Fact | Schedule | Daily - Morning coffee...start of my daily schedule

Some of you may have noticed that, unfortunately, owing to the fact that a certain person who sells truck photos on eBay commercially has been lifting my images from this album and selling them I have had to remove 2300 photos that didn't have a watermark. I have now run around 1700 through Lightroom and added a watermark with the intention of bulk uploading them again. Rather than watermark the existing (hidden) files in Flickr one at a time it will be easier to do it this way. I definitely won’t be adding individual tags with the make and model of each vehicle I will just add generic transport tags. Each photo is named after the vehicle and reg in any case. For anyone new to these images there is a chapter and verse explanation below. It is staggering how many times I get asked questions that a quick scan would answer or just as likely I can’t possibly answer – I didn’t take them, but, just to clarify-I do own the copyright- and I do pursue copyright theft.

 

This is a collection of scanned prints from a collection of photographs taken by the late Jim Taylor A number of years ago I was offered a large number of photographs taken by Jim Taylor, a transport photographer based in Huddersfield. The collection, 30,000 prints, 20,000 negatives – and copyright! – had been offered to me and one of the national transport magazines previously by a friend of Jim's, on behalf of Jim's wife. I initially turned them down, already having over 30,000 of my own prints filed away and taking space up. Several months later the prints were still for sale – at what was, apparently, the going rate. It was a lot of money and I deliberated for quite a while before deciding to buy them. I did however buy them directly from Jim’s wife and she delivered them personally – just to quash the occasional rumour from people who can’t mind their own business. Although some prints were sold elsewhere, particularly the popular big fleet stuff, I should have the negatives, unfortunately they came to me in a random mix, 1200 to a box, without any sort of indexing and as such it would be impossible to match negatives to prints, or, to even find a print of any particular vehicle. I have only ever looked at a handful myself unless I am scanning them. The prints are generally in excellent condition and I initially stored them in a bedroom without ever looking at any of them. In 2006 I built an extension and they had to be well protected from dust and moved a few times. Ultimately my former 6x7 box room office has become their (and my own work’s) permanent home.

I hope to avoid posting images that Jim had not taken his self, however should I inadvertently infringe another photographers copyright, please inform me by email and I will resolve the issue immediately. There are copyright issues with some of the photographs that were sold to me. A Flickr member from Scotland drew my attention to some of his own work amongst the first uploads of Jim’s work. I had a quick look through some of the 30 boxes of prints and decided that for the time being the safest thing for me to do was withdraw the majority of the earlier uploaded scans and deal with the problem – which I did. whilst the vast majority of the prints are Jims, there is a problem defining copyright of some of them, this is something that the seller did not make clear at the time. I am reasonably confident that I have since been successful in identifying Jims own work. His early work consists of many thousands of lustre 6x4 prints which are difficult to scan well, later work is almost entirely 7x5 glossy, much easier to scan. Not all of the prints are pin sharp but I can generally print successfully to A4 from a scan.

 

You may notice photographs being duplicated in this Album, unfortunately there are multiple copies of many prints (for swapping) and as I have to have a system of archiving and backing up I can only guess - using memory - if I have scanned a print before. The bigger fleets have so many similar vehicles and registration numbers that it is impossible to get it right all of the time. It is easier to scan and process a print than check my files - on three different PC’s - for duplicates. There has not been, nor will there ever be, any intention to knowingly breach anyone else's copyright. I have presented the Jim Taylor collection as exactly that-The Jim Taylor Collection- his work not mine, my own work is quite obviously mine.

Unfortunately, many truck spotters have swapped and traded their work without copyright marking it as theirs. These people never anticipated the ease with which images would be shared online in the future. I would guess that having swapped and traded photos for many years that it is almost impossible to control their future use. Anyone wanting to control the future use of their work would have been well advised to copyright mark their work (as many did) and would be well advised not to post them on photo sharing sites without a watermark as the whole point of these sites is to share the image, it is very easy for those that wish, to lift any image, despite security settings, indeed, Flickr itself, warns you that this is the case. It was this abuse and theft of my material that led me to watermark all of my later uploads. I may yet withdraw non-watermarked photos, I haven’t decided yet. (I did in the end)

To anyone reading the above it will be quite obvious that I can’t provide information regarding specific photos or potential future uploads – I didn’t take them! There are many vehicles that were well known to me as Jim only lived down the road from me (although I didn’t know him), however scanning, titling, tagging and uploading is laborious and time consuming enough, I do however provide a fair amount of information with my own transport (and other) photos. I am aware that there are requests from other Flickr users that are unanswered, I stumble across them months or years after they were posted, this isn’t deliberate. Some weekends one or two “enthusiasts” can add many hundreds of photos as favourites, this pushes requests that are in the comments section ten or twenty pages out of sight and I miss them. I also have notifications switched off, I receive around 50 emails a day through work and I don’t want even more from Flickr. Other requests, like many other things, I just plain forget – no excuses! Uploads of Jim’s photos will be infrequent as it is a boring pastime and I would much rather work on my own output.

 

And so to the weekend again. And what might be the last orchid-free weekend until well into June or even August.

 

So, enjoy the churches while you can.

 

Saturday, and not much really planned. We get up at half six with it fully light outside. The cloud and drizzle had not arrived, instead it was pretty clear and sunny.

 

No time for thinking about going out to take shots, as we had hunter-gathering to do.

 

In fact, we didn't need much, just the usual stuff to keep us going. That and the car was running on fumes. So we will that up first, and then into Tesco and round and round we go, fully the trolley up. It being Mother's Day on Saturday, we were having Jen round on Sunday, we were to have steak, so I get mushrooms.

 

And once back, we have breakfast then go to Preston for the actual steak, three ribeyes, all cut from the same stip. Jools had gone to look at the garden centre for ideas as we're going to dig up the raspberries, so just wondering what to put in their place.

 

By then the rain had come, and so we dashed back to the car, and on the way home called in at two churches.

 

First off was Goodnestone, just the other side of Wingham.

 

Its a fine estate church, covered in wonderfully knapped bricks, giving it an East Anglian feel. Before we went in, we sheltered under a tree to much on a sausage roll I had bought at the butcher, that done, we go to the church, which is open.

 

I have been here quite recently, five years back, and in truth no much glass to record, but I do my best, leave a fiver of the weekly collection and we drove over the fields to Eastry.

 

St Mary is an impressive church, with carved and decorated west face of the Norman tower, at its base an odd lean-to porch has been created, leading into the church, which does have interest other than the 35 painted medallions high in the Chancel Arch, once the backdrop to the Rood.

 

I snap them with the big lens, and the windows too. A warden points out what looks like a very much older painted window high among the roof timbers in the east wall of the Chancel.

 

I get a shot, which is good enough, but even with a 400mm lens, is some crop.

 

I finish up and we go home, taking it carefully along nearly flooded roads.

 

Being a Saturday, there is football, though nothing much of interest until three when Norwich kick off against Stoke: could they kick it on a wet Saturday afternoon in the Potteries?

 

No. No, they couldn't.

 

Ended 0-0, City second best, barely laid a glove on the Stoke goal.

 

And then spots galore: Ireland v England in the egg-chasing, Citeh v Burnley in the Cup and Chelsea v Everton in the league, all live on various TV channels.

 

I watch the first half of the rugby, then switch over when England were reduced to 14, so did enjoy the lad Haarland score another hat-trick in a 6-0 demolition.

 

And that was that, another day over with.....

 

---------------------------------------------

 

Set away from the main street but on one of the earliest sites in the village, flint-built Eastry church has an over restored appearance externally but this gives way to a noteworthy interior. Built in the early thirteenth century by its patrons, Christ Church Canterbury, it was always designed to be a statement of both faith and power. The nave has a clerestory above round piers whilst the east nave wall has a pair of quatrefoils pierced through into the chancel. However this feature pales into insignificance when one sees what stands between them - a square panel containing 35 round paintings in medallions. There are four deigns including the Lily for Our Lady; a dove; Lion; Griffin. They would have formed a backdrop to the Rood which would have been supported on a beam the corbels of which survive below the paintings. On the centre pier of the south aisle is a very rare feature - a beautifully inscribed perpetual calendar or `Dominical Circle` to help find the Dominical letter of the year. Dating from the fourteenth century it divides the calendar into a sequence of 28 years. The reredos is an alabaster structure dating from the Edwardian period - a rather out of place object in a church of this form, but a good piece of work in its own right. On the west wall is a good early 19th century Royal Arms with hatchments on either side and there are many good monuments both ledger slabs and hanging tablets. Of the latter the finest commemorates John Harvey who died in 1794. It shows his ship the Brunswick fighting with all guns blazing with the French ship the Vengeur. John Bacon carved the Elder this detailed piece of work.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Eastry

 

------------------------------------------

 

Above the Chancel Arch, enclosed within a rectangular frame, are rows of seven "medallion" wall paintings; the lower group was discovered in 1857 and the rest in 1903. They remained in a rather dilapidated state until the Canterbury Cathedral Wall Paintings Department brought them back to life.

 

The medallions are evidently of the 13th Century, having been painted while the mortar was still wet. Each medallion contains one of four motifs:

 

The trefoil flower, pictured left, is perhaps a symbol of the Blessed Virgin Mary to whom the church is dedicated; or symbolic of Christ.

 

The lion; symbolic of the Resurrection

  

Doves, either singly, or in pairs, represent the Holy Spirit

  

The Griffin represents evil, over which victory is won by the power of the Resurrection and the courage of the Christian.

 

www.ewbchurches.org.uk/eastrychurchhistory.htm

 

----------------------------------------------------

 

EASTRY,

THE next parish north-eastward from Knolton is Eastry. At the time of taking the survey of Domesday, it was of such considerable account, that it not only gave name, as it does at present, to the hundred, but to the greatest part of the lath in which it stands, now called the lath of St. Augustine. There are two boroughs in this parish, viz. the borough of Hardenden, which is within the upper half hundred of Downhamford, and comprehends the districts of Hardenden, Selson and Skrinkling, and the borough of Eastry, the borsholder of which is chosen at Eastry-court, and comprehends all the rest of the parish, excepting so much of it as lies within that part of the borough of Felderland, which is within this parish.

 

THE PARISH OF EASTRY, a healthy and not unpleasant situation, is about two miles and an half from north to south, but it is much narrower the other way, at the broadest extent of which it is not more than a mile and an half. The village of Eastry is situated on a pleasing eminence, almost in the centre of the parish, exhiblting a picturesque appearance from many points of view. The principal street in it is called Eastrystreet; from it branch off Mill street, Church-street and Brook-street. In Mill street is a spacious handsome edisice lately erected there, as a house of industry, for the poor of the several united parishes of Eastry, Norborne, Betshanger, Tilmanstone, Waldershare, Coldred, Lydden, Shebbertswell, Swynfield, Wootton, Denton, Chillenden and Knolton. In Churchstreet, on the east side, stands the church, with the court-lodge and parsonage adjoining the church-yard; in this street is likewise the vicarage. In Brook-street, is a neat modern house, the residence of Wm. Boteler, esq. and another belonging to Mr. Thomas Rammell, who resides in it. Mention will be found hereafter, under the description of the borough of Hernden, in this parish, of the descent and arms of the Botelers resident there for many generations. Thomas Boteler, who died possessed of that estate in 1651, left three sons, the youngest of whom, Richard, was of Brook-street, and died in 1682; whose great-grandson, W. Boteler, esq. is now of Brook-street; a gentleman to whom the editor is much indebted for his communications and assistance, towards the description of this hundred, and its adjoining neighbourhood. He has been twice married; first to Sarah, daughter and coheir of Thomas Fuller, esq. of Statenborough, by whom he has one son, William Fuller, now a fellow of St. Peter's college, Cambridge: secondly, to Mary, eldest daughter of John Harvey, esq. of Sandwich and Hernden, late captain of the royal navy, by whom he has five sons and three daughters. He bears for his arms, Argent, on three escutcheons, sable, three covered cups, or; which coat was granted to his ancestor, Richard Boteler, esq. of Hernden, by Cooke, clar. in 1589. Mr. Boteler, of Eastry, is the last surviving male of the family, both of Hernden and Brook-street. Eastry-street, comprizing the neighbourhood of the above mentioned branches, may be said to contain about sixty-four houses.

 

At the south-east boundary of this parish lies the hamlet of Updown, adjoining to Ham and Betshanger, in the former of which parishes some account of it has been already given. At the southern bounds, adjoining to Tilmanstone, lies the hamlet of Westone, formerly called Wendestone. On the western side lies the borough of Hernden, which although in this parish, is yet within the hundred of Downhamford and manor of Adisham; in the southern part of it is Shrinkling, or Shingleton, as it is now called, and the hamlet of Hernden. At the northern part of this borough lie the hamlets and estates of Selson, Wells, and Gore. Towards the northern boundary of the parish, in the road to Sandwich, is the hamlet of Statenborough, and at a small distance from it is that part of the borough of Felderland, or Fenderland, as it is usually called, within this parish, in which, adjoining the road which branches off to Word, is a small seat, now the property and residence of Mrs. Dare, widow of Wm. Dare, esq. who resides in it. (fn. 1)

 

Round the village the lands are for a little distance, and on towards Statenborough, inclosed with hedges and trees, but the rest of the parish is in general an open uninclosed country of arable land, like the neighbouring ones before described; the soil of it towards the north is most fertile, in the other parts it is rather thin, being much inclined to chalk, except in the bottoms, where it is much of a stiff clay, for this parish is a continued inequality of hill and dale; notwithstanding the above, there is a great deal of good fertile land in the parish, which meets on an average rent at fifteen shillings an acre. There is no wood in it. The parish contains about two thousand six hundred and fifty acres; the yearly rents of it are assessed to the poor at 2679l.

 

At the south end of the village is a large pond, called Butsole; and adjoining to it on the east side, a field, belonging to Brook-street estate, called the Butts; from whence it is conjectured that Butts were formerly erected in it, for the practice of archery among the inhabitants.

 

A fair is held here for cattle, pedlary, and toys, on October the 2d, (formerly on St. Matthew's day, September the 21st) yearly.

 

IN 1792, MR. BOTELER, of Brook-street, discovered, on digging a cellar in the garden of a cottage, situated eastward of the highway leading from Eastrycross to Butsole, an antient burying ground, used as such in the latter time of the Roman empire in Britain, most probably by the inhabitants of this parish, and the places contiguous to it. He caused several graves to be opened, and found with the skeletons, fibulæ, beads, knives,umbones of shields, &c. and in one a glass vessel. From other skeletons, which have been dug up in the gardens nearer the cross, it is imagined, that they extended on the same side the road up to the cross, the ground of which is now pretty much covered with houses; the heaps of earth, or barrows, which formerly remained over them, have long since been levelled, by the great length of time and the labour of the husbandman; the graves were very thick, in rows parallel to each other, in a direction from east to west.

 

St. Ivo's well, mentioned by Nierembergius, in Historia de Miraculis Natureæ, lib. ii. cap. 33; which I noticed in my folio edition as not being able to find any tradition of in this parish, I have since found was at a place that formerly went by the name of Estre, and afterwards by that of Plassiz, near St. Ives, in Huntingdonshire. See Gales Scriptores, xv. vol. i. p.p. 271, 512.

 

This place gave birth to Henry de Eastry, who was first a monk, and then prior of Christ-church, in Canterbury; who, for his learning as well as his worthy acts, became an ornament, not only to the society he presided over, but to his country in general. He continued prior thirty-seven years, and died, far advanced in life, in 1222.

 

THIS PLACE, in the time of the Saxons, appears to have been part of the royal domains, accordingly Simon of Durham, monk and precentor of that church, in his history, stiles it villa regalis, quæ vulgari dicitur Easterige pronuncione, (the royal ville, or manor, which in the vulgar pronunciation was called Easterige), which shews the antient pre-eminence and rank of this place, for these villæ regales, or regiæ, as Bede calls them, of the Saxons, were usually placed upon or near the spot, where in former ages the Roman stations had been before; and its giving name both to the lath and hundred in which it is situated corroborates the superior consequence it was then held in. Egbert, king of Kent, was in possession of it about the year 670, at which time his two cousins, Ethelred and Ethelbright, sons of his father's elder brother Ermenfrid, who had been entrusted to his care by their uncle, the father of Egbert, were, as writers say, murdered in his palace here by his order, at the persuasion of one Thunnor, a slattering courtier, lest they should disturb him in the possession of the crown. After which Thunnor buried them in the king's hall here, under the cloth of estate, from whence, as antient tradition reports, their bodies were afterwards removed to a small chapel belonging to the palace, and buried there under the altar at the east end of it, and afterwards again with much pomp to the church of Ramsey abbey. To expiate the king's guilt, according to the custom of those times, he gave to Domneva, called also Ermenburga, their sister, a sufficient quantity of land in the isle of Thanet, on which she might found a monastery.

 

How long it continued among the royal domains, I have not found; but before the termination of the Saxon heptarchy, THE MANOR OF EASTRY was become part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, and it remained so till the year 811, when archbishop Wilfred exchanged it with his convent of Christchurch for their manor of Bourne, since from the archbishop's possession of it called Bishopsbourne. After which, in the year 979 king Ægelred, usually called Ethelred, increased the church's estates here, by giving to it the lands of his inheritance in Estrea, (fn. 2) free from all secular service and siscal tribute, except the repelling of invasions and the repairing of bridges and castles, usually stiled the trinoda necessitas; (fn. 3) and in the possession of the prior and convent bove-mentioned, this manor continued at the taking of the survey of Domesday, being entered in it under the general title of Terra Monachorum Archiepi; that is, the land of the monks of the archbishop, as follows:

 

In the lath of Estrei in Estrei hundred, the archbishop himself holds Estrei. It was taxed at Seven sulings. The arable land is . . . . In demesne there are three carucates and seventy two villeins, with twenty-two borderers, having twenty-four carucates. There is one mill and a half of thirty shillings, and three salt pits of four shillings, and eighteen acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of ten hogs.

 

After which, this manor continued in the possession of the priory, and in the 10th year of king Edward II. the prior obtained a grant of free-warren in all his demesne lands in it, among others; about which time it was valued at 65l. 3s. after which king Henry VI. in his 28th year, confirmed the above liberty, and granted to it a market, to be held at Eastry weekly on a Tuesday, and a fair yearly, on the day of St. Matthew the Apostle and Evangelist; in which state it continued till the dissolution of the priory in the 31st year of king Henry VIII. when it came in to the king's hands, where it did not remain long, for he settled it, among other premises, in the 33d year of his reign, on his new created dean and chapter of Canterbury, part of whose possessions it continues at this time. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

The manerial rights, profits of courts, royalties, &c. the dean and chapter retain in their own hands; but the demesne lands of the manor, with the courtlodge, which is a large antient mansion, situated adjoining to the church-yard, have been from time to time demised on a benesicial lease. The house is large, partly antient and partly modern, having at different times undergone great alterations. In the south wall are the letters T. A. N. in flint, in large capitals, being the initials of Thomas and Anne Nevinson. Mr. Isaac Bargrave, father of the present lessee, new fronted the house, and the latter in 1786 put the whole in complete repair, in doing which, he pulled down a considerable part of the antient building, consisting of stone walls of great strength and thickness, bringing to view some gothic arched door ways of stone, which proved the house to have been of such construction formerly, and to have been a very antient building. The chapel, mentioned before, is at the east end of the house. The east window, consisting of three compartments, is still visible, though the spaces are filled up, it having for many years been converted into a kitchen, and before the last alteration by Mr. Bargrave the whole of it was entire.

 

At this mansion, then in the hands of the prior and convent of Christ-church, archbishop Thomas Becket, after his stight from Northampton in the year 1164, concealed himself for eight days, and then, on Nov. 10, embarked at Sandwich for France. (fn. 4)

 

The present lessee is Isaac Bargrave, esq. who resides at the court-lodge, whose ancestors have been lessees of this estate for many years past.

 

THE NEVINSONS, as lessees, resided at the courtlodge of Eastry for many years. They were originally of Brigend, in Wetherell, in Cumberland. They bore for their arms, Argent, a chevron, between three eagles displayed, azure. Many of them lie buried in Eastry church. (fn. 5)

 

THE FAMILY of Bargrave, alias Bargar, was originally of Bridge, and afterwards of the adjoining parish of Patrixbourne; where John Bargrave, eldest son of Robert, built the seat of Bifrons, and resided at it, of whom notice has already been taken in vol. ix. of this history, p. 280. Isaac Bargrave, the sixth son of Robert above-mentioned, and younger brother of John, who built Bifrons, was ancestor of the Bargraves, of Eastry; he was S. T. P. and dean of Canterbury, a man of strict honour and high principles of loyalty, for which he suffered the most cruel treatment. He died in 1642, having married in 1618 Elizabeth, daughter of John Dering, esq. of Egerton, by Elizabeth, sister of Edward lord Wotton, the son of John Dering, esq. of Surrenden, by Margaret Brent. Their descendant, Isaac Bargrave, esq. now living, was an eminent solicitor in London, from which he has retired for some years, and now resides at Eastry-court, of which he is the present lessee. He married Sarah, eldest daughter of George Lynch, M. D. of Canterbury, who died at Herne in 1787, S.P. They bear for their arms, Or, on a pale gules, a sword, the blade argent, pomelled, or, on a chief vert three bezants.

 

SHRINKLING, alias SHINGLETON, the former of which is its original name, though now quite lost, is a small manor at the south-west boundary of this pa Kent, anno 1619. rish, adjoining to Nonington. It is within the borough of Heronden, or Hardonden, as it is now called, and as such, is within the upper half hundred of Downhamford. This manor had antiently owners of the same name; one of whom, Sir William de Scrinkling, held it in king Edward I.'s reign, and was succeeded by Sir Walter de Scrinkling his son, who held it by knight's service of Hamo de Crevequer, (fn. 6) and in this name it continued in the 20th year of king Edward III.

 

Soon after which it appears to have been alienated to William Langley, of Knolton, from which name it passed in like manner as Knolton to the Peytons and the Narboroughs, and thence by marriage to Sir Thomas D'Aeth, whose grandson Sir Narborough D'Aeth, bart. now of Knolton, is at present entitled to it.

 

There was a chapel belonging to this manor, the ruins of which are still visible in the wood near it, which was esteemed as a chapel of ease to the mother church of Eastry, and was appropriated with it by archbishop Richard, Becket's immediate successor, to the almory of the priory of Christ-church; but the chapel itself seems to have become desolate many years before the dissolution of the priory, most probably soon after the family of Shrinkling became extinct; the Langleys, who resided at the adjoining manor of Knolton, having no occasion for the use of it. The chapel stood in Shingleton wood, near the south east corner; the foundations of it have been traced, though level with the surface, and not easily discovered. There is now on this estate only one house, built within memory, before which there was only a solitary barn, and no remains of the antient mansion of it.

 

HERONDEN, alias HARDENDEN, now usually called HERONDEN, is a district in this parish, situated about a mile northward from Shingleton, within the borough of its own name, the whole of which is within the upper half hundred of Downhamford. It was once esteemed as a manor, though it has not had even the name of one for many years past, the manor of Adisham claiming over it. The mansion of it was antiently the residence of a family of the same name, who bore for their arms, Argent, a heron with one talon erect, gaping for breath, sable. These arms are on a shield, which is far from modern, in Maidstone church, being quarterly, Heronden as above, with sable, three escallop shells, two and one, argent; and in a window of Lincoln's Inn chapel is a coat of arms of a modern date, being that of Anthony Heronden, esq. Argent, a heron, azure, between three escallops, sable. One of this family of Heronden lies buried in this church, and in the time of Robert Glover, Somerset herald, his portrait and coat of arms, in brass, were remaining on his tombstone. The coat of arms is still extant in very old rolls and registers in the Heralds office, where the family is stiled Heronden, of Heronden, in Eastry; nor is the name less antient, as appears by deeds which commence from the reign of Henry III. which relate to this estate and name; but after this family had remained possessed of this estate for so many years it at last descended down in king Richard II.'s reign, to Sir William Heronden, from whom it passed most probably either by gift or sale, to one of the family of Boteler, or Butler, then resident in this neighbourhood, descended from those of this name, formerly seated at Butler's sleet, in Ash, whose ancestor Thomas Pincerna, or le Boteler, held that manor in king John's reign, whence his successors assumed the name of Butler, alias Boteler, or as they were frequently written Botiller, and bore for their arms, One or more covered cups, differently placed and blazoned. In this family the estate descended to John Boteler, who lived in the time of king Henry VI. and resided at Sandwich, of which town he was several times mayor, and one of the burgesses in two parliaments of that reign; he lies buried in St. Peter's church there. His son Richard, who was also of Sandwich, had a grant of arms in 1470, anno 11th Edward IV. by Thomas Holme, norroy, viz. Gyronny of six, argent and sable, a covered cup, or, between three talbots heads, erased and counterchanged of the field, collared, gules, garnished of the third. His great-grandson Henry Boteler rebuilt the mansion of Heronden, to which he removed in 1572, being the last of his family who resided at Sandwich. He had the above grant of arms confirmed to him, and died in 1580, being buried in Eastry church. Richard Boteler, of Heronden, his eldest son by his first wife, resided at this seat, and in 1589 obtained a grant from Robert Cook, clarencieux, of a new coat of arms, viz. Argent, on three escutcheons, sable, three convered cups, or. Ten years after which, intending as it should seem, to shew himself a descendant of the family of this name, seated at Graveney, but then extinct, he obtained in 1599 a grant of their arms from William Dethic, garter, and William Camden, clarencieux, to him and his brother William, viz. Quarterly, first and fourth, sable, three covered cups, or, within a bordure, argent; second and third, Argent, a fess, chequy, argent and gules, in chief three cross-croslets of the last, as appears (continues the grant) on a gravestone in Graveney church. He died in 1600, and was buried in Eastry church, leaving issue among other children Jonathan and Thomas. (fn. 7) Jonathan Boteler, the eldest son, of Hernden, died unmarried possessed of it in 1626, upon which it came to his next surviving brother Thomas Boteler, of Rowling, who upon that removed to Hernden, and soon afterwards alienated that part of it, since called THE MIDDLE FARM, to Mr. Henry Pannell, from whom soon afterwards, but how I know not, it came into the family of Reynolds; from which name it was about fifty years since alienated to John Dekewer, esq. of Hackney, who dying in 1762, devised it to his nephew John Dekewer, esq. of Hackney, the present possessor of it.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Sandwich.

