View allAll Photos Tagged Develop
I developed this character for Clemenger BBDO (Sydney) and their campaign for a new award in magazine advertising. Very fun project and great people to work with! Thanks for the opportunity.
Mikasa, Hokkaido.
Fuji-Holga 120S, Fujinar 75mm F3.5 of Super-Fujicasix, replaced from EBC Fujinon 75mm F3.4 of Fujica GS645 ( www.flickr.com/photos/threepinner/22015924430/ completely broken ), negative ISO 160 from Fuji expired, exposed as ISO 100, developed with BAN from Cgugai, scanned with Plustek OpticFilm 120 + Vuescan at 5300DPI, edited with GIMP.
Bigger sizes: www.flickr.com/photos/threepinner/51325600749/sizes/ up to 10000 × 9740 pixels compatible. Learn DIY development and upgrade to film !
Barrio Venecia, Bogotá (COL)
(1950) Voigtlander Vito III (lens: Ultron 50mm f/2) / Kodak TMax 400 pushed ISO 1600
Minolta Autometer IVF / Epson Perfection 4490
Self-developed with Agfa Rodinal 1:100 (semi-stand 5ml & 495ml water at 20 Celsius. 1 hour: 3 initial agitations, then other 3 at the 30 minutes mark)
Development details on FilmDev
© 2015 Prezioso PH
follow me or avoid me on instagram tumblr facebook twitter
-------------------------------------
Don't tell me you didn't know that my street work can now be seen at my secondary Tumblr blog, www.tumblr.com/blog/smilefromthestreetsyoushoot. Amazing, isn't it? Enjoy it then, why not? Of course you will. I know it, you know it.
developed with dandelion.
(...) the duality, the double, the duplicate, the replica, echoes within me. the name of the house endures but only one lake persists."
at Hilla Kurki's art residency collaboration this summer.
Leidolf is, or rather was, the other camera maker from Wetzlar. The Lordomat C35 was developed from the Lordomat by addition of a non-coupled light meter. The meter has a selenium cell and therefore does not need batteries. Mine miraculously still works.
They did not manufacture their own lenses, but had them made by the Enna company in Munich. The Lordonar appears to be a Tessar.
I got mine from ebay. The seller had it from a house clearance. There still is a film inside. I don't know how long it's been there, but I will shoot it to the end of the roll and then have it developed. If it's dud, too bad. The camera was sold as "defective", because the seller didn't know anything about cameras and probably didn't know how to make it go click.
Before receiving it I thought it was about in the same class as the Braun Paxette, but now that I have it and can see and feel the build quality, I rank it significantly higher. About on the same level as a Contaflex III. Not yet in the realm of Leica and Contax.
Technically, it lags somewhat behind the Leica M3 and it has some design quirks. It has a double stroke film advance that, unusually, rotates clockwise, it does not have a self-timer nor does it have a frame in the viewfinder for 50 mm focal length The entire frame corresponds to the FOV of 35 mm focal length and there are added frames for 90 and 135 mm, but you have to guess the frame for 50 mm. That is a bit inconvenient.
There is a second peephole for the ranging, so you have to peer through that while focusing and then switch to the viewfinder window for composing. That is akin to the Leica II and III, though here the two peepholes are not directly next to each other.
There is a manual parallax correction, You focus, read off the range and then set a dial in front of the viewfinder. That means you will have to be moving the camera away from your face and back again to your eye several times. It's not a camera for fast action.
The camera has a leaf shutter with settings between 1 and 300, plus B. There is the usual M-X-V flash synchronisation.
The shutter release button is on the side of the lens mount, Probably the seller didn't find it there and instead pressed on some of the dials on the top deck which didn't lead to anything.
Mine is in very good shape. No dings, bumps or scratches except for a slightly bent filter ring on the lens. The case also looks good. Clearly, the previous owner took good care of it.
Shot with:
Canon EOS600D
Leica Bellows R (16860)
Leica 100mm f/4 Macro Elmar-R, bellows version (11230)
WEEK 4/52 "Develop"
Was listening to Dido music "life for rent" while doing this photo ,and made me inspired ...
A child-like man is not a man whose development has been arrested; on the contrary, he is a man who has given himself a chance of continuing to DEVELOP long after most adults have muffled themselves in the cocoon of middle-aged habit and convention.
~Aldous Huxley
before and after:
www.facebook.com/pages/Jaydees-Artography/198185330194740...
Life For Rent:
the beach residents are quite used to me. I have developed a 'live and let live' relationship with the handful of geese using the beach as temporary head quarters, and that works just great.
French Creek beach, Salish Sea BC Canada.
China Developing
China's urban development is concomitant with its economic development and integration with the dynamics of globalization. The gaps are widening between cities and countryside to reach limits never crossed. The development of rural areas, where more than 600 million Chinese still live, is a gigantic task for the Communist Party. That's why the government is building territory development programs. And comfortable houses rather than wooden houses. Young people are convinced.
These laudable goals want to make the Chinese people a "rich people" and the country the world's largest economic power, while in the countryside the population is very poor. People still live there as in the Middle Ages. Xi Jinping, the Chinese PC President has imposed a new motto: the Chinese Dream as the American Dream. It is about working for the great renaissance of the Chinese nation
Grand Canyon National Park is a national park of the United States located in northwestern Arizona, the 15th site to have been named as a national park. The park's central feature is the Grand Canyon, a gorge of the Colorado River, which is often considered one of the Wonders of the World. The park, which covers 1,217,262 acres (1,901.972 sq mi; 4,926.08 km2) of unincorporated area in Coconino and Mohave counties, received more than 4.7 million recreational visitors in 2023. The Grand Canyon was designated a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1979. The park celebrated its 100th anniversary on February 26, 2019.
The Grand Canyon became well known to Americans in the 1880s after railroads were built and pioneers developed infrastructure and early tourism. In 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt visited the site and said,
The Grand Canyon fills me with awe. It is beyond comparison—beyond description; absolutely unparalleled through-out the wide world ... Let this great wonder of nature remain as it now is. Do nothing to mar its grandeur, sublimity and loveliness. You cannot improve on it. But you can keep it for your children, your children's children, and all who come after you, as the one great sight which every American should see.
Despite Roosevelt's enthusiasm and strong interest in preserving land for public use, the Grand Canyon was not immediately designated as a national park. The first bill to establish Grand Canyon National Park was introduced in 1882 by then-Senator Benjamin Harrison, which would have established Grand Canyon as the third national park in the United States, after Yellowstone and Mackinac. Harrison unsuccessfully reintroduced his bill in 1883 and 1886; after his election to the presidency, he established the Grand Canyon Forest Reserve in 1893. Theodore Roosevelt created the Grand Canyon Game Preserve by proclamation on November 28, 1906, and the Grand Canyon National Monument on January 11, 1908. Further Senate bills to establish the site as a national park were introduced and defeated in 1910 and 1911, before the Grand Canyon National Park Act (Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 65–277) was finally signed by President Woodrow Wilson on February 26, 1919. The National Park Service, established in 1916, assumed administration of the park.
The creation of the park was an early success of the conservation movement. Its national park status may have helped thwart proposals to dam the Colorado River within its boundaries. (Later, the Glen Canyon Dam would be built upriver.) A second Grand Canyon National Monument to the west was proclaimed in 1932. In 1975, that monument and Marble Canyon National Monument, which was established in 1969 and followed the Colorado River northeast from the Grand Canyon to Lees Ferry, were made part of Grand Canyon National Park. In 1979, UNESCO declared the park a World Heritage Site. The 1987 the National Parks Overflights Act found that "Noise associated with aircraft overflights at the Grand Canyon National Park is causing a significant adverse effect on the natural quiet and experience of the park and current aircraft operations at the Grand Canyon National Park have raised serious concerns regarding public safety, including concerns regarding the safety of park users."
In 2010, Grand Canyon National Park was honored with its own coin under the America the Beautiful Quarters program. On February 26, 2019, the Grand Canyon National Park commemorated 100 years since its designation as a national park.
The Grand Canyon had been part of the National Park Service's Intermountain Region until 2018. Today, the Grand Canyon is a part of Region 8, also known as the Lower Colorado Basin.
The Grand Canyon, including its extensive system of tributary canyons, is valued for its combination of size, depth, and exposed layers of colorful rocks dating back to Precambrian times. The canyon itself was created by the incision of the Colorado River and its tributaries after the Colorado Plateau was uplifted, causing the Colorado River system to develop along its present path.
