C-130 Hercules military transport plane heading east over my house and turning south to approach the Davis-Monthan AFB runway from the southeast to the northwest.

______________________________

Lockheed C-130 Hercules

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-130_Hercules

 

C-130 Hercules

Straight-wing, four-engine turboprop-driven aircraft overflying water

USAF C-130E

Role: Military transport aircraft

National origin: United States

ManufacturerLockheed

Lockheed Martin

First flight23 August 1954

Status: In service

Primary users:

United States Air Force

United States Marine Corps

Royal Air Force

Royal Canadian Air Force

Produced: 1954–present

Number built: Over 2,500 as of 2015[1]

Unit cost

C-130E $11.9 million[2]

C-130H $30.1 million[3]

Variants:

AC-130 Spectre/Spooky

Lockheed DC-130

Lockheed EC-130

Lockheed HC-130

Lockheed Martin KC-130

Lockheed LC-130

Lockheed MC-130

Lockheed WC-130

Lockheed L-100 Hercules

Developed into: Lockheed Martin C-130J Super Hercules

 

The Lockheed C-130 Hercules is a four-engine turboprop military transport aircraft designed and built originally by Lockheed, now Lockheed Martin.

 

Capable of using unprepared runways for takeoffs and landings, the C-130 was originally designed as a troop, medivac, and cargo transport aircraft. The versatile airframe has found uses in a variety of other roles, including as a gunship (AC-130),for

airborne assault,

search and rescue,

scientific research support,

weather reconnaissance,

aerial refueling,

maritime patrol, and

aerial firefighting.

 

It is now the main tactical airlifter for many military forces worldwide. Over forty models and variants of the Hercules, including a civilian one marketed as Lockheed L-100, operate in more than sixty nations.

 

The C-130 entered service with the U.S. in the 1950s, followed by Australia and others. During its years of service, the Hercules family has participated in numerous military, civilian and humanitarian aid operations. In 2007, the C-130 became the fifth aircraft—after the English Electric Canberra, B-52 Stratofortress, Tu-95, and KC-135 Stratotanker—to mark 50 years of continuous service with its original primary customer, in this case, the United States Air Force. The C-130 Hercules is the longest continuously produced military aircraft at over 60 years, with the updated C-130J Super Hercules being produced today.[4]

 

Contents [hide]

1Design and development

1.1Background and requirements

1.2Design phase

1.3Improved versions

1.4More improvements

1.5Later models

1.6Next generation

1.7Upgrades and changes

1.8Replacement

2Operational history

2.1Military

2.2Civilian

3Variants

4Operators

5Accidents

6Aircraft on display

6.1Australia

6.2Canada

6.3Colombia

6.4Indonesia

6.5Norway

6.6Saudi Arabia

6.7United Kingdom

6.8United States

7Specifications (C-130H)

8See also

9References

10External links

Design and development[edit]

 

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2014)

Background and requirements[edit]

 

The Korean War, which began in June 1950, showed that World War II-era piston-engine transports—Fairchild C-119 Flying Boxcars, Douglas C-47 Skytrains and Curtiss C-46 Commandos—were inadequate for modern warfare. Thus, on 2 February 1951, the United States Air Force issued a General Operating Requirement (GOR) for a new transport to Boeing, Douglas, Fairchild, Lockheed, Martin, Chase Aircraft, North American, Northrop, and Airlifts Inc. The new transport would have a capacity of 92 passengers, 72 combat troops or 64 paratroopers in a cargo compartment that was approximately 41 feet (12 m) long, 9 feet (2.7 m) high, and 10 feet (3.0 m) wide. Unlike transports derived from passenger airliners, it was to be designed from the ground-up as a combat transport with loading from a hinged loading ramp at the rear of the fuselage.

 

A key feature was the introduction of the Allison T56 turboprop powerplant, first developed specifically for the C-130. At the time, the turboprop was a new application of turbine engines that used exhaust gases to turn a propeller, which offered greater range at propeller-driven speeds compared to pure turbojets, which were faster but consumed more fuel. As was the case on helicopters of that era, such as the UH-1 Huey, turboshafts produced much more power for their weight than piston engines. Lockheed would subsequently use the same engines and technology in the Lockheed L-188 Electra. That aircraft failed financially in its civilian configuration but was successfully adapted into the Lockheed P-3 Orion maritime patrol and submarine attack aircraft where the efficiency and endurance of turboprops excelled.

 

Design phase[edit]

The Hercules resembled a larger four-engine brother to the C-123 Provider with a similar wing and cargo ramp layout that evolved from the Chase XCG-20 Avitruc, which in turn, was first designed and flown as a cargo glider in 1947.[5] The Boeing C-97 Stratofreighter also had a rear ramp, which made it possible to drive vehicles onto the plane (also possible with forward ramp on a C-124). The ramp on the Hercules was also used to airdrop cargo, which included low-altitude extraction for Sheridan tanks and even dropping large improvised "daisy cutter" bombs.

 

The new Lockheed cargo plane design possessed a range of 1,100 nmi (1,270 mi; 2,040 km), takeoff capability from short and unprepared strips, and the ability to fly with one engine shut down. Fairchild, North American, Martin, and Northrop declined to participate. The remaining five companies tendered a total of ten designs: Lockheed two, Boeing one, Chase three, Douglas three, and Airlifts Inc. one. The contest was a close affair between the lighter of the two Lockheed (preliminary project designation L-206) proposals and a four-turboprop Douglas design.

 

The Lockheed design team was led by Willis Hawkins, starting with a 130-page proposal for the Lockheed L-206.[6] Hall Hibbard, Lockheed vice president and chief engineer, saw the proposal and directed it to Kelly Johnson, who did not care for the low-speed, unarmed aircraft, and remarked, "If you sign that letter, you will destroy the Lockheed Company."[6] Both Hibbard and Johnson signed the proposal and the company won the contract for the now-designated Model 82 on 2 July 1951.[7]

 

The first flight of the YC-130 prototype was made on 23 August 1954 from the Lockheed plant in Burbank, California. The aircraft, serial number 53-3397, was the second prototype, but the first of the two to fly. The YC-130 was piloted by Stanley Beltz and Roy Wimmer on its 61-minute flight to Edwards Air Force Base; Jack Real and Dick Stanton served as flight engineers. Kelly Johnson flew chase in a Lockheed P2V Neptune.[8]

 

After the two prototypes were completed, production began in Marietta, Georgia, where over 2,300 C-130s have been built through 2009.[9]

 

The initial production model, the C-130A, was powered by Allison T56-A-9 turboprops with three-blade propellers and originally equipped with the blunt nose of the prototypes. Deliveries began in December 1956, continuing until the introduction of the C-130B model in 1959. Some A-models were equipped with skis and re-designated C-130D.

 

As the C-130A became operational with Tactical Air Command (TAC), the C-130's lack of range became apparent and additional fuel capacity was added in the form of external pylon-mounted tanks at the end of the wings.

 

Improved versions[edit]

 

A Michigan Air National Guard C-130E dispatches its flares during a low-level training mission

The C-130B model was developed to complement the A-models that had previously been delivered, and incorporated new features, particularly increased fuel capacity in the form of auxiliary tanks built into the center wing section and an AC electrical system. Four-bladed Hamilton Standard propellers replaced the Aeroproducts three-blade propellers that distinguished the earlier A-models. The C-130B had ailerons with increased boost—3,000 psi (21 MPa) versus 2,050 psi (14 MPa)—as well as uprated engines and four-blade propellers that were standard until the J-model's introduction.

 

An electronic reconnaissance variant of the C-130B was designated C-130B-II. A total of 13 aircraft were converted. The C-130B-II was distinguished by its false external wing fuel tanks, which were disguised signals intelligence (SIGINT) receiver antennas. These pods were slightly larger than the standard wing tanks found on other C-130Bs. Most aircraft featured a swept blade antenna on the upper fuselage, as well as extra wire antennas between the vertical fin and upper fuselage not found on other C-130s. Radio call numbers on the tail of these aircraft were regularly changed so as to confuse observers and disguise their true mission.

 

The extended-range C-130E model entered service in 1962 after it was developed as an interim long-range transport for the Military Air Transport Service. Essentially a B-model, the new designation was the result of the installation of 1,360 US gal (5,150 L) Sargent Fletcher external fuel tanks under each wing's midsection and more powerful Allison T56-A-7A turboprops. The hydraulic boost pressure to the ailerons was reduced back to 2050 psi as a consequence of the external tanks' weight in the middle of the wingspan. The E model also featured structural improvements, avionics upgrades and a higher gross weight. Australia took delivery of 12 C130E Hercules during 1966–67 to supplement the 12 C-130A models already in service with the RAAF. Sweden and Spain fly the TP-84T version of the C-130E fitted for aerial refueling capability.

 

The KC-130 tankers, originally C-130F procured for the US Marine Corps (USMC) in 1958 (under the designation GV-1) are equipped with a removable 3,600 US gal (13,626 L) stainless steel fuel tank carried inside the cargo compartment. The two wing-mounted hose and drogue aerial refueling pods each transfer up to 300 US gal per minute (19 L per second) to two aircraft simultaneously, allowing for rapid cycle times of multiple-receiver aircraft formations, (a typical tanker formation of four aircraft in less than 30 minutes). The US Navy's C-130G has increased structural strength allowing higher gross weight operation.

 

More improvements[edit]

 

Royal Australian Air Force C-130H, 2007

The C-130H model has updated Allison T56-A-15 turboprops, a redesigned outer wing, updated avionics and other minor improvements. Later H models had a new, fatigue-life-improved, center wing that was retrofitted to many earlier H-models. For structural reasons, some models are required to land with certain amounts of fuel when carrying heavy cargo, reducing usable range.[10] The H model remains in widespread use with the United States Air Force (USAF) and many foreign air forces. Initial deliveries began in 1964 (to the RNZAF), remaining in production until 1996. An improved C-130H was introduced in 1974, with Australia purchasing 12 of type in 1978 to replace the original 12 C-130A models, which had first entered RAAF Service in 1958.

 

The United States Coast Guard employs the HC-130H for long-range search and rescue, drug interdiction, illegal migrant patrols, homeland security, and logistics.

 

C-130H models produced from 1992 to 1996 were designated as C-130H3 by the USAF. The "3" denoting the third variation in design for the H series. Improvements included ring laser gyros for the INUs, GPS receivers, a partial glass cockpit (ADI and HSI instruments), a more capable APN-241 color radar, night vision device compatible instrument lighting, and an integrated radar and missile warning system. The electrical system upgrade included Generator Control Units (GCU) and Bus Switching units (BSU)to provide stable power to the more sensitive upgraded components.[citation needed]

  

Royal Air Force C-130K (C.3)

The equivalent model for export to the UK is the C-130K, known by the Royal Air Force (RAF) as the Hercules C.1. The C-130H-30 (Hercules C.3 in RAF service) is a stretched version of the original Hercules, achieved by inserting a 100 in (2.54 m) plug aft of the cockpit and an 80 in (2.03 m) plug at the rear of the fuselage. A single C-130K was purchased by the Met Office for use by its Meteorological Research Flight, where it was classified as the Hercules W.2. This aircraft was heavily modified (with its most prominent feature being the long red and white striped atmospheric probe on the nose and the move of the weather radar into a pod above the forward fuselage). This aircraft, named Snoopy, was withdrawn in 2001 and was then modified by Marshall of Cambridge Aerospace as flight-testbed for the A400M turbine engine, the TP400. The C-130K is used by the RAF Falcons for parachute drops. Three C-130K (Hercules C Mk.1P) were upgraded and sold to the Austrian Air Force in 2002.[11]

 

Later models[edit]

The MC-130E Combat Talon was developed for the USAF during the Vietnam War to support special operations missions in Southeast Asia, and led to both the MC-130H Combat Talon II as well as a family of other special missions aircraft. 37 of the earliest models currently operating with the Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) are scheduled to be replaced by new-production MC-130J versions. The EC-130 Commando Solo is another special missions variant within AFSOC, albeit operated solely by an AFSOC-gained wing in the Pennsylvania Air National Guard, and is a psychological operations/information operations (PSYOP/IO) platform equipped as an aerial radio station and television stations able to transmit messaging over commercial frequencies. Other versions of the EC-130, most notably the EC-130H Compass Call, are also special variants, but are assigned to the Air Combat Command (ACC). The AC-130 gunship was first developed during the Vietnam War to provide close air support and other ground-attack duties.

  

USAF HC-130P refuels a HH-60G Pavehawk helicopter

The HC-130 is a family of long-range search and rescue variants used by the USAF and the U.S. Coast Guard. Equipped for deep deployment of Pararescuemen (PJs), survival equipment, and (in the case of USAF versions) aerial refueling of combat rescue helicopters, HC-130s are usually the on-scene command aircraft for combat SAR missions (USAF only) and non-combat SAR (USAF and USCG). Early USAF versions were also equipped with the Fulton surface-to-air recovery system, designed to pull a person off the ground using a wire strung from a helium balloon. The John Wayne movie The Green Berets features its use. The Fulton system was later removed when aerial refueling of helicopters proved safer and more versatile. The movie The Perfect Storm depicts a real life SAR mission involving aerial refueling of a New York Air National Guard HH-60G by a New York Air National Guard HC-130P.

 

The C-130R and C-130T are U.S. Navy and USMC models, both equipped with underwing external fuel tanks. The USN C-130T is similar, but has additional avionics improvements. In both models, aircraft are equipped with Allison T56-A-16 engines. The USMC versions are designated KC-130R or KC-130T when equipped with underwing refueling pods and pylons and are fully night vision system compatible.

 

The RC-130 is a reconnaissance version. A single example is used by the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force, the aircraft having originally been sold to the former Imperial Iranian Air Force.

 

The Lockheed L-100 (L-382) is a civilian variant, equivalent to a C-130E model without military equipment. The L-100 also has two stretched versions.

 

Next generation[edit]

Main article: Lockheed Martin C-130J Super Hercules

In the 1970s, Lockheed proposed a C-130 variant with turbofan engines rather than turboprops, but the U.S. Air Force preferred the takeoff performance of the existing aircraft. In the 1980s, the C-130 was intended to be replaced by the Advanced Medium STOL Transport project. The project was canceled and the C-130 has remained in production.

 

Building on lessons learned, Lockheed Martin modified a commercial variant of the C-130 into a High Technology Test Bed (HTTB). This test aircraft set numerous short takeoff and landing performance records and significantly expanded the database for future derivatives of the C-130.[12] Modifications made to the HTTB included extended chord ailerons, a long chord rudder, fast-acting double-slotted trailing edge flaps, a high-camber wing leading edge extension, a larger dorsal fin and dorsal fins, the addition of three spoiler panels to each wing upper surface, a long-stroke main and nose landing gear system, and changes to the flight controls and a change from direct mechanical linkages assisted by hydraulic boost, to fully powered controls, in which the mechanical linkages from the flight station controls operated only the hydraulic control valves of the appropriate boost unit.[13] The HTTB first flew on 19 June 1984, with civil registration of N130X. After demonstrating many new technologies, some of which were applied to the C-130J, the HTTB was lost in a fatal accident on 3 February 1993, at Dobbins Air Reserve Base, in Marietta, Georgia.[14] The crash was attributed to disengagement of the rudder fly-by-wire flight control system, resulting in a total loss of rudder control capability while conducting ground minimum control speed tests (Vmcg). The disengagement was a result of the inadequate design of the rudder's integrated actuator package by its manufacturer; the operator's insufficient system safety review failed to consider the consequences of the inadequate design to all operating regimes. A factor which contributed to the accident was the flight crew's lack of engineering flight test training.[15]

 

In the 1990s, the improved C-130J Super Hercules was developed by Lockheed (later Lockheed Martin). This model is the newest version and the only model in production. Externally similar to the classic Hercules in general appearance, the J model has new turboprop engines, six-bladed propellers, digital avionics, and other new systems.[16]

 

Upgrades and changes[edit]

In 2000, Boeing was awarded a US$1.4 billion contract to develop an Avionics Modernization Program kit for the C-130. The program was beset with delays and cost overruns until project restructuring in 2007.[17] On 2 September 2009, Bloomberg news reported that the planned Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) upgrade to the older C-130s would be dropped to provide more funds for the F-35, CV-22 and airborne tanker replacement programs.[18] However, in June 2010, Department of Defense approved funding for the initial production of the AMP upgrade kits.[19][20] Under the terms of this agreement, the USAF has cleared Boeing to begin low-rate initial production (LRIP) for the C-130 AMP. A total of 198 aircraft are expected to feature the AMP upgrade. The current cost per aircraft is US$14 million although Boeing expects that this price will drop to US$7 million for the 69th aircraft.[17]

 

An engine enhancement program saving fuel and providing lower temperatures in the T56 engine has been approved, and the US Air Force expects to save $2 billion and extend the fleet life.[21]

 

Replacement[edit]

In October 2010, the Air Force released a capabilities request for information (CRFI) for the development of a new airlifter to replace the C-130. The new aircraft is to carry a 190 percent greater payload and assume the mission of mounted vertical maneuver (MVM). The greater payload and mission would enable it to carry medium-weight armored vehicles and drop them off at locations without long runways. Various options are being considered, including new or upgraded fixed-wing designs, rotorcraft, tiltrotors, or even an airship. Development could start in 2014, and become operational by 2024. The C-130 fleet of around 450 planes would be replaced by only 250 aircraft.[22] The Air Force had attempted to replace the C-130 in the 1970s through the Advanced Medium STOL Transport project, which resulted in the C-17 Globemaster III that instead replaced the C-141 Starlifter.[23] The Air Force Research Laboratory funded Lockheed and Boeing demonstrators for the Speed Agile concept, which had the goal of making a STOL aircraft that can take off and land at speeds as low as 70 kn (130 km/h; 81 mph) on airfields less than 2,000 ft (610 m) long and cruise at Mach 0.8-plus. Boeing's design used upper-surface blowing from embedded engines on the inboard wing and blown flaps for circulation control on the outboard wing. Lockheed's design also used blown flaps outboard, but inboard used patented reversing ejector nozzles. Boeing's design completed over 2,000 hours of windtunnel tests in late 2009. It was a 5 percent-scale model of a narrowbody design with a 55,000 lb (25,000 kg) payload. When the AFRL increased the payload requirement to 65,000 lb (29,000 kg), they tested a 5% scale model of a widebody design with a 303,000 lb (137,000 kg) take-off gross weight and an "A400M-size" 158 in (4.0 m) wide cargo box. It would be powered by four IAE V2533 turbofans.[24] In August 2011, the AFRL released pictures of the Lockheed Speed Agile concept demonstrator. A 23% scale model went through wind tunnel tests to demonstrate its hybrid powered lift, which combines a low drag airframe with simple mechanical assembly to reduce weight and better aerodynamics. The model had four engines, including two Williams FJ44 turbofans.[23][25] On 26 March 2013, Boeing was granted a patent for its swept-wing powered lift aircraft.[26]

 

As of January 2014, Air Mobility Command, Air Force Materiel Command and the Air Force Research Lab are in the early stages of defining requirements for the C-X next generation airlifter program to replace both the C-130 and C-17. An aircraft would be produced from the early 2030s to the 2040s. If requirements are decided for operating in contested airspace, Air Force procurement of C-130s would end by the end of the decade to not have them serviceable by the 2030s and operated when they can't perform in that environment. Development of the airlifter depends heavily on the Army's "tactical and operational maneuver" plans. Two different cargo planes could still be created to separately perform tactical and strategic missions, but which course to pursue is to be decided before C-17s need to be retired.[27]

 

Operational history[edit]

 

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2014)

Military[edit]

 

USMC KC-130F Hercules performing takeoffs and landings aboard the aircraft carrier Forrestal in 1963. The aircraft is now displayed at the National Museum of Naval Aviation.

The first production aircraft, C-130As were first delivered beginning in 1956 to the 463d Troop Carrier Wing at Ardmore AFB, Oklahoma and the 314th Troop Carrier Wing at Sewart AFB, Tennessee. Six additional squadrons were assigned to the 322d Air Division in Europe and the 315th Air Division in the Far East. Additional aircraft were modified for electronics intelligence work and assigned to Rhein-Main Air Base, Germany while modified RC-130As were assigned to the Military Air Transport Service (MATS) photo-mapping division.

 

In 1958, a U.S. reconnaissance C-130A-II of the 7406th Support Squadron was shot down over Armenia by MiG-17s.[28]

 

Australia became the first non-American force to operate the C-130A Hercules with 12 examples being delivered from late 1958. These aircraft were fitted with AeroProducts three-blade, 15-foot diameter propellers. The Royal Canadian Air Force became another early user with the delivery of four B-models (Canadian designation C-130 Mk I) in October / November 1960.[29]

 

In 1963, a Hercules achieved and still holds the record for the largest and heaviest aircraft to land on an aircraft carrier.[30] During October and November that year, a USMC KC-130F (BuNo 149798), loaned to the U.S. Naval Air Test Center, made 29 touch-and-go landings, 21 unarrested full-stop landings and 21 unassisted take-offs on Forrestal at a number of different weights.[31] The pilot, LT (later RADM) James H. Flatley III, USN, was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for his role in this test series. The tests were highly successful, but the idea was considered too risky for routine "Carrier Onboard Delivery" (COD) operations. Instead, the Grumman C-2 Greyhound was developed as a dedicated COD aircraft. The Hercules used in the test, most recently in service with Marine Aerial Refueler Squadron 352 (VMGR-352) until 2005, is now part of the collection of the National Museum of Naval Aviation at NAS Pensacola, Florida.

 

In 1964, C-130 crews from the 6315th Operations Group at Naha Air Base, Okinawa commenced forward air control (FAC; "Flare") missions over the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos supporting USAF strike aircraft. In April 1965 the mission was expanded to North Vietnam where C-130 crews led formations of B-57 bombers on night reconnaissance/strike missions against communist supply routes leading to South Vietnam. In early 1966 Project Blind Bat/Lamplighter was established at Ubon RTAFB, Thailand. After the move to Ubon the mission became a four-engine FAC mission with the C-130 crew searching for targets then calling in strike aircraft. Another little-known C-130 mission flown by Naha-based crews was Operation Commando Scarf, which involved the delivery of chemicals onto sections of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos that were designed to produce mud and landslides in hopes of making the truck routes impassable.[citation needed]

 

In November 1964, on the other side of the globe, C-130Es from the 464th Troop Carrier Wing but loaned to 322d Air Division in France, flew one of the most dramatic missions in history in the former Belgian Congo. After communist Simba rebels took white residents of the city of Stanleyville hostage, the U.S. and Belgium developed a joint rescue mission that used the C-130s to airlift and then drop and air-land a force of Belgian paratroopers to rescue the hostages. Two missions were flown, one over Stanleyville and another over Paulis during Thanksgiving weeks.[32] The headline-making mission resulted in the first award of the prestigious MacKay Trophy to C-130 crews.

 

In the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, as a desperate measure the transport No. 6 Squadron of the Pakistan Air Force modified its entire small fleet of C-130Bs for use as heavy bombers, capable of carrying up to 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) of bombs on pallets. These improvised bombers were used to hit Indian targets such as bridges, heavy artillery positions, tank formations and troop concentrations.[33][34] Some C-130s even flew with anti-aircraft guns fitted on their ramp, apparently shooting down some 17 aircraft and damaging 16 others.[35]

  

The C-130 Hercules were used in the Battle of Kham Duc in 1968, when the North Vietnamese Army forced U.S.-led forces to abandon the Kham Duc Special Forces Camp.

In October 1968, a C-130Bs from the 463rd Tactical Airlift Wing dropped a pair of M-121 10,000 pound bombs that had been developed for the massive B-36 bomber but had never been used. The U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force resurrected the huge weapons as a means of clearing landing zones for helicopters and in early 1969 the 463rd commenced Commando Vault missions. Although the stated purpose of COMMANDO VAULT was to clear LZs, they were also used on enemy base camps and other targets.[citation needed]

 

During the late 1960s, the U.S. was eager to get information on Chinese nuclear capabilities. After the failure of the Black Cat Squadron to plant operating sensor pods near the Lop Nur Nuclear Weapons Test Base using a Lockheed U-2, the CIA developed a plan, named Heavy Tea, to deploy two battery-powered sensor pallets near the base. To deploy the pallets, a Black Bat Squadron crew was trained in the U.S. to fly the C-130 Hercules. The crew of 12, led by Col Sun Pei Zhen, took off from Takhli Royal Thai Air Force Base in an unmarked U.S. Air Force C-130E on 17 May 1969. Flying for six and a half hours at low altitude in the dark, they arrived over the target and the sensor pallets were dropped by parachute near Anxi in Gansu province. After another six and a half hours of low altitude flight, they arrived back at Takhli. The sensors worked and uploaded data to a U.S. intelligence satellite for six months, before their batteries wore out. The Chinese conducted two nuclear tests, on 22 September 1969 and 29 September 1969, during the operating life of the sensor pallets. Another mission to the area was planned as Operation Golden Whip, but was called off in 1970.[36] It is most likely that the aircraft used on this mission was either C-130E serial number 64-0506 or 64-0507 (cn 382-3990 and 382-3991). These two aircraft were delivered to Air America in 1964.[37] After being returned to the U.S. Air Force sometime between 1966 and 1970, they were assigned the serial numbers of C-130s that had been destroyed in accidents. 64-0506 is now flying as 62-1843, a C-130E that crashed in Vietnam on 20 December 1965 and 64-0507 is now flying as 63-7785, a C-130E that had crashed in Vietnam on 17 June 1966.[38]

 

The A-model continued in service through the Vietnam War, where the aircraft assigned to the four squadrons at Naha AB, Okinawa and one at Tachikawa Air Base, Japan performed yeoman's service, including operating highly classified special operations missions such as the BLIND BAT FAC/Flare mission and FACT SHEET leaflet mission over Laos and North Vietnam. The A-model was also provided to the South Vietnamese Air Force as part of the Vietnamization program at the end of the war, and equipped three squadrons based at Tan Son Nhut AFB. The last operator in the world is the Honduran Air Force, which is still flying one of five A model Hercules (FAH 558, c/n 3042) as of October 2009.[39] As the Vietnam War wound down, the 463rd Troop Carrier/Tactical Airlift Wing B-models and A-models of the 374th Tactical Airlift Wing were transferred back to the United States where most were assigned to Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard units.

  

U.S. Marines disembark from C-130 transports at the Da Nang Airbase on 8 March 1965

Another prominent role for the B model was with the United States Marine Corps, where Hercules initially designated as GV-1s replaced C-119s. After Air Force C-130Ds proved the type's usefulness in Antarctica, the U.S. Navy purchased a number of B-models equipped with skis that were designated as LC-130s. C-130B-II electronic reconnaissance aircraft were operated under the SUN VALLEY program name primarily from Yokota Air Base, Japan. All reverted to standard C-130B cargo aircraft after their replacement in the reconnaissance role by other aircraft.

 

The C-130 was also used in the 1976 Entebbe raid in which Israeli commando forces carried a surprise assault to rescue 103 passengers of an airliner hijacked by Palestinian and German terrorists at Entebbe Airport, Uganda. The rescue force — 200 soldiers, jeeps, and a black Mercedes-Benz (intended to resemble Ugandan Dictator Idi Amin's vehicle of state) — was flown over 2,200 nmi (4,074 km; 2,532 mi) almost entirely at an altitude of less than 100 ft (30 m) from Israel to Entebbe by four Israeli Air Force (IAF) Hercules aircraft without mid-air refueling (on the way back, the planes refueled in Nairobi, Kenya).

 

During the Falklands War (Spanish: Guerra de las Malvinas) of 1982, Argentine Air Force C-130s undertook highly dangerous, daily re-supply night flights as blockade runners to the Argentine garrison on the Falkland Islands. They also performed daylight maritime survey flights. One was lost during the war. Argentina also operated two KC-130 tankers during the war, and these refueled both the Douglas A-4 Skyhawks and Navy Dassault-Breguet Super Étendards; some C-130s were modified to operate as bombers with bomb-racks under their wings. The British also used RAF C-130s to support their logistical operations.

  

USMC C-130T Fat Albert performing a rocket-assisted takeoff (RATO)

During the Gulf War of 1991 (Operation Desert Storm), the C-130 Hercules was used operationally by the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps, along with the air forces of Australia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and the UK. The MC-130 Combat Talon variant also made the first attacks using the largest conventional bombs in the world, the BLU-82 "Daisy Cutter" and GBU-43/B "Massive Ordnance Air Blast" bomb, (MOAB). Daisy Cutters were used to clear landing zones and to eliminate mine fields. The weight and size of the weapons make it impossible or impractical to load them on conventional bombers. The GBU-43/B MOAB is a successor to the BLU-82 and can perform the same function, as well as perform strike functions against hardened targets in a low air threat environment.

 

Since 1992, two successive C-130 aircraft named Fat Albert have served as the support aircraft for the U.S. Navy Blue Angels flight demonstration team. Fat Albert I was a TC-130G (151891),[40] while Fat Albert II is a C-130T (164763).[41] Although Fat Albert supports a Navy squadron, it is operated by the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) and its crew consists solely of USMC personnel. At some air shows featuring the team, Fat Albert takes part, performing flyovers. Until 2009, it also demonstrated its rocket-assisted takeoff (RATO) capabilities; these ended due to dwindling supplies of rockets.[42]

 

The AC-130 also holds the record for the longest sustained flight by a C-130. From 22 to 24 October 1997, two AC-130U gunships flew 36 hours nonstop from Hurlburt Field Florida to Taegu (Daegu), South Korea while being refueled seven times by KC-135 tanker aircraft. This record flight shattered the previous record longest flight by over 10 hours while the two gunships took on 410,000 lb (190,000 kg) of fuel. The gunship has been used in every major U.S. combat operation since Vietnam, except for Operation El Dorado Canyon, the 1986 attack on Libya.[43]

  

C-130 Hercules performs a tactical landing on a dirt strip

During the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and the ongoing support of the International Security Assistance Force (Operation Enduring Freedom), the C-130 Hercules has been used operationally by Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Korea, Spain, the UK and the United States.

 

During the 2003 invasion of Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom), the C-130 Hercules was used operationally by Australia, the UK and the United States. After the initial invasion, C-130 operators as part of the Multinational force in Iraq used their C-130s to support their forces in Iraq.

 

Since 2004, the Pakistan Air Force has employed C-130s in the War in North-West Pakistan. Some variants had forward looking infrared (FLIR Systems Star Safire III EO/IR) sensor balls, to enable close tracking of Islamist militants.[44]

 

Civilian[edit]

 

A C-130E fitted with a MAFFS-1 dropping fire retardant

The U.S. Forest Service developed the Modular Airborne FireFighting System for the C-130 in the 1970s, which allows regular aircraft to be temporarily converted to an airtanker for fighting wildfires.[45] In the late 1980s, 22 retired USAF C-130As were removed from storage at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base and transferred to the U.S. Forest Service who then sold them to six private companies to be converted into air tankers (see U.S. Forest Service airtanker scandal). After one of these aircraft crashed due to wing separation in flight as a result of fatigue stress cracking, the entire fleet of C-130A air tankers was permanently grounded in 2004 (see 2002 airtanker crashes). C-130s have been used to spread chemical dispersants onto the massive oil slick in the Gulf Coast in 2010.[46]

 

A recent development of a C-130–based airtanker is the Retardant Aerial Delivery System developed by Coulson Aviation USA . The system consists of a C-130H/Q retrofitted with an in-floor discharge system, combined with a removable 3,500- or 4,000-gallon water tank. The combined system is FAA certified.[47]

 

Variants[edit]

 

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2014)

 

C-130H Hercules flight deck

 

A U.S. JC-130 aircraft retrieving a reconnaissance satellite film capsule under parachute.

 

C-130s from the: U.S., Canada, Australia and Israel (foreground to background)

 

RAAF C-130J-30 at Point Cook, 2006

 

Brazilian Air Force C-130 (L-382)

For civilian versions, see Lockheed L-100 Hercules.

Significant military variants of the C-130 include:

 

C-130A/B/E/F/G/H/K/T

Tactical airlifter basic models

C-130A-II Dreamboat

Early version Electronic Intelligence/Signals Intelligence (ELINT/SIGINT) aircraft[48]

C-130J Super Hercules

Tactical airlifter, with new engines, avionics, and updated systems

C-130K

Designation for RAF Hercules C1/W2/C3 aircraft (C-130Js in RAF service are the Hercules C.4 and Hercules C.5)

AC-130A/E/H/J/U/W

Gunship variants

C-130D/D-6

Ski-equipped version for snow and ice operations United States Air Force / Air National Guard

CC-130E/H/J Hercules

Designation for Canadian Armed Forces / Royal Canadian Air Force Hercules aircraft. U.S. Air Force used the CC-130J designation to differentiate standard C-130Js from "stretched" C-130Js (Company designation C-130J-30s).

DC-130A/E/H

USAF and USN Drone control

EC-130

EC-130E/J Commando Solo – USAF / Air National Guard psychological operations version

EC-130E – Airborne Battlefield Command and Control Center (ABCCC)

EC-130E Rivet Rider – Airborne psychological warfare aircraft

EC-130H Compass Call – Electronic warfare and electronic attack.[49]

EC-130V – Airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) variant used by USCG for counter-narcotics missions[50]

GC-130

Permanently Grounded "Static Display"

HC-130

HC-130B/E/H – Early model combat search and rescue

HC-130P/N Combat King – USAF aerial refueling tanker and combat search and rescue

HC-130J Combat King II – Next generation combat search and rescue tanker

HC-130H/J – USCG long-range surveillance and search and rescue

JC-130

Temporary conversion for flight test operations

KC-130F/R/T/J

United States Marine Corps aerial refueling tanker and tactical airlifter

LC-130F/H/R

USAF / Air National Guard – Ski-equipped version for Arctic and Antarctic support operations; LC-130F previously operated by USN

MC-130

MC-130E/H Combat Talon I/II – Special operations infiltration/extraction variant

MC-130W Combat Spear/Dragon Spear – Special operations tanker/gunship[51]

MC-130P Combat Shadow – Special operations tanker

MC-130J Commando II (formerly Combat Shadow II) – Special operations tanker Air Force Special Operations Command[52]

YMC-130H – Modified aircraft under Operation Credible Sport for second Iran hostage crisis rescue attempt

NC-130

Permanent conversion for flight test operations

PC-130/C-130-MP

Maritime patrol

RC-130A/S

Surveillance aircraft for reconnaissance

SC-130J Sea Herc

Proposed maritime patrol version of the C-130J, designed for coastal surveillance and anti-submarine warfare.[53][54]

TC-130

Aircrew training

VC-130H

VIP transport

WC-130A/B/E/H/J

Weather reconnaissance ("Hurricane Hunter") version for USAF / Air Force Reserve Command's 53d Weather Reconnaissance Squadron in support of the National Weather Service's National Hurricane Center

_________________________________

IMG_5183

Capable bird

Swedish Armed Forces version of the NE90

Rencontrez le pinson des arbres, le maestro des forêts.

 

Saviez-vous que ces petits oiseaux sont capables d'imiter les sons qu'ils entendent autour d'eux ? Imaginez-vous en promenade, entouré par le doux bruissement des arbres, et soudain, vous entendez un chant familier. C’est probablement ce pinson, maître de l'imitation, qui vous joue un air personnalisé. Les pinsons des arbres sont aussi d'incroyables voyageurs. Pendant l'hiver, ils migrent en masse à travers des continents entiers. Mais ce qui les rend vraiment uniques, c'est leur capacité à s'adapter à différents environnements, qu’il s’agisse de bois épais ou de parcs en ville. Gardez l'œil ouvert, vous pourriez être en train d’assister à un concert de la nature en direct !

 

Si vous pouviez apprendre à imiter un seul son de la nature comme le pinson des arbres, lequel choisiriez-vous et pourquoi ?

 

Meet the chaffinch, the maestro of the forests.

 

Did you know these little birds can mimic the sounds they hear around them? Picture yourself on a walk, surrounded by the gentle rustling of trees, when suddenly, you hear a familiar tune. It’s likely this chaffinch, a master of imitation, performing a personalized melody for you. Chaffinches are also incredible travelers. In winter, they migrate in droves across entire continents. But what truly makes them unique is their ability to adapt to different environments, whether dense woodlands or urban parks. Keep your eyes open—you might just witness a live nature concert!

 

If you could learn to mimic just one sound from nature like the chaffinch, which would you choose and why?

 

Chaffinch/Pinson des arbres (Fringilla coelebs)

 

NIKON Z5_2 + NIKKOR Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR à 560mm

f/6.3, 1/1250s, 640 ISO

 

🎁 Découvrez les meilleurs réglages de votre appareil Nikon/Canon : posenature.fr/ressources-gratuites/

+++ 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 CAC Sabre, sometimes known as the Avon Sabre or CA-27, was an Australian variant of the North American Aviation F-86F Sabre fighter aircraft. In 1951, Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation obtained a license agreement to build the F-86F Sabre. In a major departure from the North American blueprint, it was decided that the CA-27 would be powered by a license-built version of the Rolls-Royce Avon R.A.7, rather than the General Electric J47. In theory, the Avon was capable of more than double the maximum thrust and double the thrust-to-weight ratio of the US engine. This necessitated a re-design of the fuselage, as the Avon was shorter, wider and lighter than the J47.

 

To accommodate the Avon, over 60 percent of the fuselage was altered and there was a 25 percent increase in the size of the air intake. Another major revision was in replacing the F-86F's six machine guns with two 30mm ADEN cannon, while other changes were also made to the cockpit and to provide an increased fuel capacity.

 

The prototype aircraft first flew on 3 August 1953. The production aircrafts' first deliveries to the Royal Australian Air Force began in 1954. The first batch of aircraft were powered by the Avon 20 engine and were designated the Sabre Mk 30. Between 1957 and 1958 this batch had the wing slats removed and were re-designated Sabre Mk 31. These Sabres were supplemented by 20 new-built aircraft. The last batch of aircraft were designated Sabre Mk 32 and used the Avon 26 engine, of which 69 were built up to 1961.

 

Beyond these land-based versions, an indigenous version for carrier operations had been developed and built in small numbers, too, the Sea Sabre Mk 40 and 41. The roots of this aircraft, which was rather a prestigious idea than a sensible project, could be traced back to the immediate post WWII era. A review by the Australian Government's Defence Committee recommended that the post-war forces of the RAN be structured around a Task Force incorporating multiple aircraft carriers. Initial plans were for three carriers, with two active and a third in reserve, although funding cuts led to the purchase of only two carriers in June 1947: Majestic and sister ship HMS Terrible, for the combined cost of AU£2.75 million, plus stores, fuel, and ammunition. As Terrible was the closer of the two ships to completion, she was finished without modification, and was commissioned into the RAN on 16 December 1948 as HMAS Sydney. Work progressed on Majestic at a slower rate, as she was upgraded with the latest technology and equipment. To cover Majestic's absence, the Colossus-class carrier HMS Vengeance was loaned to the RAN from 13 November 1952 until 12 August 1955.

 

Labour difficulties, late delivery of equipment, additional requirements for Australian operations, and the prioritization of merchant ships over naval construction delayed the completion of Majestic. Incorporation of new systems and enhancements caused the cost of the RAN carrier acquisition program to increase to AU£8.3 million. Construction and fitting out did not finish until October 1955. As the carrier neared completion, a commissioning crew was formed in Australia and first used to return Vengeance to the United Kingdom.

The completed carrier was commissioned into the RAN as HMAS Majestic on 26 October 1955, but only two days later, the ship was renamed Melbourne and recommissioned.

 

In the meantime, the rather political decision had been made to equip Melbourne with an indigenous jet-powered aircraft, replacing the piston-driven Hawker Fury that had been successfully operated from HMAS Sydney and HMAS Vengeance, so that the "new jet age" was even more recognizable. The choice fell on the CAC Sabre, certainly inspired by North American's successful contemporary development of the navalized FJ-2 Fury from the land-based F-86 Sabre. The CAC 27 was already a proven design, and with its more powerful Avon engine it even offered a better suitability for carrier operations than the FJ-2 with its rather weak J47 engine.

 

Work on this project, which was initially simply designated Sabre Mk 40, started in 1954, just when the first CAC 27's were delivered to operative RAAF units. While the navalized Avon Sabre differed outwardly only little from its land-based brethren, many details were changed and locally developed. Therefore, there was also, beyond the general outlines, little in common with the North American FJ-2 an -3 Fury.

Externally, a completely new wing with a folding mechanism was fitted. It was based on the F-86's so-called "6-3" wing, with a leading edge that was extended 6 inches at the root and 3 inches at the tip. This modification enhanced maneuverability at the expense of a small increase in landing speed due to deletion of the leading edge slats, a detail that was later introduced on the Sabre Mk 31, too. As a side benefit, the new wing leading edges without the slat mechanisms held extra fuel. However, the Mk 40's wing was different as camber was applied to the underside of the leading edge to improve low-speed handling for carrier operations. The wings were provided with four stations outboard of the landing gear wells for up to 1000 lb external loads on the inboard stations and 500 lb on the outboard stations.

 

Slightly larger stabilizers were fitted and the landing gear was strengthened, including a longer front wheel strut. The latter necessitated an enlarged front wheel well, so that the front leg’s attachment point had to be moved forward. A ventral launch cable hook was added under the wing roots and an external massive arrester hook under the rear fuselage.

Internally, systems were protected against salt and humidity and a Rolls-Royce Avon 211 turbojet was fitted, a downrated variant of the already navalized Avon 208 from the British DH Sea Vixen, but adapted to the different CAC 27 airframe and delivering 8.000 lbf (35.5 kN) thrust – slightly more than the engines of the land-based CAC Sabres, but also without an afterburner.

 

A single Mk 40 prototype was built from a new CAC 27 airframe taken directly from the production line in early 1955 and made its maiden flight on August 20th of the same year. In order to reflect its naval nature and its ancestry, this new CAC 27 variant was officially christened “Sea Sabre”.

Even though the modified machine handled well, and the new, cambered wing proved to be effective, many minor technical flaws were discovered and delayed the aircraft's development until 1957. These included the wing folding mechanism and the respective fuel plumbing connections, the landing gear, which had to be beefed up even more for hard carrier landings and the airframe’s structural strength for catapult launches, esp. around the ventral launch hook.

 

In the meantime, work on the land-based CAC 27 progressed in parallel, too, and innovations that led to the Mk 31 and 32 were also incorporated into the naval Mk 40, leading to the Sea Sabre Mk 41, which became the effective production aircraft. These updates included, among others, a detachable (but fixed) refueling probe under the starboard wing, two more pylons for light loads located under the wing roots and the capability to carry and deploy IR-guided AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, what significantly increased the Mk 41's efficiency as day fighter. With all these constant changes it took until April 1958 that the Sabre Mk 41, after a second prototype had been directly built to the new standard, was finally approved and cleared for production. Upon delivery, the RAN Sea Sabres carried a standard NATO paint scheme with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper surfaces and Sky undersides.

 

In the meantime, the political enthusiasm concerning the Australian carrier fleet had waned, so that only twenty-two aircraft were ordered. The reason behind this decision was that Australia’s carrier fleet and its capacity had become severely reduced: Following the first decommissioning of HMAS Sydney in 1958, Melbourne became the only aircraft carrier in Australian service, and she was unavailable to provide air cover for the RAN for up to four months in every year; this time was required for refits, refueling, personnel leave, and non-carrier duties, such as the transportation of troops or aircraft. Although one of the largest ships to serve in the RAN, Melbourne was one of the smallest carriers to operate in the post-World War II period, so that its contribution to military actions was rather limited. To make matters worse, a decision was made in 1959 to restrict Melbourne's role to helicopter operations only, rendering any carrier-based aircraft in Australian service obsolete. However, this decision was reversed shortly before its planned 1963 implementation, but Australia’s fleet of carrier-borne fixed-wing aircraft would not grow to proportions envisioned 10 years ago.