 

The church, which is exempted from the archdeacon, is dedicated to St. Mary; it is a large handsome building, consisting of a nave and two side isles, a chancel at the east end, remarkably long, and a square tower, which is very large, at the west end, in which are five very unmusical bells. The church is well kept and neatly paved, and exhibits a noble appearance, to which the many handsome monuments in it contribute much. The arch over the west door is circular, but no other parts of the church has any shew of great antiquity. In the chancel are monuments for the Paramors and the Fullers, of Statenborough, arms of the latter, Argent, three bars, and a canton, gules. A monument for several of the Bargrave family. An elegant pyramidial one, on which is a bust and emblematical sculpture for John Broadley, gent. many years surgeon at Dover, obt. 1784. Several gravestones, with brasses, for the Nevinsons. A gravestone for Joshua Paramour, gent. buried 1650. Underneath this chancel are two vaults, for the families of Paramour and Bargrave. In the nave, a monument for Anne, daughter of Solomon Harvey, gent. of this parish, ob. 1751; arms, Argent, on a chevron, between three lions gambs, sable, armed gules, three crescents, or; another for William Dare, esq. late of Fenderland, in this parish, obt. 1770; arms, Gules, a chevron vaire, between three crescents, argent, impaling argent, on a cross, sable, four lions passant, quardant of the field, for Read.—Against the wall an inscription in Latin, for the Drue Astley Cressemer, A. M. forty-eight years vicar of this parish, obt. 1746; he presented the communion plate to this church and Worth, and left a sum of money to be laid out in ornamenting this church, at which time the antient stalls, which were in the chancel, were taken away, and the chancel was ceiled, and the church otherwise beautified; arms, Argent, on a bend engrailed, sable, three cross-croslets, fitchee, or. A monument for several of the Botelers, of this parish; arms, Boteler, argent, on three escutcheons, sable, three covered cups, or, impaling Morrice. Against a pillar, a tablet and inscription, shewing that in a vault lieth Catherine, wife of John Springett, citizen and apothecary of London. He died in 1770; arms, Springett, per fess, argent and gules, a fess wavy, between three crescents, counterchanged, impaling Harvey. On the opposite pillar another, for the Rev. Richard Harvey, fourteen years vicar of this parish, obt. 1772. A monument for Richard Kelly, of Eastry, obt. 1768; arms, Two lions rampant, supporting a castle. Against the wall, an elegant sculptured monument, in alto relievo, for Sarah, wise of William Boteler, a daughter of Thomas Fuller, esq. late of Statenborough, obt. 1777, æt. 29; she died in childbed, leaving one son, William Fuller Boteler; arms at bottom, Boteler, as above, an escutcheon of pretence, Fuller, quartering Paramor. An elegant pyramidal marble and tablet for Robert Bargrave, of this parish, obt. 1779, for Elizabeth his wife, daughter of Sir Francis Leigh, of Hawley; and for Robert Bargrave, their only son, proctor in Doctors Commons, obt. 1774, whose sole surviving daughter Rebecca married James Wyborne, of Sholdon; arms, Bargrave, with a mullet, impaling Leigh. In the cross isle, near the chancel called the Boteler's isle, are several memorials for the Botelers. Adjoining to these, are three other gravestones, all of which have been inlaid, but the brasses are gone; they were for the same family, and on one of them was lately remaining the antient arms of Boteler, Girony of six pieces, &c. impaling ermine of three spots. Under the church are vaults, for the families of Springett, Harvey, Dare, and Bargrave. In the church-yard, on the north side of the church, are several altar tombs for the Paramors; and on the south side are several others for the Harveys, of this parish, and for Fawlkner, Rammell, and Fuller. There are also vaults for the families of Fuller, Rammell, and Petman.

 

There were formerly painted in the windows of this church, these arms, Girony of six, sable and argent, a covered cup, or, between three talbots heads, erased and counter changed of the field, collared, gules; for Boteler, of Heronden, impaling Boteler, of Graveny, Sable, three covered cups, or, within a bordure, argent; Boteler, of Heronden, as above, quartering three spots, ermine; the coat of Theobald, with quarterings. Several of the Frynnes, or as they were afterwards called, Friends, who lived at Waltham in this parish in king Henry VII.'s reign, lie buried in this church.

 

In the will of William Andrewe, of this parish, anno 1507, mention is made of our Ladie chapel, in the church-yard of the church of Estrie.

 

The eighteen stalls which were till lately in the chancel of the church, were for the use of the monks of the priory of Christ church, owners both of the manor and appropriation, when they came to pass any time at this place, as they frequently did, as well for a country retirement as to manage their concerns here; and for any other ecclesiastics, who might be present at divine service here, all such, in those times, sitting in the chancels of churches distinct from the laity.

 

The church of Eastry, with the chapels of Skrinkling and Worth annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor of Eastry, and was appropriated by archbishop Richard (successor to archbishop Becket) in the reign of king Henry II. to the almonry of the priory of Christ-church, but it did not continue long so, for archbishop Baldwin, (archbishop Richard's immediate successor), having quarrelled with the monks, on account of his intended college at Hackington, took this appropriation from them, and thus it remained as a rectory, at the archbishop's disposal, till the 39th year of king Edward III.'s reign, (fn. 10) when archbishop Simon Islip, with the king's licence, restored, united and annexed it again to the priory; but it appears, that in return for this grant, the archbishop had made over to him, by way of exchange, the advowsons of the churches of St. Dunstan, St. Pancrase, and All Saints in Bread-street, in London, all three belonging to the priory. After which, that is anno 8 Richard II. 1384, this church was valued among the revenues of the almonry of Christ-church, at the yearly value of 53l. 6s. 8d. and it continued afterwards in the same state in the possession of the monks, who managed it for the use of the almonry, during which time prior William Sellyng, who came to that office in Edward IV.'s reign, among other improvements on several estates belonging to his church, built a new dormitory at this parsonage for the monks resorting hither.

 

On the dissolution of the priory of Christ-church, in the 31st year of king Henry VIII.'s reign, this appropriation, with the advowson of the vicarage of the church of Eastry, was surrendered into the king's hands, where it staid but a small time, for he granted it in his 33d year, by his dotation charter, to his new founded dean and chapter of Canterbury, who are the present owners of this appropriation; but the advowson of the vicarage, notwithstanding it was granted with the appropriation, to the dean and chapter as above-mentioned, appears not long afterwards to have become parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, where it continues at this time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This parsonage is entitled to the great tithes of this parish and of Worth; there belong to it of glebe land in Eastry, Tilmanstone, and Worth, in all sixtynine acres.

 

THERE IS A SMALL MANOR belonging to it, called THE MANOR OF THE AMBRY, OR ALMONRY OF CHRIST-CHURCH, the quit-rents of which are very inconsiderable.

 

The parsonage-house is large and antient; in the old parlour window is a shield of arms, being those of Partheriche, impaling quarterly Line and Hamerton. The parsonage is of the annual rent of about 700l. The countess dowager of Guildford became entitled to the lease of this parsonage, by the will of her husband the earl of Guildford, and since her death the interest of it is become vested in her younger children.

 

As to the origin of a vicarage in this church, though there was one endowed in it by archbishop Peckham, in the 20th year of king Edward I. anno 1291, whilst this church continued in the archbishop's hands, yet I do not find that there was a vicar instituted in it, but that it remained as a rectory, till near three years after it had been restored to the priory of Christchurch, when, in the 42d year of king Edward III. a vicar was instituted in it, between whom and the prior and chapter of Canterbury, there was a composition concerning his portion, which he should have as an endowment of this vicarage; which composition was confirmed by archbishop Simon Langham that year; and next year there was an agreement entered into between the eleemosinary of Christ-church and the vicar, concerning the manse of this vicarage.

 

The vicarage of Eastry, with the chapel of Worth annexed, is valued in the king's books at 19l. 12s. 1d. and the yearly tenths at 1l. 19s. 2½d. In 1588 it was valued at sixty pounds. Communicants three hundred and thirty-five. In 1640 here were the like number of communicants, and it was valued at one hundred pounds.

 

The antient pension of 5l. 6s. 8d. formerly paid by the priory, is still paid to the vicar by the dean and chapter, and also an augmentation of 14l. 13s. 4d. yearly, by the lessee of the parsonage, by a convenant in his lease.

 

The vicarage-house is built close to the farm-yard of the parsonage; the land allotted to it is very trifling, not even sufficient for a tolerable garden; the foundations of the house are antient, and probably part of the original building when the vicarage was endowed in 1367.

 

¶There were two awards made in 1549 and 1550, on a controversy between the vicar of Eastry and the mayor, &c. of Sandwich, whether the scite of St. Bartholomew's hospital, near Sandwich, within that port and liberty, was subject to the payment of tithes to the vicar, as being within his parish. Both awards adjudged the legality of a payment, as due to the vicar; but the former award adjudged that the scite of the hospital was not, and the latter, that it was within the bounds of this parish. (fn. 12)

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol10/pp98-121

Some of you may have noticed that, unfortunately, owing to the fact that a certain person who sells truck photos on eBay commercially has been lifting my images from this album and selling them I have had to remove 2300 photos that didn't have a watermark. I have now run around 1700 through Lightroom and added a watermark with the intention of bulk uploading them again. Rather than watermark the existing (hidden) files in Flickr one at a time it will be easier to do it this way. I definitely won’t be adding individual tags with the make and model of each vehicle I will just add generic transport tags. Each photo is named after the vehicle and reg in any case. For anyone new to these images there is a chapter and verse explanation below. It is staggering how many times I get asked questions that a quick scan would answer or just as likely I can’t possibly answer – I didn’t take them, but, just to clarify-I do own the copyright- and I do pursue copyright theft.

 

This is a collection of scanned prints from a collection of photographs taken by the late Jim Taylor A number of years ago I was offered a large number of photographs taken by Jim Taylor, a transport photographer based in Huddersfield. The collection, 30,000 prints, 20,000 negatives – and copyright! – had been offered to me and one of the national transport magazines previously by a friend of Jim's, on behalf of Jim's wife. I initially turned them down, already having over 30,000 of my own prints filed away and taking space up. Several months later the prints were still for sale – at what was, apparently, the going rate. It was a lot of money and I deliberated for quite a while before deciding to buy them. I did however buy them directly from Jim’s wife and she delivered them personally – just to quash the occasional rumour from people who can’t mind their own business. Although some prints were sold elsewhere, particularly the popular big fleet stuff, I should have the negatives, unfortunately they came to me in a random mix, 1200 to a box, without any sort of indexing and as such it would be impossible to match negatives to prints, or, to even find a print of any particular vehicle. I have only ever looked at a handful myself unless I am scanning them. The prints are generally in excellent condition and I initially stored them in a bedroom without ever looking at any of them. In 2006 I built an extension and they had to be well protected from dust and moved a few times. Ultimately my former 6x7 box room office has become their (and my own work’s) permanent home.

I hope to avoid posting images that Jim had not taken his self, however should I inadvertently infringe another photographers copyright, please inform me by email and I will resolve the issue immediately. There are copyright issues with some of the photographs that were sold to me. A Flickr member from Scotland drew my attention to some of his own work amongst the first uploads of Jim’s work. I had a quick look through some of the 30 boxes of prints and decided that for the time being the safest thing for me to do was withdraw the majority of the earlier uploaded scans and deal with the problem – which I did. whilst the vast majority of the prints are Jims, there is a problem defining copyright of some of them, this is something that the seller did not make clear at the time. I am reasonably confident that I have since been successful in identifying Jims own work. His early work consists of many thousands of lustre 6x4 prints which are difficult to scan well, later work is almost entirely 7x5 glossy, much easier to scan. Not all of the prints are pin sharp but I can generally print successfully to A4 from a scan.

 

You may notice photographs being duplicated in this Album, unfortunately there are multiple copies of many prints (for swapping) and as I have to have a system of archiving and backing up I can only guess - using memory - if I have scanned a print before. The bigger fleets have so many similar vehicles and registration numbers that it is impossible to get it right all of the time. It is easier to scan and process a print than check my files - on three different PC’s - for duplicates. There has not been, nor will there ever be, any intention to knowingly breach anyone else's copyright. I have presented the Jim Taylor collection as exactly that-The Jim Taylor Collection- his work not mine, my own work is quite obviously mine.

Unfortunately, many truck spotters have swapped and traded their work without copyright marking it as theirs. These people never anticipated the ease with which images would be shared online in the future. I would guess that having swapped and traded photos for many years that it is almost impossible to control their future use. Anyone wanting to control the future use of their work would have been well advised to copyright mark their work (as many did) and would be well advised not to post them on photo sharing sites without a watermark as the whole point of these sites is to share the image, it is very easy for those that wish, to lift any image, despite security settings, indeed, Flickr itself, warns you that this is the case. It was this abuse and theft of my material that led me to watermark all of my later uploads. I may yet withdraw non-watermarked photos, I haven’t decided yet. (I did in the end)

To anyone reading the above it will be quite obvious that I can’t provide information regarding specific photos or potential future uploads – I didn’t take them! There are many vehicles that were well known to me as Jim only lived down the road from me (although I didn’t know him), however scanning, titling, tagging and uploading is laborious and time consuming enough, I do however provide a fair amount of information with my own transport (and other) photos. I am aware that there are requests from other Flickr users that are unanswered, I stumble across them months or years after they were posted, this isn’t deliberate. Some weekends one or two “enthusiasts” can add many hundreds of photos as favourites, this pushes requests that are in the comments section ten or twenty pages out of sight and I miss them. I also have notifications switched off, I receive around 50 emails a day through work and I don’t want even more from Flickr. Other requests, like many other things, I just plain forget – no excuses! Uploads of Jim’s photos will be infrequent as it is a boring pastime and I would much rather work on my own output.

 

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

  

Some background:

Aeroflot is one of the oldest airlines in the world, tracing its history back to 1923. During the Soviet era, Aeroflot was the Soviet national airline and the largest airline in the world. Following the dissolution of the USSR, the carrier has been transformed from a state-run enterprise into a semi-privatized company which ranked 19th most profitable airline in the world in 2007. Aeroflot is still considered to be the de facto national airline of Russia, being 51%-owned by the Russian Government.

 

After WWII, Aeroflot's route network had extended to 295,400 kilometers (183,600 mi), and by 1950 it carried 1,603,700 passengers, 151,070 tonnes (333,050,000 lb) of freight and 30,580 tonnes (67,420,000 lb) of mail during the same year. The 20th Communist Party Congress, held in 1956, saw plans for Aeroflot services to be dramatically increased. The airline would see its overall activities increased from its then current levels by 3.8 times, and it was set the target of the carriage of 16,000,000 passengers by 1960. In order to meet these goals, Aeroflot introduced higher capacity turbojet and turbine-prop aircraft on key domestic routes, and on services to Aeroflot destinations abroad.

 

A major step for Aeroflot occurred on 15 September 1956 when the Tupolev Tu-104 jet airliner entered service on the Moscow-Omsk-Irkutsk route, marking the world's first sustained jet airline service. The airline began international flights with the type on 12 October 1956 with flights from Moscow to Prague. The aircraft placed Aeroflot in an envious position, as airlines in the West had operated throughout the 1950s with large piston-engine aircraft. By 1958 the route network covered 349,200 kilometers (217,000 mi), and the airline carried 8,231,500 passengers, and 445,600 tons of mail and freight, with fifteen percent of all-Union services being operated by jet aircraft.

 

Aeroflot introduced the Antonov An-10 and Ilyushin Il-18 in 1959, and together with its existing jet aircraft, the airline was able to extend services on modern aircraft to some twenty cities during 1960. The Tupolev Tu-114, then the world's largest airliner, entered service with the Soviet carrier on 24 April 1961 on the Moscow-Khabarovsk route; covering a distance of 6,980 kilometers (4,340 mi) in 8 hours 20 minutes. The expansion of the Aeroflot fleet saw services with modern aircraft being extended to more than forty cities in 1961, with fifty percent of all-Union services being operated by these aircraft. This fleet expansion also saw the number of passengers carried in 1961 skyrocketing to 21,800,000.

 

Further expansion came in 1962 when various medium and short-haul routes were started and respective aircraft types such as the Tupolev Tu-124, Ilyushin Il-60 and Antonov An-24 entered regular service with Aeroflot. The Tu-124 was a jet airliner, technically an 75% version of the Tu-104, while the An-24 was a lighter twin turboprop aircraft in the class of the Fokker F.27. The Il-60 was the latest addition to the domestic services, falling in between both other types.

 

Development of the Ilyushin Il-60 dated back to 12 October 1951, when the Soviet Council of Ministers published a specification for a medium-range aircraft carrying 50 to 70 passengers and 1,000 kg (2,200 lb) of cargo on routes up to 2,000 km (1,100 nmi; 1,200 mi) with a cruising speed of about 600 km/h (320 kn; 370 mph). The type was to replace the piston engine Ilyushin Il-14 on domestic routes. The number and type of engines were not specified, but jet or turboprop engines were expected and emphasis was put on ruggedness and ease of operations for operations on rural airstrips with a minimum of infrastructure.

 

Ilyushin’s OKB-240 responded at first with a scaled-down Il-18 turboprop airliner, somewhat inspired by an idea of Czech manufacturer Avia for a smaller, short-range airliner for the CSA’s Central European routes. This machine had only two engines and overall reduced dimensions, but used many components of the original airliner. But it soon became clear that the Tu-104 with its jet engines had already set higher standards, so that a completely new and more innovative design was started.

 

Internally known as “Aircraft 60”, the machine introduced some innovations while still being a conservative design. The aircraft was a two turboprop-engine low-wing monoplane with slightly swept (20° at quarter chord) wings, a circular pressurized fuselage and a conventional, yet markedly swept tail (both fin and stabilizer at 45°). The aircraft had two entry doors on the port-side before and after the wing, two overwing emergency exits on each side, and featured a retractable stairway under the rear fuselage so that passengers could directly enter the aircraft from the airfield. An APU was integrated in the rear fuselage, under the fin, for independent operation of the air condition system and starting the engines without external support.

The tricycle landing gear had four wheels fitted on the main leg bogies, which retracted inwards to lie under the fuselage instead of into the engine nacelles. The front wheel also had twin wheels, retracting forward in a well under the cockpit floor, and the aircraft’s low-pressure tires allowed operations even from grass airfields or snowy ground. Another novel feature at the time was the fitting of a weather radar in the nose, a civilian RPSN-2 "Emblema" system, doing away with the typical glazed navigator position of other former Soviet airliner designs. In order to support all-weather operations and ease the pilots’ work, “Aircraft 60” was also outfitted with an automatic approach system, supported by the radar which allowed blind navigation.

 

Despite vibration and noise problems, experienced with the earlier Il-18 airliner, Ilyushin insisted on turboprop propulsion because it was the more fuel-efficient option. He furthermore expected that no another jet-driven airliner would be politically “allowed” along the Tu-124 short haul airliner, at that time under parallel development.

 

“Aircraft 60” was powered by a pair of Kuznetsow NK-6K turboprops. This engine was one of several developments after World War II by a team of Russian scientists and deported German engineers under Ferdinand Brandner, which had worked for Junkers previously, evolving from late war German turboprop studies. This the post-war development was based on the wartime Jumo 022 turboprop design that developed 6000 eshp in a 3000 kg engine. The efforts continued with a 5000 ehp engine that weighed in at 1700 kg, completed by 1947, and with further weight savings and more modern materials, the NK-6, one of several development directions, became a large single-spool engine that was optimized for use on board of commercial aircraft like “Aircraft 60”.

 

For security reasons, the engines were mounted in front and above of the wings’ leading edge. In order to keep the wing structure as clean and simple and possible and not risk collateral damage to the landing gear in case of an engine fire, the landing gear was retracted into wells under the wing roots. This measure also kept the engine nacelle’s dimensions in very compact limits.

In order to minimize noise and vibrations, 2x4-bladed contraprops with an automatic feathering system were mounted, resulting in a characteristic humming noise when the engines were running. Due to the lower speed of these propellers, compared to a standard four- or five-blade propeller, the internal and external noise level could be significantly reduced (compared to the Il-18, which could drone at 110db in the cabin above the wings!), even though the lower frequency caused other problems, mainly vibrations at certain speeds that shook the whole airframe.

 

The standard seating of the initial version, the Il-60A, was 52 seats at a 90cm distance between the five-seat rows (two seats on port side and three on starboard). Alternatively, a maximum of 72 could be mounted in a cramped “tourist class” configuration with only 78cm distance between the seat rows, which became the late production standard configuration as Il-60B.

 

The first of two prototypes made its first flight from Zhukovsky airfield on 24 March 1960. The second prototype followed in June 1960. Two other airframes served as a static test cells. Testing was successful, and the aircraft entered production at Machinery Plant No. 30 located at Khodynka, near Moscow, replacing the Il-18 in production. Deliveries to Aeroflot began in August 1962, with the type operating its first scheduled passenger service, between Moscow and Tallinn in Estonia, on 2 October 1962.

 

The Il-60’s production remained only on a small scale, though: being a pure jet, the Tu-124 was preferred by the Aeroflot for short haul duties, as well as by the Powers That Be. Despite the type’s merits esp. in harsh climate conditions (most Il-60 were allocated to Aeroflot’s feederline services in the Soviet Union’s northern regions), the type was not popular among its crews. While the two turboprops gave sufficient power, had good handling across the whole speed envelope and the aircraft had no trouble remaining airborne with one engine shut down, the asymmetrical drag/thrust in this emergency condition was considerable and navigating the Il-60, and even more landing the aircraft, with only one engine was a challenging task.

 

Furthermore, the stalky landing gear, which prompted the crews' inofficial nickname "косино́жки" (kosinozhki = daddy longlegs), could start to vibrate under certain conditions and wobble, making a start or landing run a shaky if not dangerous affair, esp. on snow-packed and non-permanent runways. Furthermore, two Il-60 crashed on runways or airfields after hitting obstacles ubnder snow - the long front landing gear collapsed. Nobody on board was seriosuly hurt in both cases, but these accidents did not improve the type's reputation among both pilots and passengers alike.

 

Only a total of 44 machines were built: 18 Il-60As for selected connections abroad (e. g. to Scandinavia and Poland), plus 26 Il-60Bs with higher seat capacity for purely domestic service. Both machines were identical from the outside, though, and all production aircraft featured a characteristic spinal fin root extension that covered several radio and navigation antennae.

 

Ilyushin had plans for a stretched version (with two plugs inserted into the fuselage in front of and behind the wings) with a 2.2m longer fuselage and a maximum capacity of 85 passengers, and also worked on a jet-powered update with engine nacelles on pylons under and in front of the wings. But none of these improvements was turned into hardware, since not only the Tu-124 had become the preferred short/medium haul airliner for Aeroflot, the following Tu-134 had also become the political favorite, and OKB-240 focused on its long-range airliner Il-62.

 

Il-60 production already ended after only two years in 1964, and Aeroflot decommissioned its last twelve Il-60s on 21 January 1980, after more and more structural problems (wing spar cracks, caused by the NK-6’s vibrations) had become apparent and several aircraft had to be grounded.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 3 (captain, first officer and a flight engineer),

plus another seat for an optional navigator or a radio officer,

plus a three- or four-person cabin crew

Capacity: 52 – 72

Payload: 8.4 t (9.3 short tons)

Length: 32,54 m (106 ft 7 in)

Wingspan: 34.3 m (112 ft 6 in)

Height: 11,74 m (38 ft 5 1/2 in)

Wing area: 146.7 m² (1,579 sq ft)

Empty weight: 22.2 t (24.5 sT)

Max. takeoff weight: 46 t (50.7 sT)

 

Powerplant:

2× Kusnetzow NK-6K turboprop engines, rated at 3,318 kW (4,612 ehp) each

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 805 km/h (500 mph/435 knots)

Cruise speed: 665 km/h (424 mph/370 knots)

Range (Typical payload, 2 hr reserve): 2,400 km (1,300 nmi/1,490 mi)

Rate of climb: 2,750 ft/min (14.0 m/s)

Service ceiling: 11,000 m (36,000 ft)

  

The kit and its assembly:

“In Soviet Union, Aeroflot flies you!” And in order to prove this theory, this whiffy airliner is contribution #3 to the “Soviet Group Build” at whatifmodelers.com in early 2017.

 

It’s been a very long time that I had built a small-scale airliner, but then I found a (crappy!) 1:144 Mistercraft Caravelle III in my stash (actually, a re-boxed kit from a company called “Ruch” from the Sixties!), that I had originally bought just for the wings as a pure donor kit. This appears to be a blunt copy of the also rather vintage Airfix kit, but the latter has much more crisp details. O.K., the Mistercraft kit was cheap – but you have to pay otherwise…

 

Anyway, anything Soviet without an elegant Aeroflot airliner would not be complete, so I tackled this idea on short notice. The project had also been fueled by another project idea: a modern short-haul airliner like the Tu-204, but outfitted with turboprops instead of turbofan engines. For this idea (and other uses), I also had a conversion set from a Russian company called “Kompakt Mir” stashed away, with four resin 1:144 NK-14 engines. It’s actually as an aftermarket upgrade set for the Trumpeter Tu-95 model kit, but came in handy – and it is excellent stuff, by the way, with crisp detail, almost no flash or sinkholes.

