fasteners were new, flush fitting "Amal" type and there were more of them. The oil tank (which had been moved from the lower cowling location of the Merlin engine variants to forward of the fuselage fuel tanks) was increased in capacity from 6 to 10 gal.

To help balance the new engine, the radio equipment was moved further back in the rear fuselage and the access hatch was moved from the left fuselage side to the right. Better VHF radio equipment allowed for the aerial mast to be removed and replaced by a "whip" aerial further aft on the fuselage spine. Because the longer nose and the increased slipstream of the big five-bladed propeller a new tail unit with a taller, broader fin and a rudder of increased area was adopted.

 

When the new fighter entered service with 610 Squadron in December 1943 it was a leap forward in the evolution of the Spitfire. The Mk. XIV could climb to 20,000 ft (6,100 m) in just over five minutes and its top speed, which was achieved at 25,400 ft (7,700 m), was 446 mph (718 km/h). In operational service many pilots initially found that the new fighter could be difficult to handle, particularly if they were used to earlier Spitfire marks. But in spite of the difficulties, pilots appreciated the performance increases.

 

F Mk. XIVs had a total of 109.5 gal of fuel consisting of 84 gal in two main tanks and a 12.5 imp gal fuel tank in each leading-edge wing tank; other 30, 45, 50 or 90 gal drop tanks could be carried. The fighter's maximum range was just a little over 460 miles (740 km) on internal fuel, since the new Griffon engine consumed much more fuel per hour than the original Merlin engine of earlier variants. By late 1944, Spitfire XIVs were fitted with an extra 33 gal in a rear fuselage fuel tank, extending the fighter's range to about 850 miles (1,370 km) on internal fuel and a 90 gal drop tank. Mk. XIVs with "tear-drop" canopies had 64 gal. As a result, F and FR Mk. XIVs had a range that was increased to over 610 miles (980 km), or 960 miles (1,540 km) with a 90 gal drop tank. The armament initially consisted of two 20 mm Hispano cannon and four light 0.303” machine guns (in a standard “C” wing configuration), but later builds had the latter replaced with a pair of heavier 0.5” machine guns that had better range and weight of fire (“E” wing configuration).

 

The first test of the aircraft was in intercepting V1 flying bombs and the Mk. XIV was the most successful of all Spitfire marks in this role. When 150 octane fuel was introduced in mid-1944 the "boost" of the Griffon engine was able to be increased to +25 lbs (80.7"), allowing the top speed to be increased by about 30 mph (26 kn; 48 km/h) to 400 mph (350 kn; 640 km/h) at 2,000 ft (610 m).

The Mk. XIV was used by the 2nd Tactical Air Force as their main high-altitude air superiority fighter in northern Europe with six squadrons operational by December 1944.

 

One problem which did arise in service was localized skin wrinkling on the wings and fuselage at load attachment points; although Supermarine advised that the Mk. XIVs had not been seriously weakened, nor were they on the point of failure, the RAF issued instructions in early 1945 that all F and FR Mk. XIVs were to be refitted with clipped wings. Spitfire XIVs began to arrive in the South-East Asian Theatre in June 1945, too late to operate against the Japanese. In total, 957 Mk. XIVs were built, over 430 of which were FR Mk. XIVs.

 

After the war, secondhand Mk. XIVs still in good shape were exported to a number of foreign air forces; 132 went to the Royal Belgian Air Force, 70 went to the Royal Indian Air Force and 30 of the reconnaissance version went to the Royal Thai Air Force. The Royal Iraqi Air Force (RIrAF) was another operator, even though only a small one.

In late 1946, five years after the Anglo-Iraqi War had left the RIrAF shattered, the Iraqis reached an agreement with the British under which they would return their surviving Avro Ansons in exchange for the authorization to order more modern and potent fighter aircraft from the UK, namely Supermarine Spitfires and Hawker Furies. The next year, three de Havilland Doves and three Bristol Freighters were ordered, too, and they arrived in early 1947 with a batch of ten refurbished ex-RAF Spitfire F Mk. XIVcs, some of them WWII survivors. All these machines received the original wing tips to better cope with the expected higher ambient temperatures in the Middle Eastern theatre of operations, reinforced aluminum skinning along the wing roots, and they were retrofitted with hardpoints under the wings and the fuselage to carry unguided missiles, bombs and drop tanks, what gave them an additional ground attack capability. The radio equipment was modernized, too, including a DF loop antenna as navigational aid. Despite these standardizations, though, the Spitfires were delivered with a mix of the different canopies.

 

The RIrAF was still recovering and re-structuring its assets when it joined in the war against the newly created state of Israel in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The RIrAF only played a small role in the first war against Israel, though. A few Spitfire F Mk. XIVs as well as Avro Anson training bombers operated from Transjordan airfields from where they flew several attacks against the Israelis. After a series of indiscriminate attacks on Arab capitals, flown by three Boeing B-17s that had been pressed into service by the Israeli Air Force, the governments of Transjordan and Syria demanded that the Iraqis take more offensive action and replace their Ansons with Hawker Furies. However, only six Furies were sent to Damascus to join the Spitfires in the region, and they never encountered any Israeli aircraft during their deployment.

Despite some effective attacks on ground targets by the Spitfires, limited amount of cannon ammunition, RPGs and suitable bombs heavily limited the Iraqi operations. The fighters were mostly used for armed reconnaissance, and three Spitfires were upgraded to FR Mk. XIV standard for this purpose. In 1949 a second batch of eight more Spitfire F Mk. XIVs was delivered from Britain, and in 1951 the RIrAF purchased 20 more Fury F.Mk.1s, for a total of 50 F.Mk.1s single-seaters and 2 two-seaters. They soon replaced the Spitfires in frontline units, even though the machines were still kept in service.

 

In the early Fifties, thanks to increased income from oil and agricultural exports, the RIrAF was thoroughly re-equipped. In 1951, 15 each of de Havilland Canada DHC-1 Chipmunks, Percival Provosts and North American T-6s were bought to replace obsolete de Havilland Tiger Moth trainers. With these new aircraft the RIrAF Flying School was expanded into the Air Force College. The training curriculum was improved, and the number of students graduating each year was increased. This allowed to form a solid basis for the RIrAF's long-term growth. Also in 1951, the RIrAF bought its first helicopters: three Westland Dragonflies. The RIrAF's first jet fighter was the de Havilland Vampire: 12 FB.Mk.52 fighters and 10 T.Mk.55 trainers were delivered from 1953 to 1955, and they fully replaced the Spitfires. The Vampires were quickly supplemented by 20 de Havilland Venoms, delivered between 1954 and 1956.

Following the formation of the Baghdad Pact, the United States donated at least six Stinson L-5 Sentinels and seven Cessna O-1 Bird Dogs to the RIrAF. The RAF also vacated Shaibah Air Base, and the RIrAF took over it as Wahda Air Base. In 1957, six Hawker Hunter F.Mk.6s were delivered. The next year, the United States agreed to provide 36 F-86F Sabres free of charge.

 

However, following the 14 July Revolution of 1958, which resulted in the end of monarchy in Iraq, the influence of the Iraqi Communist Party grew significantly. The first commander of the Iraqi Air Force (the "Royal" prefix was dropped after the revolution), Jalal Jaffar al-Awqati, was an outspoken communist, and encouraged prime minister Abd al-Karim Qasim to improve relations between Iraq and the USSR. The Soviets reacted quickly, and in the autumn of 1958 a series of arms contracts was passed between Iraq and the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia. These stipulated the delivery of MiG-15UTI trainers, MiG-17F fighters, Ilyushin Il-28 bombers, and Antonov An-2 and An-12 transports. The first aircraft arrived in Iraq in January 1959; during the late Sixties and the early Seventies additional MiG-17s may have been purchased and then forwarded to either Syria or Egypt.

 

General characteristics

Crew: 1

Length: 32 ft 8 in (9.96 m)

Wingspan: 36 ft 10 in (11.23 m) with full span elliptical tips

Height: 10 ft 0 in (3.05 m)

Wing area: 242.1 sq ft (22.49 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 2213 (root), NACA 2209.4 (tip)

Empty weight: 6,578 lb (2,984 kg)

Gross weight: 7,923 lb (3,594 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 8,400[53] lb (3,810 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Griffon 65 supercharged V12, 2,050 hp (1,530 kW) at 8,000 ft (2,438 m),

driving a 5-bladed Jablo-Rotol propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 441 mph (710 km/h, 383 kn) in FS supercharger gear at 29,500 ft.

391 mph in MS supercharger gear at 5,500 ft.

Combat range: 460 mi (740 km, 400 nmi)

Ferry range: 1,090 mi (1,760 km, 950 nmi)

Service ceiling: 43,500 ft (13,300 m)

Rate of climb: 5,040 ft/min (25.6 m/s) in MS supercharger gear at 2,100 ft.

3,550 ft/min in FS supercharger gear at 22,100 ft.

Time to altitude: 7 mins to 22,000 ft (at max weight)

Wing loading: 32.72 lb/sq ft (159.8 kg/m²)

Power/mass: 0.24

 

Armament:

2× 20 mm (0.787-in) Hispano Mk II cannon, 120 rpg

4× 0.303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine guns, 350 rpg,

Underwing hard points for 8× 60 lb (27 kg) rockets, 2 x 250 lb (113 kg) bombs or slipper tanks,

1× ventral hardpoint for a 500 lb (227 kg) bomb or a drop tank

  

The kit and its assembly:

This was a rather spontaneous interim build. The Academy Spitfire was left over from a D-Day combo that contained a Hawker Typhoon, too, and I lacked an idea for the Spitfire for a long time) since I am not a big fan of the aircraft, at least what-if-inspiration-wise). However, when pondering about a potential operator from the very early pos-war period I remembered the Royal Iraqi Air Force and its later Hawker Hunters which retained their NATO-style camouflage (RAF green/grey) despite being primarily operated in a desert environment. This, on a Spitfire…?

 

From this idea the Academy Spitfire was built almost OOB. Because the kit offers them as an option and for the cool look, I gave the Spitfire four RPGs under each outer wing. The ventral drop tank was taken from a Special Hobby late Spitfire kit. The only other additions are the antenna mast and the non-standard DF loop antenna behind the cockpit, created from thin wire and mounted on a small, streamlined socket.

  

Painting and markings:

The upper surfaces were painted in standard RAF WWII colors, Dark Green and Ocean Grey, using a mix of Humbrol 163 and 30 for a slightly more bluish WWII-style green and a mix of 106 and 145 for a lightened grey tone, respectively. As an individual contrast and paint scheme variation the undersides and the spinner were painted in RAF Azure Blue (Humbrol 157, lightened up with 47), more appropriate than the standard WWII Medium Sea Grey from the European theatre of operations. The cockpit interior became RAF cockpit green (Humbro,78) while the inside surfaces of the landing gear were painted in Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165), reflecting the original undersides’ tone in former RAF service.

 

Other markings were minimal. The Iraqi triangles were taken from a Balkan Models Su-25 sheet, because their green was rather pale, for more contrast to the surrounding camouflage. RIrAF fin flash was taken from a PM Model Hawker Fury two-seater (a.k.a. “Bagdad Fury”). The tactical code came from an Airfix Hawker Hunter (from an optional Kuwaiti machine). This looked O.K. but somewhat bleak, so I added more markings. I could not find any evidence for special ID markings on Iraqi aircraft during the Arab-Israel war, but to add an eye-catcher I gave the aircraft white ID bands on the wings and on the fuselage – inspired by markings carried by Egyptian aircraft (e. g. Spitfires) during the conflict, but somewhat simplified, without black trim. They were created from generic white decal sheet material.

 

After some soot stains around the gun ports and the exhausts, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A relatively simple project and just a fictional livery - but the Iraqi Spitfire looks pretty cool, especially the ID stripes add a special touch. The European RAF scheme looks a bit off on an aircraft that would be delivered to the Middel East, but the Iraqi Air Force operated British types like the Hunter in this guise, and later Su-22 fighter bombers carried a similarly murky camouflage in very dark green and earth brown.

Hiking in the Berchtesgadener Alps close to Königssee - and who said, the Samyang 12mm isn't capable to render beautiful sun stars?

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Fiat G.91 was an Italian jet fighter aircraft designed and built by Fiat Aviazione, which later merged into Aeritalia. The G.91 had its origins in the NATO-organized NBMR-1 competition in 1953, which sought a light fighter-bomber "Light Weight Strike Fighter" to be adopted as standard equipment across the air forces of the various NATO nations. The competition was intended to produce an aircraft that was light, small, expendable, equipped with basic weapons and avionics and capable of operating with minimal ground support. These specifications were developed for two reasons: the first was the nuclear threat to large air bases, many cheaper aircraft could be better dispersed, and the other was to counter the trend towards larger and more expensive aircraft. After reviewing multiple submissions, the G.91 was picked as the winning design of the NBMR-1 competition.

 

The G.91 entered into operational service with the Italian Air Force in 1961, and with the West German Luftwaffe in the following year. Various other nations adopted it, such as the Portuguese Air Force, who made extensive use of the type during the Portuguese Colonial War in Africa. The G.91 remained in production for 19 years, during which a total of 756 aircraft were completed, including the prototypes and pre-production models. The assembly lines were finally closed in 1977, and the original G.91 enjoyed a long service life that extended over 35 years.

 

The G.91 was also used as a basis for a two-seat trainer variant with a stretched fuselage and further developments, based on this bigger airframe: the twin-engine development G.91Y, which was originally ordered by the Italian Air Force and Switzerland (as G.91YS) and later also operated by Poland, as well as the simpler, single-engine G-91X, a dedicated export alternative.

 

Like the G.91Y, the G.91X was an increased-performance version of the nimble baseline Fiat G.91, but unlike the G.91Y it was not funded by the Italian government but rather a private venture of Fiat. Like the G.91Y, it was based on the G.91T two-seat trainer variant. Structural modifications to reduce airframe weight increased performance and an additional fuel tank occupying the space of the G.91T's rear seat provided extra range. Combat manoeuvrability was improved with the addition of automatic leading-edge slats. While the G.91Y and X had a very similar appearance, their internal structure behind the cockpit section differed considerably and their tail section was visibly different, while the aerodynamic surfaces as well as the nose section (including the radar-less nose housing three cameras) were identical.

 

Instead of being powered by the G.91Y’s pair of small afterburning General Electric J85 turbojets, the G.91X only carried a single Pratt & Whitney J52 axial-flow dual-spool turbojet engine without reheat, a proven engine that was used in a number of successful aircraft, most of all the late Douglas A-4 Skyhawk versions. The bigger engine increased thrust by 60% over the original, earlier Orpheus-powered single-engine variants, and made the light G.91 a very agile aircraft. However, the J52 was considerably heavier than the small J85s, and despite less complex auxiliary installations, the G.91X weighed roughly 1.000 lb more than the G.91Y.

 

Performance-wise, the G.91X was, despite its conservative and heavier J52 powerplant, on par with the G.91Y, even though range, acceleration and rate of climb were not as good, the G.91Y’s afterburners gave the “Yankee Gina” a significant extra punch. On the other side, the G.91X was more robust, technically simpler and therefore easier to maintain and even better suited to operations from unprepared frontline airfields with minimal infrastructure.

Basically, the G.91X was designed to carry the same sophisticated avionics equipment as the G.91Y, which had been considerably upgraded with many of the American, British and Canadian systems being license-manufactured in Italy, but for the intended export customers in small countries with a limited budget, only a rather basic avionics package was offered, making the G.91X a simple daylight attack aircraft without any smart weapon or guided AAM capability (which the G.91Y lacked, too, only the YS for Switzerland could deploy weapons like the AIM-9 or the AGM-65).

 

Flight testing of two prototypes aircraft ran in July 1968 in parallel to the G.91Y program and was successful, with one aircraft reaching a maximum speed of Mach 0.95 in level flight, slightly less than its two-engine sibling. Airframe buffeting was noted and was rectified in production aircraft by raising the position of the tailplane slightly, and canted fins - similar to the G.91Y, but smaller - were added under the lower rear fuselage to improve directional stability. Unlike the G.91Y, which had been designed to NATO specifications, the G.91X did not feature an arrester hook, just a tail bumper.

 

The initial order of 55 G.91Y aircraft for the Italian Air Force was completed by Fiat in March 1971, by which time the company had changed its name to Aeritalia (from 1969, when Fiat Aviazione joined the Aerfer). The order was increased to 75 aircraft with 67 eventually being delivered.

In contrast to this success, the G.91X did not find immediate takers, though, because the potential market of Western-oriented countries was in the Seventies largely dominated by US American military support programs, which aggressively marketed the supersonic Northrop F-5 as a counterpart to MiG-17 and MiG-21 fighters, which had been provided to many countries by the USSR.

 

One large potential customer had been Israel, but the G.91X was declined in favor of the bigger and more sophisticated A-4N Skyhawk. Turkey and Greece also showed interest, but both eventually procured F-5 variants, heavily promoted by the USA. In the end, only a small number of the G.91X were built and sold to rather small and obscure air forces.

 

One of these few G.91X operators became Honduras. After the so-called Football War with El Salvador in 1969, the Honduran Air Force (HAF) entered the jet era in 1971 and started a re-organization and modernization program. This included the procurement of 10 old, ex-Yugoslav Canadair CL-13 Mk.4 Sabre. Later, in 1974 and as a result of an institutional growth of the Honduran Air Force, the "Coronel Hernán Acosta Mejía" Air Base, the "Coronel Armando Escalón Espinal" Base as well as the General Command of the Air Force and General Air Force General Staff were created.

 

Between 1976 and 1978 sixteen other Israeli aircraft were acquired, of the IAI \ Dassault Super-Mystere B.2 \ J-52 S'aar type, six new Cessna A-37 Dragonfly COIN aircraft and fifty UH-1 Iroquois helicopters. By then, the Sabres were in such a poor condition and deteriorated quickly under the harsh local climate, that a replacement was soon needed. The choice fell on the G.91X, not only because of the aircraft’s simplicity and ruggedness, but also because of its (though limited) reconnaissance capability as well as the engine and ammunition commonality with the ex-Israeli Sa’ars. A total of twelve G.91X were procured in 1977 and delivered until late 1979, and they were immediately put into action during the 1980s confrontation with the Sandinista government of Nicaragua, with heavy involvements in bombing raids and COIN missions. The Honduran G.91Xs flew frequent attack and reconnaissance missions, and even though they were no fighters the Ginas downed several Sandinista helicopters, including a Mil Mi-24 Hind (rather accidently shot down, though, through a salvo of unguided 5” FFARs which crossed the helicopter's flight path).

 

After the hostilities with Nicaragua had ended in 1990, the Honduran G.91Xs became actively involved in fighting drug trafficking and flew frequent reconnaissance and attack missions over home soil. By that time, the Honduran aircraft fleet was augmented or replaced (three G.91Xs had been lost through accidents or enemy fire by 1991) with 11 ex-USAF OA/A-37B Dragonflies, 12 ex-USAF Northrop F-5E/F Tiger II interceptors, 12 new Embraer T-27 Tucano armed trainers and four new CASA 101BB-02 attack airplanes.

By 1996, all eight remaining Honduran G.91Xs were, together with the Super Mystères, retired. The surviving aircraft were put up for sale as surplus, and one, already grounded G.91X airframe has been preserved at the Honduras Air Museum.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: one

Length: 11.67 m (38 ft 3.5 in)

Wingspan: 9.01 m (29 ft 6.5 in)

Height: 4.43 m (14 ft 6.3 in)

Wing area: 18.13 m² (195.149 ft²)

Empty weight: 4,400 kg (9,692 lb)

Loaded weight: 8,100 kg (17,842 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 9,000 kg (19,823 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Pratt & Whitney J52-P6A turbojet with 8,500 lbf (38,000 N) of thrust

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,110 km/h (600 kn, 690 mph, Mach 0.95) at 10,000 m (33,000 ft)

Range: 1,100 km (594 nmi, 683 mi)

Max. ferry range with drop tanks: 3,200 km (1,988 mls)

Service ceiling: 12,500 m (41,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 58 m/s (11.400 ft/min)

Wing loading: max. 480 kg/m² (98.3 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.47 at maximum loading

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.18 in) DEFA cannons with 120 RPG

4× under-wing pylon stations with a capacity of 1,814 kg (4,000 lb)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build is my submission the 2020 "One week” group build at whatifmodellers.com. I had originally earmarked my Thai Navy A-4 for this event, but already built it for the “In the navy” GB that ran a couple of weeks earlier, since it was a perfect thematic match.

 

While searching for an alternative I found a Matchbox G.91Y in the stash and wondered about a single engine alternative, a simpler aircraft in the spirit of the original G.91R variants. Since I had some surplus fuselages from G.91R Revell kits in the donor bank, the G.91X was born.

 

The basis is the Matchbox G.91Y kit, a basic affair with mediocre fit and only few details. It was mostly built OOB, except for lowered flaps (easy to realize on this kit) and a completely new lower rear fuselage from a smaller G.91R section with only a single exhaust. This feat was a little more challenging than it seems, since the G.91R is considerably smaller and shorter than the G.91Y – a lot of improvisation and PSR went into this cosmetic stunt. For instance, the seams between the parts had to be reinforced from the inside, bridging the different fuselage shapes, and a 2-3mm gap between the fuselage halves had to be filled. In order to emphasize the new engine arrangement, the G.91Y’s dorsal air scoops were sanded away and a new jet exhaust had to be found for the new, rather oval tail orifice. I eventually settled upon a protective cap from y syringe needle.

 

Furthermore, the cast-on guns were replaced with hollow steel needles, and some blade antennae (styrene sheet) as well as gun nozzle protectors (thin wire) were added. The cockpit was also slightly pimped with styrene profiles and some wire (on the ejection seat and for some side consoles), the pilot figure – even though the Matchbox figures are among the best I know – was replaced by a pilot from an Airfix A-4 Skyhawk (left over from the recent Thai Navy A-4LT build). However, the canopy remained closed, since opening it would require more fuselage cutting.

 

The ordnance was kept simple, reflecting the attack/COIN role of this aircraft: a pair of LAU-19 unguided missile pods and two Mk. 82 bombs; these came from an Italeri NATO weapon set and an Airfix A-4 kit, respectively.

  

Painting and markings:

Another inspiration for this build were pictures from a PC-7 trainer of the Guatemala Air Force, which carried a livery in three murky shades of green. I found this paint scheme pretty interesting, esp. as an alternative to the ubiquitous SEA scheme (that Honduran A-37s carried). For the G.91X I adapted the scheme with slightly more contrasty tones of two shades of green and a more brownish hue: Faded Olive Drab (Modelmaster #2051), Olive Drab (Humbrol 155) and Dark Green (Humbrol 30). The undersides were painted in a light grey (Humbrol 166). I initially considered a wrap-around scheme, but eventually found it to look too boring – also with a look at the potential markings, because aircraft of the Honduran Air Force typically only carried and carry minimal markings. Instead of the Guatemalan PC-7’s apparently symmetrical scheme I rather went for a more disruptive pattern, though.

 

The model was seriously weathered with a black ink washing and post panel shading, simulating constant use and the influence of tropical climate conditions. The decals were puzzled together from various sources and improvised. Most stencils come from the OOB sheet, the roundels on the fuselage and the flags on the fin were printed at home on clear sheet, with a white decal base added underneath. Quite complicated, but the alternative white decal paper as printing base would not yield sufficiently opaque markings. In order to add some eye-catchers I gave the Gina roundels on the fuselage and on the wings, too – these are rather modern markings, but just with the flags on the fin I found the model to look quite murky and boring. Artistic freedom… The “FAH” abbreviations were created with single USAF 45° letters.

 

Finally, after some soot stains around the guns and the exhaust with grinded graphite, the aircraft was sealed with matt Italeri acrylic varnish.