The primary public areas of the park are the South and North Rims, and adjacent areas of the canyon itself. The rest of the park is extremely rugged and remote, although many places are accessible by pack trail and backcountry roads. The South Rim is more accessible than the North Rim and accounts for 90% of park visitation.
The park headquarters are at Grand Canyon Village, not far from the South Entrance to the park, near one of the most popular viewpoints.
Most visitors to the park come to the South Rim, arriving on Arizona State Route 64. The highway enters the park through the South Entrance, near Tusayan, Arizona, and heads eastward, leaving the park through the East Entrance. Interstate 40 provides access to the area from the south. From the north, U.S. Route 89 connects Utah, Colorado, and the North Rim to the South Rim. Overall, some 30 miles of the South Rim are accessible by road.
Grand Canyon Village is the primary visitor services area in the park. It is a full-service community, including lodging, fuel, food, souvenirs, a hospital, churches, and access to trails and guided walks and talks.
Several lodging facilities are available along the South Rim. Hotels and other lodging include El Tovar, Bright Angel Lodge, Kachina Lodge, Thunderbird Lodge, and Maswik Lodge, all of which are located in Grand Canyon Village, and Phantom Ranch, located on the canyon floor. There is also an RV Park named Trailer Village. All of these facilities are managed by Xanterra Parks & Resorts, while the Yavapai Lodge (also in the village area) is managed by Delaware North.
The North Rim area of the park is located on the Kaibab Plateau and Walhalla Plateau, directly across the Grand Canyon from the principal visitor areas on the South Rim. The North Rim's principal visitor areas are centered around Bright Angel Point. The North Rim is higher in elevation than the South Rim, at over 8,000 feet (2,400 m) of elevation. Because it is so much higher than the South Rim, it is closed from December 1 through May 15 each year, due to the enhanced snowfall at elevation. Visitor services are closed or limited in scope after October 15. Driving time from the South Rim to the North Rim is about 4.5 hours, over 220 miles (350 km).
On the North Rim is the historic Grand Canyon Lodge, managed by Forever Resorts, and a campground near the lodge managed by the national park staff.
Canonet QL17 40/1.7
Kodak ImageLink Technical film
Exposed like ISO32
Developing R09 1:100, 20C, 40min.
My first self developed film which just happens to be 120 lomography earl grey 100 loaded into a box brownie, you are welcome😄
Developed in Raw Photo Processor with P160NC output profile
Virtually "printed" with "Kodak Endura Glossy Paper" profile and grain effect applied in Dehancer plugin for Adobe Photoshop
Final color tweaks made in Adobe Photoshop
Taken with a Contax IIa and Carl Zeiss Biogon 35/2.8 lens on Kentmere 400. Developed with Ilfosol 3 at a 1+14 dilution at 24 °C for 12 minutes.
In the early 1950s the Royal Air Force realised that it could streamline its training programmes if jet powered aircraft only were used. As a result of this, a requirement for a new dedicated training aircraft was issued to UK aircraft manufacturers. Originally developed by Percival as a cheap jet-powered derivative of its successful Alvis Leonides, radial-engined Piston Provost, the Jet Provost evolved into an entirely new aircraft. Powered by a Bristol-Siddeley Viper 102 engine, the prototype aircraft (XD674) took its first flight on 26th June 1954. It soon caught the eye of the RAF with its side by side layout and superb handling qualities, and was appreciated enough for the RAF to purchase an initial batch of nine airframes. They were incorporated in a new training syllabus with 2 Flight Training School (2FTS) based at RAF Hullavington, and performed very successfully.
As a result of this the Royal Air Force adopted the Jet Provost and ordered 201 T.3s in June 1959, and announced that the 'JP' would become the standard basic RAF trainer. The T.3's differed from the T.1s in having Martin Baker ejection seats, tip tanks, updated cockpit avionics and a clear-view canopy.
In November 1961 the RAF issued a follow-on order for a further 198 Jet Provosts T.4's. Powered by an updated Rolls Royce Viper 202 instead of the 102 used in the T.3, these were built and delivered by the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) until 1964.
In 1967 the RAF made a final order for further JPs, this time 105 Jet Provost T.5s. Two prototypes were built by BAC (XS230 and XS231), and the first of these first flew on February 28th 1967. The T.5 was different from the earlier T.4 with a pressurised cockpit, re-designed windscreen, sliding canopy, longer nose and new wings. Deliveries of this type started in the latter years of the 1960's. Five T.55's were also built and sold to Oman, and the type also enjoyed success in the overseas market with Sri Lanka, Kuwait, Iraq and Venezuela Air Forces.
As a result of the success of the T.5 BAC looked at producing a JP that could also be used as a light attack aircraft as well as a trainer, and the result was the Strikemaster. Changes made to the airframe included 8 stores hard-points underneath the wings, a strengthened airframe and shortened landing gear for use in rough terrains. The prototype Strikemaster first flew in October 1967 and deliveries began as the Strikemaster Mk.80 to the first export customer, Saudi Arabia in late 1968, and many others followed concluding with Sudan in 1984 with the Mk.90.
In 1993 the Jet Provost finally ended its career, spanning over 35 years, with the Royal Air Force. It was replaced by the Shorts Tucano. A number of the surviving aeroplanes were retired and sold into private ownership. As a result, they can now be found across the globe, from the UK to the USA, Australia and New Zealand.
Known universally as the 'JP', the Jet Provost helped introduce the concept of all-jet basic training for pupil pilots in the RAF for the first time, and indeed in any air force around the world.
I waited until the last minute, since my goal was to learn home developing this summer. School starts for me on Monday. Since I wanted to do my first attempt while Perry was in school, I only had Thursday and Friday this week.
It went pretty well. The only thing I got wrong was loading the film onto the spirals. I had no practice, so it was all on feel in the developing bag. Part of the film at the beginning of the spiral was loaded wrong and was touching another part of the film. This made those parts not process correctly (or maybe even at all). The roll was just a bunch of practice shots around the house to see how my Rollei meter was working. (I think it is 2 stops under). Since I don't really care about these pics I am going to put this roll of negatives to good use. I am going to practice in the light and then in the bag getting the film on the spirals. That way I will have a feel for how the film should feel for my next attempt.
The actual processing went rather smoothly. It was nice to have that first attempt under my belt. I have a second roll to process, so maybe this weekend I will make my second go at it.
Ernest Henry discovered copper in the general vicinity of Mount Cuthbert in 1867, but it was not developed further at that time. John Chapman investigated Mount Cuthbert, Excelsior, and Mighty Atom copper claims in 1900 on behalf of Melbourne investors. Mount Cuthbert assayed the best at 6.5%.
The decision by the Government to extend the Townsville railway beyond Richmond stimulated further exploration in 1905 - 1906. In 1907 the Mount Cuthbert Company had capital of £240,000 and its mines included Mount Cuthbert, Kalkadoon, Mighty Atom, Orphan (near Dobbyn) and Little Wonder. The company had major financial problems from 1909 because of the lack of rail freight and had to reconstruct its capital holdings in 1912.
In 1915, with the price of copper soaring, the company spent £120,000 constructing smelters and had already sent away copper matte by horse teams before the railway reached the mine in September 1916. William H. Corbould, who was appointed Mount Elliott mine manager in 1909 had a grand vision for rationalising the copper industry in the Cloncurry district but, while war delayed its implementation an arrangement was worked out with Mount Cuthbert whereby up to 150 tons of ore per day were to be treated at the Mount Elliott smelter at Selwyn until the Mount Cuthbert plant was completed. Then the situation would be reversed while Mount Elliott increased the capacity of its smelter. Accordingly, the Selwyn smelter ran for five months at the end of 1915 and into 1916 treating both companies' ore, including 13,000 tons railed from Mount Cuthbert.
The Mount Cuthbert smelter was designed by W.H. Corbould, who was also a noted metallurgist and its completion was delayed because of the war. The blast furnaces were eventually fired early in 1917 and the initial operation treated over 25,000 tons of ore which produced 1,804 tons of copper worth £202,350. The Mount Cuthbert Company also invested in a new winding engine and headframe, 200 ton capacity ore bins, extensions to the blacksmith's shop and electricity connected to all the surface buildings. The old equipment was removed and reassembled at the Orphan mine.
