View allAll Photos Tagged Outdated
Slightly outdated now, but has a great 3.2 px camera with flash and a very decent Mp3 player. Also a very durable phone that can more than handle a fall off the kitchen counter.
Shot in Leeds, the arches under the railway. Ilford FP4+ from bulk, outdated 1990. Shot at ASA 80 devved for 9 minutes in HC110 Dilb at 18'c.
Looks Scary
Well its definitely old and outdated. In fact, you might even say there's no way this is in operation and that its a doctors office here in #losangeles but it is.
This is the office and exam room of my hernia surgeon. Don't let the looks fool you and we all know we shouldn't judge a book by its cover.
I'll admit I did judge the book and was concerned for my safety during the exam and wondering if I should seek another doctor. Coincidentally, this was the doctor scheduled to remove my one hernia before covid. I now have two hernias and not a spleen that's retaining blood which @lacuscmedical diagnosed me and stated I refused care. Good thing I did because my spleen is just fine.
I will have my first surgery next month and 3 months later the second hernia will be removed. I've mentioned my new primary care doctor, Dr. William King, and amazing staff. I have entirely new doctors and specialists. I'm no longer in clinic care and things are getting better.
Most of all, I'm living again after being convinced, treated like, and told I was going to die. The only reason I was going to die was because of all the lousy care I was receiving from @lacarehealth and @lacuscmedical backed my Medi-Cal.
So while this office may look outdated and scary, not changing my insurance, demanding new doctors and specialists, I'd be near death or dead. This is beyond outdated and scary.
💁♀️ Phạm Huyền Trang
️with Kodak Xtra 400 (outdated)
© All right reserved
All be loved at phitrieu.com/teen/a-green-night.html
Follow me at
phitrieu.com
IG + FB | @phitrieu.pro5
X | @phitrieupro5
Abandoned and outdated control room for an unused water reservoir, Meadville, Pennsylvania
Follow me on Facebook, Pinterest, Instagram, or visit my website. Links listed below.
www.pinterest.com/keegsley/pins/
Wow is this outdated by now XD I took a lot of photos near my house in late April when the cherry blossoms were still out, but never got around to all of them. I'm still so stoked about picking up this dress from a friend--it really suits River and looked better with the cherry blossoms than I thought it would! I'm also excited to finally have the dollflower eyes I've always wanted for her, and I think this Lullaby Poem wig might be her default color ^^
Estero Trail, Pt. Reyes National Seashore, California. Not much use against COVID-19 or STDs either.
+++ 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 Nanchang J-9C was a mid-sized interceptor for the Chinese People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) that had been developed during the Eighties. By the late Seventies, a new benchmark fighter had entered the global stage, the General Dynamics F-16, and the Ministry of Defense issued a new requirement on 9 June 1979 - and slightly revised it in November – to develop an air superiority fighter with comparable performance, since the Chinese People's Liberation Army’s standard fighters of the time, the J-7 (a derivative of the Soviet MiG-21, used by both PLAAF and PLAN) and the indigenous J-8 (used by the PLAAF only), appeared both outdated and no match for the American product anymore.
The fighter project started under the designation J-9II, inherited from the stillborn (and unrelated) Chengdu J-9 heavy interceptor project that had already been proposed in 1964 and eventually, after many iterations, evermore demanding requirements concerning range and speed but no prototypes, been cancelled in 1980. To reflect the second use of the designation and avoid confusion, the new type was called J-9II (later renamed into J-9B).
The J-9II was heavily inspired by the American 4thgeneration F-16, but eventually was a very different aircraft, even though the J-9II shared the F-16’s general layout, including the characteristic lip air intake. Rumor has it that information about the American type was acquired from Egypt where the F-16 had been introduced in 1982.
Two different variants of single airframe were initially proposed by Nanchang Aircraft Factory to cater to the slightly different needs of both PLAAF and PLAN. The navy variant was already dropped in 1981, though, while the air force variant was tailored to execute fast interception missions, with a secondary ground attack capability. However, from a technological standpoint, the J-9II was still only a 3rd generation fighter, at best, and suffered from several shortcomings. For instance, the J-9II’s wing geometry was very similar to the J-7s’ and J-8s’ clipped delta wings, even though they were combined with a blended body on the upper surface for additional lift and featured organically integrated LERX that improved handling at high angles of attack. The highly swept wings gave great speed and roll characteristics, but provided poor lift at low speed what limited the J-9II’s utility as a frontline fighter.
The aircraft’s powerplant was a single WS-9 Qinling twin-shaft turbofan engine, which was a blunt copy of the British Rolls Royce RB.168 Spey 202, originally exported to China in 1975 violating the COCOM restrictions. At the time of the J-9II’s development the copied Spey was, like many other aspects of the aircraft, no longer state-of-the-art, but it was the only suitable engine for the project. In the J-9II it was paired with an indigenous afterburner.
