View allAll Photos Tagged II
Gentleman's Motor Cruiser Cordelia II, lying in Tobermory Harbour, 29 April 2013. Built Tarbert, 1929; re-engined 1955. 31 tons. © Professor S B
The beautiful Cordelia II was built in 1929 as a gentleman's yacht by the famous yacht builders Dickies of Tarbert, Argyll, for Mr William Anderson, a wealthy vegetable merchant from Cumberland. She was built to the highest Lloyds 100 A1 standard for the personal use of her owner and operated by a crew of four. She was built of the very best materials, Burmese teak planking on grown oak frames and bronze fastenings and fittings throughout and was powered by two Gardner 3J5 three cylinder engines, both of which are now in preservation, one being at Liverpool Maritime Museum.
In 1939 Cordelia was requisitioned by the Ministry of War for harbour protection duties and operated primarily in the Clyde estuary on submarine patrol duties. In 1946 she was repurchased by Mr Anderson and remained in his ownership until the early 1950s. She was then bought by Mr Cedric Pochin who kept her in North Wales. He re-engined her in 1955 with twin Gardner 5L3 90hp engines, sea water cooled , which still power her now. These engines idle at 200 rpm and have a maximum of 850 rpm, giving Cordelia a cruising speed of 10 knots. In 1981 Mr Pochin died and Cordelia was bought by Jim and Rhoda Gill and taken to Devon where she was based until 2002 when she was purchased by Alistair and Eleanor Hammond. They carried out a sympathetic restoration programme including the fuel and electric systems.
In 2005 they sailed her to France to take part in the famous Brest International Classic Boat Festival. Also in 2005 Cordelia took part in the Royal Spithead Revue before the Queen to celebrate 200 years since Trafalgar. They were unable to complete the restoration and she remained for some years in the Thames estuary alongside the Chatham Maritime Museum. The present owners found her there in 2011 and quickly realised that, while she was cosmetically in a very poor state she was fundamentally very sound. A comprehensive survey confirmed this and, after basic preparation, she was able to sail under her own power up the east coast and along the Caledonian Canal to her new base in Tobermory, Isle of Mull. Renovation work required for a commercial certificate to enable her to carry passengers is being carried out though much remains to be done.
This was captured during a great Sunset with different cloud formations, i simply just had to stare at them, so this is me watching the clouds which i do everytime i step outside my door.
Catalog #: 01_00081165
Title: Hawker, Tempest II
Corporation Name: Hawker
Official Nickname: Tempest II
Additional Information: UK
Tags: Hawker, Tempest II
Repository: San Diego Air and Space Museum Archive
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Este trabajo está licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licencia .
Esta foto la pongo a disposición de quien la quiera emplear bajo licencia Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (Si vas a emplear alguna y quieres dejar un comentario, pues mejor)
This photo was made available to those who want to use under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (If you want to use one and leave a comment, because better)
Un dels pocs Pegaso 5031T ex-La Veloz que no van arribar a anar per la zona del Vàlles era el 255, que anava empaperat amb l'anunci del parc aquàtic de La Pineda
Uno de los pocos Pegaso 5031T ex-La Veloz que no fueron a la base del Vallés fue el 255, que iba empapelado con el anuncio del parque acuático de La Pineda.
One of the few Pegaso 5031T ex-La Veloz that was not assigned to the Vallès depot was nº 255. This bus worked with all-over advertising livery from the water park La Pineda.
Queen Elizabeth II, 2002, by Rankin
This photograph is included in the book The Royal Portrait: Image and Impact, which can be purchased from the Royal Collection online shop.
© Rankin
not for reproduction
Titan II GLV
The Titan II GLV (Gemini Launch Vehicle) or Gemini-Titan II was an American expendable launch system derived from the Titan II missile, which was used to launch twelve Gemini missions for NASA between 1964 and 1966. Two unmanned launches followed by ten manned ones were conducted from Launch Complex 19 at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, starting with Gemini 1 on April 8, 1964.
The Titan II was a two-stage liquid-fuel rocket, using a hypergolic propellant combination of Aerozine 50 fuel and nitrogen tetroxide oxidizer. The first stage was powered by an LR87 engine (with two combustion chambers and nozzles, fed by a single set of turbomachinery), and the second stage was propelled by an LR-91 engine.