Mount Cuthbert township was surveyed by the Mines Department in 1916, but the nearby mines had been worked from 1908 which might explain the close proximity of the settlement to the mines and therefore the smelter.
At its peak Mount Cuthbert township had two hotels, a cordial factory, two stores, three fruiterers, a photographer, butcher, baker, fancy goods/barber, hospital, police station, boarding house, and two railway stations (Mount Cuthbert and Dollubeet). A post office operated from 1908 to 1927. The mining company officers were housed in timber cottages and a barracks, while the majority of residents lived in tents or small corrugated iron shacks with earth floors and stone hearths.
Teamsters supplied logs to the sawmill operating to supply mine timbers from 1913. A school opened in 1917 with 30 pupils taught by Miss E Stapleton. At one point in 1917 the town was reported on the verge of starvation due to problems with railway freight operations.
Today the township area contains about 60 discernible building remains and stone footings, and a commercial area near the railway on the eastern side of the settlement. A cellar, cement floor, and ships tank baking oven indicate the site of the hotel, which reputedly was moved to Kajabbi where it still serves as the Kalkadoon Hotel.
The railway arrived at Mount Cuthbert in October 1915 after taking two years to construct the section north-east from Dugald River. The curving alignment passes through narrow gaps in ridge spurs and follows the Six Mile Creek. Its formation features embankments, cuttings, and bridgeworks. Without the railway, production from the smelters was hampered due to exorbitant freight costs. There were two wayside sidings, Mount Cuthbert and the terminus, Dollubeet, at Kalkadoon.
The Kalkadoon mine is part of the Mount Cuthbert mine group, situated about 2km north along the same geological formation. The earliest mineral lease to be granted in the Mount Cuthbert area was that of the Kalkadoon to Cuthbert Fetherstonhaugh of Cloncurry who took up 4.05 ha from the 1st of August 1899. This mine was mentioned by William Lees in 1906 as the "old mine" and it had already produced 300 tons of high grade ore.
It was further developed by the Mount Cuthbert Company from about 1907. By 1912 temporary pithead gear was in place: a winch and boiler and a headframe from Charters Towers was installed the next year. By 1916 the main shaft was down 107m. Ore mined at the Kalkadoon was smelted at Mount Cuthbert from 1917 and sent to Britain as prime blister copper. It is presumed that the mine closed in 1920 when smelting ceased at Mount Cuthbert. Its manager, J. Delaney, was a well known football player in the district.
In 1918 there was a fatal accident in the Mount Cuthbert mine at the 107m level. By 1919 the main shaft was down to 148m. In 1918 the Mount Cuthbert smelters treated 36,500 tons of ore until November when the crankshaft broke on the blower engine and closed the smelters after a record run. They were not refired until August 1919 and continued smelting copper until the price fell in 1920. The smelters shut down on the 19th of June 1920 after a final run of only 63 days.
The company was forced into raising capital in 1919 and attempted a further financial reconstruction in 1922. However, continued annual losses, low metal prices and pressing debenture commitments forced its liquidation in 1923. In 1925 the Mount Elliott Company purchased the Mount Cuthbert properties and plant for an undisclosed sum, certainly much less than the £500,000 valuation.
The population rose from 50 in 1908, to a peak of 1,000 in 1918, then dropped to 750 in 1920 and to 400 in 1924, but Mount Cuthbert became a ghost town after the Mount Elliott Company bought the mine and plant in 1925.
In 1942 Mount Isa Mines bought the Mount Cuthbert smelters for £900 and plant and other machinery was railed through Cloncurry to Mount Isa's new copper smelter. The Kalkadoon was worked on tribute again in the 1960s before being abandoned.
Source: Queensland Heritage Register.
OLYMPUS OM-D E-M5 Mark II + OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO
Developed by Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC 2015.3
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The AH-1 Cobra was developed in the mid-1960s as an interim gunship for the U.S. Army for use during the Vietnam War. The Cobra shared the proven transmission, rotor system, and the T53 turboshaft engine of the UH-1 "Huey". By June 1967, the first AH-1G HueyCobras had been delivered. Bell built 1,116 AH-1Gs for the U.S. Army between 1967 and 1973, and the Cobras chalked up over a million operational hours in Vietnam.
The U.S. Marine Corps was very interested in the AH-1G Cobra, too, but it preferred a twin-engine version for improved safety in over-water operations, and also wanted a more potent turret-mounted weapon. At first, the Department of Defense had balked at providing the Marines with a twin-engine version of the Cobra, in the belief that commonality with Army AH-1Gs outweighed the advantages of a different engine fit. However, the Marines won out and awarded Bell a contract for 49 twin-engine AH-1J SeaCobras in May 1968. As an interim measure the U.S. Army passed on thirty-eight AH-1Gs to the Marines in 1969. The AH-1J also received a more powerful gun turret with a three-barrel 20 mm XM197 cannon based on the six-barrel M61 Vulcan cannon.
During the 1990s, the US forces gradually phased out its Cobra fleet. The withdrawn AH-1s were typically offered to other potential operators, usually NATO allies. Some were also given to the USDA's Forest Service for fire surveillance, and a handful AH-1s went into private hands, including the NASA. Among these airframes were some USMC AH-1Js, which had in part been mothballed in the Mojave Desert since their replacement through more powerful and modern AH-1 variants and the AH-64.
About twenty airframes were, after having been de-militarized, bought by the Kaman Corporation in 2003, in a bold move to quickly respond to more than 20 inquiries for the company’s K-1200 ‘K-Max’ crane synchropter since the type’s end of production in 2001 from firefighting, logging and industry transport requirements. While not such a dedicated medium lift helicopter as the K-1200, which had from the outset been optimized for external cargo load operations, the twin-engine AH-1J promised to be a very effective alternative and a powerful basis for a conversion into a crane helicopter.
The result of this conversion program was the Kaman K-1300, also known as the “K-Cobra” or “Crane Cobra”. While the basic airframe of the AH-1J was retained, extensive detail modifications were made. To reduce weight and compensate for the extensive hardware changes, the SeaCobra lost its armor, the chin turret, and the stub wings. Beyond that, many invisible changes were made; the internal structure between the engine mounts was beefed up with an additional cage structure and a cargo hook was installed under the fuselage in the helicopter’s center of lift.
To further optimize the K-Cobra’s performance, the dynamic components were modified and improved, too. While the engine remained the same, its oil cooler was enlarged and the original output limit to 1.500 shp was removed and the gearbox was strengthened to fully exploit the twin-engine’s available power of 1,800 shp (1,342 kW). The rotor system was also modified and optimized for the transport of underslung loads: the original UH-1 dual-blade rotors were replaced with new four-blade rotors. The new main rotor with rugged heavy-duty blades offered more lift at less rotor speed, and the blades’ lift sections were moved away from the hub so that downwash and turbulences directly under the helicopter’s CoG and man hook were reduced to keep the cargo load more stable. Due to the main rotor’s slightly bigger diameter the tail rotor was changed into a slightly smaller four-blade rotor, too. This new arrangement made the K-1300 more stable while hovering or during slow speed maneuvers and more responsive to steering input.
The Cobra’s crew of two was retained, but the cockpit was re-arranged and split into two compartments: the pilot retained the original rear position in the tandem cockpit under the original glazing, but the gunner’s station in front of him, together with the secondary dashboard, was omitted and replaced by a new, fully glazed cabin under the former gunner position. This cabin occupied the former gun station and its ammunition supply and contained a rearward-facing workstation for a second pilot with full controls. It was accessible via a separate door or a ladder from above, through a trap door in the former gunner’s station floor, where a simple foldable bench was available for a third person. This arrangement was chosen due to almost complete lack of oversight of the slung load from the normal cockpit position, despite a CCTV (closed circuit television) system with two cameras intended for observation of slung loads. The second pilot would control the helicopter during delicate load-handling maneuvers, while the primary pilot “above” would fly the helicopter during transfer flights, both sharing the workload.
To accommodate the cabin under the fuselage and improve ground handling, the AH-1J’s skids were replaced by a stalky, fixed four-wheel landing gear that considerably increased ground clearance (almost 7 feet), making the attachment of loads on the ground to the main ventral hook easier, as the K-1300 could be “rolled over” the cargo on the ground and did not have to hover above it to connect. However, an external ladder had to be added so that the pilot could reach his/her workstation almost 10 feet above the ground.