 

Nevertheless, on 10 November 1964, an AU£212 million increase in defense spending included the purchase of new aircraft for Melbourne. The RAN planned to acquire 14 Grumman S-2E Tracker anti-submarine aircraft and to modernize Melbourne to operate these. The acquisition of 18 new fighter-bombers was suggested (either Sea Sabre Mk 41s or the American Douglas A-4 Skyhawk), too, but these were dropped from the initial plan. A separate proposal to order 10 A-4G Skyhawks, a variant of the Skyhawk designed specifically for the RAN and optimized for air defense, was approved in 1965, but the new aircraft did not fly from Melbourne until the conclusion of her refit in 1969. This move, however, precluded the production of any new and further Sea Sabre.

 

At that time, the RAN Sea Sabres received a new livery in US Navy style, with upper surfaces in Light Gull Gray with white undersides. The CAC Sea Sabres remained the main day fighter and attack aircraft for the RAN, after the vintage Sea Furies had been retired in 1962. The other contemporary RAN fighter type in service, the Sea Venom FAW.53 all-weather fighter that had replaced the Furies, already showed its obsolescence.

In 1969, the RAN purchased another ten A-4G Skyhawks, primarily in order to replace the Sea Venoms on the carriers, instead of the proposed seventh and eighth Oberon-class submarines. These were operated together with the Sea Sabres in mixed units on board of Melbourne and from land bases, e.g. from NAS Nowra in New South Wales, where a number of Sea Sabres were also allocated to 724 Squadron for operational training.

 

Around 1970, Melbourne operated a standard air group of four jet aircraft, six Trackers, and ten Wessex helicopters until 1972, when the Wessexes were replaced with ten Westland Sea King anti-submarine warfare helicopters and the number of jet fighters doubled. Even though the A-4G’s more and more took over the operational duties on board of Melbourne, the Sea Sabres were still frequently deployed on the carrier, too, until the early Eighties, when both the Skyhawks and the Sea Sabres received once more a new camouflage, this time a wraparound scheme in two shades of grey, reflecting their primary airspace defense mission.

 

The CAC 27 Mk 41s’ last carrier operations took place in 1981 in the course of Melbourne’s involvements in two major exercises, Sea Hawk and Kangaroo 81, the ship’s final missions at sea. After Melbourne was decommissioned in 1984, the Fleet Air Arm ceased fixed-wing combat aircraft operation. This was the operational end of the Sabre Mk 41, which had reached the end of their airframe lifetime, and the Sea Sabre fleet had, during its career, severely suffered from accidents and losses: upon retirement, only eight of the original twenty-two aircraft still existed in flightworthy condition, so that the aircraft were all scrapped. The younger RAN A-4Gs were eventually sold to New Zealand, where they were kept in service until 2002.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 37 ft 6 in (11.43 m)

Wingspan: 37 ft 1 in (11.3 m)

Height: 14 ft 5 in (4.39 m)

Wing area: 302.3 sq ft (28.1 m²)

Empty weight: 12,000 lb (5,443 kg)

Loaded weight: 16,000 lb (7,256 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 21,210 lb (9,621 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Avon 208A turbojet engine with 8,200 lbf (36.44 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 700 mph (1,100 km/h) (605 knots)

Range: 1,153 mi, (1,000 NM, 1,850 km)

Service ceiling: 52,000 ft (15,850 m)

Rate of climb: 12,000 ft/min at sea level (61 m/s)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm ADEN cannons with 150 rounds per gun

5,300 lb (2,400 kg) of payload on six external hardpoints;

Bombs were usually mounted on outer two pylons as the mid pair were wet-plumbed pylons for

2× 200 gallons drop tanks, while the inner pair was usually occupied by a pair of AIM-9 Sidewinder

AAMs

A wide variety of bombs could be carried with maximum standard loadout being 2x 1,000 lb bombs

or 2x Matra pods with unguided SURA missiles plus 2 drop tanks for ground attacks, or 2x AIM-9 plus

two drop tanks as day fighter

  

The kit and its assembly:

This project was initially inspired by a set of decals from an ESCI A-4G which I had bought in a lot – I wondered if I could use it for a submission to the “In the navy” group build at whatifmodelers.com in early 2020. I considered an FJ-3M in Australian colors on this basis and had stashed away a Sword kit of that aircraft for this purpose. However, I had already built an FJ variant for the GB (a kitbashed mix of an F-86D and an FJ-4B in USMC colors), and was reluctant to add another Fury.

 

This spontaneously changed after (thanks to Corona virus quarantine…) I cleaned up one of my kit hoards and found a conversion set for a 1:72 CAC 27 from JAYS Model Kits which I had bought eons ago without a concrete plan. That was the eventual trigger to spin the RAN Fury idea further – why not a navalized version of the Avon Sabre for HMAS Melbourne?

 

The result is either another kitbash or a highly modified FJ-3M from Sword. The JAYS Model Kits set comes with a THICK sprue that carries two fuselage halves and an air intake, and it also offers a vacu canopy as a thin fallback option because the set is actually intended to be used together with a Hobby Craft F-86F.

 

While the parts, molded in a somewhat waxy and brittle styrene, look crude on the massive sprue, the fuselage halves come with very fine recessed engravings. And once you have cleaned the parts (NOTHING for people faint at heart, a mini drill with a saw blade is highly recommended), their fit is surprisingly good. The air intake was so exact that no putty was needed to blend it with the rest of the fuselage.

 

The rest came from the Sword kit and integrating the parts into the CAC 27 fuselage went more smoothly than expected. For instance, the FJ-3M comes with a nice cockpit tub that also holds a full air intake duct. Thanks to the slightly wider fuselage of the CAC 27, it could be mounted into the new fuselage halves without problems and the intake duct almost perfectly matches the intake frame from the conversion set. The tailpipe could be easily integrated without any mods, too. The fins had to be glued directly to the fuselage – but this is the way how the Sword kit is actually constructed! Even the FJ-3M’s wings match the different fuselage perfectly. The only modifications I had to make is a slight enlargement of the ventral wing opening at the front and at the read in order to take the deeper wing element from the Sword kit, but that was an easy task. Once in place, the parts blend almost perfectly into each other, just minor PSR was necessary to hide the seams!

 

Other mods include an extended front wheel well for the longer leg from the FJ-3M and a scratched arrester hook installation, made from wire, which is on purpose different from the Y-shaped hook of the Furies.

 

For the canopy I relied on the vacu piece that came with the JAYS set. Fitting it was not easy, though, it took some PSR to blend the windscreen into the rest of the fuselage. Not perfect, but O.K. for such a solution from a conversion set.

 

The underwing pylons were taken from the Sword kit, including the early Sidewinders. I just replaced the drop tanks – the OOB tanks are very wide, and even though they might be authentic for the FJ-3, I was skeptical if they fit at all under the wings with the landing gear extended? In order to avoid trouble and for a more modern look, I replaced them outright with more slender tanks, which were to mimic A-4 tanks (USN FJ-4s frequently carried Skyhawk tanks). They actually come from a Revell F-16 kit, with modified fins. The refueling probe comes from the Sword kit.

 

A last word about the Sword kit: much light, but also much shadow. While I appreciate the fine surface engravings, the recognizably cambered wings, a detailed cockpit with a two-piece resin seat and a pretty landing gear as well as the long air intake, I wonder why the creators totally failed to provide ANY detail of the arrester hook (there is literally nothing, as if this was a land-based Sabre variant!?) or went for doubtful solutions like a front landing gear that consists of five(!) single, tiny parts? Sadism? The resin seat was also broken (despite being packed in a seperate bag), and it did not fit into the cockpit tub at all. Meh!

  

Painting and markings:

From the start I planned to give the model the late RAN A-4Gs’ unique air superiority paint scheme, which was AFAIK introduced in the late Seventies: a two-tone wraparound scheme consisting of “Light Admiralty Grey” (BS381C 697) and “Aircraft Grey” (BS 381C 693). Quite simple, but finding suitable paints was not an easy task, and I based my choice on pictures of the real aircraft (esp. from "buzz" number 880 at the Fleet Air Arm Museum, you find pics of it with very good light condition) rather than rely on (pretty doubtful if not contradictive) recommendations in various painting instructions from models or decal sets.

 

I wanted to keep things simple and settled upon Dark Gull Grey (FS 36231) and Light Blue (FS 35414), both enamel colors from Modelmaster, since both are rather dull interpretations of these tones. Esp. the Light Blue comes quite close to Light Admiralty Grey, even though it should be lighter for more contrast to the darker grey tone. But it has that subtle greenish touch of the original BS tone, and I did not want to mix the colors.

 

The pattern was adapted from the late A-4Gs’ scheme, and the colors were dulled down even more through a light black ink wash. Some post-shading with lighter tones emphasized the contrast between the two colors again. And while it is not an exact representation of the unique RAN air superiority scheme, I think that the overall impression is there.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey, while the landing gear, its wells and the inside of the air intake became white. A red rim was painted around the front opening, and the landing gear covers received a red outline, too. The white drop tanks are a detail I took from real world RAN A-4Gs - in the early days of the air superiority scheme, the tanks were frequently still finished in the old USN style livery, hence the white body but fins and tail section already in the updated colors.

 

The decals became a fight, though. As mentioned above, the came from an ESCI kit – and, as expected, the were brittle. All decals with a clear carrier film disintegrated while soaking in water, only those with a fully printed carrier film were more or less usable. One roundel broke and had to be repaired, and the checkered fin flash was a very delicate affair that broke several times, even though I tried to save and repair it with paint. But you can unfortunately see the damage.

 

Most stencils and some replacements (e. g. the “Navy” tag) come from the Sword FJ-3. While these decals are crisply printed, their carrier film is utterly thin, so thin that applying esp. the larger decals turned out to be hazardous and complicated. Another point that did not really convince me about the Sword kit.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and some soot stains were added around the exhaust and the gun ports with graphite.

  

In the end, this build looks, despite the troubles and the rather exotic ingredients like a relatively simple Sabre with Australian markings, just with a different Navy livery. You neither immediately recognize the FJ-3 behind it, nor the Avon Sabre’s bigger fuselage, unless you take a close and probably educated look. Very subtle, though.

The RAN air superiority scheme from the late Skyhawks suits the Sabre/Fury-thing well – I like the fact that it is a modern fighter scheme, but, thanks to the tones and the colorful other markings, not as dull and boring like many others, e. g. the contemporary USN "Ghost" scheme. Made me wonder about an early RAAF F-18 in this livery - should look very pretty, too?

and so it begins...reclamation (lower right)

 

triffids – tall plants capable of aggressive and seemingly intelligent behaviour. They are able to move about by "walking" on their roots, appear to communicate with each other, and possess a deadly whip-like poisonous sting that enables them to kill their victims and feed on their rotting carcasses.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_of_the_Triffids.

  

The Day of the Triffids is a 1951 post-apocalyptic novel about a plague of blindness which befalls the entire world, allowing the rise of an aggressive species of plant.

  

One of the first novels I ever borrowed from a library as a kid. I was enraptured. The genesis of my love of science fiction. The literary depiction of the triffids slowly overtaking buildings and civilization has stayed with me. Probably why I respect and admire our natural world so much and strive to protect and nourish it. My love of plantlife is well documented here.

Mallard Duck (Disambiguation) (ˈmælɑːrd, ˈmælərd) or Wild Duck (Anas platyrhynchos)

 

The mallard (/ˈmælɑːrd, ˈmælərd/) or wild duck (Anas platyrhynchos) is a dabbling duck that breeds throughout the temperate and subtropical Americas, Eurasia, and North Africa, and has been introduced to New Zealand, Australia, Peru, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, the Falkland Islands, and South Africa. This duck belongs to the subfamily Anatinae of the waterfowl family Anatidae. The male birds (drakes) have a glossy green head and are grey on their wings and belly, while the females (hens or ducks) have mainly brown-speckled plumage. Both sexes have an area of white-bordered black or iridescent blue feathers called a speculum on their wings; males especially tend to have blue speculum feathers. The mallard is 50–65 cm (20–26 in) long, of which the body makes up around two-thirds the length. The wingspan is 81–98 cm (32–39 in) and the bill is 4.4 to 6.1 cm (1.7 to 2.4 in) long. It is often slightly heavier than most other dabbling ducks, weighing 0.7–1.6 kg (1.5–3.5 lb). Mallards live in wetlands, eat water plants and small animals, and are social animals preferring to congregate in groups or flocks of varying sizes. This species is the main ancestor of most breeds of domestic ducks.

 

The female lays eight to 13 creamy white to greenish-buff spotless eggs, on alternate days. Incubation takes 27 to 28 days and fledging takes 50 to 60 days. The ducklings are precocial and fully capable of swimming as soon as they hatch.

 

The mallard is considered to be a species of least concern by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Unlike many waterfowl, mallards are considered an invasive species in some regions. It is a very adaptable species, being able to live and even thrive in urban areas which may have supported more localised, sensitive species of waterfowl before development. The non-migratory mallard interbreeds with indigenous wild ducks of closely related species through genetic pollution by producing fertile offspring. Complete hybridisation of various species of wild duck gene pools could result in the extinction of many indigenous waterfowl. The wild mallard is the ancestor of most domestic ducks, and its naturally evolved wild gene pool gets genetically polluted by the domestic and feral mallard populations.

  

Taxonomy and evolutionary history

 

The mallard was one of the many bird species originally described in the 1758 10th edition of Systema Naturae by Carl Linnaeus. He gave it two binomial names: Anas platyrhynchos and Anas boschas. The latter was generally preferred until 1906 when Einar Lönnberg established that A. platyrhynchos had priority, as it appeared on an earlier page in the text. The scientific name comes from Latin Anas, "duck" and Ancient Greek πλατυρυγχος, platyrhynchus, "broad-billed" (from πλατύς, platys, "broad" and ρυγχός, rhunkhos, "bill"). The genome of Anas platyrhynchos was sequenced in 2013.

 

The name mallard originally referred to any wild drake, and it is sometimes still used this way. It was derived from the Old French malart or mallart for "wild drake" although its true derivation is unclear. It may be related to, or at least influenced by, an Old High German masculine proper name Madelhart, clues lying in the alternative English forms "maudelard" and "mawdelard". Masle (male) has also been proposed as an influence.

 

Mallards frequently interbreed with their closest relatives in the genus Anas, such as the American black duck, and also with species more distantly related, such as the northern pintail, leading to various hybrids that may be fully fertile. This is quite unusual among such different species, and is apparently because the mallard evolved very rapidly and recently, during the Late Pleistocene. The distinct lineages of this radiation are usually kept separate due to non-overlapping ranges and behavioural cues, but have not yet reached the point where they are fully genetically incompatible. Mallards and their domestic conspecifics are also fully interfertile.

 

Genetic analysis has shown that certain mallards appear to be closer to their Indo-Pacific relatives, while others are related to their American relatives. Mitochondrial DNA data for the D-loop sequence suggest that mallards may have evolved in the general area of Siberia. Mallard bones rather abruptly appear in food remains of ancient humans and other deposits of fossil bones in Europe, without a good candidate for a local predecessor species. The large Ice Age palaeosubspecies that made up at least the European and West Asian populations during the Pleistocene has been named Anas platyrhynchos palaeoboschas.

 

Mallards are differentiated in their mitochondrial DNA between North American and Eurasian populations, but the nuclear genome displays a notable lack of genetic structure. Haplotypes typical of American mallard relatives and eastern spot-billed ducks can be found in mallards around the Bering Sea. The Aleutian Islands hold a population of mallards that appear to be evolving towards becoming a subspecies, as gene flow with other populations is very limited.

 

Also, the paucity of morphological differences between the Old World mallards and the New World mallard demonstrates the extent to which the genome is shared among them such that birds like the Chinese spot-billed duck are highly similar to the Old World mallard, and birds such as the Hawaiian duck are highly similar to the New World mallard.

 

The size of the mallard varies clinally; for example, birds from Greenland, though larger, have smaller bills, paler plumage, and stockier bodies than birds further south and are sometimes classified as a separate subspecies, the Greenland mallard (A. p. conboschas).

  

Description

 

The mallard is a medium-sized waterfowl species that is often slightly heavier than most other dabbling ducks. It is 50–65 cm (20–26 in) long – of which the body makes up around two-thirds – has a wingspan of 81–98 cm (32–39 in) and weighs 0.7–1.6 kg (1.5–3.5 lb). Among standard measurements, the wing chord is 25.7 to 30.6 cm (10.1 to 12.0 in), the bill is 4.4 to 6.1 cm (1.7 to 2.4 in), and the tarsus is 4.1 to 4.8 cm (1.6 to 1.9 in).

 

The breeding male mallard is unmistakable, with a glossy bottle-green head and a white collar that demarcates the head from the purple-tinged brown breast, grey-brown wings, and a pale grey belly. The rear of the male is black, with white-bordered dark tail feathers. The bill of the male is a yellowish-orange tipped with black, with that of the female generally darker and ranging from black to mottled orange and brown. The female mallard is predominantly mottled, with each individual feather showing sharp contrast from buff to very dark brown, a coloration shared by most female dabbling ducks, and has buff cheeks, eyebrow, throat, and neck, with a darker crown and eye-stripe.

 

Both male and female mallards have distinct iridescent purple-blue speculum feathers edged with white, which are prominent in flight or at rest but temporarily shed during the annual summer moult. Upon hatching, the plumage of the duckling is yellow on the underside and face (with streaks by the eyes) and black on the back (with some yellow spots) all the way to the top and back of the head. Its legs and bill are also black. As it nears a month in age, the duckling's plumage starts becoming drab, looking more like the female, though more streaked, and its legs lose their dark grey colouring. Two months after hatching, the fledgling period has ended, and the duckling is now a juvenile. Between three and four months of age, the juvenile can finally begin flying, as its wings are fully developed for flight (which can be confirmed by the sight of purple speculum feathers). Its bill soon loses its dark grey colouring, and its sex can finally be distinguished visually by three factors:

1) the bill is yellow in males, but black and orange in females;

2) the breast feathers are reddish-brown in males, but brown in females; and

3) in males, the centre tail feather (drake feather) is curled, but in females, the centre tail feather is straight.

 

During the final period of maturity leading up to adulthood (6–10 months of age), the plumage of female juveniles remains the same while the plumage of male juveniles gradually changes to its characteristic colours. This change in plumage also applies to adult mallard males when they transition in and out of their non-breeding eclipse plumage at the beginning and the end of the summer moulting period. The adulthood age for mallards is fourteen months, and the average life expectancy is three years, but they can live to twenty.

 

Several species of duck have brown-plumaged females that can be confused with the female mallard. The female gadwall (Mareca strepera) has an orange-lined bill, white belly, black and white speculum that is seen as a white square on the wings in flight, and is a smaller bird. More similar to the female mallard in North America are the American black duck (A. rubripes), which is notably darker-hued in both sexes than the mallard, and the mottled duck (A. fulvigula), which is somewhat darker than the female mallard, and with slightly different bare-part colouration and no white edge on the speculum.

 

In captivity, domestic ducks come in wild-type plumages, white, and other colours. Most of these colour variants are also known in domestic mallards not bred as livestock, but kept as pets, aviary birds, etc., where they are rare but increasing in availability.

 

A noisy species, the female has the deep quack stereotypically associated with ducks. Male mallards make a sound phonetically similar to that of the female, a typical quack, but it is deeper and quieter compared to that of the female. When incubating a nest, or when offspring are present, females vocalise differently, making a call that sounds like a truncated version of the usual quack. This maternal vocalisation is highly attractive to their young. The repetition and frequency modulation of these quacks form the auditory basis for species identification in offspring, a process known as acoustic conspecific identification. In addition, females hiss if the nest or offspring are threatened or interfered with. When taking off, the wings of a mallard produce a characteristic faint whistling noise.

 

The mallard is a rare example of both Allen's Rule and Bergmann's Rule in birds. Bergmann's Rule, which states that polar forms tend to be larger than related ones from warmer climates, has numerous examples in birds, as in case of the Greenland mallard which is larger than the mallards further south. Allen's Rule says that appendages like ears tend to be smaller in polar forms to minimise heat loss, and larger in tropical and desert equivalents to facilitate heat diffusion, and that the polar taxa are stockier overall. Examples of this rule in birds are rare as they lack external ears, but the bill of ducks is supplied with a few blood vessels to prevent heat loss, and, as in the Greenland mallard, the bill is smaller than that of birds farther south, illustrating the rule.

 

Due to the variability of the mallard's genetic code, which gives it its vast interbreeding capability, mutations in the genes that decide plumage colour are very common and have resulted in a wide variety of hybrids, such as Brewer's duck (mallard × gadwall, Mareca strepera).

  

Distribution and habitat

 

The mallard is widely distributed across the Northern and Southern Hemispheres; in North America its range extends from southern and central Alaska to Mexico, the Hawaiian Islands, across the Palearctic, from Iceland and southern Greenland and parts of Morocco (North Africa) in the west, Scandinavia and Britain to the north, and to Siberia Japan and South Korea. Also in the east, it ranges to south-eastern and south-western Australia and New Zealand in the Southern hemisphere. It is strongly migratory in the northern parts of its breeding range, and winters farther south. For example, in North America, it winters south to the southern United States and northern Mexico, but also regularly strays into Central America and the Caribbean between September and May. A drake later named "Trevor" attracted media attention in 2018 when it turned up on the island of Niue, an atypical location for mallards.

 

The mallard inhabits a wide range of habitats and climates, from the Arctic tundra to subtropical regions. It is found in both fresh- and salt-water wetlands, including parks, small ponds, rivers, lakes and estuaries, as well as shallow inlets and open sea within sight of the coastline. Water depths of less than 0.9 metres (3.0 ft) are preferred, with birds avoiding areas more than a few metres deep They are attracted to bodies of water with aquatic vegetation.

  

Behaviour

 

Feeding

The mallard is omnivorous and very flexible in its choice of food. Its diet may vary based on several factors, including the stage of the breeding cycle, short-term variations in available food, nutrient availability, and interspecific and intraspecific competition The majority of the mallard's diet seems to be made up of gastropods, insects (including beetles, flies, lepidopterans, dragonflies, and caddisflies), crustaceans, worms, many varieties of seeds and plant matter, and roots and tubers. During the breeding season, male birds were recorded to have eaten 37.6% animal matter and 62.4% plant matter, most notably the grass Echinochloa crus-galli, and nonlaying females ate 37.0% animal matter and 63.0% plant matter, while laying females ate 71.9% animal matter and only 28.1% plant matter. Plants generally make up the larger part of a bird's diet, especially during autumn migration and in the winter.

 

The mallard usually feeds by dabbling for plant food or grazing; there are reports of it eating frogs. However, in 2017 a flock of mallards in Romania were observed hunting small migratory birds, including grey wagtails and black redstarts, the first documented occasion they had been seen attacking and consuming large vertebrates. It usually nests on a river bank, but not always near water. It is highly gregarious outside of the breeding season and forms large flocks, which are known as "sordes."

 

Breeding

 

Mallards usually form pairs (in October and November in the Northern Hemisphere) until the female lays eggs at the start of the nesting season, which is around the beginning of spring. At this time she is left by the male who joins up with other males to await the moulting period, which begins in June (in the Northern Hemisphere). During the brief time before this, however, the males are still sexually potent and some of them either remain on standby to sire replacement clutches (for female mallards that have lost or abandoned their previous clutch) or forcibly mate with females that appear to be isolated or unattached regardless of their species and whether or not they have a brood of ducklings.

 

Nesting sites are typically on the ground, hidden in vegetation where the female's speckled plumage serves as effective camouflage, but female mallards have also been known to nest in hollows in trees, boathouses, roof gardens and on balconies, sometimes resulting in hatched offspring having difficulty following their parent to water.

 

Egg clutches number 8–13 creamy white to greenish-buff eggs free of speckles. They measure about 58 mm (2.3 in) in length and 32 mm (1.3 in) in width. The eggs are laid on alternate days, and incubation begins when the clutch is almost complete. Incubation takes 27–28 days and fledging takes 50–60 days. The ducklings are precocial and fully capable of swimming as soon as they hatch.[citation needed] However, filial imprinting compels them to instinctively stay near the mother, not only for warmth and protection but also to learn about and remember their habitat as well as how and where to forage for food. When ducklings mature into flight-capable juveniles, they learn about and remember their traditional migratory routes (unless they are born and raised in captivity).In New Zealand, where mallards are naturalised, the nesting season has been found to be longer, eggs and clutches are larger and nest survival is generally greater compared with mallards in their native range.

 

In cases where a nest or brood fails, some mallards may mate for a second time in an attempt to raise a second clutch, typically around early-to-mid summer. In addition, mallards may occasionally breed during the autumn in cases of unseasonably warm weather; one such instance of a ‘late’ clutch occurred in November 2011, in which a female successfully hatched and raised a clutch of eleven ducklings at the London Wetland Centre.

 

During the breeding season, both male and female mallards can become aggressive, driving off competitors to themselves or their mate by charging at them.[86] Males tend to fight more than females, and attack each other by repeatedly pecking at their rival's chest, ripping out feathers and even skin on rare occasions. Female mallards are also known to carry out 'inciting displays', which encourages other ducks in the flock to begin fighting. It is possible that this behaviour allows the female to evaluate the strength of potential partners.

 

The drakes that end up being left out after the others have paired off with mating partners sometimes target an isolated female duck, even one of a different species, and proceed to chase and peck at her until she weakens, at which point the males take turns copulating with the female. Lebret (1961) calls this behaviour "Attempted Rape Flight", and Stanley Cramp and K.E.L. Simmons (1977) speak of "rape-intent flights". Male mallards also occasionally chase other male ducks of a different species, and even each other, in the same way. In one documented case of "homosexual necrophilia", a male mallard copulated with another male he was chasing after the chased male died upon flying into a glass window.[89] This paper was awarded an Ig Nobel Prize in 2003.

 

Mallards are opportunistically targeted by brood parasites, occasionally having eggs laid in their nests by redheads, ruddy ducks, lesser scaup, gadwalls, northern shovellers, northern pintails, cinnamon teal, common goldeneyes, and other mallards. These eggs are generally accepted when they resemble the eggs of the host mallard, but the hen may attempt to eject them or even abandon the nest if parasitism occurs during egg laying.

  

Predators and threats

 

In addition to human hunting, Mallards of all ages (but especially young ones) and in all locations must contend with a wide diversity of predators including raptors, mustelids, corvids, snakes, raccoons, opossums, skunks, turtles, large fish, felids, and canids, the last two including domestic ones. The most prolific natural predators of adult mallards are red foxes (which most often pick off brooding females) and the faster or larger birds of prey, e.g. peregrine falcons, Aquila eagles, or Haliaeetus eagles. In North America, adult mallards face no fewer than 15 species of birds of prey, from northern harriers (Circus hudsonius) and short-eared owls (Asio flammeus) (both smaller than a mallard) to huge bald, (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), and about a dozen species of mammalian predator, not counting several more avian and mammalian predators who threaten eggs and nestlings.

 

Mallards are also preyed upon by other waterside apex predators, such as the grey heron (Ardea cinerea), the European herring gull (Larus argentatus), the wels catfish (Silurus glanis), and the northern pike (Esox lucius). Crows (Corvus spp.) are also known to kill ducklings and adults on occasion. Also, mallards may be attacked by larger Anseriformes such as swans (Cygnus spp.) and geese during the breeding season, and are frequently driven off by these birds over territorial disputes. Mute swans (Cygnus olor) have been known to attack or even kill mallards if they feel that the ducks pose a threat to their offspring.

 

The predation-avoidance behaviour of sleeping with one eye open, allowing one brain hemisphere to remain aware while the other half sleeps, was first demonstrated in mallards, although it is believed to be widespread among birds in general.

  

Status and conservation

 

Since 1998, the mallard has been rated as a species of least concern on the IUCN Red List of Endangered Species. This is because it has a large range–more than 20,000,000 km2 (7,700,000 mi2)–and because its population is increasing, rather than declining by 30% over ten years or three generations and thus is not warranted a vulnerable rating. Also, the population size of the mallard is very large.

 

Unlike many waterfowl, mallards have benefited from human alterations to the world – so much so that they are now considered an invasive species in some regions. They are a common sight in urban parks, lakes, ponds, and other human-made water features in the regions they inhabit, and are often tolerated or encouraged in human habitat due to their placid nature towards humans and their beautiful and iridescent colours. While most are not domesticated, mallards are so successful at coexisting in human regions that the main conservation risk they pose comes from the loss of genetic diversity among a region's traditional ducks once humans and mallards colonise an area. Mallards are very adaptable, being able to live and even thrive in urban areas which may have supported more localised, sensitive species of waterfowl before development. The release of feral mallards in areas where they are not native sometimes creates problems through interbreeding with indigenous waterfowl. These non-migratory mallards interbreed with indigenous wild ducks from local populations of closely related species through genetic pollution by producing fertile offspring. Complete hybridisation of various species of wild duck gene pools could result in the extinction of many indigenous waterfowl. The mallard itself is the ancestor of most domestic ducks, and its naturally evolved wild gene pool gets genetically polluted in turn by the domestic and feral populations.

 

Over time, a continuum of hybrids ranging between almost typical examples of either species develop; the speciation process is beginning to reverse itself. This has created conservation concerns for relatives of the mallard, such as the Hawaiian duck, the New Zealand grey duck (A. s. superciliosa) subspecies of the Pacific black duck, the American black duck, the mottled duck, Meller's duck, the yellow-billed duck, and the Mexican duck, in the latter case even leading to a dispute as to whether these birds should be considered a species (and thus entitled to more conservation research and funding) or included in the mallard species. Ecological changes and hunting have also led to a decline of local species; for example, the New Zealand grey duck population declined drastically due to overhunting in the mid-20th century. Hybrid offspring of Hawaiian ducks seem to be less well adapted to native habitat, and using them in re-introduction projects apparently reduces success. In summary, the problems of mallards "hybridising away" relatives is more a consequence of local ducks declining than of mallards spreading; allopatric speciation and isolating behaviour have produced today's diversity of mallard-like ducks despite the fact that, in most, if not all, of these populations, hybridisation must have occurred to some extent.

  

Invasiveness

 

Mallards are causing severe "genetic pollution" to South Africa's biodiversity by breeding with endemic ducks even though the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds – an agreement to protect the local waterfowl populations – applies to the mallard as well as other ducks. The hybrids of mallards and the yellow-billed duck are fertile, capable of producing hybrid offspring. If this continues, only hybrids occur and in the long term result in the extinction of various indigenous waterfowl. The mallard can crossbreed with 63 other species, posing a severe threat to indigenous waterfowl's genetic integrity. Mallards and their hybrids compete with indigenous birds for resources, including nest sites, roosting sites, and food.

 

Availability of mallards, mallard ducklings, and fertilised mallard eggs for public sale and private ownership, either as poultry or as pets, is currently legal in the United States, except for the state of Florida, which has currently banned domestic ownership of mallards. This is to prevent hybridisation with the native mottled duck.

 

The mallard is considered an invasive species in New Zealand, where it competes with the local New Zealand grey duck, which was overhunted in the past. There, and elsewhere, mallards are spreading with increasing urbanisation and hybridising with local relatives.

 

The eastern or Chinese spot-billed duck is currently introgressing into the mallard populations of the Primorsky Krai, possibly due to habitat changes from global warming. The Mariana mallard was a resident allopatric population – in most respects a good species – apparently initially derived from mallard-Pacific black duck hybrids; unfortunately, it became extinct in the late 20th century.

 

The Laysan duck is an insular relative of the mallard, with a very small and fluctuating population. Mallards sometimes arrive on its island home during migration, and can be expected to occasionally have remained and hybridised with Laysan ducks as long as these species have existed. However, these hybrids are less well adapted to the peculiar ecological conditions of Laysan Island than the local ducks, and thus have lower fitness. Laysan ducks were found throughout the Hawaiian archipelago before 400 CE, after which they suffered a rapid decline during the Polynesian colonisation. Now, their range includes only Laysan Island. It is one of the successfully translocated birds, after having become nearly extinct in the early 20th century.

  

Relationship with humans

 

Domestication

 

Mallards have often been ubiquitous in their regions among the ponds, rivers, and streams of human parks, farms, and other human-made waterways – even to the point of visiting water features in human courtyards.

 

Mallards have had a long relationship with humans. Almost all domestic duck breeds derive from the mallard, with the exception of a few Muscovy breeds, and are listed under the trinomial name A. p. domesticus. Mallards are generally monogamous while domestic ducks are mostly polygamous. Domestic ducks have no territorial behaviour and are less aggressive than mallards. Domestic ducks are mostly kept for meat; their eggs are also eaten, and have a strong flavour. They were first domesticated in Southeast Asia at least 4,000 years ago, during the Neolithic Age, and were also farmed by the Romans in Europe, and the Malays in Asia. As the domestic duck and the mallard are the same species as each other, It is common for mallards to mate with domestic ducks and produce hybrid offspring that are fully fertile. Because of this, mallards have been found to be contaminated with the genes of the domestic duck.

 

While the keeping of domestic breeds is more popular, pure-bred mallards are sometimes kept for eggs and meat, although they may require wing clipping to restrict flying, or training to navigate and fly home.

 

Hunting

 

Mallards are one of the most common varieties of ducks hunted as a sport due to the large population size. The ideal location for hunting mallards is considered to be where the water level is somewhat shallow where the birds can be found foraging for food. Hunting mallards might cause the population to decline in some places, at some times, and with some populations. In certain countries, the mallard may be legally shot but is protected under national acts and policies. For example, in the United Kingdom, the mallard is protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, which restricts certain hunting methods or taking or killing mallards.

 

As food

 

Since ancient times, the mallard has been eaten as food. The wild mallard was eaten in Neolithic Greece. Usually, only the breast and thigh meat is eaten. It does not need to be hung before preparation, and is often braised or roasted, sometimes flavoured with bitter orange or with port.

  

[Credit: en.wikipedia.org/]

Cassowaries are very shy, but when provoked they are capable of inflicting injuries, occasionally fatal, to dogs and people.

+++ 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 Waffenträger (Weapon Carrier) VTS3 “Diana” was a prototype for a wheeled tank destroyer. It was developed by Thyssen-Henschel (later Rheinmetall) in Kassel, Germany, in the late Seventies, in response to a German Army requirement for a highly mobile tank destroyer with the firepower of the Leopard 1 main battle tank then in service and about to be replaced with the more capable Leopard 2 MBT, but less complex and costly. The main mission of the Diana was light to medium territorial defense, protection of infantry units and other, lighter, elements of the cavalry as well as tactical reconnaissance. Instead of heavy armor it would rather use its good power-to-weight ratio, excellent range and cross-country ability (despite the wheeled design) for defense and a computerized fire control system to accomplish this mission.

 

In order to save development cost and time, the vehicle was heavily based on the Spähpanzer Luchs (Lynx), a new German 8x8 amphibious reconnaissance armored fighting vehicle that had just entered Bundeswehr service in 1975. The all-wheel drive Luchs made was well armored against light weapons, had a full NBC protection system and was characterized by its extremely low-noise running. The eight large low-pressure tires had run-flat properties, and, at speeds up to about 50 km/h, all four axles could be steered, giving the relatively large vehicle a surprising agility and very good off-road performance. As a special feature, the vehicle was equipped with a rear-facing driver with his own driving position (normally the radio operator), so that the vehicle could be driven at full speed into both directions – a heritage from German WWII designs, and a tactical advantage when the vehicle had to quickly retreat from tactical position after having been detected. The original Luchs weighed less than 20 tons, was fully amphibious and could surmount water obstacles quickly and independently using propellers at the rear and the fold back trim vane at the front. Its armament was relatively light, though, a 20 mm Rheinmetall MK 20 Rh 202 gun in the turret that was effective against both ground and air targets.

 

The Waffenträger “Diana” used the Luchs’ hull and dynamic components as basis, and Thyssen-Henschel solved the challenge to mount a large and heavy 105 mm L7 gun with its mount on the light chassis through a minimalistic, unmanned mount and an autoloader. Avoiding a traditional manned and heavy, armored turret, a lot of weight and internal volume that had to be protected could be saved, and crew safety was indirectly improved, too. This concept had concurrently been tested in the form of the VTS1 (“Versuchsträger Scheitellafette #1) experimental tank in 1976 for the Kampfpanzer 3 development, which eventually led to the Leopard 2 MBT (which retained a traditional turret, though).

 

For the “Diana” test vehicle, Thyssen-Henschel developed a new low-profile turret with a very small frontal area. Two crew members, the commander (on the right side) and the gunner (to the left), were seated in/under the gun mount, completely inside of the vehicle’s hull. The turret was a very innovative construction for its time, fully stabilized and mounted the proven 105mm L7 rifled cannon with a smoke discharger. Its autoloader contained 8 rounds in a carousel magazine. 16 more rounds could be carried in the hull, but they had to be manually re-loaded into the magazine, which was only externally accessible. A light, co-axial 7,62mm machine gun against soft targets was available, too, as well as eight defensive smoke grenade mortars.

 

The automated L7 had a rate of fire of ten rounds per minute and could fire four types of ammunition: a kinetic energy penetrator to destroy armored vehicles; a high explosive anti-tank round to destroy thin-skinned vehicles and provide anti-personnel fragmentation; a high explosive plastic round to destroy bunkers, machine gun and sniper positions, and create openings in walls for infantry to access; and a canister shot for use against dismounted infantry in the open or for smoke charges. The rounds to be fired could be pre-selected, so that the gun was able to automatically fire a certain ammunition sequence, but manual round selection was possible at any time, too.

 

In order to take the new turret, the Luchs hull had to be modified. Early calculations had revealed that a simple replacement of the Luchs’ turret with the new L7 mount would have unfavorably shifted the vehicle’s center of gravity up- and forward, making it very nose-heavy and hard to handle in rough terrain or at high speed, and the long barrel would have markedly overhung the front end, impairing handling further. It was also clear that the additional weight and the rise of the CoG made amphibious operations impossible - a fate that met the upgraded Luchs recce tanks in the Eighties, too, after several accidents with overturned vehicles during wading and drowned crews. With this insight the decision was made to omit the vehicle’s amphibious capability, save weight and complexity, and to modify the vehicle’s layout considerably to optimize the weight distribution.

 

Taking advantage of the fact that the Luchs already had two complete driver stations at both ends, a pair of late-production hulls were set aside in 1977 and their internal layout reversed. The engine bay was now in the vehicle’s front, the secured ammunition storage was placed next to it, behind the separate driver compartment, and the combat section with the turret mechanism was located behind it. Since the VTS3s were only prototypes, only minimal adaptations were made. This meant that the driver was now located on the right side of the vehicle, while and the now-rear-facing secondary driver/radio operator station ended up on the left side – much like a RHD vehicle – but this was easily accepted in the light of cost and time savings. As a result, the gun and its long, heavy barrel were now located above the vehicle’s hull, so that the overall weight distribution was almost neutral and overall dimensions remained compact.

 

Both test vehicles were completed in early 1978 and field trials immediately started. While the overall mobility was on par with the Luchs and the Diana’s high speed and low noise profile was highly appreciated, the armament was and remained a source of constant concern. Shooting in motion from the Diana turned out to be very problematic, and even firing from a standstill was troublesome. The gun mount and the vehicle’s complex suspension were able to "hold" the recoil of the full-fledged 105-mm tank gun, which had always been famous for its rather large muzzle energy. But when fired, even in the longitudinal plane, the vehicle body fell heavily towards the stern, so that the target was frequently lost and aiming had to be resumed – effectively negating the benefit from the autoloader’s high rate of fire and exposing the vehicle to potential target retaliation. Firing to the side was even worse. Several attempts were made to mend this flaw, but neither the addition of a muzzle brake, stronger shock absorbers and even hydro-pneumatic suspension elements did not solve the problem. In addition, the high muzzle flames and the resulting significant shockwave required the infantry to stay away from the vehicle intended to support them. The Bundeswehr also criticized the too small ammunition load, as well as the fact that the autoloader magazine could not be re-filled under armor protection, so that the vehicle had to retreat to safe areas to re-arm and/or to adapt to a new mission profile. This inherent flaw not only put the crew under the hazards of enemy fire, it also negated the vehicle’s NBC protection – a serious issue and likely Cold War scenario. Another weak point was the Diana’s weight: even though the net gain of weight compared with the Luchs was less than 3 tons after the conversion, this became another serious problem that led to the Diana’s demise: during trials the Bundeswehr considered the possibility to airlift the Diana, but its weight (even that of the Luchs, BTW) was too much for the Luftwaffe’s biggest own transport aircraft, the C-160 Transall. Even aircraft from other NATO members, e.g. the common C-130 Hercules, could hardly carry the vehicle. In theory, equipment had to be removed, including the cannon and parts of its mount.

 

Since the tactical value of the vehicle was doubtful and other light anti-tank weapons in the form of the HOT anti-tank missile had reached operational status, so that very light vehicles and even small infantry groups could now effectively fight against full-fledged enemy battle tanks from a safe distance, the Diana’s development was stopped in 1988. Both VTS3 prototypes were mothballed, stored at the Bundeswehr Munster Training Area camp and are still waiting to be revamped as historic exhibits alongside other prototypes like the Kampfpanzer 70 in the German Tank Museum located there, too.

  

Specifications:

Crew: 4 (commander, driver, gunner, radio operator/second driver)

Weight: 22.6 t

Length: 7.74 m (25 ft 4 ¼ in)

Width: 2.98 m ( 9 ft 9 in)

Height: XXX

Ground clearance: 440 mm (1 ft 4 in)

Suspension: hydraulic all-wheel drive and steering

 

Armor:

Unknown, but sufficient to withstand 14.5 mm AP rounds

 

Performance:

Speed: 90 km/h (56 mph) on roads

Operational range: 720 km (445 mi)

Power/weight: 13,3 hp/ton with petrol, 17,3 hp/ton with diesel

 

Engine:

1× Daimler Benz OM 403A turbocharged 10-cylinder 4-stroke multi-fuel engine,

delivering 300 hp with petrol, 390 hp with diesel

 

Armament:

1× 105 mm L7 rifled gun with autoloader (8 rounds ready, plus 16 in reserve)

1× co-axial 7.92 mm M3 machine gun with 2.000 rounds

Two groups of four Wegmann 76 mm smoke mortars

  

The kit and its assembly:

I have been a big Luchs fan since I witnessed one in action during a public Bundeswehr demo day when I was around 10 years old: a huge, boxy and futuristic vehicle with strange proportions, gigantic wheels, water propellers, a mind-boggling mobility and all of this utterly silent. Today you’d assume that this vehicle had an electric engine – spooky! So I always had a soft spot for it, and now it was time and a neat occasion to build a what-if model around it.

 

This fictional wheeled tank prototype model was spawned by a leftover Revell 1:72 Luchs kit, which I had bought some time ago primarily for the turret, used in a fictional post-WWII SdKfz. 234 “Puma” conversion. With just the chassis left I wondered what other use or equipment it might take, and, after several weeks with the idea in the back of my mind, I stumbled at Silesian Models over an M1128 resin conversion set for the Trumpeter M1126 “Stryker” 8x8 APC model. From this set as potential donor for a conversion the prototype idea with an unmanned turret was born.

 

Originally I just planned to mount the new turret onto the OOB hull, but when playing with the parts I found the look with an overhanging gun barrel and the bigger turret placed well forward on the hull goofy and unbalanced. I was about to shelf the idea again, until I recognized that the Luchs’ hull is almost symmetrical – the upper hull half could be easily reversed on the chassis tub (at least on the kit…), and this would allow much better proportions. From this conceptual change the build went straightforward, reversing the upper hull only took some minor PSR. The resin turret was taken mostly OOB, it only needed a scratched adapter to fit into the respective hull opening. I just added a co-axial machine gun fairing, antenna bases (from the Luchs kit, since they could, due to the long gun barrel, not be attached to the hull anymore) and smoke grenade mortars (also taken from the Luchs).

 

An unnerving challenge became the Luchs kit’s suspension and drive train – it took two days to assemble the vehicle’s underside alone! While this area is very accurate and delicate, the fact that almost EVERY lever and stabilizer is a separate piece on four(!) axles made the assembly a very slow process. Just for reference: the kit comes with three and a half sprues. A full one for the wheels (each consists of three parts, and more than another one for suspension and drivetrain!