 

With these ingredients, work went on quickly and straightforward, and wings and fuselage were started separately. The wings (a combined piece with a mutual underside) received fairings for engine nacelles, made basically from drop tank halves glued to the upper wing surface. Then the resin engines were mounted to the fairings’ front ends the gaps and the nacelles’ underside sculpted with 2C putty, plus some later fine-tuning with NC putty. The Caravelle’s inward-retracting landing gear was retained, keeping the engine fairings rather short and compact.

 

On the fuselage, the Caravelle's original engines and their attachment points disappeared. The triangular windows were drilled open into circular shape, later, as a final finishing step, filled with Humbrol ClearFix for shiny window panes - this improves the overall look a lot.

 

Lead was added in the nose, the retractable stairway under the rear fuselage kept (a very Soviet design detail!) and the Caravelle’s characteristic round fin tip was cut away, to be replaced with a square scratch transplant. The stabilizers were moved down and their round tips clipped, too.

 

On the nose, a scratched thimble radome was added and blended into the fuselage, for an Il-18-ish look. While these were rather simple, cosmetic measures on the fuselage, the look of the whole aircraft was changed into a much more modern design!? This was even more emphasized when the wings and stabilizers were added – the Il-60 looks very contemporary, nothing of the Caravelle’s Fifties flavor remains.

 

The landing gear is new, bashed from the bogies of the recently slashed Dragon 1:144 B-1B bomber I abused for my Fastback build, and leftover struts from an Acedemy 1:144 Tu-22M. The latter also donated a pair of main wheels for the front leg, which is, again, from the B-1B.

The new arrangement is considerably taller than the Caravelle’s, but with the large propellers this is a convenient and plausible arrangement, despite a rather stalky appearance due to the relatively short wheelbase. The eight main wheels were taken from the RUCH kit, even though the attachment point would not fit the B-1 struts at all...

  

Painting and markings:

One can argue about Soviet aircraft design or reliability – but I must admit that I liked the Aeroflot aircraft liveries since I can remember them as a child, sometimes even witnessing Tupolev or Yak jets at the local airport. The white-and-blue outfit with almost baroque trim and details was and is IMHO a very elegant design, worthy of a state airline (which had a menacing, if not mysterious Big Brother image during the Cold War times in which I grew up).

 

Another interesting fact is that, despite the basic colors were set, each Aeroflot type bore a typical and different paint scheme, plus some exotic designs like the polar service machines with lots of red added.

 

Consequently, I had a lot of freedom, and work was made even more easy through the Mistercraft Caravelle kit: it actually contains markings for a Caravelle in Aeroflot markings! “Nonsense!”, you might say – but this aircraft actually existed: it was a movie prop (actually Air France’s F-BJTR) for filming “Enigma” at Le Bourget Airport in 1981 (check this for reference: www.airliners.net/photo/Aeroflot-%28Air-France%29/Sud-SE-...). As a side note, there was another Caravelle in fictional Interflug or ČSA colors, too, as well as a camouflaged SMB2 Super Mystère and a NMF Mystère IV with red stars on white discs, both playing the role of Soviet MiG-19s!

 

Anyway, the OOB decal sheet offered enough material for my plans, even though the blue trim was created from generic decal sheet. But door decals and most Aeroflot markings came from the movie aircraft.

 

Painting was also a pretty straightforward affair: the fuselage was painted white with acrylic paint from the rattle can, the lower fuselage by brush with Polished Aluminum Metallizer from Humbrol (which creates a very bright and clean finish) on top of a Revell Acrylics Aluminum primer coat.

For some contrast to the white and blue I painted the fixed wing parts with light grey, the rudders in Aluminum and Steel, and orange wing and stabilizer tips were added as small, additional contrasts, later even highlighted with dayglow orange.

 

In order to add some weirdness to the look, the propeller blades were painted bright blue with yellow tips. Unusual, but a common Soviet/Russian/Chinese practice.

  

A rather simple conversion, but highly effective. The Caravelle’s traces are almost not to be identified anymore, even though fuselage and wings consist of OOB material with only superficial modifications or re-locations. The engines on the wings change the look, too, and despite being massive NK-12’s they are a good match for the compact airliner – I am very happy with the outcome, even though the overall lines look much more modern than late Fifties design – even though no more modern parts were actually integrated? Weird, but entertaining. J

default abandoned warehouse graffiti shot.

 

This is actually a really shitty quality photo

 

For more check out my site of web: StayAwake.ca

Doel is a little village.

This village will be erase of the world with the extention of the Schelde river.

Some artists paint the houses to show on the world this uncredible fact.

Doel never die.

 

Doel est un petit village qui va être rasée de la carte du monde par l'extension de l'Escaut

 

Doel

Belgium location map.svg

Doel

Administration

Pays Belgique Belgique

Région Flandre Région flamande

Communauté Flandre Communauté flamande

Province Drapeau de la province de Flandre-Occidentale Province de Flandre-Orientale

Arrondissement Saint-Nicolas

Commune Beveren

Géographie

Coordonnées 51°18′″N 04°15′″E / Erreur d’expression : opérateur / inattendu, Erreur d’expression : opérateur / inattendu

Superficie 25,61 km²

Population 359 hab. (31/12/2007)

Densité 14 hab./km²

Autres informations

Gentilé

Code postal 9130

Zone téléphonique 03

Localisation de Doel au sein de Beveren

Localisation de Doel au sein de Beveren

modifier Consultez la documentation du modèle

 

Doel (appelé Den Doel dans le parler local) est un village situé dans l’extrême nord-est de la province belge de Flandre-Orientale, dans les marais du pays de Waas, sur la rive gauche de l’Escaut, large en cet endroit de quelque 1500 mètres par marée haute, en face de Lillo-Fort. Aujourd’hui intégré dans l’entité de Beveren, Doel était jusqu’en 1977 une commune autonome, d’une superficie de 25,61 km², et d’une population de quelque 1300 habitants (1972). Outre le village lui-même, l’ancienne commune de Doel comprend les hameaux de Rapenburg, Saftinge et Ouden Doel, et bien sûr, une vaste étendue de marais asséchés.

 

Depuis quelques décennies, le village se retrouve régulièrement projeté au centre de l’actualité belge, à double titre.

 

D’abord, il a été choisi, comme le village de Tihange dans la province de Liège, comme lieu d’implantation d’une des deux centrales nucléaires que compte la Belgique.

 

Ensuite, et plus récemment, il semble bien établi à présent que Doel doive s’ajouter à la liste des villages poldériens (si l’on nous permet ce néologisme) sacrifiés à l’expansion du port d’Anvers. En effet, l’évacuation totale de la bourgade, après expropriation de ses habitants, a été décidée en 1999 par l’autorité régionale flamande, pour faire place à de nouvelles installations portuaires. En dépit des résistances, et de la bataille juridique engagée par le comité d’action Doel 2020 (saisines du Conseil d’État, etc.), le sort de Doel paraît aujourd’hui scellé, et il faut craindre que les recours n’aient d’autre effet que d’en prolonger l’agonie. L’évacuation suit son cours, et à la date du 31 décembre 2006, Doel ne comptait déjà plus que 388 habitants.

Le nom de Doel (la combinaison oe se prononce comme un ou bref, API: /dul/) est attesté pour la première fois en 1267, sous la forme « De Doolen ». La signification précise demeure obscure; le terme pourrait être une référence à «dalen», vallées, au sens d’amas de sable creusés. Au Moyen Âge, les Doolen ont pu être des îlots au milieu de l’Escaut. Pour d’autres, Doel signifierait ‘digue, remblai, levée’. ‘Doel’ devint, après la domination française, la dénomination officielle.

 

La zone autour de Doel était à l’origine constituée de terres marécageuses et faisait partie d’une vaste étendue tourbeuse s’étirant d’est en ouest sur toute la Flandre zélandaise et le nord de la Flandre-Orientale. Au nord de Doel plus spécialement, dans ce qui est aujourd’hui le Verdronken Land van Saeftinghe, la couche de tourbe était particulièrement épaisse. À partir du XIIIe siècle, l’on procéda dans cette zone, qui au XIIIe siècle avait deux fois plus d’habitants que Doel, et qui hébergeait une abbaye cistercienne, à une exploitation intensive de la tourbe. Cette activité, fort lucrative, a induit une certaine prospérité dans la région.

 

L’extraction de tourbe dans la zone marécageuse eut pour effet d’abaisser le niveau du sol en de nombreux endroits et de rendre la zone vulnérable aux inondations. Dans le même temps, à partir du XIIe siècle, l’Escaut subissait de plus en plus l’emprise de la mer du Nord. Pour ces raisons, il advenait régulièrement à partir du XIVe siècle que Doel et les parties nord du Pays de Beveren fussent totalement inondées, déterminant la nécessité d’édifier des digues et d’aménager ainsi des polders.

 

Cependant, tout ce système, conjuguant poldérisation et extraction de tourbe, progressivement mis en place dans la région au cours du Moyen Âge, fut peu à peu anéanti, d’abord par une série d’inondations catastrophiques au XVIe siècle (dont la plus grave, en l’an 1570, connue sous le nom de Allerheiligenvloed, «marée de Toussaint», submergea entièrement, et à titre définitif, le marais de Saeftinghe), ensuite par les submersions, cette fois délibérément provoquées pour motifs stratégiques, durant la guerre de Quatre-Vingts Ans, notamment lors du siège d’Anvers par Alexandre Farnèse. La région était en effet alors le théâtre de combats dont l’enjeu était la maîtrise d’Anvers et de l’estuaire de l’Escaut. À cette même époque, elle fut pillée par deux fois, par des gueux (protestants) de Malines et par la soldatesque catholique royale. Les submersions volontaires ne purent empêcher Farnèse de prendre Anvers en 1585, mais les forces des États-généraux ayant réussi à s’emparer du fort de Liefkenshoek, sis au sud de Doel (et existant encore aujourd’hui), le village et le marais de Doel furent à partir de 1585 sous domination des États-généraux.

Le Hooghuis (1614).

Hooghuis : portique.

 

Lorsqu’arriva l’intermède de paix correspondant à la Trève de douze ans (1609-1621), la région entière n’était qu’une zone de désolation où marées et inondations de l’Escaut avaient libre carrière; tout était à refaire. Doel servait de point d’appui dans les opérations de guerre, et à la hauteur de l’actuel moulin se trouvait un fort abritant une garnison hollandaise. En 1614 fut accordée, par les États-Généraux de la République des Provinces-Unies, l’autorisation d’endiguer et d’assécher toute l’étendue autour de Doel. Cette décision signe l’acte de naissance de la bourgade de Doel sous sa forme actuelle, car, outre l’aménagement du marais, fut aussi commencé la construction, planifiée sur carte, du village. La disposition en damier des rues détermina une urbanisation géométrique, fort rare en ces latitudes. Les parcelles carrées ainsi formées furent ensuite bâties systématiquement, de telle façon qu’aucun jardin ne fût visible depuis la rue; ces jardins étaient (et sont encore) accessibles par d’étroits corridors aménagés entre les maisons et clos par des portillons, qu’autrefois on verrouillait pour la nuit.

 

Doel et le marais de Doel ont longtemps formé, de fait, une façon d’île, délimitée par l’Escaut d’une part, par des criques et des vasières d’autre part. Le marais de Doel s’étendait sur 1090 ha. La digue nord du marais de Doel, digue subsistant encore aujourd’hui, est la limite qui sépare le marais initial d’avec les marais aménagés ultérieurement, et permet de situer en partie les contours de cette ancienne île. Jusqu’au XVIIe siècle, Doel n’était en pratique guère accessible autrement qu’en bateau. Quant au marais de Saeftinghe, on renonça à l’endiguer, ce marais demeurant ainsi un verdronken land, une zone inondable au gré des marées; à l’heure actuelle, c’est une réserve ornithologique.

 

Au plan ecclésiastique, Doel dépendait de la paroisse de Kieldrecht et ne devint une paroisse autonome qu’en 1792. Cette même année, Doel fut attribué à l’empereur d’Autriche et vint à faire partie définitivement des Pays-Bas du Sud.

 

Lors des événements qui entourèrent l’indépendance belge en 1830, Doel subit le contrecoup de la bataille d’Anvers. En décembre 1832, les Belges, aidés de troupes françaises, réussirent à contraindre les Hollandais à céder Anvers, mais, après avoir investi le polder de Doel, ne purent cependant déloger les troupes hollandaises des forts de Liefkenshoek et de Lillo. Une garnison hollandaise continua donc d’occuper le fort de Liefkenshoek, et cela jusqu’à la signature d’un traité en 1839. Doel devint ensuite une commune autonome.

 

À partir de 1843 et jusqu’en 1945, Doel fut le siège du service de quarantaine chargé de contrôler les navires se rendant à Anvers. Le marais s’agrandit du polder Prosper (Prosperpolder, 1051 ha de terres arables), et, quelques décennies plus tard, du polder Hedwige (300 ha). À la fin du XIXe siècle, les deux tiers environ de la population doeloise vivaient de l’agriculture, et un tiers avait la pêche pour moyen de subsistance ; d’autre part, une sucrerie occupait une quarantaine de travailleurs.

 

Doel fut libérée en 1944 par des soldats britanniques et polonais. Le village eut cependant encore à souffrir des meurtrières bombes volantes V1, dont 68 tombèrent sur son territoire — 59 V1 et 9 V2 —, faisant 13 morts et détruisant totalement ou partiellement 35 maisons.

 

En 1975, Doel fusionna avec quelques communes environnantes pour constituer l’entité de Beveren.

 

Dans la bourgade, les rues sont disposées en damier, phénomène à peu près unique en Belgique : le plan se compose de trois rues parallèles à la digue, et de quatre autres rues qui les croisent à la perpendiculaire. Cette disposition remonte à la décision, prise au début du XVIIe siècle après les inondations stratégiques, de procéder à une poldérisation et un remembrement des terres autour de Doel, et est demeurée inchangée depuis.

 

* L’agglomération comprend plusieurs fermes et maisons bourgeoises. L’immeuble le plus ancien est le Hooghuis (litt. maison haute, classé monument historique), achevé de bâtir en 1614, dans le style renaissance flamand, avec monumental encadrement de porte en style baroque. L’intérieur n’est pas sans intérêt, avec ses plafonds en chêne et deux monumentales cheminées baroques du XVIIe siècle. L’édifice était au XVIIe siècle le siège de l’administration du polder, mais a aussi été le manoir appartenant à de riches bourgeois anversois; le Hooghuis est ainsi associé au nom de Rubens, cette demeure ayant été probablement la propriété de Jan Brandt, père d’Isabelle Brandt, la première épouse du peintre, et, ultérieurement, de Jan Van Broeckhoven de Bergeyck, qu’Hélène Fourment épousa en secondes noces, après le décès de Rubens.

* Le moulin, classé monument historique depuis 1946, est encastré dans la digue de l’Escaut. Il date du milieu du XVIIe siècle et figure parmi les plus anciens moulins en brique que compte la Flandre. Hors d’usage depuis 1927, le moulin est aujourd’hui aménagé en café-restaurant.

* L’église paroissiale, dédiée à Notre-Dame de l’Assomption, fut édifiée en style néoclassique entre 1851 et 1854 selon les plans de Lodewijk Roelandt, architecte municipal de Gand. Le mobilier cependant comprend des œuvres d’art plus anciennes, telles que des statues du sculpteur anversois H. F. Verbruggen (XVIIe siècle) et de E. A. Nijs (XVIIIe siècle). L’orgue est classé monument depuis 1980. L’église, endommagée suite à affaissements, fut entièrement restaurée entre 1996 et 1998. Les couches solides du sous-sol se situent à Doel à environ 11 mètres de profondeur, alors que les palées destinées à soutenir l’édifice ne s’enfoncent en terre que de 7 mètres. Cela explique pourquoi l’église penche assez fortement aujourd'hui, son clocher en particulier.

* Au nord du village, au-delà de la centrale nucléaire, à la hauteur du hameau Ouden Doel, se situent le long de l’Escaut les dernières vasières saumâtres que compte la Belgique. Ces vasières abritent le petit port de Prosperpolder et la réserve naturelle Schor Ouden Doel (51 ha).

* Doel possède un port de plaisance, constitué d’un unique bassin à marée, et un embarcadère où vient accoster le bac de Lillo-Fort, lequel effectue la traversée de l’Escaut tous les week-ends de mars à septembre.

* Doel attire de nombreux excursionnistes, en particulier pendant la période estivale. Un événement singulier est la Scheldewijding (bénédiction rituelle de l’Escaut), qui a lieu début août chaque année depuis 1975. Les festivités commencent par une messe célébrée en plein air. Ensuite, le collège des échevins (=adjoints au maire) se rend conjointement avec les conseillers communaux à un bateau amarré, en vue de la mise à l’eau d’une couronne de fleurs en commémoration des victimes de la mer et du fleuve. L’après-midi, après un spectacle naval sur l’Escaut, un cortège folklorique se met en branle, réunissant, en provenance des villages environnants, nombre de groupes et d’associations avec leurs géants et leurs sociétés musicales. Une marche aux flambeaux clôture la journée.

* En l’an 2000, une cogue (type de navire de commerce hauturier, naviguant au Moyen Âge entre les différents ports de la ligue hanséatique, en mer du Nord et en mer Baltique) a été mise au jour lors des travaux de terrassement en vue de la construction du bassin Deurganckdok. L’épave trouvée à Doel était enfouie à une profondeur entre -7 et -5m sous le niveau de la mer, dans un ancien bras ensablé de l’Escaut, connu sous le nom de Deurganck (= passage, cf. allem. Durchgang), qui autrefois communiquait directement avec le fleuve ; pour des raisons inconnues, la cogue vint échouer dans ce bras en 1404. La cogue de Doel (ainsi qu’il est désormais convenu de l’appeler) mesure environ 21m de long et 7m de large; sa hauteur conservée est de 2,5m environ. L’analyse dendrochronologique a permis d’établir que le chêne qui a fourni le bois du vaisseau a été abattu en Westphalie pendant l’hiver 1325-1326, ce qui fait de cette cogue une des plus grandes, des mieux préservées et des plus anciennes d’Europe. Une fois terminés les travaux de remise en état, la cogue sera (probablement) exposée dans le musée de la navigation de Baasrode, non loin de la ville de Termonde ; mais une maquette est d'ores et déjà visible au bezoekerscentrum (sorte d'écomusée), ouvert depuis septembre 2007 au fort de Liefkenshoek. Une deuxième cogue découverte au même endroit, mais moins bien conservée, date de 1328.

 

Les premiers projets d’expansion du port d’Anvers sur la rive gauche de l’Escaut datent de 1963 et prévoyaient que l’ensemble des polders du pays de Waas ainsi que Doel disparussent pour faire place à des bassins et à des terrains industriels. En 1968, une interdiction de construire entra en vigueur dans le village. Suite à la récession économique des années 70, ces plans d’expansion furent revus à la baisse, et l’on vit apparaître sur le plan de secteur (=plan d’occupation du sol) de 1978 la ligne dite De Bondtlijn (d’après le sénateur Ferdinand De Bondt), ligne qui allait d’est en ouest, et qui, passant tout juste au sud de Doel, limitait la zone d’extension portuaire à la partie sud des polders. L’interdiction de construire fut donc levée cette même année. Dans la première moitié des années 80 fut réalisé, au sud de Doel, le bassin Doeldok, lequel cependant n'a jamais été utilisé.

 

L’implantation industrielle moderne la plus ancienne à Doel fut la centrale nucléaire, à 1 km au nord du village, dont la construction fut entamée en 1969. Elle héberge quatre réacteurs (Doel I, mis en service en 1974, Doel II en 1975, Doel III en 1982, et Doel IV en 1985), ainsi que deux tours de refroidissement d’environ 170 mètres de hauteur.

 

En 1995 furent rendus publics les projets d’extension de l’Administration des voies navigables et des affaires maritimes (Administratie Waterwegen en Zeewezen) de l’autorité flamande, lesquels projets prévoyaient l’aménagement, un peu au sud de Doel, d’un nouveau bassin pour conteneurs, dénommé Deurganckdok. Dans la perspective de la réalisation de ce bassin, l’on se mit à s’interroger sur la vivabilité de Doel, et dans les années qui suivirent une lutte acharnée s’engagea avec comme enjeu la survie du village. En 1997 fut constitué le comité d’action Doel 2020, et des personnalités connues en Flandre, telles que l’ancien sénateur Ferdinand De Bondt, le cinéaste Frank Van Passel, et les trois prêtres Luc Versteylen (fondateur du parti vert flamand Agalev), Phil Bosmans (écrivain) et Karel Van Isacker (historien) s’associèrent au mouvement de protestation. Une prise de décision opaque et des bévues juridiques donnèrent lieu à de grands retards dans la construction du Deurganckdok et entretinrent pendant de longues années un état d’incertitude quant à l’avenir de Doel. Les habitants étaient divisés en, d’une part, ceux qui souhaitaient y rester et, d’autre part, ceux qui au contraire avaient fait choix de lutter pour obtenir un règlement d’expropriation clair et équitable. Le 1er juin 1999, le gouvernement flamand décida, après une modification provisoire du plan de secteur intervenue en 1998, que Doel devait disparaître de ce plan de secteur au titre de zone de résidence, toujours au motif de l’invivabilité du village, qualificatif récusé par les opposants.

 

Après le changement de gouvernement de la région flamande en 1999, une étude fut effectuée, sur insistance du parti vert Agalev, concernant la vivabilité de Doel après l’achèvement du nouveau bassin Deurganckdok. Cette étude cependant ne remit pas en cause la modification du plan de secteur, ni la décision déjà prise de faire disparaître Doel à terme.

 

Le 30 juillet 2002, le Conseil d’État suspendit la mise à exécution du plan de secteur tel que modifié, c'est-à-dire comportant notamment la requalification de Doel comme zone industrielle. C’est donc le plan de secteur de 1978, qui classe Doel comme zone résidentielle, qui garde force de droit. Toutefois, en vertu du Décret d’urgence (Nooddecreet) ou Décret de validation, adopté le 14 décembre 2001 au parlement flamand, le gouvernement flamand est habilité à délivrer, en vue de la construction du Deurganckdok, des permis de bâtir et à les faire sanctionner par le parlement. L’on escomptait pouvoir par cette voie contourner le plan de secteur. Le Nooddecreet était la réaction du gouvernement flamand face à la suspension des travaux du Deurganckdok imposé par un arrêté du Conseil d’État ; des comités d’action avaient en effet mis au jour des vices de procédure entachant les modifications apportées au plan de secteur. Le Nooddecreet, compte tenu qu’il interférait dans les procédures en cours, et tendait à contourner partiellement la protection juridique des citoyens, est considéré par beaucoup comme contraire aux principes de l’État de droit.

 

En octobre 1999 fut néanmoins engagée la construction du Deurganckdok, lequel fut inauguré en juillet 2005. Dès le printemps 1999 étaient venus à être connus d’autres projets encore, prévoyant notamment un deuxième grand bassin à conteneurs, le controversé Saeftinghedok (cf. ci-dessous), qui serait creusé à l’emplacement même de la petite agglomération. La mise en œuvre de ces projets reste cependant incertaine. Une décision à ce sujet est attendue au plus tôt en 2007.

 

Un nouveau « plan stratégique », que la Région flamande et les autorités portuaires anversoises ont achevé de mettre au point en 2007, devrait être approuvé bientôt. Le plan prévoit de requalifier en zone portuaire toute la zone située au nord d’une ligne Kieldrecht-Kallo (et donc englobant Doel), jusqu’à la frontière néerlandaise. La construction d’un nouveau bassin à marée, le Saeftinghedok, serait alors possible, moyennant la poursuite des expropriations.

 

Partisans et détracteurs s’opposent à propos de l’opportunité de ce bassin. Celui-ci a un fervent défenseur en la personne de Marc Van Peel, depuis fin 2006 échevin (=adjoint au maire) aux affaires portuaires de la municipalité d’Anvers. Selon M. Van Peel, l’extension du port d’Anvers est une nécessité, compte tenu, d’une part, de la croissance prévisible du trafic de conteneurs, lequel est passé, en 2007, de 7 à 8 millions d’ÉVP, et d’autre part, de ce que le port d’Anvers sera apte, dès 2008, grâce aux travaux d’approfondissement de l’estuaire qui ont été réalisés, à accueillir des porte-conteneurs d’une capacité jusqu’à 12.500 ÉVP. Si cette croissance se poursuit à ce même rythme, on peut prévoir que le Deurganckdok sera parvenu à saturation aux alentours de 2012. Or, les seules possibilités d’expansion se trouvent sur la rive gauche, dans les marais de Doel.

 

Les opposants au projet vont valoir, étude récente de la Ocean Shipping Consultants à l’appui, que la conteneurisation des marchandises pourrait atteindre bientôt son plafond, et que la croissance prévisible du trafic pourrait être moindre dans les dix années à venir que dans les années récentes. Par ailleurs, à l’heure actuelle, le Deurganckdok est loin d’avoir épuisé toute sa capacité, et il apparaît de surcroît que le rendement, exprimé en ÉVP par hectare, se situe, au port d’Anvers, avec un chiffre de 18.000 seulement, très en deçà de ce qu’il est à Rotterdam ou à Hambourg, où l’on atteint les 30.000 ÉVP par hectare. Dès lors, au lieu d’un supposé manque de capacité, ce serait plutôt d’une grande réserve de capacité (resp. d'une surcapacité, si le Saeftinghedok devait être construit) qu’il pourrait être question, de sorte que moyennant certaines améliorations techniques, et éventuellement un allongement du Deurganckdok, il devrait être possible de faire face à l’augmentation du trafic conteneurs, et ce, selon les calculs du parti écologiste Groen!, au moins jusqu'en 2027.