The bulky ventral cabin, the draggy landing gear and the new lift-optimized rotor system reduced the CraneCobra’s top speed by a third to just 124 mph (200 km/h), but the helicopter’s load-carrying capacity became 35% higher and the Cobra’s performance under “hot & high” conditions was markedly improved, too.
For transfer flights, a pair of external auxiliary tanks could be mounted to the lower fuselage flanks, which could also be replaced with cargo boxes of similar size and shape.
K-1300 buyers primarily came from the United States and Canada, but there were foreign operators, too. A major operator in Europe became Heliswiss, the oldest helicopter company in Switzerland. The company was founded as „Heliswiss Schweizerische Helikopter AG“, with headquarters in Berne-Belp on April 17, 1953, what also marked the beginning of commercial helicopter flying in Switzerland. During the following years Heliswiss expanded in Switzerland and formed a network with bases in Belp BE, Samedan GR, Domat Ems GR, Locarno TI, Erstfeld UR, Gampel VS, Gstaad BE and Gruyères FR. During the build-up of the rescue-company Schweizerische Rettungsflugwacht (REGA) as an independent network, Heliswiss carried out rescue missions on their behalf.
Heliswiss carried out operations all over the world, e. g. in Greenland, Suriname, North Africa and South America. The first helicopter was a Bell 47 G-1, registered as HB-XAG on September 23, 1953. From 1963 Heliswiss started to expand and began to operate with medium helicopters like the Agusta Bell 204B with a turbine power of 1050 HP and an external load of up to 1500 kg. From 1979 Heliswiss operated a Bell 214 (external load up to 2.8 t).
Since 1991 Heliswiss operated a Russian Kamov 32A12 (a civil crane version of the Ka-27 “Helix”), which was joined by two K-1300s in 2004. They were frequently used for construction of transmission towers for overhead power lines and pylons for railway catenary lines, for selective logging and also as fire bombers with underslung water bags, the latter managed by the German Helog company, operating out of Ainring and Küssnacht in Germany and Switzerland until 2008, when Helog changed its business focus into a helicopter flight training academy in Liberia with the support of Germany's Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
A second Kamov 32A12 joined the fleet in 2015, which replaced one of the K-1300s, and Heliswiss’ last K-1300 was retired in early 2022.
General characteristics:
Crew: 2, plus space for a passenger
Length: 54 ft 3 in (16,56 m) including rotors
44 ft 5 in (13.5 m) fuselage only
Main rotor diameter: 46 ft 2¾ in (14,11 m)
Main rotor area: 1,677.64 sq ft (156,37 m2)
Width (over landing gear): 12 ft 6 in (3.85 m)
Height: 17 ft 8¼ in (5,40 m)
Empty weight: 5,810 lb (2,635 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 9,500 lb (4,309 kg) without slung load
13,515 lb (6,145 kg) with slung load
Powerplant:
1× P&W Canada T400-CP-400 (PT6T-3 Twin-Pac) turboshaft engine, 1,800 shp (1,342 kW)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 124 mph (200 km/h, 110 kn)
Cruise speed: 105 mph (169 km/h, 91 kn)
Range: 270 mi (430 km, 230 nmi) with internal fuel only,
360 mi (570 km 310 nmi) with external auxiliary tanks
Service ceiling: 15,000 ft (4,600 m)
Hovering ceiling out of ground effect: 3,000 m (9,840 ft)
Rate of climb: 2,500 ft/min (13 m/s) at Sea Level with flat-rated torque
External load capacity (at ISA +15 °C (59.0 °F):
6,000 lb (2,722 kg) at sea level
5,663 lb (2,569 kg) at 5,000 ft (1,524 m)
5,163 lb (2,342 kg) at 10,000 ft (3,048 m)
5,013 lb (2,274 kg) at 12,100 ft (3,688 m)
4,313 lb (1,956 kg) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)
The kit and its assembly:
This is/was the second contribution to the late 2022 “Logistics” Group Build at whatifmodellers.com, a welcome occasion and motivation to tackle a what-if project that had been on my list for a long while. This crane helicopter conversion of a HueyCobra was inspired by the Mil Mi-10K helicopter – I had built a 1:100 VEB Plasticart kit MANY years ago and still remembered the helicopter’s unique ventral cabin under the nose with a rearward-facing second pilot. I always thought that the AH-1 might be a good crane helicopter, too, esp. the USMC’s twin-engine variant. And why not combine everything in a fictional model?
With this plan the basis became a Fujimi 1:72 AH-1J and lots of donor parts to modify the basic hull into “something else”. Things started with the removal of the chin turret and part of the lower front hull to make space for the ventral glass cabin. The openings for the stub wings were faired over and a different stabilizer (taken from a Revell EC 135, including the end plates) was implanted. The attachment points for the skids were filled and a styrene tube was inserted into the rotor mast opening to later hold the new four-blade rotor. Another styrene tube with bigger diameter was inserted into the lower fuselage as a display holder adapter for later flight scene pictures. Lead beads filled the nose section to make sure the CraneCobra would stand well on its new legs, with the nose down. The cockpit was basically taken OOB, just the front seat and the respective gunner dashboard was omitted.
One of the big challenges of this build followed next: the ventral cabin. Over the course of several months, I was not able to find a suitable donor, so I was forced to scratch the cabin from acrylic and styrene sheet. Size benchmark became the gunner’s seat from the Cobra kit, with one of the OOB pilots seated. Cabin width was less dictated through the fuselage, the rest of the cabin’s design became a rather simple, boxy thing – not pretty, but I think a real-life retrofitted cabin would not look much different? Some PSR was done to hide the edges of the rather thick all-clear walls and create a 3D frame - a delicate task. Attaching the completed thing with the second pilot and a dashboard under the roof to the Cobra’s lower hull and making it look more or less natural without major accidents was also a tricky and lengthy affair, because I ignored the Cobra’s narrowing nose above the former chin turret.
With the cabin defining the ground helicopter’s clearance, it was time for the next donors: the landing gear from an Airfix 1:72 Kamow Ka-25, which had to be modified further to achieve a proper stance. The long main struts were fixed to the hull, their supporting struts had to be scratched, in this case from steel wire. The front wheels were directly attached to the ventral cabin (which might contain in real life a rigid steel cage that not only protects the second crew member but could also take the front wheels’ loads?). Looks pretty stalky!
Under the hull, a massive hook and a fairing for the oil cooler were added. A PE brass ladder was mounted on the right side of the hull under the pilot’s cockpit, while a rear-view mirror was mounted for the ventral pilot on the left side.
The rotor system was created in parallel, I wanted “something different” from the UH-1 dual-blade rotors. The main rotor hub was taken from a Mistercraft 1:72 Westland Lynx (AFAIK a re-boxed ZTS Plastyk kit), which included the arms up to the blades. The hub was put onto a metal axis, with a spacer to make it sit well in the new styrene tube adapter inside of the hull, and some donor parts from the Revell EC 135. Deeper, tailored blades were glued to the Lynx hub, actually leftover parts from the aforementioned wrecked VEB Plasticart 1:100 Mi-10, even though their length had to be halved (what makes you aware how large a Mi-6/10 is compared with an AH-1!). The tail rotor was taken wholesale from the Lynx and stuck to the Cobra’s tail with a steel pin.
Painting and markings:
Another pushing factor for this build was the fact that I had a 1:72 Begemot aftermarket decal sheet for the Kamow Ka-27/32 in The Stash™, which features, among many military helicopters, (the) two civil Heliswiss machines – a perfect match!
Using the Swiss Helix’ as design benchmark I adapted their red-over-white paint scheme to the slender AH-1 and eventually ended up with a simple livery with a white belly (acrylic white from the rattle can, after extensive masking of the clear parts with Maskol/latex milk) and a red (Humbrol 19) upper section, with decorative counter-colored cheatlines along the medium waterline. A black anti-glare panel was added in front of the windscreen. The auxiliary tanks were painted white, too, but they were processed separately and mounted just before the final coat of varnish was applied. The PE ladder as well as the rotors were handled similarly.
The cockpit and rotor opening interior were painted in a very dark grey (tar black, Revell 06), while the interior of the air intakes was painted bright white (Revell 301). The rotor blades became light grey (Revell 75) with darker leading edges (Humbrol 140), dark grey (Humbrol 164) hubs and yellow tips.