Furthermore, the many hull surface details like tools or handles – these are more than a dozen bits and pieces – are separate, very fragile and small (tiny!), too. Cutting all these wee parts out and cleaning them was a tedious affair, too, plus painting them separately.

Otherwise the model went together well, but it’s certainly not good for quick builders and those with big fingers and/or poor sight.

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme was a conservative choice; it is a faithful adaptation of the Bundeswehr’s NATO standard camouflage for the European theatre of operations that was introduced in the Eighties. It was adopted by many armies to confuse potential aggressors from the East, so that observers could not easily identify a vehicle and its nationality. It consists of a green base with red-brown and black blotches, in Germany it was executed with RAL tones, namely 6031 (Bronze Green), 8027 (Leather Brown) and 9021 (Tar Black). The pattern was standardized for each vehicle type and I stuck to the official Luchs pattern, trying to adapt it to the new/bigger turret. I used Revell acrylic paints, since the authentic RAL tones are readily available in this product range (namely the tones 06, 65 and 84). The big tires were painted with Revell 09 (Anthracite).

 

Next the model was treated with a highly thinned washing with black and red-brown acrylic paint, before decals were applied, taken from the OOB sheet and without unit markings, since the Diana would represent a test vehicle. After sealing them with a thin coat of clear varnish the model was furthermore treated with lightly dry-brushed Revell 45 and 75 to emphasize edges and surface details, and the separately painted hull equipment was mounted. The following step was a cloudy treatment with watercolors (from a typical school paintbox, it’s great stuff for weathering!), simulating dust residue all over the hull. After a final protective coat with matt acrylic varnish I finally added some mineral artist pigments to the lower hull areas and created mud crusts on the wheels through light wet varnish traces into which pigments were “dusted”.

  

Basically a simple project, but the complex Luchs kit with its zillion of wee bits and pieces took time and cost some nerves. However, the result looks pretty good, and the Stryker turret blends well into the overall package. Not certain how realistic the swap of the Luchs’ internal layout would have been, but I think that the turret moved to the rear makes more sense than the original forward position? After all, the model is supposed to be a prototype, so there’s certainly room for creative freedom. And in classic Bundeswehr colors, the whole thing even looks pretty convincing.

 

+++ 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.

"Termination has never been this much fun before."

 

---

 

This is the blurred line between our technology and the technology we have yet to encounter out in the stars - the Shadowblade Energy Scout Rifle.

 

After studying the mysterious ways of the Ntryksis' weaponry, the humans decided to create a weapon of their own using their technology. Designed and manufactured straight out the Ntryksis Technology - eXperimental weapons labratory, the Shadowblade was created to meet three basic requirements:

 

- A replacement to traditional bullet firing weaponry.

- Speed, agility, and power - all in the form of a direct-energy rifle.

- Durability for long-lasted use out on the field and beyond.

 

This ESR fires directed energy instead of normal traditional bullets - the gun requires a special magazine-like battery - which allows the gun to fire 30 shots - to charge up enough power to collect enough energy to fire, hence providing ammunition. Without it, the gun won't fire properly or simply may not fire at all. As this is a human weapon, ammunition is limited, though the need to search for ammunition is expected to mitigate for the Shadowblade.

 

The Shadowblade is meant for orbital combat as well, capable of firing just as easily in space as it does on land. The slow rate of fire means that this should not be considered a complete assault weapon - this is mainly a support and reconnaissance weapon meant to pick out targets easily at long range. There are no iron sights, though a mid-long range scope is standard with all ESRs. An integrated laser sight located under the barrel is also available to assist in target acquisition and accuracy.

   

The Divine Spirit is infinite, yet it dwells in forms and inspires likeness, and thus truth enters into forms and signs.” But while landscapes portrayed the vastness and grandeur of Nature, the garden revealed her intimate aspect. All forms of art are the outward and visible expression of Ch’i, the Cosmic Breath or Energy, with which all creation must be in accord, whether it be painting, poetry, music, or the creation of a garden. Indeed, all these arts developed side by side, for the Chinese scholar was expected to be capable of interpreting the same inspiration in all three arts together and the place of both their inspiration and expression was most usually the garden, this term being applied also to the rural retreat of a sage or hermit where in some remote and beautiful scenery a hut had been built and round it trees planted. In a well-designed garden it should be difficult to distinguish between the work of man and Nature. One should “borrow scenery from Nature” and the ideal place was “among trees in the mountains.” Wherever it was, the garden was a place of quiet, meditation, and communion with Nature, whether in wild scenery beside a waterfall, or a trickling stream, or in a bamboo grove, or the courtyard of a city dwelling. The garden is “the natural home of man” and house and garden were situated according to feng-shui (wind and water) influences in harmony with the currents of Ch’i; these were held in balance in both the house and garden, as in Nature, by the yin-yang forces. The yin lunar and yang solar powers were represented by the yin valleys and waters and the yang mountains and sky with all their endless yang and yin qualities such as sunshine and shadow, height and depth, heat and cold. However small the space utilized, the garden was never laid out as a flat expanse from which all could be viewed at once. This removal of any definite boundary made for succession, expansion, rhythm, and a sense of unlimited time and space. The garden, like Nature, is ever-changing, a place of light and shade with a life-breath (Ch’i yün) which is in harmony with the rhythms of the seasons and their contrasts in weather. Irregularity of line also suggests movement and life. “Everything that is ruled and symmetrical is alien to free nature.”[3] Or, as it has been said: “The awareness of change, the interaction symbolized by the yin-yang theory, has caused Chinese gardeners to seek irregular and unexpected features which appeal more to the imagination than to the reasoning faculty of the beholder. There were certain rules and principles for gardening, but these did not lead to any conformity. The basic elements were the same for landscape painting, shan shui or ‘mountain and water’”[4] which might be imposing scenery or simply a pond and rocks. The smallest space could be converted into an effect of depth, infinite extension, and mysterious distance; groves, rockeries, bushes, winding paths, all helped to lure on beyond the immediate scene. As Rowley says of Western and Chinese art: “We restrict space to a single vista as though seen through an open door; they suggest the unlimited space of nature as though they had stepped through that open door.” The entire garden must be considered in association and relationship with all things in Nature. Chang Ch’ao says: “Planting flowers serves to invite butterflies, piling up rocks serves to invite the clouds, planting pine trees serves to invite the wind,… planting banana trees serves to invite the rain, and planting willow trees serves to invite the cicada.” These are all traditional symbolic associations. In the past in China, though man was the mediator between Heaven and Earth, he was not the measure of the universe; his place was simply to maintain the balance and harmony between the yin and the yang. It was Nature which was the Whole, and controlling cosmic power. The garden helped man in his work of maintaining harmony; it also had an ethical significance and influence. According to Ch’ien Lung it had “a refreshing effect upon the mind and regulated the feelings” preventing man from becoming “engrossed in sensual pleasures and losing strength of will.” Its pleasures were simple, natural, and spiritual. A Suchou poet wrote of the garden: “One should enter it in a peaceful and receptive mood; one should use one’s observation to note the plan and pattern of the garden, for the different parts have not been arbitrarily assembled, but carefully weighed against each other like the pairs of inscribed tablets placed in the pavilions,[6] and when one has thoroughly comprehended the tangible forms of objects one should endeavor to attain an inner communication with the soul of the garden and try to understand the mysterious forces governing the landscape and making it cohere.” The garden was for all seasons with their changing moods and colors, flowers and trees, so the pavilion and open gallery were necessary for enjoyment in the heat of summer or the cold of winter and became an integral part of the scenery. Even in winter one sat out in the pavilion to admire the beauties of the snow and to watch the budding of the almond and plum blossom. A portable brazier of glowing charcoal kept one warm and a large brazier was used to melt the snow to make tea. The garden was particularly evocative by moonlight and the new and full moons, times of spiritual power, had their own festivals, especially the festival of the mid-autumn moon. Other festivals were also celebrated in the pavilion or garden; the vernal equinox, observed on the twelfth day of the second month of the Chinese year, was known as the Birthday of the Flowers. Pavilions and galleries obviously had to blend with their surroundings. The Yüan Yeh says: “Buildings should be placed so as to harmonize with the natural formation of the ground.” When pavilions were connected by galleries these followed the rise and fall and curves of the land or winding of the waters which were often crossed by bridges, bringing in all the symbolism of the crossing of the waters, of transition, of communication between one realm or plane and another, as well as of man as mediator, occupying the central position between the great powers. Added beauty and symbolism was introduced in the “moon bridge,” a lovely half-circle which when reflected in the clear water below formed the perfect circle of the full moon. Roofs were curved and painted and the lattice work of the balustrades was lacquered and painted in harmonizing and symbolic colors. Harmony and proportion had to be maintained but symmetry was alien to Nature, thus the garden contained no such thing as clipped lawns or hedges or stiff geometrically designed flower beds, or flowers marshaled in rows or patterns. And “landscaping” had to absorb buildings and, like planted trees, make them look as if they had grown there. “One erects a pavilion where the view opens and plants flowers that smile in the face of the spring breeze.”[7] It was a place for both relaxation and active enjoyment, for solitary meditation and study, or for convivial gatherings for friends to meet and drink tea or wine or take al fresco meals. There they composed poetry and music, painted, practiced calligraphy or discussed philosophy. One amusement was to compose a poem in the time that it took a floating wine cup and saucer to drift from one end to the other on a meandering water-course set in the floor of the pavilion. A poet failing to complete his poem in the time had to catch and empty the cup. These water-courses could also be constructed in symbolic forms such as the swastika, or the cross-form of the Chinese character for the number ten, or in the shape of a lotus or open flower. Sometimes the water tumbled over small waterfalls or rocks. Pavilions were given names such as the Pavilion of the Hanging Rainbow, the Fragrance of the Lotus, the Secret Clouds, the Eight Harmonious Tones, Invitation, or Contemplation, of the Moon, Welcoming Spring, Pleasant Coolness, and so on. In some gardens there were Halls of the Moon; these were constructed in the shape of a hemisphere, the vaulted ceiling painted to represent the nocturnal sky with innumerable small windows of colored glass depicting the moon and stars. The total effect was one of the subdued light of a summer’s night. Sometimes the floor was planted with flowers, but more usually it contained running water, the moon and water being closely allied: “The moon washes its soul in the clear waters,” but although moon and waters are both yin water is symbolically related to the sun since the waters catch and reflect back the sun’s light, the yang. These halls could be large enough for holding banquets or of a smallness suitable for intimate sitting about in conversation or listening to music and poetry. Here, in the garden, where heaven and earth meet, music and poetry become the natural form of the expression of harmony. While the pavilion was built in and for the garden and was open to it, this breaking down of the distinction between in and out of doors applied also to the dwelling house which was not only sited for feng-shui but for fitting as naturally as possible into the scenery and giving access so immediately to the garden that there seemed no dividing line. Doors either did not exist or were left open. (Socially, closed doors were not considered courteous since they implied exclusion, while the open door symbolized the welcome extended by the essentially outgoing Chinese temperament with its spontaneous and natural relationships developed over the ages in the highly socialized life of a large family). Doors were often only a means of enhancing a view into the garden or to the scenery beyond, such as the moon door, a beautifully placed circle framing some special outlook. Not only was every aspect used to its full natural advantage but “if one can take advantage of a neighbor’s view one should not cut off the communication, for such a ‘borrowed prospect’ is very acceptable.” The house opened on to the garden and the garden came into the house; rooms opened on to the courtyards where flowering trees grew and ferns and flowers fringed a central pool, usually with golden carp swimming in it, for the garden was a place for animal and bird life also. Indeed, animals and plants were not considered the only ‘living’ things; everything shares in the cosmic power and mountains and rivers also ‘live.’ Nor was it at all unusual for the house to go out into the garden, for the lover of nature would move a bed out of doors, beside some special tree, shrub, or flower which was coming into bloom, so that no stage of its development and beauty would be lost; or one would sit up all night to enjoy the effect of the moonlight. “The moonlight lies like glittering water over the countryside. The wind sighs in the trees and gently touches the lute and the book that lie on the couch. The dark rippled mirror of the water swallows the half-moon. When day dawns one is awakened by the fresh breeze; it reaches the bed and all the dust of the world is blown out of one’s mind.” The garden was not, however, merely aesthetic but creative and a reminder of, and contact with, the creative forces and the great cycle of the seasons, birth, maturity, decay, death and rebirth. The merging of the native Taoism with imported Buddhism in Ch’an, or Zen, carried on the tradition of the intimate relationship between man and Nature. Ch’an Buddhism and gardens were two facets of Chinese inspiration which were adopted and carried on by the Japanese, but in later decadent times the original symbolism of the garden as a reflection of Paradise was lost and gardens became mere pleasure grounds, except where attached to monasteries in which much of the symbolism was taken over and where the association with meditation remained. In those gardens of effete times artificial extravagances crept in; windows were made in shapes which bore no relationship to symbols, such as teapots, animals, vases, and fans, even if some of these forms had, in fact, a symbolic content. But these aberrations were stigmatized by the Yüan Yeh as “stupid and vulgar” and “intelligent people should be careful in such matters.” (Shades of plastic cranes and gnomes!) The garden was a reflection of the macrocosm and embodied all the yin-yang dualisms projected in manifestation. Mountains, valleys, rivers, lakes, were all represented. As Cheng Pan ch’iao said: “The enjoyment of life should come from a view regarding the universe as a garden… so that all beings live according to their nature and great indeed is such happiness.” The importance of water in the Chinese garden was not only due to yin-yang symbolism but to the wide significance of water itself as, next to the Dragon, the greatest Taoist symbol. It is strength in weakness, fluidity, adaptability, coolness of judgment, gentle persuasion, and passionlessness. While mountains and rocks are the bones of the body and the earth its flesh, rivers and streams are the arteries and blood, life-giver and fertilizer. Flowing water and still water symbolized movement and repose and the complementary opposites, and water-worn stones represented the interaction of the soft and the hard. Still water also takes on all the symbolism of the mirror. Water could be made by forming lakes and rivers in the earth excavated for making mountains, though mountains were most frequently represented by rocks, hollow and weather-worn, fretted out by the restless sea or the elements or formed from the strange shapes of petrified trees. These rocks were carefully selected for their color, texture, grain, and shape; some were upright and towering, others, larger at the top than at the base, gave the effect of disappearing into the clouds, others, lying down, took fantastic animal shapes, some gave out a note when struck, others were mute. Sometimes the rocks formed grottoes, but whatever the shape they always appeared as natural to the setting and were as near to the form of wild mountain crags as possible, giving the impression of Nature, untamed and capricious. (In this “naturalness” it must be remarked that the mountains of China in the Yangtze gorges, the far West, and the Southern provinces have been worked by nature herself into fantastic and sometimes grotesque shapes.) “Try to make your mountains resemble real mountains. Follow Nature’s plan” but “do not forget they have to be built by human hands.” Symbolically, the mountain is of course the world axis, but in the Chinese garden it also represented the yang power in Nature with the waters as the yin; the “mountain” is traditionally placed in the middle of a lake or pond, the rock being the stable and eternal, the water the flowing and temporal. This mountain-and-water (shan shui) symbolism also obtains in landscape painting. The rock and the shadow it casts are also yang and yin. Rocks are “silent, unmovable, and detached from life, like refined scholars.” Their ruggedness also suggests the challenging and dangerous element in the mountains and in life. In larger gardens the mountains were sufficiently high for the formation of small valleys and dales, with winging streams opening out into lakes on which boat journeys could be taken and where the water could be spanned by bridges. Sometimes a series of islands or rocks were so connected. Tunnels in the rocks gave the same effect and carried the same symbolism as bridges in passing from one world to another. But “even a little mountain may give rise to many effects… a small stone may evoke many feelings.”[11] Shen Fu says: “In the designing of a rockery or the training of flower trees one should try to show the small in the large and the large in the small and provide for the real in the unreal and the unreal in the real. One reveals and conceals alternately, making it sometimes apparent and sometimes hidden.” Both the yang mountain and the yin tree are axial and so represent stability and balance between the two great powers; they also offer a line of communication for man between the celestial yang forces coming down to earth and the earthly yin forces reaching up to heaven, with man again as central and responsible for the maintenance of balance and harmony in responding equally to the yin and yang powers. Trees were an essential feature of both the domestic and hermitage garden, particularly the latter where they were often the only addition made by man to the natural scenery and their variety was almost as important as the trees themselves. While all trees are beautiful and symbolize the feminine power, some were especially noted for their yin-yang qualities. Though yin as a tree, the pine and cedar express yang masculine dignity and rigidity in contrast to the feminine gracefulness, pliability, and charm of the willow, both these trees were considered necessary to maintain the yin-yang harmony. Flowering trees such as the almond, cherry, plum, and peach were esteemed—one should say loved—for their beauty and their symbolism. The almond, as the first flower of the year, is in many traditions the Awakener, watchfulness. As flowering in winter it is also courage in adversity. The cherry depicts delicacy of feeling and purity of feeling on the yin side and nobility on the yang. The plum, a symbol of winter and beauty signified strength and longevity and the hermit. It is one of the favorite subjects for artists and the plum, pine, and bamboo were called “the three friends of winter.” The almond and plum are both symbolic of new life coming in spring, but the plum should have a gnarled trunk and branches, called sleeping dragons, as the yang to offset the delicate blossoms of the yin; they also represent the old and new together. Just as lovers of the garden would move their beds out under trees, so we read of artists who wandered all night in the moonlight to catch every phase of the beauty of “the dry limbs clad in jade-white blooms.”

The peach holds a special position as the tree of the Taoist genii or Immortals; it is the Tree of Life at the center of Paradise. It is also the Tree of Immortality and one bite of the fruit growing on the tree in Paradise confers immediate immortality. Peach stones were apotropaic and were beautifully and symbolically carved and kept, or worn, as amulets and talismans. The tree is a symbol of spring, youth, marriage, wealth, and longevity.

 

Preeminent among flowers were the lotus, peony, and chrysanthemum. The peony is the only purely yang flower. Flowers, with their cup shape, naturally depict the yin receptive aspect in nature, but the peony is a royal flower, flaunting the red, fiery, masculine color; it is also nobility, glory, riches. The chrysanthemum, on the other hand, is a flower of quiet retirement, the beloved flower of the cultured scholar, the retired official, who was of course also a scholar, the philosopher, and poet. It was so much cultivated in retirement that it became a symbol of that life and of leisure. It signifies longevity as being that which survives the cold and as autumnal it is harvest and wealth, but it is primarily ease, leisure, joviality, and enjoyment. Yüan Chung-lang said that the retired and the scholar were fortunate in having “the enjoyment of the hills and water, flowers and bamboo” largely to themselves since “luckily they lie outside the scope of the strugglers for fame and power who are so busy with their engrossing pursuits that they have no time for such enjoyment.”

But the lotus, a universal symbol in the East (its symbolism is taken on by the lily and sometimes the rose in the West) is “the flower that was in the Beginning, the glorious lily of the Great Waters… that wherein existence comes to be and passes away.” It is both yin and yang and contains within itself the balance of the two powers; it is solar as blooming in the sun and lunar as rising from the dark of the waters of pre-cosmic chaos. As the combination of air and water it symbolizes spirit and matter; its roots bedded in the darkness of the mud depict indissolubility; its stem, the umbilical cord of life, attaches man to his origins and is also a world axis; rising through the opaque waters of the manifest world, the leaves and flowers reach and unfold in the air and sunlight, typifying potentiality in the bud and spiritual expansion and realization in the flower; its seeds, moving on the waters are creation. The lotus is associated with the wheel both as the solar matrix and the sun-wheel of cycles of existence. Iamblichus calls it perfection, since its leaves, flowers, and fruit form the circle. As lunar-solar, yin-yang, the lotus is also the androgyne, the self-existent. It has an inexhaustible symbolism in Hinduism, Taoism, and Buddhism alike. Again it appears as both solar and lunar associated with sun gods such as Surya and lunar goddesses such as Lakshmi; solar with Amitabha and lunar with Kwan-yin and androgynous in Kwannon. The lotus is the Golden Flower of Taoism, the crystallization and experience of light, the Tao. While on the spiritual level it represents the whole of birth, growth, development, and potentiality, on the mundane level it depicts the scholar-gentleman who comes in contact with mud and dirty water but is uncontaminated by it. Apart from its almost endless symbolism, the lotus is a flower of great beauty and highly evocative; as Osvald Sirén says, a sheet of lotus blossom “emanates a peculiar magic, an atmosphere that intoxicates like fragrant incense and lulls like the rhythms of a rising and falling mantra.” Ancient China understood many things which are only now reaching the West and being hailed as new discoveries. She anticipated by centuries the “discovery” that flowers and plants have feelings. Yüan Chung-lang knew that they have their likes and dislikes and compatibilities among other vegetation and that they respond to care and appreciation in more than a material way. The flowers in a Chinese garden were genuinely loved, but not in any “precious” aestheticism, rather in an intimate relationship between living individuals. He said that “flowers have their moods of happiness and sorrow and their time of sleep.… When they seem drunk, or quiet and tired, and when the day is misty, that is the sorrowful mood of flowers.… When they bask in the sunlight and their delicate bodies are protected from the wind, that is the happy mood of flowers.… When the ancient people knew a flower was about to bud they would move their beds and pillows and sleep under it watching how the flower passed from infancy to maturity and finally dropped off and died.… As for all forms of noisy behavior and common vulgar prattle, they are an insult to the spirits of flowers. One should rather sit dumb like a fool than offend them.”[13] Among things which flowers dislike are: too many guests; ugly women putting flowers in their hair; dogs fighting; writing poems by consulting a rhyming dictionary; books kept in bad condition; spurious paintings; and common monks talking Zen! On the other hand they do like a visiting monk who understands tea! Picked flowers and vases of flowers should never be regarded as normal, only as a temporary expedient employed by those living in cities and unnatural places deprived of the hills and lakes or any garden. For the town-dweller or for one kept indoors of necessity the miniature garden was created; though it was also seen in pavilions it was most usually on the tables of scholars. It, too, symbolized Paradise, the Isles of the Blessed, or the Abode of the Immortals reflected in miniature perfection with the whole range of the yin-yang symbolism. Exceptionally beautiful stones or shells were used and there were miniature grottoes, trees, bamboos, and grasses growing among the mountains, valleys, and waters. The making of these gardens was an art in itself; just as Wang Wei maintained that the artist can bring all Nature into the space of a small painting, so the creator of a garden, large, small, or miniature can concentrate the cosmos within its bounds. Enclosing the whole garden in the city, or where the extent of the garden was limited, was the wall which was used not only as a boundary but as a setting for trees, shrubs, and flowers; it could also provide an aperture which opened up some special view. In the city, where space was restricted, walls were often a garden in themselves, sometimes built with considerable width with a roof-garden effect or with trees and shrubs planted on top and flowers and ferns in the crevices below. Enclosing walls also helped to make the city garden a place where one could find “stillness in turmoil.” Apart from the symbolism of the enclosed garden the walls brought in the yin-yang significance of the interplay of light and shade. Today China joins the industrial nations of the world in “exploiting” Nature. Hideous concrete blocks of flats, offices, and factories insulate man from any contact with the yellow earth and, sadly, Seyyed Hossein Nasr’s words can be applied: “There is nearly total disequilibrium between modern man and nature as attested by nearly every expression of modern civilization which seeks to offer a challenge to nature rather than to cooperate with it.… The harmony between man and nature has been destroyed.”

   

Coachwork by Carrozzeria Figoni

Chassis n° 55221

 

Les Grandes Marques du Monde au Grand Palais 2020

Bonhams

Parijs - Paris

Frankrijk - France

February 2020

 

Estimated : € 4.000.000 - 7.000.000

Sold for € 4.600.000

 

Here, Bonhams proudly offers the renowned 'Geoffrey St John', 56-years in his ownership, 1932 Bugatti Type 55 Supersport with its unique, 1933-fitted, Figoni coachwork. This magnificent high-performance, Post-Vintage Thoroughbred two-seater began life as a works-backed Bugatti entry in the 1932 Le Mans 24-Hour race. It was co-driven there by two of France's most capable and charismatic drivers, the aristocratic Sarthois (from Le Mans) Count Guy Bouriat Quintart and the renowned Monegasque future French Champion, Louis Chiron.

 

While this 2.3-litre supercharged straight-8 Bugatti originated with a spartan lightweight racing body tailored to that year's Le Mans 24-Hour regulations, following its post-race sale to Parisian magazine publisher Jacques Dupuy it was speedily rebodied in Boulogne sur-Seine on the outskirts of Paris by the now legendary Italian-born stylist/coachbuilder Giuseppe Figoni.

 

Following an awards-rich early history in France, this mouth-watering sports Bugatti survived World War 2 and, as long ago as August, 1963 – some 56 years ago – it was acquired by its long standing owner, leading British Bugattiste, Geoffrey St John.

 

This magnificent car became the apple of his eye, and he was devastated in June 1994 when it was involved in a road accident in France, assailed by a speeding car driven by a youth who was both uninsured, and drunk. Frontal damage to the car was beautifully repaired in a subsequent, utterly painstaking 5,000-hour restoration, from which his Bugatti Type 55 – chassis '55221' – re-emerged, the vast majority of its original St John-ownership fabric having been successfully preserved and repaired...A photographic record of the restoration has been documented by Independent Bugatti Consultant Mark Morris.

 

In fact, Bugatti Type 55 chassis '55221' was ordered by Guy Bouriat as early as January 1, 1932. The order form specifies: "2.3 litre Supersport car, Type 55, supercharged, 4-seat torpedo body, complying with Le Mans regulations. With 6 Bugatti wheels and all necessary accessories for a 24 hours race. Automatic fuel cap." The address on the form is Bouriat's family home in Paris, 44 Rue Fabert, near the Champ de Mars. No trace has been found in the factory archives of any related invoice or payment – perhaps indicative of it having been treated as a works entry for Bouriat as an established (and well connected) racing driver.

 

To meet this formal order, chassis No. '55221'/(initial) engine '14' was assembled at the works in April 1932, concurrent with sister chassis using engines '15' and '16'. It was factory-bodied as a torpedo, the Molsheim bodyshop register recording it as being the first of the bodies built in June 1932: "Carr 24h . 55/14 -55221. juin 32". The car was then delivered to Paris by road on June 11th, 1932 – ready for the following weekend's important race at Le Mans.

 

Le Mans 24-Hours - June 18-19, 1932.

 

Guy Bouriat and Louis Chiron in '55221' starred under race number '15' amongst the 27 entries for this late-Depression-era 24-Hour Grand Prix d'Endurance.

 

Charles Faroux of the journal 'L'Auto' reported: "There are four Bugattis entered of which two, above all, deserve attention by the speed they achieved during testing days: one is at the hands of Chiron and Bouriat, while the other has Count Czaykowski and the brave Friderich as pilots... I would not be at all surprised to see these two pairs fight hard with the Alfa Romeos, as did the Bentleys and Mercedes."

 

While '55221' was fitted with a 130-litre fuel tank, the sister Type 55 for Count Czaykowski/Friderich had only a 115-litre tank. In the opening race period, four Alfa Romeo 8C-2300s led, with this Bouriat/Chiron Bugatti keeping pace in fifth place. But, as Faroux then reported: "At the beginning of the third hour, we are told to the astonishment of everyone, that Bouriat, then fifth, (has) run out of gas... Bouriat was helped to the pit. Of course he is declared out of the race since his forced stop happened on the 22nd lap when he had two more laps to run before refuelling" – having thus infringed the organising ACO club's unpitying minimum refuelling distance rule.

 

The 'L'Auto' issue of June 20, 1932, then described how: "Wisely, Bouriat and Chiron had lined their tank with a thick piece of felt and duckboard providing good protection against flying stones. This protection could not extend to a small part above the rear axle trumpet; it is in this small gap that a stone stuck, bending the metal sheet which resisted, but whose crimping parted and let 50 litres of gas leak through it. Bouriat, then in his twentieth lap, who knew he could run forty more laps on his fuel, thought there was a breakdown of his fuel supply and finds his carburettor empty and the floats, lacking damping, detached. Unavoidable withdrawal. Having abandoned, he is given 5 litres of fuel to go back to the pit. It is while refuelling to return to the pit that he sees the leak in the tank and realizes the cause of it. What a terrible tragedy...".

 

This Bugatti '55221' had in fact represented the French industry's best hope of a home win at Le Mans that year, but its split fuel tank helped leave the course clear for Raymond Sommer/Luigi Chinetti to win – for Alfa Romeo and Italy...

 

Post-race, '55221' was sold to Jacques Dupuy, motoring-enthusiast son of Paul Dupuy, proprietor of the newspaper 'Le Petit Parisien', and founder of the magazines 'Mirroir des Sports' and 'Sciences et Vie'. In a 1992 letter to Pierre-Yves Laugier, Jacques Dupuy recalled: "I bought the Bugatti from Guy Bouriat. It was a black 2+2 torpedo with light aluminium body. The car could reach 200 km/h...I kept it with its bucket seats for a few months before taking it to Figoni's. It was bodied there according to my drawings. The steel body was black and white. The dashboard was in black leather...I sold the car about three or four years later, after the 1936 Paris-Nice rally, to Monsieur Gandon, a wine and spirits merchant at 152 Boulevard Hausmann."

 

Between 1928 and 1933, the Figoni bodyshop at "14 rue Lemoine, Boulogne, Seine", bodied some 77 Bugattis.

 

Jean Dupuy's order for this Bugatti Type 55 appears in the Figoni register in February 1933, while the August issue that year of 'L'Équipement Automobile' carries a profile drawing of the car and cites its Nitrolac enamel paintwork as being "iris black and Leda white".

 

M. Dupuy also recalled how: "During my custody, I had to go twice to the factory one of them was for repairing the compressor (factory note dated March 21st 1933). I won the Paris-Nice rally in 1933 beating the Alfa Romeos in the Sport category. At La Turbie, I reached 83km/h standing start. This car is the 2300cc single shaft...which was maintained for me by Mr Rocatti, a Bugatti specialist in Paris who had a garage at Buttes-Chaumont".

 

XIIth Critérium International de Tourisme Paris-Nice, 1933

 

The journal 'L'Auto' for March 30th 1933 described how the Paris-Nice Rally was to be run in three stages: Paris-Vichy, Vichy-Marseille and Marseille-Nice. Jacques Dupuy's Type 55 would run as number '52' in up-to-3-litre Class D. In the 1km Michelet stage – with standing start and flying finish - Dupuy set the fastest time, of 34 seconds, averaging 105,882km/h (66.09mph). Upon arrival in Nice on April 3rd, an idling and acceleration test took place on the Quai des États-Unis in which Dupuy's Bugatti set times of 49.6 secs and 18 secs respectively.

 

Next day, in a 500 metres trial before thousands of spectators on the Promenade des Anglais Dupuy again bettered the rival Alfa Romeos of Gunzburg and Weinberg, at 142,860 km/h (88mph). In the final stage on the famous 6.3km (3.9-mile) La Turbie hill-climb, Dupuy finally won the Paris-Nice event overall, with a climb time of 4mins 25.6secs, 85.391km/h (53mph). The 'L'Auto' report described how: "Victory goes to Jacques Dupuy. This young pilot had a 2.3 litre double camshaft Bugatti at his disposal. No need to be a pre-eminent driver and Jacques Dupuy never had such pretentiousness. But you had to own a car complying with the regulations. The 2.3 litre Bugatti fully satisfied. In congratulating Dupuy, one must not forget the maker of Molsheim...".

 

The Bois de Boulogne Concours d'Elégance - June 24, 1933

 

Two months after his Paris-Nice victory Jacques Dupuy entered his freshly Figoni-bodied Bugatti '55221' in the annual Parisian Grand Concours d'Elégance. The Countess de Rivals-Mazères had been invited "to enhance his convertible" and after the car had won the 'L'Auto'-sponsored first class judged, for over 10hp open cars, the Countess helped show it in two further categories backed by the journals 'Fémina' and 'L'Intransigeant' In the third category (cars over 15 HP presented by ladies and driven by a chauffeur in livery), Mme de Rivals-Mazères – accompanied by two Scottie dogs - "sur Bugatti 17C cabriolet transformable Figoni" won a Spark gramophone...

 

Owner Dupuy recovered his laurelled thoroughbred and would use it for three more years before selling it, as he recalled, to Marcel Gandon.

 

The new owner was the 38-year-old son of wine merchant Alphonse Gandon, of 152 Boulevard Hausmann, Paris, but he kept '55221' only briefly – from early-1936 to April 1937 – when he bought a brand-new Type 57S Atalante. On November 28, 1936, the unique Figoni-bodied Type 55 was sold via Bugatti to Garage Bayard, 22 Rue Bayard, Paris, the sale document stating: "Sold to garage Bayard one car Type 55 N° 55221, engine 14 (ex Gandon) 2 seat roadster bodywork (convertible by Figoni) in good working order, second hand sold as is for a net price of 25 000 francs".

 

Paris-Saint-Raphaël Rallye Féminin 1937

 

The Garage Bayard was run by Charles de Lavoreille, Jacques de Valence and a M. Richer-Delavau and the latter's wife ran '55221' in the March 17-22, 1937 'IXe Paris-Saint-Raphaël Féminin' – entry number '48', facing a 1,039 km route to be completed in five days, staging through Nevers, Clermont-Ferrand, Orange and Toulon. In initial 500 metres standing start, and 1km flying-start tests at Nevers Mme Richer-Delavau placed 6th in each, and in the Saint-Sébastien hill-climb at Saint Raphaël, she maintained her position with a time of 47.8secs, behind Mmes Lamberjack and Lucy O'Reilly Schell in their Delahaye Sport. Overall in the Rally she would finish sixth and fifth in class.

 

M. Laugier's Bugatti records show that on December 27, 1937, an un-named Parisian enthusiast bought '55221' from Garage Bayard. This might have been Roger Teillac, a Bugatti specialist based in the Avenue de Suffren, as his archives contain three pictures of the car, but wearing a 1938 Nancy licence plate. Teillac possibly maintained the car for another owner 1938-39 or had taken back the car in the post-war summer of 1946 when his establishment repaired its oil sump, split by frost.

 

Certainly, Louis Stephanazzi had acquired the car on May 7, 1938, and registered it '5658 KU 5' to his home address of 49bis Avenue Anatole France, Nancy. Family memory recalls that the car was hidden dismantled during the war in the garage that Stephanazzi ran in town. The Germans requisitioned his garage where they would repair their vehicles. At the back were a Bugatti Type 57 convertible, bought in Paris in August 1938, and the 55 roadster, which both survived the conflict.

On September 16, 1946, the Type 55 was sold in Paris under licence plate '4239 RP 4' and one month later, it passed to André Couston, a dealer from Nice, resident at 4bis Avenue Mont Alban. On October 18, 1946 he re-registered the car '3286 BA 8'. At the time André Couston also owned the first Type 55 roadster, chassis '55201'.

 

On July 30th 1948, '55221' returned to Paris, registered '7220 RQ 4'. Its owner was possibly Jacques Devinot who told M. Laugier in June 1993: "I owned three Bugattis...(including)...the Type 55 convertible...bought around 1948 from a garage near Porte de Champerret. It was then sold to Mr Bierlein from Paris in 1950 who sold it to a Canadian man. I found it back later at Docime's, dismantled. The registration papers were never changed and the Canadian man came to see me to get a sale certificate which I refused to do, having already done one for Mr Bierlein. When I bought the car, the chassis had been bent and I had to dismantle the car and correct it. As I see it, every bit was original on the car which was in a cream and black livery". He also had a luggage rack installed by Figoni»

 

The Police register confirms M. Devinot's dates, while a letter from him states that in August 1950 the Bugatti was owned by Gaston Bierlein, of Hôtel Pylone 1, Megève, Haute-Savoie. He kept the car for five years before selling it on March 24, 1955, to Canadian journalist Douglas Lachance, of 59 Avenue Hoche, Paris. The car – with its engine dismantled or removed - was then consigned to leading Bugatti specialist Gaston Docime, in the Rue de la Saussaie, Neuilly-sur-Seine. It remained in there until August 28, 1962 when British Type 55 enthusiast Anthony Austin Morse, a dentist of 4 Westfield Road, Rugby, imported it into England, less engine, with a £20 deposit on the import duty pending valuation.

 

A. A. Morse then owned three Type 55s - '55220', '55221' and '55223' – but he quickly sold the unique Figoni-bodied example to Henry H. Thomas of White Cottage, Belmond Park Road, Maidenhead, proprietor of the Fernley Service Station, who on July 25, 1963, re-sold it to Geoffrey St John, of Woodland Cottage, Greenwich Lane, Leafield, Oxon for £750

 

In a letter to Geoffrey St John, dated August 12, 1963, the eminent British Bugatti Registrar Hugh Conway wrote: "I did point out the engineless car to Morse, at Docime's, which he bought for £100 and sold to Thomas..." In another letter, Conway remarked that the engine of '55221' could have been sold by Docime in the USA.

 

Geoffrey St John restored the car to running order with engine 26 ex 55223 installed. It became a stable-mate for his Type 35B and Type 51 Grand Prix cars and it has remained in this single family ownership to this day. Geoffrey St John was a talented technician working for Smiths Industries, and eventually became the company's Chief Engineer, while dedicating most of his spare time to Bugatti restoration, tuning and racing. He was a most talented driver and became the sporting Bugatti marque's foremost British exponent over many years. He was exceptionally highly regarded as a twin-cam 2.3 Bugatti specialists, and always took particular delight in driving '55221' widely throughout the UK, and in Continental Europe, particularly – of course in France.

 

It was on a French road – near Auxerre in June 1994 – that he had the misfortune to be hit by a drunken driver, as described. The damage sustained took some two years of work to put right, Geoffrey St John being determined (at considerable extra expense) to save absolutely all of the car's original fabric that had escaped total destruction. Chassis straightening, keeping all the original parts, was carried out by renowned British specialist Gino Hoskins (Images on file).

 

A November 2019 inspection report on the car has been compiled by leading French Bugatti authority Pierre-Yves Laugier. He sums up its present condition thus: "The car keeps its original chassis, repaired in 1994. It (the original element of the chassis) is 90% complete with a few additional strengthening plates added according to Christian Huet, Parisian expert in charge of the accident file. The exterior of the car after restoration was completely in accordance with the original after more than 5,000 hours work.

 

"It (then) took part in its first event in the summer of 1996 (and so) the only Figoni roadster on a Supersport Type 55 Bugatti chassis is ready to join the world of rallies and concours d'élégance. It remains one of the most beautiful expressions of a Sports car by a coachbuilder, multi-purpose and powerful, one of the most important witnesses of the golden era of coachbuilding and know-how of the Bugatti brand..."

 

In detail M. Laugier observed: "The frame bore number 22, but the fixing hole of the spare wheel shows only one of the '2s' (the other having been drilled through). The front axle is of the right type, with no number and is probably new". In fact Geoffrey St John always maintained that the current front axle is an original, Bugatti-manufactured, hollow front axle of correct Type 55 specification...

 

M. Laugier continued: "The engine (comprising a matched pair of upper and lower crankcase castings – the left-rear mounting leg of which carries) assembly number '48' from roadster '55223'/engine '26'. One observes important welding traces under the rear-left mounting piece. Front-left mounting piece (the integrally cast engine leg), which was completely destroyed in the accident, was melted down and re-cast from a pattern amongst Geoffrey St John's spare parts collection. The re-cast leg was then welded back into place.

 

The clutch casing carries on both parts number '14'. Both gearbox and rear-axle sumps were rewelded after the accident. Traces are still visible on the original parts.

 

"The car was equipped with an overdrive. Compressor No '33' is ancient and of the right kind, but is not the one on the car in 1933, because a note of the repair workshop for compressors dated March 21st, 1933. states: 'Compressor 55 N° 45, Mr Rocatti, Paris, client Mr Dupuy, milling of notches in the chambers' The body of the gearbox is engraved (stamped) '39'. It is probably the factory replacement box, following the 38 (other such gearboxes that were) produced from 1931 to 1933.

 

"It could have been fitted to the car after one of the races in which it took part between 1933 and 1937. The original gearbox of the car, No '14', is today on a Type 55 chassis '55235' with a British history and which in 1962 was equipped with a Cotal gearbox. The original rear axle numbered '14' is the original one (installed in) the car and has race type ratio of 14 x 54 instead of the usual 13 x 54 of the first Type 55."

 

Mark Morris adds: "The front axle is of the right type, with no number" .

 

Pierre-Yves Laugier's report continues: "The fixed parts of the body are made of steel, while the opening parts are made of aluminium. After the accident in 1994, the wooden dashboard was rebuilt as the original wood board was split in two. The aluminium part of the bonnet had also to be completely replaced as well as the left front wing and the right door. Most of the wooden structure was kept. The work was carried out at Terry Hall's workshop. Drums and left front brake shoe were rewelded and two brake shoes were replaced. The wheel rim of several wheels was redone by welding - particularly visible on the spare wheel."

 

M. Laugier further observes: "The chassis plate of the vehicle is ancient. It wears number '55221', apparently over-stamped. It is of the Type 57 'Bas-Rhin' type and the number '57282' can be detected underneath (which) tallies with a Type 57 chassis number delivered in the Nord department in April 1935".

 

Since completion of restoration work in 1996 until Mr St John's recent passing, '55221' was regularly exercised by him. In similar style to the modern-day Bugatti Veyron, Chiron and EB110 models – which are both a schoolboy pin-up and a modern car collector's dream - so in its heyday the Bugatti Type 55 was a hugely coveted automotive jewel.

 

It is in essence a Grand Prix car with sports bodywork for use on the open road, powered by a 2.3-litre supercharged twin-cam 8-cylinder engine –as developed for the multiple Grand Prix-winning Bugatti Type 51 and only moderately detuned. Even in 1932 this power unit's blistering power and torque endowed the Type 55 with 0-60mph acceleration in 13 seconds and the hitherto unheard-of top speed – for a road car - of 115mph.

 

Even in the backwash from The Great Depression, the most style-conscious of high-society glitterati all aspired to the Type 55 – and, with its technical specification and haute couture body styling, it was squarely aimed at the most wealthy...and the most dashing...clientele such as the Duc de la Tremoille, Victor Rothschild and Nicholas Embiricos. With its contemporary price tag of some $7,500, Bugatti produced only 38 Type 55s, 27 of which are now known to survive.

 

And amongst them, this Figoni-bodied example – with its waistline-level doors offering proper cockpit wprotection in contrast to the doorless, cut-down cockpit sides of the more common Jean Bugatti roadster style – is unique. It is offered here in running order, accompanied by not only the immensely fine-detailed Pierre-Yves Laugier and Mark Morris inspection and history reports, but also by a substantial array of relevant spare parts. After 56 years in one ownership this is – when judged by the highest standards - a unique example of perhaps the most mouth-watering of all Bugatti models, and a definitive connoisseur's car to be truly, truly, coveted...

WELL ---- WELL ---- WELL

.

“Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it.” by Lou Holtz

“This life is yours. Take the power to choose what you want to do and do it well. Take the power to love what you want in life and love it honestly. Take the power to walk in the forest and be a part of nature. Take the power to control your own life. No one else can do it for you. Take the power to make your life happy.” by Susan Polis Schutz

.

VS

.

“To wish to be well is a part of becoming well.” by Seneca

“Wish well, be well.” by Turkish Proverb

.

VS

.

"A kind heart is a fountain of gladness, making everything in its vicinity freshen into smiles." by unknown

Italian: "Un cuore gentile è una fontana di felicità, che rinfresca nei sorrisi ogni cosa vicina."

 

"Water, the Hub of Life. Water is its mater and matrix, mother and medium.

Water is the most extraordinary substance! Practically all its properties are anomolous, which enabled life to use it as building material for its machinery. Life is water dancing to the tune of solids." by Albert Szent-Gyorgyi

"Children of a culture born in a water-rich environment, we have never really learned how important water is to us. We understand it, but we do not respect it." by William Ashworth, Nor Any Drop to Drink, 1982

   

The iPhone 7 Plus has a very capable camera system when it comes to certain types of macro and closeup photography. The small size and placement of the dual lenses close to one corner make it possible to get photographs from a perspective that would be almost impossible from any other camera.