  

A relatively simple project – chosen with the perspective of just a week (well, eight days, to be honest) to tackle and finish it, despite the major fuselage surgery and the photo shooting and editing on top.

The Typhoon FGR.Mk 4 is a highly capable and extremely agile fourth-generation multi-role combat aircraft, capable of being deployed for the full spectrum of air operations, including air policing, peace support and high-intensity conflict. Initially deployed in the air-to-air role as the Typhoon F.Mk 2, the aircraft now has a potent, precision multi-role capability as the FGR4. The pilot performs many essential functions through the aircraft’s hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) interface which, combined with an advanced cockpit and the Helmet Equipment Assembly (HEA), renders Typhoon superbly equipped for all aspects of air operations.

 

Although Typhoon has flown precision attack missions in all its combat deployments to date, its most essential role remains the provision of quick reaction alert (QRA) for UK and Falkland Islands airspace. Detachments have also reinforced NATO air defence in the Baltic and Black Sea regions.

 

With its multi-role capability and variety of weapons, the Typhoon FGR4 is capable of engaging numerous target types. In the air-to-air role it employs the infraredguided Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM) and radar-guided, beyond visual range Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM). These weapons, used in conjunction with the jet’s ECR-90 Captor radar and PIRATE electro-optical targeting system, combine with the Typhoon’s superior performance and manoeuvrability to make it a formidable platform.

 

For ground-attack and close air support (CAS) missions, Typhoon is compatible with the GPS/laser-guided Enhanced Paveway II and Paveway IV weapons, usually in conjunction with the Litening III targeting pod. Its regular configuration for the armed reconnaissance and CAS roles includes Litening III, Paveway IV and the internal 27mm gun.

 

Paveway IV offers cockpit-programmable impact angle, impact direction and fuse delay features for precisely tailored target effects. The 27mm gun is ideally suited to providing warning shots or for accurate attacks against targets including light vehicles and personnel.

The VL- 650 Partisan is a light military, single-engine, low-wing single-seat aircraft capable of performing fighter, close air support, and counter insurgency (COIN) missions.

 

Please watch this and many other fantastic creations here: www.flickr.com/photos/einon/

 

The pilot is accommodated in an enclosed, heated and ventilated cockpit with adjustable seats. The cockpit canopy slides backwards to open. The landing gear retracts backwards under the wings. Rubber dampers provide shock absorption, and hydraulic brakes are used for wheel braking.

 

The aircraft was specially designed for low-altitude missions against day and night visible ground targets in a broad area. Its readily available to be loaded with weapons and supplied through a flexible system of auxiliary airfields that required no special preparations, especially in mountainous regions. Therefore, the Partisan can also take-off from short unprepared runways, even ones covered in deep snow when fitted with skis. The aircraft is also slightly armoured, being capable to survive shell impacts up to 20mm.

The Partisan was intended for close ground force support, and it can also be used for training of pilots in visual day/night flights, aiming, missile firing and bombing of ground targets.

Permanent armament comprises two wing-mounted 20mm cannons and one 37mm anti-tank engine mounted cannon. It can also use rockets, guided and unguided bombs, external guns and air to air missiles.

 

General characteristics

Crew: 1

Length: 8.03 m

Wingspan: 10.54 m

Height: 3.10 m

Wing area: 21.0 m²

Empty weight: 1030 kg

Max. takeoff weight: 4224 kg

Powerplant: 1 × V-435 Turboprop; (2 000hp)

Performance

Maximum speed: 695 km/h at 1,500 m (5,000 ft)

Cruise speed: 310 km/h

Stall speed: 40 km/h

Range: 800 km

Armament

Guns: One 37mm cannon engine mounted; Two 20mm guns on the wings.

Guns: 2 externals pods with two 12,7mm (0´50) machine guns.

Rockets: 2 FS-1000 rocket pods with 18 90mm rockets each or 2 rocket pods with 4 152mm rockets each or 4 simple 152mm anti-tank guided rockets.

Missiles: 2 defensive air to air AA-2020 Valkyria missiles;

Bombs: Maximum – 2 500kg guided or unguided bombs.

 

Hope you like it!

Please watch this and many other fantastic creations here: www.flickr.com/photos/einon/

Please fav or comment!

 

Eínon

A Gunner of 32 Battery, 16 Regiment Royal Artillery checks the components of a Rapier Air Defence System prior to its use on Exercise Capable Eagle.

 

The Royal Artillery were supporting the Royal Air Force as part of a large scale exercise that saw aircraft deployed at a Yorkshire airfield operating across Scotland and Northern England.

 

With more than forty years of service, the Rapier ground-to-air missile system is a key element of the air defence umbrella of any RAF deployed operating base. While the RAF Regiment and RAF Police use their specialist knowledge to defend UK air forces from ground attack, it falls to the Royal Artillery to provide a point defence against air attack.

  

-------------------------------------------------------

© Crown Copyright 2013

Photographer: Sgt Ralph Merry ABIPP RAF

Image 45156201.jpg from www.defenceimages.mod.uk

  

This image is available for high resolution download at www.defenceimagery.mod.uk subject to the terms and conditions of the Open Government License at www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/. Search for image number 45156201.jpg

 

For latest news visit www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-defence

Follow us:

www.facebook.com/defenceimages

www.twitter.com/defenceimages

 

Some background:

Simple, efficient and reliable, the Regult (リガード, Rigādo) was the standard mass production mecha of the Zentraedi forces. Produced by Esbeliben at the 4.432.369th Zentraedi Fully Automated Weaponry Development and Production Factory Satellite in staggering numbers to fill the need for an all-purpose mecha, this battle pod accommodated a single Zentraedi soldier in a compact cockpit and was capable of operating in space or on a planet's surface. The Regult saw much use during Space War I in repeated engagements against the forces of the SDF-1 Macross and the U.N. Spacy, but its lack of versatility against superior mecha often resulted in average effectiveness and heavy losses. The vehicle was regarded as expendable and was therefore cheap, simple, but also very effective when fielded in large numbers. Possessing minimal defensive features, the Regult was a simple weapon that performed best in large numbers and when supported by other mecha such as Gnerl Fighter Pods. Total production is said to have exceeded 300 million in total.

 

The cockpit could be accesses through a hatch on the back of the Regult’s body, which was, however, extremely cramped, with poor habitability and means of survival. The giant Zentraedi that operated it often found themselves crouching, with some complaining that "It would have been easier had they just walked on their own feet". Many parts of the craft relied on being operated on manually, which increased the fatigue of the pilot. On the other hand, the overall structure was extremely simple, with relatively few failures, making operational rate high.

 

In space, the Regult made use of two booster engines and numerous vernier thrusters to propel itself at very high speeds, capable of engaging and maintaining pace with the U.N. Spacy's VF-1 Valkyrie variable fighter. Within an atmosphere, the Regult was largely limited to ground combat but retained high speed and maneuverability. On land, the Regult was surprisingly fast and agile, too, capable of closing with the VF-1 variable fighter in GERWALK flight (though likely unable to maintain pace at full GERWALK velocity). The Regult was not confined to land operations, though, it was also capable of operating underwater for extended periods of time. Thanks to its boosters, the Regult was capable of high leaping that allowed the pod to cover long distances, surprise enemies and even engage low-flying aircraft.

 

Armed with a variety of direct-fire energy weapons and anti-personnel/anti-aircraft guns, the Regult offered considerable firepower and was capable of engaging both air and ground units. It was also able to deliver powerful kicks. The armor of the body shell wasn't very strong, though, and could easily be penetrated by a Valkyrie's 55 mm Gatling gun pod. Even bare fist attacks of a VF-1 could crack the Regult’s cockpit or immobilize it. The U.N. Spacy’s MBR-07 Destroid Spartan was, after initial battel experience with the Regult, specifically designed to engage the Zentraedi forces’ primary infantry weapon in close-combat.

 

The Regult was, despite general shortcomings, a highly successful design and it became the basis for a wide range of specialized versions, including advanced battle pods for commanders, heavy infantry weapon carriers and reconnaissance/command vehicles. The latter included the Regult Tactical Scout (リガード偵察型). manufactured by electronics specialist Ectromelia. The Tactical Scout variant was a deadly addition to the Zentraedi Regult mecha troops. Removing all weaponry, the Tactical Scout was equipped with many additional sensor clusters and long-range detection equipment. Always found operating among other Regult mecha or supporting Glaug command pods, the Scout was capable of early warning enemy detection as well as ECM/ECCM roles (Electronic Countermeasures/Electronic Counter-Countermeasures). In Space War I, the Tactical Scout was utilized to devastating effect, often providing radar jamming, communication relay and superior tactical positioning for the many Zentraedi mecha forces.

 

At the end of Space War I in January 2012, production of the Regult for potential Earth defensive combat continued when the seizure operation of the Factory Satellite was executed. After the war, Regults were used by both U.N. Spacy and Zentraedi insurgents. Many surviving units were incorporated into the New U.N. Forces and given new model numbers. The normal Regult became the “Zentraedi Battle Pod” ZBP-104 (often just called “Type 104”) and was, for example, used by Al-Shahal's New U.N. Army's Zentraedi garrison. The related ZBP-106 was a modernized version for Zentraedi commanders, with built-in boosters, additional Queadluun-Rhea arms and extra armaments. These primarily replaced the Glaug battle pod, of which only a handful had survived. By 2067, Regult pods of all variants were still in operation among mixed human/Zentraedi units.

  

General characteristics:

Accommodation: pilot only, in standard cockpit in main body

Overall Height: 18.2 meters

Overall Length: 7.6 meters

Overall Width: 12.6 meters

Max Weight: 39.8 metric tons

 

Powerplant & propulsion:

1x 1.3 GGV class Ectromelia thermonuclear reaction furnace,

driving 2x main booster Thrusters and 12x vernier thrusters

 

Performance:

unknown

 

Armament:

None

 

Special Equipment and Features:

Standard all-frequency radar antenna

Standard laser long-range sensor

Ectromelia infrared, visible light and ultraviolet frequency sensor cluster

ECM/ECCM suite

  

The kit and its assembly:

I had this kit stashed away for a couple of years, together with a bunch of other 1:100 Zentraedi pods of all kinds and the plan to build a full platoon one day – but this has naturally not happened so far and the kits were and are still waiting. The “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com in August 2021 was a good occasion and motivation to tackle the Tactical Scout model from the pile, though, as it perfectly fits the GB’s theme and also adds an exotic science fiction/anime twist to the submissions.

 

The kit is an original ARII boxing from 1983, AFAIK the only edition of this model. One might expect this kit to be a variation of the 1982 standard Regult (sometimes spelled “Reguld”) kit with extra parts, but that’s not the case – it is a new mold with different parts and technical solutions, and it offers optional parts for the standard Regult pod as well as the two missile carrier versions that were published at the same time, too. The Tactical Scout uses the same basis, but it comes with parts exclusive for this variant (hull and a sprue with the many antennae and sensors).

 

I remembered from a former ARII Regult build in the late Eighties that the legs were a wobbly affair. Careful sprue inspection revealed, however, that this second generation comes with some sensible detail changes, e. g. the feet, which originally consisted of separate toe and heel sections (and these were hollow from behind/below!). To my biggest surprise the knees – a notorious weak spot of the 1st generation Regult kit – were not only held by small and flimsy vinyl caps anymore: These were replaced with much bigger vinyl rings, fitted into sturdy single-piece enclosures made from a tough styrene which can even be tuned with small metal screws(!), which are included in the kit. Interesting!

 

But the joy is still limited: even though the mold is newer, fit is mediocre at best, PSR is necessary on every seam. However, the good news is that the kit does not fight with you. The whole thing was mostly built OOB, because at 1:100 there's little that makes sense to add to the surface, and the kit comes with anything you'd expect on a Regult Scout pod. I just added some lenses and small stuff behind the large "eye", which is (also to my surprise) a clear part. The stuff might only appear in schemes on the finished model, but that's better than leaving the area blank.

 

Otherwise, the model was built in sub-sections for easier painting and handling, to be assembled in a final step – made possible by the kit’s design which avoids the early mecha kit’s “onion layer” construction, except for the feet. This is the only area that requires some extra effort, and which is also a bit tricky to assemble.

 

However, while the knees appear to be a robust construction, the kit showed some material weakness: while handling the leg assembly, one leg suddenly came off under the knees - turned out that the locator that holds the knee joint above (which I expected to be the weak point) completely broke off of the lower leg! Weird damage. I tried to glue the leg into place, but this did not work, and so I inserted a replacement for the broken. This eventually worked.

  

Painting and markings:

Colorful, but pretty standard and with the attempt to be authentic. However, information concerning the Regults’ paint scheme is somewhat inconsistent. I decided to use a more complex interpretation of the standard blue/grey Regult scheme, with a lighter “face shield” and some other details that make the mecha look more interesting. I used the box art and some screenshots from the Macross TV series as reference; the Tactical Scout pod already appears in episode #2 for the first time, and there are some good views at it, even though the anime version is highly simplified.

 

Humbrol enamels were used, including 48 (Mediterranean Blue), 196 (RAL 7035, instead of pure white), 40 (Pale Grey) and 27 (Sea Grey). The many optics were created with clear acrylics over a silver base, and the large frontal “eye” is a piece of clear plastic with a coat of clear turquoise paint, too.

 

The model received a black ink washing to emphasize details, engraved panel lines and recesses, as well as some light post-shading through dry-brushing. Some surface details were created with decal stripes, e. g. on the upper legs, or with a black fineliner, and some color highlights were distributed all over the hull, e. g. the yellowish-beige tips of the wide antenna or the bright blue panels on the upper legs.

 

The decals were taken OOB, and thanks to a translation chart I was able to decipher some of the markings which I’d interpret as a serial number and a unit code – but who knows?

 

Finally, the kit received an overall coat of matt acrylic varnish and some weathering/dust traces around the feet with simple watercolors – more would IMHO look out of place, due to the mecha’s sheer size in real life and the fact that the Regult has to be considered a disposable item. Either it’s brand new and shiny, or busted, there’s probably little in between that justifies serious weathering which better suits the tank-like Destroids.

  

A “normal” build, even though the model and the topic are exotic enough. This 2nd generation Regult kit went together easier than expected, even though it has its weak points, too. However, material ageing turned out to be the biggest challenge (after all, the kit is almost 40 years old!), but all problems could be overcome and the resulting model looks decent – and it has this certain Eighties flavor! :D

 

Some background:

Simple, efficient and reliable, the Regult (リガード, Rigādo) was the standard mass production mecha of the Zentraedi forces. Produced by Esbeliben at the 4.432.369th Zentraedi Fully Automated Weaponry Development and Production Factory Satellite in staggering numbers to fill the need for an all-purpose mecha, this battle pod accommodated a single Zentraedi soldier in a compact cockpit and was capable of operating in space or on a planet's surface. The Regult saw much use during Space War I in repeated engagements against the forces of the SDF-1 Macross and the U.N. Spacy, but its lack of versatility against superior mecha often resulted in average effectiveness and heavy losses. The vehicle was regarded as expendable and was therefore cheap, simple, but also very effective when fielded in large numbers. Possessing minimal defensive features, the Regult was a simple weapon that performed best in large numbers and when supported by other mecha such as Gnerl Fighter Pods. Total production is said to have exceeded 300 million in total.

 

The cockpit could be accesses through a hatch on the back of the Regult’s body, which was, however, extremely cramped, with poor habitability and means of survival. The giant Zentraedi that operated it often found themselves crouching, with some complaining that "It would have been easier had they just walked on their own feet". Many parts of the craft relied on being operated on manually, which increased the fatigue of the pilot. On the other hand, the overall structure was extremely simple, with relatively few failures, making operational rate high.

 

In space, the Regult made use of two booster engines and numerous vernier thrusters to propel itself at very high speeds, capable of engaging and maintaining pace with the U.N. Spacy's VF-1 Valkyrie variable fighter. Within an atmosphere, the Regult was largely limited to ground combat but retained high speed and maneuverability. On land, the Regult was surprisingly fast and agile, too, capable of closing with the VF-1 variable fighter in GERWALK flight (though likely unable to maintain pace at full GERWALK velocity). The Regult was not confined to land operations, though, it was also capable of operating underwater for extended periods of time. Thanks to its boosters, the Regult was capable of high leaping that allowed the pod to cover long distances, surprise enemies and even engage low-flying aircraft.

 

Armed with a variety of direct-fire energy weapons and anti-personnel/anti-aircraft guns, the Regult offered considerable firepower and was capable of engaging both air and ground units. It was also able to deliver powerful kicks. The armor of the body shell wasn't very strong, though, and could easily be penetrated by a Valkyrie's 55 mm Gatling gun pod. Even bare fist attacks of a VF-1 could crack the Regult’s cockpit or immobilize it. The U.N. Spacy’s MBR-07 Destroid Spartan was, after initial battel experience with the Regult, specifically designed to engage the Zentraedi forces’ primary infantry weapon in close-combat.

 

The Regult was, despite general shortcomings, a highly successful design and it became the basis for a wide range of specialized versions, including advanced battle pods for commanders, heavy infantry weapon carriers and reconnaissance/command vehicles. The latter included the Regult Tactical Scout (リガード偵察型). manufactured by electronics specialist Ectromelia. The Tactical Scout variant was a deadly addition to the Zentraedi Regult mecha troops. Removing all weaponry, the Tactical Scout was equipped with many additional sensor clusters and long-range detection equipment. Always found operating among other Regult mecha or supporting Glaug command pods, the Scout was capable of early warning enemy detection as well as ECM/ECCM roles (Electronic Countermeasures/Electronic Counter-Countermeasures). In Space War I, the Tactical Scout was utilized to devastating effect, often providing radar jamming, communication relay and superior tactical positioning for the many Zentraedi mecha forces.

 

At the end of Space War I in January 2012, production of the Regult for potential Earth defensive combat continued when the seizure operation of the Factory Satellite was executed. After the war, Regults were used by both U.N. Spacy and Zentraedi insurgents. Many surviving units were incorporated into the New U.N. Forces and given new model numbers. The normal Regult became the “Zentraedi Battle Pod” ZBP-104 (often just called “Type 104”) and was, for example, used by Al-Shahal's New U.N. Army's Zentraedi garrison. The related ZBP-106 was a modernized version for Zentraedi commanders, with built-in boosters, additional Queadluun-Rhea arms and extra armaments. These primarily replaced the Glaug battle pod, of which only a handful had survived. By 2067, Regult pods of all variants were still in operation among mixed human/Zentraedi units.

  

General characteristics:

Accommodation: pilot only, in standard cockpit in main body

Overall Height: 18.2 meters

Overall Length: 7.6 meters

Overall Width: 12.6 meters

Max Weight: 39.8 metric tons

 

Powerplant & propulsion:

1x 1.3 GGV class Ectromelia thermonuclear reaction furnace,

driving 2x main booster Thrusters and 12x vernier thrusters

 

Performance:

unknown

 

Armament:

None

 

Special Equipment and Features:

Standard all-frequency radar antenna

Standard laser long-range sensor

Ectromelia infrared, visible light and ultraviolet frequency sensor cluster

ECM/ECCM suite

  

The kit and its assembly:

I had this kit stashed away for a couple of years, together with a bunch of other 1:100 Zentraedi pods of all kinds and the plan to build a full platoon one day – but this has naturally not happened so far and the kits were and are still waiting. The “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com in August 2021 was a good occasion and motivation to tackle the Tactical Scout model from the pile, though, as it perfectly fits the GB’s theme and also adds an exotic science fiction/anime twist to the submissions.

 

The kit is an original ARII boxing from 1983, AFAIK the only edition of this model. One might expect this kit to be a variation of the 1982 standard Regult (sometimes spelled “Reguld”) kit with extra parts, but that’s not the case – it is a new mold with different parts and technical solutions, and it offers optional parts for the standard Regult pod as well as the two missile carrier versions that were published at the same time, too. The Tactical Scout uses the same basis, but it comes with parts exclusive for this variant (hull and a sprue with the many antennae and sensors).

 

I remembered from a former ARII Regult build in the late Eighties that the legs were a wobbly affair. Careful sprue inspection revealed, however, that this second generation comes with some sensible detail changes, e. g. the feet, which originally consisted of separate toe and heel sections (and these were hollow from behind/below!). To my biggest surprise the knees – a notorious weak spot of the 1st generation Regult kit – were not only held by small and flimsy vinyl caps anymore: These were replaced with much bigger vinyl rings, fitted into sturdy single-piece enclosures made from a tough styrene which can even be tuned with small metal screws(!), which are included in the kit. Interesting!

 

But the joy is still limited: even though the mold is newer, fit is mediocre at best, PSR is necessary on every seam. However, the good news is that the kit does not fight with you. The whole thing was mostly built OOB, because at 1:100 there's little that makes sense to add to the surface, and the kit comes with anything you'd expect on a Regult Scout pod. I just added some lenses and small stuff behind the large "eye", which is (also to my surprise) a clear part. The stuff might only appear in schemes on the finished model, but that's better than leaving the area blank.

 

Otherwise, the model was built in sub-sections for easier painting and handling, to be assembled in a final step – made possible by the kit’s design which avoids the early mecha kit’s “onion layer” construction, except for the feet. This is the only area that requires some extra effort, and which is also a bit tricky to assemble.

 

However, while the knees appear to be a robust construction, the kit showed some material weakness: while handling the leg assembly, one leg suddenly came off under the knees - turned out that the locator that holds the knee joint above (which I expected to be the weak point) completely broke off of the lower leg! Weird damage. I tried to glue the leg into place, but this did not work, and so I inserted a replacement for the broken. This eventually worked.

  

Painting and markings:

Colorful, but pretty standard and with the attempt to be authentic. However, information concerning the Regults’ paint scheme is somewhat inconsistent. I decided to use a more complex interpretation of the standard blue/grey Regult scheme, with a lighter “face shield” and some other details that make the mecha look more interesting. I used the box art and some screenshots from the Macross TV series as reference; the Tactical Scout pod already appears in episode #2 for the first time, and there are some good views at it, even though the anime version is highly simplified.

 

Humbrol enamels were used, including 48 (Mediterranean Blue), 196 (RAL 7035, instead of pure white), 40 (Pale Grey) and 27 (Sea Grey). The many optics were created with clear acrylics over a silver base, and the large frontal “eye” is a piece of clear plastic with a coat of clear turquoise paint, too.

 

The model received a black ink washing to emphasize details, engraved panel lines and recesses, as well as some light post-shading through dry-brushing. Some surface details were created with decal stripes, e. g. on the upper legs, or with a black fineliner, and some color highlights were distributed all over the hull, e. g. the yellowish-beige tips of the wide antenna or the bright blue panels on the upper legs.

 

The decals were taken OOB, and thanks to a translation chart I was able to decipher some of the markings which I’d interpret as a serial number and a unit code – but who knows?

 

Finally, the kit received an overall coat of matt acrylic varnish and some weathering/dust traces around the feet with simple watercolors – more would IMHO look out of place, due to the mecha’s sheer size in real life and the fact that the Regult has to be considered a disposable item. Either it’s brand new and shiny, or busted, there’s probably little in between that justifies serious weathering which better suits the tank-like Destroids.

  

A “normal” build, even though the model and the topic are exotic enough. This 2nd generation Regult kit went together easier than expected, even though it has its weak points, too. However, material ageing turned out to be the biggest challenge (after all, the kit is almost 40 years old!), but all problems could be overcome and the resulting model looks decent – and it has this certain Eighties flavor! :D

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

In 1948, a swept wing version of the F-84 was created with the hope of bringing performance to the level of the F-86. The last production F-84E was fitted with a swept tail, a new wing with 38.5 degrees of leading-edge sweep and 3.5 degrees of anhedral, and a J35-A-25 engine producing 5,300 pound-force (23.58 kN) of thrust. The aircraft was designated XF-96A and flew on 3 June 1950. Although the airplane was capable of 602 knots (693 mph, 1,115 km/h), the performance gain over the F-84E was considered minor. Nonetheless, it was ordered into production in July 1950 as the F-84F Thunderstreak. The F-84 designation was eventually retained because the fighter was expected to be a low-cost improvement of the straight-wing Thunderjet with over 55 percent commonality in tooling.