For the “HELOG/Heliswiss” tagline the lower white section had to be raised to a medium position on the fuselage, so that they could be placed on the lower flanks under the cockpit. The white civil registration code could not be placed on the tail and ended up on the engine cowling, on red, but this does not look bad or wrong at all.
The cheatlines are also decals from the Ka-32 Begemot sheet, even though they had to be trimmed considerably to fit onto the Cobra’s fuselage – and unfortunately the turned out to be poorly printed and rather brittle, so that I had to improvise and correct the flaws with generic red and white decal lines from TL Modellbau. The white cross on the tail and most stencils came from the Begemot sheet, too. Black, engine soot-hiding areas on the Cobra’s tail were created with generic decal sheet material, too.
The rotor blades and the wheels received a black ink treatment to emphasize their details, but this was not done on the hull to avoid a dirty or worn look. After some final details like position lights the model was sealed with semi-matt acrylic varnish, while the rotors became matt.
A weird-looking what-if model, but somehow a crane-copter variant of the AH-1 looks quite natural – even more so in its attractive red-and-white civil livery. The stalky landing gear is odd, though, necessitated by the ventral cabin for the second pilot. I was skeptical, but scratching the latter was more successful than expected, and the cabin blend quite well into the AH-1 hull, despite its boxy shape.
I don’t have a darkroom so I develop my film in the kitchen. But she says one day I’ll have my special place, in the basement, in a corner. I think she’s talking about a spot to develop film…
Film: Fujifilm Superia X-TRA 400 @ 400 ISO | Develop/Scan: Irohas Photo (Noritsu Koki EZ Controller)
Svema 200, my favorite B/W film has a very strong but thin base. It is so thin it can be a challenge to load on a developing reel. Thinking a wider flange, like the one pictured on the bottom would make life a lot easier since getting it started is the hardest part. It did seem to load easier but I was having unusual problems of large areas not developing. hummmmm. So I loaded a strip in daylight and found the film was loading in the same spiral right behind itself. No more Arista reels for Svema.
The top reel is my good old faithful Paterson, I have many of these. AP, Coast and many other brands make reels very close to this design, although I have used some that do not have plastic as smooth and slick as Paterson. I really stick to the Paterson brand on these. Some consider this to be a standard reel and offer the wide flange as a premium reel.
The middle reel is a Vivitar branded reel, I don't know who really made it but I have only seen it with the Vivitar name. It works well for any film including Svema. I would love a few more of these, they are a little easier to teach newbies how to load a reel.
The bottom is the Arista Premium wide flange reel, I have seen it made under Samigon, AP, and Omega names, often referred to as a premium reel. Sorry but I need a reel to work with any film I load on it so out it went.
The short pieces of film in reels are simply there to make the loading flanges easier to see although nano_burger's comment below about film chimping is hilarious.
Some background:
The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. Its production was preceded by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X was strictly a jet aircraft, built to demonstrate that a jet fighter with the features necessary to convert to Battroid mode was aerodynamically feasible. After the VF-X's testing was finished, an advanced concept atmospheric-only prototype, the VF-0 Phoenix, was flight-tested from 2005 to 2007 and briefly served as an active-duty fighter from 2007 to the VF-1's rollout in late 2008, while the bugs were being worked out of the full-up VF-1 prototype (VF-X-1).
The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I - and remained the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later, though.
The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentraedi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment.
The basic VF-1 was deployed in four sub-variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie, FAST Pack "Super" Valkyrie and the additional RÖ-X2 heavy cannon pack weapon system for the VF-1S for additional firepower. The FAST Pack system was designed to enhance the VF-1 Valkyrie variable fighter, and the initial V1.0 came in the form of conformal pallets that could be attached to the fighter’s leg flanks for additional fuel – primarily for Long Range Interdiction tasks in atmospheric environment. Later FAST Packs were designed for space operations.
After the end of Space War I, the VF-1 continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would be replaced in 2020 as the primary Variable Fighter of the U.N. Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.
The versatile aircraft underwent constant upgrade programs. For instance, about a third of all VF-1 Valkyries were upgraded with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems from 2016 onwards, placed in a streamlined fairing in front of the cockpit. This system allowed for long-range search and track modes, freeing the pilot from the need to give away his position with active radar emissions, and it could also be used for target illumination and guiding precision weapons.
Many Valkyries also received improved radar warning systems, with sensor arrays, depending on the systems, mounted on the wing-tips, on the fins and/or on the LERXs. Improved ECR measures were also added to some machines, typically in conformal fairings on the flanks of the legs/engine pods.
The U.N.S. Marine Corps, which evolved from the United States Marine Corps after the national service was transferred to the global U.N. Spacy command in 2008, was a late adopter of the VF-1, because the Valkyries’ as well as the Destroids’ potential for landing operations was underestimated. But especially the VF-1’s versatility and VTOL capabilities made it a perfect candidate as a replacement for the service’s AV-8B Harrier II and AH-1 Cobra fleet in the close air support (CAS) and interdiction role. The first VF-1s were taken into service in January 2010 by SVMF-49 “Vikings” at Miramar Air Base in California/USA, and other units followed soon, immediately joining the battle against the Zentraedi forces.
The UNSMC’s VF-1s were almost identical to the standard Valkyries, but they had from the start additional hardpoints for light loads like sensor pods added to their upper legs, on the lower corners of the air intake ducts. These were intended to carry FLIR, laser target designators (for respective guided smart weapons) or ECM pods, while freeing the swiveling underwing hardpoints to offensive ordnance.
Insisting on their independent heritage, the UNSMC’s Valkyries were never repainted in the U.N. Spacy’s standard tan and white livery. They either received a unique two tone low visibility gray paint scheme (the fighter units) or retained paint schemes that were typical for their former units, including some all-field green machines or VF-1s in a disruptive wraparound livery in grey, green and black.
Beyond A and J single-seaters (the UNSMC did not receive the premium S variant), a handful of VF-1D two-seaters were upgraded to the UNSMC’s specification and very effectively operated in the FAC (Forward Air Control) role, guiding both long-range artillery as well as attack aircraft against enemy positions.
The UNSMC’s VF-1s suffered heavy losses, though – for instance, SVMF-49 was completely wiped out during the so-called “Zentraedi Rain of Death” in April 2011, when the Zentraedi Imperial Grand Fleet, consisting of nearly five million warships, appeared in orbit around the Earth. Commanded by Dolza, Supreme Commander of the Zentraedi, they were ordered to incinerate the planet's surface, which they did. 70% of the Earth was utterly destroyed, according to the staff at Alaska Base. Dolza initially believed this to be total victory, until a massive energy pulse began to form on the Earth's surface. This was the Grand Cannon, a weapon of incredible destructive power that the Zentraedi were unaware of, and it disintegrated a good deal of the armada that was hanging over the Northern Hemisphere. While the Zentraedi were successful in rendering the weapon inoperable before it could fire a second time, the SDF-1 began a counterattack of its own alongside the renegade Imperial-Class Fleet and Seventh Mechanized Space Division, which destroyed the Imperial Grand Fleet. After this event, though, the UNSMC as well as other still independent services like the U.N. Navy were dissolved and the respective units integrated into the all-encompassing U.N. Spacy.
The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters. The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68)
However, the fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction!
General characteristics:
All-environment variable fighter and tactical combat Battroid,
used by U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force and U.N.S. Marine Corps
Accommodation:
Pilot only in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat
Dimensions:
Fighter Mode:
Length 14.23 meters
Wingspan 14.78 meters (at 20° minimum sweep)
Height 3.84 meters
Battroid Mode:
Height 12.68 meters
Width 7.3 meters
Length 4.0 meters
Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons;
Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons;
MTOW: 37.0 metric tons
Power Plant:
2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or 225.63 kN in overboost
4x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip)
18x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles
Performance:
Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h
Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87
g limit: in space +7
Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24
Design Features:
3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system
Transformation:
Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.
Min. time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.