 

For the past week or so, I have supplemented the native camera system with the Kamerar / Ztylus lens systems. These lenses slide up over the dual native lenses, giving me additional tele-photo, fisheye and macro options. Suffice would be that I have enjoyed making photographs with my iPhone more in this past week than I have for a very long time. The quality is good, and the lenses are very easy to use.

 

For this image, I added a x10 macro lens to the x2 native lens. This brought the subject very close to the iPhone, and produced a very shallow depth of field. I set the focus on the front portion of the antennae. This left the remainder of the moth with a soft look that I found to be calming and satisfying.

 

----------

Links for background information ...

 

kamerar.com/products/kamerar-zoom-lens-kit-for-iphone-7-plus

ztylus.com/products/kamerar-zoom-lens-kit-for-iphone-7-plus

 

----------

 

[ Location - Barton, Australian Capital Territory, Australia ]

 

----------

Photography notes ...

The photograph was taken using the following hardware ...

- iPhone 7 Plus.

- 56mm* (x2) lens [* 35mm equivalent value of the actual focal length of 3.99mm].

- Gizmon TLR Bluetooth Remote Shutter.

- Gray Card made by ProCamera.

 

I acquired the photograph (4032 x 3024 pixels) with an ISO of 20, exposure time of 1/950 seconds, and an aperture of f/1.8. The iPhone flash was used. A x10 Kamerar/Ztylus macro lens was used in combination with the x2 native lens.

 

Post-processing ...

- I downloaded the photographs from my iPhone 7 Plus to the MacBook Air 11" using a lightning/USB cable and the iExplorer app (Macroplant).

- Sometimes I do this over WiFi using PhotoSync (touchbyte GmbH). Notably, I have found that iExplorer does not handle properly the images that have been edited using the native Apple iPhone "Photos" app (i.e., it will only transfer the original image, not the edited image).

- I viewed and sorted the photographs that were taken using XnViewMP (Pierre-e-Gougelet) and Lightroom (Adobe Systems Incorporated). Saved the images that had some chance of being posted online.

 

Lightroom - Applied minor basic lighting and color adjustments.

PhotoSync - Copied the JPEG file to my iPad Mini for final processing, review, enjoyment, and posting to social media.

 

@MomentsForZen #MomentsForZen #MFZ #iPhone7Plus #iPhone #iExplorer #Lightroom #XnViewMP #PhotoSync #Kamerar #Ztylus #Macro #Closeup #Moth #Antennae

A rare view of one of the flight capable Skylab Orbital Workshops (OWS), at the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Co. facility in Huntington Beach, CA. Possibly/probably(?) the first/flown OWS?

If the OWS is the backup, aka “Skylab B”, then it’s the one that’s been on display at the NASM since 1976. If so, then even in this 1971 photograph, it did not yet have its micrometeoroid shield/sunshade installed. So then, safe to assume that it never did? I sort of thought that it was (at some point) removed in order to replicate the condition/configuration of the one flown. I’ve never seen it in person; however, from photos I’ve seen, it was/is? indeed displayed with one solar array wing extended.

To the left, mounted on its work jig & surrounded by work platforms looks to be one of the Skylab Saturn IB S-IVB stages. I think.

 

8.5" x 11".

 

My SWAG of the year is based on the page 233 image at the following & the photograph being on “A KODAK PAPER”

 

history.nasa.gov/SP-4011.pdf

Mons Meg est une bombarde médiévale (XVe siècle) de la collection des Royal Armouries prêtée à Historic Scotland. Elle symbolise le passé militaire glorieux de l'Écosse. Cet impressionnant canon de siège de 6 tonnes, de calibre 20 pouces (510 mm) est capable de tirer des boulets de pierre pesant 330 livres (150 kgs) jusqu'à 2 miles de distance (3,2 kms). A l’origine le canon était peint avec du plomb rouge pour l’empêcher de rouiller. Il fallait cent hommes pour le transporter. Avec l'énorme "canon des Dardanelles" en bronze coulé de 17 tonnes fabriquée en 1464 pour le sultan turc Mohamet II (exposé à présent dans la cour de la Tour de Londres), ces bombardes sont parmi les plus gros canons jamais construits. L'auteur anglais Dudley Pope cite le Mons Meg mais également le Dulle Griet de Gand comme exemples des plus gros canons construits au Moyen Age, et dit des deux qu'ils "ont probablement été fabriqués en "Flandre" (région qui deviendra plus tard la Belgique et que les Français appelaient "Pays-Bas"). Le "Dulle Griet mesurait plus de 5 m de long pesait 12.5 tonnes avec un calibre à la bouche d'environ 90 cm. Il était peint en rouge sang lui valant le surnom de « grand démon rouge ». Le nom flamand Griet et le nom anglais Meg sont tous deux des diminutifs du nom de Margaret (ou Margriet), équivalents du français Marguerite. Mons Meg a été construit par Jehan Cambier, fabricant d'artillerie du duc de Bourgogne Philippe le Bonet il a été testé avec succès à Mons dans le comté de Hainaut dans l'actuelle Belgique, en juin 1449. Le duc n'en prendra livraison qu'en 1453. Le duc a offert la bombarde au roi d'Écosse James II en 1457 dont il avait aidé à négocier le mariage en signe de son soutien.

Le canon est fabriqué selon la méthode qui consistait à forger ensemble des barres de fer droites autour d'un mandrin, et de les consolider ensuite avec des cercles de fer, dilatés par chauffe et brusquement refroidis à l'eau pour provoquer un rétrécissement, à la manière des barriques. La manière dont ces canons sont fabriqués ainsi que les variations de qualité de la poudre noire dont les ingrédients étaient souvent transportés séparément et mélangés sur place, en faisait des armes très peu fiables. Les explosions n'étaient pas rares, et on peut dire que ces bombardes étaient plus dangereuses pour leurs servants que pour ceux sur qui on tirait. L'effet psychologique de la flamme et du tonnerre au départ du coup étaient plus impressionnant que le gros boulet de pierre. Il faut également imaginer la somme d'efforts et d'énergie nécessaires au déplacement de ces énormes pièces, ainsi que la difficulté de leur mise en batterie. Une fois en place, ces bombardes ne pouvaient plus être déplacées, et tout réglage de visée était exclu. Elles ne pouvaient tirer qu'une dizaine de coups par jour au maximum en raison de l’énorme chaleur générée par la charge de poudre, et si leurs gros boulets de pierre parvenaient à ouvrir des brèches dans des murailles pas trop épaisses, ils étaient pratiquement sans effet contre l'infanterie et la cavalerie, qui pouvait les voir arriver de loin et les éviter assez aisément.

La bombarde a été employée dans les sièges jusqu'au milieu du XVIe siècle. Probablement pour la première fois en 1460 au château de Roxburgh près de la frontière avec l'Angleterre. Au cours de cette bataille, le roi Jacques II d'Écosse a été mortellement blessé lorsqu'un autre canon de siège géant a explosé. En 1489, elle a été emmenée à 80 km (50 miles) à l'ouest du château de Dumbarton (puis le château de Norham), pour aider à maîtriser le comte de Lennox. Le poids énorme de Mons Meg la rendait très difficile à déplacer. Sa vitesse moyenne n'était que de 14 kms (9 miles) par jour. Elle termina ses jours de combat dans la marine du roi Jacques V, prenant sa retraite vers 1540. Elle ne fut tiré ensuite que lors d'occasions cérémonielles : en 1558 pour célébrer le mariage de Mary Queen of Scots avec le dauphin français, puis de nouveau en 1681, en guise de salut d'anniversaire pour le futur roi Jacques VII. Malheureusement le baril éclata rendant le Mons Meg inutilisable (les cerceaux fracturés sont encore visibles). En 1754, Mons Meg fut emmenée à la Tour de Londres, où il y resta 75 ans. Il est ramené au château en 1829. La cavalerie et l’infanterie l’escortent de Leith Docks à Castle Rock. Mons Meg a depuis été restauré et est maintenant exposé dans le château. Il reste très populaire aujourd’hui auprès des touristes, qui ne résistent pas à mettre la tête dans l'énorme canon…

 

Mons Meg is a medieval (15th century) bombard from the collection of the Royal Armories on loan to Historic Scotland. It symbolizes Scotland's glorious military past. This impressive 6-ton, 20-inch (510 mm) caliber siege gun is capable of firing stone balls weighing 330 pounds (150 kg) up to 2 miles away (3.2 km). Originally the barrel was painted with red lead to prevent it from rusting. It took a hundred men to transport it. Together with the massive 17-tonne cast bronze 'Dardanelle Cannon' made in 1464 for the Turkish Sultan Mohammet II (now on display in the courtyard of the Tower of London), these bombards are among the largest cannons ever built. The English author Dudley Pope cites the Mons Meg but also the Dulle Griet of Ghent as examples of the largest guns built in the Middle Ages, and says of both that they "were probably made in 'Flanders' (a region which later became Belgium and which the French called "Pays-Bas"). The "Dulle Griet was more than 5 m long, weighed 12.5 tons with a caliber at the muzzle of about 90 cm. He was painted blood red, earning him the nickname "great red demon". The Flemish name Griet and the English name Meg are both diminutives of the name Margaret (or Margriet), equivalents of the French Marguerite. Mons Meg was built by Jehan Cambier, artillery maker for the Duke of Burgundy Philippe le Bonet it was successfully tested in Mons in the county of Hainaut in present-day Belgium, in June 1449. The duke never took delivery of it than in 1453. The Duke gifted the bombard to King James II of Scotland in 1457 whose marriage he had helped negotiate as a sign of his support.

The barrel is made by the method of forging straight iron bars together around a mandrel, and then consolidating them with iron hoops, expanded by heating and suddenly cooled with water to cause shrinkage, to the way of the barrels. The way in which these guns are made as well as the variations in quality of black powder whose ingredients were often transported separately and mixed on site, made them very unreliable weapons. Explosions were not uncommon, and it can be said that these bombards were more dangerous for their servants than for those who were fired at. The psychological effect of the flame and the thunder at the start of the blow were more impressive than the large stone ball. One must also imagine the amount of effort and energy required to move these huge pieces, as well as the difficulty of putting them in battery. Once in place, these bombards could no longer be moved, and any aiming adjustment was excluded. They could only fire about ten shots a day at the most because of the enormous heat generated by the powder charge, and if their big stone balls managed to open breaches in walls not too thick, they were practically without effect against infantry and cavalry, which could see them coming from afar and avoid them quite easily.

The bombard was used in sieges until the middle of the 16th century. Probably first seen in 1460 at Roxburgh Castle near the border with England. During this battle, King James II of Scotland was mortally wounded when another giant siege cannon exploded. In 1489, she was taken 80 km (50 miles) west of Dumbarton Castle (then Norham Castle), to help subdue the Earl of Lennox. Mons Meg's enormous weight made her very difficult to move. Its average speed was only 14 kms (9 miles) per day. She ended her days of combat in the navy of King James V, retiring around 1540. She was only fired afterwards on ceremonial occasions: in 1558 to celebrate the marriage of Mary Queen of Scots to the French Dauphin, then to again in 1681, as a birthday greeting for the future King James VII. Unfortunately the barrel burst rendering the Mons Meg unusable (the fractured hoops are still visible). In 1754, Mons Meg was taken to the Tower of London, where he remained for 75 years. He was brought back to the castle in 1829. Cavalry and infantry escorted him from Leith Docks to Castle Rock. Mons Meg has since been restored and is now on display in the castle. It remains very popular today with tourists, who can't resist putting their heads in the huge cannon...

 

The BAC 167 Strikemaster is essentially an armed version of the Jet Provost T Mk 5; the Strikemaster was modified with an uprated engine, wing hardpoints capable of carrying 4 500 pound Mk82 bombs, two machine guns under the intakes, uprated flap system with two jacks, larger airbrake jacks, new communication and navigation gear, different electrical system, canopy breakers on the ejection seats, and a revised fuel system including conformal fuel tanks on the wing tips. First flown in 1967, the aircraft was marketed as a light attack or counter-insurgency aircraft, but most large-scale purchasers were air forces wanting an advanced trainer, although Ecuador, Oman and Yemen have used their aircraft in combat. A total of 146 were built.

 

The Strikemaster was capable of operating from rough air strips, with dual ejection seats suitable even for low-altitude escape, and it was therefore widely used by third-world nations. Operations by the type were restricted by most military users after the Royal New Zealand Air Force found fatigue cracking in the wings of its aircraft. Many aircraft retired by Botswana, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia and Singapore have found their way into museums and private collections.

 

The Strikemaster was deployed by the Royal Air Force of Oman on several occasions during the Dhofar Rebellion, including a notable appearance providing Close Air Support during the Battle of Mirbat. Three Strikemasters were shot down over the course of the war, including one lost to an SA-7 missile.

 

The Ecuadorian Air Force deployed the Strikemaster during the brief 1995 Cenepa War, flying ground sorties against Peruvian positions. An Ecuadorian Strikemaster crashed during a training mission in the Northern Border area, near Colombia, on 25 March 2009. Both pilots ejected; one later died of injuries received during the rescue attempt.

+++ 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 Focke Wulf Ta 338 originated as a response of request by the RLM in mid 1943 for an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), optimized for the interceptor and point defense role and without a hazardous liquid rocket engine as means of propulsion. In the course of the year, several German manufacturers responded with a multitude of highly innovative if not unusual design, including Heinkel with the ducted fan project "Lerche", Rheinmetall-Borsig with a jet-powered tailsitter, and Focke Wulf. This company’s engineering teams submitted two designs: the revolutionary "Triebflügel" concept and the more conservative, yet still futuristic "P.03.10338" tail sitter proposal, conceived by Focke Wulf’s leading engineer Kurt Tank and Walter Kappus from BMW, responsible for the engine development.

 

The P.03.10338 was based on the proven Fw 190 fighter, but the similarities were only superficial. Only the wings and a part of the fuselage structure around the cockpit would be used, but Tank assumed that using existing parts and tools would appreciably reduce development and production time.

A great part of the fuselage structure had to be re-designed to accommodate a powerful BMW 803 engine and its integral gearbox for an eight-bladed contraprop.

 

The BMW 803 was BMW's attempt to build a high-output aircraft engine, primarily for heavy bombers, by basically "coupling" two BMW 801 engines back-to-back into a single and very compact power unit. The result was a 28-cylinder, four-row radial engine, each comprising a multiple-bank in-line engine with two cylinders in each bank, which, due to cooling concerns, were liquid cooled.

 

This arrangement was from the start intended to drive independent contra-rotating propellers, in order to avoid stiffness problems with the whole engine driving just a single crankshaft and also to simply convert the raw power of this unit into propulsion. The front half of the engine drove the front propeller directly, while the rear engine drove a number of smaller shafts that passed between the cylinders of the front engine before being geared back together to drive the rear prop. This complex layout resulted in a rather large and heavy gearbox on the front of the engine, and the front engine needing an extended shaft to "clear" that gearbox. The four-row 803 engine weighed 2,950 kg (6,490 lb) dry and 4,130 kg (9,086 lb) fully loaded, and initial versions delivered 3,900 PS (3,847 hp; 2,868 kW).

 

While the engine was heavy and there were alternatives with a better weight/output ratio (e. g. the Jumo 222), the BMW 803 was favored for this project because it was the most powerful engine available, and it was relatively compact so that it could be fitted into a fighter's airframe. On the P.03.10338 it drove an all-metal, eight-blade contraprop with a diameter of 4,25 m (13 ft 11 in).

 

In order to accept this massive engine, the P.03.10338’s structure had to be stiffened and the load-bearing structures re-arranged. The aircraft kept the Fw 190's wing structure and surface, but the attachment points at the fuselage had to be moved for the new engine mount, so that they ended up in mid position. The original space for the Fw 190's landing gear was used for a pair of radiator baths in the wings' inner leading edge, the port radiator catering to the front engine half while the radiator on starboard was connected with the rear half. An additional annular oil and sodium cooler for the gearbox and the valve train, respectively, was mounted in the fuselage nose.

 

The tail section was completely re-designed. Instead of the Fw 190's standard tail with fin and stabilizers the P.03.10338’s tail surfaces were a reflected cruciform v-tail (forming an x) that extended above and below the fuselage. On the four fin tips, aerodynamic bodies carried landing pads while the fuselage end contained an extendable landing damper. The pilot sat in a standard Fw 190 cockpit, and the aircraft was supposed to start and land vertically from a mobile launch pad. In the case of an emergency landing, the lower stabilizers could be jettisoned. Nor internal armament was carried, instead any weaponry was to be mounted under the outer wings or the fuselage, in the form of various “Rüstsätze” packages.

 

Among the many exotic proposals to the VTOL fighter request, Kurt Tank's design appeared as one of the most simple options, and the type received the official RLM designation Ta 338. In a rush of urgency (and maybe blinded by clever Wunderwaffen marketing from Focke Wulf’s side), a series of pre-production aircraft was ordered instead of a dedicated prototype, which was to equip an Erprobungskommando (test unit, abbreviated “EK”) that would evaluate the type and develop tactics and procedures for the new fighter.

 

Fueled by a growing number of bomber raids over Germany, the “EK338” was formed as a part of JG300 in August 1944 in Schönwalde near Berlin, but it took until November 1944 that the first Ta 338 A-0 machines were delivered and made operational. These initial eight machines immediately revealed several flaws and operational problems, even though the VTOL concept basically worked and the aircraft flew well – once it was in the air and cruising at speeds exceeding 300 km/h (186 mph).

 

Beyond the many difficulties concerning the aircraft’s handling (esp. the landing was hazardous), the lack of a landing gear hampered ground mobility and servicing. Output of the BMW 803 was sufficient, even though the aircraft had clear limits concerning the take-off weight, so that ordnance was limited to only 500 kg (1.100 lb). Furthermore, the noise and the dust kicked up by starting or landing aircraft was immense, and servicing the engine or the weapons was more complicated than expected through the high position of many vital and frequently tended parts.

 

After three Ta 338 A-0 were lost in accidents until December 1944, a modified version was ordered for a second group of the EK 338. This led to the Ta 338 A-1, which now had shorter but more sharply swept tail fins that carried single wheels and an improved suspension under enlarged aerodynamic bodies.

This machine was now driven by an improved BMW 803 A-2 that delivered more power and was, with an MW-50 injection system, able to produce a temporary emergency output of 4.500 hp (3.308 kW).

 

Vertical start was further assisted by optional RATO units, mounted in racks at the rear fuselage flanks: either four Schmidding SG 34 solid fuel booster rockets, 4.9 kN (1,100 lbf) thrust each, or two larger 9.8 kN (2,203 lbf) solid fuel booster rockets, could be used. These improvements now allowed a wider range of weapons and equipment to be mounted, including underwing pods with unguided rockets against bomber pulks and also a conformal pod with two cameras for tactical reconnaissance.

 

The hazardous handling and the complicated maintenance remained the Ta 338’s Achilles heel, and the tactical benefit of VTOL operations could not outbalance these flaws. Furthermore, the Ta 338’s range remained very limited, as well as the potential firepower. Four 20mm or two 30mm cannons were deemed unsatisfactory for an interceptor of this class and power. And while bundles of unguided missiles proved to be very effective against large groups of bombers, it was more efficient to bring these weapons with simple and cheap vehicles like the Bachem Ba 349 Natter VTOL rocket fighter into target range, since these were effectively “one-shot” weapons. Once the Ta 338 fired its weapons it had to retreat unarmed.

 

In mid 1945, in the advent of defeat, further tests of the Ta 338 were stopped. I./EK338 was disbanded in March 1945 and all machines retreated from the Eastern front, while II./EK338 kept defending the Ruhrgebiet industrial complex until the Allied invasion in April 1945. Being circled by Allied forces, it was not possible to evacuate or destroy all remaining Ta 338s, so that at least two more or less intact airframes were captured by the U.S. Army and later brought to the United States for further studies.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length/height on the ground: 10.40 m (34 ft 2 in)

Wingspan: 10.50 m (34 ft 5 in)

Fin span: 4:07 m (13 ft 4 in)

Wing area: 18.30 m² (196.99 ft²)

Empty weight: 11,599 lb (5,261 kg)

Loaded weight: 16,221 lb (7,358 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 16,221 lb (7,358 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× BMW 803 A-2 28-cylinder, liquid-cooled four-row radial engine,

rated at 4.100 hp (2.950 kW) and at 4.500 hp (3.308 kW) with emergency boost.

4x Schmidding SG 34 solid fuel booster rockets, 4.9 kN (1,100 lbf) thrust each, or

2x 9.8 kN (2,203 lbf) solid fuel booster rockets

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 860 km/h (534 mph)

Cruise speed: 650 km/h (403 mph)

Range: 750 km (465 ml)

Service ceiling: 43,300 ft (13,100 m)

Rate of climb: 10,820 ft/min (3,300 m/min)

Wing loading: 65.9 lb/ft² (322 kg/m²)

 

Armament:

No internal armament, any weapons were to be mounted on three hardpoints (one under the fuselage for up to 1.000 kg (2.200 lb) and two under the outer wings, 500 kg (1.100 lb) each. Total ordnance was limited to 1.000 kg (2.200 lb).

 

Various armament and equipment sets (Rüstsätze) were tested:

R1 with 4× 20 mm (.79 in) MG 151/20 cannons

R2 with 2x 30 mm (1.18 in) MK 213C cannons

R3 with 48x 73 mm (2.874 in) Henschel Hs 297 Föhn rocket shells

R4 with 66x 55 mm (2.165 in) R4M rocket shells

R5 with a single 1.000 kg (2.200 lb) bomb under the fuselage

R6 with an underfuselage pod with one Rb 20/20 and one Rb 75/30 topographic camera

  

The kit and its assembly:

This purely fictional kitbashing is a hardware tribute to a highly inspiring line drawing of a Fw 190 VTOL tailsitter – actually an idea for an operational RC model! I found the idea, that reminded a lot of the Lockheed XFV-1 ‘Salmon’ prototype, just with Fw 190 components and some adaptations, very sexy, and so I decided on short notice to follow the urge and build a 1:72 version of the so far unnamed concept.

 

What looks simple (“Heh, it’s just a Fw 190 with a different tail, isn’t it?”) turned out to become a major kitbashing. The basis was a simple Hobby Boss Fw 190 D-9, chose because of the longer tail section, and the engine would be changed, anyway. Lots of work followed, though.

 

The wings were sliced off and moved upwards on the flanks. The original tail was cut off, and the cruciform fins are two pairs of MiG-21F stabilizers (from an Academy and Hasegawa kit), outfitted with reversed Mk. 84 bombs as aerodynamic fairings that carry four small wheels (from an 1:144 T-22M bomber) on scratched struts (made from wire).

 

The cockpit was taken OOB, only a pilot figure was cramped into the seat in order to conceal the poor interior detail. The engine is a bash from a Ju 188’s BMW 801 cowling and the original Fw 190 D-9’s annular radiator as well as a part of its Jumo 213 cowling. BMW 801 exhaust stubs were inserted, too, and the propeller comes from a 1:100 VEB Plasticart Tu-20/95 bomber.

 

Since the BMW 803 had liquid cooling, radiators had to go somewhere. The annular radiator would certainly not have been enough, so I used the space in the wings that became available through the deleted Fw 190 landing gear (the wells were closed) for additional radiators in the wings’ leading edges. Again, these were scratched with styrene profiles, putty and some very fine styrene mesh.

 

As ordnance I settled for a pair of gun pods – in this case these are slipper tanks from a Hobby Boss MiG-15, blended into the wings and outfitted with hollow steel needles as barrels.

  

Painting and markings:

Several design options were possible: all NMF with some colorful markings or an overall RLM76 finish with added camouflage. But I definitively went for a semi-finished look, inspired by late WWII Fw 190 fighters.

 

For instance, the wings’ undersides were partly left in bare metal, but the rudders painted in RLM76 while the leading edges became RLM75. This color was also taken on the wings’ upper sides, with RLM82 thinly painted over. The fuselage is standard RLM76, with RLM82 and 83 on the upper side and speckles on the flanks. The engine cowling became NMF, but with a flashy ‘Hartmann Tulpe’ decoration.

 

Further highlights are the red fuselage band (from JG300 in early 1945) and the propeller spinner, which received a red tip and segments in black and white on both moving propeller parts. Large red “X”s were used as individual aircraft code – an unusual Luftwaffe practice but taken over from some Me 262s.

 

After a light black ink wash some panel shading and light weathering (e.g. exhaust soot, leaked oil, leading edges) was done, and the kit sealed under matt acrylic varnish.

  

Building this “thing” on the basis of a line drawing was real fun, even though challenging and more work than expected. I tried to stay close to the drawing, the biggest difference is the tail – the MiG-21 stabilizers were the best option (and what I had at hand as donation parts), maybe four fins from a Hawker Harrier or an LTV A-7 had been “better”, but now the aircraft looks even faster. ;)

Besides, the Ta 338 is so utterly Luft ’46 – I am curious how many people might take this for real or as a Hydra prop from a contemporary Captain America movie…

Some background:

The idea for a heavy infantry support vehicle capable of demolishing heavily defended buildings or fortified areas with a single shot came out of the experiences of the heavy urban fighting in the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942. At the time, the Wehrmacht had only the Sturm-Infanteriegeschütz 33B available for destroying buildings, a Sturmgeschütz III variant armed with a 15 cm sIG 33 heavy infantry gun. Twelve of them were lost in the fighting at Stalingrad. Its successor, the Sturmpanzer IV, also known by Allies as Brummbär, was in production from early 1943. This was essentially an improved version of the earlier design, mounting the same gun on the Panzer IV chassis with greatly improved armour protection.

 

While greatly improved compared to the earlier models, by this time infantry anti-tank weapons were improving dramatically, too, and the Wehrmacht still saw a need for a similar, but more heavily armoured and armed vehicle. Therefore, a decision was made to create a new vehicle based on the Tiger tank and arm it with a 210 mm howitzer. However, this weapon turned out not to be available at the time and was therefore replaced by a 380 mm rocket launcher, which was adapted from a Kriegsmarine depth charge launcher.

 

The 380 mm Raketen-Werfer 61 L/5.4 was a breech-loading barrel, which fired a short-range, rocket-propelled projectile roughly 1.5 m (4 ft 11 in) long. The gun itself existed in two iterations at the time. One, the RaG 43 (Raketenabschuss-Gerät 43), was a ship-mounted anti-aircraft weapon used for firing a cable-spooled parachute-anchor creating a hazard for aircraft. The second, the RTG 38 (Raketen Tauch-Geschoss 38), was a land-based system, originally planned for use in coastal installations by the Kriegsmarine firing depth-charges against submarines with a range of about 3.000 m. For use in a vehicle, the RTG 38 was to find use as a demolition gun and had to be modified for that role. This modification work was carried out by Rheinmetall at their Sommerda works.

 

The design of the rocket system caused some problems. Modified for use in a vehicle, the recoil from the modified rocket-mortar was enormous, about 40-tonnes, and this meant that only a heavy chassis could be used to mount the gun. The hot rocket exhaust could not be vented into the fighting compartment nor could the barrel withstand the pressure if the gasses were not vented. Therefore, a ring of ventilation shafts was put around the barrel which channeled the exhaust and gave the weapon something of a pepperbox appearance.

 

The shells for the weapon were extremely heavy, far too heavy for a man to load manually. As a result, each of them had to be carried by means of a ceiling-mounted trolley from their rack to a roller-mounted tray at the breech. Once on the tray, four soldiers could then push it into the breech to load it. The whole process took 10 minutes per shot from loading, aiming, elevating and, finally, to firing.

There were a variety of rocket-assisted round types with a weight of up to 376 kg (829 lb), and a maximum range of up to 6,000 m (20,000 ft), which either contained a high explosive charge of 125 kg (276 lb) or a shaped charge for use against fortifications, which could penetrate up to 2.5 m (8 ft 2 in) of reinforced concrete. The stated range of the former was 5,650 m (6,180 yd). A normal charge first accelerated the projectile to 45 m/s (150 ft/s) to leave the short, rifled barrel, the 40 kg (88 lb) rocket charge then boosted this to about 250 m/s (820 ft/s).

 

In September 1943 plans were made for Krupp to fabricate new Tiger I armored hulls for the Sturmtiger. The Tiger I hulls were to be sent to Henschel for chassis assembly and then to Alkett, where the superstructures would be mounted. The first prototype was ready and presented in October 1943. By May 1944, the Sturmtiger prototype had been kept busy with trials and firing tests for the development of range tables, but production had still not started yet and the concept was likely to be scrapped. Rather than ditch the idea though, orders were given that, instead of interrupting the production of the Tiger I, the Sturmtigers would be built on the chassis of Tiger I tanks which had already been in action and suffered serious damage. Twelve superstructures and RW 61 weapons were prepared and mounted on rebuilt Tiger I chassis. However, by August 1944 the dire need for this kind of vehicle led to the adaptation of another chassis to the 380 mm Sturmmörser: the SdKfz. 184, better known as “Ferdinand” (after its designer’s forename) and later, in an upgraded version, “Elefant”.

 

The Elefant (German for "elephant") was actually a heavy tank destroyer and the result of mismanagement and poor planning: Porsche GmbH had manufactured about 100 chassis for their unsuccessful proposal for the Tiger I tank, the so-called "Porsche Tiger". Both the successful Henschel proposal and the Porsche design used the same Krupp-designed turret—the Henschel design had its turret more-or-less centrally located on its hull, while the Porsche design placed the turret much closer to the front of the superstructure. Since the competing Henschel Tiger design was chosen for production, the Porsche chassis were no longer required for the Tiger tank project, and Porsche was left with 100 unfinished heavy tank hulls.

It was therefore decided that the Porsche chassis were to be used as the basis of a new heavy tank hunter, the Ferdinand, mounting Krupp's newly developed 88 mm (3.5 in) Panzerjägerkanone 43/2 (PaK 43) anti-tank gun with a new, long L71 barrel. This precise long-range weapon was intended to destroy enemy tanks before they came within their own range of effective fire, but in order to mount the very long and heavy weapon on the Porsche hull, its layout had to be completely redesigned.

 

Porsche’s SdKfz. 184’s unusual petrol-electric transmission made it much easier to relocate the engines than would be the case on a mechanical-transmission vehicle, since the engines could be mounted anywhere, and only the length of the power cables needed to be altered, as opposed to re-designing the driveshafts and locating the engines for the easiest routing of power shafts to the gearbox. Without the forward-mounted turret of the Porsche Tiger prototype, the twin engines were relocated to the front, where the turret had been, leaving room ahead of them for the driver and radio operator. As the engines were placed in the middle, the driver and the radio operator were isolated from the rest of the crew and could be addressed only by intercom. The now empty rear half of the hull was covered with a heavily armored, full five-sided casemate with slightly sloped upper faces and armored solid roof, and turned into a crew compartment, mounting a single 8.8 cm Pak 43 cannon in the forward face of the casemate.

 

From this readily available basis, the SdKfz. 184/1 was hurriedly developed. It differed from the tank hunter primarily through its new casemate that held the 380 mm Raketenwerfer. Since the SdKfz. 184/1 was intended for use in urban areas in close range street fighting, it needed to be heavily armoured to survive. Its front plate had a greater slope than the Ferdinand while the sides were more vertical and the roof was flat. Its sloped (at 47° from vertical) frontal casemate armor was 150 mm (5.9 in) thick, while its superstructure side and rear plates had a strength of 82 mm (3.2 in). The SdKfz.184/1 also received add-on armor of 100 mm thickness, bolted to the hull’s original vertical front plates, increasing the thickness to 200 mm but adding 5 tons of weight. All these measures pushed the weight of the vehicle up from the Ferdinand’s already bulky 65 t to 75 t, limiting the vehicle’s manoeuvrability even further. Located at the rear of the loading hatch was a Nahverteidigungswaffe launcher which was used for close defense against infantry with SMi 35 anti-personnel mines, even though smoke grenades or signal flares could be fired with the device in all directions, too. For close-range defense, a 7.92 mm MG 34 machine gun was carried in a ball mount in the front plate, an addition that was introduced to the Elefant tank hunters, too, after the SdKfz. 184 had during its initial deployments turned out to be very vulnerable to infantry attacks.

 

Due to the size of the RW 61 and the bulkiness of the ammunition, only fourteen rounds could be carried internally, of which one was already loaded, with another stored in the loading tray, and the rest were carried in two storage racks, leaving only little space for the crew of four in the rear compartment. To help with the loading of ammunition into the vehicle, a loading crane was fitted at the rear of the superstructure next to the loading hatch on the roof.

Due to the internal limits and the tactical nature of the vehicle, it was intended that each SdKfz. 184/1 (as well as each Sturmtiger) would be accompanied by an ammunition carrier, typically based on the Panzer IV chassis, but the lack of resources did not make this possible. There were even plans to build a dedicated, heavily armored ammunition carrier on the Tiger I chassis, but only one such carrier was completed and tested, it never reached production status.

 

By the time the first RW 61 carriers had become available, Germany had lost the initiative, with the Wehrmacht being almost exclusively on the defensive rather than the offensive, and this new tactical situation significantly weakened the value of both Sturmtiger and Sturmelefant, how the SdKfz 184/1 was semi-officially baptized. Nevertheless, three new Panzer companies were raised to operate the Sturmpanzer types: Panzer Sturmmörser Kompanien (PzStuMrKp) ("Armored Assault Mortar Company") 1000, 1001 and 1002. These originally were supposed to be equipped with fourteen vehicles each, but this figure was later reduced to four each, divided into two platoons, consisting of mixed vehicle types – whatever was available and operational.

 

PzStuMrKp 1000 was raised on 13 August 1944 and fought during the Warsaw Uprising with two vehicles, as did the prototype in a separate action, which may have been the only time the Sturmtiger was used in its intended role. PzStuMrKp 1001 and 1002 followed in September and October. Both PzStuMrKp 1000 and 1001 served during the Ardennes Offensive, with a total of four Sturmtiger and three Sturmelefanten.

After this offensive, the Sturmpanzer were used in the defence of Germany, mainly on the Western Front. During the battle for the bridge at Remagen, German forces mobilized Sturmmörserkompanie 1000 and 1001 (with a total of 7 vehicles, five Sturmtiger and two Sturmelefanten) to take part in the battle. The tanks were originally tasked with using their mortars against the bridge itself, though it was discovered that they lacked the accuracy needed to hit the bridge and cause significant damage with precise hits to vital structures. During this action, one of the Sturmtigers in Sturmmörserkompanie 1001 near Düren and Euskirchen allegedly hit a group of stationary Shermans tanks in a village with a 380mm round, resulting in nearly all the Shermans being put out of action and their crews killed or wounded - the only recorded tank-on-tank combat a Sturmtiger was ever engaged in. After the bridge fell to the Allies, Sturmmörserkompanie 1000 and 1001 were tasked with bombardment of Allied forces to cover the German retreat, as opposed to the bunker busting for which they had originally been designed for. None was actually destroyed through enemy fire, but many vehicles had to be given up due to mechanical failures or the lack of fuel. Most were blown up by their crews, but a few fell into allied hands in an operational state.

 

Total production numbers of the SdKfz. 184/1 are uncertain but, being an emergency product and based on a limited chassis supply, the number of vehicles that left the Nibelungenwerke in Austria was no more than ten – also because the tank hunter conversion had top priority and the exotic RW 61 launcher was in very limited supply. As a consequence, only a total of 18 Sturmtiger had been finished by December 1945 and put into service, too. However, the 380 mm Raketen-Werfer 61 remained in production and was in early 1946 adapted to the new Einheitspanzer E-50/75 chassis.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Six (driver, radio operator/machine gunner in the front cabin,

commander, gunner, 2× loader in the casemate section)

Weight: 75 tons

Length: 7,05 m (23 ft 1½ in)

Width: 3,38 m (11 ft 1 in)

Height w/o crane: 3,02 m (9 ft 10¾ in)

Ground clearance: 1ft 6¾ in (48 cm)

Climbing: 2 ft 6½ in (78 cm)

Fording depth: 3 ft 3¼ (1m)

Trench crossing: 8 ft 7 ¾ in (2,64 m)

Suspension: Longitudinal torsion-bar

Fuel capacity: 1.050 liters

 

Armour:

62 to 200 mm (2.44 to 7.87 in)

 

Performance:

30 km/h (19 mph) on road

15 km/h (10 miles per hour () off road

Operational range: 150 km (93 mi) on road

90 km (56 mi) cross-country

Power/weight: 8 hp/ton

 

Engine:

2× Maybach HL120 TRM petrol engines with 300 PS (246 hp, 221 kW) each, powering…

2× Siemens-Schuckert D1495a 500 Volt electric engines with 320 PS (316 hp, 230 kW) each

 

Transmission:

Electric

 

Armament:

1x 380 mm RW 61 rocket launcher L/5.4 with 14 rounds

1x 7.92 mm (0.312 in) MG 34 machine gun with 600 rounds

1x 100 mm grenade launcher (firing anti-personnel mines, smoke grenades or signal flares)

  

The kit and its assembly:.

This fictional tank model is not my own idea, it is rather based on a picture of a similar kitbashing of an Elefant with a Sturmtiger casemate and its massive missile launcher – even though it was a rather crude model, with a casemate created from cardboard. However, I found the idea charming, even more so because the Ferdinand/Elefant was rather a rolling bunker than an agile tank hunter, despite its powerful weapon. Why not use the same chassis as a carrier for the Sturmtiger’s huge mortar as an assault SPG?

 

The resulting Sturmelefant was created as a kitbashing: the chassis is an early boxing of the Trumpeter Elefant, which comes not only with IP track segments but also alternative vinyl tracks (later boxing do not feature them), and casemate parts come from a Trumpeter Sturmtiger.

While one would think that switching the casemate would be straightforward affair, the conversion turned out to be more complex than expected. Both Elefant and Sturmtiger come with separate casemate pieces, but they are not compatible. The Sturmtiger casemate is 2mm wider than the Elefant’s hull, and its glacis plate is deeper than the Elefant’s, leaving 4mm wide gaps at the sides and the rear. One option could have been to trim down the glacis plate, but I found the roofline to become much too low – and the casemate’s length would have been reduced.

 

So, I used the Sturmtiger casemate “as is” and filled the gaps with styrene sheet strips. This worked, but the casemate’s width created now inward-bent sections that looked unplausible. Nobody, even grazed German engineers, would not have neglected the laws of structural integrity. What to do? Tailoring the casemate’s sides down would have been one route, but this would have had created a strange shape. The alternative I chose was to widen the flanks of the Elefant’s hull underneath the casemate, which was achieved with tailored 0.5 mm styrene sheet panels and some PSR – possible through the Elefant’s simple shape and the mudguards that run along the vehicle’s flanks.

Some more PSR was necessary to blend the rear into a coherent shape and to fill a small gap at the glacis plate’s base. Putty was also used to fill/hide almost all openings on the glacis plate, since no driver sight or ball mount for a machine gun was necessary anymore. New bolts between hull and casemate were created with small drops of white glue. The rest of the surface details were taken from the respective donor kits.

  

Painting and markings:

This was not an easy choice. A classic Hinterhalt scheme would have been a natural choice, but since the Sturmelefant would have been converted from existing hulls with new parts, I decided to emphasize this heritage through a simple, uniform livery: all Ferdinand elements would be painted/left in a uniform Dunkelgelb (RAL, 7028, Humbrol 83), while the new casemate as well as the bolted-on front armor were left in a red primer livery, in two different shades (Humbrol 70 and 113). This looked a little too simple for my taste, so that I eventually added snaky lines in Dunkelgelb onto the primer-painted sections, blurring the contrast between the two tones.

 

Markings remained minimal, just three German crosses on the flanks and at the rear and a tactical code on the casemate – the latter in black and in a hand-written style, as if the vehicle had been rushed into frontline service.

 

After the decals had been secured under sone varnish the model received an overall washing with dark brown, highly thinned acrylic paint, some dry-brushing with light grey and some rust traces, before it was sealed overall with matt acrylic varnish and received some dirt stains with mixed watercolors and finally, after the tracks had been mounted, some artist pigments as physical dust on the lower areas.

  

Again a project that appeared simple but turned out to be more demanding because the parts would not fit as well as expected. The resulting bunker breaker looks plausible, less massive than the real Sturmtiger but still a menacing sight.

 

+++ 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 TIE/LN starfighter, or TIE/line starfighter, simply known as the TIE Fighter or T/F, was the standard Imperial starfighter seen in massive numbers throughout most of the Galactic Civil War and onward.

The TIE Fighter was manufactured by Sienar Fleet Systems and led to several upgraded TIE models such as TIE/sa bomber, TIE/IN interceptor, TIE/D Defender, TIE/D automated starfighter, and many more.

 

The original TIEs were designed to attack in large numbers, overwhelming the enemy craft. The Imperials used so many that they came to be considered symbols of the Empire and its might. They were also very cheap to produce, reflecting the Imperial philosophy of quantity over quality.

 

However, a disadvantage of the fighter was its lack of deflector shields. In combat, pilots had to rely on the TIE/LN's maneuverability to avoid damage. The cockpit did incorporate crash webbing, a repulsorlift antigravity field, and a high-g shock seat to help protect the pilot, however these did next to nothing to help protect against enemy blaster fire.

 

Due to the lack of life-support systems, each TIE pilot had a fully sealed flight suit superior to their Rebel counterparts. The absence of a hyperdrive also rendered the light fighter totally dependent on carrier ships when deployed in enemy systems. TIE/LNs also lacked landing gear, another mass-reducing measure. While the ships were structurally capable of "sitting" on their wings, they were not designed to land or disembark their pilots without special support. On Imperial ships, TIEs were launched from racks in the hangar bays.

 

The high success rate of more advanced Rebel starfighters against standard Imperial TIE Fighters resulted in a mounting cost of replacing destroyed fighters and their pilots. That, combined with the realization that the inclusion of a hyperdrive would allow the fleet to be more flexible, caused the Imperial Navy to rethink its doctrine of using swarms of cheap craft instead of fewer high-quality ones, leading to the introduction of the TIE Advanced x1 and its successor, the TIE Avenger. The following TIE/D Defender as well as the heavy TIE Escort Fighter (or TIE/E) were touted as the next "logical advance" of the TIE Series—representing a shift in starfighter design from previous, expendable TIE models towards fast, well armed and protected designs, capable of hyperspace travel and long-term crew teams which gained experience and capabilities over time.

 

The TIE/E Escort, was a high-performance TIE Series starfighter developed for the Imperial Navy by Sienar Fleet Systems and it was introduced into service shortly before the Battle of Endor. It was a much heavier counterpart to the agile and TIE/D fighter, and more of an attack ship or even a light bomber than a true dogfighter. Its role were independent long range operations, and in order to reduce the work load and boost morale a crew of two was introduced (a pilot and a dedicated weapon systems officer/WSO). The primary duty profile included attack and escort task, but also reconnoiter missions. The TIE/E shared the general layout with the contemporary TIE/D fighter, but the cockpit section as well as the central power unit were much bigger, and the ship was considerably heavier.

 

The crew enjoyed – compared with previous TIE fighter designs – a spacious and now fully pressurized cockpit, so that no pressurized suits had to be worn anymore. The crew members sat in tandem under a large, clear canopy. The pilot in front had a very good field of view, while the WSO sat behind him, in a higher, staggered position with only a limited field of view. Both work stations had separate entries, though, and places could not be switched in flight: the pilot mounted the cockpit through a hatch on port side, while the WSO entered the rear compartment through a roof hatch.

 

In a departure from the design of previous TIE models, instead of two parallel wings to either side of the pilot module, the TIE Escort had three quadanium steel solar array wings mounted symmetrically around an aft section, which contained an I-s4d solar ionization reactor to store and convert solar energy collected from the wing panels. The inclusion of a third wing provided additional solar power to increase the ship's range and the ship's energy management system was designed to allow weapons and shields to be charged with minimum loss of power to the propulsion system.

