fall is my favorite time of year.

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

 

Some background:

Following the end of the Second World War, Poland was politically dominated by the neighboring Soviet Union; as a consequence, the Polish aviation industry underwent vast changes at the behest of the Soviets. While the nation's design offices had been liquidated, some former members had joined Poland's Aviation Institute (IL) and performed some limited work on various original projects, even though such efforts were initially officially discouraged. As such, it was at IL that the effort to design would become the first jet aircraft to be developed in Poland originated; however, during the late 1950s, responsibility for the design work on the program was transferred to aircraft manufacturer PZL-Mielec at an early stage in order that IL could resume its primary mission of scientific and technological research. Much of the design work on the program was produced in response to the specified needs of a requirement issued by the Polish Air Force for a capable jet-propelled trainer aircraft, which was seeking a replacement for the piston-engine PZL TS-8 Bies at the time.

 

Polish government officials came to openly regard the project as being of considerable importance to the nation's aviation industry, thus vigorous efforts were made to support the development of the TS-11. The main designer was Polish aeronautical engineer Tadeusz Sołtyk; his initials was the source for part of the type's official designation TS-11. Early on, it was decided to adopt a foreign-sourced turbojet engine to power the aircraft. Quickly, the British Armstrong Siddeley Viper had emerged as the company's favored option; however, reportedly, negotiations for its acquisition eventually broken down; accordingly, work on the project was delayed until a suitable domestically-built powerplant had reached an advanced stage of development.

 

On 5 February 1960, the first prototype conducted its maiden flight, powered by an imported Viper 8 engine, capable of producing up to 7.80 kN (1,750 lbf) of thrust. On 11 September 1960, the aircraft's existence was publicly revealed during an aerial display held over Lodz. The next pair of prototypes, which performed their first flights during March and July 1961 respectively, were instead powered by a Polish copy of the Viper engine, designated as the WSK HO-10. The flight test program that the three prototypes were subjected to had both demonstrated the capabilities of the new aircraft and its suitability for satisfying the Polish Air Force's stated requirements for a trainer jet; as such, it was soon accepted by the Polish Air Force.

 

During 1963, the first production model of the type, designated as the TS-11 Iskra (Spark) bis A, commenced delivery to the service. From about 1966, new-build aircraft were furnished with a newer Polish-designed turbojet engine, designated as the WSK SO-1, which was capable of producing up to 9.80 kN (2,200 lbf) of thrust and reportedly gave the TS-11 a top speed of 497 mph. From 1969 onwards, the improved WSK SO-3 engine became available, offering considerably longer times between overhauls; this engine was later improved into the WSK SO-3W, which was able to generate 10.80 kN (2,425 lbf) of thrust.

 

During the 1960s, the Iskra competed to be selected as the standard jet trainer for the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet Union had given Poland a promise to support its aviation industry and to favor the procurement of suitable aircraft for this purpose from Polish manufacturers. However, the Iskra was not selected for this role, it had lost out to the Czechoslovak Aero L-29 “Delfín”, another newly-designed jet-propelled trainer aircraft. Largely as a result of this decision, Poland became the only Warsaw Pact member to adopt the Iskra while most others adopting the rival Delfin instead, and foreign sales to other countries were highly limited.

 

During 1975, an initial batch of 50 Iskra bis D trainer aircraft were exported to India, and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited acquired license production rights for the aircraft, which became domestically known as the HAL HJT-18 "Dawon". Beyond the basic trainer variant Dawon T.1, India also adapted projected versions of the TS-11 that had never gone into production in Poland, e. g. the Iskra BR 200, locally known as the Dawon GR.2.

 

This variant was a single-seated light attack and reconnaissance aircraft, which used the two-seater airframe but had the rear cockpit faired over. In order to expand the type's performance and ordnance, HAL improved the original design and mounted a more powerful Rolls Royce Viper turbojet with an increased airflow. Wingtip tanks were added, improving range and loiter time, and the cockpit received kevlar armor against small caliber arms for low altitude operations. Instead of the trainer version's optional single 23mm cannon in the nose section the additional space through the empty instructor's seat was used for a pair of 30mm Aden cannon in the lower fuselage flanks and its ammunition, as well as for additional navigation and communication avionics.

 

The Indian Air Force procured 64 of these light aircraft from 1978 onwards, which partly replaced the outdated HAL HF-24 "Marut" fleet. These machines even saw hot combat action in 1984, when India launched Operation Meghdoot to capture the Siachen Glacier in the contested Kashmir region.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: One

Length: 11.15 m (36 ft 7 in)

Wingspan (incl. tip tanks): 11.01 m (36 ft 1 in)

Height: 3.50 m (11 ft 5½ in)

Wing area: 17.5 m² (188 ft²)

Empty weight: 2,760 kg (6,080 lb)

Loaded weight: 4,234 kg (9,325 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 4,540 kg (10,000 lb)

Powerplant:

1 × Rolls-Royce Viper turbojet, rated at 12.2 kN (2,700 lbf)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 760 km/h (419 knots, 472 mph) at 5,000 m (16,400 ft)

Cruise speed: 600 km/h (324 knots, 373 mph)

Stall speed: 140 km/h (92 knots, 106 mph) (power off, flaps down)

Range: 1,500 km (828 nmi, 931 mi)

Service ceiling: 12,000 m (39,300 ft)

Rate of climb: 16.8 m/s (3,300 ft/min)

 

Armament:

2x 30 mm Aden cannon with 120 RPG in the lower nose

4 underwing pylons, up to 1.200 kg (2.640 lb) of bombs, unguided rocket pods or gun packs

  

The kit and its assembly:

I have already butchered several of these former Intech kits from Poland, but never built one as an Iskra. Since the kit comes with optional parts to build the planned Iskra 200 BR single-seater, I gave the kit a try - and had the idea to create an "Indian Tiger" of it, as a part of a bigger plan for a future build project (see below).

 

Building the Mistercraft TS-11 is not a pleasant experience, though. The kit comes cheap, and that's what you get. While it comes with some nice features like an engine dummy, two optional canopies and ordnance loads, the whole thing tends to be crude. There's flash, gaps, a surface finish that partly looks as if the molds had been sand-blasted, mediocre if not poor fit, and the clear parts do not deserve this description – they are utterly streaky. You can certainly make something out of it with lots of effort, but it's IMHO not a good basis for an ambitious build.

 

The biggest issue I had were the parts for the single seat cockpit. There are no locator pins, and when you manage to put the canopy onto the fuselage there remains a considerable hole in the spine where the two-seater canopy would be attached. As a result, lots of PSR was necessary around the optional parts. I also scratched a rear bulkhead for the cockpit (which normally would remain empty and “open”) and added some equipment/boxes behind the pilot's seat. Messy affair.

 

Even though I’d have loved to replace the main wheels (the OOB parts had sinkholes and poorly molded details) I stuck with them because of the complicated cover arrangement, trying to cover the worst flaws under other parts. The jet exhaust was replaced, too, since I saved the engine dummy for the spares box.

 

On the wing tips, the tips were slightly trimmed and I added tanks from an 1:144 Tornado (Dragon) - a small detail that lets the Iskra appear a bit beafier than it actually is. For the same reason I omitted the single cannon in the nose with its characteristic bump, and replaced it with two guns: leftover parts from KP MiG-19 kits, plus a pair of differently shaped, smaller fairings alongside the lower flanks.

 

The ordnance comes from the scrap box, since I wanted a little more muscle than the OOB options. I went for a pair of unguided missile launchers (from a Kangnam Yak-38) and a pair of Soviet iron bombs (KP Su-25).

  

Painting and markings:

Well, the real motivation behind this build is that I used this kit as a proof-of-concept test for a planned build of the Indian Air Force's famous MiG-21 "C 992" of No. 1 Squadron that bore a striking tiger stripe scheme – but, unfortunately, there's no conclusive color picture of the aircraft, and painting suggestions remain contradictive, if not speculative. Some profiles show the aircraft with a grey of silver fuselage underside, while some have the tiger stripes wrapped around the fuselage, or not. Some have the upper camouflage wrapped around the whole fuselage, so that only the wings’ undersides remain in a light color. Some sources also claim that no darker, basic tone had been applied at all to the upper sides, and that the stripes had been directly painted on the bare aluminum surface of the Fishbed.

The worst, color-wise thing I found for this specific aircraft were in the painting instructions of the Fujimi kit: opaque FS 34227 as basic color seems to be totally off to me... But you also find suggestions of a yellowish sand tone, mid-stone, even some greenish slate grey, whatever. Fascinating subject!

 

From what I learned about the aircraft from various sources, the scheme looks like a kind of translucent/thin layer of olive drab/greenish earth or khaki tone over bare metal on all upper surfaces and wrapped around the fuselage – very light, if there was any paint at all. Alternatively, the bare metal must have been very weathered and dull, since pictures of C992 reveal no metallic shine at all.

 

On top of that, the tiger stripes (most probably in black, but there are suggestions of dark brown or green, too…) were applied manually, apparently by at least three painters who were probably working at the same time on different sections of the Indian Fishbed. Since I have the build of this aircraft on my agenda, some day, and a plan to re-create the special paint finish, this Iskra single seater was used as a test bed.

 

External painting started with an overall coat of acrylic aluminum (Revell 99), with some panels on the wings in grey (a protective lacquer, frequently applied on real-life Iskras). Then came a coat of highly thinned FS 34087 (Olive Drab) from Modelmaster, mixed with a little of Humbrol 72 (Khaki Drill) and applied with a soft, flat brush, leaving out areas where later the decals would be placed.

 

Once dry, the camouflaged areas received a wet sanding treatment, so that the edges would become bare metal again, and, here and there, the impression of flaked/worn paint was created.

 

Next came the tiger stripes. I somewhat wanted to create the three-different-painters look of C992, and so I not only used three different brushes for this task, I also used three different shades of black (acrylic “Flat Black”, "Tar Black" and “Anthracite” from Revell). Again, once dry, light sanding created a flaked/worn look.

 

The wings' undersides were left in aluminum, as well as the fuselage. This differs from the C992 benchmark, but I found the Iskra’s low stance to be more conclusive with an all NMF underside.

 

Cockpit and landing gear interior became medium grey (FS 36231). In a wake of Soviet-ism I painted the wheel discs in bright green, as a small color contrast to the otherwise rather murky aircraft.

 

The markings are a mix of IAF roundels for an early MiG-21 from a Begemot sheet, while the tactical code was taken from the Mistercraft OOB sheet. The yellow 10 Squadron badge was created with PC software and printed on white decal sheet – another, nice color highlight.

  

It looks harmless, but building the Mistercraft Iskra was a real PITA - now I know why I formerly only butchered this kit for donor parts... However, with the little modifications I made and some different ordnance the light aircraft sells its "attack/recce" role well, and the tiger livery looks pretty unique and ...Indian. And, once more, the beauty pics reveal that this paint scheme, while looking primarily decorative, is actually quite effective over typical northern Indian landscapes. C 992 can come! :D

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

General characteristics:

Crew: one

Length: 11.67 m (38 ft 3.5 in)

Wingspan: 9.01 m (29 ft 6.5 in)

Height: 4.43 m (14 ft 6.3 in)

Wing area: 18.13 m² (195.149 ft²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thrust/weight: 0.47 at maximum loading

 

Armament:

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

  

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

+++ 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?

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

General characteristics:

Crew: one

Length: 11.67 m (38 ft 3.5 in)

Wingspan: 9.01 m (29 ft 6.5 in)

Height: 4.43 m (14 ft 6.3 in)

Wing area: 18.13 m² (195.149 ft²)

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

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

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

 

Powerplant:

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

 

Performance:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thrust/weight: 0.47 at maximum loading

 

Armament:

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

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

  

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

 

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

 

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

  

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

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armoured divisions, had become increasingly urgent for the German Armed Forces, as from 1943 on the German Air Force was less and less able to protect itself against enemy fighter bombers.

Therefore, a multitude of improvised and specially designed self-propelled anti-aircraft guns were built, many based on the Panzer IV chassis. This development started with the Flakpanzer IV “Möbelwagen”, which was only a Kampfpanzer IV with the turret removed and a 20mm Flakvierling installed instead, together with foldable side walls that offered only poor protection for the gun crew. The lineage then progressed through the Wirbelwind and Ostwind models, which had their weapons and the crew protected in fully rotating turrets, but these were still open at the top. This flaw was to be eliminated in the Kugelblitz, the final development of the Flakpanzer IV.

 

The Kugelblitz used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement. The MK 103 was a powerful aircraft weapon that had formerly been fitted in single mounts to such planes as the Henschel Hs 129 or Bf 1110 in a ventral gun pod against tanks, and it was also fitted to the twin-engine Dornier Do 335 heavy fighter and other interceptors against Allied bombers. When used by the army, it received the designation “3 cm Flak 38”. It had a weight of only 141 kg (311 lb) and a length of 235 cm (93 in) with muzzle brake. Barrel length was 134 cm (53 in), resulting in caliber L/44.7 (44.7 caliber). The weapon’s muzzle velocity was around 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s), allowing an armour penetration for APCR 42–52 mm (1.7–2.0 in)/60°/300 m (980 ft) or 75–95 mm (3.0–3.7 in)/ 90°/ 300 m (980 ft), with an effective maximum firing range of around 5.700 m (18.670 ft). The MK 103 was gas-operated, fully automatic and belt-fed, an innovative feature at that time for AA guns.

In the fully enclosed Kugelblitz turret the weapons could be fired singly or simultaneously, and their theoretical rate of fire was 450 rounds a minute, even though 250 rpm in short bursts was more practical. The total ammunition load for both weapons was 1,200 rounds and the discharged cases fell into canvas bags placed under the guns. The MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, so that fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

The Kugelblitz turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body was hanging in a ring mount, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s top and kept the profile very low. The turret offered full overhead protection, 360° traverse and space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition – even though it was very cramped. Elevation of the weapons (as well as of the crew sitting inside of the turret!) was from -5° to +80°, turning speed was 60°/sec.

The commander/gunner, who had a small observation cupola on top of the turret, was positioned in the middle, behind the main guns. The two gunner assistants were placed on the left and right side in front of him, in a slightly lower position. The assistant situated left of the guns was responsible for the turret’s movements, the one on the right side was responsible for loading the guns, and the spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors..

 

However, the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz SPAAG was ill-fated: A production rate of 30 per month by December 1944 was planned, but never achieved, because tank production had become seriously hampered and production of the Panzer IV was about to be terminated in favor of the new E-series tank family. Therefore, almost all Flakpanzer IV with the Kugelblitz turret were conversions of existing hulls, mostly coming from repair shops.

In parallel, work was under way to adapt the Kugelblitz turret to the Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer hull, too, which was still in production in the former Czechoslovakian Skoda works, and to the new, light E-10 and E-25 tank chassis. Due to this transitional and slightly chaotic situation, production numbers of the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz remained limited - in early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production already ceased in May.

 

By that time, the Kugelblitz turret had been successfully adapted to the Hetzer chassis, even though this had called for major adaptations of the upper hull due to the relatively wide turret ring, which originally came from the Tiger I. The conversion worked and the unique turret could be successfully shoehorned into the Hetzer basis, making it a very compact and relatively light vehicle – it was 5 tons lighter than the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz” SPAAG.

In order to carry the turret, the welded upper hull had to be widened and the glacis plate was reinforced with an extra plate, which also covered the Hetzer’s original opening for its 75 mm gun. The resulting 60 mm (2.36 in) thick front plate was inclined 60 degrees from the vertical, and therefore offered around 120 mm (4.72 in) of effective protection – much better than the Panzer IV’s almost vertical 50 mm (or 80 mm with additional armor on late versions). In this form, the vehicle could withstand direct frontal hits from most medium Allied tanks. The side walls were rather thin, though, only 20 mm, and they became more vertical to make room for the turret mount. The engine cover behind the turret had to be modified, too. Due to the massive changes, the vehicle received a new, separate designation, “Sonderkraftfahrzeug (Sd.Kfz.) 170” and it was officially called “Leichter Flakpanzer 38(t) 3 cm“.

 

However, there were many drawbacks. The interior was cramped: the self-contained Kugelblitz turret itself already lacked internal space, but the driver – the only crew member in the hull – also had little space in front of the turret’s mount and he could only access his working place through an opening in the turret at the commander’s feet when it was in a level forward position. There was no dedicated hatch for the driver, only an emergency escape scuttle in the floor.

Another issue was the field of view from inside for everyone. As already mentioned, the driver did not have a hatch that could be used for a good view when not driving under fire. He also only had a single panoramic sight, so that he could just see what was going on directly in front of him. There were no side view openings, and especially the right side of the vehicle was literally blind. The crew in the turret also could only rely on forward-facing sights, just the commander had a rotating periscope. But due to its position, the areas directly along the vehicle’s flanks and its rear remained wide blind areas that made it very vulnerable to infantry attacks. This flaw was even worsened by the fact that there were no additional light weapons available (or even deployable from the inside) for close range defense – the Panzer IV-based SPAAGs carried a hull-mounted machine gun. And the crew had, due to the open weapon stations a much better field of view or could directly use their own light weapons.

 

With the turret’s additional weight (the Sd.Kfz. 170 was 3 tons heavier than the Hetzer), and despite a slightly uprated petrol engine, the tank was rather underpowered, especially off road. Another negative side effect of the turret was a considerably raised center of gravity. The original Hetzer was a nimble vehicle with good handling, but the Sd.Kfz. 170 was hard to control, tended to build up and roll even on the road and its off-road capabilities were markedly hampered by the concentration of weight so high above the ground, making it prone to tip over to the side when the driver did not take care of terrain slope angles. This wobbly handling, as well as the turret’s shape, gave the vehicle the unofficial nickname “Kugelhetzer”.

 

Nevertheless, all these flaws were accepted, since the Sd.Kfz. 170. was, like its Panzer IV-based predecessors, urgently needed and only regarded as an interim solution until a light E-Series chassis had been adapted to the turret. It was also surmised that the vehicle would not operate independently and rather escort other troops, so that close-range protection was in most cases ensured. Under this premise, about 100 Sd.Kfz. 170s were built until early 1946, when production of the Hetzer and its components were stopped. Operationally, the vehicle was not popular (esp. among drivers), but it was quite successful, not only against aircraft (esp. when used in conjunction with the new mobile radar-based fire direction centers), but also against lightly armored ground targets.

Plans to stretch the hull for more internal space, better field performance and crew comfort as well as replacing the engine with a bigger and more powerful 8 cylinder Tatra engine were never executed, since all resources were allocated to the new E-series tanks.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Four (commander/gunner, 2 assistants incl. radio operator, driver)

Weight: 18 tons (22.000 lb)

Length: 4.61 m (15 ft 1 in)

Width: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Height: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Ground clearance: 40 cm (15 ¾ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 320 litres (85 US gal)

 

Armor:

10 – 60 mm (0.39 – 2.36 in)

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 42 km/h (26 mph)

Sustained road speed: 36 km/h (22.3 mph)

Off-road speed: 26 km/h (16 mph)

Operational range: 177 km (110 mi)

Power/weight: 10 PS/t

 

Engine:

Praga 6-cylinder 7.8 liter petrol engine, delivering 180 PS (178 hp, 130 kW) at 2,800 rpm

 

Transmission:

Praga-Wilson Typ CV with 5 forwards and 1 reverse gears

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds

  

The kit and its assembly:

The so-called “Kugelhetzer” was a real German project in late WWII, but it was rather a vague idea, it never it made to the hardware stage. Even from its predecessor, the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz”, only five tanks were actually built. However, I found the idea interesting, since the combination of existing elements would lead to a very compact SPAAG. And since I had a spare Kugelblitz turret from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” SF mecha kits at hand, I decided to build a model of this conceptual tank.

 

The chassis is a Bergepanzer 38(t), a.k.a. “Bergehetzer”, from UM Models, an unarmed recovery tank based on the Hetzer hull with an open top. For my conversion plan it offered the benefit of a blank glacis plate and lots of spare parts for future builds. However, upon inspection of the parts-not-intended-to-be-mated I became slightly disillusioned: while the Hetzer’s upper original hull offers enough room for the ball turret itself to be inserted into the roof, it could NEVER take the turret bearing and the armored collar ring around it. They already are hard to mount on a Panzer IV hull, but the Hetzer is an even smaller vehicle, despite its casemate layout. I was about to shelf the project again, but then decided to modify and adapt the upper hull to the turret. In real life the engineers would have taken a similar route.

 

I started to scratch the superstructure from 0.5mm styrene sheet, and work started with the roof that had to be wide enough to carry the turret ring. This was glued into place on top of the hull, and from this benchmark the rest of the “armor plates” was added – starting with the engine bay cover, then adding side walls and finally the more complex corner sections, which actually consist of two triangular plates, but only one of them was actually fitted. The leftover openings were filled with acrylic putty, also in order to fill and stabilize the void between the original hull and the added plates. Later, the necessary space for the ball turret was carved away from the original hull, so that the Kugelblitz turret could be inserted in its new opening. Sounds complicated, but the construction was less complicated than expected, and it looked even better!

 

Once mated with the lower chassis, some details had to be added to the blank surfaces – e. g. racks with spare barrels for the guns and some tools and stowage boxes. These were taken from the Bergehetzer kit and partly modified to match the different hull.

What really became a challenge was the assembly of the tracks upon the model’s completion. Unfortunately, they consist of single elements and even links that have to be glued to the wheels, and since they were not crisply molded (just like the sprocket drive wheels) their installation was a rather tedious affair.

  

Painting and markings:

This is another variation of the “Hinterhalt” concept, using the three basic tones of Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). In this case – as an autumn scheme with fading light and more red and brown leaves - I used a late-war Panther as reference and gave the vehicle a rather dark basic livery consisting of green and the brown, and on top of that I added counter-colored (green on brown and brown on green) mottles, plus contrast mottles in Dunkelgelb. The tones I used were Humbrol 83, 86 and 113 - the latter is not the standard tone for the Hinterhalt scheme (180 would be appropriate), but it comes close to the typical German red Oxidrot (RAL 3009) primer, which was not only used on bare tank hulls during production but was also integrated into camouflage schemes, frequently stretched and lightened through additives. Effectively the livery is very standard, and since this Kugelhetzer model would depict a standard production vehicle and not a conversion, I extended the camouflage to the turret, too, for a consistent look.

The wheels remained in a single color (just the basic red brown and green), since camouflage was prohibited to be extended onto moving parts of the vehicle: a swirling pattern would have been very obvious and eye-catching when the vehicle was on the move.

 

A washing with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint followed. The decals – mostly taken from the small OOB sheet – came next, and I settled upon simplified national markings and just white outlines for the tactical code, due to the rather murky camouflage underneath.

The model’s main components were sealed with matt acrylic varnish from the rattle can before their final assembly, and I did some dry-brushing with light grey to emphasize details and edges. Finally, a coat of pigment dust was applied to the model’s lower areas and used to hide some flaws along the fiddly tracks.

  

A conclusive outcome, and a more complex build than obvious at first sight. The re-built upper hull was easier to realize than expected, the true horror came with the assembly of the tracks which consist of tiny, not really crisply molded elements. Why the return track section has to be constructed of five(!) segments - even though it's a straight line - is beyond my comprehension, too.

However, the outcome looks quite good, even though the use of the original Hetzer hull would have created several problems, if the original Kugelblitz turret had had to be integrated. Esp. the lack of space for the driver (and a suitable access hatch!) make this design idea rather unpractical, so that a stretched hull (AFAIK there’s a model of such a modified vehicle available) would have made sense.

The F-105 was designed as a supersonic, single-seat, fighter-bomber capable of carrying nuclear weapons or heavy bomb loads at supersonic speeds. The F-105D variant was an all-weather fighter-bomber version, fitted with mono-pulse and Doppler radar for night or bad weather operations. The original weapons bay, designed for nuclear stores, was sealed and fitted with additional fuel tanks. Bombs were carried on multiple weapons racks on the centerline of the fuselage, and on wing pylons. The aircraft was fitted with a retractable in-flight refueling probe. The first F-105D flew on 9 June 1959 and 610 F-105Ds were eventually built.

  

This aircraft has served in several F-105 units around the world and is restored to its 1967 Vietnam-era 388th Tactical Fighter Wing, 421st Tactical Fighter Squadron camouflage as it flew during its assignment to Korat RTAB, Thailand. This jet also was briefly assigned to the 355 TFW located at Takhli RTAB in 1968. After this "Thud" finished its combat tour-which certainly included missions supporting Operation "Rolling Thunder," "Steel Tiger," and "Barrel Roll"-it returned stateside and began more than a decade assigned to the District of Columbia Air National Guard and was transferred to the Air and Space Museum in late 1981.

The Nikon COOLPIX S9700 is a compact travel zoom with a 30x optical zoom lens, a 16 Megapixel CMOS sensor and a 3 inch OLED screen with a 921k dot resolution. The COOLPIX S9600, launched at the same time, has a shorter 22x zoom, a lower resolution screen, lacks the built-in GPS and of course is priced a little lower.

 

Both models support fully manual exposure control with PASM modes selected from a conventional mode dial alongside a fully auto point-and-shoot mode and feature scene detection and composite stacking modes for HDR and low noise shooting.

 

The COOLPIX S9700 has built in GPS as well as Wifi, a popular combination in a travel zoom. Add in full resolution burst shooting at 6.9 fps, a wide range of movie modes including 1080p full HD and a choice of slow motion settings, and you’ve got a very capable sounding travel zoom which ticks all the boxes at a competitive price. To find out if the real-life performance lives up to its promise, I tested the COOLPIX S9700 alongside Canon’s PowerShot SX700 HS. Both models were launched during 2014 and updated in early 2015 to the S9900 and SX710 HS respectively. During the transition from one version to the other, bargains can often be found, so I thought it would be interesting to see how these pair of potentially discounted cameras compared. So read on to find out which of these two is the best bet for those looking for a powerful zoom in a compact form factor at a competitive price.

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 design and controls

In terms of size and weight, most of the popular recent compact super-zooms are very closely matched and the COOLPIX S9700 is no exception. It measures 109.6×63.5×34.5mm and weighs 232g including battery and card. Generally, if you want a smaller body you’re going to have to sacrifice zoom range and if you want a longer zoom you’ll be looking at bigger, heavier models. The COOLPIX S9700 will fit in your jacket or coat pocket.

 

With dimensions of 113x66x34.8mm the Canon PowerShot SX700 HS is a tiny bit taller and wider, but I reckon Canon and Nikon must be doing their measuring differently because back-to-back on the desk in front of me I can’t see a significant difference. At 269g with battery and card fitted the SX700 HS is a little heavier though. The Panasonic Lumix TZ60 / ZS40 is pretty much identical at 111x64x34.4mm and 240g and the same almost goes for the Sony Cyber-shot HX50V / HX60V, at 108x64x38.3mm it’s a fair bit thicker giving it a much chunkier appearance.

 

The plastic body is finished in gloss paint and is available in black, red or white. It feels sturdy enough and all the doors and flaps fit nicely, with the exception of the pop-up flash, which sits a little proud of its recess in the top panel. Opposite, on the other side of the slight hump that houses the Wifi aerial, there’s a recessed on/off button, shutter release with zoom collar and the mode dial which is set into the top panel with an exposed rear section that can be operated with your thumb.

  

On the rear panel the control layout is much the same as on the earlier COOLPIX S9500 with a slightly larger thumb pad. The movie record button is a little lower but still conveniently positioned for thumb operation and the multi-selector wheel below it is used for menu navigation as well as one-touch access to flash, exposure compensation, focus and self-timer settings. There’s also a new button that displays a map view, showing either your current location or the location of reviewed images.

 

The COOLPIX S9700 has a fixed 3 inch OLED screen with 921k dot resolution. There’s no question that this is a good quality screen, the image is highly detailed and very stable. The colour looks accurate (though obviously this doesn’t affect image quality) and the image is nice and contrasty, making it easy to see in all but direct sunlight. The OLED screen also has a wide angle of view, so you can still see pretty well even with the camera held at high and low angles.

 

The PowerShot SX700 HS has a 3 inch LCD screen with the same resolution as the COOLPIX S9700’s and there really isn’t much to choose between them. Like the COOLPIX S9700, the S700 HS display is bright, punchy and detailed. Note the more recent COOLPIX S9900, updates the S9700 with a fully articulated screen, a unique feature among its peer group. As for the latest Canon SX710 HS, the screen is the same as its predecessor.

  

On the right side of the S9700’s body there are two small doors above and below the central wrist strap fitting. The lower one is a mini HDMI port for connection to an HD TV with an optional cable. The upper one is a USB port that is used to charge the camera as well as for transferring photos and video from the card or the built-in memory. You can charge the camera via this port using either the supplied mains charger, or by plugging it into a notebook or other suitable power source. Personally, I think this is a more versatile and useful approach than that used by the PowerShot SX700 HS where the battery has to be removed and placed in an external charger. Having said that the latter method means you can still use the camera while the battery is charging if you have a spare.

 

The COOLPIX S9700’s EN-EL12 battery provides enough power on a full charge for 300 shots – 50 more than the PowerShot SX700 HS. But if you’re prepared to have the SX700 HS dim the screen after a couple of seconds and switch off after 3 minutes, Eco mode will extend the battery life to 360 shots.

 

The COOLPIX S9700 has a built-in flash that automatically pops up when required. There are four modes selected from a menu which appears when you press the top position on the the Multi selector wheel – Off, Red-eye reduction, Standard and Slow sync. The quoted range is 6 metres at the lens wide angle setting, on the face of it more powerful than the PowerShot SX700 HS, but I suspect the figure for the COOLPIX S9700 is quoted at a higher ISO. Neither the COOLPIX S9700 nor the PowerShot SX700 IS has a hotshoe, but the SX700 HS is compatible with Canon’s HF-DC2 external flash.

 

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 lens and stabilisation

The COOLPIX S9700’s 30x optical zoom has the same 25-750mm equivalent range as the PowerShot SX700 HS, but its f3.7 – 6.4 aperture isn’t quite as bright at the wide angle end of the range as the latter’s f3.2 – 6.9. The compensation is that it’s a little brighter at the telephoto end of the range. Note the latest versions of both cameras share the same lenses as their predecessors.

 

The 25-750mm equivalent range is impressive in a compact this size, and while there are other 30x compact zooms, the Lumix TZ60 / ZS40 and the Sony HX50V / HX60V being two examples, both of those models start at a slightly wider 24mm wide angle and fall short of the COOLPIX S9700’s telephoto reach by 30mm – so that’s a 24-720mm range compared with 25-750. In practice the difference is barely noticeable, but if you’re stuck in a tight corner, the fractionally wider Sony and Panasonic may be more useful. That said, there’s always the COOLPIX S9700’s Easy panorama mode for really wide views, something the PowerShot SX700 HS lacks. Redressing the balance, the SX700 HS Framing assist button helps you keep track of subjects when zoomed in, something that’s not quite so easy on the COOLPIX S9700.