Armament:
2x Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon, firing 6,000 pulses per minute
1x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 RPG, fired at 1,200 rds/min
4x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, including…
12x AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles (3/point), or
12x MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (3/point), or
6x RMS-1 large anti-ship reaction missiles (2/outboard point, 1/inboard point), or
4x UUM-7 micro-missile pods (1/point) each carrying 15 x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles,
or a combination of above load-outs
2x auxiliary hardpoints on the legs for light loads like a FLIR sensor, laser rangefinder/
target designator or ECM pod (typically not used for offensive ordnance)
The kit and its assembly:
This fictional VF-1 was born from spontaneous inspiration and the question if the USMC could have adopted the Valkyrie within the Macross time frame and applied its rather special grey/green/black paint scheme from the Nineties that was carried by AH-1s, CH-46s and also some OV-10s.
The model is a simple, vintage ARII VF-1 in Fighter mode, in this case a VF-1D two-seater that received the cockpit section and the head unit from a VF-1J Gerwalk model to create a single seater. While the parts are interchangeable, the Gerwalk and the Fighter kit have different molds for the cockpit sections and the canopies, too. This is mostly evident through the lack of a front landing gear well under the Gerwalk's cockpit - I had to "carve" a suitable opening into the bottom of the nose, but that was not a problem.
The kit was otherwiese built OOB, with the landing gear down and (finally, after the scenic flight pictures) with an open canopy for final display among the rest of my VF-1 fleet. However, I added some non-canonical small details like small hardpoints on the upper legs and the FLIR and targeting pods on them, scratched from styrene bits.
The ordnance was changed from twelve AMM-1 missiles under the wings to something better suited for attack missions. Finding suitable material became quite a challenge, though. I eventually settled on a pair of large laser-guided smart bombs and two pairs of small air-to-ground missile clusters. The LGBs are streamlined 1:72 2.000 lb general purpose bombs, IIRC from a Hobby Boss F-5E kit, and the launch tubes were scratched from a pair of Bazooka starters from an Academy 1:72 P-51 kit. The ventral standard GU-11 pod was retained and modified to hold a scratched wire display for in-flight pictures at its rear end.
Some blade antennae were added around the hull as a standard measure to improve the simple kit’s look. The cockpit was taken OOB, I just added a pilot figure for the scenic shots and the thick canopy was later mounted on a small lift arm in open position.
Painting and markings:
Adapting the characteristic USMC three-tone paint scheme for the VF-1 was not easy; I used the symmetric pattern from the AH-1s as starting point for the fuselage and gradually evolved it onto the wings into an asymmetric free-form pattern, making sure that the areas where low-viz roundels and some vital stencils would sit on grey for good contrast and readability. The tones became authentic: USMC Field Green (FS 34095, Humbrol 105), USN Medium Grey (FS 35237, Humbrol 145) and black (using Revell 06 Tar Black, which is a very dark grey and not pure black). For some contrast the wings' leading edges were painted with a sand brown/yellow (Humbrol 94).
The landing gear became standard white (Revell 301), the cockpit interior medium grey (Revell 47) with a black ejection seat with brown cushions, and the air intakes as well as the interior of the VG wings dark grey (Revell 77). To set the camouflaged nose radome apart I gave it a slightly different shade of green. The GU-11 pod became bare metal (Revell 91). The LGBs were painted olive drab overall while the AGMs became light grey.
Roundels as well as the UNSMC and unit tags were printed at home in black on clear decal sheet. The unit markings came from an Academy OV-10. The modex came from an 1:72 Revell F8F sheet. Stencils becvame eitrher black or white to keep the low-viz look, just a few tiny color highlights bereak the camouflage up. Some of the characteristic vernier thrusters around the hull are also self-made decals.
Finally, after some typical details and position lights were added with clear paint over a silver base, the small VF-1 was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish.
A spontaneous interim project - and the UMSC's three-tone paint scheme suits the VF-1 well, which might have been a very suitable aircraft for this service and its mission profiles. I am still a bit uncertain about the camouflage's effectiveness, though - yes, it's disruptive, but the color contrasts are so high that a hiding effect seems very poor, even though I find that the scheme works well over urban terrain? It's fictional, though, and even though there are canonical U.N.S. Marines VF-1s to be found in literature, none I came across so far carried this type of livery.
Gisinia Isle is a place that was developed by 2 friends that had all your picture needs in mind.
We are OPEN to the public. Join the group, take your photos and share them with us in our flickr group.
Just make sure you clean up after yourself.
These pictures was taken at the Jungle in Gisinia.
Come on over enjoy the many places to take pictures can't wait to see you there
LM: maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Gasinia%20Isle/54/28/22
FLICKR
Contrary to the narrative that is being pushed by the mainstream that the COVID 19 virus was the result of a natural mutation and that it was transmitted to humans from bats via pangolins, Dr Luc Montagnier the man who discovered the HIV virus back in 1983 disagrees and is saying that the virus was man made.Professor Luc Montagnier, 2008 Nobel Prize winner for Medicine, claims that SARS-CoV-2 is a manipulated virus that was accidentally released from a laboratory in Wuhan, China. Chinese researchers are said to have used coronaviruses in their work to develop an AIDS vaccine. HIV DNA fragments are believed to have been found in the SARS-CoV-2 genome. We knew that the Chinese version of how the coronavirus emerged was increasingly under attack, but here’s a thesis that tells a completely different story about the Covid-19 pandemic, which is already responsible for more than 110,000 deaths worldwide. According to Professor Luc Montagnier, winner of the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2008 for “discovering” HIV as the cause of the AIDS epidemic together with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi, the SARS-CoV-2 is a virus that was manipulated and accidentally released from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, in the last quarter of 2019. According to Professor Montagnier, this laboratory, known for its work on coronaviruses, tried to use one of these viruses as a vector for HIV in the search for an AIDS vaccine! “With my colleague, bio-mathematician Jean-Claude Perez, we carefully analyzed the description of the genome of this RNA virus,” explains Luc Montagnier, interviewed by Dr Jean-François Lemoine for the daily podcast at Pourquoi Docteur, adding that others have already explored this avenue: Indian researchers have already tried to publish the results of the analyses that showed that this coronavirus genome contained sequences of another virus, … the HIV virus (AIDS virus), but they were forced to withdraw their findings as the pressure from the mainstream was too great. To insert an HIV sequence into this genome requires molecular tools. In a challenging question Dr Jean-François Lemoine inferred that the coronavirus under investigation may have come from a patient who is otherwise infected with HIV. No, “says Luc Montagnier,” in order to insert an HIV sequence into this genome, molecular tools are needed, and that can only be done in a laboratory. According to the 2008 Nobel Prize for Medicine, a plausible explanation would be an accident in the Wuhan laboratory. He also added that the purpose of this work was the search for an AIDS vaccine. The truth will eventually come out In any case, this thesis, defended by Professor Luc Montagnier, has a positive turn. According to him, the altered elements of this virus are eliminated as it spreads: “Nature does not accept any molecular tinkering, it will eliminate these unnatural changes and even if nothing is done, things will get better, but unfortunately after many deaths.” Luc Montagnier added that with the help of interfering waves, we could eliminate these sequences and as a result stop the pandemic. This is enough to feed some heated debates! So much so that Professor Montagnier’s statements could also place him in the category of “conspiracy theorists”: “Conspirators are the opposite camp, hiding the truth,” he replies, without wanting to accuse anyone, but hoping that the Chinese will admit to what he believes happened in their laboratory.
www.pourquoidocteur.fr/Articles/Question-d-actu/32184-EXC...
To entice a confession from the Chinese he used the example of Iran which after taking full responsibility for accidentally hitting a Ukrainian plane was able to earn the respect of the global community. Hopefully the Chinese will do the right thing he ads. “In any case, the truth always comes out, it is up to the Chinese government to take responsibility.”
www.gilmorehealth.com/chinese-coronavirus-is-a-man-made-v...
Back in January, when the pandemic now consuming the world was still gathering force, a Berkeley research scientist named Xiao Qiang was monitoring China’s official statements about a new coronavirus then spreading through Wuhan and noticed something disturbing. Statements made by the World Health Organization, the international body that advises the world on handling health crises, often echoed China’s messages. “Particularly at the beginning, it was shocking when I again and again saw WHO’s [director-general], when he spoke to the press … almost directly quoting what I read on the Chinese government’s statements,” he told me.
Sign up for The Atlantic’s daily newsletter.
Each weekday evening, get an overview of the day’s biggest news, along with fascinating ideas, images, and voices.
Email Address (required)
Sign Up
Thanks for signing up!