•General Specifications:
oFunction: Human-Rated Launch Vehicle for Gemini Spacecraft
oManufacturer: Martin
oCountry of Origin: United States
•Size:
oHeight: 109 feet (33.2 m)
oDiameter: 10 feet (3.05 m)
oMass: 340,000 pounds (154,200 kg)
oStages: 2
•Capacity:
oPayload to LEO: 7,900 pounds (3,580 kg)
oAssociated Rockets:
oFamily: Titan
•Launch History:
oStatus: Retired
oLaunch Sites: Cape Canaveral LC-19
oTotal Launches: 12
oSuccesses: 12
oFirst Flight: April 8, 1964
oLast Flight: November 11, 1966
oNotable Payloads: Gemini
•First Stage:
oEngines: 1 LR87-AJ-7
oThrust: 430,000 pounds-force (1,913 kN)
oSpecific Impulse: 258 sec
oBurn Time: 156 seconds
oFuel: Aerozine 50/N2O4
•Second Stage:
oEngines: 1 LR91-AJ-7
oThrust: 100,000 pounds-force (445 kN)
oSpecific Impulse: 316 sec
oBurn Time: 180 seconds
oFuel: Aerozine 50/N2O4
Modifications from the Titan II Missile
In addition to greater payload capability, the Titan II promised greater reliability than the Atlas LV-3B which had been selected for Project Mercury, because Titan’s hypergolic-fueled engines contained far fewer components.
Several modifications were made to the Titan missile to man-rate it for Project Gemini:
•A “Gemini Malfunction Detection System” was installed to inform the crew of the rocket’s status, and improve response in an emergency.
•Redundant systems were installed to reduce the chances of launch failures.
•The inertial guidance system was replaced by a lighter-weight ground-radio guidance system
•The avionics truss in the second stage was modified slightly
•To help guard against the possibility of a guidance malfunction causing the engine nozzles to gimbal hard right or left, an extra backup guidance system was added.
•The second stage propellant tanks were lengthened for longer burn time and unnecessary vernier engines and retrorockets were removed. Because the second stage engine had had issues with combustion instability, it was equipped with baffled injectors.
•The first stage was loaded with 13,000 pounds (5896 kilograms) more propellant than the Titan ICBM although the storage tank size remained unchanged.
•Modifications were made to the tracking, electrical and hydraulics systems in the interest of improved reliability.
•The propellants were chilled to slightly improve vehicle performance. This allowed for more mass to be accommodated.
•First stage engine thrust was reduced slightly to cut down on vibration and G loads.
•First stage engine burn would go until propellant depletion unlike Titan ICBMs which were designed to cut off when propellant flow/pressure and engine thrust started dropping as the tanks emptied. This was to prevent the possibility of a malfunctioning pressure sensor triggering an abort condition. Also, running until depletion would slightly boost the Titan’s capacity for payload.
Modifications were overseen by the Air Force Systems Command. The Aerojet company, the manufacturer of the Titan’s engines, had released a revised model during mid-1963 due to deficiencies in the original design, and also to attempt to improve manufacturing procedures.
Film footage of Gemini 10’s launch revealed that the first stage oxidizer tank ruptured shortly after staging and released a cloud of N2O4. As first stage telemetry had been terminated at staging, there was no data other than photographic/visual evidence to go by, however the conclusion was that either loose debris struck the oxidizer tank dome or else exhaust from the second stage engine had burned through it.
Gemini 12’s launch vehicle also experienced a tank rupture after staging and film review of Titan II ICBM launches found several occurrences of this phenomenon. Since this did not appear to pose any safety risks to the astronauts, NASA decided that it was not a concern.
During Titan II ICBM development, it had been found that the first stage turbopump gearbox was prone to total failure caused by resonant vibration in the idler gear. This problem had not occurred on actual launches, but only static firing tests. This was considered to be a critical item to fix. Aerojet developed a totally redesigned gearbox, and all of Gemini launch vehicles except for the unmanned Gemini 1 used it.
