View allAll Photos Tagged Configuration
With the dual blend configuration of the NJ4, you can offer up to five products from only 3 hoses. The ability to offer E15 through a separate hose with the NJ4 reduces the risk of mis-fueling.
To learn more about the NJ4, visit www.gilbarco.com/us/products/fuel-dispensers/flex-fuel-di...
iss071e609375 (Sept. 5, 2024) --- NASA astronaut and Expedition 71 Flight Engineer Tracy C. Dyson tests the configuration of computers that control life support systems aboard the International Space Station's Destiny laboratory module.
The beam rifle has been remade into a more solid design. As it is mentioned in an earlier picture, its first configuration has a handheld beam rifle for its primary armament, two shoulder-mounted rocket launchers, and two forearm-mounted beam sabers. This is a balanced and neutral setup that has no major advantages nor disadvantages.
Cylinders: flat-6 (boxer-configuration)
Displacement: 2341 cc
Bore x stroke: 84 x 70.4 mm
Rated output: 140 PS @ 5600 rpm (carburetored, except the USA where the new BOSCH K-Jetronic CIS (continuous fuel injection system) was used, according to stricter environmental laws)
Max. torque: 197 Nm @ 4000 rpm
Top speed: 205 km/h
0-100 km/h: under 10 s
Empty weight: 1077 kg
Cooling system: Air cooled with fan
© www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=26521
The “F-Series” (F-model) are widely seen as the genuine models (master pattern) of all 911-types in summing up of the series from MY 1968 (introduced in the middle of 1967) “A-series” to MY 1973 (discontinued in the middle of 1973).
The identifying of an early successor, an European G-model MY 1974, could lead to the following mystic question: Why are impact bumpers fitted to some early “G-series” models only?
The new 911 G-Series was introduced in 1973. The US-Versions were all equipped with this new bumpers to conform with low speed protection requirements of US law from the very beginning. The integration of the new shock absorbing bumpers as standard of the European versions followed only one year later. In Germany the “G-Series” models since 1974 are called “Blasebalg”-models (German for “bellows”).
KlassikSTADT Frankfurt
Pyritz Classics
14 February 2014
Guest room of the western-style Comfort Twin Room in triple bed configuration. Not all Comfort Twin rooms are capable of this configuration.
Schneider Kreuznach Xenon 50mm f2
manca il coperchio frontale
Kodak Retina II (type 014)
Although the Retina II model 011 (uncoated lenses) was made up to 1939, most Retina II examples you see today are postwar (1949-1950), with coated lenses. The Retina II is considered the ugly stepsister to the Retina IIa, but it has some redeeming features which I will describe below.
Configuration: the camera is a tiny package that folds flat. The lens is mounted on a flat board mounted to leather bellows and the front door (which, looking from the front, opens to the left side. The door serves as something of a lens shade. Chassis is a brass stamping with an aluminum alloy back door (and very poorly primed black paint edges). Top and bottom covers are chromed brass. Film advance is through a top-mount knob wind (with knob rewind); shutter cocking is through a lever mounted on the face. There is an interlock between the two, and it is released by the movement of the film across the sprocket wheels (a la the Zeiss Contessa). The exposure counter is a thumb-wheel coupled to a button, which you reset manually. I could never quite figure out how to do this. The shutter release is a tall cylinder, and there is a separate cable release socket. The overall body shape is angular.
Viewfinder/rangefinder: The combined viewfinde/rangefinder has a BL of about 50mm and a magnification of about 0.7x. There are no framelines, and the entire assembly pivots to correct for parallax. These finders are pretty squinty and yellowish, which is really too bad given the lens quality. The upside is that these are very tough finders, being mounted in aluminum tubes inside the top cover (like Super Ikonta Bs).
Lens: The Type 014 features a 50mm f/2 coated lens, either a Schneider Retina-Xenon or a Rodenstock Retina-Heligon (both 6 elements in 5 groups, in the popular Zeiss Planar configuration). The Heligon is more collectible, but in my experience, the Xenon is better - really a worldbeater, sharp and contrasty. The lens is helicoid-mounted, and you focus by moving a little thumb tab.
The one thing about the Schneider lenses (which appear to be vacuum-coated, rather than coagulation-coated) is that they sometimes develop tiny "stars" in the front element coating. This has no effect.
The filter thread is 29.5mm, although Kodak called this size 32mm. Kodak made filters in yellow, green, skylight, and salmon. The lens shade is a rubber screw-in type. Kodak and Walz thin filters will close under the clamshell front cover. Hoya made a number of filters, which are optically superior, but none of which will allow the front to close.
Shutter assembly: The shutter is a Compur Rapid-X #00, with speeds from 1-1/500 sec. Flash attaches via standard PC socket on the shutter face (mounted at an inconvenient 7 o'clock position). Multiblade aperture activated by a little blade-type aperture selector (which stops in detents at whole stop increments). Like most Compur postwar shutters, this one will slow down unless it is CLAd with modern lubricants.
Trying to figure out the best configuration. I might make a DIY insert to allow me to fit in a 13" MBP without scratching it.
Now with WiFi also.....
Bus No: 943
Year released: 2006
Capacity: 53; 2x2 seating configuration
Route: Dagupan-Cubao/Pasay via Dau/SCTEX-Concepcion/Capas/Tarlac/Gerona/Paniqui/Moncada/Carmen/Villasis/Urdaneta
Body: Santarosa Motorworks Inc.
Model: 2006 SR-EXFOH AC Series
Chassis: Nissan Diesel JA450SSN
Engine: Nissan Diesel PF6A
Fare: Airconditioned
Transmission System: M/T
Plate No.: AWA-215(Region I-Ilocos Region)
Taken on: September 7, 2012
Location: McArthur Highway, Brgy. Sto. Nicolas, Tarlac City, Tarlac
Configuration: Apple M1 Max chip with 10-core CPU and 32-core GPU; 32GB unified memory; 1TB SSD. This replaces my late-2019 model, which I part with a year earlier than planned.
Some quick first-impressions, with less than eight hours screen time:
Liquid Retina XDR display is visually stunning. Spectacular is better. Text is super sharp and colors are rich and vibrant—like nothing I have experienced on any laptop. Scrolling is super smooth. Hello, ProMotion! Technical resolution is 3024 by 1964 pixels. Actually available maximum scaling: 2056 by 1329. Bright, bright, bright—love it.
M1 Max chip looks promising but I will need to embark on several planned heavy-duty projects to truly assess. I will say this: Performance is fluid, and I can’t say the same about my late-2019 MBP.
Keyboard is unexpectedly better. The keys feel fabulous, require light touch, and caress the fingers. I am surprised by the subtle but absolutely significantly improved experience compared to the 16-inch MBP.
MagSafe 3 and return of other ports (HDMI and SDXC) are nice-to-haves but not need-to-haves. Over time, surely I will appreciate them.
3.5-mm headphone jack supports high-impedance headphones, which I own. My daughter is fanatical about vinyl records; to make for a more authentic listening experience, I gave her my Grado GS1000e. I now use the Audio-Technica ATH-R70x, which impedance is fairly high at 470 ohms. But, I haven’t opportunity to truly test.
Construction is solid, like a tank. The hinge is incredibly rigid (in a good way). My initial trepidation gives way to satisfaction with the apparent ruggedness.
Design is stately and strong. I don’t notice the camera notch, in case you wondered. The thin bezel makes interaction with the 16.2-inch panel both expansive and immersive. The laptop looks and feels Pro—no, premium—oddly emphasized by the brand name machine-embossed/etched onto the underside.
I will need more time using the late-2021 MBP before conveying much (much) more about it.
Regarding the photo, I feel black and white appropriately suits the Space Gray color and tank-like conveyance.
Benchmarx Corner Unit - 48 x 48 x 24 x 30H used in conjunction with 3 Benchmarx 96W x 24D x 30H benches.
SET 1 – HLT Remodel: 10-15-2023
At the rear of the right-hand actionway, we find the new fitting rooms configuration all completed. This was a fairly late development in the remodel, only having first appeared under construction on our last visit in August – and completely wrapped up by this visit two months later. Perhaps a contributing factor to the quickness there is that the work doesn’t seem to have changed things up too drastically; the fitting rooms appear to still take up much the same footprint as before, just now with an inexplicably squared-off entrance as opposed to the previously better-visible corner one. Not sure what justified this decisioning, but what do I know, lol.
P.S. -- Good timing for today's uploads, as this is the Horn Lake Target's 26th birthday!
UP NEXT – continuing our tour of the Crossgates Kroger…
(c) 2025 Retail Retell
These places are public so these photos are too, but just as I tell where they came from, I'd appreciate if you'd say who :)
The kit and its assembly:
This whif kitbashing was inspired by real design studies from General Dynamics that show evolutionary developments of the F-16 in a no-tail configuration, but with an enlarged diamond-shaped wing shape (much like the F-22's), obviously based on the F-16XL. Additionally you find several similar fantasy CG designs in the WWW – the basic idea seems to have potential. And when I stumbled across the remains of a Revell X-32 in my stash and an Intech F-16A kit, I wondered if these could not be reasonably combined...?
What sounds easy eventually ended up in a massive bodywork orgy. The Intech kit (marketed under the Polish Master Craft Label) is horrible, the worst F-16 kit I have ever seen or tried to build - it's cheap and you get what you pay for. Maybe the PM Model F-16 is worse (hard to believe, but sprue pics I saw suggest it), but the Intech kits are …challenging. This thing is like a blurred picture of an F-16: you recognize the outlines, but nothing is sharp and no part matches any other! Stay away.
Well, actually only the fuselage, the cockpit and parts of the Intech kit's landing gear survived. The X-32 kit is, on the other side, a sound offering. It was not complete anymore, since I donated parts like the cockpit and the landing gear to my SAAB OAS 41 'Vيًarr' stealth aircraft from Sweden some time ago, but there were many good parts left to work with. Especially the aerodynamic surfaces (wings and V-tail) attained my interest: these parts match well with the F-16 fuselage in size and shape if you look from above, and the leading edges even blend well with the F-16 LERXs. But: the X-32's wings are much, much thicker than the F-16's, so that the original blended wing/fuselage intersection does not match at all. Additionally, the X-32's bulged landing gear wells in the wings had to go, so these had to be filled as an initial step. The wing roots were roughly cut into the F-16 kit's shape and glued onto the fuselage. After drying, the whole blended wing/fuselage intersection had to be sculpted from scratch - several layers of putty and even more wet sanding sessions were necessary. I stopped counting after turn five, a tedious job. But it eventually paid out…
Additionally I decided to change the F-16's chin air intake and implant parts from the X-32 divertless supersonic "sugar scoop" intake. Such an arrangement has actually been tested on an F-16, so it's not too far-fetched, and its stealthy properties make a welcome update. The respective section from the X-32's lower front fuselage was cut away and had to be modified, too, because it would originally not fit at all under the F-16's front. The intake was carefully heated at the edges and the side walls bent inwards - I was lucky that no melting damage occurred! Inside of the new intake, the upper, bulged part was implanted, too, so that in real life the jet engine parts would be protected from direct frontal radar detection. The front wheel position was retained. As a consequence of the new, much more voluminous and square air intake, the rather round section from the main landing gear onwards had to be sculpted for a decent new fuselage shape, too. But compared to the massive wing/fuselage body work, this was only a minor task.