 

Dès 1999, les habitants qui le désiraient pouvaient se faire exproprier. Les maisons expropriées passaient aux mains de la Maatschappij voor Grond- en Industrialisatiebeleid van het Linkerscheldeoevergebied (Société de gestion foncière et d’industrialisation de la Rive gauche de l’Escaut, en abrégé Maatschappij Linkeroever), cependant les habitants expropriés bénéficiaient d’un droit d’habitation, garanti initialement jusqu’au 1er janvier 2007. Fin 2006, l’administration fit savoir aux habitants que le droit d’habitation serait prorogé de manière provisoire.

 

En même temps fut nommé en 1999 un médiateur social, chargé de mettre à exécution le plan d’accompagnement social et d’assister les habitants qui quittent le village volontairement. Le 31 décembre 2003, ce plan social vint à son terme. Cette manière de procéder a permis de rendre exsangue, en seulement quelques années et sans coup férir, une grande partie du village: le 1er mai 2003 ne vivaient plus dans le centre de Doel que 214 des 645 habitants qui étaient inscrits au 20 janvier 1998. Le chiffre de population réel dans le centre s’élevait toutefois, au 1er mai 2003, à 301. Le 1er septembre 2003, l’école communale fut fermée après constatation que seuls 8 élèves s’y étaient inscrits.

 

Depuis lors, si le nombre d’habitants officiel a poursuivi sa baisse (plus que 202 en mars 2006), le nombre réel s’est progressivement accru. Cela s’explique, pour petite partie, par l’arrivée de nouveaux locataires dans certaines maisons expropriées, et pour majeure partie par le fait que des squatteurs avaient occupé les immeubles vacants (les estimations se situent entre 150 et 200). Cet état de choses fut longtemps toléré par la Société propriétaire des maisons vacantes et par la municipalité de Beveren.

 

Début 2006, les médias se sont de nouveau intéressés à Doel en raison du grand nombre de squatteurs. Cela concourut à répandre dans le public l’idée que Doel s’était dans une certaine mesure muée en une zone de non-droit, où l’on pouvait sans problème s’approprier un logement vacant, ce qui, à son tour, eut pour effet d’attirer de nouveaux squatteurs et de provoquer une vague de cambriolages. Le 22 mars 2006, le bourgmestre (=maire) de Beveren annonça que les contrôles de police seraient intensifiés à Doel et que la tolérance zéro serait dorénavant en vigueur et toute activité illégale réprimée. Certains squatteurs cependant demandent à régulariser leur situation.

 

Début septembre 2007, le tribunal des référés de Termonde a interdit la démolition de logements à Doel. La Maatschappij Linkeroever avait demandé quarante permis de démolition, dont une vingtaine avaient été accordés entre-temps. Le gouvernement flamand souhaite que 125 immeubles au total — soit environ une moitié des maisons du village —, déjà acquis par l’autorité flamande, aient disparu d’ici fin 2007 ; cela du reste rejoint sa décision de mettre un terme final au droit d’habitation (woonrecht) en 2009 : toutes les maisons qui viendraient ainsi à se trouver vacantes seraient ensuite démolies. Cependant, quelques habitants de Doel, soutenus en cela par le comité d’action Doel 2020, avaient saisi le tribunal de Termonde afin d’empêcher les démolitions. Sur le plan d’occupation du sol, Doel reste classé en zone d’habitation, le nouveau plan de secteur qui requalifiait Doel en zone industrielle ayant en effet quelques années auparavant été suspendu par le Conseil d’État. Le président du tribunal a jugé que les travaux de démolition seraient dommageables aux habitants restés sur place et dépasseraient les limites de la simple incommodation.

 

Par ailleurs, et dans le même temps, une délégation des habitants de Doel s’est rendue au Parlement européen à Bruxelles pour protester contre la démolition programmée de 125 logements. La délégation a remis une requête à la Commission des pétitions du Parlement européen.

 

Source wikipédia

sorry i couldn't edit the picture. i felt like i haven't posted anything in a while. and i wanted to post these facts today, and i was to lazy to put "niley facts" x)

so yeah, these are REAL facts, so dont complain the badassity of it ;)

 

P.S. i've been seeing these facts on people's twitters and they don't even credit me. I just know for sure they're my facts, js. so, if i see them on someone's twitter without giving me credit again, i'm not posting anymore Niley facts. k? goood:)

 

64. E! says Nick is alot of the inspiration on Can't Be Tamed

 

65. Miley Cyrus was at the recording of the Year 3000 video.

 

66. Miley owns a JONAS shirt.

 

67. Nick was given a survey when he was 13, and wrote "Miley Cyrus" as his celebrity crush.

 

68. Billy Ray called Nick "a good kid" on Larry King in 09

 

69. Ryan: Are you in love with Nick Jonas? Miley; I AM NOT IN LOVE WITH NICK JONAS! R: Is he in love with you? M: Yes. Ryan: Have you made out with him? Miley: NO! Ryan; Will you makeout with him? Miley: Yes. (2007)

 

70. On Miley's can't be tamed album, "Scars" & "Take Me Along" is supposedly about Nick Jonas.

 

71. Nick sang Before The Storm in the same place he and Miley broke up. Hartford, Conneticut. (August 13, 2010.)

 

72. That same night, Noah tweeted Nick, "Hey Nick its noah! See ya. xoxo" She also tweeted about rockin out to Year 3000 and it being her favorite song. (August 13, 2010.)

 

73. Nick supposedly danced to Party In The USA at the Road Dogs Game. (August 6th, 2010)

 

74. Miley used to carry band-aids around specially for Nicks diabetes

 

75. Miley is RUMORED to be texting Nick a lot. A source says "They are not done and could possibly get together this fall"

 

76. Nick reportedly turned down a Duet with miley 'cause he was too busy touring with his brothers.

 

77. Nick changed the lyrics AGAIN to Still in Love With You from "You're not Listening" to "You're my destiny." [September 5, 2010]

 

78. Nick always smiles when Miley is mentioned to him at an interiew.

 

79. Nick and Miley both LOVE the band Coldplay.

 

80. Nick and Miley both got the new iPhone4 recently.

 

81. Paranoid is not about Miley, but it's rumored to be about Selena or Taylor Swift.

 

82. On the set of "Send it On", Joe & Nick would always make fun of Miley and say that she's the youngest of the cast. <-- this made me LOL. x)

 

83. Frankie Jonas & Noah Cyrus are team Niley.

 

84. "We wrote the song after a personal experience that made us grow in the ways of love and relationship And being able to perform this song with an old friend was truly amazing ." -Nick.

 

85. “We have one of those things where it’s kind of always there. She’s so important to me, and I’m really lucky.” - Nick.

 

86. Miley tweeted once: "Watching Beauty and The Beast :) Why can't I be more like Belle?" and Nick said his favorite Disney princess is Belle. [September 3, 2010.]

 

&

 

87. Nick couldn't stop smiling at the interview With Paul when they mentioned Miley. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp8qSeOks7k <-- BTW, love this interview! it's frickin hilarious. you should watch the whole thing x)

Siponto Puglia Italy © 2014 All rights reserved

Nikon coolpix p 7100 Signature made with Fotosketcher

 

Siponto Chiesa di San Leonardo

L'interno della chiesa è caratterizzato dallo strano aspetto della navata destra: questa, infatti, non esisteva in origine e fu aggiunta in seguito, addossandola all'ex-muro esterno, oggi muro interno alla chiesa. Alcuni affreschi e scudi crociati teutonici riportano alla metà del Duecento. Nella volta centrale troviamo un piccolo rosone. Si tratta di un” foro gnomico che, nella giornata del 21 giugno alle ore 12, attraversato da un raggio di sole, proietta un fascio luminoso, che crea un motivo a croce , che si posiziona, perfettamente al centro, tra le due colonne adiacenti l’ingresso nord della chiesa. Sulla parete del lato destro della chiesa, rispetto all’entrata a nord, vi è un altro “ foro gnomico” che attraversato da un raggio di sole il 21 marzo alle ore 16 , equinozio di primavera, proietta un fascio di luce accanto all’abside.

Siponto Church of San Leonardo

The Interior is characterized by the appearance of strange right nave: this, in fact, did not exist in origin and was added later, putting it together at the outer wall, inner wall to the Church today. Some frescoes with Teutonic Crusader shields are of in the middle of the 13th century. In the roof, there is a small central rose window. Is a hole "gnomish" that ,the 21 June at 12am, crossed by a ray of sunshine, he sends a beam of light, which creates a cross, this is perfectly positioned in the Middle, between the two adjacent columns at the North entrance of the Church. On the right wall of the Church, from the North entrance, there is another "gnomish" crossed by a ray of sunshine on 21 March at 16pm, spring equinox, projects a beam of light next to the apse.

  

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The P-51H (NA-126) was the final production Mustang, embodying the experience gained in the development of the lightweight XP-51F and XP-51G aircraft. This aircraft, brought the development of the Mustang to a peak as one of the fastest production piston-engine fighters to see service in WWII.

In July of 1943, U.S. Army approved a contract with North American Aviation to design and build a lightweight P-51. Designated NA-105, 5 aircraft were to be built and tested. Edgar Schmued, chief of design at NAA, began this design early in 1943. He, in February of 1943, left the U.S. on a two-month trip to England. He was to visit the Supermarine factory and the Rolls Royce factory to work on his lightweight project.

 

Rolls Royce had designed a new version of the Merlin, the RM.14.SM, which was proposed to increase the manifold pressure to 120 (from 67 max) and thus improve military emergency horsepower to 2,200. Schmued was very eager to use this powerplant, since the new Merlin was not heavier than the earlier models. In order to exploit the new engine to the maximum, he visited the engineers at Rolls Royce in Great Britain. However, British fighters were by tendency lighter than their U.S. counterparts and Schmued also asked for detailed weight statements from Supermarine concerning the Spitfire. Supermarine did not have such data, so they started weighing all the parts they could get a hold of and made a report. It revealed that the British had design standards that were not as strict in some areas as the U.S, and American landing gear, angle of attack and side engine design loads were by tendency higher. When Schmued returned, he began a new design of the P-51 Mustang that used British design loads, shaving off weight on any part that could yield. The result was an empty weight reduction by 600 pounds, what would directly translate into more performance.

 

This design effort led to a number of lightweight Mustang prototypes, designated XP-51F, XP-51G and XP-51J. After their testing, the production version, NA-126 a.k.a. P-51H, was closest to the XP-51F. The project began in April 1944 and an initial contract for 1,000 P-51Hs was approved on June 30, 1944, which was soon expanded.

The P-51H used the V-1650-9 engine, a modified version of the new Merlin RM.14.SM that included Simmons automatic supercharger boost control with water injection, allowing War Emergency Power as high as 2,218 hp (1,500 kW) and a continuous output of up to 1,490 hp (1.070 kW).

Even though the P-51H looked superficially like a slightly modified P-51D, it was effectively a completely new design. External differences to the P-51D included lengthening and deepening the fuselage and increasing the height of the tailfin, which reduced, together with a lower fuel load in the fuselage tank, the tendency to yaw. The landing gear was simplified and lightened. The canopy resembled the P-51D bubble top style, over a raised pilot's position. The armament was retained but service access to the guns and ammunition was improved, including the introduction of ammunition cassettes that made reloading easier and quicker. With the new airframe several hundred pounds lighter, extra power, and a more streamlined radiator, the P-51H was faster than the P-51D, able to reach 472 mph (760 km/h; 410 kn) at 21,200 ft (6,500 m), making it one of the fastest piston engine aircraft in WWII.

 

The high-performance P-51H was designed to complement the P-47N as the primary aircraft for the invasion of Japan, with 2,000 ordered to be manufactured at NAA’s Inglewood plant. Variants of the P-51H with different versions of the Merlin engine were produced in limited numbers, too, in order to ramp up production and deliveries to frontline units. These included the P-51L, which was similar to the P-51H but utilized the V-1650-11 engine with a modified fuel system, rated at maximum 2,270 hp (1,690 kW), and the P-51M, or NA-124. The P-51M, of which a total of 1629 was ordered, was built in Dallas and utilized the V-1650-9A engine. This variant was optimized for operations at low and medium altitude and lacked water injection, producing less maximum power at height. However, it featured attachment points for up to ten unguided HVAR missiles under the outer wings as well as improved armor protection for the pilot against low-caliber weapons esp. from ground troops, which ate up some of the light structure’s weight benefit.

 

Most P-51H and L were issued to USAF units, while the P-51M and some Hs were delivered to allied forces in the Pacific TO, namely Australia and New Zealand. Only a few aircraft arrived in time to become operational until the end of hostilities, and even less became actually involved in military actions during the final weeks of fighting in the Pacific.

 

The RAAF received only a handful P-51Hs, since Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (CAC) had recently started license production of the P-51D (as CA-18) and the RAAF rather focused on this type. However, there were plans in early 1945 to build the P-51H locally as the CA-21, too, but this never came to fruition.

 

New Zealand ordered a total of 370 P-51 Mustangs of different variants to supplement its Vought F4U Corsairs in the PTO, which were primarily used as fighter-bombers. Scheduled deliveries were for an initial batch of 30 P-51Ds, followed by 137 more P-51Ds and 203 P-51Ms. The first RNZAF P-51Ms arrived in April 1945 and were allocated to 3 Squadron as well as to the Flight Leaders School in Ardmore (near Auckland in Northern New Zealand) for conversion training. The machines arrived as knocked-down kits via ship in natural metal finish, but the operational machines were, despite undisputed Allied air superiority, immediately camouflaged in field workshops to protect the airframes from the harsh and salty environment, esp. on the New Guinean islands. The RNZAF Mustangs also received quick identification markings in the form of white tail surfaces and white bands on the wings and in front of and behind the cockpit, in order to avoid any confusion with the Japanese Ki-61 “Hien” (Tony) and Ki-84 (Frank) fighters which had a similar silhouette and frequently operated in a natural metal finish.

During the final weeks of the conflict, the RNZAF only scored three air victories: two Japanese reconnaissance flying boats were downed and a single Ki-84 fighter was shot down in a dogfight over Bougainville. Most combat situations of 3 Squadron were either fighter escorts for F4U fighter bombers or close air support and attacks against Japanese strongholds or supply ships.

 

After the war, many USAF P-51Hs were immediately retired or handed over to reserve units. The surviving P-51Js were, due to their smaller production numbers, were mostly donated to foreign air forces in the course of the Fifties, in order to standardize the US stock. Despite its good performance, the P-51H/J/M did not take part in the Korean War. Instead, the (by the time re-designated) F-51D was selected, as it was available in much greater numbers and had a better spares supply situation. It was considered as a proven commodity and perceived to be stouter against ground fire – a misconception, because the vulnerable ventral liquid cooling system caused heavy losses from ground fire. The alternative P-47 would have been a more effective choice. The last American F-51H Mustangs were retired from ANG units in 1957, but some of its kin in foreign service soldiered on deep into the Sixties. The F-51D even lasted into the Eigthies in military service!

 

After the end of hostilities in the PTO, the RNZAF’s forty-two operational P-51Ms met different fates: The twenty-six survivors, which had reached frontline service in New Guinea, were directly scrapped on site, because their transfer back to New Zealand was not considered worthwhile. Those used for training in New Zealand were stored, together with the delivered P-51Ds, or, together with yet unbuilt kits, sent back to the United States.

In 1951, when New Zealand’s Territorial Air Force (TAF) was established, only the stored P-51D Mustangs were revived and entered service in the newly established 1 (Auckland), 2 (Wellington), 3 (Canterbury), and 4 (Otago) squadrons. Due to the small number, lack of spares and communality with the P-51D, the remaining mothballed RNZAF F-51Ms were eventually scrapped, too.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 33’ 4” (10.173 m)

Wingspan: 37‘ (11.28 m)

Height: 13‘ 8” (4.17 m) with tail wheel on ground, vertical propeller blade

Wing area: 235 sq ft (21.83 m²)

Airfoil: NAA/NACA 45-100 / NAA/NACA 45-100

Empty weight: 7.180 lb (3,260 kg)

Gross weight: 9,650 lb (4,381 kg)

Max takeoff weight: 11,800 lb (5,357 kg)

Fuel capacity: 255 US gal (212 imp gal; 964 l)

Aspect ratio: 5.83

 

Powerplant:

1× Packard (Rolls Royce) V-1650-9A Merlin 12-cylinder liquid cooled engine, delivering 1,380 hp

(1,030 kW) at sea level, driving a 4-blade constant-speed Aeroproducts 11' 1" Unimatic propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 465 mph (750 km/h; 407 kn) at 18,000 ft (5,500 m)

Cruise speed: 362 mph (583 km/h, 315 kn)

Stall speed: 100 mph (160 km/h, 87 kn)

Range: 855 mi (1,375 km, 747 nm) with internal fuel

1,200 mi (1,930 km, 1,050 nmi) with external tanks

Service ceiling: 30,100 ft (9,200 m)

Rate of climb: 3,200 ft/min (16.3 m/s) at sea level

Wing loading: 30.5 lb/sq ft (149 kg/m²)

Power/mass: 0.19 hp/lb (315 W/kg)

Lift-to-drag ratio: 14.6

Recommended Mach limit 0.8

 

Armament:

6× 0.50 caliber (12.7mm) AN/M2 Browning machine guns with a total of 1,880 rounds

2× underwing hardpoints for drop tanks or bombs of 500 pounds (227 kg) caliber each,

or 6 or 10 5” (127 mm) T64 HVAR rockets

  

The kit and its assembly:

A relatively simple project, a whiffy color variant based on RS Model’s 1:72 P-51H kit – which I quickly turned into a P-51M, which was planned as mentioned in the background, but never produced in real life.

The model was strictly built OOB, and while this short-run kit goes together quite well, I encountered some problems along the way:

- There are massive and long ejector pin markers, sometimes in very confined locations like the radiator intake. Without a mini drill, getting rid of them is very difficult

- Somehow the instructions for the cockpit are not correct; I put the parts into place as indicated, and the pilot’s seat ended up way too far forward in the fuselage

- The canopy, while clear, is pretty thick and just a single piece, so that you have to cut the windscreen off by yourself if you want to show the otherwise very nice cockpit.

- The separated windscreen section itself includes a piece of the cowling in front of the window panes, which makes its integration into the fuselage a tricky affair. However, this IMHO not-so-perfect construction became a minor blessing because the separated windscreen turned out to be a little too narrow for the fuselage – it had to be glued forcibly to the fuselage (read: with superglue), and the section in front of the window panes offered enough hidden area to safely apply the glue on the clear piece.

- While there are some resin parts included like weighted wheels, it is beyond me why tiny bits like the underwing pitot or most delicate landing gear parts have been executed in resin, as flat parts of a resin block that makes it IMHO impossible to cut them out from.

- The tail wheel is a messy three-piece construction of resin and IP parts, with a flimsy strut that’s prone to break already upon cutting the part from the IP sprue. Furthermore, there’s no proper location inside of the fuselage to mount it. Guess and glue!

- The fit of the stabilizers is doubtful; it’s probably best to get rid of their locator pins and glue them directly onto the fuselage

- The propeller consists of a centerpiece with the blades, which is enclosed by two spinner halves (front and back). This results in a visible seam between them that is not easy to fill/PSR away

 

On the positive side I must say that the engraved surface details, the cockpit interior and the landing gear are very nice, and there is even the complete interior of the radiator and its tunnel included. PSR requirements are also few, even though you won’t get along well without cosmetic bodywork.

 

The only personal modification is a styrene tube inside of the nose for the propeller, which was mounted onto a metal axis for free rotation; OOB, the propeller is not moveable at all and is to be glued directly to the fuselage.

While the kit comes with optional ordnance (six HVARs or a pair of 500 lb bombs, both in resin), I just used the bomb pylons and left them empty, for a clean look.

  

Painting and markings:

Even though the model was a quick build, finding a suitable color concept took a while; I had a whiffy P-51H on my agenda for a long time (since the RS Models kit came out), and my initial plan was to create an Australian aircraft. This gradually changed to an RNZAF aircraft during the last weeks of WWII in the PTO, and evolved from an NMF finish (initial and IMHO most logical idea) through am Aussie-esque green/brown camouflage to a scheme I found for a P-40: a trainer that was based in New Zealand and (re)painted in domestic colors, namely in Foliage Green, Blue Sea Grey and Sky. This might sound like a standard RAF aircraft, but in the end the colors and markings make this Mustang look pretty exotic, just as the P-51H looks like a Mustang that is “not quite right”.

 

The Foliage Green is Humbrol 195 (Dark Green Satin, actually RAL 6020 Chrome Oxide Green), which offers IMHO a good compromise between the tone’s rather bluish hue and yellow shades – I find it to be a better match than the frequently recommended FS 34092, because RAL 6020 is darker. The RNZAF “Blue Sea Grey”, also known as “Pacific Blue” or “Ocean Blue”, is a more obscure tone, which apparently differed a lot from batch to batch and weathered dramatically from a bluish tone (close to FS 35109 when fresh) to a medium grey. I settled for Humbrol 144 (FS 35164; USN Intermediate Blue), which is rumored to come close to the color in worn state.

The undersides were painted with Humbrol 23 (RAF Duck Egg Blue), which I found to be a suitable alternative to the more greenish RAF Sky, even though it’s a pretty light interpretation.

Tail and spinner were painted white, actually a mix of Humbrol 22 (Gloss White) and 196 (Light Grey, RAL 7035) so that there would be some contrast room left for post-shading with pure white.

The interior of cockpit and landing gear wells was painted with zinc chromate primer yellow (Humbrol 81), while the landing gear struts became Humbrol 56 (Aluminum Dope). The radiator ducts received an interior in aluminum (Revell 99).

 

In order to simulate wear and tear as well as the makeshift character of the camouflage I painted the wings’ leading edges and some other neuralgic areas in aluminum (Revell 99, too) first, before the basic camouflage tones were added in a somewhat uneven fashion, with the metallized areas showing through.

Once dry, the model received an overall washing with thinned black ink and a through dry-brushing treatment with lighter shades of the basic tones (including Humbrol 30, 122 and 145) for post-panel-shading and weathering, esp. on the upper surfaces.

 

The decals are a mix from a Rising Decals sheet for various RNZAF aircraft (which turned out to be nicely printed, but rather thin so that they lacked opacity and rigidity), and for the tactical markings I stuck to the RNZAF practice of applying just a simple number or letter code to frontline aircraft instead of full RAF-style letter codes. The latter were used only on aircraft based on home soil, since the RNZAF’s frontline units had a different organization with an aircraft pool allocated to the squadrons. Through maintenance these circulated and were AFAIK not rigidly attached to specific units, hence there was no typical two-letter squadron code applied to them, just single ID letters or numbers, and these were typically painted on the aircraft nose and/or the fin, not on the fuselage next to the roundel. The nose art under the cockpit is a mix of markings from P-40s and F4Us.

 

The white ID bands on fuselage and wings are simple white decal strips from TL-Modellbau. While this, together with the all-white tail, might be overdone and outdated towards mid-1945, I gave the Kiwi-Mustang some extra markings for a more exciting look – and the aircraft’s profile actually reminds a lot of the Ki-61, so that they definitely make sense.

 

Towards the finish line, some additional dry-brushing with grey and silver was done, soot stains were added with graphite to the exhaust areas and the machine gun ports, and the model was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

After the recent, massive YA-14 kitbashing project, this Mustang was – despite some challenges of the RS Models kit itself – a simple and quick “relief” project, realized in just a couple of days. Despite being built OOB, the result looks quite exotic, both through the paint scheme with RNZAF colors, but also through the unusual roundels and the striking ID markings (for a Mustang). I was skeptical at first, but the aircraft looks good and the camouflage in RNZAF colors even proved to be effective when set into the right landscape context (beauty pics).

Page 04

As presented by ABC TV's DISCOVERY

Published by the Saalfield Publishing Company.

Copyright MCMLXIV American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres, Inc.

It's a fact. He was the world's most famous and beloved comic star and whether you agree or not, he remains in death the greatest comic star in the history of Hollywood. Chaplin's friendly rivalry with fellow legendary silent screen comics Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd is cemented in Tinseltown folklore. All three brilliant physical performers especially in those early years of real death defying stunt work made famous by Keaton and Lloyd. Chaplin on the other hand showcased formidable talent behind the camera lens becoming a director that complemented his deft hand of acting maniacal on one scene then displaying tender moments of innocence and romance the next. No better example than his creation of the Little Tramp in many of his vintage classic films with shabby two piece suit, bowler hat, twirling walking cane and the classic Chaplin walk with both feet pointed outwards heading onto a new adventure. In these pre-code era of Hollywood filmmaking, Chaplin was not far from controversy in how he lived his life and conducted himself. A roving womaniser at the height of his powers in the 20s and 30s, it's reported that Chaplin slept with over 2000 women in his lifetime, and a fair few of them being nothing more than late teenagers or in their 20s when he was decades older. Basically Charlie liked them young. Would have tons of paperwork filed against him on paternity suits when he denied the pregnant woman's child was his. This type of news would erode his once cast iron popularity in public and the backlash would take it's toll on his once shining career. Facing jail time on a smear campaign against him for human trafficking amongst other things, he's only choice after being acquitted was to choose exiling himself from America for the rest of his life moving to Switzerland with teen wife Oona who was 36 years younger than him. Chaplin last great American film is one of his most iconic films where he played a "Adolf Hitler" type leader and openly mocked the real life figure in the film's portrayal with raving ramblings and wild exaggerated mannerisms that Hitler became notorious for as his army matched across Western Europe in the same year of 1940 when this masterpiece film "The Great Dictator" (!940) was released. Time is a great healer as it's said and decades later and attitudes of later generations more softer than the witch-hunt attitudes of the 1940s, the Academy of Motion Pictures wanted the honour the little genius at the 1972 Oscars ceremony with a Lifetime Achievement Oscar. He accepted the invite and flew back to the US for the first time in 20 years after being barred back into the US while abroad in 1952. The scenes of Chaplin on stage accepting the Oscar with tears in his eyes as this age New America wanted to make amends for really what was an unjust crime against cinema by robbing the world of his immense talents during the decades that mattered. His career is already magnificent, imagine how much better it could've been in the 1950s and 1960s. There was still films he made during his exile, the masterpiece "Limelight" (1952), "A King in New York" (1957), and his last ever film "A Countess from Hong Kong" in 1967 are a nice mix of gems and hidden delights. Chaplin and Oona would have 8 children before ill health with a series of mini strokes set in during the late 1960s. On Christmas Day morning in 1977, Chaplin died in his sleep having another stroke. He was 88 years old. *Above photo of the Little Tramp" in 1918.