 

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 coverage wide

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 coverage tele

  

4.5-135mm at 4mm (25mm equiv)4.5-135mm at 135mm (750mm equiv)

The COOLPIX S9700 has optical image stabilisation which Nikon calls Vibration Reduction or VR. Vibration reduction is set separately for stills and movie shooting with Photo VR activated from the Setup menu. In addition to the On and Off positions there’s a third option called Hybrid. This combines the optical stabilisation with in-camera post processing to digitally remove any blurring that remains. The digital correction is applied only under certain conditions, including when the shutter speed is slower than 1/30 at the wide angle setting or 1/250 at the telephoto focal length and when the sensitivity is 200 ISO or lower.

 

In addition to Vibration Reduction, Motion detection automatically raises the ISO sensitivity to enable selection of a faster shutter speed when either subject movement is detected or there’s a risk of camera shake. It’s quite a useful feature for beginners, who might be unaware of the consequences of shooting at slow shutter speeds, but it can be turned off and manual selection of the ISO sensitivity also disables it.

 

To test the COOLPIX S9700’s stabilisation I set it to Shutter priority exposure mode, zoomed the lens to its maximum 750mm equivalent telephoto setting and took a series of shots at progressively slower shutter speeds, first with Photo VR turned off and then with it on. As you can see from the crops below, the COOLPIX S9700 can produce blur-free shots down to 1/50 at the maximum zoom range, I managed the occasional sharp shot at 1/25 but for consistency 1/50 is the limit, at around four stops slower than the photographer’s ‘one over the focal length’ dictum suggests is safe, that’s pretty impressive by any standards.

 

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 Vibration Reduction

 

100% crop, 4.5-135mm at 135mm, 125 ISO, 1/50th VR off.

  

100% crop, 4.5-135mm at 135mm, 125 ISO, 1/50th VR on.

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 shooting modes

Compared with the PowerShot SX700 HS, the COOLPIX S9700’s mode dial is relatively uncomplicated with positions for PASM modes, Auto, Scene, Effects and a smiley face icon indicating Smart portrait mode. Program Auto sets the aperture and shutter speed automatically, Aperture Priority lets you set the aperture and the shutter speed is set automatically, Shutter priority is the other way around and in Manual mode you set both the aperture and shutter speed. If this is new territory for you, the COOLPIX S9700 is the ideal camera to learn about these manual and semi-auto modes in practice.

 

In the meantime, The green camera icon on the mode dial puts the COOLPIX S9700 into Auto mode. The difference between this and Program Auto is that there’s less for you to do. You can change the image size and quality from the shooting menu and adjust exposure compensation, but you can’t shift the exposure (adjust the aperture and shutter speed whilst maintaining the same exposure value), adjust the ISO sensitivity, white balance or any of the other options available from the Shooting menu in Program auto mode.

 

Switch the mode dial to the Scene position and the menu offers 18 scene modes including all the usual suspects from Portrait to Party via Landscape, Sports, Beach, Fireworks show, and Backlighting. There are two panorama modes for shooting 180 and 360 views. You press the shutter once and pan the camera as smoothly a you can. You can pan with the camera in portrait or landscape orientation – the COOLPIX S9700 works out which, you don’t need to tell it beforehand. Portrait mode produces the largest images which are 1536 x 4800 pixels for 180 panoramas and the 360 ones measure 1536 x 9600.

 

While it isn’t one of the best HDR modes around, the COOLPIX S9700 features Nikon’s Backlighting scene mode. HDR mode fires a fast burst of bracketed shots and produces a composite HDR image from them. The COOLPIX S9700 also includes a selection of 11 special effects filters – Soft focus, Pop, Super vivid, Cross process, two toy camera effects , Nostalgic Sepia, High-contrast monochrome, High key, Low key and Selective colour. Other than selecting the colour from an on-screen palette for the Selective colour effect and choosing one of four cross process colours, none of them is customizable. All can be used for movies but note there’s no Miniature effect like on the SX700 HS. Below you can see Nostalgic sepia, High-contrast monochrome, Selective colour, Pop, Cross process, and Toy camera effect 2 .

  

The shooting menu also offers something called Quick effects. With this activated you can apply effects filters to a shot just after you’ve taken it. Effects include Pop, Super vivid, Painting, Photo illustration, High key, Toy camera effect, Cross process, fish-eye, miniature and selective colour. To apply the effect you press the OK button in the centre of the Multi selector while the image preview is on the screen, but in fact you can apply the effects an any time by pressing the OK button when previewing images in playback mode. The filtered version is saved along with the original. Quick effects can’t be applied to movies, so, alas, no miniature effect for movie clips.

 

Finally, Smart Portrait mode automatically takes a shot when it spots a smile in the frame. It doesn’t offer the wink and face self-timer functions of the SX700 HS, but you can apply a skin softening filter, shoot in continuous or BSS modes and set blink detection.

   

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 movie modes

The COOLPIX S9700 has a best quality HD movie mode of 1080p25 which is encoded at an average bit rate of around 17Mbps. All of the video modes are available in PAL and NTSC compatible frame rates (i.e. 25/30 and 50/60fps) depending on the frame rate setting in the Movie menu, from here on I’ll use the PAL specifications. Next on the menu is an interlaced 1080i50 mode, followed by 720p25. That’s followed by a another 720p mode saved in Apple’s edit-friendly iFrame format, and lastly a VGA mode that records 640×480 resolution video at 25fps (or 30fps for NTSC video mode).

 

That’s just the normal speed modes; the COOLPIX S9700 also has several HS options for playback at speeds other than real time. HS480/4x shoots 640×480 video at 4x normal speed (100 or 120fps depending on whether you have PAL or NTSC video mode selected) which plays back at quarter speed. HS720/2x records 1280×720 at double the normal frame rate for half speed playback, and finally 1080/0.5x records full HD video at half the normal frame rate for double-speed playback.

 

Audio isn’t recorded with the HS video modes but I was pleasantly surprised to discover that you can use the effects filters. The only limitation on this is that the Soft and Nostalgic sepia effects are only available with the HS720/2x mode. I should also mention that you can’t use the use zoom or Full-time AF with the HS modes. That said, although they’re fairly even matched in terms of video modes, the PowerShot SX700 HS only offers low resolution VGA (640×480) and QVGA (320x 240) modes at 1/4 and 1/8 speed playback respectively.

 

The COOLPIX S9700 doesn’t have a movie position on the mode dial, so recording is started by pressing the dedicated record button whatever mode you’re in. One of the drawbacks of this approach is that you can’t frame up your shot very easily as the screen switches from 4:3 proportions to 16:9 (assuming you’re shooting in one of the HD modes). The PowerShot SX700 HS mode dial movie position makes this much easier, but the COOLPIX S9700 does at least have a display mode that superimposes the 16:9 area on the 4:3 screen for you.

 

The COOLPIX S9700 provides two autofocus modes for movie shooting, Single AF (AF-S), which sets the focus at the beginning of your clip and Full time AF (AF-F) which continually adjusts it. AF-S is the default, but if you want to record anything that’s moving, or if you’re panning the camera from near to far subjects, you need to switch to Full-time AF. The COOLPIX S9700’s full-time AF mode works very well. The only thing that taxed it was zooming, as you can see from my coffee cup test below it copes well, keeping focus on the subject even in low light conditions.

 

The COOLPIX S9700 doesn’t support any of the PASM exposure modes for movie shooting, regardless of the position of the mode dial and ISO, the sensitivity and exposure are set automatically. In that respect it’s the same as the PowerShot SX700 HS.

 

Nikon COOLPIX S9700 sample video 1: outdoors, sunny, handheld pan

 

Download the original file (Registered members of Vimeo only)

Except for the final slow motion example all these clips were recorded in the COOLPIX S9700’s 1080p25 mode with the focus set to the continuous AF-F mode. Here the COOLPIX S9700 handles the exposure well and produces good quality footage. The stabilisation does a good job during the pan, but the full extent of the zoom – 750mm equivalent keeping the frame steady is a lot to ask and there’s a bit of jumpiness.

  

Tech Specs

 

Effective Pixels (Megapixels)

 

16.0 million

 

Sensor Size

 

1/ 2.3 in.

 

Monitor Size

 

3.0 in. diagonal

Monitor Type

 

OLED with Anti-reflection coating

5-level brightness adjustment

 

Storage Media

 

SD memory card

SDHC memory card

SDXC memory card

 

Movie

 

Full HD: 1920x1080/ 60i

Full HD: 1920x1080/ 50i

Full HD: 1920x1080/ 30p

Full HD: 1920x1080/ 25p

HD: 1280x720/ 30p

HD: 1280x720/ 25p

HS 1920x1080/ 15p

HS 1920x1080/ 12.5p

HS 1280x720/ 60p

HS 1280x720/ 50p

HS 320x240/ 240p

HS 640x480/ 120p

iFrame 720/ 30p

iFrame 720/ 25p

VGA 640x480/ 30p

VGA 640x480/ 25p

 

ISO Sensitivity

 

ISO 125 - 1600

 

ISO 3200, 6400 (available when using P, S, A or M mode)

 

Battery / Batteries

 

Rechargeable Li-ion Battery EN-EL12

 

Approx. Dimensions (Width x Height x Depth)

 

4.3 in. (109.6 mm) x 2.5 in. (63.5 mm) x 1.4 in. (34.5 mm)

 

The Tiger is capable of carrying a variety of different weapon-systems, such as SNEB unguided rockets, PARS or BrimstonerRockets and Stingers.

 

Earlier variants of the Tiger also carried 20mm guns in pods on external hardpoints, but with the chin-mounted cannon, they are usually never carried.

The Hoopoe is a medium sized bird, 25–32 cm (9.8-12.6 in) long, with a 44–48 cm (17.3-19 in) wingspan weighing 46-89 g (1.6-3.1 oz). The species is highly distinctive, with a long, thin tapering bill that is black with a fawn base. The strengthened musculature of the head allows the bill to be opened when probing inside the soil. The hoopoe has broad and rounded wings capable of strong flight; these are larger in the northern migratory subspecies. The Hoopoe has a characteristic undulating flight, which is like that of a giant butterfly, caused by the wings half closing at the end of each beat or short sequence of beats.[6]

 

The song is a trisyllabic "oop-oop-oop", which gives rise to its English and scientific names.

  

[edit] Behaviour

In what was long thought to be a defensive posture, Hoopoes sunbathe by spreading out their wings and tail low against the ground and tilting their head up; they often fold their wings and preen halfway through.[13] The Hoopoe also enjoys taking dust and sand baths.[14]

  

[edit] Diet and feeding

The diet of the Hoopoe is mostly composed of insects, although small reptiles as well as some plant matter such as seeds and berries are sometimes taken as well. It is a solitary forager which typically feeds on the ground. More rarely they will feed in the air, in pursuit of numerous swarming insects, where their strong and rounded wings make them fast and manoeuvrable. More commonly their foraging style is to stride on relatively open ground and periodically pause to probe the ground with the full length of their bill. Insect larvae, pupae and mole crickets are detected by the bill and either extracted or dug out with the strong feet. In addition to feeding in soil Hoopoes will feed on insects on the surface, as well as probing into piles of leaves and even using the bill to lever large stones and flake off bark. Common diet items include crickets, locusts, beetles, earwigs, cicadas, ant lions, bugs and ants. These can range from 10 to 150 mm in length, with the preferred size of prey being around 20-30 mm. Larger prey items are beaten against the ground or a preferred stone in order to kill them and remove indigestible body parts such as wings and legs.[6]

  

[edit] Breeding

The Hoopoe is monogamous, although the pair bond apparently only lasts for a single season. They are also territorial, with the male calling frequently to advertise his ownership of the territory. Chases and fights between rival males (and sometimes females) are common and can be brutal.[6] Birds will try to stab rivals with their bills, and individuals are occasionally blinded in fights.[15] The nest is in a hole in a tree or wall, with a narrow entrance;[14] it may be unlined or various scraps may be collected.[11] The female alone is responsible for incubating the eggs. Clutch size varies with location, with northern hemisphere birds laying more eggs than those in the southern hemisphere and birds in higher latitudes having larger clutches than those closer to the equator. In central and northern Europe and Asia the clutch size is around 12, whereas it is between four in the tropics and seven in the subtropics. The eggs are round and milky blue on laying but quickly discolour in the increasingly dirty nest.[6] They weigh 4.5 grams.[13] A replacement clutch is possible.[11]

 

The Hoopes have well developed anti-predators defences in the nest. The uropygial gland of the incubating and brooding female is quickly modified to produce a foul-smelling liquid, and the glands of nestlings do so was well. These secretions are rubbed into the plumage. The secretion, which smells like rotting meat, is thought to help deter predators, as well as deter parasites and possibly act as an antibacterial agent.[16] The secretions stop soon before the young leave the nest.[13] In addition to this secretion nestlings are able to direct streams of faeces at nest intruders from the age of six days, and will also hiss at intruders in a snake like fashion.[6] The young also strike with their bill or with one wing.[13]

 

The incubation period for the species is between 15 and 18 days. During incubation the female is fed by the male. The incubation period begins as soon as the first egg is laid, so the chicks are born asynchronously. The chicks hatch with a covering of downy feathers, by around day days feather quills emerge which become adult feathers. The chicks are brooded by the female for between 9 to 14 days.[6] The female later joins the male in the task of bringing food.[14] The young leave the nest after approximately three and a half weeks; the parent still leads them for a week.[11]

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armoured divisions, had become increasingly urgent for the German Armed Forces, as from 1943 on the German Air Force was less and less able to protect itself against enemy fighter bombers.

Therefore, a multitude of improvised and specially designed self-propelled anti-aircraft guns were built, many based on the Panzer IV chassis. This development started with the Flakpanzer IV “Möbelwagen”, which was only a Kampfpanzer IV with the turret removed and a 20mm Flakvierling installed instead, together with foldable side walls that offered only poor protection for the gun crew. The lineage then progressed through the Wirbelwind and Ostwind models, which had their weapons and the crew protected in fully rotating turrets, but these were still open at the top. This flaw was to be eliminated in the Kugelblitz, the final development of the Flakpanzer IV.

 

The Kugelblitz used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement. The MK 103 was a powerful aircraft weapon that had formerly been fitted in single mounts to such planes as the Henschel Hs 129 or Bf 1110 in a ventral gun pod against tanks, and it was also fitted to the twin-engine Dornier Do 335 heavy fighter and other interceptors against Allied bombers. When used by the army, it received the designation “3 cm Flak 38”. It had a weight of only 141 kg (311 lb) and a length of 235 cm (93 in) with muzzle brake. Barrel length was 134 cm (53 in), resulting in caliber L/44.7 (44.7 caliber). The weapon’s muzzle velocity was around 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s), allowing an armour penetration for APCR 42–52 mm (1.7–2.0 in)/60°/300 m (980 ft) or 75–95 mm (3.0–3.7 in)/ 90°/ 300 m (980 ft), with an effective maximum firing range of around 5.700 m (18.670 ft). The MK 103 was gas-operated, fully automatic and belt-fed, an innovative feature at that time for AA guns.

In the fully enclosed Kugelblitz turret the weapons could be fired singly or simultaneously, and their theoretical rate of fire was 450 rounds a minute, even though 250 rpm in short bursts was more practical. The total ammunition load for both weapons was 1,200 rounds and the discharged cases fell into canvas bags placed under the guns. The MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, so that fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.

 

The Kugelblitz turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body was hanging in a ring mount, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s top and kept the profile very low. The turret offered full overhead protection, 360° traverse and space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition – even though it was very cramped. Elevation of the weapons (as well as of the crew sitting inside of the turret!) was from -5° to +80°, turning speed was 60°/sec.

The commander/gunner, who had a small observation cupola on top of the turret, was positioned in the middle, behind the main guns. The two gunner assistants were placed on the left and right side in front of him, in a slightly lower position. The assistant situated left of the guns was responsible for the turret’s movements, the one on the right side was responsible for loading the guns, and the spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors..

 

However, the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz SPAAG was ill-fated: A production rate of 30 per month by December 1944 was planned, but never achieved, because tank production had become seriously hampered and production of the Panzer IV was about to be terminated in favor of the new E-series tank family. Therefore, almost all Flakpanzer IV with the Kugelblitz turret were conversions of existing hulls, mostly coming from repair shops.

In parallel, work was under way to adapt the Kugelblitz turret to the Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer hull, too, which was still in production in the former Czechoslovakian Skoda works, and to the new, light E-10 and E-25 tank chassis. Due to this transitional and slightly chaotic situation, production numbers of the Panzer IV-based Kugelblitz remained limited - in early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production already ceased in May.

 

By that time, the Kugelblitz turret had been successfully adapted to the Hetzer chassis, even though this had called for major adaptations of the upper hull due to the relatively wide turret ring, which originally came from the Tiger I. The conversion worked and the unique turret could be successfully shoehorned into the Hetzer basis, making it a very compact and relatively light vehicle – it was 5 tons lighter than the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz” SPAAG.

In order to carry the turret, the welded upper hull had to be widened and the glacis plate was reinforced with an extra plate, which also covered the Hetzer’s original opening for its 75 mm gun. The resulting 60 mm (2.36 in) thick front plate was inclined 60 degrees from the vertical, and therefore offered around 120 mm (4.72 in) of effective protection – much better than the Panzer IV’s almost vertical 50 mm (or 80 mm with additional armor on late versions). In this form, the vehicle could withstand direct frontal hits from most medium Allied tanks. The side walls were rather thin, though, only 20 mm, and they became more vertical to make room for the turret mount. The engine cover behind the turret had to be modified, too. Due to the massive changes, the vehicle received a new, separate designation, “Sonderkraftfahrzeug (Sd.Kfz.) 170” and it was officially called “Leichter Flakpanzer 38(t) 3 cm“.

 

However, there were many drawbacks. The interior was cramped: the self-contained Kugelblitz turret itself already lacked internal space, but the driver – the only crew member in the hull – also had little space in front of the turret’s mount and he could only access his working place through an opening in the turret at the commander’s feet when it was in a level forward position. There was no dedicated hatch for the driver, only an emergency escape scuttle in the floor.

Another issue was the field of view from inside for everyone. As already mentioned, the driver did not have a hatch that could be used for a good view when not driving under fire. He also only had a single panoramic sight, so that he could just see what was going on directly in front of him. There were no side view openings, and especially the right side of the vehicle was literally blind. The crew in the turret also could only rely on forward-facing sights, just the commander had a rotating periscope. But due to its position, the areas directly along the vehicle’s flanks and its rear remained wide blind areas that made it very vulnerable to infantry attacks. This flaw was even worsened by the fact that there were no additional light weapons available (or even deployable from the inside) for close range defense – the Panzer IV-based SPAAGs carried a hull-mounted machine gun. And the crew had, due to the open weapon stations a much better field of view or could directly use their own light weapons.

 

With the turret’s additional weight (the Sd.Kfz. 170 was 3 tons heavier than the Hetzer), and despite a slightly uprated petrol engine, the tank was rather underpowered, especially off road. Another negative side effect of the turret was a considerably raised center of gravity. The original Hetzer was a nimble vehicle with good handling, but the Sd.Kfz. 170 was hard to control, tended to build up and roll even on the road and its off-road capabilities were markedly hampered by the concentration of weight so high above the ground, making it prone to tip over to the side when the driver did not take care of terrain slope angles. This wobbly handling, as well as the turret’s shape, gave the vehicle the unofficial nickname “Kugelhetzer”.

 

Nevertheless, all these flaws were accepted, since the Sd.Kfz. 170. was, like its Panzer IV-based predecessors, urgently needed and only regarded as an interim solution until a light E-Series chassis had been adapted to the turret. It was also surmised that the vehicle would not operate independently and rather escort other troops, so that close-range protection was in most cases ensured. Under this premise, about 100 Sd.Kfz. 170s were built until early 1946, when production of the Hetzer and its components were stopped. Operationally, the vehicle was not popular (esp. among drivers), but it was quite successful, not only against aircraft (esp. when used in conjunction with the new mobile radar-based fire direction centers), but also against lightly armored ground targets.

Plans to stretch the hull for more internal space, better field performance and crew comfort as well as replacing the engine with a bigger and more powerful 8 cylinder Tatra engine were never executed, since all resources were allocated to the new E-series tanks.

  

Specifications:

Crew: Four (commander/gunner, 2 assistants incl. radio operator, driver)

Weight: 18 tons (22.000 lb)

Length: 4.61 m (15 ft 1 in)

Width: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Height: 2.63 m (8 ft 8 in)

Ground clearance: 40 cm (15 ¾ in)

Suspension: Leaf spring

Fuel capacity: 320 litres (85 US gal)

 

Armor:

10 – 60 mm (0.39 – 2.36 in)

Performance:

Maximum road speed: 42 km/h (26 mph)

Sustained road speed: 36 km/h (22.3 mph)

Off-road speed: 26 km/h (16 mph)

Operational range: 177 km (110 mi)

Power/weight: 10 PS/t

 

Engine:

Praga 6-cylinder 7.8 liter petrol engine, delivering 180 PS (178 hp, 130 kW) at 2,800 rpm

 

Transmission:

Praga-Wilson Typ CV with 5 forwards and 1 reverse gears

 

Armament:

2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds

  

The kit and its assembly:

The so-called “Kugelhetzer” was a real German project in late WWII, but it was rather a vague idea, it never it made to the hardware stage. Even from its predecessor, the Panzer IV-based “Kugelblitz”, only five tanks were actually built. However, I found the idea interesting, since the combination of existing elements would lead to a very compact SPAAG. And since I had a spare Kugelblitz turret from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” SF mecha kits at hand, I decided to build a model of this conceptual tank.

 

The chassis is a Bergepanzer 38(t), a.k.a. “Bergehetzer”, from UM Models, an unarmed recovery tank based on the Hetzer hull with an open top. For my conversion plan it offered the benefit of a blank glacis plate and lots of spare parts for future builds. However, upon inspection of the parts-not-intended-to-be-mated I became slightly disillusioned: while the Hetzer’s upper original hull offers enough room for the ball turret itself to be inserted into the roof, it could NEVER take the turret bearing and the armored collar ring around it. They already are hard to mount on a Panzer IV hull, but the Hetzer is an even smaller vehicle, despite its casemate layout. I was about to shelf the project again, but then decided to modify and adapt the upper hull to the turret. In real life the engineers would have taken a similar route.

 

I started to scratch the superstructure from 0.5mm styrene sheet, and work started with the roof that had to be wide enough to carry the turret ring. This was glued into place on top of the hull, and from this benchmark the rest of the “armor plates” was added – starting with the engine bay cover, then adding side walls and finally the more complex corner sections, which actually consist of two triangular plates, but only one of them was actually fitted. The leftover openings were filled with acrylic putty, also in order to fill and stabilize the void between the original hull and the added plates. Later, the necessary space for the ball turret was carved away from the original hull, so that the Kugelblitz turret could be inserted in its new opening. Sounds complicated, but the construction was less complicated than expected, and it looked even better!

 

Once mated with the lower chassis, some details had to be added to the blank surfaces – e. g. racks with spare barrels for the guns and some tools and stowage boxes. These were taken from the Bergehetzer kit and partly modified to match the different hull.

What really became a challenge was the assembly of the tracks upon the model’s completion. Unfortunately, they consist of single elements and even links that have to be glued to the wheels, and since they were not crisply molded (just like the sprocket drive wheels) their installation was a rather tedious affair.

  

Painting and markings:

This is another variation of the “Hinterhalt” concept, using the three basic tones of Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). In this case – as an autumn scheme with fading light and more red and brown leaves - I used a late-war Panther as reference and gave the vehicle a rather dark basic livery consisting of green and the brown, and on top of that I added counter-colored (green on brown and brown on green) mottles, plus contrast mottles in Dunkelgelb. The tones I used were Humbrol 83, 86 and 113 - the latter is not the standard tone for the Hinterhalt scheme (180 would be appropriate), but it comes close to the typical German red Oxidrot (RAL 3009) primer, which was not only used on bare tank hulls during production but was also integrated into camouflage schemes, frequently stretched and lightened through additives. Effectively the livery is very standard, and since this Kugelhetzer model would depict a standard production vehicle and not a conversion, I extended the camouflage to the turret, too, for a consistent look.

The wheels remained in a single color (just the basic red brown and green), since camouflage was prohibited to be extended onto moving parts of the vehicle: a swirling pattern would have been very obvious and eye-catching when the vehicle was on the move.

 

A washing with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint followed. The decals – mostly taken from the small OOB sheet – came next, and I settled upon simplified national markings and just white outlines for the tactical code, due to the rather murky camouflage underneath.

The model’s main components were sealed with matt acrylic varnish from the rattle can before their final assembly, and I did some dry-brushing with light grey to emphasize details and edges. Finally, a coat of pigment dust was applied to the model’s lower areas and used to hide some flaws along the fiddly tracks.

  

A conclusive outcome, and a more complex build than obvious at first sight. The re-built upper hull was easier to realize than expected, the true horror came with the assembly of the tracks which consist of tiny, not really crisply molded elements. Why the return track section has to be constructed of five(!) segments - even though it's a straight line - is beyond my comprehension, too.

However, the outcome looks quite good, even though the use of the original Hetzer hull would have created several problems, if the original Kugelblitz turret had had to be integrated. Esp. the lack of space for the driver (and a suitable access hatch!) make this design idea rather unpractical, so that a stretched hull (AFAIK there’s a model of such a modified vehicle available) would have made sense.

U.S. Army National Guard Soldiers with the 1-178th Field Artillery Battalion, South Carolina National Guard, conduct a live fire training exercise May 1, 2021, at Fort Stewart, Georgia. The training consisted of artillery firing tables and direct fire lanes during their annual training. The unit is required to successfully accomplish all tables in order to be fully mission capable and ready to deploy. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Spc. Josiah Lining, 108th Public Affairs Detachment)

+++ 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?

My mind is capable of wonderous splendor and terrible horror. When I'm at my darkest, when my mood lowers to a deep shade of black, I try to remember. I would not be capable of recognizing the beauty if I did not already understand the beast...

 

5/365

Behold, the Blacktooth Starjet! Capable of carrying one shark pilot through galactic space and providing a stable water supply to his/her cockpit. It's basically a giant stylish flying fishtank. With laserblasters. Because, you know, everything's better with laserblasters.

 

Okay, so this is really more of a joke than anything else, but I thought people would enjoy it on here. Someone challenged me to use a shark as the pilot of a spaceship, and this is the result.

 

God bless!

I nearly finished the big cat series without a puma. This was one of the last cats we saw on the day.

 

Thanks everyone for your comments!

 

"A capable stalk-and-ambush predator, the puma pursues a wide variety of prey. Primary food sources include ungulates such as deer, elk, moose, and bighorn sheep, as well as domestic cattle, horses and sheep, particularly in the northern part of its range. It will also hunt species as small as insects and rodents. This cat prefers habitats with dense underbrush and rocky areas for stalking, but it can also live in open areas. The puma is territorial and persists at low population densities. Individual territory sizes depend on terrain, vegetation, and abundance of prey. While it is a large predator, it is not always the dominant species in its range, as when it competes for prey with other predators such as the jaguar, grey wolf, American Black Bear, and the grizzly bear. It is a reclusive cat and usually avoids people. Attacks on humans remain rare, despite a recent increase in frequency.

 

Due to excessive hunting following the European colonization of the Americas and the continuing human development of puma habitat, populations have dropped in most parts of its historical range. In particular, the puma was extirpated in eastern North America, except for an isolated sub-population in Florida; there are many sightings that claim the animal is recolonizing parts of its former eastern territory, such as Maine, northern Michigan, and southern Indiana where there have been recent sightings.

 

With its vast range, the puma has dozens of names and various references in the mythology of the indigenous Americans and in contemporary culture. The puma has numerous names in English, of which cougar and mountain lion are popular. Other names include catamount, panther, mountain screamer and painter.

 

The puma holds the Guinness record for the animal with the highest number of names, presumably due to its wide distribution across North and South America. It has over 40 names in English alone."

 

Source: Wikipedia

 

Exposure 0.001 sec (1/1600)

Aperture f/2.8

Focal Length 189 mm

 

carlstovell.co.uk | facebook

In 1959 the British Army needed a vehicle capable of working with armoured formations in the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR) in Germany. The Alvis company developed the Stalwart basing it on the Salamander fire truck using the same chassis as the Sarecen and Saladin.

 

It is fitted with power assisted steering on the two front axles and has a load capacity of 5 tons. The vehicles six wheels are independently sprung to giving it the capacity to cross trenches up to 5 feet wide and to climb gradients of 1:3.

 

It was also designed to be amphibious thereby enabling it to ''swim'' across water obstacles powered by a water propulsion system mounted behind each of the rear wheels giving it a speed of 6 mph.

It was the principle support vehicle for armoured tanks and artillery regiments in combat area and a variant was also produced equipped with an Atlas crane enabling the lifting of pallets of ammunition.

 

Specifications -

 

▪︎ Engine: Rolls-Royce B81 8-cylinder petrol, 220 hp

▪︎ Range: 250 miles

▪︎ Speed (land): 35 mph

▪︎ Speed (water): 4.5 knots (6 mph)

▪︎ Weight: 14 tons

▪︎ Crew: Two.

 

Information from The Muckleburgh Military Collection.

+++ 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 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 was the F-94A, which 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 rader, 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. The Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a more roomy cockpit and the canopy was replaced by a canopy with a bow frame in the center between the two crew members, as well as a new Instrument Landing System (ILS). However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, in order to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs with machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were 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 developed at a fast pace in the Fifties. 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, 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 new variant was exclusively armed with more effective unguided air-to-air missiles.

Eventually, the type was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time, but it still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft.

 

Anyway, The F-94C's introduction and the availability of 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 Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had been phased out of USAF service. However, some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported to friendly nations, esp. to NATO countries in dire need for all-weather interceptors at the organization’s outer frontiers where Soviet bomber attacks had to be expected.

 

One of these foreign operators was Greece. In 1952, Greece was admitted to NATO and the country’s Air Force was, with US assistance, rebuilt and organized according to NATO standards. New aircraft were introduced, namely jet fighters which meant a thorough modernization. The first types flown by the Hellenic Air Force were the Republic F-84G Thunderjet (about 100 examples) and the Lockheed F-94B Starfire (about thirty aircraft).

The Hellenic F-94Bs represented the USAF’s standard, but for their second life they were modified to carry, as an alternative to the type’s standard machine gun pods under the wings, a pair of pods with unguided air-to-air missiles, similar to the F-94C. Their designation remained unchanged, though.