This semi-indigenous engine turned out to be notoriously unreliable and hardly provided the promised output of 53.4 kN/12,140 lbf dry thrust and 91.2 kN/20,500 lbf with reheat, leaving the aircraft notoriously underpowered. For comparison, the F-16A benchmark’s Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200 turbofan was rated at 14,670 lbf/64.9 kN and 23,830 lbf/106.0 kN with afterburner. The J-9II’s higher structural weight due to the limited use of light composite material hampered its performance even further.
Other differences from the F-16 included a single foldable fin in the style of the Soviet MiG-23/27 (a solution also employed on the J-8 interceptor) instead of a pair of fixed vanes on the F-16, and the pilot sat in a more upright position under a taller and conventional canopy with a fixed 3-part windscreen. Even though the lip air intake was in the same position as on the F-16, it had a totally different square shape and geometry with an adjustable intake ramp and auxiliary intakes with feathered covers on the flanks to prevent engine surge.
The J-9II’s avionics were quite state-of-the-art, though, but not highly capable when compared with foreign systems and based on existing equipment. Its primary armament consisted of IR-guided PL-5 (based on the Soviet Vympel K-13) and PL-8 short-range AAMs (a license-built Version of the Israeli Python 3), and semi-active radar-guided PL-11 mid-range AAMs (a license-built version of the Italian Aspide missile, which itself was an ungraded AIM-7 Sparrow). A total of seven hardpoints were available for a total external ordnance of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb). Secondary armament consisted of a ventral Type 23-III twin-barrel cannon, a copy of the Soviet Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L. The radar was a modified Type 1471 pulse-Doppler radar, placed under a pointed nose radome, which had a bigger diameter than the F-16’s installation, what gave the J-9II, together with the deeper cockpit section and its more bulbous canopy, a markedly different profile.
The first J-9II prototype was rolled out in August 1988 and shortly thereafter unveiled to the public in September 1988 at Farnborough International Air Show, where it was officially baptized “Tiān Hǔ” (天虎, Heavenly Tiger) – a first among Chinese military aircraft, which had until then lacked such an accolade. At the same time, it was given the AFIC code name “Freshman” by NATO. The first batch of eight J-9II aircraft was delivered to the PLAAF for evaluation in the early 1990’s. After a year of testing the air force agreed to procure more aircraft of the new type after upgrading the avionics and weapons suite with improved technology. This upgraded J-9II was then – following the PLAAF’s revised naming system – designated J-9C. The first serial production aircraft built to this revised standard were delivered to PLAAF units probably in 2001, where they primarily replaced outdated 1st generation J-8Is and some J-7 fighters, too.
However, on the PLAAF’s agenda, the J-9C was quickly superseded by the Chengdu J-10 “Vigorous Dragon” (NATO reporting name: Firebird), another medium-weight, single-engine, multirole combat aircraft. The J-10 was capable of all-weather operations and configured with a delta wing and canard design, with fly-by-wire flight controls. This project had been kicked off as early as 1981 and developed in parallel to the J-9II, even though with more severe delays, so that the Tiān Hǔ’s development had been kept up to ensure at least one more modern interceptor type for the PLAAF from 2000 on. Compared with the J-9C, the J-10 was a much more modern aircraft overall and a true 4th generation fighter on par with the F-16. When the first J-10s were delivered to the PLAAF in 2003, only two years after the first J-9Cs, the latter’s production was shut down after only roughly 100 aircraft that were exclusively operated by PLAAF interceptor regiments.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 17,06 m (55 ft 10¾ in) overall incl. pitot
Wingspan: 8,93 m (29 ft 3 in)
Height: 4,25 m (13 ft 11 in)
Wing area: 30,5 m² (327 sqft)
Empty weight: 9.373 kg (20,645 lb)
Gross weight: 13.036 kg (28,713 lb) with full internal fuel
Max takeoff weight: 19.250 kg (42,400 lb)
Fuel capacity: 7,000 pounds (3,200 kg) internal
Powerplant:
1× Xian WS-9 Qinling twin-shaft turbofan engine with afterburner,
with 53.4 kN (12,140 lbf ) dry thrust and 91.2 kN (20,500 lbf) with reheat
Performance
Maximum speed: (1,825 km/h (1,134 mph, 985 kn, Mach 1.72) at 35,000 ft (11,000 m), clean
Combat range: 1,000 km (620 mi, 540 nmi) radius with 4x AAMs and 2x drop tanks
Ferry range: 4,217 km (2,620 mi, 2,277 nmi) with 3x drop tanks, subsonic
Service ceiling: 17,500 m (57,400 ft)
Time to altitude: 17,000 m (56,000 ft) in 8 minutes 30 seconds
Rate of climb: 224 m/s (44,100 ft/min) at sea level
Roll rate: 275°/s
g limits: +6.0 sustained at 5,000 m (16,000 ft)
Thrust-to-weight: 0.72
Wing loading: 87.8 lb/sq ft (427 kg/m²)
Unstick speed: 330 km/h (210 mph; 180 kn)
Take-off run: 630 m (2,070 ft)
Touchdown speed: 224 km/h (139 mph; 121 kn)
Landing run: 900 m (3,000 ft)
Armament:
1× internal 23 mm Type 23-III (Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L) autocannon with 200 rounds
7x external hardpoints for a total ordnance of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb)
The kit and its assembly:
This what-if model was inspired by an online picture of a model, probably at a convention or competition, that I had seen many years ago: it was an F-16 with wings and stabilizers from a MiG-21 in Czech markings and with a brown/green camouflage livery. While the idea appeared odd the highly swept wings blended well into the F-16’s LERXs – and I wanted to re-create this someday.