The most notorious example came in the form of a single tweet from the WHO account on January 14: “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus.” That same day, the Wuhan Health Commission’s public bulletin declared, “We have not found proof for human-to-human transmission.” But by that point even the Chinese government was offering caveats not included in the WHO tweet. “The possibility of limited human-to-human transmission cannot be excluded,” the bulletin said, “but the risk of sustained transmission is low.”
MORE STORIES
Marine recruits sit in a group listening to a speaker off camera.
We Can’t Rely on Just the Military
URI FRIEDMAN
Donald Trump
This Is Trump’s Fault
DAVID FRUM
Xi Jinping at the School of Medicine at Tsinghua University in Beijing
China Is Avoiding Blame by Trolling the World
SHADI HAMID
This, we now know, was catastrophically untrue, and in the months since, the global pandemic has put much of the world under an unprecedented lockdown and killed more than 100,000 people.
Read: The pandemic will cleave America in two
The U.S. was also slow to recognize the seriousness of this new coronavirus, which caught the entire country unprepared. President Donald Trump has blamed the catastrophe on any number of different actors, most recently, singling out the WHO. “They missed the call,” Trump said about the body at a briefing this week. “They could have called it months earlier.”
Trump may well be looking to deflect blame for his own missed calls, but inherent structural problems at the WHO do make the organization vulnerable to misinformation and political influence, especially at a moment when China has invested considerable resources cultivating influence in international organizations whose value the Trump administration has questioned. (Trump just in March announced he would nominate someone to fill the U.S. seat on the WHO’s Executive Board, which has been vacant since 2018.)
Even in January, when Chinese authorities were downplaying the extent of the virus, doctors at the epicenter of the outbreak in Wuhan reportedly observed human-to-human transmission, not least by contracting the disease themselves. In the most famous example, Dr. Li Wenliang was censured for “spreading rumors” after trying to alert other doctors of the new respiratory ailment; he later died of the virus himself at age 33. China now claims him as a martyr. Asked about Li’s case at a press conference, the executive director of the WHO’s Health Emergencies Programme, Michael Ryan, said, “We all mourn the loss of a fellow physician and colleague” but stopped short of condemning China for accusing him. “There is an understandable confusion that occurs at the beginning of an epidemic,” Ryan added. “So we need to be careful to label misunderstanding versus misinformation; there's a difference. People can misunderstand and they can overreact.”
Those lost early weeks also coincided with the Chinese New Year, for which millions of people travel to visit family and friends. “That’s when millions of Wuhan people were misinformed,” Xiao said. “Then they traveled all over China, all over the world.”
Read: China hawks are calling the coronavirus a ‘wake-up call’
The WHO, meanwhile, was getting its information from the same Chinese authorities who were misinforming their own public, and then offering it to the world with its own imprimatur. On January 20, a Chinese official confirmed publicly for the first time that the virus could indeed spread among humans, and within days locked down Wuhan. But by then it was too late.
It took another week for the WHO to declare the spread of the virus a global health emergency—during which time Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO’s director-general, visited China and praised the country’s leadership for “setting a new standard for outbreak response.” Another month and a half went by before the WHO called COVID-19 a pandemic, at which point the virus had killed more than 4,000 people, and had infected 118,000 people across nearly every continent.
The organization’s detractors are now seizing on these missteps and delays to condemn the WHO (for which the U.S. is the largest donor), call for cutting the organization’s funding, or demand Tedros’s resignation. At the White House, Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro has been a sharp critic.
“Even as the WHO under Tedros refused to brand the outbreak as a pandemic for precious weeks and WHO officials repeatedly praised the [Chinese Communist Party] for what we now know was China’s coordinated effort to hide the dangers of the Wuhan virus from the world, the virus spread like wildfire, in no small part because thousands of Chinese citizens continued to travel around the world,” Navarro wrote to me in an email. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently said the administration was “reevaluating our funding with respect to the World Health Organization;” Trump has said an announcement on the matter will come next week. On the Hill, Republican Senators Martha McSally of Arizona and Rick Scott of Florida are both seeking an investigation of the WHO’s performance in the crisis and whether China somehow manipulated the organization. “Anybody who’s clear-eyed about it understands that Communist China has been covering up the realities of the coronavirus from Day 1,” McSally, who has called for Tedros to resign, told me. “We don’t expect the WHO to parrot that kind of propaganda.” Scott told me he wants to know whether the WHO followed their own procedures for handling a pandemic and why the organization hasn’t been forceful in condemning China’s missteps.
Asked for comment, a representative from the WHO pointed to a press conference Tedros gave this week. “Please quarantine politicizing COVID,” Tedros said then. “We will have many body bags in front of us if we don’t behave … The United States and China should come together and fight this dangerous enemy.” Even in early January, when it was still describing the disease as a mysterious new pneumonia, the WHO was publishing regular guidance for countries and health-care workers on how to mitigate its spread. And the organization says it has now shipped millions of pieces of protective gear to 75 countries, sent tests to more than 126, and offered training materials for health-care workers.
In any case, it’s not the WHO’s fault if China obscured the problem early on, says Charles Clift, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House’s Center for Universal Health who worked at the WHO from 2004 to 2006. “We’d like more transparency, that’s true, but if countries find reasons to not be transparent, it’s difficult to know what we can do about it.” The organization’s major structural weakness is that it relies on information from its member countries—and the WHO team that visited China in February to evaluate the response did so jointly with China’s representatives. The resulting report did not mention delays in information-sharing, but did say that “China’s bold approach to contain the rapid spread of this new respiratory pathogen has changed the course of a rapidly escalating and deadly epidemic.” The mission came back telling reporters they were largely satisfied with the information China was giving them.
Read: The problem with China’s victory lap
If this is something short of complicity in a Chinese cover-up—which is what former National Security Adviser John Bolton has alleged of the WHO—it does point to a big vulnerability: The group’s membership includes transparent democracies and authoritarian states and systems in between, which means the information the WHO puts out is only as good as what it’s getting from the likes of Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin. North Korea, for instance, has reported absolutely no coronavirus cases, and the WHO isn’t really in a position to say otherwise.
The structure also gives WHO leaders like Tedros an incentive not to anger member states, and this is as true of China as it is of countries with significantly less financial clout. During the Ebola epidemic in 2014, Clift said, WHO took months to declare a public-health emergency. “That’s three very small West African countries, and WHO didn’t want to upset them,” Clift said. “WHO didn’t cover itself in glory in that one.” The response this time has been much faster and better, in Clift’s observation. “It doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be examined afterwards to see what they could have done better,” he said. “And one should really investigate the origins of what happened in China.”
The WHO has also shown, however, that it can walk the line between the need for cooperation and information-sharing from member states and the need to hold them accountable for mistakes. During the SARS outbreak in 2003, a WHO spokesman criticized China for its lack of transparency and preparation, which had allowed the virus to spread unchecked. China even later admitted to mistakes in handling the outbreak.
No such critique has been forthcoming this time. One study found that China could have limited its own infections by up to 95 percent had the government acted in that early period when doctors were first raising the alarm and the Chinese Communist Party was still denying the extent of the problem. “The WHO at that time didn’t do their job,” Xiao said. “The opposite: They actually compounded Chinese authorities’ misinformation for a few weeks. That is, to me, unforgivable.”
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.
www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/04/world-health...
Some background:
The VF-1 was developed by Stonewell/Bellcom/Shinnakasu for the U.N. Spacy by using alien Overtechnology obtained from the SDF-1 Macross alien spaceship. It was preceded into production by an aerodynamic proving version of its airframe, the VF-X. Unlike all later VF vehicles, the VF-X was strictly a jet aircraft, built to demonstrate that a jet fighter with the features necessary to convert to Battroid mode was aerodynamically feasible.
After the VF-X's testing was finished, an advanced concept atmospheric-only prototype, the VF-0 Phoenix, was flight-tested from 2005 to 2007 and briefly served as an active-duty fighter from 2007 to the VF-1's rollout in late 2008, while the bugs were being worked out of the full-up VF-1 prototype (VF-X-1).
The space-capable VF-1's combat debut was on February 7, 2009, during the Battle of South Ataria Island - the first battle of Space War I, and was the mainstay fighter of the U.N. Spacy for the entire conflict. Introduced in 2008, the VF-1 would be out of frontline service just five years later.
