View allAll Photos Tagged Capable
+++ 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:
In Autumn 1946, the Saab company began internal studies aimed at developing a replacement aircraft for the Saab B 18/S 18 as Sweden's standard attack aircraft. In 1948, Saab was formally approached by the Swedish Government with a request to investigate the development of a turbojet-powered strike aircraft to replace a series of 1940s vintage attack, reconnaissance, and night-fighter aircraft then in the Flygvapnet’s inventory. On 20 December 1948, a phase one contract for the design and mock-up of the proposed aircraft was issued. The requirements laid out by the Swedish Air Force were demanding: the aircraft had to be able to attack anywhere along Sweden's 2,000 km (1,245 miles) of coastline within one hour of launch from a central location, and it had to be capable of being launched in any weather conditions, at day or night.
In response, Saab elected to develop a twin-seat aircraft with a low-mounted swept wing and equipped with advanced electronics. On 3 November 1952, the first prototype, under the handle “Fpl 32” (flygplan = aircraft) conducted its first flight. A small batch of prototypes completed design and evaluation trials with series production of the newly designated Saab 32 Lansen beginning in 1953. The first production A 32A Lansen attack aircraft were delivered to the Swedish Air Force and proceeded through to mid-1958, at which point manufacturing activity switched to the Lansen’s other two major scheduled variants, the J 32B all-weather fighter and the photo reconnaissance S 32C, optimized for maritime operations.
The idea behind the J 32 originated from the late 1940s: Even before the SAAB 29 Tunnan had taken to the air, discussions began between SAAB and the Swedish Aviation Administration regarding a future night fighter aircraft with a jet engine. Since the end of the war, the Swedish Air Force had wanted a night fighter aircraft but was forced to put these on the shelf due to cost reasons. In the end, they managed to obtain sixty de Haviland Mosquito night fighter aircraft (then designated J 30) from Great Britain as a low-budget solution, but the J 30 was far from modern at the end of the 1940s and talks with SAAB regarding a domestic alternative continued.
At the beginning of the 1950s, the Fpl 32 project was in full swing and the aircraft was selected as the basis for an indigenous all-weather jet night fighter with a sighting radar and various heavier weapons to be able to shoot down bombers – at the time of the J 32B’s design, the main bomber threat was expected to enter Swedish airspace at subsonic speed and at high altitude. The original idea was that this aircraft would replace the J 30 Mosquito from 1955 onwards, but this proved to be impossible as the J 30 fleet needed to be replaced long before this and the A 32A as initial/main varia of the Fpl 32 had priority. Because of this operational gap, in January 1951 the Swedish Air Force ordered the British de Haviland Venom (then designated J 33) as an interim all-weather fighter and plans for the J 32B were postponed until later with the idea that the Lansen’s fighter variant would replace the J 33 at the end of the 1950s and benefit from technological progress until then.
On 7 January 1957, the first J 32B conducted its maiden flight, and it was a considerable step forward from the A 32A attack aircraft – in fact, excepts for the hull, it had only little in common with the attack variant! The new fighter version was powered by a Rolls-Royce Avon Mk 47A (locally designated RM6A) which gave as much thrust without an afterburner as the SAAB A 32A's original RM5A2 did with an afterburner, greatly improving the aircraft’s rate of climb and acceleration, even though the J 32B remained only transonic.
The armament consisted of four heavier fixed 30 mm ADEN m/55 automatic cannon in a slightly re-contoured nose, plus Rb 24/AIM-9B Sidewinder IR-guided AAMs and various unguided rockets against air and ground targets. Instead of the A 32A’s Ericsson mapping and navigation radar, which was compatible with the indigenous Rb 04C anti-ship missile, one of the earliest cruise missiles in western service, the J 32B carried a PS-42/A. This was a search/tracking X-band radar with a gyro-stabilized antenna with a swivel range of 60° to each side and +60°/−30° up/down. The radar featured the option of a 3D display for both WSO and pilot and its data could be directly displayed in the pilot’s Sikte 6A HUD, a very modern solution at the time.
A total of 118 aircraft (S/N 32501-32620) were produced between 1958 and 1960, serving in four fighter units. However, the J 32B only served for just under 12 years as a fighter aircraft in the Swedish Air Force: aviation technology progressed very quickly during the 1960s and already in 1966, the J 32B began to be replaced by the J 35F, which itself was already an advanced all-weather interceptor version of the supersonic Draken. In 1969 only the Jämtland's Air Flotilla (F4) still had the J 32B left in service and the type began to be completely retired from frontline service. In 1970 the plane flew in service for the last time and in 1973 the J 32B was officially phased out of the air force, and scrapping began in 1974.
However, the J 32Bs’ career was not over yet: At the beginning of the 1970s, Målflygdivisionen (MFD for short, the “Target Air Division”) was still using old J 29Fs as target tugs and for other training purposes, and they needed to be replaced. The choice fell on the much more capable, robust and readily available J 32B. Twenty-four machines were transferred to the MFD in 1971 to be used for training purposes, losing their radar and cannon armament. Six of these six J 32Bs were in 1972 modified into dedicated target tugs under the designation J 32D, six more J 32Bs were left unmodified and allocated to various second-line tasks such as radio testing and ground training.
The other twelve J 32Bs (s/n 32507, -510, -512, -515, -529, -541, -543, -569, -571, -592, -607 and -612) became jamming aircraft through the implementation of ECR equipment under the designation J 32E. This electronics package included internally:
- An INGEBORG signal reconnaissance receiver with antennae in the radome,
covering S, C and L radar frequency bands
- A G24 jamming transmitter, also with its antenna in the radome, covering alternatively
S, C and L frequency bands. This device co-operated with the external ADRIAN jamming pod
- Apparatus 91B; a broadband jammer, later integrated with INGEBORG
- MORE, a jammer and search station for the VHF and UHF bands
- FB-6 tape player/recorder; used, among other things, to send false messages/interference
Additional, external equipment included:
- PETRUS: jamming pod, X-band, also radar warning, intended for jamming aircraft
and active missile radars
- ADRIAN: jamming pod, active on S- and C-band, intended for jamming land-based and
shipboard radars
- BOZ-1, -3, -9 and -100 chaff dispenser pods
Outwardly, the J 32E differed from its brethren only through some blade antennae around the hull, and they initially retained the fighters’ blue-green paint scheme and their tactical markings so that they were hard to distinguish from the original fighters. Over time, orange day-glow markings were added to improve visibility during training sessions. However, during the mid-Nineties, three machines received during scheduled overhauls a new all-grey low-visibility camouflage with toned-down markings, and they received the “16M” unit identifier – the only MFD aircraft to carry these openly.
When a J 32E crashed in 1975, three of the remaining six training J 32Bs were modified into J 32Es in 1979 to fill the ranks. The MFD kept operating the small J 32Ds and Es fleet well into the Nineties and the special unit survived two flotilla and four defense engagements. At that time, the Målflygdivisionen was part of the Swedish Air Force’s Upplands Flygflottilj (F16), but it was based at Malmen air base near Linköpping (where the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen was located, too) as a detachment unit and therefore the machines received the unit identifier “F16M”, even though the “M” suffix did normally not appear on the aircraft. However, through a defense ministry decision in 1996 the Target Air Division and its associated companies as well as the aircraft workshop at Malmen were to be decommissioned, what meant the end of the whole unit. On June 26, 1997, a ceremony was held over the disbandment of the division, where, among other things, twelve J 32Es made a formation flight over Östergötland.
After the decommissioning of the division, however, the Lansens were still not ‘dead’ yet: the J 32D target tugs were kept operational by a private operator and received civil registrations, and eight flightworthy J 32Es were passed over to FMV:Prov (Provningsavdelningen vid Försvarets materielverk, the material testing department of the Swedish Air Force’s Försökscentralen) to serve on, while other airframes without any more future potential were handed over to museums as exhibition pieces, or eventually scrapped. The surviving J 32Es served on in the electronic aggressor/trainer role until 1999 when they were finally replaced by ten modified Sk 37E Viggen two-seaters, after their development and conversion had taken longer than expected.
However, this was still not the end of the Saab 32, which turned out to be even more long-lived: By 2010, at least two Lansens were still operational, having the sole task of taking high altitude air samples for research purposes in collaboration with the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, and by 2012 a total of three Lansens reportedly remained in active service in Sweden.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2
Length: 14.94 m (49 ft 0 in)
Wingspan: 13 m (42 ft 8 in)
Height: 4.65 m (15 ft 3 in)
Wing area: 37.4 m² (403 sq ft)
Airfoil: NACA 64A010
Empty weight: 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 13,500 kg (29,762 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Svenska Flygmotor RM6A afterburning turbojet
(a Rolls Royce Avon Mk.47A outfitted with an indigenous afterburner),
delivering 4,88 kp dry and 6,500 kp with reheat
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,200 km/h (750 mph, 650 kn)
Range: 2,000 km (1,200 mi, 1,100 nmi) with internal fuel only
Service ceiling: 15,000 m (49,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 100 m/s (20,000 ft/min)
Armament:
No internal weapons.
13× external hardpoints (five major pylons and eight more for light weapons)
for a wide variety of up to 3.000 kg of ordnance, typically only used
for ECM and chaff/flare dispenser pods and/or a conformal ventral auxiliary tank
The kit and its assembly:
This is a what-if project that I had on my idea list for a long time, but never got the nerve to do it because it is just a mild modification – the model depicts a real aircraft type, just with a fictional livery for it (see below).
The plan to create a J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit from 1982 predated any OOB option, though. Tarangus has been offering a dedicated J 32B/E kit since 2016, but I stuck to my original plan to convert a Heller fighter bomber which I had in The Stash™, anyway)- also because I find the Tarangus kit prohibitively expensive (for what you get), even though it might have saved some work.
The Heller A 32A kit was basically built OOB, even though changing it into a J 32B (and even further into an “E”) called for some major modifications. These could have been scratched, but out of convenience I invested into a dedicated Maestro Models conversion set that offers resin replacements for a modified gun bay (which has more pronounced “cheek fairings” than the attack aircraft, the lower section is similar to the S 32C camera nose), a new jet exhaust and also the Lansen’s unique conformal belly tank – for the cost of a NIB Heller Saab 32 kit alone, though… :-/
Implanting the Maestro Models parts was straightforward and relatively easy. The J 32B gun bay replaces the OOB parts from the Heller kit, fits well and does not require more PSR than the original part. Since the model depicts a gun-less J 32E, I faired the gun ports over.
The RM6A exhaust was a bit more challenging – it is a bit longer and wider than the A 32A’s RM5. It’s not much, maybe 1mm in each dimension, so that the tail opening had to be widened and slightly re-contoured to accept the new one-piece resin pipe. The belly tank matched the kit’s ventral contours well. As an extra, the Maestro Models set also offers the J 32B’s different tail skid, which is placed further back on the fighter than on the attack and recce aircraft.
The J 32E’s characteristic collection of sizable blade antennae all around the hull was scratched from 0.5 mm styrene sheet. Furthermore, the flaps were lowered, an emergency fuel outlet was added under the tail, the canopy (very clear, but quite thick!) cut into two parts for optional open display, and the air intake walls were extended inside of the fuselage with styrene sheet.
Under the wings, four pylons (the Heller kit unfortunately comes totally devoid of any ordnance or even hardpoints!) from the spares box were added that carry scratched BOZ-1 chaff dispensers and a pair of ADRIAN/PETRUS ECM pod dummies – all made from drop tanks, incidentally from Swedish aircraft (Mistercraft Saab 35 and Matchbox Saab 29). Sure, there are short-run aftermarket sets for this special equipment that might come closer to the real thing(s), but I do not think that the (quite considerable) investments in all these exotic aftermarket items are worthwhile when most of them are pretty easy to scratch.
Painting and markings:
The paint scheme was the actual reason to build a J 32E: the fundamental plan was to build a Lansen in the Swedish air superiority low-viz two-tone paint scheme from the Nineties, and the IMHO only sensible option beyond pure fantasy was the real J 32E as “canvas”. I used JAS 39 Gripens as reference: their upper tone is called Pansargrå 5431-17M (“Tank Grey”, which is, according to trustworthy sources, very close to FS 36173, U.S. Neutral Grey), while the undersides are painted in Duvagrå 5431-14M (“Dove Grey”; approximately FS 36373, a tone called “High Low Visibility Light Grey”). Surprisingly, other Swedish types in low-viz livery used different shades; the JA 37s and late J 35Js were painted in tones called mörkgrå 033M and grå 032M, even though AJSF 37s and AFAIK a single SK 37 were painted with the Gripen colors, too.
After checking a lot of Gripen pictures I selected different tones, though, because the greys appear much lighter in real life, esp. on the lower surfaces. I ended up with FS 36231 (Dark Gull Grey, Humbrol 140, a bit lighter than the Neutral Grey) and RLM 63 (Lichtgrau, Testors 2077, a very pale and cold tone). The aircraft received a low waterline with a blurry edge, and the light grey was raised at the nose up to the radome, as seen on JA 37s and JAS 39s. To make the low-viz Lansen look a little less uniform I painted the lower rear section of the fuselage in Revell 91 and 99, simulating bare metal – a measure that had been done with many Lansens because leaking fuel and oil from the engine bay would wash off any paint in this area, leaving a rather tatty look. Di-electric fairings like the nose radome and the fin tip were painted with a brownish light grey (Revell 75) instead of black, reducing contrast and simulating bare and worn fiber glass. Small details like the white tips of the small wing fences and the underwing pylons were adapted from real-world Lansens.
After a light black ink wash, I emphasized single panels with Humbrol 125 and 165 on the upper surfaces and 147 and 196 underneath. Additionally, grinded graphite was used for weathering and a grimy look – an effective method, thanks to the kit’s fine raised panel lines. The silver wing leading edges were created with decal sheet material and not painted, a clean and convenient solution that avoids masking mess.
The ECM and chaff dispenser pods were painted in a slightly different shade of grey (FS 36440, Humbrol 40). As a subtle contrast the conformal belly tank was painted with Humbrol 247 (RLM 76), a tone that comes close to the Lansens’ standard camouflage from the Sixties’ green/blue livery, with a darker front end (Humbrol 145) and a bare metal tail section.
The cockpit interior was, according to pictures of real aircraft, painted in a greenish grey; I used Revell 67 (RAL 7009, Grüngrau) for most surfaces and slightly darker Humbrol 163 for dashboards and instrument panels. The landing gear wells as well as the flaps’ interior became Aluminum Bronze (Humbrol 56), while the landing gear struts were painted in a bluish dark green (Humbrol 195) with olive drab (Revell 46) wheel hubs - a detail seen on some real-life Saab 32s and a nice contrast to the light grey all around.
All markings/decals came from RBD Studio/Moose Republic aftermarket sheets for Saab 32 and 37. From the latter the low-viz national markings and the day-glo orange tactical codes were taken, while most stencils came from the Lansen sheet. Unfortunately, the Heller kit’s OOB sheet is pretty minimalistic – but the real A/S 32s did not carry many markings, anyway. Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish. As a confusing detail I gave the aircraft an explicit “16M” unit identifier, created with single black 4 mm letters/numbers. As a stark contrast and a modern peace-time element I also gave the Lansen the typical huge day-glo orange tactical codes on the upper wings that were carried by the Swedish interceptors of the time.
A relatively simple build, thanks to the resin conversion set – otherwise, creating a more or less believable J 32E from Heller’s A 32 kit is a tough challenge. Though expensive, the parts fit and work well, and I’d recommend the set, because the shape of the J 32B’s lower nose is quite complex and scratching the bigger jet pipe needs a proper basis. The modern low-viz livery suits the vintage yet elegant Lansen well, even though it reveals the aircraft’s bulk and size; in all-grey, the Lansen has something shark- or even whale-ish to it? The aircraft/livery combo looks pretty exotic, but not uncredible - like a proven war horse.
Incense is aromatic biotic material which releases fragrant smoke when burned. The term refers to the material itself, rather than to the aroma that it produces. Incense is used for a variety of purposes, including the ceremonies of religion, to overcome bad smells, repel insects, spirituality, aromatherapy, meditation, and for simple pleasure.
Incense is composed of aromatic plant materials, often combined with essential oils. The forms taken by incense differ with the underlying culture, and have changed with advances in technology and increasing diversity in the reasons for burning it. Incense can generally be separated into two main types: "indirect-burning" and "direct-burning". Indirect-burning incense (or "non-combustible incense") is not capable of burning on its own, and requires a separate heat source. Direct-burning incense (or "combustible incense") is lit directly by a flame and then fanned or blown out, leaving a glowing ember that smoulders and releases fragrance. Direct-burning incense is either a paste formed around a bamboo stick, or a paste that is extruded into a stick or cone shape.
HISTORY
The word incense comes from Latin for incendere meaning "to burn".
Combustible bouquets were used by the ancient Egyptians, who employed incense within both pragmatic and mystical capacities. Incense was burnt to counteract or obscure malodorous products of human habitation, but was widely perceived to also deter malevolent demons and appease the gods with its pleasant aroma. Resin balls were found in many prehistoric Egyptian tombs in El Mahasna, furnishing tangible archaeological substantiation to the prominence of incense and related compounds within Egyptian antiquity. One of the oldest extant incense burners originates from the 5th dynasty. The Temple of Deir-el-Bahari in Egypt contains a series of carvings that depict an expedition for incense.
The Babylonians used incense while offering prayers to divining oracles. Incense spread from there to Greece and Rome.
Incense burners have been found in the Indus Civilization (3300 BCE- 1300 BCE). Evidence suggests oils were used mainly for their aroma. India also adopted techniques from East Asia, adapting the inherited formulation to encompass aromatic roots and other indigenous flora. This comprised the initial usage of subterranean plant parts within the fabrication of incense. New herbs like Sarsaparilla seeds, frankincense, and cypress were used by Indians for incense.
At around 2000 BCE, Ancient China began the use of incense in the religious sense, namely for worship. Incense was used by Chinese cultures from Neolithic times and became more widespread in the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties. The earliest documented instance of incense utilization comes from the ancient Chinese, who employed incense composed of herbs and plant products (such as cassia, cinnamon, styrax, sandalwood, amongst others) as a component of numerous formalized ceremonial rites. Incense usage reached its peak during the Song Dynasty with numerous buildings erected specifically for incense ceremonies.
Brought to Japan in the 6th century by Korean Buddhist monks, who used the mystical aromas in their purification rites, the delicate scents of Koh (high-quality Japanese incense) became a source of amusement and entertainment with nobles in the Imperial Court during the Heian Era 200 years later. During the 14th century Shogunate, a samurai warrior might perfume his helmet and armor with incense to achieve an aura of invincibility (as well as to make a noble gesture to whomever might take his head in battle). It wasn't until the Muromachi Era during the 15th and 16th century that incense appreciation (Kōdō) spread to the upper and middle classes of Japanese society.
COMPOSITION
A variety of materials have been used in making incense. Historically there has been a preference for using locally available ingredients. For example, sage and cedar were used by the indigenous peoples of North America. Trading in incense materials comprised a major part of commerce along the Silk Road and other trade routes, one notably called the Incense Route.
The same could be said for the techniques used to make incense. Local knowledge and tools were extremely influential on the style, but methods were also influenced by migrations of foreigners, among them clergy and physicians who were both familiar with incense arts.
COMBUSTIBLE BASE
The combustible base of a direct burning incense mixture not only binds the fragrant material together but also allows the produced incense to burn with a self-sustained ember, which propagates slowly and evenly through an entire piece of incense with such regularity that it can be used to mark time. The base is chosen such that it does not produce a perceptible smell. Commercially, two types of incense base predominate:
- Fuel and oxidizer mixtures: Charcoal or wood powder forms the fuel for the combustion. Gums such as Gum Arabic or Gum Tragacanth are used to bind the mixture together while an oxidizer such as sodium nitrate or potassium nitrate sustains the burning of the incense. Fragrant materials are combined into the base prior to formation as in the case of powdered incense materials or after formation as in the case of essential oils. The formula for the charcoal-based incense is superficially similar to black powder, though it lacks the sulfur.
- Natural plant-based binders: Mucilaginous material, which can be derived from many botanical sources, is mixed with fragrant materials and water. The mucilage from the wet binding powder holds the fragrant material together while the cellulose in the powder combusts to form a stable ember when lit. The dry binding powder usually comprises about 10% of the dry weight in the finished incense. This includes:
- Makko (incense powder): made from the bark of various trees from the Persea such as Persea thunbergii)
- Xiangnan pi (made from the bark of Phoebe genus trees such as Phoebe nanmu, Persea zuihoensis.
- Jigit: a resin based binder used in India
- Laha or Dar: bark based powders used in Nepal, Tibet, and other East Asian countries.
TYPES
Incense materials are available in various forms and degrees of processing. They can generally be separated into "direct-burning" and "indirect-burning" types depending on use. Preference for one form or another varies with culture, tradition, and personal taste. Although the production of direct- and indirect-burning incense are both blended to produce a pleasant smell when burned, the two differ in their composition due to the former's requirement for even, stale, and sustained burning.
INDIRECT BURNING
Indirect-burning incense, also called "non-combustible incense", is a combination of aromatic ingredients that are not prepared in any particular way or encouraged into any particular form, leaving it mostly unsuitable for direct combustion. The use of this class of incense requires a separate heat source since it does not generally kindle a fire capable of burning itself and may not ignite at all under normal conditions. This incense can vary in the duration of its burning with the texture of the material. Finer ingredients tend to burn more rapidly, while coarsely ground or whole chunks may be consumed very gradually as they have less total surface area. The heat is traditionally provided by charcoal or glowing embers.
In the West, the best known incense materials of this type are frankincense and myrrh, likely due to their numerous mentions in the Christian Bible. In fact, the word for "frankincense" in many European languages also alludes to any form of incense.
- Whole: The incense material is burned directly in its raw unprocessed form on top of coal embers.
- Powdered or granulated: The incense material is broken down into finer bits. This incense burns quickly and provides a short period of intense smells.
- Paste: The powdered or granulated incense material is mixed with a sticky and incombustible binder, such as dried fruit, honey, or a soft resin and then formed to balls or small pastilles. These may then be allowed to mature in a controlled environment where the fragrances can commingle and unite. Much Arabian incense, also called "Bukhoor" or "Bakhoor", is of this type (Bakhoor actually refers to frankincense in Arabic) and Japan has a history of kneaded incense, called nerikō or awasekō, using this method.[17] Within the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition, raw frankincense is ground into a fine powder and then mixed with various sweet-smelling essential oils.
DIRECT BURNING
Direct-burning incense also called "combustible incense", is lit directly by a flame. The glowing ember on the incense will continue to smoulder and burn away the rest of the incense without continued application of heat or flame from an outside source. Direct-burning incense is either extruded, pressed into forms, or coated onto a supporting material. This class of incense is made from a moldable substrate of fragrant finely ground (or liquid) incense materials and odourless binder. The composition must be adjusted to provide fragrance in the proper concentration and to ensure even burning. The following types of direct-burning incense are commonly encountered, though the material itself can take virtually any form, according to expediency or whimsy:
- Coil: Extruded and shaped into a coil without a core. This type of incense is able to burn for an extended period, from hours to days, and is commonly produced and used by Chinese culture
- Cone: Incense in this form burns relatively fast. Incense cones were invented in Japan in the 1800s.
- Cored stick: This form of stick incense has a supporting core of bamboo. Higher quality varieties of this form have fragrant sandalwood cores. The core is coated by a thick layer of incense material that burns away with the core. This type of incense is commonly produced in India and China. When used for worship in Chinese folk religion, cored incensed sticks are sometimes known as "joss sticks".
- Solid stick: This stick incense has no supporting core and is completely made of incense material. Easily broken into pieces, it allows one to determine the specific amount of incense they wish to burn. This is the most commonly produced form of incense in Japan and Tibet.
- Powder: The loose incense powder used for making indirect burning incense is sometimes burned without further processing. They are typically packed into long trails on top of wood ash using a stencil and burned in special censers or incense clocks.
- Paper: Paper infused with incense, folded accordion style, lit and blown out. Examples are Carta d'Armenia and Papier d'Arménie.
- Rope: The incense powder is rolled into paper sheets, which are then rolled into ropes, twisted tightly, then doubled over and twisted again, yielding a two-strand rope. The larger end is the bight, and may be stood vertically, in a shallow dish of sand or pebbles. The smaller (pointed) end is lit. This type of incense is highly transportable and stays fresh for extremely long periods. It has been used for centuries in Tibet and Nepal.
The disks of powdered mugwort called 'moxa' sold in Chinese shops and herbalists are used in Traditional Chinese medicine for moxibustion treatment. Moxa tablets are not incenses; the treatment relies on heat rather than fragrance.
REED DIFFUSING
A reed diffuser is a form of incense that uses no heat. It comes in three parts: a bottle/container, scented essential incense oil, and bamboo reeds. The incense oil is placed into the container and bamboo reeds are then put into the same container. This is done to absorb some of the incense oil, as well as to help carry its scent and essence out of the container and into the surrounding air. Reeds typically have tiny tube openings that run the entire length of the stick. Oil is absorbed by the reed sticks and carried along the entire reed. These are do-it-yourself incense sticks that do not burn and look almost identical to typical incense sticks
PRODUCTION
INDIRECT BURNING
The raw materials are powdered and then mixed together with a binder to form a paste, which, for direct burning incense, are then cut and dried into pellets. Incense of the Athonite Orthodox Christian tradition are made by powdering frankincense or fir resin, mixing it with essential oils. Floral fragrances are the most common, but citrus such as lemon is not uncommon. The incense mixture is then rolled out into a slab approximately 1 cm thick and left until the slab has firmed. It is then cut into small cubes, coated with clay powder to prevent adhesion, and allowed to fully harden and dry. In Greece this rolled incense resin is called 'Moskolibano', and generally comes in either a pink or green colour denoting the fragrance, with pink being rose and green being jasmine.
DIRECT BURNING
In order to obtain desired combustion qualities, attention has to be paid to certain proportions in direct burning incense mixtures:
- Oil content: Resinous materials such as myrrh and frankincense must not exceed the amount of dry materials in the mixture to such a degree that the incense will not smolder and burn.[citation needed] The higher the oil content relative to the dry mass, the less likely the mixture is to burn effectively.[citation needed] Typically the resinous or oily substances are balanced with "dry" materials such as wood, bark and leaf powders.
- Oxidizer quantity: The amount of chemical oxidizer in gum-bound incense must be carefully proportioned. If too little, the incense will not ignite, and if too much, the incense will burn too quickly and not produce fragrant smoke.
- Mixture density: Incense mixtures made with natural binders must not be combined with too much water in mixing, or over-compressed while being formed, which would result in either uneven air distribution or undesirable density in the mixture, causing the incense to burn unevenly, too slowly, or too quickly.
- Particulate size: The incense mixture has to be well pulverized with similarly sized particulates. Uneven and large particulates result in uneven burning and inconsistent aroma production when burned.