This has happened now, even though I put some more effort into the model and furthermore stumbled over some layout questions while building it. At the core this is a Hasegawa F-16A, mated with MiG-21 wings (probably from an Academy MiG-21 F-13) and many other additional mods.
These included:
- A new, deeper nose radome from a Nakotne MiG-29 (which has a totally wrong shape with a flat underside)
- A different sliding two-piece canopy (from a Hasegawa Grumman F9F Panther) with a classic layout for an old-school look
- Fin and stabilizers taken wholesale from a PM Model Su-15, because MiG-21 surfaces appeared too small
- A twin wheel front landing gear leg with modified covers
- Different main landing gear struts with F-16 wheels
- A new exhaust installation that has a more Spey-esque shrouded layout (as on the British Phantoms); two exhaust sections from F-16 kits were glue behind each other to extend the fuselage, and a J79 nozzle (from an Italeri IAI Kfir) was mounted inside
- The F-16’s ventral twin fins were replaced with a single foldable MiG-23 fin (from an Academy kit)
- A new “pizza oven-style” air intake, blended into the lower F-16 body with LOTS of PSR
While assembling this thing and recognizing that the MiG-21 wings would shift the center of lift considerably further back I wondered if the F-16’s original landing gear with its relatively short wheelbase would work on the J-9C at all, even more so because the fuselage would be extended at the tail with the different Spey exhaust arrangement. The inspiring benchmark picture of the Czech AF kitbash was taken from an angle that did not reveal the landing gear at all, probably on purpose… To avoid any trouble later, I decided even before I closed the fuselage halves to move the whole main landing gear and its bay backwards by about 0.5”/13 mm. Two ventral sections were cut out, switched positions, and PSRed back into the body again. Messy, but worthwhile.
Blending the wings into the F-16 body was not too complicated, even though the deeper MiG-21 wings left a significant gap at their trailing edge. To bridge this, I cut out of the respective sections from the F-16 wings, glued them flush with the MiG-21 wings’ trailing edges and later filled the resulting hole with putty.
The nose section was also rather tricky. To get away from the sleek F-16 look I implanted a different canopy, which required the cockpit opening to be raised and leveled out with the help of styrene profiles and lots of PSR. Additionally, I decided to replace the original flat radome with a taller one, so that there was a new raised are in front of the windscreen. With even more PSR this worked, and the result has a strange Su-27ish look! Inside of the cockpit the F-16 parts remained, I just mounted the seat in a more upright position (and filled its back) and had to sculpt the rear bulkhead new with putty and paper tissue drenched in white glue due to the opening’s raised edge.
Another element for a different silhouette was the air intake; instead of the F-16’s oval opening with a fixed geometry I constructed an implant from Su-15 intakes, with a ramp and a totally different (square) shape, which reminds a lot of the J-10’s arrangement and also a little of the Eurfoghter/Typhoon and the experimental MiG Ye-8.
The landing gear was totally changed, too, with a new twin front wheel arrangement and modified covers as well as main landing gear struts from a MiG-23/27 (Academy kit), which were glued together in a different fashion (upper segments turned by 90° so that they hang vertically in the hull) and into the wells that were moved back, yet with the F-16’s wheels.
Additionally, I gave the aircraft a Type 23-III gun in its small, characteristic pod (left over from a Condor MiG-21), on the left side of the front landing wheel well, similar to the J-10’s arrangement.
The underwing pylons were taken from the Hasegawa F-16, the ventral pod came from an Academy MiG-23/27, placed in front of vertical styrene tube adapter as a display holder for flight scenes. The ordnance was procured from the spares bank (AIM-7 from an Intech F-16 as Aspide/PL-11 AAMs and K-13 AAMs from a KP MiG-21 clone as PL-5s). At first, I also considered a pair of drop tanks on the inner wing stations, but to give the aircraft a “faster” look I eventually left them away and only hung the AAMs under its wings.