 

In the meantime, the USAF, hoping for improved high-altitude performance from a more powerful engine, arranged for the British Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojet engine to be built in the United States as the Wright J65. To accommodate the larger engine, YF-84Fs with a British-built Sapphire as well as production F-84Fs with the J65 had a vertically stretched fuselage, with the air intake attaining an oval cross-section. Production quickly ran into problems, though. Although tooling commonality with the Thunderjet was supposed to be 55 %, but just 15 % of the tools could actually be re-used. To make matters worse, the F-84F utilized press-forged wing spars and ribs. At the time, only three presses in the United States could manufacture these, and priority was given to the Boeing B-47 Stratojet bomber over the F-84. The YJ65-W-1 engine was considered obsolete, too, and the improved J65-W-3 did not become available until 1954. When the first production F-84F flew on 22 November 1952, it was considered not ready for operational deployment due to control and stability problems. The first 275 aircraft, equipped with conventional stabilizer-elevator tailplanes, suffered from accelerated stall pitch-up and poor turning ability at combat speeds. Beginning with Block 25, the problem was improved upon by the introduction of a hydraulically powered one-piece stabilator. A number of aircraft were also retrofitted with spoilers for improved high-speed control. As a result, the F-84F was not declared operational until 12 May 1954.

 

The second YF-84F prototype was completed with wing-root air intakes. These were not adopted for the fighter due to loss of thrust, but this arrangement kept the nose section free and permitted placement of cameras, and the different design was adopted for the RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. Being largely identical to the F-84F, the Thunderflash suffered from the same production delays and engine problems, though, delaying operational service until March 1954.

 

During the F-84F’s development the Air Defense Command was looking for a replacement for the outdated F-94 ‘Starfire’ interceptor, a hasty development from the T-33 trainer airframe with an afterburner engine and an on-board radar. However, the F-94 was only armed with machine guns in its early versions or unguided missiles in its later incarnations, which were inadequate. An aircraft with better performance, ideally with supersonic speed, a better radar, and the ability to carry guided missiles (in the form if the AIR-1 and 2 ‘Falcon’ AAMs) as well as the AIR-2 ‘Genie’ missile was now requested.

 

The Douglas AIR-2 Genie followed a unique but effective concept that represented the technological state-of-the-art: it was an unguided air-to-air rocket with a 1.5 kt W25 nuclear warhead. The interception of Soviet strategic bombers was a major military preoccupation of the late 1940s and 1950s. The World War II-age fighter armament of machine guns and cannon were inadequate to stop attacks by massed bomber formations, which were expected to come in at high altitude and at high subsonic speed. Firing large volleys of unguided rockets into bomber formations was not much better, and true air-to-air missiles were in their infancy. In 1954 Douglas Aircraft began a program to investigate the possibility of a nuclear-armed air-to-air weapon. To ensure simplicity and reliability, the weapon would be unguided, since the large blast radius made precise accuracy unnecessary. Full-scale development began in 1955, with test firing of inert warhead rockets commencing in early 1956. The final design carried a 1.5-kiloton W25 nuclear warhead and was powered by a Thiokol SR49-TC-1 solid-fuel rocket engine of 162 kN (36,000 lbf) thrust, sufficient to accelerate the rocket to Mach 3.3 during its two-second burn. Total flight time was about 12 seconds, during which time the rocket covered 10 km (6.2 mi). Targeting, arming, and firing of the weapon were coordinated by the launch aircraft's fire-control system. Detonation was by time-delay fuze, although the fuzing mechanism would not arm the warhead until engine burn-out, to give the launch aircraft sufficient time to turn and escape. However, there was no mechanism for disarming the warhead after launch. Lethal radius of the blast was estimated to be about 300 meters (980 ft). Once fired, the Genie's short flight-time and large blast radius made it virtually impossible for a bomber to avoid destruction. The rocket entered service with the designation MB-1 Genie in 1957.

 

During the development phase the first carrier aircraft earmarked to carry the AIR-2 was the Northrop F-89 Scorpion, which had already been introduced in the early Fifties. While being an all-weather interceptor with on-board radar, it was a slow and large aircraft, and outdated like the F-94. Trying to keep the F-84 production lines busy, however, Republic saw the chance to design an all-weather interceptor aircraft that would surpass the F-89’s mediocre performance and meet the AIR-2 carrier requirements on the basis of the swept-wing (R)F-84F. To emphasize its dedicated interceptor role and set it apart from its fighter-bomber ancestors, the heavily modified aircraft was designated F-96B (even though it had little to do with the XF-96A that became the F-84F) and called ‘Thunderguard’.

 

The F-96B was largely based on the RF-84F’s airframe with its wing-root air intakes, what offered ample space in the aircraft’s nose for a radar system and other equipment. The radar was coupled with a state-of-the-art Hughes MC-10 fire control system. To relieve the pilot from operating the radar system one of the fuel cells behind the cockpit was deleted and a second crew member was placed behind him under an extended, strutless hood that opened to starboard. To compensate for the loss of fuel and maintain the F-84F’s range, a new tank was mounted under the cockpit floor in the aircraft’s center of gravity.

To improve performance and cope with the raised take-off weight, the F-96B was powered by an uprated Wright J65-W-18 turbojet, which generated 0.4 kN more dry thrust than the F-84F’s original J65-W-3 (7,700 lbf/34 kN). This was not too much, though, so that the J65 was additionally outfitted with an afterburner. With this upgrade the powerplant provided a maximum thrust of 10,500 lbf (47 kN), what resulted in a markedly improved rate of climb and the ability to break the sound barrier in level flight. The additional reheat section necessitated a wider and longer rear fuselage, which had to be redesigned. As an unintended side benefit, this new tail section reduced overall drag due to a slightly area-ruled coke-bottle shape behind the wings’ trailing edge, which was even emphasized through the ventral brake parachute fairing.

Armament consisted only of missiles, which were all carried externally on wing stations, all guns of the former F-84 versions were deleted to save weight. The F-96B’s weapons range included GAR-1/2/3/4 (Later re-designated as AIM-4) radar- and IR-guided Falcon air-to-air missiles and a pair of MB-1 Genie missiles. Up to four pods with nineteen unguided 2.75 in (70 mm) "Mighty Mouse" Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each were an alternative, too, and a pair of drop tanks were typically carried under the inner wings to provide the aircraft with sufficient range, since the new afterburner significantly increased fuel consumption.

 

Even though it was only a derivative design, the F-96B introduced a lot of innovations. One of these was the use of a diverertless supersonic inlet (DSI), a novel type of jet engine air intake to control air flow into their engines. Initial research into the DSI was done by Antonio Ferri in the 1950s. It consisted of a "bump" and a forward-swept inlet cowl, which worked together to divert boundary layer airflow away from the aircraft's engine. In the case of the F-96B this was realized as an inward-turning inlet with a variable contraction ratio. However, even though they had not been deemed necessary to guarantee a clean airflow, the F-96B’s air intakes were further modified with splitter plates to adapt them to the expected higher flight speeds and direct the air flow. The initial flight tests had also revealed a directional instability at high speed, due to the longer nose, so that the tail surfaces (both fin and stabilizers) were enlarged for the serial aircraft to compensate.

 

Another novel feature was an IRST sensor in front of the windscreen which augmented the on-board radar. This sensor, developed by Hughes International and designated ‘X-1’, was still very experimental, though, highly unreliable, and difficult to handle, because it relied on pressurized coolant to keep the sensor cold enough to operate properly, and dosing it at a consistent level proved to be difficult (if not impossible). On the other side the IRST allowed to track targets even in a massively radar-jammed environment. The 7” diameter silicone sensor was, together with the on-board radar, slaved to the fire control system so that its input could be used to lock guided missiles onto targets, primarily the GAR-1 and GAR-2 AAMs. The X-1 had a field of view of 70×140°, with an angular resolution of 1°, and operated in 2.5 micron wavelength range. When it worked properly the sensor was able to detect a B-47-sized aircraft’s tails aspect from 25 nm (29 ml/46 km) and a target of similar size from directly ahead from 10 nm (12 ml/19 km). Later, better developed versions of Hughes IRST, like the X-3 that was retrofitted to the F-101B in the early Sixties, had a better range and were more reliable.

 

During the Thunderguard’s development another competitor entered the stage, the F-101B Voodoo. In the late 1940s, the Air Force had already started a research project into the future interceptor aircraft that eventually settled on an advanced specification known as the 1954 interceptor. Contracts for this specification eventually resulted in the selection of the F-102 Delta Dagger, but by 1952 it was becoming clear that none of the parts of the specification other than the airframe would be ready by 1954; the engines, weapons, and fire control systems were all going to take too long to get into service. An effort was then started to quickly produce an interim supersonic design to replace the various subsonic interceptors then in service, and the F-101 airframe was selected as a starting point. Although McDonnell proposed the designation F-109 for the new aircraft (which was to be a substantial departure from the basic Voodoo fighter bomber), the USAF assigned the designation F-101B. Its development was protracted, so that the F-96B – even though it offered less performance – was ordered into production to fill the USAF’s urgent interceptor gap.

 

F-96B production started after a brief test phase in late 1957, and the first aircraft were delivered to the 60th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron in 1958. However, when it became clear that the F-101B would finally enter service in 1959, F-96B production was quickly cut down and the initial order of 300 aircraft reduced to only 150, which were produced until early 1960 in three batches. Only sixty were directly delivered to ADC units, because these were preferably equipped with the supersonic F-102A and the new F-101B, which could also carry the nuclear Genie missile. The rest was directly handed over to Air National Guard units – and even there they were quickly joined and replaced by the early ADC aircraft.

 

Operationally, almost all F-96Bs functioned under the US–Canadian North American Air Defense Command (NORAD), which protected North American airspace from Soviet intruders, particularly the threat posed by nuclear-armed bombers. In service, the F-96Bs were soon upgraded with a data link to the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system, allowing ground controllers to steer the aircraft towards its targets by making adjustments through the plane's autopilot. Furthermore, the F-96B was upgraded to allow the carrying of two GAR-11/AIM-26 Nuclear Falcon missiles instead of the Genies when they became available in 1961.

A handful F-96Bs were camouflaged during the late Sixties with the USAF’s new SEA scheme, but most aircraft retained their original bare metal finish with more or less colorful unit markings. Due to its limited capabilities and the introduction of the Mach 2 McDonnell F-4 Phantom, the last F-96B was retired from ANG service in 1971.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 54t 11 1/2 in (16,77 m) incl. pitot

Wingspan: 33 ft 7.25 in (10,25 m)

Height: 16 ft 9 in (5,11 m)

Wing area: 350 sq ft (37,55 m²)

Empty weight: 13,810 lb (6.264 kg)

Gross weight: 21,035 lb (9.541 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 28,000 lb (12.701 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Wright J65-W-18 turbojet with 8,600 lbf (34 kN) dry thrust and 10,500 lbf (47 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 695 mph (1,119 km/h, 604 kn, Mach 1.1) at 35,000 ft (10,668 m)

Cruise speed: 577 mph (928 km/h, 501 kn)

Range: 810 mi (1,304 km, 704 nmi) combat radius with two droptanks

Service ceiling: 49,000 ft (15,000 m)

Rate of climb: 16,300 ft/min (83 m/s)

Wing loading: 86 lb/sq ft (423 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

No internal guns;

6× underwing hardpoints for a total ordnance load of up to 6,000lb (2,727 kg), including

a pair of 191.5 US gal (727 l) or 375 US gal (1.429 l) drop tanks on the inner stations

and a mix of AIM-4 Falcon (up to six), MB-1 Genie (up to two) and/or pods with

nineteen 2.75”/70 mm FFAR unguided missiles each (up to four) on the outer stations

  

The kit and its assembly:

This fictional missing link between the RF-84F and the F-105 was conceived for the Fifties Group Build at whatifmodellers.com, an era when the USAF used a wide variety of interceptor aircraft types and technical advancements were quick and significant – in just a decade the interceptor evolved from a subsonic machine gun-toting aircraft to a guided weapons carrier platform, capable of Mach 2.

 

The F-96B (I re-used Republic’s dropped designation for the swept-wing F-84F) was to display one of the many “in between” designs, and the (R)F-84F was just a suitable basis for a conversion similar to the T-33-derived F-94, just more capable and big enough to carry the nuclear Genie missile.

The basis became Italeri’s vintage RF-84F kit, a rather simple affair with raised panel lines and a mediocre fit, plus some sinkholes. This was, however, heavily modified!

 

Work started with the implantation of a new tandem cockpit, taken wholesale from a Heller T-33. Fitting the cockpit tub into the wider Thunderflash hull was a bit tricky, putty blobs held the implant in place. The canopy was taken from the T-33, too, just the RF-84F’s original rear side windows were cut away to offer sufficient length for the longer clear part and the cockpit side walls had to be raised to an even level with the smaller windscreen with the help of styrene strips. With these adapters the T-33 canopy fitted surprisingly well over the opening and blended well into the spine.

 

The camera nose section lost its tip, which was replaced with the tail cone from a Matchbox H.S. Buccaneer (actually its air brake), and the camera windows as well as the slant surfaces that held them were PSRed away for a conical shape that extended the new pointed radome. Lots of weight in the nose and under the cockpit floor ensured a safe stance on the OOB landing gear.

The rear section behind the air brakes became all-new; for an afterburner I extended and widened the tail section and implanted the rear part from a B-66 (Italeri kit, too) engine nacelle, which received a wider nozzle (left over from a Nakotne MiG-29, a featureless thing) and an interior.

To balance the longer nose I also decided to enlarge the tail surfaces and replaced the OOB fin and stabilizers with leftover parts from a Trumpeter Il-28 bomber – the fin was shortened and the stabilizers reduced in span to match the rest of the aircraft. Despite the exotic source the parts blend well into the F-84’s overall design!

 

To add supersonic credibility and to connect the design further with the later F-105 I modified the air intakes and cut them into a raked shape – quite easy to realize. Once the wings were in place, I also added small splitter plates, left over from an Airfix BAC Strikemaster.

 

As an interceptor the armament had to be adapted accordingly, and I procured the quartet of IR-guided Falcons as well as the Genie duo from an Academy F-89. The large drop tanks were taken OOB from the Italeri kit. The Genies were mounted onto their massive Scorpion pylons under the outer wings of the F-96B, while the Falcons, due to relatively little space left under the wings, required a scratched solution. I eventually settled for dual launchers on small pylons, mounted in front of the landing gear wells. The pylons originally belong to an ESCI Ka-34 “Hokum” helicopter kit (they were just short enough!), the launch rails are a halved pair of F-4 Sidewinder rails from a Hasegawa air-to-air weapons set. With everything on place the F-96B looks quite crowded.

  

Painting and markings:

The machine would represent a late Fifties USAF type, so that the paint options were rather limited if I wanted to be authentic. ADC Grey was introduced in the early Sixties, SEA camouflage even later, so that bare metal became a natural choice – but this can be quite attractive! The model received an overall coat with acrylic “White Aluminum” from the rattle can, plus some darked panels all over the hull (Humbrol 56 for good contrast) and an afterburner section in Revell 91 (Iron Metallic) and Humbrol’s Steel Metallizer. The radome became deep black, the anti-glare panel in front of the windscreen olive drab (Revell 46). Light grey (Revell 75) was used for some small di-electric fairings.

Interior surfaces (cockpit and landing gear wells) were painted with Zinc Chromate primer (I used Humbrol 80), while the landing gear struts became silver-grey (Humbrol 56) and the inside of the covers as well as the air brakes were painted in bright red (Humbrol 19).

Once basic painting was done the model received a black ink washing and was rubbed with grinded graphite to emphasize the raised panel lines, and the material adds a nice dark metallic shine to the silver base coat.

 

Another challenge was to find suitable unit markings for the Fifties era in the decal vault, which would also fit onto the model. After a long search I eventually settled for rather simple markings from a 325th FIS F-102 from an Xtradecal sheet, which only features a rather timid fin decoration.

Finding other suitable standard markings remained demanding, though. Stars-And-Bars as well as the USAF taglines were taken from the Academy F-89 that also provided the ordnance, most stencils were taken from the OOB Italeri sheet and complemented by small markings from the scrap box. The biggest problem was the creation of a matching serial number. The “FF” code was originally used for P/F-51D Mustangs during the Korea War, but after the type had been phased out it might have been re-used? The letters as well as the serial number digits were created from various markings for USAF F-100s, also from an Xtradecal sheet.

 

Once the decals had been applied the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish, except for the radome, the anti-glare panel as well as the walking areas on the wings as well as parts of the afterburner section, which were coated with matt varnish.

  

A rather straightforward conversion, even though finishing the project took longer than expected. But the result looks surprisingly natural and plausible. Lots of PSR was needed to modify the fuselage, though, especially the tail section was not easy to integrate into the Thunderflash’s hull. Sticking to the simple NMF livery paid IMHO out, too: the livery looks very natural and believable on the fictional aircraft, and it suits the F-84’s bulbous shape well.

Main water parterre, with the decorative "Monatschlössl" casino.

 

The gardens of Hellbrunn, laid out 1613-1619, are Austria’s most notable Italianate gardens. Despite the baroque origin, Hellbrunn has a strong renaissance feel and features making it perhaps the single garden most capable of evoking earlier (and lost) examples of Italian water gardens such as Pratolino, which had directly influenced its creation.

 

Designed by Santino Solari for Marcus Sitticus, the Prince-Archbishop of Salzburg, Hellbrunn is a summer palace mostly intended for entertainment and leisure. Subsequently, the entire layout is riddled with literally countless water features, follies, grottos, sculptures, giochi d’aqua (trick jets) and, most remarkably, some of the best surviving and functional examples of automata (water-propelled animated figures).

 

The small castle itself is lined with elaborate grottos, including a Neptune grotto, rain grotto, a mirror grotto, a mock “ruined” vault and several automata including pneumatic bird-song. To the north of the house, an extraordinarily intact garden sequence features ponds and grottos surrounding an al-fresco stone table, similar to the one at Villa Lante but riddled with countless trick water jets.

 

Opposite, from a sunken star-shaped pond, a long narrow canal passes out which is lined with a multitude of grottoes, cascades, sculpture groups, water-plays and animated automata, terminating in a mechanical theatre and a grotto-pavilion featuring a levitating crown supported by a water jet.

 

Beyond, to the south-east of the house the large main water parterre remains from an earlier, more elobarate layout around an artificial hill topped by a summer house, now entirely vanished. Only the parterre’s fish ponds survived later alterations in the French and English style, overlooked by the decorative folly “Monatsschlössl”, a miniature castle erected in one month.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Lockheed XFV (sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Salmon", even though this was actually the name of one of its test pilots and not an official designation) was an American experimental tailsitter prototype aircraft built by Lockheed in the early 1950s to demonstrate the operation of a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter for protecting convoys.

 

The Lockheed XFV originated as a result of a proposal issued by the U.S. Navy in 1948 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aboard platforms mounted on the afterdecks of conventional ships. Both Convair and Lockheed competed for the contract, but in 1950 the requirement was revised with a call for a research aircraft capable of eventually evolving into a VTOL ship-based convoy escort fighter. On 19 April 1951, two prototypes were ordered from Lockheed under the designation XFO-1 (company designation was Model 081-40-01). Soon after the contract was awarded, the project designation changed to XFV-1 when the Navy's code for Lockheed was changed from O to V.

 

The XFV was powered by a 5,332 hp (3,976 kW) Allison YT40-A-6 turboprop engine, composed of two Allison T38 power sections driving three-bladed contra-rotating propellers via a common gearbox. The aircraft had no landing gear, just small castoring wheels at the tips of the tail surfaces which were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. The wings were diamond-shaped and relatively thin, with straight and sharp leading edges – somewhat foretelling the design of Lockheed’s Mach-2-capable F-104 Starfighter.

 

To begin flight testing, a temporary non-retractable undercarriage with long braced V-legs was attached to the fuselage, and fixed tail wheels attached to the lower pair of fins. In this form, the aircraft was trucked to Edwards AFB in November 1953 for ground testing and taxiing trials. During one of these tests, at a time when the aft section of the large spinner had not yet been fitted, Lockheed chief test pilot Herman "Fish" Salmon managed to taxi the aircraft past the liftoff speed, and the aircraft made a brief hop on 22 December 1953. The official first flight took place on 16 June 1954.

Full VTOL testing at Edwards AFB was delayed pending the availability of the 7,100 shp Allison T54, which was earmarked to replace the T40 and power eventual serial production aircraft. But the T54 faced severe development delays, esp. its gearbox. Another problem that arose with the new engine was that the propeller blade tips would reach supersonic speed and therefore compressibility problems.

After the brief unintentional hop, the prototype aircraft made a total of 32 flights. The XFV-1 was able to make a few transitions in flight from the conventional to the vertical flight mode and back, and had briefly held in hover at altitude, but the T40 output was simply not enough to ensure proper and secure VTOL operations. Performance remained limited by the confines of the flight test regime. Another issue that arose through the advancements of jet engine designs was the realization that the XFV's top speed would be eclipsed by contemporary fighters. Additionally, the purely manual handling of the aircraft esp. during landing was very demanding - the XFV could only be controlled by highly experienced pilots.

 

Both Navy and the Marines Corps were still interested in the concept, though, so that, in early 1955, the decision was made to build a limited pre-production series of the aircraft, the FV-2, for operational field tests and evaluation. The FV-2 was the proposed production version (Model 181-43-02), primarily conceived and optimized as a night/all-weather interceptor for point defense, and officially baptized “Solstice”. The FV-2 was powered by the T54-A-16 turboprop, which had eventually overcome its teething troubles and offered a combined power output equivalent of 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) from the propellers and the twin-engines’ residual thrust. Outwardly the different engine was recognizable through two separate circular exhausts which were introduced instead of the XFV’s single shallow ventral opening. The gearbox had been beefed up, too, with additional oil coolers in small ventral fairings behind the contraprops and the propeller blades were aerodynamically improved to better cope with the higher power output and rotation speed. Additionally, an automatic pitch control system was introduced to alleviate the pilot from the delicate control burdens during hover and flight mode transition.

 

Compared with the XFV, the FV-2 incorporated 150 lb (68 kg) of cockpit armor, along with a 1.5 in (38 mm) bullet-proof windscreen. A Sperry Corporation AN/APS-19 type radar was added in the fixed forward part of the nose spinner under an opaque perspex radome. The AN/APS-19 was primarily a target detection radar with only a limited tracking capability, and it had been introduced with the McDonnell F2H-2N. The radar had a theoretical maximum detection range of 60 km, but in real life air targets could only be detected at much shorter distances. At long ranges the radar was mainly used for navigation and to detect land masses or large ships.

Like the older AN/APS-6, the AN/APS-19 operated in a "Spiral Scan" search pattern. In a spiral scan the radar dish spins rapidly, scanning the area in front of the aircraft following a spiral path. As a result, however targets were not updated on every pass as the radar was pointing at a different angle on each pass. This also made the radar prone to ground clutter effects, which created "pulses" on the radar display. The AN/APS-19 was able to lock onto and track targets within a narrow cone, out to a maximum range of about 1 mile (1.5 km), but to do so the radar had to cease scanning.