Facts about this company

Coca-Cola owns and markets four of the world’s top five sparkling non-alcoholic beverages: Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Fanta and Sprite. It makes and distributes its beverages through company-owned or controlled bottling plants and distributors but also contracts independent bottling partners, wholesalers, and retailers.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

 

Some background:

The Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet is a light attack jet and advanced trainer aircraft co-manufactured by Dassault Aviation of France and Dornier Flugzeugwerke of Germany. It was developed specifically to perform the trainer and light attack missions, as well as to perform these duties more ideally than the first generation of jet trainers that preceded it.

Following a competition, a design submitted by a team comprising Breguet Aviation, Dassault Aviation, and Dornier Flugzeugwerke, initially designated as the TA501, was selected and subsequently produced as the Alpha Jet.

Both the French Air Force and German Air Force procured the Alpha Jet in large numbers, the former principally as a trainer aircraft and the latter choosing to use it as a light attack platform. In July 1978, Dassault signed an agreement with American aircraft manufacture Lockheed to market the Alpha Jet in the US market, the arrangement included provisions for Lockheed to manufacture the Alpha Jet under license. The Alpha Jet was considered as a candidate for the US Navy's VTXTS advanced trainer program, which was eventually won by the McDonnell Douglas T-45 Goshawk, a modified version of the Hawker Siddeley Hawk. Proposed modifications included undercarriage changes for nose-tow catapults and a stronger arrestor hook, as well as various US-sourced avionics and other equipment.

 

The Alpha Jet program remained prolific, though. During the early 1990s, the French Air Force investigated the “Alpha Jet 3” program, which involved installing a fully digital cockpit, a modernized communications suite, and a full navigation/attack and sensor training system.

 

Another development line was the Alpha Jet Lancier (Lancer), which would enable the trainer to act as a light, all-weather multi-purpose attack aircraft. The most obvious modification was the addition of an Anemone radar in an extended nose section with a radome, similar and shape and size of the Super Étendard’s nose section. The Anemone radar was an improved and very compact derivative of the Super Étendard’s Agave radar, weighing only a mere 60kg.

The Anemone would provide the weapon system (based on the developments for the Alpha Jet 3) with all the data required for firing air-to-sea AM39 missiles, and the data needed for air-to-ground fire control. It could also be used for aircraft self-protection, as it could also handle the fire control of air-to-air weapons.

Dassault had high hopes in export sales for the Alpha Jet Lancier (e. g. to Egypt, Qatar and Nigeria), but interest was lukewarm since the Alpha Jet was a design that had been superseded by more modern constructions, and its operation costs were relatively high.

However, in 1991, when the Alpha Jet Lancier was still on the drawing board, the French Aéronavale was looking for an advanced trainer that could also be used for carrier start and landing training – basically as a replacement for the outdated Fouga CM.175 Zéphyr. The Alpha Jet offered several benefits, including its two engines for improved operational security and the fact that the type had already been in use with the French Air Force, so that the maintenance infrastructure and experienced mechanics were readily available. Even the demand for a maritime variant could be quickly realized – thanks to the VTXTS engagement in the late Seventies.

 

The result was the so-called “Alpha Jet Lancier M”, which incorporated all the aforementioned elements. An order for 31 aircraft (one prototype plus 30 serial aircraft) was placed in early 1992. The prototype was ready in May 1993 and incorporated further changes like uprated engines (delivering 10% more thrust than the former Larzac turbofans used on the land-based variants) or foldable outer wing sections, a reinforced arrester hook and a fixed (but detachable refueling probe).

The landing gear was also modified for carrier operations, with a bigger spring deflection and a more rigid, twin-front wheel that also featured a launch hook.

 

The Anemone multi-mode radar was augmented by a lightweight Ferranti Type 105 laser rangefinder, mounted in a fairing under the port side cockpit flank, leaving space for an optional gun pod that could be carried under the fuselage. A Doppler radar for navigation purposes was added in a shallow fairing under the cockpit, too. Mission avionics were further enhanced by a helmet-mounted sight, improved cockpit displays, a datalink, and improved night vision goggles compatibility.

 

The Alpha Jet Lancier M’s most powerful weapon was the AS.39 Exocet missile. Two of these weapons (weighing 670 kg each) could be carried on the inner pylons, even typically only a single one was carried with a drop tank as counterbalance and range compensation on the opposite pylon.

The relatively compact missile is designed for attacking small- to medium-size warships (e. g. frigates, corvettes and destroyers), although multiple hits are effective against larger vessels, such as aircraft carriers. Its rocket motor, which is fueled by solid propellant, gives the Exocet a maximum range of 70 km (43 mi; 38 nmi). It is guided inertially in mid-flight and turns on active radar late in its flight to find and hit its target. As a countermeasure against air defense around the target, it maintains a very low altitude during ingress, staying one–two m above the sea surface. Due to the effect of the radar horizon, this means that the target may not detect an incoming attack until the missile is only 6,000 m from impact. This leaves little time for reaction and stimulated the design of close-in weapon systems (CIWS).

 

Trials of the Alpha Jet Lancier M prototype lasted until 1994, when serial production eventually started – just in time for the Zéphyr replacement, the trainer had been in service since 1960. The first machines arrived at the operational units in early 1995, though. Dassault still had high export hopes, but despite having an official operator now no further orders were coming forth – the Alpha Jet Lancier was simply too expensive. Plans for upgrading the land-based Alpha Jet fleet were also ultimately abandoned as being too expensive. In 1998, France's defense ministry examined prospective upgrades focused on the Alpha Jet's cockpit, such as the installation of a new Head-Up Display (HUD) and multifunction displays, though.

 

In June 2003, Dassault revealed its plans for an Alpha Jet upgrade to potentially meet the French Air Force's long term training requirements. This upgrade was similar to that which was performed for the Belgian Air Force's Alpha Jet fleet, involving the installation of a glass cockpit, increasing cockpit compatibility with frontline aircraft such as the Dassault Rafale and Dassault Mirage 2000, as well as a structural overhaul.

 

As a result of post-Cold War military cutbacks, Germany already elected to retire its own fleet of Alpha Jets in the 1990s and has re-sold many of these aircraft to both military and civilian operators. The Alpha Jet has been adopted by a number of air forces across the world and has also seen active combat use by some of these operators.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: two

Length: 13.23 m (43 ft 5 in)

Wingspan: 9.11 m (29 ft 10¾ in), folded:

Height: 4.19 m (13 ft 9 in)

Wing area: 17.50 m² (188.4 ft²)

Empty weight: 3,515 kg (7,750 lb)

Loaded weight: 5,000 kg (11,000 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× SNECMA Turbomeca Larzac 04-H-20 non-afterburning turbofans,

delivering 4.12 kN of thrust (3,173 lbf) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 1,000 km/h (540 kn, 621 mph) at sea level

Stall speed: 167 km/h (90 knots, 104 mph) (flaps and undercarriage down)

Combat radius: 610 km (329 nmi, 379 mi) lo-lo-lo profile with full ordnance

Ferry range: 2,940 km (1,586 nmi, 1,827 mi)

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

Rate of climb: 57 m/s (11,220 ft/min)

 

Armament:

1× optional 30 mm (1.18 in) GIAT 30/M791 autocannon with 125 rounds in a centerline pod

Four underwing hardpoints for a total load of 2,500 kg (5,506 lb), including up to six Matra rocket pods

with eighteen SNEB 68 mm rockets each or six CRV7 rocket pods with nineteen 70 mm rockets each;

Two AIM-9 Sidewinders or two Matra Magic IIs air-to-air missiles

Up to two AM.39 Exocet anti-ship missiles, or four AGM-65 Mavericks

or other TV-, laser or IR-guided Smart Weapons

   

The kit and its assembly:.

Another entry for the “Old Kit Group Build” at whatifmodelers.com, #4 to be precise. The basis for this conversion is the venerable Heller Alpha Jet in 1:72 scale from 1979, even though in a much more recent Revell re-boxing as a Belgian aircraft with a black/yellow/silver anniversary paint scheme.

Anyway, the moulds must have suffered a lot in the meantime, because the Revell offering comes with lots of flash, ugly ejector pin markings and even some sinkholes. I have built an old, original Heller kit a while ago, and this was much more crisp and defined!

 

However, the conversion of the kit was only cosmetic, including:

• A new, longer and more massive nose– actually the front end of a Tornado drop tank

• A completely new twin front wheel, including the well in the nose section

• Modified main landing gear with new wheels and a higher stance

• Engraved seams for the wings’ folding mechanism

• Appropriate ordnance, including…

- an Exocet missile (Academy Super Étendard)

- a drop tank (Academy OV-10 Bronco)

- a Barracuda 2 ECM pod and a Matra Phimat flare dispenser (Heller SEPECAT Jaguar)

• Some new antennae and pitots, and a more massive arrestor hook

• The laser rangefinder in its unusual (but correct!) fairing

• Some chaff/flare dispensers at the tail

 

Building the fuselage was no fun – nothing would fit, and the kit’s construction is really complicated. O.K., the Alpha Jet’s shape with its engine nacelles and the curved belly is complex, but the kit’s solution is far from perfect.

Another true weak point are the air intakes: they end after 3-4mm in a staggered, vertical wall. Really ugly, so I drilled the intakes open and moved the still necessary view blocker (black foamed styrene) a bit further back.

  

Painting and markings:

IMHO, the only potential operator for this fictional yet rather complex and expensive Alpha Jet variant would be France, and so the Lancier M ended up in the hands of the Aéronavale.

Consequently, I gave the aircraft a Nineties paint scheme inspired by the two-tone grey livery of the late Super Ètendard – also a bit of an unusual, yet familiar, touch. The basic colors I used are Humbrol 164 (Dark Sea Grey) and 165 (Medium Sea Grey), because I wanted to prevent a US look – and the frequently recommended tones of FS36118 and FS35237 are IMHO just wrong, Gunship Grey being too dark, and the grey blue being …simply much too bluish. The British tones work quite well, though, even though I still wonder about the “true” colors of this paint scheme?

 

The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey (Humbrol 67) for some contrast to the outside, the landing gear wells and the struts became Aluminum (Humbrol 56), as well as the air intakes. The interior of the landing gear covers was painted in chrome yellow primer (Humbrol 81), for some more color contrast.

 

The Barracuda 2 pod was painted in dark green, while the chaff dispenser became dark grey – as a small color contrast to the grey aircraft. The Exocet missile became white with a light grey radome, according to the real thing, but as another disruption the single drop tank received the old Aéronavale scheme in dark bluish grey and white, together with a red tip (marking the flight the aircraft belongs to).

 

The decals come mostly from a Berna Decals aftermarket sheet for French Bréguet Alizés. The sheet features, among others, a late, dark grey aircraft, and this option provided the small roundels and the grey codes. Escadrille 59S was chosen, since it was available in the sheet (with the squadron’s emblem) and originally a unit for night/all-weather training, disbanded in early 1997.

  

A simple conversion, yet very thorough and surprisingly convincing. The Lancier’s longer and more massive nose changes the character of the sleek Alpha Jet a lot, and the grey-on-grey paint scheme with the toned-down markings adds a unusual touch to the normally much more colorful aircraft. The scheme looks very natural on the Alpha Jet, too.

I consider myself a very lucky woman. Because, even if it made me suffer a lot, I always had the courage to accept the facts, and not to lie to myself.

And I don't like to delete good memories.They are a part of me, of the person I am, and of the better person I can be!

Have a great saturday you all, I'm going to town tonight, to see a show: maybe I'll take some good shot!

ciaoooo :)))

C.B. Tryon, Typographer

 

The Zender Fact 4 Spider at the Essen Motorshow.

 

Scanned photograph from 1993.

+++ 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:

After the country's independence from the United Kingdom, after its departure from the European Union in 2017, the young Republic of Scotland Air Corps (locally known as Poblachd na h-Alba Adhair an Airm) started a major procurement program to take over most basic duties the Royal Air Force formerly had taken over in Northern Britain. This procurement was preceded by a White Paper published by the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2013, which had stated that an independent Scotland would have an air force equipped with up to 16 air defense aircraft, six tactical transports, utility rotorcraft and maritime patrol aircraft, and be capable of “contributing excellent conventional capabilities” to NATO. According to the document, “Key elements of air forces in place at independence, equipped initially from a negotiated share of current UK assets, will secure core tasks, principally the ability to police Scotland’s airspace, within NATO.” An in-country air command and control capability would be established within five years of a decision in favor of independence, it continues, with staff also to be “embedded within NATO structures”.

 

Outlining its ambition to establish an air force with an eventual 2,000 uniformed personnel and 300 reservists, the SNP stated the organization would initially be equipped with “a minimum of 12 interceptors in the Eurofighter/Typhoon class, based at Lossiemouth, a tactical air transport squadron, including around six Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules, and a helicopter squadron”. The latter would not only have to take over transport duties for the army, there was also a dire need to quickly replace the former Royal Air Force’s Search and Rescue (SAR) capabilities and duties in the North with domestic resources, after this role was handed over to civilian contractor Bristow Helicopters and the RAF’s SAR units had been disbanded.

 

This led to the procurement of six AS365 Dauphin helicopters as an initial measure to keep up basic SAR capabilities, with the prospects of procuring more to become independent from the Bristow Helicopters contract. These aircraft were similar to the Eurocopter SA 366 MH-65 “Dolphin” for the United States Coast Guard but differed in many ways from them and also from any other navalized SA365 variant.

For the RoScAC’s SAR squadron, the SA 365 was taken as a starting point, but the helicopter was heavily modified and locally re-christened “Leumadair” (= Dolphin).

 

The most obvious new feature of the unique Scottish rescue variant was a fixed landing gear with the main wheels on short “stub wings” for a wider stance, stabilizing the helicopter during shipboard landings and in case of an emergency water landing - the helicopter was not able to perform water landings, even though inflatable emergency landing floats were typically fitted. Another obvious difference to other military Dauphin versions was the thimble radome on the nose for an RDR-1600 search and weather radar which is capable of detecting small targets at sea as far as 25 nautical miles away. This layout was chosen to provide the pilots with a better field of view directrly ahead of the helicopter. Additionally, an electro-optical sensor turret with an integrated FLIR sensor was mounted in a fully rotatable turret under the nose, giving the helicopter full all-weather capabilities. Less obvious were a digital glass cockpit and a computerized flight management system, which integrated state-of-the-art communications and navigation equipment. This system provided automatic flight control, and at the pilot's direction, the system would bring the aircraft to a stable hover 50 feet (15 m) above a selected object, an important safety feature in darkness or inclement weather. Selected search patterns could be flown automatically, freeing the pilot and copilot to concentrate on sighting & searching the object.

To improve performance and safety margin, more powerful Turbomeca Arriel 2C2-CG engines were used. Seventy-five percent of the structure—including rotor head, rotor blades and fuselage—consisted of corrosion-resistant composite materials. The rotor blades themselves were new, too, with BERP “paddles”at their tips, a new aerofoil and increased blade twist for increased lifting-capability and maximum speed, to compensate for the fixed landing gear and other external equipment that increased drag. To prevent leading edge erosion the blade used a rubber-based tape rather than the polyurethane used on earlier helicopters.

 

The “Leumadair HR.1”, so its official designation, became operational in mid-2019. Despite being owned by the government, the helicopters received civil registrations (SC-LEA - -LEF) and were dispersed along the Scottish coastline. They normally carried a crew of four: Pilot, Copilot, Flight Mechanic and Rescue Swimmer, even though regular flight patrols were only excuted with a crew of three. The Leumadair HR.1 was used by the RoScAC primarily for search and rescue missions, but also for homeland security patrols, cargo, drug interdiction, ice breaking, and pollution control. While the helicopters operated unarmed, they could be outfitted with manually operated light or medium machine guns in their doors.

However, the small fleet of only six helicopters was far from being enough to cover the Scottish coast and the many islands up north, so that the government prolonged the contract with Bristow Helicopters in late 2019 for two more years, and the procurement of further Leumadair HR.1 helicopters was decided in early 2020. Twelve more helicopters were ordered en suite and were expected to arrive in late 2021.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 2 pilots and 2 crew

Length: 12,06 m (39 ft 2 1/2 in)

Height: 4 m (13 ft 1 in)

Main rotor diameter: 12,10 m (39 ft 7 1/2 in)

Main rotor area: 38.54 m² (414.8 sq ft)

Empty weight: 3,128 kg (6,896 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 4,300 kg (9,480 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Turbomeca Arriel 2C2-CG turboshaft engines, 636 kW (853 hp) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 330 km/h (210 mph, 180 kn)

Cruise speed: 240 km/h (150 mph, 130 kn)

Range: 658 km (409 mi, 355 nmi)

Service ceiling: 5,486 m (17,999 ft)

 

Armament:

None installed, but provisions for a 7.62 mm M240 machine gun or a Barrett M107 0.50 in (12.7

mm) caliber precision rifle in each side door

  

The kit and its assembly:

Another chapter in my fictional alternative reality in which Scotland became an independent Republic and separated from the UK in 2017. Beyond basic aircraft for the RoScAC’s aerial defense duties I felt that maritime rescue would be another vital task for the nascent air force – and the situation that Great Britain had outsourced the SAR job to a private company called for a new solution for the independent Scotland. This led to the consideration of a relatively cheap maritime helicopter, and my choice fell on the SA365 ‘Daupin’, which has been adapted to such duties in various variants.

 

As a starting point there’s the Matchbox SA365 kit from 1983, which is a typical offer from the company: a solid kit, with mixed weak spots and nice details (e. g. the cockpit with a decent dashboard and steering columns/pedals for the crew). Revell has re-boxed this kit in 2002 as an USCG HH-65A ‘Dolphin’, but it’s technically only a painting option and the kit lacks any optional parts to actually build this type of helicopter in an authentic fashion - there are some subtle differences, and creating a convincing HH-65 from it would take a LOT of effort. Actually, it's a real scam from Revell to market the Matchbox Dauphin as a HH-65!

 

However, it was my starting basis, and for a modernized/navalized/military version of the SA365 I made some changes. For instance, I gave the helicopter a fixed landing gear, with main wheels stub wings taken from a Pavla resin upgrade/conversion set for a Lynx HAS.2, which also comes with better wheels than the Matchbox kit. The Dauphin’s landing gear wells were filled with 2C putty and in the same process took the stub wings. The front landing gear well was filled with putty, too, and a adapter to hold the front twin wheel strut was embedded. Lots of lead were hidden under the cockpit floor to ensure that this model would not becaome a tail sitter.

A thimble radome was integrated into the nose with some PSR – I opted for this layout because the fixed landing gear would block 360° radar coverage under the fuselage, and there’s not too much ground clearance or space above then cabin for a radome. Putting it on top of the rotor would have been the only other option, but I found this rather awkward. As a side benefit, the new nose changes the helicopter’s silhouette well and adds to a purposeful look.

 

The rotor blades were replaced with resin BERP blades, taken from another Pavla Lynx conversion set (for the Hobby Boss kit). Because their attachment points were very different from the Matchbox Dauphin rotor’s construction, I had to improvise a little. A rather subtle change, but the result looks very plausible and works well. Other external extras are two inflatable floating devices along the lower fuselage from a Mistercraft ASW AB 212 (UH-1) kit, the winch at port side was scratched with a piece from the aforementioned BK 117 and styrene bits. Some blade antennae were added and a sensor turret was scratched and placed in front of the front wheels. Additional air scoops for the gearbox were added, too. Inside, I added two (Matchbox) pilot figures to the cockpit, plus a third seat for a medic/observer, a storage/equipment box and a stretcher from a Revell BK 117 rescue helicopter kit. This kit also donated some small details like the rear-view mirror for the pilot and the wire-cutters - not a typical detail for a helicopter operating over the open sea, but you never know...

 

The only other adition is a technical one: I integrated a vertical styrene pipe behind the cabin as a display holder adapter for the traditional hoto shooting's in-flight scenes.

  

Painting and markings:

It took some time to settle upon a design. I wanted something bright – initially I thought about Scottish colors (white and blue), but that was not garish enough, even with some dayglo additions. The typical all-yellow RAF SAR livery was also ruled out. In the end I decided to apply a more or less uniform livery in a very bright red: Humbrol 238, which is, probably due to trademark issues, marketed as “Arrow Red (= Red Arrows)” and effectively an almost fluorescent pinkish orange-red! Only the black anti-glare panel in front of the windscreen, the radome and the white interior of the fenestron tail rotor were painted, too, the rest was created with white decal stripes and evolved gradually. Things started with a white 2mm cheatline, then came the horizontal stripes on the tail, and taking this "theme" further I added something similar to the flanks as a high contrast base for the national markings. These were improvised, too, with a 6mm blue disc and single 1.5 mm bars to create a Scottish flag. The stancils were taken from the OOB decal sheet. The interior became medium grey, the crew received bright orange jumpsuits and white "bone domes".

 

No black ink washing or post-panel-shading was done, since the Dauphin has almost no surface details to emphasize, and I wanted a new and clean look. Besides, with wll the white trim, there was already a lot going on on the hull, so that I kept things "as they were". Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of semi-gloss acrylic varnish for a light shine, except for the rotor blades and the anti-glare panel, which became matt.

  

Quite a tricky project. While the Matchbox Dauphin is not a complex kit you need patience and have to stick to the assembly order to put the hull together. PSR is needed, esp. around the engine section and for the underside. On the other side, despite being a simple model, you get a nice Dauphin from the kit - but NOT a HH-65, sorry. My fictional conversion is certainly not better, but the bright result with its modifications looks good and quite convincing, though.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The MBR-04 series were the first combat-ready Destroids and the most successful land-combat weapon Destroids that were built with OverTechnology of Macross. The abbreviation MBR (Main Battle Robot) indicates the model was developed as a walking humanoid weapon emphasizing the heavy armor firepower of an artillery combat vehicle, designed to replace mainline battle tanks.

 

Despite inferior anti-aircraft abilities, the Tomahawk boasted firepower like no other biped vehicle from the Destroid series. Originally, the Tomahawk was just called "MBR Mk. I", but once its systems and structural elements became the basis for other models, its designation changed into the "Type 04" Destroid. The main frame from the waist down was common to the Type 04 series, which included the the Defender and the Phalanx, a module which consolidated the thermonuclear reactor and ambulatory OverTechnology system of the Destroids. Production line integration using this module was a key goal of Destroid development.

 

The Type 04 series was developed jointly by Viggers and Chrauler and became also the basis of the MBR-04 Tomahawk. Unlike the variable fighters (which had to be designed to accommodate transformation mechanisms), the MBR series featured a structure with a large capacity that allowed plenty of room for machinery and armor.

 

Projectile resistance was stressed in the design, but the Tomahawk did not have the armor strength to withstand a direct hit from a Zentraedi mobile weapon. However, the Tomahawk made use of heaviness to add firepower and versatility such that it came to symbolize those features of the Destroid.

 

First development began in May 2001 and trial production began in December 2003. The decision to formally introduce the MBR-04 series of Destroids was made in June 2006, mass production began and the MBR-04-Mk I rollout occurred in February 2007. The Mk VI Tomahawk's and Mk X Defender's rollouts were in November 2007 and March 2009, respectively.

 

The MBR-04-Mk. I's initial weaponry consisted of rocket launchers and two arms for use in close-quarters combat. Eventually, the Tomahawk's arms evolved into fixed armaments unsuitable for hand-to-hand combat and thus it was best fielded in a combined arms role with cooperating Destroid models and the VF-1.

 

The Type 04 design led to expansion of installed armaments and achieved improvement in productivity and serviceability which contributed to the rapid development of the Destroid variations. The Tomahawk itself underwent a rapid development. Earlier variants, which mainly differed in the design of the arms and the weapon package, were only produced in limited numbers. The Mk. III introduced the first heavy particle beam cannon to the Destroids, and the following Mk IV. achieved excellent results in maneuvers and an enhanced output. The Mk. VI became the eventual mass production type, and some of the earlier models were later brought to Mk. VI standard.

 

Eventually, a considerable number 440 units (initially, 500 were envisioned) were deployed aboard the SDF-1 Macross and operated by the U.N. Spacy as well as the U.N.S. Marine Corps. Most of the Destroid Tomahawks were deployed upon the surface of SDF-1 to perform close-range interception and also to operate as an immediate combat force. A small number - primarily from the early variants with full arms and articulated hands for bigger field versatility in small combat groups - was operated by the UNSMC for landing operations and special tasks.

 

The Tomahawk operated as a core ground combat unit during the Great Stellar War (Space War I) and - when paired with the VF-1 variable fighter - achieved impressive military gains against the Zentraedi army.