The F-16A's fuselage was not extended, but for a different look I decided to eliminate the single fin and rather implant the X-32's outward-canted twin fins - the original extensions that hold the F-16's air brakes and now blend into the new wings' trailing edge were a perfect place, and as a side benefit they'd partly cover the jet nozzle. The latter was replaced by a respective spare part from an Italeri F-16 – the Intech nozzle is just a plain, conical tube!
The landing gear was mostly taken over from the Intech F-16, even though it is rather rough, as well as the pylons. The ordnance was puzzled together: the Sidewinders and the cropped drop tanks come from the Intech kit (the latter have a horribly oval diameter shape and the triangulare fins are a massive 1mm thick!), the Paveway bombs come from a Hasegawa air-to-ground weapons set.
Supermarine Spitfire LFVb EP120 G-LFVB
• Aircraft Type: Supermarine Spitfire Vb EP120
• Operator: The Fighter Collection
• Year of Manufacture: 1942
• Powered by: one Rolls Royce Merlin engine
• Colour Scheme: 402 Sqn, “City of Winnipeg” RCAF coded AE-A
Our Mk.V Spitfire is one of the most credited historic aircraft left anywhere in the world with an impressive SEVEN confirmed kills. EP120 was built at the Castle Bromwich factory where she was probably test flown by the legend that was Alex Henshaw. She was taken on charge by the RAF in May 1942 with 45 MU at Kinloss in Scotland. She was assigned to 501 Sqn the following month and scored six of her confirmed kills with Sqn Ldr Geoffrey Northcott at the helm. A ground collision saw her returned to Castle Bromwich for repair following which she was allocated to 19 Sqn in Cornwall. In April 1944 she was taken on charge with 402 Sqn ‘City of Winnipeg’ RCAF, coded AE-A, which are the colours she wears today.
Hawker Hurricane Mk IIB BE505
If there is a "Famous Four" of the most important allied fighter aircraft of World War II, then the cream of allied fighter technology must undoubtedly include the Supermarine Spitfire, the North-American P-51 Mustang, the Curtiss P-40 Kittyhawk and surely, the unsung hero of the Battle of Britain, the legendary Hawker Hurricane. This aircraft, born of the famous Hawker design stable, was the creation of the great Sydney Camm and was his response to the RAF's urgent requirement for a low wing monoplane fighter to balance the threat from Nazi Germany and its re-armament during the mid 1930's. Currently, there are only twelve Hurricanes in airworthy condition throughout the world; this is in spite of a total production of some 14,231 aircraft in the period from 1937 to 1944. Surviving Hurricanes in flyable condition are therefore amongst the rarest of all warbirds. Our example, originally built in 1942 has been restored to stock Mk IIB fighter-bomber status, the only flying example of the famous ‘Hurri-bombers’.
The Hurricane IIB gained prominence at a time when RAF Fighter Command went over to the offensive following the end of The Battle of Britain during which it had been. The 'Hurri-bombers', as they came to be known, bravely carried the fight to the European mainland in late 1941 and early 1942, initially armed with a pair of 250lb bombs and later with two 500lb bombs, together with an up-rated armament of twelve Browning .303 inch machine guns from the original eight.
The Hurricane is undoubtedly the most complex of the wartime fighters to restore, with its intricate melange of steel, aluminium, wood and fabric, it represents an enormous challenge to return to flying condition. As such, this major restoration project was undertaken by the internationally renowned and pre-eminent Hurricane specialists, Hawker Restorations Ltd. This company has restored no less than five of the thirteen currently airworthy Hurricanes and has a reputation within the historic aircraft restoration industry for work of the finest quality. Based in Suffolk, UK and run by Tony Ditheridge, the undisputed Hurricane 'guru', HRL has a knowledge that spans many years of research and restoration of these wonderful aircraft.
The engine is an original Packard Merlin 29 and has been fully overhauled to zero time by Maurice Hammond at Eye Tech Engineering. Maurice is undoubtedly the finest V-12 engine re-builder outside the USA and his attention to detail and originality is second to none. All other major components were tested, refurbished and returned to service and wherever possible we used the original parts, commensurate of course with safety. She ran for the first time in September 2008 and completed a comprehensive programme of ground runs.
The complexity of the Hurricane’s primary structure, particularly Sydney Camm’s rejection of simple welded joints in favour of complex fabricated connections, was entirely aimed at easing mass production by relatively unskilled workers. Each joint and task was broken down into simple parts and jobs to allow sub-assemblies to be contracted out to non-aviation industries such as furniture manufacturers. These methods were familiar however to both Hawker production workers and the RAF fitters who maintained these aircraft. The legacy of this methodology, when compared to the Spitfire with its all metal 'monocoque' construction, is that the Hurricane is a truly massive undertaking to restore today. The average number of man hours allowed for a professional Spitfire restoration is generally estimated at around 12,000 hours. That should be considered against the Hurricane, upon which around 30,000 hours must be lavished before that distinctive shape can take to the skies once more.
The history of our aircraft is one which begins at the Canadian Car & Foundry Company factory in 1942 as construction number CCF/R20023. The aircraft was originally ordered as a Mk.1 for the RAF and allocated the military serial number AG287. The production batch was subsequently diverted to RCAF use and a new Canadian serial, 1374 was allocated. Delivered on 11 February 1942, she served with the RCAF until being returned to the factory in 1943 to be up-graded to Mk.XII standard - this included the installation of the more powerful Packard built Merlin 29 engine. Returning to RCAF use she was issued to No.1 (F) OTU (Bagotville, Quebec) where she remained until struck off charge on 6 September 1944.
Following the end of hostilities the airframe was sold off to the private sector, as were many surviving RCAF Hurricanes at that time, often becoming much needed 'hardware stores' donating their parts to keep the tractors and machinery running on the many enormous farms of the Canadian prairie. Our aircraft was lucky and remained substantially whole and was acquired by collector Jack Arnold in the 1970's. After passing through the hands of other collectors she was purchased by Tony Ditheridge of Hawker Restorations Ltd. Returning to the UK and initially stored as a future personal project, restoration work began in earnest in 2005 at HRL's facility in Suffolk. The project made steady progress until it was acquired by Hangar 11 Collection in 2007 and re-registered as G-HHII. The comprehensive restoration was completed in January 2009 and saw this rare Hurricane rolled out in fighter-bomber configuration resplendent in the markings of BE505, a Manston based Mk IIB operated by 174 (Mauritius) Squadron in spring, 1942. Her first post-restoration flight took place from North Weald on January 27, 2009.
Since then, BE505 has joined the Hangar 11 Collection and has become a firm favorite at air displays, representing as she does such a rare version of this famous and much loved classic British fighter.
KLUhv Spitfire Mk IX 3W17
The legendary Spitfire is without any doubt one of the most beautiful propeller-driven aircraft of the Second World War. Although the Dutch Spitfires had clipped wing-tips instead of the more elegant elliptical wing planform, it is the shapely lines of the single-seat fighter that make the heart of any aviation enthusiast beat faster. The Spitfire was designed by R.J.Mitchell as early as 1934. He was a brilliant aircraft designer who unfortunately died at the age of 42. The prototype made its maiden flight in 1936 and was powered by a 990-hp Merlin engine driving a two-blade propeller. Our Mk.IX has a 1720-hp Rolls-Royce Packard Merlin 224 engine and a four-blade propeller. In all, 20,351 Spitfires have been built. All of the 56 Spitfires that served in the Dutch Air Force were Mark IXs.
The SKHV Spit was built in 1943 and took part in the D-day fighting. In 1946, the 322 Fighter Section (322 JaVA) was established, which in 1947 was renamed 322 Squadron, and which included our Spit as H-25. After its return from the East Indies, 322 Squadron adopted the role of a “monthly” squadron. In that period the H-registration was replaced by the 322 Squadron code (3W) followed by a serial number, our Spit becoming 3W-17. 1953 saw the end of the military career of this legendary aircraft. The greater part of the Spitfires came to a sorry end, being plundered by souvenir hunters and scrap dealers, or being burned in fire-fighting exercises.
Gyeongbokgung (Hangul: 경복궁; hanja: 景福宫), also known as Gyeongbokgung Palace or Gyeongbok Palace, was the main royal palace of the Joseon dynasty. Built in 1395, it is located in northern Seoul, South Korea. The largest of the Five Grand Palaces built by the Joseon dynasty, Gyeongbokgung served as the home of Kings of the Joseon dynasty, the Kings' households, as well as the government of Joseon.
Gyeongbokgung continued to serve as the main palace of the Joseon dynasty until the premises were destroyed by fire during the Imjin War and abandoned for two centuries. However, in the 19th century, all of the palace's 7,700 rooms were later restored under the leadership of Prince Regent Heungseon during the reign of King Gojong. Some 500 buildings were restored on a site of over 40 hectares. The architectural principles of ancient Korea were incorporated into the tradition and appearance of the Joseon royal court.
In the early 20th century, much of the palace was systematically destroyed by Imperial Japan. Since then, the walled palace complex is gradually being reconstructed to its original form. Today, the palace is arguably regarded as being the most beautiful and grandest of all five palaces. It also houses the National Palace Museum of Korea and the National Folk Museum within the premises of the complex.
OVERVIEW
Gyeongbokgung was built three years after the Joseon dynasty was founded and it served as its main palace. With Mount Bugak as a backdrop and the Street of Six Ministries (today's Sejongno) outside Gwanghwamun Gate, the main entrance to the palace, Gyeongbokgung was situated in the heart of the Korean capital city. It was steadily expanded before being reduced to ashes during the Japanese invasion of 1592.