 

The FV-2’s standard armament consisted of four Mk. 11 20 mm cannon fitted in pairs in the two detachable wingtip pods, with 250 rounds each, which fired outside of the wide propeller disc. Alternatively, forty-eight 2¾ in (70 mm) folding-fin rockets could be fitted in similar pods, which could be fired in salvoes against both air and ground targets. Instead of offensive armament, 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks for ferry flights could be mounted onto the wing tips.

 

Until June 1956 a total of eleven FV-2s were built and delivered. With US Navy Air Development Squadron 8 (also known as VX-8) at NAS Atlantic City, a dedicated evaluation and maintenance unit for the FV-2 and the operations of VTOL aircraft in general was formed. VX-2 operated closely with its sister unit VX-3 (located at the same base) and operated the FV-2s alongside contemporary types like the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar, which at that time went through carrier-qualification aboard the USS Midway. The Cougars were soon joined by the new, supersonic F-8U-1 Crusaders, which arrived in December 1956. The advent of this supersonic navy jet type rendered the FV-2’s archaic technology and its performance more and more questionable, even though the VTOL concept’s potential and the institutions’ interest in it kept the test unit alive.

 

The FV-2s were in the following years put through a series of thorough field tests and frequently deployed to land bases all across the USA and abroad. Additionally, operational tests were also conducted on board of various ship types, ranging from carriers with wide flight decks to modified merchant ships with improvised landing platforms. The FV-2s also took part in US Navy and USMC maneuvers, and when not deployed elsewhere the training with new pilots at NAS Atlantic City continued.

 

During these tests, the demanding handling characteristics of the tailsitter concept in general and the FV-2 in specific were frequently confirmed. Once in flight, however, the FV-2 handled well and was a serious and agile dogfighter – but jet aircraft could easily avoid and outrun it.

Other operational problems soon became apparent, too: while the idea of a VTOL aircraft that was independent from runways or flight bases was highly attractive, the FV-2’s tailsitter concept required a complex and bulky maintenance infrastructure, with many ladders, working platforms and cranes. On the ground, the FV-2 could not move on its own and had to be pushed or towed. However, due to the aircraft’s high center of gravity it had to be handled with great care – two FV-2s were seriously damaged after they toppled over, one at NAS Atlantic City on the ground (it could be repaired and brought back into service), the other aboard a ship at heavy sea, where the aircraft totally got out of control on deck and fell into the sea as a total loss.

To make matters even worse, fundamental operational tasks like refueling, re-arming the aircraft between sorties or even just boarding it were a complicated and slow task, so that the aircraft’s theoretical conceptual benefits were countered by its cumbersome handling.

 

FV-2 operations furthermore revealed, despite the considerably increased power output of the T54 twin engine that more than compensated for the aircraft’s raised weight, only a marginal improvement of the aircraft’s performance; the FV-2 had simply reached the limits of propeller-driven aircraft. Just the rate of climb was markedly improved, and the extra power made the FV-2’s handling safer than the XFV’s, even though this advancement was only relative because the aircraft’s hazardous handling during transition and landing as well as other conceptual problems prevailed and could not be overcome. The FV-2’s range was also very limited, esp. when it did not carry the fuel tanks on the wing tips, so that the aircraft’s potential service spectrum remained very limited.

 

Six of the eleven FV-2s that were produced were lost in various accidents within only three years, five pilots were killed. The T54 engine remained unreliable, and the propeller control system which used 25 vacuum tubes was far from reliable, too. Due to the many problems, the FV-2s were grounded in 1959, and when VX-8 was disestablished on 1 March 1960, the whole project was cancelled and all remaining aircraft except for one airframe were scrapped. As of today, Bu.No. 53-3537 resides disassembled in storage at the National Museum of the United States Navy in the former Breech Mechanism Shop of the old Naval Gun Factory on the grounds of the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., United States, where it waits for restoration and eventual public presentation.

 

As a historic side note, the FV-2’s detachable wing tip gun pods had a longer and more successful service life: they were the basis for the Mk.4 HIPEG (High Performance External Gun) gun pods. This weapon system’s main purpose became strafing ground targets, and it received a different attachment system for underwing hardpoints and a bigger ammunition supply (750 RPG instead of just 250 on the FV-2). Approximately 1.200 Mk. 4 twin gun pods were manufactured by Hughes Tool Company, later Hughes Helicopter, in Culver City, California. While the system was tested and certified for use on the A-4, the A-6, the A-7, the F-4, and the OV-10, it only saw extended use on the A-4, the F-4, and the OV-10, esp. in Vietnam where the Mk. 4 pod was used extensively for close air support missions.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/Height: 36 ft 10.25 in (11.23 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10.1 in (9.4 m)

Wing area: 246 sq ft (22.85 m²)

Empty weight: 12,388 lb (5,624 kg)

Gross weight: 17,533 lb (7,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,159 lb (8,244 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison T54-A-16 turboprop with 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) output equivalent,

driving a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 mph (941 km/h, 509 kn

Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn)

Range: 500 mi (800 km, 430 nmi) with internal fuel

800 mi (1,300 km, 700 nmi) with ferry wing tip tanks

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 12,750 ft/min (75.0 m/s)

Wing loading: 73.7 lb/sq ft (360 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (.79 in) Mk. 11 machine cannon with a total of 1.000 rounds, or

48× 2.75 in (70 mm) rockets in wingtip pods, or

a pair of 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks on the wing tips

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers-com, and a really nice what-if aircraft that perfectly fits into the time frame. I had this Pegasus kit in The Stash™ for quite a while and the plan to build an operational USN or USMC aircraft from it in the typical all-dark-blue livery from the early Fifties, and the group build was a good occasion to realize it.

 

The Pegasus kit was released in 1992, the only other option to build the XFV in 1:72 is a Valom kit which, as a bonus, features the aircraft’s fixed landing gear that was used during flight trials. The Pegasus offering is technically simple and robust, but it is nothing for those who are faint at heart. The warning that the kit requires an experienced builder is not to be underestimated, because the IP kit from the UK comes with white metal parts and no visual instructions, just a verbal description of the building steps. The IP parts (including the canopy, which is one piece, quite thick but also clear) and the decals look good, though.

 

The IP parts feature flash and uneven seam lines, sprue attachment points are quite thick. The grey IP material had on my specimen different grades of hard-/brittleness, the white metal parts (some of the propeller blades) were bent and had to be re-aligned. No IP parts would fit well (there are no locator pins or other physical aids), the cockpit tub was a mess to assemble and fit into the fuselage. PSR on any seam all around the hull. But even though this sound horrible, the kit goes together relatively easy – thanks to its simplicity.

 

I made some mods and upgrades, though. One of them was an internal axis construction made from styrene tubes that allow the two propeller discs to move separately (OOB, you just stack and glue the discs onto each other into a rigid nose cone), while the propeller tip with its radome remained fixed – just as in real life. However, due to the parts’ size and resistance against each other, the props could not move as freely as originally intended.

Separate parts for the air intakes as well as the wings and tail surfaces could be mounted with less problems than expected, even though - again – PSR was necessary to hide the seams.

  

Painting and markings:

As already mentioned, the livery would be rather conservative, because I wanted the aircraft to carry the uniform USN scheme in all-over FS 35042 with white markings, which was dropped in 1955, though. The XFV or a potential serial production derivative would just fit into this time frame, and might have carried the classic all-blue livery for a couple of years more, especially when operated by an evaluation unit. Its unit, VX-8, is totally fictional, though.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Humbrol 80 (simulating bright zinc chromate primer), and to have some contrasts I added small red highlights on the fin pod tips and the gun pods' anti-flutter winglets. For some more variety the radome became earth brown with some good weathering, simulating an opaque perspex hood, and I added white (actually a very light gray) checkerboard markings on the "propeller rings", a bit inspired by the spinner markings on German WWII fighters. Subtle, but it looks good and breaks the otherwise very simple livery.

Some post-panel-shading with a lighter blue was done all over the hull, the exhaust area and the gun ports were painted with iron (Revell 91) and treated with graphite for a more metallic shine.

Silver decal stripe material was used to create the CoroGuard leading edges and the fine lines at the flaps on wings and fins - much easier than trying to solve this with paint and brush...

 

The decals were puzzled together from various dark blue USN aircraft, including a F8F, F9F and F4U sheet. The "XH" code was created with single 1cm hwite letters, the different font is not obvious, thanks to the letter combination.

Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (still shiny, but not too bright), the radome and the exhaust area were painted with matt varnsh, though.

  

A cool result, despite the rather dubious kit base. The Pegasus kit is seriously something for experienced builders, but the result looks convincing. The blue USN livery suits the XFV/FV-2 very well, it looks much more elegant than in the original NMF - even though it would, in real life, probably have received the new Gull Gray/White scheme (introduced in late 1955, IIRC, my FV-2 might have been one of the last aircraft to be painted blue). However, the blue scheme IMHO points out the aircraft's highly aerodynamic teardrop shape, esp. the flight pics make the aircraft almost look elegant!

CFV 2.15. Improved wings/stabilizers, made it look more modern and capable. Added Cargo Module rear of Science Module, cargo pods are individually removable. Added light-speed rear of cargo Module. Sub-light engines and stabilizers are on "wings" and underneath framework. Shields also added/strengthened. Some armament added, oddly CFV had none before. Sensor array beefed up and added along top and to forward section. Still can break into Modules, so science compartment and/or cargo can be left on planet and Command Module and engines can explore or move elsewhere.

 

PS I have had THIS CFV since Christmas the year it came out. Somehow at 7 years old I was smart enough to keep the instructions.

The Rolls-Royce Griffon engine was designed in answer to Royal Naval specifications for an engine capable of generating good power at low altitudes. Concepts for adapting the Spitfire to take the new engine had begun as far back as October 1939; Joseph Smith felt that "The good big 'un will eventually beat the good little 'un." and Ernest Hives of Rolls-Royce thought that the Griffon would be "a second power string for the Spitfire". The first of the Griffon-engined Spitfires flew on 27 November 1941.

 

Although the Griffon-engined Spitfires were never produced in the large numbers of the Merlin-engined variants they were an important part of the Spitfire family, and in their later versions kept the Spitfire at the forefront of piston-engined fighter development. This article describes the Griffon-powered Spitfire variants.

 

The majority of Spitfires from the Mk VIII used C, D and E wing types. Unless otherwise noted, all Griffon-engined Spitfire variants used the strengthened Dunlop AH10019 "four spoke" pattern mainwheels. With the increasing use of hard-surfaced runways in the post-war years, many Spitfires were either manufactured or re-fitted with, larger mainwheels which were of a "three spoke" pattern. These were used on modified undercarriage legs which had reduced "toe-in" for the axles, which reduced tyre scrub.

 

Also known as the "Universal wing" the new design was standard on the majority of Spitfires built from mid-1942. This wing was structurally modified to reduce labour and manufacturing time plus it was designed to allow mixed armament options, A type, B type or four 20 mm Hispano cannon.

 

The undercarriage mountings were redesigned and the undercarriage doors were bowed in cross section allowing the legs to sit lower in the wells, eliminating the upper-wing blisters over the wheel wells and landing gear pivot points. Stronger undercarriage legs were raked 2 inches (5.08 cm) forward, making the Spitfire more stable on the ground and reducing the likelihood of the aircraft tipping onto its nose.[2] During production of the Mk VIII and Mk IX, a new undercarriage leg was introduced which had external v-shaped "scissor-links" fitted to the front of the leg; this also led to small changes in the shape of the undercarriage bay and leg fairings. Several versions of the Spitfire, including Mk XIV and Mk XVIII had extra 13 gallon integral fuel tanks in the wing leading edges, between the wing-root and the inboard cannon bay.

 

The Hispano Mk.II cannons were now belt fed from box magazines allowing for 120 rpg (the Chattelleraul system). The fairings over the Hispano barrels were shorter and there was usually a short rubber stub covering the outer cannon port. Redesigned upper wing gun bay doors incorporated "teardrop" shaped blisters to clear the cannon feed motors and the lower wings no longer had the gun bay heating vents outboard of the gunbays. To provide room for the belt feed system of the cannon, the inner machine gun bays were moved outboard between ribs 13 and 14. As the Spitfire was no longer to be used as a night fighter, the retractable landing lights were no longer fitted.

 

D Type

 

These were specifically made for the Photo-Reconnaissance Spitfires, including the PR XIX; no armament was fitted and the "D" shaped leading edges of the wings ahead of the main spar, were converted into integral fuel tanks, each carrying 66 gallons. To avoid the expansion of fuel in hot weather damaging the wing, pressure relief valves, incorporating small external vent pipes, were fitted near the wing tips.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Lockheed XFV (sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Salmon", even though this was actually the name of one of its test pilots and not an official designation) was an American experimental tailsitter prototype aircraft built by Lockheed in the early 1950s to demonstrate the operation of a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter for protecting convoys.

 

The Lockheed XFV originated as a result of a proposal issued by the U.S. Navy in 1948 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aboard platforms mounted on the afterdecks of conventional ships. Both Convair and Lockheed competed for the contract, but in 1950 the requirement was revised with a call for a research aircraft capable of eventually evolving into a VTOL ship-based convoy escort fighter. On 19 April 1951, two prototypes were ordered from Lockheed under the designation XFO-1 (company designation was Model 081-40-01). Soon after the contract was awarded, the project designation changed to XFV-1 when the Navy's code for Lockheed was changed from O to V.

 

The XFV was powered by a 5,332 hp (3,976 kW) Allison YT40-A-6 turboprop engine, composed of two Allison T38 power sections driving three-bladed contra-rotating propellers via a common gearbox. The aircraft had no landing gear, just small castoring wheels at the tips of the tail surfaces which were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. The wings were diamond-shaped and relatively thin, with straight and sharp leading edges – somewhat foretelling the design of Lockheed’s Mach-2-capable F-104 Starfighter.

 

To begin flight testing, a temporary non-retractable undercarriage with long braced V-legs was attached to the fuselage, and fixed tail wheels attached to the lower pair of fins. In this form, the aircraft was trucked to Edwards AFB in November 1953 for ground testing and taxiing trials. During one of these tests, at a time when the aft section of the large spinner had not yet been fitted, Lockheed chief test pilot Herman "Fish" Salmon managed to taxi the aircraft past the liftoff speed, and the aircraft made a brief hop on 22 December 1953. The official first flight took place on 16 June 1954.

Full VTOL testing at Edwards AFB was delayed pending the availability of the 7,100 shp Allison T54, which was earmarked to replace the T40 and power eventual serial production aircraft. But the T54 faced severe development delays, esp. its gearbox. Another problem that arose with the new engine was that the propeller blade tips would reach supersonic speed and therefore compressibility problems.

After the brief unintentional hop, the prototype aircraft made a total of 32 flights. The XFV-1 was able to make a few transitions in flight from the conventional to the vertical flight mode and back, and had briefly held in hover at altitude, but the T40 output was simply not enough to ensure proper and secure VTOL operations. Performance remained limited by the confines of the flight test regime. Another issue that arose through the advancements of jet engine designs was the realization that the XFV's top speed would be eclipsed by contemporary fighters. Additionally, the purely manual handling of the aircraft esp. during landing was very demanding - the XFV could only be controlled by highly experienced pilots.

 

Both Navy and the Marines Corps were still interested in the concept, though, so that, in early 1955, the decision was made to build a limited pre-production series of the aircraft, the FV-2, for operational field tests and evaluation. The FV-2 was the proposed production version (Model 181-43-02), primarily conceived and optimized as a night/all-weather interceptor for point defense, and officially baptized “Solstice”. The FV-2 was powered by the T54-A-16 turboprop, which had eventually overcome its teething troubles and offered a combined power output equivalent of 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) from the propellers and the twin-engines’ residual thrust. Outwardly the different engine was recognizable through two separate circular exhausts which were introduced instead of the XFV’s single shallow ventral opening. The gearbox had been beefed up, too, with additional oil coolers in small ventral fairings behind the contraprops and the propeller blades were aerodynamically improved to better cope with the higher power output and rotation speed. Additionally, an automatic pitch control system was introduced to alleviate the pilot from the delicate control burdens during hover and flight mode transition.

 

Compared with the XFV, the FV-2 incorporated 150 lb (68 kg) of cockpit armor, along with a 1.5 in (38 mm) bullet-proof windscreen. A Sperry Corporation AN/APS-19 type radar was added in the fixed forward part of the nose spinner under an opaque perspex radome. The AN/APS-19 was primarily a target detection radar with only a limited tracking capability, and it had been introduced with the McDonnell F2H-2N. The radar had a theoretical maximum detection range of 60 km, but in real life air targets could only be detected at much shorter distances. At long ranges the radar was mainly used for navigation and to detect land masses or large ships.

Like the older AN/APS-6, the AN/APS-19 operated in a "Spiral Scan" search pattern. In a spiral scan the radar dish spins rapidly, scanning the area in front of the aircraft following a spiral path. As a result, however targets were not updated on every pass as the radar was pointing at a different angle on each pass. This also made the radar prone to ground clutter effects, which created "pulses" on the radar display. The AN/APS-19 was able to lock onto and track targets within a narrow cone, out to a maximum range of about 1 mile (1.5 km), but to do so the radar had to cease scanning.

 

The FV-2’s standard armament consisted of four Mk. 11 20 mm cannon fitted in pairs in the two detachable wingtip pods, with 250 rounds each, which fired outside of the wide propeller disc. Alternatively, forty-eight 2¾ in (70 mm) folding-fin rockets could be fitted in similar pods, which could be fired in salvoes against both air and ground targets. Instead of offensive armament, 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks for ferry flights could be mounted onto the wing tips.

 

Until June 1956 a total of eleven FV-2s were built and delivered. With US Navy Air Development Squadron 8 (also known as VX-8) at NAS Atlantic City, a dedicated evaluation and maintenance unit for the FV-2 and the operations of VTOL aircraft in general was formed. VX-2 operated closely with its sister unit VX-3 (located at the same base) and operated the FV-2s alongside contemporary types like the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar, which at that time went through carrier-qualification aboard the USS Midway. The Cougars were soon joined by the new, supersonic F-8U-1 Crusaders, which arrived in December 1956. The advent of this supersonic navy jet type rendered the FV-2’s archaic technology and its performance more and more questionable, even though the VTOL concept’s potential and the institutions’ interest in it kept the test unit alive.

 

The FV-2s were in the following years put through a series of thorough field tests and frequently deployed to land bases all across the USA and abroad. Additionally, operational tests were also conducted on board of various ship types, ranging from carriers with wide flight decks to modified merchant ships with improvised landing platforms. The FV-2s also took part in US Navy and USMC maneuvers, and when not deployed elsewhere the training with new pilots at NAS Atlantic City continued.

 

During these tests, the demanding handling characteristics of the tailsitter concept in general and the FV-2 in specific were frequently confirmed. Once in flight, however, the FV-2 handled well and was a serious and agile dogfighter – but jet aircraft could easily avoid and outrun it.

Other operational problems soon became apparent, too: while the idea of a VTOL aircraft that was independent from runways or flight bases was highly attractive, the FV-2’s tailsitter concept required a complex and bulky maintenance infrastructure, with many ladders, working platforms and cranes. On the ground, the FV-2 could not move on its own and had to be pushed or towed. However, due to the aircraft’s high center of gravity it had to be handled with great care – two FV-2s were seriously damaged after they toppled over, one at NAS Atlantic City on the ground (it could be repaired and brought back into service), the other aboard a ship at heavy sea, where the aircraft totally got out of control on deck and fell into the sea as a total loss.

To make matters even worse, fundamental operational tasks like refueling, re-arming the aircraft between sorties or even just boarding it were a complicated and slow task, so that the aircraft’s theoretical conceptual benefits were countered by its cumbersome handling.

 

FV-2 operations furthermore revealed, despite the considerably increased power output of the T54 twin engine that more than compensated for the aircraft’s raised weight, only a marginal improvement of the aircraft’s performance; the FV-2 had simply reached the limits of propeller-driven aircraft. Just the rate of climb was markedly improved, and the extra power made the FV-2’s handling safer than the XFV’s, even though this advancement was only relative because the aircraft’s hazardous handling during transition and landing as well as other conceptual problems prevailed and could not be overcome. The FV-2’s range was also very limited, esp. when it did not carry the fuel tanks on the wing tips, so that the aircraft’s potential service spectrum remained very limited.

 

Six of the eleven FV-2s that were produced were lost in various accidents within only three years, five pilots were killed. The T54 engine remained unreliable, and the propeller control system which used 25 vacuum tubes was far from reliable, too. Due to the many problems, the FV-2s were grounded in 1959, and when VX-8 was disestablished on 1 March 1960, the whole project was cancelled and all remaining aircraft except for one airframe were scrapped. As of today, Bu.No. 53-3537 resides disassembled in storage at the National Museum of the United States Navy in the former Breech Mechanism Shop of the old Naval Gun Factory on the grounds of the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., United States, where it waits for restoration and eventual public presentation.

 

As a historic side note, the FV-2’s detachable wing tip gun pods had a longer and more successful service life: they were the basis for the Mk.4 HIPEG (High Performance External Gun) gun pods. This weapon system’s main purpose became strafing ground targets, and it received a different attachment system for underwing hardpoints and a bigger ammunition supply (750 RPG instead of just 250 on the FV-2). Approximately 1.200 Mk. 4 twin gun pods were manufactured by Hughes Tool Company, later Hughes Helicopter, in Culver City, California. While the system was tested and certified for use on the A-4, the A-6, the A-7, the F-4, and the OV-10, it only saw extended use on the A-4, the F-4, and the OV-10, esp. in Vietnam where the Mk. 4 pod was used extensively for close air support missions.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/Height: 36 ft 10.25 in (11.23 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10.1 in (9.4 m)

Wing area: 246 sq ft (22.85 m²)

Empty weight: 12,388 lb (5,624 kg)

Gross weight: 17,533 lb (7,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,159 lb (8,244 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison T54-A-16 turboprop with 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) output equivalent,

driving a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 mph (941 km/h, 509 kn

Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn)

Range: 500 mi (800 km, 430 nmi) with internal fuel

800 mi (1,300 km, 700 nmi) with ferry wing tip tanks

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 12,750 ft/min (75.0 m/s)

Wing loading: 73.7 lb/sq ft (360 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (.79 in) Mk. 11 machine cannon with a total of 1.000 rounds, or

48× 2.75 in (70 mm) rockets in wingtip pods, or

a pair of 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks on the wing tips

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers-com, and a really nice what-if aircraft that perfectly fits into the time frame. I had this Pegasus kit in The Stash™ for quite a while and the plan to build an operational USN or USMC aircraft from it in the typical all-dark-blue livery from the early Fifties, and the group build was a good occasion to realize it.

 

The Pegasus kit was released in 1992, the only other option to build the XFV in 1:72 is a Valom kit which, as a bonus, features the aircraft’s fixed landing gear that was used during flight trials. The Pegasus offering is technically simple and robust, but it is nothing for those who are faint at heart. The warning that the kit requires an experienced builder is not to be underestimated, because the IP kit from the UK comes with white metal parts and no visual instructions, just a verbal description of the building steps. The IP parts (including the canopy, which is one piece, quite thick but also clear) and the decals look good, though.

 

The IP parts feature flash and uneven seam lines, sprue attachment points are quite thick. The grey IP material had on my specimen different grades of hard-/brittleness, the white metal parts (some of the propeller blades) were bent and had to be re-aligned. No IP parts would fit well (there are no locator pins or other physical aids), the cockpit tub was a mess to assemble and fit into the fuselage. PSR on any seam all around the hull. But even though this sound horrible, the kit goes together relatively easy – thanks to its simplicity.

 

I made some mods and upgrades, though. One of them was an internal axis construction made from styrene tubes that allow the two propeller discs to move separately (OOB, you just stack and glue the discs onto each other into a rigid nose cone), while the propeller tip with its radome remained fixed – just as in real life. However, due to the parts’ size and resistance against each other, the props could not move as freely as originally intended.