There was also a potentially serious problem with the turbopump bearings which led to more design changes, however the odds of failing on a Gemini launch were slim to nil since GLV boosters used specially selected and tested bearings, in addition the turbopumps would be “hot fired” as part of prelaunch checks.
Combustion instability in the second stage engine was also a concern although that too had only been witnessed in static firing runs. A new injector with improved baffling was developed for the engine and flight-tested on a Titan IIIC launch; all GLVs from Gemini 8 onwards incorporated it.
After a Titan II propellant feed line was found to have some damage during factory inspections, NASA put out the requirement that all GLV propellant lines had to be X-rayed in order to prevent a potentially disastrous fuel leak during launch. X-ray tests later found several more damaged propellant lines, most likely due to careless handling.
The most significant issue in man-rating the Titan II was resolving problems with resonant vibration known as “pogo” (since the action was said to resemble that of a pogo stick) that could produce g-forces sufficient to incapacitate astronauts, but the Air Force were not interested in helping NASA with a problem that did not affect the ICBM program and could potentially delay it, or require major modifications to the design. However, Martin-Marietta argued that the pogo problem could be fixed fairly easily, and also the Air Force began to develop more of an interest in man-rating the Titan II due to the proposed Manned Orbiting Laboratory program. The primary changes made to resolve pogo were adding oxidizer standpipes, increasing the pressure in the propellant tanks, and adding a mechanical accumulator to the fuel suction side.
Another nuisance problem that occurred during the Gemini program was code-named “Green Man” and involved momentary pitch oscillations of the Titan second stage following engine cutoff. This phenomenon had happened on both Gemini and unmanned Titan II/III flights and had resulted in the failure of the ablative skirt on the second stage at least twice (those instances were dubbed “Brown Man”). Investigation following skirt failure on a Titan IIIC launch concluded that pressure buildup in the ablative skirt caused the pitch oscillations, but NASA decided that there was probably little chance of loose debris from the skirt contacting the Gemini spacecraft, so no corrective action had to be taken and in any case, the Titan IIIC incident was found to be the result of poor quality control which would not affect the more tightly supervised Gemini program.
The assembly of these rockets was done at Martin-Marietta’s plant in Baltimore, Maryland, so not to interfere with missile work at the one in Denver, Colorado, although this also saved the former plant from a planned shutdown. As with the Mercury-Atlas launch vehicles, a high degree of workmanship was stressed as well as more thorough testing of components and improved handling procedures compared with Titans designed for unmanned flights.
Flights
•GT-1
oLV Serial No: GLV-1 12556
oLaunch Date: April 8, 1964
oCrew: Unmanned orbital test flight.
•GT-2
oLV Serial No: GLV-2 12557
oLaunch Date: January 19, 1965
oCrew: Unmanned suborbital test of Gemini heat shield.
•GT-3
oLV Serial No: GLV-3 12558
oLaunch Date: March 23, 1965
oCrew: Gus Grissom and John Young
•GT-IV
oLV Serial No: GLV-4 12559
oLaunch Date: June 3, 1965
oCrew: James McDivitt and Edward H. White
•GT-V
oLV Serial No: GLV-5 12560
oLaunch Date: August 21, 1965
oCrew: Gordon Cooper and Charles P. Conrad
•GT-VII
oLV Serial No: GLV-7 12562
oLaunch Date: December 4, 1965
oCrew: Frank Borman and James Lovell
•GT-VI A
oLV Serial No: GLV-6 12561
oLaunch Date: December 15, 1965
oCrew: Wally Schirra and Thomas P. Stafford
•GT-VIII
oLV Serial No: GLV-8 12563
oLaunch Date: March 16, 1966
oCrew: Neil Armstrong and David Scott
•GT-IX A
oLV Serial No: GLV-9 12564
oLaunch Date: June 3, 1966
oCrew: Thomas P. Stafford and Eugene Cernan
•GT-X
oLV Serial No: GLV-10 12565
oLaunch Date: July 18, 1966
oCrew: John Young and Michael Collins
•GT-XI
oLV Serial No: GLV-11 12566
oLaunch Date: September 12, 1966
oCrew: Charles P. Conrad and Richard F. Gordon
•GT-XII
oLV Serial No: GLV-12 12567
oLaunch Date: November 11, 1966
oCrew: James Lovell and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin
This tiny half-frame gem is a rebranded Ricoh Auto Half. It has a clockwork motor drive, and a 25mm f2.8 lens (3 groups, four elements). Like the Olympus Trip 35, this camera offers battery-free auto-exposure. This example had a sticky shutter (now working, thanks to some gentle cleaning) and has a broken film counter (no biggie). I am unsure if the selenium meter is working, but, since it does offer manual aperture control, I should be able to use either a hand-held meter, or "sunny 16", if it does not work. But really, if I get a picture out of this one, it will be a bonus; as this little camera stands on its own as a decorative object.