For the next 273 years the palace grounds were left derelict until being rebuilt in 1867 under the leadership of Regent Heungseon Daewongun. The restoration was completed on a grand scale, with 330 buildings crowded together in a labyrinthine configuration. Within the palace walls were the Outer Court (oejeon), offices for the king and state officials, and the Inner Court (naejeon), which included living quarters for the royal family as well as gardens for leisure. Within its extensive precincts were other palaces, large and small, including Junggung (the Queen`s residence) and Donggung (the Crown prince’s residence).
Owing to its status as the symbol of national sovereignty, Gyeongbokgung was demolished during the Japanese occupation of the early 20th century. In 1911, ownership of land at the palace was transferred to the Japanese Governor-General. In 1915, on the pretext of holding an exhibition, more than 90% of the buildings were torn down. Following the exhibition the Japanese leveled whatever still remained and built their colonial headquarters, the Government-General Building (1916–26), on the site.
Restoration efforts have been ongoing since 1990. The Government-General Building was removed in 1996 and Heungnyemun Gate (2001) and Gwanghwamun Gate (2006-2010) were reconstructed in their original locations and forms. Reconstructions of the Inner Court and Crown Prince’s residence have also been completed.
HISTORY
14th—16th CENTURIES
Gyeongbokgung was originally constructed in 1394 by King Taejo, the first king and the founder of the Joseon dynasty, and its name was conceived by an influential government minister named Jeong Do-jeon. Afterwards, the palace was continuously expanded during the reign of King Taejong and King Sejong the Great. It was severely damaged by fire in 1553, and its costly restoration, ordered by King Myeongjong, was completed in the following year.
However, four decades later, the Gyeongbokgung Palace was burnt to the ground during the Japanese invasions of Korea of 1592-1598. The royal court was moved to the Changdeokgung Palace. The Gyeongbokgung palace site was left in ruins for the next three centuries.
19th CENTURY
In 1867, during the regency of Daewongun, the palace buildings were reconstructed and formed a massive complex with 330 buildings and 5,792 rooms. Standing on 4,657,576 square feet (432,703 square meters) of land, Gyeongbokgung again became an iconic symbol for both the Korean nation and the Korean royal family. In 1895, after the assassination of Empress Myeongseong by Japanese agents, her husband, Emperor Gojong, left the palace. The Imperial Family never returned to Gyeongbokgung.
20th—21st CENTURIES
Starting from 1911, the colonial government of the Empire of Japan systemically demolished all but 10 buildings during the Japanese occupation of Korea and hosted numerous exhibitions in Gyeongbokgung. In 1926, the government constructed the massive Japanese General Government Building in front of the throne hall, Geunjeongjeon, in order to eradicate the symbol and heritage of the Joseon dynasty. Gwanghwamun Gate, the main and south gate of Gyeongbokgung, was relocated by the Japanese to the east of the palace, and its wooden structure was completely destroyed during the Korean War.
Gyeongbokgung's original 19th-century palace buildings that survived both the Japanese rule of Colonial Korea and the Korean War include:
- Geunjeongjeon (the Imperial Throne Hall) — National Treasure No. 223.
- Gyeonghoeru Pavilion — National Treasure No. 224.
- Hyangwonjeong Pavilion; Jagyeongjeon Hall; Jibokjae Hall; Sajeongjeon Hall; and Sujeongjeon Hall.
Modern archaeological surveys have brought 330 building foundations to light.
RESTAURATION
In 1989, the South Korean government started a 40-year initiative to rebuild the hundreds of structures that were destroyed by the colonial government of the Empire of Japan, during the period of occupied Colonial Korea (1910-1945).
In 1995, the Japanese General Government Building, after many controversial debates about its fate, was demolished in order to reconstruct Heungnyemun Gate and its cloisters. The National Museum of Korea, then located on the palace grounds, was relocated to Yongsan-gu in 2005.
By the end of 2009, it was estimated that approximately 40 percent of the structures that were standing before the Japanese occupation of Korea were restored or reconstructed. As a part of phase 5 of the Gyeongbokgung restoration initiative, Gwanghwamun, the main gate to the palace, was restored to its original design. Another 20-year restoration project is planned by the South Korean government to restore Gyeongbokgung to its former status.
LAYOUT
MAIN GATES OF GYEONGBOKGUNG
Gwanghwamun (The Main and South Gate)
Heungnyemun (The Second Inner Gate)
Geunjeongmun (The Third Inner Gate)
Sinmumun (The North Gate)
Geonchunmun (The East Gate)
Yeongchumun (The West Gate)
OEJEON (Outer Court)
Geunjeongmun (The Third Inner Gate)
Geunjeongjeon (The Throne Hall)
Sajeongjeon (The Executive Office)
Sujeongjeon
Cheonchujeon
Manchunjeon
NAEJEONG (Inner Court)
Gangnyeongjeon (The King's Quarters)
Gyotaejeon (The Queen's Quarters)
Jagyeongjeon (The Late Queen's Quarters)
DONGGUNG (Palace of the Crown Prince)
Jaseondang (The Crown Prince's and Princesses' Quarters)
Bihyeongak (The Study of the Crown Prince)
PAVILIONS
Gyeonghoeru (The Royal Banquet Hall)
Hyangwonjeong
BRIDGES
Yeongjegyo
Having passed through the initial main gate and secondary gate (Heungnyemun Gate), visitors would pass over a small bridge named Yeongjegyo. Located on the top of the canal right next to the bridge were several imaginary creatures known as Seosu.
Chwihyanggyo
The bridge Chwihyanggyo was originally located on the north side of the island and was the longest bridge constructed purely of wood during the Joseon Dynasty; however, it was destroyed during the Korean War. The bridge was reconstructed in its present form on the south side of the island in 1953.
BIHYEONGAK
Bihyeongak (Hangul: 비현각; hanja: 丕顯閣) means big and bright a royal palace where crown prince brush up on his' study with his teacher.
BUILDINGS
GANGNYEONGJEON
Gangnyeongjeon (Hangul: 강녕전; hanja: 康寧殿), also called Gangnyeongjeon Hall, is a building used as the king's main residing quarters. First constructed in 1395, the fourth year of King Taejo, the building contains the king's bed chamber. Destroyed during the Japanese invasions of Korea in 1592, the building was rebuilt when Gyeongbokgung was reconstructed in 1867, but it was again burned down by a major fire on November 1876 and had to be restored in 1888 following the orders of King Gojong.
However, when Huijeongdang of Changdeokgung Palace was burned down by a fire in 1917, the Japanese government dismembered the building and used its construction materials to restore Huijeongdang in 1920. Current Gangnyeongjeon was built in 1994, meticulously restoring the building to its original specifications and design.
Gangnyeongjeon consists of corridors and fourteen rectangular chambers, each seven chambers located to the left and right side of the building in a layout out like a checkerboard. The king used the central chamber while the court attendants occupied the remaining side chambers to protect, assist, and to receive orders. The building rests on top of a tall stone foundation, and a stone deck or veranda is located in front of the building.
The noted feature of the building is an absence of a top white roof ridge called yongmaru (Hangul: 용마루) in Korean. Many theories exist to explain the absence, of which a prominent one states that, since the king was symbolized as the dragon during the Joseon dynasty, the yongmaru, which contains the letter dragon or yong (龍), cannot rest on top of the king when he is asleep.
GEUNJEONGJEON
Geunjeongjeon (Hangul: 근정전; hanja: 勤政殿), also known as Geunjeongjeon Hall, is the throne hall where the king formally granted audiences to his officials, gave declarations of national importance, and greeted foreign envoys and ambassadors during the Joseon dynasty. The building was designated as Korea's National Treasure No. 223 on January 8, 1985.
Geunjeongjeon was originally constructed in 1395 during the reign of King Taejo, but was burned down in 1592 when the Japanese invaded Korea. The present building was built in 1867 when Gyeongbokgung was being reconstructed. The name Geunjeongjeon, created by the minister Jeong Do-jeon, means "diligence helps governance".
Constructed mainly of wood, Geunjeongjeon sits on the center of a large rectangular courtyard, on top of a two-tiered stone platform. This two-tiered platform is lined with detailed balustrades and is decorated with numerous sculptures depicting imaginary and real animals, such as dragons and phoenixes. The stone-paved courtyard is lined with two rows of rank stones, called pumgyeseoks (Hangul: 품계석; hanja: 品階石), indicating where the court officials are to stand according to their ranks. The whole courtyard is fully enclosed by wooden cloisters.
Geunjeongmun (Hangul: 근정문; hanja: 勤政門), aligned and located directly to the south of Geunjeongjeon, is the main gate to the courtyard and to Geunjeongjeon. The gate is divided into three separate aisles, and only the king was allowed to walk through the center.
GWANGHWAMUN
Gwanghwamun (Hangul: 광화문; hanja: 光化門) is the main gate of Gyeongbokgung Palace.
GYEONGHOERU
Gyeonghoeru (Hangul: 경회루; hanja: 慶會樓), also known as Gyeonghoeru Pavilion, is a hall used to hold important and special state banquets during the Joseon Dynasty. It is registered as Korea's National Treasure No. 224 on January 8, 1985.
The first Gyeonghoeru was constructed in 1412, the 12th year of the reign of King Taejong, but was burned down during the Japanese invasions of Korea in 1592. The present building was constructed in 1867 (the 4th year of the reign of King Gojong) on an island of an artificial, rectangular lake that is 128 m wide and 113 m across.
Constructed mainly of wood and stone, Gyeonghoeru has a form where the wooden structure of the building sits on top of 48 massive stone pillars, with wooden stairs connecting the second floor to the first floor. The outer perimeters of Gyeonghoeru are supported by square pillars while the inner columns are cylindrical; they were placed thus to represent the idea of Yin & Yang. When Gyeonghoeru was originally built in 1412, these stone pillars were decorated with sculptures depicting dragons rising to the sky, but these details were not reproduced when the building was rebuilt in the 19th century. Three stone bridges connect the building to the palace grounds, and corners of the balustrades around the island are decorated with sculptures depicting twelve Zodiac animals.
Gyeonghoeru used to be represented on the 10,000 won Korean banknotes (1983-2002 Series).
GYOTAEJEON
Gyotaejeon (Hangul: 교태전; hanja: 交泰殿), also called Gyotaejeon Hall, is a building used as the main residing quarters by the queen during the Joseon Dynasty. The building is located behind Gangnyeongjeon, the king's quarters, and contains the queen's bed chamber. It was first constructed in around 1440, the 22nd year of King Sejong the Great.