Separate parts for the air intakes as well as the wings and tail surfaces could be mounted with less problems than expected, even though - again – PSR was necessary to hide the seams.

  

Painting and markings:

As already mentioned, the livery would be rather conservative, because I wanted the aircraft to carry the uniform USN scheme in all-over FS 35042 with white markings, which was dropped in 1955, though. The XFV or a potential serial production derivative would just fit into this time frame, and might have carried the classic all-blue livery for a couple of years more, especially when operated by an evaluation unit. Its unit, VX-8, is totally fictional, though.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Humbrol 80 (simulating bright zinc chromate primer), and to have some contrasts I added small red highlights on the fin pod tips and the gun pods' anti-flutter winglets. For some more variety the radome became earth brown with some good weathering, simulating an opaque perspex hood, and I added white (actually a very light gray) checkerboard markings on the "propeller rings", a bit inspired by the spinner markings on German WWII fighters. Subtle, but it looks good and breaks the otherwise very simple livery.

Some post-panel-shading with a lighter blue was done all over the hull, the exhaust area and the gun ports were painted with iron (Revell 91) and treated with graphite for a more metallic shine.

Silver decal stripe material was used to create the CoroGuard leading edges and the fine lines at the flaps on wings and fins - much easier than trying to solve this with paint and brush...

 

The decals were puzzled together from various dark blue USN aircraft, including a F8F, F9F and F4U sheet. The "XH" code was created with single 1cm hwite letters, the different font is not obvious, thanks to the letter combination.

Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (still shiny, but not too bright), the radome and the exhaust area were painted with matt varnsh, though.

  

A cool result, despite the rather dubious kit base. The Pegasus kit is seriously something for experienced builders, but the result looks convincing. The blue USN livery suits the XFV/FV-2 very well, it looks much more elegant than in the original NMF - even though it would, in real life, probably have received the new Gull Gray/White scheme (introduced in late 1955, IIRC, my FV-2 might have been one of the last aircraft to be painted blue). However, the blue scheme IMHO points out the aircraft's highly aerodynamic teardrop shape, esp. the flight pics make the aircraft almost look elegant!

The Chance Vought F4U Corsair was a carrier-capable fighter aircraft that saw service primarily in World War II and the Korean War. Demand for the aircraft soon overwhelmed Vought's manufacturing capability, resulting in production by Goodyear and Brewster: Goodyear-built Corsairs were designated FG and Brewster-built aircraft F3A. From the first prototype delivery to the U.S. Navy in 1940, to final delivery in 1953 to the French, 12,571 F4U Corsairs were manufactured by Vought, in 16 separate models, in the longest production run of any piston-engined fighter in U.S. history (1942–1953).

 

The Corsair served in the U.S. Navy, U.S. Marines, Fleet Air Arm and the Royal New Zealand Air Force, as well as the French Navy Aéronavale and other, smaller, air forces until the 1960s. It quickly became the most capable carrier-based fighter-bomber of World War II. Some Japanese pilots regarded it as the most formidable American fighter of World War II, and the U.S. Navy counted an 11:1 kill ratio with the F4U Corsair. As well as being an outstanding fighter, the Corsair proved to be an excellent fighter-bomber, serving almost exclusively in the latter role throughout the Korean War and during the French colonial wars in Indochina and Algeria.

The opening of the Connaught Bridge Generating Station, on the Klang River in Selangor, in March 1953 was a real milestone int he history of what was then Malaya - now Malaysia. The power station, capable of being either coal or oil fired, was at 80,000kw by far the largest generating station at the time in the country and, as importantly, the project included elements of a new proposed Malayan 'National Grid' that linked existing stations such as the hydro-electric plant at Chenderoh with stations and locations along the East Coast centred on the Bungsar station in Kuala Lumpur that hitherto had supplied the bulk of the capital's power requirements. As the booklet notes it meant an end to the long post-war years of restriction of supply to both industrial and domestic consumers.

 

The station was originally planned in 1944 by the Malayan Planning Unit in London in anticipation of the return to Malaya after the end of the Japanses occupation. A provisional order for the equipment was placed in 1945, with additional equipment following in 1947. Meanwhile the site at Connaught Bridge alongside the Klang River was selected in 1946 with the contract to start construction given by the Federation's Government in 1949. The first phase of the station, plant and the double circuit 66kv interconnecting lines running the 23 miles to Kuala Lumpur, was ready for opening in March 1953. Full commissioning came in 1955. Initailly the output was linked to the Bangsar (KL) station and that of Ulu Langat hydro-electric station. Construction of the former had started in 1926 and was opened in 1927 by the Government electricity department and in 1933 they purchased the Ulu Langat station from the Sungei Besi Mines Ltd. KL's earlier supplies, from 1905, had been provided from a small hydro-electric plant on the Gombak River, 12 miles from the town, what had two 400kw Pelton wheel-alternators. This had been augmented in 1919 by a mixed steam and diesel engine plant at Gombak Lane in the centre of KL.

 

Elsewhere, Penang's Municipal Department was the first to supply electriicty within Malaya when it started in 1904 - the station on the mainland at Prai came into use in 1926. By this date electricity was available in Ipoh, Johore Bahru (and Singapore), Seremban and Malacca/Melaka. That at Johore Bahru under the Johore adminsitraion grew to include Muar, Batu Pahat, Kluang, Kota Tinggi and Segamat. In Perak supplies were largely in the hands of the Perak River Hydro-Electric Power Company who operated stations at Malim Nawar (1928) and Chenderoh (1929). In North Perak the Government supplied Taiping and in Province Wellesley Messrs. Huttenbach's bought bulk supply from Penang and supplied power to various towns, supplemented by diesel generating stations in Kedah, Perak and Negri Sembilan. Power came to Kota Bharu (Kelantan), Ruab, Bentong, Kuala Lipis and Kuantan between 1928 and 1931, and in 1938 and 1939 to Mentakab, Fraser's Hill and Kuala Kubu.

 

In 1946 the Malayan Union Government acquired most electriicty undertakings except those of private companies and Penang Corporation whilst it also fully acquired the undertkaing operated by the Malacca Electric Light Company in 1948 that it has previously run on a rental basis. On the 1 September 1949 the new Central Electricity Board of the Federation fo Malaya came into existance and took over all functions of the old Electricity Department.

 

The booklet is marvellously detailed and illustrated describing the site, the power station, ancilliary equipment and other works, such as staff accomodaton and housing, with photographs and plans. The latter include a map of the proposed Malayan Grid and the plans show the works designed by both the staff of the Central Electricity Board and the consulting engineers, Preece, Cardew and Rider, and civil engineers Coode and Partners. The station took cooling water from the Klang River and could be powered by either fuel oil (via a pipeline from Port Swettenham) and coal via connections with the Malayan Railways and the colliery at Batu Arang.

 

Needless to say much of the equipment was supplied from the UK - Parsons generators and transformers and switchgear from various manufacturers including British Thomson Houston.

 

The photos are great as they show named members of the operating staff at work which is unusual but that now provided a real social history to the economic history of electricity supply in Malaysia.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Lockheed XFV (sometimes erroneously referred to as the "Salmon", even though this was actually the name of one of its test pilots and not an official designation) was an American experimental tailsitter prototype aircraft built by Lockheed in the early 1950s to demonstrate the operation of a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) fighter for protecting convoys.

 

The Lockheed XFV originated as a result of a proposal issued by the U.S. Navy in 1948 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aboard platforms mounted on the afterdecks of conventional ships. Both Convair and Lockheed competed for the contract, but in 1950 the requirement was revised with a call for a research aircraft capable of eventually evolving into a VTOL ship-based convoy escort fighter. On 19 April 1951, two prototypes were ordered from Lockheed under the designation XFO-1 (company designation was Model 081-40-01). Soon after the contract was awarded, the project designation changed to XFV-1 when the Navy's code for Lockheed was changed from O to V.

 

The XFV was powered by a 5,332 hp (3,976 kW) Allison YT40-A-6 turboprop engine, composed of two Allison T38 power sections driving three-bladed contra-rotating propellers via a common gearbox. The aircraft had no landing gear, just small castoring wheels at the tips of the tail surfaces which were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. The wings were diamond-shaped and relatively thin, with straight and sharp leading edges – somewhat foretelling the design of Lockheed’s Mach-2-capable F-104 Starfighter.

 

To begin flight testing, a temporary non-retractable undercarriage with long braced V-legs was attached to the fuselage, and fixed tail wheels attached to the lower pair of fins. In this form, the aircraft was trucked to Edwards AFB in November 1953 for ground testing and taxiing trials. During one of these tests, at a time when the aft section of the large spinner had not yet been fitted, Lockheed chief test pilot Herman "Fish" Salmon managed to taxi the aircraft past the liftoff speed, and the aircraft made a brief hop on 22 December 1953. The official first flight took place on 16 June 1954.

Full VTOL testing at Edwards AFB was delayed pending the availability of the 7,100 shp Allison T54, which was earmarked to replace the T40 and power eventual serial production aircraft. But the T54 faced severe development delays, esp. its gearbox. Another problem that arose with the new engine was that the propeller blade tips would reach supersonic speed and therefore compressibility problems.

After the brief unintentional hop, the prototype aircraft made a total of 32 flights. The XFV-1 was able to make a few transitions in flight from the conventional to the vertical flight mode and back, and had briefly held in hover at altitude, but the T40 output was simply not enough to ensure proper and secure VTOL operations. Performance remained limited by the confines of the flight test regime. Another issue that arose through the advancements of jet engine designs was the realization that the XFV's top speed would be eclipsed by contemporary fighters. Additionally, the purely manual handling of the aircraft esp. during landing was very demanding - the XFV could only be controlled by highly experienced pilots.

 

Both Navy and the Marines Corps were still interested in the concept, though, so that, in early 1955, the decision was made to build a limited pre-production series of the aircraft, the FV-2, for operational field tests and evaluation. The FV-2 was the proposed production version (Model 181-43-02), primarily conceived and optimized as a night/all-weather interceptor for point defense, and officially baptized “Solstice”. The FV-2 was powered by the T54-A-16 turboprop, which had eventually overcome its teething troubles and offered a combined power output equivalent of 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) from the propellers and the twin-engines’ residual thrust. Outwardly the different engine was recognizable through two separate circular exhausts which were introduced instead of the XFV’s single shallow ventral opening. The gearbox had been beefed up, too, with additional oil coolers in small ventral fairings behind the contraprops and the propeller blades were aerodynamically improved to better cope with the higher power output and rotation speed. Additionally, an automatic pitch control system was introduced to alleviate the pilot from the delicate control burdens during hover and flight mode transition.

 

Compared with the XFV, the FV-2 incorporated 150 lb (68 kg) of cockpit armor, along with a 1.5 in (38 mm) bullet-proof windscreen. A Sperry Corporation AN/APS-19 type radar was added in the fixed forward part of the nose spinner under an opaque perspex radome. The AN/APS-19 was primarily a target detection radar with only a limited tracking capability, and it had been introduced with the McDonnell F2H-2N. The radar had a theoretical maximum detection range of 60 km, but in real life air targets could only be detected at much shorter distances. At long ranges the radar was mainly used for navigation and to detect land masses or large ships.

Like the older AN/APS-6, the AN/APS-19 operated in a "Spiral Scan" search pattern. In a spiral scan the radar dish spins rapidly, scanning the area in front of the aircraft following a spiral path. As a result, however targets were not updated on every pass as the radar was pointing at a different angle on each pass. This also made the radar prone to ground clutter effects, which created "pulses" on the radar display. The AN/APS-19 was able to lock onto and track targets within a narrow cone, out to a maximum range of about 1 mile (1.5 km), but to do so the radar had to cease scanning.

 

The FV-2’s standard armament consisted of four Mk. 11 20 mm cannon fitted in pairs in the two detachable wingtip pods, with 250 rounds each, which fired outside of the wide propeller disc. Alternatively, forty-eight 2¾ in (70 mm) folding-fin rockets could be fitted in similar pods, which could be fired in salvoes against both air and ground targets. Instead of offensive armament, 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks for ferry flights could be mounted onto the wing tips.

 

Until June 1956 a total of eleven FV-2s were built and delivered. With US Navy Air Development Squadron 8 (also known as VX-8) at NAS Atlantic City, a dedicated evaluation and maintenance unit for the FV-2 and the operations of VTOL aircraft in general was formed. VX-2 operated closely with its sister unit VX-3 (located at the same base) and operated the FV-2s alongside contemporary types like the Grumman F9F-8 Cougar, which at that time went through carrier-qualification aboard the USS Midway. The Cougars were soon joined by the new, supersonic F-8U-1 Crusaders, which arrived in December 1956. The advent of this supersonic navy jet type rendered the FV-2’s archaic technology and its performance more and more questionable, even though the VTOL concept’s potential and the institutions’ interest in it kept the test unit alive.

 

The FV-2s were in the following years put through a series of thorough field tests and frequently deployed to land bases all across the USA and abroad. Additionally, operational tests were also conducted on board of various ship types, ranging from carriers with wide flight decks to modified merchant ships with improvised landing platforms. The FV-2s also took part in US Navy and USMC maneuvers, and when not deployed elsewhere the training with new pilots at NAS Atlantic City continued.

 

During these tests, the demanding handling characteristics of the tailsitter concept in general and the FV-2 in specific were frequently confirmed. Once in flight, however, the FV-2 handled well and was a serious and agile dogfighter – but jet aircraft could easily avoid and outrun it.

Other operational problems soon became apparent, too: while the idea of a VTOL aircraft that was independent from runways or flight bases was highly attractive, the FV-2’s tailsitter concept required a complex and bulky maintenance infrastructure, with many ladders, working platforms and cranes. On the ground, the FV-2 could not move on its own and had to be pushed or towed. However, due to the aircraft’s high center of gravity it had to be handled with great care – two FV-2s were seriously damaged after they toppled over, one at NAS Atlantic City on the ground (it could be repaired and brought back into service), the other aboard a ship at heavy sea, where the aircraft totally got out of control on deck and fell into the sea as a total loss.

To make matters even worse, fundamental operational tasks like refueling, re-arming the aircraft between sorties or even just boarding it were a complicated and slow task, so that the aircraft’s theoretical conceptual benefits were countered by its cumbersome handling.

 

FV-2 operations furthermore revealed, despite the considerably increased power output of the T54 twin engine that more than compensated for the aircraft’s raised weight, only a marginal improvement of the aircraft’s performance; the FV-2 had simply reached the limits of propeller-driven aircraft. Just the rate of climb was markedly improved, and the extra power made the FV-2’s handling safer than the XFV’s, even though this advancement was only relative because the aircraft’s hazardous handling during transition and landing as well as other conceptual problems prevailed and could not be overcome. The FV-2’s range was also very limited, esp. when it did not carry the fuel tanks on the wing tips, so that the aircraft’s potential service spectrum remained very limited.

 

Six of the eleven FV-2s that were produced were lost in various accidents within only three years, five pilots were killed. The T54 engine remained unreliable, and the propeller control system which used 25 vacuum tubes was far from reliable, too. Due to the many problems, the FV-2s were grounded in 1959, and when VX-8 was disestablished on 1 March 1960, the whole project was cancelled and all remaining aircraft except for one airframe were scrapped. As of today, Bu.No. 53-3537 resides disassembled in storage at the National Museum of the United States Navy in the former Breech Mechanism Shop of the old Naval Gun Factory on the grounds of the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., United States, where it waits for restoration and eventual public presentation.

 

As a historic side note, the FV-2’s detachable wing tip gun pods had a longer and more successful service life: they were the basis for the Mk.4 HIPEG (High Performance External Gun) gun pods. This weapon system’s main purpose became strafing ground targets, and it received a different attachment system for underwing hardpoints and a bigger ammunition supply (750 RPG instead of just 250 on the FV-2). Approximately 1.200 Mk. 4 twin gun pods were manufactured by Hughes Tool Company, later Hughes Helicopter, in Culver City, California. While the system was tested and certified for use on the A-4, the A-6, the A-7, the F-4, and the OV-10, it only saw extended use on the A-4, the F-4, and the OV-10, esp. in Vietnam where the Mk. 4 pod was used extensively for close air support missions.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/Height: 36 ft 10.25 in (11.23 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10.1 in (9.4 m)

Wing area: 246 sq ft (22.85 m²)

Empty weight: 12,388 lb (5,624 kg)

Gross weight: 17,533 lb (7,960 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,159 lb (8,244 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Allison T54-A-16 turboprop with 7,500 shp (5,600 kW) output equivalent,

driving a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 mph (941 km/h, 509 kn

Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn)

Range: 500 mi (800 km, 430 nmi) with internal fuel

800 mi (1,300 km, 700 nmi) with ferry wing tip tanks

Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m)

Rate of climb: 12,750 ft/min (75.0 m/s)

Wing loading: 73.7 lb/sq ft (360 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (.79 in) Mk. 11 machine cannon with a total of 1.000 rounds, or

48× 2.75 in (70 mm) rockets in wingtip pods, or

a pair of 200 US gal. (165 imp. gal./750 l) auxiliary tanks on the wing tips

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Fifties” group build at whatifmodellers-com, and a really nice what-if aircraft that perfectly fits into the time frame. I had this Pegasus kit in The Stash™ for quite a while and the plan to build an operational USN or USMC aircraft from it in the typical all-dark-blue livery from the early Fifties, and the group build was a good occasion to realize it.

 

The Pegasus kit was released in 1992, the only other option to build the XFV in 1:72 is a Valom kit which, as a bonus, features the aircraft’s fixed landing gear that was used during flight trials. The Pegasus offering is technically simple and robust, but it is nothing for those who are faint at heart. The warning that the kit requires an experienced builder is not to be underestimated, because the IP kit from the UK comes with white metal parts and no visual instructions, just a verbal description of the building steps. The IP parts (including the canopy, which is one piece, quite thick but also clear) and the decals look good, though.

 

The IP parts feature flash and uneven seam lines, sprue attachment points are quite thick. The grey IP material had on my specimen different grades of hard-/brittleness, the white metal parts (some of the propeller blades) were bent and had to be re-aligned. No IP parts would fit well (there are no locator pins or other physical aids), the cockpit tub was a mess to assemble and fit into the fuselage. PSR on any seam all around the hull. But even though this sound horrible, the kit goes together relatively easy – thanks to its simplicity.

 

I made some mods and upgrades, though. One of them was an internal axis construction made from styrene tubes that allow the two propeller discs to move separately (OOB, you just stack and glue the discs onto each other into a rigid nose cone), while the propeller tip with its radome remained fixed – just as in real life. However, due to the parts’ size and resistance against each other, the props could not move as freely as originally intended.

Separate parts for the air intakes as well as the wings and tail surfaces could be mounted with less problems than expected, even though - again – PSR was necessary to hide the seams.

  

Painting and markings:

As already mentioned, the livery would be rather conservative, because I wanted the aircraft to carry the uniform USN scheme in all-over FS 35042 with white markings, which was dropped in 1955, though. The XFV or a potential serial production derivative would just fit into this time frame, and might have carried the classic all-blue livery for a couple of years more, especially when operated by an evaluation unit. Its unit, VX-8, is totally fictional, though.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in Humbrol 80 (simulating bright zinc chromate primer), and to have some contrasts I added small red highlights on the fin pod tips and the gun pods' anti-flutter winglets. For some more variety the radome became earth brown with some good weathering, simulating an opaque perspex hood, and I added white (actually a very light gray) checkerboard markings on the "propeller rings", a bit inspired by the spinner markings on German WWII fighters. Subtle, but it looks good and breaks the otherwise very simple livery.

Some post-panel-shading with a lighter blue was done all over the hull, the exhaust area and the gun ports were painted with iron (Revell 91) and treated with graphite for a more metallic shine.

Silver decal stripe material was used to create the CoroGuard leading edges and the fine lines at the flaps on wings and fins - much easier than trying to solve this with paint and brush...

 

The decals were puzzled together from various dark blue USN aircraft, including a F8F, F9F and F4U sheet. The "XH" code was created with single 1cm hwite letters, the different font is not obvious, thanks to the letter combination.

Finally, the model was sealed with semi-gloss acrylic varnish (still shiny, but not too bright), the radome and the exhaust area were painted with matt varnsh, though.

  

A cool result, despite the rather dubious kit base. The Pegasus kit is seriously something for experienced builders, but the result looks convincing. The blue USN livery suits the XFV/FV-2 very well, it looks much more elegant than in the original NMF - even though it would, in real life, probably have received the new Gull Gray/White scheme (introduced in late 1955, IIRC, my FV-2 might have been one of the last aircraft to be painted blue). However, the blue scheme IMHO points out the aircraft's highly aerodynamic teardrop shape, esp. the flight pics make the aircraft almost look elegant!

The history of the A-26 Invader is long and rich. Built by Douglas Aircraft Company, it is a follow on of the famous A-20 Havoc. The comparison ends, however, with its family resemblance and its landing characteristics. Considerably larger and faster than the A-20, the A-26 has vastly increased range and is capable of carrying a much larger bomb load.

 

The “A” designation labels it as an attack light bomber aircraft. In actuality, it was larger than most medium bomber of the day, the B-25 and B-26. First introduced into combat in Europe with the 9th Army Air Force in November 1944, it quickly made a name for itself as a result of its superior performance. It was also used in the Pacific, but on a lessor scale.

 

The A-26 was kept in the USAAF inventory at the conclusion of WWII and remained active as a tactical aircraft for many years. When the USAF became a separate service in July 1947, most combat aircraft were re-designated. All bombers received the designation “B.” Consequently, the A-26 became the B-26. This caused considerable confusion then, and still does today, because now these are two B-26’s, the Martin B-26 of WWII and the Douglas B-26 of post-WWII.

 

These rugged warriors served in active combat throughout the Korean War—sometimes as attack and ground support aircraft, but often in the role of night intruders. In the latter case, painted entirely in black, they would disrupt the North Korean supply routes and communication lines, which by then were mostly active at night. This, of course, was an exceptionally hazardous mission and their losses were very high.

 

A few years later, the A-26 once more found itself being used in a similar role in Vietnam. Finally, the aging fleet of B-26’s was replaced by newer and more modern aircraft, leaving behind a proud history matched by only a few of the world’s finest aircraft.

 

Following inactivation, several of these great machines were converted to civilian duty as VIP corporate aircraft, where they were the envy of many. Others were converted to aerial tankers and employed as “Borate Bombers” for fighting forest fires. In this role, they were to excel until age finally began to take its toll and they were reluctantly pulled out of this service.

 

Few aircraft in the world can boast of the achievements that can be attributed to the Douglas A-26 (B-26). A relatively hot aircraft during landing and takeoff phases, it is demanding but honest.

 

Definitions:

 

Army: Attack Bomber, 26th design

Navy: JD1 Towed targets

Design and Manufacturing Information:

Origin: Douglas Aircraft, El Segundo and Long Beach, California/Tulsa, Oklahoma

Type: Three place, Twin engine, Shoulder wing, Land-based Attack Bomber

 

Operational Information:

 

The A-26 was unique in many ways. First, it was one of the very few combat aircraft to be conceived, designed, developed, produced, and flown in large numbers all during the course of WWII. Second, it was one of the rare large twin-engine combat aircraft designed for a single pilot. What normally would have been a co-pilot’s position, if present at all, was used for other purposes.

 

As was the case with the B-25, many modifications, particularly in the nose configurations, were to follow the service of this magnificent aircraft. As a bomber, it usually had a Pexiglas nose. Others were gun ships with a great variety of machine guns and cannons mounted in the nose. In addition these had turrets mounted on top and bottom of the rear fuselage. A single gunner used a periscope which automatically switched between the top turret and bottom turret as did the guns while firing at a target passing from above to below the aircraft. They also had pods for four guns on each of the wings. As many as 16 guns were forward pointing. It was the A-10 Warthog of its day.