Painting and markings:
Again a rather dry and subdued choice. Many active PLAAF aircraft, esp. the fighters, carry rather boring liveries, with only a few historic exceptions. For a whif that already looks quite strange I went for a simple solution, inspired by typical J-10s; these carry uniform light bluish-grey upper and lower surfaces with a low waterline and with only little contrast between the tones. To add a unique touch, though, I used RAL tones for the camouflage, namely RAL 7000 (Fehgrau, Revell 57) above and 7001 (Silbergrau, Revell 374) underneath, which both appear colder than the very similar FS 36320 and 36375 greys. The radome and some other di-electric panels were painted in a very dark green (RLM 71, Humbrol 91), inspired by JH-7 fighter bombers with a similar livery.
Even though the J-10 benchmark typically has its landing gear and the respective bays painted white, I decided to do for a more Soviet look and painted everything silver-grey (Humbrol 56) and the wheels received bright green wheel discs. The cockpit was painted with a medium grey (Revell 77) on the floor and the rear bulkhead, but also with the dreaded Soviet bright teal (ModelMaster 4664) on the side walls and the dashboard.
The model received a light black ink washing and some post-shading to give the uniform surface more visible structure. Markings/decals were puzzled together from the scrap box – including non-standard national insignia with white instead of yellow. Not really low-viz, due to the bright standard red, but more subdued than the normal markings – even though I assume that the decals were designed in a wrong fashion, because I have never seen this type of roundels in real life? The tactical code was puzzled together from five single digits on each flank of the air intake, following the pre-2004 PLAAF scheme for its cryptic 5-digit-codes that I found in a book. The code includes information about the aircraft’s individual code, its unit, and the respective squadron within it. Finally, the model was sealed overall with matt acrylic varnish and the bare metal areas around the exhaust were treated with grinded graphite to create a metallic shine.
Quite a complex build with lots of PSR, but the result looks really good, even plausible! The MiG-21 wings blend well with the F-16 fuselage and its LERXs, and the many other changes help to move the J-9C visually away from its F-16 ancestry, which makes up less than 50% of the model. Especially the new front section, with the deeper radome, taller canopy, and square air intake, make you wonder about the model’s heritage. And the all-over pale blue-grey livery adds to the authentic look, too.
From the 8th floor adjunct faculty office, looking down at Harold's Chicken and the parking garage. About 5:15 p.m., 1/50 at about 5.6, shot through a dirty window.
1952(?) Ansco Super Speedex "R" (Agfa Isolette III), recently repaired.
Test roll: Outdated T-Max 400 (1989) in HC110 Dil. B (not fresh) 75 degrees 5.5 Minutes.
See my Ansco Speedex set description for more information.
I can't wait to see whats on these. The 127 film I am not surprised to see from Belgium. But 126???
It seems to be somewhat wrong. I have always associated Belgian goods with quality.
Whats next ..the finest in Swiss disposable cameras...
A sign at Sperling/Burnaby Lake that has yet to be replaced following the October 22nd network changes.
159th St, South Holland, Illinois
1952(?) Ansco Super Speedex "R" (Agfa Isolette III), recently repaired.
Test roll: Outdated T-Max 400 (1989) in HC110 Dil. B (not fresh) 75 degrees 5.5 Minutes.
See my Ansco Speedex set description for more information.
Outdated farm equipment in Hickingen.
A small hamlet full of Germans who probably don't get it if you call them a bunch of Hicks.
Outdated (2010) NeoPan 1600 with Olympus 35-SP.
Stand dev in Rodinal 1+100, 1hr.
1/125, f2.8
Scanned with a CoolScan LS-5000.
Travelling in time - Sunday lunch at Restaurant Ochsenkopf (Ox head) #altwien #lostgeneration #tradition #outdated #spooky #krickerl #trophy #trophaeen #unnoetig #igersvienna #igersaustria #iphoneartists #iphoneonly #famiglia_vienna #famigliavienna #vienna #instagramersvienna #veryretro #vintage #70ies #instagramersaustria #2014
The BAE Systems Rapier Surface-to-Air Missile System was developed for the British Army to replace their outdated Towed Bofors 40/L70 Anti-Aircraft Guns. The system is unusual as it uses a 'Manual Optical Guidance System' sending Guidance Commands to the Missile in flight over a Radio Link, this results in a high level of accuracy, therefore a large Warhead is not required.
Entering service in 1971, it eventually replaced all other Anti-Aircraft Weapons in service with the British Army, both the Bofors Guns used against Low-Altitude Targets and the Thunderbird Missile used against Longer-Range and Higher-Altitude Targets. As the expected Air Threat moved from Medium-Altitude Strategic Missions to Low-Altitude Strikes, the fast reaction time and high maneuverability of the Rapier made it more effective than either of these Weapons, replacing most of them by 1977. Rapier was later selected by the RAF Regiment to replace their Bofors Guns and Tigercat Missiles. It also saw international sales, as of 2021, it was in the process of being replaced as one of the United Kingdom's Primary Air-Defence Weapons by Sky Sabre.