King Sejong, who was noted to have a frail health later in his reign, decided to carry out his executive duties in Gangnyeongjeon, where his bed chamber is located, instead of Sajeongjeon. Since this decision meant many government officials routinely needed to visit and intrude Gangnyeongjeon, King Sejong had Gyotaejeon built in consideration of his wife the queen's privacy.
The building was burned down in 1592 when the Japanese invaded Korea, but was reconstructed in 1867. Nevertheless, when Daejojeon of Changdeokgung Palace was burned down by a fire in 1917, the Japanese government disassembled the building and recycled its construction materials to restore Daejojeon. The current building was reconstructed in 1994 according to its original design and specifications. The building, like Gangnyeongjeon, does not have a top roof ridge called yongmaru.
Amisan (Hangul: 아미산; hanja: 峨嵋山), a famous garden created from an artificial mound, is located behind Gyotaejeon. Four hexagonal chimneys, constructed around 1869 in orange bricks and decorative roof tiles, adorn Amisan without showing their utilitarian function and are notable examples of formative art created during the Joseon Dynasty. The chimneys were registered as Korea's Treasure No. 811 on January 8, 1985.
HYANGWONJEONG
Hyangwonjeong (Hangul: 향원정; hanja: 香遠亭), or Hyangwonjeong Pavilion, is a small, two-story hexagonal pavilion built around 1873 by the order of King Gojong when Geoncheonggung residence was built to the north within Gyeongbokgung.
The pavilion was constructed on an artificial island of a lake named Hyangwonji (Hangul: 향원지; hanja: 香遠池), and a bridge named Chwihyanggyo (Hangul: 취향교; hanja: 醉香橋) connects it to the palace grounds. The name Hyangwonjeong is loosely translated as "Pavilion of Far-Reaching Fragrance", while Chwihyanggyo is "Bridge Intoxicated with Fragrance".
The bridge Chwihyanggyo was originally located on the north side of the island and was the longest bridge constructed purely of wood during the Joseon dynasty; however, it was destroyed during the Korean War. The bridge was reconstructed in its present form on the south side of the island in 1953.
JAGYEONGJEON
Jagyeongjeon (Hangul: 자경전; hanja: 慈慶殿), also called Jagyeongjeon Hall, is a building used as the main residing quarters by Queen Sinjeong (Hangul: 신정왕후; hanja: 神貞王后), the mother of King Heonjong. First constructed in 1865, it was burned down twice by a fire but was reconstructed in 1888. Jagyeongjeon is the only royal residing quarters in Gyeongbokgung that survived the demolition campaigns of the Japanese government during the Japanese occupation of Korea.
The chimneys of Jagyeongjeon are decorated with ten signs of longevity to wish for a long life for the late queen, while the west walls of the Jagyeongjeon compound are adorned with floral designs. The protruding southeast part of Jagyeongjeon, named Cheongyeollu (Hangul: 청연루; hanja: 清讌樓), is designed to provide a cooler space during the summer, while the northwest part of Jagyeongjeon, named Bokandang (Hangul: 복안당; hanja: 福安堂), is designed for the winter months. The eastern part of Jagyeogjeon, named Hyeopgyeongdang (Hangul: 협경당; hanja: 協慶堂) and distinguished by the building's lower height, was used by the late queen's assistants.
The building and the decorative walls were registered as Korea's Treasure No. 809 on January 8, 1985.
JIBOKJAE
Jibokjae (Hangul: 집옥재; hanja: 集玉齋), located next to Geoncheonggung Residence, is a two-storey private library used by King Gojong. In 1876, a major fire occurred in Gyeongbokgung Palace, and King Gojong, for a brief period, moved and resided in Changdeokgung Palace. He eventually moved back to Gyeongbokgung in 1888, but he had the pre-existing Jibokjae building disassembled and moved from Changdeokgung to the present location in 1891. Its name, Jibokjae, translates loosely in English as the "Hall of Collecting Jade".
The building uniquely shows heavy influence of Chinese architecture instead of traditional Korean palace architecture. Its side walls were entirely constructed in brick, a method commonly employed by the contemporary Chinese, and its roof formations, interior screens, and columns also show Chinese influences. Its architecture possibly was meant to give it an exotic appearance.
Jibokjae is flanked by Parujeong (Hangul: 팔우정; hanja: 八隅亭), an octagonal two-story pavilion, to the left and Hyeopgildang (Hangul: 협길당; hanja: 協吉堂) to the right. Parujeong was constructed to store books, while Hyeopgildang served as a part of Jibokjae. Both of the buildings are internally connected to Jibokjae.
Bohyeondang (Hangul: 보현당; hanja: 寶賢堂) and Gahoejeong (Hangul: 가회정; hanja: 嘉會亭), buildings that also formed a library complex to the south of Jibokjae, were demolished by the Japanese government in the early 20th century.
SAJEONGJEON
Sajeongjeon (Hangul: 사정전; hanja: 思政殿), also called Sajeongjeon Hall, is a building used as the main executive office by the king during the Joseon Dynasty. Located behind Geunjeongjeon Hall, the king carried out his executive duties and held meetings with the top government officials in Sajeongjeon. Two separate side buildings, Cheonchujeon (Hangul: 천추전; hanja: 千秋殿) and Manchunjeon (Hangul: 만춘전; hanja: 萬春殿), flank the west and east of Sajeongjeon, and while Sajeongjeon is not equipped with a heating system, these buildings are equipped with Ondols for their use in the colder months.
SUJEONGJEON
Sujeongjeon (Hangul: 수정전; hanja: 修政殿), a building located to the south of Gyeonghoeru, was constructed in 1867 and used by the cabinet of the Joseon dynasty.
TAEWONJEON
Taewonjeon (Hangul: 태원전; hanja: 泰元殿), or Taewonjeon Shrine, is an ancestral shrine originally built in 1868 to house a portrait of King Taejo, the founder of the Joseon dynasty, and to perform rites to the deceased royalties. Completely destroyed by the Japanese government in the early 20th century, the shrine was accurately restored to its former design in 2005.
DONGGUNG
Donggung (Hangul: 동궁; hanja: 東宮), located south of the Hyangwonjeong pavilion, was the compound where the crown prince and his wife were living. The four main buildings of the compound were Jaseondang and Bihyeongak, Chunbang (lecture hall, where the prince got the education preparing him to the throne), as well as Gyebang (the security building). In the 19th century, the future Emperor Sunjong lived in the compound. Dongdung was razed to the ground during the Japanese occupation. The restoration started in 1999, only Jaseondang and Bihyeongak were restored.
GEONCHEONGGUNG
Geoncheonggung (Hangul: 건청궁; hanja: 乾淸宮), also known as Geoncheonggung Residence, was a private royal residence built by King Gojong within the palace grounds in 1873.
King Gojong resided in Geoncheonggung from 1888 and the residence was continuously expanded, but on October 8, 1895, Empress Myeongseong, the wife of King Gojong, was brutally assassinated by the Japanese agents at the residence. Her body was burned and buried near the residence.
Haunted by the experiences of the incident, the king left the palace in January 1896, and never returned to the residence. Demolished completely by the Japanese government in 1909, the residence was accurately reconstructed to its former design and open to the public in 2007.
GOVERNOR-GENERAL´S RESIDENCE
The back garden of Gyeongbokgung used to contain the main part of the Japanese Governor-General's residence, that was built in the early 20th century during the Japanese occupation. With the establishment of the Republic of Korea in 1948, President Syngman Rhee used it as his office and residence. In 1993, after President Kim Young-sam's civilian administration was launched, the Japanese Governor-General's residence in the Cheongwadae compound was dismantled to remove a major symbol of the Japanese colonialism.
TOURISM
In 2011 in a survey conducted, by Seoul Development Institute, which included 800 residents and 103 urban planners and architects. It listed 39 percent of residents, voted that the palace as the most scenic location in Seoul, following Mount Namsan and Han River in the top spots.
ACCESS
Today, the Gyeongbokgung Palace is open to the public and houses the National Folk Museum of Korea, the National Palace Museum of Korea, and traditional Korean gardens.
TRANSPORTATION
Gyeongbokgung entry is located 22 Sajik-no, Jongno-gu. The nearest subway station is Gyeongbokgung Station (Station #327 on Line 3).
There has been off and on talk to extending the Shinbundang Line near the palace including during a March 2012 campaign promise by Hong Sa-duk to expand the line near Gyeongbok Palace
EVENS
In a poll of nearly 2,000 foreign visitors, conducted by the Seoul Metropolitan Government in November 2011, stated that watching the changing of the guards at the main gate Gwanghwamun as their third favorite activity in Seoul. The royal changing of the guard ceremony is held in front of the main gate every hour from 10:00 to 15:00.
From October, Gyeongbokgung open night season. from 7PM to 10PM. This event is only available to reservation in Inter Park Website.
WIKIPEDIA
The kit and its assembly:
This whif kitbashing was inspired by real design studies from General Dynamics that show evolutionary developments of the F-16 in a no-tail configuration, but with an enlarged diamond-shaped wing shape (much like the F-22's), obviously based on the F-16XL. Additionally you find several similar fantasy CG designs in the WWW – the basic idea seems to have potential. And when I stumbled across the remains of a Revell X-32 in my stash and an Intech F-16A kit, I wondered if these could not be reasonably combined...?
What sounds easy eventually ended up in a massive bodywork orgy. The Intech kit (marketed under the Polish Master Craft Label) is horrible, the worst F-16 kit I have ever seen or tried to build - it's cheap and you get what you pay for. Maybe the PM Model F-16 is worse (hard to believe, but sprue pics I saw suggest it), but the Intech kits are …challenging. This thing is like a blurred picture of an F-16: you recognize the outlines, but nothing is sharp and no part matches any other! Stay away.