 

Specifications and Performance:

 

Power Plant:

Engine: 2 Pratt & Whitney R-2800 18 cylinder air cooled radial

Horsepower: 2,000 hp. each

Propeller: Hamilton Standard constant speed

 

Dimensions:

Length: 51ft. 6in.

Wingspan: 70ft. 0in.

Height: 18ft. 3in.

Weight: 22,850lbs. empty, 35,000lbs. max.

 

Performance:

Maximum Speed: 373mph @ 15,000ft.

Maximum Range: 1,400 miles

Service Ceiling: 22,100ft

Armament: Ten .50 cal. machine guns (2 each in 2 turrets), Maximum bomb load 4,000lbs.

 

History of the Douglas A-26 at the Palm Springs Air Museum:

 

Because the A-26 was retained in the USAAF post-war inventory, many were returned to the states or flown to other USAAF (later USAF) bases. AAF-39359 was one of these. Designated A-26B-30DL, it rolled off the production line at Douglas Aircraft, Long Beach, California on 14 November 1944. It immediately departed the U.S. for assignment with the 9th Air Force with the 416th Bomb Group, as it was converted from A-20’s to A-26’s.

 

It participated in continuous operation against enemy transportation, communications, and airfields, including the Battle of the Bulge, from its initial arrival until 3 May 1945, when it flew its last combat mission of WWII. It was returned to the U.S. in August of 1945 and was assigned to Grenada AAF, Mississippi. In March 1946, it was assigned to Hobbs AAF, New Mexico and in September 1947, to McClellan AFB, California. In September 1948, all A-26’s were re-designated as B-26’s and this aircraft became a B-26B. Shortly thereafter, it was placed in storage.

 

In January 1953, it was removed from storage and fitted with a glass nose, becoming B-26C, and shipped to Iwakuni AB, Japan, where it was painted gloss black with red trim. It flew its last night intruder mission of the Korean War on 27 July 1953. In November 1953, it was assigned to Kunsan AB, Korea (K-8) with periodic operations from Miho AB, Japan. In October 1954, it was assigned to Johnson AB, Japan. In February 1956, it was placed in storage at Davis Monthan AFB, Arizona, where its Air Force career was to end. In November 1957, it was dropped from the USAF inventory.

In June 1959, it was sold to National Metal Company for $1,189.89. From there it went though a series of legal entanglements, finally ending up with Conair Aviation, Ltd., Abbotsford, British Columbia, where it was converted into as air tanker for forest fire drops—the first A-26 to be used for this purpose. It began firebombing on 5 May 1970 and operated in such places as Prince George, Kamloops and Whitehorse. Its firebombing days ended on 14 July 1987 and it was flown to Victoria, British Columbia for maintenance.

 

In April 1987 it was sold to Jerry Janes, the solid nose that had been used for firebombing was replaced by a glass nose from a B-26K, and the aircraft was flown to many airshows during that summer.

 

After being ferried to Chino, California, it was sold to Robert J. Pond and flown to Eden Prairie, Minnesota on June 5, 1988 where it became part of the Planes of Fame East. In the spring of 1997, it was ferried to Palm Springs, California to join the Palm Springs Air Museum. Today this proud A-26 (B-26) can be found in the museum’s Pacific Hangar.

   

“The Boeing Airplane Co. today announced another step toward space transportation.

Boeing unveiled a model of a space vehicle capable of carrying men on reconnaissance trips around the earth or to other planets. The vehicle also would be a space-borne service station to other interplanetary ships.

The model was shown at the annual meeting of the Association of the United States Army in Washington, D. C.

“This capsule was designed to be simpler and cheaper in its construction than any other orbital station now being considered,” said Dr. Walter Hiltner, Boeing’s lunar-systems manager.

 

Ship Built in Space

 

Here is Boeing’s description of the project:

The space ship would be built at a station orbiting the earth. Dimensions of the vehicle are 20 by 74 feet.

Technicians assembling the ship would have no need for space suits. They would be working under a large plastic bubble having controlled pressure and atmosphere.”

 

From top-to-bottom, many neat things going on here. My take:

- Two astronauts in the airlock preparing to conduct an EVA, with another crewmate at a control console, possibly responsible for the depress/repress & oversight of the impending spacewalk.

- The two gentlemen in the immediate vicinity of a large board that sort of looks like a planetary/solar system? chart, with courses already laid in? If so, outstanding. Engage.

- Below them, at the level of the fellow in the second airlock, possibly ECS equipment, like pressurized oxygen tanks…and other provisions?

- Then…what looks to be two rows of Mercury/Gemini-like possible escape/survival capsules, girdling the inner wall of the vehicle, immediately above & below the central ‘garage’? for the shuttle craft.

- Then possibly another level of provisions, equipment, etc., with a third airlock.

- Next appears to be the living/relaxation level, with what looks to be the sleeping compartment, possible galley? or reading room/library, and of course, TV room.

- Finally, possible fuel tanks. However, since I know jack about ion or nuclear propulsion, is that guess credible? Idk.

 

Even a good looking shuttle (earth ferry?) craft, tethered to a telescoping or otherwise articulating “dock/pier”, which looks to be able to draw the shuttle vehicle into the central bay, hence the two interior airlocks leading into it.

 

Tangential & excessive, but who cares. Yet another unsung aerospace hero, and associate of the aforementioned Dr. Hiltner:

 

news.rice.edu/2016/03/24/rice-mourns-aerospace-pioneer-an...

Credit: Rice University Office of Public Affairs website

 

The vehicle was part of Boeing Aircraft Company’s Program for Astronomical Research and Scientific Experiments Concerning Space (PARSECS).

An EXCELLENT & HIGHLY INFORMATIVE PARSECS discussion - as with many other topics - by a bunch of really knowledgeable folks:

 

www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/parsecs-1960.7039/

Credit: “SECRET PROJECTS: UNBUILT PROJECTS, MILITARY AND AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY” website

 

Another superb & detailed work by Robert Fetterly, along with many others. I salute you Sir, thank you for your service.

Rest In Peace:

 

www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/back-to-the-future-artist...

Credit: Peninsula Daily News website

The English Electric Lightning is a British fighter aircraft that served as an interceptor during the 1960s, the 1970s and into the late 1980s. It was capable of a top speed of above Mach 2. The Lightning was designed, developed, and manufactured by English Electric.

 

The specification for the aircraft followed the cancellation of the Air Ministry's 1942 specification E.24/43 supersonic research aircraft which had resulted in the Miles M.52 programme. Teddy Petter, formerly chief designer at Westland Aircraft, who had been taken on by English Electric in 1944 to head an office to develop aircraft rather than just make other manufacturers' designs, was a keen early proponent of Britain's need to develop a supersonic fighter aircraft. In 1947, Petter approached the Ministry of Supply (MoS) with his proposal, and in response Specification ER.103 was issued for a single research aircraft, which was to be capable of flight at Mach 1.5 (1,593 km/h; 990 mph) and 50,000 ft (15,000 m).

 

Petter initiated a design proposal with Frederick Page leading the design and Ray Creasey responsible for the aerodynamics. By July 1948 their proposal incorporated the stacked engine configuration and a high-mounted tailplane. As it was designed for Mach 1.5, the wing leading edge was swept back 40° to keep it clear of the Mach cone. This proposal was submitted in November 1948 and in January 1949 the project was designated P.1 by English Electric. On 29 March 1949 the MoS granted approval to start the detailed design, develop wind tunnel models and build a full-size mockup.

 

The design that had developed during 1948 evolved further during 1949 to further improve performance, taking many design cues from the CAC CA-23. To achieve Mach 2 the wing sweep was increased to 60° with the ailerons moved to the wingtips. In late 1949, low-speed wind tunnel tests showed that a vortex was generated by the wing which caused a large downwash on the tailplane; this issue was solved by lowering the tail below the wing. Following the resignation of Petter from English Electric, Page took over as design team leader for the P.1 and the running of EE design office. In 1949, the Ministry of Supply had issued Specification F23/49, which expanded upon the scope of ER103 to include fighter-level manoeuvring. On 1 April 1950, English Electric received a contract for two flying airframes, as well as one static airframe, designated P.1.

 

The Royal Aircraft Establishment disagreed with Petter's choice of sweep angle (60 degrees) and tailplane position (low) considering it to be dangerous. To assess the effects of wing sweep and tailplane position on the stability and control of Petter's design Short Brothers were issued a contract by the Ministry of Supply to produce the Short SB.5 in mid-1950. This was a low-speed research aircraft that could test sweep angles from 50 to 69 degrees and high or low tailplane positions. Testing with the wings and tail set to the P.1 configuration started in January 1954 and confirmed this combination as the correct one.

 

From 1953 onward, the first three prototype aircraft were hand-built at Samlesbury Aerodrome, where all Lightnings were built. These aircraft were given the aircraft serials WG760, WG763, and WG765 (the structural test airframe). The prototypes were powered by un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire turbojets, as the selected Rolls-Royce Avon engines had fallen behind schedule due to their own development problems. Since there was no space in the fuselage for fuel the thin wings were the fuel tanks and since they also provided space for the stowed main undercarriage the fuel capacity was relatively small, giving the prototypes an extremely limited endurance, and the narrow tyres housed in the thin wings rapidly wore out if there was any crosswind component during take-off or landing. Outwardly, the prototypes looked very much like the production series, but they were distinguished by the rounded-triangular air intake with no centre-body at the nose, short fin, and lack of operational equipment.

 

On 9 June 1952, it was decided that there would be a second phase of prototypes built to develop the aircraft toward achieving Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h; 1,522 mph); these were designated P.1B while the initial three prototypes were retroactively reclassified as P.1A. P.1B was a significant improvement on P.1A. While it was similar in aerodynamics, structure and control systems, it incorporated extensive alterations to the forward fuselage, reheated Rolls-Royce Avon R24R engines, a conical centre body inlet cone, variable nozzle reheat and provision for weapons systems integrated with the ADC and AI.23 radar. Three P.1B prototypes were built, assigned serials XA847, XA853 and XA856.

 

In May 1954, WG760 and its support equipment were moved to RAF Boscombe Down for pre-flight ground taxi trials; on the morning of 4 August 1954, WG760, piloted by Roland Beamont, flew for the first time from Boscombe Down. One week later, WG760 officially achieved supersonic flight for the first time, having exceeded the speed of sound during its third flight. During its first flight, WG760 had unknowingly exceeded Mach 1 (1,225 km/h; 761 mph), but due to position error the Mach meter only showed a maximum of Mach 0.95 (1,164 km/h; 723 mph). The occurrence was noticed during flight data analysis a few days later. While WG760 had proven the P.1 design to be viable, it was limited to Mach 1.51 (1,850 km/h; 1,149 mph) due to directional stability limits. In May 1956, the P.1 received the "Lightning" name, which was said to have been partially selected to reflect the aircraft's supersonic capabilities.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Indian „Samudree Baaj“ (समुद्री बाज, Sea Hawk) was a highly modified, navalized version of the British BAE Systems Hawk land-based training jet aircraft, which had been manufactured under license by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). The first indigenously built Hawk Mk. 132 trainer was delivered in 2008 to the Indian Air Force, and the type has since then been updated with indigenous avionics into the “Hawk-I” Mk. 132 from 2020 onwards. The aircraft’s Rolls Royce Adour Mk 871 engine was also license-built by HAL, and the company had experience from a wide range of aircraft projects in the past.

 

The Samudree Baaj project was initiated in 2006 by the Indian Navy, as part of the long historic plan to provide the Indian Navy with a fully capable aircraft carrier. This plan had been initiated in 1989, when India announced a plan to replace its ageing British-built aircraft carriers, INS Vikrant and INS Viraat (ex-HMS Hermes), with two new 28,000-ton Air Defence Ships (ADS) that would operate the BAe Sea Harrier aircraft. The first vessel was to replace Vikrant, which was set to decommission in early 1997. Construction of the ADS was to start at the Cochin Shipyard (CSL) in 1993 after the Indian Naval Design Organisation had translated this design study into a production model. Following the 1991 economic crisis, the plans for construction of the vessels were put on hold indefinitely.

 

In 1999, then-Defence Minister George Fernandes revived the project and sanctioned the construction of the Project “71 ADS”. By that time, given the ageing Sea Harrier fleet, the letter of intent called for a carrier that would carry more modern jet fighters. In 2001, CSL released a graphic illustration showing a 32,000-ton STOBAR (Short Take-Off But Arrested Recovery) design with a pronounced ski jump. The aircraft carrier project finally received formal government approval in January 2003. By then, design updates called for a 37,500-ton carrier to operate the MiG-29K. India opted for a three-carrier fleet consisting of one carrier battle group stationed on each seaboard, and a third carrier held in reserve, in order to continuously protect both its flanks, to protect economic interests and mercantile traffic, and to provide humanitarian platforms in times of disasters, since a carrier can provide a self-generating supply of fresh water, medical assistance or engineering expertise to populations in need for assistance.

 

In August 2006, then-Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Arun Prakash stated that the designation for the vessel had been changed from Air Defence Ship (ADS) to Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC). The euphemistic ADS had been adopted in planning stages to ward off concerns about a naval build-up. Final revisions to the design increased the displacement of the carrier from 37,500 tons to over 40,000 tons. The length of the ship also increased from 252 metres (827 ft) to 262 metres (860 ft).

It was at this time that, beyond the MiG-29K, primarily a carrier-capable trainer and also a light (and less costly) strike aircraft would be needed. With the running production of the Hawk Mk. 132 for the Indian Air Force and BAE Systems’ connection and experience to the USA and McDonnell/Boeing’s adaptation of the Hawk as the US Navy’s carrier-capable T-45 trainer, HAL was instructed to develop a suitable aircraft family on the Hawk’s basis for the new carriers.

 

HAL’s Samudree Baaj is a fully carrier-capable version of the British Aerospace Hawk Mk. The Hawk had not originally been designed to perform carrier operations, so that numerous modifications were required, such as the extensive strengthening of the airframe to withstand the excessive forces imposed by the stresses involved in catapult launches and high sink-rate landings, both scenarios being routine in aircraft carrier operations.

 

The aerodynamic changes of the aircraft, which were mutually developed by HAL and BAE Systems, included improvements to the low-speed handling characteristics and a reduction in the approach speed. Most notable amongst the changes made to the Hawk's design were extended flaps for better low-speed handling, along with the addition of spoilers on the wings to reduce lift and strakes on the fuselage which improved airflow and stabilizer efficiency.

Other, less obvious modifications included a reinforced airframe, the adoption of a more robust and widened landing gear, complete with a catapult tow bar attachment to the oleo strut of the new two-wheel nose gear design, and an arresting hook. The tail fin was extended by 1 foot (12 in, 30.5 cm) to compensate for the loss of the Hawk’s ventral stabilizing strakes. To make room for the arrester hook, the original ventral air brake was split and re-located to the flanks, similar to the USN’s T-45 trainer.

 

At the time of the Samudree Baaj’s design, the exact catapult arrangement and capacity on board of India’s new carriers was not clear yet – even more so, since the MiG-29K and its powerful engines might have made a catapult obsolete. Therefore, the Samudree Baaj was designed to be operable either with a ski jump ramp (in the style of the Russian Kiev class carriers, of which India had purchased one as INS Vikramaditya) or with only minimal launch support within the projected STOBAR concept, which included a relatively short-stroke steam catapult and a similarly short, undampened arrester gear.

 

By 2009 the basic airframe had been defined and four prototypes were built for two versions: the Mk. 101 trainer, which was basically a navalized version of the land-based Mk. 132 with almost the same mission equipment, and the Mk. 201, a single-seater. Two airframes of each type were built and the first Samudree Baaj flight took place in early 2011. The Indian government ordered 30 trainers and 15 attack aircraft, to be delivered with the first new Indian carrier, INS Vikrant, in late 2017.

 

The Samudree Baaj Mk. 201 was developed from the basic navalized Hawk airframe as a light multirole fighter with a small visual signature and high maneuverability, but high combat efficiency and capable of both strike and point defense missions. It differed from the trainer through a completely new forward fuselage whereby the forward cockpit area, which normally housed the trainee, was replaced by an electronics bay for avionics and onboard systems, including a fire control computer, a LINS 300 ring laser gyroscope inertial navigation system and a lightweight (145 kg) multimode, coherent, pulse-Doppler I band airborne radar. This multimode radar was developed from the Ferranti Blue Fox radar and capable of airborne interception and air-to-surface strike roles over water and land, with look-down/shoot-down and look-up modes. It had ten air-to-surface and ten air-to-ground modes for navigation and weapon aiming purposes.

A ventral fairing behind the radome carried a laser rangefinder and a forward-looking infrared (FLIR). Mid-air refueling was also possible, through a detachable (but fixed) probe. GPS navigation or modern night-flight systems were integrated, too.

 

Like the trainer, the Mk. 201 had a total of seven weapon hardpoints (1 ventral, four underwing and a pair of wing tip launch rails), but the more sophisticated avionics suite allowed a wider range of ordnance to be carried and deployed, which included radar-guided AAMs for BVR strokes and smart weapons and guided missiles – especially the Sea Eagle and AGM-84 “Harpoon” anti-ship missiles in the Indian Navy’s arsenal. For the maritime strike role and as a support for ASW missions, the Samudree Baaj Mk. 201 could even deploy Sting Ray homing torpedoes.

Furthermore, a pair of 30mm (1.18 in) ADEN machine cannon with 150 RPG were housed in a shallow fairing under the cockpit. The self-protection systems include a BAE SkyGuardian 200 RWR and automatic Vinten chaff/flare dispensers located above the engine exhaust.

 

The Samudree Baaj project was highly ambitious, so that it does not wonder that there were many delays and teething troubles. Beyond the complex avionics integration this included the maritime adaptation of the Adour engine, which eventually led to the uprated Adour Mk. 871-1N, which, as a side benefit, also offered about 10% more power.

However, in parallel, INS Vikrant also ran into delays: In July 2012, The Times of India reported that construction of Vikrant has been delayed by three years, and the ship would be ready for commissioning by 2018. Later, in November 2012, Indian English-language news channel NDTV reported that cost of the aircraft carrier had increased, and the delivery has been delayed by at least five years and is expected to be with the Indian Navy only after 2018 as against the scheduled date of delivery of 2014. Work then commenced for the next stage of construction, which included the installation of the integrated propulsion system, the superstructure, the upper decks, the cabling, sensors and weapons. Vikrant was eventually undocked on 10 June 2015 after the completion of structural work. Cabling, piping, heat and ventilation works were to be completed by 2017; sea trials would begin thereafter. In December 2019, it was reported that the engines on board the ship were switched on and in November 2020, only the basin trials of the aircraft carrier were completed.

 

By that time, the first Samudree Baaj aircraft had been delivered to Indian Navy 300 squadron, and even though only based at land at Hansa Air Station, flight training and military operations commenced. In the meantime, the start of Vikrant's trials had initially been scheduled to begin on 12 March 2020, but further construction delays caused that to be moved back to April. With the COVID-19 crisis, the navy explained that trials were unlikely to begin before September/October. During the Navy Day press meeting in December 2019, Navy Chief Admiral Karambir Singh said Vikrant would be fully operational before the end of 2022. The COVID-19 pandemic had already pushed that back to 2023 and further delays appeared possible.

In late 2020, the Indian Navy expected to commission Vikrant by the end of 2021. Until then, the Samudree Baaj fleet will remain land-based at INS Hansa near Goa. This not only is the INAS 300 home base, it is also the location of the Indian Navy's Shore Based Test Facility (SBTF), which is a mock-up of the 283-metre (928 ft) INS Vikramaditya (a modified Kiev-class aircraft carrier) deck built to train and certify navy pilots, primarily the the Mikoyan MiG-29K for operating from the aircraft carrier, but now also for the Samudree Baaj and for the developmental trials of the naval HAL Tejas lightweight fighter.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 11.38 m (37 ft 4 in)

Wingspan: 9.39 m (30 ft 10 in)

Height: 4.30 m (14 ft 1 in)

Wing area: 17.66 m2 (190.1 sq ft)

Empty weight: 9,394 lb (4,261 kg)

Gross weight: 12,750 lb (5,783 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 9,101 kg (20,064 lb)

Fuel capacity: 1,360 kg (3,000 lb) internal

3,210 kg (7,080 lb) with 3 drop tanks

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Turbomeca Adour Mk. 871-1N non-afterburning turbofan, 28,89 kN (6,445 lbf) thrust

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,037 km/h (644 mph, 560 kn) at sea level

Maximum speed: Mach 1.2 (never exceed at altitude)

Cruise speed: 796 km/h (495 mph, 430 kn) at 12,500 m (41,000 ft)

Carrier launch speed: 121 kn (139 mph; 224 km/h)

Approach speed: 125 kn (144 mph; 232 km/h)

Never exceed speed: 575 kn (662 mph, 1,065 km/h) / M1.04 design dive limit

Stall speed: 197 km/h (122 mph, 106 kn) flaps down

Range: 892 km (554 mi, 482 nmi) internal fuel only

Combat range: 617 km (383 mi, 333 nmi) with 2x AGM-84 and 2x 592 l (156 US gal; 130 imp gal)

Ferry range: 1,950 km (1,210 mi, 1,050 nmi) with 3 drop tanks

Service ceiling: 15,250 m (50,030 ft)

G-limits: +8/-3

Rate of climb: 58.466 m/s (11,509.1 ft/min)

Takeoff distance with maximum weapon load: 2,134 m (7,001 ft)

Landing distance at maximum landing weight with brake chute: 854 m (2,802 ft)

Landing distance at maximum landing weight without brake chute: 1,250 m (4,100 ft)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.181 in) Aden cannon with 150 rounds each

7× hardpoints (4× under-wing, 1× under-fuselage and 2 × wingtip)

for a total ordnance of 3.085 kg (6,800 lb) and a wide range of weapons

  

The kit and its assembly:

A subtle kitbashing project, inspired by a CG-rendition of a carrier-based (yet un-navalized) BAe Hawk 200 in Indian Navy service by fellow user SPINNERS in January 2021. I found the idea inspiring but thought that the basic concept could be taken further and into hardware form with a model. And I had a Matchbox Hawk 200 in The Stash™, as well as a McDonnell T-45 trainer from Italeri…

 

The plan sounds simple: take a T-45 and replace the cockpit section with the single-seat cockpit from the Hawk 200. And while the necessary cuts were easy to make, reality rears its ugly head when you try to mate parts from basically the same aircraft but from models by different manufacturers.

 

The challenges started with the fact that the fuselage shapes of both models differ – the Matchbox kit is more “voluminous”, and the different canopy shape called for a partial spine transplant, which turned out to be of very different shape than the T-45’s respective section! Lots of PSR…

In order to improve the pretty basic Matchbox Hawk cockpit I integrated the cockpit tub from the Italeri T-45, including the ejection seat, dashboard and its top cover.

For the totally different T-45 front wheel I had to enlarge the respective well and added a “ceiling” to it, since the strut had to be attached somewhere. The Hawk 200’s ventral tub for the cannons (which only the first prototype carried, later production aircraft did not feature them) were retained – partly because of their “whiffy“ nature, but also because making it disappear would have involved more major surgeries.

Most of the are behind the cockpit comes from the Italeri T-45, I just added a RHAWS fairing to the fin, extending it by 3mm.

 

A major problem became the air intakes, because the two kits differ in their construction. I wanted to use the Italeri parts, because they match the fairings on the fuselage flanks well and are better detailed than the Matchbox parts. But the boundary layer spacers between intakes and fuselage are molded into the Italeri parts, while the Matchbox kit has them molded into the fuselage. This called for major surgery and eventually worked out fine, and more PSR blended the rest of the fuselage donors around the cockpit together. A tedious process, though.