The first Rapier Units were delivered to the British Army in and the RAF Regiment 1971, in 1981 a new Rapier, FSB1 entered service. It had improved electronics and sensors, in 1990 FSB1 (M) was introduced with improvements to the Optical Tracker, Fire Unit and Radar Tracker. Rapier was at first a daylight fair weather Air Defence System, with the addition of the ''Blindfire'' Radar Tracker, Rapier became an all-weather night and day System.
Each Fire System can cover over 38.6 square miles of sky up to a height of 9,843ft, each Missile travels at over twice the speed of sound, and has a High-Explosive Warhead. During the Falklands War of 1982, Rapier Units were deployed to cover the beachhead at San Carlos, also used in the Gulf War of 1991 and the Iraq War of 2003.
Specifications:-
▪︎Type: Surface-to-Air Missile
▪︎Place of Origin: United Kingdom
▪︎Service History: In Service 1971 to present
▪︎Used By: British Army / RAF Regiment (and many more)
▪︎Wars: Falklands War / Iran–Iraq War / Gulf War
▪︎Designer: British Aircraft Corporation
▪︎Designed: 1963
▪︎Manufacturer British Aircraft Corporation 1963 to 1977 / BAe Dynamics 1977 to 1999 / MBDA UK since 1999
▪︎Produced: 1969 to the 1990's
▪︎Number Built: 25,000 Missiles / 600 Launchers / 350 Radar Units
▪︎Variants: Mk.II "Hittile" / MK.IIB Missile
▪︎Mass: 99lb
▪︎Length: 88in
▪︎Diameter: 5.2in
▪︎Warhead: Blast Fragmentation Explosive Close Proximity Warhead
▪︎Detonation Mechanism: Proximity Triggered Chemical Fuze
▪︎Power Plant: Solid-Fuel Rocket
▪︎Wing Span: 5.4in
▪︎Operational Range: 1,300 to 26,900 ft
▪︎Flight Ceiling: 9,800ft Mk.I Missile / 16,000ft Mk.II Missile
▪︎Maximum Speed: Mach 2.5 / 1,900mph
▪︎Guidance System: Semi-Automatic Command to Line of Sight
▪︎Steering System: Flight Control Surface
▪︎Launch Platform: Vehicle / Towed Trailer.
Sourced from Wikipedia en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapier_(missile) and the City of Norwich Aviation Museum.
A somewhat outdated vessel at the start of WW2.
HMS Eagle, formerly the Almirante Latorre class battleship Almirante Cochrane, launched 1918-taken over and finally commissioned by Royal Navy 1924-sunk 1942 by U-73.
Photo – Wright & Logan.
Taken from the May 1976 issue of ‘Ships Monthly’ magazine.
A man had a big collection of international, outdated currency for sale. He sat near the Roman Amphitheater in Amman downtown.
He had some spread out on the floor, and the more valuable ones in albums.
I couldn't help but stop and have a look...
It would be fun to tag the coins, if you recognize any of them :)
A look at infinity.
Mens Room, Restaurant Seegarten, Grün 80, Münchenstein / Basel
Polaroid 180, Fuji FP-100C (outdated)
7.April 2009
💁♀️ Phạm Huyền Trang
️with Kodak Xtra 400 (outdated)
© All right reserved
All be loved at phitrieu.com/teen/a-green-night.html
Follow me at
phitrieu.com
IG + FB | @phitrieu.pro5
X | @phitrieupro5
On Form 2014, Asthall Manor, Oxfordshire.
Minolta Dynax 9 and outdated (1999) Kodak Elite Chrome 200 film, exposed +1 EV
+++ 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 Nanchang J-9C was a mid-sized interceptor for the Chinese People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) that had been developed during the Eighties. By the late Seventies, a new benchmark fighter had entered the global stage, the General Dynamics F-16, and the Ministry of Defense issued a new requirement on 9 June 1979 - and slightly revised it in November – to develop an air superiority fighter with comparable performance, since the Chinese People's Liberation Army’s standard fighters of the time, the J-7 (a derivative of the Soviet MiG-21, used by both PLAAF and PLAN) and the indigenous J-8 (used by the PLAAF only), appeared both outdated and no match for the American product anymore.
The fighter project started under the designation J-9II, inherited from the stillborn (and unrelated) Chengdu J-9 heavy interceptor project that had already been proposed in 1964 and eventually, after many iterations, evermore demanding requirements concerning range and speed but no prototypes, been cancelled in 1980. To reflect the second use of the designation and avoid confusion, the new type was called J-9II (later renamed into J-9B).
The J-9II was heavily inspired by the American 4thgeneration F-16, but eventually was a very different aircraft, even though the J-9II shared the F-16’s general layout, including the characteristic lip air intake. Rumor has it that information about the American type was acquired from Egypt where the F-16 had been introduced in 1982.