Well, actually only the fuselage, the cockpit and parts of the Intech kit's landing gear survived. The X-32 kit is, on the other side, a sound offering. It was not complete anymore, since I donated parts like the cockpit and the landing gear to my SAAB OAS 41 'Vيًarr' stealth aircraft from Sweden some time ago, but there were many good parts left to work with. Especially the aerodynamic surfaces (wings and V-tail) attained my interest: these parts match well with the F-16 fuselage in size and shape if you look from above, and the leading edges even blend well with the F-16 LERXs. But: the X-32's wings are much, much thicker than the F-16's, so that the original blended wing/fuselage intersection does not match at all. Additionally, the X-32's bulged landing gear wells in the wings had to go, so these had to be filled as an initial step. The wing roots were roughly cut into the F-16 kit's shape and glued onto the fuselage. After drying, the whole blended wing/fuselage intersection had to be sculpted from scratch - several layers of putty and even more wet sanding sessions were necessary. I stopped counting after turn five, a tedious job. But it eventually paid out…
Additionally I decided to change the F-16's chin air intake and implant parts from the X-32 divertless supersonic "sugar scoop" intake. Such an arrangement has actually been tested on an F-16, so it's not too far-fetched, and its stealthy properties make a welcome update. The respective section from the X-32's lower front fuselage was cut away and had to be modified, too, because it would originally not fit at all under the F-16's front. The intake was carefully heated at the edges and the side walls bent inwards - I was lucky that no melting damage occurred! Inside of the new intake, the upper, bulged part was implanted, too, so that in real life the jet engine parts would be protected from direct frontal radar detection. The front wheel position was retained. As a consequence of the new, much more voluminous and square air intake, the rather round section from the main landing gear onwards had to be sculpted for a decent new fuselage shape, too. But compared to the massive wing/fuselage body work, this was only a minor task.
The F-16A's fuselage was not extended, but for a different look I decided to eliminate the single fin and rather implant the X-32's outward-canted twin fins - the original extensions that hold the F-16's air brakes and now blend into the new wings' trailing edge were a perfect place, and as a side benefit they'd partly cover the jet nozzle. The latter was replaced by a respective spare part from an Italeri F-16 – the Intech nozzle is just a plain, conical tube!
The landing gear was mostly taken over from the Intech F-16, even though it is rather rough, as well as the pylons. The ordnance was puzzled together: the Sidewinders and the cropped drop tanks come from the Intech kit (the latter have a horribly oval diameter shape and the triangulare fins are a massive 1mm thick!), the Paveway bombs come from a Hasegawa air-to-ground weapons set.
Tim Holtz Configuration Tray, Graphic 45 papers, Globecraft & Piccolo DIY Ornament, Art Glitter, Spellbinder Scallop Oval dies, Xyron 5" Creative Station
A schematic showing different nanoparticle configurations possible with a new technique to create bimetallic nanoparticles, invented by researchers at Argonne National Laboratory.
Image of typical testing configuration of basic electrical raceway wrapped in hemyc inside burner for one hour. (April 2005)
Visit the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's website at www.nrc.gov/.
To comment on this photo go to public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov/2012/04/01/nrc-moves-its-publ....
Motorcycle: Three Wheel semi-enclosed
Configuration: Single Passenger Cyclecar
Body: Non-structural Fairing and Canopy
Body material FRP Composite
Canopy Blow formed Cast Acrylic Lucite
Chassis: Steel box
Chassis type Lateral Pivot Ladder
Suspension: UniShock
Shock type: MC type Hydraulic/coil spring
Steering: Handlebar w/ linked tie rod
Overall Length: 93"
Overall Width: 46"
Overall Height: 52"
Empty weight: 215
With batteries: 385
Payload: 215
GVLW: 600
Weight dist: 60f/40r
Turning circle: 20 ft dia.
Aerodynamic drag : Est .35 (CD)
Watt/hours per mile: Est 50
Max range: Est 30 miles at 30 mph.
Max speed: Est 50 mph.
Gear ratio: 6/1
Power to weight: 1/40 (hp/lbs)
Specified components
Motor: Advanced DC series wound 140-01-4005
Horsepower: Cont/BHP: 3hp/17bhp
Controller: Alltrax CT1937
Charger(s) Soneil 48v
Instrumentation: Battery Charge Meter, Speedometer
Wheels: 16" Aluminum Mag type
Tires: 2.25 x 20
Brakes: Drum type-hand operated
Accelerator: Thumb operated potentiometer
Batteries: Four M34 AGM Blue Top lead acid
Battery Box 20" long x 14" wide x 9" tall
Lighting
Head lights: Halogen 45w
Turn signals Halogen 25w
Brake light Inc. bulb
Tail light Inc. bulb
Horn MC type
Freight Specs. 320 lbs 44"w x 56"h x 93"l (boxed pallet) class 150
www.blueskydsn.com/BugE_Concept.html
@San Diego International Auto Show (2007)
Hyperion, Hypersonic Mach 15 Scramjet Missile - IO Aircraft - ARRW, HAWC, Air Launched Rapid Response Weapon
Length: 120" / Span 25"
Scramjet, Hypersonic, ARRW, HAWC, Air Launched Rapid Response Weapon, Scramjet Physics, Scramjet Engineering, Hypersonic Missile, hypersonic weapon, hypersonic fighter, hypersonic fighter plane, tgv, tactical glide vehicle, hypersonic commercial aircraft, hypersonic commercial plane, hypersonic aircraft, hypersonic plane, hypersonic airline, tbcc, glide breaker, fighter plane, hypersonic fighter, boeing phantom express, phantom works, boeing phantom works, lockheed skunk works, boost glide, tactical glide vehicle, space plane, scramjet, turbine based combined cycle, ramjet, dual mode ramjet, defense science, missile defense agency, aerospike, hydrogen aircraft, airlines, military, physics, airline, aerion supersonic, aerion, spike aerospace, boom supersonic, , darpa, onr, navair, afrl, air force research lab, office of naval research, defense advanced research project agency, afosr, socom, arl, army future command, mda, missile defense agenci, dia, defense intelligence agency, Air Force Office of Scientific Research,
Iteration V8, Hyperion Mach 15 #hypersonic #scramjet (50% faster then the X-43 #nasa), 300% faster than #Lockheed, #NorthropGrumman, #Raytheon, and Boeing. Much is sanitized as the technology advances are dramatic and not public.
DOD's funding of #AGM-183A / Air Launched Rapid Response Weapon, the poeple developing it barely comprehend student level capabilities and 50/50 it will disintegrate even at Mach 5. China and Russia, already much faster and higher tech making it obsolete already, India's recent test, apx 700 mph faster.
Summarized details are accurate
#hypersonic #hypersonics #scramjet #hypersonicplane #hypersonicaircraft #skunkworks #spaceplane #boeing #lockheed #raytheon #bae #bombardier #airbus #northopgrumman #generaldynamics #utc #ge #afrl #onr #afosr #ReactionEngines #spacex #virginorbit #usaf #darpa #mda #rollsroyce #nasa #tesla #safran #embraer #AirLaunchedRapidResponseWeapon #additivemanufacturing #military #physics #3dprinting #supersonic #ramjet #tbcc #collinsaerospace #rockwell #phantomworks #hypersonicmissile #alrrw #boeingphantomworks #generalatomics #cessna #dassault #arl #unitedlaunchalliance #spaceshipcompany #navair #diu #dia #usaf #unitedtechnologies #defenseadvancedresearchprojectagency #graphene #additivemanufacturing
-----------------------------
Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle. Current technologies and what Lockheed is trying to force on the Dept of Defense, for that low speed Mach 5 plane DOD gave them $1 billion to build and would disintegrate above Mach 5, is TBCC. 2 separate propulsion systems in the same airframe, which requires TWICE the airframe space to use.
Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle is 1 propulsion system cutting that airframe deficit in half, and also able to operate above Mach 10 up to Mach 15 in atmosphere, and a simple nozzle modification allows for outside atmosphere rocket mode, ie orbital capable.
Additionally, Reaction Engines maximum air breather mode is Mach 4.5, above that it will explode in flight from internal pressures are too high to operate. Thus, must switch to non air breather rocket mode to operate in atmosphere in hypersonic velocities. Which as a result, makes it not feasible for anything practical. It also takes an immense amount of fuel to function.
-------------
Advanced Additive Manufacturing for Hypersonic Aircraft
Utilizing new methods of fabrication and construction, make it possible to use additive manufacturing, dramatically reducing the time and costs of producing hypersonic platforms from missiles, aircraft, and space capable craft. Instead of aircraft being produced in piece, then bolted together; small platforms can be produced as a single unit and large platforms can be produces in large section and mated without bolting. These techniques include using exotic materials and advanced assembly processes, with an end result of streamlining the production costs and time for hypersonic aircraft; reducing months of assembly to weeks. Overall, this process greatly reduced the cost for producing hypersonic platforms. Even to such an extent that a Hellfire missile costs apx $100,000 but by utilizing our technologies, replacing it with a Mach 8-10 hypersonic missile of our physics/engineering and that missile would cost roughly $75,000 each delivered.
Materials used for these manufacturing processes are not disclosed, but overall, provides a foundation for extremely high stresses and thermodynamics, ideal for hypersonic platforms. This specific methodology and materials applications is many decades ahead of all known programs. Even to the extend of normalized space flight and re-entry, without concern of thermodynamic failure.
*Note, most entities that are experimenting with additive manufacturing for hypersonic aircraft, this makes it mainstream and standardized processes, which also applies for mass production.
What would normally be measured in years and perhaps a decade to go from drawing board to test flights, is reduced to singular months and ready for production within a year maximum.
Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle (U-TBCC)
To date, the closest that NASA and industry have achieved for turbine based aircraft to fly at hypersonic velocities is by mounting a turbine into an aircraft and sharing the inlet with a scramjet or rocket based motor. Reaction Engines Sabre is not able to achieve hypersonic velocities and can only transition into a non air breathing rocket for beyond Mach 4.5
However, utilizing Unified Turbine Based Combine Cycle also known as U-TBCC, the two separate platforms are able to share a common inlet and the dual mode ramjet/scramjet is contained within the engine itself, which allows for a much smaller airframe footprint, thus engingeers are able to then design much higher performance aerial platforms for hypersonic flight, including the ability for constructing true single stage to orbit aircraft by utilizing a modification/version that allows for transition to outside atmosphere propulsion without any other propulsion platforms within the aircraft. By transitioning and developing aircraft to use Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle, this propulsion system opens up new options to replace that airframe deficit for increased fuel capacity and/or payload.
Enhanced Dynamic Cavitation
Dramatically Increasing the efficiency of fuel air mixture for combustion processes at hypersonic velocities within scramjet propulsion platforms. The aspects of these processes are non disclosable.
Dynamic Scramjet Ignition Processes
For optimal scramjet ignition, a process known as Self Start is sought after, but in many cases if the platform becomes out of attitude, the scramjet will ignite. We have already solved this problem which as a result, a scramjet propulsion system can ignite at lower velocities, high velocities, at optimal attitude or not optimal attitude. It doesn't matter, it will ignite anyways at the proper point for maximum thrust capabilities at hypersonic velocities.