This first generation of jets in Hellenic service became operational in 1955 and played an important role within NATO's defense strategy in the south-eastern Europe in the following years. They also took part in Operation Deep Water, a 1957 NATO naval exercise held in the Mediterranean Sea that simulated protecting the Dardanelles from a Soviet invasion and featured a simulated nuclear air strike in the Gallipoli area, reflecting NATO's nuclear umbrella policy to offset the Soviet Union's numerical superiority of ground forces in Europe.

 

In the late 1960s, the F-84 fighters were replaced by the Canadair Sabre 2 from British and Canadian surplus stocks and the Hellenic Air Force acquired new jet aircraft. These included the Lockheed F-104G Starfighter, the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter and the Convair F-102 Delta Dagger. The latter entered service in service 1969 and gradually replaced the F-94Bs in the all-weather interceptor role until 1971.

In the mid-1970s the Hellenic Air Force was further modernized with deliveries of the Dassault Mirage F1CG fleet, Vought A-7Hs (including a number of TA-7Hs) and the first batch of McDonnell-Douglas F-4E Phantom IIs, upgraded versions of which still serve today.

 

After their replacement through the F-102 the Hellenic F-94Bs were still used as advanced trainers, primarily for aspiring WSOs but also for weapon training against ground targets. But by the mid Seventies, all Hellenic F-94Bs had been phased out.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 40 ft 1 in (12.24 m)

Wingspan: 38 ft 9 in (12.16 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

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:

4x 0.5"0 (12.7 mm) machine guns in the lower nose section

2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks on the wing tips

2x underwing hardpoints for

- two pods with a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm) machine guns each, or

- two pods with a total of 24× 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets, or

- two 1.000 lb (454 kg) bombs (instead of the wing tip drop tanks)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is a rather simple entry for the 2018 "Cold War" GB at whatifmodelers.com, in the form of a more or less OOB-built Heller F-94B in a fictional guise. The original inspiration was the idea of a camouflaged F-94, since all USAF machines had been left in bare metal finish with more or less colorful additions and markings.

 

That said, the kit 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. I just added a wire pitot under the nose and opened the gun ports, plus some machine gun barrels inside made from hollow steel needles. The main wheels had to be replaced due to sinkholes, and they appeared to be rather narrow for this massive aircraft, too. I found decent replacements from a Tamiya 1:100 F-105D.

  

Painting and markings:

Even though the F-94 never wore camouflage in real life, I chose to add some (more) color to this Hellenic Starfire. In fact, the RHAF adopted several schemes for its early jet types, including grey undersides to otherwise NMF machines grey/green NATO colors, all-around ADC Grey, the so-called Aegean Grey or the USAF's South East Asia scheme. I chose the latter, since I expected an unusual look, and the colors would be a good match for the Hellenic landscape, too.

 

The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all come from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the USAF’s recommendation for the C-123 Provider transport aircraft. Beyond a black ink wash and some post-shading for weathering effects the whole surface of the kit received a wet-sanding treatment for additional wear-and-tear effects, exploiting the fact that the kit is molded in silver plastic which, in the end, shines through here and there. The result is a shaggy look, but it’s not rotten and neglected.

 

The machine gun pods received black front ends (against glare), which was also added to the tip tanks’ front end inside surfaces. The radome and the fin tip were painted with a mix of Humbrol 168 (RAF Hemp) and 28, and the gun ports as well as the afterburner section were painted with Steel Metallizer.

 

Using a 340th Mira’s early F-84G for further inspiration, I decided to add some bright squadron markings to the aircraft in the form of yellow-black-checkered tip tanks. These were created with black decal squares (cut from TL Modellbau generic material) over a painted, yellow base (Humbrol 69). I considered even more markings, e.g. a checkered fin rudder or an ornamental decoration, but eventually rejected this idea in favor of the aircraft’s camouflage theme.

 

Other decals come primarily from a HiScale F-84G sheet. Some elements were taken from the Heller OOB sheet and some additional stencils were gathered from various sources, including an Xtradecal T-33 and a PrintScale F-102 sheet.

 

After some soot stains around the exhaust were added with graphite, the kit was sealed under a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

An interesting result, since a camouflaged F-94 is literally unusual. I am positively surprised how good the aircraft looks in the USAF SEA livery.

The only Jaguar XJ220 in the world that lived up to its name, being fitted with a stunning V12 engine and making it the world's fastest production car. However, costs, setbacks, a recession or two and a myriad of other problems resulted in the dream becoming a nightmare, and the match of styling and power made in heaven being turned quickly into a BDSM session in hell!

 

The proposal for the Jaguar XJ220 seemed to come right out of nowhere. In 1986 the company was sold to Ford after ownership under British Leyland, and was producing a selection of strange luxury motors including the XJS and the XJ, which, although were very good and highly luxury machines, weren't exactly setting the world on fire.

 

But racing had been put forward to the company before, and racing team owner Tom Walkinshaw encouraged Jaguar to put one of their XJS's into the 1981 European Touring Car Championship, in which they succeeded in winning the competition in 1984. Jaguar had started to provide factory support to racing team Group 44 Racing, who were using the Jaguar-engined XJR-5 in the IMSA GT Championship, supplying V12 engines from 1983 onwards and supporting a Le Mans entry in 1984. Tom Walkinshaw and Jaguar agreed to entering the FIA Group C World Sportscar Championship and developed the XJR-6, which was powered by the Jaguar V12 engine; the car was launched during the 1985 season.

 

TWR took over the IMSA GT Championship operation in 1988 and one model – Jaguar XJR-9 – was launched to compete in both series. The XJR-9, which retained the Jaguar V12 engine, went on to win the 1988 24 Hours of Le Mans and World Sportscar Championship in the same year. The poor fuel consumption of the Jaguar V12 combined with new rules restricting refuelling during races forced the replacement of the V12 engine in the XJR-9s successors, the XJR-10 and XJR-11. The normally-aspirated Austin Rover V64V engine, designed for the MG Metro 6R4 had recently been made redundant thanks to the Group B rally ban in 1987, and the design rights were for sale. The compact, lightweight and fuel efficient nature of the small-displacement, turbocharged engine was investigated by TWR, who considered it an ideal basis for a new engine to power the XJR-10 and purchased the design rights from Austin Rover Group.

 

Jaguar and their Director of Engineering, Jim Randle, felt these racing cars were too far removed from the product available to the general public, especially with the rule changes that mandated the replacement of the Jaguar V12 engine in the forthcoming XJR-10 and XJR-11 racing cars. Therefore a project was initiated to design and build a car capable of winning Le Mans "in house", just as the Jaguar C-Type and D-Type had done. The groundwork for the project was undertaken by Randle over Christmas 1987, when he produced a 1:4 scale cardboard model of a potential Group B racing car.

 

The cardboard model was taken into the Jaguar styling studio and two mock-ups were produced. One was said to be reminiscent of the Porsche 956, the other took elements of the then current Jaguar XJ41 project and Malcolm Sayer's work on the stillborn Jaguar XJ13 racing car.

 

The project still had no official support, leaving Randle no option but to put together a team of volunteers to work evenings and weekends in their own time. The team came to be known as "The Saturday Club", and consisted of twelve volunteers. To justify the resources consumed by the project, the XJ220 needed to provide meaningful data to the engineers on handling, aerodynamics, particularly at high speeds, and aluminium structures. These requirements, together with FIA racing regulations and various government regulations governing car design and safety influenced the overall design and engineering direction of the car.

 

The FIA Group B regulations steered the concept towards a mid-engine, four-wheel drive layout, with a Jaguar V12 engine as the power source. The concept car was designed and built at very little cost to Jaguar, as Randle called in favours from component suppliers and engineering companies he and Jaguar had worked with in the past. In return he offered public recognition for their assistance and dangled the possibility of future contracts from Jaguar.

 

The name XJ220 was chosen as a continuation of the naming of the Jaguar XK120, which referred to the top speed of the model in miles per hour. The concept car had a targeted top speed of 220 mph so became the XJ220. The XK120, like the XJ220, was an aluminium-bodied sports car, and when launched was the fastest production car in the world.

 

Jaguar and engine designer Walter Hassan had previously created a 48-valve variant of their V12 engine specifically for motorsport use. It featured a double overhead camshaft layout with four valves per cylinder, compared with the single overhead camshaft and two valves per cylinder of the production engine, which was used in the Jaguar XJ and Jaguar XJS models at the time.

 

TWR and Cosworth had manufactured a number of these racing V12 engines during the 1980s and they had been raced competitively, with a 7-litre version of this engine featuring in the Le Mans winning Silk Cut Jaguar XJR-9. Five of these engines still existed, all of which were fitted with dry sump lubrication. These engines were chosen and considered to be especially useful as the dry sump would lower the vehicle's centre of gravity. The displacement of the V12 was set at 6.2L for the XJ220.

 

Jaguar had little experience with four-wheel drive systems at the time, having previously only produced rear-wheel drive cars. Randle approached Tony Rolt's company, FF Developments to design the transmission and four-wheel drive system for the XJ220, with Rolt's son Stuart running the project. Tony Rolt was the Technical Director of Ferguson Research, where he was heavily involved in the design of the four-wheel drive system used in the Jensen FF, the first sports car to be fitted with such a transmission. Tony Rolt also had a long involvement with Jaguar, winning the 1953 24 Hours of Le Mans with the factory works team driving the Jaguar C-Type.

 

The mid-engine complicated the design of the four-wheel drive system, and an innovative solution was needed to get drive from the rear of the engine to the front wheels. The chosen design took the front-wheel drive from the central differential on the rear transaxle and sent it through the V in the centre of the engine using a quill drive, before joining an inverted differential. The clutch was a twin-plate unit designed by AP Racing.

 

The design brief for the exterior restricted the use of aerodynamic aids, and aimed for a stylish yet functional body similar to the Jaguar D-Type. Drag and lift were limited at the envisioned ground clearance for road use, but the design allowed for additional downforce when the car was set up for racing; the body produced around 3,000 lb of downforce at 200 mph. The design was also intended to have a variable rear wing that folded into the bodywork at lower speeds. Aerodynamic work was undertaken at the Motor Industry Research Association wind tunnel using a 1:4 scale model, as the project was unable to budget for a full-scale mock-up.

 

The bodywork for the concept car displayed in 1988 was hand built from aluminium by Park Sheet Metal, a specialist automotive engineering company that manufactures concept cars and low-volume, niche models for various manufacturers, including Bentley. QCR Coatings undertook final painting of the bodyshell in silver. The concept also featured electrically operated scissor doors and a transparent engine cover to show off the V12 engine.

 

The concept car had a Connolly Leather-trimmed interior produced by Callow & Maddox, and was fitted with front and rear heated windscreens, electric windows, air conditioning, heated electrically adjustable seats with an Alpine Electronics CD player. The dashboard was supplied by Veglia.

 

The concept car was completed in the early hours of 18 October 1988, the day it was due to be unveiled at the British International Motor Show, being held at the National Exhibition Centre, Birmingham.

 

Jaguar's marketing department had allocated space on their stand at the motor show for the XJ220, but had not seen the vehicle until its arrival. Jaguar chairman John Egan and Roger Putnam, who was in charge of Jaguar's racing activities, were shown the vehicle the week before the motor show and signed off on the concept, allowing its unveiling. The car received an overwhelmingly positive reception by public and press, and a number of wealthy Jaguar enthusiasts handed over blank cheques to secure a purchase option should the XJ220 concept go into production. Ferrari displayed their F40 model at the same event; an estimated 90,000 additional visitors came to see the Jaguar and Ferrari cars.

 

The XJ220 was not initially intended to be a production car, but, following the reception of the concept and financial interest from serious buyers, a feasibility study was carried out by teams from TWR and Jaguar. Its conclusion was that such a car would be technically feasible, and that it would be financially viable. The announcement of a limited production run of 220 to 350 cars came on 20 December 1989. The list price on 1 January 1990 was £290,000 exclusive of value added tax, options and delivery charges, but by 1992 that had increased considerably owing to indexation of contracts. The offer was four times oversubscribed, and deposits of £50,000 exclusive of Value Added Tax (VAT) were taken from around 1400 customers; first deliveries were planned for mid-1992.

 

What Jaguar didn't reckon on was that the 1990's were going to get off to a very bad start, with a good old fashioned recession to usher in the new decade. This, combined with the various downgrades that would have to follow to make the car road legal, would result in the Jaguar XJ220 giving the company and the customers headaches in more ways than one.

 

In 1991, the company constructed a new £4 million factory at Wykham Mill, Bloxham, for the single purpose of building the XJ220, the plant being opened by the late Princess Diana. But, in order to comply with a variety of road legislation, engineering requirements resulted in significant changes to the specification of the XJ220, most notably replacement of the Jaguar V12 engine by a turbocharged V6 engine.This downgraded engine made that desirable rocket car more run-of-the-mill, and many pulled back their deposits.

 

At the same time the economy collapsed and when the first production cars left the factory in 1992, many of the original potential buyers who had put down their hefty deposits found that they couldn't afford it, and wanted their money back. Many of them cited the fact that the four wheel drive, V12 had been downgraded to a two wheel drive, V6, and thus they weren't getting what they paid for. The result was that Jaguar went so far as to take their customers to court, and forced them to buy a car they no longer wanted, the problem being exacerbated by the fact that in 1993, the McLaren F1 took the title of world's fastest production car, was available with the V12 and all things it promised, and was much smaller and more manageable than the bulky XJ220.

 

A total of just 275 cars were produced by the time production ended, 22 of their LHD models never being sold, each with a retail price of £470,000 in 1992, probably one of the biggest automotive flops in motoring history, right up there with the DeLorean and the Edsel. But this would later be advantageous for many, as this pedigree 'worlds-fastest-car' machine would go in later years for a much lower price. £150,000 mind you, but it's a lot better buying the one's that weren't sold at this reduced price, than at the initial asking price back in 1992. Therefore buyers were able to procure themselves a first-hand XJ220, for half the price, a representative saving of nearly £250,000.

 

Today the XJ220's are rare beasts indeed, rarely coming out to play due largely to their expensive upkeep, heavy fuel consumption and sheer size. But keep your eyes open in some of the more affluent neighbourhoods, be they Dubai, Beverley Hills, or the South of France, and chances are you'll be able to find one.

The Galacton Warper is capable of extreme destruction. It can warp space and time to terminate its target. Created for the Galactacon Federation of Platenthia, it was intended to eliminate threats of a serious and imminent nature. However, I took Tuesday off to go to the movies and missed the deadline of the imminent danger facing the Platenthians. As a result the planet was invaded and seized by the Crototants from Treblethum. I now feel a bit guilty for going to the movies instead of finishing this weapon. Especially as I went to see 'Days End'!!

Laury Thillemann Miss France 2011 surfs beside the qualifying for the Swatch Girls Pro today on 2st of June 2011 in Hossegor, France.

 

The world’s top female surfers proved by pairing up grace, strength and talent, that they are capable of taking the sport to new heights.

 

The 2nd SWATCH GIRLS PRO France 2011 in Hossegor delivered a firework of spectacular surfing! Moving through the rounds, the ladies faced strong currents and fast crashing waves. Heat after heat they tackled the rough challenge by laying down outstanding performances with technical, smooth and stylish surfing. Unfortunately last year’s winner and 4-time World Champion Stephanie Gilmore (AUS) and top favourite Coco Ho (HAW) were already eliminated in the early rounds.

 

In the end Sally Fitzgibbons (AUS) defeated Sage Erickson (USA) on an epic final day of competition to win the SWATCH GIRLS PRO France at Seignosse in Hossegor.

 

Both Fitzgibbons and Erickson surfed at their limit on the final day of competition in front of the packed holiday crowd who flocked to the beach to support some of the world’s finest women’s surfers, but it was Fitzgibbons who found the scores needed to take the victory over the American surfer.

 

Fitzgibbons, who is currently rated No. 2 on the elite ASP Women’s World Title Series, competed in her second consecutive SWATCH GIRLS PRO France event and her victory marks her third major ASP win this year.

 

Erickson was impressive throughout the entire competition, eventually defeating Sarah Baum (ZAF) in the Semifinals, but was unable to surpass Fitzgibbons for the win.

 

Sarah Mason Wins 2-Star Swatch Girls Pro Junior France

 

Sarah Mason (Gisbourne, NZL) 16, today took out the ASP 2-Star Swatch Girls Pro Junior France over Dimity Stoyle (Sunshine Coast QLD, AUS) 19, it a closely contested 35-minute final that went down to the wire in tricky 3ft (1m) waves at Les Bourdaines.

 

Europe’s finest under-21 athletes faced some of the world’s best up-and-comers in the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France in their attempt to qualify for the ASP World Junior Series which starts October 3, in Bali, Indonesia.

 

Mason, who impressed the entire event with her precise and stylish forehand attack, left little to chance in the 35-minute final getting off to a quick start to open her account and then built on her two-wave total to claim victory with 11.73 out of 20. The quietly spoken goofy-footer was a standout performer in the ASP 6-Star Swatch Girls Pro France and backed it up with a commanding performance against her fellow Pro Junior members.

 

“It is amazing. I am so happy and it is one of my best results for sure. It was tricky to try and pick the good ones but I picked a couple so it was great. All the girls are definitely ripping so you have to step up the level to get through your heats so I am stoked with the win. It has been super fun and I have enjoyed the entire event so to win is just amazing.”

 

Dimity Stoyle was unable to bridge the gap over her opponent in the final finishing second despite holding priority several times in the later stages of the encounter. The Swatch Girls Pro Junior France has proved the perfect training ground for Stoyle to continue with her excellent results already obtained this season on the ASP Australasia Pro Junior series where she is currently ranked nº2.

 

“I am still happy with second and I really wanted to win here but I tried my best. This is the best event I have been in so far it is really good the set up, the waves and everyone loves it. I can’t believe how good the French crowd are. They love surfing and they love us all so I am definitely going to come back.”

 

Felicity Palmateer (Perth WA, AUS) 18, ranked nº9 on the ASP Women’s Star Tour, finished equal 3rd in a low scoring tactical heat against Stoyle where positioning and priority tactics towards the final part played a major role as the frequency of set waves dropped.

 

“When I first paddled out I thought it was breaking more out the back but as the tide started to change it moved in and became a little inconsistent. At the start of the heat there were heaps of waves but then it went slow and priority came into play and I kept trying to get one. I am not really fussed because I am travelling with Dimity (Stoyle) and stoked that she has made the final.”

 

Palmateer has used the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France as a building block towards her ultimate goal of being full-time on the ASP Women’s World Tour. Her objectives are clear and 2011 is an extremely important year.

 

“I would love to get a World Junior title but at the moment my goal is to qualify for the World Tour through the Star events. If I can get more practice without that much pressure on me like this year and then if I qualify it will be even better for 2012.”

 

Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 17, placed 3rd in the Swatch Girls Pro Junior France after failing to oust eventual event winner Sarah Mason in semi-final nº1. Buitendag looked dangerous throughout the final day of competition and was unlucky not to find any quality scoring waves in a slow heat. Trailing for the majority of the encounter, Buitendag secured her best ride in the final moments which proved not enough to advance.

 

“The swell definitely dropped and although the conditions were quite nice I didn’t get any good scoring waves. I have a Pro Junior event coming up in South Africa and it is very important to get a result there to qualify for the World Juniors.”

 

Maud Le Car (St Martin, FRA) 19, claimed the best result of the European contingent finishing equal 5th to jump to nº1 position on the ASP Women’s European Pro Junior series. Le Car led a low scoring quarter-final bout against Bianca Buitendag until losing priority in a tactical error which allowed her opponent to sneak under her guard and claim the modest score required to win.

 

“I didn’t surf really well in that heat and I am a little bit disappointed because it is for the selection to the World Juniors with the other European girls. The waves were not the best and it was difficult to catch some good waves and unfortunately I didn’t make it. It is really good to be at the top but I have some other contests to improve and to do some good results and to make it to the World Juniors.”

 

The Swatch Time to Tear Expression Session was won by the team composed of Swatch Girls Pro France finalists Sally Fitzgibbons (AUS), Sage Erickson (USA) and equal 3rd placed Courtney Conlogue (USA) in a dynamic display of modern progressive surfing in the punchy 3ft peaks in front of a packed surf hungry audience lining the shore.

 

The Swatch Girls Pro is webcast LIVE on www.swatchgirlspro.com

 

For all results, videos, daily highlights, photos and news log-on to www.swatchgirlsproor www.aspeurope.com

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Final Result

Sarah Mason (NZL) 11.73 Def. Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 10.27

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Semi-Final Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 14.00 Def. Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 9.60

Heat 2: Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 10.67 Def. Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 9.57

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Quarter-Final Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 12.75 Def. Lakey Peterson (USA) 6.25

Heat 2: Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 8.95 Def. Maud Le Car (FRA) 8.50

Heat 3: Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 11.00 Def. Georgia Fish (AUS) 4.50

Heat 4: Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 17.00 Def. Nao Omura (JPN) 8.75

 

Swatch Girls Pro Junior France Round Three Results

Heat 1: Sarah Mason (NZL) 15.25, Maud Le Car (FRA) 11.00, Marie Dejean (FRA) 9.35, Camille Davila (FRA) 4.90

Heat 2: Bianca Buitendag (ZAF) 14.50, Lakey Peterson (USA) 11.50, Justine Dupont (FRA) 10.75, Phillipa Anderson (AUS) 5.10

Heat 3: Georgia Fish (AUS) 12.50, Felicity Palmateer (AUS) 9.15, Joanne Defay (FRA) 7.15, Loiola Canales (EUK) 2.90

Heat 4: Nao Omura (JPN) 10.00, Dimity Stoyle (AUS) 9.50, Barbara Segatto (BRA) 3.90, Ana Morau (FRA) 3.05

 

Photos Aquashot/ASPEurope - Swatch

The Vought F4U Corsair was a carrier-capable fighter aircraft that saw service primarily in World War II and the Korean War. Demand for the aircraft soon overwhelmed Vought's manufacturing capability, resulting in production by Goodyear and Brewster: Goodyear-built Corsairs were designated FG and Brewster-built aircraft F3A. From the first prototype delivery to the U.S. Navy in 1940, to final delivery in 1953 to the French, 12,571 F4U Corsairs were manufactured by Vought,

!n 16 separate models, in the longest production run of any piston-engined fighter in U.S. history (1942–1953).

 

The Corsair served in the U.S. Navy, U.S. Marines, Fleet Air Arm and the Royal New Zealand Air Force, as well as the French Navy Aéronavale and other, smaller, air forces until the 1960s. It quickly became the most capable carrier-based fighter-bomber of World War II. Some Japanese pilots regarded it as the most formidable American fighter of World War II,and the U.S. Navy counted an 11:1 kill ratio with the F4U Corsair.

  

Description from Wiki.

 

If you have time to comment It would be much appriciated! :)

 

Enjoy, C&C welcome.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

During the 1950s, Hindustan Aircraft Limited (HAL) had developed and produced several types of trainer aircraft, such as the HAL HT-2. However, elements within the firm were eager to expand into the then-new realm of supersonic fighter aircraft. Around the same time, the Indian government was in the process of formulating a new Air Staff Requirement for a Mach 2-capable combat aircraft to equip the Indian Air Force (IAF). However, as HAL lacked the necessary experience in both developing and manufacturing frontline combat fighters, it was clear that external guidance would be invaluable; this assistance was embodied by Kurt Tank.

 

In 1956, HAL formally began design work on the supersonic fighter project. The Indian government, led by Jawaharlal Nehru, authorized the development of the aircraft, stating that it would aid in the development of a modern aircraft industry in India. The first phase of the project sought to develop an airframe suitable for travelling at supersonic speeds, and able to effectively perform combat missions as a fighter aircraft, while the second phase sought to domestically design and produce an engine capable of propelling the aircraft. Early on, there was an explicit adherence to satisfying the IAF's requirements for a capable fighter bomber; attributes such as a twin-engine configuration and a speed of Mach 1.4 to 1.5 were quickly emphasized, and this led to the HF-24 Marut.

 

On 24 June 1961, the first prototype Marut conducted its maiden flight. It was powered by the same Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 turbojets that had powered the Folland Gnat, also being manufactured by HAL at that time. On 1 April 1967, the first production Marut was delivered to the IAF. While originally intended only as an interim measure during testing, HAL decided to power production Maruts with a pair of unreheated Orpheus 703s, meaning the aircraft could not attain supersonic speed. Although originally conceived to operate around Mach 2 the Marut in fact was barely capable of reaching Mach 1 due to the lack of suitably powerful engines.

 

The IAF were reluctant to procure a fighter aircraft only marginally superior to its existing fleet of British-built Hawker Hunters. However, in 1961, the Indian Government decided to procure the Marut, nevertheless, but only 147 aircraft, including 18 two-seat trainers, were completed out of a planned 214. Just after the decision to build the lukewarm Marut, the development of a more advanced aircraft with the desired supersonic performance was initiated.

 

This enterprise started star-crossed, though: after the Indian Government conducted its first nuclear tests at Pokhran, international pressure prevented the import of better engines of Western origin, or at times, even spares for the Orpheus engines, so that the Marut never realized its full potential due to insufficient power, and it was relatively obsolescent by the time it reached production.

Due to these restrictions India looked for other sources for supersonic aircraft and eventually settled upon the MiG-21 F-13 from the Soviet Union, which entered service in 1964. While fast and agile, the Fishbed was only a short-range daylight interceptor. It lacked proper range for escort missions and air space patrols, and it had no radar that enabled it to conduct all-weather interceptions. To fill this operational gap, the new indigenous HF-26 project was launched around the same time.

 

For the nascent Indian aircraft industry, HF-26 had a demanding requirements specification: the aircraft was to achieve Mach 2 top speed at high altitude and carry a radar with a guided missile armament that allowed interceptions in any weather, day and night. The powerplant question was left open, but it was clear from the start that a Soviet engine would be needed, since an indigenous development of a suitable powerplant would take much too long and block vital resources, and western alternatives were out of reach. The mission profile and the performance requirements quickly defined the planned aircraft’s layout: To fit a radar, the air intakes with movable ramps to feed the engines were placed on the fuselage flanks. To make sure the aircraft would fulfill its high-performance demands, it was right from the outset powered by two engines, and it was decided to give it delta wings, a popular design among high-speed aircraft of the time – exemplified by the highly successful Dassault Mirage III (which was to be delivered to Pakistan in 1967). With two engines, the HF-26 would be a heavier aircraft than the Mirage III, though, and it was planned to operate the aircraft from semi-prepared airfields, so that it would receive a robust landing gear with low-pressure tires and a brake parachute.

 

In 1962 India was able to negotiate the delivery of Tumansky RD-9 turbojet engines from the Soviet Union, even though no afterburner was part of the deal – this had to be indigenously developed by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). However, this meant that the afterburner could be tailored to the HF-26, and this task would provide HAL with valuable engineering experience, too.

Now knowing the powerplant, HAL created a single-seater airframe around it, a rather robust design that superficially reminded of the French Mirage III, but there were fundamental differences. The HF-26 had boxy air intakes with movable ramps to control the airflow to the two engines and a relatively wide fuselage to hold them and most of the fuel in tanks between the air ducts behind the cockpit. The aircraft had a single swept fin and a rather small mid-positioned delta-wing with a 60° sweep. The pilot sat under a tight canopy that offered - similar to the Mirage III - only limited all-round vision.

The HF-26's conical nose radome covered an antenna for a ‘Garud’ interception radar – which was in fact a downgraded Soviet ‘Oryol' (Eagle; NATO reporting name 'Skip Spin') system that guided the HF-26’s main armament, a pair of semi-active radar homing (SARH) ‚Saanp’ missiles.

 

The Saanp missile was developed specifically for the HF-26 in India but used many components of Soviet origin, too, so that they were compatible with the radar. In performance, the Saanp was comparable with the French Matra R.530 air-to-air missile, even though the aerodynamic layout was reversed, with steering fins at the front end, right behind the SARH seaker head - overall the missile reminded of an enlarged AIM-4 Falcon. The missile weighed 180 kg and had a length of 3.5 m. Power came from a two-stage solid rocket that offered a maximum thrust of 80 kN for 2.7 s during the launch phase plus 6.5 s cruise. Maximum speed was Mach 2.7 and operational range was 1.5 to 20 km (0.9 to 12.5 miles). Two of these missiles could be carried on the main wing hardpoints in front of the landing gear wells. Alternatively, infrared-guided R-3 (AA-2 ‘Atoll’) short-range AAMs could be carried by the HF-26, too, and typically two of these were carried on the outer underwing hardpoints, which were plumbed to accept drop tanks (typically supersonic PTB-490s that were carried by the IAF's MiG-21s, too) . Initially, no internal gun was envisioned, as the HF-26 was supposed to be a pure high-speed/high-altitude interceptor that would not engage in dogfights. Two more hardpoints under the fuselage were plumbed, too, for a total of six external stations.

 

Due to its wing planform, the HF-26 was soon aptly called “Teer” (= Arrow), and with Soviet help the first prototype was rolled out in early 1964 and presented to the public. The first flight, however, would take place almost a year later in January 1965, due to many technical problems, and these were soon complemented by aerodynamic problems. The original delta-winged HF-26 had poor take-off and landing characteristics, and directional stability was weak, too. While a second prototype was under construction in April 1965 the first aircraft was lost after it had entered a spin from which the pilot could not escape – the aircraft crashed and its pilot was killed during the attempt to eject.

 

After this loss HAL investigated an enlarged fin and a modified wing design with deeper wingtips with lower sweep, which increased wing area and improved low speed handling, too. Furthermore, the fuselage shape had to be modified, too, to reduce supersonic drag, and a more pronounced area ruling was introduced. The indigenous afterburner for the RD-9 engines was unstable and troublesome, too.

It took until 1968 and three more flying prototypes (plus two static airframes) to refine the Teer for serial production service introduction. In this highly modified form, the aircraft was re-designated HF-26M and the first machines were delivered to IAF No. 3 Squadron in late 1969. However, it would take several months until a fully operational status could be achieved. By that time, it was already clear that the Teer, much like the HF-24 Marut before, could not live up to its expectations and was at the brink of becoming obsolete as it entered service. The RD-9 was not a modern engine anymore, and despite its indigenous afterburner – which turned out not only to be chronically unreliable but also to be very thirsty when engaged – the Teer had a disappointing performance: The fighter only achieved a top speed of Mach 1.6 at full power, and with full external load it hardly broke the wall of sound in level flight. Its main armament, the Saanp AAM, also turned out to be unreliable even under ideal conditions.