Two different variants of single airframe were initially proposed by Nanchang Aircraft Factory to cater to the slightly different needs of both PLAAF and PLAN. The navy variant was already dropped in 1981, though, while the air force variant was tailored to execute fast interception missions, with a secondary ground attack capability. However, from a technological standpoint, the J-9II was still only a 3rd generation fighter, at best, and suffered from several shortcomings. For instance, the J-9II’s wing geometry was very similar to the J-7s’ and J-8s’ clipped delta wings, even though they were combined with a blended body on the upper surface for additional lift and featured organically integrated LERX that improved handling at high angles of attack. The highly swept wings gave great speed and roll characteristics, but provided poor lift at low speed what limited the J-9II’s utility as a frontline fighter.
The aircraft’s powerplant was a single WS-9 Qinling twin-shaft turbofan engine, which was a blunt copy of the British Rolls Royce RB.168 Spey 202, originally exported to China in 1975 violating the COCOM restrictions. At the time of the J-9II’s development the copied Spey was, like many other aspects of the aircraft, no longer state-of-the-art, but it was the only suitable engine for the project. In the J-9II it was paired with an indigenous afterburner.
This semi-indigenous engine turned out to be notoriously unreliable and hardly provided the promised output of 53.4 kN/12,140 lbf dry thrust and 91.2 kN/20,500 lbf with reheat, leaving the aircraft notoriously underpowered. For comparison, the F-16A benchmark’s Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200 turbofan was rated at 14,670 lbf/64.9 kN and 23,830 lbf/106.0 kN with afterburner. The J-9II’s higher structural weight due to the limited use of light composite material hampered its performance even further.
Other differences from the F-16 included a single foldable fin in the style of the Soviet MiG-23/27 (a solution also employed on the J-8 interceptor) instead of a pair of fixed vanes on the F-16, and the pilot sat in a more upright position under a taller and conventional canopy with a fixed 3-part windscreen. Even though the lip air intake was in the same position as on the F-16, it had a totally different square shape and geometry with an adjustable intake ramp and auxiliary intakes with feathered covers on the flanks to prevent engine surge.
The J-9II’s avionics were quite state-of-the-art, though, but not highly capable when compared with foreign systems and based on existing equipment. Its primary armament consisted of IR-guided PL-5 (based on the Soviet Vympel K-13) and PL-8 short-range AAMs (a license-built Version of the Israeli Python 3), and semi-active radar-guided PL-11 mid-range AAMs (a license-built version of the Italian Aspide missile, which itself was an ungraded AIM-7 Sparrow). A total of seven hardpoints were available for a total external ordnance of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb). Secondary armament consisted of a ventral Type 23-III twin-barrel cannon, a copy of the Soviet Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L. The radar was a modified Type 1471 pulse-Doppler radar, placed under a pointed nose radome, which had a bigger diameter than the F-16’s installation, what gave the J-9II, together with the deeper cockpit section and its more bulbous canopy, a markedly different profile.
The first J-9II prototype was rolled out in August 1988 and shortly thereafter unveiled to the public in September 1988 at Farnborough International Air Show, where it was officially baptized “Tiān Hǔ” (天虎, Heavenly Tiger) – a first among Chinese military aircraft, which had until then lacked such an accolade. At the same time, it was given the AFIC code name “Freshman” by NATO. The first batch of eight J-9II aircraft was delivered to the PLAAF for evaluation in the early 1990’s. After a year of testing the air force agreed to procure more aircraft of the new type after upgrading the avionics and weapons suite with improved technology. This upgraded J-9II was then – following the PLAAF’s revised naming system – designated J-9C. The first serial production aircraft built to this revised standard were delivered to PLAAF units probably in 2001, where they primarily replaced outdated 1st generation J-8Is and some J-7 fighters, too.