 

The pylons were puzzled together, including a former Matchbox EA-6B wing pylon under the fuselage, cut down and mounted in reverse and upside down! The ordnance comes from the Italeri NATO weapons set (Matra Magic and AGM-84), the ventral drop tank comes IIRC from an Eduard L-39 Albatros. Matra Magics were chosen because India never operated any Sidewinder AAM, just French or Soviet/Russian missiles like the R-60 or R-73 (unlikely on the Hawk, IMHO), and I had preferred a pair of Sea Eagle ASMs (from a Hasegawa Sea Harrier kit), but their span turned out to be too large for the Hawk’s low wings. The alternative, more slender Harpoons are plausible, though, since they are actually part of the Indian Navy’s inventory.

  

Painting and markings:

The Indian Navy theme was already settled, and I wanted to stay close to SPINNERS’ illustration as well as to real world Indian Navy aircraft. SPINNERS’ Hawk carried the typical Sea Harreir scheme in Extra Dark Sea Grey and White, and I found this livery to look a bit too much retro, because I’d place this what-if aircraft in the early 2020s, when the Sea Harriers had already been phased out. A “realistic” livery might have been an overall mid-grey paint scheme (like the land-based Indian Hawk 132s), but I found this to look too boring. As a compromise, I gave the Samudree Baaj a simple two-tone paint scheme, carried by a few late Indian Sea Harriers. It consists of upper surfaces in Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 164) and undersides in Medium Sea Grey (Modelmaster 2058), with a low waterline. The Modelmaster MSG has – for my taste – a rather bluish hue and appears almost like PRU Blue, but I left it that way.

 

The decals were puzzled together from variosu sources. the roundels come from a MiG-21F (Begemot), the unit markings and tactical codes from a Model Alliance Sea Harrier sheet, and the stencils are a mix from the Matchbox Hawk 200 and the Italeri T-45.

 

The kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish from Italeri.

 

The fictional HAL „Samudree Baaj“ looks simple, but combining kits of the basically same aircraft from different manufacturers reveals their differences, and they are not to be underestimated! However, I like the result of a navalized Hawk single-seater, and - also with the relatively simple and dull livery - it looks pretty convincing.

Many thanks to SPINNERS for the creative inspiration - even though my build is not a 100% "copy" of the artwork, but rather a step further into the navalisation idea with the T-45 parts.

 

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X (sometimes referred to as VF-X1) was strictly a conventional/non-transformable jet aircraft, even though it incorporated many structural components and several key technologies that were vital for the transformable VF-1’s successful development that ran in parallel. Therefore, the VF-X was never intended as an air superiority fighter, but rather a flight-capable analogue test bed and proof of concept for the VF-1’s basic layout and major components. In this role, however, the VF-X made vital contributions to systems’ development that were later incorporated into the VF-1’s serial production and sped the program up considerably.

 

VF-X production started in early 2006, with four airframes built. The flight tests began in February 2007. The first prototype (“01”) was piloted and evaluated by ace pilot Roy Fokker, in order to explore the aircraft’s flight envelope, general handling and for external stores carriage tests. The three other VF-Xs successively joined the test program, each with a different focus. “02” was primarily tasked with the flight control and pilot interface program, “03” was allocated to the engine, vectoring thrust and steering systems development, and “04” was primarily involved in structural and fatigue tests.

 

In November 2007, the successful VF-X tests and the flights of the VF-X-1 (the first fully transformable VF-1 prototype, which had been under construction in parallel to the VF-X program) led to formal adoption of the “Valkyrie” variable fighter by the United Nations Government.

The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict.

 

Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha, even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.

 

The basic VF-1 was deployed in four sub-variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements. These included the GBP-1S "Armored Valkyrie” external armor and infantry weapons pack, so-called FAST Packs for "Super Valkyries” for orbital use, and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Strike Valkyrie” with additional firepower.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would eventually be replaced as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III in 2020, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.

 

The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68), and several upgrade programs were introduced.

The fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction.

  

General characteristics:

Accommodation: One pilot in a Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2)

4 x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

 

Performance:

Top speed: Mach 2.71 at 10,000 m; Mach 3.87 at 30,000+ m

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24

 

Armament:

None installed, but the VF-X had 4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, plus a ventral hardpoint for a Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min or other stores like test instruments

  

The model and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Prototypes” group build at whatifmodelers.com in July 2020. Being a VF-1 fan (and have built maybe twenty o these simple Arii kits), adding a VF-X was, more or less, a must – even more so because I had a suitable Valkyrie Fighter kit at hand for the conversion. As a side note, I have actually built something quite similar from a VF-1D many years ago: a fictional, non-transformable advanced trainer, without knowing about the VF-X at all.

 

Thanks to the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, the differences between the transformable VF-1 and its early testbed were easy to identify:

- Fixed legs with faired ducts from the intakes on (thighs)

- Ankle recesses disappeared

- Less and slightly different panel lines on the back and on the nose

- ventral head unit deleted and a respective fairing installed instead

- Levelled underside (shoulder fairings of the folded arms were cut down)

- Leg attachment points on the nose deleted

- No small, circular vernier thrusters all around the hull

- Some new/different venting grills (created mostly with 0.5mm black decal stripes)

 

Beyond the changes, the VF-1A was basically built OOB. Thankfully, the VF-X already features the later VF-1’s vectored thrust nozzles/feet, so that no changes had to be made in this respect. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit for the beauty pics, and after the flight scenes had been shot, the canopy remained open on a swing arm for static display. For the same reason, the model was built with the landing gear extended.

 

As a test aircraft, the underwing pylons and their AMM-1 ordnance were left away and the attachment points hidden with putty. I also omitted the ventral gun pod and left the aircraft clean. However, for the flight scene pictures, I implanted an adapter for a display holder made from wire.

 

In order to emphasize the test vehicle character of the VF-X, I gave the model a scratched spin recovery parachute installation between the fins, using a real world F-22 testbed as benchmark. It consists of styrene profiles, quite a delicate construction. For the same reason I gave the VF-X a long sensor boom on the nose, which changes the Valkyrie’s look, too. Finally, some small blade antennae were added to the nose and to the spine behind the cockpit.

  

Painting and markings:

To be honest, I have no idea if there was only a single VF-X prototype in the Macross universe, or more. Just one appears in the TV series in episode #33, and lack of suitable information and my personal lack of Japanese language proficiency prevents any deeper research. However, this would not keep me from inventing a personal interpretation of the canonical VF-X, especially because I do not really like the original livery from the TV series: an overall light grey with some simple black trim and “TEST” written on the (fixed) legs. Yamato did an 1:60 scale toy of the VF-X, but it was/is just a VF-1 with a ventral fairing; they added some shading to the basic grey – but this does not make the aircraft more attractive, IMHO.

 

When I looked at the original conceptual drawing of the VF-X in the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, however, I was immediately reminded of the F-15 prototypes from the Seventies (and this program used a total of twelve machines!). These featured originally a light grey (FS 36375?) overall base, to which bright dayglo orange markings on wings, fins and fuselage were soon added – in a very similar pattern to the VF-X. I think the VF-X livery was actually inspired by this, the time frame matches well with the production of the Macross TV series, too, and that’s what I adapted for my model.

In order to come close to the F-15 prototype livery, I gave “my” VF-X an overall basic coat of RAL 7047 “Telegrau 4”, one of German Telekom’s corporate colors and a very pale grey that can easily be mistaken for white when you do not have a contrast reference.

 

The cockpit received a medium grey finish, the ejection seat became black with brown cushions; the pilot figure is a 1:100 seated passenger from an architecture supplies, painted like an early VF-1 pilot in a white/blue suit. The jet nozzles/feet were painted with Revell 91 (Iron) and later treated with grinded graphite for a more metallic finish. The landing gear became classic white (I used Revell 301, which is a very pure tone, as contrast to the RAL 7047 on the hull), the air intake ducts and the internal sections of the VG wings were painted with dark grey (Revell 77).

 

For some diversity I took inspiration from the Yamato VF-X toy and added slightly darker (Humbrol 166, RAF Light Aircraft Grey) areas to the hull and the legs. Next, the panel lines were emphasized through a thinned black ink wash, but I did no panel post shading so that the VF-X would not look too dirty or worn.

 

Onto this basis I applied the orange dayglo markings. On the wings and fins, these were painted – they were applied with spray paint from a rattle can, involving lots of masking. The leading edges on wings and fins were created with grey decal sheet material, too. At this stage, some surface details and more fake panel lines were added with a soft pencil.

The orange cheatline under the cockpit is a personal addition; I found that some more orange had to be added to the nose for visual balance, and I eventually went for the simple, trimmed stripe (TL Modellbau material) instead of trying to apply decal sheet material around the jagged air intakes (F-15 prototype style). The black “TEST”, “VFX” and “U.N. Spacy” markings were designed at the computer and printed on clear inkjet decal paper. Even though the “real” VF-X does not feature the UNS “kite” insignia, I decided to add them to the model. These come from the OOB sheet, which also provided most (slightly yellowed) stencils.

Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

A rather different VF-1 project (and it is – to my astonishment – #28 in my 1:100 VF-1 Fighter mode collection!!!), with more changes to the basic model kit than one might expect at first sight. VF-X and VF-1 differ considerably from each other, despite identical outlines! However, I like the outcome, and I think that going a different route from the canonical grey/black livery paid out, the bright orange markings really make this VF-X stand out, and it looks IMHO more like a testbed than the “real” aircraft from the TV series.

San Giovanni Rotondo Gargano Puglia Italia© 2015 All rights reserved

Nikon coolpix p 7100

Fotosketcher Oil painting effect and lively

 

San Giovanni Rotondo è un comune italiano di 27.304 abitanti della provincia di Foggia in Puglia, famoso al mondo per ospitare le spoglie di San Pio da Pietrelcina, frate cappuccino vissuto a lungo nella cittadina.La chiesa di Padre Pio, anche conosciuta come Santuario di San Pio, è un luogo di culto cattolico di San Giovanni Rotondo, in provincia di Foggia, nel territorio dell'arcidiocesi di Manfredonia-Vieste-San Giovanni Rotondo.Commissionata dall'Ordine dei frati minori cappuccini della provincia di Foggia, venne progettata dall'architetto italiano Renzo Piano .Con i suoi 6000 m² (in grado di contenere 7000 persone considerando un ampio margine di sicurezza) è una delle chiese più grandi in Italia per dimensioni. L'opera è stata quasi completamente finanziata dalle offerte dei pellegrini. La chiesa sorge sul monte di San Giovanni Rotondo ed è adiacente al preesistente santuario e convento in cui il frate visse e in cui ne sono state conservate le spoglie fino al trasferimento nella nuova chiesa a lui dedicata. La struttura ha una forma che ricorda quello del nautilus, e la sua pianta ricorda la spirale archimedea, il cui fulcro è posto al centro dell'aula liturgica, nel luogo dove è posto l'altare.Assieme alla struttura della chiesa vera e propria è stato costruito anche un grande sagrato (a cui la chiesa è collegata attraverso un'enorme vetrata) e un viale di accesso. Nello spazio interno ci sono i 22 archi che rappresentano la novità assoluta di quest'opera: essi, infatti, sono costituiti interamente in pietra di Apricena, varietà "bronzetto", al cui interno sono stati inseriti dei cavi che hanno determinato la precompressione che evita il cedimento della struttura. Il collegamento tra i diversi blocchi di pietra è stato effettuato tramite una speciale malta con all'interno fibre di acciaio che, in caso di evento sismico, assorbe l'eccesso di energia. Per decorare la chiesa i frati hanno commissionato molte opere a diversi artisti famosi nel loro campo: L’Ambone di Luigi Vangi,l’altare di Arnaldo Pomodoro.Il portone d’ingresso in bronzo Mimmo Paladino.

 

San Giovanni Rotondo is the name of a city and comune in the province of Foggia, Puglia region, southern Italy. In 2006 it had a population of 26,442.San Giovanni Rotondo was the home of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina from 28 July 1916 until his death on 23 September 1968. The Church of Padre Pio, also known as the sanctuary of St. Pio, is a Catholic place of worship of San Giovanni Rotondo, near Foggia, in the territory of the Archdiocese of Manfredonia-Vieste-San Giovanni Rotondo. Commissioned by the order of Friars Minor Capuchin province of Foggia, was designed by Italian architect Renzo Piano. With its 6000 m² (capable of holding 7000 people considering a large safety margin) is one of the largest churches in Italy for dimensions. The work has been almost completely funded by the Pilgrim's offerings. The Church is located on the mountain of San Giovanni Rotondo and is adjacent to the existing sanctuary and convent where the brother lived and where her remains have been preserved up to the transfer in the new church dedicated to him. The structure has a shape reminiscent of the nautilus, and his plant recalls the Archimedean spiral, whose hub is at the Centre of liturgical classroom, where is placed the altar.Together with the structure of the Church itself was built also a large churchyard (to which the Church is connected through a huge picture window) and an entranceway. In the Interior there are 22 arches that represent the absolute novelty of this work: they are made entirely in stone of Apricena, variety "bronzetto", which were included cables caused the precompression that prevents failure of the structure. The link between the various stone blocks was made through a special mortar with steel fibers that, when seismic event, it absorbs the excess energy. To decorate the Church the friars have commissioned many works to several famous artists in their field: the pulpit of Louis Vadlamani, the altar of Arnaldo Pomodoro.Il entrance door in bronze Mimmo Paladino.

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X (sometimes referred to as VF-X1) was strictly a conventional/non-transformable jet aircraft, even though it incorporated many structural components and several key technologies that were vital for the transformable VF-1’s successful development that ran in parallel. Therefore, the VF-X was never intended as an air superiority fighter, but rather a flight-capable analogue test bed and proof of concept for the VF-1’s basic layout and major components. In this role, however, the VF-X made vital contributions to systems’ development that were later incorporated into the VF-1’s serial production and sped the program up considerably.

 

VF-X production started in early 2006, with four airframes built. The flight tests began in February 2007. The first prototype (“01”) was piloted and evaluated by ace pilot Roy Fokker, in order to explore the aircraft’s flight envelope, general handling and for external stores carriage tests. The three other VF-Xs successively joined the test program, each with a different focus. “02” was primarily tasked with the flight control and pilot interface program, “03” was allocated to the engine, vectoring thrust and steering systems development, and “04” was primarily involved in structural and fatigue tests.

 

In November 2007, the successful VF-X tests and the flights of the VF-X-1 (the first fully transformable VF-1 prototype, which had been under construction in parallel to the VF-X program) led to formal adoption of the “Valkyrie” variable fighter by the United Nations Government.

The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict.

 

Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha, even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.

 

The basic VF-1 was deployed in four sub-variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements. These included the GBP-1S "Armored Valkyrie” external armor and infantry weapons pack, so-called FAST Packs for "Super Valkyries” for orbital use, and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Strike Valkyrie” with additional firepower.

 

After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would eventually be replaced as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III in 2020, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.

 

The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68), and several upgrade programs were introduced.

The fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction.

  

General characteristics:

Accommodation: One pilot in a Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2)

4 x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);

 

Performance:

Top speed: Mach 2.71 at 10,000 m; Mach 3.87 at 30,000+ m

Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24

 

Armament:

None installed, but the VF-X had 4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, plus a ventral hardpoint for a Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min or other stores like test instruments

  

The model and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Prototypes” group build at whatifmodelers.com in July 2020. Being a VF-1 fan (and have built maybe twenty o these simple Arii kits), adding a VF-X was, more or less, a must – even more so because I had a suitable Valkyrie Fighter kit at hand for the conversion. As a side note, I have actually built something quite similar from a VF-1D many years ago: a fictional, non-transformable advanced trainer, without knowing about the VF-X at all.

 

Thanks to the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, the differences between the transformable VF-1 and its early testbed were easy to identify:

- Fixed legs with faired ducts from the intakes on (thighs)

- Ankle recesses disappeared

- Less and slightly different panel lines on the back and on the nose

- ventral head unit deleted and a respective fairing installed instead

- Levelled underside (shoulder fairings of the folded arms were cut down)

- Leg attachment points on the nose deleted

- No small, circular vernier thrusters all around the hull

- Some new/different venting grills (created mostly with 0.5mm black decal stripes)

 

Beyond the changes, the VF-1A was basically built OOB. Thankfully, the VF-X already features the later VF-1’s vectored thrust nozzles/feet, so that no changes had to be made in this respect. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit for the beauty pics, and after the flight scenes had been shot, the canopy remained open on a swing arm for static display. For the same reason, the model was built with the landing gear extended.

 

As a test aircraft, the underwing pylons and their AMM-1 ordnance were left away and the attachment points hidden with putty. I also omitted the ventral gun pod and left the aircraft clean. However, for the flight scene pictures, I implanted an adapter for a display holder made from wire.

 

In order to emphasize the test vehicle character of the VF-X, I gave the model a scratched spin recovery parachute installation between the fins, using a real world F-22 testbed as benchmark. It consists of styrene profiles, quite a delicate construction. For the same reason I gave the VF-X a long sensor boom on the nose, which changes the Valkyrie’s look, too. Finally, some small blade antennae were added to the nose and to the spine behind the cockpit.

  

Painting and markings:

To be honest, I have no idea if there was only a single VF-X prototype in the Macross universe, or more. Just one appears in the TV series in episode #33, and lack of suitable information and my personal lack of Japanese language proficiency prevents any deeper research. However, this would not keep me from inventing a personal interpretation of the canonical VF-X, especially because I do not really like the original livery from the TV series: an overall light grey with some simple black trim and “TEST” written on the (fixed) legs. Yamato did an 1:60 scale toy of the VF-X, but it was/is just a VF-1 with a ventral fairing; they added some shading to the basic grey – but this does not make the aircraft more attractive, IMHO.

 

When I looked at the original conceptual drawing of the VF-X in the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, however, I was immediately reminded of the F-15 prototypes from the Seventies (and this program used a total of twelve machines!). These featured originally a light grey (FS 36375?) overall base, to which bright dayglo orange markings on wings, fins and fuselage were soon added – in a very similar pattern to the VF-X. I think the VF-X livery was actually inspired by this, the time frame matches well with the production of the Macross TV series, too, and that’s what I adapted for my model.

In order to come close to the F-15 prototype livery, I gave “my” VF-X an overall basic coat of RAL 7047 “Telegrau 4”, one of German Telekom’s corporate colors and a very pale grey that can easily be mistaken for white when you do not have a contrast reference.

 

The cockpit received a medium grey finish, the ejection seat became black with brown cushions; the pilot figure is a 1:100 seated passenger from an architecture supplies, painted like an early VF-1 pilot in a white/blue suit. The jet nozzles/feet were painted with Revell 91 (Iron) and later treated with grinded graphite for a more metallic finish. The landing gear became classic white (I used Revell 301, which is a very pure tone, as contrast to the RAL 7047 on the hull), the air intake ducts and the internal sections of the VG wings were painted with dark grey (Revell 77).

 

For some diversity I took inspiration from the Yamato VF-X toy and added slightly darker (Humbrol 166, RAF Light Aircraft Grey) areas to the hull and the legs. Next, the panel lines were emphasized through a thinned black ink wash, but I did no panel post shading so that the VF-X would not look too dirty or worn.

 

Onto this basis I applied the orange dayglo markings. On the wings and fins, these were painted – they were applied with spray paint from a rattle can, involving lots of masking. The leading edges on wings and fins were created with grey decal sheet material, too. At this stage, some surface details and more fake panel lines were added with a soft pencil.

The orange cheatline under the cockpit is a personal addition; I found that some more orange had to be added to the nose for visual balance, and I eventually went for the simple, trimmed stripe (TL Modellbau material) instead of trying to apply decal sheet material around the jagged air intakes (F-15 prototype style). The black “TEST”, “VFX” and “U.N. Spacy” markings were designed at the computer and printed on clear inkjet decal paper. Even though the “real” VF-X does not feature the UNS “kite” insignia, I decided to add them to the model. These come from the OOB sheet, which also provided most (slightly yellowed) stencils.

Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

A rather different VF-1 project (and it is – to my astonishment – #28 in my 1:100 VF-1 Fighter mode collection!!!), with more changes to the basic model kit than one might expect at first sight. VF-X and VF-1 differ considerably from each other, despite identical outlines! However, I like the outcome, and I think that going a different route from the canonical grey/black livery paid out, the bright orange markings really make this VF-X stand out, and it looks IMHO more like a testbed than the “real” aircraft from the TV series.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Douglas A-4 Skyhawk is a single-seat subsonic carrier-capable light attack aircraft developed for the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps in the early 1950s. The delta-winged, single turbojet-engine Skyhawk was designed and produced by Douglas Aircraft Company, and later by McDonnell Douglas. The Skyhawk was a relatively light aircraft, with a maximum takeoff weight of 24,500 pounds (11,100 kg) and had a top speed of 670 miles per hour (1,080 km/h). The aircraft's five hardpoints supported a variety of missiles, bombs, and other munitions, including nuclear bombs, with a bomb load equivalent to that of a World War II–era Boeing B-17 bomber.

 

Since its introduction, the Skyhawk had been adopted by countries beyond the United States and saw a very long career, with many baseline variants and local adaptations. Israel was, starting in 1966, the largest export customer for Skyhawks, and a total of 217 A-4s were eventually procured, plus another 46 that were transferred from U.S. units in Operation Nickel Grass to compensate for large losses during the Yom Kippur War.

The Skyhawk was the first U.S. warplane to be offered to the Israeli Air Force, marking the point where the U.S. took over from France as Israel's chief military supplier. A special version of the A-4 was developed for the IAF, the A-4H. This was an A-4E with improved avionics and an uprated J52-P-8A engine with more thrust from the A-4F that had replaced the Wright J65 in earlier Skyhawk variants. Armament consisted of twin DEFA 30 mm cannon in place of the rather unreliable Colt Mk.12 20 mm cannons. Later modifications included the avionics hump and an extended tailpipe, implemented in Israel by IAI to provide greater protection against heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles.

 

Deliveries began after the Six-Day War, and A-4s soon formed the backbone of the IAF's ground-attack force. In Heyl Ha'avir (Israels Air Force/IAF) service, the A-4 Skyhawk was named as the Ayit (Hebrew: עיט, for Eagle). A total of 90 A-4Hs were delivered and became the IAF’s primary attack plane in the War of Attrition between 1968 and 1970. They cost only a quarter of a Phantom II and carried half of its payload, making them highly efficient attack aircraft, even though losses were high and a number of A-4Es were imported to fill the gaps.

In early 1973, the improved A-4N Skyhawk for Israel entered service, based on the A-4M models used by the U.S. Marine Corps, and it gradually replaced the simpler and less capable A-4Hs, which were still operated in 2nd line duties. Many of the A-4Hs and A-4Es were subsequently stored in reserve in flying condition, for modernization or for sale, and two countries made purchases from this overstock: Indonesia and Uruguay.

 

Due to the declining relationship between Indonesia and the Soviet Union, there was a lack of spare parts for military hardware supplied by the Communist Bloc. Soon, most of them were scrapped. The Indonesian Air Force (TNI-AU) acquired ex-Israeli A-4Es to replace its Il-28 Beagles and Tu-16 Badgers in a covert operation with Israel, since both countries did not maintain diplomatic relationships. A total of thirty-two A-4s served the Indonesian Air Force from 1982 until 2003.

 

Uruguay was the other IDF customer, even though a smaller one. The Uruguayan Air Force was originally created as part of the National Army of Uruguay but was established as a separate branch on December 4, 1953, becoming the youngest, and also the smallest branch of the Armed Forces of Uruguay.

 

Since the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s, the Air Force was involved in the fight against the guerrilla activity that was present in the country, focusing against the MLN-T (Movimiento de Liberación Nacional – Tupamaros or Tupamaros – National Liberation Movement), that later triggered a participation in the country's politics.