  

General characteristics:

Equipment Type: main battle robot, series 04

Government: U.N. Spacy

Manufacturer: Viggers/Chrauler

Introduction: February 2007

Accommodation: 1 pilot plus space for a second crew member

 

Dimensions:

Height 12.7 meters (overall)

11.27 meters (up to head unit)

Length 5.1 meters

Width 7.9 meters

Mass: 31.3 metric tons

 

Power Plant:

Kranss-Maffai MT808 thermonuclear reactor, developing 2800 bhp output;

Auxiliary GE EM9G fuel generator, rated at 450 kW

 

Propulsion:

2x thrust nozzles mounted in the lower back region, allowing the capability to perform jumps,

plus several vernier nozzles around the hull for Zero-G manoeuvers

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 180 km/h

 

Design features:

- Detachable weapons bay (attaches to the main body via two main locks);

- Extending/retractable periscope telescope (in weapon bay directly above the cockpit);

- Option pack featuring missiles or searchlight (can be mounted on either side of the weapon bay);

- Coolant tank (installed within the upper left side of the back torso);

- Capable of performing jumps via 2 x thrust nozzles (mounted in the lower back torso);

- Radiators with exhaust ports in the rear on the left and right hips

- Cockpit can be separated from the body in an emergency (only the cockpit block is recovered);

- Head unit equipped with 2 camera eyes, upper eye moving along a slit,

the lower protected by a polarized light shield

 

Armament:

1x Mauler PBG-07 liquid-cooled electrically-charged twin particle beam gun

2x Bifors close-in self-guided rocket launchers in the shoulders

with 12 rockets per launcher (24 rockets total)

2x Astra TZ-III gun clusters in the lower chest with each cluster featuring:

- 1x laser gun

- 1x 25 mm heavy machine gun

- 1x 180 mm grenade launcher

- 1 x flamethrower

2x Ramington M-89 12.7 mm air-cooled machine guns, mounted within the head unit

 

Option packs:

1x Erlikon anti-aircraft self-guided missile launcher with 6 missiles (shoulder mount)

1x Rheinstahl 35 mm automatic rapid-fire cannon (lower arm pod)

1x Stonewell 20 mm six-barrel gatling gun (lower arm pod)

  

The kit and its assembly:

After a long time, a Macross mecha kit again. The idea behind this modified Tomahawk was that I always wondered about the clumsy "cannon arms" of the Mk. VI variant, and what an earlier version - with complete arms and hands - could have looked like? When I delved through my Macross donor parts bank I came across two lower arms from former VF-1 conversions (from different kits, though...), and I tested them on my authentic 1:100 Tomahawk Mk. VI model that I have built about 20 years ago: they seemed to work in size and volume!

An extensive spare parts and sprues safari followed and yielded two complete hands/fists from a VF-1 Gerwalk Arii kit (these appear to be totally outsized!), as well as lower arms/elbow sections, so that a transplantation to the Tomahawk’s arm stumps, which would later even allow a lengthwise axis mobility. And with some extra vinyl caps the transformation experiment could begin.

 

The basis is a Bandai re-issues of Imai’s 1982 1:100 Tomahawk kit, in specific from Macross' 30th anniversary merchandise. They seem to pop up every five years!?

However, having built and re-built several of the Imai/Arii Destroid kits, I made some changes beyond the arm transplantation, since there’s a lot of space for improvement, even though the kit as such is decent for its age. But you have to expect PSR almost everywhere, and the kit’s vintage “Matryoshka” construction of the model (build one element from two halves, place it between two more halves, etc.) does not make the assembly process easy – but there are ways to evade this inherent problem, see below.

 

One important improvement measure was a completely now hip joint arrangement. OOB, the Tomahawk's posture is pretty stiff, with the legs and feet straight forward - it's supposed to just stand upright, and with the model’s OOB joint options it is really hard to create a vivid poise. Furthermore, the bolts that hold the legs are prone to break off, even more so because the Tomahawk kit is from the 1st generation of mecha kits, without vinyl caps and just very tight joint fit.

 

My solution was the implantation of a new hip “bone” made from plastic-coated steel, which is stiff in itself but can be bent in two dimensions. The thighs had to be modified accordingly, since the wire is much thinner than the original bolts. As a convenient trick, the receptor holes in the thighs were simply filled with small vinyl rings - their outer AND inner diameter fit perfectly for the new arrangement. With this trick, a much more dynamic and "natural" leg position could be achieved, also thanks to the Tomahawk’s large feet and their joints. This tuning measure improves the model considerably.

 

Another change is the Tomahawk's weaponry, which is OOB pretty impressive. Since my fictional Mk. III lost its main arm weapons, I decided to give it at least a major cannon on the shoulder. A convenient donor came from a Dorvack 1:24 PA-36K "Berlon" kit, placed on a scratched mount on the right shoulder,. Which allows the weapon to be moved up and down. To make place for the new twin gun, the OOB sextuple missile launcher was moved to the left side, necessitating a modification of its holder, too.

 

As mentioned above, the arms use donor parts from the Arii VF-1 Gerwalk kit, but there are also less obvious changes. While the shoulder mounts and the upper arms were taken OOB from the Tomahawk kit, I modified their attachment system. Instead of the "put the arms between the fuselage halves" solution, I modified the arms so that they can be stuck independently into their respective hull openings. This has the benefit that they are actually movable (remember the tight fit of the model’s joints, add some paint and nothing will ever move), and they can be built and painted separately from the rest of the model. In order to stabilize the arms when in place and prevent them from falling out too easily, I added an interlaced styrene tube axis arrangement between them. Very simple and effective, and it works well.

 

The VF-1 Gerwalk lower arms were taken OOB. Upon test-fitting I found that the bulky Tomahawk could even take some more muscle on its new arms, so I added a pair of FAST packs from a Super Valkyrie kit to them (also found in the spares box…). These would, however, not contain AAMs, as on the VF-1, but rather more guns. I went for a medium machine cannon in the left arm and a gatling gun (scratched from syringe needles, fiddly affair...) against soft and aerial targets in the right arm.

 

In order to provide the model with some more details and depth I added a lot of small styrene bits everywhere – this is actually only necessary on the front sides of the lower legs for an authentic improvement, but all those other tiny bits and pieces just underline the mecha’s sturdiness and provide visual detail for the later painting process.

The machine guns above the cockpit were replaced with hollow steel needles; since these are thinner than the OOB barrels, I filled the gaps with paper tissues drenched in thinned white glue. Flexible cables (elastic braid) were added to the twin beam cannon and to the legs/hip joints.

  

Painting and markings:

Basically a simple affair, because I wanted to stay true to the original look of a typical Macross Destroid. These tend to carry a uniform livery, esp. the Tomahawk/Defender/Phalanx family is kept in murky/dull tones of green, brown and ochre: unpretentious "mud movers". Anything else or even complex camouflage patterns are rare. The OOB MBR-04-Mk. VI carries a reddish-brown livery, and Yamato also did an 1:60 Tomahawk action figure in an overall olive drab tone, which appears canonical.

 

However, for a personal touch I chose a greyish dark green as basic overall tone, Field Grey (Tamiya XF-65). The missile launcher covers on the shoulders were painted in NATO olive green (RAL 6014, Gelboliv, Revell 46), but the different tone became, after weathering, harder and harder to tell, so that the Tomahawk ended up with a relatively uniform livery.

 

Otherwise there's hardly any other color on the Tomahawk’s hull. The hands/fists were painted with Polished Steel metallizer, the bellows in the knees became anthracite (Revell 06). The characteristic white trim on the lower legs that many Destroids carry was painted with white - unfortunately none of the Destroid kits offers them as a decal. However, due to the legs' uneven underground, these would be difficult to apply, anyway. The lower camera visor was created with simple clear red paint on top of a basic coat with silver. The other small camera windows at the top and back are small decal squares in dayglo orange.

 

The model was thoroughly weathered with a heavier black ink wash and a total of three dry brushing turns: the first, generous treatment with acrylic Revell 67 (Grüngrau, RAL 7009), followed by the second, moer careful turn around the edges and other details with acrylic Revell 45 (Helloliv, a yellowish variant of RLM 02). The decals followed next, mostly taken from the OOB sheet, just with a few extra stencils, new tactical codes and the "Trixie” nose art (it actually belongs to a P-40F, piloted by Joseph A Bloomer Jr of the 318th FS/325th FG in the MTO) on the lower left leg – a typical detail of many Destroids.

The third dry brushing turn followed, this time with acrylic Revell 75 (a yellowish light grey), esp. on the edges and concentrated around the lower areas of the Tomahawk, simulating wear and dust/mud residue.

 

Finally, the model received an overall coat with acrylic matt varnish from the rattle can. Some bare metal showing through at a few edges was added, too, again through dry-brushing with silver. After final assembly of the elements, some mineral pigments were dusted onto the model with a soft, big brush. Around the feet, pigments were also applied into small patches of wet matt acrylic varnish, forming stable mud crusts.

  

In the end, I am quite happy with the outcome, even though the Field Grey turned out to be darker/more murky than expected, even though the color itself suits the Tomahawk well. The transplanted arms also blend well into this mecha which bristles with weapons: this fictional (I had no reference material for earlier Tomahawk versions except the official short texts from the Macross publications) result looks pretty plausible and complements the 20-years-old Mk. VI in my collection well.

 

Some of you may have noticed that, unfortunately, owing to the fact that a certain person who sells truck photos on eBay commercially has been lifting my images from this album and selling them I have had to remove 2300 photos that didn't have a watermark. I have now run around 1700 through Lightroom and added a watermark with the intention of bulk uploading them again. Rather than watermark the existing (hidden) files in Flickr one at a time it will be easier to do it this way. I definitely won’t be adding individual tags with the make and model of each vehicle I will just add generic transport tags. Each photo is named after the vehicle and reg in any case. For anyone new to these images there is a chapter and verse explanation below. It is staggering how many times I get asked questions that a quick scan would answer or just as likely I can’t possibly answer – I didn’t take them, but, just to clarify-I do own the copyright- and I do pursue copyright theft.

 

This is a collection of scanned prints from a collection of photographs taken by the late Jim Taylor A number of years ago I was offered a large number of photographs taken by Jim Taylor, a transport photographer based in Huddersfield. The collection, 30,000 prints, 20,000 negatives – and copyright! – had been offered to me and one of the national transport magazines previously by a friend of Jim's, on behalf of Jim's wife. I initially turned them down, already having over 30,000 of my own prints filed away and taking space up. Several months later the prints were still for sale – at what was, apparently, the going rate. It was a lot of money and I deliberated for quite a while before deciding to buy them. I did however buy them directly from Jim’s wife and she delivered them personally – just to quash the occasional rumour from people who can’t mind their own business. Although some prints were sold elsewhere, particularly the popular big fleet stuff, I should have the negatives, unfortunately they came to me in a random mix, 1200 to a box, without any sort of indexing and as such it would be impossible to match negatives to prints, or, to even find a print of any particular vehicle. I have only ever looked at a handful myself unless I am scanning them. The prints are generally in excellent condition and I initially stored them in a bedroom without ever looking at any of them. In 2006 I built an extension and they had to be well protected from dust and moved a few times. Ultimately my former 6x7 box room office has become their (and my own work’s) permanent home.

I hope to avoid posting images that Jim had not taken his self, however should I inadvertently infringe another photographers copyright, please inform me by email and I will resolve the issue immediately. There are copyright issues with some of the photographs that were sold to me. A Flickr member from Scotland drew my attention to some of his own work amongst the first uploads of Jim’s work. I had a quick look through some of the 30 boxes of prints and decided that for the time being the safest thing for me to do was withdraw the majority of the earlier uploaded scans and deal with the problem – which I did. whilst the vast majority of the prints are Jims, there is a problem defining copyright of some of them, this is something that the seller did not make clear at the time. I am reasonably confident that I have since been successful in identifying Jims own work. His early work consists of many thousands of lustre 6x4 prints which are difficult to scan well, later work is almost entirely 7x5 glossy, much easier to scan. Not all of the prints are pin sharp but I can generally print successfully to A4 from a scan.

 

You may notice photographs being duplicated in this Album, unfortunately there are multiple copies of many prints (for swapping) and as I have to have a system of archiving and backing up I can only guess - using memory - if I have scanned a print before. The bigger fleets have so many similar vehicles and registration numbers that it is impossible to get it right all of the time. It is easier to scan and process a print than check my files - on three different PC’s - for duplicates. There has not been, nor will there ever be, any intention to knowingly breach anyone else's copyright. I have presented the Jim Taylor collection as exactly that-The Jim Taylor Collection- his work not mine, my own work is quite obviously mine.

Unfortunately, many truck spotters have swapped and traded their work without copyright marking it as theirs. These people never anticipated the ease with which images would be shared online in the future. I would guess that having swapped and traded photos for many years that it is almost impossible to control their future use. Anyone wanting to control the future use of their work would have been well advised to copyright mark their work (as many did) and would be well advised not to post them on photo sharing sites without a watermark as the whole point of these sites is to share the image, it is very easy for those that wish, to lift any image, despite security settings, indeed, Flickr itself, warns you that this is the case. It was this abuse and theft of my material that led me to watermark all of my later uploads. I may yet withdraw non-watermarked photos, I haven’t decided yet. (I did in the end)

To anyone reading the above it will be quite obvious that I can’t provide information regarding specific photos or potential future uploads – I didn’t take them! There are many vehicles that were well known to me as Jim only lived down the road from me (although I didn’t know him), however scanning, titling, tagging and uploading is laborious and time consuming enough, I do however provide a fair amount of information with my own transport (and other) photos. I am aware that there are requests from other Flickr users that are unanswered, I stumble across them months or years after they were posted, this isn’t deliberate. Some weekends one or two “enthusiasts” can add many hundreds of photos as favourites, this pushes requests that are in the comments section ten or twenty pages out of sight and I miss them. I also have notifications switched off, I receive around 50 emails a day through work and I don’t want even more from Flickr. Other requests, like many other things, I just plain forget – no excuses! Uploads of Jim’s photos will be infrequent as it is a boring pastime and I would much rather work on my own output.

 

Cape Town, 27 October 2000

+++ 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:

After the division of Czechoslovakia by Germany in 1939, Slovakia was left with a small air force composed primarily of Czechoslovak combat aircraft. This force defended Slovakia against Hungary in March 1939, in the Slovak–Hungarian War in March 1939 in which Hungary reoccupied Carpathian Ruthenia and parts of southern Slovakia. In this the SVZ suffered some losses against Royal Hungarian Air Force. Later, the SVZ also took part in the German Invasion of Poland. The SVZ took part in Axis offensives in the Ukraine and Russian Central front sectors of the Eastern Front under the lead of Luftwaffe in the Stalingrad and Caucasus operations. This engagement resulted in great losses of aircraft and personnel, though.

 

During the World War II, the Slovak Air force was charged with the defense of Slovak airspace, and, after the invasion of Russia, provided air cover for Slovak forces fighting against the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front. For the rest of the war the SVZ fought US Army Air Forces and Royal Air Force raids against Slovakia.

 

Among the many more or less outdated German aircraft types inherited from the Luftwaffe during the early stages of WWII was a small number of Hs 123 A-1 dive bombers. The Henschel Hs 123 was a small single-seat biplane dive bomber and close-support attack aircraft. The aircraft was designed to meet the 1933 dive bomber requirements for the reborn Luftwaffe. Both Henschel and rival Fieseler (with the Fi 98) competed for the production contract requirement, which specified a single-seat biplane dive bomber. The first prototype, the Hs 123 V1, was cleared for its maiden flight on 1 April 1935; General Ernst Udet, a World War I ace, flew it on its first public demonstration flight on 8 May 1935. The first three Henschel prototypes, with the first and third powered by 485 kW (650 hp) BMW 132A-3 engines and the second by a 574 kW (770 hp) Wright Cyclone, were tested at Rechlin in August 1936. Only the first prototype had "smooth" cowlings; from that point on, all aircraft had a tightly fitting, characteristic cowling that included 18 fairings covering the engine valves. The Henschel prototypes did away with bracing wires and although they looked slightly outdated with their single faired interplane struts and cantilever main landing gear legs attached to smaller (stub) lower wings, the Hs 123 featured an all-metal construction, clean lines and superior maneuverability. Its biplane wings were of a "sesquiplane" configuration, whereby the lower wings were significantly smaller than the top wings.

 

The overall performance of the Hs 123 V1 prototype prematurely eliminated any chance for the more conventional Fi 98, which was cancelled after a sole prototype had been constructed. During testing, the Hs 123 proved capable of pulling out of "near-vertical" dives; however, two prototypes subsequently crashed due to structural failures in the wings that occurred when the aircraft were tested in high-speed dives. The fourth prototype incorporated improvements to cure these problems; principally, stronger center-section struts were fitted. After it had been successfully tested, the Hs 123 was ordered into production with a 656 kW (880 hp) BMW 132Dc engine.

 

The Hs 123 was intended to replace the Heinkel He 50 biplane reconnaissance and dive bomber as well as acting as a "stop-gap" measure until the more modern and capable Junkers Ju 87 became available. As such, production was limited and no upgrades were considered, although an improved version, the Hs 123B, was developed by Henschel in 1938. A proposal to fit the aircraft with a more powerful 716 kW (960 hp) "K"-variant of its BMW 132 engine did not proceed beyond the prototype stage, the Hs 123 V5. The V6 prototype fitted with a similar powerplant and featuring a sliding cockpit hood was intended to serve as the Hs 123C prototype.

 

About 265 aircraft were produced and production of the Hs 123A ended in Autumn 1938. It was flown by the German Luftwaffe during the Spanish Civil War and the early to midpoint of World War II. At the outbreak of hostilities, Hs 123s were committed to action in the Polish Campaign. Screaming over the heads of enemy troops, the Hs 123s delivered their bombs with devastating accuracy. A frightening aspect of an Hs 123 attack was the staccato noise of its engine that a pilot could manipulate by changing rpm to create "gunfire-like" bursts. The Hs 123 proved rugged and able to take a lot of damage and still keep on flying. Operating from primitive bases close to the front lines, the type was considered by ground crews to be easy to maintain, quick to re-equip and reliable even under dire field conditions.

 

The Polish campaign was a success for an aircraft considered obsolete by the Luftwaffe high command. Within a year, the Hs 123 was again in action in the Blitzkrieg attacks through the Netherlands, Belgium and France. Often positioned as the Luftwaffe's most-forward based combat unit, the Hs 123s flew more missions per day than other units, and again proved their worth in the close-support role. With Ju 87s still being used as tactical bombers rather than true ground support aircraft and with no other aircraft capable of this mission in the Luftwaffe arsenal the Hs 123 was destined to continue in service for some time, although numbers were constantly being reduced by attrition.

 

The Hs 123 was not employed in the subsequent Battle of Britain as the English Channel proved an insuperable obstacle for the short-ranged aircraft, and the sole leftover operator, II.(Schl)/LG 2, went back to Germany to re-equip with the Messerschmitt Bf 109E fighter bomber (Jabo) variant. The Bf 109E fighter bomber was not capable of carrying any more bombs than the Hs 123. It did, however, have a greater range and was far more capable of defending itself. On the downside were the notoriously tricky taxiing, ground handling, and takeoff/landing characteristics of the Bf 109, which were exacerbated with a bomb load.

 

At the beginning of the Balkans Campaign, the 32 examples of the Hs 123 that had been retired after the fall of France were taken back into service and handed over to the Slovak Air Force to replace the heavy losses on the Eastern Front after combat fatigue and desertion had reduced the pilots' effectiveness. Most of Slovakia's obsolete biplanes were replaced with modern German combat aircraft, including the Messerschmitt Bf 109, so that the Hs 123s were initially regarded with distrust – but the machines proved their worth in the ensuing battles. The Slovak Hs 123s took part in the Battle of Kursk and supported ground troops, some were outfitted with locally designed ski landing gears which proved to be a very effective alternative to the Hs 123’s spatted standard landing gear which was prone to collect snow and mud and even block. After this deployment at the Russian front, the Slovak Air Force was sent back to defend Slovak home air space, primarily executed with Messerschmitt Bf 109 E and G types, Avia B-534, and some other interceptor types, also helped by Luftwaffe units active in the area.

Being confined to national borders, the Slovak Hs 123s were put in reserve and relegated to training purposes, even though they were occasionally activated to support German ground troops. From late August 1944 the remaining Hs 123s also actively took part in the suppression of the Slovak National Uprising against Germany.

 

Since Hs 123 production had already stopped in 1940 and all tools had been destroyed, the permanent attritions could not be replaced - due to a lack of serviceable airframes and spare parts the type’s numbers dwindled. When Romania and the Soviet Union entered Slovakia, they organized with some captured aircraft and defectors a local Insurgent Air Force to continue the fight against Axis forces in country, including the last operational Slovak Hs 123s. No aircraft survived the war.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 1

Length: 8.33 m (27 ft 4 in)

Wingspan: 10.5 m (34 ft 5 in)

Height: 3.2 m (10 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 24.85 m² (267.5 sq ft)

Empty weight: 1,500 kg (3,307 lb)

Gross weight: 2,215 kg (4,883 lb)

 

Powerplant:

1× BMW 132Dc 9-cylinder air-cooled radial piston engine with 660 kW (880 hp),

driving a 2-bladed metal variable-pitch propeller

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 341 km/h (212 mph, 184 kn) at 1,200 m (3,937 ft)

Range: 860 km (530 mi, 460 nmi) with a 100 l drop tank

Combat range: 480 km (300 mi, 260 nmi) with 200 kg (440.9 lb) of bombs

Service ceiling: 9,000 m (30,000 ft)

Rate of climb: 15 m/s (3,000 ft/min)

 

Armament:

2× 7.92 mm MG 17 machine guns, 400 rpg

Up to 450 kg (992.1 lb) of bombs under fuselage and wings

  

The kit and its assembly:

A relatively simple what-if project, and it took a while to figure out something to do with a surplus Airfix Hs 123 A kit in The Stash™ without a proper plan yet. The Hs 123 is an overlooked aircraft, and the fact that all airframes were used during WWII until none was left makes a story in Continental Europe a bit difficult. I also did not want to create a German aircraft – Finland was an early favorite, because I wanted to add a ski landing gear (see below), but since I won’t build anything with a swastika on it this option was a dead end. Then I considered an operator from the Balkans, e. g. Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia or Slovakia – and eventually settled for the latter because of the national markings.

 

The kit was built almost OOB, and the Airfix Hs 123 is a nice offering. Yes, it’s a simple kit, but its is IMHO a very good representation, despite the many rivets on the hull, a rather bleak interior and some sinkholes (e. g. on the massive outer wings struts). It goes together well, just a little PSR here and there. I just added a dashboard (scratched from styrene sheet) and modified the OOB 50 kg bombs with extended impact fuzes with a flat, round plate at the tip, so that the bomb itself explodes above soft ground or snow for a bigger blast radius.

The only major modification is a transplanted ski landing gear from a PM Model (Finnish) Fokker D.XXI, which had to be reduced in length to fit under the compact Hs 123. A small tail ski/skid was scratched from styrene sheet material.

 

Thankfully, the Hs 123 only calls for little rigging – just between the central upper wing supports and there is a characteristic “triangle” wiring in the cowling. All these, together with the wire antenna, were created with heated sprue material.

  

Painting and markings:

Finland had been a favorite because I would have been able to apply a more interesting paint scheme than the standard Luftwaffe RLM 70/71/65 splinter scheme with a low waterline that was typical for the Hs 123 during WWII. However, as a former Luftwaffe aircraft I retained this livery but decided to add a winter camouflage as a suitable thematic supplement to the skis.

The basic colors became Humbrol 65 underneath and 30 and 75 from above – the latter for a stronger contrast to the Dunkelgrün than Humbrol 91 (Schwarzgrün). Thanks to the additional whitewash mottles, which were inspired by a similar livery seen on a contemporary Bulgarian Avia B.534, I did not have to be too exact with the splinter camouflage.

 

The cockpit and cowling interior were painted with RLM 02 (Humbrol 240), the propeller blades became Schwarzgrün (Humbrol 91, further darkened with some black) and the bombs were painted in a dark grey (Revell 77) while the small 100 l drop tank became bare aluminum (Revell 99).

 

However, before the white mottles could be added, the kit received its decals so that they could be painted around the markings, just as in real life. The Slovak national markings had to be scratched, and I used standard white simplified German Balkenkreuze over a cross made from blue decal stripes. Later a separate red decal circle was placed on top of that. The only other markings are the red “7” codes, edged in white for better contrast (from a Heller Bf 109 K) and the fuel information triangles on the fuselage from the Hs 123’s OOB sheet. As an ID marking for an Eastern Front Axis aircraft, I retained the wide yellow fuselage stripe from the OOB, sheet, too, and added yellow tips on the upper wings’ undersides.

The whitewash camouflage was then created with white acrylic paint (Revell 05), applied with a soft brush with a rounded tip. Once this had dried, I treated the surfaces with fine wet sandpaper for a weathered/worn look.

 

Finally, after some soot stains behind the exhausts and around the machine gun nozzles, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish and the rigging (see above) was done.

  

The Hs 123 might not be the sexiest aircraft of WWII, but I like this rugged pug which could not be replaced by its successor, the Ju 87, and served in its close support role until literally no aircraft was left. Putting one on skis worked quite well, and the exotic Slovak markings add a special touch – even though the national markings almost disappear among the disruptive whitewash camouflage! The result looks quite plausible, though, and the old Airfix kit is IMHO really underestimated.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Supermarine Jetfire was a stopgap solution in order to introduce a jet-powered interceptor agains German V-1 missiles that threatened the London region from June 1944 on. At that time, the only aircraft with the low-altitude speed to be effective against it was the Hawker Tempest, but fewer than 30 Tempests were available. They were assigned to No. 150 Wing RAF, and early attempts to intercept and destroy V-1s often failed.

 

One alternative was the jet-powered Gloster Meteor, which still was development - and in order to get the new engine into service (also as a response to Gloster's engagement for E.1/44 with the single-engine "Ace" fighter) Supermarine responded with the idea to replace the nose-mounted piston engine with a single Whittle W.2 engine: The "Jetfire" was born.

 

The conversion was rather simple: the Jetfire was actually a Griffon-powered Spitfire XIV with as few changes to the original airframe in order to accept the W.2. The aircraft's forward fuselage was widened to accommodate the bulbous engine with a simple nose intake. The deeper forward part of the fuselage with its round diameter gave the aircraft a pronounced "pod-and-boom" configuration.

 

Internally, the front wing spar had to be bent into an inverted U-shape to clear the engine and its jet pipe.