- Binder: Water-soluble binders such as "makko" have to be used in the right proportion to ensure that the incense mixture does not crumble when dry but also that the binder does not take up too much of the mixture.
Some kinds of direct-burning incense are created from "incense blanks" made of unscented combustible dust immersed into any suitable kind of essential or fragrance oil. These are often sold in America by flea-market and sidewalk vendors who have developed their own styles. Such items are often known as "dipped" or "hand-dipped" incense. This form of incense requires the least skill and equipment to manufacture, since the blanks are pre-formed in China or South East Asia, then simply scented with essential oils.
Incense mixtures can be extruded or pressed into shapes. Small quantities of water are combined with the fragrance and incense base mixture and kneaded into a hard dough. The incense dough is then pressed into shaped forms to create cone and smaller coiled incense, or forced through a hydraulic press for solid stick incense. The formed incense is then trimmed and slowly dried. Incense produced in this fashion has a tendency to warp or become misshapen when improperly dried, and as such must be placed in climate-controlled rooms and rotated several times through the drying process.
Traditionally, the bamboo cores of cored stick incense is prepared by hand from Phyllostachys heterocycla cv. pubescens since this species produces thick wood and easily burns to ashes in the incense stick. Through this process, known as "splitting the foot of the incense stick", the bamboo is trimmed to length, soaked, peeled, and then continuously split in halves until thin sticks of bamboo with square cross sections of less than 3mm This process has been largely been replaced by machines in modern incense production.
In the case of cored incensed sticks, several methods are employed to coat the sticks cores with incense mixture:
- Paste rolling: A wet, malleable paste of incense mixture is first rolled into a long, thin coil, using a paddle. Then, a thin stick is put next to the coil and the stick and paste are rolled together until the stick is centered in the mixture and the desired thickness is achieved. The stick is then cut to the desired length and dried.
- Powder-coating: Powder-coating is used mainly to produce cored incense of either larger coil (up to 1 meter in diameter) or cored stick forms. A bundle of the supporting material (typically thin bamboo or sandalwood slivers) is soaked in water or a thin water/glue mixture for a short time. The thin sticks are then evenly separated, then dipped into a tray of incense powder, consisting of fragrance materials and occasionally a plant-based binder. The dry incense powder is then tossed and piled over the stick while they are spread apart. The sticks are then gently rolled and packed to maintain roundness while more incense powder is repeatedly tossed onto the sticks. Three to four layers of powder are coated onto the sticks, forming a 2 mm thick layer of incense material on the stick. The coated incense is then allowed to dry in open air. Additional coatings of incense mixture can be applied after each period of successive drying. Incense sticks that are burned in temples of Chinese folk religion produced in this fashion can have a thickness between 2 and 4 millimeters.
- Compression: A damp powder is mechanically formed around a cored stick by compression, similar to the way uncored sticks are formed. This form is becoming more commonly found due to the higher labor cost of producing powder-coated or paste-rolled sticks.
JOSS STICKS
Joss sticks are the name given to incense sticks used for a variety of purposes associated with ritual and religious devotion in China and India. They are used in Chinese influenced East Asian and Southeast Asian countries, traditionally burned before the threshold of a home or business, before an image of a Chinese popular religion divinity or spirit of place, or in small and humble or large and elaborate shrine found at the main entrance to each and every village. Here the earth god is propitiated in the hope of bringing wealth and health to the village. They can also be burned in front of a door, or open window as an offering to heaven, or devas. The word "joss" is derived from the Latin deus (god) via the Portuguese deos through the Javanese dejos, through Chinese pidgin English.
Joss-stick burning is an everyday practice in traditional Chinese religion. There are many different types of joss sticks used for different purposes or on different festive days. Many of them are long and thin and are mostly colored yellow, red, and more rarely, black. Thick joss sticks are used for special ceremonies, such as funerals. Spiral joss sticks are also used on a regular basis, which are found hanging above temple ceilings, with burn times that are exceedingly long. In some states, such as Taiwan, Singapore, or Malaysia, where they celebrate the Ghost Festival, large, pillar-like dragon joss sticks are sometimes used. These generate such a massive amount of smoke and heat that they are only ever burned outside.
Chinese incense sticks for use in popular religion are generally without aroma or only the slightest trace of jasmine or rose, since it is the smoke, not the scent, which is important in conveying the prayers of the faithful to heaven. They are composed of the dried powdered bark of a non-scented species of cinnamon native to Cambodia, Cinnamomum cambodianum.[citation needed] Inexpensive packs of 300 are often found for sale in Chinese supermarkets. Despite the fact that they contain no sandalwood at all, they often include the Chinese character for sandalwood on the label, as a generic term for incense.
Highly scented Chinese incense sticks are only used by some Buddhists. These are often quite expensive due to the use of large amounts of sandalwood, aloeswood, or floral scents used. The Sandalwood used in Chinese incenses does not come from India, its native home, but rather from groves planted within Chinese territory. Sites belonging to Tzu Chi, Chung Tai Shan, Dharma Drum Mountain, Xingtian Temple, Buddhism in Sri Lanka, Buddhism in Burma and Korean Buddhism do not use incense.
BURNING INCENSE
For indirect-burning incense, pieces of the incense are burned by placing them directly on top of a heat source or on a hot metal plate in a censer or thurible.
In Japan a similar censer called a egōro (柄香炉?) is used by several Buddhist sects. The egōro is usually made of brass with a long handle and no chain. Instead of charcoal, makkō powder is poured into a depression made in a bed of ash. The makkō is lit and the incense mixture is burned on top. This method is known as Sonae-kō (Religious Burning).
For direct-burning incense, the tip or end of the incense is ignited with a flame or other heat source until the incense begins to turn into ash at the burning end. Flames on the incense are then fanned or blown out, with the incense continuing to burn without a flame on its own.
CULTURAL VARIATIONS
CHINESE INCENSE
For over two thousand years, the Chinese have used incense in religious ceremonies, ancestor veneration, Traditional Chinese medicine, and daily life.
Agarwood (chénxiāng) and sandalwood (tánxiāng) are the two most important ingredients in Chinese incense.
Along with the introduction of Buddhism in China came calibrated incense sticks and incense clocks. The poet Yu Jianwu (487-551) first recorded them: "By burning incense we know the o'clock of the night, With graduated candles we confirm the tally of the watches." The use of these incense timekeeping devices spread from Buddhist monasteries into Chinese secular society.
It is incorrect to assume that the Chinese only burn incense in the home before the family shrine. In Taoist traditions, incense is inextricably associated with the 'yin' energies of the dead, temples, shrines, and ghosts. Therefore, Taoist Chinese believe burning undedicated incense in the home attracts the dreaded hungry ghosts, who consume the smoke and ruin the fortunes of the family.
However, since Neolithic times, the Chinese have evolved using incense not only for religious ceremonies, but also for personal and environmental aromatherapy.
INDIAN INCENSE
Incense stick, also known as agarbathi (or agarbatti) and joss sticks, in which an incense paste is rolled or moulded around a bamboo stick, is one of the main forms of incense in India. The bamboo method originated in India, and is distinct from the Nepal/Tibet and Japanese methods of stick making which don't use a bamboo core. Though the method is also used in the west, particularly in America, it is strongly associated with India.
The basic ingredients are the bamboo stick, the paste (generally made of charcoal dust and joss/jiggit/gum/tabu powder - an adhesive made from the bark of litsea glutinosa and other trees), and the perfume ingredients - which would be a masala (spice mix) powder of ground ingredients into which the stick would be rolled, or a perfume liquid sometimes consisting of synthetic ingredients into which the stick would be dipped. Perfume is sometimes sprayed on the coated sticks. Stick machines are sometimes used, which coat the stick with paste and perfume, though the bulk of production is done by hand rolling at home. There are about 5,000 incense companies in India which take raw unperfumed sticks hand-rolled by approx 200,000 women working part-time at home, and then apply their own brand of perfume, and package the sticks for sale.[38] An experienced home-worker can produce 4,000 raw sticks a day. There are about 50 main companies who together account for up to 30% of the market, and around 500 of the companies, including a significant number of the main ones, including Moksh Agarbatti and Cycle Pure, are based in Bangalore.
In the Middle East, incense burning has been along tradition. The word bukhur means incense in Arabic. The well known choice for incense is the famous agarwood which is very popular in Africa, the Gulf and amongst some south Asians, but there are many many more choices. Incense come in a variety of forms such as blocks, pieces, pellets, granules or powdered, which is placed in the oil burner called mabkharah for several minutes to heat either with coal in the traditional way or via power in the modern way, allowing it to release its rich smell. However this takes awhile and the quick alternative is to use incense sticks called Oud in Middle East and Africa, and agarbatti in south Asia - again referring to the agar wood + batti meaning some sort of agar-stick. Occasionally some get confused between bukhur and oud, bukhur is the insence ie agarwood, sandlewood etc and oud being the incense sticks (and not the otherway round sometimes wires get twisted)
JERUSALEM TEMPLE INCENSE
Ketoret was the incense offered in the Temple in Jerusalem and is stated in the Book of Exodus as a mixture of stacte, onycha, galbanum and frankincense.
TIBETAN INCENSE
Tibetan incense refers to a common style of incense found in Tibet, Nepal, and Bhutan. These incenses have a characteristic "earthy" scent to them. Ingredients vary from cinnamon, clove, and juniper, to kusum flower, ashvagandha, or sahi jeera.
Many Tibetan incenses are thought to have medicinal properties. Their recipes come from ancient Vedic texts that are based on even older Ayurvedic medical texts. The recipes have remained unchanged for centuries.
JAPANESE INCENSE
In Japan incense appreciation folklore includes art, culture, history, and ceremony. It can be compared to and has some of the same qualities as music, art, or literature. Incense burning may occasionally take place within the tea ceremony, just like Calligraphy, Ikebana, and Scroll Arrangement. However the art of incense appreciation or Koh-do, is generally practiced as a separate art form from the tea ceremony, however usually practiced within a tea room of traditional Zen design.
Agarwood (沈香 Jinkō) and sandalwood (白檀 Byakudan) are the two most important ingredients in Japanese incense. Agarwood is known as "Jinkō" in Japan, which translates as "incense that sinks in water", due to the weight of the resin in the wood. Sandalwood is one of the most calming incense ingredients and lends itself well to meditation.[citation needed] It is also used in the Japanese tea ceremony. The most valued Sandalwood comes from Mysore in the state of Karnataka in India.
Another important ingredient in Japanese incense is kyara (伽羅). Kyara is one kind of agarwood (Japanese incense companies divide agarwood into 6 categories depending on the region obtained and properties of the agarwood). Kyara is currently worth more than its weight in gold.
Some terms used in Japanese incense culture include:
- Incense Arts: [香道, Kodo]
- Agarwood: [ 沈香 ] – from heartwood from Aquilaria trees, unique, the incense wood most used in incense ceremony, other names are: lignum aloes or aloeswood, gaharu, jinko, or oud.
- Censer/Incense burner: [香爐] – usually small and used for heating incense not burning, or larger and used for burning
- Charcoal: [木炭] – only the odorless kind is used.
- Incense woods: [ 香木 ] – a naturally fragrant resinous wood.
USAGE
Incense is used for a variety of purposes, including the ceremonies of all the main religions, to overcome bad smells, repel insects, purify or improve the atmosphere, aromatherapy, meditation, and for simple pleasure.
PRACTICAL
Incense fragrances can be of such great strength that they obscure other, less desirable odours. This utility led to the use of incense in funerary ceremonies because the incense could smother the scent of decay. Another example of this use, as well as of religious use, is the giant Botafumeiro thurible which swings from the ceiling of the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela. It is used in part to mask the scent of the many tired, unwashed pilgrims huddled together in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela.
A similar utilitarian use of incense can be found in the post-Reformation Church of England. Although the ceremonial use of incense was abandoned until the Oxford Movement, it was common to have incense (typically frankincense) burned before grand occasions, when the church would be crowded. The frankincense was carried about by a member of the vestry before the service in a vessel called a 'perfuming pan'. In iconography of the day, this vessel is shown to be elongated and flat, with a single, long handle on one side. It is important to note that the perfuming pan was used instead of the thurible, as the latter would have likely offended the Protestant sensibilities of the 17th and 18th centuries.
The regular burning of direct combustion incense has been used for chronological measurement in incense clocks. These devices can range from a simple trail of incense material calibrated to burn in a specific time period, to elaborate and ornate instruments with bells or gongs, designed to involve and captivate several of the senses.
Incense made from materials such as citronella can repel mosquitoes and other aggravating, distracting or pestilential insects. This use has been deployed in concert with religious uses by Zen Buddhists who claim that the incense that is part of their meditative practice is designed to keep bothersome insects from distracting the practitioner. Currently, more effective pyrethroid-based mosquito repellent incense is widely available in Asia.
Papier d'Arménie was originally sold as a disinfectant as well as for the fragrance.
Incense is also used often by people who smoke indoors, and do not want the scent to linger.
AestheticMany people burn incense to appreciate its smell, without assigning any other specific significance to it, in the same way that the foregoing items can be produced or consumed solely for the contemplation or enjoyment of the refined sensory experience. This use is perhaps best exemplified in the kōdō (香道?), where (frequently costly) raw incense materials such as agarwood are appreciated in a formal setting.ReligiousUse of incense in religion is prevalent in many cultures and may have their roots in the practical and aesthetic uses considering that many religions with not much else in common all use incense. One common motif is incense as a form of sacrificial offering to a deity. Such use was common in Judaic worship and remains in use for example in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican churches, Taoist and Buddhist Chinese jingxiang (敬香 "offer incense [to ancestors/gods]), etc.
HEALTH
Incense smoke contains various contaminants including gaseous pollutants, such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and absorbed toxic pollutants (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and toxic metals). The solid particles range between ~10 and 500 nm. The emission rate decreases in the row Indian sandalwood > Japanese aloeswood > Taiwanese aloeswood > smokeless sandalwood.
Research carried out in Taiwan in 2001 linked the burning of incense sticks to the slow accumulation of potential carcinogens in a poorly ventilated environment by measuring the levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (including benzopyrene) within Buddhist temples. The study found gaseous aliphatic aldehydes, which are carcinogenic and mutagenic, in incense smoke.
A survey of risk factors for lung cancer, also conducted in Taiwan, noted an inverse association between incense burning and adenocarcinoma of the lung, though the finding was not deemed significant.
In contrast, a study by several Asian Cancer Research Centers showed: "No association was found between exposure to incense burning and respiratory symptoms like chronic cough, chronic sputum, chronic bronchitis, runny nose, wheezing, asthma, allergic rhinitis, or pneumonia among the three populations studied: i.e. primary school children, their non-smoking mothers, or a group of older non-smoking female controls. Incense burning did not affect lung cancer risk among non-smokers, but it significantly reduced risk among smokers, even after adjusting for lifetime smoking amount." However, the researchers qualified the findings by noting that incense burning in the studied population was associated with certain low-cancer-risk dietary habits, and concluded that "diet can be a significant confounder of epidemiological studies on air pollution and respiratory health."
Although several studies have not shown a link between incense and cancer of the lung, many other types of cancer have been directly linked to burning incense. A study published in 2008 in the medical journal Cancer found that incense use is associated with a statistically significant higher risk of cancers of the upper respiratory tract, with the exception of nasopharyngeal cancer. Those who used incense heavily also had higher rates of a type of cancer called squamous-cell carcinoma, which refers to tumors that arise in the cells lining the internal and external surfaces of the body. The link between incense use and increased cancer risk held when the researchers weighed other factors, including cigarette smoking, diet and drinking habits. The research team noted that "This association is consistent with a large number of studies identifying carcinogens in incense smoke, and given the widespread and sometimes involuntary exposure to smoke from burning incense, these findings carry significant public health implications."
In 2015, the South China University of Technology found toxicity of incense to Chinese hamsters ovary cells to be even higher than cigarettes.
Frankincense has been shown to cause antidepressive behavior in mice. It activated the poorly understood ion channels in the brain to alleviate anxiety and depression.
WIKIPEDIA
The display reads:
ADA in Vietnam – M42 Duster
Combat experience in the Korea War quickly showed that while the M19 40mm Gun Motor Carriage was a capable platform, it needed improvement. By 1952, a new anti-aircraft tank was in development, designated the T141. The new vehicle used the same turret and gun mount from the M19, but mated it with the larger, more powerful M41 Walker Bulldog light tank hull. The resulting vehicle was standardized as the M42 40mm Gun Motor Carriage by 1952 and entered full production that year.
However, with the service entry of the Nike Ajax system in 1953, the Army was focused on missile systems and with the introduction of the Hawk missile in the late 1950s, the M42 was quickly passed to National Guard units and all but removed from the active inventory by 1963.
Just two years later, US forces entered combat in South Vietnam. Two Hawk missile battalions were deployed to provide air defense around Saigon and along the DMZ, but an additional system was needed to cover potential low-altitude threats. In addition to the air defense requirement, the Army also needed a vehicle that could provide heavy firepower for both convoy escort and firebase defense. The M42 was back in demand and by the beginning of 1966, three battalions were formed for service in Vietnam.
Those three units, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery; 4th Battalion, 60th Artillery; and 5th Battalion, 2nd Artillery arrived in-theater by mid-year and immediately had a significant impact on operations in their respective areas of operation. Each “Duster” battalion had a quad .50 battery and searchlight battery attached, forming an air defense task force that could respond to both air and ground threats, day or night.
On 20 June 1968, Air Defense and Field Artillery split the Artillery branch and the Duster, Quad, Searchlight and Hawk units were then designated ADA rather than “Artillery,” with the parenthetical Automatic Weapons, Searchlight or Guided Missile designation.
The story of Army Air Defense in Vietnam provides a fascinating contrast to the operations and equipment of the rest of the branch during the 1960s and early 1970s. While Army Air Defense of the day was focused on the strategic threat of a Soviet nuclear strike and were using the latest technology to deter that threat, the three ADA Duster battalions effectively used weapon systems from the “last war” to provide low altitude air defense and on-call direct fire support to infantry and artillery units across the entirety of South Vietnam from 1966 through 1972.
M42 Duster Specifications:
Weight: 50,000 lbs fully loaded
Height: 9 feet 4 inches
Length: 19 feet
Width: 10 feet 7 inches
Crew: Commander, driver, two loaders, two gunners
Armament: Two M2A1 40mm automatic anti-aircraft guns with 240 rounds per gun; 1-2 7.62 M60 Machine Guns with 1,750 rounds
Main Armament Rate of Fire: 120 rounds per minute, per gun
Engine: Continental AOS-895-3 6-cylinder opposed gasoline engine
Range: 100 miles
Speed 45 mph
The museum’s Duster served with the 1-44th Artillery in 1968.
The Duster occasionally towed the M332 ammunition trailer, which doubled the Duster’s ammunition capacity. However, it would be a liability in combat and would normally be removed before the Duster would be used in the convoy escort role.
Most Dusters in Vietnam carried some form of artwork. Usually the crew would name both the front hatch and the gun shield above the main armament.
Sergeant Mitchell W. Stout was born in Lenoir City, Tennessee on 24 February, 1950. He enlisted in the Army on 15 August 1967 and served his first tour in Vietnam as a rifleman with the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry Regiment in the Mekong Delta from August 1968 to August 1969. After completing his first tour, SGT Stout rotated back to the US, but returned to South Vietnam just five months later as a M42 Duster crewman.
Three months into his second tour, SGT Stout was commanding an M42 Duster at the Khe Gio bridge along Route 9, a strategic east-west route that was the supply lifeline to friendly outposts in western I Corps.
SGT Mitchell Stout
C/1-44th Artillery (Automatic Weapons), Khe Gio Bridge
The U.S. Army outpost at Khe Gio Bridge on Highway 9 near the DMZ was overrun by North Vietnamese troops on 12 March 1970. Fourteen Americans held the outpost along with a platoon of ARVN Infantry. Two M42 Dusters from C Battery 1-44th Artillery gave the small force a significant amount of firepower to protect the bridge, while an M151A1 searchlight jeep from G Battery, 29th Artillery provided nighttime battlefield illumination. Of those fourteen Americans, two were killed in action, five wounded and one was captured. Yet they fought valiantly and protected the bridge on Route 9, sparing it from destruction. Sergeant Mitchell Stout’s actions during the battle would earn him a posthumous Medal of Honor:
Citation:
Sgt. Stout distinguished himself during an attack by a North Vietnamese Army Sapper company on his unit's firing position at Khe Gio Bridge. Sgt. Stout was in a bunker with members of a searchlight crew when the position came under heavy enemy mortar fire and ground attack. When the intensity of the mortar attack subsided, an enemy grenade was thrown into the bunker. Displaying great courage, Sgt. Stout ran to the grenade, picked it up, and started out of the bunker. As he reached the door, the grenade exploded. By holding the grenade close to his body and shielding its blast, he protected his fellow soldiers in the bunker from further injury or death. Sgt. Stout's conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action, at the cost of his own life, are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon him, his unit and the U.S. Army.
Taken December 13th, 2013.
At the beginning of the Vietnam War, there was little interest in a dedicated counterinsurgency (COIN) aircraft. The USAF was too committed to an all-jet, nuclear-capable force, while the US Army was satisfied with its helicopter fleet; the Navy concentrated on its carriers, and while the Marines were mildly interested, they lacked funding.
Vietnam was to change that. Horrendous losses among US Army UH-1s was to lead to a rethinking of helicopter doctrine, and pointed up the lack of a dedicated COIN aircraft. The USAF found itself depending on World War II-era A-26K Invaders, former US Navy A-1 Skyraiders, and converted trainers like the T-28 Trojan. The USAF also found itself in the market for a better forward air control (FAC) aircraft, due to the high loss rate of its O-1 Birddogs and O-2 Skymasters. Finally, the US Navy needed something to better cover its Mobile River Force units in the Mekong Delta, which could not always depend on USAF air support. In 1963, all three services issued a requirement for a new light design capable of performing as both a COIN and FAC aircraft. North American's NA-300 was selected in 1964 and designated OV-10A Bronco.
The OV-10 design drew heavily on independent research done at the China Lake research establishment, which in turn was inspired by the World War II P-38 Lightning fighter. The P-38 used a central "gondola" fuselage to concentrate all of its firepower along the centerline, which made for better accuracy; the OV-10 would do the same. As in the P-38, the engines were contained in twin booms that stretched back to the tail. The Bronco's four machine gun armament was placed in sponsons on either side of the fuselage, while ordnance was carried beneath the sponsons. To satisfy the USAF's requirements for a FAC aircraft, the two-man crew flew underneath a large, spacious canopy that gave them superb visibility. Because the Marines wanted an aircraft that could carry a Recon team, the fuselage was extended and, if the rear seat was removed, five paratroopers could be squeezed into the back, or two stretchers.
When the OV-10 arrived in Vietnam in 1968, there was a fear that the Bronco would be the jack of all trades and master of none. In fact, it proved to be excellent in all of its roles. As a FAC, it was a huge improvement over the slower O-1 and O-2; as a COIN aircraft, it was also a good aircraft, though it could not carry the same amount of ordnance as an A-1. The Navy equipped one squadron with OV-10As as VAL-4--nicknamed the "Black Ponies" for their dark green camouflage--and these were used extensively over the Mekong Delta. There were problems with the design: the airframe was actually too heavy for the engines, which left it underpowered, and ditching was invariably fatal for the pilot, as his seat tended to hurl forward into the instrument panel. Nonetheless, the Bronco turned in a sterling performance in Southeast Asia.
Though the Navy transferred its surviving Black Ponies to the Marines after the end of American involvement in Vietnam, the USAF and Marines would keep theirs for the next 20 years. For the 1970s and 1980s, the OV-10 replaced all other FAC designs in USAF service, aside from a handful of OA-37B Dragonfly squadrons. The Marines also kept their OV-10s and further refined the design by adding all-weather capability in the long-nosed OV-10D variant.
By the First Gulf War in 1991, the OV-10 was starting to show its age. The USAF began retiring its fleet even before Desert Storm; the Bronco was considered to be too slow to survive a modern air defense environment. Though the Marines used some of their OV-10Ds, the loss of two aircraft also led the USMC to retire their Broncos after war's end. Both services chose jets as replacements--the USAF with modified OA-10A Thunderbolt IIs, and the Marines with two-seat all-weather F/A-18Ds.
OV-10s were also a mild export success, going to seven other countries, mainly in the COIN role. Most have since been retired in favor of newer designs, though the Philippines still has a large and active OV-10 force. The type enjoyed a brief renaissance in 2015 when two former Marine OV-10Ds were taken up by the USAF for use against ISIS forces in Iraq, to see if the design was still viable. Though the OV-10s performed well, the USAF is not likely to put it back into production. 360 were built, and at least 25 are on display in museums aside from the aircraft that are still operational.
68-3787, shown here, is a Vietnam War veteran; it served with the 20th Tactical Air Support Squadron at Da Nang, South Vietnam, between 1970 and 1972. These aircraft used the callsign "Nail," alongside O-2 "Covey" FACs and nighttime "Sleepytime" FACs. I'm not sure where it went after Vietnam, but there's a good chance it served with the 601st Tactical Air Support Wing at Sembach, West Germany--in which case, this might not be the first time I've seen this aircraft! It was retired in 1991 and donated to the National Museum of the USAF.
Though 1980s-era OV-10s were camouflaged in "Europe Two" green and gray, 68-3787 was restored to the overall light gray used by Broncos over Vietnam. It is displayed with four LAU-3 rocket launchers (loaded with smoke and white phosphorus rockets to mark targets, though these could be used against enemy personnel in emergencies) and an external drop tank.
Since I grew up with OV-10s when my dad was at Sembach, it was a treat to see one of them again.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some Background:
The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.
The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.
The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.
The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.
Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.
The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.
At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.
The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.
One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.
All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.
The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.
The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.
Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.
For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)
Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)
Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)
Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)
Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)
Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)
Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,
5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight
Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks
Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)
Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)
Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)
Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.48
Armament:
No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…
2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks
or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…
2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)
machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each
The kit and its assembly:
This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.
I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.
The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?
The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.
Painting and markings:
This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.
Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.
The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.
The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.
After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.
The MOL Northern Juvenile, capable of carrying 8,800 twenty-foot equivalent units, set a record today as the largest container ship to ever call on Jacksonville. The ship, which transited the Suez Canal from Asia before reaching the U.S. east coast, loaded and offloaded cargo at JAXPORT’s TraPac Container Terminal at Dames Point.
More than 1 million containers move through Jacksonville's public and private marine terminals annually. Jacksonville boasts the widest shipping channel in the Southeast U.S., wide enough for two ships to pass at the same time and offers worldwide cargo service from more than 40 ocean carriers, including direct service with Europe, Africa, South America, the Caribbean and other key markets.