© Derrick Brown 2007
Samsung Blackjack II in Wine Red.
Front Cover of Blackjack II
* Microsoft® Windows Mobile 6 Standard(TM)
* AT&T Mobile Music and Cellular Video capable
* Windows Media Player® 10 Mobile
* Bluetooth® 2.0® wireless connectivity
* Simultaneous voice and data capabilities
* Quad-band world phone with tri-band UMTS/HSDPA
* Slim design PDA with full QWERTY keyboard
* 2 MP camera with video recording
* Microsoft® Direct Push for real-time email delivery
* Microsoft Office Mobile® - Edit Word® and Excel®, view PowerPoint files
* Email - Xpress Mail, ActiveSync, and more
* Synchronize your desktop and calendar wirelessly
* Instant Messaging - AOL®, Windows Live®, Yahoo!®
* GPS support for TeleNav Navigator
* Hands-free loudspeaker and microphone
* Large 2.4"color LCD screen
* Video Share calling support
* Fast loading HTML browser
* MEdiaTM Net capable
* RSS Reader
* World-phone high-speed 3G capability (UMTS/HSDPA) for data, downloading, and Web surfing.
* XM Radio Mobile
I built something!
In the 1990’s and up to 2005 if I remember correctly, LEGO had a small KÖF II shunter locomotive in their German location in Hohenweststedt.
I always wanted to build it, had the stickers ready for years, and during the current craze of building trains, what ifs and so on for my kid, I simply got started with it, trying to build it like I’d build an official set again.
I failed miserably.
Turns out that if you want to keep this thing somewhat correct looking, there is no way building it as a (hypothetical) LEGO set. At least not motorized (but what’s a train without a motor?).
So I gave up and built it like I used to build before I started at LEGO, heavily inspired by how Michael Jasper built his Köf III loco (probably 15 years ago, when he found that perfect ballance between fanbuilds and playability for trains: brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=161474 ) and this is what I ended up with.
There are some things that I’ve seen before, like for example the cups for lighs were first used like that by Duq I think, and although I had an alternative idea for them, I decided that I want it hillarious instead of 100% accurate. There are so many LEGO Köfs out there that it’s difficult to reinvent the wheel anyway.
It’s not too crazy buildingwise, but it would be impossible to launch in it’s current state as it’s too fragile.
Looking at pics, I’m thinking that the lower edge of the cabin should be minislopes, but it looks wrong when built, so I ended up with these bows.
I decided that I’d rather have an engine compartment and the snout three wide than that slanted nose that starts too wide, and ends too narrow, and completley wrong engine bay covers, the handrails that run along the top edge of the snout kind of help to cheat the width there a bit. I made two grilles. The yellow uses a sticker though to mask off the black edge of the plates underneath. No idea which one is better.
I didn’t forget the doors, I simply didn’t build them, it would require some tweaks and loosing the minifig, and I find trains that don’t have the space for a dude pointless. These things were shunting at snail’s speeds anyway, I doubt the doors were closed much in summer anyway.
I also deliberatley lost the two hand rails on each side of the door opening, I had them, looked dumb, made the loco wider without adding much detail, the LEGO logo would have to be smaller... Meh.
I also decided to give the running boards a wooden look, some model manufacturers make them look like wood, some don’t, I seem to see wooden planks on some of the pictures of the original, but it might aswell be rust. I don’t know.