The W.2 was mounted slightly angled downwards, and the jet pipe was bifurcated so that it ran along the fuselage flanks above the wings, with an exhaust just behind the wings’ trailing edges. To protect the fuselage, steel heatshield were added to the flanks. Furthermore, the former radiator fairings for the Griffon and the respective plumbing were removed and faired over, saving weight and internal space – and weight was reduced as much as possible to achieve a decent performance with the rather experimental centrifugal jet engine. The conventional Spitfire tailsitter landing gear remained unmodified, just additional covers for the main wheels were added for improved aerodynamics at high speed.

 

The first prototype was already finished in October 1944, and taxiing trials started immediately. The heatshields proved to be too short and the heat from the engine exhaust melted the duralumin skin of the rear fuselage. Additionally, the tailwheel received a longer strut for a cleaner airflow under the stabilizer on the ground – the original, shorter strut created an air cushion under the stabilizer that lifted the whole tail upwards when the throttle was opened, resulting in poor handling at low taxiing speeds.

 

Modifications to rectify the problems took until late December, and by this time a second prototype had been completed. After a few taxiing tests, it was transferred to the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) for full-scale wind tunnel testing that lasted until February 1945.

 

On the 26th of that month, the RAF issued requirements that the aircraft should have a maximum speed of 770 km/h (480 mph) at sea level and a speed of 850 km/h (530 mph) at an altitude of 5,000 meters (16,400 ft). It should be able to climb to that altitude in 4 1/2 minutes or less and it should have a range of 500 kilometers (310 mi) at 90% of maximum speed.

 

The Jetfire failed to meet these targets, but it was still fast enough to intercept the V-1 and was quickly available. The average speed of V-1s was 550 km/h (340 mph) and their average altitude was 1,000 m (3,300 ft) to 1,200 m (3,900 ft). Fighter aircraft required excellent low altitude performance to intercept them and enough firepower to ensure that they were destroyed in the air rather than crashing to earth and detonating. Most aircraft were too slow to catch a V-1 unless they had a height advantage, allowing them to gain speed by diving on their target.

 

Originally a total of 200 Jetfire Mk.Is were ordered, and on the drawing board an improved variant with a bubble canopy, a slightly larger tail fin, stabilizers with a 10° dihedral in order to get them better out of the jet efflux’s path and an armament of four 20 mm cannon (the Mk.II) was already taking shape. But this initial and any follow-on orders were quickly cancelled or changed to the more advanced and promising twin-engined Gloster Meteor that finally became operational.

 

Consequently, the total production run of the Jetfire Mk.I just reached 26 aircraft: 18 were delivered to RAF 616 Squadron, the rest were used by the Tactical Flight at Farnborough that had been established in 1944 in order to prepare active squadrons for the radically new jet fighters. In late March 1945, the Jetfires became operational, upon which both tactical applications and limitations were extensively explored.

 

Despite many shortcomings (sluggish acceleration, poor climb and agility except for a very good roll rate), the still rather experimental and primitive Jetfire was able to fulfill its intended V-1 interception role, and two V-1 interceptions were achieved during the following weeks. In the front line units they were quickly replaced by more effective types like the Gloster Meteor, the Hawker Tempest or the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt. Anyway, the Jetfire was still helpful to path the RAF’s way for operational jet fighters and helped discover new high speed problems, including compressibility buffeting at higher speeds, causing increased drag, and it showed clearly the limits of traditional fighter aircraft designs.

  

General characteristics

Crew: 1

Length: 31 ft 8 in (9.66 m)

Wingspan: 36 ft 10 in (11.23 m)

Height: 10 ft 0 in (3.05 m)

Wing area: 242.1 sq ft (22.49 m2)

Airfoil: NACA 2213 (root), NACA 2209.4 (tip)

Empty weight: 8,434 lb (3,826 kg)

Gross weight: 12,211 lb (5,539 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Rolls-Royce B.37 Derwent turbojet, 2,000 lbf (8.9 kN) static thrust

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 748 km/h (468 mph)

Range: 395 km (247 miles) with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 12,750 m (41,820 ft)

Rate of climb: 12 m/s (2362 ft/min)

Thrust/weight: 0.45

Time to altitude: 5.0 min to 30,000 ft (9,145 m)

 

Armament:

2× 20 mm British Hispano MkV cannons (120 RPG) and

2× 12,7 mm (0.5") machine guns (250 RPG) in the outer wings

Provision for up to six "60lb" 3" rockets under the outer wings,

or two 500 lb (227 kg) bombs, or a pair of drop tanks

  

The kit and its assembly:

The first entry for the "Old Kit" group build at whatifmodelers.com in late 2016 - anything goes, the kit's mould just has to date back to 1985 and further. For this one I settled on the FROG Spitfire Mk. XIV, which, AFAIK, dates back to 1969, and an engine donor from a KP Yak-23, which is supposed to have hit the markets behind the Iron Curtain in 1981.

 

Originally, the background story pretty much sums up the idea behind this kitbash: How could the - already fast - Spitfire be further augmented with one of the new jet engines around 1944, when V1 attacks started against the British main land and the Meteor was still in development? A simple engine swap with as much airframe of the piston-engine ancestor would be the answer. Similar ideas had been undertaken in Germany, with re-engined versions of the Bf 109 and the Fw 190, and after WWII, when German jet technology had become available to the Soviet Union, the Yak-15/17/23 family followed a similar pattern.

 

The Yak-23 came as a natural donation aircraft for the Derwent nose. After careful measures and strategic cuts the Spitfire lost its Griffon engine (already earmarked for another kitbash...) and the Yak-23 its nose and exhaust pipe: the original plan had been to use a central, ventral exhaust pipe under the cockpit, even though this would create issues with the tail wheel (just as on the Yak-15 - it received in service an all-metal tail wheel! Imagine the sparks on the runway...).

 

Anyway, while dry-fitting the parts it turned out that pretty little of the Yak-23 exhaust section could be mounted with clean lines: I'd either have had to create a semi-recessed exhaust with lots of body work (and pretty implausible), or switch to a totally different solution.

 

That came with a bifurcated exhaust pipe, running along the wing roots and ending at the wings' trailing edge. While this sounds weird, too, the Hawker SeaHawk actually had such an arrangement - on a service aircraft!

As a side effect, the fairings for the jet pipes now offered a good basis for the necessary intersection between the round and bulky Derwent nose fairing and the narrow, oval Spitfire fuselage.

 

The new jet pipes were created with styrene tubes and lots of putty, and the result does not look bad at all. Actually, with the deleted radiators and the Griffon carburetor intake gone, the aircraft has a very sleek profile, even though the top view reveals the innate "pod and boom" layout of the nose-mounted centrifugal jet engine.

 

The latter received a new intake interior with some fine mesh and a central bullet fairing (the Yak-23's vertical splitter would not make any sense, since there'd be no nose wheel anymore). The landing gear was taken more or less OOB, I just added some struts and extra wheel covers. The tail wheel comes from an Airfix Hawker Hurricane and changed into a fully retractable arrangement. The cockpit was taken OOB, too, just a tank dummy was added behind the pilot's seat and the canopy sliced into three pieces for an optional open display.

 

The "E wing" armament was taken over from the Spitfire Mk. XIV, I just added the elegant drop/slipper tanks from the Yak-23 kit. This breaks up the clean lines of the "Jetfire", but I think that the thirsty Derwent might have needed some extra fuel for a decent approach range and some loiter time while intercepting incoming V-1s?

 

The V-1 from the FROG kit was built for the flight scenes, too. It’s a very simple model consisting only of four parts with rather mediocre fir, esp. the pulse engine halves, but a fairly good representation. Maybe the propeller for the fuse timer is missing, but that can be scratched easily.

Only personal additions are a grate in the air intake, and a hidden adapter for a display, for the pics. Maybe this flying bomb ends up later as ordnance under a German bomber build?

  

Painting and markings:

Very conservative, late war RAF Dark Green/Ocean Grey/Medium Sea Grey with typical ID markings and codes. 616 Squadron was chosen because it was one of the units that introduced the Meteor for V-1 interception.

 

Paints are basically enamels from the ModelMaster Authentic range. The Sky fuselage band was improvised with a decal from a vintage Matchbox Brewster Buffalo (matching the the Sky code letters from Xtradecal pretty well), while the codes and serial numbers themselves were created from single letter digits (the "/G" addition to the serial number signaled that the aircraft was to be guarded at any time while on the ground).

 

The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey while the landing gear became aluminum. As a highlight, the air intake edge was painted with silver, more for a dramatic effect than for realism.

The yellow wing leading edge markings were created with generic decal sheet material. The only special markings on the aircraft are the white stripes on tail and wings, which I also used to underlay the serial code.

 

Only little panel-shading and weathering was done, some panel lines were manually created with a fine pencil since a lot of surface details on the fuselage were lost during the extensive PSR process around the wing/jet pipes area.

 

Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

 

The V-1 has painted with no special paradigm in mind, with RLM81 upper surfaces and RLM 76 undersides, with a very wavy waterline and some grey patches on the wings. The engine was painted with aluminum first and then a thin coat of red primer added.

  

The resulting aircraft of this kitbash looks better than expected, even though the change of the exhaust arrangement came unexpected – even though I think the Jetfire became more appealing through the side pipes, despite the overall tadpole proportions.

As a side note, the story is not over yet, because there’s an engine-less Yak-23 left over, and I wonder what it might look like with a piston engine grafted to the empty nose?

 

Okuni posing with a mixed-media painting I made to celebrate my wedding anniversary. Fun random fact: Okuni is the painter of the Big Three, but I haven't really had the opportunity to portray that side of her. She often collabs with Guórén (for poetry or prose) and Adhara (who is actually a pretty good calligrapher, believe it or not).

.

I'm still alive, folks! But so many things have been happening irl, and trying to rebuild my professional life from the ground up meant that hobbies would have to take a backseat.

Some of you may have noticed that, unfortunately, owing to the fact that a certain person who sells truck photos on eBay commercially has been lifting my images from this album and selling them I have had to remove 2300 photos that didn't have a watermark. I have now run around 1700 through Lightroom and added a watermark with the intention of bulk uploading them again. Rather than watermark the existing (hidden) files in Flickr one at a time it will be easier to do it this way. I definitely won’t be adding individual tags with the make and model of each vehicle I will just add generic transport tags. Each photo is named after the vehicle and reg in any case. For anyone new to these images there is a chapter and verse explanation below. It is staggering how many times I get asked questions that a quick scan would answer or just as likely I can’t possibly answer – I didn’t take them, but, just to clarify-I do own the copyright- and I do pursue copyright theft.

 

This is a collection of scanned prints from a collection of photographs taken by the late Jim Taylor A number of years ago I was offered a large number of photographs taken by Jim Taylor, a transport photographer based in Huddersfield. The collection, 30,000 prints, 20,000 negatives – and copyright! – had been offered to me and one of the national transport magazines previously by a friend of Jim's, on behalf of Jim's wife. I initially turned them down, already having over 30,000 of my own prints filed away and taking space up. Several months later the prints were still for sale – at what was, apparently, the going rate. It was a lot of money and I deliberated for quite a while before deciding to buy them. I did however buy them directly from Jim’s wife and she delivered them personally – just to quash the occasional rumour from people who can’t mind their own business. Although some prints were sold elsewhere, particularly the popular big fleet stuff, I should have the negatives, unfortunately they came to me in a random mix, 1200 to a box, without any sort of indexing and as such it would be impossible to match negatives to prints, or, to even find a print of any particular vehicle. I have only ever looked at a handful myself unless I am scanning them. The prints are generally in excellent condition and I initially stored them in a bedroom without ever looking at any of them. In 2006 I built an extension and they had to be well protected from dust and moved a few times. Ultimately my former 6x7 box room office has become their (and my own work’s) permanent home.

I hope to avoid posting images that Jim had not taken his self, however should I inadvertently infringe another photographers copyright, please inform me by email and I will resolve the issue immediately. There are copyright issues with some of the photographs that were sold to me. A Flickr member from Scotland drew my attention to some of his own work amongst the first uploads of Jim’s work. I had a quick look through some of the 30 boxes of prints and decided that for the time being the safest thing for me to do was withdraw the majority of the earlier uploaded scans and deal with the problem – which I did. whilst the vast majority of the prints are Jims, there is a problem defining copyright of some of them, this is something that the seller did not make clear at the time. I am reasonably confident that I have since been successful in identifying Jims own work. His early work consists of many thousands of lustre 6x4 prints which are difficult to scan well, later work is almost entirely 7x5 glossy, much easier to scan. Not all of the prints are pin sharp but I can generally print successfully to A4 from a scan.

 

You may notice photographs being duplicated in this Album, unfortunately there are multiple copies of many prints (for swapping) and as I have to have a system of archiving and backing up I can only guess - using memory - if I have scanned a print before. The bigger fleets have so many similar vehicles and registration numbers that it is impossible to get it right all of the time. It is easier to scan and process a print than check my files - on three different PC’s - for duplicates. There has not been, nor will there ever be, any intention to knowingly breach anyone else's copyright. I have presented the Jim Taylor collection as exactly that-The Jim Taylor Collection- his work not mine, my own work is quite obviously mine.

Unfortunately, many truck spotters have swapped and traded their work without copyright marking it as theirs. These people never anticipated the ease with which images would be shared online in the future. I would guess that having swapped and traded photos for many years that it is almost impossible to control their future use. Anyone wanting to control the future use of their work would have been well advised to copyright mark their work (as many did) and would be well advised not to post them on photo sharing sites without a watermark as the whole point of these sites is to share the image, it is very easy for those that wish, to lift any image, despite security settings, indeed, Flickr itself, warns you that this is the case. It was this abuse and theft of my material that led me to watermark all of my later uploads. I may yet withdraw non-watermarked photos, I haven’t decided yet. (I did in the end)

To anyone reading the above it will be quite obvious that I can’t provide information regarding specific photos or potential future uploads – I didn’t take them! There are many vehicles that were well known to me as Jim only lived down the road from me (although I didn’t know him), however scanning, titling, tagging and uploading is laborious and time consuming enough, I do however provide a fair amount of information with my own transport (and other) photos. I am aware that there are requests from other Flickr users that are unanswered, I stumble across them months or years after they were posted, this isn’t deliberate. Some weekends one or two “enthusiasts” can add many hundreds of photos as favourites, this pushes requests that are in the comments section ten or twenty pages out of sight and I miss them. I also have notifications switched off, I receive around 50 emails a day through work and I don’t want even more from Flickr. Other requests, like many other things, I just plain forget – no excuses! Uploads of Jim’s photos will be infrequent as it is a boring pastime and I would much rather work on my own output.

 

12-2016

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

 

Some background:

In October 1951, a heavy tank project was underway to mount an oscillating turret with an automatically loading 120mm Gun on the hull of the 120mm Gun Tank T43. (The T43 would later be serialized as the 120mm Gun Tank M103, America’s last heavy tank.). This was the T57, and the Rheem Manufacturing Company were granted a contract to design and build two pilot turrets and autoloading systems.

During the T57’s development, it became clear that it was feasible to mount a lighter armored version of the T57 turret on the hull of the 90mm Gun Tank T48 (The T48 later became the 90mm Gun Tank M48 Patton). This combination granted the possibility of creating a ‘heavy gun tank’ that was considerably lighter (and therefore more agile and tactically flexible) than any previously designed.

In May 1953, a development project was started to create such a tank. It would be designated the 120mm Gun Tank T77, and another contract was signed with Rheem to create two pilot tanks. The T77 weighed about 50 tons, with armor of the hull being up to 110mm thick. It was originally powered by a 650 hp Continental AVSI-1790-6 V12, air-cooled twin-turbo gasoline engine. This would propel the tank to a speed of 30 mph (48 km/h). The tank was supported on a torsion bar suspension, attached to six road wheels. The drive sprocket was at the rear, while the idler was at the front. The idler wheel was of the compensating type, meaning it was attached to the closest roadwheel by an actuating arm. When the roadwheel reacted to terrain, the idler was pushed out or pulled in, keeping constant track tension. The return of the track was supported by five rollers.

 

The T77 had a crew of four: The driver’s position was standard for M48 hulls, located centrally in the bow at the front of the hull. Arrangements inside the turret were standard, too: The loader was positioned to the left of the gun, the gunner was on the right with the commander behind him.

 

The T77’s oscillating turret could be easily mounted to the unmodified 2.1 m (85 inch) turret ring of the M48 hull, and on other tanks, too. It consisted of two actuating parts: a collar that was attached to the turret ring, allowing 360° horizontal traverse, and a pivoting upper part with a long cylindrical ‘nose’ and a low profile flat bustle that held the gun, which could elevate to a maximum of 15 degrees, and depress 8 degrees. It also held the complex loading mechanism and the turret crew.

Both turret halves utilized cast homogeneous steel armor. The sides of the collar were made to be round and bulbous in shape to protect the trunnions that the upper half pivoted on. Armor around the face was 127mm (5 inches) thick, angled at 60 degrees, what meant an effective 10 in (254 mm) equivalent of RHA at the turret front. Maximum armor strength was 137mm (5.3 inches) on the convex sides of the turret, and this dropped to 51 mm (2 inches) on the bustle.

Though it looked like two, there were actually three hatches in the turret’s roof: There was a small hatch on the left for the loader, and the slightly raised cupola for the commander on the right, which featured six periscopes. These two standard hatches were part of a third large, powered hatch, which took up most of the middle of the roof, granting a larger escape route for the crew but also allowed internal turret equipment to be removed easily. It was also a convenient way to replenish the ammunition storage, even though a use under battle conditions was prohibitive. In front of the loader’s hatch was a periscope, housings for a stereoscopic rangefinder were mounted on the sides of the swiveling turret part, and there was another periscope above the gunner’s position, too. Behind the large hatch was the ejection port for spent cartridges, to its right was the armored housing for the ventilator.

 

The initial Rheem Company turret concept had the gun rigidly mounted to the turret without a recoil system, and the long gun barrel protruded from a narrow nose. The gun featured a quick change barrel but was otherwise basically identical to the 120mm Gun T123E1, the gun being trialed on the T43/M103. However, for the T57/77 turret and the autoloader, it was modified to accept single piece ammunition, unlike the T43/M103, which used separately loading ammo due to the round’s high weight. This new gun was attached to the turret via a conical adapter that surrounded the breech end of the gun. One end screwed directly into the breech, while the front half extended through the ‘nose’ and was secured in place by a large nut. The force created by the firing of the gun and the projectile traveling down the rifled barrel was resisted by rooting the adapter both the breech block and turret ring. As there was no inertia from recoil to automatically open the horizontally sliding breech block, a hydraulic cylinder was introduced. Upon firing the main gun, this hydraulic cylinder was triggered via an electric switch. This new variant of the T123 cannon was designated the 120mm Gun T179. It was fitted with a bore evacuator (fume extractor) and a simple, T-shaped muzzle brake.

A single .30 Caliber (7.62mm) machine gun was mounted coaxially, and another such weapon or a medium 0.5” machine gun could be attached to a mount on the commander’s cupola.

 

Using standard Armor-Piercing Ballistic Cap Tracer Rounds, the T179 was capable of penetrating 221-millimetre (8.7 in) of 30-degree sloped rolled-homogenous armor at 1,000 yards and 196-millimetre (7.7 in) at 2,000 yards. It could also penetrate 124-millimetre (4.9 in) 60-degree sloped rolled-homogenous armor at 1,000 yards and 114-millimetre (4.5 in) at 2,000 yards.

 

The T179’s automatic loader was located below the gun and it gave the weapon a projected rate of fire of 30 rounds per minute, even though this was only of theoretical nature because its cylinder magazine only held 8 rounds. After these had been expended, it had to be manually re-loaded by the crew from the inside, and the cannon could not be operated at that time. Ammunition types such as High-Explosive (HE), High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT), Armor Piercing (AP), or Armor-Piercing Ballistic-Capped (APBC) could be fired and be selected from the magazine via a control panel by either the gunner or the tank commander, so that it was possible to quickly adapt to a changing tactical situation – as long as the right rounds had been loaded into the magazine beforehand.

 

The cannon itself was fed by a ramming arm that actuated between positions relative to the breech and magazine, operating in five major steps:

1) The hydraulically operated ramming arm withdrew a round and aligned it with the breach.

2) The rammer then pushed the round into the breach, triggering it to close.

3) Gun was fired.

4) Effect of gun firing trips the electric switch that opens the breech.

5) Rammer picks up a fresh round, at the same time ejecting the spent cartridge through a trap door in the roof of the turret bustle.

 

Beyond the 8 rounds ready-for fire in the magazine, the main gun had only a very limited ammunition supply due to the large size of the 1-piece rounds: only 21 more 120 mm rounds could be stored in the hull and at the base of the turret.

 

After thorough trials, the T77 was, powered by a more fuel-efficient Continental AVDS-1790-2 V12, air-cooled twin-turbo diesel engine with 750 bhp (560 kW), accepted as a replacement for the U.S. Army‘s unloved heavy M103 and introduced as the M77. The first M77s were assembled at the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant in March 1964. However, the M77 was primarily a support vehicle for standard tank units and reserved for special operations. Therefore, the type’s production numbers remained low: only 173 tanks were eventually built until 1968 and exclusively allocated to U.S. Army units in Western Germany, with a focus on West Berlin and Southern Germany (e.g. in the Fulda Gap), where they were to repel assaults from Eastern Germany and defend vital installations or critical bottlenecks.

 

Due to its high rate of fire and long range, the M77 was ideally suited for defensive tasks and hit-and-run tactics. But this was, unfortunately, the type’s only selling point: The oscillating turret turned out to be complex, concerning both handling as well as maintenance, and in practice it did not offer the same weapon stability as the M48’s or the later M60’s conventional design, especially when firing during movement. The cramped interior and the many mechanical parts of the bulky autoloader inside of the turret did not make the tank popular among its crews, either. Several accidents occurred during manoeuvers while the loader tried to refill the magazine under combat pressure. A further weakness was the type’s low ammunition stock and the fact that, despite the autoloader, there was still a loader necessary to feed the magazine. The low ammunition stock also heavily limited the tactical value of the tank: typically, the M77 had to leave its position after expending all of its ammunition and move to a second line position, where the huge one-piece rounds could be replenished under safer conditions. But this bound other resources, e. g. support vehicles, and typically the former position had to be given up or supplanted by another vehicle. Operating the M77 effectively turned out to be a logistic nightmare.

 

During its career, the M77 saw only one major upgrade in the mid-Seventies: The M77A1 was outfitted with a new multi-chamber muzzle brake, muzzle reference and crosswind sensors (the latter was mounted in a small mast on the rear of the turret) and an improved turret stabilization system along with an upgraded turret electrical system. All of these measures were intended to improve the tank’s 1st shot kill probability, esp. at long range. A large AN/VSS-1(V)1 white/IR searchlight was added above the gun barrel, too. All tanks in service were upgraded in this fashion, no new tanks were built. Unlike the M48, neither the M77 nor the Rheem turret or its autoloader system were cleared for export, even though Israel showed interest.

 

In the early Eighties, there were further plans for another upgrade of the M77 fleet to a potential A2 status. This would have introduced a laser rangefinder (instead of the purely optical device) and a solid state M21 ballistic computer with a digital databus. The M21 would have allowed a pre-programmed selection and fire sequence of different ammunition types from the magazine’s chambers, plus better range and super-elevation correction. However, this did not happen because the M77 had become obsolete through the simple depletion of its exotic 120 mm ammunition from the army’s stocks. Therefore, another plan examined the possibilities of replacing the T179 gun with the 105 mm M68 rifled anti-tank gun, a license-built version of the British L7 gun, which had, despite the smaller caliber, a performance comparable to the bigger 120 mm T179. But since the M48 chassis and its armor concept had become outdated by the time, too, the M77A1 fleet was by 1986 fully replaced by the M60A3, the US Army’s new standard MBT.

  

Specifications:

Crew: 4 (commander, driver, loader, gunner)

Weight: 51 tons

Length: 6.946 m (22 ft 9.5 in) hull only, 10,66 m (34 ft 11 in) overall w. gun forward

Width: 3.63 m (11 ft 11 in)

Height: 3.08 m (10 ft 1 in)

Suspension: Torsion-bar

Ground clearance: 1 ft 6.2 in (0.46 m)

Fuel capacity: 385 US gal (1,457 l)

 

Armor:

0.5 – 5.3 in (13 – 137 mm)

 

Performance:

Speed:

- Maximum, road: 30 mph (48 km/h)

- Sustained, road: 25 mph (40 km/h)

- Cross country: 9.3 to 15.5 mph (15 to 25 km/h)

Climbing capability:

- 40% side slope and 60% max grade

- Vertical obstacle of 36 inches (91 cm)

- 102 inches (2.59 m) trench crossing

Fording depth: Unprepared: 4 ft (1.219 m), prepared: 8 ft (2.438 m)

Operational range: 287 ml (463 km) on road

Power/weight: 16.6 hp (12.4 kW)/tonne

 

Engine:

1× Continental AVDS-1790-2 V12, air-cooled twin-turbo diesel engine, 750 bhp (560 kW)

 

Transmission:

General Motors CD-850-3, 2-Fw/1-Rv speed GB

 

Armament:

1× 120 mm T179 L/60 rifled anti-tank gun with an autoloader and a total of 29 rounds

1× co-axial 7.62 mm M240C machine gun with 3.000 rounds

1× .50 cal (12.7 mm) M2 Browning (600 rounds) or .30 cal (7.62 mm) M73 machine

anti-aircraft machine gun (1.000 rounds) on the commander’s cupola with 600 rounds

  

The kit and its assembly:

This is another fictional creation, but, like many of my whif builds, it is rooted in reality and an extrapolation of what could have been. The oscillating tower with the M103’s 120 mm cannon and an autoloader was actually developed, and there were several tank projects that made use of it. The T77 was the final proposal, but, like the T57 on the M103 basis and other designs from the Rheem Company, the T77’s development was arduously slow, so that the project was finally canceled in 1957 by the US Ordnance Department. Two turrets were actually built, though, but they were scrapped in February 1958, and the T77 only existed on paper or in model form.