Florida is now the nation’s third most populous state – and more than 60 million U.S. consumers live within a one-day truck drive of Jacksonville’s port. JAXPORT terminals are serviced by three U.S. interstates (I-10, I-95 and I-75), and the city has 36 daily train departures via three railroads: CSX, Norfolk Southern, and Florida East Coast. The port’s equal balance of imports and exports provides backhaul opportunities, saving money and maximizing transportation costs.
JAXPORT has invested $600 million in recent infrastructure investments in everything from cranes to docks to rail and a newly authorized project to deepen the federal shipping channel.
The eventlocation of the Swatch Girls Pro seen today on 3nd 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
+++ 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 Douglas A-4 Skyhawk is a single-seat subsonic carrier-capable light attack aircraft developed for the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps in the early 1950s. The delta-winged, single turbojet-engined Skyhawk was designed and produced by Douglas Aircraft Company, and later by McDonnell Douglas. It was originally designated A4D under the U.S. Navy's pre-1962 designation system.
Skyhawks played key roles in the Vietnam War, the Yom Kippur War, and the Falklands War. Sixty years after the aircraft's first flight in 1954, some of the 2,960 produced (through February 1979). The Skyhawk found many users all around the world, and some still remain in service with the Argentine Air Force and the Brazilian Naval Aviation. Operators in Asia included Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand.
Thailand procured the Skyhawk in 1984, for the Royal Thai Navy air arm to be used for naval and air space surveillance, against sea surface targets and for close air support for the Royal Thai Marine Corps. A total of thirty aircraft were purchased from the USA, twenty-four single seaters and six two-seat TA-4J trainers.
The single seaters were refurbished A-4Cs from USN overstock, modernized to a standard that came close to the USN’s A-4L, but with some specific differences and unique features that made them suitable for all-weather strike operations. This modified version was re-designated as A-4LT and featured the late Skyhawk versions’ distinct “Camelback” fairing that house the additional avionics as well as a heat exchanger. The most distinctive external difference to any other Skyhawk version was a unique, pointed radome.
The update for Thailand included an AN/APQ-126 terrain following radar in the nose, which was integrated into an ILAAS digital navigation system – a very modern system of its era. The radar also fed a navigation and weapons delivery computer which made possible accurate delivery of bombs from a greater stand-off distance, greatly improving survivability.
Further special equipment for the Thai Skyhawks included, among others, a Hughes AN/ASB-19 Angle Rate Bombing System, a Bendix AN/APN-141 Low altitude radar altimeter, an AN/AVQ-7(V) Head Up display (HUD), air refueling capability (with a fixed but detachable refueling probe), a brake parachute housing below the jet pipe, two additional underwing hardpoints (for a total for five, like the A-4E) and an increased payload. Avionics were modernized and expanded, giving the Thai Skyhawks ability to carry modern AIM-9L Sidewinder AAMs and AGM-65 Maverick AGMs. The latter became, beyond standard iron bombs and pods with unguided missiles, the aircrafts’ main armament against naval targets.
However, despite the modernization of the avionics, the A-4LTs retained the A-4Cs’ Wright J65-W-20 engine with 8,200 lbf (36 kN) of takeoff thrust.
The first aircraft were delivered in December 1985 to the Royal Thai Navy (RTN / กองทัพเรือไทย / Kong thap ruea thai), carrying a USN grey/white livery. They served in the No.104 RTN Squadron, distributed among two wings based at U-Tapao near Bangkok and at Songkhla in the south of Thailand, close to the Malaysian border. During regular overhauls (executed at Singapore Aircraft Industries, now ST Aerospace), the RTN Skyhawks soon received a new wraparound camouflage with reduced insignia and markings.
While in service, the Thai Skyhawks soon suffered from frequent maintenance issues and a low availability rate, since replacement parts for the reliable yet old J65 engine became more and more difficult to obtain. At times, half of the A-4LT fleet had to remain grounded because of engine problems. In consequence, the Thai Skyhawks were in the mid-Nineties supplemented by fourteen Vought A-7E Corsairs (plus four two-seaters) in the coastal defense, sea patrol and anti-shipping role. In 1999, they were retired and replaced by Royal Thai Air Force F-16s.
General characteristics:
Crew: one
Length: 40 ft 3 in (12.29 m)
Wingspan: 26 ft 6 in (8.38 m)
Height: 15 ft (4.57 m)
Wing area: 259 ft² (24.15 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 0008-1.1-25 root, NACA 0005-0.825-50 tip
Empty weight: 9,146 lb (4,152 kg)
Loaded weight: 18,300 lb (8,318 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 24,500 lb (11,136 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Curtiss-Wright J65-W-20 turbojet with 8,200 lbf (36 kN)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 575 kn (661 mph, 1,064 km/h)
Range: 1,700 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,220 km)
Combat radius: 625 nmi, 1,158 km
Service ceiling: 42,250 ft (12,880 m)
Rate of climb: 8,440 ft/min (43 m/s)
Wing loading: 70.7 lb/ft² (344.4 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.51
g-limit: +8/-3 g
Armament:
2× 20 mm (0.79 in) Colt Mk. 12 cannons in the wing roots, 100 RPG
Total effective payload of up to 7,700 lb (3,500 kg) on five hardpoints
- 1× Centerline: 3,500 lb capability
- 2× Inboard wing: 2,200 lb capability each
- 2× Outboard wing: 1,000 lb capability each
The kit and its assembly:
I originally had this project stashed away for the upcoming "1 Week Group Build" at whatifmodelers.com in June 2020, but since the current "In the Navy" GB had some days to go (and even received a two week extension) I decided to tackle this build on short notice.
The original idea was simply to build an A-4L, a modernized A-4C for the USN Reserve units, but similar machines had also been exported to Malaysia. For the naval theme I came across the Royal Thai Navy and its A-7E Corsairs - and from that the idea of a Skyhawk predecessor from the Eighties was born.
Instead of an A-4C (Fujimi does one in 1:72, but it's a rare kit) I based my build upon the nice Airfix A-4B/Q kit. Its biggest difference is the shorter nose, so that I decided to modify this "flaw" first and added a pointed radome instead of the usual blunt Skyhawk nose; not certain where it came from – it looks very Sea-Harrier-ish, but it’s actually the tip of a large drop tank (Italeri Tornado?). Nevertheless, this small change created a weird look, even more so with the black paint added to it later.
Further additions and mods are a dorsal avionics bulge from an Italeri A-4M, a scratched kinked refueling probe (made from wire and white glue, the early Skyhawks had straight probes but this would certainly interfere with the new radar in the nose), a brake parachute fairing under the tail (scratched, too, from sprue material) and additional antennae under the nose and behind the cockpit. Nothing fancy, rather details from more modern Skyhawk versions.
The AGM-65 Maverick missiles and their respective launch rails came from an Italeri Saab 39 Gripen, the drop tank on the ventral pylon is OOB.
Painting and markings:
This was a tough decision. The Thai Corsairs as primary (and historically later) benchmark carried a standard USN grey/white high-viz livery, even though with small roundels. There were also VTOL Harriers (former Spanish Matadors) operated for a short period by the Thai navy on board of the multi-purpose carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet, which wore a darker two-tone grey livery, pretty boring, too. I rather wanted something more exciting (if not exotic), a more modern wraparound scheme, suited for both overwater and high-altitude duties. That brought me to the Thai F-5Ts (a.k.a. Tigris), which carried - among others - a quite unique US export/aggressor scheme in three shades of light grey, including FS 35414, which looked like a pale turquoise on these machines. I furthermore took inspiration by early Indonesian A-4s, which also carried an US export scheme, nicknamed "Grape", which included darker shades of blue, blue-gray and the bright FS 35414, too.
I eventually settled upon a compromise between these two liveries and tried to adapt the standard F-5 aggressor camouflage pattern for the A-4, made up from FS 36440 (Light Gull Grey), 35164 (Intermediate Blue) and 35414 (Light Blue). Current Thai L-39 Albatros trainers seem to carry a similar livery, even though I am not certain about the tones that are actually used.
The basic enamel paints I used are Humbrol 129 and 144, and for the greenish Light Blue I used "Fulcrum Grey Green" from Modelmaster (#2134), a tone that is quite greenish but markedly darker and more dull than e.g. Humbrol 65, so that the color would not stand out brightly from the other greys and better fit between them. Worked quite well.
The inside of the slats as well as of the air brakes on the flanks were painted in bright red (Humbrol 19), while the landing gear and the interior of the air intake were painted in white (Humbrol 130). The cockpit was painted in a bluish mid grey (Revell 57).
After basic overall painting, the model received the usual light black ink washing and some post-panel-shading, for a lightly used/weathered look.
Most decals/markings come from a Thai Harrier (from an Italeri AV-8A kit), some other markings and stencils were puzzled together from the scrap box, e.g. from a USN F-5E aggressor and from a Peruvian Mirage 2000. Some additional details like the black gun soot areas on the wing roots or the fine white lines on the radome were created with generic decal sheet material.
Finally, the kit received an overall coat of matt acrylic varnish, except for the radome, which became semi-gloss.
As intended, this build was realized in just a couple of days - and I am positively surprised how good the Skyhawk looks in its unusual, if not exotic colors! This fictional livery certainly looks different from a potential standard USN grey/white outfit, and more exciting than a dull grey-in-grey livery. And it’s so weird that it even adds some credibility to this whiffy aircraft model. 😉
+++ 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 Douglas A-4 Skyhawk is a single-seat subsonic carrier-capable light attack aircraft developed for the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps in the early 1950s. The delta-winged, single turbojet-engined Skyhawk was designed and produced by Douglas Aircraft Company, and later by McDonnell Douglas. It was originally designated A4D under the U.S. Navy's pre-1962 designation system.
Skyhawks played key roles in the Vietnam War, the Yom Kippur War, and the Falklands War. Sixty years after the aircraft's first flight in 1954, some of the 2,960 produced (through February 1979). The Skyhawk found many users all around the world, and some still remain in service with the Argentine Air Force and the Brazilian Naval Aviation. Operators in Asia included Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand.
Thailand procured the Skyhawk in 1984, for the Royal Thai Navy air arm to be used for naval and air space surveillance, against sea surface targets and for close air support for the Royal Thai Marine Corps. A total of thirty aircraft were purchased from the USA, twenty-four single seaters and six two-seat TA-4J trainers.
The single seaters were refurbished A-4Cs from USN overstock, modernized to a standard that came close to the USN’s A-4L, but with some specific differences and unique features that made them suitable for all-weather strike operations. This modified version was re-designated as A-4LT and featured the late Skyhawk versions’ distinct “Camelback” fairing that house the additional avionics as well as a heat exchanger. The most distinctive external difference to any other Skyhawk version was a unique, pointed radome.
The update for Thailand included an AN/APQ-126 terrain following radar in the nose, which was integrated into an ILAAS digital navigation system – a very modern system of its era. The radar also fed a navigation and weapons delivery computer which made possible accurate delivery of bombs from a greater stand-off distance, greatly improving survivability.
Further special equipment for the Thai Skyhawks included, among others, a Hughes AN/ASB-19 Angle Rate Bombing System, a Bendix AN/APN-141 Low altitude radar altimeter, an AN/AVQ-7(V) Head Up display (HUD), air refueling capability (with a fixed but detachable refueling probe), a brake parachute housing below the jet pipe, two additional underwing hardpoints (for a total for five, like the A-4E) and an increased payload. Avionics were modernized and expanded, giving the Thai Skyhawks ability to carry modern AIM-9L Sidewinder AAMs and AGM-65 Maverick AGMs. The latter became, beyond standard iron bombs and pods with unguided missiles, the aircrafts’ main armament against naval targets.
However, despite the modernization of the avionics, the A-4LTs retained the A-4Cs’ Wright J65-W-20 engine with 8,200 lbf (36 kN) of takeoff thrust.
The first aircraft were delivered in December 1985 to the Royal Thai Navy (RTN / กองทัพเรือไทย / Kong thap ruea thai), carrying a USN grey/white livery. They served in the No.104 RTN Squadron, distributed among two wings based at U-Tapao near Bangkok and at Songkhla in the south of Thailand, close to the Malaysian border. During regular overhauls (executed at Singapore Aircraft Industries, now ST Aerospace), the RTN Skyhawks soon received a new wraparound camouflage with reduced insignia and markings.
While in service, the Thai Skyhawks soon suffered from frequent maintenance issues and a low availability rate, since replacement parts for the reliable yet old J65 engine became more and more difficult to obtain. At times, half of the A-4LT fleet had to remain grounded because of engine problems. In consequence, the Thai Skyhawks were in the mid-Nineties supplemented by fourteen Vought A-7E Corsairs (plus four two-seaters) in the coastal defense, sea patrol and anti-shipping role. In 1999, they were retired and replaced by Royal Thai Air Force F-16s.
General characteristics:
Crew: one
Length: 40 ft 3 in (12.29 m)
Wingspan: 26 ft 6 in (8.38 m)
Height: 15 ft (4.57 m)
Wing area: 259 ft² (24.15 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 0008-1.1-25 root, NACA 0005-0.825-50 tip
Empty weight: 9,146 lb (4,152 kg)
Loaded weight: 18,300 lb (8,318 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 24,500 lb (11,136 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Curtiss-Wright J65-W-20 turbojet with 8,200 lbf (36 kN)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 575 kn (661 mph, 1,064 km/h)
Range: 1,700 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,220 km)
Combat radius: 625 nmi, 1,158 km
Service ceiling: 42,250 ft (12,880 m)
Rate of climb: 8,440 ft/min (43 m/s)
Wing loading: 70.7 lb/ft² (344.4 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.51
g-limit: +8/-3 g
Armament:
2× 20 mm (0.79 in) Colt Mk. 12 cannons in the wing roots, 100 RPG
Total effective payload of up to 7,700 lb (3,500 kg) on five hardpoints
- 1× Centerline: 3,500 lb capability
- 2× Inboard wing: 2,200 lb capability each
- 2× Outboard wing: 1,000 lb capability each
The kit and its assembly:
I originally had this project stashed away for the upcoming "1 Week Group Build" at whatifmodelers.com in June 2020, but since the current "In the Navy" GB had some days to go (and even received a two week extension) I decided to tackle this build on short notice.
The original idea was simply to build an A-4L, a modernized A-4C for the USN Reserve units, but similar machines had also been exported to Malaysia. For the naval theme I came across the Royal Thai Navy and its A-7E Corsairs - and from that the idea of a Skyhawk predecessor from the Eighties was born.
Instead of an A-4C (Fujimi does one in 1:72, but it's a rare kit) I based my build upon the nice Airfix A-4B/Q kit. Its biggest difference is the shorter nose, so that I decided to modify this "flaw" first and added a pointed radome instead of the usual blunt Skyhawk nose; not certain where it came from – it looks very Sea-Harrier-ish, but it’s actually the tip of a large drop tank (Italeri Tornado?). Nevertheless, this small change created a weird look, even more so with the black paint added to it later.
Further additions and mods are a dorsal avionics bulge from an Italeri A-4M, a scratched kinked refueling probe (made from wire and white glue, the early Skyhawks had straight probes but this would certainly interfere with the new radar in the nose), a brake parachute fairing under the tail (scratched, too, from sprue material) and additional antennae under the nose and behind the cockpit. Nothing fancy, rather details from more modern Skyhawk versions.
The AGM-65 Maverick missiles and their respective launch rails came from an Italeri Saab 39 Gripen, the drop tank on the ventral pylon is OOB.
Painting and markings:
This was a tough decision. The Thai Corsairs as primary (and historically later) benchmark carried a standard USN grey/white high-viz livery, even though with small roundels. There were also VTOL Harriers (former Spanish Matadors) operated for a short period by the Thai navy on board of the multi-purpose carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet, which wore a darker two-tone grey livery, pretty boring, too. I rather wanted something more exciting (if not exotic), a more modern wraparound scheme, suited for both overwater and high-altitude duties. That brought me to the Thai F-5Ts (a.k.a. Tigris), which carried - among others - a quite unique US export/aggressor scheme in three shades of light grey, including FS 35414, which looked like a pale turquoise on these machines. I furthermore took inspiration by early Indonesian A-4s, which also carried an US export scheme, nicknamed "Grape", which included darker shades of blue, blue-gray and the bright FS 35414, too.
I eventually settled upon a compromise between these two liveries and tried to adapt the standard F-5 aggressor camouflage pattern for the A-4, made up from FS 36440 (Light Gull Grey), 35164 (Intermediate Blue) and 35414 (Light Blue). Current Thai L-39 Albatros trainers seem to carry a similar livery, even though I am not certain about the tones that are actually used.
The basic enamel paints I used are Humbrol 129 and 144, and for the greenish Light Blue I used "Fulcrum Grey Green" from Modelmaster (#2134), a tone that is quite greenish but markedly darker and more dull than e.g. Humbrol 65, so that the color would not stand out brightly from the other greys and better fit between them. Worked quite well.
The inside of the slats as well as of the air brakes on the flanks were painted in bright red (Humbrol 19), while the landing gear and the interior of the air intake were painted in white (Humbrol 130). The cockpit was painted in a bluish mid grey (Revell 57).
After basic overall painting, the model received the usual light black ink washing and some post-panel-shading, for a lightly used/weathered look.
Most decals/markings come from a Thai Harrier (from an Italeri AV-8A kit), some other markings and stencils were puzzled together from the scrap box, e.g. from a USN F-5E aggressor and from a Peruvian Mirage 2000. Some additional details like the black gun soot areas on the wing roots or the fine white lines on the radome were created with generic decal sheet material.
Finally, the kit received an overall coat of matt acrylic varnish, except for the radome, which became semi-gloss.
As intended, this build was realized in just a couple of days - and I am positively surprised how good the Skyhawk looks in its unusual, if not exotic colors! This fictional livery certainly looks different from a potential standard USN grey/white outfit, and more exciting than a dull grey-in-grey livery. And it’s so weird that it even adds some credibility to this whiffy aircraft model. 😉
Some background:
The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.
As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.
The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.
The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.
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, anyway. 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, 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.
By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).
During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 23 tons
Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)
Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)
Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)
Suspension: Leaf spring
Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)
Armour:
10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)
Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)
Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)
Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road
Power/weight: 13 PS/t
Engine:
Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)
Transmission:
ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios
Armament:
2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds
1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount
The kit and its assembly:
This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.
There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…
However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.
Painting and markings:
Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.
The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.
The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.
The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.
Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.
A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.
Eighth church on this 2021 Heritage/Ride and Stride Weekend, and all previous seven were open.
Which is worth pointing out, is unprecedented.
In fact, all 9 were open, some new and some, like Oare, revisits, but all worth doing.
St Peter is small and simple, a fine church overlooking Faversham Creek, on the edge of the once unhealthy marshes, now on a road that no longer leads to a ferry to Harty, but to a nature reserve.
I was greeted by a fine pair of ladies, who welcomed me as though I had cycled, and ensured the lights were put on inside.
Highlight is the modern glass with a representation of a Mulberry Harbour, as the designer of the road access part lived in the parish.
-------------------------------------------
St Peter’s Oare, a Grade I listed building, is often described as a ‘mainly 13th century church’ – which it is. However, the view that confronts the visitor entering the churchyard gate is pure Victoriana, the work of diocesan architect Joseph Clarke, an example of the sympathetic restoration of which not all Victorians were capable.
Indeed, it is this west elevation, with its louvred bell-tower and cedar-shingled spirelet, that is St Peter’s to visitors, artists and photographers.
The building could hardly be better sited. It stands where village becomes countryside, set inconspicuously back from a road that leads only to the broadening waters of the Swale and their marshland bird-life. In the churchyard, a few mature trees remain of those that once cast gloom over church and graves. They rise from among ancient headstones and ivy-clad tombs, providing summer shade for those who want to enjoy the panoramic views over Oare Creek and acre upon distant acre of marsh pastures with the North Downs as a backdrop. With binoculars or good eyesight you can rest on one of the conveniently located benches and count how many far-off churches you can pick out from this elevated point of vantage.
But how old is the church? you ask. Everyone seems to. To this there is no categorical answer. Today the building is little changed since the 1860s restoration and yet there was a church here when the Domesday Book was penned – well, half a church, but which half our Norman forebears didn’t say. A church half-finished? Or a church part-razed by the tempests of that tempestuous age?
What we do know is that the chancel was extended eastwards in the late 14th or early 15th century, and some time thereafter the old east window was taken out and replaced by a larger one in the Perpendicular style. The actual glass is more recent – the work of F.C. Eden. It was given in memory of artist Francis Forster, a casualty of WWI. Another window by this noted London artisan, on the north wall, commemorates another war victim. Below it a memorial slab set into the frame of this once tall lancet window names those who died in the great explosion of 1916, when the marshes throbbed with a wartime industry of munitions manufacture.
Back in the secluded peace of this village church is one treasured rarity, a square font of Purbeck marble from the late Norman/Early English period. Its sides were once elaborately carved, but many years ago it went missing, only to be recovered decades later from a nearby pond, somewhat the worse for its immersion. Was it concealed from Cromwell’s ravaging iconoclasts? No one knows. This hazy fact must take its place with the many mysteries hidden among the pages of time. But is it not these undocumented secrets that make a church like St Peter’s so alluring? Who can tell when the truth will emerge and another page of history can be written?
www.thekingsdownandcreeksidecluster.co.uk/?page_id=683
-------------------------------------------
A small Norman church overlooking Oare Creek with fine views to the east. Built of flint with Victorian additions by Joseph Clarke, the exterior is dominated by lively painted spirelet and south porch and muscular buttresses. Inside, a simple view with no chancel arch is enlivened by a Norman font, simple Victorian pulpit and fine stained glass windows by F C Eden. The west window – an oculus – contains the date 1867 recording the restoration of the church. A plaque commemorates those who lost their lives in one of the explosions at the nearby Gunpowder factory in 1916. The overall impression is of a lovingly cared for church, mirroring the lives of generations of Oare folk and it is highly recommended.
www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Oare
-------------------------------------------
ORE
LIES the next parish north westward from Davington, and is so called from the etymology of it in the Saxon language, signifying a fenny or marshy place.
This parish is a very low situation, at the very edge of the marshes, it is consequently but little known or frequented, its vicinity to the marshes, and its low and watry situation, make it very unhealthy, so that it is but very thinly inhabited, but the lands are very rich and fertile, the waters of the Swale are its northern boundaries; on its south it rises up towards Bysing-wood, from which it is distant about a mile. The village is occupied by a few fishermen and oyster dredgers, situated near the middle of the parish on a small ascent, having the church about a quarter of a mile to the north-westward of it, and Ore-court at the like distance, at the edge of the marshes. The creek, which is navigable up to the village, whence it runs north-east, and at a little more than half a mile's distance joins the Faversham creek, and flows with it about the like distance, till it meets the waters of the Swale.
Several scarce plants have been observed in this parish by Mr. Jacob, who has enumerated them among his Plantæ Favershamienses, to which book the reader is referred for a list of them.
THE MANOR of Ore was part of the vast possessions of Odo, bishop of Baieux, and earl of Kent, the Conqueror's half-brother, under the general title of whose lands it is thus entered in the general survey of Domesday:
In Lest de Wiwarlet. In Favreshant hundered, Adam holds of the bishop (of Baieux) Ore. It was taxed at two sulings. The arable lands are four carucates. In demesne there is one, and ten villeins, with ten borderers, having two carucates. There is half a church, and one mill of twenty-two shillings, and two fisheries without tallage, and one salt-pit of twenty-eight pence. Wood for the pannage of six bogs. In the time of king Edward the Confessor it was worth four pounds, and afterwards sixty shillings, now one hundred shillings. Turgis held it of king Edward.
And a little afterwards there is another entry as follows:
Adam holds of the bishop one yoke in Ore, and it was taxed at one yoke. The arable land is one carucate. Four villeins now hold this to ferme, and pay twenty shillings, and it was worth so much separately. There is a church. Leunold held it of king Edward.
Four years after the taking of the above survey, the bishop of Baieux was disgraced, and all his possessions were consiscated to the crown.
Upon which the manor of Ore came to be held immediately, or in capite of the king, by the beforementioned. Adam de Port, of whose heirs it was afterwards again held by Arnulf Kade, who gave this manor, with that of Stalishfield, and their appurtenances, to the knights hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem, and it was assigned by them to the jurisdiction of their preceptory, established at Swingfield.
The manor of Ore continued part of the possessions of these knights till the general dissolution of their hospital in the 32d year of Henry VIII. when this order was suppressed by an act then specially passed for that purpose. (fn. 1)
This manor seems to have remained in the hands of the crown till king Edward VI. granted it in his 5th year, to Edward, lord Clinton and Say, who next year re-conveyed it back again to the king. (fn. 2)
How it passed from the crown afterwards I have not found, but that at length it came into the possession of the family of Monins, and thence by sale to that of Short, one of which, Samuel Short, esq. owned it in 1722, and it continued down in his descendants to Philip Short, esq. who was succeeded in it by Mr. Charles Maples Short, who died a few years ago at Jamaica, on which it became vested in Mr. Humphry Munn, gent. in right of Lydia Short his wife. Hence it passed by sale to Mr. Bonnick Lipyeatt, who died in 1789, leaving two daughters his coheirs, who married Mr. Charles Brooke, of London, and Mr. Gosselin, and entitled them respectively to this estate.
A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.
There are noparochial charities. The poor constantly relieved here are not more than two; casually about six.
ORE is within the ECCLESTASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Ospringe.
The church which is dedicated to St. Peter, is a small building, of one isle and one chancel, having a pointed steeple at the west end, in which are two bells.
This church, which was antiently accounted only as a chapel to that of Stalisfield, belonged to the priory of St. Gregory, in Canterbury, perhaps part of its orignal endowment by archbishop Lanfranc, in the time of the Conqueror, and it was confirmed to it, among its other possessions, by archbishop Hubert, about the reign of king Richard I.
In the 8th year of Richard II. there was a yearly pension paid from the church of Ore, of ten shillings to the priory of Rochester, and another of eight shilling to that of Leeds. (fn. 3)
This church remained part of the possessions of the priory of St. Gregory, till the dissolution of it in the reign of Henry VIII. in the 27th year of which, an act having passed for the suppression of all such religious houses, whose revenues did not amount to the clear yearly value of two hundred pounds, this priory was thereby dissolved, and the scite of it, together with all its lands, possessions, and revenues, surrendered into the king's hands, by John Symkins, prior of it.
The church of Ore remained with the other possessions of the priory in the crown but a small time, for an act passed that year to enable the king and the archbishop of Canterbury to exchange the scite of the late dissolved priory of St. Radigund near Dover, with all its possessions, lately given by the king to the archbishop, for the scite of the late dissolved priory of St. Gregory, and all the possessions belonging to it, excepting the manor of Howfield, in Chartham.
After which the parsonage of this church was demised by the archbishop, as it has been since by his successors, among the rest of the revenues of the priory of St. Gregory, from time to time, in one great lease, (in which all advowsons and nominations to churches and chapels have constantly been excepted) in which state it continues at this time. George Gipps, esq. of Harbledown, M.P. is the present lessee of then to the archbishop, and Mr. John Hope, of Ore, is the present leffee under him for the parsonage of this church, at the yearly rent of thirty-four pounds.