However, on the PLAAF’s agenda, the J-9C was quickly superseded by the Chengdu J-10 “Vigorous Dragon” (NATO reporting name: Firebird), another medium-weight, single-engine, multirole combat aircraft. The J-10 was capable of all-weather operations and configured with a delta wing and canard design, with fly-by-wire flight controls. This project had been kicked off as early as 1981 and developed in parallel to the J-9II, even though with more severe delays, so that the Tiān Hǔ’s development had been kept up to ensure at least one more modern interceptor type for the PLAAF from 2000 on. Compared with the J-9C, the J-10 was a much more modern aircraft overall and a true 4th generation fighter on par with the F-16. When the first J-10s were delivered to the PLAAF in 2003, only two years after the first J-9Cs, the latter’s production was shut down after only roughly 100 aircraft that were exclusively operated by PLAAF interceptor regiments.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 17,06 m (55 ft 10¾ in) overall incl. pitot
Wingspan: 8,93 m (29 ft 3 in)
Height: 4,25 m (13 ft 11 in)
Wing area: 30,5 m² (327 sqft)
Empty weight: 9.373 kg (20,645 lb)
Gross weight: 13.036 kg (28,713 lb) with full internal fuel
Max takeoff weight: 19.250 kg (42,400 lb)
Fuel capacity: 7,000 pounds (3,200 kg) internal
Powerplant:
1× Xian WS-9 Qinling twin-shaft turbofan engine with afterburner,
with 53.4 kN (12,140 lbf ) dry thrust and 91.2 kN (20,500 lbf) with reheat
Performance
Maximum speed: (1,825 km/h (1,134 mph, 985 kn, Mach 1.72) at 35,000 ft (11,000 m), clean
Combat range: 1,000 km (620 mi, 540 nmi) radius with 4x AAMs and 2x drop tanks
Ferry range: 4,217 km (2,620 mi, 2,277 nmi) with 3x drop tanks, subsonic
Service ceiling: 17,500 m (57,400 ft)
Time to altitude: 17,000 m (56,000 ft) in 8 minutes 30 seconds
Rate of climb: 224 m/s (44,100 ft/min) at sea level
Roll rate: 275°/s
g limits: +6.0 sustained at 5,000 m (16,000 ft)
Thrust-to-weight: 0.72
Wing loading: 87.8 lb/sq ft (427 kg/m²)
Unstick speed: 330 km/h (210 mph; 180 kn)
Take-off run: 630 m (2,070 ft)
Touchdown speed: 224 km/h (139 mph; 121 kn)
Landing run: 900 m (3,000 ft)
Armament:
1× internal 23 mm Type 23-III (Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L) autocannon with 200 rounds
7x external hardpoints for a total ordnance of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb)
The kit and its assembly:
This what-if model was inspired by an online picture of a model, probably at a convention or competition, that I had seen many years ago: it was an F-16 with wings and stabilizers from a MiG-21 in Czech markings and with a brown/green camouflage livery. While the idea appeared odd the highly swept wings blended well into the F-16’s LERXs – and I wanted to re-create this someday.
This has happened now, even though I put some more effort into the model and furthermore stumbled over some layout questions while building it. At the core this is a Hasegawa F-16A, mated with MiG-21 wings (probably from an Academy MiG-21 F-13) and many other additional mods.
These included:
- A new, deeper nose radome from a Nakotne MiG-29 (which has a totally wrong shape with a flat underside)
- A different sliding two-piece canopy (from a Hasegawa Grumman F9F Panther) with a classic layout for an old-school look
- Fin and stabilizers taken wholesale from a PM Model Su-15, because MiG-21 surfaces appeared too small
- A twin wheel front landing gear leg with modified covers
- Different main landing gear struts with F-16 wheels
- A new exhaust installation that has a more Spey-esque shrouded layout (as on the British Phantoms); two exhaust sections from F-16 kits were glue behind each other to extend the fuselage, and a J79 nozzle (from an Italeri IAI Kfir) was mounted inside
- The F-16’s ventral twin fins were replaced with a single foldable MiG-23 fin (from an Academy kit)
- A new “pizza oven-style” air intake, blended into the lower F-16 body with LOTS of PSR
While assembling this thing and recognizing that the MiG-21 wings would shift the center of lift considerably further back I wondered if the F-16’s original landing gear with its relatively short wheelbase would work on the J-9C at all, even more so because the fuselage would be extended at the tail with the different Spey exhaust arrangement. The inspiring benchmark picture of the Czech AF kitbash was taken from an angle that did not reveal the landing gear at all, probably on purpose… To avoid any trouble later, I decided even before I closed the fuselage halves to move the whole main landing gear and its bay backwards by about 0.5”/13 mm. Two ventral sections were cut out, switched positions, and PSRed back into the body again. Messy, but worthwhile.
Blending the wings into the F-16 body was not too complicated, even though the deeper MiG-21 wings left a significant gap at their trailing edge. To bridge this, I cut out of the respective sections from the F-16 wings, glued them flush with the MiG-21 wings’ trailing edges and later filled the resulting hole with putty.
The nose section was also rather tricky. To get away from the sleek F-16 look I implanted a different canopy, which required the cockpit opening to be raised and leveled out with the help of styrene profiles and lots of PSR. Additionally, I decided to replace the original flat radome with a taller one, so that there was a new raised are in front of the windscreen. With even more PSR this worked, and the result has a strange Su-27ish look! Inside of the cockpit the F-16 parts remained, I just mounted the seat in a more upright position (and filled its back) and had to sculpt the rear bulkhead new with putty and paper tissue drenched in white glue due to the opening’s raised edge.
Another element for a different silhouette was the air intake; instead of the F-16’s oval opening with a fixed geometry I constructed an implant from Su-15 intakes, with a ramp and a totally different (square) shape, which reminds a lot of the J-10’s arrangement and also a little of the Eurfoghter/Typhoon and the experimental MiG Ye-8.
The landing gear was totally changed, too, with a new twin front wheel arrangement and modified covers as well as main landing gear struts from a MiG-23/27 (Academy kit), which were glued together in a different fashion (upper segments turned by 90° so that they hang vertically in the hull) and into the wells that were moved back, yet with the F-16’s wheels.