On February 8, 1973, President Juan María Bordaberry tried to assert his authority over the Armed Forces by returning them to their normal duties and appointing a retired Army general, Antonio Francese, as the new Minister of National Defense. Initially, the Navy of Uruguay supported the appointment, but the National Army and Uruguayan Air Force commanders rejected it outright. On February 9 and 10, the Army and Air Force issued public proclamations and demanded his dismissal and changes in the country's political and economic system. Bordaberry then gave up to the pressure, and on February 12, at the Cap. Juan Manuel Boiso Lanza Air Base, Headquarters of the General Command of the Air Force, the National Security Council (Consejo de Seguridad Nacional) was created. The Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force was one of its permanent members, and the Armed Forces of Uruguay from now on were effectively in control of the country, with Bordaberry just participating in a self-coup.

 

During this period of time, the Air Force took control of the country's airdromes, some aircraft that were seized from the subversion, appointed some of its general officers to led the flag carrier PLUNA, reinforced the combat fleet with Cessna A-37B Dragonfly and FMA IA-58A Pucará attack aircraft in 1976 and 1981, modernized the transport aircraft with the purchase of five Embraer C-95 Bandeirante in 1975 and five CASA C-212 Aviocar and one Gates Learjet 35A in 1981, introduced to service two brand new Bell 212 helicopters, and achieved another milestone, with the first landing of a Uruguayan aircraft in Antarctica, on January 28, 1984, with a Fairchild-Hiller FH-227D.

 

Since the end of the military government, the Air Force returned to its normal tasks, and always acting under the command of the President and in agreement with the Minister of National Defense, without having entered the country's politics again, whose participation, in addition, has been forbidden in almost all activities for the Armed Forces. Towards the late Eighties, the Uruguayan Air Force underwent a fundamental modernization program: Between 1989 and 1999 a total number of 48 aircraft were acquired, including twelve Skyhawks (ten single seaters and two trainers), followed by three Lockheed C-130B Hercules in 1992, to carry out long-range strategic missions, six Pilatus PC-7U Turbo Trainers, also acquired in 1992 for advanced training (replacing the aging fleet of Beechcraft T-34 Mentors in Santa Bernardina, Durazno, that had been in service with the Air Force since 1977), two Beechcraft Baron 58 and ten Cessna U-206H Stationair in 1998 (with Uruguay becoming the first operator of this variant, used for transport, training and surveillance). Two Eurocopter AS365N2 Dauphin for search and rescue and transport followed, also in 1998, and 13 Aermacchi SF-260 in 1999, to fully replace the aging fleet of T-34 training aircraft and become the new basic trainer of the Uruguayan Air Force within the Military School of Aeronautics (Escuela Militar de Aeronáutica) in Pando, Canelones. Furthermore, on April 27, 1994, through Decree No. 177/994 of the Executive Power, a new Air Force Organization was approved, and the Tactical Regiments and Aviation Groups disappeared to become Air Squadrons, leading to the current structure of the Uruguayan Air Force.

 

The Skyhawks were procured as more capable complement and partial replacement for the FAU’s Cessna A-37B Dragonfly and FMA IA-58A Pucará attack aircraft fleet. Being fast jets, however, they would also be tasked with limited airspace defense duties and supposed to escort and provide aerial cover for the other attack types in the FAU’s inventory. The Skyhawks were all former IDF A-4H/TA-4Hs. They retained their characteristic tail pipe extensions against IR-guided missiles (primarily MANPADS) as well as the retrofitted avionics hump, but there were many less visible changes, too.

 

After several years in storage, a full refurbishment had taken place at Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI). The single seaters’ original Stewart-Warner AN/APG-53A navigation and fire control radar was retained, but some critical avionics were removed before export, e. g. the ability to carry and deploy AGM-45 Shrike anti-radar-missiles or the rather unreliable AGM-12 Bullpup, as well as the Skyhawk’s LABS (toss-bombing capability) that made it a potential nuclear bomber. On the other side avionics and wirings to carry AIM-9B Sidewinder AAMs on the outer pair of underwing pylons were added, so that the FAU Skyhawks could engage into aerial combat with more than just their onboard guns.

The A-4Hs’ 30 mm DEFA cannons were removed before delivery, too, even though their characteristic gondola fairings were retained. In Uruguay they were replaced with 20 mm Hispano-Suiza HS.804 autocannons, to create communality with the FAU’s Pucará COIN/attack aircraft and simplify logistics. MER and TER units (Multiple/Triple Ejector Racks), leased from Argentina, boosted the Skyhawks’ ordnance delivery capabilities. A Marconi ARL18223 360° radar warning receiver and a Litton LTN-211 GPS navigation system were introduced, too. Despite these many modifications the FAU’s A-4Hs retained their designation and, unofficially, the former Israeli “Eagles” were aptly nicknamed “Águila” by their new crews and later by the public, too.

 

Upon introduction into service the machines received a disruptive NATO-style grey/green camouflage with off-white undersides, which they should retain for the rest of their lives – except for a single machine (648), which was painted in an experimental all-grey scheme. However, like the FAU Pucarás, which received grim looking but distinctive nose art during their career, the Skyhawks soon received similar decorations, representing the local ‘Jabalí’ (wild boars).

 

During the Nineties, the Uruguayan Skyhawks were frequently deployed together with Pucarás along the Brazilian border: Brazilian nationals were detected removing cattle from Uruguayan territory! Dissuasive missions were flown by the Pucarás departing from Rivera to Chuy in eastern Uruguay, covering a span of more than 200 nm (368 km) along the Uruguay/Brazil border, relaying the location of the offending persons to Uruguay’s Army armored units on the ground to take dissuading action. The Skyhawks flew high altitude escorts and prevented intrusion of the Uruguayan airspace from Brazil, and they were frequently called in to identify and repel intruders with low-level flypasts.

 

The Skyhawks furthermore frequently showed up around the Uruguayan city Masoller as a visible show of force in a longstanding border and territory dispute with Brazil, although this had not harmed close diplomatic and economic relations between the two countries. The disputed area is called Rincón de Artigas (Portuguese: Rincão de Artigas), and the dispute arose from the fact that the treaty that delimited the Brazil-Uruguay border in 1861 determined that the border in that area would be a creek called Arroyo de la Invernada (Portuguese: Arroio da Invernada), but the two countries disagree on which actual stream is the so-named one. Another disputed territory is a Brazilian island at the confluence of the Quaraí River and the Uruguay River. None of these involvements led to armed conflict, though.

 

The Uruguayan Skyhawk fired in anger only over their homeland during drugbusting raids and for interception of low performance, drug trafficking aircraft which were increasingly operating in the region. However, the slower IA 58 Pucará turned out to be the better-suited platform for this task, even though the Skyhawks more than once scared suspicious aircraft away or forced them to land, sometimes with the use of gunfire. At least one such drug transport aircraft was reputedly shot down over Uruguayan territory as its pilot did not reply or react and tried to escape over the border into safe airspace.

 

These duties lasted well into the Nineties, but Uruguay’s small Skyhawk fleet was relatively expensive to operate so that maintenance and their operations, too, were dramatically cut back after 2000. The airframes’ age also showed with dramatic effect: two A-4Hs were lost independently in 2001 and 2002 due to structural fatigue. Active duties were more and more cut back and relegated back to the A-37s and IA 58s. In October 2008, it was decided that the Uruguayan A-4 Skyhawk fleet would be withdrawn and replaced by more modern aircraft, able to perform equally well in the training role and, if required, close support and interdiction missions on the battlefield. The last flight of an FAU A-4 took place in September 2009.

 

This replacement program did not yield any fruits, though. In May 2013 eighteen refurbished Sukhoi Su-30 MKI multirole air superiority fighters were offered by the Russian Federation and Sukhoi in remarkably favorable condition that included credit facilities and an agreement branch for maintenance. These conditions were also offered for the Yak-130 Mitten. By December 2013 Uruguayan personnel had test flown this plane in Russia. In the meantime, a number of A-37B Dragonfly were purchased from the Ecuadorian Air Force in January 2014 to fill the FAU’s operational gaps. Also, the Uruguayan and Swiss governments discussed a possible agreement for the purchase of ten Swiss Air Force Northrop F-5Es plus engines, spare parts and training, but no actual progress was made. The Uruguayan Air Force also used to show interest on the IA-58D Pucará Delta modernization program offered by Fábrica Argentina de Aviones, but more recently, among some of the possible aircraft that the Air Force was considering, there were the Hongdu JL-10 or the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master. But despite of how necessary a new attack aircraft is for the FAU, no procurements have been achieved yet.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 40 ft 1.5 in (12.230 m)

Wingspan: 27 ft 6 in (8.38 m)

Height: 15 ft 2 in (4.62 m)

Wing area: 260 sq ft (24 m²)

Airfoil: root: NACA 0008-1.1-25; tip: NACA 0005-.825-50

Empty weight: 9,853 lb (4,469 kg)

Gross weight: 16,216 lb (7,355 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 24,500 lb (11,113 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Pratt & Whitney J52-P-8A turbojet engine, 9,300 lbf (41 kN) thrust

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 585 kn (673 mph, 1,083 km/h) at sea level

Range: 1,008 nmi (1,160 mi, 1,867 km)

Ferry range: 2,194 nmi (2,525 mi, 4,063 km)

g limits: +8/-3

Rate of climb: 5,750 ft/min (29.2 m/s)

Wing loading: 62.4 lb/sq ft (305 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.526

 

Armament:

2× 20 mm (0.79 in) Hispano-Suiza HS.804 autocannon with 100 RPG

5× hardpoints with a total capacity of 8,500 lb (3,900 kg)

  

The kit and its assembly:

The third build in my recent “Uruguayan What-if Trip”, and a rather spontaneous idea. When I searched for decals for my Uruguayan Sherman tank, I came across a decal sheet from an Airfix IA 58 Pucará (2008 re-boxing), which included, beyond Argentinian markings, a Uruguayan machine, too. This made me wonder about a jet-powered successor, and the omnipresent Skyhawk appeared like a natural choice for a light attack aircraft – even though I also considered an IAI Kfir but found its Mach 2 capability a bit overdone.

Checking history I found a suitable time frame during the Nineties for a potential introduction of the A-4 into Uruguayan service, and this was also the time when Indonesia indirectly bought 2nd hand A-4E/Hs from Israel. This was a good match and defined both the background story as well as the model and its details.

 

The model kit is an Italeri A-4E/F (Revell re-boxing), built mostly OOB with a short/early fin tip (the kit comes with an optional part for it, but it is too short and I used the alternative A-4M fin tip from the kit and re-shaped its leading edge) and the bent refueling probe because of the radar in the nose (the original straight boom interfered with it). I just implanted an extended resin tailpipe (from Aires, see below), used the OOB optional brake parachute fairing and scratched fairings for the A-4H’s former DEFA guns (which were placed, due to their size, in a lower position than the original 20 mm guns and had an odd shape) from styrene rods.

 

I also modified the ordnance: the OOB ventral drop tank was taken over but the kit’s original LAU-19 pods molded onto the inner wing pylons were cut off and moved to the outer stations. The inner pylons then received MERs with five Mk. 82 500 lb iron bombs each (left over from a Hasegawa Skyhawk kit) – typically for the Skyhawk, the inner front stations on the MERs (and on TERs, too) were left empty, because anything bigger than a 250 lb Mk. 81 bomb interfered with the landing gear covers.

 

Building posed no real problems; some PSR was necessary on many seams, though, but that’s standard for the Italeri Skyhawk kit. Just the extended tailpipe caused unexpected trouble: the very nice and detailed Aires resin insert turned out to be a whole 2mm(!) wider than the Skyhawk’s tail section, even though its height and shape was fine. I solved this pragmatically and, after several trials, glued the extended pipe between the fuselage halves, closed them with some force and filled the resulting wedge-shaped ventral gap that extended forward almost up to the wings’ trailing edge with putty. Under the paint this stunt is not obvious, and I suspect that the Italeri Skyhawk’s tail is simply too narrow?

 

Different/additional blade antennae were added under the front fuselage and behind the canopy as well as a tiny pitot in front of the windscreen (piece of thin wire) and fairings for the radar warning receivers were integrated into the fin’s leading edge and above the extended tail pipe, scratched from styrene sheet material. And, finally, a thin rod (made from heated styrene) was added for the Skyhawk’s steerable front wheel mechanism.

 

A good thing about the Italeri Skyhawk is that its clear part encompasses the whole canopy, including its frame. It comes as a single piece, though, but can be easily cut in two parts to allow an open cockpit display. The alternative Hasegawa A-4E/F has the flaw that the clear part is molded without the canopy frame, which has a rather complex shape, so that modding it into open position is a very complicated task.

  

Painting and markings:

Basically very simple: I relied upon FAU Pucarás as benchmark, which carry a rather unremarkable NATO-style livery in dark grey and dark green over very light grey, almost white undersides. This does not sound interesting, but it’s not a color combo typically seen on a Skyhawk, so that this already offers a subtle whiffy touch – and it suits the Skyhawk IMHO well.

 

To make the simple scheme more interesting, though, I decided to apply the camouflage in a more disruptive, higher resolution pattern, using the Kuwaiti A-4KU pattern as benchmark, just with replaced colors. On real-life pictures, the Uruguayan Pucarás as well as some early A-37s show a good contrast between the green and the grey, so that I chose Tamiya XF-62 (U.S. WWII Olive Drab) and Humbrol 156 (RAF Dark Camouflage Grey) as basic tones; the undersides were painted in Humbrol 147 (FS 36495), leaving a brightness margin for post-shading with an even lighter tone.

 

The landing gear as well as the air intakes’ interior were painted in white, the landing gear covers’ edges received a thin red edge. The cockpit interior became standard Dark Gull Grey.

For good contrast with the light undersides, the rocket launchers became light grey (Humbrol 127) drab. The MERs became classic white and the ten 250 lb bombs were painted in olive drab.

 

As usual, the kit received an overall light black ink washing and some post-panel shading, which also acts as a weathering measure. Esp. the Pucarás’ grey appears very bleached on many photos.

 

Roundels, fin flash and FAU taglines came from the aforementioned Airfix Pucará sheet, even though they turned out to be rather thick and not printed sharply. Most stencils were taken from an Airfix A-4Q Skyhawk, one of the new mold kits, which also came with Argentinian markings and stencils in Spanish. The respective sheet also provided a decal for the black anti-glare panel, even though it had to be cut in two halves to fit in front of the wider A-4E windshield, and the resulting gap was painted out with black. The tactical codes once belonged to a Kawasaki T-4 (Hasegawa). The soot-hiding squares above the gun muzzles are generic black decals. The only decal that was taken over from the Skyhawk’s OOB decal sheet were the rings around the arrester hook.

 

Overall, the FAU Skyhawk still looked rather dry. To add some excitement, I gave the aircraft a wild boar “face”, similar to the FAU Pucarás. The decoration originally belongs to an USAF A-10 and came from a HiDecal sheet. Unfortunately, this boar face was carried by a rather special A-10 with an experimental desert paint scheme consisting of Brown (FS 20140), Tan Special (FS 20400) and Sand (FS 20266) that was applied before deployment to Saudi Arabia in November 1990. This scheme did not catch on, though, and most A-10s retained their murky Europe One/Lizard scheme. Therefore, the artwork consists primarily of black and sand – white would have been better, stylistically. But I took what I could get and, as a kind of compensation, the sand color does not make the boar snout stand out too much. To my surprise, the four decals that create the wraparound hog face fitted quite well in size and around the Skyhawk’s rather pointed nose. I just left the nostrils away because they’d look odd together with the small black radome and a small ventral gap between the mouth halves had to be bridged with black paint and another piece of decal sheet that simulates a di-electric cover.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and ordnance as well as landing gear were mounted.

  

The third and for now the last build in my recent ‘Uruguayan whif’ model series. I like the grey-green Skyhawk a lot – it’s not spectacular and looks very down-to-earth (except for the nose art, maybe), but it’s very believable. The NATO style livery is rather unusual for the A-4, it was AFAIK not carried by any real in-service Skyhawk, but it suits the aircraft well.

+++ 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 ASTA (Aerospace Technologies of Australia, formerly Government Aircraft Factories) Baza development was started in 1995 when the Royal Australian Air Force was searching for a two-seat training aircraft that would allow the transition from initial training on piston-engined aircraft to jets, and could also be used for weapon training and CAS/reconnaissance duties.

 

ASTA responded with a low-wing two-turboprop-engined all-metal monoplane with retractable landing gear, capable of operating from unprepared strips when operationally required. The aircraft, internally coded “A-31”, was of conventional, all-metal (mainly duralumin) construction. The unswept cantilever wings have 3° of dihedral and are fitted with slotted trailing-edge flaps.

 

The A-31 had a tandem cockpit arrangement; the crew of two was seated under the upward opening clamshell canopy on Martin-Baker Mk 6AP6A zero/zero ejection seats and were provided with dual controls.

 

Armor plating was fitted to protect the crew and engines from hostile ground fire. The aircraft was powered by a pair of Garrett TPE 331 engines, driving sets of three-bladed propellers which were also capable of being used as air brakes.

 

The A-31 was designed for operations from short, rough airstrips.[The retractable tricycle landing gear, with a single nose wheel and twin main wheels retracting into the engine nacelles, is therefore fitted with low pressure tires to suit operations on rough ground, while the undercarriage legs are tall to give good clearance for underslung weapon loads. The undercarriage, flaps and brakes are operated hydraulically, with no pneumatic systems.

 

Two JATO rockets can be fitted under the fuselage to allow extra-short take-off.

Fuel is fed from two fuselage tanks of combined capacity of 800 L (180 imp gal; 210 US gal) and two self-sealing tanks of 460 L (100 imp gal; 120 US gal) in the wings.

 

Fixed armament of the A-31 consisted of two 30mm Aden cannons mounted under the cockpits with 200 rounds each. A total of nine hardpoints were fitted for the carriage of external stores such as bombs, rockets or external fuel tanks, with one of 1,000 kg (2,200 lb) capacity mounted under the fuselage and the remaining two pairs of 500 kg (1,100 lb) capacity beneath the wing roots and wings inside of the engine nacelles, and two more pairs of hardpoints outside of the engines for another 500 kg and 227 kg, respectively. Total external weapons load was limited to 6,800 lb (3,085 kg) of weapons, though.

Onboard armaments were aimed by a simple reflector sight, since no all weather/night capabilities were called for – even though provisions were made that external sensors could be carried (e. g. a TISEO or a PAVE Spike pod).

 

Severe competition arose through the BAe Hawk, though: the Royal Australian Air Force ordered 33 Hawk 127 Lead-in Fighters (LIFs) in June 1997, 12 of which were produced in the UK and 21 in Australia – and this procurement severely hampered the A-31’s progress. The initial plan to build 66 aircraft for domestic use, with prospects for export, e. g. to Sri Lanka, Indonesia or Turkey, was cut down to a mere 32 aircraft which were to be used in conjunction with the Australian Army in the FAC role and against mobile ground targets.

 

This extended role required an upgrade with additional avionics, an optional forward looking infrared (FLIR) sensor and a laser ranger in an extended nose section, which lead to the Mk. II configuration - effectively, only five machines were produced as Mk.I types, and they were updated to Mk. II configuration even before delivery to the RAAF in August 1999.

 

Since then, the ASTA A-31 has been used in concunction with RAAF's Pilatus PC-9 and BAe Hawk Mk. 127 trainers. Beyond educational duties the type is also employed for Fleet support to Navy operations and for close air support to Army operations.

 

The 'Baza' (christened by a small sized bird of prey found in the forests of South Asia and Southeast Asia) has even seen serious military duty and already fired in anger: since August 2007, a detachment of No. 114 Mobile Control and Reporting Unit RAAF has been on active service at Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan, and a constant detachment of six A-31's from RAAF 76 Suqadron has been assigned to armed reconnaissance and protection of approximately 75 personnel deployed with the AN/TPS-77 radar, assigned the responsibility to co-ordinate coalition air operations.

  

General characteristics

Crew: 2

Length (incl. Pitot): 14.69 m (48 ft 1 ½ in)

Wingspan: 14.97 m (49 ft)

Height: 3, 75 m (12 ft 3 in)

Wing area: 30.30 m2 (326.1 sq ft)

Aspect ratio: 6.9:1

Airfoil: NACA 642A215 at root, NACA641 at tip

Empty weight: 4,020 kg (8,863 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 6,800 kg (14,991 lb)

Internal fuel capacity: 1,280 L (280 imp gal; 340 US gal)

 

Powerplant:

2 × Garrett TPE 331-11U-601G turboprop engines, 820 kW (1.100 hp) each

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 515 km/h (311 mph; 270 kn) at 4.570 m (15.000 ft)

Cruising speed: 430 km/h (267 mph; 232 kn) at 2.500 m (8.200 ft)

Stall speed: 143 km/h (89 mph; 77 kn) (flaps and undercarriage down)

Never exceed speed: 750 km/h (466 mph; 405 kn)

Range:1.611 km (1.000 mi; 868 nmi), clean and internal fuel only

Ferry range: 3,710 km (2,305 mi; 2,003 nmi) max internal and external fuel

Service ceiling: 10,000 m (32,808 ft)

g limits: +6/-3 g

Rate of climb: 6.5 m/s (1.276 ft/min)

 

Armament

2× 30 mm ADEN cannons in the lower nose

Up to 6,800 lb (3,085 kg) of weapons on nine external hardpoints

  

The kit and its assembly:

Like many of my whifs, this was spawned by a project at whatifmodelers.com from fellow user silverwindblade that ran under the handle "COIN aircraft from a Hawk" - and in fact, the BAe Hawk's fuselage with its staggered cockpit and good field of view appears as a good basis for a conversion.

 

I liked the idea VERY much, and while silverwindblade's work would rather develop into a futuristic canard layout aircraft, I decided to keep the COIN aircraft rather conservative - the FMA 58 'Pucara' from Argentina would be a proper benchmark.

 

The basis here is the Italeri BAe Hawk Mk. 127 kit which comes with the longer nose and modified wings for the RAAF version, as well as with false decals.

Anyway, I'd only use the fuselage, anything else is implanted, partly from unlikely donation kits! Wings incl. engine nacelles and stablizers come from the vintage box scale (1:166?) Revell Convair R3Y-2 Tradewind flying boat(!), the fin from an Academy OV-10 Bronco.

The landing gear was puzzled together, among other from parts of a 1:200 Concorde, the propellers were scratched.

 

Biggest mod to the fuselage is the dissection of the air intakes (and their blending with the fuselage) as well as a new tail section where the Adour jet engine's exhaust had been.

  

Painting and markings:

This model was agood excuse to finally apply an SIOP color scheme, which was originally carried by USAF's strategic bombers like B-52 or FB-111. But what actually inspired me were Australian C-130s - it took some time to figure out that their scheme were the USAF's SIOP colors (FS 34201, 34159 and 34079). But that made the Baza's potential user's choice (and fictional origin) easy.

 

As a COIN role aircraft I settled on a wraparound scheme. I found a pattern scheme on an USN Aggerssor A-4 Skyhawk that had been painted in SIOP colors, too, and adapted it for the model. Basic colors were Humbrol 31, 84 and 116, good approximations - the result looks odd, but suits the Baza well.

 

Later, panels were emphasized through dry painting with lighter shades and a light black ink wash was applied.

 

The landing gear became classic white, the cockpit interior medium gray - nothing fancy.

 

The markings were improvised - the Italeri Hawk Mk. 127 features RAAF 'roos, but these are printed in black - wrong for the OOB kit, but very welcome on my aircraft. The rest was salvaged from the scrap box, the tactical code A-31-06 created with single letters from TL Modellbau.

1 2 ••• 17 18 20 22 23 ••• 79 80