It pays, procurations to the archdecaon five shillings, and to the archbishop at his visitaiton two shillings. When the church of Ore was separated from that of Stalisfield, I have not found, but it has long been an independent church of itself.
It was, long before the dissolution of the priory of St. Gregory, served as a curacy by the religious of it; since which it has been esteemed as a perpetual curacy, of the patronage of the successive archbishops of Canterbury, and continues to at this time. In 1640 the communicants here were forty-seven.
The lessee of the parsonage pays the curate, by the convenants of his lease, the yearly sum of fifteen pounds.
¶Before the year 1755, it had been augmented by the governors of queen Anne's bounty with the sum of two hundred pounds, and divine service was performed here only once a fortnight; since which it has been augmented with 1000l. more, and it is now performed here once a week. Of the above sum of 1200l. in the year 1764, 260l. were laid out in the purchase of an estate, of a house, buildings, and twenty-two acres of land, in Ospringe; and in 1770, another estate was purchased, consisting of a house, buildings, and thirty-three acres of land, in Boughton under Blean. The remaining 280l. yet remain in the governors hands.
Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.
After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .
The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.
Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.
"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."
Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.
In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).
Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.
Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.
"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.
Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.
Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.
Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.
The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.
Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.
"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."
With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.
From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.
Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.
On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.
Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.
Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.
Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.
The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.
Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.
Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.
Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.
A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.
On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.
The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.
Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.
But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.
Israeli Police Yamam unit during Counter Terror Training
The Yamam (Hebrew: ימ"מ, an acronym for Special Central Unit (יחידה מרכזית מיוחדת, Yehida Merkazit Meyuhedet)) is the elite civilian counter-terrorism unit in Israel. The Yamam is capable of both hostage-rescue operations and offensive take-over raids against targets in civilian areas. Besides military duties, it also performs SWAT duties and undercover police work.
Name and structure
In Israel the Yamam is also known as the "Unit for Counter-Terror Warfare" (Hebrew: היחידה ללוחמה בטרור). It is subordinate to the Ministry of Internal Security central command and is part of the civilian Israel Police force, specifically the Israel Border Police. Its operators and officers are professional policemen on payroll, usually with infantry experience from their military service within the Israel Defense Forces. Yamam recruits its members exclusively from Israeli units.
Responsibilities
The unit is primarily responsible for civilian hostage rescue within Israel's borders, but from about the mid-1990s it has also been used for tasks such as arresting police suspects who have barricaded themselves in structures and requiring specialized extraction methods, as well as in personal security for VIPs and in counter-terror operations within the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Yamam are schooled in basic Arabic and dress to assimilate within the Arab population to avoid detection in order to carry out raids to arrest those suspected of conducting terrorist activities within Israel.
However, most of the Yamam's activity is classified, and published Yamam operations are often credited to other units.
Organisation
The Yamam has around 200 officers, and consists a headquarters element, an intelligence section and a small team responsible for the development of new operational techniques and testing new equipment. Aside from these central elements, the bulk of the unit is divided into a number of sections, each consisting of five teams, each containing operators with a particular specialization, so that the section includes within its numbers all the elements needed for a successful operation: roping team, entry team, medic team, sniping team, dog team, EOD team (demolition and bomb disposal). Thus, whereas an IDF special forces operation needs to assemble elements from different specialist units, in Yamam, they are all permanently part of the same unit, living, training and operating together.
Officers
Applicants for Yamam must be between 22 and 30 years old and must have completed their three-year infantry service in the IDF with a level 7 of IDF training or higher, although no previous police experience is required. Unlike American SWAT teams, the YAMAM is a professional unit with only combat duties and no other police type work. The selection process includes a "hell week" said to be one of the hardest in the world. This level of difficulty is achieved because all the applicants are already seasoned combat soldiers, like the US Delta force. The skills they are looking for in every candidate are: intelligence, physical fitness, motivation, trustworthiness, accountability, maturity, stability, judgment, decisiveness, teamwork, influence, and communication. Training lasts 6 months and is carried out in the unit's own training center, although some use is made of the facilities at the IDF Counter Terror Warfare School (LOTAR, Unit 707.) The course is divided into an three-month general CT training period at the end of which recruits are selected for their specialization and then concentrate for the remaining four months on that specialization. Upon graduation, individuals are posted to fill gaps in the sections. Yamam considers that it has several advantages over the IDF counter-terror units, first, because the men are more mature, most in their mid 30's and early 40's, and spend much longer in the unit than the equivalent military units, and, second, because the units contain a far broader range of ages and experience.
The Yamam is self-dependent, training its own operators in all fields, such as sniping, reconnaissance, dog operating, bomb disposal, etc. As a result, the Yamam has a rapid deployment time and high coordination between various squads (sniping squad, entry team, engagement force, etc.).
Waiting in the rain & in vain for 60103 Flying Scotsman at Ampthill Crossing 4/11/2017 (It was 25 minutes earlier than scThe British Rail Class 222 is a diesel multiple unit high-speed train capable of 125 mph (200 km/h). Twenty-seven units have been built in Belgium by Bombardier Transportation.
The Class 222 is similar to the Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 Super Voyager trains used by CrossCountry and Virgin Trains, but it has a different interior. The Class 222 trains have more components fitted under the floors to free up space within the body. Since 2009 East Midlands Trains has been the only train operating company using Class 222s.
All coaches are equipped with a Cummins QSK19 diesel engine of 750 hp (560 kW) at 1800 rpm.[2] This powers a generator, which supplies current to motors driving two axles per coach. Approximately 1,350 miles (2,170 km) can be travelled between each refuelling.
Class 222 have rheostatic braking using the motors in reverse to generate electricity which is dissipated as heat through resistors situated on the roof of each coach; this saves on brake pad wear.
In common with the Class 220s, B5000 lightweight bogies are used - these are easily recognisable since the entire outer surface of the wheel is visible, with inboard axle bearings.
The Class 222 are fitted with Dellner couplers,[3] as on Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 SuperVoyager trains,[3] though these units cannot work together in service because the Class 222 electrical connections are incompatible with the Class 220 and Class 221 trains.[3][clarification needed]
All Class 222 units are maintained at the dedicated Etches Park depot in Derby, just south of Derby station.
Formation[edit]
Seven car length Class 222 No. 222003 at London St Pancras
Five car length Class 222 No. 222016 at Bedford
Class 222 units are currently running in the following formations:
East Midlands Trains: seven cars with 236 standard seats and 106 first-class seats.
Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
Coach B - Standard Class
Coach C - Standard Class
Coach D - Standard Class with Buffet counter
Coach F - First Class
Coach G - First Class
Coach H - First Class, kitchen and driving cab
East Midlands Trains: five cars with 192 standard seats and 50 first-class seats
Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
Coach B - Standard Class
Coach C - Standard Class with Buffet counter
Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite
Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab
East Midlands Trains: four cars with 132 standard seats and 33 first-class seats
Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
Coach B - Standard Class with Buffet counter
Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite
Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab
The four- and five-car units can be coupled to form 9/10-car services at peak times. When coupled together, coaches A-G are found in the front unit and the rear coaches become labelled J, K, L, M, N, with the first-class seats in coaches J and K.
Initially, the 23 units ordered for Midland Mainline were 4-car and 9-car. Over time these have been gradually modified to the current formations. The 4-car units ordered by Hull Trains had an option when constructed to be extended to 5-cars if required.[4]
East Midlands Trains has named the following Meridians:
Unit numberNameDate namedNamed byNotes
222 001The Entrepreneur Express22 September 2011Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed to kick off the start of the 2011 entrepreneur festival MADE
222 002The Cutlers' Company18 October 2011Pamela Liversidge, Master CutlerNamed to mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and Sheffield
222 003Tornado24 March 2009Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorDriving car 60163 named as it has the same number as Tornado
222 004Children's Hospital Sheffield26 February 2013Michael Vaughan, Charity PatonTo mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and the Sheffield Children's Hospital
222 006The Carbon Cutter31 May 2011Philip Hammond, Transport SecretaryTo mark the introduction of eco-mode to the fleet
222 008Derby Etches Park13 September 2014David Horne, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed as part of the open day at Derby Etches Park
222 015175 Years of Derby's Railways 1839 - 201418 July 2014Paul Atterbury, Antiques Roadshow Expert and railway authorTo mark 175 years of railways in Derby
222 022Invest In Nottingham19 September 2011Jon Collins, leader of Nottingham City CouncilNamed to launch the 2011 Invest in Nottingham day
222 011Sheffield City Battalion 1914-191811 November 2014Ron Wiltshire, Royal British Legion representativeNamed to honour Sheffield City Battalion who fought in the World War I
East Midlands Trains Class 222/0 No. 222018 at Loughborough.
In 2008 further rearrangements were made to the sets: another carriage was removed from the eight-car Meridians, except for 222 007, which has been reduced to five cars.[6] The surplus coaches were then added to the remaining four-car Meridians to make six seven-car sets (222 001-222 006) and 17 five-car sets (222 007-222 023). This took place from March to October 2008; as part of the process, two first-class coaches removed from 222 007 were converted to standard class and part first class.
The seven-car trains are almost exclusively used on the fast services between London St Pancras and Sheffield. These do not operate the London St Pancras-Leeds, although the service is via Sheffield. The five-car trains are mainly used between London St Pancras and Sheffield, Nottingham or Corby on semi-fast services. The four-car trains supplement the five-car trains on these services.
In December 2008 the Class 222 Meridians started work on the hourly London St Pancras to Sheffield services, because they have faster acceleration than the High Speed Trains and so were able to reduce the Sheffield to London journey time by 12 minutes. The hourly Nottingham service was then transferred to High Speed Train running to cover for the Meridians now working the hourly Sheffield fast service.[7]
In February 2009, 222 101 and 222 102 transferred from Hull Trains to East Midlands Trains, and were quickly repainted in the East Midlands Trains white livery. 222 104 followed from Hull Trains later in the year. 222 103 followed a few months after 222 104 after repairs had been completed (see below). 222 103 has now been reinstated for service after two years for repairs after the unit fell from jacks at Bombardier, Crofton in early 2007.
heduled and sitting in my car it passed by heard but not seen)
Geralt: As capable soldiers, I'm sure the Blue Stripes aren't behind inciting the people against magic-users. But I will need to see your spymaster.
Roche: Is that all? If this spares my men, the favor will be well worth it.
Alternative to other CSC offerings, this capable camera made by the most evolving electronics company is a interesting offering now, when the NX300 is here. Large APS-C sensor with usable ISO 3200, easy handling, very solid build, many functions for both amateur and advanced photographers, full controls, WiFi connectivity, 8 fps, and very good lenses. The 18-55 is really nice, and firmware modifications made the auto focus faster and raw files smaller. Now when the production life of the NX210 comes to an end, some local resellers run crazy and the price is falling like a stone - I found this one for $250 with some benefits. For that money it´s a quite powerful and handy camera.
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:)
Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.
After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .
The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.
Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.
"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."
Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.
In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).
Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.
Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.
"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.
Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.
Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.
Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.
The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.
Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.
"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."
With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.
From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.
Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.
On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.
Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.
Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.
Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.
The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.
Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.
Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.
Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.
A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.
On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.
The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.
Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.
But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.
Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.
After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .
The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.
Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.
"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."
Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.
In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).
Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.
Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.
"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.
Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.
Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.
Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.
The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.
Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.
"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."
With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.
From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.
Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.
On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.
Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.
Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.
Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.
The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.
Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.
Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.
Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.
A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.
On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.
The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.
Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.
But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.
+++ 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 origins of the Henschel Hs 165 date back to early 1937, when the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM, German Ministry of Aviation) issued a specification for a carrier-based torpedo bomber to operate from Germany's first aircraft carrier, the Graf Zeppelin construction of which had started at the end of 1936. The specification was originally issued to two aircraft producers, Fieseler and Arado, and demanded an all-metal biplane with a maximum speed of at least 300 km/h (186 mph), a range of at least 1,000 km and capable both of torpedo and dive-bombing. By the summer of 1938 the Fieseler design proved to be superior to the Arado design, the Ar 195.
Anyway, by the time the Fi 167 prototype was ready for tests and proved its excellent handling, the biplane layout was already outdated and did not promise much development potential. Therefore, the RLM's request was repeated in late 1938 and a monoplane requested. Since the Graf Zeppelin was not expected to be completed before the end of 1940, the RLM did not put much pressure behind the project.
Among others, Henschel replied with the Hs 165. It was a compact and conservative low wing monoplane of all-metal construction with a crew of two (pilot and navigator/observer/gunner) under a common, heavily framed and high glasshouse canopy. In order to achieve a high performance, the airframe was originally developed around the new 14 cylinder BMW 139 radial engine with 1,550 hp (1,140 kW). The main landing gear was fully retractable, retracting outwards into wells that were part of the outer, foldable wings. Similar to the Ju87 C, the wings could manually be folded backwards, so that the aircraft became very compact for onboard stowage.
The tail wheel, placed behind a V-shaped arrester hook, could not be retracted, even though a mechanism allowed the control of the tail's ground clearance for the carriage of a torpedo under the fuselage and an optimized angle of attack for starts and landings.
Armament consisted of a pair of 20mm MG FF cannons in the wings, a pair of 7.92mm machine guns above the engine, synchronized to fire through the propeller arc, and another single light machine gun for rear defense.
Among the special equipment of the Hs 165 for naval operations was a two-seat rubber dinghy with signal ammunition and emergency ammunition. A quick fuel dump mechanism and two inflatable 750 L (200 US gal) bags in each wing and a further two 500 L (130 US gal) bags in the fuselage enabled the aircraft to remain afloat for up to three days in calm seas.
When the first two prototypes of the Hs 165 (the V-1 and V-2) were about to be finished, it became clear that the BMW 139 would not materialize, but rather be replaced by an even more powerful engine. The new design was given the name BMW 801 after BMW was given a new block of "109-800" engine numbers by the RLM to use after their merger with Bramo. The first BMW 801A's ran in April 1939, only six months after starting work on the design, with production commencing in 1940.
Hs 165 V-1 was re-engined and ready for testing in mid 1940, while the first catapult launch tests on board of the Graf Zeppelin carrier were already carried out with Arado Ar 197s, modified Junkers Ju 87Bs and modified Messerschmitt Bf 109Ds. However, the Graf Zeppelin was still incomplete and not ready for full military service, and the changing strategic situation led to further work on her being suspended. In the wake of this decision, the completion of further carrier-borne aircraft was stopped and the completed examples were taken into Luftwaffe service in several evaluation/test units.
The Hs 165 initially fell victim to this decision, and only five airworthy airframes were completed as Hs 165 A-0 pre-production aircraft. Anyway, these were kept in service as test beds and other development duties, and Henschel kept working on detail improvements since the aircraft was also intended to become a land-based replacement for the Ju 87 dive bombers which had become obsolete by 1941, too. This aircraft was planned as the Hs 165 B.
However, by the spring of 1942 the usefulness of aircraft carriers in modern naval warfare had been amply demonstrated, and on 13 May 1942, the German Naval Supreme Command ordered work resumed on the German carrier projects. Henschel was happy to have the refined Hs 165 A at hand, and the type was immediately put into production.
The resulting Hs 165 A-1 differed in many equipment details from the former pre-production aircraft, and the armament was upgraded, too. The wing-mounted MG FF 20mm cannons were replaced with more effective and lighter MG 151/20 guns, while the pair of MG 17 machine guns above the engine was replaced by a pair of heavy MG 131 machine guns. The observer's single, light MG 15 machine gun was also upgraded to a belt-fed MG 81Z with two barrels, or a single MG 131.
The original BMW 801A engine remained the same, though, and due to the Hs 165 A-1’s higher overall weight the aircraft's performance deteriorated slightly.
Production did not last for long though, because further work on the Graf Zeppelin was soon terminated, and this time for good. In the meantime, the RLM had also decided to reduce the variety of aircraft types and rather develop specialized versions of existing aircraft than dedicated types like the Hs 165. As a consequence Hs 165 production was stopped again in June 1943, with several improved versions on the drawing board. These included the A-2 single seater and the C with an alternative liquid-cooled Jumo 213 powerplant.
The land-based Hs 165 B never materialized because, at the time of the type’s introduction into service, the dive bomber concept had turned out to be much too vulnerable in the European theatre of operations. Effectively, the Hs 165 needed cover from more agile fighters and did not stand a chance against enemy fighters.
However, until the end of production about 100 Hs 165 aircraft had been delivered to land-based front line units, since no German aircraft carrier ever materialized, and these machines were primarily used in Northern Europe in the coastal defense role and for harassment attacks in the North and Baltic Sea until 1945.
In service, they were gradually replaced by Ju 88 torpedo bombers and the Fw 190 A-5a/U14, which was able to carry a single torpedo, too, but offered a much better performance than the heavy and large Hs 165.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2 (pilot and observer/gunner)
Length: 11.08 m (36 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 13.95 m (45 ft 9 in)
Height: 4.18 m (13 ft 8 in)
Wing area: 26.8 m² (288 ft²)
Empty weight: 9,725 lb (4,411 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 14,300 lb (6,486 kg)
Powerplant:
1 × BMW 801A air-cooled 14 cylinder two row radial engine, 1,700 hp (1,250 kW)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 302 mph (262 kn, 486 km/h) at 11,000 ft (3,350 m)
Cruise speed: 235 mph (204 kn, 378 km/h)
Range: 1,400 miles (1,220 nmi, 2,253 km)
Service ceiling: 22,500 ft (6,860 m)
Wing loading: 43.1 lb/ft² (210 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.12 hp/lb (0.19 kW/kg)
Armament:
2× 20 mm MG 151/20 cannon in the wings
2 × 13 mm MG 131 machine gun above the engine
1 × 7.92 mm MG 81Z, firing backwards
1× 1000 kg (2,200 lb) bomb, or
1× 765 kg (1,685 lb) torpedo, or
1 × 500 kg (1,100 lb) bomb plus 4 × 50 kg (110 lb) bombs, or
4 × 250 kg (551 lb) ventrally
The kit and its assembly:
Another entry for the 2016 "In the Navy" Group Build at whatfimodelers.com, and in this case a complete kitbash for a fictional aircraft. Originally, this idea started as a Hs 126 on floats, which then turned into a low wing aircraft (in the Ju 87 class) and finally evolved into a carrier-capable torpedo bomber. Pretty dramatic evolution, but once the plan was settled, things quickly turned into hardware.
Ingredients include:
- Fuselage, cockpit and stabilizers (though mounted differently) from an Italeri Hs 126
- Wings from a Mastercraft (ex ZTM Plastyk) PZL 23 Karas, with the ventral gondala removed
- Landing gear from a Matchbox He 70, wheels from a Mastercraft Su-22;
- Engine/cowling from an Academy Fw 190, plus various donation parts and a putty plug
- Canopy from a Matchbox Brewster Buffalo
- German torpedo from the spares box (IIRC from an Italeri He 111)
Even though this is a kitbash, work was rather easy and straightforward, because most of the parts come from OOB donation kits. First, the Hs 126 fuselage was finished without an interior and the Fw 190 nose section transplanted. Inside, a styrene tube was added in order to hold the propeller and let it spin freely. In parallel, the landing gear wells were cut into the wings and the flaps separated/opened. Then the canopy was integrated into the fuselage, using styrene strips and putty.
For the wings, a wide opening had to be cut into the Hs 126’s lower fuselage, and the parts took some putty work to blend together.
Once the wings were in place, the landing gear was mounted as well as the scratched torpedo hardpoint. The cockpit interior followed suit with new seats and two figures, then the Buffalo canopy was modified for the rear machine gun mount and glued into place.
Painting and markings:
I wanted a rather "dry", typical German livery, and settled for a simple splinter scheme with a low waterline in the naval colors RLM 72 (a kind of very dark olive drab) and 73 (a bluish, very dark green) with light blue (RLM 65) undersides.
In this case I used enamels from the Modelmaster Authentic range, treated with a light black ink wash and with serious panel shading (with Humbrol 66 and a mix of Humbrol 30 + 77, respectively), because some color pictures I got hands on from early German naval aircraft (e. g. He 115 or Ar 196) suggest that the two murky, green tones weathered and bleached easily, and the enhanced contrast between the very similar colors was IMHO helpful, anyway.
The interior and the landing gearw as painted in contemporary RLM 02, the torpedo is simple black with a gun metal tip and a brass propeller.
The markings had to be puzzled together; I originally wanted the kit to be part of one of the Küstenfliegergruppen, in particular KüFliGr 106. But in mid 1943, these were partly integrated into the Kampffliegergruppen, and offensive parts of KüFliGr 106 were added to KG 6. It took some time to figure out where KG 6 was operating in the time frame I wanted to place the Hs 165, and eventually found 8./KG 6 from the third group that was based in Belgium at that time and flew Ju 88 torpedo bombers - so I added the Hs 165 to that squadron.
As a side effect, the aircraft would not carry any of the fuselage bands or other bright ID markings - the only color highlights are the red wing tip and the individual code "K" letter, and I used a grey decal for the 8th squadron's code letter "S" for better contrast with the dark green livery. Another "highlight" is a KG 6 emblem behind the engine, which I found on a Peddinghaus Decals sheet in the stash. Anyway, this minimal and very conservative livery does not look bad at all, though?
A complex kitbashing,done in about a week, and despite some trouble and major body work the result looks IMHO very good - especially the flight scenes, with the retracted (retouched...) landing gear show the sleek lines of the Hs 126, the fictional Hs 165 looks pretty fast and purposeful. And with a different engine, this could also carry some Hinomaru - the thing reminds me a lot of Japanese torpedo bombers (e. g. the B5N?) and carrier-borne reconnaissance aircraft?
The new BMW 1 Series.
Unmistakably sporty, with a higher quality feel and greater presence.
New special-edition models, an enhanced premium interior, extended
connectivity features and the latest-generation iDrive operating system: this is
the next generation of the BMW 1 Series. The sportiest representative of the
premium compact class comes with a broad range of efficient engines
encompassing powerful three-, four- and six-cylinder variants. Uniquely in this
class, the BMW 1 Series has rear-wheel drive, with the intelligent xDrive allwheel-
drive system available as an option. The new edition of the
BMW 1 Series will be launched in July 2017 in 3-door and 5-door versions.
The BMW 1 Series: a tour de force in the premium compact class.
The success story of this sporty compact model dates back to late-summer
2004 and the introduction of the original BMW 1 Series. Thanks to its
superior agility and driving dynamics, it rapidly positioned itself as the epitome
of sporting prowess in the compact segment. To date, more than two million
units of the BMW 1 Series have been sold worldwide, of which approximately
960,000 are from the latest model generation. Germany is the most important
international market and this is where one in four BMW 1 Series is sold,
followed by the UK (20 per cent) and China (eight per cent). The
BMW 1 Series is built in Germany at the plants in Regensburg (3-door and 5-
door models) and Leipzig (5-door). There are also assembly plants for the
Asia-Pacific region in Chennai (India) and Rayong (Thailand).
New special-edition models with striking looks.
The BMW 1 Series is unmistakeably sporty: dynamic contours, the distinctive
kidney grille, long bonnet and a sportily stylish rear define its appearance. New
special-edition models – the Edition Sport Line Shadow, Edition M Sport
Shadow and BMW M140i Edition Shadow – see BMW emphasising the
youthfully refreshing, sporty character of the 1 Series. The special editions
stand out from their siblings with a kidney grille frame painted in black, LED
headlights with black inserts and darkened rear lights which likewise feature
LED technology. The BMW 1 Series Edition M Sport Shadow has black
exhaust tailpipes, too. The new exterior colours Seaside Blue and Sunset
Orange also contribute to the new car’s more striking looks.
The Sport Line, Urban Line and M Sport variants of the BMW 1 Series remain
in the line-up alongside the standard model. And now there are also specialedition
models to choose from. The handover from one model to the next
sees five new light-alloy wheels being added to the range in 17- and 18-inch
formats. A total of 16 different wheel designs – in sizes ranging from 16 to
18 inches – provide plenty of scope for personalisation. The new
BMW 1 Series Edition Sport Line Shadow comes with exclusive 17-inch lightalloy
wheels (725) as standard. The Edition M Sport Shadow has 18-inch
wheels in either Jet Black or Bicolour Jet Black (719 M) to complement its
shadow-like character. And an additional 18-inch light-alloy wheel design is
offered for the M140i/M140i xDrive Edition Shadow (436 M in Orbit Grey).
Upgraded interior, redesigned instrument panel.
Moving inside the new BMW 1 Series, an array of details add to the cabin’s
exclusive, high-quality feel. With a clear and stylish design, the instrument
panel has been completely reworked to place an even greater emphasis on
driver focus. The black-panel instrument cluster has likewise been
reconfigured. Contrast stitching gives the various model variants a
sophisticated appearance. The centre stack, which houses the control panels
for the radio and air conditioning system, features a high-gloss black surface.
There is a roll cover for the cupholders in the centre console, giving the new
interior a clean look. And the window buttons in the doors now have chrome
trim. Thanks to virtually imperceptible gaps, the glove compartment blends
seamlessly into the overall ambience. The air vents for the air conditioning
have been revised and also contribute to the generous impression of space
created by the interior of the new BMW 1 Series.
Customers can also specify an optional new seat covering in Cognac Dakota
leather, while the interior trim strips are now available with Pearl Chrome
accents. The Urban Line offers exclusive new combinations of white or black
acrylic glass with chrome detailing. The standard model, Sport Line and
M Sport variants can be ordered with new combinations of Piano Finish Black,
aluminium or Fineline wood trim with chrome. When it comes to the seat
coverings, BMW 1 Series customers can choose from seven cloth variants,
some including leather or Alcantara.
Using iDrive, the touchscreen or voice control to operate various functions.
The new BMW 1 Series is equipped with the latest generation of the iDrive
operating system as standard. Using the iDrive Touch Controller allows the
driver to comfortably access and activate a variety of vehicle, navigation and
entertainment functions with one hand. Thanks to the touchpad integrated
into the Controller, it is easy to enter destinations for the navigation system in
handwriting style. If the optional Navigation system Professional is fitted, the
high-resolution central 8.8-inch display now comes in touchscreen form.
Intelligent voice control is the third way of operating these functions.
Perfectly connected from the word go.
Thanks to the standard built-in SIM card in the BMW 1 Series,
ConnectedDrive provides optimum connectivity and access to BMW services
without having to rely on the customer’s smartphone. These include the
Concierge Services, where personal assistants select destinations such as
restaurants or hotels for the driver while en route, make reservations and then
send the information directly to the vehicle’s navigation system, complete with
all contact details. Online Entertainment gives BMW 1 Series occupants a
choice of millions of music tracks and audio books, while RTTI (Real Time
Traffic Information) finds a smart way around traffic jams. RTTI now also
includes a hazard preview based on fleet information, meaning that in addition
to the real-time traffic situation, the service also notifies drivers of dangerous
situations – such as accidents or heavy rain – detected by other BMW
vehicles. Anonymised sensor data is used for this purpose. Hazard reports
and rain are shown on the map in the vehicle’s display, while a warning and
message appear on the navigation map when approaching the location of the
danger.