 

Although it was based on the standard twin ion engine design, the TIE/E’s propulsion system was upgraded to the entirely new, powerful P-sz9.8 triple ion engine. This allowed the TIE/E a maximum acceleration of 4,220 G or 21 MGLT/s and a top speed of 144 MGLT, or 1,680 km/h in an atmosphere — almost 40 percent faster than a former standard TIE Fighter. With tractor beam recharge power (see below) redirected to the engines, the top speed could be increased to 180 MGLT in a dash.

In addition to the main thrusters located in the aft section, the TIE Escort's triple wing design allowed for three arrays of maneuvering jets and it featured an advanced F-s5x flight avionics system to process the pilot's instructions. Production models received a class 2, ND9 hyperdrive motivator, modified from the version developed for the TIE Avenger. The TIE/E also carried a Sienar N-s6 Navcon navigation computer with a ten-jump memory.

 

Special equipment included a small tractor beam projector, originally developed for the TIE Avenger, which could be easily fitted to the voluminous TIE Escort. Models produced by Ysanne Isard's production facility regularly carried such tractor beams and the technology found other uses, such as towing other damaged starfighters until they could achieve the required velocity to enter hyperspace. The tractor beam had limited range and could only be used for a short time before stopping to recharge, but it added new tactics, too. For instance, the beam allowed the TIE/E crews to temporarily inhibit the mobility of enemy fighters, making it easier to target them with the ship's other weapon systems, or prevent enemies from clear shots.

 

The TIE Escort’s weapons systems were primarily designed to engage bigger ships and armored or shielded targets, like armed freighters frequently used by the Alliance. Thanks to its complex weapon and sensor suite, it could also engage multiple enemy fighters at once. The sensors also allowed an effective attack of ground targets, so that atmospheric bombing was a potential mission for the TIE/E, too.

.

The TIE Escort Fighter carried a formidable array of weaponry in two modular weapon bays that were mounted alongside the lower cabin. In standard configuration, the TIE/E had two L-s9.3 laser cannons and two NK-3 ion cannons. The laser and ion cannons could be set to fire separately or, if concentrated power was required, to fire-linked in either pairs or as a quartet.

The ship also featured two M-g-2 general-purpose warhead launchers, each of which could be equipped with a standard load of three proton torpedoes or four concussion missiles. Depending on the mission profile, the ship could be fitted with alternative warheads such as proton rockets, proton bombs, or magnetic pulse warheads.

Additionally, external stores could be carried under the fuselage, which included a conformal sensor pallet for reconnaissance missions or a cargo bay with a capacity for 500 kg (1.100 lb).

 

The ship's defenses were provided by a pair of forward and rear projecting Novaldex deflector shield generators—another advantage over former standard TIE models. The shields were designed to recharge more rapidly than in previous Imperial fighters and were nearly as powerful as those found on capital ships, so that the TIE/E could engage other ships head-on with a very high survivability. The fighters were not equipped with particle shields, though, relying on the reinforced titanium hull to absorb impacts from matter. Its hull and wings were among the strongest of any TIE series Starfighter yet.

 

The advanced starfighter attracted the attention of several other factions, and the Empire struggled to prevent the spread of the technology. The ship's high cost, together with political factors, kept it from achieving widespread use in the Empire, though, and units were assigned only to the most elite crews.

 

The TIE/E played a central role in the Empire's campaign against rogue Grand Admiral Demetrius Zaarin, and mixed Defender and Escort units participated in several other battles, including the Battle of Endor. The TIE Escort continued to see limited use by the Imperial Remnant up to at least 44 ABY, and was involved in numerous conflicts, including the Yuuzhan Vong War..

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another group build contribution, this time to the Science Fiction GB at whatifmodelers.com during summer 2017. Originally, this one started as an attempt to build a vintage MPC TIE Interceptor kit which I had bought and half-heartedly started to build probably 20 years ago. But I did not have the right mojo (probably, The Force was not strong enough…?), so the kit ended up in a dark corner and some parts were donated to other projects.

 

The sun collectors were still intact, though, and in the meantime I had the idea of reviving the kit’s remains, and convert it into (what I thought was) a fictional TIE Fighter variant with three solar panels. For this plan I got myself another TIE Interceptor kit, and stashed it away, too. Mojo was still missing, though.

 

Well, then came the SF GB and I took it as an occasion to finally tackle the build. But when I prepared for the build I found out that my intended design (over the years) more or less actually existed in the Star Wars universe: the TIE/D Defender! I could have built it with the parts and hand and some improvisation, but the design similarity bugged me. Well, instead of a poor copy of something that was more or less clearly defined, I rather decided to create something more individual, yet plausible, from the parts at hand.

 

The model was to stay a TIE design, though, in order to use as much donor material from the MPC kits as possible. Doing some legwork, I settled for a heavy fighter – bigger than the TIE Interceptor and the TIE/D fighter, a two-seater.

Working out the basic concept and layout took some time and evolved gradually. The creative spark for the TIE/E eventually came through a Revell “Obi Wan’s Jedi Starfighter” snap fit kit in my pile – actually a prize from a former GB participation at phoxim.de (Thanks a lot, Wolfgang!), and rather a toy than a true model kit.

 

The Jedi Fighter was in so far handy as it carries some TIE Fighter design traits, like the pilot capsule and the characteristic spider web windscreen. Anyway, it’s 1:32, much bigger than the TIE Interceptor’s roundabout 1:50 scale – but knowing that I’d never build the Jedi Starfighter OOB I used it as a donor bank, and from this starting point things started to evolve gradually.

 

Work started with the cockpit section, taken from the Jedi Starfighter kit. The two TIE Interceptor cockpit tubs were then mounted inside, staggered, and the gaps to the walls filled with putty. A pretty messy task, and once the shapes had been carved out some triangular tiles were added to the surfaces – a detail I found depicted in SW screenshots and some TIE Fighter models.

 

Another issue became the crew – even though I had two MPC TIE Interceptors and, theorectically, two pilot figures, only one of them could be found and the second crewman had to be improvised. I normally do not build 1:48 scale things, but I was lucky (and happy) to find an SF driver figure, left over from a small Dougram hoovercraft kit (from Takara, as a Revell “Robotech” reboxing). This driver is a tad bigger than the 1:50 TIE pilot, but I went with it because I did not want to invest money and time in alternatives. In order to justify the size difference I decided to paint the Dougram driver as a Chiss, based on the expanded SW universe (with blue skin and hair, and glowing red eyes). Not certain if this makes sense during the Battle of Endor timeframe, but it adds some color to the project – and the cockpit would not be visible in much detail since it would be finished fully closed.

 

Reason behind the closed canopy is basically the poor fit of the clear part. OOB, this is intended as an action toy – but also the canopy’s considerable size in 1:50 would prevent its original opening mechanism.

Additional braces on the rel. large window panels were created with self-adhesive tape and later painted over.

 

The rear fuselage section and the solar panel pylons were scratched. The reactor behind the cockpit section is actually a plastic adapter for water hoses, found in a local DIY market. It was slightly modified, attached to the cockpit “egg” and both parts blended with putty. The tail opening was closed with a hatch from the OOB TIE Interceptor – an incidental but perfect match in size and style.

 

The three pylons are also lucky finds: actually, these are SF wargaming/tabletop props and would normally be low walls or barriers, made from resin. For my build, they were more or less halved and trimmed. Tilted by 90°, they are attached to the hull with iron wire stabilizers, and later blended to the hull with putty, too.

 

Once the cockpit was done, things moved more swiftly. The surface of the hull was decorated with many small bits and pieces, including thin styrene sheet and profiles, steel and iron wire in various strengths, and there are even 1:72 tank tracks hidden somewhere, as well as protective caps from syringes (main guns and under the rear fuselage). It’s amazing how much stuff you can add to such a model – but IMHO it’s vital in order to create some structure and to emulate the (early) Star Wars look.

  

Painting and markings:

The less spectacular part of the project, even though still a lot of work because of the sheer size of the model’s surface. Since the whole thing is fictional, I tried to stay true to the Imperial designs from Episode IV-VI and gave the TIE/E a simple, all-light grey livery. All basic painting was done with rattle cans.

Work started with a basic coat of grey primer. On top of that, an initial coat of RAL 7036 Platingrau was added, esp. to the lower surfaces and recesses, for a rough shading effect. Then, the actual overall tone, RAL 7047, called “Telegrau 4”, one of Deutsche Telekom’s corporate tones, was added - mostly sprayed from abone and the sides onto the model. Fuselage and panels were painted separately, overall assembly was one of the final steps.

 

The solar panels were to stand out from the grey rest of the model, and I painted them with Revell Acrylic “Iron Metallic” (91) first, and later applied a rather rich wash with black ink , making sure the color settled well into the many small cells. The effect is pretty good, and the contrast was slightly enhanced through a dry-brushing treatment.

 

Only a few legible stencils were added all around the hull (most from the scrap box or from mecha sheets), the Galactic Empire Seal were inkjet-printed at home, as well as some tactical markings on the flanks, puzzled together from single digits in "Aurebash", one of the Imperial SW languages/fonts.

For some variety and color highlights, dozens of small, round and colorful markings were die-punched from silver, yellow, orange, red and blue decal sheet and were placed all over the hull - together with the large panels they blur into the the overall appearance, though. The hatches received thin red linings, also made from generic decals strips.

 

The cockpit interior was a bit challenging, though. Good TIE Fighter cockpit interior pictures are hard to find, but they suggest a dark grey tone. More confusingly, the MPC instructions call for a “Dark Green” cockpit? Well, I did not like the all-grey option, since the spaceship is already monochrome grey on the outside.

 

As a compromise I eventually used Tamiya XF-65 "Field Grey". The interior recieved a black ink in and dry-brushing treatment, and some instruments ansd screens were created with black decal material and glossy black paint; some neon paint was used for sci-fi-esque conmtraol lamps everywhere - I did not pay too much intention on the interior, since the cockpit would stay closed, and the thick clear material blurs everything inside.

Following this rationale, the crew was also painted in arather minimal fashion - both wear a dark grey uniform, only the Chiss pilot stands aout with his light blue skin and the flourescent red eyes.

 

After an overall black ink wash the model received a dry brusing treatment with FS 36492 and FS 36495, for a weathered and battle-worn look. After all, the "Vehement" would not survive the Ballte of Endor, but who knows what became of TIE/E "801"'s mixed crew...?

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish, and some final cosmetic corrections made.

 

The display is a DIY creation, too, made from a 6x6" piece of wood, it's edges covered with edgebonder, a steel wire as holder, and finally the display was paited with semi-matt black acrylic paint from the rattle can.

  

A complex build, and the TIE/E more or less evolved along the way, with only the overall layout in mind. Work took a month, but I think it was worth the effort. This fantasy creation looks pretty plausible and blends well into the vast canonical TIE Fighter family - and I am happy that I finally could finish this mummy project, including the surplus Jedi Starfighter kit which now also find a very good use!

 

An epic one, and far outside my standard comfort zone. But a wothwhile build!

 

Etna is not only one of the most active volcanoes on Earth, but also one of the most versatile. It is capable of producing nearly all volcanic phenomena that are seen worldwide (luckily, the most violent and potentially devastating are very rare), and if you work as a volcanologist on Etna you have a good chance to see everything from quiet lava outflow to small Strombolian explosions, big Strombolian explosions, towering columns of ash and gas, lava fountains roaring hundreds, sometimes thousands of meters high, pyroclastic flows, small mudflows, kilometer-long eruptive fissures, large scoria cones growing in a matter of a few days to weeks ... plus, all of this happens rather frequently (for example, pyroclastic flows have occurred at least three times in the past 12 months).

 

The most characteristic and frequent type of volcanic activity seen at Etna in recent decades is a phenomenon called lava fountains, often also dubbed "paroxysm" - short, violent and outstandingly spectacular episodes of lava fountaining and lava flow emissions accompanied by the formation of tall columns of ash and gas. They occur exclusively at the summit craters of Etna (all four of the present summit craters have produced varying numers of lava fountains), and often come in long sequences - such as the 20 episodes at the Northeast Crater in 1977-1978, 22 episodes at the Southeast Crater in 1998-1999 and again 66 in the year 2000 ... and the ongoing sequence initiated in January 2012, which thus far consists of 20 events.

 

These paroxysmal episodes nearly always start with small explosions, which gradually grow stronger (though there may be fluctuating activity over periods of hours to days) and eventually pass into continuous, sustained lava fountaining, accompanied by lava outflow and ash emission. The transition from intense Strombolian activity to lava fountaining is often surprisingly abrupt, and so often is the end of a lava fountain. At the end of the lava fountain of 5 January 2012, the volcano roared like a gigantic animal in agony; after a last, extremely loud outcry, there was suddenly total silence, and we've seen similar things in many previous paroxysms.

 

There are other paroxysms, however, that end in a long, drawn-out sequence of very powerful explosions caused by the bursting of huge bubbles of magma in the conduit, which produce tremendous detonations heard to tens of kilometers away. These are more rare, and during the current sequence of paroxysmal episodes, we've seen these only twice, on 19 and 25 July 2011. And then, once again, on 9 February 2012.

 

Personally, I can't really decide which of the two versions of a paroxysm's end I find more awesome, though the bursting bubbles certainly are more rewarding in terms of time - they can go on for hours and hours.

 

The latest lava fountaining episode occurred on the early morning of 9 February 2012 at the New Southeast Crater (some sort of an offspring of what we now informally call the "old" Southeast Crater, last active 5 years ago). It lasted longer than most of its predecessors - the most intense activity fell in the time interval between 01:05 and 06:05 h GMT. Already around 04:00 h, one vent sitting on the southeast rim of the crater occasionally produced huge bursts of countless, meter-sized incandescent bombs, while two other vents within the crater emitted tall lava fountains. When fountaining ceased, the detonation of huge magma blisters continued for several hours, and some of this happened right at daybreak, when the colors are the most beautiful one can imagine.

 

Here's one of those explosions - I tried to capture as many as possible on video and therefore took few photographs of the phenomenon - in a frame ripped from one of my videos. It was recorded around 05:50 h GMT and I did some contrast enhancing on the original. I will post the link to the full video clip (containing a few more explosions) on YouTube in the comments below.

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.

 

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 be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.

The versatile aircraft also underwent constant upgrade programs. For instance, about a third of all VF-1 Valkyries were upgraded with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems from 2016 onwards, placed in a streamlined fairing on the upper side of the nose, just in front of the cockpit. This system allowed for long-range search and track modes, freeing the pilot from the need to give away his position with active radar emissions, and it could also be used for target illumination and guiding precision weapons.

Many Valkyries also received improved radar warning systems, with receivers, depending on the systems, mounted on the wing-tips, on the fins and/or on the LERXs. Improved ECR measures were also mounted on some machines, typically in conformal fairings on the flanks of the legs/engine pods.

 

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)

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 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 kit and its assembly:

Well, once in a while I dig one of these vintage ARII kits out of the mecha pile and let the spirits flow. This time it was a distraction from Corona cabin fever, and this Valkyrie is heavily based on a profile drawing published in the Macross source book “Variable Fighter Master File VF-1 Valkyrie”, p. 122; an online version of this profile can be found here:

 

mechajournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/2010-1-SVF-65...

 

It shows aircraft “100”, though, the machine of SVF-65’s squadron leader, a VF-1 in an all-light blue livery with blue and white trim and some exotic details like a blue canopy frame or a yellow buzz number. I always found this scheme quite attractive, so I decided to replicate it with a model.

However, I was not able to 100% copy the look of “NE 100”, so I rather decided to build a standard fighter from this unit, with a slightly less flashy livery but still as close to the benchmark as possible.

 

Concerning the model, it’s another vintage ARII VF-1, in this case a basic VF-1A. It was built OOB, with the landing gear retracted, a scratched wire display that sticks in the gun pod’s rear end and holds the Valkyrie in flight, and the simple model received a few standard personal updates like a pilot figure and some blade antennae. The ordnance is strictly OOB.

  

Painting and markings:

The basic colors are Humbrol 47 (Sea Blue) overall, with white (Revell 301, a very pure/cold tone) on nose and fins and dark blue (Humbrol 15, Midnight Blue) and medium blue (Humbrol 48, Mediterranean Blue) trim lines. As mentioned above, I tried to stay as close to the benchmark profile as possible, and this posed some challenges.

Painting was done, as usual, only with brushes. The trim on fins, legs and wings was created with paint and masking, while the cheatlines under the cockpit were “faked” with enamel paint on decal sheet, since masking would have been a messy affair in this section of the tiny model. The grey leading edges on wings and fins were done with decal material, too.

 

After a black ink wash, very light post-shading was added. The decals and stencils come mostly from the OOB sheet, which turned out to be tough customers because it took them ages to detach from the carrier paper. The tactical codes were gathered from the scrap box: the “114”s come from a 1:72 Canadair Tutor trainer (their BuNo), the “NE” code on the fin with 3D effect was created from yellow and black single letters of the same size placed one above the other. The “SVF-65”, “ARMD-5” and “AKAGI” tags were created at home with an ink jet printer and respective clear carrier film.

Finally, after some typical highlights with clear paint had been added, the small VF-1 was sealed with a semi-gloss acrylic varnish.

  

A small and quick interim project, realized in just a few days – most time passed while waiting for the gloss Humbrol enamels to cure properly. There are certainly better VF-1 kits, but I just love those simple vintage ARII models. Staying close to the benchmark profile was quite a challenge, but worked out fine, and the compromise of a “normal” fighter of the unit with slightly simplified markings turned out well. And it’s certainly not the last Valkyrie of this kind to come…

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

In the late 1970ies, the Mikoyan OKB design bureau began working on a very light “strike fighter” that was intended to be a direct competitor to the F-16 Fighting Falcon. This new Mikoyan design, designated Izdeliye 33 (Izd 33) (and variously translated as “Article 33”, “Project 33”, “Product 33”, or “Project R-33”), was of conventional layout and similar in appearance to the F-16, with a fixed geometry, chin-mounted air intake and a blended wing and body layout and pronounced leading edge root extensions (LERX).

 

The aircraft was originally powered by a single Klimov RD-33 afterburning turbofan engine – the same engine used by the twin-engined MiG-29. Overall, the Izdeliye 33 was less complex and capable than the MiG-29, but also much cheaper in acquisition and operation.

 

The Izdeliye 33’s outlines resembled the MiG-29, but actually only a few components were shared, e .g. the landing gear. All aerodynamic surfaces were different, and the BWB fuselage with its single engine and air intake duct necessitated a much different internal structure.

After extensive wind-tunnel testing and evaluation of several aerodynamic details (e. g. different LERX layouts with blended edges or dogtooth tips, and different elevator layouts), the first prototype was built and successfully tested in 1984.

 

Progress was slow, since most of OKB MiG’s resources were concentrated on the MiG-29, though, but the aircraft showed good characteristics. State acceptance trials were underway when the program received a hard blow in 1986: the Soviet Air Force (VVS) dropped its support for the Izdeliye 33, due to VVS’ change of operational needs, financial constraints, a growing preference for multirole designs and the doctrine not to operate single engine combat aircraft anymore.

 

Since development of the Izdeliye 33 had already progressed to the hardware stage and the VVS was about to introduce it’s a new fighter generation (the MiG-29 as tactical fighter and the bigger Su-27 as long range inteceptor), which were not allowed for export at that time, the Izdeliye 33’s role was changed.

 

With the domestic market barred, it became a light fighter aircraft with not-so-up-tp-date avionics for foreign operators, much like the former American F-5 program. Sales potential was regarded as high, because many Soviet-friendly nations operating the ageing MiG-21 or MiG-23 export models at that time would appreciate a relatively simple and cost-efficient replacement.

 

In due course the aircraft received the official designation MiG-33SE ("S" for, "seriynyy" = serial and "E" for "eksportnyy" = export).

These production aircraft differed in several details from the Izdeliye 33, the most obvious change were enlarged elevator surfaces and bulges on the flanks which had become necessary in roder to fit bigger low pressure tires to the main landing gear for operations on rough airstrips.

 

Compared with the prototypes, the operational MiG-33 was powered by a Tumansky R-25-300 turbojet, rated at 55 kN (12,000 lbf) dry military power, 68.5 kN (15,400 lbf) with afterburner and 96.8 kN (21,800 lbf) for 3 minutes with boosted afterburner (CSR mode, altitude < 4,000 metres (13,000 ft)). The air intake received an adjustable ramp and the radome became smaller.

 

The first airframes left the Sokol production plant at Nizhny Novgorod in 1987. When the aircraft became known to the public it received the ACSS code name “Foghorn” in the West.

Instead of the MiG-29's state-of-the-art Phazotron RLPK-29 radar fire control system, a less sophisticated RLPK-29E targeting system, based on the N019EA "Rubin" radar, was fitted. As a secondary sensor, a modified S-31E optoelectronic targeting/navigation system and different IFF transponders were fitted.

 

This avionics suite still featured modes for look-down/shoot-down and close-in fighting. With this equipment, the MiG-33SE was able to carry the new and very effective R-73 (NATO: AA-11 "Archer") short-range air-to-air missile, as well as the R-27 (AA-10 "Alamo") mid-range AAM with IR and radar homing. A SPO-15L "Beryoza" ("Birch") radar warning receiver was carried, too, along with chaff/flare dispensers.

 

The new type quickly found buyers: first orders came, among others, from Algeria, Angola, Eritrea, North Korea and Vietnam, and deliveries started in early 1988. In 1989 the MiG-33SE was also offered to India for license production (replacing the country’s large MiG-21 fleet), but the country wanted a more potent aircraft and eventually became one of the first MiG-29 export customers.

 

Beyond its operational service, the MiG-33SE left other footprints in Asia, too. Following the cancellation of U.S. and European companies’ participation in the development of the Westernized Chengdu J-7 variant known as the “Super-7”, China launched a program in 1991 to develop an indigenous evolution of this MiG-21-based design, which it designated the FC-1 (“Fighter China 1”).

 

To expedite its development, officials of the Chengdu Aircraft Industries Corporation (CAC) or the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC) – perhaps both – approached Mikoyan for technical support.

In 1998, CATIC purchased Izdeliye 33 design and test information from the Mikoyan design bureau, along with other research and development assistance. These designs were used for the development of JF-17 / FC-1 by Pakistan and China, which entered production in 2007.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length (incl. pitot): 16,2 m (53 ft)

Wingspan: 10.73 m (35 ft 1.5 in)

Height: 5,5 m (18 ft)

Wing area: 35,6 m² (382 ft²)

Empty weight: 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)

Loaded weight: 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)

Fuel capacity: 3,500 kg. (7,716 lbs.) internally

 

Powerplant:

1× Tumansky R-25-300 turbojet, rated at 55 kN (12,000 lbf) dry military power,

68.5 kN (15,400 lbf) with afterburner and 96.8 kN (21,800 lbf) emergency power

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.2 (2,530+ km/h, 1,500+ mph) at high altitude; 1,110 km/h (690 mph) at low altitude

Range: 1,550 km (837 nmi, 963 mi) with drop tanks

Ferry range: 3,335 km (1,800 nmi, 2,073 mi) with auxiliary fuel

Service ceiling: 17,060 m (59,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 285 m/s (56,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 337 kg/m² (69 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.7 at loaded weight

Maximum design g-load: +9 g

 

Armament:

1x 30 mm GSh-30-1 cannon with 150 rounds in the left fuselage side

7 Hard points (6x pylons under-wing, 1x under fuselage) for up to 3,500 kg (7,720 lb)

of ordnance including six air-to-air missiles — a mix of semi-active radar homing

(SARH)/infrared homing R-60, R-27, R-73, active radar homing R-77 AAMs.

Air-to-ground weapons include RBK-500, PB-250, FAB-250, FAB 500-M62, TN-100, ECM Pods,

S-8 rockets in respective pods, S-24 unguided rockets and guided Kh-25 and Kh-29 ASMs

  

The kit and its assembly:

Firts submission to 2016's first Group Build I take part in - the Cold War GB at whatifmodelers.com, and this year also starts with a "real what-if aircraft": MiG’s Izdeliye 33 was a real project, but it never got off of the drawing board or beyond wind tunnel test models. Nevertheless, it makes a great Whif topic, had it entered production and service.

 

Most interesting is the fact that the Izdeliye 33 looks a lot like the American F-16, but only superficially. Creating this aircraft as a model from scratch is rather challenging, because there are only few sources to consult, and you need a basis to start from. For the latter you have IMHO two options, beyond carving it from wood: convert an F-16 kit and change details or use a MiG-29 as basis, because it was a contemporary design and features many analogies and design details.

 

I rejected the F-16 route, because the result would certainly look like a poor Soviet fighter prop from a Hollywood B movie. The MiG-29 route would take (much) more work, but the result appear like a unique aircraft with Russian heritage, IMHO. And I think that's also the way the MiG engineers went somehow: take the two engine design, and narrow it for just a single engine.

 

Another factor for this design route was the donation kit that I had bought for this project some time ago: a Nakotne MiG-29 from Latvia, which is the worst model representation of the Fulcrum that I have seen so far. It is simple, and almost no detail is correct. Furthermore, it features crude, raised panel lines and a plastic that is rather brittle and thick, not easy to work with. I was somehow reminded of the products of VEB Plasticart from GDR times… But this wrongness was actually the kit’s selling point, as well as its low price tag.

 

The basic idea was to narrow the fuselage so that a single, wide air intake and an engine bay of bigger diameter than the original RD-33 nacelles remained – easy to do, because the whole lower fuselage half, even including the air intakes, are just a single piece! The front section was cut off, too, and a totally new cockpit tub was added - from a Revell Fiat G.91.

 

Inside, a jet engine fan, a scratched air duct with a ramp and some engine bay interior (which is visible through empty holes for the main landing gear bays…) were added.

 

Using the finished, narrowed fuselage as pattern, the upper half was cut into pieces, too: The spine and the cockpit section remained, shortened at the end and lowered in depth, as well as narrow outer BWB sections that would match the spine’s width when mounted. With lots of putty and body sculpting a new upper fuselage was created, as well as a new tail section for a bigger, single jet exhaust.

 

The nozzle is a mix from a Revell F-16 intersection (necessary in order to bridge the rather oval fuselage end with the round nozzle), a Matchbox F-14 nozzle and inside a sprocket wheel from an 1:72 Panzer IV mimicks an afterburner...

 

A new nose cone had to be used, too, and as a weird concidence a vintage Matchbox F-16 radome in the spares box (probably 30 years old!) was a perfect match to the fuselage, which had to be shortened at the front end, too, because the narrowed fuselage somewhat disturbed overall proportions.

 

The wings were taken OOB from the Nakotne kit, their (utterly wrong) square shape reminds a lot of the F-16, but they were placed about 5mm further forward. The elevators come from an Intech F-16C, with a dogtooth manually added (F-15 style, as seen on the later Izdeliye 33 model that can be found in literature). The single, tall fin is a mix of an Intech F-16 root combined with a modified Italeri F-18 Hornet fin. The stabilizer fins under the rear fuselage belong to an Italeri F-16.

 

The landing gear had to be modified, too. The OOB pieces are rather clumsy, and only the main struts survived. Their attchment points had to be moved forward, though, due to the overall change of proportions of the model. New wheels were used, too. The main wheels come from an Italeri X-32, while the front wheel comes, IIRC, from a Matchbox A-4M main landing gear.

 

Besides, the front wheel arrangement had to be re-designed, because the original position half way between the air intake trunks was not possible anymore and the new intake ramp needed space, too. Finding a plausible arrangement was not easy, since I did not want to change the OOB air intake position. So a new well was cut out under the cockpit section, the cockpit floor becoming a part of the well, and the single front wheel now retracts forward. O.K.,FOD now poses a serious issue, but I'd assume that my MiG-33 would have received louvres like the MiG-29 that prevent damage while taxiing?

 

Keen eyes might notice a front wheel change in the course of several beauty pics - the result of a kit crash from the holder which (only) smashed the front wheel strut. I replaced it with a better piece from an Italeri BAe Hawk. Took some adaptation work, but in the end it looks even better than the original attempt.

 

Around the hull several sensors, pitots and antennae were added from scratch, since the whole kit had lost a lot of its raised panel lines and other details in the construction process.

 

The underwing pylons were taken OOB, but the ordnance was totally replaced by more delicate versions of the R-27 and R-60 AAMs - these were taken from a leftover OOB set from an Italeri MiG-29.

Lots of work, but worthwhile!

  

Painting and markings:

As a non VVS-aircraft, there were many options for exotic customers, and I settled for Vietnam. Reason behind it is that I was inspired by VPAF Su-22 fighter bombers, which carry either a four-tone tactical camouflage or are painted in two shades of an intense (if not blatant) and cold baby blue!

 

These uniform upper and lower surfaces really carry bright colors, and together with the red and yellow VPAF cockades plus the typically red tactical codes these aircraft rather look like aggressors or fake museum or movie pieces! Especially when they carry drop tanks sporting the tactical scheme’s colors… Ugh!

 

The basic tone for everything is Humbrol's 44 (Pastel Blue), a co0lor I never expected to apply on a model in this amount! On the underside it was used at 100% as basic tone, while for the upper surfaces it was mixed 4:1 with Humbrol 144 (FS 35614, Intermediate Blue) and a drop of ModelMaster's Ultramarine Blue. The difference between these two tones is hard to tell, though.

 

Radomes were painted in Ocean Grey (Humbrol 106), while the cockpit was kept in typical Soviet cockpit teal. The landing gear wells were painted with a mix of Aluminum and Chromate Primer (Humbrol 56 and 81).

 

A serious issue during the painting process was the recreation of panel lines and some surface structures. Some lines in the wings and the spine were still intact, and these were in a first step made visible through grinded graphite, gently rubbed across the surfaces with a soft cloth.

 

From these, new/additional panel lines were painted on the blank surfaces with a very soft pencil - and you can hardly tell where these blur into each other. Panels themselves were emphasized through dry painting with lighter basic tones, and some more effects were added through more dull blue-grey shades. Not perfect, but for such a heavily modified kit not bad at all.

 

The decals appear minimalistic, just with roundels (from a PrintScale L-39 sheet), the tactical code (typical Chinese code digits from a Trumpeter J-8II sheet) and the eagle emblems (from a Begemot MiG-29 sheet), but there are probably more than sixty small red or black stencils all over the hull, taken from the OOB Nakotne sheet.

 

After some final weathering with graphite (esp. around the nozzle) the whole kit was sealed with acrylic matt varnish from the rattle can, and final details like position lights, pitot tips or the glossy IRST in front of the canopy were crafted.

 

The missiles received typical real world liveries, basically with white bodies and the R-27's fins in shades of grey.

  

A major conversion project, but the result looks interesting: the F-16 that was not, sort of.

It's funny to find many influences from other designs, and while one could take the Izdeliye 33 as a blunt F-16 copy I do not think that it was one, rather a retrograded MiG-29, following aerodynamic necessities that would lead to a similar overall outline.

And the bright blue color is really uniue - if this one does not stand out (at least on the ground, at altitude it appreas to be very effectice!), what else? Probably only the Red Arrows...

Ducked outside for 5 min's (in between coughs) tonight to give the Irix 21/1.4 a quick test...

16 frames ISO3200 f/2.5 6s

raw developed in DxO PhotoLab 6, stacked in Starry Landscape Stacker, bit of a tweak in Color Efex Pro and a final stop back in PhotoLab.

Didn't stress too much about the shot .. just wanted to get an idea on coma and how much actual light it's capable of.

Building on the commercial success of the De Havilland DH.84 Dragon, and filling the need for a faster, more capable aircraft, De Havilland came up with the DH 89 Dragon Six - sometimes called the Dragon Rapide, and later just Rapide - the prototype first flying in April 1934. With its DH Gypsy Major 6 engines of 200 hp, and capable of carrying eight passengers, it was an instant success in the civil market.

 

The De Havilland factory at Hatfield was soon occupied with orders for companies, and airlines such as Olley Air Services and Hillman Airways Ltd. In response to requests to improve landing performance, De Havilland fitted small flaps under the lower wings from 1936, which steepened the glide angle and prevented the problem of ‘floating’ which had affected the Rapide.

 

The RAF ordered two DH.89a aircraft as communication machines for No. 24 Squadron in 1938, but this was just the start of the flood. With the outbreak of war, orders poured in for aircraft for navigation training, radio operator training, air ambulances and more communications machines. These military aircraft were called Dominie T.1, and given the designation of DH.89b; they joined no less than 205 civilian machines which had been ‘impressed’ for both RAF and Royal Navy use.

 

With Hatfield starting to concentrate on building the impressive, new, Mosquito, De Havillands needed a sub-contractor to build the Dominie. They chose Brush Coachworks Ltd of Loughborough, Leicestershire, a company who normally built ‘bus bodies (which used a great deal of wood framework), and had built Avro 504 aircraft during the Great War. The Dominie was a true workhorse during World War II, with some even being supplied to USAAF units in the UK in a form of ‘reverse Lend-Lease’! This aircraft was built by Brush Coachworks in 1944 as a Dominie (serial no. NR750, c/n 6838) for the RAF.

 

The shape of British commercial aviation following WWII was to have been dictated by the Brabazon Report. However, some of the recommended ‘Brabazon Types’ were slow coming into service. Thus this demobbed now-DH.89a was sold in 1947 to A Hamson & Son Ltd who registered it as G-AKIF and passed it on to Manx Air Charters. It remained in the hands of a variety of small firms until 1968 when it was purchased by the Parachute Regiment's Free Fall Club at Netheravon.

 

In 1971 it was was repainted in Rothmans cigarette colours, named 'The Rothmans Skydiver' and operated in Norway as part of a sponsorship promotion of the British Army's Red Devils parachute display team. It was registered as LN-BEZ in Norway. The aircraft returned to the UK and its registration of G-AKIF in 1973 with Airborne Taxi Services Ltd.

 

On 2 August 2006, G-AKIF was damaged during a landing accident at Duxford Aerodrome with nine passengers on board which saw the aircraft pitch forward and the propellers dig into the ground. Subsequently it was restored to flying condition and is seen above taxiing towards take-off during the 2013 Duxford Air Show.

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

 

by starkdesignhouse ift.tt/232pQnv

www.joebaugher.com - 161159 (DR-1) converted to F-14D(R) and was TARPS-capable. With VF-213 was aircraft used in last-ever recovery of an F-14 from a combat mission Feb 8 2006 aboard USS Theodore Roosevelt in northern Arabian Gulf. Flew from USS Theodore Roosevelt to NAS Pensacola FL Apr 13 2006 for entry into National Museum of Naval Aviation. SOC the same day.

+++ 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 English Electric Skyspark was a British fighter aircraft that served as an interceptor during the 1960s, the 1970s and into the late 1980s. It remains the only UK-designed-and-built fighter capable of Mach 2. The Skyspark was designed, developed, and manufactured by English Electric, which was later merged into the newly-formed British Aircraft Corporation. Later the type was marketed as the BAC Skyspark.

 

The specification for the aircraft followed the cancellation of the Air Ministry's 1942 E.24/43 supersonic research aircraft specification which had resulted in the Miles M.52 program. W.E.W. "Teddy" Petter, formerly chief designer at Westland Aircraft, 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) and 50,000 ft (15,000 m).

 

Petter initiated a design proposal with F W "Freddie" Page leading the design and Ray Creasey responsible for the aerodynamics. As it was designed for Mach 1.5, it had a 40° swept wing to keep the leading edge clear of the Mach cone. To mount enough power into the airframe, two engines were installed, in an unusual, stacked layout and with a high tailplane This proposal was submitted in November 1948, and in January 1949 the project was designated P.1 by English Electric. On 29 March 1949 MoS granted approval to start the detailed design, develop wind tunnel models and build a full-size mock-up.

 

The design that had developed during 1948 evolved further during 1949 to further improve performance. 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 initial high tailplane; this issue was solved by lowering the tail below the wing. Following the resignation of Petter, Page took over as design team leader for the P.1. 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 the stacked engine layout, as well as the low tailplane position, was considered to be dangerous, too. 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 tailplane positions high or low. Testing with the wings and tail set to the P.1 configuration started in January 1954 and confirmed this combination as the correct one. The proposed 60-degree wing sweep was retained, but the stacked engines had to give way to a more conventional configuration with two engines placed side-by-side in the tail, but still breathing through a mutual nose air intake.

 

From 1953 onward, the first three prototype aircraft were hand-built at Samlesbury. These aircraft had been assigned 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 not much space in the fuselage for fuel, the thin wings became the primary 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. The narrow tires 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 center-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); 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 center 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 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. While WG760 had proven the P.1 design to be viable, it was plagued by directional stability problems and a dismal performance: Transonic drag was much higher than expected, and the aircraft was limited to Mach 0.98 (i.e. subsonic), with a ceiling of just 48,000 ft (14,630 m), far below the requirements.

 

To solve the problem and save the P.1, Petter embarked on a major redesign, incorporating the recently discovered area rule, while at the same time simplifying production and maintenance. The redesign entailed a new, narrower canopy, a revised air intake, a pair of stabilizing fins under the rear fuselage, and a shallow ventral fairing at the wings’ trailing edge that not only reduced the drag coefficient along the wing/fuselage intersection, it also provided space for additional fuel.

On 4 April 1957 the modified P.1B (XA847) made the first flight, immediately exceeding Mach 1. During the early flight trials of the P.1B, speeds in excess of 1,000 mph were achieved daily.

In late October 1958, the plane was officially presented. The event was celebrated in traditional style in a hangar at Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough, with the prototype XA847 having the name ‘Skyspark’ freshly painted on the nose in front of the RAF Roundel, which almost covered it. A bottle of champagne was put beside the nose on a special rig which allowed the bottle to safely be smashed against the side of the aircraft.

On 25 November 1958 the P.1B XA847 reached Mach 2 for the first time. This made it the second Western European aircraft to reach Mach 2, the first one being the French Dassault Mirage III just over a month earlier on 24 October 1958

 

The first operational Skyspark, designated Skyspark F.1, was designed as a pure interceptor to defend the V Force airfields in conjunction with the "last ditch" Bristol Bloodhound missiles located either at the bomber airfield, e.g. at RAF Marham, or at dedicated missile sites near to the airfield, e.g. at RAF Woodhall Spa near the Vulcan station RAF Coningsby. The bomber airfields, along with the dispersal airfields, would be the highest priority targets in the UK for enemy nuclear weapons. To best perform this intercept mission, emphasis was placed on rate-of-climb, acceleration, and speed, rather than range – originally a radius of operation of only 150 miles (240 km) from the V bomber airfields was specified – and endurance. Armament consisted of a pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon in front of the cockpit, and two pylons for IR-guided de Havilland Firestreak air-to-air missiles were added to the lower fuselage flanks. These hardpoints could, alternatively, carry pods with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets. The Ferranti AI.23 onboard radar provided missile guidance and ranging, as well as search and track functions.

 

The next two Skyspark variants, the Skyspark F.1A and F.2, incorporated relatively minor design changes, but for the next variant, the Skyspark F.3, they were more extensive: The F.3 had higher thrust Rolls-Royce Avon 301R engines, a larger squared-off fin that improved directional stability at high speed further and a strengthened inlet cone allowing a service clearance to Mach 2.0 (2,450 km/h; the F.1, F.1A and F.2 were all limited to Mach 1.7 (2,083 km/h). An upgraded A.I.23B radar and new, radar-guided Red Top missiles offered a forward hemisphere attack capability, even though additional electronics meant that the ADEN guns had to be deleted – but they were not popular in their position in front of the windscreen, because the muzzle flash blinded the pilot upon firing. The new engines and fin made the F.3 the highest performance Skyspark yet, but this came at a steep price: higher fuel consumption, resulting in even shorter range. From this basis, a conversion trainer with a side-by-side cockpit, the T.4, was created.

 

The next interceptor variant was already in development, but there was a need for an interim solution to partially address the F.3's shortcomings, the F.3A. The F.3A introduced two major improvements: a larger, non-jettisonable, 610-imperial-gallon (2,800 L) ventral fuel tank, resulting in a much deeper and longer belly fairing, and a new, kinked, conically cambered wing leading edge. The conically cambered wing improved manoeuvrability, especially at higher altitudes, and it offered space for a slightly larger leading edge fuel tank, raising the total usable internal fuel by 716 imperial gallons (3,260 L). The enlarged ventral tank not only nearly doubled available fuel, it also provided space at its front end for a re-instated pair of 30 mm ADEN cannon with 120 RPG. Alternatively, a retractable pack with unguided 55 mm air-to-air rockets could be installed, or a set of cameras for reconnaissance missions. The F.3A also introduced an improved A.I.23B radar and the new IR-guided Red Top missile, which was much faster and had greater range and manoeuvrability than the Firestreak. Its improved infrared seeker enabled a wider range of engagement angles and offered a forward hemisphere attack capability that would allow the Skyspark to attack even faster bombers (like the new, supersonic Tupolev T-22 Blinder) through a collision-course approach.

Wings and the new belly tank were also immediately incorporated in a second trainer variant, the T.5.

 

The ultimate variant, the Skyspark F.6, was nearly identical to the F.3A, with the exception that it could carry two additional 260-imperial-gallon (1,200 L) ferry tanks on pylons over the wings. These tanks were jettisonable in an emergency and gave the F.6 a substantially improved deployment capability, even though their supersonic drag was so high that the extra fuel would only marginally raise the aircraft’s range when flying beyond the sound barrier for extended periods.

 

Finally, there was the Skyspark F.2A; it was an early production F.2 upgraded with the new cambered wing, the squared fin, and the 610 imperial gallons (2,800 L) ventral tank. However, the F.2A retained the old AI.23 radar, the IR-guided Firestreak missile and the earlier Avon 211R engines. Although the F.2A lacked the thrust of the later Skysparks, it had the longest tactical range of all variants, and was used for low-altitude interception over West Germany.

 

The first Skysparks to enter service with the RAF, three pre-production P.1Bs, arrived at RAF Coltishall in Norfolk on 23 December 1959, joining the Air Fighting Development Squadron (AFDS) of the Central Fighter Establishment, where they were used to clear the Skyspark for entry into service. The production Skyspark F.1 entered service with the AFDS in May 1960, allowing the unit to take part in the air defence exercise "Yeoman" later that month. The Skyspark F.1 entered frontline squadron service with 74 Squadron at Coltishall from 11 July 1960. This made the Skyspark the second Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the second fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe (the first one in both categories being the Swedish Saab 35 Draken on 8 March 1960 four months earlier).

 

The aircraft's radar and missiles proved to be effective, and pilots reported that the Skyspark was easy to fly. However, in the first few months of operation the aircraft's serviceability was extremely poor. This was due to the complexity of the aircraft systems and shortages of spares and ground support equipment. Even when the Skyspark was not grounded by technical faults, the RAF initially struggled to get more than 20 flying hours per aircraft per month compared with the 40 flying hours that English Electric believed could be achieved with proper support. In spite of these concerns, within six months of the Skyspark entering service, 74 Squadron was able to achieve 100 flying hours per aircraft.

 

Deliveries of the slightly improved Skyspark F.1A, with revised avionics and provision for an air-to-air refueling probe, allowed two more squadrons, 56 and 111 Squadron, both based at RAF Wattisham, to convert to the Skyspark in 1960–1961. The Skyspark F.1 was only ordered in limited numbers and served only for a short time; nonetheless, it was viewed as a significant step forward in Britain's air defence capabilities. Following their replacement from frontline duties by the introduction of successively improved Skyspark variants, the remaining F.1 aircraft were employed by the Skyspark Conversion Squadron.

The improved F.2 entered service with 19 Squadron at the end of 1962 and 92 Squadron in early 1963. Conversion of these two squadrons was aided by the of the two-seat T.4 and T.5 trainers (based on the F.3 and F.3A/F.6 fighters), which entered service with the Skyspark Conversion Squadron (later renamed 226 Operational Conversion Unit) in June 1962. While the OCU was the major user of the two-seater, small numbers were also allocated to the front-line fighter squadrons. More F.2s were produced than there were available squadron slots, so later production aircraft were stored for years before being used operationally; some of these Skyspark F.2s were converted to F.2As.