 

However, the HF-26M came just in time to take part in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and was, despite its weaknesses, extensively used – even though not necessarily in its intended role. High-flying slow bombers were not fielded during the conflict, and the Teer remained, despite its on-board radar, heavily dependent on ground control interception (GCI) to vector its pilot onto targets coming in at medium and even low altitude. The HF-26M had no capability against low-flying aircraft either, so that pilots had to engage incoming, low-flying enemy aircraft after visual identification – a task the IAF’s nimble MiG-21s were much better suited for. Escorts and air cover missions for fighter-bombers were flown, too, but the HF-26M’s limited range only made it a suitable companion for the equally short-legged Su-7s. The IAF Canberras were frequently deployed on longer range missions, but the HF-26Ms simply could not follow them all the time; for a sufficient range the Teer had to carry four drop tanks, what increased drag and only left the outer pair of underwing hardpoints (which were not plumbed) free for a pair of AA-2 missiles. With the imminent danger of aerial close range combat, though, During the conflict with Pakistan, most HF-26M's were retrofitted with rear-view mirrors in their canopies to improve the pilot's field of view, and a passive IR sensor was added in a small fairing under the nose to improve the aircraft's all-weather capabilities and avoid active radar emissions that would warn potential prey too early.

 

The lack of an internal gun turned out to be another great weakness of the Teer, and this was only lightly mended through the use of external gun pods. Two of these cigar-shaped pods that resembled the Soviet UPK-23 pod could be carried on the two ventral pylons, and each contained a 23 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L autocannon of Soviet origin with 200 rounds. Technically these pods were very similar to the conformal GP-9 pods carried by the IAF MiG-21FLs. While the gun pods considerably improved the HF-26M’s firepower and versatility, the pods were draggy, blocked valuable hardpoints (from extra fuel) and their recoil tended to damage the pylons as well as the underlying aircraft structure, so that they were only commissioned to be used in an emergency.

 

However, beyond air-to-air weapons, the HF-26M could also carry ordnance of up to 1.000 kg (2.207 lb) on the ventral and inner wing hardpoints and up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) on the other pair of wing hardpoints, including iron bombs and/or unguided missile pods. However, the limited field of view from the cockpit over the radome as well as the relatively high wing loading did not recommend the aircraft for ground attack missions – even though these frequently happened during the conflict with Pakistan. For these tactical missions, many HF-26Ms lost their original overall natural metal finish and instead received camouflage paint schemes on squadron level, resulting in individual and sometimes even spectacular liveries. Most notable examples were the Teer fighters of No. 1 Squadron (The Tigers), which sported various camouflage adaptations of the unit’s eponym.

 

Despite its many deficiencies, the HF-26M became heavily involved in the Indo-Pakistan conflict. As the Indian Army tightened its grip in East Pakistan, the Indian Air Force continued with its attacks against Pakistan as the campaign developed into a series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar, and close-support attacks by fighter jets, with night attacks against airfields and strategic targets by Canberras and An-12s, while Pakistan responded with similar night attacks with its B-57s and C-130s.

The PAF deployed its F-6s mainly on defensive combat air patrol missions over their own bases, leaving the PAF unable to conduct effective offensive operations.  Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against PAF forward air bases in Pakistan until the end of the war, and interdiction and close-support operations were maintained. One of the most successful air raids by India into West Pakistan happened on 8 December 1971, when Indian Hunter aircraft from the Pathankot-based 20 Squadron, attacked the Pakistani base in Murid and destroyed 5 F-86 aircraft on the ground.

The PAF played a more limited role in the operations, even though they were reinforced by Mirages from an unidentified Middle Eastern ally (whose identity remains unknown). The IAF was able to conduct a wide range of missions – troop support; air combat; deep penetration strikes; para-dropping behind enemy lines; feints to draw enemy fighters away from the actual target; bombing and reconnaissance. India flew 1,978 sorties in the East and about 4,000 in Pakistan, while the PAF flew about 30 and 2,840 at the respective fronts.  More than 80 percent of IAF sorties were close-support and interdiction and about 45 IAF aircraft were lost, including three HF-26Ms. Pakistan lost 60 to 75 aircraft, not including any F-86s, Mirage IIIs, or the six Jordanian F-104s which failed to return to their donors. The imbalance in air losses was explained by the IAF's considerably higher sortie rate and its emphasis on ground-attack missions. The PAF, which was solely focused on air combat, was reluctant to oppose these massive attacks and rather took refuge at Iranian air bases or in concrete bunkers, refusing to offer fights and respective losses.

 

After the war, the HF-26M was officially regarded as outdated, and as license production of the improved MiG-21FL (designated HAL Type 77 and nicknamed “Trishul” = Trident) and later of the MiG-21M (HAL Type 88) was organized in India, the aircraft were quickly retired from frontline units. They kept on serving into the Eighties, though, but now restricted to their original interceptor role. Beyond the upgrades from the Indo-Pakistani War, only a few upgrades were made. For instance, the new R-60 AAM was introduced to the HF-26M and around 1978 small (but fixed) canards were retrofitted to the air intakes behind the cockpit that improved the Teer’s poor slow speed control and high landing speed as well as the aircraft’s overall maneuverability.

A radar upgrade, together with the introduction of better air-to-ai missiles with a higher range and look down/shoot down capability was considered but never carried out. Furthermore, the idea of a true HF-26 2nd generation variant, powered by a pair of Tumansky R-11F-300 afterburner jet engines (from the license-built MiG-21FLs), was dropped, too – even though this powerplant eventually promised to fulfill the Teer’s design promise of Mach 2 top speed. A total of only 82 HF-26s (including thirteen two-seat trainers with a lengthened fuselage and reduced fuel capacity, plus eight prototypes) were built. The last aircraft were retired from IAF service in 1988 and replaced with Mirage 2000 fighters procured from France that were armed with the Matra Super 530 AAM.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 14.97 m (49 ft ½ in)

Wingspan: 9.43 m (30 ft 11 in)

Height: 4.03 m (13 ft 2½ in)

Wing area: 30.6 m² (285 sq ft)

Empty weight: 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)

Gross weight: 10,954 kg (24,149 lb) with full internal fuel

Max takeoff weight: 15,700 kg (34,613 lb) with external stores

 

Powerplant:

2× Tumansky RD-9 afterburning turbojet engines; 29 kN (6,600 lbf) dry thrust each

and 36.78 kN (8,270 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,700 km/h (1,056 mph; 917 kn; Mach 1.6) at 11,000 m (36,000 ft)

1,350 km/h (840 mph, 730 kn; Mach 1.1) at sea level

Combat range: 725 km (450 mi, 391 nmi) with internal fuel only

Ferry range: 1,700 km (1,100 mi, 920 nmi) with four drop tanks

Service ceiling: 18,100 m (59,400 ft)

g limits: +6.5

Time to altitude: 9,145 m (30,003 ft) in 1 minute 30 seconds

Wing loading: 555 kg/m² (114 lb/sq ft)

 

Armament

6× hardpoints (four underwing and two under the fuselage) for a total of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb);

Typical interceptor payload:

- two IR-guided R-3 or R-60 air-to-air-missiles or

two PTB-490 drop tanks on the outer underwing stations

- two semi-active radar-guided ‚Saanp’ air-to-air missiles or two more R-3 or R-60 AAMs

on inner underwing stations

- two 500 l drop tanks or two gun pods with a 23 mm GSh-23L autocannon and 200 RPG

each under the fuselage

  

The kit and its assembly:

This whiffy delta-wing fighter was inspired when I recently sliced up a PM Model Su-15 kit for my side-by-side-engine BAC Lightning build. At an early stage of the conversion, I held the Su-15 fuselage with its molded delta wings in my hand and wondered if a shortened tail section (as well as a shorter overall fuselage to keep proportions balanced) could make a delta-wing jet fighter from the Flagon base? Only a hardware experiment could yield an answer, and since the Su-15’s overall outlines look a bit retro I settled at an early stage on India as potential designer and operator, as “the thing the HF-24 Marut never was”.

 

True to the initial idea, work started on the tail, and I chopped off the fuselage behind the wings’ trailing edge. Some PSR was necessary to blend the separate exhaust section into the fuselage, which had to be reduced in depth through wedges that I cut out under the wings trailing edge, plus some good amount of glue and sheer force the bend the section a bit upwards. The PM Model's jet exhausts were drilled open, and I added afterburner dummies inside - anything would look better than the bleak vertical walls inside after only 2-3 mm! The original fin was omitted, because it was a bit too large for the new, smaller aircraft and its shape reminded a lot of the Suchoj heavy fighter family. It was replaced with a Mirage III/V fin, left over from a (crappy!) Pioneer 2 IAI Nesher kit.

 

Once the rear section was complete, I had to adjust the front end - and here the kitbashing started. First, I chopped off the cockpit section in front of the molded air intake - the Su-15’s long radome and the cockpit on top of the fuselage did not work anymore. As a remedy I remembered another Su-15 conversion I did a (long) while ago: I created a model of a planned ground attack derivative, the T-58Sh, and, as a part of the extensive body work, I transplanted the slanted nose from an academy MiG-27 between the air intakes – a stunt that was relatively easy and which appreciably lowered the cockpit position. For the HF-26M I did something similar, I just transplanted a cockpit from a Hasegawa/Academy MiG-23 with its ogival radome that size-wise better matched with the rest of the leftover Su-15 airframe.

 

The MiG-23 cockpit matched perfectly with the Su-15's front end, just the spinal area behind the cockpit had to be raised/re-sculpted to blend the parts smoothly together. For a different look from the Su-15 ancestry I also transplanted the front sections of the MiG-23 air intakes with their shorter ramps. Some mods had to be made to the Su-15 intake stubs, but the MiG-23 intakes were an almost perfect fit in size and shape and easy to integrate into the modified front hill. The result looks very natural!

However, when the fuselage was complete, I found that the nose appeared to be a bit too long, leaving the whole new hull with the wings somewhat off balance. As a remedy I decided at a rather late stage to shorten the nose and took out a 6 mm section in front of the cockpit - a stunt I had not planned, but sometimes you can judge things only after certain work stages. Some serious PSR was necessary to re-adjust the conical nose shape, which now looked more Mirage III-ish than planned!

 

The cockpit was taken mostly OOB, I just replaced the ejection seat and gave it a trigger handle made from thin wire. With the basic airframe complete it was time for details. The PM Model Su-15s massive and rather crude main landing gear was replaced with something more delicate from the scrap box, even though I retained the main wheels. The front landing gear was taken wholesale from the MiG-23, but had to be shortened for a proper stance.

A display holder adapter was integrated into the belly for the flight scenes, hidden well between the ventral ordnance.

 

The hardpoints, including missile launch rails, came from the MiG-23; the pylons had to be adjusted to match the Su-15's wing profile shape, the Anab missiles lost their tail sections to create the fictional Indian 'Saanp' AAMs. The R-3s on the outer stations were left over from a MP MiG-21. The ventral pylons belong to Academy MiG-23/27s, one came from the donor kit, the other was found in the spares box. The PTB-490 drop tanks also came from a KP MiG-21 (or one of its many reincarnations, not certain).

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme for this fictional aircraft was largely inspired by a picture of a whiffy and very attractive Saab 37 Viggen (an 1:72 Airfix kit) in IAF colors, apparently a model from a contest. BTW, India actually considered buying the Viggen for its Air Force!

IAF aircraft were and are known for their exotic and sometimes gawdy paint schemes, and with IAF MiG-21 “C 992” there’s even a very popular (yet obscure) aircraft that sported literal tiger stripes. The IAF Viggen model was surely inspired by this real aircraft, and I adopted something similar for my HF-26M.

 

IAF 1 Squadron was therefore settled, and for the paint scheme I opted for a "stripish" scheme, but not as "tigeresque" as "C 992". I found a suitable benchmark in a recent Libyian MiG-21, which carried a very disruptive two-tone grey scheme. I adapted this pattern to the HA-26M airframe and replaced its colors, similar to the IAF Viggen model, which became a greenish sand tone (a mix of Humbrol 121 with some 159; I later found out that I could have used Humbrol 83 from the beginning, though...) and a very dark olive drab (Humbrol 66, which looks like a dull dark brown in contrast with the sand tone), with bluish grey (Humbrol 247) undersides. With the large delta wings, this turned out to look very good and even effective!

 

For that special "Indian touch" I gave the aircraft a high-contrast fin in a design that I had seen on a real camouflaged IAF MiG-21bis: an overall dark green base with a broad, red vertical stripe which was also the shield for the fin flash and the aircraft's tactical code (on the original bare metal). The fin was first painted in green (Humbrol 2), the red stripe was created with orange-red decal sheet material. Similar material was also used to create the bare metal field for the tactical code, the yellow bars on the splitter plates and for the thin white canopy sealing.

 

After basic painting was done the model received an overall black ink washing, post-panel shading and extensive dry-brushing with aluminum and iron for a rather worn look.

The missiles became classic white, while the drop tanks, as a contrast to the camouflaged belly, were left in bare metal.

 

Decals/markings came primarily from a Begemot MiG-25 kit, the tactical codes on the fin and under the wings originally belong to an RAF post-WWII Spitfire, just the first serial letter was omitted. Stencils are few and they came from various sources. A compromise is the unit badge on the fin: I needed a tiger motif, and the only suitable option I found was the tiger head emblem on a white disc from RAF No. 74 Squadron, from the Matchbox BAC Lightning F.6&F.2A kit. It fits stylistically well, though. ;-)

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (except for the black radome, which became a bit glossy) and finally assembled.

  

A spontaneous build, and the last one that I completed in 2022. However, despite a vague design plan the model evolved as it grew. Bashing the primitive PM Model Su-15 with the Academy MiG-23 parts was easier than expected, though, and the resulting fictional aircraft looks sturdy but quite believable - even though it appears to me like the unexpected child of a Mirage III/F-4 Phantom II intercourse, or like a juvenile CF-105 Arrow, just with mid-wings? Nevertheless, the disruptive paint scheme suits the delta wing fighter well, and the green/red fin is a striking contrast - it's a colorful model, but not garish.

Nothing on reverse.

 

A ground crewman displaying various sized ordnance capable of being dropped by aircraft at his airfield.

 

The aeroplane behind him is a DFW C.V, an armed reconnaissance aircraft capable of carrying 100kg worth of bombs. It was produced in larger numbers than any other German aircraft during World War I. About 2000 were manufactured in DFW and about 1250 licence maufactured by the Aviatik (DFW C.V (Av), designated also as Aviatik C.VI), Halberstadt, LVG, and Schütte-Lanz.

 

Source: Wiki

A mach-2 capable, single engine, two-seat, second-generation interceptor, the Aethon served for decades in the Bonaparti Air Force.

 

For intercepting and/or breaking up incoming bomber formations, the IF-53G can be armed with a combination of radar-guided, IR Guided AAMs or a single, unguided nuclear Air-to-Air Rocket. Its twin 30mm cannons and high speed makes the Aethon a formidable dogfighter for its era despite its primary role remaining as an interceptor. The Gulf model lacks the ability to mount air-to-ground weaponry on its two wing, and one fuselage stations. All three are wet hard points capable of carrying auxiliary fuel tanks.

  

Though the US Navy reconsidered its decision to retire the AD Skyraider after the Korean War, it was still a piston-engined attack aircraft designed during World War II, while the Navy preferred going to a modern, all-jet attack/fighter fleet. To supplement and then replace the AD, the Navy issued a requirement for a jet attack fighter weighing no more than 48,000 pounds, capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons, and with a speed of at least 550 miles an hour. The Navy was not surprised when Douglas’ chief designer, Edward Heinemann, submitted a proposal for a delta-winged, light attack jet—they were surprised to find that it met all of the requirements, yet weighed in at only 23,000 pounds, less than half the required weight. It was also so small that it did not need folding wings to fit on aircraft carrier elevators. Heinemann deliberately omitted as much weight as possible to bring the aircraft in under weight, and subsequently, at a lower unit cost than anticipated. One part of this effort was external structural ribbing for the rudder; this “temporary” solution would be used on every aircraft produced.

 

Heinemann’s design was quickly ordered by the Navy as the A4D Skyhawk. The first A4D-1 flew in June 1952, with deliveries to the fleet beginning in 1956. Pilots used to the increasingly larger and more powerful aircraft the US Navy fielded in the late 1950s, such as the F3H Demon and F4H Phantom II, were surprised at the diminutive A4D, which looked toylike on the decks of Forrestal-class supercarriers. It quickly earned the nicknames “Tinkertoy Bomber,” “Scooter,” and “Heinemann’s Hot Rod.”

 

The Skyhawk—redesignated A-4 in 1962—also quickly gained a reputation for reliability and nimbleness. Despite its small size, it could carry its own weight in bombs and still turn inside anything in the inventory, even the purpose-built F-8 Crusader fighter. For this reason, the Navy began assigning A-4C Skyhawks as “emergency fighter” detachments to Essex-class antisubmarine carriers, as these ships, still equipped with World War II-era hydraulic catapults and limited in deck space, could not carry the more modern F-4. Besides their internal 20mm cannon, A-4s could also carry up to four Sidewinder missiles.

 

It would be in the Vietnam War that the A-4 would prove its worth. Besides its large bombload and superb manuverability, the Skyhawk was also found to be able to take considerable punishment. Several A-4s returned to their carriers missing pieces of rudder or with holes shot through the wings. At the beginning of American involvement, the Navy began replacing the older A-4C “short-nose” models with the improved A-4E, which added a fifth hardpoint and a longer nose with more advanced avionics; this was quickly supplemented by the A-4F, which added a dorsal hump with still more avionics and ECM equipment.

 

Until the A-7 Corsair II began arriving in the fleet in the late 1960s, the A-4 represented the backbone of naval light attack units, operating alongside the A-6 Intruder in striking targets throughout Southeast Asia. On land, A-4s served with Marine Corps units, and proved so reliable and well-liked that the Marines decided not to use the A-7 at all. The Skyhawk also proved itself to be adaptable to other missions: A-4s carried out the US Navy’s first precision strike mission, a 1967 attack on the Hanoi thermal powerplant with AGM-62 Walleye missiles, and also served as Wild Weasel/Iron Hand suppression of enemy air defense aircraft, armed with AGM-45 Shrikes.

 

Though they were slower than the F-4 and F-8, and lacked the A-6’s ability to fly in the worst of inclement weather, the Skyhawk was not defenseless against enemy MiGs: it was the only American aircraft that could turn with a MiG-17 if it was “clean” of bombs, and only one A-4 was lost to enemy aircraft during the Vietnam War. In turn, one A-4, piloted by Lieutenant Commander Ted Schwartz, shot down a MiG-17 with Zuni rockets in 1967. Skyhawks would drop the first and last bombs of US Navy aircraft in the Vietnam War, and flew more sorties than any other naval aircraft—and paid a commensurate price: 362 Skyhawks were shot down or lost in accidents during the war, the most of any one type. Two A-4 pilots won the Medal of Honor during Vietnam, James Stockdale and Michael Estocin, the latter posthumously; longtime prisoner of war Everett Alvarez Jr. was also an A-4 pilot, as was fellow POW and later Presidential candidate, John McCain.

 

The A-4’s story did not end with Vietnam. Recognizing its superb manueverability, the US Navy began building adversary units with Skyhawks simulating the MiG-17 as part of the Top Gun program, beginning in 1969. These stripped down “Mongoose” A-4s proved to be a match even against far more advanced F-14 Tomcats and F-18 Hornets, and A-4s remained in the adversary role until 1998. Alongside these aircraft, the Navy used two-seat TA-4J Skyhawks as advanced trainers until 2003, while Marine units continued to use the penultimate A-4M Skyhawk in the light attack role until after the First Gulf War in 1991; Marine OA-4M “fast FAC” forward air control aircraft flew as late as 1998. The TA-4J was replaced by the T-45 Goshawk; there has never truly been a replacement for the A-4E adversaries and A-4M light attack aircraft, though the AV-8B Harrier supplemented them.

 

While Vietnam was the last war for American Skyhawks, foreign users would put the aircraft to further use. Israel would use their A-4H/Ns in the Yom Kippur War with heavy casualties, due to more advanced Egyptian and Syrian air defenses; better luck was had in the Lebanon War of 1982. Argentina’s A-4B/Qs saw extensive service over the Falklands in 1982, impressing even their British adversaries with hair-raising low-level bomb runs against British ships in San Carlos Water: though the Argentine aircraft took severe punishment from Fleet Air Arm Sea Harriers, they also sank or damaged five ships. Finally, Kuwait used their A-4KU Skyhawks from the beginning of the First Gulf War.

 

Overall, 2960 A-4s were produced and flew with the air arms of eleven nations. Quite a few survive as government contract aggressor aircraft, or in private hands, while many are preserved in museums.

 

This A-4E is Bureau Number 151064; it started its career with VA-83 ("Rampagers") aboard the USS Forrestal (CV-59) in 1965. After year stints with two Marine squadrons and the Naval Air Test Center at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland, 151064 joined first VF-101 ("Grim Reapers"), then VF-171 ("Aces") at NAS Key West, Florida, from 1975 to 1984. As both of these squadrons were Fleet Replacement Squadrons for the US Navy's remaining F-4 Phantoms, 151064 likely acted as a "hack" aircraft for pilots to maintain flight hours, or as an aggressor trainer. That was certainly its next role with its next and final squadron: VF-45 ("Blackbirds"), which provided Atlantic Fleet squadrons with adversary training, still operating from Key West. 151064 would act as an aggressor A-4 until 1994, when it was retired. In 2004, it was donated to Planes of Fame in Chino, California.

 

Clearly, 151064 has seen better days. It still carries Spraylat from its days at AMARG in Arizona, and the camouflage has faded after nearly 30 years in the desert sun. The aircraft itself is intact, and at some point Planes of Fame does intend to restore the aircraft. I saw it in the museum's boneyard in May 2021.

 

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 one was a kind of mental distraction, after putting together eight models for the “RAF Centenary” group build at whatifmodelers.com – and it’s the realization of an idea I had maybe 20 years ago when I worked part-time at a painter. One day I came at a wholesale shop across a rattle can with RAL 1000 (Beigegrün), a kind of yellow-ish RAF Sky and one of the ugliest colors you can imagine beyond RLM02. But I thought “One day I’ll try to paint a VF-1 with THIS, and it will certainly not look bad…”.

 

Said and done, the VF-1J remained basically OOB but received some mods and updates. First of all, the kit was to be displayed in flight, with its wheels tucked up, so I added one of my home-made standard display stands to the gun pod.

Then the kit received, as a standard treatment, some characteristic blade antennae on the back and the nose which the kit simply lacks, due to the small scale and its simplicity.

 

Then came some cosmetic additions – partly canonical, partly fictional. The IRST fairing in front of the cockpit as well as the sensor mounted on the wing roots were inspired by official source material. The fairings on the lower legs are home-made and also inspired by authentic VF-1s, even though their shape is different. The RHAWS antennae at the tips of the fins are a similar case, improvised with styrene sheet and putty. The missile pods were scratched from leftover AMM-1 missile heads and styrene profile, for more ordnance and a more streamlined look than the OOB dozen of AMM-1s on the underwing pylons. Last but not least, the cockpit received an extended dashboard (filling the space between the pilot’s legs) and a pilot figure.

  

Painting and markings:

Green! This became the theme that would make the idea of RAL 1000 as basic color tolerable. I settled for a uniform livery, inspired by a profile found in a source book (even though it was be basically blue). I wanted a somewhat plausible and convincing look.

 

Basic painting was done with brushes and most of the trim in bright green and white was done with generic decal sheet material. A tedious process, but in the end a convenient solution. Some very light post-shading (with Humbrol 90) was done, shifting the overall RAL 1000 into a more greenish direction.

 

The decals and stencils come mostly from the OOB sheet, but some individual markings were gathered from the scrap box. For instance, the green clovers on the fins’ outsides come from a Hasegawa Ki-61, while the USN-style code “ET” on the fins’ insides are tactical letter codes from an RAF SEPECAT Jaguar.

  

A small and quick interim project – and the RAL 1000-based livery does actually not look as bad as (secretly) expected. In fact, the green livery is a nice contrast to the red roundels – a bit unusual in the Macross universe, but the Valkyrie looks good!

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

The KAI T-50 Golden Eagle (골든이글) is a family of South Korean supersonic advanced trainers and light combat aircraft, developed by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with Lockheed Martin. The T-50 is South Korea's first indigenous supersonic aircraft and one of the world's few supersonic trainers.

 

The T-50 program started in the late Nineties and was originally intended to develop an indigenous trainer aircraft capable of supersonic flight, to train and prepare pilots for the KF-16 and F-15K, replacing trainers such as T-38 and A-37 that were then in service with the ROKAF. Prior South Korean aircraft programs include the turboprop KT-1 basic trainer produced by Daewoo Aerospace (now part of KAI), and license-manufactured KF-16.

 

The mother program, code-named KTX-2, began in 1992, but the Ministry of Finance and Economy suspended the original project in 1995 due to financial constraints. The basic design of the aircraft was set by 1999, and eventually the development of the aircraft was funded 70% by the South Korean government, 17% by KAI, and 13% by Lockheed Martin.

 

In general, the T-50 series of aircraft closely resembles the KF-16 in configuration, but it actually is a completely new design: the T-50 is 11% smaller and 23% lighter than an F-16, and in order to create enough space for the two-seat cockpit, the air intake was bifurcated and placed under the wing gloves, resembling the F/A-18's layout.

 

The aircraft was formally designated as the T-50 'Golden Eagle' in February 2000, the T-50A designation had been reserved by the U.S. military to prevent it from being inadvertently assigned to another aircraft model. Final assembly of the first T-50 took place between 15 January and 14 September 2001. The first flight of the T-50 took place in August 2002, and initial operational assessment from 28 July to 14 August 2003.

 

The trainer has a cockpit for two pilots in a tandem arrangement, both crew members sitting in "normal" election seats, not in the F-16's reclined position. The high-mounted canopy is applied with stretched acrylic, providing the pilots with good visibility, and has been tested to offer the canopy with ballistic protection against 4-lb objects impacting at 400 knots.

 

The ROKAF, as original development driver, placed an initial production contract for 25 T-50s in December 2003, with aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2005 and 2009. Original T-50 aircraft were equipped with the AN/APG-67(v)4 radar from Lockheed Martin. The T-50 trainer is powered by a GE F404 engine built under license by Samsung Techwin. Under the terms of the T-50/F404-102 co-production agreement, GE provides engine kits directly to Samsung Techwin who produces designated parts as well as performing final engine assembly and testing.

 

The T-50 program quickly expanded beyond a pure trainer concept to include the TA-50 armed trainer aircraft, as well as the FA-50 light attack aircraft, which has already similar capabilities as the multirole KF-16. Reconnaissance and electronic warfare variants were also being developed, designated as RA-50 and EA-50.

 

The TA-50 variant is a more heavily armed version of the T-50 trainer, intended for lead-in fighter training and light attack roles. It is equipped with an Elta EL/M-2032 fire control radar and designed to operate as a full-fledged combat platform. This variant mounts a lightweight three-barrel cannon version of the M61 Vulcan internally behind the cockpit, which fires linkless 20 mm ammunition. Wingtip rails can accommodate the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, a variety of additional weapons can be mounted to underwing hardpoints, including precision-guided weapons, air-to-air missiles, and air-to-ground missiles. The TA-50 can also mount additional utility pods for reconnaissance, targeting assistance, and electronic warfare. Compatible air-to-surface weapons include the AGM-65 Maverick missile, Hydra 70 and LOGIR rocket launchers, CBU-58 and Mk-20 cluster bombs, and Mk-82, -83, and -84 general purpose bombs.

 

Among the operators of the TA-50 are the Philippines, Thailand and the ROKAF, and the type has attracted a global interest, also in Europe. The young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) chose, soon after the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the TA-50 as a complement to its initial procurements and add more flexibility to its small and young air arm.

 

According to a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six [Lockheed Martin] C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”.

 

According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

This plan was immediately set into action after the country's independence in late 2017 with the purchase of twelve refurbished Saab JAS 39A Gripen interceptors for Quick Reaction Alert duties and upgraded, former Swedish Air Force Sk 90 trainers for the RoScAC. But these second hand machines were just the initial step in the mid-term procurement plan.

 

The twelve KAI TA-50 aircraft procured as a second step were to fulfill the complex requirement for a light and cost-effective multi-purpose aircraft that could be used in a wide variety of tasks: primarily as an advanced trainer for supersonic flight and as a trainer for the fighter role (since all Scottish Gripens were single seaters and dedicated to the interceptor/air defense role), but also as a light attack and point defense aircraft.

 

Scotland was offered refurbished F-16C and Ds, but this was declined as the type was deemed to be too costly and complex. Beyond the KAI T-50, the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master and the BAe Hawk were considered, too, but, eventually, a modified TA-50 that was tailored to the RoScAC’s procurement plans was chosen by the Scottish government.

 

In order to fulfill the complex duty profile, the Scottish TA-50s were upgraded with elements from the FA-50 attack aircraft. They possess more internal fuel capacity, enhanced avionics, a longer radome and a tactical datalink. Its EL/M-2032 pulse-Doppler radar has been modified so that it offers now a range two-thirds greater than the TA-50's standard radar. It enables the aircraft to operate in any weather, detect surface targets and deploy AIM-120 AAMs for BVR interceptions. The machines can also be externally fitted with Rafael's Sky Shield or LIG Nex1's ALQ-200K ECM pods, Sniper or LITENING targeting pods, and Condor 2 reconnaissance pods to further improve the machine’s electronic warfare, reconnaissance, and targeting capabilities.

 

Another unique feature of the Scottish Golden Eagle is its powerplant: even though the machines are originally powered by a single General Electric F404 afterburning turbofan and designed around this engine, the RoScAC TF-50s are powered by a Volvo RM12 low-bypass afterburning turbofan. These are procured and serviced through Saab in Sweden, as a part of the long-term collaboration contract for the RoScAC’s Saab Gripen fleet. This decision was taken in order to decrease overall fleet costs through a unified engine.

 

The RM12 is a derivative of the General Electric F404-400. Changes from the standard F404 includes greater reliability for single-engine operations (including more stringent birdstrike protection) and slightly increased thrust. Several subsystems and components were also re-designed to reduce maintenance demands, and the F404's analogue Engine Control Unit was replaced with the Digital Engine Control – jointly developed by Volvo and GE – which communicates with the cockpit through the digital data buses and, as redundancy, mechanical calculators controlled by a single wire will regulate the fuel-flow into the engine.

 

Another modification of the RoScAC’s TA-50 is the exchange of the original General Dynamics A-50 3-barrel rotary cannon for a single barrel Mauser BK-27 27mm revolver cannon. Being slightly heavier and having a lower cadence, the BK-27 featured a much higher kinetic energy, accuracy and range. Furthermore, the BK-27 is the standard weapon of the other, Sweden-built aircraft in RoScAC service, so that further synergies and cost reductions were expected.