Plus, in selected cities in Germany and the USA, the On-Street Parking
Information service uses the Navigation system Professional display to
indicate the probability of finding an available roadside parking space.
The all-encompassing digital concept BMW Connected seamlessly integrates
the BMW 1 Series into the user’s digital life via touchpoints such as an
iPhone, Apple Watch, Android smartphone or smartwatch. BMW Connected
detects mobility-related information, such as the addresses contained in the
appointments calendar, and transmits this automatically to the vehicle. The
user then receives a message on their smartphone notifying them in advance
of the ideal departure time based on real-time traffic information. In addition,
places the user drives to regularly and personal mobility patterns are also
stored automatically. This means that manually entering destination
addresses in the navigation system is set to largely become a thing of the
past. If navigation details such as the destination address and desired arrival
time have already been set outside the vehicle on the user’s smartphone, the
link between phone and car will allow BMW Connected to transfer the
information seamlessly and make it available to the BMW navigation system.
BMW Connected and the Remote Services allow BMW 1 Series drivers to
stay in touch with their car at all times, no matter where they are. They can
control the heating and ventilation, lock and unlock the doors and call up
vehicle-related information, quickly and easily using their smartphone. And if
they happen to forget where they parked their car, they can check its location
on a map via BMW Connected. Alternatively, the vehicle’s horn or headlight
flasher can be activated remotely in order to locate it in a large car park, for
example. With the help of Alexa and Alexa-capable devices, BMW 1 Series
drivers in Germany and the UK can even manage their appointments in the
BMW Connected mobility agenda and operate vehicle functions by voice
control from the comfort of their home.
For the first time, BMW now offers Microsoft Office 365 users a secure server
connection for exchanging and editing emails, calendar entries and contact
details in the BMW 1 Series, thanks to the car’s built-in Microsoft Exchange
function.
The optional in-car WiFi hotspot provides a high-speed mobile internet
connection for up to ten devices. Apple CarPlay is also available for the
BMW 1 Series via a BMW navigation system. Integrating the smartphone into
the vehicle’s system environment allows the phone and selected apps to be
operated using the iDrive Controller, voice commands or the touchscreen
display (if the Navigation system Professional is specified). Compatible
smartphones can also be supplied with power wirelessly by means of an
optional inductive charging tray.
Driver assistance systems: extra help for the driver.
The assistance systems on the options list for the new BMW 1 Series include
Active Cruise Control with Stop & Go function, which enables the vehicle to
move along with the flow of traffic automatically up to near its maximum
speed. The system alerts the driver and applies the brakes if it detects an
obstacle. The Driving Assistant is also available as an option and comprises
the Lane Departure Warning system and City Collision Mitigation, which
applies the brakes automatically at speeds up to 60 km/h (37 mph) in
response to an imminent collision with a car, motorcycle or pedestrian, for
instance. The Parking Assistant, meanwhile, manoeuvres the car into parking
spots that are either parallel or perpendicular to the road. Its ultrasonic sensors
help to search for suitable spaces while travelling at up to 35 km/h (22 mph).
Highly efficient three-, four- and six-cylinder power units.
The new BMW 1 Series comes with a wide choice of petrol and diesel
engines, comprising three-, four- and six-cylinder variants. They all hail from
the state-of-the-art BMW EfficientDynamics engine family and feature
BMW TwinPower Turbo technology. With the exception of the BMW 116i,
116d EfficientDynamics Edition and 118d xDrive, all models can be specified
with the eight-speed Steptronic or eight-speed Steptronic Sport transmission
as an alternative to the six-speed manual gearshift. The M140i xDrive can only
be ordered with the eight-speed Steptronic Sport transmission.
On the petrol side, the line-up ranges from the BMW 116i – whose
turbocharged three-cylinder unit produces 80 kW/109 hp (fuel consumption
combined: 5.4 – 5.0 l/100 km [52.3 – 56.5 mpg imp]; CO2 emissions
combined: 126 – 116 g/km)* – to the BMW M140i M Performance model,
which stirs 250 kW/340 hp from its six-cylinder in-line engine (fuel
consumption combined: 7.8 – 7.1 l/100 km [36.2 – 39.8 mpg imp]; CO2
emissions combined: 179 – 163 g/km)*.
The diesel models likewise draw their power from cutting-edge engine
technology. In addition to a basic concept that is inherently more efficient, all
the three- and four-cylinder units feature new turbocharger technology and
enhanced common-rail direct injection systems. At the lower end of the
power spectrum is the BMW 116d, delivering 85 kW/116 hp and maximum
torque of 270 Newton metres (199 lb-ft). In the process, it burns
4.1 – 3.6 litres of fuel per 100 km (68.9 – 78.5 mpg imp), equating to CO2
emissions of 107 – 96 g/km*. In extra-efficient BMW 116d EfficientDynamics
Edition guise, fuel consumption is a frugal 3.8 – 3.4 l/100 km
(74.3 – 83.1 mpg imp), resulting in CO2 emissions of 101 – 89 g/km*. The
most powerful four-cylinder diesel engine in the line-up can be found in the
new BMW 125d. The multi-stage turbocharging technology, including
variable turbine geometry for the high-pressure turbocharger, results in
remarkably quick response, output of 165 kW/224 hp and peak torque of
450 Newton metres (332 lb-ft). Combined fuel consumption comes in at
4.6 – 4.3 l/100 km [61.4 – 65.7 mpg imp] and combined CO2 emissions are
120 – 114 g/km*.
Intelligent all-wheel drive for optimum power transmission.
The BMW M140i, BMW 118d and BMW 120d can be specified with
BMW xDrive intelligent all-wheel drive as an alternative to classical rear-wheel
drive. Besides the specific benefits of AWD – such as optimum transmission
of power to the road, supreme driving safety and maximum traction in wintry
conditions, for example – BMW xDrive also reduces understeer and oversteer
through corners. The result is sharper handling in situations such as when
turning into bends.
Two new elite athletes from BMW M GmbH: the M140i andM140i xDrive.
The sportiest member of the BMW 1 Series range also boasts a new look. To
mark the new model year, the BMW M140i M Performance model is also
available in M140i Edition Shadow trim. Black inserts are added to the
standard LED headlights and the kidney grille surround is painted black. The
darkened rear light assemblies lend further impact to the car’s sporting aura,
* Fuel consumption figures based on the EU test cycle, may vary depending on the tyre format specified.
as do the standard 18-inch light-alloy wheels, which are now available for the
first time in Style 436 M Orbit Grey and Style 719 M Jet Black or Bicolour Jet
Black, to go with the previously available Ferric Grey (Style 436 M). The
sportiest BMW 1 Series leaves the factory shod with high-performance
mixed-size tyres as standard, with dimensions of 225/40 at the front and
245/35 at the rear.
The BMW M140i is powered by a three-litre straight-six engine complete with
direct injection, M Performance TwinPower Turbo technology with twin-scroll
turbocharging, fully variable valve timing (VALVETRONIC) and Double-
VANOS variable camshaft control. This all combines to give the BMW M140i
an output of 250 kW/340 hp and maximum torque of 500 Newton metres
(369 lb-ft), which can be summoned from as low down as 1,520 rpm and
remains on tap up to 4,500 rpm. This gives the BMW M140i all the right
credentials for delivering extraordinary performance: with the six-speed
manual gearshift, this compact racer sprints from 0 to 100 km/h (62 mph) in
4.8 seconds, while top speed is electronically limited to 250 km/h (155 mph).
When the optional eight-speed Steptronic Sport transmission is specified, the
BMW M140i reaches the 100 km/h (62 mph) mark from rest in an even
quicker 4.6 seconds (fuel consumption combined: 7.1 l/100 km
[39.8 mpg imp]; CO2 emissions combined: 163 g/km)*. Performance is even
more remarkable in the BMW M140i xDrive versions, thanks to the presence
of intelligent all-wheel drive. Equipped with the eight-speed Steptronic Sport
transmission as standard, the M140i xDrive surges from 0 to 100 km/h
(62 mph) in 4.4 seconds, while returning combined fuel consumption of
7.4 l/100 km (38.2 mpg imp) and CO2 emissions of 169 g/km*.
Variable sport steering adds to the impression of exceptional agility at the
wheel of the BMW M140i. It comes with electromechanical power assistance
and adapts the steering angle of the front wheels to the prevailing driving
situation. This allows lightning-fast evasive manoeuvres but also produces a
sensation of excellent directional and straight-line stability in motorway driving.
The M Sport suspension, M Sport braking system and shorter throw for the
six-speed manual gearshift have all been perfectly matched to the might of
the six-cylinder in-line engine, as have high-performance tyres designed to
ensure that acceleration and braking force are transmitted to the road to
optimum effect. The Driving Experience Control switch in the BMW M140i
features the same modes included in all models in the range, such as
Comfort, Sport and ECO PRO, but also adds the ultra-dynamic Sport+ mode.
In this setting, the configuration of the Dynamic Stability Control system
allows the driver to perform controlled drifts.
Is anyone capable of looking at an inchworm and NOT singing to it? Do you suppose inchworms get tired of hearing "Inchworm, inchworm, measuring the marigolds ..."?
(For a charming version, see:
Waiting in the rain & in vain for 60103 Flying Scotsman at Ampthill Crossing 4/11/2017 (It was 25 minutes earlier than scheduled and sitting in my car it passed by heard but not seen)
The British Rail Class 222 is a diesel multiple unit high-speed train capable of 125 mph (200 km/h). Twenty-seven units have been built in Belgium by Bombardier Transportation.
The Class 222 is similar to the Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 Super Voyager trains used by CrossCountry and Virgin Trains, but it has a different interior. The Class 222 trains have more components fitted under the floors to free up space within the body. Since 2009 East Midlands Trains has been the only train operating company using Class 222s.
All coaches are equipped with a Cummins QSK19 diesel engine of 750 hp (560 kW) at 1800 rpm.[2] This powers a generator, which supplies current to motors driving two axles per coach. Approximately 1,350 miles (2,170 km) can be travelled between each refuelling.
Class 222 have rheostatic braking using the motors in reverse to generate electricity which is dissipated as heat through resistors situated on the roof of each coach; this saves on brake pad wear.
In common with the Class 220s, B5000 lightweight bogies are used - these are easily recognisable since the entire outer surface of the wheel is visible, with inboard axle bearings.
The Class 222 are fitted with Dellner couplers,[3] as on Class 220 Voyager and Class 221 SuperVoyager trains,[3] though these units cannot work together in service because the Class 222 electrical connections are incompatible with the Class 220 and Class 221 trains.[3][clarification needed]
All Class 222 units are maintained at the dedicated Etches Park depot in Derby, just south of Derby station.
Formation[edit]
Seven car length Class 222 No. 222003 at London St Pancras
Five car length Class 222 No. 222016 at Bedford
Class 222 units are currently running in the following formations:
East Midlands Trains: seven cars with 236 standard seats and 106 first-class seats.
Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
Coach B - Standard Class
Coach C - Standard Class
Coach D - Standard Class with Buffet counter
Coach F - First Class
Coach G - First Class
Coach H - First Class, kitchen and driving cab
East Midlands Trains: five cars with 192 standard seats and 50 first-class seats
Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
Coach B - Standard Class
Coach C - Standard Class with Buffet counter
Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite
Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab
East Midlands Trains: four cars with 132 standard seats and 33 first-class seats
Coach A - Standard Class with driving cab and reservable space for two bikes
Coach B - Standard Class with Buffet counter
Coach D - Standard Class / First Class composite
Coach G - First Class, kitchen and driving cab
The four- and five-car units can be coupled to form 9/10-car services at peak times. When coupled together, coaches A-G are found in the front unit and the rear coaches become labelled J, K, L, M, N, with the first-class seats in coaches J and K.
Initially, the 23 units ordered for Midland Mainline were 4-car and 9-car. Over time these have been gradually modified to the current formations. The 4-car units ordered by Hull Trains had an option when constructed to be extended to 5-cars if required.[4]
East Midlands Trains has named the following Meridians:
Unit numberNameDate namedNamed byNotes
222 001The Entrepreneur Express22 September 2011Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed to kick off the start of the 2011 entrepreneur festival MADE
222 002The Cutlers' Company18 October 2011Pamela Liversidge, Master CutlerNamed to mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and Sheffield
222 003Tornado24 March 2009Tim Shoveller, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorDriving car 60163 named as it has the same number as Tornado
222 004Children's Hospital Sheffield26 February 2013Michael Vaughan, Charity PatonTo mark the successful partnership between East Midlands Trains and the Sheffield Children's Hospital
222 006The Carbon Cutter31 May 2011Philip Hammond, Transport SecretaryTo mark the introduction of eco-mode to the fleet
222 008Derby Etches Park13 September 2014David Horne, East Midlands Trains Managing DirectorNamed as part of the open day at Derby Etches Park
222 015175 Years of Derby's Railways 1839 - 201418 July 2014Paul Atterbury, Antiques Roadshow Expert and railway authorTo mark 175 years of railways in Derby
222 022Invest In Nottingham19 September 2011Jon Collins, leader of Nottingham City CouncilNamed to launch the 2011 Invest in Nottingham day
222 011Sheffield City Battalion 1914-191811 November 2014Ron Wiltshire, Royal British Legion representativeNamed to honour Sheffield City Battalion who fought in the World War I
East Midlands Trains Class 222/0 No. 222018 at Loughborough.
In 2008 further rearrangements were made to the sets: another carriage was removed from the eight-car Meridians, except for 222 007, which has been reduced to five cars.[6] The surplus coaches were then added to the remaining four-car Meridians to make six seven-car sets (222 001-222 006) and 17 five-car sets (222 007-222 023). This took place from March to October 2008; as part of the process, two first-class coaches removed from 222 007 were converted to standard class and part first class.
The seven-car trains are almost exclusively used on the fast services between London St Pancras and Sheffield. These do not operate the London St Pancras-Leeds, although the service is via Sheffield. The five-car trains are mainly used between London St Pancras and Sheffield, Nottingham or Corby on semi-fast services. The four-car trains supplement the five-car trains on these services.
In December 2008 the Class 222 Meridians started work on the hourly London St Pancras to Sheffield services, because they have faster acceleration than the High Speed Trains and so were able to reduce the Sheffield to London journey time by 12 minutes. The hourly Nottingham service was then transferred to High Speed Train running to cover for the Meridians now working the hourly Sheffield fast service.[7]
In February 2009, 222 101 and 222 102 transferred from Hull Trains to East Midlands Trains, and were quickly repainted in the East Midlands Trains white livery. 222 104 followed from Hull Trains later in the year. 222 103 followed a few months after 222 104 after repairs had been completed (see below). 222 103 has now been reinstated for service after two years for repairs after the unit fell from jacks at Bombardier, Crofton in early 2007.
Some background:
The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.
As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.
The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.
The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.
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, anyway. 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, 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.
By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).
During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 23 tons
Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)
Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)
Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)
Suspension: Leaf spring
Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)
Armour:
10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)
Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)
Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)
Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road
Power/weight: 13 PS/t
Engine:
Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)
Transmission:
ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios
Armament:
2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds
1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount
The kit and its assembly:
This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.
There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…
However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.
Painting and markings:
Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.
The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.
The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.
The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.
Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.
A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some Background:
The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.
The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.
The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.
The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.
Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.
The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.
At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.
The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.
One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.
All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.
The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.
The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.
Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.
For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)
Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)
Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)
Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)
Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)
Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)
Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,
5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight
Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks
Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)
Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)
Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)
Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.48
Armament:
No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…
2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks
or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…
2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)
machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each
The kit and its assembly:
This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.
I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.
The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?
The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.
Painting and markings:
This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.
Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.
The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.
The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.
After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some Background:
The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.
The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.
The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.
The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.
Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.
The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.
At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.
The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.
One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.
All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.
The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.
The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.
Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.
For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)
Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)
Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)
Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)
Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)
Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)
Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,
5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight
Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks
Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)
Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)
Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)
Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.48
Armament:
No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…
2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks
or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…
2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)
machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each
The kit and its assembly:
This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.
I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.
The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?
The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.
Painting and markings:
This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.
Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.
The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.
The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.
After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.
Former Fire Chief Thomas Harrigan, 46, lies dying in a Miami hospital room, suffering from mesothelioma, black lung, heart failure, and other diseases linked to his exposure to toxic substances while working on the Ground Zero rubble pile for three months after 9/11.Doctors have given him until July to live. On the day these photos were taken, he had receved a letter cutting off his Social Security disability payments, saying that he was capable of working
Federation Forest State Park, WA
“Icmadophila is capable of killing and overgrowing moss mats. When colonizing mossy surfaces, the leading edge of the lichen is associated with a zone of necrosis in the moss.” - McCune, Bruce. 2017. Microlichens of the Pacific Northwest. Volume 2: Keys to the Species.
"Often you'll see lichens growing with bryophytes, so the two are potential competitors and a variety of lichen-bryophyte interactions do occur. Crustose lichens look like thin skins or simple washes of paint on the underlying soil, rock or wood. At first it would appear that such simple, two-dimensional growth forms could be easily overgrown by many bryophytes. In fact some crustose lichens are very effective at keeping bryophytes away, quite likely with chemical deterrents. Lichens produce a wide variety of chemical compounds, some of which have negative effects on bryophytes - acting to prevent spore germination or inhibiting protonemal or gametophytic growth [reference link] ." - www.anbg.gov.au/lichen/ecology-plants.html
my lichen photos by genus - www.flickr.com/photos/29750062@N06/collections/7215762439...
my photos arranged by subject, e.g. mountains - www.flickr.com/photos/29750062@N06/collections
The display reads:
ADA in Vietnam – M42 Duster
Combat experience in the Korea War quickly showed that while the M19 40mm Gun Motor Carriage was a capable platform, it needed improvement. By 1952, a new anti-aircraft tank was in development, designated the T141. The new vehicle used the same turret and gun mount from the M19, but mated it with the larger, more powerful M41 Walker Bulldog light tank hull. The resulting vehicle was standardized as the M42 40mm Gun Motor Carriage by 1952 and entered full production that year.
However, with the service entry of the Nike Ajax system in 1953, the Army was focused on missile systems and with the introduction of the Hawk missile in the late 1950s, the M42 was quickly passed to National Guard units and all but removed from the active inventory by 1963.
Just two years later, US forces entered combat in South Vietnam. Two Hawk missile battalions were deployed to provide air defense around Saigon and along the DMZ, but an additional system was needed to cover potential low-altitude threats. In addition to the air defense requirement, the Army also needed a vehicle that could provide heavy firepower for both convoy escort and firebase defense. The M42 was back in demand and by the beginning of 1966, three battalions were formed for service in Vietnam.
Those three units, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery; 4th Battalion, 60th Artillery; and 5th Battalion, 2nd Artillery arrived in-theater by mid-year and immediately had a significant impact on operations in their respective areas of operation. Each “Duster” battalion had a quad .50 battery and searchlight battery attached, forming an air defense task force that could respond to both air and ground threats, day or night.
On 20 June 1968, Air Defense and Field Artillery split the Artillery branch and the Duster, Quad, Searchlight and Hawk units were then designated ADA rather than “Artillery,” with the parenthetical Automatic Weapons, Searchlight or Guided Missile designation.
The story of Army Air Defense in Vietnam provides a fascinating contrast to the operations and equipment of the rest of the branch during the 1960s and early 1970s. While Army Air Defense of the day was focused on the strategic threat of a Soviet nuclear strike and were using the latest technology to deter that threat, the three ADA Duster battalions effectively used weapon systems from the “last war” to provide low altitude air defense and on-call direct fire support to infantry and artillery units across the entirety of South Vietnam from 1966 through 1972.
M42 Duster Specifications:
Weight: 50,000 lbs fully loaded
Height: 9 feet 4 inches
Length: 19 feet
Width: 10 feet 7 inches
Crew: Commander, driver, two loaders, two gunners
Armament: Two M2A1 40mm automatic anti-aircraft guns with 240 rounds per gun; 1-2 7.62 M60 Machine Guns with 1,750 rounds
Main Armament Rate of Fire: 120 rounds per minute, per gun
Engine: Continental AOS-895-3 6-cylinder opposed gasoline engine
Range: 100 miles
Speed 45 mph
The museum’s Duster served with the 1-44th Artillery in 1968.
The Duster occasionally towed the M332 ammunition trailer, which doubled the Duster’s ammunition capacity. However, it would be a liability in combat and would normally be removed before the Duster would be used in the convoy escort role.
Most Dusters in Vietnam carried some form of artwork. Usually the crew would name both the front hatch and the gun shield above the main armament.
Sergeant Mitchell W. Stout was born in Lenoir City, Tennessee on 24 February, 1950. He enlisted in the Army on 15 August 1967 and served his first tour in Vietnam as a rifleman with the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry Regiment in the Mekong Delta from August 1968 to August 1969. After completing his first tour, SGT Stout rotated back to the US, but returned to South Vietnam just five months later as a M42 Duster crewman.
Three months into his second tour, SGT Stout was commanding an M42 Duster at the Khe Gio bridge along Route 9, a strategic east-west route that was the supply lifeline to friendly outposts in western I Corps.
SGT Mitchell Stout
C/1-44th Artillery (Automatic Weapons), Khe Gio Bridge
The U.S. Army outpost at Khe Gio Bridge on Highway 9 near the DMZ was overrun by North Vietnamese troops on 12 March 1970. Fourteen Americans held the outpost along with a platoon of ARVN Infantry. Two M42 Dusters from C Battery 1-44th Artillery gave the small force a significant amount of firepower to protect the bridge, while an M151A1 searchlight jeep from G Battery, 29th Artillery provided nighttime battlefield illumination. Of those fourteen Americans, two were killed in action, five wounded and one was captured. Yet they fought valiantly and protected the bridge on Route 9, sparing it from destruction. Sergeant Mitchell Stout’s actions during the battle would earn him a posthumous Medal of Honor:
Citation:
Sgt. Stout distinguished himself during an attack by a North Vietnamese Army Sapper company on his unit's firing position at Khe Gio Bridge. Sgt. Stout was in a bunker with members of a searchlight crew when the position came under heavy enemy mortar fire and ground attack. When the intensity of the mortar attack subsided, an enemy grenade was thrown into the bunker. Displaying great courage, Sgt. Stout ran to the grenade, picked it up, and started out of the bunker. As he reached the door, the grenade exploded. By holding the grenade close to his body and shielding its blast, he protected his fellow soldiers in the bunker from further injury or death. Sgt. Stout's conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action, at the cost of his own life, are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon him, his unit and the U.S. Army.
Taken December 13th, 2013.
Aeroscopia est un musée aéronautique français implanté à Blagnac (Haute-Garonne), près du site AéroConstellation, et accueille notamment deux exemplaires du Concorde, dont l'ouverture a eu lieu le 14 janvier 2015
Le tarmac Sud du musée n'est capable d'accueillir que trois gros appareils. L'installation des appareils fut définitivement terminée après que le premier prototype de l'A400M-180 y fut arrivé le 16 juillet 2015, en dépit de la possibilité de 360 000 euros de TVA.
Concorde, F-BVFC, MSN209 aux couleurs d'Air France
Caravelle 12, F-BTOE, MSN280 aux couleurs d'Air Inter, dernier exemplaire construit
A400M-180, F-WWMT, MSN001 stationné depuis le 16 juillet 2015
La réalisation en 2019 du nouveau tarmac au Nord du musée permet l'accueil d'appareils supplémentaires issus des entreprises locales Airbus et ATR. Le transfert des avions entre le site Airbus "Lagardère" et le musée a lieu sur une semaine, à raison d'un appareil par jour :
ATR 72-600, F-WWEY, MSN098 aux couleurs d'ATR, transféré sur site le 26 août 2019, premier exemplaire du 72 dans sa version 600
Airbus A340-600, F-WWCA, MSN360 aux couleurs d'Airbus, transféré sur site le 27 août 2019, premier exemplaire de l'A340 dans sa version 600
Airbus A320-111, F-WWAI, MSN001 aux anciennes couleurs d'Airbus, transféré sur site le 28 août 2019, premier exemplaire de l'A320 : inauguration le 14 février 1987 en présence de Lady Diana et du Prince Charles, premier vol le 22 février 1987
Airbus A380-800, F-WXXL, MSN002 aux couleurs d'Airbus, transféré sur site le 29 août 2019, second exemplaire de l'A380. Les deux ponts de cet appareil sont visitables, ainsi que le cockpit.
ATR 42-300, F-WEGC, MSN003 aux anciennes couleurs d'ATR, transféré sur site le 30 août 2019, troisième exemplaire du 42. Cet exemplaire est décoré aux couleurs du MSN001 et porte l'immatriculation F-WEGA
Concorde, F-WTSB, MSN201 (ANAE), il s'agit d'un appareil de présérie qui a servi entre autres à transporter plusieurs présidents de la République française.
Airbus A300B4-203, F-WUAB, MSN238 (Airbus Heritage), décoré aux couleurs du prototype, au lieu de MSN001 démantelé. L'intérieur est visitable. Dans la première section des vitrages transparents permettent de voir la structure et les systèmes de l'avion, tandis que dans les sections suivantes sont représentés des aménagements de première classe et VIP.
Super Guppy de l'association Ailes Anciennes Toulouse, l'appareil qui servait au transport des tronçons d'Airbus est exposé porte ouverte, et une passerelle permet l'accès à la soute où un film est projeté. L'ouverture n'a pas été une mince affaire, l'appareil n'ayant pas été ouvert pendant 15 ans. L'aide des anciens mécaniciens de l'avion a été primordiale pour permettre une ouverture en toute sécurité.
Corvette (Airbus)
Falcon 10 no 02, prototype ayant servi aux essais du turboréacteur Larzac (Ailes Anciennes Toulouse)
Fouga Magister (AAT)
Gazelle prototype (AAT)
Mirage III C (AAT)
Nord 1100 (AAT)
Lockheed F-104G (AAT)
MiG-15 (AAT)
MS.760 Paris (AAT)
Vought F-8E(FN) Crusader et son réacteur (AAT)
Alouette II Marine (AAT)
Cessna Skymaster (AAT)
Fairchild Metro, ancien avion de Météo-France (AAT)
HM-293, de Rodolphe Grunberg
Chagnes MicroStar, avion de construction amateur, version biréacteur de Rutan VariViggen (AAT)
Saab J35OE Draken (AAT)
Aeroscopia is a French aeronautical museum located in Blagnac (Haute-Garonne), near the AéroConstellation site, and notably hosts two copies of the Concorde, which opened on January 14, 2015
The south tarmac of the museum can only accommodate three large aircraft. The installation of the devices was definitively finished after the first prototype of the A400M-180 arrived there on July 16, 2015, despite the possibility of 360,000 euros in VAT.