 

The F.3, with more powerful engines and the new Red Top missile was expected to be the definitive Skyspark, and at one time it was planned to equip ten squadrons, with the remaining two squadrons retaining the F.2. However, the F.3 also had only a short operational life and was withdrawn from service early due to defence cutbacks and the introduction of the even more capable and longer-range F.6, some of which were converted F.3s.

 

The introduction of the F.3 and F.6 allowed the RAF to progressively reequip squadrons operating aircraft such as the subsonic Gloster Javelin and retire these types during the mid-1960s. During the 1960s, as strategic awareness increased and a multitude of alternative fighter designs were developed by Warsaw Pact and NATO members, the Skyspark's range and firepower shortcomings became increasingly apparent. The transfer of McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom IIs from Royal Navy service enabled these much longer-ranged aircraft to be added to the RAF's interceptor force, alongside those withdrawn from Germany as they were replaced by SEPECAT Jaguars in the ground attack role.

The Skyspark's direct replacement was the Tornado F.3, an interceptor variant of the Panavia Tornado. The Tornado featured several advantages over the Skyspark, including far larger weapons load and considerably more advanced avionics. Skysparks were slowly phased out of service between 1974 and 1988, even though they lasted longer than expected because the definitive Tornado F.3 went through serious teething troubles and its service introduction was delayed several times. In their final years, the Skysparks’ airframes required considerable maintenance to keep them airworthy due to the sheer number of accumulated flight hours.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 51 ft 2 in (15,62 m) fuselage only

57 ft 3½ in (17,50 m) including pitot

Wingspan: 34 ft 10 in (10.62 m)

Height: 17 ft 6¾ in (5.36 m)

Wing area: 474.5 sq ft (44.08 m²)

Empty weight: 31,068 lb (14,092 kg) with armament and no fuel

Gross weight: 41,076 lb (18,632 kg) with two Red Tops, ammunition, and internal fuel

Max. takeoff weight: 45,750 lb (20,752 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Rolls-Royce Avon 301R afterburning turbojet engines,

12,690 lbf (56.4 kN) thrust each dry, 16,360 lbf (72.8 kN) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2.27 (1,500 mph+ at 40,000 ft)

Range: 738 nmi (849 mi, 1,367 km)

Combat range: 135 nmi (155 mi, 250 km) supersonic intercept radius

Range: 800 nmi (920 mi, 1,500 km) with internal fuel

1,100 nmi (1,300 mi; 2,000 km) with external overwing tanks

Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,000 m)

Zoom ceiling: 70,000 ft (21,000 m)

Rate of climb: 20,000 ft/min (100 m/s) sustained to 30,000 ft (9,100 m)

Zoom climb: 50,000 ft/min

Time to altitude: 2.8 min to 36,000 ft (11,000 m)

Wing loading: 76 lb/sq ft (370 kg/m²) with two AIM-9 and 1/2 fuel

Thrust/weight: 0.78 (1.03 empty)

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm (1.181 in) ADEN cannon with 120 RPG in the lower fuselage

2× forward fuselage hardpoints for a single Firestreak or Red Top AAM each

2× overwing pylon stations for 2.000 lb (907 kg each)

for 260 imp gal (310 US gal; 1,200 l) ferry tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was a submission to the “Hunter, Lightning, Canberra” group build at whatifmodellers.com, and one of my personal ultimate challenges – a project that you think about very often, but the you put the thought back into its box when you realize that turning this idea into hardware will be a VERY tedious, complex and work-intensive task. But the thematic group build was the perfect occasion to eventually tackle the idea of a model of a “side-by-side engine BAC Lightning”, a.k.a. “Flatning”, as a rather conservative alternative to the real aircraft’s unique and unusual design with stacked engines in the fuselage, which brought a multitude of other design consequences that led to a really unique aircraft.

 

And it sound so simple: take a Lightning, just change the tail section. But it’s not that simple, because the whole fuselage shape would be different, resulting in less depth, the wings have to be attached somewhere and somehow, the landing gear might have to be adjusted/shortened, and how the fuselage diameter shape changes along the hull, so that you get a more or less smooth shape, was also totally uncertain!

 

Initially I considered a MiG Ye-152 as a body donor, but that was rejected due to the sheer price of the only available kit (ModelSvit). A Chinese Shenyang J-8I would also have been ideal – but there’s not 1:72 kit of this aircraft around, just of its successor with side intakes, a 1:72 J-8II from trumpeter.

I eventually decided to keep costs low, and I settled for the shaggy PM Model Su-15 (marketed as Su-21) “Flagon” as main body donor: it’s cheap, the engines have a good size for Avons and the pen nib fairing has a certain retro touch that goes well with the Lightning’s Fifties design.

The rest of this "Flatning" came from a Hasegawa 1:72 BAC Lightning F.6 (Revell re-boxing).

 

Massive modifications were necessary and lots of PSR. In an initial step the Flagon lost its lower wing halves, which are an integral part of the lower fuselage half. The cockpit section was cut away where the intake ducts begin. The Lightning had its belly tank removed (set aside for a potential later re-installation), and dry-fitting and crude measures suggested that only the cockpit section from the Lightning, its spine and the separate fin would make it onto the new fuselage.

 

Integrating the parts was tough, though! The problem that caused the biggest headaches: how to create a "smooth" fuselage from the Lightning's rounded front end with a single nose intake that originally develops into a narrow, vertical hull, combined with the boxy and rather wide Flagon fuselage with large Phantom-esque intakes? My solution: taking out deep wedges from all (rather massive) hull parts along the intake ducts, bend the leftover side walls inwards and glue them into place, so that the width becomes equal with the Lightning's cockpit section. VERY crude and massive body work!

 

However, the Lightning's cockpit section for the following hull with stacked engines is much deeper than the Flagon's side-by-side layout. My initial idea was to place the cockpit section higher, but I would have had to transplant a part of the Lightning's upper fuselage (with the spine on top, too!) onto the "flat" Flagon’s back. But this would have looked VERY weird, and I'd have had to bridge the round ventral shape of the Lightning into the boxy Flagon underside, too. This was no viable option, so that the cockpit section had to be further modified; I cut away the whole ventral cockpit section, at the height of the lower intake lip. Similar to my former Austrian Hasegawa Lightning, I also cut away the vertical bulkhead directly behind the intake opening - even though I did not improve the cockpit with a better tub with side consoles. At the back end, the Flagon's jet exhausts were opened and received afterburner dummies inside as a cosmetic upgrade.

 

Massive PSR work followed all around the hull. The now-open area under the cockpit was filled with lead beads to keep the front wheel down, and I implanted a landing gear well (IIRC, it's from an Xtrakit Swift). With the fuselage literally taking shape, the wings were glued together and the locator holes for the overwing tanks filled, because they would not be mounted.

 

To mount the wings to the new hull, crude measurements suggested that wedges had to be cut away from the Lightning's wing roots to match the weird fuselage shape. They were then glued to the shoulders, right behind the cockpit due to the reduced fuselage depth. At this stage, the Lightning’s stabilizer attachment points were transplanted, so that they end up in a similar low position on the rounded Su-15 tail. Again, lots of PSR…

 

At this stage I contemplated the next essential step: belly tank or not? The “Flatning” would have worked without it, but its profile would look rather un-Lightning-ish and rather “flat”. On the other side, a conformal tank would probably look quite strange on the new wide and flat ventral fuselage...? Only experiments could yield an answer, so I glued together the leftover belly bulge parts from the Hasegawa kit and played around with it. I considered a new, wider belly tank, but I guess that this would have looked too ugly. I eventually settled upon the narrow F.6 tank and also used the section behind it with the arrestor hook. I just reduced its depth by ~2 mm, with a slight slope towards the rear because I felt (righteously) that the higher wing position would lower the model’s stance. More massive PSR followed….

 

Due to the expected poor ground clearance, the Lightning’s stabilizing ventral fins were mounted directly under the fuselage edges rather than on the belly tank. Missile pylons for Red Tops were mounted to the lower front fuselage, similar to the real arrangement, and cable fairings, scratched from styrene profiles, were added to the lower flanks, stretching the hull optically and giving more structure to the hull.

 

To my surprise, I did not have to shorten the landing gear’s main legs! The wings ended up a little higher on the fuselage than on the original Lightning, and the front wheel sits a bit further back and deeper inside of its donor well, too, so that the fuselage comes probably 2 mm closer to the ground than an OOB Lightning model. Just like on the real aircraft, ground clearance is marginal, but when the main wheels were finally in place, the model turned out to have a low but proper stance, a little F8U-ish.

  

Painting and markings:

I was uncertain about the livery for a long time – I just had already settled upon an RAF aircraft. But the model would not receive a late low-viz scheme (the Levin, my mono-engine Lightning build already had one), and no NMF, either. I was torn between an RAF Germany all-green over NMF undersides livery, but eventually went for a pretty standard RAF livery in Dark Sea Grey/Dark Green over NMF undersides, with toned-down post-war roundels.

A factor that spoke in favor of this route was a complete set of markings for an RAF 11 Squadron Lightning F.6 in such a guise on an Xtradecal set, which also featured dayglo orange makings on fin, wings and stabilizers – quite unusual, and a nice contrast detail on the otherwise very conservative livery. All stencils were taken from the OOB Revell sheet for the Lightning. Just the tactical code “F” on the tail was procured elsewhere, it comes from a Matchbox BAC Lightning’s sheet.

 

After basic painting the model received the usual black ink washing, some post-panel-shading and also a light treatment with graphite to create soot strains around the jet exhausts and the gun ports, and to emphasize the raised panel lines on the Hasegawa parts.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and final bits and pieces like the landing gear and the Red Tops (taken OOB) were mounted.

  

A major effort, and I have seriously depleted my putty stocks for this build! However, the result looks less spectacular than it actually is: changing a Lightning from its literally original stacked engine layout into a more conservative side-by-side arrangement turned out to be possible, even though the outcome is not really pretty. But it works and is feasible!

French postcard, no. AB 2104. Caption: Sean Penn beard.

 

Gifted and versatile Sean Penn (1960) is an American actor and director. Penn is a powerhouse film performer capable of intensely moving work, who has gone from strength to strength during a colourful film career. He won an Oscar in 2004 for his leading role in Mystic River, after having been nominated three times before. In 2009, he won another Oscar for Milk. Penn is also the recipient of more than 45 other film awards, including a Silver Bear for Dead Man Walking. Penn has drawn much media attention for his stormy private life and political viewpoints.

 

Sean Justin Penn was born in Santa Monica, in 1960. Penn is the son of director Leo Penn, who was blacklisted during McCarthy's reign for refusing to testify, and actress Eileen Ryan (née Annucci). He has two brothers: actor Chris Penn (1965-2006) and musician Michael Penn. He grew up in Santa Monica, in a neighborhood populated by future celebrities Charlie Sheen and Emilio Estevez, the sons of actor Martin Sheen. The children spent much of their free time together, making a number of amateur films shot with Super-8 cameras. Still, Penn's original intention was to attend law school, although he ultimately skipped college to join the Los Angeles Repertory Theater. After making his professional debut on an episode of television's Barnaby Jones, he relocated to New York, where he soon appeared in the play Heartland. A TV movie, The Killing of Randy Webster, followed in 1981 before he made his feature debut later that same year as the military cadet defending his academy against closure in Taps (Harold Becker, 1981). He then had his breakthrough as fast-talking surfer stoner Jeff Spicoli in Fast Times at Ridgemont High (Amy Heckerling, 1982). Jason Ankeny at AllMovie: "he stole every scene in which he appeared, helping to elevate the picture into a classic of the teen comedy genre; however, the quirkiness which would define his career quickly surfaced as he turned down any number of Spicoli-like roles to star in the 1983 drama Bad Boys, followed a year later by the Louis Malle caper comedy Crackers and the period romance Racing With the Moon. While none of the pictures performed well at the box office, critics consistently praised Penn's depth as an actor. " He next contributed a stellar performance as a drug addict turned government spy alongside Timothy Hutton in the Cold War spy thriller The Falcon and the Snowman (John Schlesinger, 1985), followed by a teaming with icy Christopher Walken in the chilling At Close Range (James Foley, 1986). Penn's brother Chris played his brother in the film and their mother played the role of their grandmother in At Close Range. The youthful Sean then paired up with his then-wife, pop diva Madonna in the woeful, and painful, Shanghai Surprise (Jim Goddard, 1986), which was savaged by the critics, but Sean bounced back with a great job as a hot-headed young cop in Colors (Dennis Hopper, 1988), gave another searing performance as a US soldier in Vietnam committing atrocities in Casualties of War (Brian De Palma, 1989) and appeared alongside Robert De Niro in the uneven comedy We're No Angels (Neil Jordan, 1989). He has appeared in more than forty films.

 

During the 1990s, Sean Penn really got noticed by critics as a mature, versatile, and accomplished actor, with a string of dynamic performances in first-class films. Almost unrecognisable with frizzy hair and thin-rimmed glasses, Penn was simply brilliant as corrupt lawyer David Kleinfeld in the gangster movie Carlito's Way (Brian De Palma, 1993) and he was still in trouble with authority as a Death Row inmate pleading with a caring nun (Susan Sarandon) to save his life in Dead Man Walking (Tim Robbins, 1995), for which he received his first Oscar nomination. Penn had also moved into directing, with the quirky but interesting The Indian Runner (1991), about two brothers with vastly opposing views on life, and in 1995 he directed Jack Nicholson in The Crossing Guard (1995). Both films received overall positive reviews from critics. Sean then played the brother of wealthy Michael Douglas, involving him in a mind-snapping scheme in The Game (David Fincher, 1997), and also landed the lead role of Sgt. Eddie Walsh in the star-studded anti-war film The Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick, 1998), before finishing the 1990s playing an offbeat 1930s jazz guitarist in Sweet and Lowdown (Woody Allen, 1999). For this part, he scored another Oscar nomination.

 

Sean Penn played a mentally disabled father fighting for custody of his seven-year-old daughter in I Am Sam (2001). He received his third Oscar nomination for this role, but in the following years, he finally won the Oscar for the best male lead of the year. He won the first for his part as an anguished father seeking revenge for his daughter's murder in the gut-wrenching Mystic River (Clint Eastwood, 2003), and the second six years later for his role as gay politician and civil rights activist Harvey Milk in Milk (Gus Van Sant, 2008). Jason Ankeny at AllMovie: "The Oscar (for Mystic River), coupled with a standing ovation by the audience, showed once and for all that Penn's unorthodox approach to his acting career hadn't had an adverse effect on his popularity" In between, he played a mortally ill college professor in 21 Grams (Alejandro G. Iñárritu, 2003) and a possessed businessman in The Assassination of Richard Nixon (Niels Mueller, 2004) with Naomi Watts. Penn was a militant opponent of the Iraq war. He also supports Sea Shepherd and is on the advisory board of this organisation. Singer Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam, who is friends with Penn, wrote soundtracks for several films in which Penn acted or which were directed by him, including Dead Man Walking, Into the Wild, and I Am Sam. Sean Penn also appeared in The Tree of Life (Terrence Malick, 2011) with Brad Pitt, and The Professor and the Madman (Farhad Safinia, 2019) opposite Mel Gibson. In March 2018, he published the novel 'Bob Honey Who Just Do Stuff'. Penn was engaged to actress Elizabeth McGovern, who played him in Racing with the Moon in 1984. He married singer Madonna in 1985 and divorced her in 1989. He then began a relationship with actress Robin Wright, with whom he had a daughter Dylan in 1991 and a son Hopper in 1993, and married in 1996. A divorce petition followed in December 2007, and became final in 2009, since then Penn has had relationships with actresses Scarlett Johansson and Charlize Theron, among others. In 2016, he began a relationship with Australian actress Leila George, whom he married in July 2020. She filed for divorce in late 2021.

 

Sources: Jason Ankeny (AllMovie), Wikipedia (Dutch), and IMDb.

 

And, please check out our blog European Film Star Postcards.

MU Capable ERODE 22221 WAP4 Hauling ERS-NZM Mangala Exp With Dead ERS 40103 WDP4D at Thrissur.Mangala Act as Loco Carrier to ERS DLS

Title.

Horizon in June.

六月の水平線。

 

【7 photos title: Reminiscence】

【７枚の写真のタイトル：追憶】

 

( iPhone 11 Pro shot )

 

Kujukurihama. Motosuka Beach. Sanmu City. Chiba Prefecture. Japan. June 1, 2023. … 0.9 / 7

(Today's photo. It is unpublished.)

九十九里浜。本須賀海岸。山武市。千葉県。日本。２０２３年６月１日。 … 0.9 / 7

(今日の写真。それは未発表です。）

  

images.

Number_i … Bye 24/7

youtu.be/CpyaODl0bSY?si=P3_1QW9LFfbJj6Gz

  

_________________________________

_________________________________

Number_i のアルバムがGJでオジサンのヘビロテ😃

youtu.be/yxR0_vRkQm0?si=-VdbmwCIOsMtZ3Pe

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

タイトル

“” A.I. 　アップルのアイデンティティについて””

  

マークザッカーバーグ氏の批判に、アップルは耳を傾けるだろうか。

僕にはそう思えない。アップルヴィジョンプロに夢を見せられた僕には。

 

メタのマークザッカーバーグ氏は、有名なポッドキャストに出演し、アップルはアイフォン以来革新的な製品を発売せず、売り上げも落ちていると批判したようだ。

アップルのポッドキャストに現れ、アップルを批判すると言うのは軽いジョークに思えるが、真剣に訴えたんだろうと僕は思う。

なぜなら、今の彼はARグラスという武器を手にしているからだ。

おそらく、さまざまな関係機関や優秀なスタッフが彼を支え、それなりの目標を達成したんだろうが、パワーブック５４０cから使い続けてきた僕のような古いアップルファンからしてみれば、まだ物作りのアイデンティを彼からはまったく感じない。

 

これは他の、現在世界を制覇しているIT企業らも含む。

メタ、アマゾン、テスラ。マイクロソフト。グーグル。

社名が並ぶだけで、このテキストを読まれている方は名前と顔をすでに浮かべているはずだ。

 

僕は以前、スティーブ・ジョブズはアーティストではないと書いた。

彼は、現世界に散らばったイメージを紡ぎ合わせ、それを膨らます。そして未来へリンクさせる。それが得意だっただけだ。

実際に創作していたのはジョナサンアイブだ。少数ながらも僕のような意見を持っている方もいるだろう。

 

しかし、先述したIT関連の面々が、トランプ氏に再び権力が戻るとなった途端に会社の方針を覆す様子を見ていると、僕は一言、どうしても意見したいのだ。

 

彼らが作ったARグラスや車などには、肝心な観念が欠けている。思想という重い言葉や、軽めのアイデンティティと言い換えてもいい。

確かに、ティムクック氏やアップルの現在のスタッフらは、発売前の商品に関して口を滑らせることが多くなった。

 

僕は、以前から書いているように音楽が大好きだ。

外界を断ち、アーティストらがスタジオにこもって、怒りや憎しみ、喜びや悲しみを一心不乱になって一音に吹き込む。何かを託すと言ってもいい。

そして、完成したアルバムを発表し、どんな思いを込めて制作したのかを語る。（僕が好きなプリンスはほとんど語らなかったので、完成された作品を理解する必要があった）

 

アルバムが完成し、発表するまで、彼らはひとことも語らない。

僕の胸を震わせたのは、そんなアーティストらだった。

 

僕の中に淡く灯っているアップルの革新性は、いまでも消えていない。

それは昨年、大失敗だと批判されたアップルヴィジョンプロでさえも消すことはできない。むしろ、アイフォン以上の強烈な光を放っている。

ただの斬新な電化製品ではなく、細かな電気部品の向こうに観念や思想を感じるからだ。

 

残念ながら、メタのARグラスやテスラの車に、僕がその観念や思想を感じることは今後もないだろう。

 

長々と書いてきたが、結論は以下の記事だ。

 

1.5億円超をAppleのティム・クックCEOがトランプの大統領就任式に寄付

gigazine.net/news/20250104-apple-ceo-tim-cook-donates-1-m...

 

一読すると、ティムクック氏も他のIT会社同様、魂を売ったのかと思われるがそうではない。

ティムクック氏は個人的にトランプ氏へ献金をするが、アップル社だけは他社と同じようには献金していない。

アップルは、トランプ氏になびかなかったのだ。

 

アップル社の観念や思想とは、具体的に何かと訊かれたら、僕はこう答える。

アップルとは、自分自身を信じる人間が集まっているグループだ。

 

たぶん、天国のスティーブ・ジョブズは、僕がクソ真面目に書いたテキストを、鼻で笑っていることだろう。

トランプ氏に媚びない会社。

それがAppleさ。:)

  

１月１５日

嬉しい記事を読んだ後で。

 

Mitsushiro Nakagawa.

  

Title:

"A.I. About Apple's Identity"

  

Will Apple Listen to Mark Zuckerberg’s Criticism?

I don’t think so. Not after Apple Vision Pro showed me what dreams look like.

 

Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, appeared on a famous podcast and criticized Apple, claiming that the company hasn’t released an innovative product since the iPhone and that its sales are declining.

It may sound like a lighthearted joke to criticize Apple on a podcast, but I believe he was serious. After all, he now has AR glasses in his arsenal.

 

It’s likely that a network of capable institutions and talented staff have supported him in achieving a reasonable set of goals. However, as a longtime Apple fan who has been using their products since the PowerBook 540c, I can’t sense any identity as a creator from him.

 

The same applies to other dominant IT companies today: Meta, Amazon, Tesla, Microsoft, and Google.

Just seeing their names likely brings faces to mind for anyone reading this text.

 

In the past, I wrote that Steve Jobs was not an artist.

He had a knack for weaving together scattered images from the world, expanding them, and linking them to the future. That was his strength.

It was Jonathan Ive who actually created. There may be others like me who share this minority view.

 

Still, when I see these IT giants reversing their company policies the moment Trump regains power, I feel compelled to say this:

 

The AR glasses, cars, and other products they create lack a crucial element: a core concept. You could call it a philosophy or, more lightly, an identity.

Indeed, Tim Cook and the current Apple staff have become more prone to leaking information about unreleased products.

 

As I’ve written before, I love music.

Musicians isolate themselves in studios, pouring their anger, hatred, joy, and sorrow into every note, as if entrusting something to it.

Then they release their completed album, sharing the thoughts and emotions that went into its creation. (Prince, one of my favorites, rarely spoke about his work, leaving it to the audience to understand.)

 

Artists don’t say a word until their album is finished and released.

Those are the kind of creators who move me deeply.

 

The faint light of innovation in Apple still glows within me.

Even the Apple Vision Pro, which was criticized as a massive failure last year, couldn’t extinguish it. In fact, it radiates a more intense light than the iPhone ever did.

It’s not just a novel electronic gadget; it conveys a sense of philosophy and vision beyond its intricate components.

 

Unfortunately, I don’t think I will ever feel such a philosophy or vision from Meta’s AR glasses or Tesla’s cars.

 

This has been a long discussion, but my conclusion ties back to the following article:

 

Tim Cook Donates Over $1.5 Million to Trump’s Inauguration

gigazine.net/news/20250104-apple-ceo-tim-cook-donates-1-m...

 

At first glance, it may seem like Tim Cook has sold his soul to Trump, just like other IT companies. But that’s not the case.

While Cook made a personal donation to Trump, Apple as a company refrained from making similar contributions.

Apple did not bow to Trump.

 

If you were to ask me what Apple’s philosophy or vision is, I would say this:

Apple is a group of people who believe in themselves.

 

Steve Jobs, watching from heaven, is probably smirking at this overly serious text of mine.

“A company that doesn’t bow to Trump—that’s Apple,” he’d say. :)

 

January 15

After reading an uplifting article.

 

Mitsushiro Nakagawa

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

:

Photo Music and iTunes Playlist Link::

music.apple.com/jp/playlist/photo-music/pl.u-Eg8qefpy8Xz

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

消えた境界線から生まれたもの　～ 去ってゆく川村記念美術館を振り返って ～

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/54020588671/in/dateposted...

 

What Emerged from the Vanishing Boundaries~ Reflecting on the Departing Kawamura Memorial Museum ~

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/54020588671/in/dateposted...

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

Important Notices.

 

I have relaxed the following conditions.

I will distribute my T-shirt to the world for free.

m.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/50656401427/in/dateposted-p...

m.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/50613367691/in/dateposted-p...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

​

 

Exhibition in 2025

  

Theme

The Nightfly

  

Images

Donald Fagen … I.G.Y.

youtu.be/Ueivjr3f8xg?si=xmqGPQjyIKoTs4Q5

 

Live.

youtu.be/Di0_KYtmVKI?si=CLFpU2n0gXahqLPB

  

Mitsushiro - Nakagawa

  

Organizer

Design Festa

designfesta.com

  

Location

Tokyo Big Sight

www.bigsight.jp

  

Date

Autumn 2025.

  

exhibition.mitsushiro.nakagawa@gmail.com

  

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Notice regarding "Lot No.402_”.

  

From now on I will host "Lot No.402_".

 

The work of Leonardo da Vinci who was sleeping.

That is the number when it was put up for auction.

No sign was written on the work.

So this work couldn't conclude that it was his work.

However # as a result of various appraisals # it was exposed to the sun.

A work that no one notices. A work that speaks quietly without a title.

I will continue to strive to provide it to many people in various ways.

 

October 24 2020 by Mitsushiro - Nakagawa.

  

Mitsushiro Nakagawa belong to Lot No. 402 _.Copyright©︎2025 Lot No.402_ All rights reserved.

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Profile.

In November 2014 # we caught the attention of the party selected to undertake the publicity for a mobile phone that changed the face of the world with just a single model # and will conclude a confidentiality agreement with them.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Interviews and novels.

About my book.

 

I published a book a long time ago.

At that time # I uploaded my interview as a PDF on the internet.

Its Japanese and English.

 

I will publish it for free.

For details # I explained to the Amazon site.

 

How to write a novel.

How to take a picture.

A sense of distance to the work.

 

All of these have something in common.

I wrote down what I felt and left it.

 

I hope my text will be read by many people.

Thank you.

 

Mitsushiro.

 

1 Interview in English

 

2 novels. unforgettable 'English version.(This book is Dedicated to the future artist.)

 

3 Interview Japanese version

 

4 novels. unforgettable ' JPN version.

 

5 A streamlined trajectory. only Japanese.

 

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

iBooks. Electronic Publishing. It is free now.

 

0.about the iBooks.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

1.unforgettable '(ENG.ver.)(This book is Dedicated to the future artist.)

itunes.apple.com/us/book/unforgettable/id1216576828?ls=1&...

 

2.unforgettable '(JNP.ver.)(This book is Dedicated to the future artist.)

itunes.apple.com/us/book/unforgettable/id1216584262?ls=1&...

 

3. Streamlined trajectory.(For Japanese only.)

itunes.apple.com/us/book/%E6%B5%81%E7%B7%9A%E5%BD%A2%E3%8... =11

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

My Novel : Unforgettable'

 

(This book is Dedicated to the future artist.)

  

Synopsis

Kei Kitami, who is aiming for university, meets Kaori Uemura, an event companion who is 6 years older than her, on SNS.

Kaori's dream of coming to Tokyo is to become friends with a famous artist.

For that purpose, the radio station's producer, Ryo Osawa, was needed.

Osawa speaks to Kaori during a live radio broadcast.

"I have a wife and children. But I want to meet you."

Rika Sanjo, who is Kei's classmate and has feelings for him, has been looking into her girlfriend Kaori's movements. . . . .

   

Mitsushiro Nakagawa

All Translated by Yumi Ikeda .

www.fotolog.net/yuming/

  

images.

U2 - No Line On The Horizon Live in Dublin

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oKwnkYFsiE&feature=related

  

Main story

 

There are two reasons why a person faces the sea.

One to enjoy a slice of shine in the sea like children bubbling over in the beach.

The other to brush the dust of memory like an old man who misses old days staring at the shine

quietly.

Those lead to only one meaning though they do not seem to overlap. It’s a rebirth.

I face myself to change tomorrow a vague day into something certain.

That is the meaning of a rebirth.

I had a very sweet girlfriend when I was 18.

After she left I knew the meaning of gentleness for the first time and also a true pain of loss. After

she left # how many times did I depend too much on her # doubt her # envy her and keep on telling lies

until I realized it is love?

I wonder whether a nobody like me could have given something to her who was struggling in the

daily life in those days. Giving something is arrogant conceit. It is nothing but self-satisfaction.

I had been thinking about such a thing.

However I guess what she saw in me was because I had nothing. That‘s why she tried to see

something in me. Perhaps she found a slight possibility in me # a guy filled with ambiguous unstable

tomorrow. But I wasted days depending too much on her gentleness.

Now I finally can convey how I felt in those days when we met.

  

1/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24577016535/in/dateposted...

2/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24209330259/in/dateposted...

3/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/23975215274/in/dateposted...

4/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24515964952/in/dateposted...

5/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24276473749/in/dateposted...

6/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24548895082/in/dateposted...

7/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24594603711/in/dateposted...

8/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24588215562/in/dateposted...

9/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24100804163/in/dateposted...

  

Fin.

  

images.

U2 - No Line On The Horizon

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oKwnkYFsiE&feature=related

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Title of my book : unforgettable'

Author : Mitsushiro Nakagawa

Out Now.

ISBN978-4-86264-866-2

in Amazon.

Unforgettable’ amzn.asia/d/eG1wNc5

_________________________________

_________________________________

The schedule of the next novel.

Still would stand all time. (Unforgettable '2)

(It will not go away forever)

Please give me some more time. That is Japanese.

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

My Works.

 

1 www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/48072442376/in/dateposted...

2 www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/48078949821/in/dateposted...

3 www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/48085863356/in/dateposted...

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Do you want to hear my voice?

:)

 

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw

 

1

About the composition of the picture posted to Flicker. First type.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw

 

2

About the composition of the picture posted to Flicker. Second type.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=443

 

3

About when I started Fotolog. Architect 's point of view.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=649

 

4

Why did not you have a camera so far?

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=708

 

5

What is the coolest thing? The photo is as it is.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=776

 

6

About the current YouTube bar. I also want to tell # I want to leave.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=964

 

7

About Japanese photographers. Japanese YouTube bar is Pistols.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1059

 

8

The composition of the photograph is sensibility. Meet the designers in Milan. Two questions.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1242

 

9

What is a good composition? What is a bad composition?

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1482

 

10

What is the time to point the camera? It is slow if you are looking into the viewfinder or display.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1662

 

11

Family photos. I can not take pictures with others. The inside of the subject.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1745

 

12

About YouTube 's photographer. Camera technology etc. Sensibility is polished by reading books.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=2144

 

13

About the Japanese newspaper. A picture of a good newspaper is Reuters. If you continue to look at useless photographs # it will be useless.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=2305

 

14

About Japanese photographers. About the exhibition.

Summary. I wrote a novel etc. What I want to tell the most.

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=2579

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

I talked about how to make a work.

 

About work production 1/2

youtu.be/ZFjqUJn74kM

  

About work production 2/2

youtu.be/pZIbXmnXuCw

 

1 Photo exhibition up to that point. Did you want to go?

 

2 Well # what is an exhibition that you want to visit even if you go there?

 

3 Challenge to exhibit one work every month before opening a solo exhibition at the Harajuku Design Festa.

 

4 works are materials and silhouettes. Similar to fashion.

 

5 Who is your favorite artist? What is it? Make it clear.

 

6 Creating a collage is exactly the same as taking photos. As I wrote in the interview # it is the same as writing a novel.

 

7 I want to show it to someone # but I do not make a piece to show it. Aim for the work you want to decorate your own room as in the photo.

 

8 What is copycat? Nowadays # it is suspected to be beaten. There is something called Mimesis?

 

ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimesis

kotobank.jp/word/Mimesis-139464

 

9 What is Individuality? What is originality?

 

www.youtube.com/user/mitsushiro/

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

Explanation of composition. 2

 

1.Composition explanation 2 ... 1/4

youtu.be/yVbvneBIMs8

 

2.Composition explanation 2 ... 2/4

youtu.be/LToFez9vOAw

 

3.Composition Explanation 2 ... 3/4

youtu.be/uTR0wVi9Z7M

 

4.Composition Explanation 2 ... 4/4

youtu.be/h2LjfU6Vvno

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

My shutter feeling.

 

youtu.be/3JkbGiFLjAM

 

Today's photo.

It is a photo taken from Eurostar.

 

This video is an explanation.

 

I went to Milan in 2005.

At that time # I went from Milan to Venice.

We took Eurostar into the transportation.

 

This photo was not taken from a very fast Eurostar.

When I changed the track # I took a picture at the moment I slowed down.

  

Is there a Japanese beside you?

Please have my video translated.

:)

 

In the Eurostar to Venice . 2005. shot ... 1 / 2

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/49127115021/in/dateposted...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

Miles Davis sheet 1955-1976.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

flickr.

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

instagram.

www.instagram.com/mitsushiro_nakagawa/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Pinterest.

www.pinterest.jp/MitsushiroNakagawa/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

YouPic

youpic.com/photographer/mitsushironakagawa/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

twitter.

twitter.com/mitsushiro

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

facebook.

www.facebook.com/mitsushiro.nakagawa

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

threads.

www.threads.net/@mitsushiro_nakagawa

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Blue sky.

bsky.app/profile/mitsushironakagawa.bsky.social

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Amazon.

www.amazon.co.jp/gp/profile/amzn1.account.AHSKI3YMYPYE5UE...

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

My statistics (as of December 15, 2024)

How many views have you had on Flickr and Youpic

Flickr 24,260,172 Views

Youpic 7,957,826 Views

x.com/mitsushiro/status/1868185157909582014

 

My statistics (as of August 1, 2024)

How many views have I had on Flickr and Youpic

Flickr 23,192,383 Views

Youpic 7,574,603 Views

 

My statistics. (As of February 7, 2024)

What is the number of accesses to Flickr and YouPic

Flickr 21,694,434 Views

Youpic 7,003,230 Views

 

What is the number of accesses to Flickr and YouPic?

(As of November 13, 2023)

Flickr 20,852,872 View

Youpic 6,671,486 View

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Japanese is the following.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

Title of my book unforgettable' Mitsushiro Nakagawa Out Now. ISBN978-4-86264-866-2

 

Mitsushiro Nakagawa belong to Lot No. 204 _ . Copyright©︎2024 Lot No.402_ All rights reserved.

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

Title.

六月の水平線。

  

【７枚の写真のタイトル：追憶】

  

( iPhone 11 Pro shot)

  

九十九里浜。本須賀海岸。山武市。千葉県。日本。２０２３年６月１日。 … 0.9 / 7

(今日の写真。それは未発表です。）

  

images.

Number_i … Bye 24/7

youtu.be/CpyaODl0bSY?si=P3_1QW9LFfbJj6Gz

  

::写真の音楽とiTunesプレイリストをリンク::

music.apple.com/jp/playlist/photo-music/pl.u-Eg8qefpy8Xz

  

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

重要なお知らせ。

 

僕は以下の条件を緩和します。

僕はTシャツを無料で世界中へ配布します。

m.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/50656401427/in/dateposted-p...

m.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/50613367691/in/dateposted-p...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

２０２5年の展示

  

テーマ

The Nightfly

 

Images

Donald Fagen … I.G.Y.

youtu.be/Ueivjr3f8xg?si=xmqGPQjyIKoTs4Q5

 

Live.

youtu.be/Di0_KYtmVKI?si=CLFpU2n0gXahqLPB

  

Mitsushiro - Nakagawa

 

主催

デザインフェスタ

designfesta.com

 

場所

東京ビッグサイト

www.bigsight.jp

  

日程

2025年 秋。

 

exhibition.mitsushiro.nakagawa@gmail.com

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

   

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

” Lot No.402_ ” に関するお知らせ。

  

今後、僕は、” Lot No.402_ ”を主催します。

 

このロットナンバーは、眠っていたレオナルドダヴィンチの作品がオークションにかけらた際に付されたものです。

作品にはサインなどがいっさい記されていなかったため、彼の作品だと断定できませんでした。

しかし、様々な鑑定の結果、陽の光を浴びました。

誰にも気づかれない作品。肩書がなくとも静かに語りかける作品。

僕はこれから様々な形で、多くの皆様に提供できるよう努めてゆきます。

 

2020年10月24日 by Mitsushiro - Nakagawa.

 

Copyright©︎2021 Lot No.402_ All rights reserved.

_________________________________

_________________________________

プロフィール

2014年11月、たった1機種で世界を塗り替えた携帯電話の広告を請け負った選考者の目に留まり、秘密保持同意書を結ぶ。

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

インタビューと小説。

僕の本について。

 

僕は、昔に本を出版しました。

その際に、僕のインタビューをPDFでネット上へアップロードしていました。

その日本語と英語。

 

僕は、無料でを公開します。

詳細は、アマゾンのサイトへ解説しました。

 

小説の書き方。

写真の撮影方法。

作品への距離感。

 

これらはすべて共通項があります。

僕は、僕が感じたことを文章にして、残しました。

 

僕のテキストが多くの人に読んでもらえることを望みます。

ありがとう。

 

Mitsushiro.

 

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

  

１　インタビュー　英語版

 

２　小説。unforgettable’ 英語版。

 

３　インタビュー　日本語版

 

４　小説。unforgettable’ 日本語版。(この小説は未来のアーティストへ捧げます)

(四百字詰め原稿用紙４５６枚)

 

　あらすじ

　大学を目指している北見ケイは、SNS上で、6歳年上のイベントコンパニオン、上村香織に出会う。

　上京してきた香織の夢は、有名なアーティストの友達になるためだ。

　そのためにはラジオ局のプロデューサー、大沢亮の存在が必要だった。

　大沢は、ラジオの生放送中、香織へ語りかける。

　「僕には妻子がある。しかし、僕は君に会いたいと思っている」

　ケイの同級生で、彼を想っている三條里香は、香織の動向を探っていた。。。。。

  

本編

 

人が海へ向かう理由には、二つある。

　ひとつは、波打ち際ではしゃぐ子供のように、今の瞬間の海の輝きを楽しむこと。

　もうひとつは、その輝きを静かに見据えて、過ぎ去った日々を懐かしむ老人のように記憶の埃を払うこと。

　二つは重なり合わないようではあるけれども、たったひとつの意味しか生まない。

　再生だ。

　明日っていう、曖昧な日を確実なものへと変えてゆくために、自分の存在に向き合う。

　それが再生の意味だ。

 

　十八歳だった僕には大切な人がいた。

 

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

  

５　流線形の軌跡。　日本語のみ。

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

iBooks.電子出版。（現在は無料）

 

0.about the iBooks.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

1.unforgettable’ ( ENG.ver.)(This book is Dedicated to the future artist.)

itunes.apple.com/us/book/unforgettable/id1216576828?ls=1&...

For Japanese only.

 

2.unforgettable’ ( JNP.ver.)(この小説は未来のアーティストへ捧げます)

itunes.apple.com/us/book/unforgettable/id1216584262?ls=1&...

 

3.流線形の軌跡。

itunes.apple.com/us/book/%E6%B5%81%E7%B7%9A%E5%BD%A2%E3%8...

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

僕の小説。英語版　

My Novel Unforgettable' (This book is Dedicated to the future artist.)

 

Mitsushiro Nakagawa

All Translated by Yumi Ikeda .

www.fotolog.net/yuming/

   

1/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24577016535/in/dateposted...

2/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24209330259/in/dateposted...

3/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/23975215274/in/dateposted...

4/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24515964952/in/dateposted...

5/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24276473749/in/dateposted...

6/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24548895082/in/dateposted...

7/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24594603711/in/dateposted...

8/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24588215562/in/dateposted...

9/9

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/24100804163/in/dateposted...

Fin.

  

images.

U2 - No Line On The Horizon Live in Dublin

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oKwnkYFsiE&feature=related

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Title of my book : unforgettable'

Author : Mitsushiro Nakagawa

Out Now.

 

ISBN978-4-86264-866-2

in Amazon.

Unforgettable’ amzn.asia/d/eG1wNc5

_________________________________

_________________________________

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

僕の作品。

 

1 www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/48072442376/in/dateposted...

2 www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/48078949821/in/dateposted...

3 www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/48085863356/in/dateposted...

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

あなたは僕の声を聞きたいですか？

:)

 

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw

  

1

フリッカーへ投稿した写真の構図について。１種類目。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw

 

2

フリッカーへ投稿した写真の構図について。２種類目。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=443

 

3

Fotologを始めた時について。 建築家の視点。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=649

 

4

なぜ、今までカメラを手にしなかったのか？

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=708

 

5

何が一番かっこいいのか？　写真はありのままに。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=776

 

6

現在のユーチューバーについて。僕も伝え、残したい。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=964

 

7

日本人の写真家について。日本のユーチューバーはピストルズ。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1059

 

8

写真の構図は、感性。ミラノのデザイナーに会って。二つの質問。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1242

 

9

良い構図とは？　悪い構図とは？

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1482

 

10

カメラを向ける時とは？　ファインダーやディスプレイを覗いていては遅い。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1662

 

11

家族写真。他人では撮れない。被写体の内面。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=1745

 

12

ユーチューブの写真家について。カメラの技術等。感性は、本を読むことで磨く。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=2144

 

13

日本の新聞について。良い新聞の写真はロイター。ダメな写真を見続けるとダメになる。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=2305

 

14

日本の写真家について。その展示について。

まとめ。僕が書いた小説など。僕が最も伝えたいこと。

youtu.be/b1o6Xf-Mjhw?t=2579

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

作品制作について 1/2

youtu.be/ZFjqUJn74kM

 

作品制作について 2/2

youtu.be/pZIbXmnXuCw

  

１　それまでの写真展。自分は行きたいと思ったか？

 

２　じゃ、自分が足を運んででも行きたい展示とは何か？

 

３　原宿デザインフェスタで個展を開くまでに、毎月ひとつの作品を展示することにチャレンジ。

 

４　作品とは、素材とシルエット。ファッションと似ている。

 

５　自分が好きなアーティストは誰か？　どんなものなのか？　そこをはっきりさせる。

 

６　コラージュの作成も写真の撮り方と全く同じ。インタビューに書いたように小説の書き方とも同じ。

 

７　誰かに見せたい、見せるがために作品は作らない。写真と同じように自分の部屋に飾りたい作品を目指す。

 

８　パクリとは何か？　昨今、叩かれるパクリ疑惑。ミメーシスとは？

 

　　https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ミメーシス

　　https://kotobank.jp/word/ミメーシス-139464

  

９　個性とはなにか？　オリジナリティってなに？

 

おまけ　眞子さまについて

 

という流れです。

お時間がある方は是非聴いてください。

:)

 

www.youtube.com/user/mitsushiro/

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

  

構図の解説２

 

1.構図の解説２ ... 1/4

youtu.be/yVbvneBIMs8

 

2.構図の解説２ ... 2/4

youtu.be/LToFez9vOAw

 

3.構図の解説２ ... 3/4

youtu.be/uTR0wVi9Z7M

 

4.構図の解説２ ... 4/4

youtu.be/h2LjfU6Vvno

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

僕のシャッター感覚

 

youtu.be/3JkbGiFLjAM

 

In the Eurostar to Venice . 2005. shot ... 1 / 2

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/49127115021/in/dateposted...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Miles Davis sheet 1955-1976.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

_________________________________

_________________________________

flickr.

www.flickr.com/photos/stealaway/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

YouTube.

www.youtube.com/user/mitsushiro/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

instagram.

www.instagram.com/mitsushiro_nakagawa/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Pinterest.

www.pinterest.jp/MitsushiroNakagawa/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

YouPic

youpic.com/photographer/mitsushironakagawa/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

fotolog

www.fotolog.com/stealaway/

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

twitter.

twitter.com/mitsushiro

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

facebook.

www.facebook.com/mitsushiro.nakagawa

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

threads.

www.threads.net/@mitsushiro_nakagawa

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Blue sky.

bsky.app/profile/mitsushironakagawa.bsky.social

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Amazon.

www.amazon.co.jp/gp/profile/amzn1.account.AHSKI3YMYPYE5UE...