Hydrogen vs Kerosene Fuel Sources
Kerosene is an easy fuel to work with, and most western nations developing scramjet platforms use Kerosene for that fact. However, while kerosene has better thermal properties then Hydrogen, Hydrogen is a far superior fuel source in scramjet propulsion flight, do it having a much higher efficiency capability. Because of this aspect, in conjunction with our developments, it allows for a MUCH increased fuel to air mixture, combustion, thrust; and ability for higher speeds; instead of very low hypersonic velocities in the Mach 5-6 range. Instead, Mach 8-10 range, while we have begun developing hypersonic capabilities to exceed 15 in atmosphere within less then 5 years.
Conforming High Pressure Tank Technology for CNG and H2.
As most know in hypersonics, Hydrogen is a superior fuel source, but due to the storage abilities, can only be stored in cylinders thus much less fuel supply. Not anymore, we developed conforming high pressure storage technology for use in aerospace, automotive sectors, maritime, etc; which means any overall shape required for 8,000+ PSI CNG or Hydrogen. For hypersonic platforms, this means the ability to store a much larger volume of hydrogen vs cylinders.
As an example, X-43 flown by Nasa which flew at Mach 9.97. The fuel source was Hydrogen, which is extremely more volatile and combustible then kerosene (JP-7), via a cylinder in the main body. If it had used our technology, that entire section of the airframe would had been an 8,000 PSI H2 tank, which would had yielded 5-6 times the capacity. While the X-43 flew 11 seconds under power at Mach 9.97, at 6 times the fuel capacity would had yielded apx 66 seconds of fuel under power at Mach 9.97. If it had flew slower, around Mach 6, same principles applied would had yielded apx 500 seconds of fuel supply under power (slower speeds required less energy to maintain).
Enhanced Fuel Mixture During Shock Train Interaction
Normally, fuel injection is conducted at the correct insertion point within the shock train for maximum burn/combustion. Our methodologies differ, since almost half the fuel injection is conducted PRE shock train within the isolator, so at the point of isolator injection the fuel enhances the combustion process, which then requires less fuel injection to reach the same level of thrust capabilities.
Improved Bow Shock Interaction
Smoother interaction at hypersonic velocities and mitigating heat/stresses for beyond Mach 6 thermodynamics, which extraordinarily improves Type 3, 4, and 5 shock interaction.
6,000+ Fahrenheit Thermal Resistance
To date, the maximum thermal resistance was tested at AFRL in the spring of 2018, which resulted in a 3,200F thermal resistance for a short duration. This technology, allows for normalized hypersonic thermal resistance of 3,000-3,500F sustained, and up to 6,500F resistance for short endurance, ie 90 seconds or less. 10-20 minute resistance estimate approximately 4,500F +/- 200F.
*** This technology advancement also applies to Aerospike rocket engines, in which it is common for Aerospike's to exceed 4,500-5,000F temperatures, which results in the melting of the reversed bell housing. That melting no longer ocurrs, providing for stable combustion to ocurr for the entire flight envelope
Scramjet Propulsion Side Wall Cooling
With old technologies, side wall cooling is required for hypersonic flight and scramjet propulsion systems, otherwise the isolator and combustion regions of a scramjet would melt, even using advanced ablatives and ceramics, due to their inability to cope with very high temperatures. Using technology we have developed for very high thermodynamics and high stresses, side wall cooling is no longer required, thus removing that variable from the design process and focusing on improved ignition processes and increasing net thrust values.
Lower Threshold for Hypersonic Ignition
Active and adaptive flight dynamics, resulting in the ability for scramjet ignition at a much lower velocity, ie within ramjet envelope, between Mach 2-4, and seamless transition from supersonic to hypersonic flight, ie supersonic ramjet (scramjet). This active and dynamic aspect, has a wide variety of parameters for many flight dynamics, velocities, and altitudes; which means platforms no longer need to be engineered for specific altitude ranges or preset velocities, but those parameters can then be selected during launch configuration and are able to adapt actively in flight.
Dramatically Improved Maneuvering Capabilities at Hypersonic Velocities
Hypersonic vehicles, like their less technologically advanced brethren, use large actuator and the developers hope those controls surfaces do not disintegrate in flight. In reality, it is like rolling the dice, they may or may not survive, hence another reason why the attempt to keep velocities to Mach 6 or below. We have shrunken down control actuators while almost doubling torque and response capabilities specifically for hypersonic dynamics and extreme stresses involved, which makes it possible for maximum input authority for Mach 10 and beyond.
Paradigm Shift in Control Surface Methodologies, Increasing Control Authority (Internal Mechanical Applications)
To date, most control surfaces for hypersonic missile platforms still use fins, similar to lower speed conventional missiles, and some using ducted fins. This is mostly due to lack of comprehension of hypersonic velocities in their own favor. Instead, the body itself incorporates those control surfaces, greatly enhancing the airframe strength, opening up more space for hardware and fuel capacity; while simultaneously enhancing the platforms maneuvering capabilities.
A scramjet missile can then fly like conventional missile platforms, and not straight and level at high altitudes, losing velocity on it's decent trajectory to target. Another added benefit to this aspect, is the ability to extend range greatly, so if anyone elses hypersonic missile platform were developed for 400 mile range, falling out of the sky due to lack of glide capabilities; our platforms can easily reach 600+ miles, with minimal glide deceleration.
I just recently aquired a really nice, vintage Besson Cornet - Details as follows:
Bell marked:
CLASS A
50 Medals of Honour
FB
Besson & Co.
"Prototype"
198 EUSTON ROAD
LONDON
(with Single star symbol below)
On receipt I gave it a really good CLA (I managed to get the seized 3rd valve bottom cap off). It is now playing fairly well with good tuning.
If I am feeling wealthy later in the year I might get it professionally serviced to get it playing the best it can and sort out that dent in the bell.
Description & History:
--------------------------------
An authentic Besson & Co. Brevet cornet, manufactured around 1911 (serial number 85515). Renowned for their craftsmanship and rich tonal quality, Besson Class A instruments of this era were designed for professional use and have become highly sought after by collectors and players alike.
The last owner purchased it from a lady in Yorkshire whose grandfather played this instrument, she said initially in the Halifax Fire Brigade band then after the war Mexborough Fire Brigade band. The last owner bought it to play the Last Post at Newcastle Emlyn Remembrance service on 10 November 2024. That was its most recent outing.
The instrument is in good condition, with all components functional. The bell has a couple of dents (does not affect playability).
Included Accessories:
1. Original Hard Case (Poor Condition): Structurally intact but shows significant wear, consistent with its age.
2. Set of 7 vintage mouthpieces:
“Salvation Army No. 1”
“Hawkes & Son. 1 Model” (marked with a 5)
“Hawkes & Son. 2 Model”
"Selmer Range-finder Air-cooled - 16D" (Modified shank)
"Selmer Range-finder Air-cooled - 17D" (Boxed)
"Kilchen & Co Leeds - KOOLKUP 3"
Unmarked Trumpet mouthpiece
3. Silver Transitional Adapter (“512” Marked) - facilitates compatibility with different mouthpiece designs, enhancing the instrument’s versatility.
4. Brass Transitional Adapter (Unmarked): - A second brass adapter designed for additional configurations.
5. S.B.I. Co Lyre: -A genuine Salvationist Brass Instrument Company lyre, used for holding sheet music during performances.
Condition Summary:
-----------------------------
Instrument: Good condition, with couple of small dents in the bell and minor wear from age.
Case: Structurally intact but in poor cosmetic condition. Retains original clasp and internal compartments.
Accessories: All items are vintage, functional, and rare, significantly enhancing the set’s value.
Notes:
---------
The big air-cooled mouthpieces are bonkers and too much for the horn but they work nicely on my flugel horn!
Out of all the mouthpieces I think the beaten up Hawkes 1 model (5) and Sally Army No. 1 play the best... I guess that is why they are the most beaten up!
When F-86Ds were upgraded to the F-86L configuration, an AN/ARR-39 datalink receiver was fitted, which had a blade-like antenna sticking out of the fuselage just forward of and below the starboard wing. The AN/ARC-27 command radio of the F-86D was replaced by an AN/ARC-34 set. An AN/APX-25 identification radar was added, and a new AN/ARN-31 glide slope receiver was provided.
All Follow-On aircraft were brought up to F-86D-45 standards before starting with the electronics upgrades, including the installation of the drag chute in the tail. In the F-86L, two protruding cooling air intakes were added to the fuselage sides just aft of the wing, replacing the older recessed cooling ducts. The same J47-GE-33 or J47-GE-17B engine of the F-86D was retained, but the F-86L was fitted with the F-86F-40 wing, with twelve-inch wingtip extensions and "6-3" leading edge extensions with slats. The wingspan and wing area were 39.1 feet and 313.37 square feet respectively. The new wing improved the handing ability and provided better turning at high altitudes. The reconditioned F-86Ls retained the armament of twenty-four rockets of the F-86D.
The first flight took place on December 27, 1955. That particular aircraft had just the SAGE equipment installed, and the first conversion incorporating all of the Follow-On changes did not fly until May of 1956. A total of 981 F-86Ds were modified to the F-86L configuration. After conversion in 1956-57, F-86Ls were issued to most of the ADC wings that were using the F-86D. First to receive the F-86L was the 317th FIS at McChord AFB, which first received the planes in late November of 1956. The service of the F-86L with the ADC was destined to be quite brief, since by the time the last F-86L conversion was delivered, the type was already being phased out in favor of the Convair F-102A and F-106A delta-winged interceptors. The last F-86Ls left ADC service by 1960.
It should be noted that F-86L aircraft were also assigned to the 196th FIS, which was an integral part of Air Defense Command. The 196th FIS was based at Ontario ANGB, and the successor unit is the Guard refueling unit currently based at March Field. (Source: Ray V. Miller).
During the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, six ANG F-86L squadrons were on alert. The last F-86Ls were withdrawn from ANG service during the summer of 1965.
-March Field Air Museum website (www.marchfield.org/)Nicknamed the "Flying Vacuum" because of its low slung jet intakes, the F-89 Scorpion would ingest any loose objects it crossed paths with on the runway. An attempt to place screens over the intakes failed when, at high altitudes, ice formed over the screens and caused the engines to flare out. Designed as an all weather ground attack fighter, the Scorpion was the first US interceptor armed with nuclear air-to-air missiles and the first aircraft to live fire an AIR-2 Genie nuclear air-to-air missile on 19 July 1957.