 

The Scottish Department of National Defense announced the selection of the TA-50 in August 2018, after having procured refurbished Saab Sk 90 and JAS 39 Gripen from Sweden as initial outfit of the country's small air arm with No. 1 Squadron based at Lossiemouth AB.

 

Funding for the twelve aircraft was approved by Congress on September 2018 and worth € 420 mio., making the Golden Eagle the young country’s first brand new military aircraft. Deliveries of the Golden Hawk TF.1, how the type was officially designated in Scottish service, began in November 2019, lasting until December 2020.

The first four Scottish Golden Hawk TF.1 aircraft were allocated to the newly established RoScAC No. 2 Squadron, based at Leuchars, where the RoScAC took control from the British Army. The latter had just taken over the former air base from the RAF in 2015, losing its “RAF air base” status and was consequentially re-designated “Leuchars Station”, primarily catering to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards who have, in the meantime, become part of Scotland’s Army Corps. The brand new machines were publically displayed on the shared army and air corps facility in the RoScAC’s new paint scheme on 1st of December 2019 for the first time, and immediately took up service.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 2

Length: 13.14 m (43.1 ft)

Wingspan (with wingtip missiles): 9.45 m (31 ft)

Height: 4.94 m (16.2 ft)

Wing area: 23.69 m² (255 ft²)

Empty weight: 6,470 kg (14,285 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,300 kg (27,300 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× Volvo RM12 afterburning turbofan, rated at 54 kN (12,100 lbf) dry thrust

and 80.5 kN (18,100 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: Mach 1.5 (1,640 km/h, 1,020 mph at 9,144 m or 30,000 ft)

Range: 1,851 km (1,150 mi)

Service ceiling: 14,630 m (48,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 198 m/s (39,000 ft/min)

Thrust/weight: 0.96

Max g limit: -3 g / +8 g

 

Armament:

1× 27mm Mauser BK-27 revolver cannon with 120 rounds

A total of 7 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip and one under fuselage)

for up to 3,740 kg (8,250 lb) of payload

  

The kit and its assembly:

A rare thing concerning my builds: an alternative reality whif. A fictional air force of an independent Scotland crept into my mind after the hysterical “Brexit” events in 2016 and the former (failed) public vote concerning the independence of Scotland from the UK. What would happen to the military, if the independence would take place, nevertheless, and British forces left the country?

 

The aforementioned Scottish National Party (SNP) paper from 2013 is real, and I took it as a benchmark. Primary focus would certainly be set on air space defense, and the Gripen appears as a good and not too expensive choice. The Sk 90 is a personal invention, but would fulfill a good complementary role.

Nevertheless, another multi-role aircraft would make sense as an addition, and both M-346 and T-50 caught my eye (Russian options were ruled out due to the tense political relations), and I gave the TA-50 the “Go” because of its engine and its proximity to the Gripen.

 

The T-50 really looks like the juvenile offspring from a date between an F-16 and an F-18. There’s even a kit available, from Academy – but it’s a Snap-Fit offering without a landing gear but, as an alternative, a clear display that can be attached to the engine nozzle. It also comes with stickers instead of waterslide decals. This sounds crappy and toy-like, but, after taking a close look at kit reviews, I gave it a try.

 

And I am positively surprised. While the kit consists of only few parts, moulded in the colors of a ROCAF trainer as expected, the surfaces have minute, engraved detail. Fit is very good, too, and there’s even a decent cockpit that’s actually better than the offering of some “normal” model kits. The interior comes with multi-part seats, side consoles and dashboards that feature correctly shaped instrument details (no decals). The air intakes are great, too: seamless, with relatively thin walls, nice!

 

So far, so good. But not enough. I could have built the kit OOB with the landing gear tucked up, but I went for the more complicated route and trans-/implanted the complete landing gear from an Intech F-16, which is available for less than EUR 5,- (and not much worth, to be honest). AFAIK, there’s white metal landing gear for the T-50 available from Scale Aircraft Conversions, but it’s 1:48 and for this set’s price I could have bought three Intech F-16s…

 

But back to the conversion. This landing gear transplantation stunt sounds more complicated as it actually turned out to be. For the front wheel well I simply cut a long opening into the fuselage and added inside a styrene sheet as a well roof, attached under the cockpit floor.

For the main landing gear I just opened the flush covers on the T-50 fuselage, cut out the interior from the Intech F-16, tailored it a little and glued it into its new place.

 

This was made easy by the fact that the T-50 is a bit smaller than the F-16, so that the transplants are by tendency a little too large and offer enough “flesh” for adaptations. Once in place, the F-16 struts were mounted (also slightly tailored to fit well) and covers added. The front wheel cover was created with 0.5 mm styrene sheet, for the main covers I used the parts from the Intech F-16 kit because they were thinner than the leftover T-50 fuselage parts and feature some surface detail on the inside. They had to be adapted in size, though. But the operation worked like a charm, highly recommended!

 

Around the hull, some small details like missing air scoops, some pitots and antennae were added. In a bout of boredom (while waiting for ordered parts…) I also added static dischargers on the aerodynamic surfaces’ trailing edges – the kit comes with obvious attachment points, and they are a small detail that improves the modern look of the T-50 even more.

 

Since the Academy kit comes clean with only a ventral drop tank as ordnance, underwing pylons from a SEPECAT Jaguar (resin aftermarket parts from Pavla) and a pair of AGM-65 from the Italeri NATO Weapons set plus launch rails were added, plus a pair of Sidewinders (from a Hasegawa AAM set, painted as blue training rounds) on the wing tip launch rails.

Since the T-50 trainer comes unarmed, a gun nozzle had to be added – its position is very similar to the gun on board of the F-16, on the upper side of the port side LERX. Another addition are conformal chaff/flare dispensers at the fin’s base, adding some beef to the sleek aircraft.

  

Painting and markings:

I did not want a grey-in-grey livery, yet something “different” and rather typical or familiar for the British isles. My approach is actually a compromise, with classic RAF colors and design features inspired by camouflage experiments of the German Luftwaffe on F-4F Phantoms and Alpha Jets in the early Eighties.

 

For the upper sides I went for a classic British scheme, in Dark Green and Dark Sea Grey (Humbrol 163 and 164), colors I deem very appropriate for the Scottish landscape and for potential naval operations. These were combined with elements from late RAF interceptors: Barley Grey (Humbrol 167) for the flanks including the pylons, plus Light Aircraft Grey (Humbrol 166) for the undersides, with a relatively high waterline and a grey fin, so that a side or lower view would rather blend with the sky than the ground below.

 

Another creative field were the national markings: how could fictional Scottish roundels look like, and how to create them so that they are easy to make and replicate (for a full set for this kit, as well as for potential future builds…)? Designing and printing marking decals myself was an option, but I eventually settled for a composite solution which somewhat influenced the roundels’ design, too.

My Scottish roundel interpretationconsists of a blue disk with a white cross – it’s simple, different from any other contemporary national marking, esp. the UK roundel, and easy to create from single decal parts. In fact, the blue roundels were die-punched from blue decal sheet, and the cross consists of two thin white decal strips, cut into the correct length with the same stencil, using generic sheet material from TL Modellbau.

 

Another issue was the potential tactical code, and a small fleet only needs a simple system. Going back to a WWII system with letter codes for squadrons and individual aircraft was one option, but, IMHO, too complicated. I adopted the British single letter aircraft code, though, since this system is very traditional, but since the RoScAC would certainly not operate too many squadrons, I rather adapted a system similar to the Swedish or Spanish format with a single number representing the squadron. The result is a simple 2-digit code, and I adapted the German system of placing the tactical code on the fuselage, separated by the roundel. Keeping British traditions up I repeated the individual aircraft code letter on the fin, where a Scottish flag, a small, self-printed Fife coat-or-arms and a serial number were added, too.

 

The kit saw only light weathering and shading, and the kit was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

Creating this whif, based on an alternative historic timeline with a near future perspective, was fun – and it might spawn more models that circle around the story. A Scottish Sk 90 and a Gripen are certain options (and for both I have kits in the stash…), but there might also be an entry level trainer, some helicopters for the army and SAR duties, as well as a transport aircraft. The foundation has been laid out, now it’s time to fill Scotland’s history to come with detail and proof. ;-)

 

Besides, despite being a snap-fit kit, Academy’s T-50 is a nice basis, reminding me of some Hobby Boss kits but with less flaws (e .g. most of the interiors), except for the complete lack of a landing gear. But with the F-16 and Jaguar transplants the simple kit developed into something more convincing.

Center Healthy Diet plan Pointer

 

Mass command as well as normal physical exercise are actually important for keeping your cardiovascular system in condition-- but the food items you eat might matter merely as a lot. A heart-healthy eating plan can lower your hazard of heart problem or movement by 80 %. By knowing which meals together with the strategies of food preparation are actually healthiest for your center, you may be capable to manage or perhaps protect against heart problem and higher blood tension, and also get greater control over the top-notch together with the span of your lifestyle.

Within this Write-up:.

 

You can prevent heart illness.

Remove filled and trans fats.

Choose foods items that decrease cholesterol levels.

Steer understandable of salt together with the processed foods items.

Get back residence food preparation.

Concentrate on high-fiber meals.

Command section measurements-- and your weight.

 

Print this! Ordinary Text SizeLarger Words SizeLargest Text Dimension.

You can go through actions to stop heart problem.

 

Cardiovascular disease may be the leading fantastic of women and guys, yet that does not suggest you can't shield your own self. Aside from exercise, bewaring about which you eat-- and what you don't consume-- may help you reduced blood cholesterol, management blood stress as well as blood glucose degrees, and preserve a healthy and balanced mass. If you have actually actually been recognized with cardiovascular disease or perhaps experience high cholesterol levels or perhaps blood pressure, a heart-smart diet regimen can assist you much better manage these problems, lowering your hazard for soul spell.

 

Improving your diet regimen is an important measure to stopping cardiovascular disease, but you could feel unsure where to start. Check out at the huge image: your total consuming designs are more vital compared to consuming over various meals. No singular food can easily create you like magic healthy and balanced, therefore your objective could be to combine a range of well-balanced meals cooked in healthy and balanced methods in to your diet plan, and create these habits your brand-new way of living.

Consume Much more.

 

Eat Much less.

 

Well-balanced fatty tissues: raw nuts, olive oil, fish oils, flax seeds, or perhaps avocados.

 

Trans fats through partially hydrogenated or even deep-fried foods items; saturated fatty tissues from whole-fat dairy or red food.

 

Nutrients: vibrant fruits together with the vegetables-- frosted or perhaps clean, well prepared without butter.

 

Packaged foods items of any type of kind, specifically those steep in salt.

 

Nutrient: cereals, breadstuffs, and pasta made because of entire grains or even vegetables.

 

White or egg cell breadstuffs, granola-type cereals, fine-tuned noodles or even rice.

 

Omega 3 and protein: fish and shellfish, fowl.

 

Reddish food, sausage, bratwurst, fried chick.

 

Calcium and also protein: Egg dress uniforms, egg alternatives, skim or 1 % milk, nonfat or low-fat cheeses or yogurt.

 

Egg yolks, entire or even 2 percentage milk, whole milk goods like cheese or yogurt.

Heart well-balanced diet recommendations: Remove saturated as well as trans fatty tissues.

 

Both types of fat raise your LDL, or "poor" blood cholesterol degree, which can easily improve your threat for center attack together with the shock. Keep these root causes in thoughts as you make and prepare food items choices-- together with the understand how to prevent them.

 

Boundary solid fat. Minimize the volume of sturdy fatty tissues like butter, margarine, or minimizing you include in food items when cooking or perhaps serving. As an alternative of cooking along with butter, as an example, flavor your meals using natural herbs or lemon juice. You could also restrict strong fat by trimming down fat off your meat or perhaps deciding on leaner healthy proteins.

Substitute. Swap out high-fat foods items for their lower-fat equivalents. Leading your cooked potato, for instance, with condiment or low-fat yogurt instead compared to butter, or make use of low-sugar fruit array on your toast as opposed to margarine. When food preparation, use liquefied oils like canola, safflower, olive, or sunflower, as well as alternative a couple of egg cell whites for one entire egg cell in a formula.

Be label-savvy. Check food tags on any kind of equipped meals. Numerous treats, perhaps even those labeled "lowered fatty tissue," may be actually created along with oils including trans fats. One clue that a food gets some trans fatty tissue is the phrase "somewhat hydrogenated." As well as seek concealed fatty tissue; refried beans might contain lard, or perhaps breakfast grains may experience substantial amounts of fatty tissue.

The finest way to avoid saturated or even trans fats is to modify your way of life methods. Rather of flakes, snack on fruit or perhaps vegetables.

 

Not all fats are actually poor for your center.

 

While saturated and also trans fats are roadblocks to a healthy soul, unsaturated fats are actually essential completely health. You merely need to find out the difference. "Good" fats feature:.

 

Omega 3 Fatty Acids. Greasy fish like salmon, trout, or even herring as well as flax seed, canola oil, as well as walnuts all have polyunsaturated fatty tissues that are actually important for the physical body.

Omega 6 Fatty Acids. Vegetable oils, soy nuts, together with the numerous sorts of seeds all consist of healthy and balanced fatty tissues.

Monounsaturated fats. Almonds, cashews, pecans, butters, and also peanuts created because of these nuts, along with coconuts, are all good origins of "good" fat.

 

Center well-balanced diet plan tips: Pick foods items that decrease cholesterol.

 

Unwell blood cholesterol degrees raise your risk for cardiovascular disease, therefore keeping yours reasonable is actually fundamental to a healthier center. Your diet regimen is actually central to handling your blood cholesterol. Some foods may in fact reduce your cholesterol levels, while others just produce issues worse.

 

Foods including higher levels of filled fatty tissues or trans fats-- such as spud nicks and packaged cookies-- can easily improve your cholesterol levels much more significantly than cholesterol levels- containing meals such as eggs. Filled fat and trans fat both increase LDL ("harmful") blood cholesterol.

Make practical selections. Decide on foods rich in unsaturated fatty tissues, nutrient, and healthy protein. Fruits, vegetables, fish, seeds, nuts, and also beans are all terrific blood cholesterol regulators. The most effective foods items for lowering cholesterol levels are actually oatmeal, fish, pines (together with the additional nuts), olive oil, and also meals strengthened using sterols or even stanols-- compounds located in flowers that aid block out the immersion of blood cholesterol.

Bear in mind that labels can easily be deceiving. Browsing food tags can easily normally be complexed since packaged meals with labels like "cholesterol free" or "low blood cholesterol" aren't essentially heart-healthy; they may perhaps even contain blood cholesterol that is actually heart-risky. Stay with basics whenever possible: fruit, veggies, nuts, as well as slim healthy proteins.

 

Reducing your blood cholesterol with fish or perhaps fish oil supplements.

 

By extraing fish like or even herring to your eating plan two times a full week, you can drastically decrease your cholesterol levels, and also thus your threat for cardiovascular system attack. Fish include omega-3 greasy acids, which work like superheroes, performing kindness for your heart-- together with the your whole physical body.

Heart healthy diet plan tips: Stay away from salt and also refined meals.

 

Consuming a number of sodium could help in high blood stress, which is a huge danger aspect for heart attack. Minimizing the salt in your food items is a huge part of a heart-healthy nutrition. The American citizen Cardiovascular system Association recommends just concerning a tsp of sodium a time for an adult. That may seem amazingly small, however there are really several painless-- also scrumptious-- ways to decrease your salt ingestion.

 

Lessen tinned or refined foods. Much of the salt you consume comes through canned or procedured foods like soups or even held up suppers-- even chicken or even additional meats frequently have actually sodium extrad during processing. Consuming new foods items, trying to find saltless meats, together with the creating your personal soups or mishmashes may drastically lessen your sodium ingestion.

Prepare in your house, making use of flavors for taste. Cooking for your own good allows you to have more command over your salt intake. Make use of the numerous mouth watering substitutes to salt. Try new herbs like tulsi, thyme, or even chives. In the dried out seasonings church aisle, you can locate substitutes including allspice, gulf leaves behind, or cumin to taste your food without salt.

Replacement reduced salt variations, or even salt replacements. Select your dressings together with the packaged foods cautiously, seeking meals classified sodium free, low salt, or unsalted. Much better yet, utilize new ingredients together with the chef without sodium.

 

The SPRINKLE diet for decreasing blood pressure.

 

The Dietary Approaches to Quit High blood pressure, or DASH nutrition, is actually a particularly created eating strategy to help you lower your blood tension, which is actually a major cause of high blood pressure and stroke. To find out much more, download the brochure from the National Heart, Lung, and also Blood Institute found in the Funds and References area underneath.

Cardiovascular system well-balanced diet regimen pointers: Revive home food preparation.

 

This's remarkably complicated to eat right for your heart when you are actually consuming out a lot, ordering in, or even eating microwave suppers together with the various other procedured meals. The really good headlines is actually that you could understand to create quick, core meals in your home. This is actually easier and also reduced time-consuming compared to you may think.

Heart-healthy grocery purchasing as well as keeping.

 

Producing a heart-friendly diet begins using keeping your refrigerator using obtainable and healthy meals. Prep a checklist just before you browse through the outlet or even agriculturalist's market, and also keep a little bit of time after your travel to establish your own self up for effectiveness in the course of the week.

Check out marks.

 

While browsing the church aisles of a supermarket in the USA, try to find meals showing the American citizen Center Association's heart-check mark to find heart-healthy foods. This company logo means that the food has been actually accredited to accommodate the American citizen Heart Association's requirements for filled fat and cholesterol levels. In Melbourne, seek the Soul Foundation Tick.

 

United states Soul Affiliation.

 

American citizen Heart Association.

 

Australian Soul Structure.

 

Australian Heart Foundation.

 

Heal substitutions. Decide on substitutions like 1 % or skimmed milk as opposed to whole milk, limp margarine for butter, and also lean meats like chicken and fish in spot of ribs or perhaps area food. These alternatives can easily save you a whole time's truly worth of saturated fatty tissue.

Make foods ready-to-eat. When you create healthy and balanced meals very easy to get in the course of your active week, you are actually much more likely to remain heart-healthy. When you come house from grocery purchasing, vilified fruits and also veggies and keep all of them in the fridge, all set for the following food or even when you are actually looking for a ready-to-eat treat.

Use your fridge. Heal consuming less complicated by freezing heart-healthy foods in one-on-one portions. Freeze fruits for example, strawberries, grapes, as well as orange slices to make them far more entertaining to eat for children. Be actually thorough with part dimensions: the highly recommended offering of prepared food has to do with the dimension of a deck of cards, while a serving of noodles ought to be actually about the measurements of a ball.

 

Heart-healthy cooking suggestions.

Healthy and balanced Formulas Could Save Cash.

 

When you ready and also cook dishes at home, you possess far better management over the dietary material as well as the total healthfulness of the meals you eat. An added incentive: you could likewise conserve cash.

 

Develop a public library of heart-healthy recipes. Stockpile on heart-healthy cookbooks and also dishes for food preparation ideas. The net is total of meals blog sites and also websites committed to well-balanced cooking approaches and dishes, and a regional collection may be a great source for recipe books.

Make use of heart-healthy cooking procedures. Only as necessary as selecting healthy foods items at the grocery outlet is how you cook those meals in to healthy dishes. Use low-fat strategies: you can easily bake, broil, microwave, roast, vapor, poach, softly stir fry, or even sauté-- utilizing a little quantity of veggie or olive oil, lessened salt broth, together with the seasonings.

Cook only two times a week as well as create meals for the whole full week. Preparing healthy food items ahead of time this method is actually perhaps the most convenient, money-saving, and heart-saving approach readily available.

 

Core healthy and balanced eating plan suggestions: Concentrate on high-fiber meals.

 

A diet plan higher in fiber could reduce "bad" cholesterol levels and supply nutrients that may help safeguard versus heart disease. Through replacing up on whole grains, vegetables, and fruits, you may have many of the fiber you'll require, which signifies you'll also be decreasing your hazard of heart problem.

Opt for entire grains.

 

Clarified or refined meals are lower in nutrient material, therefore make whole grains an intrinsic component of your eating plan. There are lots of easy means to add whole grains to your foods.

 

Breakfast more efficiently. For morning meal opt for a high-fiber breakfast grain-- one with 5 or even additional grams of nutrient per serving. Or extra a handful of tablespoons of raw wheat or grain bran to your best-loved grain.

Try a brand-new grain. Try out wild rice, untamed rice, barley, whole-wheat noodles, and also bulgur. These substitutes are actually much higher in nutrient compared to their more mainstream equivalents-- and you could find you enjoy their flavors.

Expand your cooking. When cooking in the house, substitute whole-grain flour for one-half or all the white flour, due to the fact that whole-grain flour is heavier compared to white flour. In yeast breads, utilize a little far more yeast or permit the dough increase much longer. Try including crushed bran cereal or perhaps raw wheat or grain bran to buns, cakes, and also biscuits.

Incorporate flaxseed. Flaxseeds are small brown seeds that are high in nutrient and omega-3 greasy acids, which may reduce your complete blood cholesterol levels. You can grind the seeds in a coffee mill or perhaps meals processor together with the rouse a teaspoon of them into natural yogurt, applesauce, or perhaps hot cereal.

 

Eat a variety of veggies as well as fruits.

 

The majority of vegetables and fruits are reduced in calories and also high in nutrient, making all of them core healthy and balanced. You can easily make use of a couple of the observing approaches to make consuming veggies as well as fruits aspect of your diet regimen everyday.

 

Maintain vegetables and fruit at your fingertips. Wash and also cut fruit together with the veggies and put all of them in your fridge for quick as well as healthy treats. Decide on dishes that include these high-fiber components, like vegetable stir-fries or even salad.

Combine veggies into your cooking. Include pre-cut fresh or perhaps icy vegetables to sauces together with the soups. For instance, mix cut frozen cabbages into ready pastas dressing or toss fresh infant carrots in to stews.

Don't leave out the vegetables. Legumes are fiber-rich, too. Consume even more lentils, grains, together with the greens. Incorporate renal system beans to canned soup or a green salad.

Make snacks matter. Wholesome and dried out fruit, raw veggies, as well as whole-grain biscuits are all great means to add nutrient at snack precious time. A periodic handful of nuts is actually also a healthy, high-fiber snack.

 

Center healthy and balanced diet plan pointers: Management portion measurements-- and your mass.

 

Acquiring or even holding excess weight indicates that your cardiovascular system ought to operate harder, together with the this often causes hypertension-- a huge source of heart disease. Accomplishing a healthy physique mass is actually essential to lowering your danger of heart problem. Lowering part sizes is actually an important action to shedding or even preserving a healthy and balanced mass. Attempt the subsequent strategies to control your portion dimensions:.

 

A serving measurements is a particular quantity of meals, specified by popular measurements such as cups, pieces, or perhaps oz.s-- and a well-balanced offering measurements may be actually an area more compact compared to you are actually used to. Evaluating providing measurements is actually a know skill, so you may need to use determining cups, spoons, and a food items range to assist.

Eyeball this. The moment you get a more desirable plan of just what a providing should be actually, you can easily predict your portion. You could use usual materials for reference; for example, an offering of pasta should be about the size of a ball (a little smaller sized than a cricket ball), while an offering of poultry, food, or even fish concerns the measurements and also density of a deck of playing cards.

Be mindful of bistro parts. Sections served in bistros are often far more than anyone demands. Split an entrée using your dining companion, or even enjoy half your dish home for tomorrow's lunch time.

 

No solitary food items may make you like magic healthy and balanced, so your target could be actually to integrate a number of healthy and balanced meals prepared in well-balanced means in to your eating plan, and also create these practices your new way of life.

The ideal foods for lowering cholesterol levels are actually oatmeal, fish, pines (as well as other nuts), tawny oil, together with the foods items fortified along with sterols or even stanols-- materials discovered in flowers that help obstruct the absorption of blood cholesterol.

Browsing food tags can easily commonly be actually complicated since packaged foods with tags like "blood cholesterol cost-free" or even "low blood cholesterol" aren't automatically heart-healthy; they may also include blood cholesterol that's heart-risky. While browsing the alleys of a grocery outlet in the U.S., appearance for foods presenting the American citizen Soul Affiliation's heart-check mark to identify heart-healthy meals. Only as necessary since deciding on well-balanced foods at the grocery outlet is exactly how you cook those foods in to well-balanced foods.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some Background:

During the 1950s, Hindustan Aircraft Limited (HAL) had developed and produced several types of trainer aircraft, such as the HAL HT-2. However, elements within the firm were eager to expand into the then-new realm of supersonic fighter aircraft. Around the same time, the Indian government was in the process of formulating a new Air Staff Requirement for a Mach 2-capable combat aircraft to equip the Indian Air Force (IAF). However, as HAL lacked the necessary experience in both developing and manufacturing frontline combat fighters, it was clear that external guidance would be invaluable; this assistance was embodied by Kurt Tank.

 

In 1956, HAL formally began design work on the supersonic fighter project. The Indian government, led by Jawaharlal Nehru, authorized the development of the aircraft, stating that it would aid in the development of a modern aircraft industry in India. The first phase of the project sought to develop an airframe suitable for travelling at supersonic speeds, and able to effectively perform combat missions as a fighter aircraft, while the second phase sought to domestically design and produce an engine capable of propelling the aircraft. Early on, there was an explicit adherence to satisfying the IAF's requirements for a capable fighter bomber; attributes such as a twin-engine configuration and a speed of Mach 1.4 to 1.5 were quickly emphasized, and this led to the HF-24 Marut.

 

On 24 June 1961, the first prototype Marut conducted its maiden flight. It was powered by the same Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 turbojets that had powered the Folland Gnat, also being manufactured by HAL at that time. On 1 April 1967, the first production Marut was delivered to the IAF. While originally intended only as an interim measure during testing, HAL decided to power production Maruts with a pair of unreheated Orpheus 703s, meaning the aircraft could not attain supersonic speed. Although originally conceived to operate around Mach 2 the Marut in fact was barely capable of reaching Mach 1 due to the lack of suitably powerful engines.

 

The IAF were reluctant to procure a fighter aircraft only marginally superior to its existing fleet of British-built Hawker Hunters. However, in 1961, the Indian Government decided to procure the Marut, nevertheless, but only 147 aircraft, including 18 two-seat trainers, were completed out of a planned 214. Just after the decision to build the lukewarm Marut, the development of a more advanced aircraft with the desired supersonic performance was initiated.

 

This enterprise started star-crossed, though: after the Indian Government conducted its first nuclear tests at Pokhran, international pressure prevented the import of better engines of Western origin, or at times, even spares for the Orpheus engines, so that the Marut never realized its full potential due to insufficient power, and it was relatively obsolescent by the time it reached production.

Due to these restrictions India looked for other sources for supersonic aircraft and eventually settled upon the MiG-21 F-13 from the Soviet Union, which entered service in 1964. While fast and agile, the Fishbed was only a short-range daylight interceptor. It lacked proper range for escort missions and air space patrols, and it had no radar that enabled it to conduct all-weather interceptions. To fill this operational gap, the new indigenous HF-26 project was launched around the same time.

 

For the nascent Indian aircraft industry, HF-26 had a demanding requirements specification: the aircraft was to achieve Mach 2 top speed at high altitude and carry a radar with a guided missile armament that allowed interceptions in any weather, day and night. The powerplant question was left open, but it was clear from the start that a Soviet engine would be needed, since an indigenous development of a suitable powerplant would take much too long and block vital resources, and western alternatives were out of reach. The mission profile and the performance requirements quickly defined the planned aircraft’s layout: To fit a radar, the air intakes with movable ramps to feed the engines were placed on the fuselage flanks. To make sure the aircraft would fulfill its high-performance demands, it was right from the outset powered by two engines, and it was decided to give it delta wings, a popular design among high-speed aircraft of the time – exemplified by the highly successful Dassault Mirage III (which was to be delivered to Pakistan in 1967). With two engines, the HF-26 would be a heavier aircraft than the Mirage III, though, and it was planned to operate the aircraft from semi-prepared airfields, so that it would receive a robust landing gear with low-pressure tires and a brake parachute.

 

In 1962 India was able to negotiate the delivery of Tumansky RD-9 turbojet engines from the Soviet Union, even though no afterburner was part of the deal – this had to be indigenously developed by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). However, this meant that the afterburner could be tailored to the HF-26, and this task would provide HAL with valuable engineering experience, too.

Now knowing the powerplant, HAL created a single-seater airframe around it, a rather robust design that superficially reminded of the French Mirage III, but there were fundamental differences. The HF-26 had boxy air intakes with movable ramps to control the airflow to the two engines and a relatively wide fuselage to hold them and most of the fuel in tanks between the air ducts behind the cockpit. The aircraft had a single swept fin and a rather small mid-positioned delta-wing with a 60° sweep. The pilot sat under a tight canopy that offered - similar to the Mirage III - only limited all-round vision.

The HF-26's conical nose radome covered an antenna for a ‘Garud’ interception radar – which was in fact a downgraded Soviet ‘Oryol' (Eagle; NATO reporting name 'Skip Spin') system that guided the HF-26’s main armament, a pair of semi-active radar homing (SARH) ‚Saanp’ missiles.

 

The Saanp missile was developed specifically for the HF-26 in India but used many components of Soviet origin, too, so that they were compatible with the radar. In performance, the Saanp was comparable with the French Matra R.530 air-to-air missile, even though the aerodynamic layout was reversed, with steering fins at the front end, right behind the SARH seaker head - overall the missile reminded of an enlarged AIM-4 Falcon. The missile weighed 180 kg and had a length of 3.5 m. Power came from a two-stage solid rocket that offered a maximum thrust of 80 kN for 2.7 s during the launch phase plus 6.5 s cruise. Maximum speed was Mach 2.7 and operational range was 1.5 to 20 km (0.9 to 12.5 miles). Two of these missiles could be carried on the main wing hardpoints in front of the landing gear wells. Alternatively, infrared-guided R-3 (AA-2 ‘Atoll’) short-range AAMs could be carried by the HF-26, too, and typically two of these were carried on the outer underwing hardpoints, which were plumbed to accept drop tanks (typically supersonic PTB-490s that were carried by the IAF's MiG-21s, too) . Initially, no internal gun was envisioned, as the HF-26 was supposed to be a pure high-speed/high-altitude interceptor that would not engage in dogfights. Two more hardpoints under the fuselage were plumbed, too, for a total of six external stations.

 

Due to its wing planform, the HF-26 was soon aptly called “Teer” (= Arrow), and with Soviet help the first prototype was rolled out in early 1964 and presented to the public. The first flight, however, would take place almost a year later in January 1965, due to many technical problems, and these were soon complemented by aerodynamic problems. The original delta-winged HF-26 had poor take-off and landing characteristics, and directional stability was weak, too. While a second prototype was under construction in April 1965 the first aircraft was lost after it had entered a spin from which the pilot could not escape – the aircraft crashed and its pilot was killed during the attempt to eject.