Additionally, I gave the aircraft a Type 23-III gun in its small, characteristic pod (left over from a Condor MiG-21), on the left side of the front landing wheel well, similar to the J-10’s arrangement.
The underwing pylons were taken from the Hasegawa F-16, the ventral pod came from an Academy MiG-23/27, placed in front of vertical styrene tube adapter as a display holder for flight scenes. The ordnance was procured from the spares bank (AIM-7 from an Intech F-16 as Aspide/PL-11 AAMs and K-13 AAMs from a KP MiG-21 clone as PL-5s). At first, I also considered a pair of drop tanks on the inner wing stations, but to give the aircraft a “faster” look I eventually left them away and only hung the AAMs under its wings.
Painting and markings:
Again a rather dry and subdued choice. Many active PLAAF aircraft, esp. the fighters, carry rather boring liveries, with only a few historic exceptions. For a whif that already looks quite strange I went for a simple solution, inspired by typical J-10s; these carry uniform light bluish-grey upper and lower surfaces with a low waterline and with only little contrast between the tones. To add a unique touch, though, I used RAL tones for the camouflage, namely RAL 7000 (Fehgrau, Revell 57) above and 7001 (Silbergrau, Revell 374) underneath, which both appear colder than the very similar FS 36320 and 36375 greys. The radome and some other di-electric panels were painted in a very dark green (RLM 71, Humbrol 91), inspired by JH-7 fighter bombers with a similar livery.
Even though the J-10 benchmark typically has its landing gear and the respective bays painted white, I decided to do for a more Soviet look and painted everything silver-grey (Humbrol 56) and the wheels received bright green wheel discs. The cockpit was painted with a medium grey (Revell 77) on the floor and the rear bulkhead, but also with the dreaded Soviet bright teal (ModelMaster 4664) on the side walls and the dashboard.
The model received a light black ink washing and some post-shading to give the uniform surface more visible structure. Markings/decals were puzzled together from the scrap box – including non-standard national insignia with white instead of yellow. Not really low-viz, due to the bright standard red, but more subdued than the normal markings – even though I assume that the decals were designed in a wrong fashion, because I have never seen this type of roundels in real life? The tactical code was puzzled together from five single digits on each flank of the air intake, following the pre-2004 PLAAF scheme for its cryptic 5-digit-codes that I found in a book. The code includes information about the aircraft’s individual code, its unit, and the respective squadron within it. Finally, the model was sealed overall with matt acrylic varnish and the bare metal areas around the exhaust were treated with grinded graphite to create a metallic shine.
Quite a complex build with lots of PSR, but the result looks really good, even plausible! The MiG-21 wings blend well with the F-16 fuselage and its LERXs, and the many other changes help to move the J-9C visually away from its F-16 ancestry, which makes up less than 50% of the model. Especially the new front section, with the deeper radome, taller canopy, and square air intake, make you wonder about the model’s heritage. And the all-over pale blue-grey livery adds to the authentic look, too.
Zero emission vehicle oh the Rhine,
powered by the water current.
Polaroid 180, outdated 669 film
7. Mai 2009
I got a film from a friend. A Efke KB14, outdated 1986. Not stored cold in a dry environment at all. Ok, well, it won't kill me to try it, I thought, and loaded the Leica.
The result was horrible. Of course. The film was totally hazed and really dark. But somewhere deep down in the darkness some faint images could be seen. I scanned a few, and they turned out - well, not technically perfect - but with a certain charm.
Looks Scary
Well its definitely old and outdated. In fact, you might even say there's no way this is in operation and that its a doctors office here in #losangeles but it is.
This is the office and exam room of my hernia surgeon. Don't let the looks fool you and we all know we shouldn't judge a book by its cover.
I'll admit I did judge the book and was concerned for my safety during the exam and wondering if I should seek another doctor. Coincidentally, this was the doctor scheduled to remove my one hernia before covid. I now have two hernias and not a spleen that's retaining blood which @lacuscmedical diagnosed me and stated I refused care. Good thing I did because my spleen is just fine.
I will have my first surgery next month and 3 months later the second hernia will be removed. I've mentioned my new primary care doctor, Dr. William King, and amazing staff. I have entirely new doctors and specialists. I'm no longer in clinic care and things are getting better.
Most of all, I'm living again after being convinced, treated like, and told I was going to die. The only reason I was going to die was because of all the lousy care I was receiving from @lacarehealth and @lacuscmedical backed my Medi-Cal.
So while this office may look outdated and scary, not changing my insurance, demanding new doctors and specialists, I'd be near death or dead. This is beyond outdated and scary.
💁♀️ Phạm Huyền Trang
️with Kodak Xtra 400 (outdated)
© All right reserved
All be loved at phitrieu.com/teen/a-green-night.html
Follow me at
phitrieu.com
IG + FB | @phitrieu.pro5
X | @phitrieupro5