According to the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA/RSA), Maxwell AFB, AL, the museum's F-89J has the following history:
The aircraft at the March Field Museum is a J model, serial number 52-1949. It was manufactured by Northrop and delivered to the Air Force on 24 November 1954
In June, 1981, it was transported by truck to March AFB Museum. The nose radar equipment was removed and placed into a display case by former radar technician who was in the RAF during WWII. The display shows the many glass radio tubes in use at the time. This aircraft is on loan from the USAF.
-March Field Air Museum website (www.marchfield.org/)
Since the East bay trails get kind of soupy, I put on road tires and fenders for the winter on my Rivendell Bombadil. I'm also going to set up a drop bar cockpit
GV II* Western complex of integrated multi-component wool textile factory, now partially in use as small industrial estate, with the remaining component structures empty at the time of inspection (August 2000). Late C18, continuously enlarged and re-modelled between c.1800 and c.1920, with late C20 alterations and changes of use to individual components. Coursed rubble sandstone, with ashlar and red brick dressings, and red brick, with slate and C20 sheet roof coverings.
PLAN: the complex forms the western half of the extensive wool textile manufacturing site at Tonedale Mills, which is divided into two parts by a water course, the Back Stream. The site housed wool and yarn preparation processes in a complex of functionally-related buildings, identified as mills 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, and combing shed sited in rectangular configurations to the north and west of the site, with a multi function range, housing boiler repair, power generation, wool mixing and cleaning and tin smithing facilities to the east side.
Mills 2 and 3 represent the phased development between 1861 and 1871 of a twenty-one bay steam-powered, and subsequently electrically-powered worsted spinning mill. Early phase to east, eleven bays of four storeys and attics, of rubble sandstone, with keyed semi-circular arch-headed windows up to second floor level, and similar window openings to attic floor. Fourth floor with flat-headed openings. Entrance to mill within fire-proof stair tower at east end, within six-bay return elevation. Doorway with plank double doors with adjacent shaft box for entry of horizontal shaft associated with vertical drive shaft, now removed, within stair well. Later 17 bay phase of c.1871 to the west, constructed to a slightly wider plan, but of matching materials and detailing externally, with a fire-proof stair and water tower and a large engine house at the junction of the two phases. INTERIOR: both phases are of non-fire proof construction, with timber floors supported on substantial cross beams. Cast-iron columns with compression plates and bolting faces on north side for line shaft cradles. M-profile collared roof with principals carried on cast-iron brackets bolted to floor beams. Collars set within cast-iron shoes support short king posts. Roof valley column supports with rectangular eyed heads. Later phase shares constructional characteristics, but with heavier columns with four-way bolting faces, and the upper floors retain evidence of multiple line shafts. Both phases retain internal metal fire doors. Stair tower with brick jack arch fire-proofing. Adjacent engine house, with brick vaulted ceiling at third floor level retaining lifting rings. The engine house, thought to have housed a double beam engine designed to power both sides of the mill, retains the engine entablature support stonework in the internal cross walls, and cast-iron shaft boxes for the vertical power shaft, now removed. To the north of mills 2 and 3, single storeyed combing shed for sorting and combing worsted fibre prior to spinning. Narrow rectangular brick building with projecting bays to the south frontage facing the spinning mill formerly housing combing machinery. To the south of the spinning mill, mills no.4 and 6. Mill no.4 of red brick with a slated roof, two storeys, fourteen bays, aligned east-west, with a narrow five-bay storeyed crosswing at the east end. Main range with stacked basket arch-headed windows to each bay, with double doors to both floors at the east end. Hipped west end to roof, which has a deep eaves supported on paired brackets. Narrow gabled crosswing, the gable detailed as an open pediment, with ground floor doorway beneath multi-pane overlight. East side wall with stacked windows and single doorway to bay two. The mill was used for blending coloured wool fibres, with carding machines on the first floor. The narrow end bay was a storeyed motor room, used to power the upper floor machinery. To the east, no.6 mill, of rubble stone with red brick dressings. Ten bays, three storeys, with four bay returns, and a narrow two bay upper floor with horizontally-boarded cheeks above short roof slopes to outer bays. The west gable has windows arranged vertically 4:4:2, the east gable has an infilled double doorway to the centre, four first floor openings and two upper floor openings, one a window, one with boarded shutter. The boarded flanks, originally louvred, now house casement frames. The building was originally multi-functional, with baskets, used for wool transportation on site, made on the upper two floors, and machines for puttee (military leggings) knitting on the ground floor. This building appears to have been powered by a horizontal shaft from the spinning mill to the north. To the south of no.4 mill, no.5 mill. Massive, rectangular building of fourteen bays, with a narrow storeyed frontage, aligned north-south and a north-light shed extending westwards to the site boundary. Late C19, of smooth red brick rising from a deep plinth, with narrow storeyed range forming east front, with hipped slated roof and semi-circular arch-headed window and door openings. Single storeyed half-hip roofed porches to bays one and two, and bays eleven and twelve, each with three blind semi-circular arched openings and a wide doorway. Closely-spaced tall window openings to ground floor and a smaller number of first floor openings, some detailed as taking-in doors. A single pivoting wall crane survives towards the centre of the range. Three bay returns to each end, with single storey shed side walls extending to the west.
INTERIOR: floored frontage range with chute openings in ceiling for carded wool processed at first floor level. Arcaded shed interior with cast-iron columns supporting transverse arcade plates, with straight timber braces mounted in sockets in the columns, which are widely spaced, each bay accommodating two sections of half-glazed north light roof. The shed was used for manual wool sorting after washing and carding processes had taken place.
West of no.5 mill, multi-function range, with twin gabled, red brick boiler repair house to the north with wide semi-circular arched openings to centre of ground floors, and twin upper floor openings. Northern part with interior lifting gear, southern part adapted for storage. Further south, low, single storeyed rubble stone L-shaped cross range, formerly power house to provide alternating and direct current electricity from diesel generators. Further south, on west side, hipped roof red brick range with long and short wings extending eastwards, which accommodated a tin smithing shop, associated with the other metal-working shops on site, and wool mixing and cleaning processes required prior to carding and sorting in the shed opposite.
A multi phase and multi-function C19 wool textile mill site, forming the western part of the Tonedale Mills complex. The site retains a full complement of buildings which housed the wool preparation and yarn spinning processes required in the manufacture of woollen and worsted cloths, together with power generation and ancillary processes such as basket making and metal working needed in a complex, geographically-dispersed manufacturing complex. Tonedale Mills is thought to be the largest and most comprehensively -representative textile manufacturing site in the south-west, with a range of surviving structures unparalleled in England.
Listing NGR: ST1275521349
Image of typical testing configuration of basic electrical raceway configurations wrapped in hemyc 1hr rating fire barrier. (April 2005)
Visit the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's website at www.nrc.gov/.
To comment on this photo go to public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov/2012/04/01/nrc-moves-its-publ....
Image Disclaimer - Please note that all of the images shown are for illustrative purposes only. The rooms pictured are not necessarily typical of the accommodation available at Student Apartments, which can vary in terms of size, configuration, and finish.
Composed of 4 separate benches that can be moved and rearranged: 32W x 24D x 30H, Corner 46 x 46 x 24 x 24 x 30H, 42W x 24D x 30H, and 36.5W x 24D x 30H with semi-circular island projection.
I'm trying to maximize open desktop space, so I placed the machinery in an arc across the corner surface which is very deep.
The baseline 4x4 configuration of the SMTV family, the Mk401A short bed is the mobile and versatile vehicle ready to move all types of cargo across any sort of terrain you can throw at it.
Features include opening doors and top hatch, a cab capable of seating 2 minifigs with body armor and headgear, foldable gunner’s bench, turning front wheels, a center-pivoting rear axle, and spare tire with lift arm.
As with my other builds, this is made with all purchasable parts and can be built in real life.
If you're interested in this build, a file can be found here:
INSTRUCTIONS AVAILABLE FOR P558 SUPERDUTY - MULTIPLE CONFIGURATIONS
On September 24, 2015, Ford unveiled the 2017 Ford Super Duty line at the 2015 State Fair of Texas. he frame is made from 95% high strength steel and the body (like the contemporary F-150) is made from 6000 series aluminum alloy. For the first time since 1999, both the Super Duty and F-150 lines are constructed using the same cab.
For 2017 production, the Super Duty line shares its powertrain lineup with its 2016 predecessor: a 6.2L gasoline V8, 6.8L V10 (F-450 and above), with a 6.7L diesel V8 available in all versions. The 6.2L gasoline V8 engine remains at 385 hp but torque rises from 405 lb-ft to 430 lb-ft. Additionally, the gasoline V8 produces its max torque at over 700 rpm less than the previous 405 lb-ft engine. The 6.7L diesel engine also remains at the same 440 hp (323 kW) but torque increases from 860 lb-ft upwards to 925 lb-ft.
The 2020 Super Duty debuted at the 2019 Chicago Auto Show. It features a revised grille and tailgate design, new wheel options, and higher-quality interior materials for the Limited trim. A new 7.3-liter gasoline engine is available. Nicknamed "Godzilla", it makes 430 horsepower and 475 lb-ft of torque.
Cab configurations continue to be 2-Door Regular Cab, 4-Door Super Cab, and 4-Door Super Crew Cab, with Short Box (6' 9") and Long Box (8') bed lengths. The truck will be available in F-250, F-350, and F-450 pickup truck models, and F-350, F-450, and F-550 chassis cab models. All will be available in both 4X2 and 4X4 configurations. The F-350 will be the only model available in either Single Rear Wheel (SRW) or Dual Rear Wheel (DRW) configurations, the F-450 and F-550 will only be available in a Dual Rear Wheel (DRW) configuration, and the F-250 will only be available in a Single Rear Wheel configuration.
This is a photograph from finish of the fourth annual running of the AON Mullingar Half Marathon which was held on Saturday 17th March 2019 (St. Patrick's Day Lá Fhéile Pádraig 2018) in Mullingar, Co. Westmeath, Ireland at 10:30. This photograph was taken at at the 13 mile mark in the home straight within Mullingar Town Park. Following on from the incredible success of the first three years of the race this year the total numbers participating rose from just under 600 in 2015, 900 in 2016, over 1200 in 2017 and yet again over 1200 this year. Proceeds raised by the AON Mullingar Half Marathon will go directly to T.E.A.M (Temporary Emergency Accommodation Midlands) finding safe & secure accommodation for homeless women and children. The roots of the successs of the event last year was the excellent organisation and a very flat and fast route. All of these characteristics were repeated this year except for the weather. This was a bitterly cold day with air temperatures struggling to get above 4C and a severe wind chill from an easterly breeze making it for very difficult running conditions. Indeed the race could be described as a race of two halves in terms of weather. The first half participants had the strong, cold easterly wind at their faces. However, turning for home along the Royal Canal this became a very strong tailwind for 4 - 5 miles from around Flynn's Machinery/Junction 14 M4. Participants travelled from all over Ireland with a very large participation from runners around Mullingar and the midlands. The race has an AAI permit. The course reverted to its original route this year. Last year saw a small change to the course configuration when the race crossed the M4 Motorway at The Downs via a winding pedestrian footbridge. This was not included this year.