 

After this loss HAL investigated an enlarged fin and a modified wing design with deeper wingtips with lower sweep, which increased wing area and improved low speed handling, too. Furthermore, the fuselage shape had to be modified, too, to reduce supersonic drag, and a more pronounced area ruling was introduced. The indigenous afterburner for the RD-9 engines was unstable and troublesome, too.

It took until 1968 and three more flying prototypes (plus two static airframes) to refine the Teer for serial production service introduction. In this highly modified form, the aircraft was re-designated HF-26M and the first machines were delivered to IAF No. 3 Squadron in late 1969. However, it would take several months until a fully operational status could be achieved. By that time, it was already clear that the Teer, much like the HF-24 Marut before, could not live up to its expectations and was at the brink of becoming obsolete as it entered service. The RD-9 was not a modern engine anymore, and despite its indigenous afterburner – which turned out not only to be chronically unreliable but also to be very thirsty when engaged – the Teer had a disappointing performance: The fighter only achieved a top speed of Mach 1.6 at full power, and with full external load it hardly broke the wall of sound in level flight. Its main armament, the Saanp AAM, also turned out to be unreliable even under ideal conditions.

 

However, the HF-26M came just in time to take part in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and was, despite its weaknesses, extensively used – even though not necessarily in its intended role. High-flying slow bombers were not fielded during the conflict, and the Teer remained, despite its on-board radar, heavily dependent on ground control interception (GCI) to vector its pilot onto targets coming in at medium and even low altitude. The HF-26M had no capability against low-flying aircraft either, so that pilots had to engage incoming, low-flying enemy aircraft after visual identification – a task the IAF’s nimble MiG-21s were much better suited for. Escorts and air cover missions for fighter-bombers were flown, too, but the HF-26M’s limited range only made it a suitable companion for the equally short-legged Su-7s. The IAF Canberras were frequently deployed on longer range missions, but the HF-26Ms simply could not follow them all the time; for a sufficient range the Teer had to carry four drop tanks, what increased drag and only left the outer pair of underwing hardpoints (which were not plumbed) free for a pair of AA-2 missiles. With the imminent danger of aerial close range combat, though, During the conflict with Pakistan, most HF-26M's were retrofitted with rear-view mirrors in their canopies to improve the pilot's field of view, and a passive IR sensor was added in a small fairing under the nose to improve the aircraft's all-weather capabilities and avoid active radar emissions that would warn potential prey too early.

 

The lack of an internal gun turned out to be another great weakness of the Teer, and this was only lightly mended through the use of external gun pods. Two of these cigar-shaped pods that resembled the Soviet UPK-23 pod could be carried on the two ventral pylons, and each contained a 23 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L autocannon of Soviet origin with 200 rounds. Technically these pods were very similar to the conformal GP-9 pods carried by the IAF MiG-21FLs. While the gun pods considerably improved the HF-26M’s firepower and versatility, the pods were draggy, blocked valuable hardpoints (from extra fuel) and their recoil tended to damage the pylons as well as the underlying aircraft structure, so that they were only commissioned to be used in an emergency.

 

However, beyond air-to-air weapons, the HF-26M could also carry ordnance of up to 1.000 kg (2.207 lb) on the ventral and inner wing hardpoints and up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) on the other pair of wing hardpoints, including iron bombs and/or unguided missile pods. However, the limited field of view from the cockpit over the radome as well as the relatively high wing loading did not recommend the aircraft for ground attack missions – even though these frequently happened during the conflict with Pakistan. For these tactical missions, many HF-26Ms lost their original overall natural metal finish and instead received camouflage paint schemes on squadron level, resulting in individual and sometimes even spectacular liveries. Most notable examples were the Teer fighters of No. 1 Squadron (The Tigers), which sported various camouflage adaptations of the unit’s eponym.

 

Despite its many deficiencies, the HF-26M became heavily involved in the Indo-Pakistan conflict. As the Indian Army tightened its grip in East Pakistan, the Indian Air Force continued with its attacks against Pakistan as the campaign developed into a series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar, and close-support attacks by fighter jets, with night attacks against airfields and strategic targets by Canberras and An-12s, while Pakistan responded with similar night attacks with its B-57s and C-130s.

The PAF deployed its F-6s mainly on defensive combat air patrol missions over their own bases, leaving the PAF unable to conduct effective offensive operations.  Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against PAF forward air bases in Pakistan until the end of the war, and interdiction and close-support operations were maintained. One of the most successful air raids by India into West Pakistan happened on 8 December 1971, when Indian Hunter aircraft from the Pathankot-based 20 Squadron, attacked the Pakistani base in Murid and destroyed 5 F-86 aircraft on the ground.

The PAF played a more limited role in the operations, even though they were reinforced by Mirages from an unidentified Middle Eastern ally (whose identity remains unknown). The IAF was able to conduct a wide range of missions – troop support; air combat; deep penetration strikes; para-dropping behind enemy lines; feints to draw enemy fighters away from the actual target; bombing and reconnaissance. India flew 1,978 sorties in the East and about 4,000 in Pakistan, while the PAF flew about 30 and 2,840 at the respective fronts.  More than 80 percent of IAF sorties were close-support and interdiction and about 45 IAF aircraft were lost, including three HF-26Ms. Pakistan lost 60 to 75 aircraft, not including any F-86s, Mirage IIIs, or the six Jordanian F-104s which failed to return to their donors. The imbalance in air losses was explained by the IAF's considerably higher sortie rate and its emphasis on ground-attack missions. The PAF, which was solely focused on air combat, was reluctant to oppose these massive attacks and rather took refuge at Iranian air bases or in concrete bunkers, refusing to offer fights and respective losses.

 

After the war, the HF-26M was officially regarded as outdated, and as license production of the improved MiG-21FL (designated HAL Type 77 and nicknamed “Trishul” = Trident) and later of the MiG-21M (HAL Type 88) was organized in India, the aircraft were quickly retired from frontline units. They kept on serving into the Eighties, though, but now restricted to their original interceptor role. Beyond the upgrades from the Indo-Pakistani War, only a few upgrades were made. For instance, the new R-60 AAM was introduced to the HF-26M and around 1978 small (but fixed) canards were retrofitted to the air intakes behind the cockpit that improved the Teer’s poor slow speed control and high landing speed as well as the aircraft’s overall maneuverability.

A radar upgrade, together with the introduction of better air-to-ai missiles with a higher range and look down/shoot down capability was considered but never carried out. Furthermore, the idea of a true HF-26 2nd generation variant, powered by a pair of Tumansky R-11F-300 afterburner jet engines (from the license-built MiG-21FLs), was dropped, too – even though this powerplant eventually promised to fulfill the Teer’s design promise of Mach 2 top speed. A total of only 82 HF-26s (including thirteen two-seat trainers with a lengthened fuselage and reduced fuel capacity, plus eight prototypes) were built. The last aircraft were retired from IAF service in 1988 and replaced with Mirage 2000 fighters procured from France that were armed with the Matra Super 530 AAM.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 14.97 m (49 ft ½ in)

Wingspan: 9.43 m (30 ft 11 in)

Height: 4.03 m (13 ft 2½ in)

Wing area: 30.6 m² (285 sq ft)

Empty weight: 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)

Gross weight: 10,954 kg (24,149 lb) with full internal fuel

Max takeoff weight: 15,700 kg (34,613 lb) with external stores

 

Powerplant:

2× Tumansky RD-9 afterburning turbojet engines; 29 kN (6,600 lbf) dry thrust each

and 36.78 kN (8,270 lbf) with afterburner

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,700 km/h (1,056 mph; 917 kn; Mach 1.6) at 11,000 m (36,000 ft)

1,350 km/h (840 mph, 730 kn; Mach 1.1) at sea level

Combat range: 725 km (450 mi, 391 nmi) with internal fuel only

Ferry range: 1,700 km (1,100 mi, 920 nmi) with four drop tanks

Service ceiling: 18,100 m (59,400 ft)

g limits: +6.5

Time to altitude: 9,145 m (30,003 ft) in 1 minute 30 seconds

Wing loading: 555 kg/m² (114 lb/sq ft)

 

Armament

6× hardpoints (four underwing and two under the fuselage) for a total of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb);

Typical interceptor payload:

- two IR-guided R-3 or R-60 air-to-air-missiles or

two PTB-490 drop tanks on the outer underwing stations

- two semi-active radar-guided ‚Saanp’ air-to-air missiles or two more R-3 or R-60 AAMs

on inner underwing stations

- two 500 l drop tanks or two gun pods with a 23 mm GSh-23L autocannon and 200 RPG

each under the fuselage

  

The kit and its assembly:

This whiffy delta-wing fighter was inspired when I recently sliced up a PM Model Su-15 kit for my side-by-side-engine BAC Lightning build. At an early stage of the conversion, I held the Su-15 fuselage with its molded delta wings in my hand and wondered if a shortened tail section (as well as a shorter overall fuselage to keep proportions balanced) could make a delta-wing jet fighter from the Flagon base? Only a hardware experiment could yield an answer, and since the Su-15’s overall outlines look a bit retro I settled at an early stage on India as potential designer and operator, as “the thing the HF-24 Marut never was”.

 

True to the initial idea, work started on the tail, and I chopped off the fuselage behind the wings’ trailing edge. Some PSR was necessary to blend the separate exhaust section into the fuselage, which had to be reduced in depth through wedges that I cut out under the wings trailing edge, plus some good amount of glue and sheer force the bend the section a bit upwards. The PM Model's jet exhausts were drilled open, and I added afterburner dummies inside - anything would look better than the bleak vertical walls inside after only 2-3 mm! The original fin was omitted, because it was a bit too large for the new, smaller aircraft and its shape reminded a lot of the Suchoj heavy fighter family. It was replaced with a Mirage III/V fin, left over from a (crappy!) Pioneer 2 IAI Nesher kit.

 

Once the rear section was complete, I had to adjust the front end - and here the kitbashing started. First, I chopped off the cockpit section in front of the molded air intake - the Su-15’s long radome and the cockpit on top of the fuselage did not work anymore. As a remedy I remembered another Su-15 conversion I did a (long) while ago: I created a model of a planned ground attack derivative, the T-58Sh, and, as a part of the extensive body work, I transplanted the slanted nose from an academy MiG-27 between the air intakes – a stunt that was relatively easy and which appreciably lowered the cockpit position. For the HF-26M I did something similar, I just transplanted a cockpit from a Hasegawa/Academy MiG-23 with its ogival radome that size-wise better matched with the rest of the leftover Su-15 airframe.

 

The MiG-23 cockpit matched perfectly with the Su-15's front end, just the spinal area behind the cockpit had to be raised/re-sculpted to blend the parts smoothly together. For a different look from the Su-15 ancestry I also transplanted the front sections of the MiG-23 air intakes with their shorter ramps. Some mods had to be made to the Su-15 intake stubs, but the MiG-23 intakes were an almost perfect fit in size and shape and easy to integrate into the modified front hill. The result looks very natural!

However, when the fuselage was complete, I found that the nose appeared to be a bit too long, leaving the whole new hull with the wings somewhat off balance. As a remedy I decided at a rather late stage to shorten the nose and took out a 6 mm section in front of the cockpit - a stunt I had not planned, but sometimes you can judge things only after certain work stages. Some serious PSR was necessary to re-adjust the conical nose shape, which now looked more Mirage III-ish than planned!

 

The cockpit was taken mostly OOB, I just replaced the ejection seat and gave it a trigger handle made from thin wire. With the basic airframe complete it was time for details. The PM Model Su-15s massive and rather crude main landing gear was replaced with something more delicate from the scrap box, even though I retained the main wheels. The front landing gear was taken wholesale from the MiG-23, but had to be shortened for a proper stance.

A display holder adapter was integrated into the belly for the flight scenes, hidden well between the ventral ordnance.

 

The hardpoints, including missile launch rails, came from the MiG-23; the pylons had to be adjusted to match the Su-15's wing profile shape, the Anab missiles lost their tail sections to create the fictional Indian 'Saanp' AAMs. The R-3s on the outer stations were left over from a MP MiG-21. The ventral pylons belong to Academy MiG-23/27s, one came from the donor kit, the other was found in the spares box. The PTB-490 drop tanks also came from a KP MiG-21 (or one of its many reincarnations, not certain).

  

Painting and markings:

The paint scheme for this fictional aircraft was largely inspired by a picture of a whiffy and very attractive Saab 37 Viggen (an 1:72 Airfix kit) in IAF colors, apparently a model from a contest. BTW, India actually considered buying the Viggen for its Air Force!

IAF aircraft were and are known for their exotic and sometimes gawdy paint schemes, and with IAF MiG-21 “C 992” there’s even a very popular (yet obscure) aircraft that sported literal tiger stripes. The IAF Viggen model was surely inspired by this real aircraft, and I adopted something similar for my HF-26M.

 

IAF 1 Squadron was therefore settled, and for the paint scheme I opted for a "stripish" scheme, but not as "tigeresque" as "C 992". I found a suitable benchmark in a recent Libyian MiG-21, which carried a very disruptive two-tone grey scheme. I adapted this pattern to the HA-26M airframe and replaced its colors, similar to the IAF Viggen model, which became a greenish sand tone (a mix of Humbrol 121 with some 159; I later found out that I could have used Humbrol 83 from the beginning, though...) and a very dark olive drab (Humbrol 66, which looks like a dull dark brown in contrast with the sand tone), with bluish grey (Humbrol 247) undersides. With the large delta wings, this turned out to look very good and even effective!

 

For that special "Indian touch" I gave the aircraft a high-contrast fin in a design that I had seen on a real camouflaged IAF MiG-21bis: an overall dark green base with a broad, red vertical stripe which was also the shield for the fin flash and the aircraft's tactical code (on the original bare metal). The fin was first painted in green (Humbrol 2), the red stripe was created with orange-red decal sheet material. Similar material was also used to create the bare metal field for the tactical code, the yellow bars on the splitter plates and for the thin white canopy sealing.

 

After basic painting was done the model received an overall black ink washing, post-panel shading and extensive dry-brushing with aluminum and iron for a rather worn look.

The missiles became classic white, while the drop tanks, as a contrast to the camouflaged belly, were left in bare metal.

 

Decals/markings came primarily from a Begemot MiG-25 kit, the tactical codes on the fin and under the wings originally belong to an RAF post-WWII Spitfire, just the first serial letter was omitted. Stencils are few and they came from various sources. A compromise is the unit badge on the fin: I needed a tiger motif, and the only suitable option I found was the tiger head emblem on a white disc from RAF No. 74 Squadron, from the Matchbox BAC Lightning F.6&F.2A kit. It fits stylistically well, though. ;-)

 

Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (except for the black radome, which became a bit glossy) and finally assembled.

  

A spontaneous build, and the last one that I completed in 2022. However, despite a vague design plan the model evolved as it grew. Bashing the primitive PM Model Su-15 with the Academy MiG-23 parts was easier than expected, though, and the resulting fictional aircraft looks sturdy but quite believable - even though it appears to me like the unexpected child of a Mirage III/F-4 Phantom II intercourse, or like a juvenile CF-105 Arrow, just with mid-wings? Nevertheless, the disruptive paint scheme suits the delta wing fighter well, and the green/red fin is a striking contrast - it's a colorful model, but not garish.

Goole is the furthest inland port in Britain.

 

The port is capable of handling nearly 3 million tonnes of cargo per annum, making it one of the most important ports on the east coast of England.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goole

 

The Yorkshire Waterways Museum

 

An independent Museum that celebrates Yorkshire's waterways heritage.

 

www.waterwaysmuseum.org.uk

 

This is the home of the Tugs and Tom Pudding trains which transported coal from South and West Yorkshire for transfer into larger ships using the boat hoists. These boat hoists are now industrial icons.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Pudding

+++ 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?

Land Rover Defender vehicles have been used by many of the world's military forces, including the US in some limited capacity, following experience with the vehicle during the first Gulf War, where US forces found the British Army's vehicles to be more capable and better suited to operation in urban areas and for air-lifting than the Humvee. The British Army has used Land Rovers since the 1950s, as have many countries in the Commonwealth of Nations. The British Army replaced its Series III fleet with One Tens in 1985, with a smaller fleet of Nineties following in 1986. Both used the 2.5-litre naturally aspirated diesel engine. These older vehicles are reaching the end of their service lives, with many being sold onto the civilian market from the late 1990s.

 

In 1994 Land Rover created the Defender XD (XD= extra duty) to replace and complement these vehicles. Powered by 300Tdi engines, the XD has a much stronger chassis, with fibre webbing around the welded joints in the chassis and around stress points to massively increase load capacity. The XD was available both in Defender 90 and 110 forms and known to the British Army as Land Rover Wolves. Usually 110-inch (2,794 mm) soft or hard tops, they are used for patrol, communications and supply duties. 90XDs are less common, but are generally ordered as soft top or hard top vehicles for light liaison and communications. Short-wheelbase vehicles lack the load capacity needed by modern armies, and the increased power of heavy-lift helicopters has made the larger 110s easily air-transportable- a historic advantage of the smaller, lighter 90.

 

Land Rover offered its "core" military Defenders with the 300Tdi engine rather than the more powerful but more complicated Td5 engine offered in civilian vehicles. The 300 Tdi Defender went into service in the "Green Fleet" from 1998. Before the 300Tdi engine was introduced, military Land Rovers were offered with 2.5-litre petrol and diesel engines, as well as the 3.5-litre V8 petrol. Trials with the Td5 engine proved it to be reliable in battlefield conditions. However, initially it was decided that servicing and repairing its electronic control systems should they fail was too complicated and reliant on having diagnostic computers available. Land Rover were also unable to guarantee they could make the Td5 resistant to the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) generated by a nuclear weapon. However, following successful trials by the Australian Defence Force of the TD5 Landrover, the British MOD purchased a small fleet of TD5 Landrover Defender 110's for its "Green Fleet" between 2000 and 2002. These were specially converted for the MOD by Landrover Specialist Vehicles. They were plated with UK military registration plates and painted IRR green. Most of these vehicles were deployed in the Falklands as troop carriers and communications vehicles for use by the Royal Marines and UK Special Forces. A small number of TD5 Defender 110s were also ordered for the Royal Navy. These were painted navy blue and deployed to the Falklands. Of these Royal Navy vehicles a few were later re-painted IRR green and reassigned to Royal Marines and SBS use. The more powerful TD5 engine, which was capable of being re-mapped up to around 200 Bhp was ideally suited to the rugged terrain of the Falklands and for towing trailers. The majority of these Falkland vehicles were sold off to Military Motors Ltd by the MOD in 2013. The troop carriers had eight passenger seats in the rear and two rear side windows each side for extra visibility. Visually, these UK military troop carrier TD5 Defenders looked similar to the ones used by the Australian Defence Force except that the UK ones were plain IRR green.

 

The British police have used Land Rovers (including the Defender) in their service for many years, they are supplied with the entire range from Land Rover itself. Due to the ongoing terrorist threat and proliferation of public order disturbances, the Police Service of Northern Ireland has employed armoured and hardened versions of the Land Rover Defender for over 40 years in various guises. The current PSNI armoured public order vehicle is based upon a heavy duty Defender 110 chassis which starts life as a chassis cab and which is then stripped of the original body and fitted with upgraded suspension, brakes, and drive train. The bonnet, wings and roof are produced from armoured composite materials whilst the body is manufactured from a range of armoured steel and composite materials by OVIK Crossway OVIK Special Vehicles Division and is known as the PANGOLIN.

  

Sussex police Land Rover

In 2004 a fleet of 12 long wheelbase 110 Td5 Land Rovers were produced for the federal German government, varying between 110 vans, 110 HCPUs and 110 4x4s. The German government did not renew the supply contract after 2006, instead turning to Mercedes for their logistics fleet.

 

Vehicles produced for the German government order were produced in metallic grey with white roofs. The electrical installation on these vehicles was a special order and kept "luxury" fittings and fixtures to a bare minimum. Four FFR equipped vehicles were produced to facilitate the VHF radios in service at that time with the German government and police authorities. Following the change-over to the Mercedes contract, the federal German government sold their Td5 fleet.

 

The Albanian Land Force also possesses a large fleet of Land Rover Defenders, a quantity of them are gifted by the Turkish and Italian armies and the rest of the fleet are bought.

 

With 300Tdi production stopping in 2006, Land Rover set up production of a military version of the four-cylinder Ford Duratorq engine that is also used as a replacement for the Td5 in civilian vehicles.

 

The British Army's Land Rovers have been the subject of criticism following recent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The majority of British Service Land Rovers carry no armour-plating and the composite armoured SNATCH Land Rover (originally designed to withstand small arms fire and hand-launched projectiles as experienced in Northern Ireland) is not immune to the larger roadside bomb and rocket attacks. Some have called for British troops to be equipped with Humvees, or other such vehicles. However, similar criticisms have been levelled at the American vehicle. Other proposals include the South African made RG-31 or similar larger and more heavily armoured trucks or armoured vehicles that provide greater protection.

 

There have been many rumours about a replacement vehicle type. This is most likely the larger, higher-capacity 4x4 or 6x6 Pinzgauer forward-control vehicle similar to the now disused Land Rover 101 forward control, given that the current Land Rover design is also reaching its weight limits due to the increasing amounts of communications and weapons gear used by modern patrol forces. The OVIK Crossway CROSSWAY vehicle has also been mooted as a possible replacement with its 5.4 tonne capacity in 4x4 format and 7.5 tonne capacity in 6x6 format.

 

In 2012 the German company 4WARD4X4 start develop monitoring shelters and transport flatbeds for military Land Rover Defender 130 single cab. On shelter vehicle and a flatbed vehicle should only work in pair of one unit.

 

Air Force Tech. Sgt. Anthony Barrow, a munitions systems specialist, assigned to the Ohio Air National Guard’s 180th Fighter Wing, inspects a GBU-31 guided air-to-surface weapon during Agile Combat Employment training at the 180FW in Swanton, Ohio, Jan. 10, 2023. ACE training allows Airmen to widen capabilities by training in adjacent career fields, creating Multi-Capable Airmen that can operate in a contested, degraded and operationally limited environment. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Airman 1st Class Sarah Stalder Lundgren)

  

Capable of 12 frames per second burst mode shooting (RAW+JPEG), the snapper can also capture 14 frames per second with the mirror locked up and the camera shooting JPEGs.

  

---

Check out my preview of the EOS-1D X here:

Canon EOS-1D X exclusive hands-on

   

More photos here:

Canon EOS-1D X unveiling: photo gallery

   

Follow me on Twitter @ ShawnCNETAsia

 

and check out CNET Asia Cameras for your daily camera fix:)

+++ 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:

Although Japan had designed and manufactured a number of military aircraft before and during World War II, it was forbidden according to the Potsdam Declaration from engaging in the production of airplanes and other products that could be used to rearm a military. These restrictions, however, were lightened by the United States during the Korean War, opening up the possibility for a Japanese company to produce a civilian aircraft.

 

Actually a consortium of several different manufacturing companies and university professors, NAMC was founded in April 1957 by executives from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Fuji Heavy Industries, Shin Meiwa Manufacturing, Sumitomo, Japan Aircraft, Showa Aircraft, and Kawasaki Heavy Industries with the goal of designing and manufacturing a Japanese civilian turboprop airliner to replace the successful but aging Douglas DC-3. The resulting aircraft, the YS-11, a low-winged twin-turboprop-engine monoplane, capable of seating up to 60 passengers, became a successful civilian airliner.

On 30 August 1962, the first YS-11 prototype performed its maiden flight. Deliveries commenced on 30 March 1965 and commercial operations began the following month. The majority of orders for the type were issued from various Japanese airliners. While sales to such customers were swift in the YS-11's initial years of availability, this limited market soon became saturated, leading to a slump in demand. By the late 1970s, after producing several variations of the YS-11, NAMC hoped to introduce a jet airliner in order to replace and upgrade the primarily domestic operators and compete with those short-haul airliners being produced in the U.S. by companies such as Boeing and McDonnell Douglas.

 

This project was called YS-21 and work started in 1968. During the design phase, a high level of attention was paid to market research and operator concerns – even though this was almost exclusively limited to the domestic, Japanese market. Amongst other changes made, the prospective jetliner was increased in size, changing its maximum seating capacity from the YS-11’s 60 to at least 85 passengers in a five-abreast configuration, with a maximum of 100 seats in a tight single-class arrangement.

The aircraft’s general layout resembled the contemporary Boeing 737: a low-wing twin-jet airliner with a conventional tail and podded engines slung under the only slightly swept (just 25°at quarter chord) wings. However, the engines were not directly mounted under the wings, but rather in pods on pylons that set them apart from the wings’ undersurfaces. Fuel was stored within both the outer wings and within the lower fuselage. As a special feature, additional pylon-mounted tanks could be installed under the outer wings for extended range operations if so required.

 

Special care was taken to allow the aircraft to operate from the same smaller airfields as the YS-11, and various elements of the YS-21 were designed to maximize passenger comfort and operator convenience during operations on 2nd class airfields. One such measure was the rear entry door with built-in stairs that, while adding structural complexity, meant that mobile airport stairs were unnecessary for boarding. In order to ensure operations on smaller airfields and reduce ground pressure, the aircraft received, despite its compact size, four-wheel bogies on its main landing gear. The machine furthermore feature an autonomous power unit (APU) for operations independent from most airfield equipment.

 

However, a central problem of the YS-21’s development became the powerplant: there was no indigenous engine available to power the aircraft, and developing one at a timely schedule for the YS-21 program turned out to be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. At one stage of development, NAMC had reportedly intended the YS-21 to be powered by a pair of Bristol Siddeley BS.75 turbofans. However, this selection was hotly contested by rival British engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce, who proposed their Rolls-Royce Spey Junior, a simplified version of the Rolls-Royce Spey.

The engine procurement from foreign sources caused a lot of debate, not only among the NAMC engineers, but also on a political level, since the YS-21 was intended to be a 100% domestic product. Eventually, pragmatism prevailed and the Pratt & Whitney JT8D-9 with thrust reversers and an output of 14,500 lbf (64.50 kN) was chosen, because it was, at the time of the YS-21’s development, to be built under license by Mitsubishi for the Kawasaki C-1 JASDF military jet transport aircraft. A compromise that more or less saved face of the project leaders and the political powers that promoted the aircraft.

 

A distinctive design trademark of the YS-21 became its engine pods: in order to gain as much ground clearance as possible and keep the landing gear short, the JT8s’ auxiliary installations were mounted to the engines’ sides, resulting in a noticeable bulge on the pods’ outer flanks and a noticeable oval air intake orifice.

 

Initial domestic market response was quite positive, mostly boosted by national pride, though, and NAMC tried to attract the interest of major national airlines (primarily JAL and ANA, but also smaller companies) and several foreign regional airlines, touting the YS-21 as the better alternative to the foreign Douglas DC-9 or Boeing 737. A few airlines, also from other countries, showed some initial interest but only ANA and JAL placed concrete orders. These were (mis)interpreted as a very positive sign, though, and production was prematurely greenlighted with only 15 firm orders and 10 options in the books.

 

This lack of interest could be, despite the YS-21’s qualities, contributed to several factors. The main influence was the oil crisis of the 1970s, but another factor was the YS-21’s limited capacity and range – suitable for domestic service in Japan with many short routes, but unattractive for many other potential users. At maximum payload, the aircraft's range was only a mere 1,700 km (a comparable early Boeing 737 had a range of 2.800km), and the optional underwing tanks did not help much since drag and extra weight almost entirely compensated for the potential increase in range. This inherent flaw resulted in a high refueling frequency that grounded the aircraft more often than other types and, as a further effect, relatively high operating costs.

 

Consequently, the YS-21 achieved no foreign sales, and beyond JAL and ANA as launch customers and main operators of the type, only Japan Transocean Air ordered four machines. With a total of only thirty-three sales and with one of the three prototypes refurbished and sold as the 11th YS-21 to ANA, the airliner represented a severe failure for NAMC and the Japanese commercial airliner industry. Plans for an enlarged version with a stretched fuselage for up to 120 passengers never left the drawing board, since both the domestic and the international markets for short and medium range passenger aircraft were already dominated by other types like the Boeing 727 and 737.

 

In service, the YS-21 was quickly nicknamed “Karigane” (かりがね; Wild Goose), due to its slender fuselage, the streamlined cockpit section that resembled a goose’s head on a long neck, and the engine nacelles under the rather straight wings, which reminded of the bird’s stretched feet upon landing. This nickname was never officially adopted, though, but frequently used by the crews and in public.

 

The YS-21 turned out to be a reliable and sturdy aircraft, popular among its crews for its good low speed handling. On 29 April 1995, the last YS-21s in service flew their last commercial flights. Throughout their combined cumulative operational lifetimes, the YS-21s accumulated a total of 1.18 mio. flight hours, during which 80.4 million passengers were carried across 1.3 mio. individual flights, without any accidents and an impressive 98% in-service reliability.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 3

Capacity: 85 with 8,400 kg (18,519 lb) payload

Length: 32.40 m (106 ft 1 1/2 in)

Wingspan: 34.3 m (112 ft 6 in)

Height: 10.80 m (35 ft 4 1/2 in)

Wing area: 146.7 m2 (1,579 sq ft)

Empty weight: 22,200 kg (48,943 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 46,000 kg (101,413 lb)

Powerplant:

2× Mitsubishi-built Pratt & Whitney JT8D-9 low bypass turbofans, 64 kN (14,500 lbf) thrust each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 590 mph (950 km/h, 510 kn) at 6,100 m (20,000 ft)

Cruise speed: 470–530 mph (750–850 km/h, 400–460 kn) at 6,100 m (20,000 ft)

Range: 1,700 km (1,100 mi, 920 nmi)

Service ceiling: 12,000 m (39,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 16.7 m/s (3,300 ft/min) at 2,135 m (7,005 ft)

Takeoff roll: 1,859 m (6,099 ft)

Landing roll: 1,755 m (5,670 ft)

  

The kit and its assembly:

Even though I am not a fan of small-scale airliners, I have recently (and successfully) built two what-if conversions, and I still had the idea of this short-haul airliner in the back of my mind since my Il-60 airliner build. The latter was based on a Caravelle airliner and featured two turboprops on the wings in new nacelles as well as a low tail. However, when I built it, I already considered a similar conversion, just with podded jet engines under the wings like the Dassault Mercure or the Boeing 737.

I had based the Il-60 on the rather crappy Caravelle kit from Mastercraft, so that I switched this time to the new (but much more expensive) Amodel kit – in this case the Caravelle 10R model, which comes with proper JT8 engine pods.