Concorde, F-BVFC, MSN209 in Air France colors
Caravelle 12, F-BTOE, MSN280 in Air Inter colors, last model built
A400M-180, F-WWMT, MSN001 parked since July 16, 2015
The construction in 2019 of the new tarmac north of the museum will accommodate additional aircraft from local Airbus and ATR companies. The transfer of planes between the Airbus "Lagardère" site and the museum takes place over a week, at the rate of one aircraft per day:
ATR 72-600, F-WWEY, MSN098 in ATR colors, transferred to site on August 26, 2019, first copy of the 72 in its 600 version
Airbus A340-600, F-WWCA, MSN360 in Airbus colors, transferred to site on August 27, 2019, first copy of the A340 in its 600 version
Airbus A320-111, F-WWAI, MSN001 in the old Airbus colors, transferred to site on August 28, 2019, first copy of the A320: inauguration on February 14, 1987 in the presence of Lady Diana and Prince Charles, first flight on February 22, 1987
Airbus A380-800, F-WXXL, MSN002 in Airbus colors, transferred to site on August 29, 2019, second copy of the A380. The two decks of this aircraft can be visited, as well as the cockpit.
ATR 42-300, F-WEGC, MSN003 in the old ATR colors, transferred to the site on August 30, 2019, third specimen of the 42. This specimen is decorated in the colors of the MSN001 and bears the registration F-WEGA
Concorde, F-WTSB, MSN201 (ANAE), this is a pre-production aircraft which was used, among other things, to transport several presidents of the French Republic.
Airbus A300B4-203, F-WUAB, MSN238 (Airbus Heritage), decorated in the colors of the prototype, instead of dismantled MSN001. The interior can be visited. In the first section transparent glazing allows to see the structure and systems of the aircraft, while in the following sections are shown first class and VIP fittings.
Super Guppy from the Ailes Anciennes Toulouse association, the aircraft which was used to transport the Airbus sections is on display with the door open, and a gangway allows access to the hold where a film is shown. Opening was no small feat, as the device has not been opened for 15 years. The help of the former mechanics of the aircraft was essential to allow a safe opening.
Corvette (Airbus)
Falcon 10 no 02, prototype used for testing the Larzac turbojet engine (Ailes Anciennes Toulouse)
Fouga Magister (AAT)
Prototype Gazelle (AAT)
Mirage III C (AAT)
North 1100 (AAT)
Lockheed F-104G (AAT)
MiG-15 (AAT)
MS.760 Paris (AAT)
Vought F-8E (FN) Crusader and its engine (AAT)
Alouette II Marine (AAT)
Cessna Skymaster (AAT)
Fairchild Metro, former Météo-France (AAT) aircraft
HM-293, by Rodolphe Grunberg
Chagnes MicroStar, amateur-built aircraft, twin-jet version of Rutan VariViggen (AAT)
Saab J35OE Draken (AAT)
+++ 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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Northrop Grumman (formerly Grumman) EA-6B "Prowler" is a twin-engine, four-seat, mid-wing electronic-warfare aircraft derived from the A-6 "Intruder" airframe. The EA-6A was the initial electronic warfare version of the A-6 used by the United States Marine Corps and United States Navy. Development on the more advanced EA-6B began in 1966. An EA-6B aircrew consists of one pilot and three Electronic Countermeasures Officers, though it is not uncommon for only two ECMOs to be used on missions. It is capable of carrying and firing anti-radiation missiles (ARMs), such as the AGM-88 HARM missile.
The Prowler was in service with the U.S. Armed Forces from 1971 until 2019. It has carried out numerous missions for jamming enemy radar systems, and in gathering radio intelligence on those and other enemy air defense systems. From the 1998 retirement of the United States Air Force EF-111 "Raven" electronic warfare aircraft, the EA-6B was the only dedicated electronic warfare plane available for missions by the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Marine Corps, and the U.S. Air Force until the fielding of the Navy's EA-18G "Growler" in 2009. Following its last deployment in late 2014, the EA-6B was withdrawn from U.S. Navy service in June 2015, followed by the USMC in March 2019.
Origins
The EA-6A "Electric Intruder" was developed for the U.S. Marine Corps during the 1960s to replace its EF-10B "Skyknights". The EA-6A was a direct conversion of the standard A-6 "Intruder" airframe, with two seats, equipped with electronic warfare (EW) equipment. The EA-6A was used by three Marine Corps squadrons during the Vietnam War. A total of 27 EA-6As were produced, with 15 of these being newly manufactured ones. Most of these EA-6As were retired from service in the 1970s with the last few being used by the Navy with two electronic attack "aggressor" squadrons, with all examples finally retired in the 1990s. The EA-6A was essentially an interim warplane until the more-advanced EA-6B could be designed and built.
The substantially redesigned and more advanced EA-6B was developed beginning in 1966 as a replacement for EKA-3B "Skywarriors" for the U.S. Navy. The forward fuselage was lengthened to create a rear area for a larger four-seat cockpit, and an antenna fairing was added to the tip of its vertical stabilizer. Grumman was awarded a $12.7 million contract to develop an EA-6B prototype on 14 November 1966. The "Prowler" first flew on 25 May 1968, and it entered service on aircraft carriers in July 1971. Three prototype EA-6Bs were converted from A-6As, and five EA-6Bs were developmental airplanes. A total of 170 EA-6B production aircraft were manufactured from 1966 through 1991.
The EA-6B "Prowler" is powered by two Pratt & Whitney J52 turbojet engines, and it is capable of high subsonic speeds. Due to its extensive electronic warfare operations, and the aircraft's age (produced until 1991), the EA-6B is a high-maintenance aircraft, and has undergone many frequent equipment upgrades. Although designed as an electronic warfare and command-and-control aircraft for air strike missions, the EA-6B is also capable of attacking some surface targets on its own, in particular enemy radar sites and surface-to-air missile launchers. In addition, the EA-6B is capable of gathering electronic signals intelligence.
The EA-6B "Prowler" has been continually upgraded over the years. The first such upgrade was named "expanded capability" (EXCAP) beginning in 1973. Then came "improved capability" (ICAP) in 1976 and ICAP II in 1980. The ICAP II upgrade provided the EA-6B with the capability of firing Shrike missiles and AGM-88 HARM missiles.
Advanced Capability EA-6B
The Advanced Capability EA-6B "Prowler" (ADVCAP) was a development program initiated to improve the flying qualities of the EA-6B and to upgrade the avionics and electronic warfare systems. The intention was to modify all EA-6Bs into the ADVCAP configuration, however the program was removed from the Fiscal Year 1995 budget due to financial pressure from competing Department of Defense acquisition programs.
The ADVCAP development program was initiated in the late 1980s and was broken into three distinct phases: Full-Scale Development (FSD), Vehicle Enhancement Program (VEP) and the Avionics Improvement Program (AIP).
FSD served primarily to evaluate the new AN/ALQ-149 Electronic Warfare System. The program utilized a slightly modified EA-6B to house the new system.
The VEP added numerous changes to the aircraft to address deficiencies with the original EA-6B flying qualities, particularly lateral-directional problems that hampered recovery from out-of-control flight. Bureau Number 158542 was used. Changes included:
Leading edge strakes (to improve directional stability)
Fin pod extension (to improve directional stability)
Ailerons (to improve slow speed lateral control)
Re-contoured leading edge slats and trailing edge flaps (to compensate for an increase in gross weight)
Two additional wing stations on the outer wing panel (for jamming pods only)
New J52-P-409 engines (increased thrust by 2,000 lbf (8.9 kN) per engine)
New digital Standard Automatic Flight Control System (SAFCS)
The added modifications increased the aircraft gross weight approximately 2,000 lb (910 kg) and shifted the center of gravity 3% MAC aft of the baseline EA-6B. In previous models, when operating at sustained high angles of attack, fuel migration would cause additional shifts in CG with the result that the aircraft had slightly negative longitudinal static stability. Results of flight tests of the new configuration showed greatly improved flying qualities and the rearward shift of the CG had minimal impact.
The AIP prototype (bureau number 158547) represented the final ADVCAP configuration, incorporating all of the FSD and VEP modifications plus a completely new avionics suite which added multi-function displays to all crew positions, a head-up display for the pilot, and dual Global Positioning/Inertial navigation systems. The initial joint test phase between the contractor and the US Navy test pilots completed successfully with few deficiencies.
After the program was canceled, the three experimental "Prowler's", BuNo 156482, 158542 and 158547, were mothballed until 1999. During the next several years, the three aircraft were dismantled and reassembled creating a single aircraft, b/n 158542, which the Navy dubbed "FrankenProwler". It was returned to active service 23 March 2005.
Improved Capability (ICAP)
Northrop Grumman received contracts from the U.S. Navy to deliver new electronic countermeasures gear to "Prowler" squadrons; the heart of each ICAP III set consists of the ALQ-218 receiver and new software that provides more precise selective-reactive radar jamming and deception and threat location. The ICAP III sets also are equipped with the Multifunction Information Distribution System (MIDS), which includes the Link 16 data link system. Northrop has delivered two lots and will be delivering two more beginning in 2010. The majority of EA-6B "Prowler's" in service today are the ICAP II version, carrying the ALQ-99 Tactical Jamming System.
Design
Designed for carrier-based and advanced base operations, the EA-6B is a fully integrated electronic warfare system combining long-range, all-weather capabilities with advanced electronic countermeasures. A forward equipment bay and pod-shaped fairing on the vertical fin house the additional avionics equipment. It has been the primary electronic warfare aircraft for the U.S Navy and U.S. Marine Corps. The EA-6B's primary mission is to support ground-attack strikes by disrupting enemy electromagnetic activity. As a secondary mission it can also gather tactical electronic intelligence within a combat zone, and another secondary mission is attacking enemy radar sites with anti-radiation missiles.
The Prowler has a crew of four, a pilot and three Electronic Countermeasures Officers (known as ECMOs). Powered by two non-afterburning Pratt & Whitney J52-P-408A turbojet engines, it is capable of speeds of up to 590 mph (950 km/h) with a range of 1,140 miles (1,840 km).
Design particulars include the refueling probe being asymmetrical, appearing bent to the right. It contains an antenna near its root. The canopy has a shading of gold to protect the crew against the radio emissions that the electronic warfare equipment produces.
Operational history
The EA-6B entered service with Fleet Replacement Squadron VAQ-129 in September 1970, and Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 132 (VAQ-132) became the first operational squadron, in July 1971. This squadron began its first combat deployment to Vietnam on America 11 months later, soon followed by VAQ-131 on Enterprise and VAQ-134 on Constellation. Two squadrons of EA-6B "Prowler's" flew 720 sorties during the Vietnam War in support of US Navy attack aircraft and USAF B-52 bombers.
During the 1983 invasion of Grenada, four "Prowler's" supported the operation from USS Independence (CV-62).
Following the Achille Lauro hijacking, on 10 October 1985 Prowlers from USS Saratoga (CV-60) provided ESM support during the interception of the EgyptAir 737 carrying four of the hijackers.
Prowlers jammed Libyan radar during Operation El Dorado Canyon in April 1986. "Prowler's" from USS Enterprise (CVN-65) jammed Iranian Ground Control Intercept radars, surface-to-air missile guidance radars and communication systems during Operation Praying Mantis on 18 April 1988.
A total of 39 EA-6B "Prowler's" were involved in Operation Desert Storm in 1991, 27 from six aircraft carriers and 12 from USMC bases. During 4,600 flight hours, "Prowler's" fired over 150 HARM missiles. Navy "Prowler's" flew 1,132 sorties and USMC flew 516 with no losses.
With the retirement of the EF-111 "Raven" in 1998, the EA-6B was the only dedicated aerial radar jammer aircraft of the U.S. Armed Forces, until the fielding of the Navy's EA-18G "Growler" in 2009. The EA-6B has been flown in almost all American combat operations since 1972, and is frequently flown in support of the U.S. Air Force missions.
In 2001, 124 "Prowler's" remained, divided between twelve Navy, four Marine, and four joint Navy-Air Force "Expeditionary" squadrons. A Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) staff study recommended that the EF-111 "Raven" be retired to reduce the types of aircraft dedicated to the same mission, which led to an Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) program memorandum to establish 4 land based "expeditionary" "Prowler" squadrons to meet the needs of the Air Force.
Though once considered being replaced by Common Support Aircraft, that plan failed to materialize. In 2009, the Navy EA-6B "Prowler" community began transitioning to the EA-18G "Growler", a new electronic warfare derivative of the F/A-18F "Super Hornet". All but one of the active duty Navy EA-6B squadrons were based at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island. VAQ-136 was stationed at Naval Air Facility Atsugi, Japan, as part of Carrier Air Wing 5, the forward deployed naval forces (FDNF) air wing that embarks aboard the Japan-based George Washington. VAQ-209, the Navy Reserve's sole EA-6B squadron, was stationed at Naval Air Facility Washington, Maryland. All Marine Corps EA-6B squadrons were located at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina.
In 2013, the USN planned to fly the EA-6B until 2015, while the USMC expect to phase out the "Prowler" in 2019. The last Navy deployment was on George H.W. Bush in November 2014, with VAQ-134. The last Navy operational flight took place on 27 May 2015. Electronic Attack Wing, U.S. Pacific Fleet (CVWP), hosted a retirement commemoration for the EA-6B from 25 to 27 June 2015 at NAS Whidbey Island.
ADULT SEA OTTERS: MONTEREY BAY
The southern, or California, sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) has been listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act since 1977. It belongs to the order Carnivora and the family Mustelidae. Two other otter subspecies are also recognized – E. lutris kenyoni, which is found from Oregon to Alaska, and E. lutris lutris, which inhabits parts of Russia and northern Japan. Sea otters are highly specialized marine mammals capable of living their entire lives without ever having to leave the ocean, have the densest fur of any mammal and are one of the few marine species to use tools. Sea otters are an apex predator of the near shore ecosystem. The species is considered a keystone species because of their critical importance to the health and stability of the near shore marine ecosystem. They are also considered a sentinel species because their health reflects that of California’s coastal oceans. The southern sea otter population has exhibited high levels of mortality in recent years. Scientists attribute up to 40 percent of southern sea otter mortality to infectious diseases alone, many of which are known to have anthropogenic causes and land-sea linkages. The single greatest threat to the sea otter is an oil spill. One large oil spill in central California could be catastrophic, with the potential of driving the entire southern sea otter population into extinction.
Description
The sea otter is one of the smallest marine mammals, but one of the largest members of the family Mustelidae, a group that includes skunks and weasels among others. Adult males reach an average length of 4.5 feet (1.4 m) with a typical weight between 50 and 100 lbs. (23 to 45 kg), while adult females reach an average length of 4 feet (1.2 m) and typically weigh 45 lbs. (20 kg). It has a highly buoyant, elongated body, blunt snout and small, wide head. Sea otters have an acute sense of smell and taste and have good vision both above and below the water surface. They also rely heavily on their sense of touch.
Sea otters exhibit numerous adaptations, which help them survive in their challenging marine environment. Long whiskers help them to detect vibrations in murky waters and sensitive forepaws, with retractable claws, help them to groom, locate and capture prey underwater, and use tools. When underwater, they can close their nostrils and small ears. The sea otter’s hind feet are webbed and flipper-like, and are used in conjunction with its lower body to propel the animal through the water. It has a long, flattened tail, which they use as a rudder and for added propulsion. Hearing is one sense that is not yet fully understood, although studies suggest they are particularly sensitive to high-frequency sounds. Their teeth are unique for a mammal in that they are blunt and designed for crushing, rather than being sharp for tearing like most marine mammals are equipped with.
With the exception of its nose and pads of its paws, the sea otter’s body is covered in dense fur. The fur consists of two layers. The short, brown under fur can be as dense as 1 million hairs per square inch, making its fur the densest of any mammal. By comparison, we only have about 100,000 hairs in total on our heads. A top layer of long, waterproof guard hairs helps to keep the under fur layer dry by keeping cold water away from the skin. The pelage is typically deep brown in color with silver-gray highlights, with the coloration of the head and neck being lighter than the body. Unlike other marine mammals, such as seals and sea lions, sea otters do not have any blubber, so they depend on this exceptionally thick, water-resistant fur to stay warm in the cold, coastal Pacific.
Range & Habitat
Historically, southern sea otters were present in coastal marine habitats from northern California to Baja California in Mexico. This range decreased significantly during the fur trade during the 18th and 19th centuries, with excessive hunting nearly driving the species into extinction by the early 1900s. The current range extends along the California coast from Half Moon Bay in the north to Santa Barbara in the south, though individuals are occasionally seen outside these limits. A small population of sea otters lives at San Nicolas Island as a result of translocation efforts initiated in 1987.
Sea otters are found in a variety of coastal marine habitats, including rocky shores and sea-bottoms, sandy sea-bottoms, as well as coastal wetlands. Sea otters naturally inhabit offshore areas with an abundance of food and kelp canopy. They tend to live in ocean depths shallower than 130 feet (40 m) with water temperatures ranging between 35°F and 60°F.
Behavior
Most of a sea otter’s life is spent at sea, though they do occasionally haul out on land, where they appear clumsy and walk with a rather awkward gait. They eat, sleep, mate and give birth in the water. Sea otters spend most of their time floating on their backs at the surface grooming, eating, resting, and diving for food on the seafloor. Sea otters are relatively slow swimmers, generally traveling at 3-5 mph (5-8 km/h). They typically swim belly-up on their backs, propelling themselves through the water using their webbed hind feet. If a faster speed is required, for instance when a male is patrolling it’s territory for competing males or when in hot pursuit of a sexually receptive female, it turns over onto its stomach and in addition to using its webbed hind feet, it undulates its entire body for greater propulsion and acceleration.
Sea otters groom themselves almost continuously while at the surface, a practice critical for maintaining the insulating and water repellant properties of their fur. Its pliable skeleton and loosely fitted skin allow the animal the flexibility to reach any part of its body. During a grooming bout, which generally occurs directly after a foraging bout (a period of time in which diving and eating takes place) or resting bout, the animal can be seen somersaulting, twisting and turning, and meticulously rubbing its fur at the water surface. This behavior not only cleans the fur, but also traps air bubbles against the skin within the millions of hairs of its pelage. This layer of entrapped air creates an insulating barrier (similar to that of a double-paned window), which prevents water from reaching the skin. Constant grooming is absolutely critical for their survival. If cold ocean water reaches their skin, it will immediately begin to draw heat out of the animal, which disrupts the animal’s ability to thermo regulate and will ultimately lead to hypothermia and death.
Sea otters often rest together in single-sex groups called rafts. They are known to wrap themselves up in kelp to keep from drifting out to sea. While resting at the surface, a sea otter will often times hold its forepaws above the water surface and fold its hind feet up onto to its torso to help conserve heat.
With the exception of territorial males, who have the privilege of living among females, males and females tend to live in separate groups. The center of the sea otter range is predominately occupied by females (of all ages) and territorial males, as well as some dependent pups and recently weaned juvenile males. The northern and southern edges of the range are largely male dominated areas; consisting of juvenile, sub adult and adult males. Numbers in these male areas tend to increase in winter and spring because there are fewer mating opportunities with sexually receptive females during this time of the year.
Females generally have small home territories while many adult males hold larger aquatic territories consisting of several adult females. Bachelor males (animals who are either to young or too old to defend their own territories) reside in the large male-only groups at either end of the range. Males travel much greater distances throughout the range than females, typically making seasonal treks of up to 200 miles between the months of June and November when the highest proportion of females are in estrous. On any given day though, males tend to remain in the same general location, moving only a mile or two along the coastline. Females, on the other hand, are sedentary by nature, generally staying within 10 – 20 miles of their home ranges. Their home ranges are smaller because they have higher metabolic costs while pregnant and raising their pup.
Sea otters are equally active both night and day. A foraging bout occurs for several hours in the morning, typically starting just before sunrise. A second foraging bout begins in the afternoon, usually lasting for several hours until sunset. A grooming bout occurs before and after each foraging bout and resting bout follows at midday, followed again by another grooming and resting bout. A third foraging bout may also occur around midnight.
Although difficult to hear from shore, sea otters exhibit a variety of vocal behaviors. Pups are the most vocal. A pup can be heard squealing when its mother leaves it to dive for food and often times when a male approaches. Their cry is similar to that of a gull. Other vocalizations include: coos and grunts, which occur when an animal is eating or when content, as in the case of a pair-bonded couple during courtship; whines occur when an animal is frustrated, as in the case of an older pup wanting to suckle or an adult male attempting to mate with an uninterested female; growls, snarls, whistles and hisses can be heard when an animal is frightened or distressed, as in the case of a captured otter.
Food & Foraging
An otter must consume approximately 25% of its bodyweight in prey each day just to stay alive! A 75-pound otter can eat up to 1,500 sea urchins a day, or about 25 pounds of seafood (for a 75 pound kid, that would amount to eating 75 quarter pound hamburgers every day!). To meet its high energetic and thermoregulation demands, a sea otter’s metabolic rate is 2 to 3 times that of comparatively sized mammals. Sea otters consume a wide variety of benthic invertebrates. Prey items include sea urchins, abalone, crabs, mussels, clams, marine snails, marine worms, sea stars, and squid. In total, otters eat at least 50 species of benthic (bottom-dwelling) invertebrates, although individuals tend to specialize on only a few main prey types. Prey specialization and feeding preferences are passed on from mother to pup.
The strong forelegs paws are used to locate and capture prey. Pockets of loose skin under each foreleg are used to store prey it has gathered on the seafloor for the ascent to the surface. Rocks are often used as tools to dislodge prey on the sea floor and to break open the hard outer shells of some prey items upon returning to the surface. Floating belly-up in the water, they place rocks on their chests and repeatedly pound hard-shelled prey against them to gain access the meat inside. While eating, an otter will roll repeatedly in the water to wash away food scraps from its chest. Unlike most other marine mammals, sea otters commonly drink seawater. Although most of the animal’s water needs are met through the consumption of prey, its large kidneys allow it to extract fresh water from seawater.
Sea otters generally forage close to shore in depths shallower than 60 feet (18 m) but are capable of diving to depths of 300 feet (90 m) or more. With a relatively large lung capacity for it’s size, an otter can hold its breath for 5 minutes, but most dives are two minutes or less in duration. Source: www.seaotters.com
Some background:
The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.
As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.
The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.
The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.
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, anyway. 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, 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.
By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).
During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 23 tons
Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)
Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)
Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)
Suspension: Leaf spring
Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)
Armour:
10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)
Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)
Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)
Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road
Power/weight: 13 PS/t
Engine:
Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)
Transmission:
ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios
Armament:
2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds
1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount
The kit and its assembly:
This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.
There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…
However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.
Painting and markings:
Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.
The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.
The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.
The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.
Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.
A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.
Some background:
The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.
As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.
The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.
The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.
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, anyway. 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, 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.
By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).
During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 23 tons
Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)
Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)
Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)
Suspension: Leaf spring
Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)
Armour:
10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)
Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)
Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)
Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road
Power/weight: 13 PS/t
Engine:
Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)
Transmission:
ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios
Armament:
2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds
1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount
The kit and its assembly:
This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.
There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…
However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.
Painting and markings:
Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.
The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.
The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.
The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.
Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.
A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some Background:
The Lockheed F-94 Starfire was a first-generation jet aircraft of the United States Air Force. It was developed from the twin-seat Lockheed T-33 Shooting Star in the late 1940s as an all-weather, day/night interceptor, replacing the propeller-driven North American F-82 Twin Mustang in this role. The system was designed to overtake the F-80 in terms of performance, but more so to intercept the new high-level Soviet bombers capable of nuclear attacks on America and her Allies - in particular, the new Tupelov Tu-4. The F-94 was furthermore the first operational USAF fighter equipped with an afterburner and was the first jet-powered all-weather fighter to enter combat during the Korean War in January 1953.
The initial production model, the F-94A, entered operational service in May 1950. Its armament consisted of four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M3 Browning machine guns mounted in the fuselage with the muzzles exiting under the radome for the APG-33 radar, a derivative from the AN/APG-3, which directed the Convair B-36's tail guns and had a range of up to 20 miles (32 km). Two 165 US Gallon (1,204 litre) drop tanks, as carried by the F-80 and T-33, were carried on the wingtips. Alternatively, these could be replaced by a pair of 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs under the wings, giving the aircraft a secondary fighter bomber capability. 109 were produced.
The subsequent F-94B, which entered service in January 1951, was outwardly virtually identical to the F-94A. Its Allison J33 turbojet had a number of modifications made, though, which made it a very reliable engine. The pilot was provided with a roomier cockpit and the canopy received a bow frame in the center between the two crew members. A new Instrument Landing System (ILS) was fitted, too, which made operations at night and/or in bad weather much safer. However, this new variant’s punch with just four machine guns remained weak, and, to improve the load of fire, wing-mounted pods with two additional pairs of 0.5” machine guns were introduced – but these hardly improved the interceptor’s effectiveness. 356 of the F-94B were nevertheless built.
The following F-94C was extensively modified and initially designated F-97, but it was ultimately decided just to treat it as a new version of the F-94. USAF interest was lukewarm since aircraft technology had already developed at a fast pace – supersonic performance had already become standard. Lockheed funded development themselves, converting two F-94B airframes to YF-94C prototypes for evaluation with a completely new, much thinner wing, a swept tail surface and a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J48. This was a license-built version of the afterburning Rolls-Royce Tay, which produced a dry thrust of 6,350 pounds-force (28.2 kN) and approximately 8,750 pounds-force (38.9 kN) with afterburning. Instead of machine guns, the proposed new variant was exclusively armed with unguided air-to-air missiles.
Tests were positive and eventually the F-94C was adopted for USAF service, since it was the best interim solution for an all-weather fighter at that time. It still had to rely on Ground Control Interception Radar (GCI) sites to vector the interceptor to intruding aircraft, though.
The F-94C's introduction and the availability of the more effective Northrop F-89C/D Scorpion and the North American F-86D Sabre interceptors led to a quick relegation of the earlier F-94 variants from mid-1954 onwards to second line units and to Air National Guards. By 1955 most of them had already been phased out of USAF service, and some of these relatively young surplus machines were subsequently exported or handed over to friendly nations, too. When sent to the ANG, the F-94As were modified by Lockheed to F-94B standards and then returned to the ANG as B models. They primarily replaced outdated F-80C Shooting Stars and F-51D/H Mustangs.
At that time the USAF was looking for a tactical reconnaissance aircraft, a more effective successor for the RF-80A which had shown its worth and weaknesses during the Korea War. For instance, the plane could not fly at low altitude long enough to perform suitable visual reconnaissance, and its camera equipment was still based on WWII standards. Lockheed saw the opportunity to fill this operational gap with conversions of existing F-94A/B airframes, which had, in most cases, only had clocked few flying hours, primarily at high altitudes where Soviet bombers were expected to lurk, and still a lot of airframe life to offer. This led to another private venture, the RF-94B, auspiciously christened “Stargazer”.