The race began on Pearse Street/Austin Friar's Street in the town and proceeds North East out of the town to the N52 Delvin/Dundalk road towards Lough Sheever. The course then follows beautiful rural country roads out to The Downs at the M4. The only significant hill or rise on the course occurs here at about 7 miles when runners cross a pedestrian footbridge over the M4 near Junction 14 Thomas Flynn and Sons The Downs. The race then joins the now local access route of the old N4 road and then joins the Royal Canal at Great Down. The remainder of the race follows the Royal Canal back westward to Mullingar town. The towpath on the Canal is perfectly flat and in excellent condition. Runners will notice how the level of the canal changes dramatically along the route - at points the canal is level with the towpath. In other places the canal is at least 3 meters lower than the canal path. However the path is perfectly flat and firm the whole way. The course then leaves the Royal Canal at the Ardmore Road/Millmount area of the town and finishes in the Mullingar Town Park on Austin Friar's Street beside the Annebrook Hotel. The park provides a very nice setting for the finish of the race and runners and their families can mix and congregate around the finish area and the hotel.
Timing and event management was provided by www.myrunresults.com/. Their website is here [www.myrunresults.com/] and will contain the results to today's race.
Our full set of photographs are available at: www.flickr.com/photos/peterm7/albums/72157664768562807
The Apollo 12 Lunar Module (LM), in a lunar landing configuration, is photographed in lunar orbit from the Command and Service Modules (CSM) on Nov. 19, 1969. Aboard the LM were astronauts Charles Conrad Jr., commander; and Alan L. Bean, lunar module pilot. via NASA ift.tt/1lwOF9L
When F-86Ds were upgraded to the F-86L configuration, an AN/ARR-39 datalink receiver was fitted, which had a blade-like antenna sticking out of the fuselage just forward of and below the starboard wing. The AN/ARC-27 command radio of the F-86D was replaced by an AN/ARC-34 set. An AN/APX-25 identification radar was added, and a new AN/ARN-31 glide slope receiver was provided.
All Follow-On aircraft were brought up to F-86D-45 standards before starting with the electronics upgrades, including the installation of the drag chute in the tail. In the F-86L, two protruding cooling air intakes were added to the fuselage sides just aft of the wing, replacing the older recessed cooling ducts. The same J47-GE-33 or J47-GE-17B engine of the F-86D was retained, but the F-86L was fitted with the F-86F-40 wing, with twelve-inch wingtip extensions and "6-3" leading edge extensions with slats. The wingspan and wing area were 39.1 feet and 313.37 square feet respectively. The new wing improved the handing ability and provided better turning at high altitudes. The reconditioned F-86Ls retained the armament of twenty-four rockets of the F-86D.
The first flight took place on December 27, 1955. That particular aircraft had just the SAGE equipment installed, and the first conversion incorporating all of the Follow-On changes did not fly until May of 1956. A total of 981 F-86Ds were modified to the F-86L configuration. After conversion in 1956-57, F-86Ls were issued to most of the ADC wings that were using the F-86D. First to receive the F-86L was the 317th FIS at McChord AFB, which first received the planes in late November of 1956. The service of the F-86L with the ADC was destined to be quite brief, since by the time the last F-86L conversion was delivered, the type was already being phased out in favor of the Convair F-102A and F-106A delta-winged interceptors. The last F-86Ls left ADC service by 1960.
It should be noted that F-86L aircraft were also assigned to the 196th FIS, which was an integral part of Air Defense Command. The 196th FIS was based at Ontario ANGB, and the successor unit is the Guard refueling unit currently based at March Field. (Source: Ray V. Miller).
During the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, six ANG F-86L squadrons were on alert. The last F-86Ls were withdrawn from ANG service during the summer of 1965.
-March Field Air Museum website (www.marchfield.org/)Nicknamed the "Flying Vacuum" because of its low slung jet intakes, the F-89 Scorpion would ingest any loose objects it crossed paths with on the runway. An attempt to place screens over the intakes failed when, at high altitudes, ice formed over the screens and caused the engines to flare out. Designed as an all weather ground attack fighter, the Scorpion was the first US interceptor armed with nuclear air-to-air missiles and the first aircraft to live fire an AIR-2 Genie nuclear air-to-air missile on 19 July 1957.
According to the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA/RSA), Maxwell AFB, AL, the museum's F-89J has the following history:
The aircraft at the March Field Museum is a J model, serial number 52-1949. It was manufactured by Northrop and delivered to the Air Force on 24 November 1954
In June, 1981, it was transported by truck to March AFB Museum. The nose radar equipment was removed and placed into a display case by former radar technician who was in the RAF during WWII. The display shows the many glass radio tubes in use at the time. This aircraft is on loan from the USAF.
-March Field Air Museum website (www.marchfield.org/)
The configurations of the bow is based on the actual dimension data of the ship. There has been many disputes and debates in the modelling community concerning configurations and the terminology of the Queen's ships being 'race-built'.
Working with the HALF MOON Project some twenty years ago gave me the opportunity to weigh and balance Dutch and English ships in their physical appearance. As a result, I concluded that 'race-built' only meant that the English galleon was lighter at sea than its Spanish rivals. They were easy to manuever, like the Dutch ships, because they carried lighter guns and a lower forecastle. The hulls were still tub-like... and there's no getting around those facts.
Current configuration. I'm still experimenting and swapping stuff out. I'll cut foam and do better cable management once it's settled a bit more.
TC Electronics Polytune -> Morley Bad Horsie Wah -> Rocktron Short Timer Delay (set with just a tiny delay to widen the sound a little) -> Danelectro CTO-1 Transparent Overdrive -> Boss HM-2 (my roommate stumbled across an amazing distortion tone using an odd combo of the CTO-1 and HM-2, that's why it's on there) -> Boss MT-2 (for serious scooped metal) -> Digitech Hyper Phase -> Danelectro CV-1 Vibe -> Danelectro CT Tremelo -> Digitech Hyper Delay -> Amp. All sitting on a Behringer PB1000 pedalboard.
I still have a lot more pedals than fit on the board so I'm not sure what to do. The current setup is oriented towards running into my roommate's Blackheart Little Giant amp (which sounds great but is pretty minimalist) and getting fun noises, rather than being a tight metal rig.
How to configure Raspberry Pi for the first time
If you would like to use this photo, be sure to place a proper attribution linking to xmodulo.com
INSTRUCTIONS AVAILABLE FOR P558 SUPERDUTY - MULTIPLE CONFIGURATIONS
On September 24, 2015, Ford unveiled the 2017 Ford Super Duty line at the 2015 State Fair of Texas. he frame is made from 95% high strength steel and the body (like the contemporary F-150) is made from 6000 series aluminum alloy. For the first time since 1999, both the Super Duty and F-150 lines are constructed using the same cab.
For 2017 production, the Super Duty line shares its powertrain lineup with its 2016 predecessor: a 6.2L gasoline V8, 6.8L V10 (F-450 and above), with a 6.7L diesel V8 available in all versions. The 6.2L gasoline V8 engine remains at 385 hp but torque rises from 405 lb-ft to 430 lb-ft. Additionally, the gasoline V8 produces its max torque at over 700 rpm less than the previous 405 lb-ft engine. The 6.7L diesel engine also remains at the same 440 hp (323 kW) but torque increases from 860 lb-ft upwards to 925 lb-ft.
The 2020 Super Duty debuted at the 2019 Chicago Auto Show. It features a revised grille and tailgate design, new wheel options, and higher-quality interior materials for the Limited trim. A new 7.3-liter gasoline engine is available. Nicknamed "Godzilla", it makes 430 horsepower and 475 lb-ft of torque.
Cab configurations continue to be 2-Door Regular Cab, 4-Door Super Cab, and 4-Door Super Crew Cab, with Short Box (6' 9") and Long Box (8') bed lengths. The truck will be available in F-250, F-350, and F-450 pickup truck models, and F-350, F-450, and F-550 chassis cab models. All will be available in both 4X2 and 4X4 configurations. The F-350 will be the only model available in either Single Rear Wheel (SRW) or Dual Rear Wheel (DRW) configurations, the F-450 and F-550 will only be available in a Dual Rear Wheel (DRW) configuration, and the F-250 will only be available in a Single Rear Wheel configuration.
Each axis configuration for the Align power feeder is slightly different. This drawing might help explain the feeder-to-leadscrew interface concept since proper adjustment is required. The written instructions are terrible. The videos are not complete and the dialog is in Chinese.
It appears to me, based on the parts provided in each feeder kit, that Align intends for the brass pinion gear hob to be pinned in place to the shaft by drilling and pounding in the provided roll pins. I don't like that type of installation, and frankly it isn't required if proper care and attention is given to the compressed assembly as noted in the drawing above.
Hopefully this drawing along with the photos that follow for each axis will help anyone else attempting this installation. It took a good deal of head scratching for me to puzzle out the installation.
How to upgrade the kernel on CentOS
If you would like to use this photo, be sure to place a proper attribution linking to xmodulo.com
Far more compact and efficient. Far less tripods involved. Control center contains all necessary pieces in one block and is power mains connexion-independent. Block communicates wit remaining equipment thru IR, RF and BT.
The final design configuration of the "2nd Series" shower from Fame. Whatever could be its version along its production, it always have had the same size, which was exactly the same of the Lorenzetti shower, so it has about 5.5" of height x 5" of diameter, its upper cover has about 4.5" of diameter and the maximum diameter (clamp) is 6", but unlike the Lorenzetti shower, this one made by Fame is quite heavy and required a strong pipe to stand it... if you ever saw some electric shower installed in pipes with a cord or a wire from the roof attached to the pipe, it means that there was one of this shower installed there in the past...
This guy was a best seller and like the shower from Lorenzetti, it was one of the most popular electric shower in the 70's. Believe it or not, people used to give it as a wedding present!
Here it's possible to see a tv commercial aired in 1975: www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV_13mk6zbg