 

Despite a completely new layout of the aircraft, I wanted to change as little as possible and use only few donor parts. In fact, the only additional/new parts are the radome (actually a propeller spinner from a Matchbox He 115, simply glued onto the Caravelle’s nose and blended into the fuselage with PSR) and longer landing gear struts, because the re-located engines under the wings called for a bigger ground clearance. The front leg was completely replaced (taken from a 1:200 Space Shuttle, but still with OOB wheels), while on the main struts only the legs were replaced with longer parts from a 1:72 F4U. A weird detail: the kit comes with separate struts and bogies, but this makes this surgery relatively easy. In order to change the profile of the aircraft I replaced the round fin tip with a square one, scratched with styrene sheet and PSR.

 

Lots of PSR went into the build, in part because of peculiar solutions the mold designers chose. For instance, the window section consists of three clear panels per side, to be glued into recesses on the flanks, which have back walls. The benefit of this construction is beyond me, because it just causes surface mess and calls for sanding and filling. Naturally, the three panels per side do not lie perfectly flat or even in their recesses, and they are in total 2mm too long for their intended openings…? WHY!? If Amodel had wanted a clean solution, they could (and should) have molded the complete fuselage halves as clear parts? Another weak point I came across was the windshield, which comes (Minicraft style) as a clear cockpit area section and seemed to belong to an altogether different aircraft – it did not fit into the respective fuselage opening at all and called for massive trimming and more PSR…

 

These problems with the clear parts almost ruined everything, and that’s a shame because the Amodel Caravelle is a nice kit of this airliner, with fine, recessed surface details and delicate details. Nevertheless, even though it is a modern mold the kit does not get together easily, a typical short-run affair without locator pins.

 

As a typical feature of my airliner builds, I added a vertical styrene tube in the fuselage’s center of gravity as a display holder adapter for the in-flight scenes.

  

Painting and markings:

I had a hard time figuring out a potential manufacturer and operator for this aircraft – placed into the Seventies time frame, there were many similar designs on the market, so why add another short-/medium range airliner with a rather limited capacity which would rather be a Sixties design? After long considerations I settled upon a Japanese aircraft – national pride and stubborn processes might certainly lead to such an aircraft, and the YS-11 shows that the idea is not far-fetched.

 

I also considered a fictional airline as operator, but when I checked options for an aftermarket decal sheet, I realized that the early ANA livery, the so-called “Mohican” scheme due to the blue dorsal stripe, featured a da Vinci helicopter as a logo. I never noticed this before or wasn’t able to identify it, and I found this badge so charming and weird that I eventually settled for ANA as the aircraft’s operator. After some more search I even found a decal sheet from 26decals for an ANA Boeing 767 from 2009 in a retro scheme, and I was also able to organize a Mohican livery sheet from a Hasegawa 1:200 Boeing 737, because the 767 fin emblems were simply oversized for the Caravelle’s fin.

 

Creating and adapting the early ANA scheme to the model was complicated, though. In an initial step I gave the model’s underside and the upper wing surfaces a coat of White Aluminum from the rattle can – I opted for this simple quasi-NMF finish because of its retro look. The upper fuselage became white, with the help of decal sheet material and enamel paint (Humbrol 22). The blue spine and the fin were also painted with a brush in French Blue (Modelmaster), which came close to the cheat lines’ blue tone from the retro 767 sheet – even though these are IMHO a bit dark. Some fine-tuning and decal trimming had to be done in order to make the livery work, though, but I think the result looks quite good – better than expected after this material mish-mash.

 

Once the basic livery had been applied, the windows were added with decals. The cockpit windows had to be improvised, since Amodel’s Caravelle sheet does not offer a decal option for the windscreen. But I am not sure if it would have matched the modified nose section at all? So I trimmed down the Boeing 767 windscreen from the 26decal sheet and improvised. The cabin windows were taken from the 767, too. I wanted a very different look from the Caravelle’s original triangular window rows, and with the 767 windows' rather oval shape and higher density, this worked well. It also makes the YS-21 look bigger than it actually is.

After that, the airline markings and some more details like walkways on the wings (created with generic decal strips from TL Modellbau) were added.

 

In a final step, the landing gear was finished and some more detail painting (position lights, exhausts and thrust reversers) was done, before the kit was sealed with an overall coat of gloss acrylic varnish for a clean and shiny look.

 

I am torn about the outcome of this build, esp. the Amodel base. After long waiting, I hoped for a decent Caravelle kit in 1:144 scale. It is basically there, but the weird window panel construction really ruins what could have been a crisp up-to-date offering. This does not ruin the model as such, but the panel solution is IMHO far from perfect and user-friendly. :(

The layout conversion into the 737-style YS-21 whif worked well, despite some problems, and I think there’s only little left of what reminds of the model’s Caravelle heritage. The ANA Mohican livery also looks stylish, it adds a nice retro touch to the aircraft, very Seventies (if not Sixties?). With the glossy and bright finish, the model even looks, from certain angles, like a vintage Chinese tin toy?

Updated the model with proportions and missing detail.

 

History from Wikipedia:

The South Australian Railways N Class locomotives were built in 1881 by the Baldwin Locomotive Works for the South Australian Railways (S.A.R.). They were rebuilt in 1904, which vastly improved their performance and completely changed their look from a typical American locomotive of the time to a more British one.

 

The N class locomotives, along with two O class engines, were imported from Baldwin Locomotive Works in the United States, for the South Australian Railways. The two O class units were essentially goods engines, but the N class locomotives were made for working passenger trains on the new "Intercolonial Railway", which ran through the Adelaide Hills. They were the first to be fitted with bogie tenders. When they were originally brought into service in 1881, they were allocated to run passenger and mixed trains between Adelaide and Kapunda. On 14 March 1883, N class locomotive No. 52 was rostered to haul the train, with the State Governor on board, to officially open the line between Adelaide and Aldgate. With a great deal of difficulty, it managed to haul the train to Blackwood, where it finally broke down. Later that day, it eventually finished the trip to Aldgate, with only the Vice-Regal and Ministerial carriages attached.

 

N class locomotives continued to run services through the Adelaide Hills and on some occasions worked to Strathalbyn. In 1904, both N classes were rebuilt at Islington Railway Workshops, which completely changed their appearance from the classic American design of that period to a more conventional British outline. Along with the rebuilding, the locomotives also got new bogie tenders. After they were rebuilt, the primary duty of the N class was hauling livestock trains between Adelaide and Terowie. Though the N class locomotives were then capable of fulfilling the duties of the Rx class locomotives, they still worked on livestock trains. The rebuilt N class roamed their way around the S.A.R. system until both were withdrawn in the mid 1920s.

Please choose one of the following options to browse our catalogue...

 

-[Nalogg Weapons Design]

--[Mech Armaments]

---[Projectile 2]

Processing Request...

 

1) Name: Nalogg Light Field Rifle

Order Code: L-FR001

Recommended mount type: S-M sized Mech Single Hand

Notes: This is our basic mid-range mech-sized rifle. Capable of firing several different types of rounds, complete with built-in radar locator.

Price: $5,000.00

 

2) Name: Nalogg Medium Field Rifle

Order Code: M-FR001

Recommended mount type: S-M sized mech Single Hand

Notes: This value-priced mech arm is great for medium-to-long range targets, and comes with a built-in ultrasonic bayonet for close-quarter skirmishes.

Price: $7,000.00

 

3) Name: Falcon Maser Sniper Rifle

Order Code: FMSR001

Recommended mount type: S-M sized mech Single Hand.

Notes: The Falcon is prized as a smaller mech sniper utility. Its exceptionally efficient heat-recapture rating as well as relatively low heat build-up, both work to give this weapon a slightly higher rate of fire than other Maser weapons. What it lacks compared to the Maser Cowboy in versatility, it makes up for in surgical precision.

Price: $10,000.00

 

4) Name: Black Bull Volley Gun

Order Code: BB4-001

Recommended mount type: S-M mech Single Hand

Notes: One of our "small-arms for big mechs" series. The customers have spoken: they said, "We need additional arms to strap onto our mechs, aside from larger SMG and energy weapons." The black bull is a 4-barrel pistol which fires self-propelled incendiary rounds. Pilots have the option of firing each barrel separately or all at once in "pepperbox" style.

Price: $7,000.00

 

5) Name: Nalogg J-16 Mech Sized Pistol

Order Code: J16P-001

Recommended mount type: S-M sized mech Single Hand

Notes: Another of our "small-arms for big mechs" series. This semi-automatic pistol uses our standard "charge ignition" technology to fire its rounds. Sixteen slug clip capacity, plus one in the chamber, this sidearm is an invaluable companion.

Price: $5,000.00

 

6) Name: Nalogg Light SMG

Order Code: LSMG001

Recommended mount type: S-M-L sized mech Dual Hands

Notes: A slightly higher rate of fire than the Komodo, this weapon appeals to the professionals. But novices will enjoy the sturdy construction and ease of reloading.

Price: $6,500.00

 

7) Name: "Muskrat" Heavy Field Rifle

Order Code: H-FR001

Recommended mount type: M-L sized mech Dual Hand

Notes: Not quite sniper material, but this weapon fills the long range semi-auto niche perfectly. Versatility and ease of loading make the Muskrat a winner.

Price: $10,000.00

 

8) Name: Nalogg "Wrangler" Medium Machine Gun

Order Code: MMG001

Recommended mount type: M-L sized mech Dual Hand

Notes: We know what you're saying... "A scope on a machine gun?" Well this isn't any scope, and this isn't any machine gun. The Nalogg Wrangler uses similar targeting technology to our SRDS to assess structural weak points, and compensate for kick and jitter of the gun. What appear to be uncontrolled bursts end up as volleys of precision hits.

Price: $15,000.00

 

9) Name: Nalogg Anti Mech Rifle

Order Code: AMRX-001

Recommended mount type: M-L sized mech Dual Hand

Notes: The AMR is fresh off the testing range. We at Nalogg supply mechs to the battlefield, but we also realize the need for mech pilots to defend against enemy mech forces. Our AMR uses extra-long incendiary anti-mech rounds. These rounds are designed to drive deeply into mech armor with a specialized delayed charge. The AMR can strip a mech (or similar vehicle) of its armor.

Price: $17,000.00

 

10) Name: Coral Snake Frag Cannon

Order Code: CS-001

Recommended mount type: S-M-L sized mech Single Hand

Notes: The Coral Snake is the ultimate in anti-infantry. Named so because of its ability to "chew", the frag cannon fires specialized multi-stage explosive scatter rounds which always seem to find their way under body armor, and those living targets into the dog's breakfast.

Price: $7,000.00

 

11) Name: Nalogg Crow Heavy SMG

Order Code: CROW-001

Recommended mount type: M-L sized mech Dual Hands

Notes: Name your target, and the crow can take care of it. It's equally capable at short, medium, and long ranges, has a high rate of fire, and larger rounds than its little sisters. Also, its price is a steal!

Price: $10,000.00

 

12) Name: Nalogg Light Autocannon

Order Code: LAC-001

Recommended mount type: M-L-sized Mech Dual Hand

Notes: Do you ever find yourself saying, "I need to hurl large chunks of metal at this target from long range." We at Nalogg understand, so we made the light autocannon just for you. It fires slugs roughly the size of newborn babies in rapid succession. The LAC will also notify its user when the barrel becomes overheated, and at the push of a button, switches to a cooled barrel stored internally. The overheated barrel will then remain inside until its time to switch again.

Price: $18,000.00

 

DISCLAIMER

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

 

The Indian HAL HG-30 Bāja (‘Hawk’) had been designed and manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. in the early 60ies, when it became clear that the Indian Air Force was left without a capable and rather simple aircraft for these roles - the “jet age” had been in full development, but fast and large aircraft like the Su-7 or Hawker Hunter were just not suited for low-altitude missions against day and night visible ground targets in a broad area.

 

Indian military planners assumed that potential aggressor will first disable airfields, so the Bāja was designed to take-off from short unprepared runways, and it was readily available to be loaded with weapons and supplied through a flexible system of auxiliary airfields that required no special preparations, especially in mountainous regions.

 

The resulting HG-30 Bāja was a light, single-engine, low-wing single-seat aircraft with a metal airframe, capable of performing close air support, counter insurgency (COIN), and reconnaissance missions. The type featured a license-built Rolls Royce Dart turboprop engine and a reinforced, retractable tricycle landing gear for operations on rugged terrain. The unpressurized cockpit was placed as far forward and high as possible, offering the pilot an excellent view. The ejection seat was armored and the cockpit lined with nylon flak curtains.

The first HG-30 prototype flew in February 1962, and a total of 89 examples of the Bāja were built between 1963 and 1965, including two pre-production aircraft. These introduced some improvements like fixed wingtip tanks, a bulged canopy which improved the rear view or self-sealing and foam-filled fuselage tanks.

 

Armament consisted of four fixed 20mm cannons in the wings, plus unguided missiles, unguided bombs or napalm tanks under the wings and the fuselage on a total of 11 hardpoints. The inner pair under the wings as well as the centerline pylon were able to carry 1.000 lbs each and were ‘wet’ for optional drop tanks. The next pair could carry 500 lbs each, and the outer six attachment points were reserved for missile rails or single bombs of up to 200 lbs caliber. A total external ordnance load of up to 4.500 lbs could be carried, even though this was rarely practiced since it severely hampered handling.

 

The Bāja was exclusively used by the Indian Air Force, serving with 3rd (‘Cobras’) and 5th (‘Tuskers’) Squadrons in the Eastern and Western regions, alongside Toofani and Ajeet fighter bombers. Even though there was some foreign interest (e .g. from Israel and Yugoslavia,) no export sales came to fruition.

A tandem-seated trainer version was envisaged, but never left the drawing board, since Hindustan had already developed the HJT-16 Kiran jet trainer for the IAF which was more suitable, esp. with its side-by-side cockpit. Even a maritime version with foldable outer wings, arresting hook and structural reinforcements was considered for the Indian Navy.

 

The HG-30 did not make it in time into service for the five-week Indo-Pakistani war of 1965, but later saw serious action in the course of the Bangladesh Liberation War and the ensuing next clash between India and Pakistan in December 1971, when all aircraft (originally delivered in a natural metal finish) quickly received improvised camouflage schemes.

 

The 1971 campaign settled down to series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar and close-support attacks by fighters, with night attacks against airfields and strategic targets, into which the HG-30s were heavily involved. Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against Pakistan's forward air bases in the West until the end of the war, and large scale interdiction and close-support operations were maintained.

The HG-30 excelled at close air support. Its straight wings allowed it to engage targets 150 MPH slower than swept-wing jet fighters. This slower speed improved shooting and bombing accuracy, enabling pilots to achieve an average accuracy of less than 40 feet, and the turboprop engine offered a much better fuel consumption than the jet engines of that era.

While it was not a fast aircraft and its pilots were a bit looked down upon by their jet pilot colleagues, the HG-30 was well liked by its crews because of its agility, stability at low speed, ease of service under field conditions and the crucial ability to absorb a lot of punishment with its rigid and simple structure.

 

After the 1971 conflict the Bāja served with the IAF without any further warfare duty until 1993, when, after the loss of about two dozen aircraft due to enemy fire and (only three) accidents, the type was completely retired and its COIN duties taken over by Mi-25 and Mi-35 helicopters, which had been gradually introduced into IAF service since 1984.

  

General characteristics

Crew: 1

Length: 10.23 m (33 ft 6¼ in)

Wingspan: 12.38 m (40 ft 7¼ in) incl. wing tip tanks

Height: 3.95 m (12 ft 11¼ in)

Empty weight: 7,689 lb (3,488 kg)

Max. take-off weight: Loaded weight: 11,652 lb (5,285 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls Royce Dart RDa.7 turboprop engine, with 1.815 ehp (1.354 kW)/1.630 shp (1.220 kW) at 15,000 rpm

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 469 mph (755 km/h) at sea level and in clean configuration

Stall speed: 88 km/h (48 knots 55 mph)

Service ceiling: 34,000 ft (10,363 m)

Rate of climb: 5,020 ft/min (25.5 m/s)

Range: 1,385 miles (2,228 km) at max. take-off weight

 

Armament:

4× 20mm cannons (2 per wing) with 250 RPG

A total of 11 underwing and fuselage hardpoints with a capacity of 4.500 lbs (2.034 kg); provisions to carry combinations of general purpose or cluster bombs, machine gun pods, unguided missiles, air-to-ground rocket pods, fuel drop tanks, and napalm tanks.

     

The kit and its assembly

This fictional COIN aircraft came to be when I stumbled across the vintage Heller Breguet Alizé kit in 1:100 scale. I did some math and came to the conclusion that the kit would make a pretty plausible single-seat propeller aircraft in 1:72...

 

Finding a story and a potential user was more of a challenge. I finally settled on India – not only because the country had and has a potent aircraft industry, a COIN aircraft (apart from obsolete WWII types) would have matched well into the IAF in the early 70ies. Brazil was another manufacturer candidate – but then I had the vision of Indian Su-7 and their unique camouflage scheme, and this was what the kit was to evolve to! Muahahah!

 

What started as a simple adaptation idea turned into a true Frankenstein job, because only little was left from the Heller Alizé – the kit is SO crappy…

 

What was thrown into the mix:

• Fuselage, rudder and front wheel doors from the Heller Alizé

• Horizontal stabilizers from an Airfix P-51 Mustang

• Wings are the outer parts from an Airfix Fw 189, clipped and with new landing gear wells

• Landing gear comes from a Hobby Boss F-86, the main wheels from the scrap box

• Cockpit tub comes from a Heller Alpha Jet, seat and pilot from the scrap box

• The canopy comes from a Hobby Boss F4U Corsair

• Ordnance hardpoints were cut from styrene strips

• Propeller consists of a spinner from a Matchbox Mitsubishi Zero and blades from two AH-1 tail rotors

• Ordnance was puzzled together from the scrap box; the six retarder bombs appeared appropriate, the four missile pods were built from Matchbox parts. The wingtip tanks are streamlines 1.000 lbs bombs.

 

The only major sculpting work was done around the nose, in order to make the bigger propeller fiat and to simulate an appropriate air intake for the engine. Overall this thing looks pretty goofy, rather jet-like, with the slightly swept wings. On the other side, the Bāja does not look bad at all, and it has that “Small man’s A-10” aura to it.

 

Putting the parts together only posed two trouble zones: the canopy and the wings. The Corsair canopy would more or less fit, getting it in place and shaping the spine intersection was more demanding than expected. Still not perfect, but this was a “quick and dirty” project with a poor basis, anyway, so I don’t bother much.

Another tricky thing were the wings and getting them on the fuselage. That the Fw 189 wings ended up here has a reason: the original kit provided two pairs of upper wing halves, the lower halves were lacking! Here these obsolete parts finally found a good use, even though the resulting wing is pretty thick and called for some serious putty work on the belly side… Anyway, this was still easier than trying to modify the Alizé wings into something useful, and a thick wing ain’t bad for low altitude and bigger external loads.

  

Painting and markings

As mentioned before, the garish paint scheme is inspired by IAF Su-7 fighter bombers during/after the India-Pakistani confrontation of 1971. It’s almost surreal, reason enough to use it. Since a 1:72 Su-7 takes up so much shelf space I was happy to find this smaller aircraft as a suitable placebo.

 

I used Su-7 pictures as benchmarks, and settled for the following enamels as basic tones for the upper grey, brown and green:

• Humbrol 176 (Neutral Grey, out of production), for a dull and bluish medium grey

• Testors 1583 (Rubber), a very dark, reddish brown

• Humbrol 114 (Russian Green, out of production)

 

For the lower sides I used Testors 2123 (Russian Underside Blue). The kit received a black ink wash and some dry painting for weathering/more depth. Judging real life aircraft pics of IAF Su-7 and MiG-21, the original underside tone is hardly different from the upper blue grey and it seems on some aircraft as if the upper tone had been wrapped around. The aircraft do not appear very uniform at all, anyway.

 

Together with the bright IAF roundels the result looks a bit as if that thing had been designed by 6 year old, but the livery has its charm - the thing looks VERY unique! The roundels come from a generic TL Modellbau aftermarket sheet, the tactical codes are single white letters from the same manufacturer. Other stencils, warning signs and the squadron emblem come from the scrap box – Indian aircraft tend to look rather bleak and purposeful, except when wearing war game markings...

   

In the end, a small and quick project. The model was assembled in just two days, basic painting done on the third day and decals plus some weathering and detail work on the forth – including pics. A new record, even though this one was not built for perfectionism, rather as a recycling kit with lots of stock material at hand. But overall the Bāja looks exotic and somehow quite convincing?

+++ 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 Ling-Temco-Vought A-7 Corsair II was a carrier-capable subsonic light attack aircraft introduced to replace the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk. The A-7 airframe design was based on the successful supersonic Vought F-8 Crusader, although it was somewhat smaller and rounded off. The Corsair II initially entered service with the United States Navy during the Vietnam War. It was later adopted by the United States Air Force, including the Air National Guard, to replace the Douglas A-1 Skyraider and North American F-100 Super Sabre. The aircraft was also exported to several foreign countries, including Greece, Portugal, Thailand and New Zealand.

 

For the latter operator, the Corsair II was part of a major modernization campaign in the early 1970s. For instance, in 1970 14 McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawks were purchased to replace the Vampire FB5's, which had been the primary light attack aircraft for the RNZAF for years, but the type was hopelessly outdated.

Furthermore New Zealand was also looking for a replacement of its similarly ageing Canberra fleet. These 31 aircraft were also phased out of service in mid 1970, and the A-7 chosen as the RNZAFs new fighter bomber because of its proven all-weather strike capability and advances avionics.

 

The RNZAF bought and operated 22 LTV A-7 Corsair II aircraft primarily in the coastal defense/anti-ship and sea patrol roles, air interdiction and air defense roles being secondary duties. The RNZAF Corsair II was very similar to the US Navy’s A-7E, even though the machines would only be operated form land bases. Designated A-7N, the machines featured an AN/APN-190 navigational radar with a Doppler groundspeed and drift detector plus an AN/APQ-128 terrain following radar. For the deployment of smart weapons, the machines were outfitted with a Pave Penny laser target acquisition system under the air intake lip, similar to the USAF’s A-7D, and could carry a wide range of weaponry and sensors, including AN/AAR-45 FLIR pods for an improved all-weather performance. Against enemy ships and large ground targets, visually guided smart bombs (AGM-62 and the more modern GBU-8 HOBOS) were bought, as well as AGM-65 Maverick against smaller, high priority targets.

 

Active service lasted between 1975 and 1999, and the A-7Ns were originally allocated between RNZAF 2 and 75 Squadron at Ohakea, where they were operated together with A-4K and TA-4K. The latter were also emplyed for A-7N pilot conversion training, since the RNZAF did not operate any Corsair II two seaters.

Several times the Squadron deployed to Clark Air Base in the Philippines and to Hawaii with both of the Corsair IIs and Skyhawks to exercise with the United States Air Force. Furthermore, the annual deployments as part of the Five Power Defence Agreement (called Exercise Vanguard) had the Squadron visit Australia, Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand to practice with those countries. Two RNZAF A-7s of 75 Squadron even made visits to Great Britain.

 

In the early Nineties the Corsair IIs started to suffer from numerous maintenance and logistic problems due to the lack of spare parts and general financial problems. This also prevented a major avionics update and the procurement of AGM-84 Harpoon missiles for the A-7Ns and the RNZAF P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft. The maintenance situation became so dire that several aircraft were cannibalized for spare parts to service other fighters. In 1992 only sixteen A-7Ns remained operational. This resulted in the available fighters no longer being assigned and dedicated to one specific squadron, but shared and assigned to one of the RNZAF combat squadrons (2, 14 and 75 Squadron, respectively), as needed.

 

During its 24 years of duty in the RNZAF, the A-7 fleet suffered 8 severe accidents with aircraft losses (and two pilots being killed). Nevertheless, the introduction of the A-7 was seen as a success due to the evolution that it allowed the Air Force in aircraft maintenance, with focus in modern computer and electronic systems, and in the steady qualification of pilots and technicians.

 

In 1999, the National Government selected an order of 28 F-16A/B Fighting Falcon aircraft to replace the complete fleet of A-4 Skyhawks and A-7 Corsair IIs, but this procurement plan was cancelled in 2001 following election by the incoming Labour Government under Helen Clark. This was followed by the disbanding of several fixed wing aircraft squadrons, with the consequence of removing the RNZAF's air combat capability. The last A-7 flight in RNZAF service took place on 1st of October 2001. Subsequently, most of the RNZAF's fighter pilots left New Zealand to serve in the Royal Australian Air Force and the Royal Air Force.

 

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 46 ft 2 in (14.06 m)

Wingspan: 38 ft 9 in (11.8 m), 23 ft 9 in (7.24 m) wings folded

Height: 16 ft 1 in (4.9 m)

Wing area: 374.9 sq ft (34.83 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 65A007 root and tip

Empty weight: 19,127 lb (8,676 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 41,998 lb (19,050 kg) overload condition.

Fuel capacity: 1,338 US gal (5,060 l; 1,114 imp gal) (10,200 lb (4,600 kg)) internal

 

Powerplant:

1 × Allison TF41-A-2 non-afterburning turbofan engine, 15,000 lbf (66.7 kN) thrust

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 600 kn (690 mph; 1,111 km/h) at Sea level

Range: 1,070 nmi; 1,231 mi (1,981 km) maximum internal fuel

Ferry range: 1,342 nmi; 1,544 mi (2,485 km) with maximum internal and external fuel

Service ceiling: 42,000 ft (13,000 m)

Wing loading: 77.4 lb/sq ft (378 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: 0.50

Take-off run: 1,705 ft (519.7 m) at 42,000 lb (19,000 kg)

 

Armament:

1× M61A1 Vulcan 20 mm (0.787 in) rotary cannon with 1,030 rounds

6× under-wing and 2× fuselage pylon stations (for mounting AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs only)

with a total ordnance capacity of 15,000 lb (6,803.9 kg)

  

The kit and its assembly:

An idea that had been lingering on my project list for some years, and a recent build of an RNZAF A-7 by fellow modeler KiwiZac at whatifmodelers.com eventually triggered this build, a rather simple alternative livery whif. I had this idea on the agenda for some time, though, already written up a background story (which was accidently deleted early last year and sent the project into hiatus - until now) and had the kit as well as decals collected and stashed away.

 

The basis is the Hobby Boss A-7, which is available in a wide range of variant in 1:72 scale. Not cheap, but IMHO the best Corsair II kit at the moment, because it is full of ample surface details, goes together nicely and features a complete air intake, a good cockpit tub and even some maintenance covers that can be displayed in open position, in case you want to integrate the kit in a diorama. In my case it’s the A-7E kit, because I wanted a late variant and the US Navy’s refueling probe instead of the A-7D’s dorsal adapter for the USAF refueling boom system.

 

For the fictional RNZAF A-7N no fundamental changes were made. I just deliberately used OOB parts like the A-7D’s Pave Penny laser targeting pod under the air intake. As a personal addition I lowered the flaps slightly for a more lively look. Around the hull, some blade antennae were changed or added, and I installed the pair of pitots in front of the windscreen (made from thin wire).

 

The FLIR pod came with the kit, as well as the drop tank under the inner starboards wing pylon and the AIM-9Bs. Only the GBU-8s were externally sourced, from one of the Hasegawa USAF ordnance sets.

 

For the finalized kit on display I mounted the maintenance covers in open position, but for the beauty pics they were provisionally placed in closed position onto the kit’s flanks. The covers had to be modified for this stunt, but since their fit is very good and tight they easily stayed in place, even for the flight scenes!

 

Painting and markings:

This was the more interesting part – I wanted „something special“ for the fictional RNZAF Corsair II. Upon delivery, the USAF SEA scheme would certainly have been the most appropriate camouflage – the A-4K’s were painted this way and the aforementioned inspiring build by KiwiZac was finished this way.

 

Anyway, my plan had been from the start a machine in late service with low-viz markings similar to the A-4Ks, which received an attractive three-tone wrap-around scheme (in FS 34102, 34079 and 36081) or a simple all-around coat of FS 34079.

 

Both of these schemes could have been a sensible choice for this project, but… no! Too obvious, too simple for my taste. I rather wanted something that makes you wonder and yet make the aircraft look authentic and RNZAF-esque.

 

While digging for options and alternatives I stumbled upon the RNZAF’s C-130 Hercules transporters, which, like Canadian machines, carry a wrap-around scheme in two tones of grey (a light blue grey and a darker tone with a reddish hue) and a deep olive green tone that comes close to Dark Slate Grey, together with low-viz markings. A pretty unique scheme! Not as murky as the late A-4Ks and IMHO also well suited for the naval/coastal environment that the machine would patrol.

 

I was not able to positively identify the original tones on the CAF and RNZAF Hercs, so I interpreted various aircraft pictures. I settled upon Humbrol 163 (RAF Dark Green) 125 (FS 36118, Gunship Grey) and Revell 57 (RAL 7000, similar to FS 35237, but lighter and “colder”). For the wraparound scheme I used the C-130s as benchmark.

 

The cockpit became Dark Gull Grey (Humbrol 140) while the landing gear and the air intake duct became – behind 5mm of grey around the intake lip - white. The maintenance hatches’ interior was painted with a mix of Humbrol 81 and 38, for a striking zinc chromate primer look.

 

After a light black ink wash the kit received some panel post-shading for more contrast esp. between the dark colors and a slightly worn and sun-bleached look, since the aircraft would be depicted towards the end of its active service life.

 

Decals were the most challenging task, though: finding suitable RNZAF roundels is not easy, and I was happy when Xtradecal released an appropriate sheet that offers kiwi roundels for all positions (since motifs for port and starboard have to be mirrored). The Kiwi squadron emblem actually belongs to an RNZAF A-4K (from an Old Models sheet). The serial codes were puzzled together from single letter (TL Modellbau), most stencils come from the Hobby Boss OOB sheet.

  

A simple build, yet a very interesting topic and in the end also an IMHO very cool-looking aircraft in its fictional livery. Building the Hobby Boss A-7 was easy, despite some inherent flaws of the kit (e .g. totally blank dashboard and side consoles, and even no decals included!). The paint scheme lent from the RNZAF Hercs suits the SLUF well, though.

+++ 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 North American FJ-4 Fury was a swept-wing carrier-capable fighter-bomber, originally developed for the United States Navy and Marine Corps. It was the final development in a lineage that included the Air Force's F-86 Sabre. The FJ-4 shared its general layout and engine with the earlier FJ-3, but featured an entirely new wing design. And it was, as a kind of final embodiment with the FJ-4B, a very different aircraft from the F-86 .