The RF-94B was based on the F-94B interceptor with its J33 engine and the original unswept tail. The F-94B’s wings were retained but received a different leading-edge profile to better cope with operations at low altitude. The interceptor’s nose with the radome and the machine guns underneath was replaced by a new all-metal nose cone, which was more than 3 feet longer than the former radar nose, with windows for several sets of cameras; the wedge-shaped nose cone quickly earned the aircraft the unofficial nickname “Crocodile”.
One camera was looking ahead into flight direction and could be mounted at different angled downward (but not moved during flight), followed by two oblique cameras, looking to the left and the right, and a vertical camera as well as a long-range camera focussed on the horizon, which was behind a round window at port side. An additional, spacious compartment in front of the landing gear well held an innovative Tri-Metrogen horizon-to-horizon view system that consisted of three synchronized cameras. Coupled with a computerized control system based on light, speed, and altitude, it adjusted camera settings to produce pictures with greater delineation.
All cameras could be triggered individually by pilot or a dedicated observer/camera systems operator in the 2nd seat. Talking into a wire recorder, the crew could describe ground movements that might not have appeared in still pictures. A vertical view finder with a periscopic presentation on the cockpit panel was added for the pilot to enhance visual reconnaissance and target identification directly under the aircraft. Using magnesium flares carried under its wings in flash-ejector cartridges, the RF-94B was furthermore able to fly night missions.
The RF-94B was supposed to operate unarmed, but it could still carry a pair of 1.000 lb bombs under its wings or, thanks to added plumbings, an extra pair of drop tanks for ferry flights. The F-94A/B’s machine gun pods as well as the F-94C’s unguided missile launchers could be mounted to the wings, too, making it a viable attack aircraft in a secondary role.
The USAF was highly interested in this update proposal for the outdated interceptors (almost 500 F-94A/Bs had been built) and ordered 100 RF-94B conversions with an option for 100 more – just when a severe (and superior) competitor entered the stage after a lot of development troubles: Republic’s RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance version. The first YRF-84F had already been completed in February 1952 and it had an overall slightly better performance than the RF-94B. However, it offered more internal space for reconnaissance systems and was able to carry up to fifteen cameras with the support of many automatized systems, so that it was a single seater. Being largely identical to the F-84F and sharing its technical and logistical infrastructures, the USAF decided on short notice to change its procurement decision and rather adopt the more modern and promising Thunderflash as its standard tactical reconnaissance aircraft. The RF-94B conversion order was reduced to the initial 100 aircraft, and to avoid operational complexity these aircraft were exclusively delivered to Air National Guardss that had experience with the F-94A/B to replace their obsolete RF-80As.
Gradual replacement lasted until 1958, and while the RF-94B’s performance was overall better than the RF-80A’s, it was still disappointing and not the expected tactical intelligence gathering leap forward. The airframe did not cope well with constant low-level operations, and the aircraft’s marginal speed and handling did not ensure its survivability. However, unlike the RF-84F, which suffered from frequent engine problems, the Stargazers’ J33 made them highly reliable platforms – even though the complex Tri-Metrogen device turned out to be capricious, so that it was soon replaced with up to three standard cameras.
For better handling and less drag esp. at low altitude, the F-94B’s large Fletcher type wingtip tanks were frequently replaced with smaller ones with about half capacity. It also became common practice to operate the RF-94Bs with only a crew of one, and from 1960 on the RF-94B was, thanks to its second seat, more and more used as a trainer before pilots mounted more potent reconnaissance aircraft like the RF-101 Voodoo, which eventually replaced the RF-94B in ANG service. The last RF-94B was phased out in 1968, and, unlike the RF-84F, it was not operated by any foreign air force.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2 (but frequently operated by a single pilot)
Length: 43 ft 4 3/4 in (13.25 m)
Wingspan (with tip tanks): 40 ft 9 1/2 in (12.45 m)
Height: 12 ft. 2 (3.73 m)
Wing area: 234' 8" sq ft (29.11 m²)
Empty weight: 10,064 lb (4,570 kg)
Loaded weight: 15,330 lb (6,960 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 24,184 lb (10,970 kg)
Powerplant:
1× Allison J33-A-33 turbojet, rated at 4,600 lbf (20.4 kN) continuous thrust,
5,400 lbf (24 kN) with water injection and 6,000 lbf (26.6 kN) thrust with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 630 mph (1,014 km/h) at height and in level flight
Range: 930 mi (813 nmi, 1,500 km) in combat configuration with two drop tanks
Ferry range: 1,457 mi (1,275 nmi, 2,345 km)
Service ceiling: 42,750 ft (14,000 m)
Rate of climb: 6,858 ft/min (34.9 m/s)
Wing loading: 57.4 lb/ft² (384 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.48
Armament:
No internal guns; 2x 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) drop tanks on the wing tips and…
2x underwing hardpoints for two additional 165 US Gallon (1,204 liter) ferry tanks
or bombs of up to 1.000 lb (454 kg) caliber each, plus…
2x optional (rarely fitted) pods on the wings’ leading edges with either a pair of 0.5" (12.7 mm)
machine guns or twelve 2.75” (70 mm) Mk 4/Mk 40 Folding-Fin Aerial Rockets each
The kit and its assembly:
This project was originally earmarked as a submission for the 2021 “Reconnaissance & Surveillance” group build at whatifmodellers.com, in the form of a Heller F-94B with a new nose section. The inspiration behind this build was the real-world EF-94C (s/n 50-963): a solitary conversion with a bulbous camera nose. However, the EF-94C was not a reconnaissance aircraft but rather a chase plane/camera ship for the Air Research and Development Command, hence its unusual designation with the suffix “E”, standing for “Exempt” instead of the more appropriate “R” for a dedicated recce aircraft. There also was another EF-94C, but this was a totally different kind of aircraft: an ejection seat testbed.
I had a surplus Heller F-94B kit in The Stash™ and it was built almost completely OOB and did – except for some sinkholes and standard PSR work – not pose any problem. In fact, the old Heller Starfire model is IMHO a pretty good representation of the aircraft. O.K., its age might show, but almost anything you could ask for at 1:72 scale is there, including a decent, detailed cockpit.
The biggest change was the new camera nose, and it was scratched from an unlikely donor part: it consists of a Matchbox B-17G tail gunner station, slimmed down by the gunner station glazing's width at the seam in the middle, and this "sandwich" was furthermore turned upside down. Getting the transitional sections right took lots of PSR, though, and I added some styrene profiles to integrate the new nose into the rest of the hull. It was unintentional, but the new nose profile reminds a lot of a RF-101 recce Voodoo, and there's, with the straight wings, a very F-89ish look to the aircraft now? There's also something F2H-2ish about the outlines?
The large original wing tip tanks were cut off and replaced with smaller alternatives from a Hasegawa A-37. Because it was easy to realize on this kit I lowered the flaps, together with open ventral air brakes. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just modified the work station on the rear seat and replaced the rubber sight protector for the WSO with two screens for a camera operator. Finally, the one-piece cockpit glazing was cut into two parts to present the model with an open canopy.
Painting and markings:
This was a tough decision: either an NMF finish (the natural first choice), an overall light grey anti-corrosive coat of paint, both with relatively colorful unit markings, or camouflage. The USAF’s earlier RF-80As carried a unique scheme in olive drab/neutral grey with a medium waterline, but that would look rather vintage on the F-94. I decided that some tactical camouflage would make most sense on this kind of aircraft and eventually settled for the USAF’s SEA scheme with reduced tactical markings, which – after some field tests and improvisations in Vietnam – became standardized and was officially introduced to USAF aircraft around 1965 as well as to ANG units.
Even though I had already built a camouflaged F-94 some time ago (a Hellenic aircraft in worn SEA colors), I settled for this route. The basic colors (FS 30219, 34227, 34279 and 36622) all came from Humbrol (118, 117, 116 and 28, respectively), and for the pattern I adapted the paint scheme of the USAF’s probably only T-33 in SEA colors: a trainer based on Iceland during the Seventies and available as a markings option in one of the Special Hobby 1:32 T-33 kits. The low waterline received a wavy shape, inspired by an early ANG RF-101 in SEA camouflage I came across in a book. The new SEA scheme was apparently applied with a lot of enthusiasm and properness when it was brand new, but this quickly vaned. As an extra, the wing tip tanks received black anti-glare sections on their inner faces and a black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen - a decal from a T-33 aftermarket sheet. Beyond a black ink wash the model received some subtle panel post-shading, but rather to emphasize surface details than for serious weathering.
The cockpit became very dark grey (Revell 06) while the landing gear wells were kept in zinc chromate green primer (Humbrol 80, Grass Green), with bright red (Humbrol 60, Matt Red) cover interiors and struts and wheels in aluminum (Humbrol 56). The interior of the flaps and the ventral air brakes became red, too.
The decals/markings came from a Special Hobby 1:72 F-86H; there’s a dedicated ANG boxing of the kit that comes with an optional camouflaged aircraft of the NY ANG, the least unit to operate the “Sabre Hog” during the Seventies. Since this 138th TFS formerly operated the F-94A/B, it was a perfect option for the RF-94B! I just used a different Bu. No. code on the fin, taken from a PrintScale A/T-37 set, and most stencils were perocured from the scrap box.
After a final light treatment with graphite around the afterburner for a more metallic shine of the iron metallic (Revell 97) underneath, the kit was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
A camouflaged F-94 is an unusual sight, but it works very well. The new/longer nose considerably changes the aircraft's profile, and even though the change is massive, the "Crocodile" looks surprisingly plausible, if not believable! And, despite the long nose, the aircraft looks pretty sleek, especially in the air.
The Shot:
Taken in a Studio Setup at the National College of Arts in Lahore, 3 continues lights and 2 strobes used to light up the scene.
EXIF
Canon EOS 6D
Exposure: 1/400
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 120mm
ISO Speed: 400 ISO
Exposure Bias: 0 Step
Metering Mode: Pattern
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II USM ♥
For Professional Services, Please contact:
(+92) 345 588 8440
muhammadfahadraza@gmail.com
To please their base and also to prove that Leica was capable of making an all-mechanical SLR on their own, Leica designed and produced the Leica R6 in 1988.
The Leica R6 is an all-mechanical, manual metering single-lens reflex camera. Unlike the R3 through R5, the R6 shutter is mechanically timed. The meter is the only thing being powered by the batteries. Without battery power, the meter will not work, but the camera is otherwise fully functional. With their intricate clockwork timing mechanicsms, mechanical shutters are expensive to make.
Some useful links:
Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.
After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .
The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.
Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.
"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."
Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.
In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).
Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.
Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.
"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.
Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.
Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.
Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.
The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.
Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.
"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."
With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.
From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.
Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.
On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.
Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.
Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.
Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.
The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.
Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.
Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.
Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.
A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.
On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.
The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.
Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.
But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.
The Convair B-58 Hustler was the first operational supersonic jet bomber, and the first capable of Mach 2 flight. The aircraft was developed for the United States Air Force for service in the Strategic Air Command (SAC) during the 1960s. Originally intended to fly at high altitudes and speeds to avoid Soviet fighters, the introduction of highly accurate Soviet surface-to-air missiles forced the B-58 into a low-level penetration role that severely limited its range and strategic value. This led to a brief operational career between 1960 and 1969. Its specialized role was succeeded by other American supersonic bombers, such as the FB-111A and the later B-1B Lancer.
The B-58 received a great deal of notoriety due to its sonic boom, which was often heard by the public as it passed overhead in supersonic flight.
This aircraft flew from Los Angeles to New York and back on 5 March 1962, setting three separate speed records, and earning the crew the Bendix Trophy and the Mackay Trophy for 1962. The aircraft was flown to the Museum on 1 March 1969.
General characteristics
* Crew: 3: pilot; observer (navigator, radar operator, bombardier); defense system operator (DSO; electronic countermeasures operator and pilot assistant).
* Length: 96 ft 10 in (29.5 m)
* Wingspan: 56 ft 9 in (17.3 m)
* Height: 29 ft 11 in (8.9 m)
* Wing area: 1,542 ft² (143.3 m²)
* Airfoil: NACA 0003.46-64.069 root, NACA 0004.08-63 tip
* Empty weight: 55,560 lb (25,200 kg)
* Loaded weight: 67,871 lb (30,786 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 176,890 lb (80,240 kg)
* Powerplant: 4× General Electric J79-GE-5A turbojet
* *Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0068
* Drag area: 10.49 ft² (0.97 m²)
* Aspect ratio: 2.09
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.0 (1,319mph) at 40,000 ft (12,000 m)
* Cruise speed: 610 mph (530 kn, 985 km/h)
* Combat radius: 1,740 mi (1,510 nmi, 3,220 km)
* Ferry range: 4,100 mi (4,700 nmi, 7,600 km)
* Service ceiling: 63,400 ft (19,300 m)
* Rate of climb: 17,400 ft/min (88 m/s) at gross weight[30]
* Wing loading: 44.0 lb/ft² (215 kg/m²)
* Thrust/weight: 0.919 lbf/lb
* Lift-to-drag ratio: 11.3 (without weapons/fuel pod)
Armament
* Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.79 in) T171 cannon[29]
* Bombs: 4× B-43 or B61 nuclear bombs; maximum weapons load was 19,450 lb (8,820 kg)
The display reads:
ADA in Vietnam – M42 Duster
Combat experience in the Korea War quickly showed that while the M19 40mm Gun Motor Carriage was a capable platform, it needed improvement. By 1952, a new anti-aircraft tank was in development, designated the T141. The new vehicle used the same turret and gun mount from the M19, but mated it with the larger, more powerful M41 Walker Bulldog light tank hull. The resulting vehicle was standardized as the M42 40mm Gun Motor Carriage by 1952 and entered full production that year.
However, with the service entry of the Nike Ajax system in 1953, the Army was focused on missile systems and with the introduction of the Hawk missile in the late 1950s, the M42 was quickly passed to National Guard units and all but removed from the active inventory by 1963.
Just two years later, US forces entered combat in South Vietnam. Two Hawk missile battalions were deployed to provide air defense around Saigon and along the DMZ, but an additional system was needed to cover potential low-altitude threats. In addition to the air defense requirement, the Army also needed a vehicle that could provide heavy firepower for both convoy escort and firebase defense. The M42 was back in demand and by the beginning of 1966, three battalions were formed for service in Vietnam.
Those three units, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery; 4th Battalion, 60th Artillery; and 5th Battalion, 2nd Artillery arrived in-theater by mid-year and immediately had a significant impact on operations in their respective areas of operation. Each “Duster” battalion had a quad .50 battery and searchlight battery attached, forming an air defense task force that could respond to both air and ground threats, day or night.
On 20 June 1968, Air Defense and Field Artillery split the Artillery branch and the Duster, Quad, Searchlight and Hawk units were then designated ADA rather than “Artillery,” with the parenthetical Automatic Weapons, Searchlight or Guided Missile designation.
The story of Army Air Defense in Vietnam provides a fascinating contrast to the operations and equipment of the rest of the branch during the 1960s and early 1970s. While Army Air Defense of the day was focused on the strategic threat of a Soviet nuclear strike and were using the latest technology to deter that threat, the three ADA Duster battalions effectively used weapon systems from the “last war” to provide low altitude air defense and on-call direct fire support to infantry and artillery units across the entirety of South Vietnam from 1966 through 1972.
M42 Duster Specifications:
Weight: 50,000 lbs fully loaded
Height: 9 feet 4 inches
Length: 19 feet
Width: 10 feet 7 inches
Crew: Commander, driver, two loaders, two gunners
Armament: Two M2A1 40mm automatic anti-aircraft guns with 240 rounds per gun; 1-2 7.62 M60 Machine Guns with 1,750 rounds
Main Armament Rate of Fire: 120 rounds per minute, per gun
Engine: Continental AOS-895-3 6-cylinder opposed gasoline engine
Range: 100 miles
Speed 45 mph
The museum’s Duster served with the 1-44th Artillery in 1968.
The Duster occasionally towed the M332 ammunition trailer, which doubled the Duster’s ammunition capacity. However, it would be a liability in combat and would normally be removed before the Duster would be used in the convoy escort role.
Most Dusters in Vietnam carried some form of artwork. Usually the crew would name both the front hatch and the gun shield above the main armament.
Sergeant Mitchell W. Stout was born in Lenoir City, Tennessee on 24 February, 1950. He enlisted in the Army on 15 August 1967 and served his first tour in Vietnam as a rifleman with the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry Regiment in the Mekong Delta from August 1968 to August 1969. After completing his first tour, SGT Stout rotated back to the US, but returned to South Vietnam just five months later as a M42 Duster crewman.
Three months into his second tour, SGT Stout was commanding an M42 Duster at the Khe Gio bridge along Route 9, a strategic east-west route that was the supply lifeline to friendly outposts in western I Corps.
SGT Mitchell Stout
C/1-44th Artillery (Automatic Weapons), Khe Gio Bridge
The U.S. Army outpost at Khe Gio Bridge on Highway 9 near the DMZ was overrun by North Vietnamese troops on 12 March 1970. Fourteen Americans held the outpost along with a platoon of ARVN Infantry. Two M42 Dusters from C Battery 1-44th Artillery gave the small force a significant amount of firepower to protect the bridge, while an M151A1 searchlight jeep from G Battery, 29th Artillery provided nighttime battlefield illumination. Of those fourteen Americans, two were killed in action, five wounded and one was captured. Yet they fought valiantly and protected the bridge on Route 9, sparing it from destruction. Sergeant Mitchell Stout’s actions during the battle would earn him a posthumous Medal of Honor:
Citation:
Sgt. Stout distinguished himself during an attack by a North Vietnamese Army Sapper company on his unit's firing position at Khe Gio Bridge. Sgt. Stout was in a bunker with members of a searchlight crew when the position came under heavy enemy mortar fire and ground attack. When the intensity of the mortar attack subsided, an enemy grenade was thrown into the bunker. Displaying great courage, Sgt. Stout ran to the grenade, picked it up, and started out of the bunker. As he reached the door, the grenade exploded. By holding the grenade close to his body and shielding its blast, he protected his fellow soldiers in the bunker from further injury or death. Sgt. Stout's conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action, at the cost of his own life, are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon him, his unit and the U.S. Army.
Taken December 13th, 2013.
Some background:
The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.
As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.
The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.
The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.
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, anyway. 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, 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.
By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).
During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 23 tons
Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)
Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)
Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)
Suspension: Leaf spring
Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)
Armour:
10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)
Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)
Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)
Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road
Power/weight: 13 PS/t
Engine:
Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)
Transmission:
ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios
Armament:
2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds
1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount
The kit and its assembly:
This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.
There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…
However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.
Painting and markings:
Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.
The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.
The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.
The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.
Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.
A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.
7/14/11 cblog, I AM LOVEABLE & CAPABLE ;
ho fam art, m: "'IALAC ...I am loveable & capable ....every person is loveable ..wife will feel better if she is loved..and chance to share gifts..children cute..but..if we forget the IALAC of a person ..we lessen the self worth ..u r loveable but not capable ..or u r capable but not loveable ..we lessen the value...put down words ..keep it in mind ..in gospel today hesus values our IALAC .."take my yoke.." u will find rest for yourselves ..we all want to find rest ..remove my..jesus tells us take my yoke..what mean? 2000 yrs ago the yoke they placed was on beast of burden or on 2 men ..carry my yoke ..meaning..share the weight ..says we r capable..together..ask for grace..that he may accompany us on the cross ..how pray what pray for ..why this cross ..ls...carry with me..
Ex 3:13-20 "Moses, hearing the voice of the LORD from the burning bush, said to him,“When I go to the children of Israel and say to them,‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you, if they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what am I to tell them?” God replied, “I am who am.” Then he added, “This is what you shall tell the children of Israel: I AM sent me to you.” God spoke further to Moses, “Thus shall you say to the children of Israel: The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.“This is my name forever; this my title for all generations“Go and assemble the elders of Israel, and tell them: The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has appeared to me and said I am concerned about you and about the way you are being treated in Egypt; so I have decided to lead you up out of the misery of Egypt into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites a land flowing with milk and h
them: The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has appeared to me and said I am concerned about you and about the way you are being treated in Egypt; so I have decided to lead you up out of the misery of Egypt into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites a land flowing with milk and honey.“Thus they will heed your message. Then you and the elders of Israel shall go to the king of Egypt and say to him:“The LORD, the God of the Hebrews, has sent us word. Permit us, then, to go a three-days’ journey in the desert, that we may offer sacrifice to the LORD, our God.“Yet I know that the king of Egypt will not allow you to go unless he is forced I will stretch out my hand, therefore, and smite Egypt by doing all kinds of wondrous deeds there. After that he will send you away.” R. (8a) The Lord remembers his covenant for ever or R. Alleluia. Give thanks to the LORD, invoke his name; make known among the nations his deeds
em, and wonders in the land of Ham R. The Lord remembers his covenant for ever or R. Alleluia
"Jesus said 'Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened and I will give you rest Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart; and you will find rest for yourselves. For my yoke is easy, and my burden light"
TThe stigmas attached to breastfeeding in industrial nations and the dangers they pose
When my first child was just several months old I did what so many working women do – I stopped breastfeeding because I just didn’t feel capable of doing both. Even though I worked for a very large company, there were no policies for breastfeeding moms, no places in which to discreetly pump during the day, and no extended breaks allowed in order to feed my daughter if she was brought to the office. There were no mothers in my circle of friends and co-workers who breastfed after returning to work, if at all. I felt as if I had failed in that one job that as a mother I was supposed to be able to do.
Breastfeeding, although recommended by the World Health Organization, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other leading organization as the most complete and best way to feed infants, is still not accepted in so many modern cultures. When it is accepted, it is not always supported and encouraged.
Just as recently as December of 2011, a breastfeeding sit-in was declared in Target stores across America in response to one mother’s reports of ill-treatment after she chose to breastfeed her baby in the store. Employees apparently asked her to move from her spot in the women’s clothing section of the store where she was breastfeeding her baby, completely covered with a blanket, to an even more remote location – a dressing room.
Those who do find offense to breastfeeding appear to be most specifically adverse to it when it is done where they know it is happening. It doesn’t even have to be something that is seen – it can be as innocent as a mother swaddling her baby under a blanket where not even a single tiny toe is visible. The naysayers appear to be afraid that even a glimpse of breast flesh might be seen. Ironic, in a country where you can’t go to the mall without seeing teenagers dressed in less clothing than I wear to the beach, and where movies and television commercials are flooded with more skin than I ever revealed breastfeeding.
The Stigmas of Breastfeeding
In third world countries breastfeeding is a necessity and a completely accepted and encouraged aspect of raising children. However, in industrial nations such as the United States of America, breastfeeding is still looked at as something that is done in large part by 4 groups of moms:
Throwback hippies (I saw this with all of the love for a generation from which I come)
Natural pathogen moms who wouldn’t ever consider manufactured foods of any kinds
Working moms who have more demanding things to do with their time
Those who are too poor to purchase formula and the necessary supplies
Moms who might consider breastfeeding are often put off by several stereotypes, stigmas, and unfortunate concerns.
Formula, like wine, is not cheap, especially the good stuff. There is an undercurrent in American society that breastfeeding is something that those who can’t afford formula choose to do.
Breastfeeding is icky (according to some). There is a stigma that it is gross and perverted to have an infant so dependent on what society has declared to be a purely sexual body part. Our “modernized” society has melded breastfeeding and sexual imagery – two totally separate issues – and has somehow declared breastfeeding in public to be inappropriate. Yet parents can yell at their children during tee-ball games, belittle their children for not doing well enough in school, and ignore their children as they spend more time texting than talking. Somehow our definition of inappropriate has gone askew.
Breastfeeding reduces your social life. Nothing says “new mom” like when you are out with friends to dinner and a baby nearby begins to cry and you spring a leak in a natural response.
Breastfeeding your baby means you won’t be able to return to work at full capacity and pursue career goals with vigor.
Yes – there are unfortunately some truths to these stigmas, but only because society hasn’t caught up to reality. They shouldn’t be stigmas and issues that stop moms from providing this wonderful and natural source of nutrition for their babies.
Breastfeeding does mean restructuring your social life – but so does becoming a parent in general. Good friends at dinner won’t think less of you if you need to pump-n-dump – those who do probably aren’t worth dinner plans anyway.
Even though the laws are changing, they are still not current with world health opinions and endeavors. Working outside of the home will be more challenging as a breastfeeding mom. You will need to plan ahead and let your employer know how often you will need to pump and work with your employer to find a suitable place to do this and store the milk. It won’t always be easy, but it will be worth your time and your infant’s health and relationship with you. Don’t let it be something you regret like I do.
When my 2nd child was just days old I became very ill with a high fever and signs of a bacterial infection, and was told I needed to be hospitalized for a round of IV antibiotics. I immediately saw my hopes and plans of breastfeeding for at least the first year of his life begin to fail as I hadn’t even been able to breastfeed long enough to establish a pattern with my newborn – until my stubborn Irish side kicked in and I refused to be admitted to the hospital without my son allowed in my room so I could breastfeed. The hospital staff relented and I was admitted for 3 days of treatment with him at my side.
That baby, and his brothers who followed, were all breastfed for at least the first year of their lives, despite the roadblocks and stigmas that modern society tends to place on the choice. Don’t let the breastfeeding backlash stop you from providing your child with the best nutritional and developmental start possible – even if you aren’t Irish.
Some background:
The need for a specialized self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, capable of keeping up with the armored 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 turretless 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 first proposal for the Kugelblitz envisioned mounting a modified anti-aircraft turret, which had originally been developed for U-boats, on the Panzer IV chassis. It was armed with dual 30 mm MK 303 Brunn guns. However, this was eventually abandoned, since development of this gun had not yet been completed, and, in any case, the entire production run of this weapon turret would have been reserved for Germany's Kriegsmarine. However, enough firepower that enabled the Flakpanzer to cope with armoured attack aircraft, namely the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2, which was a major threat to German tanks, was direly needed.
As the best readily available alternative, the Kugelblitz eventually used the 30 mm MK 103 cannon in a Zwillingsflak ("twin flak") 103/38 arrangement, and it combined the chassis and basic superstructure of the existing Panzer IV medium battle tank with a newly designed turret. This vehicle received the official designation SdKfz. 161/7 Leichter Flakpanzer IV 3 cm „Kugelblitz”.
The turret’s construction was unique, because its spherical body, which was protected with 20 mm steel shells in front and back, was hanging in a ring mount from the Tiger I, suspended by two spigots – it was effectively an independent capsule that only slightly protruded from the tank’s upper side and kept the vehicle’s profile very low, unlike its predecessors. 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 turret was fully enclosed, with full overhead protection, 360° traverse and (rather limited) space for the crew of three plus weapons and ammunition. Driver and radio operator were located in the front of the hull, as with all German tanks. 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. The spare ammunition was located on the right side. Each of these three crew members had separate hatch doors, which they could use to enter or exit the vehicle. The gunner assistants’ hatch doors each had a small round shaped extra hatch, which were used for mounting sighting devices, and there were plans to outfit the turret with a stereoscopic range finder for the commander.