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

僕の統計。（2024年12月15日現在）

フリッカー、ユーピクのアクセス数は？

Flickr 24,260,172 View

Youpic 7,957,826 View

x.com/mitsushiro/status/1868185157909582014

 

僕の統計。（2024年8月1日現在）

フリッカー、ユーピクのアクセス数は？

Flickr 23,192,383 View

Youpic 7,574,603 View

 

僕の統計。（2024年2月7日現在）

フリッカー、ユーピクのアクセス数は？

Flickr 21,694,434 View

Youpic 7,003,230 View

 

僕の統計。（2023年11月13日現在）

フリッカー、ユーピクのアクセス数は？

Flickr 20,852,872 View

Youpic 6,671,486 View

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

Japanese is the following.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vBRMWGk29EmsoBV2o9NM1LIVi...

 

Title of my book unforgettable' Mitsushiro Nakagawa Out Now. ISBN978-4-86264-866-2

 

Mitsushiro Nakagawa belong to Lot no.204_ . Copyright©︎2020 Lot no.204_ All rights reserved.

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

” Lot No.402_ ” に関するお知らせ。

  

今後、僕は、” Lot No.402_ ”を主催します。

 

このロットナンバーは、眠っていたレオナルドダヴィンチの作品がオークションにかけらた際に付されたものです。

作品にはサインなどがいっさい記されていなかったため、彼の作品だと断定できませんでした。

しかし、様々な鑑定の結果、陽の光を浴びました。

誰にも気づかれない作品。肩書がなくとも静かに語りかける作品。

僕はこれから様々な形で、多くの皆様に提供できるよう努めてゆきます。

 

2020年10月24日 by Mitsushiro - Nakagawa.

 

Copyright©︎2024 Lot No.402_ All rights reserved.

_________________________________

_________________________________

 

And I know that she's capable of anything, it's riveting

But when you wake up she's always gone, gone, gone

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iFa5We6zqw

 

Cinzia Scaffidi, Vice President of Slow Food Italy, indicates biodiversity as a value capable of becoming art, which Koen Vanmechelen – conceptual artist who in his works has always being dealing with the themes of diversity and bio- and cultural identity – has developed in the Life Bank Project.

In the setting that once hosted the Bank of Venice, in Palazzo Franchetti, today the seat of the Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere e Arti, the artist Koen Vanmechelen positioned, as opening gate of an evocative gothic garden, two big black bronze hands, one male and one female, symbolic guardians of two extremely delicate sculptures made of Murano glass, representing a little chick and a heap of scattered seeds. Between the antique wooden furniture, a new bank has taken on a life of its own, substituting currency with the real patrimony of our civilization: the seed!

Over 500 seeds establishing the “Bank of Life” – ancient seeds that have been lost, forgotten, collected and conserved by “resilient” farmers and specialized research centers – have been selected for the project to represent the genetic heritage of our culture and our millenary history.

The selection was curated by Piergiorgio Defilippi, founder of the bio-social Farm “Il Rosmarino”, Marcon (Venice), starting from a cereal that is the symbol of the evolution of our civilization: the Einkorn Wheat, whose history dates back to the Neolithic and traces the transition from the nomadic hunting to the stancial and rural settlement. The seeds catalogue followed the development of the typically mediterranean diet, with the choice of varieties, even for the most common ones, that have not been artificially hybridized but which represent the natural path of evolution. For this precise reason, with respect of the spirit of Slow Food “Terra Madre”, the locating of the seeds has been exclusively conducted through the direct contact with farmers, associations of safeguard and research centres spread all over the world.

The interaction with the public and the multi-sensoriality express themselves through a symbolic seeding which tracks back to the thought of the Japanese botanist and philosopher Masanobu Fukuoka (1913-2008) pioneer of the natural or “Do Nothing” agriculture and author of the now legendary essay “The One-Straw Revolution”.

Cinzia Scaffidi, Vice President of Slow Food Italy, indicates biodiversity as a value capable of becoming art, which Koen Vanmechelen – conceptual artist who in his works has always being dealing with the themes of diversity and bio- and cultural identity – has developed in the Life Bank Project.

In the setting that once hosted the Bank of Venice, in Palazzo Franchetti, today the seat of the Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere e Arti, the artist Koen Vanmechelen positioned, as opening gate of an evocative gothic garden, two big black bronze hands, one male and one female, symbolic guardians of two extremely delicate sculptures made of Murano glass, representing a little chick and a heap of scattered seeds. Between the antique wooden furniture, a new bank has taken on a life of its own, substituting currency with the real patrimony of our civilization: the seed!

Over 500 seeds establishing the “Bank of Life” – ancient seeds that have been lost, forgotten, collected and conserved by “resilient” farmers and specialized research centers – have been selected for the project to represent the genetic heritage of our culture and our millenary history.

The selection was curated by Piergiorgio Defilippi, founder of the bio-social Farm “Il Rosmarino”, Marcon (Venice), starting from a cereal that is the symbol of the evolution of our civilization: the Einkorn Wheat, whose history dates back to the Neolithic and traces the transition from the nomadic hunting to the stancial and rural settlement. The seeds catalogue followed the development of the typically mediterranean diet, with the choice of varieties, even for the most common ones, that have not been artificially hybridized but which represent the natural path of evolution. For this precise reason, with respect of the spirit of Slow Food “Terra Madre”, the locating of the seeds has been exclusively conducted through the direct contact with farmers, associations of safeguard and research centres spread all over the world.

The interaction with the public and the multi-sensoriality express themselves through a symbolic seeding which tracks back to the thought of the Japanese botanist and philosopher Masanobu Fukuoka (1913-2008) pioneer of the natural or “Do Nothing” agriculture and author of the now legendary essay “The One-Straw Revolution”.

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 Hawk Class Assault Drop-ship is capable of landing and recovering 82 Spaceborne troops into a hot LZ. Although Spaceborne troops are normally deployed via drop pods this formidable dropship is capable of providing excellent air to ground support and delivering its cargo into a hostile area. The Hawk has crew of four pilot, copilot, EW officer and loadmaster. Is armed with missiles, mini guns and chin mounted retractable cannon. troopers can enter via the rear ramp or 2 side doors. all seats are foldable allowing or a quick reconfigure from troop to cargo carrier. it is fully moonbase compliant and capable of docking with other spacecraft, through the Top side Airlock

The future of the whole planet is in a big danger. During the trip to Europe's past Emmett Brown and his family get into the hands of Hitler's supporters, dreaming about creating a machine, which is capable to move the whole armies in time and space. Marty finds out about the existence of the second De Lorean and gets back to the Soviet Union to find a distant relative of the professor. Only together they can save the Browns and intercept Nazi's plans.

 

Dedicated to all fans of the cult movie trilogy Back to the Future!

_______________________________________________

Будущее всей планеты в серьезной опасности. Во время путешествия в прошлое Европы Эмметт Браун и его семья попадают в руки сторонников Гитлера, мечтающих создать машину, способную перемещать во времени и пространстве целые армии. Марти узнает о существовании второй Де Лореан и отправляется назад в СССР на поиски дальнего родственника профессора. Только вместе они смогут спасти Браунов и помешать планам нацистов.

 

Посвящается всем фанатам и поклонникам культовой кинотрилогии Назад в Будущее!

_______________________________________________

Many thanks to TrapleS for translating into English these text! =)

 

I have already photographed De Lorean model in 1/43 scale, but then decided that I should take another shot where the angle will be different and you can view the model quite well. There was a question about choosing a suitable background. Originally the idea was to use the picture of the real places in Whittier state California as the background, where the filming process was. But I haven’t found any suitable quality photos in the Internet.

And then came up with the idea, why not put a De Lorean on the background of Moscow. Of course I’ve chosen the Red Square, because Moscow is associated with it in the world (besides the balalaika, vodka and bears). I began to develop this idea and eventually decided to make a poster for the fictional fourth part.

The photo used as the background was found and purchased at photostock. Pure chance and luck that I managed to find unconventional Photo of the Red Square, which perfectly fits into my ideas about the right background. But, I had to toil with the image in Photoshop, because cobblestone road at the bottom of the photo, didn’t fit the scale of the model. Perhaps it was inserted by the author in Photoshop too, so I had to savvy about how to adapt the image for it to look more or less naturally.

Poster without a brief description of the film was not well understood. Therefore, I came up with prehistory, however, it does not quite fit into the more peaceful concept of "Back to the Future", which has always been based on the plot of protagonists’ life during their time travel. But why not to do something more global for the 4th part? ; )

A pile of weekly work in the evenings in Photoshop, a lot of text now .. and all of that is to take a photo of one damn scale car. I think it's time to treat myself =)

In general, I hope you liked the result and at least someone has read this text until the end.

_______________________________________________

 

Я уже фотографировал модель Де Лореан в масштабе 1/43, но потом решил, что надо сделать еще один снимок, где ракурс будет другой и модель можно осмотреть достаточно хорошо. Встал вопрос о выборе подходящего фона. Изначально была идея использовать в качестве фона фотографию реального места в городе Whittier штат Сalifornia, где проходили съемки фильма. Но ни одного подходящей качественной фотографии, в инете я не нашел.

 

И тут в голову пришла идея, а почему бы не поместить Де Лореан на фоне Москвы. Конечно же выбор пал на Красную площадь, ведь именно с ней и ассоциируется Москва во всем мире (помимо балалаек, водки и медведей)) Я стал развивать эту идею и в итоге решил сделать постер к вымышленной 4-ой части.

 

Фотография, использованная в качестве фона была найдена и приобретена на стоках. Чистая случайность и удача, что мне удалось найти нешаблонное фото Красной площади, которое идеально вписывалось в мои представления о правильном фоне. Правда, мне пришлось повозиться с изображеним в фотошопе, т.к. вымощенная булыжником дорога в нижней части фото, никак не подходила по масштабу к модели. Возможно она тоже была вставлена автором в фотошопе, поэтому мне пришлось поломать голову, как подогнать изображение, чтобы выглядело все более-менее естественно.

 

Постер без краткого описания фильма был бы не совсем понятен. Поэтому придумал предысторию, правда, она не совсем укладывается в более миролюбивую концепцию «Назад в будущее», которая всегда строилась на жизненных перипетиях главных героев во время их путешествий во времени. Но почему бы для 4 части не сделать что-то более глобальное. ; )

 

Куча недельной работы по вечерам в фотошопе, куча текста сейчас.. и все для того, чтобы сделать фотографию одной чертовой машинки. По-моему, мне пора лечиться =)

 

В общем, надеюсь, вам понравился полученный результат и хоть кто-то дочитал этот текст до конца.

+++ 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 McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) T-45 Goshawk was a highly modified version of the BAe Hawk land-based training jet aircraft. Manufactured by McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) and British Aerospace (now BAe Systems), the T-45 was used by the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps (USMC) as an aircraft carrier-capable trainer.

The Goshawk's origins began in the mid-1970s, when the US Navy began looking for a single aircraft replacement for both its T-2 and TA-4 jet trainers. The US Navy started the VTXTS advanced trainer program in 1978. Several companies made submissions, e. g. North American or Northrop/Vought. Due to the size of the potential contract, European companies made submissions, too, including a navalized Alpha Jet from Dassault/Dornier and a fully carrier-capable version of the BAe Hawk Mk.60, mutually proposed by British Aerospace (BAe) and McDonnell Douglas (MDC). The latter eventually won the competition and BAe and MDC were awarded the T-45 contract in 1981.

 

The Hawk had not been designed for carrier operations and numerous modifications were required to make it suitable for use on carriers. These included improvements to the low-speed handling characteristics and a reduction in the approach speed. It was found that the aircraft was apt to stall at the low approach speed required. Modifications were designed by BAe in England; most notably a simple slat system was devised, operated by an actuator and linkage mechanism to fit into the small space available. Strakes were also added on the fuselage to improve airflow. Other changes were a strengthened airframe, a more robust and wider landing gear with a two-wheel nose landing gear, a catapult tow bar attachment and an arresting hook. The modified aircraft was christened “Goshawk”, flew in 1988 for the first time and became operational in 1991.

 

Beyond being a naval trainer the T-45 was also adapted for first-line duty with strike capabilities, in the form of the OA-45 for the USMC. The role of this aircraft dated back to the Vietnam War when twenty-three A-4 two-seaters were converted into OA-4Ms for “FastFAC” (Fast Forward Air Controller) missions, in order to control interdiction sorties dedicated to shaping the battlefield for future operations. Basically, the OA-4M was a TA-4F equipped with A-4M electronics. The most visible and characteristic change was the fitting of the A-4M’s dorsal electronics hump, neatly faired into the rear of the two-seat canopy. The nose sensor group of the OA-4M was basically the same as that of the A-4M, but the Angle/Rate Bombing system was not installed as it would not be needed.

 

When the T-45 was introduced in the early Nineties, the USMCs OA-4Ms had reached the end of their service life and the USMC started looking for a replacement, wanting a comparable, light and fast fixed-wing aircraft. The USMC did not accept the LTV A-7 as an A-4 replacement (even though a two-seater version was available), because it was already dated, too, and not part of the USMC inventory. The USMC's A-4Ms were supposed to be replaced by the VTOL AV-8 by the mid-nineties, but the AV-8, even as a two-seater, was deemed unsuitable for FFAC duties. The new T-45 looked like a good and economical alternative with future potential, since the airframe was brand new and the type's infrastructure was fully established, so that a small number of specialized aircraft could easily be supported without much extra cost.

 

With fresh experience from the 1st Gulf War in 1990-91 the decision was made to buy 25 extra T-45A airframes and convert them to OA-45A standard. Most important change were modified wings, using structures and systems from the BAe Hawk 100 series. While the T-45 only had two underwing and a single ventral hardpoint, the OA-45A featured a total of seven: four underwing and one ventral hardpoints, plus wingtip stations for defensive air-to-air missiles. Upgraded avionics allowed the deployment of a wide range of external stores, including air-to-ground missiles and rocket launchers, a reconnaissance pod, retarded and free-fall bombs of up to 1,000 pounds (450 kg) caliber, runway cratering, anti-personnel and light armor bombs, cluster bombs, practice bombs as well as external fuel tanks and ECM pods. This was a vital asset, since Desert Storm had proved that FFAC aircraft had to have an offensive capability to handle targets of opportunity on their own, when no air assets to control were available. A total ordnance load of up to 6,800 lb (3,085 kg) was possible, even though the aircraft was not supposed to play an offensive role and rather act from a distance, relying on its small size and agility.

 

Communication modifications for the FastFAC role included a KY-28 secure voice system, an ARC-159 radio and an ARC-114 VHF radio. Similar to the Skyhawk, a hump behind the cockpit had to be added to make room for the additional electronic equipment and a heat exchanger. Other additions were a continuous-wave Doppler navigation radar under a shallow ventral radome underneath the cockpit, a ground control bombing system, an APN-194 altimeter, an ALR-45 radar warning suite, a retrofitted, fixed midair refueling probe and cockpit armor plating that included Kevlar linings on the floor and the lower side walls as well as externally mounted armor plates for the upper areas.

 

VMA-131 of Marine Aircraft Group 49 (the Diamondbacks) retired its last four OA-4Ms on 22 June 1994, and the new OA-45A arrived just in time to replace the venerable Skyhawk two-seaters in the FastFAC role. Trainer versions of the Skyhawk remained in Navy service, however, finding a new lease on life with the advent of "adversary training". OA-45A deliveries were finished in 1996 and the 25 aircraft were distributed among the newly established Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron (MALS, formerly Headquarters & Maintenance Squadron/H&MS) 12 & 13. The USMC crews soon nicknamed their new mounts "GosHog", to underlöine ist offensive capabilities and to set themselves apart from the USN's "tame" trainers. Even though thos name was never officially approved it caught on quickly.

 

After initial experience with the new aircraft and in the wake of technological advances, the USMC decided to upgrade the OA-45As in 2000 to improve its effectiveness and interaction capabilities with ground troops. This primarily resulted in the addition of a forward-looking infrared camera laser in the aircraft’s nose section, which enabled the aircraft to execute all-weather/night reconnaissance and to illuminate targets for laser-guided infantry shells or ordnance launched by the OA-45 itself or by other aircraft. Through this measure the OA-45 became capable of carrying and independently deploying light laser-guided smart weapons like the GBU-12 and -16 “Paveway II” glide bombs or the laser-guided AGM-65E “Maverick” variant. The update was gradually executed during regular overhauls in the course of 2001 and 2002 (no new airframes were built/converted), the modified machines received the new designation OA-45B.

 

After this update phase, the OA-45Bs were deployed in several global conflicts and saw frequent use in the following years. For instance, MALS 13 used its OA-45Bs operationally for the first time in October 2002 when the squadron was tasked with providing support to six AV-8B Harrier aircraft in combat operations in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom. This mission lasted until October 2003, four aircraft were allocated and one OA-45B was lost during a landing accident.

On 15 January 2003, MALS 13 embarked 205 Marines and equipment aboard the USS Bonhomme Richard in support of combat operations in Southwest Asia during Operation Southern Watch. Four OA-45Bs successfully supported these troops from land bases, marking targets and flying reconnaissance missions.

Furthermore, six MALS 13 OA-45Bs took actively part in Operation Iraqi Freedom from Al Jaber Air Base, Kuwait, and An Numiniyah Expeditionary Air Field, Iraq, where the aircraft worked closely together with the advancing ground troops of the USMC’s 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit. They successfully illuminated targets for US Navy fighter bombers, which were launched from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) in the Persian Gulf, and effectively guided these aircraft to their targets. Two OA-45Bs were lost during this conflict, one through enemy MANPADS, the other through friendly AA fire. In late May 2003 the surviving machines and their crews returned to MCAS Yuma.

 

On 16 March 2007, the 200th T-45 airframe was delivered to the US Navy. From this final batch, six airframes were set aside and modified into OA-45Bs in order to fill the losses over the past years.

Later T-45 production aircraft were built with enhanced avionics systems for a heads-up display (HUD) and glass cockpit standard, while all extant T-45A aircraft were eventually converted to a T-45C configuration under the T-45 Required Avionics Modernization Program (T-45 RAMP), bringing all aircraft to same HUD plus glass cockpit standard. These updates, esp. concerning the cockpit, were introduced to the OA-45Bs, too, and they were re-designated again, now becoming OA-45Cs, to reflect the commonality with the Navy’s Goshawk trainers. Again, these modifications were gradually introduced in the course of the OA-45s’ normal maintenance program.

 

In 2007, an engine update of the whole T-45 fleet, including the OA-45s, with the Adour F405-RR-402 was considered. This new engine was based on the British Adour Mk 951, designed for the latest versions of the BAe Hawk and powering the BAe Taranis and Dassault nEUROn UCAV technology demonstrators. The Adour Mk 951 offered 6,500 lbf (29 kN) thrust and up to twice the service life of the F405-RR-401. It featured an all-new fan and combustor, revised HP and LP turbines, and introduced Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC). The Mk 951 was certified in 2005, the F405-RR-402 derived from it was certified in 2008, but it did not enter service due to funding issues, so that this upgrade was not carried out.

 

The final delivery of the 246th T-45 airframe took place in November 2009, and both T-45 and the OA-45 "GosHog" are supposed to remain in service until 2035.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 (pilot, observer)

Length: 39 ft 4 in (11.99 m)

Wingspan: 30 ft 10 in (9.39 m)

Height: 13 ft 5 in (4.08 m)

Wing area: 190.1 ft² (17.7 m²)

Empty weight: 10,403 lb (4,460 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 14,081 lb (6,387 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Turbomeca F405-RR-401 (Adour) non-afterburning turbofan with 5,527 lbf (26 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 2 (2,204 km/h (1,190 kn; 1,370 mph) at high altitude

Combat radius: 800 km (497 mi, 432 nmi)

Ferry range: 3,200 km (1,983 mi) with drop tanks

Service ceiling: 15,240 m (50,000 ft)

Wing loading: 283 kg/m² (58 lb/ft²)

Thrust/weight: 0.97

Maximum g-load: +9 g

 

Armament:

No internal gun; seven external hardpoints (three on each wing and one under fuselage)

for a wide range of ordnance of up to 6,800 lb (3,085 kg), including up to six AIM-9 Sidewinder for

self-defense, pods with unguided rockets for target marking or ECM pods, but also offensive weapons

of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) weight, including iron/cluster bombs and guided AGM-65, GBU-12 and -16.

  

The kit and its assembly:

This fictional T-45 variant is actually the result of a long idea evolution, and simply rooted in the idea of a dedicated OA-4M replacement for the USMC; in real life, the FFAC role has been transferred to F-18 two-seaters, though, but the T-45 appeared like a sound alternative to me.

 

There's only one T-45 kit available, a dubious T-45A from Italeri with poor wings and stabilizers. Wolfpack also offers a T-45, but it’s just a re-boxing of the Italeri kit with some PE parts and a price tag twice as big – but it does not mend the original kit’s issues… After reading the A-4 Skyhawk book from the French "Planes & Pilots" series, I was reminded of the USMC's special OA-4M FAC two-seaters (and the fact that it is available in kit form from Italeri and Hasegawa), and, cross-checking the real-world timeline of the T-45, I found that it could have been a suitable successor. The ide of the USMC’s OA-45 was born! :D

 

Building-wise the Italeri T-45 remained close to OOB, even though I transplanted several parts from an Italeri BAe Hawk Mk. 100 to create a different look. I modified the nose with the Mk. 100’s laser fairing and added some radar warning sensor bumps. This transplantation was not as easy as it might seem because the T-45’s nose is, due to the different and more massive front landing gear quite different from the Hawk’s. Took some major PSR to integrate the laser nose.

An ALR-45 “hot dog” fairing from a late A-4M (Italeri kit) was added to the fin, together with a small styrene wedge extending the fin’s leading edge. This small detail markedly changes the aircraft’s look. I furthermore added a refueling probe, scratched from coated wire and some white glue, as well as a low “camel back” fairing behind the cockpit, created from a streamlined bomb half with air outlets for an integrated heat exchanger. Blade antennae were relocated and added. A shallow bump for the Doppler radar was added under the fuselage behind the landing gear well – left over from an Airfix A-4B (from an Argentinian A-4P, to be correct, actually a dorsal fairing).

 

On the wings, a tailored pair of pylons and wing tip launch rails from the Italeri BAe Hawk Mk. 100 kit were added, too, as well as the donor kit’s pair of Sidewinders. The rest of the ordnance consists of drop tanks and LAU-19 pods for target marking missiles. The tanks were taken from the Hawk Mk. 100 kit, too, the rocket launchers came from an Italeri NATO aircraft weapons set. The centerline position carries an ALQ-131 ECM pod from a Hasegawa US aircraft weapons set on a pylon from the scrap box.

  

Painting and markings:

The low-viz idea prevailed, since I had some leftover OA-4M decals from Italeri kits in store, as well as some other suitable low-viz decals from a Revell A-4F kit. However, an all-grey livery was IMHO not enough, and when I came across a picture of a USN low-viz A-7E with an improvised desert camouflage in sand and reddish brown applied over the grey (even partly extending over its markings) from Operation Iraqi Freedom, I had that extra twist that would set the OA-45 apart. MALS-13 was chosen as operator because I had matching codes, and, as another benefit, the unit had actually been deployed overseas during the 2003 Iraq War, so that the whif’’s time frame was easily settled, adding to its credibility.

 

The livery was built up just like on the real aircraft: on top of a basic scheme in FS 36320 and 36375 (Humbrol 128 and 127) with a slightly darker anti-glare panel in front of the cockpit (FS 35237, I used Revell 57 as a slightly paler alternative) I applied the low-viz marking decals, which were protected with a coat of acrylic varnish. Next, additional desert camouflage was added with dry-brushed sand and millitary brown (supposedly FS 33711 and 30400 in real life, I used, after consulting pictures of aircraft from both Gulf Wars, Humbrol 103 (Cream) and 234 (Dark Flesh). They were applied with a kind of a dry-brushing technique, for a streaky and worn look, leaving out the codes and other markings. The pattern itself was inspired by an USMC OV-10 Bronco in desert camouflage from the 1st Gulf War.

On top of that a black ink washing was applied. Once things had thoroughly dried over night, I wet-sanded the additional desert camouflage away, carefully from front to back, so that the edges became blurred and the underlying grey became visible again.

 

The cockpit interior was painted in standard Dark Gull Grey (Humbrol 140), while the air intakes and the landing gear became white, the latter with red trim on the covers’ edges – just standard. Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

The upgraded T-45 is an interesting result. The add-ons suit the aircraft, which already looks sturdier than its land-based ancestor, well. The improvised desert paint scheme with the additional two-tone camouflage over the pale grey base really makes the aircraft an unusual sight, adding to its credibility.

Hardware-wise I am really happy how the added dorsal hump blends into the overall lines – in a profile view it extends the canopy’s curve and blends into the fin, much like the A-4F/M’s arrangement. And the modified fin yields a very different look, even though not much was changed. The T-45 looks much beefier now, and from certain angles really reminds of the OA-4M and sometimes even of a diminutive Su-25?

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.

  

© Crown Copyright 2018

 

Photographer: RAF Photographer

 

Image 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/.

 

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

 

Follow us:

 

www.twitter.com/defenceimages

The Theresian Military Academy was under Maria Theresa on 14 December 1751 with the mission "Make he me thereof capable officers and righteous men" to the first commander Field Marshal Leopold Joseph of Daun founded and is, thus, the oldest active uninterruptedly the officer training dedicated Military Academy of the World. Memorable is that the building since 1752 - except for the years of occupation, war and destruction due to the Third Reich - uninterruptedly hosted the Military Academy, while the Royal Military Academy Woolwich, founded in 1741, was closed in 1939. The Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, founded in 1947, only from a sentimental point of view continues the tradition of its predecessor academy. In Wiener Neustadt, in contrast, were admitted since 1752 almost without interruption per year 100 nobles and 100 commoners. The officers of the Austria-Hungarian army as well were to 1918 formed here.

The term military academy it wears since the unification with the nursery of Cadets in 1769. Already in 1771 appeared a by local director lieutenant field marshal Johann Georg Carl Freiherr von Hannig elaborated regulated curriculum and 1775 the by Maria Theresa sanctioned Academy Regulations. The training period at that time was eleven years and was gradually reduced to three years.

The famous Styrian Archduke Johann of Austria was 44 years (1805-1849) Chief Executive Officer of Theresian Military Academy.

In the First Republic, the training was to 1934 performed in Enns (Upper Austria) and then again in Wiener Neustadt. A special feature in the time between the Austrofascism and the Annexation is the refusal of Major General Rudolf Towarek (1933-1938 Commander of the Military Academy), to hand over the castle to German Wehrmacht which had just invated Austria. He had the guard paraded with fixed bayonet and so refused the Wehrmacht several days admission to the castle. This act had until his retirement no negative impacts on Major General Towarek, he even obtained permission to continue to wear the Austrian uniform after his retirement.

By Colonel Erwin Rommel, later Field Marshal, immediately after the Annexation a training school for officer training was set up which he at the beginning also directed himself. To the school the Daun barracks was added.

Towards the end of World War II, the castle was almost completely destroyed by bombs, fires and looting. It burned in April and May 1945 within almost 14 days completely down. The remaining ruins were in the reconstruction in the years 1946 to 1959 restored to its historical form, the interior, however, adapted to current requirements. So the military academy was able to resume operations in the year 1958.

Main portal of the Theresian Military Academy

After the founding of the Armed Forces in 1955, the Military Academy was housed again until 1958 in Enns, from where it subsequently moved back to the castle of Wiener Neustadt, that after the damages caused by the Second World War had been repaired.

In Vienna Museum of Military History, the campaign streamer of the first flag of the military academy is set up. It was donated by Maria Theresia just before her death in 1780 for the first flag, supposedly she should have embroidered it personally. Under the banner ribbon there are two paintings (gouaches) of Bernhard Albrecht (1758-1822). Albrecht was an art teacher at the Military Academy and he also depicted the pupils in their military and athletic exercises. So show the images scenes as "target practice with mortars" and "balancing exercises of cadets at the high balance beam". The sheets have emerged 1785-1793.

The current commander is Brigadier Karl Pronhagl.

 

Die Theresianische Militärakademie wurde unter Maria Theresia am 14. Dezember 1751 mit dem Auftrag „Mach’ er mir tüchtige Offiziere und rechtschaffene Männer darauß“ an den ersten Kommandanten Feldmarschall Leopold Joseph von Daun gegründet und ist somit die älteste aktive, durchgängig der Offiziersausbildung gewidmete Militärakademie der Welt. Denkwürdig ist, dass das Gebäude seit 1752 – mit Ausnahme der Okkupations- Kriegs- und Zerstörungsjahre in Folge des Dritten Reiches durchgängig die Militärakademie beherbergte, wogegen die 1741 gegründete Royal Military Academy Woolwich 1939 geschlossen wurde. Die Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, gegründet 1947, setzt nur in ideeller Hinsicht die Tradition ihrer Vorgängerakademie fort. In Wiener Neustadt wurden dagegen seit 1752 fast durchgängig pro Jahr je 100 Adelige und 100 Bürgerliche aufgenommen. Auch die Offiziere der Österreich-Ungarischen Armee wurden bis 1918 hier ausgebildet.

Die Bezeichnung Militärakademie trägt sie seit der Vereinigung mit der Pflanzschule für Kadetten im Jahr 1769. Bereits 1771 erschien ein vom Lokaldirektor Feldmarschalleutnant Johann Georg Carl Freiherr von Hannig ausgearbeiteter geregelter Studienplan und 1775 das von Maria Theresia sanktionierte Akademie-Reglement. Die Ausbildungszeit betrug damals elf Jahre und wurde schrittweise auf drei Jahre verkürzt.

Der berühmte steirische Erzherzog Johann von Österreich war 44 Jahre (von 1805 bis 1849) Oberdirektor der Theresianischen Militär-Akademie.

In der ersten Republik wurde die Ausbildung bis 1934 in Enns durchgeführt und anschließend wieder in Wiener Neustadt. Eine Besonderheit in der Zeit zwischen dem Austrofaschismus und dem Anschluss ist die Weigerung des Generalmajors Rudolf Towarek (1933–1938 Kommandant der Militärakademie), die Burg der in Österreich einmarschierten deutschen Wehrmacht zu übergeben. Er ließ die Wache mit aufgepflanzten Bajonett aufmarschieren und verweigerte so der Wehrmacht mehrere Tage den Zutritt zur Burg. Diese Tat hatte bis auf seine Pensionierung keine negativen Auswirkungen auf Generalmajor Towarek, er erhielt sogar die Erlaubnis, nach seiner Pensionierung weiterhin die österreichische Uniform zu tragen.

Von Oberst Erwin Rommel, dem späteren Generalfeldmarschall, wurde unmittelbar nach dem Anschluss eine Kriegsschule für die Offiziersausbildung eingerichtet, die er anfangs auch selbst leitete. Zu der Schule kam auch die Daun-Kaserne dazu.

Gegen Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs wurde die Burg durch Fliegerbomben, Brände und Plünderungen fast vollkommen zerstört. Sie brannte im April und Mai 1945 innerhalb von fast 14 Tagen restlos aus. Die übrig gebliebene Ruine wurde beim Wiederaufbau in den Jahren 1946 bis 1959 in ihrer historischen Form wiederhergestellt, das Innere jedoch den zeitlichen Erfordernissen angepasst. So konnte die Militärakademie im Jahr 1958 ihren Betrieb wieder aufnehmen.

Hauptportal der Theresianischen Militärakademie

Nach der Gründung des Bundesheeres im Jahr 1955 war die Militärakademie nochmals bis 1958 in Enns untergebracht, von wo sie anschließend wieder in die Burg von Wiener Neustadt übersiedelte, nachdem die Beschädigungen durch den Zweiten Weltkrieg behoben worden waren.

Im Wiener Heeresgeschichtlichen Museum ist das Fahnenband der ersten Fahne der Militärakademie ausgestellt. Es wurde von Maria Theresia knapp vor ihrem Tod 1780 für die erste Fahne gestiftet, angeblich soll sie es persönlich bestickt haben. Unter dem Fahnenband befinden sich zwei Bilder (Gouachen) von Bernhard Albrecht (1758–1822). Albrecht war Zeichenlehrer der Militärakademie und schilderte auch die Zöglinge bei ihren militärischen und sportlichen Übungen. So zeigen die Bilder Szenen wie „Übungsschießen mit Mörsern“ und „Balancierübungen der Kadetten auf dem hohen Balkensteg“. Die Blätter sind zwischen 1785 und 1793 entstanden.

Der aktuelle Kommandant ist Brigadier Karl Pronhagl.

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theresianische_Milit%C3%A4rakademie

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 sub-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.

 

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 be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.

The versatile aircraft underwent constant upgrade programs. For instance, about a third of all VF-1 Valkyries were upgraded with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems from 2016 onwards, placed in a streamlined fairing in front of the cockpit. This system allowed for long-range search and track modes, freeing the pilot from the need to give away his position with active radar emissions, and it could also be used for target illumination and guiding precision weapons.

Many Valkyries also received improved radar warning systems, with sensor arrays, depending on the systems, mounted on the wing-tips, on the fins and/or on the LERXs. Improved ECR measures were also added to some machines, typically in conformal fairings on the flanks of the legs/engine pods.

 

The U.N.S. Marine Corps, which evolved from the United States Marine Corps after the national service was transferred to the global U.N. Spacy command in 2008, was a late adopter of the VF-1, because the Valkyries’ as well as the Destroids’ potential for landing operations was underestimated. But especially the VF-1’s versatility and VTOL capabilities made it a perfect candidate as a replacement for the service’s AV-8B Harrier II and AH-1 Cobra fleet in the close air support (CAS) and interdiction role. The first VF-1s were taken into service in January 2010 by SVMF-49 “Vikings” at Miramar Air Base in California/USA, and other units followed soon, immediately joining the battle against the Zentraedi forces.

 

The UNSMC’s VF-1s were almost identical to the standard Valkyries, but they had from the start additional hardpoints for light loads like sensor pods added to their upper legs, on the lower corners of the air intake ducts. These were intended to carry FLIR, laser target designators (for respective guided smart weapons) or ECM pods, while freeing the swiveling underwing hardpoints to offensive ordnance.

 

Insisting on their independent heritage, the UNSMC’s Valkyries were never repainted in the U.N. Spacy’s standard tan and white livery. They either received a unique two tone low visibility gray paint scheme (the fighter units) or retained paint schemes that were typical for their former units, including some all-field green machines or VF-1s in a disruptive wraparound livery in grey, green and black.

Beyond A and J single-seaters (the UNSMC did not receive the premium S variant), a handful of VF-1D two-seaters were upgraded to the UNSMC’s specification and very effectively operated in the FAC (Forward Air Control) role, guiding both long-range artillery as well as attack aircraft against enemy positions.

 

The UNSMC’s VF-1s suffered heavy losses, though – for instance, SVMF-49 was completely wiped out during the so-called “Zentraedi Rain of Death” in April 2011, when the Zentraedi Imperial Grand Fleet, consisting of nearly five million warships, appeared in orbit around the Earth. Commanded by Dolza, Supreme Commander of the Zentraedi, they were ordered to incinerate the planet's surface, which they did. 70% of the Earth was utterly destroyed, according to the staff at Alaska Base. Dolza initially believed this to be total victory, until a massive energy pulse began to form on the Earth's surface. This was the Grand Cannon, a weapon of incredible destructive power that the Zentraedi were unaware of, and it disintegrated a good deal of the armada that was hanging over the Northern Hemisphere. While the Zentraedi were successful in rendering the weapon inoperable before it could fire a second time, the SDF-1 began a counterattack of its own alongside the renegade Imperial-Class Fleet and Seventh Mechanized Space Division, which destroyed the Imperial Grand Fleet. After this event, though, the UNSMC as well as other still independent services like the U.N. Navy were dissolved and the respective units integrated into the all-encompassing U.N. Spacy.

 

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 and U.N.S. Marine Corps

 

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 225.63 kN in overboost

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 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 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

2x auxiliary hardpoints on the legs for light loads like a FLIR sensor, laser rangefinder/

target designator or ECM pod (typically not used for offensive ordnance)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This fictional VF-1 was born from spontaneous inspiration and the question if the USMC could have adopted the Valkyrie within the Macross time frame and applied its rather special grey/green/black paint scheme from the Nineties that was carried by AH-1s, CH-46s and also some OV-10s.

 

The model is a simple, vintage ARII VF-1 in Fighter mode, in this case a VF-1D two-seater that received the cockpit section and the head unit from a VF-1J Gerwalk model to create a single seater. While the parts are interchangeable, the Gerwalk and the Fighter kit have different molds for the cockpit sections and the canopies, too. This is mostly evident through the lack of a front landing gear well under the Gerwalk's cockpit - I had to "carve" a suitable opening into the bottom of the nose, but that was not a problem.

The kit was otherwiese built OOB, with the landing gear down and (finally, after the scenic flight pictures) with an open canopy for final display among the rest of my VF-1 fleet. However, I added some non-canonical small details like small hardpoints on the upper legs and the FLIR and targeting pods on them, scratched from styrene bits.

 

The ordnance was changed from twelve AMM-1 missiles under the wings to something better suited for attack missions. Finding suitable material became quite a challenge, though. I eventually settled on a pair of large laser-guided smart bombs and two pairs of small air-to-ground missile clusters. The LGBs are streamlined 1:72 2.000 lb general purpose bombs, IIRC from a Hobby Boss F-5E kit, and the launch tubes were scratched from a pair of Bazooka starters from an Academy 1:72 P-51 kit. The ventral standard GU-11 pod was retained and modified to hold a scratched wire display for in-flight pictures at its rear end.

 

Some blade antennae were added around the hull as a standard measure to improve the simple kit’s look. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just added a pilot figure for the scenic shots and the thick canopy was later mounted on a small lift arm in open position.

 

Painting and markings:

Adapting the characteristic USMC three-tone paint scheme for the VF-1 was not easy; I used the symmetric pattern from the AH-1s as starting point for the fuselage and gradually evolved it onto the wings into an asymmetric free-form pattern, making sure that the areas where low-viz roundels and some vital stencils would sit on grey for good contrast and readability. The tones became authentic: USMC Field Green (FS 34095, Humbrol 105), USN Medium Grey (FS 35237, Humbrol 145) and black (using Revell 06 Tar Black, which is a very dark grey and not pure black). For some contrast the wings' leading edges were painted with a sand brown/yellow (Humbrol 94).

 

The landing gear became standard white (Revell 301), the cockpit interior medium grey (Revell 47) with a black ejection seat with brown cushions, and the air intakes as well as the interior of the VG wings dark grey (Revell 77). To set the camouflaged nose radome apart I gave it a slightly different shade of green. The GU-11 pod became bare metal (Revell 91). The LGBs were painted olive drab overall while the AGMs became light grey.

 

Roundels as well as the UNSMC and unit tags were printed at home in black on clear decal sheet. The unit markings came from an Academy OV-10. The modex came from an 1:72 Revell F8F sheet. Stencils becvame eitrher black or white to keep the low-viz look, just a few tiny color highlights bereak the camouflage up. Some of the characteristic vernier thrusters around the hull are also self-made decals.

Finally, after some typical details and position lights were added with clear paint over a silver base, the small VF-1 was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish.

  

A spontaneous interim project - and the UMSC's three-tone paint scheme suits the VF-1 well, which might have been a very suitable aircraft for this service and its mission profiles. I am still a bit uncertain about the camouflage's effectiveness, though - yes, it's disruptive, but the color contrasts are so high that a hiding effect seems very poor, even though I find that the scheme works well over urban terrain? It's fictional, though, and even though there are canonical U.N.S. Marines VF-1s to be found in literature, none I came across so far carried this type of livery.

Kaaba

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  

Pilgrims circumambulating the Kaaba during the HajjThe Kaaba (Arabic: الكعبة al-Kaʿbah, IPA: [ˈkɑʕbɐ]: "Cube")[1] is a cuboidal building in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, and is the most sacred site in Islam.[2] The building predates Islam, and, according to Islamic tradition, the first building at the site was built by Abraham. The building has a mosque built around it, the Masjid al-Haram. All Muslims around the world face the Kaaba during prayers, no matter where they are.

 

One of the Five Pillars of Islam requires every capable Muslim to perform the Hajj pilgrimage at least once in their lifetime. Multiple parts of the Hajj require pilgrims to walk several times around the Kaaba in a counter-clockwise direction (as viewed from above). This circumambulation, the Tawaf, is also performed by pilgrims during the Umrah (lesser pilgrimage).[2] However, the most dramatic times are during the Hajj, when two million pilgrims simultaneously gather to circle the building on the same day.

 

Contents

1 Location and physical attributes

2 Black Stone

3 History

3.1 Before Islam

3.2 Islamic tradition

3.2.1 At the time of Muhammad

3.3 Since Muhammad's time

4 Cleaning

5 Qibla and prayer

6 Notes

7 References

8 External links

    

Technical drawing of the Kaaba showing dimensions and elements

Left: Conceptual representation of the Kaaba, as built by Abraham; Right: Representation of the Kaaba as it stands todayThe Kaaba is a large masonry structure roughly the shape of a cube. It is made of granite from the hills near Mecca, and stands upon a 25 cm (10 in) marble base, which projects outwards about 35 cm (14 in).[2] It is approximately 13.1 m (43 ft) high, with sides measuring 11.03 m (36.2 ft) by 12.86 m (42.2 ft).[3][4] The four corners of the Kaaba roughly face the four cardinal directions of the compass.[2] In the eastern corner of the Kaaba is the Ruknu l-Aswad "the Black Corner"" or al-Ħajaru l-Aswad "the Black Stone", possibly a meteorite remnant; at the northern corner is the Ruknu l-ˤĪrāqī "the Iraqi corner". The western corner is the Ruknu sh-Shāmī "the Levantine corner" and the southern is Ruknu l-Yamanī "the Yemeni corner".[2][4]

 

The Kaaba is covered by a black silk and gold curtain known as the kiswah, which is replaced yearly.[5][6] About two-thirds of the way up runs a band of gold-embroidered calligraphy with Qur'anic text, including the Islamic declaration of faith, the Shahada.

 

In modern times, entry to the Kaaba's interior is generally not permitted except for certain rare occasions and for a limited number of guests. The entrance is a door set 2 m (7 ft) above the ground on the north-eastern wall of the Kaaba, which acts as the façade.[2] There is a wooden staircase on wheels, usually stored in the mosque between the arch-shaped gate of Banū Shaybah and the well of Zamzam. Inside the Kaaba, there is a marble and limestone floor. The interior walls are clad with marble halfway to the roof; tablets with Qur'anic inscriptions are inset in the marble. The top part of the walls are covered with a green cloth decorated with gold embroidered Qur'anic verses. Caretakers perfume the marble cladding with scented oil, the same oil used to anoint the Black Stone outside.

 

There is also a semi-circular wall opposite, but unconnected to, the north-west wall of the Kaaba known as the hatīm. This is 90 cm (35 in) in height and 1.5 m (4.9 ft) in width, and is composed of white marble. At one time the space lying between the hatīm and the Kaaba belonged to the Kaaba itself, and for this reason it is not entered during the tawaf (ritual circumambulation). Some believe that the graves of Abu Simbel, prophet Ishmael and his mother Hagar[2] are located in this space.

 

Muslims throughout the world face the Kaaba during prayers, which occur five times a day. For most places around the world, coordinates for Mecca suffice. Worshippers in the Sacred Mosque pray in concentric circles around the Kaaba.

 

Black Stone

Main article: Black Stone

The Black Stone is a significant feature of the Kaaba, believed by Muslims to date back to the time of Adam and Eve.[7] Located on the eastern corner of the Kaaba, it is about 30 cm (12 in) in diameter and surrounded by a silver frame. All Hajj pilgrims must attempt to kiss the Stone as Muhammad once did. If they cannot then a flying kiss would be sufficient [8] Because of the large crowds, this is not always possible, and so as pilgrims walk around the Kaaba, they are to point to the Stone on each circuit.[9]

 

History

Before Islam

 

'King Fahad' gate of the Grand Masjid (Masjid al Haram) in Mecca.

'King Fahad' gate of the Grand Masjid at night in Mecca.As little is known of the history of the Kaaba, there are various opinions regarding its formation and significance.