 

The first FJ-4 flew on 28 October 1954 and delivery began in February 1955. Of the original order for 221 FJ-4 fighters, the last 71 were modified into the FJ-4B fighter-bomber version, of which the Netherlands received 16 aircraft under the designation FJ-4B from the USA in the course of NATO support. Even though the main roles of the MLD were maritime patrol, anti-submarine warfare and search and rescue, the FJ-4B was a dedicated fighter-bomber, and these aircraft were to be used with the Dutch Navy’s Colossus-Class carrier HNLMS Karel Doorman (R81).

 

Compared to the lighter FJ-4 interceptor, the FJ-4B had a stronger wing with six instead of four underwing stations, a stronger landing gear and additional aerodynamic brakes under the aft fuselage. The latter made landing safer by allowing pilots to use higher thrust settings, and were also useful for dive attacks. Compared to the FJ-4, external load was doubled, and the US FJ-4Bs were capable of carrying a nuclear weapon on the inboard port station, a feature the MLD Furies lacked. The MLD aircraft were still equipped with the corresponding LABS or Low-Altitude Bombing System for accurate delivery of ordnance.

The Dutch Furies were primarily intended for anti-ship missions (toting up to five of the newly developed ASM-N-7 missiles - renamed in AGM-12B Bullpup after 1962 - plus a guidance pod) and CAS duties against coastal targets, as well as for precision strikes. In a secondary role, the FJ-4B could carry Sidewinder AAMs for interception purposes.

 

The MLD's FJ-4B became operational in 1956, just in time to enhance the firepower of the Karel Doorman, which just had its 24 WW-II era propeller driven Fairey Firefly strike fighters and Hawker Sea Fury fighter/anti-ship aircraft backed up with 14 TBF Avenger ASW/torpedo bombers and 10 Hawker Sea Hawk fighters (the MLD owned 22 of these) for an ASW/Strike profile. The Furies joined the carrier in late 1957 and replaced the piston-engined attack aircraft.

 

In 1960, during the Dutch decolonization and planned independence of Western New Guinea, a territory which was also claimed by Indonesia, the Karel Doorman set sail along with two destroyers and a modified oil tanker to 'show the flag'. In order to avoid possible problems with Indonesia's ally Egypt at the Suez Canal, the carrier instead sailed around the horn of Africa. She arrived in Fremantle, Australia, where the local seamen's union struck in sympathy with Indonesia; the crew used the propeller thrust of aircraft chained down on deck to nudge the carrier into dock without tugs! In addition to her air wing, she was ferrying twelve Hawker Hunter fighters to bolster the local Dutch defense forces, which the Karel Doorman delivered when she arrived at Hollandia, New Guinea.

 

During the 1960 crisis, Indonesia prepared for a military action named Operation Trikora (in the Indonesian language, "Tri Komando Rakyat" means "The Three Commands of the People"). In addition to planning for an invasion, the TNI-AU (Indonesian Air Forces) hoped to sink the Karel Doorman with Soviet-supplied Tupolev Tu-16KS-1 Badger naval bombers using AS-1 Kennel/KS-1 Kometa anti-ship missiles. This bomber-launched missile strike mission was cancelled on short notice, though, because of the implementation of the cease-fire between Indonesia and the Netherlands. This led to a Dutch withdrawal and temporary UN peacekeeping administration, followed by occupation and annexation through Indonesia. While the Dutch aircraft served actively during this conflict, flying patrols and demonstrating presence, visibly armed and in alert condition, no 'hot' sortie or casualty occured, even though one aircraft, 10-18, was lost in a start accident. The pilot ejected safely.

 

The MLD FJ-4Bs only served on the carrier until its overhaul in 1964, after which the carrier-borne attack role was eliminated and all aircraft were transferred to land bases (Valkenburg) or in reserve storage. The Seahawks were retired from service by the end of the 1960s after the sale of the Karel Doorman to Argentina, and the FJ-4Bs were returned to the United States, where they were re-integrated into the USMC until the end of the 1960ies, when all FJ-4 aircraft were phased out.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 36 ft 4 in (11.1 m)

Wingspan: 39 ft 1 in (11.9 m)

Height: 13 ft 11 in (4.2 m)

Wing area: 338.66 ft² (31.46 m²)

Empty weight: 13,210 lb (6,000 kg)

Loaded weight: 20,130 lb (9,200 kg)

Max. take-off weight: 23,700 lb (10,750 kg)

Powerplant: 1 × Wright J65-W-16A turbojet, 7,700 lbf (34 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 680 mph (1,090 km/h) at 35,000 ft (10,670 m)

Range: 2,020 mi (3,250 km) with 2× 200 gal (760 l) drop tanks and 2× AIM-9 missiles

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

Rate of climb: 7,660 ft/min (38.9 m/s)

Wing loading: 69.9 lb/ft² (341.7 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: .325

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (0.787 in) cannon

6× pylons under the wings for 3,000 lb (1,400 kg) external ordnance, including up to 6× AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs, bombs and guided/unguided ASM, e .g. ASM-N-7 (AGM-12B Bullpup) missiles.

  

The kit and its assembly

Originally, this model project was inspired by a (whiffy) Dutch F3H Demon profile, designed by fellow user Darth Panda at whatifmodelers.com. I found the idea of a foreign/NATO user of one of these early carrier-borne jet fighters very inspiring – not only because of the strange design of many of these aircraft, but also since the USN and USMC had been the only real world users of many of these types.

 

Initially, I planned to convert a F3H accordingly. But with limited storage/display space at home I decided to apply the MLD idea to another smaller, but maybe even more exotic, type: the North American FJ-4B Fury, which was in 1962 recoded into AF-1E.

I like the beefy Sabre cousin very much. It’s one of those aircraft that received little attention, even from model kit manufacturers. In fact, in 1:72 scale there are only vintage vacu kits or the very basic Emhar kit available. Th Emhar kit, which I used here and which is a kind donation of a fellow modeler (Thanks a lot, André!), a rather rough thing with raised panel lines and much room for improvements. As a side note, there's also a FJ-4B from Revell, but it's just a 1996 re-issue with no improvements, whatsoever.

 

Another facet of the model: When I did legwork concerning a possible background story, I was surprised to find out that the Netherlands actually operated aircraft carriers in the 1950s, including carrier-borne, fixed-wing aircraft, even jets in the form of Hawker Sea Hawks. The real life FJ-4Bs service introduction, the naissance of NATO and the Indonesian conflict as well as the corresponding intervention of the Karel Doorman carrier all fell into a very plausible time frame – and so there’s a very good and plausible story why the MLD could actually have used the Fury fighter bomber!

 

The Emhar kit was not modified structurally, but saw some changes in detail. These include a scratch-built cockpit with side walls, side consoles and a new ejection seat, plus a Matchbox pilot figure, a new front wheel (from a Kangnam Yak-38, I believe), plus a lot of added blade aerials and a finer pitot.

The flaps were lowered, for a more lively look- Another new feature is the opened air intake, which features a central splitter - in fact a vertically placed piece of a Vicker Wellesley bomb container from Matchbox. At the rear end, the exhaust pipe was opened and lengthened internally.

 

The six weapon hardpoints were taken from the original kit, but I did not use the four Sidewinder AAMs and the rather bulky drop tanks. So, all ordnance is new: the Bullpups come from the Hasegawa air-to-ground missile set, the drop tanks are leftover pieces from a Hobby Boss F-86. They are much more 'delicate', and make the Fury look less stout and cumbersome. The guidance pod for the Bullpups (a typical FJ-4B feature with these weapons) is a WWII drop tank, shaped with the help of benchmark pictures. Certainly not perfect, but, hey - it's just a MODEL!

  

Painting and markings

I used mid-1950ies MLD Sea Furys and Sea Hawks as a design benchmark, but this Fury is placed just into the time frame around 1960 when the MLD introduced a new 3-digit code system. Before that, a code "6-XX" with the XX somewhere in the 70 region would have been appropriate, and I actually painted the fuselage sides a bit darker so as if the old code had recently been painted over.

 

Dutch MLD aircraft tended to keep their former users’ liveries, but in the FJ-4B’s case I thought that a light grey and white aircraft (USN style) with Dutch roundels would look a bit odd. So I settled for early NATO style with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper sides (Humbrol 123) and Sky from below (Testors 2049 from their Authentic Line).

 

I also went for an early design style with a low waterline - early Hawker Sea Furies were painted this way, and a high waterline would probably be more typical. But in the face of potential seriosu action, who knows...? Things tend to be toned down quickly, just remember the RN Harriers during the Falkland conflict. I'll admit that the aircraft looks a bit simple and dull now, but this IMHO just adds to the plausible look of this whif. I prefer such subtleties to garish designs.

 

The surfaces were weathered with dry-brushed lighter shades of the basic tones (mostly Humbrol 79, but also some 140 and 67, and Humbrol 90 and 166 below), including overpainted old codes in a slightly darker tone of EDSG, done with Revell 77. A light wash with black ink emphasizes edges and some details - the machine was not to look worn.

 

The interior was painted in medium grey (Humbrol 140), the landing gear is white (Humbrol 130), and some details like the air intake rim, the edges of the landing gear covers, the flaps or the tips of the wing fences were painted in bright red (Humbrol 174), for some contrast to the overall grey upper sides.

 

The MLD markings were puzzled together. The roundels come from an Xtradecal sheet for various Hawker Sea Furies, the '202' code comes, among others, from a Grumman Bearcat aftermarket sheet. The 'KON. MARINE' line is hand-made, letter by letter, from a TL Modellbau aftremarket sheet.

Most stencils and warning sign decals come from the original decal sheet, as well as from a FJ-4 Xtradecal aftermarket sheet, from F-86 kits and the scrap box. I wanted these details to provide the color to the aircraft, so that it would not look too uniform, but still without flashy decorations and like a rather utilarian military item.

 

finally, the model received a coat of semi-matt varnish (Tamiya Acryllic), since MLD aircraft had a pretty glossy finish. No dirt or soot stains were added - the Dutch kept their (few) shipborne aircraft very clean and tidy!

  

So, all in all, a simple looking aircraft, but this Dutch Fury has IMHO a certain, subtle charm - probably also because it is a rather rare and unpopular aircraft, which in itself has a certain whiffy aura.

Capable of spitting out 800-900 rounds per minute, the 7.92mm German Maschinengewehr MG 34 was one of the most feared weapons of World War II, along with its descendant, the MG 42. Fitted here with a 50-round drum magazine, sling, and front bipod. WWII reenactment, Rockford, Illinois

Eucalyptus pauciflora:

Capable of tolerating severe weather conditions, this hardy eucalypt is commonly found in subalpine areas across the eastern regions of Australia. Young branches are glossy and red and as the tree matures, it develops smooth bark ranging in colour from green to grey and cream. Often, the trunk and branches will develop a crooked, twisted appearance. Leaves are large, glossy, thick and waxy and white flowers appear during the warmer months, followed by large gumnuts

via Playground Markings UK bit.ly/1POUgTV

"Infants are capable of deductive problem solving before age one, new study reveals"

+++ 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 North American FJ-4 Fury was a swept-wing carrier-capable fighter-bomber, originally developed for the United States Navy and Marine Corps. It was the final development in a lineage that included the Air Force's F-86 Sabre. The FJ-4 shared its general layout and engine with the earlier FJ-3, but featured an entirely new wing design. And it was, as a kind of final embodiment with the FJ-4B, a very different aircraft from the F-86 .

 

The first FJ-4 flew on 28 October 1954 and delivery began in February 1955. Of the original order for 221 FJ-4 fighters, the last 71 were modified into the FJ-4B fighter-bomber version, of which the Netherlands received 16 aircraft under the designation FJ-4B from the USA in the course of NATO support. Even though the main roles of the MLD were maritime patrol, anti-submarine warfare and search and rescue, the FJ-4B was a dedicated fighter-bomber, and these aircraft were to be used with the Dutch Navy’s Colossus-Class carrier HNLMS Karel Doorman (R81).

 

Compared to the lighter FJ-4 interceptor, the FJ-4B had a stronger wing with six instead of four underwing stations, a stronger landing gear and additional aerodynamic brakes under the aft fuselage. The latter made landing safer by allowing pilots to use higher thrust settings, and were also useful for dive attacks. Compared to the FJ-4, external load was doubled, and the US FJ-4Bs were capable of carrying a nuclear weapon on the inboard port station, a feature the MLD Furies lacked. The MLD aircraft were still equipped with the corresponding LABS or Low-Altitude Bombing System for accurate delivery of ordnance.

The Dutch Furies were primarily intended for anti-ship missions (toting up to five of the newly developed ASM-N-7 missiles - renamed in AGM-12B Bullpup after 1962 - plus a guidance pod) and CAS duties against coastal targets, as well as for precision strikes. In a secondary role, the FJ-4B could carry Sidewinder AAMs for interception purposes.

 

The MLD's FJ-4B became operational in 1956, just in time to enhance the firepower of the Karel Doorman, which just had its 24 WW-II era propeller driven Fairey Firefly strike fighters and Hawker Sea Fury fighter/anti-ship aircraft backed up with 14 TBF Avenger ASW/torpedo bombers and 10 Hawker Sea Hawk fighters (the MLD owned 22 of these) for an ASW/Strike profile. The Furies joined the carrier in late 1957 and replaced the piston-engined attack aircraft.

 

In 1960, during the Dutch decolonization and planned independence of Western New Guinea, a territory which was also claimed by Indonesia, the Karel Doorman set sail along with two destroyers and a modified oil tanker to 'show the flag'. In order to avoid possible problems with Indonesia's ally Egypt at the Suez Canal, the carrier instead sailed around the horn of Africa. She arrived in Fremantle, Australia, where the local seamen's union struck in sympathy with Indonesia; the crew used the propeller thrust of aircraft chained down on deck to nudge the carrier into dock without tugs! In addition to her air wing, she was ferrying twelve Hawker Hunter fighters to bolster the local Dutch defense forces, which the Karel Doorman delivered when she arrived at Hollandia, New Guinea.

 

During the 1960 crisis, Indonesia prepared for a military action named Operation Trikora (in the Indonesian language, "Tri Komando Rakyat" means "The Three Commands of the People"). In addition to planning for an invasion, the TNI-AU (Indonesian Air Forces) hoped to sink the Karel Doorman with Soviet-supplied Tupolev Tu-16KS-1 Badger naval bombers using AS-1 Kennel/KS-1 Kometa anti-ship missiles. This bomber-launched missile strike mission was cancelled on short notice, though, because of the implementation of the cease-fire between Indonesia and the Netherlands. This led to a Dutch withdrawal and temporary UN peacekeeping administration, followed by occupation and annexation through Indonesia. While the Dutch aircraft served actively during this conflict, flying patrols and demonstrating presence, visibly armed and in alert condition, no 'hot' sortie or casualty occured, even though one aircraft, 10-18, was lost in a start accident. The pilot ejected safely.

 

The MLD FJ-4Bs only served on the carrier until its overhaul in 1964, after which the carrier-borne attack role was eliminated and all aircraft were transferred to land bases (Valkenburg) or in reserve storage. The Seahawks were retired from service by the end of the 1960s after the sale of the Karel Doorman to Argentina, and the FJ-4Bs were returned to the United States, where they were re-integrated into the USMC until the end of the 1960ies, when all FJ-4 aircraft were phased out.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 36 ft 4 in (11.1 m)

Wingspan: 39 ft 1 in (11.9 m)

Height: 13 ft 11 in (4.2 m)

Wing area: 338.66 ft² (31.46 m²)

Empty weight: 13,210 lb (6,000 kg)

Loaded weight: 20,130 lb (9,200 kg)

Max. take-off weight: 23,700 lb (10,750 kg)

Powerplant: 1 × Wright J65-W-16A turbojet, 7,700 lbf (34 kN)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 680 mph (1,090 km/h) at 35,000 ft (10,670 m)

Range: 2,020 mi (3,250 km) with 2× 200 gal (760 l) drop tanks and 2× AIM-9 missiles

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

Rate of climb: 7,660 ft/min (38.9 m/s)

Wing loading: 69.9 lb/ft² (341.7 kg/m²)

Thrust/weight: .325

 

Armament:

4× 20 mm (0.787 in) cannon

6× pylons under the wings for 3,000 lb (1,400 kg) external ordnance, including up to 6× AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs, bombs and guided/unguided ASM, e .g. ASM-N-7 (AGM-12B Bullpup) missiles.

  

The kit and its assembly

Originally, this model project was inspired by a (whiffy) Dutch F3H Demon profile, designed by fellow user Darth Panda at whatifmodelers.com. I found the idea of a foreign/NATO user of one of these early carrier-borne jet fighters very inspiring – not only because of the strange design of many of these aircraft, but also since the USN and USMC had been the only real world users of many of these types.

 

Initially, I planned to convert a F3H accordingly. But with limited storage/display space at home I decided to apply the MLD idea to another smaller, but maybe even more exotic, type: the North American FJ-4B Fury, which was in 1962 recoded into AF-1E.

I like the beefy Sabre cousin very much. It’s one of those aircraft that received little attention, even from model kit manufacturers. In fact, in 1:72 scale there are only vintage vacu kits or the very basic Emhar kit available. Th Emhar kit, which I used here and which is a kind donation of a fellow modeler (Thanks a lot, André!), a rather rough thing with raised panel lines and much room for improvements. As a side note, there's also a FJ-4B from Revell, but it's just a 1996 re-issue with no improvements, whatsoever.

 

Another facet of the model: When I did legwork concerning a possible background story, I was surprised to find out that the Netherlands actually operated aircraft carriers in the 1950s, including carrier-borne, fixed-wing aircraft, even jets in the form of Hawker Sea Hawks. The real life FJ-4Bs service introduction, the naissance of NATO and the Indonesian conflict as well as the corresponding intervention of the Karel Doorman carrier all fell into a very plausible time frame – and so there’s a very good and plausible story why the MLD could actually have used the Fury fighter bomber!

 

The Emhar kit was not modified structurally, but saw some changes in detail. These include a scratch-built cockpit with side walls, side consoles and a new ejection seat, plus a Matchbox pilot figure, a new front wheel (from a Kangnam Yak-38, I believe), plus a lot of added blade aerials and a finer pitot.

The flaps were lowered, for a more lively look- Another new feature is the opened air intake, which features a central splitter - in fact a vertically placed piece of a Vicker Wellesley bomb container from Matchbox. At the rear end, the exhaust pipe was opened and lengthened internally.

 

The six weapon hardpoints were taken from the original kit, but I did not use the four Sidewinder AAMs and the rather bulky drop tanks. So, all ordnance is new: the Bullpups come from the Hasegawa air-to-ground missile set, the drop tanks are leftover pieces from a Hobby Boss F-86. They are much more 'delicate', and make the Fury look less stout and cumbersome. The guidance pod for the Bullpups (a typical FJ-4B feature with these weapons) is a WWII drop tank, shaped with the help of benchmark pictures. Certainly not perfect, but, hey - it's just a MODEL!

  

Painting and markings

I used mid-1950ies MLD Sea Furys and Sea Hawks as a design benchmark, but this Fury is placed just into the time frame around 1960 when the MLD introduced a new 3-digit code system. Before that, a code "6-XX" with the XX somewhere in the 70 region would have been appropriate, and I actually painted the fuselage sides a bit darker so as if the old code had recently been painted over.

 

Dutch MLD aircraft tended to keep their former users’ liveries, but in the FJ-4B’s case I thought that a light grey and white aircraft (USN style) with Dutch roundels would look a bit odd. So I settled for early NATO style with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper sides (Humbrol 123) and Sky from below (Testors 2049 from their Authentic Line).

 

I also went for an early design style with a low waterline - early Hawker Sea Furies were painted this way, and a high waterline would probably be more typical. But in the face of potential seriosu action, who knows...? Things tend to be toned down quickly, just remember the RN Harriers during the Falkland conflict. I'll admit that the aircraft looks a bit simple and dull now, but this IMHO just adds to the plausible look of this whif. I prefer such subtleties to garish designs.

 

The surfaces were weathered with dry-brushed lighter shades of the basic tones (mostly Humbrol 79, but also some 140 and 67, and Humbrol 90 and 166 below), including overpainted old codes in a slightly darker tone of EDSG, done with Revell 77. A light wash with black ink emphasizes edges and some details - the machine was not to look worn.

 

The interior was painted in medium grey (Humbrol 140), the landing gear is white (Humbrol 130), and some details like the air intake rim, the edges of the landing gear covers, the flaps or the tips of the wing fences were painted in bright red (Humbrol 174), for some contrast to the overall grey upper sides.

 

The MLD markings were puzzled together. The roundels come from an Xtradecal sheet for various Hawker Sea Furies, the '202' code comes, among others, from a Grumman Bearcat aftermarket sheet. The 'KON. MARINE' line is hand-made, letter by letter, from a TL Modellbau aftremarket sheet.

Most stencils and warning sign decals come from the original decal sheet, as well as from a FJ-4 Xtradecal aftermarket sheet, from F-86 kits and the scrap box. I wanted these details to provide the color to the aircraft, so that it would not look too uniform, but still without flashy decorations and like a rather utilarian military item.

 

finally, the model received a coat of semi-matt varnish (Tamiya Acryllic), since MLD aircraft had a pretty glossy finish. No dirt or soot stains were added - the Dutch kept their (few) shipborne aircraft very clean and tidy!

  

So, all in all, a simple looking aircraft, but this Dutch Fury has IMHO a certain, subtle charm - probably also because it is a rather rare and unpopular aircraft, which in itself has a certain whiffy aura.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

General characteristics:

All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid,

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

 

Accommodation:

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

Dimensions:

Fighter Mode:

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

 

Battroid Mode:

Height 12.68 meters

Width 7.3 meters

Length 4.0 meters

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons;

Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons;

MTOW: 37.0 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

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

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

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

 

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

 

Performance:

Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h

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

g limit: in space +7

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

 

Design Features:

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

 

Transformation:

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

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

 

Armament:

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

or a combination of above load-outs

 

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

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

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

 

The kit and its assembly:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

  

Painting and markings:

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

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

A steam-hydraulic forge hammer capable of 15,000 tons of pressure at the Friedrich-Krupp AG factory in Essen. (Germany, 1920s).

 

Founded in 1811 by Friedrich Carl Krupp, Friedrich-Krupp AG was a major German industrial conglomerate specializing in steel and arms production. During the World War 1 Krupp manufactured Battleships, U-boats, Howitzers, Railway artillery, the A7V Sturmpanzerwagen and other notable weapons such as the 42cm M-Gerät howitzer “Big Bertha” and the "Paris-Geschütz" (Paris Gun) super-heavy siege artillery. During the post war rearmament period Krupp aligned itself strongly with the new regime and became a vital supplier of military equipment to the Wehrmacht.

 

During World War 2 due to lack of local available workers, Krupp manufacturing exploited slave labour from concentration camps and prisoners of war often under hard conditions and long working hours. After World War II Alfried Krupp the head of the company, was convicted of war crimes at Nürnberg Trials and sentenced to twelve years imprisonment. The company was also ordered to be dismantled and its assets confiscated, however Krupp was pardoned and released in 1951 and his holdings were restored in 1953.

  

Original Image Source: (unknown)

Crop, repair, upscale, colorize: RyanN81

 

[The World War 2 colorized photos are apolitical, and are simply for historical interest and research purposes only. Any comments relating to politics, racism or other inappropriate/offensive subjects will be removed].

   

... of amazing things.

 

Got for it folks!

The M2 is capable of Full HD video recording at up to 30 fps, with stereo microphones.

It has integrated Wi-Fi and the ability to connect to smartphones.

 

review article my husband wrote in Japanese.

news.mynavi.jp/articles/2013/12/17/eosm2_af_test/index.html

 

Nikon D300 / Tamron SP AF90mm F2.8 Di Macro

Some background:

The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X (sometimes referred to as VF-X1) was strictly a conventional/non-transformable jet aircraft, even though it incorporated many structural components and several key technologies that were vital for the transformable VF-1’s successful development that ran in parallel. Therefore, the VF-X was never intended as an air superiority fighter, but rather a flight-capable analogue test bed and proof of concept for the VF-1’s basic layout and major components. In this role, however, the VF-X made vital contributions to systems’ development that were later incorporated into the VF-1’s serial production and sped the program up considerably.

 

VF-X production started in early 2006, with four airframes built. The flight tests began in February 2007. The first prototype (“01”) was piloted and evaluated by ace pilot Roy Fokker, in order to explore the aircraft’s flight envelope, general handling and for external stores carriage tests. The three other VF-Xs successively joined the test program, each with a different focus. “02” was primarily tasked with the flight control and pilot interface program, “03” was allocated to the engine, vectoring thrust and steering systems development, and “04” was primarily involved in structural and fatigue tests.

 

In November 2007, the successful VF-X tests and the flights of the VF-X-1 (the first fully transformable VF-1 prototype, which had been under construction in parallel to the VF-X program) led to formal adoption of the “Valkyrie” variable fighter by the United Nations Government.

The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict.

 

Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha, even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.

 

The basic VF-1 was deployed in four sub-variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements. These included the GBP-1S "Armored Valkyrie” external armor and infantry weapons pack, so-called FAST Packs for "Super Valkyries” for orbital use, and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S “Strike Valkyrie” with additional firepower.

 

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

 

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

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

  

General characteristics:

Accommodation: One pilot in a Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat

Length 14.23 meters

Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)

Height 3.84 meters

Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons

Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

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

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

 

Performance:

Top speed: Mach 2.71 at 10,000 m; Mach 3.87 at 30,000+ m

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

 

Armament:

None installed, but the VF-X had 4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, plus a ventral hardpoint for a Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min or other stores like test instruments

  

The model and its assembly:

Another submission to the “Prototypes” group build at whatifmodelers.com in July 2020. Being a VF-1 fan (and have built maybe twenty o these simple Arii kits), adding a VF-X was, more or less, a must – even more so because I had a suitable Valkyrie Fighter kit at hand for the conversion. As a side note, I have actually built something quite similar from a VF-1D many years ago: a fictional, non-transformable advanced trainer, without knowing about the VF-X at all.

 

Thanks to the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, the differences between the transformable VF-1 and its early testbed were easy to identify:

- Fixed legs with faired ducts from the intakes on (thighs)

- Ankle recesses disappeared

- Less and slightly different panel lines on the back and on the nose

- ventral head unit deleted and a respective fairing installed instead

- Levelled underside (shoulder fairings of the folded arms were cut down)

- Leg attachment points on the nose deleted

- No small, circular vernier thrusters all around the hull

- Some new/different venting grills (created mostly with 0.5mm black decal stripes)

 

Beyond the changes, the VF-1A was basically built OOB. Thankfully, the VF-X already features the later VF-1’s vectored thrust nozzles/feet, so that no changes had to be made in this respect. A pilot figure was added to the cockpit for the beauty pics, and after the flight scenes had been shot, the canopy remained open on a swing arm for static display. For the same reason, the model was built with the landing gear extended.

 

As a test aircraft, the underwing pylons and their AMM-1 ordnance were left away and the attachment points hidden with putty. I also omitted the ventral gun pod and left the aircraft clean. However, for the flight scene pictures, I implanted an adapter for a display holder made from wire.

 

In order to emphasize the test vehicle character of the VF-X, I gave the model a scratched spin recovery parachute installation between the fins, using a real world F-22 testbed as benchmark. It consists of styrene profiles, quite a delicate construction. For the same reason I gave the VF-X a long sensor boom on the nose, which changes the Valkyrie’s look, too. Finally, some small blade antennae were added to the nose and to the spine behind the cockpit.

  

Painting and markings:

To be honest, I have no idea if there was only a single VF-X prototype in the Macross universe, or more. Just one appears in the TV series in episode #33, and lack of suitable information and my personal lack of Japanese language proficiency prevents any deeper research. However, this would not keep me from inventing a personal interpretation of the canonical VF-X, especially because I do not really like the original livery from the TV series: an overall light grey with some simple black trim and “TEST” written on the (fixed) legs. Yamato did an 1:60 scale toy of the VF-X, but it was/is just a VF-1 with a ventral fairing; they added some shading to the basic grey – but this does not make the aircraft more attractive, IMHO.

 

When I looked at the original conceptual drawing of the VF-X in the “Macross - Perfect Memory” source book, however, I was immediately reminded of the F-15 prototypes from the Seventies (and this program used a total of twelve machines!). These featured originally a light grey (FS 36375?) overall base, to which bright dayglo orange markings on wings, fins and fuselage were soon added – in a very similar pattern to the VF-X. I think the VF-X livery was actually inspired by this, the time frame matches well with the production of the Macross TV series, too, and that’s what I adapted for my model.

In order to come close to the F-15 prototype livery, I gave “my” VF-X an overall basic coat of RAL 7047 “Telegrau 4”, one of German Telekom’s corporate colors and a very pale grey that can easily be mistaken for white when you do not have a contrast reference.

 

The cockpit received a medium grey finish, the ejection seat became black with brown cushions; the pilot figure is a 1:100 seated passenger from an architecture supplies, painted like an early VF-1 pilot in a white/blue suit. The jet nozzles/feet were painted with Revell 91 (Iron) and later treated with grinded graphite for a more metallic finish. The landing gear became classic white (I used Revell 301, which is a very pure tone, as contrast to the RAL 7047 on the hull), the air intake ducts and the internal sections of the VG wings were painted with dark grey (Revell 77).

 

For some diversity I took inspiration from the Yamato VF-X toy and added slightly darker (Humbrol 166, RAF Light Aircraft Grey) areas to the hull and the legs. Next, the panel lines were emphasized through a thinned black ink wash, but I did no panel post shading so that the VF-X would not look too dirty or worn.

 

Onto this basis I applied the orange dayglo markings. On the wings and fins, these were painted – they were applied with spray paint from a rattle can, involving lots of masking. The leading edges on wings and fins were created with grey decal sheet material, too. At this stage, some surface details and more fake panel lines were added with a soft pencil.

The orange cheatline under the cockpit is a personal addition; I found that some more orange had to be added to the nose for visual balance, and I eventually went for the simple, trimmed stripe (TL Modellbau material) instead of trying to apply decal sheet material around the jagged air intakes (F-15 prototype style). The black “TEST”, “VFX” and “U.N. Spacy” markings were designed at the computer and printed on clear inkjet decal paper. Even though the “real” VF-X does not feature the UNS “kite” insignia, I decided to add them to the model. These come from the OOB sheet, which also provided most (slightly yellowed) stencils.

Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

A rather different VF-1 project (and it is – to my astonishment – #28 in my 1:100 VF-1 Fighter mode collection!!!), with more changes to the basic model kit than one might expect at first sight. VF-X and VF-1 differ considerably from each other, despite identical outlines! However, I like the outcome, and I think that going a different route from the canonical grey/black livery paid out, the bright orange markings really make this VF-X stand out, and it looks IMHO more like a testbed than the “real” aircraft from the TV series.