The tank’s MK 103 was a powerful 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 Kaliber 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 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. Due to the fact that the MK 103 cannons produced a lot of powder smoke when operated, fume extractors were added, which was another novelty.
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, anyway. 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, 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.
By early 1945, only around 50 operational vehicles had been built and production of the SdKfz. 161/7 already ceased in May. The first five produced vehicles were given to the newly formed “Panzerflak Ersatz- und Ausbildungsabteilung” (armored Flak training and replacement battalion) located near the city of Ohrdruf (Freistaat Thüringen region in central Germany). One company was divided into three platoons equipped with a mix of different Flakpanzers vehicles. The first platoon was equipped with the Wirbelwind, the second with Ostwind, and the third platoon was equipped with experimental vehicles, such as the Kugelblitz or the “Zerstörer 45”, which was basically a Wirbelwind with a 3-cm-Flak-Vierling 103/38 (armed with four MK 103s).
During the unit’s initial trials and deployments, the 3 cm Flak 38 turned out to be a troublesome design, largely because of the strong vibration when firing, and gun smoke frequently filled the turret with hazardous effects on the crews. The vibrations made the target aiming difficult and could even cause damage on the mounting itself – but due to the dire war situation, production was kept up. However, during the running production of the Kugelblitz turret, reinforcements to the mount structure were gradually added, as well as improved sighting systems. None of the operational SdKfz. 161/7s received these upgrades, though, since it was only regarded as a transitional model that filled the most urgent defense gaps. Later production Panzer IV Kugelblitz vehicles were almost exclusively sent to units that defended Berlin, where they fought against the Soviet assault on the German capital.
Specifications:
Crew: Five (commander/gunner, 2 assistants, driver, radio operator)
Weight: 23 tons
Length: 5.92 m (19 ft 5 in)
Width: 2.88 m (9 ft 5 ¼ in)
Height: 2.3 m (7 ft 6 ½ in)
Suspension: Leaf spring
Fuel capacity: 470 l (120 US gal)
Armour:
10 – 50 mm (0.39 – 1.96 in)
Performance:
Maximum road speed: 40 km/h (25 mph)
Sustained road speed: 34 km/h (21.1 mph)
Off-road speed: 24 km/h (15 mph)
Operational range: 210 km (125 mi); 130 km (80 mi) off-road
Power/weight: 13 PS/t
Engine:
Maybach HL 120 TRM V12 petrol engine with 300 PS (296 hp, 221 kW)
Transmission:
ZF Synchromesh SSG 77 gear with 6 forward and 1 reverse ratios
Armament:
2× 30 mm 3 cm Flak 38 (MK 103/3) with a total of 1.200 rounds
1× 7.92 mm Maschinengewehr 34 with 1,250 rounds in bow mount
The kit and its assembly:
This is a model of a tank that actually existed, but only in marginal numbers – not more than five Panzer IV with the revolutionary Kugelblitz turret are known to have existed or even seen service. However, it fits well into the ranks of fictional/projected Heer ’46 tanks, and I have been wanting to build or create one for along time.
There are some 1:72 kits available, e. g. from Mako, but they are rare and/or expensive. So I rather went for an improvisation approach, and it turned out to be very successful. The complete turret comes from one of the Modelcollect “Vierfüssler” mecha kits – these carry such an installation under the belly(!), what makes absolutely NO sense to me. I especially wonder how the crew is supposed to enter and operate the turret in its upside down position? Not to mention a totally confined field of fire…
However, the Modelcollect Kugelblitz tower comes complete with its bearing and the armored collar. It was simply mated with the hull from a late Hasegawa Panzer IV – in my case even a Wirbelwind, which also came with some suitable additional details like stowing boxes for gun barrels. The attachment ring for the turret had just to be widened far enough to accept the Kugelblitz installation – and it worked well! Very simple, but highly effective.
Painting and markings:
Well, this did not work 100% as intended. I wanted to emphasize the fact that the tanks would have been built from revamped hulls, so I gave all parts an initial overall coat with RAL 3009, Oxydrot. These were then overpainted with a three-tone Hinterhalt scheme in Dunkelgelb (RAL 7028), Olivgrün (RAL 6003) and Rotbraun (RAL 8012). The pattern was adapted from a Wirbelwind, which I had found in literature, consisting of narrow stripes across the hull with additional spots of Dunkelgelb on top of the darker tones. In order to emphasize the idea of a converted tank with the turret coming from another source, I gave the latter a uniform Dunkelgelb livery.
The colors used were Humbrol enamels, this time a different selection of tones, namely 167 (RAF Hemp), 159 (Khaki Drab) and a mix of 160 and 10 (German Rotbraun and Chocolate Brown, for a darker hue). However, I wanted the Oxydrot to shine through the camouflage, but despite efforts with thinned paint and sparse use of the enamels the effect is not as visible as expected. I left it that way, though, here and there the red primer is visible, but a lot of the livery became obscured through the following wash with dark red brown, highly thinned acrylic paint and a final coat of pigment dust on the model’s lower areas.
The original black vinyl track was treated with a cloudy mix of grey, red brown and iron acrylic paint, and finally dusted with pigments, too.
The decals were gathered from several sources – the tactical code was puzzled together with Roman and Arabic numbers in red (seen on some vehicles from assault gun units), the emblem on the turret shows Berlin’s mascot, the bear, taken from a Modelcollect Heer ’46 kit’s sheet.
Some dry-brushing with light grey was done to simulate dust and worn edges, but not too much since the vehicle was to be presented in a more or less new state. And then the model was sealed with acrylic matt varnish.
A relatively simple build, since only the turret was exchanged/transplanted. The result looks better than expected, though, and the Kugelblitz turret fit into the Panzer IV hull like the hand into a tight glove. Very convincing. And I might add another Kugelblitz variant, this time either on a Hetzer hull (which was a real alternative to the Panzer IV) or on an E-25, it seems as if an 1:72 kit becomes soon available from Modelcollect.
All-new 2015 Jeep® Renegade: Most Capable Small SUV Expands the Brand's Global Portfolio
- All-new 2015 Jeep® Renegade marks the brand's first entry in the small SUV segment
- Renegade Trailhawk model delivers best-in-class 4x4 Trail Rated capability with class-exclusive Jeep Active Drive Low, which includes 20:1 crawl ratio and Jeep Selec-Terrain system
- Designed to expand the Jeep brand globally, the all-new 2015 Renegade combines the brand's heritage with fresh new styling to appeal to youthful and adventurous customers
- Nothing else like it: Renegade displays a powerful stance with aggressive wheel-to- body proportions, plus the freedom of two My Sky open-air roof systems
- Renegade's all-new interior exudes an energetic appearance with rugged and functional details, crafted in high-quality materials and inspired colors
- All-new "small-wide 4x4 architecture" combines best-in-class off-road capability with world-class on-road driving dynamics
- Designed for global markets – with 16 fuel-efficient powertrain combinations for different markets around the world – including the world's first nine-speed automatic transmission in a small SUV
- Renegade will offer a best-in-class combination of fuel efficiency and off-road capability
- Technology once limited to premium SUVs: award-winning Uconnect Access, Uconnect touchscreen radios and the segment's largest full-color instrument cluster
- Loaded with up to 70 available advanced safety and security features
- Designed in America, crafted in Italy, the 2015 Renegade highlights the Jeep brand's global resources and dedication to meeting customer needs in more than 100 countries
The all-new 2015 Jeep® Renegade expands the brand's global vehicle lineup, entering the growing small SUV segment, while staying true to the adventurous lifestyle Jeep is known for. Renegade delivers a unique combination of best-in-class off-road capability, open-air freedom and convenience, a segment-first nine-speed automatic transmission that contributes to outstanding on- road and off-road driving dynamics, fuel-efficient engines, world-class refinement, and a host of innovative safety and advanced technology offerings. The result is an efficient vehicle created to attract youthful and adventurous customers around the world to the Jeep brand.
The all-new 2015 Jeep Renegade expands the brand's product portfolio and targets the rapidly expanding small SUV segment around the globe with benchmark levels of efficiency and driving dynamics, while at the same time delivering best-in-class 4x4 capability that customers expect from Jeep,‖ said Mike Manley, President and CEO - Jeep Brand, Chrysler Group LLC. ―Renegade symbolizes the brand's renowned American design, ingenuity and innovation, marking the Jeep brand's first entry into the small SUV segment in more than 100 markets around the globe.
Best-in-class off-road capability thanks to two all-new 4x4 systems
Leveraging 4x4 technology from the all-new Jeep Cherokee, the all-new 2015 Jeep Renegade offers two of the most advanced and intelligent 4x4 systems in its class, all to deliver best-in-class off-road capability. Both systems can provide up to 100 percent of the engine's available torque to the ground, through any wheel, for optimal grip.
- Jeep Active Drive – full-time 4x4 system
- Jeep Active Drive Low – class-exclusive full-time 4x4 system with 20:1 crawl ratio
Innovation is also at the forefront of any new Jeep vehicle, and the Renegade is the first small SUV to feature a disconnecting rear axle and power take-off unit (PTU) – all to provide Jeep Renegade 4x4 models with enhanced fuel economy. The system instantly engages when 4x4 traction is needed.
Both Jeep Active Drive and Active Drive Low 4x4 systems include the Jeep Selec-Terrain system, providing up to five modes (Auto, Snow, Sand and Mud modes, plus exclusive Rock mode on the Trailhawk model) for the best four-wheel-drive performance on- or off-road and in any weather condition.
Trail Rated: Renegade Trailhawk 4x4 model
For customers who demand the most off-road capability from their Jeep vehicles, the Renegade Trailhawk model delivers best-in-class Trail Rated 4x4 capability with:
- Standard Jeep Active Drive Low (20:1 crawl ratio)
- Selec-Terrain system with exclusive Rock mode
- Increased ride height 20 mm (0.8 inches)
- Skid plates, and red front and rear tow hooks
- Unique fascias deliver 30.5 degree approach, 25.7 degree breakover and 34.3 degree departure angles
- 17-inch all-terrain tires
- Up to 205 mm (8.1 inches) of wheel articulation
- Hill-descent Control
- Up to 480 mm (19 inches) of water fording
- Up to 1,500 kg (3,300-lb.) towing capability with MultiJet II diesel engine and 907 kg (2,000- lb.) towing capability with 2.4-liter Tigershark engine, with available tow package
A global Jeep design for a rapidly growing global brand
From the start, Jeep designers knew the Renegade would need to deliver best-in-class off-road capability with city-sized proportions that exuded the brand's rugged style while at the same time enhancing versatility, maneuverability and style. Additionally designers were tasked to create an all- new SUV that would symbolize the brand's renowned American design and ingenuity, as it would mark the Jeep brand's first entry into the small SUV segment in more than 100 markets around the globe. Last, Renegade had to offer the open-air freedom that dates back to its 1941 roots with the Willys MB Jeep.
The result is the all-new 2015 Renegade, a vehicle that builds on the Jeep Wrangler's powerful stance, and features fresh new styling with rugged body forms and aggressive proportions that enable best-in-class approach and departure angles purposely designed to deliver best-in-class off- road capability. And for segment-exclusive panoramic views, two available My Sky open-air roof panel systems conveniently stow to provide passengers open-air freedom with ease.
All-new interior exudes a rugged and energetic appearance
The all-new Jeep Renegade interior features a rugged and energetic appearance that builds upon Jeep's legendary brand heritage. Its precisely crafted detail, innovative and high-quality color and material appointments, state-of-the-art technology, and clever storage features draw inspiration from contemporary extreme sports gear and lifestyles.
The interior of the all-new 2015 Jeep Renegade has a distinctive form language which Jeep designers have titled ―Tek-Tonic.‖ This new design theme is defined by the intersections of soft and tactile forms with rugged and functional details. Major surfaces such as the sculpted soft-touch instrument panel are intersected with bold functional elements like the passenger grab handle – indispensable for off-road adventures and borrowed from its big brother, the legendary Jeep Wrangler. Unique ―protective clamp fasteners,‖ anodized design accents and inspired colors are derived from extreme sports equipment, while the newly familiar ―X‖ shapes inspired by its roof and tail lamps add to Renegade's Tek-Tonic interior look. And to make sure all of the needed passenger gear fits, the Renegade is designed with an efficient and flexible interior package that includes a removable, reversible and height-adjustable cargo floor panel and fold-forward front-passenger seat.
My Sky: continuing Jeep open-air freedom since 1941
Keeping the tradition of the legendary 1941 Willys MB Jeep, the all-new 2015 Renegade offers open-air freedom with two available My Sky open-air roof systems. With a manual removable, or removable with premium power tilt/slide feature, the segment-exclusive My Sky roof-panel systems quickly bring the outdoors inside. Designed for convenience, the honeycomb fiberglass polyurethane roof panels are lightweight and stow neatly in the rear cargo area. For added design detail, both My Sky roof systems feature a debossed ―X‖ stamped into the roof that exude strength and play on the brand's utilitarian history.
Best-in-class off-road capability with world-class on-road driving dynamics
Designed and engineered to first and foremost deliver legendary Jeep 4x4 capability, the all-new 2015 Renegade is the first small SUV from Chrysler Group to use the all-new ―small-wide 4x4 architecture.‖
With its fully independent suspension capable of up to 205 mm (8.1 inches) of wheel articulation and 220 mm (8.7 inches) of ground clearance (Trailhawk), Renegade raises the bar in the small SUV segment with best-in-class off-road capability. Extensive use of advanced steels, composites and advanced computer-impact simulations enable the all-new 2015 Renegade's architecture to deliver world-class torsional stiffness and Jeep brand's durability required for Trail Rated adventures.
The all-new Renegade is the first Jeep to integrate Koni's frequency selective damping (FSD) front and rear strut system. This damping system enables the Jeep Renegade to deliver world-class road-holding and handling characteristics.
Designed for global markets: 16 powertrain combinations
True to the Jeep brand, the all-new Renegade will offer customers in global markets maximum off- road capability and fuel efficiency. The Renegade will offer up to 16 strategic powertrain combinations – the most ever in a Jeep vehicle – customized to markets around the world to meet a range of performance and efficiency needs. Powertrain options include:
- Four MultiAir gasoline engine offerings
- Two MultiJet II diesel engine offerings
- Efficient and flex-fuel capable E.torQ engine
- Emissions and fuel-saving Stop&Start technology
- Segment-first nine-speed automatic transmission
- Two manual and one dual-dry clutch transmission (DDCT) offerings
World's first small SUV with nine-speed automatic transmission
Like the new Jeep Cherokee, the all-new 2015 Jeep Renegade has raised the bar - this time in the small SUV class - with the first available nine-speed automatic transmission. When paired with either the 2.0-liter MultiJet II diesel engine, or 2.4-liter MultiAir2 gas engine, the nine-speed transmission delivers numerous benefits customers will appreciate, including aggressive launches, smooth power delivery at highway speeds and improved fuel efficiency versus a six-speed automatic transmission.
Segment-exclusive technologies once found only on higher classed SUVs
The all-new 2015 Jeep Renegade offers technology features once found only in upper-segment vehicles, and makes them attainable to customers in the growing small SUV segment – including award-winning Uconnect Access, Uconnect touchscreens and the segment's largest full-color instrument cluster.
- Uconnect Access: Utilizes embedded cellular technology to allow Jeep Renegade occupants to get directly in contact with local emergency-service dispatchers – all with the push of the 9-1-1 Assist button on the rearview mirror. Uconnect Access applies the same logic to roadside assistance. One push of the ―ASSIST‖ button summons help directly from Chrysler Group's roadside assistance provider, or the Vehicle Customer Care Center. Further peace of mind comes from the system's ability to receive text messages, announce receipt of texts, identify senders and then ―read‖ the messages aloud with Bluetooth-equipped cell phones. AOL Autos named Uconnect Access its ―Technology of the Year for 2013.‖ (Uconnect services may vary in different markets)
- Uconnect touchscreen radio systems: Award-winning in-vehicle handsfree communication, entertainment and available navigation. Key features available on the Uconnect 5.0 and 6.5AN systems include a 5.0-inch or 6.5-inch touchscreen display, Bluetooth connectivity, single or dual-turner, radio data system capability (RDS), digital audio broadcast (DAB), HD Radio, digital media broadcasting (DMB), SiriusXM Radio, SiriusXM Travel Link, SiriusXM Travel Link, USB port and auxiliary audio jack input. (Uconnect services may vary in different markets)
- Segment's largest full-color instrument cluster display: Filling the Jeep Renegade's gauge cluster in front of the driver is an available 7-inch, full-color, premium multiview display, featuring a reconfigurable function that enables drivers to personalize information inside the instrument cluster. The information display is designed to visually communicate information, using graphics and text, quickly and easily.
Renegade features up to 70 advanced safety and security features
Safety and security were at the forefront in the development of the all-new 2015 Jeep Renegade, setting the stage for up to 70 available safety and security features – including the availability of Forward Collision Warning-Plus and LaneSense Departure Warning-Plus.
In addition, engineers added both active and passive safety and security features, including Blind- spot Monitoring; Rear Cross Path detection; ParkView rear backup camera with dynamic grid lines; electronic stability control (ESC) with electronic roll mitigation and seven standard air bags.
Jeep brand's global resources
Designed in America and crafted in Italy, the 2015 Renegade continues the Jeep brand's dedication to the global marketplace and demonstrates the depths of its available resources. The final assembly location for the Renegade will be at the Melfi Assembly Plant. The Renegade's global portfolio of powertrain production includes the United States, Italy and Brazil.
Like many of the fans who endured the cold, drizzly conditions inside Reliant Stadium to start the game, the Texans took a few minutes to warm up Sunday afternoon in the regular season finale against the Chicago Bears.
After a wake-up call courtesy of a momentum-changing sack by defensive end Mario Williams and a stern message from coach Gary Kubiak, the fans were treated to a spectacular offensive display led by Pro Bowler Andre Johnson and rookie running back Steve Slaton .
The 31-24 win gave Houston its second-consecutive 8-8 record to end the season, and it shut out the Bears from postseason contention.
Texans owner Bob McNair admired the team's strong finish to the season.
"I'd rather be 16-0," McNair said. "But I think starting out the way we did, 0-4, coming back, understand that only nine other teams have ever done that (start 0-4 and finish .500 or better) in this history of the NFL. So I think it was an accomplishment for our team."
Early on, the Texans appeared to suffer from the same malaise they showed at Oakland a week earlier. But the team erased a 10-0 deficit in the first quarter with 21 unanswered points to take a 21-10 lead early in the third quarter.
In that stretch, Johnson scored back-to-back touchdowns to bring the franchise-record crowd of 70,838 to its feet. The Pro Bowler finished with 10 catches for 148 yards (14.8 avg.) to end the season with the NFL lead in receptions (115) and receiving yards (1,575).
Meanwhile, Slaton rebounded from a first half in which he totaled only 19 rushing yards and lost a fumble to put the offense on his back in the final quarter of play. By gaining 128 total yards from scrimmage and scoring a touchdown in the game, Slaton may have sealed NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year honors.
Slaton’s five-yard gain with 1:24 remaining in the contest gave Houston a first down and allowed the team to run out the remainder of the clock.
"I really like the way we came back and played after we played pretty poorly on both sides of the ball throughout the first quarter," Kubiak said.
Chicago scored its first touchdown with 5:57 remaining in the first quarter when wide receiver Brandon Lloyd stretched out for a four-yard touchdown grab near the front left pylon. A 15-yard reception by wide receiver Devin Hester and a 15-yard penalty on defensive end Tim Bulman for roughing the passer set up the score.
Wide receiver André Davis ' 39-yard kickoff return down the Bears' sideline gave the Texans solid field position at their 42-yard line to begin their second possession. But Slaton fumbled on the first play from scrimmage after being tackled by cornerback Charles Tillman. Defensive end Alex Brown recovered the fumble and returned it 17 yards to the Houston 38.
Three plays later, Robbie Gould's 37-yard field goal made the score 10-0.
The next drive started promising when quarterback Matt Schaub threw a tight spiral to Davis for a 33-yard gain up the middle of the field. But tight end Owen Daniels was penalized 15 yards for unnecessary roughness on the next play, and Schaub was flagged 10 yards for intentional grounding one play later to derail the drive and force a punt.
Upon returning to the sideline, the offense received an earful from Kubiak.
"I just didn't think we were going about our business the way we were capable of playing," Kubiak said. "That's not us. We're usually a pretty poised group as a football team and right there is losing poise and getting a shot in on a guy and all of a sudden it took a lot of momentum away from us."
With 11:26 left in the first half, Chicago took over at the Houston 49 following a three-and-out series by the Texans. But Williams saved the defense with his 12th sack of the season by tackling quarterback Kyle Orton at the Chicago 45 for a 10-yard loss on third down.
From there, Johnson caught three passes for 72 yards, including a 43-yard touchdown where he dragged two defenders with him over the goal line. Kris Brown's extra point cut the Bears' lead to 10-7 with 5:50 remaining before halftime.
Running back Ryan Moats forced a fumble on the ensuing kickoff when he tackled Devin Hester. Brown dove on the ball at the Chicago 38 for the Texans' first takeaway.
On third-and-goal at the three-yard line, Schaub threw a fade route to Johnson in the back right corner of the end zone, and Johnson ripped away the ball from Tillman for the score.
Safety Danieal Manning returned the opening kickoff of the second half 40 yards to the Chicago 45. But on third-and-six, rookie safety Dominique Barber blitzed off the right side to sack Orton for a nine-yard loss.
Picking up where he left off in the first half, Johnson gained 21 yards to the Houston 48 on his first reception of the third quarter. Later, Slaton's 17-yard catch and wide receiver Kevin Walter's 23-yard grab helped give the Texans a first down at the Chicago 17.
Moats scored his first touchdown with the team on a two-yard rush off the left guard to cap the nine-play drive. Brown's extra point extended the Texans' lead to 21-10 with 8:30 left in the third quarter.
The Bears refused to lie down and responded with a seven-play, 77-yard drive over 3:00. A 37-yard catch by Hester to the Texans' one-yard line set up Orton's touchdown pass to tight end Greg Olsen.
Late in the third quarter, the Texans moved into scoring range thanks to a 33-yard catch by Daniels to the Chicago 15. On third-and-10 at the 15-yard line, wide receiver David Anderson made a diving nine-yard reception, and Schaub dove forward on fourth down to keep the drive alive.
Following two short rushes by Slaton, Schaub's pass intended for Anderson on third-and-goal from the four-yard line fell incomplete, setting up Brown's 22-yard field goal.
Following a Chicago punt to the Houston 11 midway through the fourth quarter, Schaub drove the offense 89 yards in 11 plays. On the first play of the series, he avoided a safety on first down by tossing a pass in the flats to Slaton, who outran a defensive lineman for an 11-yard gain. Two plays later, Slaton rushed for 47 yards before Manning tackled him at the Chicago 29.
A 14-yard reception by Johnson set up Slaton's 15-yard touchdown run, but a holding call on right guard Mike Brisiel negated the score. On the next run by Slaton, he was tackled and fumbled after a one-yard run, but Kubiak challenged the call. Replays showed Slaton's elbow was down before the ball came loose, and officials overturned the call.
On third-and-14, Bears linebacker Nick Roach was penalized for holding, giving the Texans an automatic first down at the 14-yard line. Slaton capped the team’s second-consecutive 11-play series with a two-yard touchdown run to make the score 31-17 after Brown's extra point.
The Bears made things interesting by picking apart the Texans' prevent defense on an 11-play, 72-yard drive over 1:55. On fourth-and-one at the Houston 11, Orton dove forward for a first down at the two-minute warning. He moved the Bears to the one-yard line by finding running back Adrian Peterson open on a nine-yard screen pass.
Safety Eugene Wilson was injured on the play, resulting in a burned timeout for Houston. Once play was restored, Orton pushed his way over the goal line for a touchdown that made the score 31-23 with 1:29 left in the game.
But Gould’s onside kick was recovered by Walter at the Chicago 44, and Slaton preserved the win on his final carry of the game for five yards and a first down.
In November of 2009, Swordsmith David DelaGardelle and Metal Artisan Andy Davis of the Mad Dwarf Workshop were contacted by the production team working on bringing Marvel Comic’s legendary comic book Thor to the big screen. They were looking for swordsmith’s capable of crafting a huge, intricately detailed, legendary hero weapon for the formidable and powerful character, Heimdall. Without hesitation, we took on this incredible but difficult task in the short time the production team had given us. Setting out we had no idea just how much we would learn and just how much of a blessing and adventure the experience would be.
The props team working on the film came to us with a rough conceptual design that one of their talented artists had painted. David then began to refine the design back forth with the team in Photoshop to make it as functional and realistic as possible. In refining the design, we tried our best within the parameters to throw in some slightly historical touches seen on some ancient Germanic swords, such as the swords fuller and knot work patterns. The sword itself however is obviously at its core meant to be majestic and quite literally “out of this world”.
We were blessed with the task to bring to life two hero steel and two stunt aluminum copies of this one sword.
While we were only asked to create this one particular sword it was still the most challenging project we had ever undertaken as sword makers, up to this point. So we were happy to pour all of our energy and imagination into this one very prominent hero sword. The rest of the film’s weapons were beautifully crafted by none other than world renowned swordsmith and armourer: Tony Swatton and his skilled group at Sword and Stone in California.
After we had finalized the design for Heimdall’s sword with the team we went straight to the forge with a drive and zeal to craft something incredible. We began by crafting the blade from high quality L6 tool steel. Ground, hardened, tempered, and polished it to an antique blued finish. The swords ornate guard and pommel were the most challenging aspect of the entire sword, due to their unique shape and function.
Heimdall’s sword is not simply a mere war sword, instead it is an ancient and key that controls Heimdall’s technologically advanced observatory on the Bifrost bridge of Asgard. It opens and closes portals to other worlds and dimensions in which the hero’s fight in the film. Being both a sword and a key, the guard serves the double purpose of obviously protecting its wielder, and also serving as extending handle bars to turn the key once its placed into its keyhole.
The guard and pommel were cast out of hollowed polished bronze for the hero steel swords, and colored lightweight aluminum for the stunt versions. Norse knotwork was carved into the fittings and into the figured Mahogany grips by hand on each copy of the sword. The knotwork is a reflective nod back to the original Norse mythology and cultural-history the comics were based off of, while still keeping a modern vibe of an unknown advanced civilization. The knotwork is also reflective of the patterns seen inside the walls of Heimdall’s observatory and in the architecture and décor of the city of Asgard itself. In total, the sword stood at 5 ½ feet long from tip to pommel, and the hero steel and bronze versions weighed close to 10 pounds each.
In the end, Heimdall’s sword turned out to be a sword we would have never dreamed of crafting ourselves. We are beyond thankful for being blessed to have worked on such a creatively stimulating and challenging project that pushed our skills further as young swordsmith’s who are still learning this craft in a traditional context.
We're honored to have played a small role in this incredible film, and we hope that our work somehow reflectes back to the traditional and historical elements of swordsmithing amidst the incredible visual scope of this modern epic.