The VF-1 proved to be an extremely capable craft, successfully combating a variety of Zentradi mecha even in most sorties which saw UN Spacy forces significantly outnumbered. The versatility of the Valkyrie design enabled the variable fighter to act as both large-scale infantry and as air/space superiority fighter. The signature skills of U.N. Spacy ace pilot Maximilian Jenius exemplified the effectiveness of the variable systems as he near-constantly transformed the Valkyrie in battle to seize advantages of each mode as combat conditions changed from moment to moment. The basic VF-1 was deployed in four minor variants (designated A, D, J, and S) and its success was increased by continued development of various enhancements including the GBP-1S "Armored" Valkyrie and FAST Pack "Super" Valkyrie weapon systems.
After the end of Space War I, the VF-1A continued to be manufactured both in the Sol system (notably on the Lunar facility Apollo Base) and throughout the UNG space colonies. Although the VF-1 would eventually be replaced as the primary VF of the UN Spacy by the more capable, but also much bigger, VF-4 Lightning III in 2020, a long service record and continued production after the war proved the lasting worth of the design.
The VF-1 was without doubt the most recognizable variable fighter of Space War I and was seen as a vibrant symbol of the U.N. Spacy even into the first year of the New Era 0001 in 2013. At the end of 2015 the final rollout of the VF-1 was celebrated at a special ceremony, commemorating this most famous of variable fighters.
The VF-1 Valkryie was built from 2006 to 2013 with a total production of 5,459 VF-1 variable fighters with several variants (VF-1A = 5,093, VF-1D = 85, VF-1J = 49, VF-1S = 30, VF-1G = 12, VE-1 = 122, VT-1 = 68)
However, the fighter remained active in many second line units and continued to show its worthiness years later, e. g. through Milia Jenius who would use her old VF-1 fighter in defense of the colonization fleet - 35 years after the type's service introduction!
Equipment Type: all-environment variable fighter and tactical combat battroid
Government: U.N. Spacy, U.N. Navy, U.N. Space Air Force
Accommodation: pilot only in Marty & Beck Mk-7 zero/zero ejection seat
Dimensions:
Fighter Mode:
Length 14.23 meters
Wingspan 14.78 meters (fully extended)
Height 3.84 meters
Battroid Mode:
Height 12.68 meters
Width 7.3 meters
Length 4.0 meters
Empty weight: 13.25 metric tons;
Standard T-O mass: 18.5 metric tons;
MTOW: 37.0 metric tons
Power Plant:
2x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry/P&W/Roice FF-2001 thermonuclear reaction turbine engines, output 650 MW each, rated at 11,500 kg in standard or in overboost (225.63 kN x 2)
4 x Shinnakasu Heavy Industry NBS-1 high-thrust vernier thrusters (1 x counter reverse vernier thruster nozzle mounted on the side of each leg nacelle/air intake, 1 x wing thruster roll control system on each wingtip);
18 x P&W LHP04 low-thrust vernier thrusters beneath multipurpose hook/handles
Performance:
Battroid Mode: maximum walking speed 160 km/h
Fighter Mode: at 10,000 m Mach 2.71; at 30,000+ m Mach 3.87
g limit: in space +7
Thrust-to-weight ratio: empty 3.47; standard T-O 2.49; maximum T-O 1.24
Design Features: 3-mode variable transformation; variable geometry wing; vertical take-off and landing; control-configurable vehicle; single-axis thrust vectoring; three "magic hand" manipulators for maintenance use; retractable canopy shield for Battroid mode and atmospheric reentry; option of GBP-1S system, atmospheric-escape booster, or FAST Pack system
Transformation:
Standard time from Fighter to Battroid (automated): under 5 sec.
Min time from Fighter to Battroid (manual): 0.9 sec.
Armament:
1 x internal Mauler RÖV-20 anti-aircraft laser cannon, firing 6,000 pulses per minute
1 x Howard GU-11 55 mm three-barrel Gatling gun pod with 200 rds fired at 1,200 rds/min
4 x underwing hard points for a wide variety of ordnance, including
12x AMM-1 hybrid guided multipurpose missiles (3/point), or
12x MK-82 LDGB conventional bombs (3/point), or
6x RMS-1 large anti-ship reaction missiles (2/outboard point, 1/inboard point), or
4x UUM-7 micro-missile pods (1/point) each carrying 15 x Bifors HMM-01 micro-missiles, or a combination of above load-outs
Optional Armament:
Shinnakasu Heavy Industry GBP-1S ground-combat protector weapon system, or
Shinnakasu Heavy Industry FAST Pack augmentative space weapon system
The kit and its assembly:
This is one more 1:100 Bandai VF-1, IMHO a design masterpiece created by Shoji Kawamori and one of my favorite mecha designs ever, because it was created as an late 70ies style jet fighter that could transform into a robot in a secondary role, a simple, purposeful military vehicle.
I’ve built more than a dozen of these kits over the last 25 years, so I know it pretty well, especially its weaknesses. But the small Valkyries, originally manufactured by IMAI and now still on sale through Bandai (they pop up every 5 years when another Macross anniversary occurs…) are simple and easy to modify, and to me a kind of clean canvas for weird and colorful ideas. The VF-1 carries a huge creative potential.
This VF-1A was built almost OOB. I just made some minor mods, partly based on the design benchmark (see below). These include a pilot figure for the cockpit – actually a modified, HO (1:87) scale sitting soldier from Roco Minitanks; 1:100 pilot figures are hard to find, but I found that these squatted figures fill the cockpit and the relatively flat seat pretty well. A few characteristic blade antennae (four under the lower front fuselage and two behind the cockpit) were added.
Since this VF-1A was to be displayed in flight, the landing gear could be omitted and the covers mounted in closed position. The underwing ordnance was omitted and the pylons’ attachment points faired over. The handgun, hanging under the fuselage in flight mode, was replaced by a smoke generator and an associate tank - actually a drop tank from an Airfix 1:72 Saab Viggen. It also holds an adapter for a scratch-built display, which is taller and less obvious than the OOB offering.
Painting and markings:
This is where the actual work took place – and this Canadian VF-1 is a personal interpretation of a fictional custom Valkyrie profiles by CrazyCanuck, posted at macross.net in the fan art section (check
www.macross2.net/m3/forfansonly/crazycanuck/layouts-snowb... for reference).
There’s hardly a livery that does not suit the elegant VF-1, and I found the Snowbirds scheme very pleasing. I also liked the idea that the VF-1 would be used all over the world, with national adaptations like a Royal Navy(!) variant backed by official publications and source books. So, why not a Canadian Valkyrie?
For easy painting the kit was built in separate section (cockpit, fuselage with wings and butterfly tail, legs, head and the smoke generator), and the use of white AND red –together with yellow IMHO the most challenging tone to work with on models – scared me.
Due to the kit’s tininess I painted everything by brush with enamels. The basic tones are Humbrol 130 and 19, the latter turned out to be a very good representation of the Snowbirds’ deep scarlet red tone.
The cheatline all long the VF-1, literally from nose to feet, was created with decals. Most come from an 1:72 Snowbirds CL-141 Tutor sheet from Victoria productions in Canada (excellent stuff!), part of the trim had to be improvised and extended with generic blue and white decal sheet.
In contrast to the CrazyCanuck illustration, I decided to add Macross insignia instead of Canadian roundels – keeping in line with similar “nationalized” VF-1s in official source books. Some Canadian symbols like the flags on the fins, the roundels in the round depressions at the ankles and the huge Canadian flag on the starboard wing (a personal addition, the maple leaf is a decal while the rest was done with paint) were adopted, though, and they suit the Valkyrie well.
After basis painting was done I followed the engraved panel lines with a fine, very soft pencil. An experiment, because I just wanted a subtle emphasis esp. on the white surfaces, not the 2D/comic-style full black panel lines of former builds.
No other weathering was done, since this VF-1 was to look clean and bright. Finally, everything was sealed with a coat of gloss acrylic varnish, and the characteristic clear parts (visor on the head, position lights on the legs, laser muzzles, position lights) were laid out with acrylic silver and filled out with various shades of clear paint. Just small things, but they enhance the overall impression of the simple model kit a lot.
After a long time it’s a good feeling to build an VF-1 again, and creating a rather bright one was fun, even though the paint job was challenging. But patience and clever improvisation paid out: that Snowbird really stands out, the Snowbirds livery suits the VF-1 well! :-D