 

The early Arabian population consisted primarily of warring nomadic tribes. When they did converge peacefully, it was usually under the protection of religious practices.[10] Writing in the Encyclopedia of Islam, Wensinck identifies Mecca with a place called Macoraba mentioned by Ptolemy. His text is believed to date from the second century AD, before the rise of Islam,[11] and described it as a foundation in southern Arabia, built around a sanctuary. The area probably did not start becoming an area of religious pilgrimage until around the year AD 500. It was around then that the Quraysh tribe (into which Muhammad was later born) took control of it, and made an agreement with the local Kinana Bedouins for control.[12] The sanctuary itself, located in a barren valley surrounded by mountains, was probably built at the location of the water source today known as the Zamzam Well, an area of considerable religious significance.

 

In her book, Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the Kaaba was dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols which either represented the days of the year,[13] or were effigies of the Arabian pantheon. Once a year, tribes from all around the Arabian peninsula, be they Christian or pagan, would converge on Mecca to perform the Hajj.

 

Imoti[14] contends that there were multiple such "Kaaba" sanctuaries in Arabia at one time, but this is the only one built of stone. The others also allegedly had counterparts to the Black Stone. There was a "red stone", the deity of the south Arabian city of Ghaiman, and the "white stone" in the Kaaba of al-Abalat (near the city of Tabala, south of Mecca). Grunebaum in Classical Islam points out that the experience of divinity of that time period was often associated with stone fetishes, mountains, special rock formations, or "trees of strange growth."[15] The Kaaba was thought to be at the center of the world with the Gate of Heaven directly above it. The Kaaba marked the location where the sacred world intersected with the profane, and the embedded Black Stone was a further symbol of this as a meteorite that had fallen from the sky and linked heaven and earth.[16] According to the Boston Globe, the Kaaba was a shrine for the Daughters of God (al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat) and Hubal.[17]

 

According to Sarwar,[18] about four hundred years before the birth of Muhammad, a man named "Amr bin Lahyo bin Harath bin Amr ul-Qais bin Thalaba bin Azd bin Khalan bin Babalyun bin Saba", who was descended from Qahtan and king of Hijaz (the northwestern section of Saudi Arabia, which encompassed the cities of Mecca and Medina), had placed a Hubal idol onto the roof of the Kaaba, and this idol was one of the chief deities of the ruling Quraysh tribe. The idol was made of red agate, and shaped like a human, but with the right hand broken off and replaced with a golden hand. When the idol was moved inside the Kaaba, it had seven arrows in front of it, which were used for divination.[19]

 

To keep the peace among the perpetually warring tribes, Mecca was declared a sanctuary where no violence was allowed within 20 miles (32 km) of the Kaaba. This combat-free zone allowed Mecca to thrive not only as a place of pilgrimage, but also as a trading center.[20]

 

Patricia Crone disagrees with most academic historians on most issues concerning the history of early Islam, including the history of the Kaaba. In Makkan Trade and the Rise of Islam, Crone writes that she believes that the identification of Macoraba with the Kaaba is false, and that Macoraba was a town in southern Arabia in what was then known as Arabia Felix.[21]

 

Many accounts[which?], including Muslim accounts, and some accounts written by academic historians, stress the power and importance of the pre-Islamic Mecca.[weasel words] They depict it as a city grown rich on the proceeds of the spice trade. Crone believes that this is an exaggeration and that Makkan may only have been an outpost trading with nomads for leather, cloth, and camel butter. Crone argues that if Mecca had been a well-known center of trade, it would have been mentioned by later authors such as Procopius, Nonnosus, and the Syrian church chroniclers writing in Syriac. However, the town is absent from any geographies or histories written in the last three centuries before the rise of Islam.[22]

 

According to The Encyclopaedia Britannica, "before the rise of Islam it was revered as a sacred sanctuary and was a site of pilgrimage."[23] According to the German historian Eduard Glaser, the name "Kaaba" may have been related to the southern Arabian or Ethiopian word "mikrab", signifying a temple.[11] Again, Crone disputes this etymology.

 

Islamic tradition

Part of a series on

Eschatology

Christian eschatology[show]

Bibical texts

 

Picture of the Kaaba taken in 1880According to the Qur'an, the Kaaba was first built by Ibrahim (Abraham) and his son Ismāʿīl (Ishmael).[24] Islamic traditions assert that the Kaaba "reflects" a house in heaven called al-Baytu l-Maʿmur[25] (Arabic: البيت المعمور‎) and that it was first built by the first man, Adam. Ibrahim and Ismail rebuilt the Kaaba on the old foundations. [26]

 

At the time of Muhammad

At the time of Muhammad (CE 570-632), his tribe the Quraysh was in charge of the Kaaba, which was at that time a shrine containing hundreds of idols representing Arabian tribal gods and other religious figures, including Jesus and Mary. Muhammad earned the enmity of his tribe by claiming the shrine for the new religion of Islam that he preached. He wanted the Kaaba to be dedicated to the worship of the one God alone, and all the idols evicted. The Quraysh persecuted and harassed him continuously[27], and he and his followers eventually migrated to Medina in 622.

 

After this pivotal migration, or Hijra, the Muslim community became a political and military force. In 630, Muhammad and his followers returned to Mecca as conquerors, and he destroyed the 360 idols in and around the Kaaba.[28][29] While destroying each idol, Muhammad recited [Qur'an 17:81] which says "Truth has arrived and falsehood has perished for falsehood is by its nature bound to perish."[28][29]

  

A 1315 illustration from the Persian Jami al-Tawarikh, inspired by the story of Muhammad and the Meccan clan elders lifting the Black Stone into place when the Kaaba was rebuilt in the early 600s.[30]The Kaaba was re-dedicated as an Islamic house of worship, and henceforth, the annual pilgrimage was to be a Muslim rite, the Hajj, which visits the Kaaba and other sacred sites around Mecca.[31] Islamic histories also mention a reconstruction of the Kaaba around 600. A story found in Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasūl Allāh, one of the biographies of Muhammad (as reconstructed and translated by Guillaume), describes Muhammad settling a quarrel between Meccan clans as to which clan should set the Black Stone cornerstone in place. According to Ishaq's biography, Muhammad's solution was to have all the clan elders raise the cornerstone on a cloak, and then Muhammad set the stone into its final place with his own hands.[30][32][33] Ibn Ishaq says that the timber for the reconstruction of the Kaaba came from a Greek ship that had been wrecked on the Red Sea coast at Shu'ayba, and the work was undertaken by a Coptic carpenter called Baqum.[34]

 

It is also claimed by the Shīʿa that the Kaaba is the birth place of ʿAlī ibn Abī Tālib, the fourth caliph and cousin and son-in-law of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.[31]

 

Since Muhammad's time

The Kaaba has been repaired and reconstructed many times since Muhammad's day.

 

Abd-Allah ibn al-Zubayr, an early Muslim who ruled Mecca for many years between the death of ʿAli and the consolidation of Ummayad power, is said to have demolished the old Kaaba and rebuilt it to include the hatīm, a semi-circular wall now outside the Kaaba. He did so on the basis of a tradition (found in several hadith collections[35]) that the hatīm was a remnant of the foundations of the Abrahamic Kaaba, and that Muhammad himself had wished to rebuild so as to include it.

 

This structure was destroyed (or partially destroyed) in 683, during the war between al-Zubayr and Umayyad forces commanded by Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef. Al-Hajjaj used stone-throwing catapults against the Meccans.

 

The Ummayads under ʿAbdu l-Malik ibn Marwan finally reunited all the former Islamic possessions and ended the long civil war. In 693 he had the remnants of al-Zubayr's Kaaba razed, and rebuilt on the foundations set by the Quraysh.[36] The Kaaba returned to the cube shape it had taken during Muhammad's lifetime.

 

During the Hajj of 930, the Qarmatians attacked Mecca, defiled the Zamzam Well with the bodies of pilgrims and stole the Black Stone, removing it to the oasis region of Eastern Arabia known as al-Aḥsāʾ, where it remained until the Abbasids ransomed it back in 952 CE.

 

Apart from repair work, the basic shape and structure of the Kaaba have not changed since then.[37]

 

The Kaaba is depicted on the reverse of 500 Saudi Riyal, and the Iranian 2000 rials banknotes.[38]

 

Cleaning

The building is opened twice a year for a ceremony known as "the cleaning of the Kaaba." This ceremony takes place roughly fifteen days before the start of the month of Ramadan and the same period of time before the start of the annual pilgrimage.

 

The keys to the Kaaba are held by the Banī Shaybat (بني شيبة) tribe. Members of the tribe greet visitors to the inside of the Kaaba on the occasion of the cleaning ceremony. A small number of dignitaries and foreign diplomats are invited to participate in the ceremony.[39] The governor of Mecca leads the honored guests who ritually clean the structure, using simple brooms. Washing of the Kaaba is done with a mixture of Zamzam and Persian rosewater.[40]

 

Qibla and prayer

Main article: Qibla

 

Supplicating pilgrim at Masjid al-HaramThe Qibla is the Muslim name for the direction faced during prayer[Qur'an 2:143–144] While it may appear to some non-Muslims that Muslims worship the Kaaba, it is simply the focal point for prayer. The qibla has changed at least twice.

 

Notes

^ Also known as al-Kaʿbatu l-Mušarrafah (الكعبة المشرًّفة "The Noble Kaʿbah), al-Baytu l-ʿAtīq (البيت العتيق "The Primordial House"), or al-Baytu l-Ḥarām (البيت الحرام "The Sacred House")

^ a b c d e f g Wensinck, A. J; Ka`ba. Encyclopaedia of Islam IV p. 317

^ Peterson, Andrew (1996). Dictionary of Islamic Architecture.. London: Routledge. archnet.org/library/dictionary/.

^ a b Hawting, G.R; Ka`ba. Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an p. 76

^ "'House of God' Kaaba gets new cloth". The Age Company Ltd.. 2003. www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/11/1044725746252.html. Retrieved 2006-08-17.

^ "The Kiswa - (Kaaba Covering)". Al-Islaah Publications. members.tripod.com/worldupdates/newupdates10/id43.htm. Retrieved 2006-08-17.

^ SaudiCities - The Saudi Experience. "Makkah - The Holy Mosque:The Black Stone". www.saudicities.com/mmosque.htm. Retrieved August 13 2006.

^ Elliott, Jeri (1992). Your Door to Arabia. ISBN 0-473-01546-3.

^ Mohamed, Mamdouh N. (1996). Hajj to Umrah: From A to Z. Amana Publications. ISBN 0-915957-54-x.

^ Grunebaum, p. 18

^ a b Wensinck, A. J; Ka`ba. Encyclopaedia of Islam IV p. 318 (1927, 1978)

^ Grunebaum, p. 19

^ Karen Armstrong (2000,2002). Islam: A Short History. pp. 11. ISBN 0-8129-6618-x.

^ Imoti, Eiichi. "The Ka'ba-i Zardušt", Orient, XV (1979), The Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan, pp. 65-69.

^ Grunebaum, p. 24

^ Armstrong, Jerusalem, p. 221

^ "Ask the Globe". Boston Globe. April 23, 1999.

^ Hafiz Ghulam Sarwar. Muhammad the Holy Prophet. pp. 18–19.

^ Brother Andrew. "Hubal, the moon god of the Kaba". bible.ca. www.bible.ca/islam/islam-moon-god-hubal.htm. Retrieved 2007-09-04.

^ Armstrong, Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths, p. 221-222

^ Crone, Patricia (2004). Makkan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias. pp. 134-137

^ Crone, Patricia (2004). Makkan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias. p. 137

^ Britannica 2002 Deluxe Edition CD-ROM, "Ka'bah."

^ "AL-BAQARA (THE COW)". Online Quran Project. al-quran.info/#&&sura=2&aya=127&trans=en-.... Retrieved 2009-04-08.

^ Hajj-e-Baytullah. "Baytullah - The House of Allah". www.ezsoftech.com/hajj/hajj_article1.asp. Retrieved August 13 2006.

^ Azraqi, Akhbar Makkah, vol. 1, pp. 58-66

^ www.mocaz.com/essays/Persecution in Mecca.pdf

^ a b Hamali, Mohamed Hashim (31 My - 6 June 2001). "Islam, iconography and the Taliban". Al-Ahram Weekly Online (536). weekly.ahram.org.eg/2001/536/in7.htm. Retrieved 2008-10-05.

^ a b "Conquest of Makkah". Compendium of Muslim Texts. University of Southern California. www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/pillars/fasting/tajuddi.... Retrieved 2008-10-05.

^ a b University of Southern California. "The Prophet of Islam - His Biography". www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/prophet/profbio.html. Retrieved August 12 2006.

^ a b The Book of History, a History of All Nations From the Earliest Times to the Present. Viscount Bryce (Introduction). The Grolier Society.

^ Guillaume, A. (1955). The Life of Muhammad. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 84-87

^ Saifur Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, translated by Issam Diab (1979). "Muhammad's Birth and Forty Years prior to Prophethood". Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum (The Sealed Nectar): Memoirs of the Noble Prophet. www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/SM_tsn/ch1s6.html. Retrieved 2007-05-04.

^ Cyril Glasse, New Encyclopedia of Islam, p. 245. Rowman Altamira, 2001. ISBN 0759101906

^ Sahih Bukhari 1506, 1508;Sahih Muslim 1333

^ Sahih Bukhari 1509; Sahih Muslim 1333

^ Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. The Rituals of Hajj and ‘Umrah, Mizan, Al-Mawrid

^ Central Bank of Iran. Banknotes & Coins: 2000 Rials. – Retrieved on 24 March 2009.

^ enc.slider.com/Enc/Kaaba

^ Islam Online.net - Saudi Arabia Readies for Hajj Emergencies (December 29 2005), Retrieved November 30 2006.

References

Peterson, Andrew (1996). Dictionary of Islamic Architecture London: Routledge.

Hawting, G.R; Ka`ba. Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an

Elliott, Jeri (1992). Your Door to Arabia. ISBN 0-473-01546-3.

Mohamed, Mamdouh N. (1996). Hajj to Umrah: From A to Z. Amana Publications. ISBN 0-915957-54-x.

Wensinck, A. J; Ka`ba. Encyclopaedia of Islam IV

Karen Armstrong (2000,2002). Islam: A Short History. ISBN 0-8129-6618-x.

Crone, Patricia (2004). Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias.

[1915] The Book of History, a History of All Nations From the Earliest Times to the Present, Viscount Bryce (Introduction), The Grolier Society.

Guillaume, A. (1955). The Life of Muhammad. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Grunebaum, G. E. von (1970). Classical Islam: A History 600 A.D. - 1258 A.D.. Aldine Publishing Company. ISBN 202-15016-

HOG Capable GZB WAP-7 #30406 accelerating towards ANVT taking charge of 22412 NDLS-NHLN A.C. S.F Express.

To view more of my images, of aircraft, please click "here" !

 

C-17 Globemaster III. The C-17 Globemaster III is a longrange, heavy-lift strategic transport aircraft that can operate close to a potential area of operations for combat, peacekeeping or humanitarian missions worldwide.

C-17 is capable of rapid, strategic delivery of troops and all types of cargo to main operating bases anywhere in the world. The Globemaster’s load-bearing rear ramp and digitally controlled loading systems, combined with the skills of its crews and ground handlers, enable large, complex items of equipment, including Chinook helicopters, military vehicles and other heavy items of specialist kit to be loaded. It can transport 100,000lb (45,360kg) of freight more than 4,500nm (8,334km) while flying at altitudes above 35,000ft. The aircraft’s design enables high-angle, steep approaches at relatively slow speeds, allowing it to operate into small, austere airfields and onto runways as short as 3,500ft long and just 90ft wide. The Royal Air Force had been without an organic outsize strategic lift capability since the Short Belfast was withdrawn in 1976, relying, ironically, on civilian operated Belfasts for the movement of such loads during the 1982 Falklands War and making use of chartered freighters. By the end of the 1990s it had become clear that this capability gap ought to be filled, and in 2000 the Ministry of Defence (MoD) agreed a seven-year ‘lease and support’ contract with Boeing and the US Air Force (USAF) for four C-17A Globemaster III strategic transports. On August 28, 1981, the USAF had chosen the McDonnell Douglas C-17 as winner of its C-X competition for a new military transport aircraft primarily to replace the Lockheed C-141 StarLifter. The C-17’s development process was less than straightforward, however, a complex and changing procurement schedule delaying first flight until September 15, 1991. Internal manoeuvrings at McDonnell Douglas further complicated the programme as C-17 responsibility moved between divisions and although the 1993 first delivery to an operational USAF unit was from the original manufacturer, in 1997 the C-17 became a Boeing product on the latter’s acquisition of its rival. The C-17A had become the Globemaster III on February 5, 1993, following on from the USAF’s Douglas C-74 Globemaster and C-124 Globemaster II post-war piston-engined transports. By the time the UK defined its initial C-17 requirement the type was well established in service and the RAF benefitted from access to the global C-17 support network and supply chain. In UK service, the type is typically referred to as C-17 or Globemaster, no formal RAF role/numerical designation (Globemaster C.Mk 1 would have followed the regular pattern of aircraft titles) being applied, since the aircraft was initially leased. Number 99 Squadron reformed at RAF Brize Norton to operate the aircraft, which rapidly became a stalwart and key enabler of the airbridge operation that sustained UK operations in Afghanistan. Even at the peak of Operation Herrick, however, the C-17 serviced humanitarian and operational commitments elsewhere and rather than taking an option to extend the C-17 lease by two years, the MoD bought the initial four aircraft and ordered a fifth in 2006. Continued demand saw a sixth ordered in 2007, a seventh in 2009 and the eighth and, to date, final example in 2012. The latter was ordered and delivered within weeks at a reported cost of £200 million according to an MoD press statement. With the end of Herrick, 99 Sqn has continued flying many of the types of mission in which the C-17 excelled during the operation, moving personnel and equipment, and performing aeromedical evacuation missions with a suite of surgical facilities and staff on board. Support to deployed operations remains as important as ever and RAF C-17s are regular visitors to allied forward bases, particularly in connection with French anti-terrorist work in Africa. Humanitarian flights, typically planned and flown wherever needed at very short notice, are common 99 Sqn trade, while the fact remains that when a C-17 taxies onto an airfield ramp anywhere in the world, with the Union Jack painted large on its side, there can be no doubt that UK interests are involved.

 

BAE146. Exclusively operated out of RAF Northolt by 32 (The Royal) Squadron, the BAe 146 is primarily tasked in the Command Support Air Transport (CSAT) role. Two 146 variants are operational, the VIP-configured CC.Mk 2 and the Quick Change (QC) C.Mk 3, which can be rapidly converted between passenger and cargo configurations. The CC2’s primary role is the transport of senior government ministers and Ministry of Defence (MOD) personnel and, most famously, senior members of the Royal Family, although this work represents by far the minority of 32(TR) Sqn’s tasking. If required, the 146’s defensive aids suite (DAS) also offers government ministers and high-ranking military leaders protection during visits overseas where a risk to security is perceived. Outside VIP work, the CC.Mk 2 has an operational role in-theatre, providing essential support to military commanders by moving personnel and smaller freight items. The type’s presence also enables key face-to-face engagement between commanders and their personnel, coalition partners and host nation leadership representatives.

Purchased as a pair of ex-TNT 146-200QC aircraft in 2012, the C.Mk 3s entered service in 2013 after modifications, including the addition of a DAS, for RAF service. They have made a considerable contribution to tactical airlift capability, taking on missions that might otherwise have taken larger aircraft off their primary tasking.

 

Source of information:-

 

www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/

“The machine above is capable of carrying a crew of several people to a point beyond the rear of the moon, claims Dr. Wernher von Braun in the current issue of Collier's magazine.”

 

Also at:

 

dreamsofspace.blogspot.com/2012/03/colliers-march-22-1952...

Credit: Dreams of Space - Books and Ephemera website

 

The photograph (in color) was featured in the March 22, 1952 issue of Collier’s Magazine, pages 32 & 33, with the caption:

 

"Specifically designed round-the-moon ship hovers 200 miles above lunar surface as space scientists take close-up photographs. One-way journey from station in space will take five days to cover 239,000 miles. Never-seen face of the moon is to right. Trip will have to be timed so that sun lights hidden side."

 

Another is:

 

"The first trip to the moon will be without landing, in a ship designed to travel in space only, taking off near the Space Station and returning to it. Here the round-the-moon ship is some 240,000 miles from earth, 50 miles above the lunar surface. The large crater is Aristillus (diameter 35 miles); the other crater is Autolycus; the distant mountains are the lunar Apennines. [51]" The image being most likely used in another publication, as plate 51?

Credit: contributor 'magnus z' at the SECRET PROJECTS/Unbuilt Projects, Military and Aerospace Technology website, at www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=5033.0

Informative and entertaining reading!

 

The above description is accurate/correct, not the Collier's original. And, neither here nor there, but the Apollo 15 landing site is somewhere in the background of this depiction, near the lunar limb.

 

Yet another, and I find this mildly interesting:

 

This exact illustration is reproduced (as plate/figure XX) - minus the 'round-the-moon' ship - in the book "MAN AND THE MOON", written/commentary by Robert S Richardson, with illustrations attributed to Chesley Bonestell, published 1961. The accompanying description in the book being "Looking south toward Aristillus (foreground) and Autolycus from 50 miles above the surface. Palus Putredinus and the Appennine Mountains can be seen in the distance. The time is sunset."

 

Lastly...and this is cool. Bid now!!! ;-)

 

www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2018/space-and-ex...

Credit: Sotheby's

+++ 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 Supermarine Seafire was a naval version of the Supermarine Spitfire adapted for operation from aircraft carriers. It was analogous in concept to the Hawker Sea Hurricane, a navalized version of the Spitfire's stablemate, the Hawker Hurricane. The name Seafire was derived from the abbreviation of the longer name Sea Spitfire.

 

The idea of adopting a navalized, carrier-capable version of the Supermarine Spitfire had been mooted by the Admiralty as early as May 1938. Despite a pressing need to replace various types of obsolete aircraft that were still in operation with the Fleet Air Arm (FAA), some opposed the notion, such as Winston Churchill, although these disputes were often a result of an overriding priority being placed on maximizing production of land-based Spitfires instead. During 1941 and early 1942, the concept was again pushed for by the Admiralty, culminating in an initial batch of Seafire Mk Ib fighters being provided in late 1941, which were mainly used for pilots to gain experience operating the type at sea. While there were concerns over the low strength of its undercarriage, which had not been strengthened like many naval aircraft would have been, its performance was found to be acceptable.

 

From 1942 onwards, further Seafire models were quickly ordered, including the first operationally-viable Seafire F Mk III variant. This led to the type rapidly spreading throughout the FAA. In November 1942, the first combat use of the Seafire occurred during Operation Torch, the Allied landings in North Africa. In July 1943, the Seafire was used to provide air cover for the Allied invasion of Sicily; and reprised this role in September 1943 during the subsequent Allied invasion of Italy. During 1944, the type was again used in quantity to provide aerial support to Allied ground forces during the Normandy landings and Operation Dragoon in Southern France. During the latter half of 1944, the Seafire became a part of the aerial component of the British Pacific Fleet, where it quickly proved to be a capable interceptor against the feared kamikaze attacks by Japanese pilots which had become increasingly common during the final years of the Pacific War. Several Seafire variants were produced during WWII, more or less mirroring the development of its land-based ancestor.

 

The Seafire continued to be used for some time after the end of the war, and new, dedicated versions were developed and exported. The FAA opted to promptly withdraw all of its Merlin-powered Seafires and replace them with Griffon-powered counterparts. The type saw further active combat use during the Korean War, in which FAA Seafires performed hundreds of missions in the ground attack and combat air patrol roles against North Korean forces during 1950. The Seafire was withdrawn from FAA service during the 1950s and was replaced by the newer Hawker Sea Fury, the last piston engine fighter to be used by the service, along with the first generation of jet-propelled naval fighters, such as the de Havilland Vampire, Supermarine Attacker, and Hawker Sea Hawk.

 

After WWII, the Royal Canadian Navy and French Aviation Navale also obtained Seafires to operate from ex-Royal Navy aircraft carriers. France received a total of 140 Seafires of various versions from 1946 on, including 114 Seafire Mk IIIs in two tranches (35 of them were set aside for spare part) until 1948, and these were followed in 1949 by fifteen Mk. 15 fighters and twelve FR Mk. 23 armed photo reconnaissance aircraft. Additionally, twenty land-based Mk. IXs were delivered to Naval Air Station Cuers-Pierrefeu as trainers.

 

The Seafire Mk. 23 was a dedicated post-war export version. It combined several old and new features and was the final “new” Spitfire variant to be powered by a Merlin engine, namely a Rolls-Royce Merlin 66M with 1,720 hp (1,283 kW) that drove a four-blade propeller. The Mk. 23 was originally built as a fighter (as Seafire F Mk. 23), but most machines were delivered or later converted with provisions for being fitted with two F24 cameras in the rear fuselage and received the service designation FR Mk. 23 (or just FR.23). Only 32 of this interim post-war version were built by Cunliffe-Owen, and all of them were sold to foreign customers.

 

Like the Seafire 17, the 23 had a cut-down rear fuselage and teardrop canopy, which afforded a better all-round field of view than the original cockpit. The windscreen was modified, too, to a rounded section, with narrow quarter windows, rather than the flat windscreen used on land-based Spitfires. As a novel feature the Seafire 23 featured a "sting" arrestor hook instead of the previous V-shaped ventral arrangement.

The fuel capacity was 120 gal (545 l) distributed in two main forward fuselage tanks: the lower tank carried 48 gal (218 l) while the upper tank carried 36 gal (163 l), plus two fuel tanks built into the leading edges of the wings with capacities of 12.5 (57 l) and 5.5 gal (25 l) respectively. It featured a reinforced main undercarriage with longer oleos and a lower rebound ratio, a measure to tame the deck behavior of the Mk. 15 and reducing the propensity of the propeller tips "pecking" the deck during an arrested landing. The softer oleos also stopped the aircraft from occasionally bouncing over the arrestor wires and into the crash barrier.

The wings were taken over from the contemporary Spitfire 21 and therefore not foldable. However, this saved weight and complexity, and the Seafire’s compact dimensions made this flaw acceptable for its operators. The wings were furthermore reinforced, with a stronger main spar necessitated by the new undercarriage, and as a bonus they were able to carry heavier underwing loads than previous Seafire variants. This made the type not only suitable for classic dogfighting (basic armament consisted of four short-barreled 20 mm Hispano V cannon in the outer wings), but also for attack missions with bombs and unguided rockets.

 

The Seafire’s Aéronavale service was quite short, even though they saw hot battle duty. 24 Mk. IIIs were deployed on the carrier Arromanches in 1948 when it sailed for Vietnam to fight in the First Indochina War. The French Seafires operated from land bases and from Arromanches on ground attack missions against the Viet Minh before being withdrawn from combat operations in January 1949.

After returning to European waters, the Aéronavale’s Seafire frontline units were re-equipped with the more modern and capable Seafire 15s and FR 23s, but these were also quickly replaced by Grumman F6F Hellcats from American surplus stock, starting already in 1950. The fighters were retired from carrier operations and soon relegated to training and liaison duties, and eventually scrapped. However, the FR.23s were at this time the only carrier-capable photo reconnaissance aircraft in the Aéronavale’s ranks, so that these machines remained active with Flottille 1.F until 1955, but their career was rather short, too, and immediately ended when the first naval jets became available and raised the performance bar.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 31 ft 10 in (9.70 m)

Wingspan: 36 ft 10 in (11.23 m)

Height: 12 ft 9 in (3.89 m) tail down with propeller blade vertical

Wing area: 242.1 ft² (22.5 m²)

Empty weight: 5,564 lb (2,524 kg)

Gross weight: 7,415 lb (3,363 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce Merlin 66M V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine,

delivering 1,720 hp (1,283 kW) at 11,000 ft and driving a 4-bladed constant-speed propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 404 mph (650 km/h) at 21,000 ft (6,400 m)

Cruise speed: 272 mph (438 km/h, 236 kn)

Range: 493 mi (793 km) on internal fuel at cruising speed

965 mi (1,553 km) with 90 gal drop tank

Service ceiling: 42,500 ft (12,954 m)

Rate of climb: 4,745 ft/min (24.1 m/s) at 10,000 ft (3,048 m)

Time to altitude: 20,000 ft (6,096 m) in 8 minutes 6 seconds

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm Hispano V cannon; 175 rpg inboard, 150 rpg outboard

Hardpoints for up to 2× 250 lb (110 kg) bombs (outer wings), plus 1× 500 lb (230 kg) bomb

(ventral hardpoint) or drop tanks, or up to 8× "60 lb" RP-3 rockets on zero-length launchers

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build was another attempt to reduce The Stash. The basis was a Special Hobby FR Mk. 47, which I had originally bought as a donor kit: the engine housing bulges of its Griffon engine were transplanted onto a racing P-51D Mustang. Most of the kit was still there, and from this basis I decided to create a fictional post-WWII Seafire/Spitfire variant.

 

With the Griffon fairings gone a Merlin engine was settled, and the rest developed spontaneously. The propeller was improvised, with a P-51D spinner (Academy kit) and blades from the OOB 5-blade propeller, which are slightly deeper than the blades from the Spitfire Mk. IX/XVI prop. In order to attach it to the hull and keep it movable, I implanted my standard metal axis/styrene tube arrangement.

 

With the smaller Merlin engine, I used the original, smaller Spitfire stabilizers but had to use the big, late rudder, due to the taller fin of the post-ware Spit-/Seafire models. The four-spoke wheels also belong to an earlier Seafire variant. Since it was an option in the kit, I went for a fuselage with camera openings (the kit comes with two alternative fuselages as well as a vast range of optional parts for probably ANY late Spit- and Seafire variant – and also for many fictional hybrids!), resulting in a low spine and a bubble canopy, what gives the aircraft IMHO very sleek and elegant lines. In order to maintain this impression I also used the short cannon barrels from the kit. For extended range on recce missions I furthermore gave the model the exotic underwing slipper tanks instead of the optional missile launch rail stubs under the outer wing sections. Another mod is the re-installment of the small oil cooler under the left wing root from a Spitfire Mk. V instead of the symmetrical standard radiator pair – just another subtle sign that “something’s not right” here.

  

Painting and markings:

The decision to build this model as a French aircraft was inspired by a Caracal Decals set with an Aéronavale Seafire III from the Vietnam tour of duty in 1948, an aircraft with interesting roundels that still carried British FAA WWII colors (Dark Slate Grey/Dark Sea Grey, Sky). Later liveries of the type remain a little obscure, though, and information about them is contradictive. Some profiles show French Seafires in British colors, with uniform (Extra) Dark Sea Grey upper and Sky lower surfaces, combined with a high waterline – much like contemporary FAA aircraft like the Sea Fury. However, I am a bit in doubt concerning the Sky, because French naval aircraft of that era, esp. recce types like the Shorts Sunderland or PBY Catalina, were rather painted in white or very light grey, just with uniform dark grey upper surfaces, reminding of British Coastal Command WWII aircraft.

 

Since this model would be a whif, anyway, and for a pretty look, I adopted the latter design, backed by an undated profile of a contemporary Seafire Mk. XV from Flottille S.54, a training unit, probably from the Fifties - not any valid guarantee for authenticity, but it looks good, if not elegant!

Another option from that era would have been an all-blue USN style livery, which should look great on a Spitfire, too. But I wanted something more elegant and odd, underpinning the bubbletop Seafire’s clean lines.

 

I settled for Extra Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 123) and Light Grey (FS. 36495, Humbrol 147) as basic tones, with a very high waterline. The spinner was painted yellow, the only colorful marking. Being a post-war aircraft of British origin, the cockpit interior was painted in black (Revell 09, anthracite). The landing gear wells became RAF Cockpit Green (Humbrol 78), while the inside of the respective covers became Sky (Humbrol 90) – reflecting the RAF/FAA’s post-war practice of applying the external camouflage paint on these surfaces on Spit-/Seafires, too. On this specific aircraft the model displays, just the exterior had been painted over by the new operator. Looks weird, but it’s a nice detail.

 

The roundels came from the aforementioned 1948 Seafire Mk. III, and their odd design – esp. the large ones on the wings, and only the fuselage roundels carry the Aéronavale’s anchor icon and a yellow border – creates a slightly confusing look. Unfortunately, the roundels were not 100% opaque, this became only apparent after their application, and they did not adhere well, either.

The tactical code had to be improvised with single, black letters of various sizes – they come from a Hobby Boss F4F USN pre-WWII Wildcat, but were completely re-arrenged into the French format. The fin flash on the rudder had to be painted, with red and blue paint, in an attempt to match the decals’ tones, and separated by a white decal stripe. The anchor icon on the rudder had to be printed by myself, unfortunately the decal on the bow side partly disintegrated. Stencils were taken from the Special Hobby kit’s OOB sheet.

 

The model received a light black ink washing, post-panel shading with dry-brushing and some soot stains around the exhausts, but not too much weathering, since it would be relatively new. Finally, everything was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A relatively quick and simple build, and the Special Hobby kit went together with little problems – a very nice and versatile offering. The mods are subtle, but I like the slender look of this late Spitfire model, coupled with the elegant Merlin engine – combined into the fictional Mk. 23. The elegant livery just underlines the aircraft’s sleek lines. Not spectacular, but a pretty result.

 

A paratrooper of B Company of 2nd Battalion The Parachute Regiment boards a Royal Air Force C-130J Hercules during Exercise Capable Eagle.

 

The soldiers were taking part in Exercise Capable Eagle, dropping from a Hercules C130J of 47 Sqn, over Wiley Sike, part of the RAF Spadeadam training area.

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

© Crown Copyright 2013

Photographer: Fg Off Tony Durrant

Image 45156300.jpg from www.defenceimages.mod.uk

  

Use of this image is subject to the terms and conditions of the MoD News Licence at www.defenceimagery.mod.uk/fotoweb/20121001_Crown_copyrigh...

 

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

Follow us:

www.facebook.com/defenceimages

www.twitter.com/defenceimages

Fore ventral view showing mining particle beam cannon and sensor suite.

 

Name: S.S. Bessemer

 

Registration Number: KCC-1894 (Kolter Construction Contract Number 1,894)

  

Affiliation: Kolter Mining, Refining, and Fuel.

 

Class Name: Bessemer class

  

Type: Deep Space Mining Operations Flagship

 

Commissioned: Circa late 2500’s, post recent major conflict

 

Specifications:

  

Length: 1,844 meters (184.4 studs, 58.1 inches, 4.83 feet, 147.5 cm model)

  

Width: 503 meters (50.3 studs, 15.8 inches, 40.2 cm model)

  

Height: 484 meters, 398 meters without dorsal comms array, (48.4 studs, 15.2 inches, 38.7 cm model)

  

Crew: 2,950 standard complement + capacity for crew families, as well as smaller guest quarters for up to 2,000 additional personnel to be moved to/from mining operations.

 

Armament: 1 super-heavy coaxial particle beam cannon, (primarily for asteroid mining, but also more than capable of defensive action,) 4 dual-mounted heavy particle cannon turrets, 8 dual-mounted medium particle cannon turrets, 2 coaxial fore medium particle cannons, 80 quad-mounted 80mm anti-fighter flak railgun turrets.

 

Defensive systems:

Hull: Super-heavy steel alloy hull with carbon nanotube/buckypaper composite layers as spall lining.

Armor plating: steel, titanium alloy, tungsten, ceramic, and carbon nanotube composite armor layers against asteroids/other space debris, kinetic weapons, kinetic spalling, particle, laser, and plasma fire. Thick composite armor provides excellent survivability, but with very high mass. Some battleships are less armored than this ship.

Bulkheads: Extensive titanium bulkhead support network.

Structural integrity field: High power system designed for significant cargo mass placing stress on the frame, or to withstand asteroid impacts to the hull.

Shielding: Internally housed high power adaptive particle field repulsing shielding system capable of surviving significant punishment. Some older battleships have less robust shielding.

 

Powerplant: 1 primary matter-antimatter reactor with extensive fuel reserves, 2 secondary fusion reactors with extensive fuel reserves. Multiple massive power capacitors. Extensive heatinks.

 

Propulsion: 1 massive primary fusion engine for sub-lightspeed travel, 1 internal FTL core capable of moderate FTL speed, long range travel, and 32 large reaction control thrusters for slow but dependable below light speed maneuvering.

 

Computer systems: Single supercomputer core with onboard Virtual Intelligence system.

  

Comms and Sensors: Local and FTL comms arrays. Radar, LIDAR, infrared, multi-spectral, and additional other local area sensors systems, along with extensive FTL sensors.

 

Additional Systems: High power artificial singularity for both artificial gravity generation and inertial dampening, allowing for 1G gravity even when hauling an entire cargo hold full of heavy-metal. 6 massive blast furnaces for refining metal ore, an enormous central cargo hold system, 4 fuel refining tanks, 4 massive fuel storage tanks, and an internal rail system for moving ore and personnel.

 

Embarked Craft: 2 Thunderbird class super-heavy cargo/personnel shuttles, 2 Hurricane class heavy cargo/personnel shuttles, 20 heavy mining drones, 24 medium mining drones, 2 gunships of variable class, 2 heavy fighter/bombers of variable class, potential for multiple additional light shuttles and fighters.

 

Background: After seeing both the devastation to outlying areas of space caused by the recent Great War, and the corruption within the Federal Defense Navy (working title) Admiralty, Captain David Courtland retired honorably from military service and went to helm his family’s generations old mining company, Kolter Mining, Refining, and Fuel; one of the largest mining companies in United Earth Federation space. (Working title.)

 

He wanted to take the company, already a reputable and successful business, in a new direction. That direction was the disputed, war-torn, no-man’s-waste-land of space known as The Divide, (working title) situated between the major powers of the galaxy. Life in The Divide was desperate, with little hope for the many people stranded in the ruins, poverty, and crime infested land. None of the major powers could intervene without starting another territorial war, and as such, pirates, gangs, and unscrupulous mega-corporations ruled supreme.

 

Courtland wanted to make a difference to this sorrowful place, and with trillions of credits and a Fortunes 1,000 company at his control, he had the means to at least begin; although even he lacked the ability to single-handedly remedy the myriad of woes The Divide faced.

 

David’s plan was simple, to move significant mining operations to The Divide, thus:

1: Creating new, safe, well-paying, good jobs for both an area and an industry that seldom offered such things.

2: Allowing for the placement of company security forces to deter pirate activity around major settlements.

3: Providing tax-free revenue to fund new schools, hospitals, food, water, shetler, and other charitable activities in The Divide.

  

But to do it, he required a new kind of mining vessel, as well as additional security forces. Thus he contacted Nelson Heavy Industries, who in turn partnered with AxonTech Interstellar Systems for some components, to place an order for a line of custom massive deep space mining operation flagships with enhanced combat capabilities and capable of operating in the remotest reaches of space for months or even years at a time. And so the Bessemer class was born.

 

The Bessemer class is unlike any mining vessel ever produced before it. Certainly significantly larger mining ships existed, but these were typically little more than unarmed, slow moving things with small engines; closer to a semi-mobile starbase than a combination frontier battleship/mining vessel. But Courtland required something unique. Something that could move faster, survive more punishment, and something that had teeth; not a fragile, barely moving thing that would only sit in safe areas of space. Courtland needed a mighty sheepdog in a world of sheep and wolves.

 

Bessemer class vessels are 1,844 meters long, and possess more armor, firepower, and shielding than many pre Great War battleship designs. Almost any pirate or local gang would be terrified of the sight of over a mile of steel and particle cannons; clad in Kolter white, green, and yellow.

 

But the Bessemer, and others of her class, are not merely warships masquerading as civilian craft. They are heavy mining machines that live up to their name; a steel producing process that revolutionized the industry of Earth some seven hundred years earlier. The Bessemer and her sister ships are capable of blasting metal-rich asteroids to bits with their coaxial mining particle beam cannon, and then having swarms of automated mining drones devour any valuable deposits within before unloading the materials into the Bessemer’s ore hold for the internal rail system to run any raw ore through her six corvette sized forges, and then having the refined metal shunted to her cavernous lower hold, while any waste material from the refining process is vented directly into space.

 

Ships of this class are outfitted with a sizable hangar, advanced sensor suite, extensive internal cargo bays, and large cargo pod clamps that allow it to act in the capacity of miner, defensive ship, operations command center, and even freighter and personnel carrier should usual shipping to outlying mining sites be disrupted.

 

But capable as they are, these are not the spartan mining vessels with unlivable working conditions that some shady companies have been known to operate. These space-faring cities of steel feature robust safety systems, spacious and comfortable crew quarters, multiple restaurants, multiple mess-halls, multiple shops for clothing, food, electronics, and other items, an arcade, multiple gyms with weights, various weight and cardio machines, martial arts areas, gymnastics equipment, along with a walking track, a small bowling alley, an olympic sized swimming pool, a multi-sport stadium, a greenhouse, hydroponics bays, a small stage/concert area, several computer labs, a library, a small movie theater, crew lounges and break areas, a salon/spa, a bar/club, chapels, classroom/daycare areas, office areas, as well as repair stations, enough dry and frozen storage to keep everyone fed for extended missions, advanced workshops, astrotography, laboratories, guest bunk-rooms, and a starbase grade medical center.

 

Not everyone is happy about Kolter Mining’s efforts, however. While Courtland founded the Kolter Foundation to aid those in need, he also lobbied for what came to be known as the Kolter Bill to be passed. Mining employees out in the colonies loved the added protections this afforded them. But the executives of Kolter’s rival mining companies operating out of Earth’s colony worlds quickly found themselves facing laws that favored the profits of Kolter and their already developed safety systems and excellent treatment of employees. What’s more, the Federal Defense Navy Admiralty have been continually frustrated that rather than helping to line their pockets as part of the military industrial complex, Courtland has been working tirelessly to reveal their corruption and hidden support of crime in outlying areas of space.

 

What’s more, there are even rumors that Courtland is now working with, and possibly even helping to fund, a mercenary vigilante unit out in The Divide known as the Phoenix Command Group, founded by Jonathan Scarlett, another former Federal Defense Navy Captain who ran afoul of the Admiralty.

 

The wealthy and corrupt among the Admiralty, military industrial complex, crime syndicates, and corrupt businesses running shady operations out in The Divide are deeply troubled by these rumors. But those who are now citizens of no nation, and who have known nothing but hopelessness and need for years, have a slight spark of hope rising like a Phoenix.

   

IRL info: This digital SHIP was made in Bricklink’s Studio software from September 11th to September 30th, 2021. I did not originally plan to participate in SHIPtember, but I couldn’t resist. It is 184 studs (58.1 inches) long, 50 studs wide, and 48 studs high. It is comprised of 23,470 pieces, which I believe makes it my highest piece-count SHIP to date, and means that the model itself has a mass of 973.502 ounces, or 60.843 pounds, or 27.597 kilograms, which most likely makes it my heaviest SHIP as well as my most piece intensive. (I really need to learn to build a little more hollow.) Note that it uses all real pieces/colors that are available for sale on Bricklink. (Albeit at a price that makes attempting to build it in physical bricks highly impractical.) It is 100% connected, and should be at least somewhat stable in real life. I would want to reinforce the fore-end with more Technic, and switch out the longest Lego Technic axle holding the engine for an aftermarket stainless steel version. I cannot guarantee that various sections built out from the main SNOT and Technic frame would be totally stable without slight redesign of a few bits. It would also require a hefty display stand of some kind.

 

The current pictures are WIP to show the completed status of the build itself. Better renders done by importing the Studio build into Mecabricks, replacing any pieces that fail to load or change position, and then exporting to Blender for higher quality rendering, and finally hopefully doing some cool backgrounds with GIMP, will hopefully follow before whatever October picture deadline is decided on. Please do not use these early pictures in the poster if time remains, as I hope to provide better ones. Thank you for reading this lengthy description. Have a cookie.

 

If this ship had a theme song, this magnificent piece by Clamavi De Profundis would be it: youtu.be/Xm96Cqu4Ils