 

The impulse for this build actually came from a 1:72 resin turret for the T57 project from ModelTrans/Silesian Models. I found the concept cool and the turret had a very futuristic look, so that I bought a set with the vague intention to use it for a mecha conversion someday. Then it gathered dust in the stash, until I recently stumbled upon the 1:72 M103 kit from Dragon and considered a T57 build. But this kit is very rare and expensive, at least here in Germany, so I shelved this plan again. However, I started to play with the idea of a U.S. Army vehicle with a Rheem Company turret. Then I found a Revell M60 kit in the stash and considered it for a whiffy build, but eventually rejected the idea because a turret concept from the late Fifties would hardly make its way onto a tank from the late Seventies or later. When I did further research concerning the Rheem turret, I came across the real T77 project on the basis of the M48, and dug out an ESCI M48A5 from the pile (realizing that I had already hoarded three of them…!), so the M77 project was finally born.

 

Otherwise, the build was a straightforward affair. The T57 turret is a massive resin piece with a separate barrel and very fine surface details. Some of them, delicate lugs, were unfortunately broken off, already OOB but also by me while handling the pieces. They could be easily replaced with brass wire, though, which was also used to add small rails to the collar. The very long and thin barrel was replaced with a white metal aftermarket piece. It’s actually a barrel for a Soviet T-10 with a complex muzzle brake (made from brass), but the size was just fine and looks very good on this fictional tank.

Some details were added to the turret or transplanted from the M48 kit, e. g. the prominent IR searchlight or the machine gun on the commander cupola. Furthermore, I added a textile seal to the gap between the turret sections and to the barrel’s root, made from paper tissue drenched in thinned white glue. The same method was used to create the searchlight cover, too.

 

Since the turret base had a smaller diameter than the M48’s attachment opening, I had to improvise a suitable adapter with styrene strips. The M48A5 hull itself was taken OOB.

  

Painting and markings:

I was happy that I could place this model into a later time frame, so that the U.S. Army’s uniform Olive Drab times were already over. In the 1970s, the US Mobility Equipment Research & Design Command (MERDC) developed a system of camouflage patterns for US Army vehicles. These consisted of a set of standardized patterns for each vehicle, to be used with a set of twelve colours. The local terrain conditions and colours decided which of the paints were to be used, and on which parts of a vehicle. Then, if conditions altered, for example by a change in the weather, or by the unit moving into a new area of operations, the scheme could be quickly adjusted to suit them by replacing only one or two colours by different ones.

For example, if a vehicle was painted in the US & European winter scheme, which had a dark green and a medium brown as its predominant colours, and it started to snow, by overpainting either the green or the brown with white, one of the two snow schemes could be created. This gave a high degree of flexibility, though in practice it was hardly ever actually made use of—most vehicles were painted in one scheme and kept that.

I gave the M77 the “Winter Verdant” MERDC scheme, which was frequently used in Germany. It consists of Forest Green (FS 34079), Earth Red (FS 30117), Sand (FS 30277) and Black (FS 37038). The pattern itself was adapted from the standardized M60 MERDC scheme. Colors used were ModelMaster 1701 and 1710, plus Humbrol 238 and Revell 06. The seals on the turret and the searchlight cover were painted in a faded olive drab, the track segments with a mix of iron, dark grey and red brown.

 

After basic painting with brushes, the kit received a washing with thinned black and red brown acrylic paint. Decals (taken from the ESCI kit) came next, then the model received an overall dry brushing treatment with Humbrol 72 (Khaki Drill) and 168 (Hemp). Finally, everything was sealed with matt acrylic varnish from the rattle can and the lower hull areas were dusted with mineral pigments, simulating dust and mud.

  

Another relatively simple conversion, since only the (oscillating) turret was swapped. However, I was skeptical at first because the turret was originally intended for an M103 hull - but mounting it on a smaller M48 chassis worked well, just like in real life!

Lake Atitlan Facts, these 10 fun and interesting facts about Lake Atitlan, Guatemala barely skim the surface when it comes to what makes this area of the world unique, but these facts are great insight into what makes Lake Atitlan unlike any other place.

Lake Atitlan Facts | 10 Things You...

 

growyourowncure.org/lake-atitlan-facts-10-things-probably...

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

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

  

Some background:

The Grumman Mohawk began as a joint Army-Marine program through the then-Navy Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer), for an observation/attack plane that would outperform the light and vulnerable Cessna L-19 Bird Dog. In June 1956, the Army issued Type Specification TS145, which called for the development and procurement of a two-seat, twin turboprop aircraft designed to operate from small, unimproved fields under all weather conditions. It would be faster, with greater firepower, and heavier armor than the Bird Dog, which had proved very vulnerable during the Korean War.

 

The Mohawk's mission would include observation, artillery spotting, air control, emergency resupply, naval target spotting, liaison, and radiological monitoring. The Navy specified that the aircraft had to be capable of operating from small "jeep" escort class carriers (CVEs). The DoD selected Grumman Aircraft Corporation's G-134 design as the winner of the competition in 1957. Marine requirements contributed an unusual feature to the design: since the Marines were authorized to operate fixed-wing aircraft in the close air support (CAS) role, the mockup featured underwing pylons for rockets, bombs, and other stores, and this caused a lot of discord. The Air Force did not like the armament capability of the Mohawk and tried to get it removed. On the other side, the Marines did not want the sophisticated sensors the Army wanted, so when their Navy sponsors opted to buy a fleet oil tanker, they eventually dropped from the program altogether. The Army continued with armed Mohawks (and the resulting competence controversy with the Air Force) and also developed cargo pods that could be dropped from underwing hard points to resupply troops in emergencies.

 

In mid-1961, the first Mohawks to serve with U.S. forces overseas were delivered to the 7th Army at Sandhofen Airfield near Mannheim, Germany. Before its formal acceptance, the camera-carrying AO-1AF was flown on a tour of 29 European airfields to display it to the U.S. Army field commanders and potential European customers. In addition to their Vietnam and European service, SLAR-equipped Mohawks began operational missions in 1963 patrolling the Korean Demilitarized Zone.

 

Germany and France showed early interest in the Mohawk, and two OV-1s were field-tested by both nations over the course of several months. No direct orders resulted, though, but the German Bundesheer (Army) was impressed by the type’s performance and its capability as an observation and reconnaissance platform. Grumman even signed a license production agreement with the French manufacturer Breguet Aviation in exchange for American rights to the Atlantic maritime patrol aircraft, but no production orders followed.

 

This could have been the end of the OV-1 in Europe, but in 1977 the German government, primarily the interior ministry and its intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), showed interest in a light and agile SIGINT/ELINT platform that could fly surveillance missions along the inner-German border to the GDR and also to Czechoslovakia. Beyond visual reconnaissance with cameras and IR sensors, the aircraft was to be specifically able to identify and locate secret radio stations that were frequently operated by Eastern Block agents (esp. by the GDR) all across Western Germany, but primarily close to the inner-German border due to the clandestine stations’ low power. The Bundeswehr already operated a small ELINT/ECM fleet, consisting of converted HFB 320 ‘Hansa’ business jets, but these were not suited for stealthy and inconspicuous low flight level missions that were envisioned, and they also lacked the ability to fly slowly enough to locate potential “radio nests”.

 

The pan and the objective were clear, but the ELINT project caused a long and severe political debate concerning the operator of such an aerial platform. Initially, the Bundesheer, who had already tested the OV-1, claimed responsibility, but the interior ministry in the form of the German customs department as well as the German police’s Federal Border Guard, the Bundesgrenzschutz and the Luftwaffe (the proper operator for fixed-wing aircraft within the German armed forces), wrestled for this competence. Internally, the debate and the project ran under the handle “Schimmelreiter” (literally “The Rider on the White Horse”), after a northern German legendary figure, which eventually became the ELINT system’s semi-official name after it had been revealed to the public. After much tossing, in 1979 the decision was made to procure five refurbished U.S. Army OV-1As, tailored to the German needs and – after long internal debates – operate them by the Luftwaffe.

 

The former American aircraft were hybrids: they still had the OV-1A’s original short wings, but already the OV-1D’s stronger engines and its internal pallet system for interchangeable electronics. The machines received the designation OV-1G (for Germany) and were delivered in early 1980 via ship without any sensors or cameras. These were of Western German origin, developed and fitted locally, tailored to the special border surveillance needs.

 

The installation and testing of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite lasted until 1982. It was based on a Raytheon TI Systems emitter locator system, but it was locally adapted by AEG-Telefunken to the airframe and the Bundeswehr’s special tasks and needs. The system’s hardware was stowed in the fuselage, its sensor arrays were mounted into a pair of underwing nacelles, which occupied the OV-1’s standard hardpoints, allowing a full 360° coverage. In order to cool the electronics suite and regulate the climate in the internal equipment bays, the OV-1G received a powerful heat exchanger, mounted under a wedge-shaped fairing on the spine in front of the tail – the most obvious difference of this type from its American brethren. The exact specifications of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite remained classified, but special emphasis was placed upon COMINT (Communications Intelligence), a sub-category of signals intelligence that engages in dealing with messages or voice information derived from the interception of foreign communications. Even though the “Schimmelreiter” suite was the OV-1Gs’ primary reconnaissance tool, the whole system could be quickly de-installed for other sensor packs and reconnaissance tasks (even though this never happened), or augmented by single modules, what made upgrades and mission specialization easy. Beyond the ELINT suite, the OV-1G could be outfitted with cameras and other sensors on exchangeable pallets in the fuselage, too. This typically included a panoramic camera in a wedge-shaped ventral fairing, which would visually document the emitter sensors’ recordings.

 

A special feature of the German OV-1s was the integration of a brand new, NATO-compatible “Link-16” data link system via a MIDS-LVT (Multifunctional Information Distribution System). Even though this later became a standard for military systems, the OV-1G broke the ground for this innovative technology. The MIDS was an advanced command, control, communications, computing and intelligence (C4I) system incorporating high-capacity, jam-resistant, digital communication links for exchange of near real-time tactical information, including both data and voice, among air, ground, and sea elements. Outwardly, the MIDS was only recognizable through a shallow antenna blister behind the cockpit.

 

Even though the OV-1Gs initially retained their former American uniform olive drab livery upon delivery and outfitting in German service, they soon received a new wraparound camouflage for their dedicated low-level role in green and black (Luftwaffe Norm 83 standard), which was better suited for the European theatre of operations. In Luftwaffe service, the OV-1Gs received the tactical codes 18+01-05 and the small fleet was allocated to the Aufklärungsgeschwader (AG) 51 “Immelmann”, where the machines formed, beyond two squadrons with RF-4E Phantom IIs, an independent 3rd squadron. This small unit was from the start based as a detachment at Lechfeld, located in Bavaria/Southern Germany, instead of AG 51’s home airbase Bremgarten in South-Western Germany, because Lechfeld was closer to the type’s typical theatre of operations along Western Germany’s Eastern borders. Another factor in favor of this different airbase was the fact that Lechfeld was, beyond Tornado IDS fighter bombers, also the home of the Luftwaffe’s seven HFB 320M ECM aircraft, operated by the JaBoG32’s 3rd squadron, so that the local maintenance crews were familiar with complex electronics and aircraft systems, and the base’s security level was appropriate, too.

 

With the end of the Cold War in 1990, the OV-1Gs role and field of operation gradually shifted further eastwards. With the inner-German Iron Curtain gone, the machines were now frequently operated along the Polish and Czech Republic border, as well as in international airspace over the Baltic Sea, monitoring the radar activities along the coastlines and esp. the activities of Russian Navy ships that operated from Kaliningrad and Saint Petersburg. For these missions, the machines were frequently deployed to the “new” air bases Laage and Holzdorf in Eastern Germany.

 

In American service, the OV-1s were retired from Europe in 1992 and from operational U.S. Army service in 1996. In Germany, the OV-1 was kept in service for a considerably longer time – with little problems, since the OV-1 airframes had relatively few flying hours on their clocks. The Luftwaffe’s service level for the aircraft was high and spare parts remained easy to obtain from the USA, and there were still OV-1 parts in USAF storage in Western German bases.

 

The German HFB 320M fleet was retired between 1993 and 1994 and, in part, replaced by the Tornado ECR. At the same time AG 51 was dissolved and the OV-1Gs were nominally re-allocated to JaboG 32/3. With this unit the OV-1Gs remained operational until 2010, undergoing constant updates and equipment changes. For instance, the machines received in 1995 a powerful FLIR sensor in a small turret in the aircraft’s nose, which improved the aircraft’s all-weather reconnaissance capabilities and was intended to spot hidden radio posts even under all-weather/night conditions, once their signal was recognized and located. The aircrafts’ radio emitter locator system was updated several times, too, and, as a passive defensive measure against heat-guided air-to-air missiles/MANPADS, an IR jammer was added, extending the fuselage beyond the tail. These machines received the suffix “Phase II”, even though all five aircraft were updated the same way.

Reports that the OV-1Gs were furthermore retrofitted with the avionics to mount and launch AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs under the wing tips for self-defense remained unconfirmed, even more so because no aircraft was ever seen carrying arms – neither the AIM-9 nor anything else. Plans to make the OV-1Gs capable of carrying the Luftwaffe’s AGM-65 Maverick never went beyond the drawing board, either. However, BOZ chaff/flare dispenser pods and Cerberus ECM pods were occasionally seen on the ventral pylons from 1998 onwards.

 

No OV-1G was lost during the type’s career in Luftwaffe service, and after the end of the airframes’ service life, all five German OV-1Gs were scrapped in 2011. There was, due to worsening budget restraints, no direct successor, even though the maritime surveillance duties were taken over by Dornier Do 228/NGs operated by the German Marineflieger (naval air arm).

  

General characteristics:

Crew: Two: pilot, observer/systems operator

Length: 44 ft 4 in (13.53 m) overall with FLIR sensor and IR jammer

Wingspan: 42 ft 0 in (12.8 m)

Height: 12 ft 8 in (3.86 m)

Wing area: 330 sq. ft (30.65 m²)

Empty weight: 12,054 lb (5,467 kg)

Loaded weight: 15,544 lb (7,051 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 18,109 lb (8,214 kg)

 

Powerplant:

2× Lycoming T53-L-701 turboprops, 1,400 shp (1,044 kW) each

 

Performance:

Never exceed speed: 450 mph (390 knots, 724 km/h)

Maximum speed: 305 mph (265 knots, 491 km/h) at 10,000 ft (3,050 m)

Cruise speed: 207 mph (180 knots, 334 km/h) (econ cruise)

Stall speed: 84 mph (73 knots, 135 km/h)

Range: 944 mi (820 nmi, 1,520 km) (SLAR mission)

Service ceiling: 25,000 ft (7,620 m)

Rate of climb: 3,450 ft/min (17.5 m/s)

 

Armament:

A total of eight external hardpoints (two ventral, three under each outer wing)

for external loads; the wing hardpoints were typically occupied with ELINT sensor pods, while the

ventral hardpoints frequently carried 300 l drop tanks to extend loiter time and range;

Typically, no offensive armament was carried, even though bombs or gun/missile pods were possible.

  

The kit and its assembly:

This build became a submission to the “Reconnaissance” Group Build at whatifmodellers.com in July 2021, and it spins further real-world events. Germany actually tested two OV-1s in the Sixties (by the German Army/Bundesheer, not by the air force), but the type was not procured or operated. The test aircraft carried a glossy, olive drab livery (US standard, I think) with German national markings.

However, having a vintage Hasegawa OV-1A in the stash, I wondered what an operational German OV-1 might have looked like, especially if it had been operated into the Eighties and beyond, in the contemporary Norm 83 paint scheme? This led to this purely fictional OV-1G.

 

The kit was mostly built OOB, and the building experience was rather so-so – after all, it’s a pretty old mold/boxing (in my case the Hasegawa/Hales kit is from 1978, the mold is from 1968!). Just a few things were modified/added in order to tweak the standard, short-winged OV-1A into something more modern and sophisticated.

 

When searching for a solution to mount some ELINT sensor arrays, I did not want to copy the OV-1B’s characteristic offset, ventral SLAR fairing. I rather settled for the late RV-1D’s solution with sensor pods under the outer wings. Unfortunately, the OV-1A kit came with the type’s original short wings, so that the pods had to occupy the inner underwing pair of hardpoints. The pods were scratched from square styrene profiles and putty, so that they received a unique look. The Mohawk’s pair of ventral hardpoints were mounted, but – after considering some drop tanks or an ECM pod there - left empty, so that the field of view for the ventral panoramic camera would not be obscured.

 

Other small additions are some radar warning sensor bumps on the nose, some extra antennae, a shallow bulge for the MIDS antenna on the spine, the FLIR turret on the nose (with parts from an Italeri AH-1 and a Kangnam Yak-38!), and I added a tail stinger for a retrofitted (scratched) IR decoy device, inspired by the American AN/ALG-147. This once was a Matchbox SNEB unguided missile pod.

  

Painting and markings:

For the intended era, the German Norm 83 paint scheme, which is still in use today on several Luftwaffe types like the Transall, PAH-2 or CH-53, appeared like a natural choice. It’s a tri-color wraparound scheme, consisting of RAL 6003 (Olivgrün), FS 34097 (Forest Green) and RAL 7021 (Teerschwarz). The paints I used are Humbrol 86 (which is supposed to be a WWI version of RAL 6003, it lacks IMHO yellow but has good contrast to the other tones), Humbrol 116 and Revell 9. The pattern itself was adapted from the German Luftwaffe’s Dornier Do 28D “Skyservants” with Norm 83 camouflage, because of the type’s similar outlines.

 

A black ink washing was applied for light weathering, plus some post-shading of panels with lighter shades of the basic camouflage tones for a more plastic look. The cockpit interior was painted in light grey (Humbrol 167), while the landing gear and the interior of the air brakes became white. The scratched SLAR pods became light grey, with flat di-electric panels in medium grey (created with decal material).

The cockpit interior was painted in a rather light grey (Humbrol 167), the pilots received typical olive drab Luftwaffe overalls, one with a white “bone dome” and the other with a more modern light grey helmet.

 

The decals were improvised. National markings and tactical codes came from TL Modellbau sheets, the AG 51 emblems were taken from a Hasegawa RF-4E sheet. The black walkways were taken from the Mohak’s OOB sheet, the black de-icer leading edges on wings and tail were created with generic black decal material. Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).

  

An interesting result, and the hybrid paint scheme with the additional desert camouflage really makes the aircraft an unusual sight, adding to its credibility.

Texaco ad from the early Fifties.

Beer has food value but food has no beer value

via Blogger ift.tt/1QeAwXp

BOX DATE: 2000

MANUFACTURER: Mattel

SPECIAL FEATURES: Roll out walls; working microphone; fold down dance floor

MISSING ITEMS: Cafeteria table, counter, 4 trays, 3 food dishes, 4 soda cans, 4 forks, couch, printer, laptop, phone book, 3 newspapers, magazines, 3 package, box

 

PERSONAL FUN FACT: The lockers pretty much sum up why my sister and I wanted this school. They really open, they look realistic yet colorful....everything you could want. This originally came with name stickers for the Generation Girls. But I got my school secondhand in the early 2000s. There were a few pieces of the name labels left, but most were gone or partially torn. So they eventually were all peeled off. That was fine with us, since Colleen and I rarely played with the Generation Girls in the school. Instead we had our usual cast of favorite dolls, which rotated around depending on the time frame. There would be a designated locker for School Photographer Becky, Pet Pals Skipper, 2001 Sparkling Jasmine...even Kid Kore Katie. It's interesting because Katie was eight....so I'm not sure why she'd have a high school locker. I even made little text books out of construction paper and gel pens for each of the dolls. I would do different fonts, copying names from my own textbooks. Sometimes I'd doodle on the covers, to make it look like the dolls got bored in class. The slide out walls also added some realism. It was a bummer we didn't get any of the furniture that originally came with this set. But we had so many dolls in play, that we couldn't have possibly fit them at the flimsy cafeteria table. So we just sat the dolls on the floor and pretended there was a table. Colleen and I always used our imaginations to fill in the missing set pieces or even characters we didn't have. The newspaper room was also a fun set to utilize. I really liked the copy machine...but I was bummed it wasn't three dimensional. The walls are vinyl which can be retracted into the school. This makes everything super compact and easy to store. However, when you store it for a while and then roll out the walls, they stay curled. So I always have to use putty to stick under the metal bases. This keeps the walls taught and straight. This wasn't so much an issue when I was a kid, because the school was set up ALL the time.

wearandcheer.com/facts-about-depression/

Depression is an enormous problem and it is increasing. Through looking at the figures we can clear up ordinary misconceptions and make it easier to tackle main depression at its root.

Major depression is the No.1 psychological disorder in the western world. It is increasing in all age groups,...

by Staff Author on Wear and Cheer - Fashion, Lifestyle, Cooking and Celebrities - Visit Now wearandcheer.com/facts-about-depression/

You must like it and share it with your friends.

Series of 4 Posters on Food Facts.

Some of you may have noticed that, unfortunately, owing to the fact that a certain person who sells truck photos on eBay commercially has been lifting my images from this album and selling them I have had to remove 2300 photos that didn't have a watermark. I have now run around 1700 through Lightroom and added a watermark with the intention of bulk uploading them again. Rather than watermark the existing (hidden) files in Flickr one at a time it will be easier to do it this way. I definitely won’t be adding individual tags with the make and model of each vehicle I will just add generic transport tags. Each photo is named after the vehicle and reg in any case. For anyone new to these images there is a chapter and verse explanation below. It is staggering how many times I get asked questions that a quick scan would answer or just as likely I can’t possibly answer – I didn’t take them, but, just to clarify-I do own the copyright- and I do pursue copyright theft.

 

This is a collection of scanned prints from a collection of photographs taken by the late Jim Taylor A number of years ago I was offered a large number of photographs taken by Jim Taylor, a transport photographer based in Huddersfield. The collection, 30,000 prints, 20,000 negatives – and copyright! – had been offered to me and one of the national transport magazines previously by a friend of Jim's, on behalf of Jim's wife. I initially turned them down, already having over 30,000 of my own prints filed away and taking space up. Several months later the prints were still for sale – at what was, apparently, the going rate. It was a lot of money and I deliberated for quite a while before deciding to buy them. I did however buy them directly from Jim’s wife and she delivered them personally – just to quash the occasional rumour from people who can’t mind their own business. Although some prints were sold elsewhere, particularly the popular big fleet stuff, I should have the negatives, unfortunately they came to me in a random mix, 1200 to a box, without any sort of indexing and as such it would be impossible to match negatives to prints, or, to even find a print of any particular vehicle. I have only ever looked at a handful myself unless I am scanning them. The prints are generally in excellent condition and I initially stored them in a bedroom without ever looking at any of them. In 2006 I built an extension and they had to be well protected from dust and moved a few times. Ultimately my former 6x7 box room office has become their (and my own work’s) permanent home.

I hope to avoid posting images that Jim had not taken his self, however should I inadvertently infringe another photographers copyright, please inform me by email and I will resolve the issue immediately. There are copyright issues with some of the photographs that were sold to me. A Flickr member from Scotland drew my attention to some of his own work amongst the first uploads of Jim’s work. I had a quick look through some of the 30 boxes of prints and decided that for the time being the safest thing for me to do was withdraw the majority of the earlier uploaded scans and deal with the problem – which I did. whilst the vast majority of the prints are Jims, there is a problem defining copyright of some of them, this is something that the seller did not make clear at the time. I am reasonably confident that I have since been successful in identifying Jims own work. His early work consists of many thousands of lustre 6x4 prints which are difficult to scan well, later work is almost entirely 7x5 glossy, much easier to scan. Not all of the prints are pin sharp but I can generally print successfully to A4 from a scan.

 

You may notice photographs being duplicated in this Album, unfortunately there are multiple copies of many prints (for swapping) and as I have to have a system of archiving and backing up I can only guess - using memory - if I have scanned a print before. The bigger fleets have so many similar vehicles and registration numbers that it is impossible to get it right all of the time. It is easier to scan and process a print than check my files - on three different PC’s - for duplicates. There has not been, nor will there ever be, any intention to knowingly breach anyone else's copyright. I have presented the Jim Taylor collection as exactly that-The Jim Taylor Collection- his work not mine, my own work is quite obviously mine.

Unfortunately, many truck spotters have swapped and traded their work without copyright marking it as theirs. These people never anticipated the ease with which images would be shared online in the future. I would guess that having swapped and traded photos for many years that it is almost impossible to control their future use. Anyone wanting to control the future use of their work would have been well advised to copyright mark their work (as many did) and would be well advised not to post them on photo sharing sites without a watermark as the whole point of these sites is to share the image, it is very easy for those that wish, to lift any image, despite security settings, indeed, Flickr itself, warns you that this is the case. It was this abuse and theft of my material that led me to watermark all of my later uploads. I may yet withdraw non-watermarked photos, I haven’t decided yet. (I did in the end)

To anyone reading the above it will be quite obvious that I can’t provide information regarding specific photos or potential future uploads – I didn’t take them! There are many vehicles that were well known to me as Jim only lived down the road from me (although I didn’t know him), however scanning, titling, tagging and uploading is laborious and time consuming enough, I do however provide a fair amount of information with my own transport (and other) photos. I am aware that there are requests from other Flickr users that are unanswered, I stumble across them months or years after they were posted, this isn’t deliberate. Some weekends one or two “enthusiasts” can add many hundreds of photos as favourites, this pushes requests that are in the comments section ten or twenty pages out of sight and I miss them. I also have notifications switched off, I receive around 50 emails a day through work and I don’t want even more from Flickr. Other requests, like many other things, I just plain forget – no excuses! Uploads of Jim’s photos will be infrequent as it is a boring pastime and I would much rather work on my own output.

 

Leake Street